Is this safe? Need reality check
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this safe? Need reality check
Hey there. I don't know any other pipeline pilots that don't work for my company so I could use some safety advice on our procedures.
I fly a C172 on a waiver between 300-500 ft inspecting gas and liquid underground pipelines and right of way. I visually scan the right of way and report anything I see, such as dead vegetation or construction. I take photos of the site, and record the location on paper, without an observer helping. I fly in a lot of congested airspace, as some of the lines go right through GA airport property. Some routes fly over hills with almost nowhere to land. Here's where I have the safety issue: the clients want me to do all the reporting in the air as I see it. So, if I fly over a construction site, right now I write it down and report it at my fuel stop two hours later. But they want me to call in the site to the technician immediately and text the pictures and location. It isn't an easy thing to do...I have to circle to take pictures already, I record the lat/long from my computer using a screenshot but explaining verbally where the location is to the technician is quite a feat. "North of the right of way at milepost 42, along State Road 35 behind the farmhouse" would be what they want. In order to get all that I have to circle and look at my laptop, and zoom in on the map while trying to figure out what road that is I am flying over. Figuring it out later on the ground is no problem.
I get that they want the "emergency" calls right away. I always do that, but I climb above 500 and circle a safe distance away from obstacles or airfields (this is still not easy or "safe," just "safer"). An emergency would be a backhoe digging right that moment over the pipeline. However, engineer stakes or an idle piece of equipment is not an emergency. What is the difference if I do it right then or in two hours? I understand they'd like to have it sooner. But really the danger of doing all this is my issue. Circling at 500ft, looking at laptop, making phone calls and texting. Did I mention this is in a 172 with no autopilot? I have already had one close call with another aircraft. Please let me know if my concern is justified or if I need to turn in my wings. I'm a mid-time pilot, no noob but this just seems dangerous and I don't think any number of hours will make it safer.
Thanks for the comments.
I fly a C172 on a waiver between 300-500 ft inspecting gas and liquid underground pipelines and right of way. I visually scan the right of way and report anything I see, such as dead vegetation or construction. I take photos of the site, and record the location on paper, without an observer helping. I fly in a lot of congested airspace, as some of the lines go right through GA airport property. Some routes fly over hills with almost nowhere to land. Here's where I have the safety issue: the clients want me to do all the reporting in the air as I see it. So, if I fly over a construction site, right now I write it down and report it at my fuel stop two hours later. But they want me to call in the site to the technician immediately and text the pictures and location. It isn't an easy thing to do...I have to circle to take pictures already, I record the lat/long from my computer using a screenshot but explaining verbally where the location is to the technician is quite a feat. "North of the right of way at milepost 42, along State Road 35 behind the farmhouse" would be what they want. In order to get all that I have to circle and look at my laptop, and zoom in on the map while trying to figure out what road that is I am flying over. Figuring it out later on the ground is no problem.
I get that they want the "emergency" calls right away. I always do that, but I climb above 500 and circle a safe distance away from obstacles or airfields (this is still not easy or "safe," just "safer"). An emergency would be a backhoe digging right that moment over the pipeline. However, engineer stakes or an idle piece of equipment is not an emergency. What is the difference if I do it right then or in two hours? I understand they'd like to have it sooner. But really the danger of doing all this is my issue. Circling at 500ft, looking at laptop, making phone calls and texting. Did I mention this is in a 172 with no autopilot? I have already had one close call with another aircraft. Please let me know if my concern is justified or if I need to turn in my wings. I'm a mid-time pilot, no noob but this just seems dangerous and I don't think any number of hours will make it safer.
Thanks for the comments.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes but...
It's a little hard to tell what is "normal" when the boss and the client are telling you this is what's expected, because the "pilot before you did it this way." Either I am being too cautious and need to learn to do this, or I need to push back and tell them this is too much. Would really like to talk to 3 or 4 other pipeline pilots to see what they are expected to do by their companies. It would be best if I could say, "No other pipeline companies expect this level of reporting, this is really unusual." Or, "The FAA forbids use of text messaging while flying." Otherwise they're just going to keep telling me to do it. If I had industry SOP or regulations to point to that would be great, but I don't think they exist. I need some ammo, help me.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: England
Age: 61
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phrogger,
500 feet looking out of the window taking photos and then texting them to base is not normal or safe; this should be a pilot and observer job minimum and preferably a two engined aircraft.
Even if you found other pipeline pilots that were doing this, it does not make it safe. The fact that you are asking the questions means that you are sensible enough to realise that this is potentially dangerous whereas others may be less sensible.
Your longevity will be greatly improved if you tell them that you are not going to do this type of work.
500 feet looking out of the window taking photos and then texting them to base is not normal or safe; this should be a pilot and observer job minimum and preferably a two engined aircraft.
Even if you found other pipeline pilots that were doing this, it does not make it safe. The fact that you are asking the questions means that you are sensible enough to realise that this is potentially dangerous whereas others may be less sensible.
Your longevity will be greatly improved if you tell them that you are not going to do this type of work.
Professional Student
Wot everyone else said. Circling at low level in busy airspace can easily go badly wrong if you're trying to text/write/call etc. My advice would be to get an observer along with you to do all that.
I can't speak as to fixed wing low level ops, but I do know in the UK the railway inspection guys (rotary) have dedicated observer who does the observing.
I can't speak as to fixed wing low level ops, but I do know in the UK the railway inspection guys (rotary) have dedicated observer who does the observing.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: london
Age: 60
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
neither safe nor legal. Look at the terms and conditions of your phone contract. Operating aeronautical mobile is absolutely forbidden.
See also the federal law on the matter
47 C.F.R. § 22.925 Prohibition on airborne operation of cellular telephones.
Title 47 - Telecommunication
Title 47: Telecommunication
PART 22—PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICES
Subpart H—Cellular Radiotelephone Service
See also the federal law on the matter
47 C.F.R. § 22.925 Prohibition on airborne operation of cellular telephones.
Title 47 - Telecommunication
Title 47: Telecommunication
PART 22—PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICES
Subpart H—Cellular Radiotelephone Service
Excluding war zones, Aerial Filming/ photography kills more cameramen/photographers than ALL other causes COMBINED.
When I've operated (Video) camera For powerlines work in a helicopter a three man crew is ideal.
There is precedent in the USA that your employers could be legally liable in the event of an accident.
Mickjoebill
When I've operated (Video) camera For powerlines work in a helicopter a three man crew is ideal.
There is precedent in the USA that your employers could be legally liable in the event of an accident.
Mickjoebill
Everything is under control.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't sound safe, but seems illegal. I hope this isn't common practice in the U.S. pipeline industry.
§22.925 Prohibition on airborne operation of cellular telephones.
Cellular telephones installed in or carried aboard airplanes, balloons or any other type of aircraft must not be operated while such aircraft are airborne (not touching the ground). When any aircraft leaves the ground, all cellular telephones on board that aircraft must be turned off. The following notice must be posted on or near each cellular telephone installed in any aircraft:
“The use of cellular telephones while this aircraft is airborne is prohibited by FCC rules, and the violation of this rule could result in suspension of service and/or a fine. The use of cellular telephones while this aircraft is on the ground is subject to FAA regulations.”
§22.925 Prohibition on airborne operation of cellular telephones.
Cellular telephones installed in or carried aboard airplanes, balloons or any other type of aircraft must not be operated while such aircraft are airborne (not touching the ground). When any aircraft leaves the ground, all cellular telephones on board that aircraft must be turned off. The following notice must be posted on or near each cellular telephone installed in any aircraft:
“The use of cellular telephones while this aircraft is airborne is prohibited by FCC rules, and the violation of this rule could result in suspension of service and/or a fine. The use of cellular telephones while this aircraft is on the ground is subject to FAA regulations.”
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Legal restrictions
Thanks for your replies, it helps to know it's not just me. I do think what they're asking me to do is unsafe, and I've limited it to true urgent reports for the time being. Hopefully they won't push me any more.
For argument's sake, the law about cellular use in the air seems to be not enforced or at least widely ignored. My A20 headset has a bluetooth receiver specifically for making calls from the cockpit via cell phone. Additionally, I've flown in a Cirrus model that has the capability to call right from the MFD. I don't even object to calling from the air, it's doing it at 500 feet that concerns me. The legal ban is based on concern about cockpit instrument interference and there's nothing that a cell phone can do to my 172 to make it fall out of the sky. Actually, the texting is far worse (think texting and driving). FAR 91.21 limits the use of personal electronic devices in the cockpit only for "air carrier operations." In any case, their use is permitted if their use is for purposes related to flight or company operations, which is a big loophole.
I'm finding that aerial pipeline inspection seems to be loosely regulated. My "training" consisted of two short flights and a couple short tests which anyone could pass with 15 minutes of study. I could name a dozen things that would make it safer: Higher altitude, use an observer, have an autopilot (at least alt hold), install TCAS/ADS-B Out, etc. But in the end, this is a bottom-feeder job that only the desperate and crazy would do, and they cut all kinds of corners to keep it cheap (although to be fair the plane is in great shape). So wonder which one I am, and how long I should do this?
For argument's sake, the law about cellular use in the air seems to be not enforced or at least widely ignored. My A20 headset has a bluetooth receiver specifically for making calls from the cockpit via cell phone. Additionally, I've flown in a Cirrus model that has the capability to call right from the MFD. I don't even object to calling from the air, it's doing it at 500 feet that concerns me. The legal ban is based on concern about cockpit instrument interference and there's nothing that a cell phone can do to my 172 to make it fall out of the sky. Actually, the texting is far worse (think texting and driving). FAR 91.21 limits the use of personal electronic devices in the cockpit only for "air carrier operations." In any case, their use is permitted if their use is for purposes related to flight or company operations, which is a big loophole.
I'm finding that aerial pipeline inspection seems to be loosely regulated. My "training" consisted of two short flights and a couple short tests which anyone could pass with 15 minutes of study. I could name a dozen things that would make it safer: Higher altitude, use an observer, have an autopilot (at least alt hold), install TCAS/ADS-B Out, etc. But in the end, this is a bottom-feeder job that only the desperate and crazy would do, and they cut all kinds of corners to keep it cheap (although to be fair the plane is in great shape). So wonder which one I am, and how long I should do this?
The simplest solution is get another job.
Ban on cellphone use when airborne is probably not aircraft safety but the phone latching onto multiple relay stations and obstructing the network. This is easily detected and if it annoys the network operator enough you will get a snotty letter at least.
What they are asking you to do is downright dangerous. Me, I'd just walk out. Life's not worth that sort of (very considerable) risk. And while you're at it shop them to their insurance company - that'll stop 'em.
Ban on cellphone use when airborne is probably not aircraft safety but the phone latching onto multiple relay stations and obstructing the network. This is easily detected and if it annoys the network operator enough you will get a snotty letter at least.
What they are asking you to do is downright dangerous. Me, I'd just walk out. Life's not worth that sort of (very considerable) risk. And while you're at it shop them to their insurance company - that'll stop 'em.
