what happened at a nature reserve?

[malthousemouse]

hi.

i'm a granny whose father was a ww2 raf pilot, and he trained on tiger moths in canada around 1941 (so just missed the battle of britain). the tradition was to hedgehop in celebration on the day you got your wings - many of his friends overdid it and were killed going under bridges, between telegraph poles and the like. there is a throwaway comment in the film 'battle of britain' (if i remember rightly) where a leading character mentions that more pilots were killed in training than in combat.

does this sort of thing still happen? i was on the edge of low-flying area 31h recently, and observed raf pumas at approx 20-40ft over a nature reserve, flying through clouds of birds, including swans, which could have got into the rotors and affected pilot control. the helicopters were facing towards the viewing hides at that point, and there was a mum and toddler in one of those hides.

are sssi's (nature reserves) featured on pilots' maps? what happens if a swan gets in the rotors? is there anything i can do to politely inform aircraft training centres of the risk to pilots/birds/birdwatchers/toddlers/mums?

i've already been through the official reporting process, but nobody tells you anything.

thanks for kindly reading this.

[rotornut]

There was an accident in Northern Alberta a few years ago where a helicopter had an accident involving a large bird when flying over a river. The machine, a Bell 47, hit the bird which smashed the bubble and came into the cockpit. The pilot was knocked out but the helicopter somehow came down without injuring the pilot. So accidents do happen and it's up to the pilot to keep a good lookout.

[niknak]

There's no doubt that in the very early days, more pilots died in training than in action, but that's because of the infrastructure, and I quote from our village website -
"18th june 1917 - Mattishall Army Training Airfield - a trainee pilot failed land his craft properly and as a result was gravely injured, he was to taken to Norwich Hospital by horse and cart, but died of his injuries before arrival'
It took an hour and 15 mins to get to Norwich hospital.
These days, given Air Ambulances, it's matter of minutes.

In my neck of the woods, their are bombing and firing areas within the area of the Wash and Donna Nook (East Lincolnshire Coast), but they are carefully designed to avoid the breeding and considerable bird activity area in both areas.
It may not be obvious to a non aviation person, but to fly where birds are breeding is utter madness and a sure way to write of aircraft and aircrew.

It seems ironic that since the NOD have taken the care to avoid such areas, bird population is improving, and seal population is booming - it appears seals are very touchy about human contact but couldn't give a **** about aircraft.

Such areas are very well marked on civilian and military maps, some have more to lose than others.

[fireflybob]

How interesting! My father was a flying instructor during WW2 and spent a year at Trenton in Canada on the examining wing. He always told me that more were killed in flying training at one stage than were lost in action!

He himself survived an accident flying a Miles Magister with his student when they hit a tree low flying! I got the feeling he learned a lot about flying from the accident and luckily he only came away with a broken nose which when you see the wreckage on the photograph was a miracle!

[PAXboy]

Hi malthousemouse if you have written to official sources and can document that you did so AND that you had no reply, it sounds like the next port of call is the MP. If they do not respond, it's the dear old media. Start with the local paper and see if they will raise a stink.

Above all else, DOCUMENT with photographs, dates and times that it happens. If you don't have the evidence, no one will listen to you. Best of luck.


(on the more general theme) My uncle was killed in the early 50s when the conversion to jets was still being learnt. he was an instructor but his student killed them both on approach to RAF Stradishall in Cambridgeshire.

[Agaricus bisporus]

i'm a granny whose father was a ww2 raf pilot, and he trained on tiger moths in canada

As a "Granny" you are of an age and education that should know better than to commit such mangling of the language. Even my (US) Microsoft spell checker revolts at your errors. One naturally assumes that if writing is gobbledegook then content is the same...This diminishes your credibility, especially as a first post.

are sssi's (nature reserves) featured on pilots' maps?

Well, no...If every site that was suspected of harbouring Great Crested Newts, rare spiders or flowers were shown on maps there would be no room for the important stuff like mountains, power lines, TV towers etc. Also, sssi's (sic - ouch!!) - are not necessarily nature reserves. Or viccy-verkie...

what happens if a swan gets in the rotors

Well, use your imagination. (For those lacking in that department, it gets very messy for the swan, and for the airman who has to hose it all off later.) Sure, the swan could do far worse damage in engines, tail rotor or cockpit but that question was not asked...
Just what is being asked here? And by whom? And why?
Just what is your point?

[Tiger_mate]

My Granny could not quote lines from the 'Battle of Britain' movie, but then again, she is not a Troll either.

[Gainesy]

Hmm, doubt many Grannies could name LFAs.

[malthousemouse]

thank you

hi paxboy and others who have kindly answered my question.

thank you for the information. i had intended to write to my mp if i had heard nothing after 15 days (when i'm told i should receive an answer).

however i'm only interested in seeing that it doesn't happen again, and i'm not interested in how the mod deals with the staff/students concerned, and don't expect to be told that kind of detail.

from what i hear, i now understand that the problem is systemic: the maps and regulations are apparently there; however from where i stand, it appears that there is room for improvement in the way they are being used, at least by some departments.

one reason why i posted my question was that i was interested to understand the mindset of those people who had risked causing distress or an accident. i still cannot be sure whether it was a prank, but i am beginning to wonder whether poor training had something to do with it.

regarding my manner of communication and one member of the forum - i'm sorry if the lack of capitals frightens united states spellchecking equipment - but i do not have to use capitals if i don't want to. please note that i have adhered to forum rules in the matter of politeness, which is more than some people here have done.

thank you all again for your kind assistance.

[dakkg651]

Malthousemouse.

I wonder why you posted your question on this forum?

The military or rotorheads forums would have been more logical.

Then again, they would have sussed you much sooner I think.

Yorkshire Post is my guess.

[Jackonicko]

As a civilian journalist (albeit a specialist one) working in defence/aerospace for nearly 25 years, and as a regular observer of all aspects of RAF flying operations, from brief to debrief (and indeed from Monday Met brief to Friday's Happy Hour), and as an RAF (UAS) trained private pilot, and as the son of an RAF aircrew officer who served from 1942 to 1978, I hope that I can put your mind at rest, if you are who you purport to be.

The authorisation process for every sortie flown today is such that the kind of 'high jinks' and 'licenced hooliganism' with which your father would have been familiar simply does not exist (unless you're lucky enough to get an exchange tour with the Sultan of Oman). There is simply no longer any room for 'pranks', beating up friends' houses, and all of the other irresponsible types of behaviour which may once have been routine. And because authorised, responsible low flying is their raison d'etre (and after incidents with litigation-happy farmers and horseriders), Joint Helicopter Command's authorisation procedures and policies are extremely tight.

Nor is training (particularly in the rotary wing community) anything less than rigorous and excellent, and great care is taken to avoid anything that could cause an accident. Moreover, great care is also taken to avoid causing distress to people and livestock, and indeed to avoid anything that will stir up Nimbies and interfering busybodies.

My criticism would, in fact, be that too much effort and time is expended in avoiding trivial and pretty baseless complaints (as opposed to avoiding damage, distress to livestock). Low flying is needed, and people need to learn to enjoy watching it, or learn to ignore it, or at least to tolerate it.

In my experience, if low flying Pumas found themselves amid 'clouds of birds' (and I'd want photographic evidence that it happened, because it's so improbable) it would be because the birds were not where they were expected to be - and bird sanctuaries, migration routes, etc. are generally known and generally avoided, along with Studs, riding stables, hospitals, etc. The idea that anyone would deliberately fly through flocks of birds (flocks rather than clouds, surely?) and towards bird-watchers' hides is risible.

In an increasingly 'moaning' society, the list of 'avoids' has grown exponentially.

I do have to say that my wife (who is unusually air minded) would not know the designation of particular LFAs and I do not know anybody old enough to be a grandparent (even with the proviso that they are also young enough to have had a father serving in WW2) who would take a cavalier attitude to grammar, apostrophes, etc, and certainly not use all lower case.

Many of those here will be equally sceptical, I suspect, and this will directly affect the amount of banter (and even hostility) that your post will attract, and will lead to a disinclination to provide serious answers.

Please do not assume that this indicates any reluctance to face up to the issue - only a reluctance to feed a troll, or (far worse to many here) a filthy journo.

PS: If ever I'm confined to a rest home when the gout gets too much to bear (probably in about 2051 or so), I hope that the sons of today's PPRuNers will take pity on me, ignore the 'avoid' and come and wire the place to raise my morale.....

[Wader2]

Jacko, welcome back. Anywhere interesting? Did you get the CD?

[malthousemouse]

there is nothing to suss

sorry to disappoint you, but there are no conspiracies here.

1. thank you for mentioning two other useful forums: i wasn't aware of them.

2. re the low flying areas: anyone can easily research these by going to the mod website and searching for 'low flying.' this research direction was given to me by the low-flying helpline which has been put in place for horse riders, since an accident to a horse rider a few years ago caused a change in practice. re the puma aircraft: anyone can check out helicopters seen at very close quarters by googling for web images of military helicopters. these matters are not privileged information.

3. i began by mentioning that i was a granny, and mentioning my father's military memories which applied to the matter in question, to show you the way i was thinking, and where i was coming from. i'm flattered that you might think i could be a journalist. a couple of decades ago i was working in the display ads dept of a local newspaper, and was offered the chance to train as a journalist, but unfortunately had to turn it down due to my responsibilities as a parent. it would have been good to have been able to contribute something more useful to the world - but i must be satisfied if i can do my bit towards resolving the matter i have been discussing here.

4. if there is anything else that has frightened you in any way, please let me know, and i'll answer it to the best of my ability. for myself, i am satisfied with those useful answers that i've already been given on this forum, and i've already thanked people for it.

5. i was surprised to see that there is still a rather stereotyped, rather limited, view of grannies around here. grandparents can come from all backgrounds. the main difference between the older generation and most people on this forum, is that retired people are less likely to be in a position to cause you any problems: hence my attempt to reassure you. in my case, i enjoy conspiracies, and i enjoy the idea of pranks, just like anyone else. however it always helps if we understand each other properly.

cheers.

[malthousemouse]

you are entitled to your opinion

you are entitled to your opinion, of course, but sadly some of it does not square with what i have observed; nor does it square with other reports of incidents received by english nature, and yorkshire wildlife trusts, which manage the reserves in question. but thank you for your advice regarding photographic evidence. i'll pass it on to the above departments.

i am intrigued to see that the matter of capital letters still frightens you because it doesn't fit a certain rather old-fashioned stereotype. please try to understand that (a) some people don't fit into stereotypes easily; (b) capital letters, or the lack of them, are quite harmless in themselves.

this is not the right place for a discussion of this subject, but since you raise the matter, i shall give a few brief points. the idea of grammatical rules was first promoted in the eighteenth century, partly because it seemed appropriate for the new enlightened and scientific ways of thinking that were being developed. these rules were influenced to a certain extent by analysis of greek and latin, and by the logic of mathematics, for example. there was also the political influence of the french academy. however, during the twentieth century, some linguists, philosophers and writers began to be concerned that grammatical rules were adding further limitations of expression to those already caused by the use of language itself. there is plenty more to be said about this, but i daresay i have said more than enough.

thank you for going to the trouble of writing such a long reply, and thank you for your interest.

[Wader2]

malthousemalt hvng interpretd hand written letter of 18th c i can attest how difficult to read what was effectiv block of unpunctatd text the device of caps and puncs was no doubt standardisd and has continud to be mod to aid comprehension revertng to lowercase block text does nothing to aid comprehensibility

A properly crafted piece of written text may be assimilated more readily than one that does not obey extant rules.

[PlasticCabDriver]

By "recently", when exactly do you mean?

[Jackonicko]

Since a long reply didn't seem to penetrate, here's a short one.

The kind of reckless indiscipline and cowboy flying that you described no longer happens. Whatever you think that you saw, you did not see helicopter crews playing pranks.

The incident that you describe sounds unlikely. Perhaps you don't have the experience or knowledge to interpret what you think you saw?

Even if it occurred, you can be certain that flying into a flock of birds was entirely unintentional.

And if that "does not square with what you have observed; nor with other reports of incidents received by English Nature, and Yorkshire Wildlife Trusts, which manage the reserves in question" I suspect that would be because there are far too many trouble-making Nimbys, with an anti-military, anti-aviation agenda, and with an axe to grind.

There is nothing to get your undies in a twist about, and you should move on and bother your council about potholes or light pollution, or some other real problem.

And that's about as polite a version of "F*** off and meddle elsewhere, you tiresome windbag" as I can manage.

W2,
Orlando and HAI. Yes. Great listening, but did you not get my e-mail?

[Tiger_mate]

malthousemouse, if you are from the generation that you claim, then you should be setting a fine example of English Grammar rather then the poor demonstration that you have provided. For if you do not, this forum could descend into the mobile text speak of todays generation, and I for one shall have to attend 'language courses' to read and (more importantly) understand it.

The UK has hundreds of SSSI, not all of which receive 'AVOID' status. As it happens, the MOD also has thousands of acres of open ground, which because of its restricted public access, creates a wildlife haven despite artillery, low flying, and even bombing ranges.

A helicopter could legitimately fly through one of these areas as low as 10' agl in certain flight profiles. Whilst practising to go to war, a task which is now taken for granted by the UK public, and one which barely raises an eyebrow when brothers (& sisters) in arms die in the line of duty.

FWIW, I still think that you are a troll. But sleep easy tonight, knowing that if the said Puma crews are on their way to Afghanistan tomorrow, they are probably prepared for the task in hand, despite inconveniencing your bird-watching.

To sucessfully complain about training, is to put lives in danger through reduced training facilities. I am sure the swans didnt mind, after all, they probably have more flying hours then all the helicopter crews added together.

On the subject of horse riders, despite the MOD being very pro-active on this matter, too many riders refuse to wear high visibility clothing. Foxhunting groups are the worst offenders. Black jackets on riders mounted on dark coloured horses are especially difficult to see from the air, and just as motorcyclists should ride with helmets (law) and lights on (common sense) so should horse riders be wearing helmets and high vis clothing.

Doh....I've fed the troll. C U L8r M8

[dakkg651]

Jackonicko

I love your two stages of diplomacy.

Unfortunately, I think we are wasting our time with this one.

Strange she hasn't asked what a troll is yet.

I bet she's read Chickenhawk!

[Foxtrot Oscar]

Only recently joined PPRuNe, pray tell what a troll is?