What would you do about this idiot?
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Big Hilly,
Concerning your hypothetical scenarios, in virtually all those cases I think I'd talk to the person about it. After all, he/she is a mate. I would be concerned to try to get them to change their behaviour, which would make a lot more sense than either shopping them or turning a blind eye. If that didn't work, then I'd have to decide what to do next...but that would depend on their response to my concern...and I'm talking about concern, not confrontation.
IMHO. that sort of approach usually works best. Not that I always do it very well. When I tried to do something about a friend who was developing a serious drinking problem, she lost her temper and didn't speak to me for months. Mind you, she did stop drinking so much too. I think I've learned since then not to be too blunt...or maybe to be blunt, but gently.
Concerning your hypothetical scenarios, in virtually all those cases I think I'd talk to the person about it. After all, he/she is a mate. I would be concerned to try to get them to change their behaviour, which would make a lot more sense than either shopping them or turning a blind eye. If that didn't work, then I'd have to decide what to do next...but that would depend on their response to my concern...and I'm talking about concern, not confrontation.
IMHO. that sort of approach usually works best. Not that I always do it very well. When I tried to do something about a friend who was developing a serious drinking problem, she lost her temper and didn't speak to me for months. Mind you, she did stop drinking so much too. I think I've learned since then not to be too blunt...or maybe to be blunt, but gently.
Peoples' Champion!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whirly,
As always, an excellent post. BUT, what if the person in the scenarios was not a friend but someone whom you had never met? Would it change your response or would you still deal with it in the same way?
BH
As always, an excellent post. BUT, what if the person in the scenarios was not a friend but someone whom you had never met? Would it change your response or would you still deal with it in the same way?
BH
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BH
Dare I add a little more to Saab's point without incurring your great wrath?
You did a similar thing on a previous thread where you made a very valid point, in a reasonably moderate way, under a very provocative title. Unfortunately many people concentrated more on the provocation than the point that was made.
I am not criticising, as Saab isn't, I think that we are both saying that you could make your very valid and valuable thoughts have more impact if you left out the eye-catching hyperbole.
Anyway...your call
Timothy
Dare I add a little more to Saab's point without incurring your great wrath?
You did a similar thing on a previous thread where you made a very valid point, in a reasonably moderate way, under a very provocative title. Unfortunately many people concentrated more on the provocation than the point that was made.
I am not criticising, as Saab isn't, I think that we are both saying that you could make your very valid and valuable thoughts have more impact if you left out the eye-catching hyperbole.
Anyway...your call
Timothy
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I usually am pretty laid back about what people do, unless it endangers others.
I will report a burglary in progress, I would report dangerous driving and I would stop a mate from driving home over the limit.
I think I would have to apply the same principles to someone who was clearly doing something dangerous when flying, although I do accept that the current 'system' whereby the investigator is also the prosecutor is not ideal.
If someone did something which did seem 'less clever' and I was in the opportunity to have a chat about it then I would do so although it has to be said that there are a fair few people in aviation who's egos are a bit too big to accept any comments or criticism.
Contrary to what others have written on this thread before I find that those with more experience are usually the more perceptive variety of aviators.
As with most things in life, the longer you're around the more you can accept and admit that you don't know it all!
FD
I will report a burglary in progress, I would report dangerous driving and I would stop a mate from driving home over the limit.
I think I would have to apply the same principles to someone who was clearly doing something dangerous when flying, although I do accept that the current 'system' whereby the investigator is also the prosecutor is not ideal.
If someone did something which did seem 'less clever' and I was in the opportunity to have a chat about it then I would do so although it has to be said that there are a fair few people in aviation who's egos are a bit too big to accept any comments or criticism.
Contrary to what others have written on this thread before I find that those with more experience are usually the more perceptive variety of aviators.
As with most things in life, the longer you're around the more you can accept and admit that you don't know it all!
FD
Peoples' Champion!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Timothy,
Fair point indeed, my friend. But I thought I'd been fairly calm this time ‘round. . . .
Either way, it's brought up some valuable points and has been extremely interesting.
BH
Fair point indeed, my friend. But I thought I'd been fairly calm this time ‘round. . . .
Either way, it's brought up some valuable points and has been extremely interesting.
BH
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Enniskillen
Age: 67
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BH
I think you were right to post the information and you were right not to report the pilot.
I remember years ago looking up to some of the "low flyers" and listening to their stories.
I managed to get by without flying too much with any of them and now quite a few are not around anymore.
It became a guessing game when we heard of a local aircraft crash as to which one of about 6 were involved. I am sure most areas have a few idiots.
I would like to think that posts on this forum helps young pilots to stay safe by taking the advice of those who have been around a while
TR
I think you were right to post the information and you were right not to report the pilot.
I remember years ago looking up to some of the "low flyers" and listening to their stories.
I managed to get by without flying too much with any of them and now quite a few are not around anymore.
It became a guessing game when we heard of a local aircraft crash as to which one of about 6 were involved. I am sure most areas have a few idiots.
I would like to think that posts on this forum helps young pilots to stay safe by taking the advice of those who have been around a while
TR
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think you were right to post the information and you were right not to report the pilot...I remember years ago looking up to some of the "low flyers"...quite a few are not around anymore.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Enniskillen
Age: 67
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HWD
My post on page 4
"I would drop the owner a nice polite note to inform him that he or whoever was using his aircraft seemed to be a bit low close to the motorway and that some "anti" might report him".
I would try to do something about it but not involve the CAA
TR
My post on page 4
"I would drop the owner a nice polite note to inform him that he or whoever was using his aircraft seemed to be a bit low close to the motorway and that some "anti" might report him".
I would try to do something about it but not involve the CAA
TR
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, concerning the hypothetical scenarios again, but with a stranger, not a friend...
I'd certainly do something about the drinking and driving. Maybe not once, but if he made a habit of it, I'd report him. Since nobody could do anything at that point because it's heresay, I might try to do something useful, like persuade his friends, wife, mother or anyone he might listen to, to stop him. If someone was killed I'd very definitely report him (or her), and be willing to stand up in court if necessary.
The hard core porn? I tend to think what people do in private is their own business, however distasteful. If it concerns kids, it's even more distasteful. But I don't know for certain that it leads to harming anyone. It may be against the law, but to me, that's not the point. I might mention it, so that he knew that I knew, but no more, unless it seemed that he might do more than just look at pictures...
Low level flying. I think our low level flying rules go over the top. I've been in the US, flying legally at 200-300 ft...in helicopters, don't know if f/w rules are the same there or not. It didn't do anyone any harm, it wasn't dangerous, and often that's the case here. If it was a one-off, I'd probably ignore it. If it happened regularly, I'd mention it to someone the guy/gal might be inclined to listen to...flying instructor, airfield manager, or whoever. If there was an accident? This gets complicated. To what extent are you responsible if an accident is caused by something you do, but which you didn't directly cause? If I walk naked down the hard shoulder and an accident occurs, was it my fault? If I have a super-expensive flashy car that everyone gawks at and the staring and lack of attention to driving causes an accident, is that my fault?
I think this last example demonstrates clearly the reason for the differing opinions on this thread. Low flying is not dangerous, in and of itself, all the time, by every pilot. It just happens to be against the law in the UK. And I personally would ALWAYS do something about things which are dangerous or could harm others, even if they're legal (mild neglect of animals falls into this category, and I've made enemies as a result in the past, and I don't care). I won't step in just because something is against the law; sometimes, IMHO, the law is an ass. Low flying is a borderline case; hence the rather (I hope uncharacteristically) woolly thinking in this post.
This is my thinking so far. But none of this is clear-cut black and white, as you know. If I manage to come to a clearer view, I'll let you know.
I'd certainly do something about the drinking and driving. Maybe not once, but if he made a habit of it, I'd report him. Since nobody could do anything at that point because it's heresay, I might try to do something useful, like persuade his friends, wife, mother or anyone he might listen to, to stop him. If someone was killed I'd very definitely report him (or her), and be willing to stand up in court if necessary.
The hard core porn? I tend to think what people do in private is their own business, however distasteful. If it concerns kids, it's even more distasteful. But I don't know for certain that it leads to harming anyone. It may be against the law, but to me, that's not the point. I might mention it, so that he knew that I knew, but no more, unless it seemed that he might do more than just look at pictures...
Low level flying. I think our low level flying rules go over the top. I've been in the US, flying legally at 200-300 ft...in helicopters, don't know if f/w rules are the same there or not. It didn't do anyone any harm, it wasn't dangerous, and often that's the case here. If it was a one-off, I'd probably ignore it. If it happened regularly, I'd mention it to someone the guy/gal might be inclined to listen to...flying instructor, airfield manager, or whoever. If there was an accident? This gets complicated. To what extent are you responsible if an accident is caused by something you do, but which you didn't directly cause? If I walk naked down the hard shoulder and an accident occurs, was it my fault? If I have a super-expensive flashy car that everyone gawks at and the staring and lack of attention to driving causes an accident, is that my fault?
I think this last example demonstrates clearly the reason for the differing opinions on this thread. Low flying is not dangerous, in and of itself, all the time, by every pilot. It just happens to be against the law in the UK. And I personally would ALWAYS do something about things which are dangerous or could harm others, even if they're legal (mild neglect of animals falls into this category, and I've made enemies as a result in the past, and I don't care). I won't step in just because something is against the law; sometimes, IMHO, the law is an ass. Low flying is a borderline case; hence the rather (I hope uncharacteristically) woolly thinking in this post.
This is my thinking so far. But none of this is clear-cut black and white, as you know. If I manage to come to a clearer view, I'll let you know.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi BH I have been following this thread with interest
To report or not to report, that is the question, and probably one of the most tricky ones to answer as well!
For many years I was the holder of a 'red card'. That is a an 'Authorisation Card' issued by the CAA to inspect documents, enter aircraft, prevent flight etc for flight safety reasons (not financial). This 'card' expired a couple of years ago and I did not bother to renew it for one simple reason. It was always difficult to decide when to use it and when not to. In the end I never actually used it in anger at all. I much preferred the more gentlemanly alternative of have good natter off the record.
Authorised officers and officials have it easier than yourself in that they have the power to question the alleged offender and gather the facts before deciding a course of action. I normally found that after a damn good 'fact gathering session' I had actually got my point across to the offender and could drop the subject.
A quiet word to the register owner/operator would be my advice. Unfortunately if you get a less than responsive reply you are then left with a decision that has become more difficult. That is to either drop the subject and therefore feel you have failed in your task, or notify the authorities which lets face it, nobody really wants to do.
Good luck with whichever way you go....
SATCO Biggin
To report or not to report, that is the question, and probably one of the most tricky ones to answer as well!
For many years I was the holder of a 'red card'. That is a an 'Authorisation Card' issued by the CAA to inspect documents, enter aircraft, prevent flight etc for flight safety reasons (not financial). This 'card' expired a couple of years ago and I did not bother to renew it for one simple reason. It was always difficult to decide when to use it and when not to. In the end I never actually used it in anger at all. I much preferred the more gentlemanly alternative of have good natter off the record.
Authorised officers and officials have it easier than yourself in that they have the power to question the alleged offender and gather the facts before deciding a course of action. I normally found that after a damn good 'fact gathering session' I had actually got my point across to the offender and could drop the subject.
A quiet word to the register owner/operator would be my advice. Unfortunately if you get a less than responsive reply you are then left with a decision that has become more difficult. That is to either drop the subject and therefore feel you have failed in your task, or notify the authorities which lets face it, nobody really wants to do.
Good luck with whichever way you go....
SATCO Biggin
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: DNMM/UK
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whirlybird,
I beg to differ with your opinion. Low flying is very dangerous and the dangers are reduced when the pilot recieves adequate training. PPL(A) training includes low level nav but it isn't to train us to fly at low level but to give awareness of the potential dangers if we find ourselves stuck at L/L e.g in low cloud base. Like aerobatics, Low level flying is dangerous and should only be attempted by those trained to do so, e.g military pilots.
Low level flying is the main factor in the high level of noise complaints and traffic conflicts in general aviation.
I think it is disturbing that people think that they can break the law just because they think it is not dangerous.
I still believe that in that every pilot has a duty to report ANY practice that is deemed dangerous or potentially dangerous to the necessary authorities. It makes me laugh when people think that they are capable of carrying out their own investigations. I think the CAA have trained investigators and the necessary resources (in this case radar tapes could prove helpful) to carry out proper investigations. Despite their reputation, i would rather have the CAA carry out an investigation than some know-all PPL.
Aviation Rule No.1- You can break any rule in the interest of safety
Aviation Rule No.2- Legal doesn't mean safe, illegal doesn't mean unsafe
Aviation Rule No.3- Do not attempt anything you have not being PROPERLY trained to do e.g L/Level flying, aerobatics, fixing or flying aircraft, aviation investigation.
Capt. Manuvar
I beg to differ with your opinion. Low flying is very dangerous and the dangers are reduced when the pilot recieves adequate training. PPL(A) training includes low level nav but it isn't to train us to fly at low level but to give awareness of the potential dangers if we find ourselves stuck at L/L e.g in low cloud base. Like aerobatics, Low level flying is dangerous and should only be attempted by those trained to do so, e.g military pilots.
Low level flying is the main factor in the high level of noise complaints and traffic conflicts in general aviation.
I think it is disturbing that people think that they can break the law just because they think it is not dangerous.
I still believe that in that every pilot has a duty to report ANY practice that is deemed dangerous or potentially dangerous to the necessary authorities. It makes me laugh when people think that they are capable of carrying out their own investigations. I think the CAA have trained investigators and the necessary resources (in this case radar tapes could prove helpful) to carry out proper investigations. Despite their reputation, i would rather have the CAA carry out an investigation than some know-all PPL.
Aviation Rule No.1- You can break any rule in the interest of safety
Aviation Rule No.2- Legal doesn't mean safe, illegal doesn't mean unsafe
Aviation Rule No.3- Do not attempt anything you have not being PROPERLY trained to do e.g L/Level flying, aerobatics, fixing or flying aircraft, aviation investigation.
Capt. Manuvar
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
Captain M, yours is the most sensible reply that I have read. In an old thread about a low flying ac near the lakes, a lot of people were very strong willed pushing the "chill pill". Your statement about being illegal but not unsafe is spot on. As an ex military helo instructor, teaching LLNav down to 50'/140 kts, I now COULD do it but DON'T do it because it is ILLEGAL!!!!! These people cause complaints and deserve everything they get. Flying Lawyer, defend away, I agree you can't judge height easily. But if they did do it, take the licence. Rant over.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTT,
Although, due to the difference in how these matters get dealt with by the authorities the analogy is not 100% accurate, I would like to put it to you that following on that logic, you would take away everyone's driving licence if they were done for speeding?
Look forward to your reply.
FD
Although, due to the difference in how these matters get dealt with by the authorities the analogy is not 100% accurate, I would like to put it to you that following on that logic, you would take away everyone's driving licence if they were done for speeding?
Look forward to your reply.
FD
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Who cares? ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 676
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Capt. Manuvar
I, too, agree with all your posts.
If people would follow the rules that exist, we wouldn't need new ones! It may only take one or two isolated incidents to make the powers that be tighten the rules and make life for GA even more restrictive!!
Yes, it's very difficult to judge heights... but if the plane was so low that Big Hilly and his friends could read the registration from a moving vehicle, then it was too low!
and possibly some of the other motorists reported the incident...
Westy, a bit surprised at some of the postings...
I, too, agree with all your posts.
If people would follow the rules that exist, we wouldn't need new ones! It may only take one or two isolated incidents to make the powers that be tighten the rules and make life for GA even more restrictive!!
Yes, it's very difficult to judge heights... but if the plane was so low that Big Hilly and his friends could read the registration from a moving vehicle, then it was too low!
and possibly some of the other motorists reported the incident...
Westy, a bit surprised at some of the postings...
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt M wrote:
Like aerobatics, Low level flying is dangerous
I'm sure he talks b@llocks, too.
Aerobatics are not inherently dangerous, low level flying is not inherently dangerous - both need far more preparation, currency and caution than straight and at FL45.
I don't low fly - but several times a week F15s and RAF jets scream over my strip at 250' - is it dangerous? No! Is it a bloody nuisance and does it frighten my livestock? Yes.
I flew three times this evening - once on my own aerobatting down to 500' whilst finalising my DA approval sequence. The other two trips were with pax - one a S&L "tour of the bay" at 1800', the other an intro to basic positive aerobatic maneouvers at 4000'+
None of the above was as dangerous as moving a particularly fractious bull or even a Saturday night out in Norwich's Riverside.
This thread is reverting to type - some folk want to be mini-airline captains driving their spamcans, others LEGALLY try and explore different facets of aviation.
Stik
Like aerobatics, Low level flying is dangerous
I'm sure he talks b@llocks, too.
Aerobatics are not inherently dangerous, low level flying is not inherently dangerous - both need far more preparation, currency and caution than straight and at FL45.
I don't low fly - but several times a week F15s and RAF jets scream over my strip at 250' - is it dangerous? No! Is it a bloody nuisance and does it frighten my livestock? Yes.
I flew three times this evening - once on my own aerobatting down to 500' whilst finalising my DA approval sequence. The other two trips were with pax - one a S&L "tour of the bay" at 1800', the other an intro to basic positive aerobatic maneouvers at 4000'+
None of the above was as dangerous as moving a particularly fractious bull or even a Saturday night out in Norwich's Riverside.
This thread is reverting to type - some folk want to be mini-airline captains driving their spamcans, others LEGALLY try and explore different facets of aviation.
Stik
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Who cares? ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 676
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Monoccock
self critical? what's self critical about it? explain please....
Low flying may be fun, and in some cases may even be safe enough. But there's a time and place for everything and over a busy motorway is surely not the place! Over some obstacle free farmland, ok... but not over a motorway or anywhere which endangers others. It's as simple as that.
But the subject of this thread was/is whether or not to tattle to the authorities or not. I'm afraid there is no solution to that because each case most be individually considered..... they cannot be generalised.
Westy
self critical? what's self critical about it? explain please....
Low flying may be fun, and in some cases may even be safe enough. But there's a time and place for everything and over a busy motorway is surely not the place! Over some obstacle free farmland, ok... but not over a motorway or anywhere which endangers others. It's as simple as that.
But the subject of this thread was/is whether or not to tattle to the authorities or not. I'm afraid there is no solution to that because each case most be individually considered..... they cannot be generalised.
Westy
'just another atco'
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LTC Swanwick
Age: 60
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This threat has fascinated me because I am genuinely surprised at many people's perceptions/assumptions about the original incident.
If I was driving down the M40 and saw a very low flying Condor, my initial thoughts would be that the aircraft was in some sort of trouble. This is assuming that it wasn't operating out of an airfield or farm strip that I was aware of. Even, as BH describes, the aircraft continued along the motorway for a period of time, I would still be concerned for the welfare of the aircraft and the crew rather than thinking of any malicious intent. In my experience, very few people push the rules or break the rules in the way described just for the sake of it and I feel sure there is some perfectly reasonable explanation. I, for one, would be very keen to be reassured that the aircraft and crew are safe and well rather than discussing the rights and wrongs of reporting them.
Not trying to be self-righteous - maybe just a controller thing!
If I was driving down the M40 and saw a very low flying Condor, my initial thoughts would be that the aircraft was in some sort of trouble. This is assuming that it wasn't operating out of an airfield or farm strip that I was aware of. Even, as BH describes, the aircraft continued along the motorway for a period of time, I would still be concerned for the welfare of the aircraft and the crew rather than thinking of any malicious intent. In my experience, very few people push the rules or break the rules in the way described just for the sake of it and I feel sure there is some perfectly reasonable explanation. I, for one, would be very keen to be reassured that the aircraft and crew are safe and well rather than discussing the rights and wrongs of reporting them.
Not trying to be self-righteous - maybe just a controller thing!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
FlyinDutch, you are absolutely right... I didn't make the comparison with driving too fast, which is just as illegal. Mind you, I got a speeding ticket last year. First in 20 years accident free driving (ish). Now, I stick to the limits because I can't afford to lose my licence. So what do we do, possibly give an endorsment valid for a period of time which is in effect, "you have had your last chance and are on probation for X months"? That would probably work!!