Blues and two's RAF Police

[Gamu Nhengu]

Hello chaps. If I was being pursued by the RAF Police and decided to drive off camp onto the civvy roads do they have the authority to follow me with their blues and two's going?

[Roadster280]

Yes.

They have reason to believe a crime was committed on service property (ie the incident began on camp), and equally they suspect you are a service member.

[LH2]

Hello chaps. If I was being pursued by the RAF Police and decided to drive off camp onto the civvy roads do they have the authority to follow me with their blues and two's going?

What are you planning? :E

[MATELO]

I would say NO.

Dont think they have any right to chase anybody with "blues and two's" flashing off any UK RAF base.If they wanted you nicked, I believe they have to call the local rozza's.

[Cows getting bigger]

Thinking of running off with the family silver?

Oh, sorry I forgot - that's already gone.

[Army Mover]

Depends (or used to); some service police units had policemen who, in addition to their service version, had police warrant cards issued by the local civilian chief constable.

Mind you though, in those days they didn't have blue's and two's, it was a bell and a flag. :eek:

[FantomZorbin]

Roadster is correct. However, MOD Police have no such caveats and have equal powers both on and off Service property ... scary thought!!

[Gweedo]

I was the stn rock running a police flight at one of the RAF's smaller units (when we had some). All my feds were signed up by the local constabulary as specials, so that in theory, they could act off station with both our own people and the civvies. Mind you, as far as I know, and certainly when I was there, they never used these 'powers'.

[Just This Once...]

RAF Plod have pretty much the same powers both on and off base. Even if you evaded them on base they could still pitch-up at your civilian house on the other side of the country, force an entry, arrest you, search the house etc which may give your wife and kids a fair old surprise!

[Pontius Navigator]

And the MOD Police carry firearms.

As for operating off-base, I know of an instance where they conducted surveillance off-base. And another where they followed the guilty b*st*rd from one unit to another and then arrested him.

[Gnd]

You may find that it is the road traffic law that prevents the 'Blues and twos' bit.
If they were to have an accident and were not correctly authorised or trained on civilian highways, they WOULD be liable. Driving for another lighted service, the Chief Constables (and ACPO) of some UK counties have stated that they would prosecute the law to their fullest ability if untrained persons (even on legitimate shouts) had an accident using the equipment - they can follow and apprehend but not necessarily with emergency lighting?? Try it and see how you get on?
They also are not permitted to contravene road traffic law so would stop as red lights – defeats the purpose really!!!!

a little more info (http://www.ukemergency.co.uk/information/bluelightuse.htm#Blue_Light_Exemptions) - note only RAF mountain rescue are specified.

[Pontius Navigator]

Down near Warminster I saw an RMP WO with blues certainly having stopped someone on the dual carriageway.

[BEagle]

Back in the days of station exercises, long before mobile phones or even radiopagers, RAFP used to roar around the MQs in Cartoontown blasting away on a very loud two-tone air horn in order to invite participation in yet another pratteval of one form or another.

Often at 0-dark-00!

Eventually, the locals had enough - and the Stn Cdr was informed that, if ever this happened again, RAFP would be prosecuted under whatever law it is which forbids the use of car horns in built up areas between 2330 and 0700.

Although the horn was rather more effective than the tannoy which I once heard at about 0500 in the Brize OM in early 1984. After clearing his throat, the night porter (remember when we had such chaps?) politely announced, rather discreetly, "Good morning, exercise Taceval is now in force".....:\

[extpwron]

Gamu,

Surely Simon and Cheryl can sort things out for you?

Good Luck BTW – I think you should stay.

[timex]

If civvy police cannot "pursue" unless correctly trained then Service Police will not be allowed to either, (A lot of Constabularies will no longer allow pursuits unless Air Support is available).

[xenolith]

Just This Once

"RAF Plod have pretty much the same powers both on and off base. Even if you evaded them on base they could still pitch-up at your civilian house on the other side of the country, force an entry, arrest you, search the house etc which may give your wife and kids a fair old surprise!"

B@LL@CKS.

[Mr C Hinecap]

Only those trained are allowed to use the blues and twos - even an MT driver without b&t training has to have the lights covered when on the public highway - even if delivering it to a garage. However, if trained, then yes they can. This sort of thing is usually explicitly sorted with the local Chief Constable to ensure compliance.

[airborne_artist]

a little more info (http://www.ukemergency.co.uk/information/bluelightuse.htm#Blue_Light_Exemptions) - note only RAF mountain rescue are specified.

Must be lots of mountain rescue teams in Herefordshire then :}

[Gnd]

Airborne, Silver disks are a totally different subject!!!!! You can't catch them to tell them off and I don't think the web site was thinking of their kind of emergency?

[Sir Herbert Gussett]

I think extpwron and myself are the only ones getting the joke here!

[SilsoeSid]

RAF Plod have pretty much the same powers both on and off base. Even if you evaded them on base they could still pitch-up at your civilian house on the other side of the country, force an entry, arrest you, search the house etc which may give your wife and kids a fair old surprise!

Especially when they drop you at the door of your MQ home back at base and the missus finds out about this 'other' house on the other side of the country!
;)

[Just This Once...]

xenolith -

Just This Once

"RAF Plod have pretty much the same powers both on and off base. Even if you evaded them on base they could still pitch-up at your civilian house on the other side of the country, force an entry, arrest you, search the house etc which may give your wife and kids a fair old surprise!"

B@LL@CKS.

Care to add a little more detail to the 'B@LL@CKS' call or do you just not like the RAF Plod having such powers?

:confused:

[extpwron]

Substitute “UK Border Agency” for “RAF Police” and you can see that this is a thinly disguised cry for help from this young girl.

Come on guys, rally round – Simon is:

BBC News - Simon Cowell joins Gamu deportation fight (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-11507475)

[Willard Whyte]

I recall 'a bit of trouble' with a bunch of yoofs on a marriage patch a few moons ago. RAF plod declined to act stating it was for civvy police to intervene, civvy police said it was down to RAF plod as the patch was behind the wire.

Wouldn't have been so worrying but for the fact it involved threatening behaviour with knives.

[Tashengurt]

Don't think RAF Pol have much in the way of powers off crown property. Given that 'real' Police can rarely justify a pursuit I wouldn't fancy a Snowdrops chance of doing so legitimately.

[unclenelli]

Lincs police won't allow Bs&2s.
On the way to a crash-site in the Humber a few years ago they even had to pay the Humber Bridge Toll - despite the fact that 1/2 way across the bridge they were no longer in Lincolnshire!!!!!

[xenolith]

Just This Once

As your scenario is over simplistic twaddle and therefore, in military par’ lance, utter b@ll@cks there is no need to explain further. :hmm:

[Just This Once...]

Such a detailed contribution.:rolleyes:

[Tashengurt]

As your scenario is over simplistic twaddle and therefore, in military par’ lance, utter b@ll@cks there is no need to explain further.

I do hate it when people sit on the fence. :ooh::ooh:

[chopd95]

Thread Drift?
Beagle,

last night porter I recall was the chap at the Towers who announced the Whittle Hall film on sunday evening !

then of course ththere was that film with Charlotte Rampling - better take one of my pills!

[cargosales]

Just don't forget that if a Snowdrop approaches you with a dog in tow then you should direct any and all comments towards the four legged side of the partnership.

You need to be talking to the one with the higher IQ!!

CS

[BolkowJunior]

As I understand it, military police have jurisdiction over a prescribed area around any military base, so they can stop anybody who is acting suspiciously even outside the wire. For those who are still serving in Germany, Civilian dependants used to be subject to military law (I am assuming that is still the same as well):{

[Rigga]

I seem to remember that RAFP have as much power as a chocolate frog in any circumstances against civilians. They can't detain civvies (on or off camp) or try to pull them up unless they are inside the wire. They can only ask for 'real' police assistance or escort the wrongdoer off the camp/site.

MODplods have way more status.

[Pontius Navigator]

Rigga, but they can shoot them :}

[Ali Barber]

Surely they have the right to make a citizen's arrest, but who's court would it end up in? Also, don't the civvie emergency services have to obey the road traffic act? The blues and 2s may act as a warning to other traffic, but if they nail another vehicle after jumping a red light, it's down to them; at least, that's how I understand the regulations.

[Rigga]

PN - I forgot they were sometimes armed - but even then, the armed ones I knew were too busy shooting themselves in their feet or legs.


Ali, Anyone can make a "citizens arrest" (but what exactly is that?) but you still can't imprison or detain anyone.

[Roadster280]

This came up on Arrse a little while back (although it was RMP not RAFP). It's not entirely correct to say that Service Police have zero power over civilians.

If the RMP/RAFP believe a person to be a servicemember, or the body has committed a crime on military property, they may arrest. Not a citizen's arrest, a full-blown handcuffs/back-of-the-van job.

If subsequently the arrestee proves to be a civvy, they will be released, and there is jack $hit they can do about the arrest in retrospect, as long as the Service Police can show that they had reason to believe it was a soldier/sailor/airman they nabbed.

Also, Service Police may arrest ex-servicemen for crimes committed while they were serving that come to light after discharge. Since the dischargee is now a civvy, again, the Service Police have powers over (certain) civvies in certain circumstances.

[Pezza]

In answer to the original post, RAFP cannot generally use blues and twos off site in this country. Germany and other areas have local rules.

There are/ were some exceptions where the local Chief Constable had authorised RAFP to use blues and twos off base. This was/ is usually due to the lack of civpol coverage in the area so they gain from the concession.

Empowering RAFP as specials would help with powers of arrest but would not help with lights and sirens as Specials can't use them either.

MOD Police are different as they are classed as a Home Office force.

[Pezza]

Also, the power of arrest over dependents only exists overseas.

[JagRigger]

Thre points to ponder:

1 - why did our RAFP have a cover to fit to their blue lights when transiting between camp and off-site MQ's ?

2 - why is it that if they detain a civvi, they must immediately call for Civ Pol assistance ?

3 - OK Redcaps, but in some garrison towns I have encountered patrols of one Military / O
one Civ Pol - covers all options ?

[Just This Once...]

JagRigger,

The simple answer is that pre-2001 (plus further powers gained in 2003) the RAF Police pretty much turned into civilians when they stepped off the base - hence the days of covering up blue lights and even the word 'police' on their cars.

Since 2001 the RAF Police, in common with their Army and Navy equivalents, have gained a whole raft of draconian powers that would have seemed impossible when I joined the RAF. The additional 2003 changes (brought in against a background of post 9-11 knee-jerk) means the simple RAF plod have a huge range of powers never previously anticipated. The very idea that an RAF Police flt lt would have powers, in extremist, to search a regular civilian house, without a judicial warrant, just because the civilians living there shared it with someone who either is (or was) a service person is astonishing. As a comparison, for the civilian police those powers are usually held no lower than superintendent.

I'm not convinced at all that the RAF Police need such powers, nor do I think they are fit to use them. I am not sure the upper-echelons of the RAF are convinced either.

[xenolith]

Just This Once

You said,

"I'm not convinced at all that the RAF Police need such powers, nor do I think they are fit to use them. I am not sure the upper-echelons of the RAF are convinced either."

I had a fairly lengthy diatribe prepared, at your request, as further explanation of my low opinion of your origional post re this issue. Its not needed now that you have returned to planet earth and done it for me.

Thanks :ok:

However, I would go further, they are not fit to use them and no right minded member of the 'upper echelon' would ever let them use them!

[Pezza]

It took long enough but the last post finally pushed this thread to be a Police bashing.

Unfortunately I have to agree that there are some members of the RAFP that would not have a clue and would totally abuse these powers if permitted. However, as with all trades there are good and bad and I can only think that to make a sweeping statement such as the last post can only be made on the back of experiences with the bad side of the trade and not much actual knowledge.

[xenolith]

PEZZA

Wrong, I'm afraid, on so many levels. However unpalatable the facts the RAF Police simply are not upto that level of police work, nothing personal just a fact.

Going back to the origional thread; I did have the immense pleasure of once watching a Provost Officer, in his police vehicle blue lights flashing, chase 3 aircrew types on their bicycles.

Their offence........ riding without lights at twilight! Priceless!

[Just This Once...]

I’m not keen on turning this into a police-bashing thread as the police just put these rules into practice. It is the higher chain of command to decide what regulations and laws need to come into force and not to ignore them completely in the false hope that no service police officer will ever try and use them. Over time the service police appetite to use these powers will increase until checked by judicial review. My key message is that these new laws do affect military aircrew and the chain of command.

Made up example:

Tornado GR4 crew authorised for OLF. During an otherwise uneventful OLF trip the weather closes in a bit and they deviate off track for a few miles and they exit the lateral limits of the OLF area. Weather is still a bit rubbish and rather than weather-abort into the package of ac somewhere above they end push-on at under 200’ for a minute or so in the normal low flying area before re-entering the OLF area where the weather is now better. During the subsequent debrief of HUD tapes the entire formation discuses the decision of the crew to push-on vs low-level abort. Several learning points come out or are reinforced before the crews disperse and think little more of it. Meanwhile a completely separate flying complaint comes in from a different part of the route and the RAF Police start a routine investigation.

Follow-up, Pre-31 Oct 2009

A couple of weeks later the RAF Police pop into the sqn and chat to the nav (pilot is now in Theatre). Nav explains the sortie profile – medium level, AAR, air-to-air photo-shoot in new sqn markings, low level transit to range, OLF and then medium level home. Police take simple statement from nav & formation leader and takes copy of tapes and routing. Evidence shows that the flying complaint has no basis but notes the MSD bust 30 mins later and sends note through to sqn boss who happened to be the formation leader and auth. Sqn boss rolls his eyes at the RAF Police note and files it in B One N. Civilian complainant informed of investigation and that the crew were at 1000’ agl descending, cleared to 250’ MSD, and not at 30’ as the complainant had alleged. The End.

Follow-up, Post-31 Oct 2009

A couple of weeks later the RAF Police pop into the sqn and interview the nav (pilot is now in Theatre). Nav explains the sortie profile – medium level, AAR, air-to-air photo-shoot in new sqn markings, low level transit to range, OLF and then medium level home. Police take statement from nav & formation leader and takes copy of tapes and routing. Evidence shows that the flying complaint has no basis but notes the MSD bust 30 mins later. Civilian complainant informed of investigation and that the crew were at 1000’ agl descending, cleared to 250’ MSD, and not at 20’ as the complainant had alleged.

RAF Police believe that they have sufficient grounds to believe that the crew have flown at a ‘height less than the minimum height prescribed by regulations’; this is a serious offence and carries a prison sentence ‘not to exceed 2 years’ [Armed Forces Act 2006, Section 34, enacted 31 Oct 2009]. Pilot is arrested by service police when crewing out of an ac in Theatre and is held in custody prior to questioning. Pilot is searched, as is his room in Theatre, fingerprinted and DNA taken; sqn boss is left dumb-founded. Meanwhile back in the UK the RAF Police have arrived to conduct a search of pilot’s home in pursuit of a camera he may have had with him on the sortie as well as any other electronic evidence. His wife (an accomplished NHS surgeon), 5 kids and disabled mother are all rather distraught having come home to find a load of RAF corporals searching their civilian house.

Perhaps an extreme example but we are currently relying on ‘judgement’ of very junior personnel to ensure that the above does not happen; but the RAF Police are convinced that they have such powers.

Fly Safe & Fly Legal.
:eek:

[Gnd]

Still, it is in contradiction to the 2006 road traffic act. You may not pursue with B&2 unless trained, NO civilian force will train and qualify you. The IAM instructors, or similar, will not do this either although they are all Class 1 examiners; unless the CC says they can or you are a warranted Policeman posted into a vehicular traffic billet.

If you injure or kill someone you WILL be prosecuted for GBH or Manslaughter, even the Police are investigated for due diligence and necessity (after authorisation from the duty inspector). Weather they kick your back door in or not, they can’t do it with B&2 (the original question?)

[Pezza]

XENOLITH

How so? Please enlighten me as to how you can make that statement without knowing every single member of the RAFP?

As I said in my earlier post, this seems to be a statement made without regard to the facts.

[Tashengurt]

If you injure or kill someone you WILL be prosecuted for GBH or Manslaughter

No. You wont.

[Mr C Hinecap]

Their offence........ riding without lights at twilight! Priceless!

I take it you have dealt with the aftermath of a road traffic accident before then? Looking after the stupids on the bike and preserving their life if they aren't bright enough to have lights on. Seems fair enough - given the example they were also failing to set. :ugh:

[xenolith]

Hinecap

You take it right!

Further, I maintain that riding a bicycle without lights is not an emergency that requires pursuit with blue lights flashing, particularly when the 'miscreants' are personally known to said Provost Officer as they live in the same building.

Further still..................ahh whats the point.

[Tashengurt]

I too was told to get off my bike and walk after the snowdrop on the gate decided my front light was too dim.
He was only slightly less annoying than the one who flapped an unbuttoned pocket on my combats telling me to "get a grip!"
I'm afraid all the ones I met behaved like petulant teenagers. Of course, they mostly were!

[Pontius Navigator]

Thre points to ponder:

1 - why did our RAFP have a cover to fit to their blue lights when transiting between camp and off-site MQ's ?

Because thems were the rules

2 - why is it that if they detain a civvi, they must immediately call for Civ Pol assistance ?

Civpol has primacy

3 - OK Redcaps, but in some garrison towns I have encountered patrols of one Military / one Civ Pol - covers all options ?

Indeed and the redcap may have more power in this instance (and I don't mean jurisdicton.) :}

I remember o'dark hundred at ISK, on the public road between the two halves of the camp, one FS RAFP (ex-para) chastising an exercise intruder who failed to comply with a resaonable request to put his hands on his head and STFU. A tap on the knee cap with an SLR got the message through.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Tashengurt, re your 19:55 post

Yes, you will.

See here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/paramedic-caused-fatal-crash-by-ignoring-red-light-580899.html) for the report of a local lad, who I believe was eventually sent down for this incident. The charge was causing death by dangerous driving.

[Herc-u-lease]

See here (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/paramedic-caused-fatal-crash-by-ignoring-red-light-580899.html) for the report of a local lad, who I believe was eventually sent down for this incident.

or maybe he just got away with a £1200 fine and 3 months driving ban:

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Berkshire | Careless driving paramedic fined (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/berkshire/3229553.stm)

either way, no immunity from prosecution

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Herc-u-lease

Thanks for that link. As you noted, the point is, there is no immunity from prosecution.

[Lima Juliet]

Easy solution - use LJ's golden rule and don't get caught!

...and if you do, deny everything as trying to prove is very difficult for the average plod - they usually rely on a confession!

[Legalapproach]

Not only is there no immunity from prosecution but most police standing orders forbid even class 1 pursuit trained drivers from continuing with car chases which might present a danger to the public.

[changeitnot]

So many powers to people both civilian and military who undertake such a short training course.
Perhaps the selection process is so good they only pick the very very best!

[Tashengurt]

Cpt Pugwash,
That makes my point! No charge for GBH or Manslaughter, that's why we have death by dangerous and more recently by careless!

:ugh::ugh::ugh:

Changeitnot,
Training to be civpol is two years. I know it pales compared to say, a Doctor, but it isn't that short is it?

[sisemen]

but even then, the armed ones I knew were too busy shooting themselves in their feet or legs.


Or negligently discharging their weapon in the approach tunnel to COC (had the concrete wall not been in the way the bullet was destined for the back of my head).

Or punching unauthorised holes in a desk with a small high velocity 9mm object.

Or taking a Sterling SMG off-base unauthorised (presumably to impress his bird)

Or breaking into a contractor's hut and nicking the Kit Kats and chewing gum (the chewing gum was, according to the evidence at the DCM, for his dog!!)

Or ordering some "norty toys" by mail order, told by the missus to send them right back, and then putting the package by the door of a bunker in the SSA. When the EOD team blew the package the guys name and address was clearly visible!

Ah yes, Honington was an absolute riot in the 80s. :} And then I had a flight under my command at Benson in the 90s :oh:

[Whenurhappy]

I had occasion earlier this year to be interviewed under caution as a result of a theft of service equipment from my place of work. Interviewes were delayed by several weeks as there was a jurisdictional spat between the MDP and the RAFP. The MDP treated the matter as a simple (and regrettably all-too-common) theft from my place of work whereas the RAFP regarded it as something altogether more sinsiter. Eventually the RAFP were allowed to interview me under caution. I had the benefit of a good solicitor however it was not required. The interview was very professional, and the investigators were aware of the systemic sy faults that abounded at my workplace. The matter eventually dried up as my solicitor reinterated that I was a victim of a criminal act and that the employer (MOD) had a statutory responsibility to provide a safe and secure (peacetime) working environment.

Mind you, the lap top was never found.

[Gnd]

Tash,

If you had the ability to actually articulate what you are on about people might take you seriously and yes, I was - I know!

[ShyTorque]

An junior RAF policeman at a base in Germany stole a sub imprest from an officer's locker in our squadron hangar. He was court martialled and found guilty.

The background was worrying for a number of reasons, but in particular:

A) He had no legitimate reason to obtain the keys and enter the locked hangar.

B) He had no way of knowing there was an imprest in the locker and it was hidden amongst the (male) officer's dirty aircrew underwear.

To be fair, he didn't use his blues and twos on his way to the hangar, or on the way back to the guardroom to sign the keys back in. Still a bit of a giveaway, silly chap.

[Rigger1]

The majority of them seem unable to apply common sense when carrying out even the most basic tasks (altough to be fair, most of the dog handlers are seem to be ok).

Take this recent true example: 2 airmen, 1 of them a JNCO, are walking back from the bar in the small hours and see the small Naafi spar shop at the side of the airmans mess unlocked, they've had a drink or 2, but still decide to invstigate. They enter the shop because they know there is a phone inside and call th RAFP, rather than leaving the shop empty and going on foot. RAFP turn up and both are arrested, put in the cells for the night and interviewed in the morning for breaking into the shop. Nothing was missing from the shop, it was simply a case of someone closed the door, didn't lock it and it blew open.

It took a the lads Sqn Ldr a visit to OCA to get them released and the stupid invstigation stopped.

And if that is RAFP bashing then so be it, and no I wasn't one of the lads.

[cornish-stormrider]

And that says it all about the RAF coppers - in all my dealings with them I met two who were not total p***ks. Thats good odds, two out of about 40.

I have never known such small minded, chips on shoulders, petty, obnoxious and difficult idiots.

Here's one - I was out surfing, took a 10' longboard to my face. Drove back to camp feeling a bit unwell. thought I'd stop at the cop shop and ask if they wouldn't mind ringing the duty medic seeing as how I was still bleeding and all. they tried to arrest me for fighting.

I explained that no - surfing injury etc. eventually they call they duty medic who says - what the **** are you doing - head injury. why is he not being taken to casualty?

so they turf me into the back of the 110 and drive me to Elgin - 110 landrover, no medic, no seatbelt and two coppers driving like arses so they didn't get the car dirty.

And then they said - you can make your own way back!! never mind the concussion etc we're off it's shift change.

I have one word for all those type of people - JACK.

[Gnd]

Tash,

Good job, got enough idiots as it is.

[Roadster280]

RAF Firemen don't enter burning buildings

WAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well the RAF firemen at Upavon stood back and watched as the Pewsey part timers drove up the hill to put out a fire in the HQ a fair while back.

I'm sure they are trained in firefighting in buildings, but since their role was to support low flying on SPTA, they wouldn't (couldn't) deal with the office fire.

There were plenty of RAFP there too. Most of them were good eggs. However, one of our Army lancejacks offered banter to one of the SAC Acting (Unpaid) Cpls, and got locked up for his trouble. Cue enraged Troop Staff Sergeant seen to be entering guardroom. Lots of shouting, no more than two minutes elapsed, then seen returning with said LCpl, followed by ashen-faced RAF Policemen out of the guardroom.

Another one tried to stop me for drink-driving, before his pal (also my pal) told him to wind his neck in, he'd seen me drink 2 pints in the Ship.

And of course there were the female RAFP Cpls. Some of whom spent as much time in our (Army) block getting some than they spent in their own block!!!

[Tashengurt]

I recall a civvie house in a small cul-de-sac at Leuchars suffering a chimney fire.
The base water fairies turned out in one of their enormous airfield tenders but only really succeded in blocking the street when the part-timers from wherever (Tayport?) arrived.
Still, the thought was there I guess.

[Ranger 1]

Our lot in the Civil Airport fire service would certainly enter buildings on site, and I'm sure off site close to the place if life was at risk.

[ShyTorque]

A few years ago I was a Puma OCU QHI. On returning to Odiham from a training sortie, the staff QCI on board observed a serious car accident in progress on the busy M3, immediately adjacent to the westbound North Warnborough exit slip road. A car had hit the central reservation, turned over onto its roof, and instantly burst into flames. No-one got out.

I advised ATC what had just happened with a request for the emergency services to attend. I also advised them I intended to land to offer what assistance we could. I put the Puma on the grass central reservation of the main road, by the M3 exit roundabout, and shut down. One crewman ran down the slip road to the scene, carrying our big BCF cabin fire extinguisher and the aircraft first aid kit.

The car fire was extinguished and the dazed occupant was pulled safely out of the car. The crewman returned, having had a big thankyou from the police (turned out the car was stolen and was being pursued by the boys in blue from London, so the driver was arrested).

On my return to Odiham I received a message to immediately contact the RAF Police, which I did. I was told by said corporal policeman that I was accused of landing my helicopter on the M3 to pick up a hitch-hiker (presumably my returning crewman) which was apparently an offence.

Muppet :ugh:

[Pontius Navigator]

Smoke and Flames BEagle, smoke and flames, either keeps the bottom feeders in business filling side columns in the Daily whatever or hides the real chat in the weeds.

BEagle will come out in a monk and you will incur his wrath if you bin his beloved Weber.

[PPRuNe Pop]

HOWEVER!!

Some threads on Mil are trash stuff sometimes and we have culled a fair few this last 24hrs. So if any of you deal in garbage you best stay away.

We have better things to do than give succour to village idiots.

This thread is now closed.