The scene is set - incl Low Flying rules and Is there a 'cultural divide'?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alderney or Lancashire UK
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone clarify which rule specifies PPR? the nearest I can find is:
20 (2)
The commander of an aircraft arriving at or departing from an aerodrome in the United Kingdom shall take all reasonable steps to ensure upon landing or prior to departure, as the case may be, that notice of that event is given to the person in charge of the aerodrome, or to the air traffic control unit or aerodrome flight information service unit at the aerodrome.
The pub in this case is an aerodrome while the helicopter is using it.
As I read this, the obligation is to report landing ASAP. NOT get prior permission. If this is the case, no rule has been broken.
I cant find any mention of PPR in the ANO. Is it the law of trespass? If so, is that not outside the remit of the CAA? Does trespass still exist?
Anyone help? Yet again aviation law is clear as mud.
Edit. I ask as I have dropped in at pubs (although recognised landing sites) in the past, unannounced, too. I always get ppr if planning a trip to restaurant or pub.
20 (2)
The commander of an aircraft arriving at or departing from an aerodrome in the United Kingdom shall take all reasonable steps to ensure upon landing or prior to departure, as the case may be, that notice of that event is given to the person in charge of the aerodrome, or to the air traffic control unit or aerodrome flight information service unit at the aerodrome.
The pub in this case is an aerodrome while the helicopter is using it.
As I read this, the obligation is to report landing ASAP. NOT get prior permission. If this is the case, no rule has been broken.
I cant find any mention of PPR in the ANO. Is it the law of trespass? If so, is that not outside the remit of the CAA? Does trespass still exist?
Anyone help? Yet again aviation law is clear as mud.
Edit. I ask as I have dropped in at pubs (although recognised landing sites) in the past, unannounced, too. I always get ppr if planning a trip to restaurant or pub.
Last edited by Gaseous; 28th Jul 2006 at 22:37.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 62
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the problem with you people, so this guy dropped into a pub for a drink so what, from some of your comments most of you should be flying fixed wing and just land at airports !!!!!!!!!
From what I can see most people are pleased to see a heli comming into a pub or restaurant as long as it is flown responsible surely that is part of the fun !!!!!!
Most of the comments here are to prosecute or report the pilot, who cares how many hours the pilot has, he could have 10,000 hours and have only flown around the circuit at a airport and still be rubbish why does every one make such a big deal about hours as if it means the more hours the better the pilot !!!
Get a life you guys and do some exciting flying for a change !!!!!!!!
From what I can see most people are pleased to see a heli comming into a pub or restaurant as long as it is flown responsible surely that is part of the fun !!!!!!
Most of the comments here are to prosecute or report the pilot, who cares how many hours the pilot has, he could have 10,000 hours and have only flown around the circuit at a airport and still be rubbish why does every one make such a big deal about hours as if it means the more hours the better the pilot !!!
Get a life you guys and do some exciting flying for a change !!!!!!!!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SWANSEA
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the scene is set
there are many things we should'nt do,i do not not not fly with the rule book in my pocket,lets stick to the facts shall we,no rule was broken and the landowner had no problem, so, why should you, as for flying in bad weather,ever heard of an instrument rating?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SWANSEA
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good on you mate, you seem to understand what flying is all about, i totally agree with you that there is a lot of store put on hours flown,it means nothing if you have never left the circuit! You are correct again when you say that people like to see helicopters arriving,it's exiting and when (as i often do) offer them a quick spin they are off the planet for the rest of the day!That's what i call good PR.
the scene is set
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 62
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah go on Bright Ling report him or get someone else to do the dirty for you, your obviously when of those heli pilots who has never made a mistake or landed some where they shouldn't have.
I've seen loads like you propping up the bar in the flying club frowning on pilots who know how to have a little harmless fun now and again!!
You and alot of other pilots forget that one of the most important gauges to keep in the green is the "ENJOYMENT GAUGE" !!!!!!
Try it some time. I wonder has TOT ever landed some where he should'nt perhaps he will be honest and let the rest of us know.
I've seen loads like you propping up the bar in the flying club frowning on pilots who know how to have a little harmless fun now and again!!
You and alot of other pilots forget that one of the most important gauges to keep in the green is the "ENJOYMENT GAUGE" !!!!!!
Try it some time. I wonder has TOT ever landed some where he should'nt perhaps he will be honest and let the rest of us know.
Hello,
Firstly I'd like to say that in my opinion flying a helicopter to a pub for a spot of lunch is great. Unfortunately it's not something I've done yet but if I could afford it I definitely would.
Royston, if indeed you are the pilot in question then I think there is nothing much wrong with what you did and I agree that some of the previous posts are way over the top.
The only suggestion I would make is, that you should always get the landowners permission before you land on his/her property. It’s not just courtesy, it is also is a legal requirement. Obviously in your case the landowner was more than happy but other people might not be so accommodating (see posts above).
The other point to be aware of (and I am not saying that this was the case here) is to make sure the landing site is not in a build up area. If it is (and it’s sometimes not easy to decide) then CAA approval is required for any landing on an unlicensed aerodrome.
Regards,
Woolf
Firstly I'd like to say that in my opinion flying a helicopter to a pub for a spot of lunch is great. Unfortunately it's not something I've done yet but if I could afford it I definitely would.
Royston, if indeed you are the pilot in question then I think there is nothing much wrong with what you did and I agree that some of the previous posts are way over the top.
The only suggestion I would make is, that you should always get the landowners permission before you land on his/her property. It’s not just courtesy, it is also is a legal requirement. Obviously in your case the landowner was more than happy but other people might not be so accommodating (see posts above).
The other point to be aware of (and I am not saying that this was the case here) is to make sure the landing site is not in a build up area. If it is (and it’s sometimes not easy to decide) then CAA approval is required for any landing on an unlicensed aerodrome.
Regards,
Woolf
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
landowners permission ............... it is a legal requirement.
Which law?
ANO?
Rules of the Air?
Can anyone point to the actual legal requirement?
H.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South Thames
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone point to the actual legal requirement?
We then sought further legal advice and the following was given:
Permission may be implied (as in welcome sign, public entrance to public parking etc)
Permission might be conditional (footpath to letter box, closed gate at end of drive)
Permission may be by stautory right. (Public footpath, neighbour right of way, water board electicity company, warrant, court order etc)
If you have none of the above and no owners permission then you are probably trespassing (with another million bits of grey area)
Some food for thought though if you get it wrong. The owner will have recourse for your unlawful act and can consider a landing fee or lien and padlock your machine to the ground until you pay (Its been done!).
I much prefer the ask nicely, or apologise profusely method. A friend of mine keeps a bottle of champagne in the back, along with a nice smile just in case he ever needs it for this very reason.
The other method of course is to get Flying Lawyer and his colleagues to help you out which in turn helps him with his own landing fees. (Only joking! I am too old to sue and I fly therefore I have no money left)
Sometimes its better not to ask the question
AOG
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,158
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
As mentioned, it actually comes from the law of trespass, and possibly any parts of common law that have not been put into abeyance by Act Of Parliament, but local Planning permission is involved, too, although this is slightly off topic. In fact, current planning regulations allow a helicopter to be used for personal, business and leisure uses "as many people use a private car" from the owner's dwelling house without limitation, making it exempt from planning control, provided the use is incidental, or ancillary to, the principal use of the land. Planning Policy Note 24 about Planning and Noise paragraph 18 states that, in general, where helicopters are used from gardens or commercial premises and their use is incidental to the principal use of the land then planning permission is not generally required, but the commonly accepted frequency is that a spot of land can be used up to 28 days in a year witht planning permission being required. There are quite a few spots in the average field......
Phil
Phil
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this case is a typical example of the british disease. ie outraged onlooker doesnt like what he sees and says "there should be a law against it", but there isnt - never mind, we`ll make one up- and a few so called facts as well.
theres no rule of the air about prior permission and the chances of being prosecuted for trespass are about nil. I remember all the rubbish written about rule 5 in a recent thread. Jeez. some of you would only let us land at licenced aerodromes under supervision of a CAA inspector.
theres no rule of the air about prior permission and the chances of being prosecuted for trespass are about nil. I remember all the rubbish written about rule 5 in a recent thread. Jeez. some of you would only let us land at licenced aerodromes under supervision of a CAA inspector.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: LONDON
Age: 49
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bravo!!
Well said Jackplug!!
I see it this way..... anything else is speculation.
Was anyone hurt?
Was any property damaged?
Did the land owner prosecute?
Did the pilot fall out of the sky half cut?
End Of.
I see it this way..... anything else is speculation.
Was anyone hurt?
Was any property damaged?
Did the land owner prosecute?
Did the pilot fall out of the sky half cut?
End Of.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
landing permission?
Heliport how does this fit for an OZ definition. ?
First I looked at the Act, then the Regs, then an ops manual that I found.
In all of the below I interpret that if I am a private land owner and I can disprove any allowances catered for and I am upset because the vibrations of the said low flying or landing helicopter boiled my fish pond dry, made my warm beer go flat, etc. then I can have a go at said helicopter owner / pilot / operator / etc under common law.
Further, CAR 92 (1) sates that you must not take off or land at a place unless it is suitable. Up to you to work out whether you have satisfied the section in blue below. I.E. Do you have permission or not and or not violated someone else’s right at common law.
Flying lawyer and others might put a simpler matrix on it, esp. for UK ops.
CASA Civil Aviation Act
20A reckless operation of aircraft
(1) A person must not operate an aircraft being reckless as to whether the manner of operation could endanger the life of another person.
(2) A person must not operate an aircraft being reckless as to whether the manner of operation could endanger the person or property of another person.
30 Weather etc. to be a defence
(1) In any proceedings for an offence against this Act or the regulations, it is a defence if the act or omission charged is established to have been due to extreme weather conditions or other unavoidable cause.
(2) Any defence established under subsection (1) need only be established on the balance of probabilities.
CASA Civil Aviation Regulation
157 Low flying
(1) The pilot in command of an aircraft must not fly the aircraft over:
(a) Any city, town or populous area at a height lower than 1,000 feet; or
(b) any other area at a height lower than 500 feet.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(2) An offence against subregulation (1) is an offence of strict liability.
Note For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.
(3)A height specified in subregulation (1) is the height above the highest point of the terrain, and any object on it, within a radius of:
(a) in the case of an aircraft other than a helicopter — 600 metres; or
(b) in the case of a helicopter — 300 metres;
from a point on the terrain vertically below the aircraft.
(3A)Paragraph (1) (a) does not apply in respect of a helicopter flying at a designated altitude within an access lane details of which have been published in the AIP or NOTAMS for use by helicopters arriving at or departing from a specified place.
(4)Subregulation (1) does not apply if:
(a) through stress of weather or any other unavoidable cause it is essential that a lower height be maintained; or
(b) the aircraft is engaged in private operations or aerial work operations, being operations that require low flying, and the owner or operator of the aircraft has received from CASA either a general permit for all flights or a specific permit for the particular flight to be made at a lower height while engaged in such operations; or
(c) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in flying training and flies over a part of a flying training area in respect of which low flying is authorised by CASA under subregulation 141 (1); or
(d) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in a baulked approach procedure, or the practice of such procedure under the supervision of a flight instructor or a check pilot; or
(e) the aircraft is flying in the course of actually taking-off or landing at an aerodrome; or
(f) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in:
(i) a search; or
(ii) a rescue; or
(iii) dropping supplies;
in a search and rescue operation; or
(g) the aircraft is a helicopter:
(i) operated by, or for the purposes of, the Australian Federal Police or the police force of a State or Territory; and
(ii) engaged in law enforcement operations; or
(h) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in an operation which requires the dropping of packages or other articles or substances in accordance with directions issued by CASA.
However (see in blue above) for any allowed ops below 500 AGL then the prudent operator will always include in their operations manual the following – or similar.
ATTENTION IS DIRECTED TO THE FACT THAT THE PERMISSION GRANTED DOES NOT CONFER ON AN OPERATOR ANY RIGHTS, AS AGAINST THE OWNER OF THE LAND OVER WHICH THE OPERATION MAY BE CONDUCTED, OR PREJUDICE IN ANY WAY THE RIGHTS AND REMEDIES WHICH ANY PERSON MAY HAVE IN COMMON LAW IN RESPECT OF ANY INJURY TO PERSONS OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY CAUSED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BY THE OPERATOR.
First I looked at the Act, then the Regs, then an ops manual that I found.
In all of the below I interpret that if I am a private land owner and I can disprove any allowances catered for and I am upset because the vibrations of the said low flying or landing helicopter boiled my fish pond dry, made my warm beer go flat, etc. then I can have a go at said helicopter owner / pilot / operator / etc under common law.
Further, CAR 92 (1) sates that you must not take off or land at a place unless it is suitable. Up to you to work out whether you have satisfied the section in blue below. I.E. Do you have permission or not and or not violated someone else’s right at common law.
Flying lawyer and others might put a simpler matrix on it, esp. for UK ops.
CASA Civil Aviation Act
20A reckless operation of aircraft
(1) A person must not operate an aircraft being reckless as to whether the manner of operation could endanger the life of another person.
(2) A person must not operate an aircraft being reckless as to whether the manner of operation could endanger the person or property of another person.
30 Weather etc. to be a defence
(1) In any proceedings for an offence against this Act or the regulations, it is a defence if the act or omission charged is established to have been due to extreme weather conditions or other unavoidable cause.
(2) Any defence established under subsection (1) need only be established on the balance of probabilities.
CASA Civil Aviation Regulation
157 Low flying
(1) The pilot in command of an aircraft must not fly the aircraft over:
(a) Any city, town or populous area at a height lower than 1,000 feet; or
(b) any other area at a height lower than 500 feet.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(2) An offence against subregulation (1) is an offence of strict liability.
Note For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.
(3)A height specified in subregulation (1) is the height above the highest point of the terrain, and any object on it, within a radius of:
(a) in the case of an aircraft other than a helicopter — 600 metres; or
(b) in the case of a helicopter — 300 metres;
from a point on the terrain vertically below the aircraft.
(3A)Paragraph (1) (a) does not apply in respect of a helicopter flying at a designated altitude within an access lane details of which have been published in the AIP or NOTAMS for use by helicopters arriving at or departing from a specified place.
(4)Subregulation (1) does not apply if:
(a) through stress of weather or any other unavoidable cause it is essential that a lower height be maintained; or
(b) the aircraft is engaged in private operations or aerial work operations, being operations that require low flying, and the owner or operator of the aircraft has received from CASA either a general permit for all flights or a specific permit for the particular flight to be made at a lower height while engaged in such operations; or
(c) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in flying training and flies over a part of a flying training area in respect of which low flying is authorised by CASA under subregulation 141 (1); or
(d) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in a baulked approach procedure, or the practice of such procedure under the supervision of a flight instructor or a check pilot; or
(e) the aircraft is flying in the course of actually taking-off or landing at an aerodrome; or
(f) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in:
(i) a search; or
(ii) a rescue; or
(iii) dropping supplies;
in a search and rescue operation; or
(g) the aircraft is a helicopter:
(i) operated by, or for the purposes of, the Australian Federal Police or the police force of a State or Territory; and
(ii) engaged in law enforcement operations; or
(h) the pilot of the aircraft is engaged in an operation which requires the dropping of packages or other articles or substances in accordance with directions issued by CASA.
However (see in blue above) for any allowed ops below 500 AGL then the prudent operator will always include in their operations manual the following – or similar.
ATTENTION IS DIRECTED TO THE FACT THAT THE PERMISSION GRANTED DOES NOT CONFER ON AN OPERATOR ANY RIGHTS, AS AGAINST THE OWNER OF THE LAND OVER WHICH THE OPERATION MAY BE CONDUCTED, OR PREJUDICE IN ANY WAY THE RIGHTS AND REMEDIES WHICH ANY PERSON MAY HAVE IN COMMON LAW IN RESPECT OF ANY INJURY TO PERSONS OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY CAUSED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY BY THE OPERATOR.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 62
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Guy's I've just flown in from The Western Helidays and I'm sure I saw one of those Yellow Robbie things, I believe it was an R22 parked outside a pub in Pontypridd ( Thats in South Wales) I couldn't believe it !!!
The car park was empty though !!
The car park was empty though !!
I know loads of people who will have a pint or two and fly, in my experience most fly much smoother after one or two !! Are the alcohol rules the same for FAA and CAA ? I have to say the pilots on this topic do seem to be "holier than thou " after all you would need a pint or two to drown your sorrows if all you had to fly was an R22 !!!!!!!!
