Ullswater Lake Maule pilot not guilty
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There have been incidents where a member of the public have seen amodel aircraft disappear from view, they have phoned the Police or emergency services to report an aircraft crash......yep! it's a quiet day, so they all rush out on a full scale attendance, but nobody makes a basic enquiry to establish wether there was, indeed, an aircraft transiting the area.
Same with hoax fire calls and false intruder alerts (Hatton Gardens excepted
) I believe it's called "jumping the gun" and appears to have happened on this occasion....If they hadn't done their practice response on this occasion, they would have just repacked their kit a half-hour earlier.
To suggest this response to a false -alarm has cost a fortune, is disingenuous.
I bags second trip, Flyingmac.
Same with hoax fire calls and false intruder alerts (Hatton Gardens excepted
) I believe it's called "jumping the gun" and appears to have happened on this occasion....If they hadn't done their practice response on this occasion, they would have just repacked their kit a half-hour earlier.To suggest this response to a false -alarm has cost a fortune, is disingenuous.
I bags second trip, Flyingmac.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The tragic 'Derwent incident' (I won't say 'accident') was way different to the Ullswater event. Please don't use it to castigate the 'Ullswater' pilot.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A year or so ago I was involved in a accident at the strip. A passer-by phoned the emergency services and then came across. Hearing this the pilot also phoned the emergency services and very patiently explained that yes he was the pilot and yes there were no injuries and no the emergency service were not required.
4 fire engines, 2 police cars and one ambulance turned up in the next 40 odd minutes - some having got lost on the way.
whilst having the emergency services available is a very good thing I cannot help but think we possible have either an over provision or a severe lack of common sense.
Castigating anyone because the emergency services were called out is on the basis of this experience is completely unjustified.
As for blaming the Ullswater pilot for someone else trying it, that too would be unjustified - that would be evolution punishing the stupid, otherwise known as the Darwin award competition!
4 fire engines, 2 police cars and one ambulance turned up in the next 40 odd minutes - some having got lost on the way.
whilst having the emergency services available is a very good thing I cannot help but think we possible have either an over provision or a severe lack of common sense.
Castigating anyone because the emergency services were called out is on the basis of this experience is completely unjustified.
As for blaming the Ullswater pilot for someone else trying it, that too would be unjustified - that would be evolution punishing the stupid, otherwise known as the Darwin award competition!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is very funny.
Some of the comments are so pompous and predictable.
An earlier thread about the water-skiing Harvards : http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...nuine-not.html
The discussion was 9 years ago, when they were not well-known outside South Africa, but it's still worth reading for the varying responses at the time.
Most posts were made before the truth was revealed.
Some posters still had doubts even after it was revealed.
---
Certainly not.
That would be absurd.
I don't subscribe to the view that everyone should be prevented from doing something risky (which the Ullswater incident may/may not have been - I don't know enough about the pilot or the circumstances to form an opinion) in case someone else tries to emulate and things go wrong.
And, in general, provided no-one else is put at risk I wouldn't prohibit adults from risking their own lives.
There's a grey area re informed risk, but that's a separate and more complex issue.
eg Years ago, I carried a passenger during displays and was a passenger during displays but that has been prohibited for a long time.
Some of the comments are so pompous and predictable.
An earlier thread about the water-skiing Harvards : http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...nuine-not.html
The discussion was 9 years ago, when they were not well-known outside South Africa, but it's still worth reading for the varying responses at the time.
Most posts were made before the truth was revealed.
Some posters still had doubts even after it was revealed.
---
Okay.... When the next pilot tries it, because they saw the video, and it does not go well, can we castigate the Ullswater pilot then?
That would be absurd.
I don't subscribe to the view that everyone should be prevented from doing something risky (which the Ullswater incident may/may not have been - I don't know enough about the pilot or the circumstances to form an opinion) in case someone else tries to emulate and things go wrong.
And, in general, provided no-one else is put at risk I wouldn't prohibit adults from risking their own lives.
There's a grey area re informed risk, but that's a separate and more complex issue.
eg Years ago, I carried a passenger during displays and was a passenger during displays but that has been prohibited for a long time.
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 16th Apr 2015 at 11:26.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To suggest this response to a false -alarm has cost a fortune, is disingenuous.
Every call-out the life-saving service makes, costs on average £2,500
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like to think of PPRuNe as a place to converse with pilots of a professional attitude. Sure, there are dumb and risky thinks to be done in planes, and in 39 years of flying, I've done quite a few of them. Happily (luckily) I've never hurt anyone, nor done damage to the point where insurance was claimed.
I reported myself to Transport Canada once, for very public low flying, when I had buzzed a very busy public beach at 50 feet. I knew that someone was going to report me, so I may as well get there first. When I explained to TC why I did this, I got a smile and a "don't worry about it". I had drawn attention to three drowning kids, who were rescued. I guess that TC figured that the risk I had flown was worth the reward.
The public at large can understand planes flying over, circling, taking off and landing. Otherwise, the public will think it is unusual, and perhaps worthy of report - how nice that they care to bother!
In 25 years as a volunteer firefighter, I have flown one of my planes on average once a month to search an emergency call. Most of the time, I am happy to confirm that we don't need a surface response, as the emergency does not exist. A surface response will be a minimum $1000 cost, usually much more. That is totally a local tax cost.
I think it would be nice if we "professional" attitude pilots would be publicly seen to not encourage cowboy flying (at least when the reward is very small) - but that's just me, perhaps....
I reported myself to Transport Canada once, for very public low flying, when I had buzzed a very busy public beach at 50 feet. I knew that someone was going to report me, so I may as well get there first. When I explained to TC why I did this, I got a smile and a "don't worry about it". I had drawn attention to three drowning kids, who were rescued. I guess that TC figured that the risk I had flown was worth the reward.
The public at large can understand planes flying over, circling, taking off and landing. Otherwise, the public will think it is unusual, and perhaps worthy of report - how nice that they care to bother!
In 25 years as a volunteer firefighter, I have flown one of my planes on average once a month to search an emergency call. Most of the time, I am happy to confirm that we don't need a surface response, as the emergency does not exist. A surface response will be a minimum $1000 cost, usually much more. That is totally a local tax cost.
I think it would be nice if we "professional" attitude pilots would be publicly seen to not encourage cowboy flying (at least when the reward is very small) - but that's just me, perhaps....
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right, that's it, I've been persuaded by the compelling points of view on here. I've decided to ditch my vintage taildragger for a Cessna 152 that I'll only fly from paved runways, and I'll ditch the sports car for a Volvo and only drive to the airfield at the speed limit minus 30%. I'll certainly no longer do any flying below 2000' let alone below 500'. I hadn't realised my selfish attitude had the potential to get so many emergency services people out for a drive in the country.
Come on guys, get real. If you're not harming someone else and you're no proven to be incompetent, then just live and let live. I grew up on the edge of Barton Fell, about half a mile from where this took place and watched people daily go into the hills in a T shirt and trainers only to be retrieved by a big yellow chopper. Some of those people might have actually been locals with plenty of knowledge about what they were doing and the helicopter wasn't for them, just the same as this water skier may well have been an experienced bush pilot who had done this many times before. Judge those in question on their results, not their decision to do something that you yourself would choose not to do.
Come on guys, get real. If you're not harming someone else and you're no proven to be incompetent, then just live and let live. I grew up on the edge of Barton Fell, about half a mile from where this took place and watched people daily go into the hills in a T shirt and trainers only to be retrieved by a big yellow chopper. Some of those people might have actually been locals with plenty of knowledge about what they were doing and the helicopter wasn't for them, just the same as this water skier may well have been an experienced bush pilot who had done this many times before. Judge those in question on their results, not their decision to do something that you yourself would choose not to do.
Right, that's it, I've been persuaded by the compelling points of view on here. I've decided to ditch my vintage taildragger for a Cessna 152 that I'll only fly from paved runways, and I'll ditch the sports car for a Volvo and only drive to the airfield at the speed limit minus 30%. I'll certainly no longer do any flying below 2000' let alone below 500'. I hadn't realised my selfish attitude had the potential to get so many emergency services people out for a drive in the country.
.
.
Come on guys, get real. If you're not harming someone else and you're no proven to be incompetent, then just live and let live
So I am sorry you feel aggrieved that your privilege to do something stupid in an aircraft is being questioned, but actions have consequences and the consequences with these kinds of activities are never good.....
Last edited by Big Pistons Forever; 16th Apr 2015 at 16:45.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Step Turn
You are right to do so.
However, it's important, at least IMHO, to acknowledge that one's own attitude does not necessarily precisely coincide with that of others who have an equally professional attitude.
Or, put another way, it's a mistake to assume that people who don't share your views do not have a professional attitude.
Katamarino
& fastjet45 (Ok lets all go and hide in your front room ...)
I agree.
I like to think of PPRuNe as a place to converse with pilots of a professional attitude.
However, it's important, at least IMHO, to acknowledge that one's own attitude does not necessarily precisely coincide with that of others who have an equally professional attitude.
Or, put another way, it's a mistake to assume that people who don't share your views do not have a professional attitude.
Katamarino
& fastjet45 (Ok lets all go and hide in your front room ...)
I agree.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay.... When the next pilot tries it, because they saw the video, and it does not go well, can we castigate the Ullswater pilot then?
As I said, the 'Derwent' tragedy bears no relation to anyone waterskiing an aeroplane. There's 'an elephant in the room' about 'Derwent' that neither the AAIB or anyone on here has actually put into words. You don't have to be Einstein to work it out, though.
Anyone doing what the Ullswater pilot did is more likely to have been inspired by the 'waterskiing Harvards' video where the pilots were acting sensibly....
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 67
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the call-out
The emergency services (especially up here) often tell folk that they would rather suffer from a good intentioned unneeded call-out than one too late or a false one.
(Better safe than sorry, don't you think)
So like it or not, the caller will not come to any criticism for doing what the emergency services ask us all to do!
As regards Ullswater it is owned and managed by the National Trust, so the two landings will have been totally without the land (water) owners permission.
As the reg can be seen from the video I would not be surprised that the owners get a serious letter.
The only Lake that has ever had permission to land was Windermere, especially during WW2 as they built Sunderlands there. the last flying one (at that time) landed in 1990
The other water that has seen landings is, apparently Wastwater which a local has landed on as a friend of his owns land on the shore, which means he can give permission over riding the NT (who ain't happy about it)
To carry on with the realities of life up here.
Mobile phones to report the incident, forget them, there is no signal as there are very few masts, the planners see to that!
So the reporter could have seen part of it and had to drive to the nearest accessible land line to report it.
SAR response
Helicopter, Prestwick, Valley or the NE of the country, at least 60+ miles
Ambulance, Penrith 15 miles along, in the main, twisty country roads
Fire, fully manned Penrith (see above) or Patterdale, part time so they have to turn out from their normal jobs
Mountain Rescue (who also do water rescue) all volunteers that get called from home, jobs etc.
Oh and Air Ambulance under 10 mins flying time, but it isn't amphibious
So go on, tell me had you been on that aircraft.
What would you prefer?
No call out, but if it was a real incident a longer delay waiting for assistance.
Or a good meaning call-out that had it been for real would have got resources there that bit quicker
The emergency services (especially up here) often tell folk that they would rather suffer from a good intentioned unneeded call-out than one too late or a false one.
(Better safe than sorry, don't you think)
So like it or not, the caller will not come to any criticism for doing what the emergency services ask us all to do!
As regards Ullswater it is owned and managed by the National Trust, so the two landings will have been totally without the land (water) owners permission.
As the reg can be seen from the video I would not be surprised that the owners get a serious letter.
The only Lake that has ever had permission to land was Windermere, especially during WW2 as they built Sunderlands there. the last flying one (at that time) landed in 1990
The other water that has seen landings is, apparently Wastwater which a local has landed on as a friend of his owns land on the shore, which means he can give permission over riding the NT (who ain't happy about it)
To carry on with the realities of life up here.
Mobile phones to report the incident, forget them, there is no signal as there are very few masts, the planners see to that!
So the reporter could have seen part of it and had to drive to the nearest accessible land line to report it.
SAR response
Helicopter, Prestwick, Valley or the NE of the country, at least 60+ miles
Ambulance, Penrith 15 miles along, in the main, twisty country roads
Fire, fully manned Penrith (see above) or Patterdale, part time so they have to turn out from their normal jobs
Mountain Rescue (who also do water rescue) all volunteers that get called from home, jobs etc.
Oh and Air Ambulance under 10 mins flying time, but it isn't amphibious
So go on, tell me had you been on that aircraft.
What would you prefer?
No call out, but if it was a real incident a longer delay waiting for assistance.
Or a good meaning call-out that had it been for real would have got resources there that bit quicker
Last edited by west lakes; 16th Apr 2015 at 19:08.
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 67
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you watch the video west lake? The aircraft flew away.....
But knowing the roads in that area (do you?) the person who reported it may have only got a glimpse of an aircraft getting low over the water or even the point where the wheels were on the water and decided to call 999 without waiting or watching it.
The incident took place at the North end of Ullswater near Pooley Bridge, at the beginning of the video the end of the Steamer Pier can be seen, to the right of this is a road with intermittent views of the lake up to the pier. So it is quite possible a vehicle heading north may have only seen part of what occurred and drove into Pooley Bridge to report it.
Where the aircraft touched is not visible from the village or any other premises
You did read this sentence didn't you, especially the second bit?
So the reporter could have seen part of it and had to drive to the nearest accessible land line to report it.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North west
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Lakes, some of what you say is incorrect, Telphone signal at the north end of ullswater is actually pretty reasonable particularly as it's near penrith and quite flat. Secondaly NT certainly does not own all of the lake. I believe there have also been occasional float plane flights from Ullswater pre speed limit days.
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 67
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What would the "serious letter' say?
But ask yourself this, if you owned land or water or even a private field and someone used it to do a touch and go without your permission.
Would you just shrug it off or would you inform them of their "error"?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: E Anglia
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SSD:
The cynics amongst us might say different and that there were striking similarities:
Hence the presence of a friend with video camera on the banks of the Derwent at the very spot and when it all went t*ts up the hastily cobbled excuse of engine failure leading to a decision that ditching in the water was a safer option than landing in the flat fields surrounding the accident site.....
Cusco.
The tragic 'Derwent incident' (I won't say 'accident') was way different to the Ullswater event. Please don't use it to castigate the 'Ullswater' pilot.
Hence the presence of a friend with video camera on the banks of the Derwent at the very spot and when it all went t*ts up the hastily cobbled excuse of engine failure leading to a decision that ditching in the water was a safer option than landing in the flat fields surrounding the accident site.....
Cusco.
I know very little about trains.
If I saw a train approaching a bend at what seemed like too high a speed, I might be concerned.
Knowing the limitations of my train-based knowledge, however, I probably wouldn't run off and call 999 reporting a derailment. I would wait a few moments in case it actually made it around the bend just fine.
I think the same concept applies here.
If I saw a train approaching a bend at what seemed like too high a speed, I might be concerned.
Knowing the limitations of my train-based knowledge, however, I probably wouldn't run off and call 999 reporting a derailment. I would wait a few moments in case it actually made it around the bend just fine.
I think the same concept applies here.