What would you do about this idiot?
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 630
Likes: 2
From: UK
At great risk of playing devil's avacado,
The facts as to why the Condor was allegedly flying lower than might be normal above the M40 are unknown, yet their are cries of report him to the CAA.
A few months ago, two aircraft blatantly contravened a TRA and carried out part of an extremely low level aerobatic sequence over members of the public and parked aircraft when apparently given permission for a 'run and break' and everyone was up in arms that anything should be done about them!! Bizarre!
BH
As for the 'having a word with him' bit, you have the name and address of the registered owner, who was not necessarily the pilot.
What if one of your fellow motorists on the M40 reported you to the Police for failing to pay proper attention to the job in hand whilst driving down the motorway - you even managed to read the registration! How would you feel?
As the others said, chill pill time.
The facts as to why the Condor was allegedly flying lower than might be normal above the M40 are unknown, yet their are cries of report him to the CAA.
A few months ago, two aircraft blatantly contravened a TRA and carried out part of an extremely low level aerobatic sequence over members of the public and parked aircraft when apparently given permission for a 'run and break' and everyone was up in arms that anything should be done about them!! Bizarre!
BH
As for the 'having a word with him' bit, you have the name and address of the registered owner, who was not necessarily the pilot.
What if one of your fellow motorists on the M40 reported you to the Police for failing to pay proper attention to the job in hand whilst driving down the motorway - you even managed to read the registration! How would you feel?
As the others said, chill pill time.
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 2,913
Likes: 0
From: London
Big Hilly
Ideally: Option 1
If you're unable to keep your urge to interfere in check, then: Option 3. If you're genuinely interested in the image of GA and/or flight safety rather than just giving him the benefit of your experience (whatever that is) you might want to write your letter in a manner which sounds less bombastic and 'pain in the rear' than your post.
I wonder if the flying did harm the reputation of GA? I doubt if the people slowing down to look were getting as hot under the collar as you. It's just possible they were enjoying looking at the aeroplane.
Blood still boiling since 13:20? I hope nobody annoys you when you're flying.
If you really must go for Option 2, please also write to the registered owner and tell him Flying Lawyer is so disgusted by your actions he's offered to defend him free of charge. It would be worth it for the fun of cross-examining you, and testing your ability to estimate heights.
People who advise reporting others to the CAA, often saying the reported pilot has 'nothing to worry about' if he's innocent (or words to that effect) either haven't got the slightest idea of the worry and expense to which such actions put the pilot or, possibly, just don't care.
smarthawke
Agree with you about the above incident.
However, your account of the other incident is a gross distortion of what actually occurred. Don't believe everything the 'powers that be' at the PFA tell you. In particular, don't believe anything that idiot Steve Moody says, or the version put about by some types in the PFA holy of holies who, since the event, have (a) denied that Moody walked off the job in a huff when the Controller on duty didn't agree the pilots had done anything wrong and didn't support moody reporting them and (b) have tried to say Moody wasn't trying to get the pilots in trouble but only trying to protect the PFA.
The pilots agreed to accept a formal caution from the CAA in order to put an end to the matter. They didn't do so because they thought they were guilty of any offence. I wish they'd fought it, mainly because I think they would have been acquitted, but also because I would have enjoyed myself cross-examining the ridiculous Moody.
BTW, I'm not prejudiced against the PFA as an association - some of my best friends are members.
Tudor Owen
Ideally: Option 1
If you're unable to keep your urge to interfere in check, then: Option 3. If you're genuinely interested in the image of GA and/or flight safety rather than just giving him the benefit of your experience (whatever that is) you might want to write your letter in a manner which sounds less bombastic and 'pain in the rear' than your post.
I wonder if the flying did harm the reputation of GA? I doubt if the people slowing down to look were getting as hot under the collar as you. It's just possible they were enjoying looking at the aeroplane.
Blood still boiling since 13:20? I hope nobody annoys you when you're flying.
If you really must go for Option 2, please also write to the registered owner and tell him Flying Lawyer is so disgusted by your actions he's offered to defend him free of charge. It would be worth it for the fun of cross-examining you, and testing your ability to estimate heights.
People who advise reporting others to the CAA, often saying the reported pilot has 'nothing to worry about' if he's innocent (or words to that effect) either haven't got the slightest idea of the worry and expense to which such actions put the pilot or, possibly, just don't care.
smarthawke
Agree with you about the above incident.
However, your account of the other incident is a gross distortion of what actually occurred. Don't believe everything the 'powers that be' at the PFA tell you. In particular, don't believe anything that idiot Steve Moody says, or the version put about by some types in the PFA holy of holies who, since the event, have (a) denied that Moody walked off the job in a huff when the Controller on duty didn't agree the pilots had done anything wrong and didn't support moody reporting them and (b) have tried to say Moody wasn't trying to get the pilots in trouble but only trying to protect the PFA.
The pilots agreed to accept a formal caution from the CAA in order to put an end to the matter. They didn't do so because they thought they were guilty of any offence. I wish they'd fought it, mainly because I think they would have been acquitted, but also because I would have enjoyed myself cross-examining the ridiculous Moody.
BTW, I'm not prejudiced against the PFA as an association - some of my best friends are members.
Tudor Owen
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 0
From: E Anglia
B H
If you've clocked his reg. and have his address, then write to him politely and with not so much invective as you have displayed on this list.
If you get a reply which you feel needs a response, put it on the mantelpiece for a week before you reply.
Then back off and be happy.
Safe flying
Cusco
If you get a reply which you feel needs a response, put it on the mantelpiece for a week before you reply.
Then back off and be happy.
Safe flying
Cusco
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,460
Likes: 0
From: London
I think that maybe some people are being a little hard on BH.
After all, before he did anything, he turned to us, his peers, and asked our joint opinion as to the best course of action, has had a moderate consensus that, if he feels that he must do anything, he should talk to the guy quietly himself, and has agreed to go with that majority view and do what we jointly suggest.
So, give the man a break. He asked our advice, he should be allowed to do that without receiving personal attacks, and is taking it, which shows a deal of good sense and humility.
Timothy
After all, before he did anything, he turned to us, his peers, and asked our joint opinion as to the best course of action, has had a moderate consensus that, if he feels that he must do anything, he should talk to the guy quietly himself, and has agreed to go with that majority view and do what we jointly suggest.
So, give the man a break. He asked our advice, he should be allowed to do that without receiving personal attacks, and is taking it, which shows a deal of good sense and humility.
Timothy
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk
BH (big hump?)
As others far more eloquent and far better qualified than myself (FL/Monocock/Cusco) have suggested similar responses to my initial post, I urge you to calm down and only worry about those things that you can influence.
Stik
edited to acknowledge a cross posting by Timothy - a nice chap but very pinko-liberal
As others far more eloquent and far better qualified than myself (FL/Monocock/Cusco) have suggested similar responses to my initial post, I urge you to calm down and only worry about those things that you can influence.
Stik
edited to acknowledge a cross posting by Timothy - a nice chap but very pinko-liberal
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 382
Likes: 10
From: England
I wouldn't get so wound up about this!
Whatever you do don't report him, that'd be ridiculous.
I agree however that it might be a bit dangerous encase a member of the public wasn't impressed so if you do anything maybe send him a letter telling him he's not helping GA.
Whatever you do don't report him, that'd be ridiculous.
I agree however that it might be a bit dangerous encase a member of the public wasn't impressed so if you do anything maybe send him a letter telling him he's not helping GA.
Thread Starter
Peoples' Champion!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
From: UK
Flying Lawyer,
I would have no wish to be cross-examined by you – your reputation as a lawyer and as an advocate of GA in the UK goes before you and I bow to your far superior experience.
Timothy,
Thank you for your kind and reasoned words.
I have been advised to remove the email received from the character relating to the 'other matter' as SB are ‘onto it’.
The rest of the replies goes only to demonstrate the excellence and enormous diversity that we have here on PPRuNe. Thank you all for your comments.
BH
I would have no wish to be cross-examined by you – your reputation as a lawyer and as an advocate of GA in the UK goes before you and I bow to your far superior experience.
Timothy,
Thank you for your kind and reasoned words.
I have been advised to remove the email received from the character relating to the 'other matter' as SB are ‘onto it’.
The rest of the replies goes only to demonstrate the excellence and enormous diversity that we have here on PPRuNe. Thank you all for your comments.
BH
The Original Whirly
Joined: Feb 1999
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 4,327
Likes: 2
From: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
I can't quite believe this thread...
Big Hilly gets hot under the collar about low flying...
A few other people jump on the bandwagon in agreement...
Others get extremely annoyed at the mere suggestion that the chap should be reported...
Big Hilly accepts all comments entirely reasonably, but that's not enough - annoyance and even insults continue.
For Gawd's sake, guys, what's up with you all? Is it something in the stars at the moment or what?
Either the chap was illegally low flying, or he wasn't.
Either he should be reported, or he shouldn't.
Big Hilly may or may not be able to judge height; Flying Lawyer may or may not be able to prove that he can't.
There wasn't an accident, and nobody died; so far as we know nobody was even upset about it.
I can understand the different opinions, but not the sheer strength of feeling exhibited by so many.
Big Hilly gets hot under the collar about low flying...
A few other people jump on the bandwagon in agreement...
Others get extremely annoyed at the mere suggestion that the chap should be reported...
Big Hilly accepts all comments entirely reasonably, but that's not enough - annoyance and even insults continue.
For Gawd's sake, guys, what's up with you all? Is it something in the stars at the moment or what?
Either the chap was illegally low flying, or he wasn't.
Either he should be reported, or he shouldn't.
Big Hilly may or may not be able to judge height; Flying Lawyer may or may not be able to prove that he can't.
There wasn't an accident, and nobody died; so far as we know nobody was even upset about it.
I can understand the different opinions, but not the sheer strength of feeling exhibited by so many.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
From: 75N 16E
so far as we know nobody was even upset about it
it made me bloody furious and my blood is still boiling
I'd get p*ssed off with someone circling my house at 200', but along a motorway? The danger level is really not that great is it? ("what was that bump?...ooh, I think we've just got a Condor stuck in the grill"), I've seen low flying a/c, but so long as their actions weren't dangerous IMO I wouldn't dream of shopping them. If they were doing aero's over my house at 500' it'd be a different matter though.
You wouldn't believe the number of old biddies who used to complain about the "low flying" helo's when we had an RNAS near where I live. They even winge about the Red Arrows...
EA
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
From: Io
You wouldn't believe the number of old biddies who used to complain about the "low flying" helo's when we had an RNAS near where I live. They even winge about the Red Arrows...
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: Kent, of course!
Ooh, Big Hilly and The Flying Lawyer in court. THAT I would love to see!!!! I know who my money would be on and it wouldn't be the lawyer!
I think I'm one of the few people who actually knows who Big Hilly is. He's justifiably protective about his privacy but I will say this. If there's ANYONE on these forums who is qualified to judge the height of an aircraft from a moving car, then it's him. Years of flying fast jets for the military gives you experience far beyond the likes of Monocock and Sensible's PPL (A)'s!!!
The good grace with which he has taken the abuse and name calling on here (Sensible, if you'd like to have a go at calling him a 'Prick' to his face, I'm fairly sure I can arrange it) is a testament to his utter professionalism and dedication to aviation safety.
If this thread has done nothing else, it has shown several members of the pprune community in their true and rather unpleasant colours.
John
I think I'm one of the few people who actually knows who Big Hilly is. He's justifiably protective about his privacy but I will say this. If there's ANYONE on these forums who is qualified to judge the height of an aircraft from a moving car, then it's him. Years of flying fast jets for the military gives you experience far beyond the likes of Monocock and Sensible's PPL (A)'s!!!
The good grace with which he has taken the abuse and name calling on here (Sensible, if you'd like to have a go at calling him a 'Prick' to his face, I'm fairly sure I can arrange it) is a testament to his utter professionalism and dedication to aviation safety.
If this thread has done nothing else, it has shown several members of the pprune community in their true and rather unpleasant colours.
John
Last edited by Kentish Lad; 29th March 2004 at 08:59.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
From: DNMM/UK
I don't know what history you people have with each other but i must say i'm shocked by some of the responses.
If a pilot intentionally breaks the law without a valid reason then i believe he/she deserves any punishment they get. Rules are created for a reason. These cowboys don't do the image of GA any good. If i had been the one driving down the M40, this debate wouldn't have come up. i am aware that the CAA have an unnecessarily heavy handed approach to prosecution. in the end of the day it is up to the CAA to investigate, that what those exhorbitant fees we pay them are for. If this pilot was within his rights to fly at that height then i believe he would be cleared.
If some tabloid reporter had witnessed this incident, it would have been a different story.
By not reporting alleged ANO infingements, who are we protecting?
Capt. M
If a pilot intentionally breaks the law without a valid reason then i believe he/she deserves any punishment they get. Rules are created for a reason. These cowboys don't do the image of GA any good. If i had been the one driving down the M40, this debate wouldn't have come up. i am aware that the CAA have an unnecessarily heavy handed approach to prosecution. in the end of the day it is up to the CAA to investigate, that what those exhorbitant fees we pay them are for. If this pilot was within his rights to fly at that height then i believe he would be cleared.
If some tabloid reporter had witnessed this incident, it would have been a different story.
By not reporting alleged ANO infingements, who are we protecting?
Capt. M
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
From: South Norfolk, England
Capt. Manuvar
In some ways your aurgument has merit ... but mainly in a political way! It's a bit like the identity card debate, you know, the one that says ... "only those with something to hide would have reason to object to carrying a card"
There can be no end of legitimate reasons for low level flying such as described and without the facts we simply don't know if this pilot was an idiot or not. Ok, like you say ... just report them and let the CAA go about their business, but why? If he was legitimate why bring the CAA down on him causing no end of heartache when a simple letter and request for information may just allay your fears. If he fails to respond or has no good reason for his actions you can then decide to take it further if you see fit.
All
Do we really live in a society where we seem to enjoy getting others into trouble just because we "think" or worse "decide" they are acting out of turn?
If anything, as a pilot you are better placed to realise there "may" have been a reason for his/her "apparent" recklessness. Fear not ... there are enough who know b... all! about flying who may have reported him/her for you anyway!
SS
In some ways your aurgument has merit ... but mainly in a political way! It's a bit like the identity card debate, you know, the one that says ... "only those with something to hide would have reason to object to carrying a card"
There can be no end of legitimate reasons for low level flying such as described and without the facts we simply don't know if this pilot was an idiot or not. Ok, like you say ... just report them and let the CAA go about their business, but why? If he was legitimate why bring the CAA down on him causing no end of heartache when a simple letter and request for information may just allay your fears. If he fails to respond or has no good reason for his actions you can then decide to take it further if you see fit.
All
Do we really live in a society where we seem to enjoy getting others into trouble just because we "think" or worse "decide" they are acting out of turn?
If anything, as a pilot you are better placed to realise there "may" have been a reason for his/her "apparent" recklessness. Fear not ... there are enough who know b... all! about flying who may have reported him/her for you anyway!
SS
Flies for fun
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 789
Likes: 0
From: Wishing it was somewhere sunny!
Quote: "Tis a testament to his utter professionalism and dedication to aviation safety." I think more of a testament to the thought of if not the action of creating unnecesary mischief. I for one would not have given a second thought as to what "action" I could take to make this individuals life more difficult for him/her.
here are far too many self appointed “police” motivated to create trouble, distress and expense for others. Maybe the merits of taking action would be supported IF an individuals flying was either a hazard to other aircraft or property or causing a noise or safety hazard to other persons. It seems from what is reported that there was no more to this incident than somebody who may or may not have been flying at a lower altitude than they should have been. There has been no suggestion that they were at risk of collision or that they were frightening old ladies or horses. It is my view therefore that there is absolutely no reason for any action whatsoever to be taken against the pilot who may in any event been on approach to an airfield private or otherwise. Unless there is a strong case of reporting a pilot in the public interest then surely any action can only be judged as spiteful.
here are far too many self appointed “police” motivated to create trouble, distress and expense for others. Maybe the merits of taking action would be supported IF an individuals flying was either a hazard to other aircraft or property or causing a noise or safety hazard to other persons. It seems from what is reported that there was no more to this incident than somebody who may or may not have been flying at a lower altitude than they should have been. There has been no suggestion that they were at risk of collision or that they were frightening old ladies or horses. It is my view therefore that there is absolutely no reason for any action whatsoever to be taken against the pilot who may in any event been on approach to an airfield private or otherwise. Unless there is a strong case of reporting a pilot in the public interest then surely any action can only be judged as spiteful.
Guest
Posts: n/a
BH
You need to decide what to do - the thing that concerns me is the apparent ease with which you were able to read the registration.
Flying Lawyer may be able to make you look like a fool in court, but that doesn't mean that you are wrong in your estimate - the two things are different.
What if this pilot repeats the act (if it was an act, not borne from necessity,which we do not know), gets it wrong and crashes on to a motorway, causing a major pile up?
If it were me, I would be tempted to pen a short letter to the registered address saying that you observed his/her 'emergency' stating the time and date adding that you were pleased that he/she was able to recover from the engine trouble or whatever caused the descent to low altitude and offer your sincere hope that this person never encounters such a hazardous situation again.
But of course, you must decide what to do.
You need to decide what to do - the thing that concerns me is the apparent ease with which you were able to read the registration.
Flying Lawyer may be able to make you look like a fool in court, but that doesn't mean that you are wrong in your estimate - the two things are different.
What if this pilot repeats the act (if it was an act, not borne from necessity,which we do not know), gets it wrong and crashes on to a motorway, causing a major pile up?
If it were me, I would be tempted to pen a short letter to the registered address saying that you observed his/her 'emergency' stating the time and date adding that you were pleased that he/she was able to recover from the engine trouble or whatever caused the descent to low altitude and offer your sincere hope that this person never encounters such a hazardous situation again.
But of course, you must decide what to do.