Sydney Harbour Bridge: one law for them?

[Squeaks]

Rumour has it that a NSW Police Squirrel caused a fair bit of grief recently, flying under the Harbour Bridge "because they can" :rolleyes:

Any truth to the rumour? Any repercussions from CASA, or is the part time police pilot/CP for a well known Traffic Network getting away with it, again :mad: It's sensitive enough for the average bloke complying with the regs, but this does get a bit tediously blatant :yuk:

[Daedal_oz]

Rumour has it that...


I see you are getting into the PPRUNE swing of things. I myself prefer a little more solid evidence, like a photo (unless it appears in the People's Daily), before launching off on an accusation that will cause grief for someone.

But I admire your style - you could report for the Daily Telegraph without any problem whatsoever.

Go on! Don't tell me! You are a reporter!!

[rotaryman]

I have Photo's :)

If only i was smart enough and know how to post them i would!!:E

I agree though that its seems we have one law for one! and another for the rest of us......:yuk:

Oh and i have flown under the Bridge! had to write to 4 Goverment Depts to get permmision..

CASA
Roads & Traffic Authority
Harbour Master
Sydney Ports Authority



:ok:

[BigMike]

Thats simple, go to photobucket.com and set up a free account, upload your photos, then link them here.

Looking forward to seeing them.

[loachboy]

http://www.vpmag.com/yssy/viewtopic.php?t=10102&highlight=polair

[SilsoeSid]

Rumour has it that a NSW Police Squirrel caused a fair bit of grief recently, flying under the Harbour Bridge "because they can"
Seen the photo and even so, 'if they can', what is the big problem?

For grief, read envy!

http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/8.gif

SS

[Ascend Charlie]

Sounds like you would do it if you could, just for the heck of it. At least they had a reason.

I have done it, in the Polair machine, and it was on searches for bodies. Part of being under there was a thrill, part was a worry that some jealous dill would drop something on me from above.

[ShyTorque]

:bored: yawn........ :rolleyes:

[cyclicpushover]

Yes, because they can!:p

Heres some more pics.

http://hoore.com/helo/polair_bridge/

[SilsoeSid]

Because we could!! :=

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

http://bestsmileys.com/army/13.gif

SS

[eagle 86]

I've got to say that the more I read this forum the more I'm convinced we have some ******* idiots who purport themselves to be "professional" helicopter pilots - I don't think a number of you have what it takes - go away and get a job that matches your capabilities!
GAGS
E86

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Ah, eagle - is it the pic of the Lynx that upset you? Fear not - that was a fully legal and authorised manoeuvre back in the days when 1 BR Corps and attendant flying types were poised to throw Boris back east of Berlin. The skill was practised to enable the anti-tank helis to move in and out of firing position without exposure to enemy view/countermeasures. All other battlefield helis practised the same task to enable them to operate in the NW European likely-conflict area.

Flight under wires is still practised; there have been operations which have required the technique - not everywhere has the cosy punch-up-to-MSA and recover for an ILS option.

Just 'cos people had to do it doesn't mean to say they couldn't enjoy it, though, eh?

[CyclicRick]

That bridge looks familiar! Somewhere near Soest maybe?

[SilsoeSid]

Heaven forbid that we should even think about flying under wires...at night...on goggles...as part of a 6-ship formation!!!

Best not tell Eagle about the pirouettes down the runway on NVG in order to 'hone the skills'.

Eagle 86I don't think a number of you have what it takes - go away and get a job that matches your capabilities! IMHO a professional military helicopter pilot has to have the skills in order to do these things. They are taught and practised under close regulation and supervision. Wouldn't it be silly to be shot down because you had to climb 2/3/400ft to get over the wires/bridge!!

The fact that we did these things meant that they were within our capabilities should the skills be required for real. If we didn't do them they wouldn't be. That's what practise and training is all about.

I do have a different job now thanks , and as my skills have faded through lack of practise, thankfully I won't have the need for under wires/bridges flying or in fact any of that low level NOE type stuff for a while.

But when/if we get NVG, I'm sure the old pirouettes will once more become a useful practise !!

[SilsoeSid]

CyclicRick,

The Ex. was down Bitburg way, around Trier on the Mosel.
Boy, that was a tough one!!!

Just for Eagle86, from the other side, yes more than once, because we could!!

http://www.geocities.com/pprunessilsoesid/lynxbridge2.jpg


http://bestsmileys.com/army/13.gif

SS

[delta3]

Just out of curiousity, this kind of situations probably have created commotions before, but....


In France I was told that one of the reasons min alt was increased from 150" to 500" was to avoid flying under bridges.

So apparantly it is dangereous/undesirable.

But in France they make you fly 150" over mediterean p.ex around Cannes and Nice to be clear of traffic. In LAX you can see the dolfins and the baywatch girls around venise beach if at 150" you pass below LAX take-off.
In UK the Thames is considered a safe passage to London Heliport.

Am i wrong to suggest that in the precise case of the picture, with adapted speed (I do not want to generalise) it appears to be at least as safe below as above the bridge....

What is the catch....

In Belgium min alt is still 150", so flying under some bridges would be technically possible.


d3

[ShyTorque]

In W. Germany (as it was then) the air control orders for BAOR exercises (sometimes a week or a fortnight long) used to be NOT ABOVE 150 ft agl for helicopters. We all used to do it, in relative safety because it was properly thought out, regulated and trained for.

It could get quite interesting when carrying an underslung load but we managed it for many years without incident.

P.S. When carrying out a concealed approach and departure there was NO minimum height for helis, only a lateral separation from obstacles. For under wires the minimum height was 2 metres. I recall it was 6 metres clearance from the obstacle above the aircraft and 3 metres clearance laterally.

Sid's photos show the Lynx well within the regulations.

Just can't see why some less experienced folk get bunched up about it. :hmm:

[Whirlygig]

Just can't see why some less experienced folk get bunched up about it.
'Cos we're jealous!!!

Cheers

Whirls

[ShyTorque]

Oh, I see! I suppose at 2 metres agl even a Schweizer seems fast :p

[wg13_dummy]

http://img350.imageshack.us/img350/1575/wires7wo.jpg

Lynx three ship under wires.

I think Sid was behind me at the time. :ok:

Sorry for the poor quality. It was rather difficult trying to fit a phone camera behind me gogs.

[overpitched]

In ag spraying in this country it is uncommon to fly OVER the wires. Feels much safer to stay down with your skids in the weeds that way you fly under all the wires, not just the ones you see.

[SilsoeSid]

I'll follow you anywhere 'wg', as long as you stop turning off those Station Keeping Lights when I least expect it!! http://bestsmileys.com/scared/7.gif

http://www.geocities.com/pprunessilsoesid/NVGlaunch.jpg
http://bestsmileys.com/scared/1.gif
SS

[eagle 86]

Silsoesid and others - you missed my point - I was replying to the originator of this post and others who seem to believe that they have the right to do what others may appear to be doing without understanding the operational reasons/training that has gone into those that may have the authority to do what others can't/aren't permitted to do - if you follow my point!
PS I too am a twenty year veteran with a touch of war service and still fly EMS.

[Ascend Charlie]

Ummm... Eagle 86, you learnt to fly in the mid-60s, and despite your absence from flying for a year or two, you are still more than a 20-year veteran.

That old brain is worse than I thought it was! Drink more red wine, it stimulates the grey matter.

[Big Beres]

Squeaks

That was almost a year ago now , when Polair flew under the bridge....(old news).........just wondering ,why you said it was recently......??

BB

[Thud_and_Blunder]

eagle86,

I think I'll lead the apologies - I misread your point. Sorry!

SSid

Station-keeping lights are for wussies. Real-NVG-formation-on-a-Lynx involves keeping the lead Lynx instrument-panel "u/c lock" captions just above the skyline... OK, a different sort of Lynx from yours. Different job, too... :ooh: :ok:

[Max Contingency]

As one who has spent more than his fair share of time flying under bridges (usually looking for some poor individual who jumped) I have discovered one nasty little 'gotcha'.

If your aircraft has a radalt fitted, watch out for the false returns bouncing back from the roof above you. Your radalt will over-read and, if you have it coupled to a height hold, it will pull you down rapidly as it tries to correct the error.

:ooh:

[Daedal_oz]

Station-keeping lights are for wussies. Real-NVG-formation-on-a-Lynx involves keeping the lead Lynx instrument-panel "u/c lock" captions just above the skyline

NVGs are for wussies...real night formation involves keeping the red-lit NR guage of the other aircraft in view without aids.

LL flying in Germany was a hoot. Never go over a wire or bridge you could go under. I do recall being in a Lynx six-ship under some nice wires near Hilders.

...and never go above 150 feet...lest thee be smote by a German/American/British jet doing their equivalent of the LL thing. (Almost got cleaned up by a German Alpha Jet going past the Sennelager ranges on the way to the Bremen PX one day.)

[delta3]

Military tactics have quite different objectives than civil ones.
Even as a civilian I was tought low level tactical flight by a military pilot in the french provence and I love it. But I am afraid it is not legal in the civil world.

d3