Police helicopter wasting public funds

[[email protected]]

i have been flying since 1987 been landing helicopters on
my land since 92 other pilots use the site as well ,the west yorkshire police pilots must find it amusing and film me landing and other pilolts and send the video to the CAA for breaking rule 5, they now have sent video footage of the helicopter on my land
OR are we this is a grey area and the meaning of the rule 5 artical can change to suit the CAA they are many heli pads around the UK that are not suitable, the site on my land is always clear in and out and put no one in danger at any time
they now have sent video footage of the helicopter parked on my land the CAA rang me to ask about this and told them yes it was there WHO ARE THE BABYS HERE THIS IS CHILDISH MY 7 YEAR OLD HAS MORE BRAINS THAN THE WEST YORKSHIRE POLICE HELICOPTER PILOTS
WAISTING PUBLIC FUNDS dose this remind all of you when you was at school i am going to tell on you, for what nothing
i am just a heli pilot getting on with my life buy for now
Graham from halton moor leeds

[RotorPig]

It doesn't matter how long you've been doing something, it doesn't make it legal or safe! If you're not breaking any rules or regulations you have nothing to fear ;). The force helicopter is just reporting what it sees. Continue to fly safely and within the rules and nothing will happen.

If someone committed a crime against you or your property wouldn't you expect your local police to use all their assets available to resolve the problem (including the helicopter?), seems you can't have it both ways:uhoh

[DSR10]

Why should the police involve themselves with a civil matter for the CAA. I suspect that their "pilot" wants to play god and rat on anyone else who owns a rotary and not be a taxi driver for the boys in blue.
Check out invasion of privacy & data acts. Chief Constables wife using facility for shopping etc.

[Heliport]

[email protected]

I'm very sorry to read about the difficulties you've been experiencing.
It's a harsh fact of life that there are always petty-minded people about who get pleasure trying to cause trouble for others. I think the aviation world is a generally better than the average because we're a small community and pilots usually try to help each other, but that doesn't mean we don't have our share of trouble-makers.

The green-eyed monster often plays a part - you can afford a helicopter of your own, and they can't, so they try to make trouble for you.

It's not clear whether you know for sure, or are guessing, that the police have reported you. And, even if they have, what part the pilot played in it all.
Perhaps you've suffered from some envious policeman with a chip about people with more money than him? Policemen don't get paid the sort of money to afford a helicopter so maybe the pilot was told to fly over your house so the cop could make a video recording?

It's probably difficult, but try to look on the bright side - there must be very little crime in your area if the police are able to spend time and resources on this sort of thing.

Either way, it would be wrong and very unfair to judge all police pilots by this one incident, or by RotorPig's post.
RotorPig obviously thinks it's funny judging by the ;) he put in his post but remember, the forum's anonymous so he may not be a police pilot at all. He may just be trying to damage the image of police pilots with that post.

I'm afraid somebody obviously has a grudge against you as we saw from Skywolf's posts yesterday (now deleted). Perhaps it's the same person, or maybe they're friends.

Watch your back, take proper advice, and try not to let the b*ggers get you down.

Let us know how you get on - and Good Luck. :ok:

Heliport

(Edit)
If you find out who reported you, it would probably be a help to other pilots in your area to know so they are aware of the risk. But please don't post any names without clearing it with me by e-mail first.

H.

[Vfrpilotpb]

Rotorpig,

Lancashire Police helicopter was used to photograph my house and all the land around it , when they tried unsuccessfully to nail me with serious charges for getting a bunch of drunken tossers of my land having just failed to set fire to my garage with £80ks worth of cars in there( is that not Arson?), I was arrested and prosecuted, the tossers(Arsonists) were witnesses for the Crown, but thankfully the Jury saw through the situation, to me I can see no justification in the use of the Police Helicopter for that sort of work! Despite the Lancs Heli crews being a rather nice bunch, it is how their bosse's dictate their workload rather than the crews themselves:ouch:

Rather like TCs boss in north Wale's he must be on the verge of some piriac crusade against all and every civillian motorist and biker who enters into or drives in N Wales, his own daughter has been pulled for speeding and yet he is still chasing and persuing weekend genuine bikers and now Older motorists, probably very shortly he will start a campaign against drivers of Red cars, or could it be cars with big tyres, whatever I bet Billy Burglar is having a field day in North Wales!!:E

[Droopy]

Goodness me, handbags at dawn or what? I have no close knowledge of West Yorks ASU policy or of this case, [though the prose style of MD600 and sbiggee do seem remarkably similar?] but let me offer my view.

Our ASU takes photos all the time; contingency planning, accident investigation and frequently for prosecution cases. Pretty much without exception the requests for the photos/video come from an agency external to the ASU and they have to go through various levels of authorisation and approval depending on the subject.

We obviously note where someone may have a private landing site; I'm sure you'd want the police crew in your area to know when to be alert to someone rotors running in a back garden about to lift? Only once in 14 years have I been tasked to take photos for a case involving aviation legislation and that was at the CAA's request.

Basically what I'm offering is an answer to a point that crops up maybe every 6 months on this forum; police ASUs are extremely unlikely to instigate a prosecution against another pilot unless what's been done is absolutely outrageous; to be honest it causes more problems than it solves, and the quiet phone call should be the preferred option in wherever possible. If, however, we perform the role of, er, Air "Support" Unit then we can be tasked to support another part of the force whether we like it, agree with it or aren't even remotely a**ed one way or the other by providing a service to meet their request.

This isn't being slopey-shouldered, just following orders, but to suggest that someone is conducting some sort of malicious harrassment without the other side being put is really a bit much.

[Heliport]

Thanks for posting Droopy.

RotorPig's total lack of sympathy with sbiggee and "Continue to fly safely and within the rules and nothing will happen" comment seems more like traffic cop mentality than pilots' thinking.
I have no idea if he's a police pilot, policeman or neither. My only concern was that neither sbiggee nor anyone else should think his post was typical of police pilots' attitude to fellow aviators.

As a Mod, I very rarely reveal my own opinion in discussions, but I allow myself the luxury now and again. Having done so, I'll now go back to the Mod's bench! :D

Heliport

[[email protected]]

hi many thanks for your replys on this matter A few thinks have come about and not always very good with words and explaning things
But all my problems started when i bought a turbine helicopter
not the expencive type its an alouette 11 shes and old girl but in very good condition we have been filmed 3 times now and the CAA has the footage the last one was in the past 4 weeks on the helipad i received call from CAA telling me that west yorkshire helicopter support unit had sent the video in again
{public funds}.
i am not saying all helicopter police pilots are the same
the best man who flew the west yorkshire poilce helicopter was a very good friend of mine and a lot of people will remember him
his name was DICK MESTON what a good man i will never forget him TOP PILOT.
Now the man who has a problem with me flys for west yorkshire police i have never met him but I have lots of proof for slander for spreading rummers about me.

Would like to post photo of my site flying in and out if this is possible and then people can say yes good or bad.

Any way gone on to much Graham Leeds.

Graham
I've deleted a few sentences from your post. I know it's tempting, but just because someone's saying bad things about you doesn't mean it's right (or a good idea) to do the same - at least not here. Describing him so people will know who he is still counts as 'identifying' someone, even though you didn't post his name.

I can understand why you're angry if you've been operating there for 11 years without incident but you may end up with a fight to keep operating there so play it carefully and cleverly.
It's up to you if you post a picture and ask opinions but I wouldn't if I were you. Prepare yourself confidentially with a few trusted people who're in a position to give you an informed opinion. A 'trial run' on a public site where your enemies may also be reading what's said and pick up ideas to use against you isn't a clever way to go about it.

Heliport

[truncheon meat]

As one of those "poorly paid police officers who can't afford a helicopter of his own" I feel deeply offended by the implication by Heliport that this makes me into a mean and petty minded individual.
I would have thought that, as a moderator, heliport would have been a little more conservative in the comments made in his/her post. There is also an element of encouragement to persons flouting the regulations which, as anybody involved in aviation must agree, is likely to breed an environment in which the rules become something to be derided.
Moderators must be allowed to make comment and air their views but to immediately club all police officers working in aviation as mean minded because of the actions of one unidentified individual I find deeply insulting.
I work within an extremely professional unit where both pilots and police officers do their utmost to ensure that flight safety is never compromised and I retain the right, as I swore to do when I was attested as a police officer, to prosecute those who break the law and preserve the safety and rights of those who do not.

[Thomas coupling]

Oooh la la.

I sometimes wonder about certain people.

Does ANYONE seriously believe that ANY public service sector would OPENLY flaunt their capabilities for absolutely no or very trivial reasons whatsoever???

Open misuse of public service funding would most certainly be jumped on within days if not hours if it was freely exposed to their customers (the public).

It's the stuff that goes on in the background that one needs to worry about..don't you think. ??http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=102248

You can take it or leave it, but I know for a fact that there isn't a police air support unit in the country that would knowingly indulge in such petty, insignificant, ineffective, time consuming, tasking such as this........................................................ ......

unless there is more to it than meets the eye :suspect:

Heliport...you should know better!

Rotorpig: don't be such a t*t.


VFR: didn't know you were a born again biker

[EjectEject]

Well said Truncheon Meat. As Rotopig said, if no rules have been broken then sbiggee has nothing to fear. However, I wonder where Heliport would be if Rule 5 was being contravened and it all went pear shaped one day??

[Heliport]

truncheon meat
Interesting that you've put something on quotation marks which I didn't say. Isn't that called a 'verbal' in your line of work? ;)
I didn't say, nor do I think, that police officers are "poorly paid". If not being able to afford a helicopter of our own meant "poorly paid", there'd be an awful lot of us in that club.

I don't see how saying "some envious policeman with a chip etc" implies that all policemen have a chip. I don't think they all do, but I have no doubt whatsoever that some do. That's based on the attitude of some, not all, traffic cops towards people who drive expensive cars but I also realise that some traffic cops aren't influenced by such things and that others are just mean and petty-minded towards all motorists regardless of what car they're driving. ie A spread of human nature just like every other walk of life.

Usually, I am extremely "conservative" in my comments. In fact, I rarely join in discussions at all and try to hold the balance as much as I can, but I let myself go maybe a couple of times a year (sometimes less) and say what I really think. This was one of those occasions.

"an element of encouragement to persons flouting the regulations"
That puzzles me. I've not read anything which makes me think that sbigee (Graham) is flouting any regulations. Curious that you've jumped to that conclusion, but I'm just an ordinary member of the public not a police officer.

"which, as anybody involved in aviation must agree, is likely to breed an environment in which the rules become something to be derided."
If I was encouraging people to flout the regulations (which I wasn't) there'd be something in that point - but I couldn't give you you a simple 'Agree' or Disagree' answer to that proposition without further discussion.

"to immediately club all police officers working in aviation as mean minded because of the actions of one unidentified individual I find deeply insulting."
Read my post again. I said no such thing.

I have a high opinion of police pilots and have no reason to doubt you work within an extremely professional unit, but I'm not sure I understand the next part. You say "..... where both pilots and police officers do their utmost to ensure that flight safety is never compromised".
If you're referring to the ASU helicopter, I understand. If you're referring to other people's flying, I don't. Are you saying that civilian pilots of police helicopters have a 'police' role? ie Policing other pilots? As civilian empoyees? Or that non-pilot Observers feel qualified to police pilots?

I understand, and enthusiastically support, the attitude Droopy described. If I saw another pilot doing something "absolutely outrageous" I might be tempted to report them myself. I susepct many pilots would react the same way, regardless of whether they were plice ASU pilots. It would have to be absolutely outrageous before I'd report another pilot but I wouldn't rule out doing so.

"I retain the right, as I swore to do when I was attested as a police officer, to prosecute those who break the law and preserve the safety and rights of those who do not."
That all sound very grand, but it's just the sort of thing traffic wardens say when they issue tickets a few minutes after the time has run out, and traffic officers say when they book people going fractionally over the speed limit. (NB: I'm referring to the mean and petty-minded types, not all traffic wardens and not all traffic policemen.) Sorry to keep using traffic as examples but, like most people, my only risk of finding myself on the wrong side of the police is as a driver.
Mind you, if what you say is right, perhaps I'd better be even more careful when I fly. After all, you retain the right to prosecute those who break the law and you don't sound like someone who's likely to be what I would regard as 'reasonable' and open to the argument that it was 'technical' or 'very minor'.

I still hope (and believe) the approach Droopy describes is the better one. I'd hate to think airborne police officers were flying around the air like traffic cops trying to catch someone breaking an aviation regulation.

We agree about one thing. It's wrong to make sweeping generalisations about a group based on one individual's actions. But, if you read it again, you'll see that's what I said when I responded to sbiggee's post.

Please don't think I'm being rude if I don't take any further part in the discussion. I've had my 'say what I really think' moment and, even more important, I'm off on my hols early tomorrow morning and others will be moderating the forum for a couple of weeks. In fact, it's a bit frustrating - potential for a good discssion here!

Got to go - haven't packed yet and I don't want to be caught speeding on the way to the airport! :D

Heliport

(Edit)

TC
Please don't think I'm anti-ASU's. Nothing could be further from the truth, as you know. ;)
It seems very odd that sbiggee's been operating from his land for 11 years and now has the local ASU taking videos and sending them to the CAA. If they've been tasked to do so, his criticism of the ASU is misplaced. I've never heard of ASU's behaving in this way so, even if he's right that a particular person has some personal axe to grind against him, I still don't think that's a basis for tarring all ASU's with the same brush - which is the point I made originally.

[Helinut]

Like so many things, it all depends on the facts, and the posts don't really give enough information to let anyone decide. Long on opinion and subjective comment and short on evidence.

Certainly, in my experience it would be unusual to deploy a police aircraft for a purpose such as was described by sbiggee. Units have deployment criteria taking into account the costs of flying. Usually, there is a crew of 1 pilot and 2 observers who are usually police officers. One of the observers is responsible for deciding what (police) task is done. The pilot takes them there. The observers work the cameras and other stuff. This means that at least 3 people need to "conspire" to carry out a task. All flights and "tasks" are logged. The pilot does not decide where he goes or what the aircraft is used for. His only veto is on grounds of flight safety or legality (i.e. whether the flight can be completed in accordance with aviation legislation).

If someone considers particular police activity is worthy of it, they should make a complaint. If, as is suggested, there is some sort of bizarre personal vendetta, then it would not be too difficult to reveal this. The police are (usually) meticulous in investigating their own ............

But, if someone has broken a regulation/legal rule and the evidence is there to prove it, you can't really expect the police to ignore it. Their role as law enforcers extends to the ANO - they are specifically given powers under these Orders akin to those given to CAA officers. They have powers of arrest in connection with certain offences, like endangering aircraft, they can require to inspect aviation documents...........

It is also not the case that the Aviation Rules like Rule 5 are civil law, they are part of the criminal law.

Heliport does raise an interesting question about individual pilots "going native". I have come across a very small number of police pilots who, because they fly for the police, do get a bit over-zealous in aviation matters. That view of such behaviour is my personal opinion, and I do not operate in that way myself. I have also come across pilots with such attitudes working for commercial operators or flying schools.

However, it is the right of every citizen to draw attention to apparent law-breaking to those who are employed to enforce the law, and be prepared to give evidence (if he has any). In other circumstances, it would even be called being a good citizen!

[truncheon meat]

Oh, Heliport. Now I am being called the sort of copper who has no function of independent or reasonable thought. I like to think of myself as one of those coppers who has fought over the years to retain the right to use my discretion if an offence deserves it.

The Air navigation Order is actually law and, yes, if somebody breaches that order then I will use my discretion as to whether I should lead toward a prosecution.

Wherever you are going on your holiday, please have a good one, don't be frightened by foreign policemen if you go abroad!

By the use of words such as "verbals" I gather you are an avid fan of The Bill. If you would like me to, I'll video it for you.

As for telling you which ASU I work for, no, I shall not. I also retain my right to protect my anonymity and, police aviation being the tightly knit world it is, to name the unit for which I work would be tantamount to giving away my identity. I find it a little strange to be asked that question by a moderator, especially one who has such sparse information on his own profile.

I have no personal grudge against you or any other contributor to this thread but I feel that there are some within the thread who are using it to have a dig at police officers. My opinion only. If others prescribe to that opinion, which some obviously do from the replies so far, then I feel just ever so slightly vindicated.

[CaptainEagle]

If there was as much effort put into stopping drunk driving as there is trying to restrict the activities of general aviation I think everyone would be a lot safer.

No one can ever say (and then go home and sleep that night) that the police hovering over somebody's PRIVATE LAND in their EC135 with very charred and hot £50 notes flying out the exhausts taking pictures of a helipad (unless of course it was beside a school or hospital) is a good use of resources or anything other and an another example of a bunch of a*s holes with chips on their shoulders wasting time because they frankly have nothing better to do.

I frequently get stopped in my car on the roads and subjected to questioning about where I got it even though I've broken no laws. Why? Because its a BMW and I'm a young guy, so obviously I've stolen it right? No, the police just have a problem with me having it. Sibiggee, keep your helipad, and if anyone has a problem with it, tell them to come and take it from you by force, they'll go quiet after that.

[J.A.F.O.]

"I retain the right, as I swore to do when I was attested as a police officer, to prosecute those who break the law and preserve the safety and rights of those who do not."

Now, that may sound to some like the argument used by a petty minded Traffic Warden. However, it sounds to me (neither a police officer nor a police pilot) like someone who takes their duties and responsibilities seriously.

I don't want to get involved in the main discussion as I have no knowledge of any of the circumstances - although that doesn't seem to stop others - but for a moderator to deride a poster on this board because they have a professional attitude is despicable.

As for Capt. Eagle - schools and hospitals? I really don't follow your logic, are those the only places a police helicopter may wish to land? Is crime not committed away from schools and hospitals? And as for your whining about being stopped in your car then I'm glad that you wouldn't mind if the police made no enquiries if it were stolen as it will save the force involved money which, I believe, was the intention of this thread.

[Thomas coupling]

Captain Beagle:
There you go again blowing hot air from that exhaust pipe of yours.
Your not listening are you:
You aren't in possession of the facts in this story are you?
You are basing your opinions on your personal experience of being 'harassed by the police', aren't you?
You're jumping the gun aren't you?

I wonder why they stop you in your Beemer, beagle?

JAFO said it all :rolleyes:

[Flying Lawyer]

From time to time, I read people on these forums saying "if you've done nothing wrong, you've got nothing to fear."
The curious thing is that in all the years I've been advising pilots/operators under investigation, or representing them in court, I've never once heard one of them say: "I've done nothing wrong so I've got nothing to fear."
Could it be they were all worried because they'd all done something wrong? I suppose that's possible.
Or could it be it's one of those things which is very easy to say when you're not the one at the wrong end of a CAA investigation or prosecution - and not being put to the time and expense of dealing with it?

Nothing to fear if you've done nothing wrong? What utter rubbish. People worry something will go wrong and they'll be convicted. And that's before time and expense are taken into account. If the investigation comes to nothing, the person who's been under investigation won't have any of the personal or legal cost of dealing with it reimbursed. If he's prosecuted and acquitted he'll usually get something back, but never everything it's cost.

truncheon meat
'vindicated'? :confused: This is a discussion forum where we exchange views and often have very interesting discussions. When we join a discussion, some people share our views and some don't. Being vindicated doesn't come into it.
I was relieved to see you mention the sensible use of discretion in your second post; there was no hint of it in your first and it certainly isn't something I'd assume. Most police officers seem to use discretion when dealing with minor/trivial offences, but by no means all. Just in case you think I only defend or am being anti-police , I've prosecuted more murderers and others who've been given Life sentences for other serious offences than I can remember.
You seem rather sensitive to people making what you regard as unjustified comments about certain types of police officers. Count yourself lucky you're not a lawyer. We constantly have people condemning us as an entire group, not just particular types of lawyers.
As a new member, perhaps you don't realise Moderators are always anonymous so you won't find many, if any, clues under Mods' profiles. You might want to remove 'Guildford' from your profile if you don't want people to know your force. ;)

Helinut
Interesting post, and I agree with much of what you say, but I'm interested in one point. I'd always assumed the position was as described by Droopy (police ASUs are extremely unlikely to instigate a prosecution against another pilot unless what's been done is absolutely outrageous) but you say "if someone has broken a regulation/legal rule and the evidence is there to prove it, you can't really expect the police to ignore it" which seems to be nearer the Rotorpig/Truncheon line.
Should we think of police helicopters when we're flying in the same way we think of police cars when we're driving?

JAFO
If a police officer reported every offence or suspected offence he encountered, however trivial, he'd be entirely within his rights. We obviously hold very different views about whether that means he has a "professional attitude."
What? Me a lawyer saying that! Despicable! :eek:

[Vfrpilotpb]

TC, I used to be, but lost a couple of good guys along the way, so cowhide now hung up.:cool:

FL, Normally I would agree with your comments about nothing to fear, but when a mans castle ( House) or (Drum for those who do watch the BILL) is invaded by Glock bearing flakjacketed size 12's with wifey and three children fast asleep, to be arrested and carted off in just me brief's, when all you have done is to chase off your property a load of drunken tossers who had set fire to said property, and then gone back to bed, and it costs you £30k to stand your ground, then I do feel following that sort of experience, dished out by my local flatfoots, that we do have a little cause for concern and worry, there is a definate attitude similar to the Americans in Iraq, Shoot first and ask after. even after that sort of treatment I am NOT anti Police, but I feel there is a lack of control in certain departments of our national Police force, with 97% being OK but the other 3% are the real problem:ouch:

[Droopy]

Captain Eagle - the the old days of hovering over someone's landing site and taking lots of invasive photographs are long gone; these days we have a method which is technologically far superior. What we do is fly along on the way back from a task and say to each other, "Oh look there's a new helipad in that back garden, lucky chap". We then get back in the office and [this is the real breakthrough] we break open the box of felt-tip pens and mark the site on the wall map. It's cutting edge stuff I know and perhaps a bit controversial but I think it could be here to stay...

[md 600 driver]

droopy
i might have it wrong but are you infering i am sbigee as well ,

i have not posted to this thread and i can confirm that i am not s bigee also the west yorks asu might even guess who i am and s biggee is and confirm
md600 driver[temp gazz driver]

[Mikeb]

Reading the post's over the last day or so it seems that the normal "we are superior to normal citizens attitude" is starting to come threw from the police guy's posting here.

From my limited experience dealing with the police, they will always look for an easy prosecution against a generally law abiding person rather than chase the hard core criminals who are more difficult to catch and have more experience of avoiding prosecution. Just look at the resources being used to catch speeding drivers! The traffic cops in my area are all driving new Mercedes cars with a fleet of camera vans positioned on motorway bridges to support them. When was the last time you noticed a speed trap outside a school?

My former business premises were recently burgled; the investigation officer told the new owners there was a very slim chance of catching the people responsible. He suggested improving the security system protecting the building as it had failed to work during the burglary. The system was upgraded an as a result there have been three false alarms in a two month period. Due to the false alarms the local police have now sent the owners a letter stating that they will not respond to any further alarm activations as they only have limited resources. But they have the resources to run there nice AS355...

My local police ASU is lands at the airport were my helicopter is based, they are often in the café having lunch, but never get involved in conversation with other pilots and generally keep themselves to themselves. Whenever you walk into the café they always give you that “You are Guilty of Something” Look.

Flying Lawyer’s comment “Should we think of police helicopters when we're flying in the same way we think of police cars when we're driving?” I hope not! As I am sure most of us drive badly when being followed by a police car, your mind is racing thinking what have I done wrong? Not concentrating on driving.
What happens if the police helicopter’s start to try and police the air? Will we all stop contacting the local airfield for FIS in an attempt to hide our identity from the listening Police ASU? Just in-case we have accidentally broken a rule?

[Nigd3]

I have been reading this thread with increasing interest.
Police/general public conflicts always tend to get some good discussion from both sides and the biases tend to show quite quickly, although I think TC has tried to show a balanced opinion.

I am not anti police or think they are the champions of the public by the way.

If there has been a complaint about helicopters using the private landing site and the CAA want evidence, why can't they send up one or two of their own inspectors for a few days (via car) and video (or whatever they need to do) what is going on from the ground, rather than using a Police helicopter when it could be deployed elsewhere or saving some of the relevant Police authorities budget. Maybe one quick flight over to give the CAA confirmation a helicopter is being flown from there is ok but to video the site several times does seem pointless and a waste of money IMHO.

Let the CAA get whatever they need to assess the legality etc of what is going on and then make a detailed report to determine a fair and consistent decision.........................................back in the real world....................

NigD3

[sss]

Reading the post's over the last day or so it seems that the normal "we are superior to normal citizens attitude" is starting to come threw from the police guy's posting here.

i dont think it is a superior thing, more the fact that police officers try to do an important job that is always criticised, by liberty, the press, and many other bodies.

you dont rountinly hear about good work done by police in the newspapers, tv or even your neighbours.

when people are constantly critisiced would they not be a little defensive, especially when they are made by people who wouldnt do the job in the fiirst place for what ever reason.

they deal with things everything in society from good, bad to evil. distressing, gorey that others wouldnt deal with. and all walks of society and are expected to please everyone,

i think overall they do a good job and maybe a little more support may get a better police service, or if you can do better well, join them and see if you can make a difference.

if not why not see how they work in other countries, we arnt that bad off with what we have got.

[J.A.F.O.]

Flying lawyer - I wasn't suggesting that every incident and offence should be reported, merely applauding the fact that Truncheon Meat wasn't willing to turn a blind eye - "without fear or favour" is, I believe, the term used.

Mikeb - I couldn't possibly reply to your idiotic drivel without slipping into language that is not allowed on this bulletin board.

sss - well said.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Some interesting points of view so far. It's prompted me to write this account of My most recent shift on days:

What I did:

Arrived 10 mins before shift-start time, chatted to the bored security man at the entrance, went into the office. Completed handover/takeover, checked Met and that wonderful AIS NOTAM system, did W&Balance calcs and paperwork. Had a cup of tea and bowl of cereal, went out to aircraft (oh, sorry PPRuNe Saddo#1, is that not on your list? It's just that ships are what matelots are found in over here, and we don't want to be, er, tarred with that brush do we?) to do the compressor washes and Daily Inspection. Topped up the MGB oil, helped by police observer who manipulated the Risbridger pump even though it's not in his job description.

Went back inside, made tea (it's true Pete - honest!!), finished paperwork and started OU homework. After 15 minutes, made way out to aircraft (pronto) as ground units in neighbouring city were in pursuit of car containing 5 scrotes. These had already carried out street thefts, stolen/wrecked one OAPs moped and were driving lethally out of town. Arrived overhead Scrotemobile which stopped just before it entered another built-up area. Observed bomburst and helped ground units round up and arrest 4 offenders. Was looking for 5th when WPC called up to say she'd found him hiding in boot of (stolen) ScroMo along with muchos burgled items. Headed back past base en route to the first of several fires seen that day. Glorious weather, dry ground and bored youngsters seem to have that effect... Spent 35 minutes looking for suicidal man who'd rigged up hosepipe from exhaust into car, and was now on his mobile to the Force Control Room. The lass there was not having a good morning, hearing him become less and less coherent as the engine rumbled on in the background. We didn't see him, but the units on the ground did - he'll live (probably a "cry for help", as CO usually works faster than that). You should've seen those officers sprint from garage to garage for over half an hour, with all that stab-proof clobber they have to wear.

Back to base, refuelled aircraft, waved back to pilot of Robin who must pay a fortune to keep his aircraft there, headed in to finish paperwork and restart homework. Was caught by observers as I played minesweeper instead of studying Quantum Chromodynamics - forced to make teas for remainder of shift as punishment. Brain started hurting.

Early afternoon, call came through re stolen vehicle on motorway. Launched immediately, found vehicle (which was doing well over 70 in 30MPH areas including schools) and maintained observation position while crew controlled the pursuit. Watched as the stolen vehicle graunched to a halt and the 2 occupants scarpered. Police Motorway Patrol M-class Merc arrived; observed the officer in the passenger side emerge from his vehicle and start sprinting after the driver of the abandoned car. Helpful cyclist lent his bike to policeman - observed said bobby now go pounding off after his target. Target stopped sprinting - mistake, as bobby launched himself straight off the bike and put him unmistakeably under arrest. Meanwhile, our observers had guided the M-class driver around to where the passenger of the stolen car was trying to nonchalantly stroll away from the area. Second man swiftly joined his mate in cuffs. Eight minutes 30 secs from ops room chair to 2 in custody - result! Especially as car was loaded with proceeds from 2 days worth of burglaries. Resumed patrol - nothing unusual, back to base/refuel/tea/paperwork (note priorities).

Another inconclusive trip to try and find would-be housebreakers reported hiding in a garden. Back to base refuel etc; chatted to the pilot from the air taxi firm based in the same building as us. Hosted visiting bobbies who'd come to collect evidential video (well, made them tea while the observers showed them the Motorway Bicycle Display Team video clip over and over again...). Twelve hours after starting shift, packed up homework and started handover to the night crew. Offered to make incoming pilot a cup of tea, but he's had one of mine before and - not knowing the antidote - wisely refused. Went back to the accommodation. Slept.

What I DIDN'T do :

I didn't ignore the security man, or treat him like something I'd just found on the bottom of my shoe - as some of the passengers for the Business Terminal often do. Some of them drive BMWs, you know...

I didn't ask the observers if we could go and scout out some helicopter sites so's we could give the owners a hard time; I'd be out of a job within hours if I tried.

I didn't ignore or patronise the air taxi or Robin pilots, both of whom are probably at least my equals or better at what they do.

I didn't point out yet again to my long-suffering observers that: (deep breath) people who buy expensive cars, keep them outside their empty garage, leave the keys hanging on the front door below a glass panel and then go and watch telly in a back room (exhale...) actually deserve to have some teenage sh*t come along, break glass, steal keys, get into motor and drive off. Mind you, I didn't entirely sympathise with the people who'd just seen what happens when you do that, either.

I didn't ask the bobbies if I could patrol up and down the CTZ boundary looking out for unauthorised intruders on one side or illegal low-fliers on the other. Mind you, I did mutter an oath at the **** in his Robbie who flew along at dusk, no lights, smack on the boundary at 800 feet talking to nobody - still, it's a free country...

I didn't forget to apologise to ATC after I had to ask them to say again to a call they made during the pursuit. Or to thank them for liaising with the airport of the neighbouring city during the earlier ScroMo op, which saved me a frequency change and a couple of calls just when things were really busy.


So there you are - not much paranoid persecution of fellow pilots there, just a satisfying day's work. Before I started this job I had 27 years of working for Her Maj, developing the inevitable healthy cynicism that tends to go with the job. Like most, I had my own preconceived ideas about the sort of people who join the Police and do their work. Well, I'm delighted to say that they continue to pleasantly surprise me with their honesty, integrity and - all too often - their personal courage. I've seen sights from above that would make your hair curl - including the death of 2 of your sometimes-reviled traffic officers when they were rammed by a drunken speeding motorist. So next time you feel like venting your spleen, just pause for a sec, think what that officer might have had to see or do perhaps not too long ago, then give him/her the benefit of the doubt that you would want from him/her. Try smiling too - if nothing else it'll confuse the beggars. You know, you could even try obeying the law and sticking to the rules of the road! - then they'd leave you in peace! - maybe :E

Right, that's done. Back to gluons, hadrons and quarks, then... :sad:

[Hilico]

He describes a day like that and knows the term "quantum chromodynamics"? Yes, and so he joins Nick Lappos and Rich Lee in the Pantheon.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

No No No No! I'm trying to learn about QCD - and not doing brilliantly, even though it's only Level 1 of the OU (think first term on a real degree course...). NL & co? I am not worthy.. and who's that playing Bohemian Rhapsody in the background?

[Helinut]

Flying Lawyer,

[I feel a bit vulnerable at trying to explain my thoughts about any aspect of the law to you but here goes anyway]

What I was trying to say was that the police are (fairly obviously) meant to enforce the criminal law; and that far from excluding the ANO etc. they specifically do have some powers (and associated responsibilities) in respect of the ANO etc. They may not be the main law enforcer in aviation, but I think it probably unwise to expect them to ignore obvious and significant breaches which occur in front of them.

This does not mean that police helicopters (usually) spend any significant time and effort investigating possible breaches of aviation law on their own initiative.

Let me use an example that has occurred to me. Several days previously, a TRA had been designated to protect emergency services aircraft at the scene of a major accident. It had been NOTAMed, and the local ATC FIS providers were telling pilots about it. The pilot of an aeroplane flew within the TRA and passed close to, and at the same height as a low-level hovering police helicopter, so that he scared the crew of that aircraft. Don't then be surprised if the crew want to know who it was and why the aeroplane flew in that way.

Equally, these days, if you blunder into a Control Zone at a significant airport, don't be surprised if you get chased by a Police Helicopter that has been requested to identify the aircraft by ATC and/or "the counter-terrorism squad".

Police helicopters do get used for work for other law enforcement agencies from time to time. Customs and Excise use Police Air Support, for example. I have never flown a job for the CAA yet, but have done a number of jobs for the AAIB in connection with air accidents and their investigation. We also, of course, go looking for lost or distressed aircraft too. Just like we often get involved in similar tasks in connection with the railways, other means of transport and all manor of human activities.

I can only agree that the legal process is a time and money consuming business, and it can take enormous effort and cost a lot to defend yourself. I am not sure that the main people to blame for this are the crew of police helicopters (whether police officers or civilian pilots) - I would have thought that politicians, lawyers, administrators, lawyers, public opinion, lawyers and the media had more to do with that. I am also sure that police officers would agree with you about the extraordinary amount of time and effort absorbed in the legal justice system.

Anyone with any experience of the legal justice system knows it is distinctly imperfect. If we could find a better system than the current one we would all be pleased to see it adopted.

[John Eacott]

T & B,

Another quiet day in the office? Great description, I look forward to seeing the videotape on PCA one day ;)

[SASless]

All Police Agencies have Internal Review procedures to address allegations of wrongdoing by officers. I would suggest you take a very large Chill Pill.....then in a most business like and polite manner....visit the Cop Shop.....make parley with the Chief Constable.....state your concerns....take your proof of correctness....and see if you cannot resolve the issues in a low key....gentlemanly manner.

I dare say....this ain't the correct venue for redress of grievance if you in fact have one. We will throw our arms about your shoulders....and say nice supportive things....but that does not resolve the issue.

Now if by chance....you are not legal....and have liabilities that would make such a visit an unwise move.....then maybe a return to a very low key profile might be the better move.

Maybe offering to assist the police whenever possible by providing your aircraft when appropriate might be the way to win them over. I used that approach at a previous worksite and it worked miracles. After I loaded up my 500E with State Troopers to look for a criminal that had attacked another State Trooper, my ability to land at the company office in a vacant field went without notice beyond a smile and a handwave. One Trooper even told a complainant , "That was our helicopter!"

Even Heliport will agree that Sugar beats Vinegar for catching a fly!
:ok:

[Thomas coupling]

I think Sbigee has left the building :hmm:

[[email protected]]

well i am still here and looking at the responces i would like to thank all off you for your comments
and my conclusion is i am not doing any thing wrong helicopters was designed for there ability to take off from small places
and i have alwasy flown helicopters for this reason
in america they fly in and out of citys in between sky scrapers.
i am landing my helicopter over open land and will continue to untill the day comes the west yorkshire police helicopter films me again and sends it to the C A A and wait to see what happens a big fine they are 3 people who fly this helicopter and we have all decided to continue
to fly from here who they catch i dont know we will split the cost 3 ways who ever they film if we get fined or found not guilty we are not breaking any rules we have looked at rule 5 and the CAA
has lost many cases in the past
i have worked hard for my dreem since the age of 7 and now to have to look over your shoulder where ever you fly it knocks
fun out of it
TCAS is a nice thing to have Now one step ahead whos around now we know.
they might film me from space forgot about that

[Windle Poons]

At the risk of appearing flippant, which is a big word and I fully intend to look it up in the dictionary one day, maybe we should organise some job swaps for a while, so that we can more appreciate each others perspective.

The answer to all the following questions is yes…..

Am I a police officer?
Do I enjoy my job?
Do I work on an ASU?
Do I enjoy my specific role?
Do I enjoy reading and contributing on PPRUNE?
Have I enjoyed reading this thread?
Can I hear the sound of axes being ground?
Do I wish I could afford to own a helicopter?
Do I wish I had my PPL(H)? (Only had 5 hrs to date)

The answer to all the following questions is no…..

Do I want to go and patrol the streets again, be spat at, otherwise assaulted and generally abused for doing my job?
Would I mind if I had to?
Do I have a chip on my shoulder?
Am I jealous of people that can afford to own a helicopter? (Just because I would like one doesn't make me jealous of others that do)
Do I think Heliport should have made the comments he did using his moderator logon?
Do I own a BMW?
Do I wish I owned a BMW?

Most drivers tend to believe that they are better or more skilled than they actually are (this includes all drivers: civilian, police or otherwise) They believe they are safe and they think they are in control whatever the situation. In my opinion most pilots are the opposite and safety is at the forefront of their mind. The consequences of their actions are more clearly thought through in advance, which is rarely the case on the roads.

As an aside, I have never given anyone a fixed penalty ticket (3 points) for speeding. Whenever in the past I have stopped people for speeding I have asked them, what they think would happen if someone ran out into the road so that it was impossible to avoid them. The 'accident' itself would not be their fault, but that of the person who ran out. However because at the time of the collision they were travelling in excess of the speed limit, if the person were to die, they are likely to be charged with death by careless (or possibly even dangerous) driving. It is possible to go to prison for up to ten years for an accident that was not directly their fault, because they were speeding. Most have argued that the chances of it happening are remote, which is true, but their faces and reactions always changed when I tell them that it happened to me, although I was doing 37 in a 60 mph limit on a dual carriageway. There are many times since that I have wondered what would have happened if I had been doing 70 or 80 that day. I always asked errant motorists to do the same. That more than 3 points I reckon slows people down.

Back to the point (well mine at any rate). There are, and always will be, a few pilots who fly like many people drive, and ignore the law. We know they exist, and these few, tarnish the reputation of the majority. It’s the same for the police. There are always a few that tarnish the reputation of the rest of us, however things differ in the police for several reasons. Not least of which is that a police officer may be held in dereliction of duty (on or off duty) with the potential of losing their job, if they fail to act in response to an offence. Pilots are not.

Your opinion please. A police officer (off duty) sees somebody attempting to steal a car. Should they:

A. Take action because it's the right thing to do and anyway they have sworn to do so?
B. Take action, because they could get into trouble if they don't?
C. Ignore it, it's not really their business.

If your answer is C, assume it’s your car? What if it wasn't a police officer that saw it, but a pilot, would your answer differ? Possibly and probably for good reason. If however the offence is now one against the Air Navigation Order does your answer still change? If it does then you are being a tad hypocritical or at least bias towards the aviation industry, of which by the way, I am proud to be a small part of. As such I do not want any other person to act in a way that might bring its standards down, just as I wouldn't want another police officer to do the same to the police service. But it does happen. The aviation industry is quite closed, and few outside know how it works and are aware of all that goes on, therefore it is easy to keep things in house, lest the external reputation suffer for the malpractice of a few. Is that OK? It certainly echoes strongly of the police culture of not so long ago.

As police officers who happen to be part of the aviation industry, we are not suddenly relieved of our duty or discretion. Yes we should use common sense, but if we see anything that is clearly dangerous and could possibly harm others then we should take action. It should not matter whether it's in the air or the ground. Do we really want the police to deal with some offences and completely ignore others? Discretion is a wonderful thing, but everyone has their own slant on it, and those views are very apparent on this thread.

You may come back at me and say, "ahh but the police would not act if they saw a colleague erring." I think most people would be surprised at how eagerly a police officer will report their colleagues for the most trivial matter upwards. In fact it is encouraged. But you're right, there are officers that turn a blind eye, but these are the few that I have mentioned, and they ruin it for the rest of us. It wasn't always that way, there used to be a 'look after your own' policy, but, whether you like it or not, times have changed and most police officers will now report a colleague's misdemeanours.

The aviation industry on the other hand, is still IMO, very much, a 'look after your own' place to work. Many threads on these forums will bear this out.:uhoh: However, before I am lambasted, flayed and hung out to dry, I am not saying that this is necessarily wrong. Whilst in the police this attitude is akin to corruption, in aviation it is not, and colleagues are very much aware of the commercial pressures placed on others as well as a host of other factors. There is also the fact that failure to act when an offence is committed is not, in itself, legally wrong. If you believe this attitude is alright for the aviation industry then that's fine.

The police have rightly been criticised for many things in the past, from incompetence to corruption, and we are still suffering because of the things that we (the service) have done wrong in the past. I am sure that this post will have some pilots feeling indignant, and many will think it unfair or plainly wrong. If this is the case, then you will be well placed to understand how as police officers we feel when unfair or plainly wrong posts are made about the police.

On a spiritual note maybe we should all read, inwardly digest and act upon Luke Chapter 6, verses 37 to 42.:) Something about planks and eyes (thought it rather appropriate for Rotorheads!).

WP :ok:

Edited for typo.

[zardoz]

I appreciate that this may be a little off topic, but to obtain a PPL(H) is there any sort of written test, or do you just draw a ring around the answer with a crayon?

[[email protected]]

i dont think all asu are the same its just this one and its all instigated by one man poisoning the others who thinks he can
control who he wants hes not a police man hes a pilot and Dick
Meston was always one step of him.
The police have to do there job yes some are fair and have brains and see the world with open eyes and some have blinkers
on. just like mr public we are all human after all and not perfect we all have to die some day so lets all try to get on together.
i am sounding like a vicar now i am shuting up for a while

BIG GEE

[Thomas coupling]

Big G:

Can I ask a couple of questions, if that's OK?

1. Do you own/operate both an Hungarian registered Gazelle, and an Hungarian registered Allouette? Or only one of them?

2. Do you have an AOC?

3. Are you english?

4. Are you familiar with Rule 5 of the ANO?

I hope this isn't too much of a problem for you...

Many thanks for your co-operation.

TC

[Vfrpilotpb]

TC,
I feel 3 & 4 could be NO(but quietly):ok:

[HeliMark]

Big Gee, question.

Are you breaking the law by doing what you are doing?

If so, even if this police officer is a little ambitious (he/they are doing there job), are you not wrong first and foremost?

Are you placing the blame on the police for what ultimately is your wrong doing?

I am not here to chime in to defend anyone. Do not know your rules on that side of the pond enough to do so. But I see a theme here. Kinda like the one I was always hearing when I worked the street about how that person was picked on because he/she was a young kid in an expensive automobile. Not that the driving was such that it kept getting them noticed. Or the fixed wing pilot who could not believe I prosecuted him just because he went under me in the middle of a city, and I was only at 400 agl.

[Coconutty]

Getting away from the original subject for a moment, FlyingLawyer poses an interesting question when he asks :

"Should we think of police helicopters when we're flying in the same way we think of police cars when we're driving? "


:hmm:

I think that most Police Officers would agree with me that when they go out on patrol they see "lots" of motorists committing offences which are considered as being towards the petty end of the scale : Not wearing a seat belt and Using a mobile phone while driving are two examples.

The Police don't have the time to stop everyone they see committing these dastardly crimes, or they wouldn't have time to do anything else ( like catching the burglars, robbers, rapists etc )
but on seeing the patrol car the "offender" will ( usually ) have the presence of mind to put their seat belt on, or hang up the phone.

This tells us two important things :

1. The individual KNOWS that what they were doing was wrong
2. The Police patrol has a deterrent effect

( See where this is going ? )

Now then, contrary to the opinions of a few motorists ( who are often the worst "offenders" ) the laws, or more precisely the variety of Road Traffic Legislation that "Traffic Cops" are supposed to enforce, was NOT intended to simply persecute motorists, nor was it intended as a Revenue raising exercise for the Police fund, but was enacted for the SAFETY of road users.

There are far too many people killed on our roads as a direct result of ignoring some of these regulations ( Excess speed being the single cause of the most fatalities on our roads ).

( You should have got my drift by now ... )

So : The answer to FlyingLawyers question should probably be YES - especially if it has the same effect of reminding the "driver" of some apparantly petty regulation that they are not complying with, and has the same effect as buckling up in the car - the rules and regulations of the air are there, just like the one's that tell us to buckle up and stick to 70 on the motorway - for the safety of us all :ooh:

Here's a question of my own :
How many AAIB reports have you read that identify a chain of events which started when a regulation or rule ( or maybe even a correct procedure ) was not followed ?

I sincerely hope we don't read any in the future concerning "illegal" helipads :(

[[email protected]]

thanks again for all your replys and i will answer
yes i am english born and bread
yes i know this rule 5 inside out but you can read it time and time
again and it can mean two things its not in laymen's its like most of the CAA publications it stinks and its not plane english

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Ah, good ol' plane English...

[bonkerjones513]

Sbigee
This story intrigues me. Why video you 3 times? What happenened to the first two? Why do I get the feeling that there's something you are not telling us?


Quoted from your earlier post
(But all my problems started when i bought a turbine helicopter
not the expencive type its an alouette 11 shes and old girl but in very good condition we have been filmed 3 times now and the CAA has the footage the last one was in the past 4 weeks on the helipad i received call from CAA telling me that west yorkshire helicopter support unit had sent the video in again)

Why not post the picture of your site and let the flyers reading this thread give you an honest opinion about it.

Heliport probably knows more than we do but likes to keep the topic interesting. Who awarded this bunkem 5 stars.

I'm sure heliport that those lads up there in their super modern 135 helicopter look down with envy at this guy in his old alouette 11 and are green with envy. You come out of this as a bit of a pratt sir.

Would some-one like to explain rule 5. Perhaps sbigee could.

Why are the helicopters hungarian registered?

[Happy Landing !]

Speaking as a former Police officer, a pilot, a private owner, with a private site 1 mile North of a UK international Airport, from where a Police helicopter unit is based.

This guy must have either wound up the locals, prompting them to stick in a complaint. Wound up the Police unit somehow, prompting them to take action, or wound up the CAA. Either way, judging by the tone and content of his writing I expect it’s all Three!

My local Police unit haven’t the time, finance nor inclination to fanny around with wayward pilots unless he/she has brought some indiscretion upon himself. To a point, the Police have no jurisdiction on aspects of Rule 5 (I may be wrong, and stand corrected), but if this guy is causing a nuisance, he may deserve exactly what he’s getting.

On the other hand this post may be a wind-up and this guy may not even be old enough to be a pilot.
:{

[Thomas coupling]

Big G:

Sorry about this, can I ask a couple of questions, if that's OK?

1. Do you own/operate both an Hungarian registered Gazelle, and an Hungarian registered Allouette? Or only one of them?

2. Do you have an AOC?

3. Are you absolutely certain you are english?



I hope this still isn't too much of a problem for you...


Apologies if I'm not making myself clear.

[Roofus]

Big G

I'd have to ask a similar question to TC here.... 'Are you sure you're English?' I only ask because your grammar & spelling aren't the best!
(Or perhaps happy landings has it right...you're only six?)

Having flown on ASU's, the only time we ever took evidential video of private property was if there was suspicion of wrong doing or a complaint had been received.

I'm pleased that you've acheived your dream, you're very lucky in that respect. Do I resent you? Not at all. I'm living my dream.

I'd humbly suggest that the CAA will happily explain the definitions of Rule 5, if you're having trouble with the interpretation. In my experience they were more than happy to help when phoned for advice.

My opinions on the 'grassing' up of fellow pilots tends to be a tad controversial.....because if I thought their actions endangered A/C, Crew or Third Parties I would report them. So....are you fully inside the law? Or, as others have already touched upon, is there more to this than you're telling?

Ho-Hum....back to reality & work! :ok:

[Bearintheair]

Big G:

Stop whinging !

If you've a genuine complaint of harassment by your police asu make a formal complaint to the force concerned (try their professional standards dept).

If its found to have any grounds the police staff will be dealt with and they'll be off your back. (They'll probably be off the asu if not off the force).

If you've no genuine grounds, tell us the whole story of what you're hiding. could it be that you get up to something that you'd rather a passing police helo doesn't see ?

[StevieTerrier]

Roofus / TC- is it an offence now to not use correct grammar and spelling when posting on PPRUNE? Can Big G expect to have his collar felt by the local ASU for Crimes Against The English Language?

Little bit too smug, guys.

[Vfrpilotpb]

Roofus,

Cos sum of us up ere int North dont ave the wright sort of lingo that suits some on this thred, dont mean we cant stand our corner, most of us were brung up in hard times, and worked ard to make us brass,

What we missed on the way old chap, was the ability to speak and write like most of the prats who write in our newspapers most days of the week, but worst of all those who are in power, ie the government, our deputy Prime Minister good old three Jags John, the highest paid steward I have ever known has a turn of phrase that I bet you would not challenge if he came to visit your ASU. one of the most wealthy men in the country was standing on market stalls only 18 years ago, now he owns half of EGNH and has a fleet of Helis and A/c that the Queen ( your boss) would be proud of.

If you understand what " ****E "means, what difference is there if I say fertilizer or manure , you will still understand it is ****E, sadly most of us are hard working sorts, NOT ENGLISH TEACHERS :ouch:

[bonkerjones513]

Yeh rufus I think there is a smell of arrogance and superiority coming out of your corner and it's you that has a lack of intelligence for having to resort to the comments you made. Bet you'de had a bit of dutch courage. Lets stick to the thread or are you trying to embaress(did I spell that right?) SBiggee into saying no-more

[ppheli]

Gazelle HA-PPY is a Yugoslav built example, which means it has zero chance of getting on the G register, but would be a lot cheaper to buy, but likely means a trip to Hungary for maintenance. That said, sbiggee's operated it with no apparent problems from the authorities for at least four years (it was at Helitech at Redhill in Sep99 by my reckoning)

Alouette II HA-LFZ is of unknown origin so far, but carries a code 2403 on the nose and is camo scheme. sbiggee seems to have added it to his fleet on 13th August, routing in via Calais, Southend and Gamston. It carries a Hungarian flag next to the reg

sbiggee - wasn't it you who had the Alouette II F-GNVB in the Leeds area some time back??

I conclude that sbiggee prefers registrations from outside the UK. Got to give him credit for securing the reg HA-PPY too!

However, reading through the thread, something doesn't tie up... So here's one more question for sbiggee...

6. How do you know that the person you refer to in this quote "call from CAA telling me that west yorkshire helicopter support unit had sent the video in again" was _really_ from the CAA and not someone trying to wind you up?

I think you should just cock a snook at this phone prankster - would the CAA really use the telephone approach like this? Guess I haven't needed to find out yet.. ;)

[Happy Landing !]

PPHILI,

Christ, How on earth did you get hold of all that info:ugh:

Frightening stuff.

Happy

(now Un Happy)

[Coconutty]

"Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae.

The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm.

Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig huh?"

[Jed A1]

SBiggee,

Come on give us some more facts.

How often do you fly said machines?
Where do you fly to and from?
What type of flying is it, leisure, business, personal transportation etc?
How many hours a year do you fly?
Who flies with you?
Who pays for fuel, landing fees and maintenance etc?
Why are the machines registered out of the country?

All in the interests of getting the whole picture / story.

Coconutty,

Brilliant stuff.

[[email protected]]

Hi all no more postings my grammer is not good enough
for this site Thank you. BUY or is bye

[bonkerjones513]

SB Seems to me there are too many hard questions that you have no desire to answer. You may have opened a can of worms

Some-one must know where this site is and why it draws attention, or maybe answer some of the other questions being asked. If there are three helicopters owned by SBiggee. What does he use them for and where are they flown from? Did I see somewhere that the Gaz is painted in police colours. Now why would anyone do that. Is there no custom duties to pay when you bring in a helicopter from another country. Could I bring an hungarian car in?

If the CAA or the police are reading pprune he may have drawn a bit more attention to himself.

Come-on Heliport give the guy some more support. You took his side quickly but have now dropped out saying your 're off on holiday. We know you go on line while on holiday and will be reading this, so how about a comment from you.

[Earpiece]

Roofus, TC,

Don't be put off by the fact you can write English. When I learned to fly I'd heard that English was the international language of aviation. God help those foreigners who are trying to understand some of the English in this thread.

And another thing. When I was a little boy a bigee, biggy, biggee was something else!

(R)Earpiece

[PPRuNe Radar]

The only relevant question to sbigee is whether he is operating the helicopter(s) legally or not. And it is for the CAA to investigate and judge, not his peers, or anyone on here.

His nationality, those of the helicopters, and so on, are actually irrelevant. Unless they break the statement above.

Would all those clamouring for the answers be willing to provide all their details on an anonymous website ?? Who will be first ??

PS ... perfect spelling and/or grammar have never been a requisite on PPRuNe ... even if non moderators seem to think it is their right to pull people up for it. :hmm:

PPS I know Roofus from of old and he has an excellent reputation, as well as proven track record in helo ops. Listen wisely to his words.

[helimatt]

For those of us not operating in the U.K Could someone give a brief run down of rule 5:confused:

[Vfrpilotpb]

This thread must be quite interesting to a lot of people, yesterday the 17th of Sept at 0830 BST there had been 2093 hits or views, today the 18th Sept at o830 BST there had been 2561 hits, quite impressive Eh !!:ok:

[Helinut]

helimatt,

Bearing in mind that we don't know whether the "problem" raised has anything to do with Rule 5, I will briefly try to answer your question.

Rule 5 of the Rules of the Air are the complicated set of rules governing low flying in the UK. As was discussed in several threads recently, they are complicated and difficult to understand. The elements cover:

danger to persons or property on the ground in the event of engine failure
a minimum 500 ft separation distance from various ground based objects
minimum height rule (1,500') when flying over congested areas
restrictions on flying over or near open air assemblies

There are general and specific exemptions and variations that further complicate interpretation.

There are some aspects of the Rule that are ambiguous. The CAA tend to try to interpret some of these quite widely. However, there are some notable court cases which have failed which suggest the courts may take a different, perhaps more realistic view.

The CAA are, give them credit for once, trying to simplify the Rule and have a current proposal which was discussed on this forum a few weeks ago which would change the rule for the better.

I will stop at that

a) because it would take for ever; and
b) it might be taken as some sort of insight into the particular case, which I do not have.

[truncheon meat]

Contributors,

I would like to present you with a hypothetical situation.....

I am a police officer and, whilst off duty on my way to work, in my car, somebody does something that I object to. I record the vehicle index number and, when I get to work, use the Police National Computer, to which I have access, to obtain the details of the driver of that vehicle. Using those details I then write to the driver at his or her home address and castigate them for their action and insult them in the text of the letter

Have i overstepped the mark? Have I abused the computer records? Have I perhaps stretched the Data Protection Act legislation? In my own view the answer to all three of those questions would be yes.

Had I done all of this in my official capacity and in a fair manner then the answers may well be different. I wonder what your thoughts on the matter are.

Where is all this leading in this thread I hear you ask.

I attach below a text received by me from Heliport, the moderator of this forum. Please note that he has given his permission for me to use this in any way I see fit and i would like to thank him (or her) for that permission.

"Dear PC ****, ************* Police / truncheon meat

I'll leave it to one of the other Mods, SuperMods or Administrators to deal with your protest as they see fit. That's partly because I consider it the correct thing to do, and partly because I'm too busy to waste time dealing with childish complaints.
I'm not remotely anti-police and, if you calmed down and took the trouble to read what I've said with a little more care, you'd see I was referring to a particular type of police officer, not police officers in general.

Please don't misinterpret this as an apology. If you're incapable of participating in a discussion without running off to complain that someone's said something you don't like, that's your problem not mine. Most of us grow out of that sort of behaviour when we're toddlers. I expressed what I made clear was a personal opinion. I stand by it.

I see you've only made four posts, two of them on this topic. Rotorheads is a very successful forum and its format works. If you don't like it, I suggest you find another forum more to your liking. I have no intention of changing it to accommodate your hyper-sensitivity.

Please feel free to make use of this reply as you wish and make it clear that I've invited you to do so.

Heliport
Rotorheads Moderator
PPRuNe SuperModerator"

This message was received, not as a private message which I feel would have been appropriate, even given the insulting tone of the content, but as an e-mail to my business e-mail inbox.

The very fact that it is headed by my force identification number and force name leads me to feel that it is almost in the vein of "I know who you are!"

The accusation of childishness refers, I believe to the fact that I reported Heliport to the moderator regarding one of his postings on this thread.

I feel that, as someone of middle age who has served in the military for 15 years and the police service for 16 years I am far from childish. In fact, no less an authority than the Ministry of defence considered me adult, stable and pschologically mature enough to, for four years, have my finger on the trigger of the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent. The police service felt that I was adult enought to bear the responsibility of being armed. Someone deemed me adult enough to have raised three children, all now well into mature and responsible adulthood.

Childish? No. Fun loving and willing to throw the occasional grenade into a forum and watch the fallout, yes.

As for the comment regarding the number of posts made, should that be a measure of the suitability and impact of a posters contribution to a particular thread? I personally do not think so.

Does Heliport not even consider that I may have more than one pseudonym, as I am sure do many others. I would imagine that Heliport must have more than one. And that is my point. As a moderator Heliport, surely you should moderate.

(mod·er·a·tor
Pronunciation: 'mä-d&-"rA-t&r
Function: noun
Date: circa 1560
1 : one who arbitrates : MEDIATOR
2 : one who presides over an assembly, meeting, or discussion: as a : the presiding officer of a Presbyterian governing body b : the nonpartisan presiding officer of a town meeting c : the chairman of a discussion group.

If you feel that you would like to contribute to a thread and state opinions I would have felt it more suitable for those to be made under another pseudonym and not under the title of moderator.

I shall make further use of the text received by me from Heliport in that I intend to send it to Captain Prune.

Am I being over sensitive? Please let me know.

[Thomas coupling]

Truncheon meat: I have to agree with your initial comments about Heliports response to you on page 1. They were mildly inflammatory and could be(and were) misinterpreted.
However, he is only human and it is extremely rare that Heliport fires up like this. When I re-read it in slow time, together with his further response further on down the page, I have come to the conclusion that he was aware of these indiscretions.

You are new to this forum. You are, no doubt, familiar with your own pilot's strange rapport and social intercourse (:eek: ). It is peculiar to our industry and spectacularly well emphasised here on this helicopter forum.
Do not be offended by what you read here, take everything with a pinch of salt and treat it for what it is, a group of spotters shooting the breeze, nothing more nothing less. The day it is taken out of context, or acted on, is a sad day, mainly for the individuals concerned.
Take what you need/want from this forum and if one doesn't like what one reads (even if it is personal). smile and move on
DON'T DWELL ON IT :hmm: Life is too short.

You won't get a response from HP atleast until the end of the month, he really has been given his orders by his other half to stay away from the PC for the duration!

As far as this thread is concerned, there is more to this than meets the eye, but for reasons which should by now be obvious, they cannot and will not be made available for public consumption.
Time will tell.

[Mars]

Not generally well known or understood but an aircraft operating in a foreign country (other than in Commercial Air Transport) must operate in compliance with those rules of the State of Registration (that are produced in compliance with ICAO Annex 6 Part III Section III for International General Aviation); and, any additional rules promulgated in the AIP of the State in which the aircraft is operated.

How many of you are familiar with ICAO Annex 6 Part III Section III - International General Aviation?

[Helinut]

Mars,

I am not quite sure that I understand your post. I always thought that if an aircraft of one country operated in another country, it had to comply with the laws of both countries, where these were defined to apply to that aircraft.

Let me give an example. In the UK we have a 500 ft separation distance rule from an aircraft and buildings, structures people etc etc. So it is quite legal to fly say 200 ft agl, so long as you don't fly within 500 ft of buldings etc. ............ In some/many European countries they have a 500 ft minimum height rule. If a UK aircraft is flown over such a country it must comply with both sets of rules, and therefore not fly below 500 ft agl.

Are you suggesting anything different from this, or am I missing the point?

[Mars]

Helinut,

The post was not directed at Rule 5 (which in any case is ICAO Annex 2 specific) but you are correct in your assumption.

It was more generally addressed at the elements of ICAO Annex 6 Part III Section III - i.e.: General; Flight Operations; Performance; Instruments, equipment and flight documents; Communication and navigation equipment; Maintenance; and Flight Crew - which also require compliance.

[Letsby Avenue]

Hey, Truncheon Meat – You are being worse than sensitive, you are being a prat.. Can I suggest that you leave the Professional Pilots Rumour Network to the Professional Pilots and you go and play on your little Police ASU forum where no doubt your witty contributions will be appreciated? Byeeeee…..:cool:

[Vfrpilotpb]

Truncheon Meat, or might we call you TM,

Don't take to heart things written on this thread or even on this forum, I am one of many PPL(H) persons, who learn much from the input of the people who are paid to fly these weird contraptions, I wish I was only young enough to make it worth my while to get a job flying Helicopters, but I digress, some people say it like it is, I am one of those, on bad days I bark, on worse days I bite, but normally I am very kind with my comments and I even stop my car to allow old ladies to cross the road, when I joined this Pprune thingy a couple of posts ago, I really found that some commenst from certain posters wound me up tighter than the elastic in John Prescotts Y fronts, in fact TC and I had a long running really ill tempered do at each other, purely and simply through me misinterpreting what was written, but today I feel that TC is an unseen good friend, in fact Id love to buy him a pint and glean info from his wide experience.

I do feel that you are being a little Hyper Sensitive to some critical words, and I feel that you should stand back a little and take a tiny chill pill, after all this is not a practise, its the real thing we, members of Pprune that is come onto this Rotoheads forum, to converse and swap ideas and gain information and help from other who are much wiser and far more experienced, somebody may have given you the permission to bear arms, you have been lucky enough to raise a shed full of children and you put yourself into the service of the community at large, but does that mean youve lost a little bit of humanity in the process, I dont think so, so my friend, take it with a pinch, You know it makes sense.

Told like it is from the heart, not edited for grammer or sppeeling cos Im not a teacher of English.

Will now hang up my Halo:yuk:

[md 600 driver]

letsby

is that the private one they can use without us seeing


ive not entered in this thread as droopy thinks i am s bigee and wont reply to confirm that i am not. any one knowing me to confirm


steve [not s bigee or ever been but i do know s biggee as i live locally ]

[ppheli]

I can confirm that md600driver is not sbiggee

md600driver flies an N reg md600, an N reg Hiller and a G- reg (ex UK military) Gazelle

sbiggee flies HA reg Gazelle and HA reg Alouette

So, md, what was it you wanted to say about your fellow Yorkshireman's situation?

[Flying Lawyer]

PC Truncheon Meat
My goodness you take yourself very seriously!
If I reported a post or whinged to Captain Pprune every time someone wrote something critical of lawyers on these forums I'd be reporting or whinging virtually every day. On the other hand, if If I was as sensitive as you, I'd find a lawyers website where we could all tell each other how wonderful we are without any danger of anyone daring to suggest any member of our profession could possibly be anything less than perfect. Isn't there a Police Federation forum or similar where there's no danger of your being offended.

If you don't want people replying to your police e-mail address, then don't send e-mails from it. When you report a post your message goes by e-mail so any reply comes back to your e-mail address..I realise this explanation is less sinister and dramatic than the one in your vivid imagination, but that'show the system works. If your e-mailis PC49@SurreyPolice that's where the reply is sent.
If you're so concerned about keeping your force a secret, it wasn't too clever listing your location as Guildford and commenting on another thread about Surrey ASU. Perhaps all these frightfully responsible positions you've held haven't included training in undercover work. :D


.
There's so much to learn from this forum if you're interested in helicopters or helicopter operations. If someone posts something you don't like, do what the rest of us do - answer it with a better argument (if you think it's important enough to bother) , or move on to the next post. Throwing your toys out of your pram gives a most unfortunate impression. to say the least. Letsby Avenue put it more succinctly. Perhaps he's got a point.

[Droopy]

MD600 - don't get hung up about what was merely a comment about the prose styles, which on the first couple of postings were remarkably similar.

[blade sail]

Truncheon Meat

Perhaps a little over sensitive. Not a prat though in my opinion. I think I might have been a little upset by the use of my e-mail address to send me the text you quote. However, let's just sit back, relax and get on shall we. There's enough conflict in the world.

How about the two of you getting together, buying each other a drink and shaking hands with an agreement to disagree.

Heliport, perhaps the same should be said to you too in this case. You have done a good job as moderator to date but perhaps truncheon meat's suggestion that your opinions could have been made under another name were reasonable. After all, a moderator is supposed to be neutral.

Let's get back to the real question here, one which I note SBiggee has still not replied to, what sort of flying is he doing from the site mentioned, is he willing to show us some piccies of his site and whatever flying he is doing, is it being done legally. If he has nothing to worry about why not give us an answer? The question has been posed a number of times but as yet no response frm SB. Come on, you can tell us.

[Happy Landing !]

PPHELI,

There you go again!! how do you do that?

Mr T.M

I understand the shortcomings of Surrey Police more than you know! In fact I know Mount Browne exceedingly well indeed!

Get my point? Your audience on this, or indeed any web based forum attracts an auful lot of visitors. Small World you know:ok:

Take a chill pill mate, no offence has been deliberately directed at you.

btw, I'll say hello to Andy Catlin or Hoss for you :uhoh:

[Thomas coupling]

Happy landings:

The Gazelle in question in Yorks:

HA-PPY SOKO-AEROSPATIALE SA.341G GAZELLE 1118/021 JRV.....(YU),YU-HDN,HA-VLA,HA-LFR,HA-PPY

If you've got internet, you've got complete control.

Try typing into Google:
aircraft registrations and take it from there:oh:


Blade sail:

try reading the whole thread, you'll have read that Heliport is away until end of Sept, and Sbigee has left the building :uhoh:

[Genghis the Engineer]

A fascinating thread, I wonder if I might conject slightly.

Firstly, since it seems to have become traditional I'll state my own involvement with the police. I've never been in the police force or arrested for anything, certified one police FW aircraft, breathalised twice (on both occasions after drinking orange juice all evening), and spoken or written to just about every force and prosecuting authority in the UK at some point - invariably because they need my help on some aviation matter, rather than I'm helping them with their inquiries. Apart from a pathological dislike of speed cameras (especially those in Northants twixt my home and Sywell airfield), I have nothing but respect for the boys in blue based upon my own personal experiences. Oh, and my neighbour used to fly a police helicopter. Right that's over with.


Starting with a couple of highly-probables...

(1) Our man has neighbours.
(2) He flies a helicopter from his garden
(3) At least one of his neighbours doesn't like him, or his helicopter. This may in part be down to revenge for the criminal damage he keeps committing to English spelling and grammar, envy because they can't afford a helicopter of their own, or they just don't like the noise? - who knows.

Now a bit of pure conjecture, I'm going to suggest that what's happened was something like this....

(1) Unhappy neighbour decided to report our man to the police. They may even have photographed or videod it. They might even mention rule 5 - since every anti-aviation campaigner in the country knows about rule 5 (although very few understand it I suspect).
(2) Terrestrial police decided that they didn't understand aviation, best send it to the ASU who do.
(3) ASU, read report, when passing decide to take a look at the strip from the air. May even take a photo of it for the report.
(4) ASU then decide it's not their problem, best send it to the CAA and let them worry about it.
(5) Our chap gets a letter from CAA asking what's going on, because they've received a complaint from the police.
(6) This may have happened more than once.


As I say, pure conjecture - but it fits the facts as presented, doesn't show the ASU in particularly poor light nor the regular police in his area.

G

[Rich Lee]

Genghis - Damn your conjecture Sir! Logic has no place in the drama of this melodramatic thread. In the future I would request that you please wait until the score is written and the musical staged before divulging the conclusion. Well then, .........correct even though you may very well be....... the mystery of the thread is for me, no more.

As for speed cameras I would agree with you Sir. Thomas Edison once said in part that "There will one day spring from the brain of science a machine or force so fearful in its potentialities, so absolutely terrifying, that even man, the fighter, who will dare torture and death in order to inflict torture and death, will be appalled". There are those who feel he was speaking of the speed camera--an evil design from the mind of the devil that deserves no place in civilized society. Do they have them in France?

[sss]

please dont pick on speed cameras they have feeling as well, but i do agree with this written by a gentleman from another part of the world.

(ps i do apologise that its not about police helicopters wasting public funds but somone did mention cameras and they should be defended.)

If there's one thing I can't stand - no it's not speed cameras - but people who can't stand speed cameras.

Oooh! This sounds kinda controversial! Actually it's more hypocritical than controversial. Not by me, but by "them" - The people that are forever whinging about speed cameras. So why do I feel this way? Simple! Because not a single one of "them" has got the balls to actually come out and say what they really mean: What they can't stand is speed limits not speed cameras. You disagree? Okay then, (in my best Lloyd Grossman impersonation) "let's look at the facts..."

So you're opposed to speed cameras? Okay. What if I was to tell you that the Government had just raised the speed limit on every road to 100MPH. Are you still against them? Or how about if I was to tell you that the penalty had been reduced from £60 and 3 points on your licence to just a £5 'slap on the wrist'. Still against them? Umm, Err, Ahh. Tell you what - Get back to me when you've thought up a valid argument.

The bottom line is people like to speed. And at the same time, people don't like to get caught. It's as simple as that! So bearing this in mind, let's have a look at some of the usual arguments that the people against cameras come out with...

'Speed cameras are just there to raise money'

And so are collection bowls in churches. Of course you have a choice as to whether you put any money into a collection bowl, just as you have a choice whether you drive through a speed camera under or over the speed limit. I mean, it's not as if it's compulsory to break the speed limits now is it?

'Speed cameras can't tell the difference between someone who speeds all the time and someone who just does it the once'

Sorry, but I think you'll find that they can! If you speed all the time, you'll get lot's of tickets. If you only speed the once, you'll only get the one. Or am I missing something?

'If the road is clear then it is perfectly safe to drive faster'

(Just a quick recap - Speed cameras enforce speed limits) So what you're really saying is that the speed limits are wrong? Right?

'Speed cameras have no discretion'

And you think the traffic police have? I'm sorry, but have you met one recently? Obviously not! Discretion is not in their vocabulary. (In fact, I'd go as far as to say that they undergo a surgical procedure to have it removed. Probably.) But if it were, are you telling me that if you were caught by a camera you'd be mightily pissed off, but if you were caught doing exactly the same speed by a policeman who didn't let you off, sorry - I mean didn't exercise his discretion, you'd be more than happy? I think not.

'Speed cameras don't catch criminals'

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a criminal is someone who breaks the law - Right? And since exceeding a speed limit is breaking the law, then it would follow that the only thing speed cameras do is catch criminals. Oh you mean they don't catch burglars and robbers. Well that's why they're called 'speed' cameras. Now if they were called 'speed, burglar and robber cameras' then you might have a case under the Trade Descriptions Act...

'The police should spend their time catching proper criminals instead of targeting motorists'

I hate to be the one to tell you this, but sitting inside each one of those grey roadside boxes is a big pile of electronics, not a policeman with a Polaroid camera who could be better employed making up evidence, pushing criminals downs flights of stairs (he tripped - honestly!) and all the other things they get up to. If anything, cameras actually 'free up' the police to do other things rather than enforce speed limits. Now that sounds like a very good argument for more cameras wouldn't you say?

Oh this could go on and on forever. So let's get to the point - Stop whinging about speed cameras and start whinging about what you really hate: Speed limits. (It won't do you any good but at least we'll respect you for your honesty!) And in the meantime, here's a tip for you - That big thing right in front of your nose is called a speedometer: It tells you how fast you're going. If you use it in conjunction with your brake pedal then you should be just fine! Get the idea?

The demons are quiet for now and hopefully my head will remain intact until the next time...

[bonkerjones513]

Genghis your logic seems fine. Mr SB signs off his first entry on this thread with Graham from Halton Moor Leeds. I phoned a friend in Leeds and he tells me that Halton Moor is mainly a large run down council estate on the edge of Leeds. Its notorious for car crime and the police helicopter spends hours everyday over it.

I wonder if SB lives on that estate. They would be jealous of him if he went home in a helicopter and there would be more than a few to complain if he was landing in the backgarden of a semi.

Come on SB give us a photo and talk to us. This can only get worse

[Genghis the Engineer]

Rich - it's even worse in France. In the UK, thanks to overwhelming public pressure, the things are painted bright yellow (ok, certain forces - Kent for example, like hiding them behind trees or but at least you have a fighting chance) and you can legally own a detector.

In France, the local Police / Gendarmerie are still allowed to camouflage them, AND they've banned detectors.

I'm with you and Edison.

G


N.B. sss, do you have shares in the company that makes these infernal contraptions.

N.B.B. Rich, if you are to be found in the bar of the W-B next week please feel to track me down and conject back all you wish.

[sss]

i wish i did i would be a millionaire and have a little fleet of aircraft flying from my back garden

[truncheon meat]

I have taken note of the comments in this thread and I have, as a result had a good look at the thread and, in particular, my own comments and I must say, I agree, I have been over sensitive and probably a prat as well.
I would like to apologise to those taking part in this thread, in which I shall continue to maintain an interest, for making a complete a**e of myself.
I shall be sending a private message of apology to Heliport.
Thank you for your comments, both for and against which I value and which have made me review my actions.
I would however like to say that just because I live in Guildford, doesn't necessarily indicate which force I work for. I know a copper in Leicestershire whose only home is in Holland!

Sincerely,

Truncheon Meat

[ShyTorque]

TM,

I make no comment on the disagreement you were having and I'm not saying you were right or wrong....but well done to have the balls to stand up and publicly apologise.

As regards the content of the original thread, I can't imagine an ASU wasting much time, effort and flying hours repeatedly videoing an alleged misdemeanour such as landing an aircraft.

I also suspect there is more to this than that.

[DeepC]

Is Mr Biggee a wind up?

The unusual thing about the story so far is that a thorough working over of google produces very little.

The gentleman says he owns two hungarian registered helicopters. We even have reg numbers. We know that Halton Moor is not an area renowned for high flying, heli owning, rich people. A Graham from Halton Moor must be a local legend with his fleet of helicopters in the back garden. We can only assume that internet connections are a bit scarce in that corner of Leeds. In aviation circles and especially because of spotters any movements are logged pretty mercilessly and posted on some obscure spotter site. This gentleman must therefore be flying to and from very private landing sites to not get a mention in these spotter sites. HA-PPY we have confirmed is registered (links to the Hungarian Register via landings.com).

This has to be one of the more entertaining threads on PPRuNe at the moment.

Keep it coming. Rumour and Conjecture heartily welcomed. Occasional facts keep the thread alive. Come back sbiggee all is forgiven!

DeepC

P.S. A large dose of respect for Truncheon Meat for coming back and apologising. Top effort.

[Hilico]

Truncheon Meat - welcome to a very large club.

sss - can I marry you and have your babies?

[Time Out]

Thomas Coupling said (way back on 12th):

Open misuse of public service funding would most certainly be jumped on within days if not hours if it was freely exposed to their customers (the public).

On 19th, an Evening Star article stated:
SUFFOLK police today rejected claims the force helicopter was being over-used for trivial crimes, arguing it is a vital crime-fighting tool that reassures the public.

source: http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/Content/news/story.asp?datetime=19+Sep+2003+20%3A12&tbrand=ESTOnline&tCategory=News&category=News&brand=ESTOnline&itemid=IPED19+Sep+2003+12%3A12%3A58%3A983

So is this an indicator of just such misuse being jumped on, once exposed? Or another unfair go at police?

Truncheon meat, don't be shy....

[zardoz]

Genghis - the cameras in the UK only have to be yellow and visible if the individual Chief Constable is keeping the money, if it's going to central Gov. funds they can hide them willy nilly.
Why that is, I haven't a clue.

TM - what big ba**s you have! Must be that tight flight suit :D
Here's hoping others will be as brave..

[Thomas coupling]

Some more nuggets of information:

Big G tells me he doesn't own the Hungarian Gazelle, he just flies it.

It has recently been painted in................wait for it.......................................................... ......................................................police colours (blue and yellow)(same paint scheme)
:E :suspect: :uhoh:

[md 600 driver]

It has recently been painted in................wait for it.......................................................... ......................................................police colours (blue and yellow)(same paint scheme)

TC please define recently
this helicopter was painted in 1999
also
the gazzelle is painted in metallic black with a yellow stripe down its back not as you put it blue and yellow

when it was painted by its owner it was because he liked the colour scheme , west yorks asu was nothing like that colour [it is upsetting they copied a similar scheme in blue and white ]

out of interest how long has the force had blue /yellow and is it a recognised colur scheme how many have black and yellow

some months after it was painted the military started using the same colours

the owner of h-appy is going to helitech on wed also big g both in the gazz

i will be going on tues in my pretend raf helicopter i suppose i must have painted in red white to deceive also

steve

[bonkerjones513]

Hi MD600 You say that SB is a friend of yours and have made some effort to defend comments being made. The main topic of this thread is a landing site and your friend being victimised for using it. Answer these then:

Do you know the site in question?

Are you one of the three that lands there, or have, or would you land there?

Is it a suitable landing site or is it on a council estate?

Is he being victimised in your opinion?

Your silence to these questions will be accepted, as you feel you don't wish to incriminate yourself.

[Helinut]

Time Out,

If anyone actually reads the newspaper article about the Suffolk Police helicopter, there is a complete absence of any information about the tasks that are alleged to be "trivial". This just smacks of a general whinge, the sort of thing that happens quite frequently. A police helicopter is such an obvious target for this sort of thing, cos it is high profile and appears expensive. I think that jealousy may play a part in these complaints too, sometimes. :D

"Member of the public" complainants about helicopter presence are not normally told what the helicopter was doing, although when a complaint is made the police will internally check that the use was sensible. Complaints channelled through elected representatives may get a more specific response.

The good burghers of Suffolk should think themselves lucky that their police have bought a relatively quiet EC135 :ok: and not a Squirrel ! :) :rolleyes: ;)

[md 600 driver]

Do you know the site in question? YES

Are you one of the three that lands there NO


Is it a suitable landing site I HONESTLY CANT SEE THE PROBLEM WITH LANDING THERE THE APPROACH IS OVER FIELDS I HAVE LANDED AT LICENCED SITES THAT IN MY OPPINION ARE NOT SAFE THIS SITE IS SAFER THAN ALOT
or is it on a council estate? YES [DID YOU KNOW LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE BROUGHT UP IN COUNCIL ESTATES THAT GO ON TO DO GREAT THINGS HE ACTUALLY OWNS AND RUNS A HOSTEL THERE I FIRST SAW GRAHAMS PLACE AND HIS HELICOPTER IN A NATIONAL NEWSPAPER YEARS AGO

Is he being victimised in your opinion?I CANT SEE WHY THE CAA CAN FIND THIS SITE ILLEGAL I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM OTHERS THE REASONS WHY SO I COULD MAKE MY MIND UP BUT IT DOES NOT SEEM TO BE

I BELIVE THERE IS LOTS OF PETTY JEALOUS PEOPLE OUT THERE
I WANTED FROM A EARLY AGE TO FLY I LIVED NEXT TO BARTON AIRPORT IN MANCHESTER I TOLD A FRIEND THAT I WOULD BE A PILOT WHEN I GREW UP [I LIVED IN A COUNCIL HOUSE TOO] HE SAID IT WAS NOT FOR OUR TYPE OF PEOPLE ,WHEN I GOT OLDER I THOUGHT OF JOINING THE RAF/ARMY AND LEARNING TO FLY BUT I DECIEDED AGAINST IT AS THE WAGES WERE NOT THAT GOOD IN THE SERVICES AND THE PAY AFTER YOU LEFT WAS NOT MUCH BETTER SO I DECIEDED TO WORK AND PAY FOR IT MY SELF ,I NOW OWN AND RUN A £3,000,000 A YEAR COMPANY AND CAN AFFORD THE TOYS I WANT BUT I WORKED HARD FOR WHATS MINE AND WHEN PETTY JEALOUS PEOPLE WINGE I GET ANNOYED

CAPITALS ARE ANSWERS
SPELLING IS CRAP
HELICOPTERS ARE FANTASTIC [IF I DIDNT HAVE ANY MONEY I
WOULD PROBERLY BE THERE WITH MY LITTLE REGISTRATION NUMBER BOOK WEARING MY ANORAC]

THERE GOES MY ANNONIMITY
SAME GOES FOR BIG G HE EVEN USES HIS EMAIL ADDRESS AS A
NAME



REGARDS STEVE

[StevieTerrier]

Fascinating thread indeed. Here's a little bit more grist to 't mill. A couple of weeks ago The Carling Festival was held at Bramhope Nr. Leeds. One of my regular photographers had been tasked by the local paper to take aerials of the festival site. Being a lover of money, he rang around anybody else he could think may be interested in buying a copy.

When he rang the Festival Organisers offering his services, he was told "thanks anyway , but the Police helicopter crew is taking some for us".

Anybody from Carr Gate like to comment?

[bonkerjones513]

MD 600 good answers. You say it is on a council estate. I can't imagine how helicopters can be flown in and out of an estate without complaints especially jet turbine ones. I'd still like to see a picture of the site. There can't be a similar situation anywhere else in the UK.

[Helinut]

The jealousy/envy thing is a peculiarly British disease. Life is too short though, and if you are the subject of such a reaction, it is best just to ignore it. The people who suffer most are the sources of such feelings. Like anti-airfield complainers, they make their own lives a misery, instead of getting on with life themselves.

Like MD600 Driver, I decided one day (many years ago) that I wanted to fly helicopters. It took a long time, I applied myself in a different way, but now I fly a Police helicopter for a living. Used to own/fly an R22 too, but not any more on a pilot's salary ...........

[truncheon meat]

Relating to the expense of using a police helicopter, there is an official formula used by the Home Office and known as the O'Donnel Principle.

Basically a load of bodies were hidden on Cannock Chase, nine I think, and then they sent out a fixed wing, a rotary and good old bobbies on foot to look for them in one square mile of open area.

The helicopter took 12 minutes to find them, the fixed wing 20 minutes and the bobbies 450 man (or is it person) hours.

Working on the basic costs as a foot officer at £10-00 per hour that is 450 x £10 = £4,500 for the search.

The helicopter at say, £400-00 per hour for 12 minutes ie 400 / 5 = £80.

Not sure about fixed wing costs so will leave that one to someone who knows but to cost the same as a foot search the helicopter hourly costs would have to be £22,500.

In all, a police helicopter more than pays for itself if you use those figures.

What do the good citizens of Suffolk see as trivial crimes? If somebody keys my neighbour's car then I would probably consider it to be trivial compared to the rape of young woman, however, if it were my car then I am sure my view would be slightly different.

Police have certain powers when it comes to "serious arrestable offences" but if you look at the books then it doesn't give a financial loss figure which must be reached before it becomes "serious". The theft of a pensioners last five pounds in the world could be considered serious whilst the theft of £5000 from the home of a multi millionaire could be construed as minor. It all depends on the effect upon the victim and that's where the problem lies. Those who scream noise abatement and misuse of police funds in relation to the use of police helicopters would be the first to complain if the aircraft refused to attend following the rape or murder of a complainants relative on the grounds that it would be too noisy or too costly. Surely the thing is that using the helicopter could improve the chances of apprehending a criminal and that is what it's there for.

Do these people feel that a car thief only ever steals one car and then ends his or her budding career as a car taker? The phrase "nip it in the bud" should be applied.

I suppose that perhaps all the complainants could paint their roofs green with a bright yellow cross on it then the aircraft crew would know who was willing to accept the use of the helicopter and who would rather it stayed well away.

We generally want to have our cake and eat it don't we?

Give the boys and girls trying to do their best a break.

[jumpseater]

A while ago I was tasked to investigate noise and track keeping complaints from a plod heli. The aircraft was a squirrel and had recwently been based in an area that had seen a large increase in car thefts and joy riding. As such they were quite busy when first deployed and we received a number of complaints about the operation. However most complainants when they realised it was helping in ensuring that their cars were where they left them the previous evening accepted the intrusion. I did have one bloke shouting the odds that this (UK) was becoming a police state, etc etc, rant rant, when I suggested that he look at Nigeria if he wanted a valid comparison.That week the Nigerians had done something awful, (no change there then), which had made the papers, and he then quietened down. In due course because the plod were so susccesfull at nicking various slags, the number of flights and disturbance decreased. The plod were usually very good at letting us know if they'd managed to nick anyone so when responding to the whinger I could let them know an arrest was made, not for what, but that info helped the understanding.

Also as a route took the heli directly over housing, and agreement was made that they would only directly overfly the houses if it were mission critical in getting to the incident as soon as possible. If it were not life and death then the heli would route visually via the edge of the houses, which was a nice and considerate solution to minimise their impact. Safer too if anything unexpected happened, I think this was before Roof's landing!.

[md 600 driver]

just to one more point i dont have any problems with the asu from carr gate in fact one of my friends works there
and i dont care a hoot if any police/ambulance or any other helicopter is ever used for private jollys because i would if i could
steve

[zardoz]

I'm sure someone else will point it out, but the colour scheme is a HO recommendation for maximum visibility to avoid near misses. It was directly copied from the millitary training fleet and is supposed to be black sides/underneath, and yellow top. this has been allowed to stretch to d.blue and yellow, with the good old Met being the only ones to hold on to the old white scheme.

[J.A.F.O.]

I read the Evening Star article posted above and it (indirectly, as always) says that the Suffolk police helicopter is merely a status symbol. If, by that, it means that it is a symbol of Suffolk's status as the safest county in England, a status which the helicopter has helped the officers on the ground to acheive during its three years in service, then I don't suppose one can argue.

Respect to TM.

[Coconutty]

Wonder what colour scheme the Met will go for, when they have decided what they are going to replace their Squirrels with ?

Watch this space :rolleyes:

[sss]

Wonder what colour scheme the Met will go for

how about a nice blue & yellow battenburg like the traffic cars?

[Thomas coupling]

Off topic - sorry!

Police helicopter colour scheme:

It is a voluntary scheme which was copied from the military idea that conspicuity needed updating. Devised mainly for training a/c, the then DERA (now QinetiQ (spelling?), decided after tests that the best colour was matt black all over. This was modified by the time it went into production to gloss black - that is why all the hawk training a/c in the UK are this colour.
I don't know why the mil didn't carry over this colour scheme to other trainers.
When the police looked at it, it came as a recommendation from the H.O. as a 'duty of care' issue - avoid this advice at your peril!
The hierarchy weren't too impressed by matt black (too mad max!), so changed it to the next nearest (publicly acceptable)colour which was dark navy blue. Add to that the fact that the DERA trial wasn't designed for police helicopters, and the colour scheme was further bastardised to navy blue with a small yellow section on top, to cater for low level conspicuity offsetting against a dark countryside background.
This scheme has been further diluted by successive police units choosing additional modifications to the original clean lines, and you have today a real mix of paint schemes - for some - the whole idea of conspicuity has gone right out of the window.
Conspicuity relies on 'bigger is better', therefore the greater the navy blue surface area, the more conspicuous the object.
I wonder where these units stand were there to be an accident involving conspicuity???


MD600: when you use capitals on the web, it means you are SHOUTING:oh:

[john du'pruyting]

TC
As
1, No police units have gone for matt black.
2, All police units have diluted the amount of dark paint on their aircraft
3, The Dera trial was just that, a trial and it came out with a recommendation/ theory (but not a proof) on the best colour scheme.
Then I suspect that those units which have added more and more yellow or not even opted for the current fashion would stand fairly well!:O

[Obs cop]

If I may add some relevant comments to some of the matters raised above.

Firstly high/low visibility speed cameras.

Police forces have the option to keep "some" of the revenue generated from speed cameras (the rest goes to the govenment) as long as the following conditions apply:

1. The cameras must be brightly coloured and placed in clear sight of road users.

2. The cash raised does not go into the main police budget. It goes into a road safety fund which is spent on road safety matters alone, by a partnership of the police and local authorities.

3. The cameras must only be placed where there is a recorded history of collisions resulting in deaths or serious injuries.

Should a force wish to conceal/hide/camoflage cameras then all of the proceeds go straight to the government.

Whilst I am not a fan of speed cameras, preferring the human side of policing, the misconception is that the police forces make money from the cameras. I can state catagorically that they do not, much as they would like to help their massively streched budgets.


The next major point concerns the funding of police forces and therefore "wasting" of those funds.

Police forces work closely with their local Police Authorities. The Police Authority is made up of normal members of the public who collectively are responsible for overseeing the performance of the force, and more critically set the budget given to the police . Since an airbourne asset is such a considerable investment, it (and its performance) is very closely monitored by both the senior officers and the Police Authority. The budget allocates it a set number of hours for the year. Anything over and above those hours incur an additional expense which again has to be agreed by the force's respective authority.

As a result, our ASU maintains records to indicate the purpose of every flight hour spent and also the results, eg. arrests. The aircraft is operated by a crew and just as I can be done for speeding in my marked police car if I cannot justify it, the crew are responsible for ensuring that the time airbourne is used appropriately.

Don't forget that part of the role of the helicopter can include PR, so if they are able to they will accomodate some requests for aerial photography if it doesn't interfere with the normal operations of the helicopter (ie. training flights are carried out to ensure the crew are up to speed. Some of those flights will practice aerial photography/video work which I see the results of when I need pictures of addresses in my more pro-active policing roles.) There is no reason why a crew take pictures of an event for PR purposes whilst using it as a training exercise.

The key to this however, is that the Police Authority could not give two hoots about how many rule 5 transgressions were reported to the CAA. It is not a role the aircraft is in place for unless there is a direct request from another agency, which is then charged to that agency. Unless it is a policing role, a training flight or an objective set by the chief constable, the cost of additional tasking is passed to the organisation requesting it.


Bearing all of this in mind, i can only think of a couple of reasons why the police helicopter in question has allegedly filmed the landing site area 3 times.

Firstly, it is at the request (and expense) of the CAA.

Secondly, the operations from the heli site are dangerous or interefere with the police helicopter.

Sadly, without a report or prosecution being made by the CAA we may never know.

Obs cop

[md 600 driver]

obs cop

Secondly, the operations from the heli site are dangerous or interefere with the police helicopter

is there a law that says only the police helicopter can opperate in a area ? what if a police helicopter is dangerous to the opperation of a civvy helicopter ? does a civvy helicopter give way to a police helicopter ? and where is the relevent bits in the ano?

you will more than likely not reply as most of the other police pilots/obs have not replied
as you are wrong again

where i have the greatest respect for carr gate asu i cant say the same for other asu s the advise/answers/views given are incorect

i do however belive this thread will be in the national press next week a reporter has been trying to contact a few ppruners for comments

[Helinut]

md600 driver,

I think you jump to all sorts of conclusions about what Obs Cop was saying. However, steeling myself to answer your questions (before I run and hide) :)

Article 63 of the ANO says it is an offence to endanger an aircraft. It applies equally to police aircraft as any other aircraft. The person who does the endangering is the one who may be held responsible by a court. It can be a prat with a laser on the ground trying to blind the pilot of an aircraft, the pilot of any aircraft or someone in it - it all depends what they do.

Police helicopters can have priority over other aircraft, although generally, all aircraft have to comply with the Rules of the Air.

A good example of the sort of situation that might interest a police helicopter is something like the case that I mentioned, where an aircraft contravened a TRA specifically created to protect emergency services aircraft. Not only is it of interest to the police helicopter but, in that case, the pilot of the other aircraft is committing an offence by being in the TRA (without permission).

I am not sure how your comment about "the press" is meant - is it some sort of threat, and if so to whom? :(

[Obs cop]

md 600 driver,

calm down, take my post the way it was intended and please don't pigeon hole me with

you will more than likely not reply as most of the other police pilots/obs have not replied
as you are wrong again

If you read my post you will find the following,

1. It has been posted on a Rumour Network, where individuals express opinions.

2. I stated 2 reasons that I could see for the videos allegedly being sent to the CAA. I was not saying that these were the only 2 reasons, I was merely trying to put the matter from the point of view of a police officer.

3. I have not supported or condoned the events, I have merely provided some background information concerning police funding. Afterall, the thread heading introduces "wasting public funds". The one thing that had not been mentioned was where the money allegedly wasted comes from.

In response to your comments,

There is a law relating to temporary areas of controlled airspace being established, at certain times, relating to some police helicopter operations. These instances are, from what I aware, few and far between in the grand scheme of things. Otherwise, the law that applies to all VFR aircraft operations is obviously the rules of the air. Police helicopters are no different from any other aircraft in terms of the need to apply them.

If you were flying your friend around, who happened to have a video camera and an aircraft did something which posed a danger to yourselves or any one else, airbourne or otherwise; you would be quite within your rights to video it and forward it to the local police or the CAA. The police are no different in that respect.

Furthermore,

The operation of surveillance equipment, including video cameras is strictly controlled by the Human Rights Act, the European Convention on Human Rights and more recently the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. In a nutshell, we are not allowed to target persons with this equipment unless we have a relevant authority (for which there needs to be supporting intelligence or evidence) or there is a spontaneous incident whereby delaying recording to obtain an authorisation would jepardise the gatering of that evidence.

I find it interesting that you are keen to stress that I am wrong again .

Please let me know where you have previously challenged me for being wrong with my opinions and understanding of police ASU's.

I should also like to know what elements of my last post were wrong, bearing in mind the thrust of my post was to provide background information, not challenging the rights or wrongs of the specific incident which started this post.

Whilst you were willing to quickly and inaccurately stereotype and pigeon hole me, I shall refrain from doing the same to you.

Regards

Obs cop

[Ascend Charlie]

What kind of idiot wants to get the press involved???

The headlines of the Daily Blurt will scream things like "Police helicopter targets innocent private pilot" and will only stir up the locals to complain about any helicopter landing anywhere.

It can only be a bad thing.:{

[ShyTorque]

md 600,

This might appear off topic I know, but are you by any chance the pilot of the MD600N involved in an airprox with a police helicopter in November 2000?

Thanks.

[md 600 driver]

shy torque

no i only got mine in 2001 there are lots of md 600 pilots

by any chance are you the twin engined pilot that crashed into a house in wales

do you still work for a asu?

steve

please note i am in no way against any police pilots in any way whatsoever but i might be getting that way now

[RDRickster]

I've been away from PPRuNe for a few days and was amazed to find that this particular topic has gone on to eight full pages. Isn't it time to stick a fork in this topic... it is definately done!

[ShyTorque]

md 600,

Thanks

No

No

You do appear to be against police pilots already, reading your last but one post in particular. I was just wondering why.

[Roofus]

MD600

No....I was that Pilot. I suffered a tail-rotor control failure at 400'agl & crashed into the roof of a house.

From your tone you seem to think that's it's something to be ashamed of. Go read the accident report & then you'll understand that I'm actually very proud of my actions that day.

What has that to do with this thread anyway?

Do I still work for an ASU? Nope I've got myself a better job, with the all important payrise.

Good Day Gents :mad:

[bonkerjones513]

MD600 it would be great if the press got involved, just think about all those people on that estate and others who are fed up of helicopters landing in back gardens. They could use the photos to send to the planning departments and confirm that permission has not been granted for use as a heliport. Having money is not an excuse to just do as you wish because its fun and that applies to abusing the privilege of working with a police helicopter.

Have you got planning permission?

[Arkroyal]

Fascinating thread, that's kept me out of the sun for an hour.

The originator appears to have thrown his toys out of the cot because some people have asked him some pertinent questions in an attempt to get him to flesh out his allegations.

That, PpruneRadar, is why he is being asked the questions. If he was not going to substantiate his post, then why post it?

There is obviously a lot more to this than the one sided rant from sbigg. Heliport might like to immediately close ranks with a fellow 'persecuted pilot', but we would like more info upon which to base any judgement.

Here are another few questions, which, If the organ grinder is still pouting, perhaps the monkey could answer.

What kind of grown up uses the handle 'Big G'

Why do you think that a residential area is the right place for a heliport?

If you've got the cash to run helicopters, then why live there? (or is the estate vital to your business?)

[[email protected]]

big gee back let me point out NO PERSON has ever complained on my estate they are down to earth people and have there own life to live. to be honest they like it.
and as far as planning goes it's over 10 years i have been landing on my own and planning can do jack s--- about it
i have never landed on a house i have never took off with the helilift APU still attached AND NOT REPORTED.
OR TOOK OFF WITH TIE DOWNS on. does this ring a bell to the ASU.
ALL I AM DOING IS LANDING A HELICOPTER, I DONT FLY OVER HOUSES TO LAND at any time i can land safe. NOT ON A HOUSE ROOF
and to top all this off the man who says i have been done by the CAA is wrong and stop slaging me down, and this same man has used my helipad haven't you BOB from sherburn. and i have photos
yes i am back and don;t give a s--- about my grammer
I am at helitech wednesday in ha-ppy .come and see me have a chat, i am a good man not done no harm to any one in my life
Graham Snook ask at helitech i will be there REGARDS ALL
BIG GEE

[J.A.F.O.]

Helitech, eh? I've heard that they've had to cancel it this year due to all the flying teddies and dummies from those on this thread.

:p

JAFO

[Roofus]

sbiggee

I was gonna rise to the bait of your obvious critiscm of my crash. However I've tired of exchanging pleasantries with someone who isn't prepared to have a rational discussion.

If someone knows how to post a link, would you kindly throw up the link to the crash report relating to G-SAEW 21 April 2000. Maybe sbiggee can read it & then decide if critiscm is due. I'm fed up of being criticised by people who haven't a clue what they're talking about. :mad:

Enjoy Helitech.......

[rotorcraig]

Roofus

Report is here (http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_avsafety/documents/page/dft_avsafety_500932.hcsp)

Regards,

RC

[Thomas coupling]

Steve (MD600 driver),
calm down, we don't want you having a heart attack now do we????????????

[Arkroyal]

Nice to see you back, sbigg

Any chance you might answer some of the questions you've been asked, instead of leading off in rant - mode?

[Roofus]

Thanks RC. :ok:

[Nigd3]

Roofus

I think you should change your pprune login to Roof - U/S after such a spectacular bit of improvisation in difficult circumstances.

For what its worth, I read the report a while ago and thought you did an excellent job, proven by you still being here to rise (or not) to Sbiggee's baits, err I mean posts.

Come on sbiggee, give us some pics of the landing site and area (you could always ask your local Police ASU if they have any).
Im tired of looking at ugly helicopter pilots on that other sticky thread.
:D :p :D

NigD3

[DeepC]

Having a look at Multimap, the only way of approaching the Halton Moor estate without flying over houses is to approach from the South over the Golf Course. No immediate evidence of a helipad on the 1:5000 aerial photos.

Being a nosy kind of guy, I input 'sbiggee:aol.com' into google groups and came up with a single message from someone with that address (but known as 'David') trying to convince everyone that google is run by the NSA. (National security Agency apparently). It used the same inimitable grammer of 'Graham'. Weird.

DeepC

[[email protected]]

yes google is run and owned by the NSA.
yes i will add photos of the site, as soon as i scan them. i am going to edit a video i have and put the take off and landing on.
its an old video of a hughes 300 i had. any more questions please.
sorry about the remark about the helicopter in the house,
please do not take offence. regards BIG GEE

[Arkroyal]

yes google is run and owned by the NSA It just gets worse and worse:confused:

Answers man

[md 600 driver]

tc

belive it or not ive not had a heart attack ,nearly or worse depends on which way you look at it but you did make me chuckle and point taken

steve

i must learn to chill out

rufus

sorry to cause offence it was not intended and i appoligise

i was however trying to reply to the post by shytorque in the same tone as he posted to me hoping he would realise what he said offended me ,but it turned out wrong i think you did fantastic in landing your helicopter and i hope that if it ever happened to me i could do the same

regards steve

ps tried to post yesterday but aol would not let me reply any one else had any similar probs

[Arkroyal]

Still no questions answered then

[Windle Poons]

Sbiggee/Graham/David* please be careful, you may have discovered that Google is run by the NSA, but are you aware that PPRuNe is really run by the CAA? :E

WP - realigning tongue to central position from cheek. :p

* Delete as applicable or not.

[DeepC]

I take it some of you met Sbiggee at Helitech. Did you get any further with his side of the story?

A little bit more searching on the net and I build up a picture of a bloke with an interest in lasers and a desire to get another job in June/July 2002.

Sbiggee have you sorted a video or photo out yet? Any chance of pointing out where you land on a multimap aerial photo?

Even at 1:5000 some detail of likely conflicts will probably be evident.

DeepC

(100th Post!)

[Arkroyal]

Yeah, come on Big G, you started the thread looking for our support in your crusade.

How can we give it if you refuse to give us the full story?

[[email protected]]

HI good day at helitech. meet a few people, very interesting.
DEEPC. one of my hobbies is a alternative energy if you look further on the web you will see unlimited items on this subject by me.hydrogen on demand car. lasers. cloud busting this is weather weather manipulation. weather front's, moving them to different directions. SH-- i can go on all day. I, WE. are getting off the subject
photos soon or they is getmapping.com
BIG GEE

[My names Turkish]

I may be wrong, and I know some of you know this guy, but this sounds like a big long wind up. The language and subject of the last few posts makes me very suspicous, that last one on manipulating the weather and the NSA almost made me wet my pants though!

[DBChopper]

MNT, I agree.

I keep reading to see if something interesting happens but this is all starting to sound a bit drug-induced now.

Must dash, just off to reposition a large cumulus that is shading my garden...

:E

[[email protected]]

this is what the world is up against, small minded people, who know it all ,well i tell you you must know jack sh--
have a look on the web for http://www.metatech.org/cloudbuster_&_orgone_generator.html
have alook around.
take your blinkers off, if your wifes will let you all.

[NearlyStol]

Looked at the link.
Did you notice any men in white coats in the back of the police helicopter? (coming to take me away HA HA HEE HEE HA HA)

[[email protected]]

THE TRUTH ALWAYS HURTS. is it ok with you wife to be on the net,
bye. I THINK THIS IS THE END NOW. please go to new subject
NOW over and out...............................................

[pilotwolf]

Come on Guys give Sbiggee a break! Each to their own after all... :cool:

Its a very very thin line between sanity and madness! Here's not the place to judge. After all the various different military organisations have been experimenting with weather alteration for years.

Remember - most of us her fly helicopters and I am frequently reminded by numerous people - especially plank drivers - that we must be insane to fly rotary aircraft.... :p

PW

[Multy]

Now I know why the weather in Leeds is so bad!

[Obs cop]

MNT,

I feel I must agree with you about this being a wind up. I haven't laughed for as long in ages after reading the metatech link posted by Sbiggee.

Nice link:\ :E :} :} ;)

Now where did those nice people in white coats get to?

Obs cop

[My names Turkish]

Sbigee/Wind up Artist, Not sure how we went from Police Helicopters to Changing the weather to the NSA running the internet to our wives on the internet in two pages. I think you might need to worry about your mum catching you up past your bed time looking at God only know what on the Internet. Just promise us you'll do your English homework more from now on. Some of your posts made me wince.

:please go to new subject Hey buddy you started it and avoided every question you were asked! Campaign to stir the poo backfired?

Have to go now, some silent running helicopters with Commandos abseiling out of them are in my back garden, must have traced me through Google:p

[unbridled]

Everyone knows that everything they read on the net is true - so how can you doubt sbiggee? Anyway, for absolute proof :rolleyes: he exists and is a pilot, see his CV online at helinews.com (http://www.helinews.com/cvboard/cvs/604.html).

[Ascend Charlie]

Well, i can understand why the police filmed his back yard, if he has those things that look like ZSU-23s pointing at passing planes.

And perhaps they are wondering how a raging basket case ever got a pilot licence, and enough money to buy several helicopters.:8

[212man]

"Do be discriminating which UFO’s you aim at, though. If they are not predatory and you make them mad, they may pay you back by messing with your carburetor or something, as they did to us once. "

Classic line from the link above! I feel pretty safe, though, as my car has fuel injection and in any case I would only ever zap the predatory ones (well you would, wouldn't you?)

[Nigd3]

Sod you lot taking piss, Im gonna try and build one.!!!!

If some guy in Namibia can build one fron scavenged parts then Im sure they will have all the stuff down B&Q:D

[truncheon meat]

SBiggee, Before you finally go OVER the edge and OUT of the real world, how about the video/photos you promised?

I am afraid that, entitled to your opinion as you may be, your posts have done absolutely nothing to enhance your reputation and seem to have done more to push the CAA toward introducing psychological testing for prospective licence holders.:E :*

[J.A.F.O.]

The most fascinating thing is that he lists only English under "Languages" on his CV.

You must all do this - go to the metatech home page, it just gets better and better.

I know of nowhere else on the web (or anywhere else) that you can go for help if you suspect that you are a victim of mind control or find out about repressed memories of military service on Mars. Find out about the USAFs war with the Sylphs and the real reason for war in Iraq.

Fascinating and definitely not the work of lunatics, oh no, not at all.

Thanks sbiggee.

[Jed A1]

Absolutely brilliant link. As 212 man said, some great quotes.

"It’s open season on the B Sirian craft and other predatory ones, as far as we’re concerned. They can’t hurt you, by the way, if you aren’t afraid of them. Universal law restricts them more than it does us. We can pay later for breaking it, but they are just unable to break it, apparently."

They need to update the above paragraph to include - "but ASU's can really p1$$ you off by filming you"

Flying lawyer needs to explain and help me understand "Universal law" a bit better. I seem to have missed that in all my air law exams - it must be something new!

I think the "Holy Hand Grenades" will be most useful!

[bonkerjones513]

Why do I think that SBiggee possibly brings in a complete wreck or two from abroad, and then sets about them in a shed somewhere, with a spanner a hammer and a bit of paint? That would be in-between making cloud busters of course. He then flies them on the cheap from his garden. With no reference to rufuss, may I suggest that there could be another roof landing soon.

[Multy]

I have it on good authority this is the site: Look to the top left of the sports field and you can see a light brown pad in the back garden of the house. This i believe is the helipad.http://www.multimap.com/map/photo.cgi?client=public&x=433946&y=433305&scale=5000&width=500&height=310&multimap.x=115&multimap.y=19

[My names Turkish]

Good, finally we are getting somewhere. Will there be a denial?, stay tuned for this and more:bored:

[Vfrpilotpb]

From the simple scale of the area involved, if that Brown spot is indeed the LP, then it is less than the min required from other property, plus the sports field? could be full of very eager and not safety conciouse children on some days when landing or taking off.

But then again we are all speculating, for lack of info!:ooh:

[md 600 driver]

my names turkish

ive never seen s bigee with a wreck granted hes had a french/hungarian/english reg helis but they have always been sound aircraft

[Happy Landing !]

Don't know who flew it in, but I saw a Black & Yellow Gaz HA-PPY at Duxford.

It was there I swear it was.

:cool:

[My names Turkish]

MD 600, if you READ more carefully next time you will notice I did not make the remark, here is the comment you refer to, in full:

bonkerjones513: Why do I think that SBiggee possibly brings in a complete wreck or two from abroad, and then sets about them in a shed somewhere, with a spanner a hammer and a bit of paint? That would be in-between making cloud busters of course. He then flies them on the cheap from his garden. With no reference to rufuss, may I suggest that there could be another roof landing soon.

[md 600 driver]

turkish
i didnt read it very well did i sorry

so bonker jones what wrecks as s bigee brought in from abroad

[whoateallthepies]

I thought that Metatech site was a load of rubbish until I read about the "Holy Hand Grenade". That one is definitely for real, I remember seeing one used against the killer rabbit in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.:}

[Thomas coupling]

I wonder if SbigGee ever thinks about the wind direction. Looks to me like only one way in and one way out?

It's a shame he's gone...


MD600, you're 'bigging' him up all the time, go get him and ask him to come back :E

[ShyTorque]

If the photo is correct and that is a sports field adjacent to the place where the helicopter is being operated from then the term "Rule 5.1.c Exemption" springs to mind......

[Autorotate]

When I was at Heli Tech went over and had a look at said aircraft. According to the data plate on the control panel it is an SA341G and the serial number was 021.

Hope this helps.

:E

[Arkroyal]

Although I've been studiously ignored so far by the originator, I'll try again.

So, Little G, is Multy right? Is the link he posted correct? Is that your pad?

How the hell do you expect any of us to make up our minds whetther you deserve your Police interest or not, with no facts?

There's an equation forming in my mind

semiliterateblokewithlotsofcashlivingbeneathhismeansoncounci lestate=dealer

[md 600 driver]

ark royal

if you had a business ie a hotel/hostel with living accomodation [like s bigee]and didnot mind living on a council estate would that make you a aircraft dealer
steve

[Hover Bovver]

MD 600
Not sure that is the sort of DEALER that Ark Royal is refering to!

[My names Turkish]

Come on MD600 and Sbigee/Fibber, lets not be rude to Arkroyal where are the answers? I'll be your best friend if you tell us!

[md 600 driver]

turkish

what answers do you want off me that i have not given if its in relation to s bigges landing area i dont think thats the sort of info i should publish on a public site

arkroyal

what sort of dealer do you mean

hover bover

what sort of dealer do you think he means a boat dealer :D

[Rich Lee]

According to what one of the elders said, taking an enemy on the battlefield is like a hawk taking a bird. Even though it enters into the midst of a thousand of them, it gives no attention to any bird other than the one that it has first marked. So it would seem the direction of this thread.

[My names Turkish]

Rich Lee, Ok fair enough I'll give you that. However the point thats been made here is that they tried to sling mud at the Police who are only doing what they are asked. Sbigee tried to sling that mud, and as soon as he became unstuck he fled the scene. How can you feel sympathetic that its blown up in his face, when HE was the one who started it all. He made the accusations but when asked nicely to substantiate them there was no reply. Your right the teasing got a bit out of hand though.

MD600, The question that poor old Ark Royal is asking is, is that the site in the above Photograph?

[Daifly]

Am I the only sane one around here...?

[Rich Lee]

Turkish- A great man once said "I hold it to be of great prudence for men to abstain from threats and insulting words towards any one, for neither the one nor the other in any way diminishes the strength of the enemy; but the one makes him more cautious, and the other increases his hatred of you, and makes him more persevering in his efforts to injure you." I believe this is great advice for all involved.

Daifly......perhaps, but it probably depends on your definition of sane

[md 600 driver]

turkish

let me explain some things to you

1 i have never tried to sling mud at the west yorks asu
2 i have no axe to grind with any asu /publicservice helicopter/police force
3 i am not bothered if the west yorks asu or any other police helicopter was ever used for any other purpose other than police use i think the pilots should be able to use them more and promote the use of helicopters in other areas
4 i have taken offence at some things said by other police pilots and when wrong appoliged to them
5 i will not confirm s biggees address if he wants to he can i dont think this is the correct forum for this ,would you like it if i told every body your address
6 i do not like unfounded accusations about myself or blatent lies being written about me
7 when i have seen something i thought was incorrect i have corrected it and when wrong appoligised

i do now think this thread is getting too personal for me and bow out i did not start this thread so i wont finish it but a note of caution you reep what you sow next time you maybe fair game

steve