Airprox: Harrier vs. Air Ambulance (again!)

[Bomber ARIS]

Near-miss incident investigated

An investigation is under way after an RAF Harrier jet narrowly avoided a mid-air collision with an air ambulance helicopter over Gloucestershire.
The incident happened on 9 February near the M5 Strensham Services, north of Tewkesbury.

It is not clear how near the aircraft came to each other, but is said to have been close enough to compromise both.

James Hotson, spokesman for the Civil Aviation Authority, said the miss is being assessed by the UK Airprox Board.

A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said: "Obviously, air safety remains of paramount importance to the RAF, who study the lessons from the "airprox" report and where appropriate will take action to minimise the risk of recurrence."


link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/gloucestershire/4287299.stm) to BBC News

[PPRuNe Radar]

So was it a collision ... or wasn't it ??

[2STROPS]

What is the point of this post? :confused:

We have a sensational tag line saying a collision, but there is no collision just 2 a/c avoiding each other in the open FIR. It may have been close but that is one of the risks everybody who operates low level has to be aware of.

2S

[SilsoeSid]

Absolutely 2STROPS, even though the air Ambo just happened to be at its operating base, denoted by the purple 'H' on any aviation mappage!! http://www.soccerhooligan.com/forums/html/emoticons/graywanker.gif


A simple heading error, perhaps by both Bomber and of course the Harrier pilot. :ugh:

[Bomber ARIS]

Sorry to disappoint, 2STROPS.

The UK is overdue its next fatal RAF vs. civvy mid-air, so hopefully the next time you click on a post such as this, you'll derive all the pornographic pleasure you were so cruely denied this time.

You opened this post EXPECTING to read of death, carnage and twisted metal; that implies an unacceptable level of risk out there in the open FIR.

Just because that's the way it is, doesn't mean that's the way it should be. There are a lot of people who are very unhappy with the status quo - You may be quite happy mixing it, low-level, with an "enemy" against whom you stand no chance and have no recourse, but I am not. (Please don't mention the toothless AIRPROX system - it's wholly understandable why the last helicopter man on the Board quit in frustration)

[imabell]

bomber,

2strops, or myself, or anyone else clicking on this thread wouldn't expect anything else except what the heading implied. a story of a midair. you got the attention that you wanted with a misleading topic and then deride a poster who has made a correct observation. silsoe's graphic is right on.:yuk: :mad:

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

When I had mine, I didn't see him coming, and I didn't see hiim going. It was all over in a flash ! TX was on, mode C too. No radar coverage for trace i'm afraid. Didn't complete a full airprox and London info were not interested - but wish I did now. High speed in GAville should be banned - it's outrageous - but until it happens to you, you may find it hard to agree !http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v650/theflyingsquirrel/snowman.jpg

[Bertie Thruster]

this is a problem for many air ambulance operations across the UK and especially for us in the E. Midlands.

In many areas each sortie will require descent/climbout through the fast jet low level band,(1500ft to 250ft)

Due expense TCAS has not yet featured on any charity funded aircraft. (the Home Office helped fund TCAS on all police helos)

Most difficult is the departure phase when very often both paramedics are "eyes in" with the casualty.

I will be attending an MOD/GA community disscussion forum (SHAIRSPACE) next week, Any workeable suggestions?

[SilsoeSid]

Morning all,

Obviously there will be very little to prevent this sort of thing happening should the air ambulance be out on a job in the sticks, (TCAS excepted of course!). However as this incident was, as far as I am aware, close to the base of this particular air ambulance, perhaps these 'HLSs of regular use' should be given more 'highlight' on any mappage.

As it stands, the aviation overlays gives as much importance to an HLS in the military HLS directory, used bi-annually if that, to an HLS that is in constant use.

I'm not promoting any formal form of avoidance area, perhaps just a thicker, slightly larger diameter mark up on the planning maps.

The law of averages will soon work this problem out itself, until then, maybe we can lock the stable door while said stable is still occupied.

Why bring this subject up now? Because it has very nearly happened. :sad:

Anyway,

http://www.angelfire.com/journal/mclaren/photogallery/photo18952/tuppence.jpgthat's my tuppence worth.

[JimL]

Surely the object of this post was to make available to all interested parties (all of us who are interested in improvements of safety) the details of an incident which had all the precursers for an accident.

It matters little what the title of the thread is; surely the point is, what needs to be done to prevent this incident leading to the inevitable accident. So far, apart from ACAS - which is an obvious choice of a barrier, providing the military are prepared to take part in such a solution - there has been little or no practical debate.

The mixing of low fast jets and helicopter traffic in the UK FIR has always had the potential for disaster (as the jetranger accident over the lake district showed). The BHAB and operators have had little success in raising the profile of this problem - let's hope that it does not require another accident before an appropriate solution is found.

Jim

[916]

It was obviously a good day for us in that area.
Conducting a training flight between Glos and Shob I had an encounter with a Hawk which passed from behind, along the port side, rolled to its left, at less than 150'.
Having spoken to "Airprox" they said that our radar returns merged into one and it looked "very scary".:uhoh:

[2STROPS]

BH Glad you have changed the misleading tag line for this post. You are obviously a sensationalist.

You may or may not be a professional but you should be aware that professional aviators take great interest in all accidents and incidents that occur to other people and hope to benefit from their misfortune. By sensationalizing your post you bring nothing to the debate.

The potential for mid-air collisions is high in our crowded airspace. It is incumbent on all pilots to minimise the risk to themselves. Unless it is essential for their flight then it is not sensible to cruise in the 1000- ground level band. This is even stated on the CAA 500,000 chart.

I have no personal knowledge of this incident but it was perhaps predictable. Siting an air ambulance base on the edge of a HIRTA (Delford) which is a choke point in the LFS will mean that there will always be a potential conflict with a fast jet avoiding the HIRTA.

When I fly VFR in the UK I always try and be above 1500agl so that I am sky lined and therefore much easier to see by fast moving traffic.

We expect the RAF to defend us and we should expect them to have realistic training. If we want max protection for our air ambulance sites then base them on airfields with ATZs

2S

[SilsoeSid]

2 Strops;When I fly VFR in the UK I always try and be above 1500agl so that I am sky lined and therefore much easier to see by fast moving traffic.
Unless of course they are at the same height or above you ! :ugh:

The UK Low Flying System (UKLFS)
The UKLFS is designed to allow the efficient and effective management of military low flying while ensuring that the activity is spread as widely as practicable. It covers the whole of the open airspace of the UK and surrounding oversea areas as far as the boundary of the UK Flight Information Region, from surface to 2,000 ft above ground or sea level.

[2STROPS]

SS

quote "Unless of course they are at the same height or above you !"

Having used the UKLFS in the past it is very very unusual to be above 500ft. Even the old Vulcan used to low fly at 500ft.

While your definition of the UKLFS is correct it demeans the argument for safe flying within the UKLFS. If you had flown in the system in a FJ you would be aware that the most frequently used band is 100-500ft with the majority at 250ft so flying at 1500ft is a sensible height.

Your quote of the definition bears as much reason to the argument as Gordon Brown saying he hasn't ruined our UK pensions by taking 5 Billion a year from the pension funds

2S

[Bomber ARIS]

Hello all, a little explanation is in order, I feel.

I subscribe to the Google Alert facility - I automatically get sent information of an air ambulance nature to my e-mail account. On this occasion, I felt that the information received was worthy of further dissemination. I cut and pasted the article, link and even the title (allowing myself journalistic licence only to add the word "again" in parentheses) before buggering off out for the evening.

The very first words in my initial post were "Near-miss" - impossible to misconstrue, thought I. All the post offered was a short piece, a facsimile of the BBC article - I offered no opinion, save for a wee angry red faced icon.

I returned home later that evening to discover that I had commited an appalling deed, an affront to the right thinking people of the world..

I must admit I still cannot understand the venom aimed at myself, the poster, solely based upon the original topic name (I see the topic name has now been altered, so 2STROPS, you have a moderator, not me, to thank.) I am missing something that obviously has infuriated several of you. Once again, I feel as though I must appologise that the aircraft did not collide!!!

Further research today has informed me that, as SilsoeSid alluded to earlier, the helicopter in question was on final approach to a charted HLS. It is all very well flying above 1500' if weather and tasking permit, but at some point one has to return to planet earth. If my intel is even half true, it would appear that the jet passed below the level of the air ambulance during short finals to its base. What flying profile should the helicopter have followed to mitigate this type of risk?? (I have also heard that this is by no means an isolated occurence at this particular HLS)


The potential for mid-air collisions is high in our crowded airspace
I have no personal knowledge of this incident but it was perhaps predictable

2STROPS, why are you prepared to just lie back and accept this situation.

One would hope that having a clearly defined HLS depicted on a flying chart would be enough warning for our pointy aviators, but your suggestion that the only way to be safe is for all air ambos move to licenced airfields implies that that is the smallest target the RAF can avoid. Get real! We have one of the finest air forces in the world - they ought to be able to cope with avoiding areas less than 5nm diameter. The air ambulances, police ,etc. have the right to be safe when OUTWITH an ATZ.

We expect the RAF to defend us and we should expect them to have realistic training

If it's realistic training they require, there are vast expanses of Canada, etc. If it's to be relevant, why not go play in the sand pit or Afghanistan. The likelihood of a Cold War style battle scenario in Eastern Europe looks rather low on the list of possibe futures the UK may face.....(Don't start me on European politics!)

[SilsoeSid]

2STROPS;
OK ...........

Don't see what your point is.

That is not 'my definition,' it is 'the' definition, part of it anyway.

It may be unusual for FJ traffic to be above 500' but the UKLFS 'does' go up to 2000'.

Picture this,
FJ temporarily navigationally embarrassed, (if it ever happens), climbs up to have a better looksee. "I can go up to 2000' because I'm booked into the LFS".
At 1500' FJ can see everything, regains sortie profile but....WHOOSH.....WTFWT?

Of course even if you are above the LFA it doesn't mean you will not encounter FJ traffic.

I don't have the answers, but ideas, such as if you fly outside the UKLFS, ie above 2000', the chances are that even if you are v.unlucky that FJ will only get you on the climb out when he is eyes out, we hope! OR, when you are landing!

When I fly from EGBB to EGBJ, past the previously mentioned air ambulance HLS, which is a common occurence, I most certainly try to go above 2000'.

SS

[2STROPS]

I agree with some of what you say but you do not help your argument when you use language such as:-

" the next time you click on a post such as this, you'll derive all the pornographic pleasure you were so cruely denied this time.

You opened this post EXPECTING to read of death, carnage and twisted metal; that implies an unacceptable level of risk out there in the open FIR."

Expect to be attacked if you can't have a reasoned temperate argument.

2S

[SilsoeSid]

This will be interesting, 2STROPS having 2 conversations at once, and not mentioning who his particular rant is aimed at. :ouch:

[Bertie Thruster]

2strops, my HEMS base is on a military field with ATZ. However......

I fly an average of 9 public transport sectors a day, average 12 minutes long. 3 of those sectors will involve adhoc landing/takeoff in open FIR. ATC doesn't pick up all the LL FJ traffic (too low) (When they do however they offer me as much help as they can)

On takeoff two way r/t with ATC is often not possible due range and height. This is the most critical period...I beleive it will only be a matter of time before our luck runs out. Is it an airprox when I'm sitting on the ground and a FJ goes straight overhead at 250ft?? Happened twice in 2004. Next time I might be be climbing out of that field location ........................................................


How can I make this operation safer?

[Droopy]

BT, do you have a TCAS? It's made the single greatest change we've seen for low level open FIR work [and yes I know they don't always wear their squawk]

[PPRuNe Radar]

PPRuNe Radar, you must be nine kinds of retarded to have read even the smallest portion of my post and still not be able to answer your own question.

Your title said one thing, your post said another thing entirely. I was asking what the true picture was since, as has been stated, there is a strong interest in accidents and incidents by the aviation community. Making assumptions is stupid in our world, hence I didn't assume you had made a mistake but perhaps had heard more about the story or that it was not as first reported.

Doesn't say a lot for your consistency or accuracy in checking facts if things don't match up. Have a rest.

[2STROPS]

SS.

It was obvious who I was replying to unless you didn't understand what was written or thought you had written what was in the "" marks (it means quote)

Bertie at last somebody who doesn't have a prejudiced point to make.

We had a far worse problem than this in Germany in the 70s/80s where the volume of low level FJ traffic was huge. It was not a healthy place to be between 250 and 1000ft. The tactic I used if I had to penetrate that layer was to take off and accelerate to cruise speed while below 250ft. While doing this I would fly a curving course always looking into the turn while my crewman looked behind and out of the turn. While still maintaining the curve I would zoom climb to 1000ft plus.

By flying a curve you are posing a crossing target to a FJ and it is easier for him to pick up a crossing target than a head/tail on target. Landing light on also helps.

This system worked for me and while seeing many FJs I always managed to avoid them.

The only real near miss I had was with an Army scout who managed to take off into a Wessex formation of 18 a/c arranged in two columns down a valley. He ricocheted down the formation and I saw him as a plan view of his underside!!! Not bad nearly 18 airpoxes in about 5 mins. :O

I hope this helps. Fly safe

2S

[SilsoeSid]

2 Strops,

"Siting an air ambulance base on the edge of a HIRTA (Delford) which is a choke point in the LFS will mean that there will always be a potential conflict with a fast jet avoiding the HIRTA."

Perhaps then, FJs should take 'extreme' caution especially with the HLS, HIRTA and choke points all being at the same place. ;)

I didn't think my view was prejudiced, just a different view from yours, which seems to be simply accepting that this is a potential conflict area.
Is what I have said radically different to Bertie T?


It used to be in Germany that rotary stayed below 200' to avoid conflict. There was no need to go higher! Then it all got complicated! :sad:

I would like to ask, when you say, "The tactic I used if I had to penetrate that layer...."

Was there not an SOP at any level for this action, or did you just make it up as you went along ? :ooh:

18 Wessex down a valley in 2 columns, no right hand rule or perhaps wind consideration??????
That's just asking for a 'what if'. And it did. No room for manoeuvre there!
Was that made up as you went along aswell?? :ooh:


Before the inevitable happens, perhaps now we should ask, whos fault would it be?

FJ not good enough look out, route selection.
Heli pilot for landing / taking off at his HLS / Incident site.
System(s) for not fitting TCAS.
Those who sited HLS.
CAA for approving HLS.

Where will it stop?

[2STROPS]

SS

You seem to be in a combative mood or are you always highly charged. The derogatory comment -"did you make it up as you went along" makes me think you have never been in a combat efficient unit

There was no SOP for climbing out from low level my experience was gained from fighter affil with the Lightnings and in debriefs afterwards we asked what was the worst thing we could do to bring ourselves to their attention. There answer being a climbing turn because we are causing movement in at least 2 axes (understand??).

As for your condescending comment about the the Wessex formation it would be too difficult to explain to somebody as aggressive as yourself. Suffice it to say it was a very professionally led formation which arrived at the designated DOP at the right time with the individual Army elements dropped in the right place to complete their bridge assault. All rules of the air were applied as far as possible when leading a formation at 50ft in a 443 area. The Scout pilot didn't do a clearing turn or was just very unfortunate and very shaken when he left our formation:sad:

2S

[SilsoeSid]

I do apologise for my derogatory remarks 2 Strops, however;afterwards we asked what was the worst thing we could do to bring ourselves to their attention. Surely you should have asked what was the 'best' thing you could do to bring yourselves to their attention. :p
All rules of the air were applied as far as possible.. As far as possible !, How about a safer, yes safer, line astern. :oh:
The Scout pilot didn't do a clearing turn
Probably because he was in a valley!:ok:

SS

Sorry again, going way off topic....must regain track!

[2STROPS]

SS

Apology accepted;)

We asked what was the worst thing we could do because we were doing fighter affil and didn't want to be seen!!

Line astern in the formation couldn't be done as each element had to land at the same time either side of the objective.

In my vocab a clearing turn was taught in the hover either a 90 left/right or if performance allowed a 360. So it can be done in a valley.

As far as your questions go my views are:-

FJ not good enough look out, route selection. - If this happened with helio on finals to HLS then bad route selection going to near a marked HLS

Heli pilot for landing / taking off at his HLS / Incident site. Defensive maneuvering as explained above always assume a FJ is about to get you a la Germany.

System(s) for not fitting TCAS. Very much so this should be mandatory on all low level users. FJ in N Sea look for 0040 on our transponders but TCAS would be far better.

Those who sited HLS. This is not a good site next to a HIRTA near a major motorway interchange which is bound to be used as a turning point/check point by all and sundry. No protection by an ATZ - what is wrong with Staverton the home of BAS!!

CAA for approving HLS. I always like to blame them
:ok:

[Basher577]

For what its worth I think the the HLS is a bit of a red herring. The fact that it Air Ambulance was at its main operating base is a matter for concern, but its far out-weighed by the amount of field landings HEMS aircraft have to make on a day to day basis.

The facts as I see them (for what its worth) are.

HEMS units are funded by charity.
TCAS is expensive.
The trend will be for HEMS units to move their bases to private sites away from airfields to save money.
HEMS land anywhere.
HEMS aircraft have high visibility paint schemes.

The forces need to low fly.
The low flying booking system and ALFIENS never included the civies effectively and probably could'nt.
Millitary aircraft are camouflaged and move fast.
The Military don't always talk to the ATC when outside regulated airspace.

I don't have the answers but I do think the onus lies mainly with military to see and avoid.

I guess its just the "price of freedom".

Safe flying

[[email protected]]

So - everyone seems to have gone off on one without knowing whether or not the Harrier pilot in question did see the air ambulance and took sufficient avoiding action (or none at all if not required). Instead the FJ community is pilloried for being a danger to GA just because they fly fast and low - this is particularly amusing since a large proportion of GA traffic has the worst lookout (ie none) of all. After 20 odd years of flying round the UK (in helos) I have had to take avoiding action on more Cessnas and R22s than I ever have on FJ.
What do you expect the Harriers and Tornados to do - flash their lights or waggle their wings to acknowledge they have seen you? Just because they don't do this or don't change course doesn't mean they haven't seen you it's just as likely that they elect to maintain course and know that the seperation will be sufficient. As to being flown over when you are on the ground - helicopters in fields are bloody difficult to see even when you know they are there - if in doubt try a blind call on 300.8 (low level common) or even guard.
All the moaning about FJ low level training will just result in one thing - closing the UKLFS and a gradual but massive reduction in capability for the RAF.

[Bertie Thruster]

I remember an auth used in Germany in the '80's to avoid the FJ band; "transit not above 150ft agl"? ( I used to like that one!)

Can't see that going down too well over here!

TCAS might help:

There is a police unit in the Midlands with a FJ transit corridor (1000ft) runnning right over the base HLS. Even in the low hover at the base the (Home Office funded) TCAS would pick up approaching FJ's using the corridor. A major improvement to FS!

And now I'm operating HEMS Public Transport with little notice to adhoc sites in unregulated airspace in busy FJ LL areas, picking up passengers who haven't chosen to fly.

In my opinion not having TCAS in this operation poses extra risk to the public and is a major setback to FS.

Crab. I dont think anyone one this thread is knocking LL FJ training.

[SilsoeSid]

Good morning crab@;

I would consider anyone a danger to GA if they were flying fast and low, not just FJ, isn't that how accidents happen?

To brand GA traffic the 'worst lookout (ie none )', seems a bit harsh, having sat in a few types of FJ and flown in a Hawk which I'm sure a lot of us here have, the outside view isn't particularly good out of a FJ window now is it?
I'm sure GA don't want to get hit by a FJ as much as FJ don't want to hit GA traffic.

You highlight this when you say, "After 20 odd years of flying round the UK (in helos) I have had to take avoiding action on more Cessnas and R22s than I ever have on FJ."

Thats because of the danger of a FJ, you can't see the blighters! Just because you didn't see it to take avoiding action, doesn't mean they weren't there.Therefore it would seem that it is incumbant for the FJ world to realise this. This is not a theatre of war and as such it MUST be apprecieted that there is other GA traffic out there, that is allowed to be there. I get the feeling here that some think that the FJ world can use the UKLFS with impunity. :ugh:

Surely the phrase, "FLIGHT SAFETY IS EVERYONES RESPONSIBILITY", must come into this somewhere.

The only time I have seen Harriers / Tornados / Hawks / Jaguars / A10s / F-16s flash their lights or waggle their wings at me was when they had just buzzed me, intentionally or not! More often as not as they come screaming up from behind. I suppose its good fun from the FJ perspective, but WTFWT was a phrase that comes to mind!

Unfortunately, I think I'm safe on this one, Air Ambulances and Police helicopters are not UHF equipped to be able to give a call on 300.8.
Anyway in my experience, military a/c tend to be on a 'chat frequency' and an operating frequency, so what would be the point of that? Assuming of course the FJ pilot knew the area the Heli was taking off from.
What would you suggest we give references to our position from / to in order that the FJ can acknowledge that he is nearby the heli operating area? Airfields / beacons / towns ? You see the problem?

Nobody here want to see the UKLFS 'closed down or reduced', we've all got the T-Shirt etc, but the question still remains, "What can be done to make it safer?"

By the way;
All the moaning about FJ low level training will just result in one thing - closing the UKLFS and a gradual but massive reduction in capability for the RAF. Isn't that 2 things. :confused:

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition. :ok:

http://xeniteia.typepad.com/xeniteia/images/spanish.jpg

Have a warm and dry day. :D
ATB
SS

[TeeS]

Well I have to plead guilty to being the one who first suggested Strensham as our Southern operating base! In my defence, there were a whole host of requirements that came before consideration of low flying fast jets. Firstly, it had to be in the best position for the required coverage - additionally, we had to consider crew travelling time, public access, noise complaints etc. Operating from an active airfield brings its own problems, ATC delays, visitors airside, circuit disruption etc.

I would also question whether Defford creates a choke point or whether it is actually used as a target for training sorties!

I for one would not like to see any huge restriction on low flying training in the UK just so long as the Jet Jockies are aware we are there and are keeping a good look out.

TeeS

[Bertie Thruster]

Crab, I wasn't suggesting that FJ's should spot and avoid me on the ground. It was my(perhaps poor) way of illustrating a perceived risk factor of the chance of a LL midair FJ(v)HEMS in Lincs/Notts area.

1. While on the ground at jobs we are directly overflown low level approx once every 6 months. ( this gives some indication of level of traffic)

2.Approx once every 6 months we "see and mutually avoid" with FJ's at about 250ft while approaching/departing adhoc field sites. (At the same time looking DOWN for wires, fod, horses, etc)

3. We have had 2 Airprox's with FJ's in last 5 years. (Didn't see and avoid each other until V close!)

'High' midair risk factor (if traffic not seen) My estimate for our HEMS unit: once every 500 sorties, ie twice a year.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

Well obviously they don't keep a good lookout or they wouldn't have rudely brushed passed me like they did - they have wired seats too, better a few heavy bruises and a broken bone for them, then a wipeout for me ! Speeding up the motorway at 155 in your S class is just as diabolical as flying at 600 knots in highly congested GA traffic areas and crossing major navigational ground features - such as the Tonbridge - Ashford railway line, the UK's straightest bit of track while other innocent pilots are obeying the right hand rule. There are lots of places to do low flying for the RAF and they should be fenced off by NOTAM when in use. I came so close to losing my life that day and I don't really want to be there again. They're the ones with the radar kits on board, they should learn to bloody use them !

[2STROPS]

FS

So a FJ "rudely " flashed past you? What did you expect him to do ask for permission!! May I ask what height you were when your incident happened.

As for crossing line features it is done every day of the year you don't expect somebody to approach a line feature fly up it 'til it ends then carry on in the direction they were going, do you??:confused:

As for using their radars - which RAF a/c have air/air radars? And which do not; something for you to find out as you broaden your aviation experience. (To start you off -Tornado F3 yes, Hawk no).

Be careful saying that The RAF should be corralled in certain areas. They already are. If you gave the great British public the choice in a referendum:-

"Do you want your lifestyle and country protected from foreign influence by the Armed forces or do you want noisy General Aviation A/c allowed below 2000ft."

What do you think the answer may be:E

2S

[SilsoeSid]

:hmm: Mmm, I think we can now see the cut of 2strops' jib!

[Non-PC Plod]

It was only after I very nearly got wiped by a Jaguar that I discovered what a total waste of time the Airprox board is. Jag never saw me, TCAS saved my life - I just managed to dive out of the way before the Jag passed 150' straight over the top of me. The summary of the board was that it examines what actually happened, not what might have happened. Since we didnt collide, there was no risk of collision??????? I beg to differ! The Jag was, it appears, flying too fast, below his weather minima, and not looking out sufficiently to see a high-conspicuity painted, white strobing, TCAS squawking helo with 2 x landing lights on pointing at him. But, the Airprox board is not there to apportion blame.

So - no blame, no risk of collision because we didnt collide. Is the Airprox board just a pointless talking shop? - discuss.

I'll get my coat, Taxi for one!

[Head Turner]

Ladies and Gentlemen I would like to add my piece to this discussion in special regard to the data that is marked on the CAA charts and apparently on the charts available to the LL jets.

Where I and one other pilot frequently fly into and of course out of, is marked clearly, for sure on the CAA 1:500,000 chart, and that this information IS available to the LL jet pilots.

We are frequently overflown and sooner or later something will happen. To alert the RAF to my concerns I wrote explaining the risk and asked if pilots would avoid overflying these sites. The answer, sadly was not encouraging and overflights are continuing to occur. It was explained that this was the official policy.

Therefore the attempts to improve my survival rate and perhaps the lives of the other pilot and inocent people have come to nothing.

We have strobes and use the landing light and search light set off to the side to help to be seen.

It is my opinion that the Low Flying undertaken by the fast jets is outdated and the procedures were probably written when there were fewer helicopters in the open FIR. From my knowledge there have been numerous police and air ambulance helicopters brought into service in the past 15 years and all those Robinson helicopters that are now so popular.

There ought to be standard routes for the fast low level jets which are clearly marked on the CAA charts and crossing them would be carried out in the most expeditious way. Is this too much to ask? These routes would be designed to avoid active helipads and once established no helipads would be permitted under these routes. A fair give and take situation.

So that's my pennyworth in this airprox debate.

[Bertie Thruster]

I dont mind the FJ's myself. Quite exciting really. Its my medics and pax I've got to think of now, they are "public transport" passengers after all.

My best one was in Germany about 1983. A Harrier flew directly just under my Gazelle from behind. I was approx 150ft AGL. I actually heard his engine before I saw him appear underneath me!

I always get a buzz when I see one low level; its the old FAC excitement! How else could I shoot things with my Gazelle?

The A-10's were amusing;

"Hiya Croc" (that I'm afraid to say was my FAC callsign) "this is Pork Flight. We are a pair of A-10s. We have Maverick missiles, 30 mike mike, hersey bars, pepsi cola and superman comics. What trade u got?"

I suppose it's all a bit more serious these days.

[PANews]

Part of the problem can be laid at the feet of the military.

The UK military still do not appear to have developed a TCAS type equipment of their own. They steadfastly refuse to use TCAS off the shelf, they want a specialised system. Whatever that means.

At the time a Tucano hit [perhaps brushed past would be less violent!] the police Squirrel of Western Counties in September 1997 this gear was 'in development' and I guess it still is. Even then lots of smaller aircraft were never to have 'it' so whats the point? The Tucano pilot was heads down and he came up behind plod who had no TCAS.

Another problem that surfaced at that time was that having no transponder on a RAF aircraft was not a problem as long as the formation had one.... so you get a warning from your TCAS and move out of the way and collect another bit of the fast jet formation.....

I am not aware that anything has changed greatly.....

[Bertie Thruster]

UK police helos have now all got TCAS (thanks to government cash, duty of care,etc)

I dont think any of the HEMS helos have TCAS

[What Limits]

Must admit TCAS is long overdue for HEMS aircraft, after all they are more vulnerable than police helis that have had the kit for a long time.

Have been enjoying the benefits of TCAS for some time. How we ever managed before I do not know. Certainly has reduced the risk of air-to-air in my estimation.

Flew out of Strensham several times and was very conscious of the FJ use of that location as a turning point. Why can't we have an ATZ for these locations similarly Devizes, Marden, Ripley, Boreham and all the others out on a limb somewhere.

[SilsoeSid]

UK police helos have now all got TCAS
I know of one who hasn't. ;)

[Marco]

I agree with a previous comment. The AIRPROX board is a toothless organisation. Admittedly there are civilians on the board but after several years in military aviation and >10 years in emergency services aviation my opinion leads me to believe 'it is an organisation run by crabs for the protection of crabs'.
:(

[Fortyodd]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UK police helos have now all got TCAS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


"I know of one who hasn't. ;) "

I know of Three more!! ;) ;) ;)

[Hilico]

A suggested solution: let each county's HEMS share a crew room with a local RAF station. Fertile ground for a regular beneficial exchange of views? (Easy for Norfolk, difficult for Essex, I know.)

[PANews]

Good idea but probably dated. In the last few days the Government has again been talking about shedding yet more MoD airfields.

Similar insecurity has just led the Humberside Police to opt out of Leconfield.... they were not pushed but the insecurity itself had the 'desired' effect and they decided not to invest in a rebuild on the former RAF field. They are off to Humberside Airport and are building a new base for occupation this summer.

[SilsoeSid]

Or why not let the FJ boys have a day or 2 out with the air ambulance, (well at least 'to' the incident!), and see how safe they feel!

And then the air ambo boys can have a go in the FJ, to see what they can/cannot see.

Everyone in the picture, links made, some ideas banded around, Robert is your mums brother and I'm sure a BBQ would fit in there nicely as well. :ok:

Of course the invite should extend to other air units without TCAS :)

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

Sorry to be a civvy street pain in the gearbox strops, but as I said, until it happens to you, i'm sure you'll never be able to agree - and I sincerely hope it does not. I was at 1500' incidently. I do appreciate what the RAF guys do but not at any price to the innocent.

[Bertie Thruster]

Police helos without TCAS!! If not fitted, why not? I thought the cash was there for all police units to go TCAS.

Or are we talking spare a/c?

Or congested area, non mil low level FJ type locations?


Hilico; I operate HEMS from a major RAF airfield. I dont need more exchange of views, I need TCAS. I've also been low level in Tornados and Hawks (sadly not Harrier) to see what I could see. (supersonic at 200ft as well. Ok Ok!! that one was over the Falklands ) I still need TCAS. We all get on great. FJ Low Level ?-- --Hey it's the east of England!! Coningsby, Wittering, Cottesmore, Scampton, Cranwell, Waddington , Barkston . Marham just round the corner, Vale of York just above. Lots of important mil training all over. I really would appreciate TCAS fitted for the HEMS role.

[Non-PC Plod]

Head Turner - Sorry, dont agree on Low Flying training having to be on set routes. Its simply not going to prepare you for being dumped in an unfamiliar environment and having to do it in anger for the first time with people taking a pop at you.

What the military could pay more attention to is avoidance criteria for particular sites. At the moment microlight and helo sites, and many glider sites, light a/c strips etc are all "see and avoid". ie, duty nav bloke can draw his line on the map straight over the top of these sites and hope duty looking out bloke dodges any traffic. Busy sites such as police/HEMS ought to be treated differently from (for example) a farm strip which gets used once in a blue moon on a sunny Sunday in July. They need protection from someone who is perhaps under training dealing with bounce aircraft, simulated AAA, ground radar spikes, an instructor giving him a hard time etc, who is maybe not looking out the front for the vital 1.5 secs when it can make a difference.

Likewise, the CAA could do more to acknowledge that low flying training happens, and where and how. On a military low flying map, choke points and flow directions up and down valleys are marked. Biggles knows which way to look when hes crossing the valley. Civvy bloke has to guess which way Biggles uses it as a one-way street unless he has local knowledge or has proffed a military map.

How about a coordinated approach, or am I being too obvious??

[Weasel Watcher]

Bomber Aris`s post raises once again the continuing conflict in the open FIR at low level. All users of Class G airspace under VFR have the right to expect that all other users will be making every effort to maintain a good lookout. Sadly, in many cases reported in recent years it has often come to light that fast jet crews operating at up to 450 knots at low level have been `heads in` when approaching IP or target in order to maximise their chances of a successful mission at the expense of their lookout.

One controversial contribution is for fast jets to be equipped with some form of collision avoidance equipment. This has been repeatedly promised by the MOD and just as frequently delayed for financial or political reasons. At present we are in a `we cannot find suitable equipment`phase, next we should expect `there is no room to fit it`closely followed by ` there isn`t really a problem is there?` phases. It has been seen before.

The CAA has been quick to mandate the fitting of collision avoidance equipment to aerial work helicopters operating below 500 feet, why should not the MOD do the same for fast jets?

[Bertie Thruster]

So why haven't the CAA mandated TCAS for all UK HEMS? We spend nearly all our time in the fast jet band and at least 25% in the critical 0-500ft band, taking off and landing at adhoc sites.

(And its all public transport)

Regarding HEMS, who carries the can for "duty of care"?

CAA? Charity? or Operator?

[Hotel Uniform Yankee]

The police helicopter operating in Humberside is fitted with TCAS.

[[email protected]]

Bleat - whinge - moan RAF flying too fast and low making our life difficult. Try a. looking out, b. getting yourselves TCAS and UHF equipped, c. campaigning to the CAA to have Civvy maps marked with the UKLFS and choke points and d. subscribe to the big sky theory since there hasn't actually been a mid-air since the jetranger one which resulted in the pipeline inspection notification system.

Alternatively volunteer to go to war without low level training and see how long you survive.

Alternatively 2, get HEMS to use the ARCCK (or another suitable agency) as a coordinator as happens in Scotland and they will create a TDA around any job sites you have.

Alternatively 3, make a blind call on guard lifting from field sites if you are really worried.

PS ever heard of head-up displays to prevent heads in operation? They are fitted to all FJ.

[ShyTorque]

Crab,

Surely, you cannot be serious when you say that civilian registered aircraft should be fitted with a military UHF radio? Why don't FJ crews listen out on VHF as their radios already have this facility?

[2STROPS]

Crab.

Hope you have your tin hat and flack jacket on as you are sure to receive incoming from I've done it, you can't do it as well as me the SilsoeSid.:ugh:

I also agree with you. Lookout is all important for everybody. It is also sensible for civil too keep out of the 1500ft and below band as much as possible and FJ too keep below 500ft as much as possible.

TCAS would be a great help but blame Gordon Brown for not funding it and MOD civil servants, who too preserve their jobs make even the simplest decisions take years.

2S
:ok:

[SilsoeSid]

OK 2STROPS if you insist!

crab, in answer to your solutions;


a. 'Try looking out'.
Do you honestly believe that doesn't happen?
What happens when the FJ comes up from the rear 120 degrees?

b. 'Getting yourselves TCAS and UHF equipped'.
And who will pay for that? Oh sorry, the charity will.
FJ will have to have their emitters on for TCAS to work.

c. 'Campaigning to the CAA to have Civvy maps marked with the UKLFS and choke points'.
While we are at it, perhaps the maps can be supplied free of charge to the air ambulances as a charity donation.
You have also missed the point on this one, that the a/c was landing at its home base. So, more prudent methinks that the military maps highlight more the HLSs.

d. 'Subscribe to the big sky theory since there hasn't actually been a mid-air since the jetranger one which resulted in the pipeline inspection notification system'.
YET!!!!!


With respect, IMHO, the biggest problem on this thread, (and no 2STROPS contrary to what you think, I don't think I'm any better than anyone else here), is that most of the air ambulance or police a/c pilots are ex military and have a v.good working knowledge of the UKLFS. On the other hand, I get the impression that those siding with 'the other side' haven't seen it from the other air users point of view.

Other points;

1. 'Alternatively volunteer to go to war without low level training and see how long you survive.'
Unless I have missed it, noone has said anything against the low level flying training being carried out.

2. 'Alternatively 2, get HEMS to use the ARCCK (or another suitable agency) as a coordinator as happens in Scotland and they will create a TDA around any job sites you have.'
And you will be able to get the airborne FJs the message in such a short time for them to be able to stay clear.?
A TDA just to take off and land at operating base?

3. 'Alternatively 3, make a blind call on guard lifting from field sites if you are really worried.'
REPEAT. No UHF radio.
Is it wise to call lifting/departing on an International Distress Frequency?
Do FJ monitor VHF Guard while out on a LL trg sortie?

4. 'PS ever heard of head-up displays to prevent heads in operation? They are fitted to all FJ.'
I think that this is your red herring.
At FJ speed, clearly they are not all they're cracked up to be with FJs not being able to see anyone anyway!
Couldn't the HUD obscure the 'dot' of the GA traffic, until it gets to a decent, too late to react to, size.


Perhaps a few visits are required after all.

[Bertie Thruster]

Even if it were possible to request a TDA in time, an average of 3 TDA's a day on the LL routes either side of Waddo would really impede the LL training in the East!!

TCAS on HEMS would help a great deal. How about the MOD paying for installation? After all they will loose an aircraft as well!

[Basher577]

Crab do you actually read the posts before you get your shovel out?

The majority of the posts here accept the need for LL training, we should cos most of us are ex military.

There are approx 16 Air Ambulance in the UK we average 3 shouts a day,(max being 15 for this unit) we are airbourne in 2 min, and you suggest we get a TDA for every incident we attend. Mmmm does your boot really fit that well in your mouth?

Blind call, How many times do you need to be told we don't have UHF! We are run by charities and the money is'nt falling of trees hence the lack of TCAS.

Here is an idea, lets cut the crab hotel bill for one exercise and that should pay for TCAS for all the HEMS units in the UK!

Bertie, I'm going to try push CHAS to lobby for TCAS from goverment. May be worth a letter from all HEMS units in that direction. Might be wasted effort but worth a try.

[ShyTorque]

Flying Squirrel, come on, don't beat about the bush now......

Thing it's, it's class G airspace so unfortunately it's a free for all. Having flown both inside and outside the military, each side has its own problems and its own job to do. Ranting does little to achieve a solution. :(

Edit: Ah! I see you have removed your rather offensive post immediately before this one

I agree with Bertie, TCAS is a life saver. (He and I used to fly the same police aircraft). TCAS probably saved our bacon on a number of occasions but unfortunately, it isn't the be all and end all. One particular concern of mine is that a lot of GA pilots (as well as the military) don't use their transponders to best effect, negating the chance of them alerting the crew of a TCAS equipped aircraft of their presence. I started a thread on this about four or five years ago, begging pilots of transponder equipped aircraft to always fly with "Alt" selected. Anyone would think I had tried to take away human rights and was accused of being anti GA etc etc!

[2STROPS]

FlyingS

So you are a "non public school educated buffoon" that explains alot;) Don't forget the military pay taxes also so they are also paying:ok:

The low level environment is dangerous but to try and blame it all on the military is idiotic. There have been several cases where the civilian hasn't been looking out that have ended in tragedy eg. photo a/c flying in circles while taking photos and not looking out.

Keep high keep safe:ok:

2S

[SilsoeSid]

I'm so sorry everyone, but I have to comment on 2 strops' last comment, it has been bugging me all night/morning.


If this guy is "flying in circles while taking photos and not looking out." ;

I have to ask, what is he taking pictures of?

The instrument panel ? http://www.soccerhooligan.com/forums/html/emoticons/graywanker.gif


Oh what the heck, while I'm at it;
It's easier to fly in circles by looking out than looking in, so why would he be making it more difficult for himself?


I refer to my previous smiley.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Flying Squirrel,

Thankyou for removing your off-target and offensive post. The vast majority of pilots you appear to intend working alongside in your new-found capacity as a commercial heli pilot are ex-mil, non-public-school educated (those fellas all become stockbrokers and hire us for weekend trips-to-the-races) and as keen to survive as you are. Among the very sensible suggestions here is the one about staying above 1500 feet when the weather permits. I suspect that's one lesson you'll remember, eh?

Sid, some very good points in your reply to Crab, but that .gif is certainly your favourite of the moment, innit? Are you letting them get to you...?

[SilsoeSid]

:E

"The low level environment is dangerous but to try and blame it all on the military is idiotic."
Call me an idiot if you like and I'm sure you will, but who flies into who here?

You can't put a bull into a china shop and then blame the shopkeeper for having his china on the shelves.

Child runs into another in the playground, other child injured.....whos at fault?

Sports car races around car park crashes into another....whos at fault?

They are all allowed to be in their respective places aren't they? (apart from the bull perhaps!)

If a child wants to run around freely, take them to open area.
If a sports car driver wants to go fast, go to a track day.
If a FJ pilot wants to train flying low and fast, DUA, NOTAM.
(you may forget the bull at this stage)

How many LL sorties take place in area 19 (N.Ireland)? Rhet.

If you mix the 2 they become 1 and nobody wants that.......do they?


Anyone mention CANP ? :mad:


Just a 10CC (http://www.allthelyrics.com/lyrics/10cc/windows_in_the_jungle/food_for_thought-130-lyric/) track :8
Or is it really Chris Rea (http://www.lyricsfreak.com/c/chris-rea/30524.html) ? :E

[2STROPS]

Magic been keeping SS up :E

If my memory serves me right he was single pilot taking pics of houses or a wedding so his lookout would have included the brides garter and not the sky he should have been searching for conflicting traffic.

Sadly I believed he didn't survive the encounter.:(

2S

[[email protected]]

Well who was already an established user of the airspace before air ambulances and police helis came along? Oh yes the military doing that nasty fast low flying.

So who should make sure they are properly equipped with UHF and TCAS before they come and play in the big boys playground?

All FJ will be serviceable transponder equipped and use it or they are not allowed into the UKLFS and the only people who disable the mode C used to be the air defence boys who don't flash around in helicopter territory.

My point about HUDs was that at low level a FJ pilot doesn't have to look in for information and can concentrate on lookout.

SS -1. if the pilots lookout was so good they would see and avoid the FJ. What about a lookout turn before transitioning or a climbing turn on departure?
2. Why shouldn't the charity pay to have the aircraft fully equipped to do the job safely? Land ambulances don't go out without lights, indicators and radios do they.
3. Why shouldn't the charity pay for decent maps - land ambulances have GPS nav with audio commentary.
4. A TDA is announced on guard UHF and takes seconds to organise - every overland SAROP will have one extablished usually before the aircraft has got airborne.
5. How many AA and police have overflown minor airfields or farmers strips without making an RT call or considering potential traffic?

[handysnaks]

Crab,
Re FJ lookout, I was under the impression that Tornado jocks (we can call them FJ can't we?) are renowned for NOT looking out !:E (They certainly used to be:p)
re point 2 Land ambulances are paid for by the health authority, not charity. It takes quite a bit of fundraising just to get a basically equipped helicopter operational!
Re point 3 See the answer to point 2 above, however, they should have current maps/charts.

[ShyTorque]

"So who should make sure they are properly equipped with UHF and TCAS before they come and play in the big boys playground?"

Crab, I think you cannot be serious. It's class G airspace (suggest you refresh your brain what that means next time you do your QHI recat). It certainly doesn't belong to the military jet boys, in fact it could be argued that they are a minority user these days. BTW, how many UK military FJs have TCAS?

"How many AA and police have overflown minor airfields or farmers strips without making an RT call or considering potential traffic?"

At 420 kts and 250 feet? Not many!

[quichemech]

Handy,
sorry but the English and welsh Air Ambs are all charity funded except for London Hems, local health authorities do make donations but it is charity run.Oh sorry that yellow thing running out of coventry is paid for partially by the Warwickshire Amb trust.:sad:

[handysnaks]

QM
sorry but the English and welsh Air Ambs are all charity funded
That is the implication of
2 Land ambulances are paid for by the health authority, not charity
:rolleyes:
do pay attention;)

[Bertie Thruster]

Crab, have the SAR cabs been fitted with TCAS yet?
I remember enjoying several very close calls with LL FJ's that TCAS (if it had been around then) might have prevented.

I also remember RCC asking us once if the TDA activated around a job we were on could be lifted as it was holding up urgent LL training!!

[Gaseous]

Just a couple of thoughts on the UHF. I operate a private aircraft from a site under Warton's fast jet circuit. I can't get VHF on the ground due to topography and after a couple of times being frightened to death by Eurofighters as I took off, I thought I would try to listen for their UHF transmissions, so I got an icom scanner and connected it up to a spare headset lead and plugged it into the intercom.

It does work but its hard to work out where they are from just listening in.

I also got one of these things that detects squawks and works out the distance. No direction, but if it counts down quick it sure makes the look out better. Its better than nothing but not much.

The thing that gives me most peace of mind is a 360 as soon as I lift and a damn good look out.

[SilsoeSid]

2 Strops, (perhaps the number should be increased ;) )Magic been keeping SS up I shouldn't flatter yourself if I were you, the military aren't the only ones who operate at night, and even then its wrap it up at midnight and off to the mess.

'Magic' hasn't kept me up for a while now, but I'm sure they are still very nice and helpful chaps. :ok:

If the photographing pilot didn't survive the encounter, how can you possibly know what he was up to at the time of said incident? :confused:
(I would insert the usual smiley at this moment, but I'm using it too much!)

[2STROPS]

In Bonnie Scotland the government pays for the Air Ambulances. :ok:

Perhaps you English and Welsh types ought to persuade that nice Scot Gordon (I have ruined your pensions, £40 billion and counting) Brown to cough up for you too. Why should charities have to pay. Any way MSRA will get you if you make it to hospital.:(
Interesting that most of the incidents are down south while we have more low flying up here.

Over to you SS:uhoh:

[quichemech]

Handy, sorry read it properly this time:oh:

[ec135driver]

Ok, here goes; Cessna driver in Carno Mid Wales, 1990/1 I think, was taking pix of houses and was hit from the 7-8 o'clock position by a Jag. I don't think he could have been expected to see that coming. So, why did the Jag pilot not see him? After all the Cessna was engaged in a perfectly legal right turn and the Jag was V.high speed at low level in a valley, I think the onus was on him to be heads up and eyes out.

Do we really need Low Level training in the open FIR over so much of the UK? Why can't the crabs do it in the deeper reaches of Scotland? Maybe the sooner the crabs all get to fly desks and let UAV's do the work the better (Helmet on, sand bags in position - incoming!)

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

ec135driver, Carno is not a good example. If you wish to use this particular mid-air, you must ask the following questions:

What height above ground did the collision take place? Was the Cessna complying with Rule 5?

How 'safe' is it to be in an orbit taking photos of objects on the ground with a handheld camera whilst flying solo? If you want to talk "onus", under VFR the onus was on both pilots to be "heads up and eyes out".

[Bertie Thruster]

There is plenty of airspace for everyone. We just need to know when and where the jets are coming from before we can see them.

The technology for this is available but the charities are hard pushed to afford £50-60k per airframe for TCAS. (some are still struggling just to stay airborne).

The recent Strensham incident has apparently got the attention of the NHS, so perhaps some progress, re TCAS funding, might come out of this.

(Local NHS trusts supply the Paramedics who crew the HEMS)

[[email protected]]

Strange that the charities can afford to upgrade from Bo105 to EC135 and the like but not go the extra mile for TCAS. Since the argument for upgrade was no doubt increased safety and reduced operating costs it is false economy to scrimp on TCAS if you really believe there is a real threat of losing an aircraft.

I had 2 different FJ fly close to me today both coming from behind (one during a PFL and the other positioning for ILS) but they both saw me and manoeuvred away - maybe it was the white strobes, maybe it was the hover floods, maybe it was just the aircraft they saw but they saw me and that was in reducing vis due to light snow showers.

In the South West we get a lot of low level FJ traffic because there is little regulated airspace and few built up areas to avoid but we manage without TCAS.

Maybe you should look at how many jobs you get launched to that aren't really essential but keep your callout stats high to please the charity and the NHS and then consider your exposure time to the 'FJ threat' during non-urgent lifesaving flights.

I am sure I seem hard nosed and unreasonable about this but everyone loves to slag off the military because we are an easy target.

If you want FJ pilot reaction and comments then post on the Military Aircrew thread but don't be surprised at the response.

No FJ crew goes out to frighten helicopter pilots and they don't launch without proper briefing and planning (including CANPs). Neither do they deliberately overfly AA or police HLS and since they don't know which field you will be in on a job they can hardly be expected to avoid you there.

[Droopystop]

There is some wonderful technology out there that will in theory help to avoid this, but none of this technology can look around hills (except satelite coms). TCAS and UHF are only line of sight, which isn't very far in Welsh valleys, Lakeland fells or Scottish Glens.

TDA's are great but cannot be communicated to FJs already Low level in mountainous terrain. TDAs are regularly busted simply because there is no way the FJs can be told that of their existance. The average AA leg is of 5 - 15 mins so there is little if any time to set up a TDA.

There is no simple answer to this, but maybe satelite links and TCAS in all FJ and HF links between AA and ARCC might help. Until then may be AEW top cover for all LL FJs. Yeah right. It does surprise me that the military do not fit TCAS already, after all they stand to loose the most in case of a mid air (more expensive kit and the mauling the military would get from the more tenacious journos).

It is encumbant on all of us to keep a good look out and to be talking or at least listening on the appropriate frequency. But is this practical at times of high pilot work load (250' at 400kts or short finals to wire strewn LS)?

[Bomber ARIS]

Since the argument for upgrade was no doubt increased safety and reduced operating costs Due to the Bolkow losing its IFR capability on December 31st 2004, many charities required an updated aircraft to maintain their all weather capability. The 135 offers a larger, more comfortable working environment for the paramedics and an extra seat which, coupled with the 135's superior performance, permits the carrying of observers, extra medical staff, etc.

I had 2 different FJ fly close to me today both coming from behind (one during a PFL and the other positioning for ILS) but they both saw me and manoeuvred away - maybe it was the white strobes, maybe it was the hover floods,.... ....maybe it was because you were in a f**king enormous, bright yellow Sea King?


Maybe you should look at how many jobs you get launched to that aren't really essential but keep your callout stats high to please the charity and the NHS and then consider your exposure time to the 'FJ threat' during non-urgent lifesaving flights. crab, perhaps your most desperate "argument" yet. I think you'll find that when some hapless citizen rings "999", it is the call centre person on the end of the blower who will dispatch a road vehicle, an air ambulance or maybe even your good self in your SAR machine - if I understand things correctly, a HEMS flight may only be legally undertaken if so tasked.


The consistent opinion amongst the non-civil heli pilots appears to be that, in the case of the Jet Ranger death and the Cessna fatality, the civil pilots were the ones to blame. Personally, I cannot ignore the fact that in each instance, a fast jet has flown THROUGH another aircraft; it's a very disturbing image.

I am curious as to how this whole thread would have panned out had the incident in question been a fatal collision??

[SilsoeSid]

crab, No FJ crew goes out to frighten helicopter pilots and they don't launch without proper briefing and planning (including CANPs). Before I continue, no they don't go out to do it, but if the opportunity arises ! :E

I'm glad someone took the bait anyway.

If I can refer you to GENERAL AVIATION SAFETY SENSE LEAFLET 18A, MILITARY LOW FLYING (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/SRG_GAD_SSL18.PDF)CIVIL LOW LEVEL ACTIVITY

LATCC (Mil) ALFENS Ops disseminates the information notified
from the Civil Aircraft Notification Procedure (CANP), to all military flying units.

.....However, no provision is made for commercial (public transport) transit flights at low level.

The ALFENS Ops should be contacted not less than 4 hours beforehand, but preferably earlier, to discuss CANP. This minimum period of 4 hours for notification is required so that aircrew can be advised during their flight planning. Notifications with less than 4 hours notice will generally be accepted but as the notice period diminishes, so does the likelihood of the message getting through. Perhaps on this thread, CANP as useful as a machmeter on an S-61! ;)

And from the horses mouth;

I had 2 different FJ fly close to me today both coming from behind (one during a PFL and the other positioning for ILS) but they both saw me and manoeuvred away - maybe it was the white strobes, maybe it was the hover floods,.... So, were you looking out? I suspect the answer is yes, and I bet you didn't see them til they had passed you.

Perhaps they didn't see you after all, as I guess that the one that was positioning for an ILS may have been told about you from the ATCU, and as the other was doing a PFL would have done a comprehensive HASEL check before commencing the exercise.

Today, it could have been you !!!

[[email protected]]

Firstly, I was the one doing the PFL and I was the one positioning for the ILS (outside controlled airspace with no ATC) - both in open FIR (class G airspace for ShyTorque) and since I said they both came from behind me - No I didn't see them until they were past me -THAT is my point, they SAW me!

If they saw me because I was in a yellow helicopter then why don't you all paint your AA yellow?

Bomber - you know as well as I do that ambulance control will often task a land ambulance and an air ambulance to the same job - not because an air ambulance has been specifically requested but because the more times the AA gets called out the better the stats look when you are raising money for the charities. I suspect a careful analysis of AA jobs would show that although it is nice for the patient to get to hospital quicker, it is not essential and that the number of injuries requiring immediate helicopter evacuation are far less prevalent.
Has anyone got stats for how many patients would have died but for the AA compared to the actual number of callouts?

As far as I am aware AA are not IFR or night capable (although they should be) so why is that a justification for upgrade?

Droopy, as far as I was aware we were not talking about mountainous areas and UHF guard can be heard at low level in 95% of the UK which is why TDAs are broadcast on it.

Siloesid - you do seem to have a very biased view of FJ pilots - were you a wannabe when you were in the mob? I know some of them can be cocky w*nkers on the ground but don't dismiss their airborne skills lightly - try doing their training and then criticise.
BTW I didn't first mention the CANP system and yes I do know it's no use for AA and police ops.

The Tornado/206 incident involved a non-UK based crew who didn't know about the 206 when they briefed (in Germany I think) and then got airborne for their mission profile that included low level in UK. Since that trajic accident the PINs (pipeline inspection notification system) has been instigated by MOD and any notified activity is included in preflight briefings.

If you are operating AA and you have a problem with FJ then try ringing the local RAF station and talking to someone about it - you might be surprised that we go out of our way to avoid pi88ing people off and we certainly do not treat Airprox as an occupational hazard.

[Bertie Thruster]

Crab, the local RAF stations all around E. Midlands work very hard to successfully coordinate our AA transits in the local area. In much of Lincolnshire it would be very difficult operate without the cooperation of the military. I receive a daily ops briefing in the Flight Planning room of the largest RAF station in the area. I regularly discuss with the local controllers how to safely conduct my operations.

My operation had 2 Airprox with FJ in 2000 but none since, so perhaps we are doing something right.

One area of concern remains: safe t/o and landings through the 250ft band.

Which way would public opinion sway, regarding local mil LL flying, after just one FJ/AA airtoair?

[TeeS]

Hi Crab,

You are off the mark with your comments about Air Ambulance tasking. The Ambulance Control staff really do not care whether we are flying or not, it makes no difference to them other than getting a case off their screen!

The facts are -

We still struggle to get some controls to task us because they are worried that this is wasting money. (False - we actually get cheeper per mission the more we are used.)

The statistics look dreadful if we respond to inappropriate tasks because they show up as aborted or not carried.

Yes, a large number of patients would cope quite well without air transport - there are often hidden benefits e.g. leaving road resources in the rural area rather than losing them for 2 or 3 hours. How many times have you winched someone off a boat that would have survived if they had just carried on to the nearest harbour?

Cheers

TeeS

[[email protected]]

Tees - exactly my point - we get tasked to a lot of stuff that doesn't need a helicopter but the CG get the 999 call in and clear it in the quickest but not always the cheapest or most efficient way - don't tell me this doesn't happen with AA because I know it does.

The point I was trying to make is that in any heli operation there is always an element of risk which everyone will try to reduce but can never completely eradicate so make sure you only put yourself at risk (if that is how you perceive the FJ problem) when you really are on urgent lifesaving, not just freeing up a land ambulance to sit on a motorway junction or in a car park somewhere.

Bertie - you are clearly doing something right - good effort - unlike some of the others who just want to moan. As for the take-off and landing phase my only suggestion is a curving flight path both on arrival and departure to maximise lookout and have as many lights on as possible.

You are right on the public opinion - look at what is happening to helicopter low flying monitoring after the Heather Cook inquest - the military are an easy target.

[SilsoeSid]

Crab,

This is not an anti-military low flying subject.

You are quite correct that you weren't the first to mention the CANP, but the bait laying doesn't count!
It shows, perhaps, that before this thread, your knowledge bucket in the protection of civil low flying air operations wasn't as full as it is becoming. :ouch:

SS


(edited to lessen the scratchmarks, meow!)

[What Limits]

I don't think that curving flight path take off and landings are permitted under Cat A/ Class I ops.

[SilsoeSid]

And it would certainly be an interesting take off using the heliport/elevated helipad procedure at Cat A whilst maintaining a good look out and utilising the curving flight path method recommended by crab!:ouch:

All this, whilst maintaining within 30 dgrees of the wind! :ugh:

[2STROPS]

ss

You are digging yourself a bigger hole. You are saying your procedures are endangering yourself by being unable to keep a good lookout in what you admit is a dangerous portion of your flight:confused:

What is Cat A? (Think JAROPS)

2S

[SilsoeSid]

2S,

Please explain how you would maintain a good effective lookout whilst flying backwards in an upward curving flightpath, as recommended by crab.

I assume that you were taught to fly by the guy at Shoreham who has that amazing video. (Sorry, I can't remember his name.)



JAR-OPS 3.480 Terminology

\'Category A\' with respect to helicopters means multi-engine helicopters designed with engine and system isolation features specified in JAR-27/29 or equivalent acceptable to the JAA and Helicopter Flight Manual performance information based on a critical engine failure concept which assures adequate designated surface area and adequate performance capability for continued safe flight in the event of an engine failure.

In other words,

Category A Take-off:.
The take-off must be performed in such a manner that in the event of a single engine failure the helicopter must be able to:
Prior to TDP, return to, and stop safely on the take-off area (rejected take-off).
After TDP, continue the take-off and climbout, and attain a configuration and airspeed that allows continued flight.


SO, if you are \'flying backwards in an upward curving flightpath, as recommended by crab\', and the donk stops how are you complying with CAT A?

Would you like to borrow a shovel. :ok:

[ec135driver]

So much gets posted here so quickly I apologise if my post seems to hark back too far.

I think my point about the Cessna at Carno illustrates the problem perfectly! He was engaged in a right turn using a fixed camera, mounted on the right seat, he MAY have been below 500' but that does not mean he was infringing rule 5 which relates to distance from and object not height agl. In any case that is a red herring - he was hit from behind!

Regarding two other points:

A Cat A takeoff requires (in my aircraft) a backward climb to 120' minimum, therefore we are just entering the FJ minimum alt of 250' as we are getting decent forward speed and rate of climb, quite a long time to have no decent vision to the rear quarter.

Secondly many air ambulance are IFR and therefore night approved.

Thirdly, you may believe that FJ's do not deliberately overfly AA or Police HLS, but you should spend a week at Strensham! Half the RAF fj's come by at some time or another.

[quichemech]

When I was last at Strensham they didn't just flyby they very often overflew and on one occasion came rather to close to HV as it was lifting on a job, crew didn't know about it until I told them when they got back!

The site is very clearly marked on all the maps!

[[email protected]]

Yes SS of course I have become an A2 QHI and a Sqn trg off without knowing anything about CANP!!!

Who said anything about a backwardclimb? If AA have to comply with Cat A procedures and it is endangering the aircraft to do so maybe you should either A. campaign to the CAA to have the rules changed or B. not do the job at all.
It seems to me that you are less at risk waiting for the land ambulance than hoping a FJ doesn't sneak up on you while you are climbing backwards to 120'.

Anyway I thought we were talking about field operations not elevated helidecks.

If there is a problem at Strensham then talk to the MOD, don't bleat about it on PPrune.

If wanting the military low flying to be contained in DUAs/notamed areas/Canada isn't an anti-mil low flying suggestion I don't know what is.

PS SS your profile indicates you are an apache god not a mere mortal AA driver - unless it's all bo88ocks of course.....

[SilsoeSid]

Yes SS of course I have become an A2 QHI and a Sqn trg off without knowing anything about CANP!!!

Who said anything about a backwardclimb? If AA have to comply with Cat A procedures and it is endangering the aircraft to do so maybe you should either A. campaign to the CAA to have the rules changed or B. not do the job at all.
It seems to me that you are less at risk waiting for the land ambulance than hoping a FJ doesn't sneak up on you while you are climbing backwards to 120'.

Anyway I thought we were talking about field operations not elevated helidecks.

If there is a problem at Strensham then talk to the MOD, don't bleat about it on PPrune.

If wanting the military low flying to be contained in DUAs/notamed areas/Canada isn't an anti-mil low flying suggestion I don't know what is.

PS SS your profile indicates you are an apache god not a mere mortal AA driver - unless it's all bo88ocks of course..... Sorry, I had to quote that in order to preserve it should crab wish to alter the post.

Lets bear in mind that crab felt he had to remind us that he is an A2 QHI and a Sqn trg off.

'Field operations', 'air ambulance', 'Cat A Ops' and crab you are surprised we are talking about backward take offs, better known as a heliport/elevated helipad procedure.

Even with my limited requirement for field operations, (dropping off bobbies to apprehend someone, investigate something or to land in a field at the scene of an RTC outside the operating hours of the local aa, and even my short stint with an aa unit,), I have had to use a helipad arrival / departure in order to comply with Cat A Operations. I can imagine that 'normal' air ambulance ops in the field will require the helipad departure/arrival profile if not all then certainly most of the time. If AA have to comply with Cat A procedures and it is endangering the aircraft to do so maybe you should either A. campaign to the CAA to have the rules changed or B. not do the job at all. Classic crab, pure classic. What was it again? A2 QHI, Sqn trg off.

May I suggest that should you ever need an air ambulance, then make sure that you have at least about 500metres of clear area in the near vicinity. And consider yourself an extra set of eyes.!


"PS SS your profile indicates you are an apache god not a mere mortal AA driver - unless it's all bo88ocks of course....."

My profile indicates 'WAH64FS2004' then a comma so make your own conclusion again.

[2STROPS]

SS

Sorry must hand you the shovel. CAT A refers to the helicopter not the procedure. Under JAROPS there are now 3 performance classess. You require a CAT A helicopter to perform Class 1 and 2 procedures

Class 1 which equates to the old Cat A ie critical engine stops anywhere and helicopter can continue to fly away or land safely in the reject area.

Class 2 which equates to the old Cat A restricted, ie critical engine stops and helicopter can continue to fly away but if failure occurs early during t/off or late in landing phase a forced landing may be required.

Class 3 where the performance is such that an engine failure in flight may result in a force landing in a multi engined helicopter but will be required in a single:uhoh:

The CAA allow class 2 performance for operation to an elevated helipad (oil rig) so why can't the police/AA arrange the same dispensation.

It is all about risk management. Is it more likely an engine will stop at a critical time or will you be hit by a FJ because your lookout is restricted by procedure limitations. Is it safer to land in a field with a better approach/dep path which allows Class 1 performance but is further from the casualty who may need instant attention. Can you move after dropping off the medics to a safer t/off point. These are all questions that an exp pilot should be asking.

It seems that not enough is being done on BOTH sides to alleviate the danger.

2S

[SilsoeSid]

Firstly;


Section 1 SubPart A
JAR-OPS [Part] 3 does not apply to helicopters when used in military, customs, police services and SAR.


Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (HEMS) operations shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements contained in JAR-OPS Part 3 except for the variations contained in Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(d) for which a specific approval is required.


Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(d) Helicopter Emergency Medical Service

Performance requirements

(i) Take-off and landing

Helicopters with a MTOM of 5 700 kg or less

(A) Helicopters conducting operations to/from a heliport at a hospital which is located in a hostile environment, shall be operated in accordance with Subpart G (Performance Class 1)[; except when the operator holds an Approval to operate under Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(i).]

(B) Helicopters conducting operations to/from a HEMS
operating site located in a hostile environment shall as far as possible be operated in accordance with Subpart G (Performance Class 1).
The commander shall make every reasonable effort to minimise the period during which there would be
danger to helicopter occupants and persons on the surface in the event of failure of a power unit.


(ii) Take-off and landing

Helicopters with a MTOM exceeding 5 700 kg.
Helicopters conducting HEMS shall be operated in accordance with Performance Class 1.


So, (Cat A) Perf 1 unless variation approval has been granted? :confused: :{ ;) :ok:

[2STROPS]

SS

You are coming round at last:ok:

your quote
"B) Helicopters conducting operations to/from a HEMS
operating site located in a hostile environment shall as far as possible be operated in accordance with Subpart G (Performance Class 1).
The commander shall make every reasonable effort to minimise the period during which there would be danger to helicopter occupants and persons on the surface in the event of failure of a power unit."

This is Class 2 so there is dispensation to avoid the helipad departure if the commander assesses the risk of a FJ collision as high.

As I and Crab have said before a curving departure Class 2 will give you the best chance of seeing and being seen. :ok:

2S

[[email protected]]

Thanks 2strops.

SS I have only flown in the Military and as such have never had to comply with Cat A procedures and view them with complete disdain. We fly our own profiles to minimise exposure to not only engine failure at critical stages of flight, but also other aircraft.

Good pilots think about what they are doing and why rather than blindly following the 'rule book' and endangering the aircraft and pax.

I missed the FS part of the AH64 - are you sure you don't fly AirAmbulanceFS2005 as well.

[SilsoeSid]

OK, I see crab and 2S are in agreement.

For my next OPC I shall make sure that more time is taken on this curving departure, with backward option as required, as opposed to / in addition to, the normal profiles required.

I wonder what the answer will be on that one. :ouch:

crab;Good pilots think about what they are doing and why rather than blindly following the 'rule book' and endangering the aircraft and pax. Like avoiding HLSs and other areas of GA traffic activity, thinking the UKLFS will protect them in the event of......?:confused:......never had to comply with Cat A procedures and view them with complete disdain. WOW! :ooh: :(

[MightyGem]

I also fly the EC 135. The "rules" do not state that I shall back up to 120' when departing a confined HLS. They merely say that should an engine fail before I reach a set height, then I shall be able to land back on that landing site without injurying my passengers. If I lose an engine above that height, then I shall be able to fly away, coming no closer than 35' above any obstacles on the flight path.

The 120' has been determined by the aircraft manufacturer based on the performance limits of the aircraft. Therefore, it is an aircraft limitation,Good pilots think about what they are doing and why rather than blindly following the 'rule book' and endangering the aircraft and pax. and deviating from it WOULD be endangering the pax, and operating outside the aircraft's limitations.

Crab, I'm surprised at your disdain for a technique that is designed for the safety of your self and the aircraft. How many times have you lifted out of a confined area in your Gazelle/Lynx/Puma etc, in a peacetime/non tactical environment and thought, "If I lose an engine now, I am in the sh!t"?

[Bertie Thruster]

Crab, Class one profiles generally result in flight paths very similar to your own "safe single engine" profiles. So the way you fly departures in the military is actually very similar in outcome to what you view with "complete distain" !

Would it be ok if I quoted your comments from this thread at the Directorate of Air Staff "Shairspace" conference tomorrow?

(earlier in this thread I asked for suggestions for the conference)

"The aims of the conference are simple:

a. Engender a safer operating environment for users of Class G airspace.

b. Provide a vehicle for communication between civilian and military operators.

c. Increase awareness and understanding of attendees in a non-confrontational environment."

[3 o'clock]

Is it just me, or are these guys wrapped too tight for HMES… Hell, they’re probably wrapped too tight for New Orleans…

[Droopystop]

The interesting factor in this thread is the level of misunderstanding that civvies have of the military and vice versa. It reflects my own experience of working in a mix of civilian and ex military pilots. It is all too easy for a FJ to be perceived as an airspace hog. They do after all need loads of space, don’t always talk to local LARS units and generally seemingly act as if they own the sky. Yes, they are an easy target for frustrated civilian pilots. I don’t think the military should be surprised at this. Equally I know the military have derogatory perceptions of civilian pilots. The fact is that most of these perceptions are miss guided, but very few seem to make the effort to re-educate themselves.

We all share the same airspace and none of us want to see a mid air between any type of aircraft. It is fact that an AA when on a lifesaving mission is afforded the highest priority (Category A) and is up there with aircraft which have declared an emergency. Not even SAR flights (Category B) can get priority over AA. It might then be natural for an AA pilot to expect some form of protection from the system when on life saving ops.

The airspace system was developed sometime ago. However the airspace usage has changed dramatically since then, there are many more sports pilots flying all manners of contraptions, the multitude of GA Cessna’s and Robinson’s, IF CAT flights outside CAS plus the advent of airborne police and ambulance operations. The point I was trying to make in my last post is that it seems to me that the system has not kept up with the changing face of aviation. FJ’s need to be protected from AA as much as the other way around.

Maybe harmonisation of SAR should not be limited to SAR flights. Perhaps all airborne emergency assets should be brought under a single central control. That way the most suitable asset can be tasked to an incident (yes I am thinking of a recent thread here), but most importantly a single agency can co-ordinate low level traffic more effectively.

Slagging each other off is not going to prevent a mid air. A better understanding of other air users might.

[PPRuNe Radar]

We all share the same airspace and none of us want to see a mid air between any type of aircraft. It is fact that an AA when on a lifesaving mission is afforded the highest priority (Category A) and is up there with aircraft which have declared an emergency. Not even SAR flights (Category B) can get priority over AA. It might then be natural for an AA pilot to expect some form of protection from the system when on life saving ops.

But this is only in terms of an ATC clearance. Class G airspace operations require no ATC clearance, nor can ATC impose one or give any priority. 'See and be seen' is the rule which applys.

[ShyTorque]

"SS I have only flown in the Military and as such have never had to comply with Cat A procedures and view them with complete disdain. We fly our own profiles to minimise exposure to not only engine failure at critical stages of flight, but also other aircraft.

Good pilots think about what they are doing and why rather than blindly following the 'rule book' and endangering the aircraft and pax."

Crab,

I am surprised and quite dismayed that someone who obviously considers himself as an expert (A2 QHI, sqn training officer etc) can show such ignorance and speak so disparagingly of civilian operations. FYI, Bertie Thruster has actually seen the situation from your side too.... because he used to fly your beloved Seaking and ............ (edited for Bertie Thruster)

Are you really saying that a licensed pilot required to comply with the performance regulations regarding departure should routinely fail to do so, because of a perceived threat of a fast jet collision? Surely not.

What if, during such a manoeuvre, the aircraft suffered an engine failure and the pilot failed to secure the aircraft and its occupants because of his non-standard take-off technique....

You have missed two very important things.

Firstly, following the AAIB investigation, the CAA would take one large step forwards and secondly, the aircraft insurers would take one large pace backwards.

Go figure.

[SASless]

Someone correct me if I am wrong here....our helicopter pilot friend that is whining here about a FJ whizzing by at nearly nought feet....made the statement after a long discription of a takeoff profile that sounds interesting.....he said...."...and that is a very long time not to have a good view to the rear quarter..." or words to that effect.

My question is simply....just when does one ever have a good view of the sky and traffic to your rear in a helicopter? Lord knows, in some helicopters, it limited looking anywhere but straight ahead. Set yourself in a MD-500 and try to look out to the side....or in a Bell Medium and try to look anywhere but at the 12 o'clock direction......Chinooks....forget anything past about 4 o'clock on the right side and 8 o'clock if you are in the left hand seat.

Me thinks he doth protest too much.

[Bertie Thruster]

ShyTorque! Don't blow my cover too much then!

Back to the subject; I presume your machine has TCAS? (the owners having a bit of spare cash!) To what degree do you find TCAS helps lookout during landings/takeoffs at your various private sites in the mil LL areas?

[[email protected]]

MightyGem, Bertie, ShyTorque etc - let's get this straight; I was commenting on Siloe Sids assertion that he should climb backwards to 120' above obstacles before transitioning to comply with legislation - He said it was his required flight profile not me. And he was only trying to bait me about my suggestion that a curving approach and departure profile would give better 6 o'clock lookout for FJ (which is what this thread is about not Cat A performance).

Yes I have been in many positions where an engine failure would have resulted in a broken aircraft or worse but I would not have been able to do the job required of me if I had insisted on being safe single engine - it is a risk assessment that has to be weighed up as all ex mil pilots know against the need to perform the duty.

In civvy strasse you are compelled by legislation to treat AA and Police work as public transport (ridiculous as it may be) and as such are hamstrung by performance limitations that, in the context of this thread can put you more at risk from a mid air than they do from the consequences of a very unlikely engine failure. When was the last time a twin squirrel or EC135 had a donk stop during a transition?

I do not consider myself an expert in this field or any other - people just love taking my comments out of the context in which they are given eg this thread. Any one that good at jumping to conclusions based on minimal information should be a Daily Mail journalist.

[ShyTorque]

Sorry, BT, I presumed you were just being your usual modest self .. post edited :p

In my opinion TCAS is an essential piece of kit. It has its limitations, such as inaccuracy in azimuth and lack of altitiude readout on some targets due to no mode C. Also, dare I say it, some military aircraft do NOT appear on it for some reason....possibly not squawking?). Those who criticise it have almost invariably not flown with it.

Some critics think it keeps the pilots eyes inside the cockpit, but the opposite tends to be true - it often makes the pilot realise just how many aircraft are nearby but not easily seen. :ok:

We include the TCAS screen as a complementary part of our lookout scan. One of our more commonly used HLSs is in the LFA which is also Class G and used by civiliian aircraft from the largest UK flying school as a training area.

[SilsoeSid]

"Back to the basic issue" required here I think crab!

SS is on the pad at Strensham. (Site of airprox)
Because of the location and surroundings a helipad departure is required.
This requires me to lift into the hover, climb until I gain the correct sight picture, then commence a backwards moving climb to 100' HAT and approximately 300' behind the pad. This is my TDP. (Take-off Descision Point)

This must be done within 30 deg of the wind.

http://www.geocities.com/pprunessilsoesid/helipaddepart.jpg

(I did not mention 120' above obstacles, but I can understand your confusion, much like when you said, "I do not consider myself an expert in this field or any other", but you were more than happy to tell us you were an A2 QHI & Sqn trg off. :confused: )

As has been mentioned previously, Strensham seems to be a magnet for FJ for some reason and as you can see, the take off profile for the site does not allow for any downwind look out or 'curving flightpath' until the 'climb at Vy' stage.

As Mighty Gem said it is an aircraft limitation.... and deviating from it WOULD be endangering the pax, and operating outside the aircraft's limitations.


crab,Good pilots think about what they are doing and why rather than blindly following the 'rule book' and endangering the aircraft and pax. I would suggest that an engine problem (as unlikely as it is), is more likely than a FJ up the chuff, and as such would still fly the helipad profile at this site.

However, there is no excuse for a FJ to low fly over a marked HLS as described thus earlier, "When I was last at Strensham they didn't just flyby they very often overflew and on one occasion came rather to close to HV as it was lifting on a job...".


I'm not quite sure what crab and 2Ss camp are after here apart from supporting the 'bullies in the playground'.

[2STROPS]

SS

So you agree that Strensham is a poor choice for an AA helicopter site.

1. The area is crowded so you have to do a class 1 departure.

2. It is on the edge of a HIRTA so traffic is funneled past it

3. It is on a major motorway used by all and sundry as a line feature.

4. It is by a major motorway interchange used as a turning point.

So which bright spark chose this as an AA site? :confused:

Why not use Staverton the home of BAS? It is only 10nm away

Your Class 1 departure still allows you to do a curving departure once you have reached Vtoss as you accel towards Vy and beyond.

You must also learn to grow up if you want to be a professional helicopter pilot as slinging quotes about bullies is rather immature :yuk:

2S

[[email protected]]

SS - 2 strops beat me to the point about poor location for a police site - the Tornado and Harrier HIRTA clearances are only at LOW in the D band so the Defford transmitter doesn't protect you - now if you can get them to change it to B band then things will be different.

Since all performance figures for single engine flyaways have a height figure - it must be above obstacles that you would have to clear so that is why I mention 120' above obstacles - you used the 120' figure in the first place.

I only mentioned my quals because you assumed (wrongly as usual) that I knew little of civilian ops - I have held an ATPLH since 1991, what about you?

Whilst on the subject of clearing up incorrect facts - up until Dec 04 the Strensham site was marked as a blue circle with a blue H inside it - just like every other HLS whether it be a private site (JCB, Ferranti etc) or a busy AA site. Police sites that are notified to AIDU are indicated by a red circle with a red H (the same as a MRT pick-up site) and that is how Strensham is annotated on 1/4 and 1/2 mil low flying charts - not as a purple diamond.

As such the police sites are not afforded any protection beyond see and avoid so I suggest that you and others lobby AIDU and the MOD for some different map markings so that A. they stand out as being different from a hotel LS and B. they could be protected with a mandatory avoidance margin like gliding sites (2nm/2000').

Any FJ mate looking through the low flying part of the planning doc in conjunction with the low flying chart will not register Strensham as a police site because it is just another HLS in the planning doc and the red marking on the chart is overlayed with a purple HIRTA circle making almost illegible.

The same regulations that force you into Cat A transitions also preclude civvy SAR from winching when not safe single engine - possibly why they don't do mountains. My disdain for Cat A performance is in it's application to helicopter operations which really shouldn't come under public transport regs since they are emergency services and should be exempt. It is like preventing police cars and ambulances from exceeding the speed limit because it is the law of the land and someone might get hurt if the law is broken.

PS if saying that due to the location and nature of the site you have to carry out a cat A departure isn't agreeing that the site selection is poor then I don't know what is.

[SilsoeSid]

2S,

I haven't agreed with anything reference HLS selection. I'm sure there are those higher up the food chain than I, that made the relevant descisions on that one. Far be it for me to comment on your observations as you lay them down. (ok later.)

As far as Cat A operations are concerned on my type, VToss is only applicable in the clear area, continued take off, engine failure after TDP scenario.

So your curving departure statement is incorrect in the Strensham take off situation.

As far as your numbered points are concerned,

1. Go visit some units.
2. Avoid HIRTA, avoid HLS aswell perhaps!
3. Most traffic using the line feature will be aware of the HLS.
4. So the turning point circle will be marked on the map next to the HLS circle during the planning phase then?

Calling someone immature, well that's a really mature thing to do. :rolleyes:



crab,

Once more for the hard of reading, " I did not mention 120\' above anything"! It was someone else on the last page.

Clearing up incorrect facts.........The only \'120\' I mentioned was the, \'What happens when the FJ comes up from the rear 120 degrees?\', comment on page 4.

The height figure you are after that I use is calculated pre flight and is the \'Distance Required to Clear a 35 ft Obstacle\' on take off – Clear Airfield / Heliport/Elevated Helipad.


Another qualification, well done in feeling you have to justify yourself to me. Since 1991, before me, well done again.

As Sqn trg off, do/did you run discussions in your unit as SOP, (Statement of the Oldest Person?) := You obviously wouldn\'t take time to listen to any young boys on the block.

Any FJ mate looking through the low flying part of the planning doc in conjunction with the low flying chart will not register Strensham as a police site because it is just another HLS in the planning doc and the red marking on the chart is overlayed with a purple HIRTA circle making almost illegible. Mainly because Strensham isn\'t a police site, ;) , however, what strikes me is you are saying that either the maps are at fault, or the FJs are not paying attention to detail.

PS if saying that due to the location and nature of the site you have to carry out a cat A departure isn\'t agreeing that the site selection is poor then I don\'t know what is. Cat A departure = public transport flight, whether clear area or helipad.
Even taking off from Rwy 27L at Heathrow would require a Cat A departure. Thought you may have grasped that by now. In addition, I refer to my reply to 2Ss point 1 previously.

By the way, does the turning point have to be as big as a major motorway junction? I thought IPs of that nature were so the ABFACS knew where to look before the run in! :ok:


Perhaps a Gliding Avoidance Area, (sounds as if it\'s designed to keep gliders away! ) type restriction is needed in this case.
How much would that disrupt LL flying training? :ooh:

[2STROPS]

SS

You say
"Even taking off from Rwy 27L at Heathrow would require a Cat A departure."
It is not quite right. It would require a Class 1 departure but with 27L having a TORA/TODA of12,0001ft I hope you wouldn't be doing a helipad departure;) To get max payload I presume you would use a V1 of Vy + 10kts assuming your Vtoss is V1-10.

You haven't answered my question about why the AA operation is not moved to Staverton where it would get far more protection and allow heavier weight take offs:ok:

2S

[SilsoeSid]

2S,

What don't you understand about.......

CATEGORY A OPERATIONS

Category A Take-off:.
The take-off must be performed in such a manner that in the event of a single engine failure the helicopter must be able to:
Prior to TDP, return to, and stop safely on the take-off area (rejected take-off).
After TDP, continue the take-off and climbout, and attain a configuration and airspeed that allows continued flight.

So wherever I take off, Strensham, Heathrow, Battersea or Dartmoor, I will comply with Cat A Operations.

If I choose to do a helipad departure, that would be up to me, what's your problem with that?To get max payload I presume you would use a V1 of Vy + 10kts assuming your Vtoss is V1-10. No, I would use my standard take off profile with V1 @ the 8 sec point http://www.soccerhooligan.com/forums/html/emoticons/graywanker.gif


Ok, Staverton, (I am not in any position to comment officially), and the moving of the air ambulance there to.

I have to agree that it would afford some protection for the landing/taking off stages of flight at the operating base, however it must have been sited there for a reason don't you think?
Wouldn't this then be a case of them being bullied out of Strensham? "My playground, you get back indoors." Even crab has said that the HLS is marked on the maps, but is obscured/not noticed.

The issue of heavier take off weights is surely not an issue, as those on board would be departing for the scene. :confused:

[2STROPS]

SS

Your ops manual must differ from ours then as ours talks about the helicopter being certified as Catergory A in JAROPS 3.480(a)(1).
This allows it to conduct Performance Class 1 and Performance Class 2 operations. i.e public transport. It is the helicopter that is certified as Catergory A not the procedure.

We do Performance Class 1 operations with a Catergory A helicopter.

2S

[MightyGem]

PS if saying that due to the location and nature of the site you have to carry out a cat A departure isn't agreeing that the site selection is poor then I don't know what is.
The fact that you have to do a helipad(rearward) departure has nothing to do with poor site selection, merely the size of the site available.

To carry out a normal transition and fly away, I need to have a minimum of 250m of clear area in front of me. Ideally that would put the pad in the middle of a field of 250m radius, to allow for all wind directions. Unfortunately, that would cost a lot of money, and for an Air Ambulance, funded by public donation, could not even be considered.

So, you could have the best sited helipad in the world, but if it's not big enough, then you're reversing out.

[SilsoeSid]

We do Performance Class 1 operations with a Catergory A helicopter. I should hope so to !

"JAR–OPS 3.485 General
An operator shall ensure that helicopters operated in Performance Class 1 are certificated in Category A."

Likewise, and 'our' manual talks about "CATEGORY A OPERATIONS."

[[email protected]]

So we come back to the problem of money and that people perceive a need for air ambulances (fair enough) but then procure and operate them on a shoestring taking what operating sites are available (and cheapest) and then making the operations fit the site. As a result - instead of having nice clear take-off and arrival paths which would allow more fuel/pax etc to be carried and give you options for departure profiles, you end up limiting your operation simply because the site requires helideck departures.

On top of this your flight profile is made more hazardous because you are operating in class G airspace with no airspace protection and run the risk of taking a low flying aircraft up the jacksie because you can't manoeuvre during departure.

Then, no-one bothers to get the authorities (CAA or MOD) to highlight or protect AA or Police sites in class G airspace and no-one bothers to check how their sites are portrayed on military maps because no-one will pay for one to look at.

And finally because the charities are cash-strapped they balk at the cost of TCAS or UHF radios (I would definitely have UHF if I was operating in the vicinity of a military airfield).

You only get as much Flight Safety as you are prepared to pay for so talk to your operators if you are unhappy with the status quo.

The Cornwall AA operates out of St Mawgan with full ATC and crash cover, the protection of a MATZ, a massive hangar courtesy of the RAF and a huge, clear airfield to depart and arrive from. That would be called a good site in my book and it works extremely well even if he is only on VHF.

SS you didn't mention 120' (your figure is 100' - big difference!)- EC135 driver did but since you insist on insulting people and then claiming you were laying bait then I can be forgiven for ignoring your protestations. You talked on one post about dropping off bobbies so I assumed that Strensham was a police site (well outside my area of ops) and someone must have asked AIDU to notify it as such since that is how it now appears on the maps. If this is not the case then please inform AIDU and have it changed back.
Since it now becomes clear that it is an AA site then see all the comments above re poor site selection.

As someone else pointed out Strensham is on a big line feature with HIRTAs either side which funnel the FJ traffic. A basic student looking at a map would work than one out, check the planning doc and see nothing other than an HLS that he just needs to see and avoid and crack on.

If you don't tell anyone you are there you won't get noticed.

[Bertie Thruster]

"Shairspace" yesterday. Very good presentations on the LL system and Airprox organisation and local ATC. There was no formal discussion period.

Excellent police ops presentation by a regular PPRUNER!

HEMS ops were not invited to present.

At the end I collared a senior MOD rep for £k50 x 14 (TCAS for the AA cabs). My rationale? The first hems/mil fatal would very likely seriously affect LL ops due back-lash from public, press and coroner, (total closure probably)


Anyway it's back to the collecting tin!

"Any spare change Gov?"

[ShyTorque]

All this discussion / argument about a base helipad is all very well but of course it's totally irrelevant once the heli is out on a shout at a field location.

Seems to me that TCAS for all AA helis and a bit more diligence on the mode 3/A plus C from the military chaps is probably the best way forward.

Quote: "(I would definitely have UHF if I was operating in the vicinity of a military airfield)." unquote.

Crab, By that same logic, it would as pertinent to ask that military aircraft tune to an appropriate VHF freq. in the low flying system. Most, if not all, modern military UHF sets contain a VHF facility, whilst the converse isn't true. Retrofitting a small helicopter with an additional UHF set isn't perhaps as straightforward as you seem to think it is, least of all because of the weight and space penalty.

You seem quite keen to belittle the charity Air Ambulance organisation. Do I sense that air ambulances might be seen as possible "competitors" for RAF SAR?

[Sandy Toad]

Crab(I would definitely have UHF if I was operating in the vicinity of a military airfield).

And all FJs operating near Civilian Airfields have VHF nowadays.....?

[Bertie Thruster]

No problems reported in 11 years use of VHF by ambucopter in the Waddo-Cranwell-Barkston-Scampton-Conningsby-Cottesmore-Wittering-Marham area.

[Last call for Mr..]

Although it was quite a way back in this thread, I feel I must step in and defend the Aiprox Board. The comments stating that it is toothless and a waste of time are incorrect. It was pressure from the Airprox Board that got TCAS introduced in the first place and they continue to apply pressure for many other airspace users to adopt a CWS, Military and Gliders included.

The assumption that the board is RAF for the benefit of RAF is completely without foundation. The majority of the board is civilian not military.

The issues regarding low flying in the UK are bound to raise temperatures. We have very limited airspace in the UK and there is growing traffic from all areas. In addition to TCAS, we should also be looking at the mandatory carriage of SSR throughout the UK (Squeals of horror from the C172 owners) as TCAS is no good against non-squawkers and also better provision of Lower Airspace Radar Services (Who is going to pay for that?)

Have a safe weekend everyone.:cool:

[anjouan]

crab,

You are obviously a military pilot. Your possession of an ATPL(H) since 1991 is thus totally irrelevant to your experience of flying on civilian operations. I have held a degree in Marine Biology since 1965, but I know nothing about it, as I have never worked as a Marine Biologist, I've been too busy being a military, then a civil pilot.

[Weasel Watcher]

Last call for Mr....
The assertion that the majority of the Airprox Board is civilian is numerically correct, at the last count of 23 attendees 11 were RAF.

In recent years numerous opportunities to make strong recommendations regarding the fitting of CWS to fast jets were sidestepped and lame excuses from MOD RAF about lack of space and cost were greeted with the famous Gallic shrug and the next item on the agenda.

It is understood that the Chairmanship of the Airprox Board has at last been wrested from the retired fast jet brigade, so perhaps now we shall see the excellent job that the Board does in other areas of aviation extended to this particular area of conflict.

[[email protected]]

Just call me duty target...

Anjouan - I only mentioned the ATPLH to p*ss off SS and it worked. Just because I am a mil pilot doesn't mean I am ignorant of AA and police ops - quite the opposite, we work with them frequently in the SW. Also many of my ex colleagues from mil days (RAF and AAC) are current AA and police pilots.

ShyTorque - I do not belittle the valuable service AA give - I just question doing it on a shoestring, I think a national AA service that would benefit from economies of scale should be govt funded and properly equipped instead of the present charity based system. If FJ need to talk to a civvy field then I am sure they can dial up a VHF freq but be realistic about how often that is going to happen - even then it would be a major airfield as they are travelling too quickly to call every minor airfield and HLS - they just avoid protected airspace and crack on. I really don't believe FJ operate in the UKLFS without squawking 3A/C - if they don't cause a TCAS alert then there must be compatibilty issues.

Bertie - since you left there doesn't seem to be any money for anything in the military especially FS stuff so I'm not surprised that they didn't give you a cheque for the TCAS. You have no probs in your operating area because Mil ATC are used to running dual VHF/UHF frequencies unlike civvy airfields. Wattisham does the same with its Police helo while the rest of the Matz traffic operates on UHF.

[SilsoeSid]

No it didn't. I am as qualified as you are crab in that department and dare I say it, more up to date. :p

TTFN

[ShyTorque]

Crab,

Good to see you seemed to have wound it in a little.... appreciate that. Of course most of us are actually in agreement in most areas. :ok:

I agree about the non-compatibility / impracticability of disparate RT freqs, that's why I countered your statement that civvy air should listen on UHF.

The more of us (both sides of the barbed wire) that have TCAS the better and ALL aircraft interested in self preservation should have at least SSR with mode C and use it. With a FJ coming inbound at LL, the usual pilot lookout can be ineffective and both parties need all the help they can get.

BTW, I would estimate that about 40% of military traffic we encounter doesn't appear on the TCAS fitted to our aircraft. It isn't a type related thing, more random, so I can only assume it's because the IFF wasn't on at the time...

A subject in itself, but I couldn't agree more that the Air Ambulance and Police Air Support would be much better if a national organisation had been formed for each some years ago. Economy of scale, fewer aircraft types etc = a better deal for the public all round. The sad ethos in UK is to try to do everything piecemeal and on the cheap to the point where the whole thing becomes unworkable - military included these days (where ARE they spending our taxes?). The fact that AA has to rely on voluntary contributions from the public is a national disgrace.

[ec135driver]

Hello again folks, couple of points - BAS moved to Staverton after AA was based at Strensham, some considerable expense was incurred at the base (hanger, offices etc) and also the political problem of the customer being co-located with the services provider (what happens if they lose the contract? more expense incurred to move out)

No performance advantage with airfield use, the EC135 can perform Helipad profile at MAUW

One last thing - Forget choke points, line features etc, if a FJ hits an AA in flight the FJ will have flown directly into an object in front of it. It is extremely unlikely that the reverse will be true.

And one further last point, when I fly I am working, possibly about to save someones life, you are just training, the moral onus is on you not to place me and my crew in danger.

Train somewhere else

[[email protected]]

EC135 - a simplistic view to say the least - and other people said this wasn't an anti mil low flying thread! When I go flying I am usually in the process of saving someone's life (SAR) but I don't insist on having the whole airspace to myself.

On various Flight Safety courses I have seen videos of HUD tapes where a non-conflicting dot on the horizon becomes wall to wall Cessna/microlight/helicopter in under 2 seconds and only becomes an apparent threat in less than 1. So saying that the FJ will have just flown into something in front of it in the event of a mid air is rather fatuous. The fact that it doesn't happen on a regular basis is a testament to their training and their lookout.

Helicopters are easy to see when you are another helicopter (we managed at Boscastle with 7 and didn't bump into each other) but very difficult to spot from 250' at 420 kts, especially if it is moving slowly to or from the hover.

TCAS, bright colour scheme, one yellow rotor blade, white strobes and as many lights shining in as many directions as possible; have as many of these as possible if you want to protect yourself.

[Bertie Thruster]

Crab. Glad to see you list TCAS first in your list of protective measures. The others only make the helo stand out better to the FJ pilot. (and only visually, in that 2 second 'dot to splat' moment)
TCAS is the only measure, available at the moment, that will make the FJ stand out better to the helo pilot. ( and very often I have found, on police choppers, with up to 10-15 seconds warning)

So TCAS for HEMS please.

"Any spare change Gov(ernment)?"

[[email protected]]

Bertie, glad to see you're working weekends as well as representing the AA during the week ;) I hope they're paying you enough!! I don't know why Shy gets so many FJs that don't trigger the TCAS - use of a serviceable transponder is a requirement in the milAIP for operating in the UKLFS - if they are turning them off then they should be shopped as it is clearly a dangerous practice.

Shytorque - not so much wound in as not rising to SS's baiting - I wouldn't want to defeat an unarmed man in a battle of wits!

[SilsoeSid]

crab@,

Not only, as you say, the "use of a serviceable transponder is a requirement in the milAIP for operating in the UKLFS", I am led to believe that;

"Use of a serviceable transponder is now MANDATORY for military flights within the United Kingdom Low Flying System (UKLFS)"

If TCAS is not alerting these FJs coming 'your way', then something must be done to investigate why not.
If an AirProx is put in by a TCAS equipped a/c and no warning was given, then the board MUST surely be investigating why.


Just off to sort out my arsenal of wits! :)

SS

[Thomas coupling]

We did a 3 year review of close proximity activities for BHAB ( 2000-2003) so that they could remind the DOT and the MOD what the state of play was. It concerned emergency services helicopter operations Vs puddle jumpers and military FW and RW activities.
Observations:

Most HEMS outfits failed to submit sufficient data.

Most police units relied heavily on TCAS

The MOD made the right noises but couldn't convert words to action (citing IRAQ on both occasions as an excuse for no cash).
Ironically, I have a letter here from Portillo when he was defence secretary (in early 90's) defending his position which was that there wasn't enough of a threat to take precautionary action.

AIRPROX and its machinery is a joke . A toothless waste of government money. I have lost count of how many people have filed for near misses only to be issued with the standard response letter stating that it has been looked into and the incident has been declared category C (no risk of collision).
We recently, nearly collided with a pair of jaguars which were flying at 420 kts at 250' in below minimum weather limits (4km)and they admitted it - no risk of collision?????

As I said some time back, On average there is a mid air between mil and civvy every 6 years. We are a year overdue:ooh:


Cat A takeoffs.

Crab - normally you come out with some sterling stuff. But this time you really are talking bollocks mate.
You might have an ATPL(H) but you've never practiced it in anger so you haven't a clue what you're on about. The mil take off going fwd. If something happens (not necessarily the donk stopping) then a mil pilot is committed to landing into unknown territory AND at relatively high fwd speed.
Commercial helos transition backwards, because its been proven that the landing spot is (a) safe (you've just taken off from it) and (b) there is little or no run on speed. Guess which is safer. The CAA care about passengers, the Mil don't.

Don't slag off civvy performance profiles unless you understand them. Now get back to talking sense

And the threat of being taken out from behind whilst transitioning, by a FJ is ludicrous. Do you know of any FJ's at 300+ knots transitting at <120' ???:ok:

[SASless]

Now this has gone far enough....

I know you Brits can complicate anything beyond belief....but listen to what you are saying here. We are down to the point that in the middle of a takeoff from a helipad....you expect the guy to check his TCAS to see if he is going to get whacked by some nimrod (person not aircraft) zipping along at nought feet and 400 Kts?

Somewhere around page two this thread has become silly.

Plot the base on the map....notify the uniformed mafia of the location by letter, e-mail, phone call, or personal visit. The umaf then does it thing to make sure the boys and gals in blue give that location some room.....

Run your strobes....do a clearing turn before takeoff....for what good that does with some pointy headed rascal getting his jolly by hugging the trees in violation of policy....and make your takeoff. Fer Chrissakes guys....this is not all that complicated.

Talking about profiles...TCAS...who has an ATPL ....who doesn't. It sounds like the MOD has too much money for internet access and the civvies have a case of envy.

It is a very small country but the sky there is still pretty big yet. Big sky...small aircraft.....maybe the odds are not as bad as one thinks. Still the odds of one mid-air between civvy aircraft and a military aircraft.....once every six years....sounds a bit much to me. Must be we have a lot more sky here.

Lord knows....I had the pants scared off me numerous times around the Isle of Skye...Rassay Sound area and the glens on the way back to Inverness by Jags...Buccs...and Phantoms in the late 70's but you learn to live with it.

[Bertie Thruster]

Sasless; we have learnt to live with it over here; once every 6 years!

We would like the average to get very much longer.

As you probably know there are two main types of civil parapublic helo ops in the UK; police (funded by taxpayer) and HEMS(funded by charity).

Several years ago the police operators were offered TCAS funding by the government after a very close call, Police AS355 (v) Tucano (The aircraft actually touched.)

HEMS Charities were not offered any aid.

Quite a few of the pilots here alternate in police/hems duties. We experience the value of TCAS in FJ awareness in the police role and would dearly appreciate its help during HEMS work.

I am not talking base work but field work under the main LL transit routes.

[[email protected]]

TC - I am fully aware of the pros and cons of Cat A departures and I understand why they are used for public transport ops - my concern on this topic was that flying those profiles was putting the aircraft at more risk from a mid air than from an unlikely engine failure (and it was HEMS operators who voiced this concern first not me). I agree that at 100 to 150' you should not encounter a fast mover but I have seen them below that as, I am sure, have you. I suggested lookout turns and curving departures but was promptly rubbished by the 'we must fly Cat A with no deviations' brigade.
As it happens I frequently depart HLS and field sites using a towering take-off technique to give my self a vertical reject option should a donk stop - I don't need to see the landing area to go straight back down onto it - but I lookout before I transition and start to turn (and look) as soon as I am safe single.

I understand (from personal experience) how shocking it can be to have a FJ whizz past you when you weren't expecting it and the natural assumption is that he didn't see you. The fact is that most of the time they did and that is why there aren't more mid-airs. Now don't get me wrong, I am not saying a miss is a miss is a miss but what seems adequate avoidance margin to a FJ mate might not seem 'safe' or adequate when you are on the receiving end.

[freeride]

Crab

As someone who has been on both sides of the fence, I admire your defence of the UK LFS. However, have you ever called West Drayton to register a CANP? No, you have RCC to do that. If you did you would find out what a cake and a..e party it is. Generally in this situation you, alone, are dealing with aircraft logistics, engineering, passengers, freight and where you will sleep tonight on your own - not at all like having an ops clerk and six engineers pandering to your needs.

I use the CANP system when I can as it is the only means of defence when USLing. These ops are very intensive as you know and trying to keep an eye on a load in a mirror, the aircraft performance, ground handlers etc, etc doesn't leave much time for avoiding FJs. I have now lost count of the number of times that these CANPs have been infringed, I have even been "wazzed" at low level when I was talking to the same mil radar unit as the FJ (subsequent investigation showed he had come for a closer inspection little knowing I had 50' of wire strop beneath the aircraft). They have even been infringed by mil helos - heaven forbid. None of us are perfect (apart from A2 QHIs) and plans often change without much notice but when the next FJ/rotary midair happens as it surely will who will be to blame? I doubt very much if it will be the helo operator.

There needs to be a place for the FJs to operate at LL. I know that it is very controlled at the moment from an admin point of view and when the accident occurs the MOD will have all the paperwork to show exactly how it happened but once let loose in LFA ? are the pointy ones really doing their best to avoid us? We crop up in the most unusual places you know, a lot of the time even a SAR God would be suprised to see us:ok: