Once is stupid, twice is irresponsible.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CJ must have been indulging in Scrumpy. One minute he's worried about kite string round rotor heads, then its a low wing single, and then its too low to get the number.
I suspect it was a seagull and he was just having a bad day. Mind you, I don't like seagulls flying past my bedroom window either.
I object to know it all's shouting their mouths off. Much better to have a quiet word with the person responsible. Ranting here is about as much use as getting a sandwich board with your complaint on it and walking up and down outside your holiday home. I personally would prefer you did that.
ZA
I suspect it was a seagull and he was just having a bad day. Mind you, I don't like seagulls flying past my bedroom window either.
I object to know it all's shouting their mouths off. Much better to have a quiet word with the person responsible. Ranting here is about as much use as getting a sandwich board with your complaint on it and walking up and down outside your holiday home. I personally would prefer you did that.
ZA
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bird strikes can do a massive amount of damage, but you have to be unlucky for it to bring the aircraft down. Though when you hit multiple birds it makes it far worse. I wouldn't want to hit a large flock of herring gulls in anything other than a chieftan tank.
However, most birds are usually not 500ft out to sea, but right over the beach and/or slightly inland. That's where their food is, so there are ways of minimising the risk.
S.O.S has an open invitation to come and see, whilst he's at it, also have a good look at our "webbed feet" - shortly before they connect with his knackers....
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: southeast UK
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't you just love the way these threads degenerate into name calling, mud slinging, Pi** taking and general chest thumping.
The viewpoint that it is 'legal therefore I can do it' is going to be the deathnell of GA in this country.
No it is not going to be reported to the CAA as some kind of alleged breach of the ANO but it is another great tool in the hands of the environmentalists. Residents groups, consultative committees, pressure groups, tree huggers, local councils and all manner of other activists are just waiting for this sort of thing to happen.
The residents go anti, the councillors get onboard to get the votes and the next thing you know any planning application for aviation purposes within a 100 miles gets scuppered.
Been there, got the T shirt. (many times)
The viewpoint that it is 'legal therefore I can do it' is going to be the deathnell of GA in this country.
No it is not going to be reported to the CAA as some kind of alleged breach of the ANO but it is another great tool in the hands of the environmentalists. Residents groups, consultative committees, pressure groups, tree huggers, local councils and all manner of other activists are just waiting for this sort of thing to happen.
The residents go anti, the councillors get onboard to get the votes and the next thing you know any planning application for aviation purposes within a 100 miles gets scuppered.
Been there, got the T shirt. (many times)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Cranfield UK
Age: 70
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low flying in Suffolk
Probably the same aircraft that flew south to north across Pakefield beach at Lowestoft on wed or thurs evening about 1930 local. It was a white low wing aircraft with the standard Piper Cherokee blue and yellow stripes on the tail. It was low about 200 ft above the sea IMHO. I do not consider it was a dangerous flight unless there was an engine failure involved and even then a ditching or beach landing may have been possible by said pilot. I did consider her actions and concluded it was a fun session. Perhaps unwise but I am not convinced that it was illegal at the time I observed this action. As others have said there is a place and time for low flying practice and perhaps over the sea in summer evenings at low water is one of the best??? Just the sort of thing to sit back with a pint and a cornish pasty and deliberate and reminisce of those great summer experiences that we are privileged to generate and relive from time to time?????????
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,609
Received 469 Likes
on
248 Posts
A thought.
Someone exercises a personal choice, takes a known risk, it turns bad and ends up in the drink.
Lifeboat launched. Lifeboat crew are volunteers, no-one forces them to go. They exercise a personal choice, take a known risk.
Is there a difference?
Someone exercises a personal choice, takes a known risk, it turns bad and ends up in the drink.
Lifeboat launched. Lifeboat crew are volunteers, no-one forces them to go. They exercise a personal choice, take a known risk.
Is there a difference?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 84
Posts: 1,434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cornish Jack.
I am afraid I DO get it.
A trivial act of slightly risky flying has allegedly been perpetrated & you have taken it upon yourself to be judge & jury & pronounce the pilot guilty of being a Prat.
Who gave you this authority?
Do you also report people who pass you on the road who you consider to be speeding?
I too have been involved in the business of "picking up the bits" hence the "Crash one". This guy did not kill anyone or any seagulls or puppies. Perhaps his competence & professionalism played a part. I hope he enjoyed his run along your beach, good luck to him. It is called LIVING.
I strongly suggest you take a chill pill, before you are prescribed Atenolol or some such.
I am afraid I DO get it.
A trivial act of slightly risky flying has allegedly been perpetrated & you have taken it upon yourself to be judge & jury & pronounce the pilot guilty of being a Prat.
Who gave you this authority?
Do you also report people who pass you on the road who you consider to be speeding?
I too have been involved in the business of "picking up the bits" hence the "Crash one". This guy did not kill anyone or any seagulls or puppies. Perhaps his competence & professionalism played a part. I hope he enjoyed his run along your beach, good luck to him. It is called LIVING.
I strongly suggest you take a chill pill, before you are prescribed Atenolol or some such.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, most birds are usually not 500ft out to sea, but right over the beach and/or slightly inland. That's where their food is, so there are ways of minimising the risk.
Complete and utter nonsense, anyone familiar with this particular part of the country will know that it is particularly the gulls amongst other large winged beasties, which feed between the shoreline and out to sea.
S.O.S has an open invitation to come and see, whilst he's at it, also have a good look at our "webbed feet" - shortly before they connect with his knackers....
Complete and utter nonsense, anyone familiar with this particular part of the country will know that it is particularly the gulls amongst other large winged beasties, which feed between the shoreline and out to sea.
S.O.S has an open invitation to come and see, whilst he's at it, also have a good look at our "webbed feet" - shortly before they connect with his knackers....
I also used to watch the local banner towers go up and down the coast line at no more than a couple of hundred feet everyday and you know what? They never crashed or died once.
Is low level flying dangerous? Yep, a bit. If things go wrong you have limited your options and that isn't the most sensible thing to do, however all this tub thumping is a load of knackers.
Even if the worst that could have happened, happened, then the only person to be injured or killed is likely to have been the pilot (as long as there weren't passengers on board.)
You can dream up doomsday scenarios until the cows come home, but frankly all that you are doing is turning into the HSE man who walks around his garden extolling how a bamboo stick is potential killer.
Nothing happened, no-one got hurt and this whole thread is a storm in a teacup.
Had they have been a member at one of the clubs I've been responsible for and I saw it, then they'd have got a rollicking. However, I've seen people do far more dangerous things on a daily basis. Many of them supposed aviation professionals with many years experience.
I just find the idea of whinging on here about it laughable. The pilot is unlikely to ever read about it and no action can be taken.
If you want to stop it happening, then get their reg. (they were supposedly close enough for you to have read it with the naked eye) and report it, or go along and have a quiet word with the person responsible.
There are just better things to get your knickers in a twist than this.
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably the same aircraft that flew south to north across Pakefield beach at Lowestoft on wed or thurs evening about 1930 local. It was a white low wing aircraft with the standard Piper Cherokee blue and yellow stripes on the tail.
Why would you want to fly that low
Cheers
Whirls
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I once saw a low flying aircraft, at least 500' horizontally offshore from the beach where I was sitting, hit the mast of a sailing boat that the pilot failed to see.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,609
Received 469 Likes
on
248 Posts
.... the Red Arrow in question thought he'd hit his mate.....
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lifeboat launched. Lifeboat crew are volunteers, no-one forces them to go. They exercise a personal choice, take a known risk.
Is there a difference?
Is there a difference?
ShyTorque
Yes, there's a huge difference, the lifeboat volunteers are highly trained in rescuing people who have had the misfortune to get themselves into bother, or, as is often the case, people who haven't given't a thought to the consequences of what they are doing and every year some of them give up their lives rescuing such folk.
I assume you have the same short sighted attitude about firefighters, paramedics, the UK armed forces and all volunteer rescue services?
Your post is crass and worthy of an apology.
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goatface, sometimes it's only you who reads such things into posts. There's nothing crass about ShyTorque's post; he offers a thought, that's all, and maybe it's a viewpoint not personally held but postulated in the name of debate.
It's a thought with which you obviously disagree but it's nothing so severe that warrants such an outburst.
Cheers
Whirls
It's a thought with which you obviously disagree but it's nothing so severe that warrants such an outburst.
Cheers
Whirls
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
A quick Q - has anyone here seen the results of a crash following a total power-loss at LL?
Course two before mine lost a QFI and his stude in N Yorkshire when their Bulldog's engine gave out at 250'. The stude got away from the aircraft, but died soon after, and before rescuers arrived. The QFI did not get out/survive. Bear in mind that the QFI was trained and auth'd for the sortie - can Cornish Jack's pilot claim that?
I saw the wreckage and debris laid out in a hangar at Leeming.
Course two before mine lost a QFI and his stude in N Yorkshire when their Bulldog's engine gave out at 250'. The stude got away from the aircraft, but died soon after, and before rescuers arrived. The QFI did not get out/survive. Bear in mind that the QFI was trained and auth'd for the sortie - can Cornish Jack's pilot claim that?
I saw the wreckage and debris laid out in a hangar at Leeming.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen the results from a fair few accidents from all sorts of different scenarios, none of them have been pretty.
Losing the donk at low level doesn't necessarily have to have a fatal outcome, but it's a hell of a lot more likely than if it happened at a few thousand feet above something soft.
However, you could make the same argument about flying over water in a single. If it goes wrong, you're usually in trouble.
Losing the donk at low level doesn't necessarily have to have a fatal outcome, but it's a hell of a lot more likely than if it happened at a few thousand feet above something soft.
However, you could make the same argument about flying over water in a single. If it goes wrong, you're usually in trouble.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well airborne I'm not sure of the relevance. 'Getting out' at 250 ft is not an option. Flying the aircraft to arrive on the ground at the usual 40 kts ish should mean not much more risk than any forced landing.
I say not much as obviously there is much less choice of the landing site - unless you are low level over a beach - when below the mid-tide mark it is all pretty much the same!
I say not much as obviously there is much less choice of the landing site - unless you are low level over a beach - when below the mid-tide mark it is all pretty much the same!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If low level flying is so dangerous then I hope that everyone behaves responsibly and doesn fly below 500'. Love to know how you're going to land though.
I haven't seen anything about the risks of flying low over the sea which don't also apply to over land (birds, masts, etc. all appear over both land and sea).
If the original poster's concern is about engine failure then I'm sure this applies equally to those pilots who do 3-degree glide slope approaches into airfields which have housing estates on the approach.
I haven't seen anything about the risks of flying low over the sea which don't also apply to over land (birds, masts, etc. all appear over both land and sea).
If the original poster's concern is about engine failure then I'm sure this applies equally to those pilots who do 3-degree glide slope approaches into airfields which have housing estates on the approach.
Thread Starter
Well, Chaps and Chapesses - what a fascinating little exercise this has been, to be sure.
I have had no involvement in the GA world previously, other than picking up their relatively frequent 'trade' offerings in the S&R world. Most of those, from memory, would provoke the same thought - How COULD this have happened - how could this person have carried on into deteriorating conditions below safety height? How could they get themselves into a position such that there was no recoverable option? How could ... etc? Is the 'half crown/ sixpence' syndrome missing from GA pilots? (you may need to be pre-decimal to understand that one)
Now, to paraphrase my reply to Crash One, I get it, I really do. Demonstrably, among the GA fraternity there appear to be those who have no idea of the fact that aviation is an extremely unforgiving environment. There are, equally those who DO understand the potential problems and cater for them. This is not just a non-military thing. I have lost too many friends and acquaintances in the Services from just such lack of judgement to think that. The Flight Safety statistics make grim reading but they ARE available and, if you have enough sense to read and understand them, it might, one day make the difference to whether you live or die ... Yep, it's that stark!! Apart from not understanding the threat to themselves, it appears that there are an unfortunately large number who don't give a fig for other people's safety. Again, not limited to the GA fraternity but the potential for destruction is so much greater when the 'weapon' is an aircraft. This truism will be 'Granny's egg sucking lesson' for SOME of the contributors but will provoke yet more ' How dare he? Wind your neck in, etc., responses from others.
Well, so be it. While the Forum title may appear to exclude this particular niche, ALL aviation operates via the same aerodynamic laws and in similar environments. Private flying is not immune from the consequences of its actions any more than the professionals. Forget that and it will remind you - painfully!
So, we all make our own choices - mine is that I shall return to the areas where safety is considered to be both necessary and rewarding and leave those of you who feel that it is an intrusion into your personal liberty to your own devices. It's a shame, but "There's none so blind etc."
I have had no involvement in the GA world previously, other than picking up their relatively frequent 'trade' offerings in the S&R world. Most of those, from memory, would provoke the same thought - How COULD this have happened - how could this person have carried on into deteriorating conditions below safety height? How could they get themselves into a position such that there was no recoverable option? How could ... etc? Is the 'half crown/ sixpence' syndrome missing from GA pilots? (you may need to be pre-decimal to understand that one)
Now, to paraphrase my reply to Crash One, I get it, I really do. Demonstrably, among the GA fraternity there appear to be those who have no idea of the fact that aviation is an extremely unforgiving environment. There are, equally those who DO understand the potential problems and cater for them. This is not just a non-military thing. I have lost too many friends and acquaintances in the Services from just such lack of judgement to think that. The Flight Safety statistics make grim reading but they ARE available and, if you have enough sense to read and understand them, it might, one day make the difference to whether you live or die ... Yep, it's that stark!! Apart from not understanding the threat to themselves, it appears that there are an unfortunately large number who don't give a fig for other people's safety. Again, not limited to the GA fraternity but the potential for destruction is so much greater when the 'weapon' is an aircraft. This truism will be 'Granny's egg sucking lesson' for SOME of the contributors but will provoke yet more ' How dare he? Wind your neck in, etc., responses from others.
Well, so be it. While the Forum title may appear to exclude this particular niche, ALL aviation operates via the same aerodynamic laws and in similar environments. Private flying is not immune from the consequences of its actions any more than the professionals. Forget that and it will remind you - painfully!
So, we all make our own choices - mine is that I shall return to the areas where safety is considered to be both necessary and rewarding and leave those of you who feel that it is an intrusion into your personal liberty to your own devices. It's a shame, but "There's none so blind etc."
