Chinook Power Line Strike Wales
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Ipswich
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
A colleague has a house that overlooks Chivenor and his son is an aviation spotter - he told his dad what the Chinook was doing.
You can start with name calling if it makes you feel clever but the Catterick crash started with 'high spirits' and 'interesting flying manoeuvres' and ended in tragedy. If the lessons still haven't been learned and the wire strike was the same flight as the one my mate's lad saw then getting it out there is the best thing to do to prevent another poorly disciplined crew taking other people with them.
It may not have been connected with the wire-strike flight at all and everything may well have been squeaky clean and above board - perhaps the SI will answer those questions.
You can start with name calling if it makes you feel clever but the Catterick crash started with 'high spirits' and 'interesting flying manoeuvres' and ended in tragedy. If the lessons still haven't been learned and the wire strike was the same flight as the one my mate's lad saw then getting it out there is the best thing to do to prevent another poorly disciplined crew taking other people with them.
It may not have been connected with the wire-strike flight at all and everything may well have been squeaky clean and above board - perhaps the SI will answer those questions.
I assume when your “report” is proved to be the dog toffee it is you’ll apologise as publicly as you’ve slated?
I repeat - you should know better.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
A colleague has a house that overlooks Chivenor and his son is an aviation spotter - he told his dad what the Chinook was doing.
You can start with name calling if it makes you feel clever but the Catterick crash started with 'high spirits' and 'interesting flying manoeuvres' and ended in tragedy. If the lessons still haven't been learned and the wire strike was the same flight as the one my mate's lad saw then getting it out there is the best thing to do to prevent another poorly disciplined crew taking other people with them.
It may not have been connected with the wire-strike flight at all and everything may well have been squeaky clean and above board - perhaps the SI will answer those questions.
You can start with name calling if it makes you feel clever but the Catterick crash started with 'high spirits' and 'interesting flying manoeuvres' and ended in tragedy. If the lessons still haven't been learned and the wire strike was the same flight as the one my mate's lad saw then getting it out there is the best thing to do to prevent another poorly disciplined crew taking other people with them.
It may not have been connected with the wire-strike flight at all and everything may well have been squeaky clean and above board - perhaps the SI will answer those questions.
A pilot of your experience knows way better than to take the opinion of a ‘colleague’s son’ and chuck it up here. That’s just doubling down on the first comment about ‘stunting and bunting’.
I don’t know what the Chiv crew were doing and neither do you. All I do know is that authorised advanced handling can take place anywhere where it is deemed safe to do so. A flat airfield seems entirely reasonable to me. That doesn’t imply ill discipline as per the Catterick Puma.
So when the SI exonerates the crew I will apologise but while doubt exists (you can try and deride my source as much as you like) I stand by my comments.
You will understand that 'a pilot of my experience' doesn't put things like that on forums lightly. I have seen too many accidents in my time caused by overconfident pilots trying to show how good they are to worry about offending someone if it prevents the same happening again.
Authorised advanced handling is one thing - display manoeuvres is another.
Even in isolation, the wire-strike asks questions about operating heights unless this set of triple 11KvA was strung across a valley.
I just get the feeling you are protesting too much.
You will understand that 'a pilot of my experience' doesn't put things like that on forums lightly. I have seen too many accidents in my time caused by overconfident pilots trying to show how good they are to worry about offending someone if it prevents the same happening again.
Authorised advanced handling is one thing - display manoeuvres is another.
Even in isolation, the wire-strike asks questions about operating heights unless this set of triple 11KvA was strung across a valley.
I just get the feeling you are protesting too much.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
So when the SI exonerates the crew I will apologise but while doubt exists (you can try and deride my source as much as you like) I stand by my comments.
You will understand that 'a pilot of my experience' doesn't put things like that on forums lightly. I have seen too many accidents in my time caused by overconfident pilots trying to show how good they are to worry about offending someone if it prevents the same happening again.
Authorised advanced handling is one thing - display manoeuvres is another.
Even in isolation, the wire-strike asks questions about operating heights unless this set of triple 11KvA was strung across a valley.
I just get the feeling you are protesting too much.
You will understand that 'a pilot of my experience' doesn't put things like that on forums lightly. I have seen too many accidents in my time caused by overconfident pilots trying to show how good they are to worry about offending someone if it prevents the same happening again.
Authorised advanced handling is one thing - display manoeuvres is another.
Even in isolation, the wire-strike asks questions about operating heights unless this set of triple 11KvA was strung across a valley.
I just get the feeling you are protesting too much.
Which bit of 'I stand by my comments' did you not understand?
I can apologise to the wirestrike crew for the allegation of stunting and bunting at Chiv - it was a completely different crew according to CADS but the Captain's name (Chiv aircraft) didn't come as a surprise.
The location of the wirestrike is rather obvious due to the SAROPs red circle centered on it - their min height has been blocked out though................
To be fair the wires are strung across a valley but they are marked.
The location of the wirestrike is rather obvious due to the SAROPs red circle centered on it - their min height has been blocked out though................
To be fair the wires are strung across a valley but they are marked.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I can apologise to the wirestrike crew for the allegation of stunting and bunting at Chiv - it was a completely different crew according to CADS but the Captain's name (Chiv aircraft) didn't come as a surprise.
The location of the wirestrike is rather obvious due to the SAROPs red circle centered on it - their min height has been blocked out though................
To be fair the wires are strung across a valley but they are marked.
The location of the wirestrike is rather obvious due to the SAROPs red circle centered on it - their min height has been blocked out though................
To be fair the wires are strung across a valley but they are marked.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
(you can try and deride my source as much as you like) I stand by my comments
So much for your impeccable sources then. Quite sad really.
I have acknowledged the wirestrike aircraft was not the 'stunting' aircraft but my colleague's son has photographic evidence of the aircraft 'manoeuvring' at Chiv so my source stands.
What will be sad is if there is the same 'cowboy' culture that existed in the Puma force not so long ago.
I'm sure the SI will determine if the wirestrike aircraft was operating legally or not.
What will be sad is if there is the same 'cowboy' culture that existed in the Puma force not so long ago.
I'm sure the SI will determine if the wirestrike aircraft was operating legally or not.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,836
Received 2,803 Likes
on
1,193 Posts
Ahhh demonstrating a Chinook to the locals... My first recollection was a certain Australian arriving at Upavon from down in the valley and then cranking it around the big house.... I seem to remember that got the phone ringing... sorry bit of a drift 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I have acknowledged the wirestrike aircraft was not the 'stunting' aircraft but my colleague's son has photographic evidence of the aircraft 'manoeuvring' at Chiv so my source stands.
What will be sad is if there is the same 'cowboy' culture that existed in the Puma force not so long ago.
I'm sure the SI will determine if the wirestrike aircraft was operating legally or not.
What will be sad is if there is the same 'cowboy' culture that existed in the Puma force not so long ago.
I'm sure the SI will determine if the wirestrike aircraft was operating legally or not.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I have acknowledged the wirestrike aircraft was not the 'stunting' aircraft but my colleague's son has photographic evidence of the aircraft 'manoeuvring' at Chiv so my source stands.
What will be sad is if there is the same 'cowboy' culture that existed in the Puma force not so long ago.
I'm sure the SI will determine if the wirestrike aircraft was operating legally or not.
What will be sad is if there is the same 'cowboy' culture that existed in the Puma force not so long ago.
I'm sure the SI will determine if the wirestrike aircraft was operating legally or not.
You’ve just thrown a second crew straight under the bus. Perhaps if you have ‘evidence’ and you are that concerned, then you should report them rather than post on an anonymous public forum? To quote one of your earlier posts you are not ‘getting it out there’ by accusing crews on PPRuNe....
Throwing the crew under the bus??? really? If I were still in the military I might be tempted to ring a mate or two to pass on a gypsy's warning but Pprune can fulfill the same function. far better to get someone to have a quiet word than make a formal complaint that can't be withdrawn.
I really hope you are not eligible for jury service.
If you are flying low level in the modern military and don't assume that everyone watching has a camera then you are very naive.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
what a strange comment - don't you think Flight Safety is important then? If you saw a picture of an aircraft that had clearly hit very low wires, would you not ask questions of the crew? Similarly, having done plenty of 'advanced handling' as well as display manouevres, I know how easy it is to blur the boundaries between the two and let enthusiasm get the better of good judgement.
If you are flying low level in the modern military and don't assume that everyone watching has a camera then you are very naive.
If you are flying low level in the modern military and don't assume that everyone watching has a camera then you are very naive.
I was referring to your propensity to convict/condemn without factual evidence.
However, as I said, the SI will exonerate the crew if there is nothing to criticise so why get so out of shape about a fat old crab taking an interest?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
that's because you assume I don't have any evidence for the Chiv aircraft. The picture of the wirestrike aircraft asks far more questions, as does the removal of their min height on CADs for the legs.
However, as I said, the SI will exonerate the crew if there is nothing to criticise so why get so out of shape about a fat old crab taking an interest?
However, as I said, the SI will exonerate the crew if there is nothing to criticise so why get so out of shape about a fat old crab taking an interest?
Or put in a formal complaint....
Or apologise for the second time today....
Still a whole lot of protesting from those who believe neither crew did anything wrong - if you are so sure, why keep going on about it?
Not quite so - I acknowledged the Chiv aircraft was not the wirestrike aircraft but that was after confirming that through CADs. Any photographic evidence will remain in the private domain - would you defenders of the crew really want a video posted on here?
My colleague's son (who has grown up around helicopters all his life) actually said to his dad 'Was it a display crew practising their routine?' And this is a young man who has seen a few Chinook displays.
If there is nothing to see here, stop protesting their innocence.
If there is something to see, then have a word with the crew not to be so stupid - North Devon is full of grockles all armed with phones who would like nothing better than to post some 'punchy' helicopter flying on social media.
You previously admitted that your "evidence" was wrong.
My colleague's son (who has grown up around helicopters all his life) actually said to his dad 'Was it a display crew practising their routine?' And this is a young man who has seen a few Chinook displays.
If there is nothing to see here, stop protesting their innocence.
If there is something to see, then have a word with the crew not to be so stupid - North Devon is full of grockles all armed with phones who would like nothing better than to post some 'punchy' helicopter flying on social media.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Still a whole lot of protesting from those who believe neither crew did anything wrong - if you are so sure, why keep going on about it?
Not quite so - I acknowledged the Chiv aircraft was not the wirestrike aircraft but that was after confirming that through CADs. Any photographic evidence will remain in the private domain - would you defenders of the crew really want a video posted on here?
My colleague's son (who has grown up around helicopters all his life) actually said to his dad 'Was it a display crew practising their routine?' And this is a young man who has seen a few Chinook displays.
If there is nothing to see here, stop protesting their innocence.
If there is something to see, then have a word with the crew not to be so stupid - North Devon is full of grockles all armed with phones who would like nothing better than to post some 'punchy' helicopter flying on social media.
Not quite so - I acknowledged the Chiv aircraft was not the wirestrike aircraft but that was after confirming that through CADs. Any photographic evidence will remain in the private domain - would you defenders of the crew really want a video posted on here?
My colleague's son (who has grown up around helicopters all his life) actually said to his dad 'Was it a display crew practising their routine?' And this is a young man who has seen a few Chinook displays.
If there is nothing to see here, stop protesting their innocence.
If there is something to see, then have a word with the crew not to be so stupid - North Devon is full of grockles all armed with phones who would like nothing better than to post some 'punchy' helicopter flying on social media.
3 options.......
Crab is not eligible for jury service due to things he's done in the past. A good mate told me so.
At least he thinks it might have been Crab - it certainly looked quite like him.
I think it's important to get this out there - if i'm wrong then i will apologise (sort of)
But if there's nothing to see here I'm sure Crab will not protest.
(To be clear - This is a tongue in cheek post to point out certain double standards)
At least he thinks it might have been Crab - it certainly looked quite like him.
I think it's important to get this out there - if i'm wrong then i will apologise (sort of)
But if there's nothing to see here I'm sure Crab will not protest.
(To be clear - This is a tongue in cheek post to point out certain double standards)
I'd like to see an answer to the most pertinent post here, Distant Voice's question about the ALARP statement. From other posts it's obvious that the "reasonably practicable" bit hasn't been pursued with any vigour, with many years between seemingly ad hoc trials. Why no structured approach to 'pulling through' the technology? (It's ok, I know the answer, and it's nothing to do with money).
Meanwhile, perhaps the mods could shut down once and for all those who habitually play the man, not the ball. It's spoiling the forum. Banter is fine, but personal attacks divert from what could have been a tragedy.
Remember, 'rumours' first mooted here have explained many accidents/incidents over the years.
Meanwhile, perhaps the mods could shut down once and for all those who habitually play the man, not the ball. It's spoiling the forum. Banter is fine, but personal attacks divert from what could have been a tragedy.
Remember, 'rumours' first mooted here have explained many accidents/incidents over the years.