Helicopter pilot saves fixed-wing pilot - Unbelievable sequel! (NOW UPDATED)
Sims Fly Virtually
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Used to be 3rd Sand Dune from the Left - But now I'm somewhere else somewhere else.
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
an update -
"To thank her rescuers" - (the name of the CP somehow appears to have been left out of all reporting, despite his having, apparently, got out of the aircraft to assist????)
No reference in any article to be found on a search of the Argus web-site about the actions of the employers! Hopefully my letter to the Editor,and the News Reporter, will elicit some investigation there.
Scum!
(link to this thread provided to Argus for background - Danny, I hope you have no objection)
Should anyone be able to link me to a response by the Argus, I'd appreciate a PM, as I can't get my "local paper" here in the sandpit!
Oh - and seeing as the Beeb has covered the news, I thought they might like to look into the "sequel" as well. Hopefully the Company will soon be announcing that they've fired the CP, and given Dom a nice Christmas bonus for "actions promoting the Company's image"!
(and, as a fellow, occasional, student myself of a different Shoreham-based company, given Mr Beeke a few free lessons
)
If anyone would like to post the email addy of the Company, I'll pledge a tenner on my "plastic" to them, to go towards covering Dom's costs! and include appropriate comments!!)
Miss Mason has been at home this week resting. She has arranged to meet Mr Underdown and Mr Beeke
"To thank her rescuers" - (the name of the CP somehow appears to have been left out of all reporting, despite his having, apparently, got out of the aircraft to assist????)
No reference in any article to be found on a search of the Argus web-site about the actions of the employers! Hopefully my letter to the Editor,and the News Reporter, will elicit some investigation there.
Scum!
(link to this thread provided to Argus for background - Danny, I hope you have no objection)
Should anyone be able to link me to a response by the Argus, I'd appreciate a PM, as I can't get my "local paper" here in the sandpit!
Oh - and seeing as the Beeb has covered the news, I thought they might like to look into the "sequel" as well. Hopefully the Company will soon be announcing that they've fired the CP, and given Dom a nice Christmas bonus for "actions promoting the Company's image"!
(and, as a fellow, occasional, student myself of a different Shoreham-based company, given Mr Beeke a few free lessons
)If anyone would like to post the email addy of the Company, I'll pledge a tenner on my "plastic" to them, to go towards covering Dom's costs! and include appropriate comments!!)
Last edited by ExSimGuy; 15th Dec 2006 at 19:01.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be very happy if anyone came to help me if I was stuck in my straps upside down with a sh1t load of petrol dripping down on me, The heli pilots did the right thing and I will do the same if ever in his position and I wouldn't give a stuff what the CAA would say!
If he needs some cash to defend it, I am happy to help.
PS Flying Lawyer - your a top bloke as well!
If he needs some cash to defend it, I am happy to help.
PS Flying Lawyer - your a top bloke as well!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Belgium
Age: 60
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regardless of (legal) consequenses "You should always try to save a life"
What's the name of the FI. I will put him on my list.
What's the name of the FI. I will put him on my list.
Last edited by HillerBee; 16th Dec 2006 at 19:12.
Ich bin ein Prooner.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Home of the Full Monty.
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=SASless;3019980]
It is not inconsistent to consider the FI may have wrongfully assumed a rescue function that he was not properly trained, equipped, or tasked to do. We have had many instances of professional SAR crews lamblasting such amateur efforts even when the non-professional intervention saved lives.
Perhaps Craab will jump in here and re-iterate all the reasons he has posted in the past which would validate the dangers that such non-professional SAR acts pose to the public? Unquote.
Long ago I was undergoing rudimentary industrial First Aid training. When I queried the amount of force I was using doing C.P.R., (on a dummy) with a concern about possibly breaking a few ribs in a real-life scenario, I was assured that it was much more desirable to be alive with some broken ribs, than dead without.
In other words, get stuck in, there's a life at risk. Properly trained or not, in a given situation, you have to act, regardless of your training, or lack thereof, especially if you are the only person around.
If the life is saved, all other consequences can be sorted out later.
It is not inconsistent to consider the FI may have wrongfully assumed a rescue function that he was not properly trained, equipped, or tasked to do. We have had many instances of professional SAR crews lamblasting such amateur efforts even when the non-professional intervention saved lives.
Perhaps Craab will jump in here and re-iterate all the reasons he has posted in the past which would validate the dangers that such non-professional SAR acts pose to the public? Unquote.
Long ago I was undergoing rudimentary industrial First Aid training. When I queried the amount of force I was using doing C.P.R., (on a dummy) with a concern about possibly breaking a few ribs in a real-life scenario, I was assured that it was much more desirable to be alive with some broken ribs, than dead without.
In other words, get stuck in, there's a life at risk. Properly trained or not, in a given situation, you have to act, regardless of your training, or lack thereof, especially if you are the only person around.
If the life is saved, all other consequences can be sorted out later.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congratulations to the FI involved a good lesson for his students. (All students)
Here is a few notes for the hapless CP to peruse. I knew that bound assistance for aircraft or vessels in distress related back to the Titanic, only because a distant rellie of mine (step grandfather) had informed (berated) me with such.
He had been a rad-tech responsible for fitting radios on board ships, sail the first voyage with it and instruct the crew in the operation and repair there-of. They used have one frequency only for all comms worldwide, a situation that extended well into the Great War as far as I am aware.
On that fateful night he was on a ship of the same company as Titanic’s and on watch, listening and relaying all night. The ship he was on was too distant to assist and next morning he put the story in the ships daily, roneoed paper.
He was summonsed to the captain’s cabin and told in NO uncertain terms that it was, a) preposterous and b) impossible and therefore he should withdraw the story. Of course when the ship berthed some days later there was no record of apology forthcoming from the skipper.
I guess each contracting state (in this case Britain) can do a search of their rules of the air and see where the Chicago convention and other agreements apply.
I certainly am aware as most everyone would be, that there have been actions against rescuing ‘enthusiasm’ when later it was found that, a) the ‘rescue’ contributed further to a medical condition and b) that no immediate threat to the victims life was then apparent. But in this case with a trained person on the job, it should be bollocks to that. I think the arguments would centre on the ‘currency’ of the medical qualification.
Here below is a sample of a few minutes at Google, all the best to flying lawyer etc. and yes happy to add to the hat should it be needed.
Surely an apology must soon be forthcoming from the owners / chiefs of the outfit involved, perhaps a return form of disapproval (MOR?) from the CAA to the CP and AOC holder.
TET
International Wireless Telegraph convention 1903 (Berlin)
Article 22
Aircraft of the contracting States shall be entitled to the same measures of assistance for landing, particularly in case of distress, as national aircraft.
Article 35
(c) The use of wireless telegraphy in air navigation, the establishment of the necessary wireless stations, and the observance of international wireless regulations.
Chicago Convention 1944 (This is our bible, well as far as my naïve impression extends)
Article -25
Aircraft in distress
Aircraft in Each contracting State undertakes to provide such
measures of assistance to aircraft in distress in its
territory as it may find practicable, and to permit,
subject to control by its own authorities, the owners
of the aircraft or authorities of the State in which
the aircraft is registered to provide such measures
of assistance as may be necessitated by the circumstances.
Each contracting State, when undertaking
search for missing aircraft, will collaborate in
coordinated measures which may be recommended from
time to time pursuant to this Convention.
SOLAS Convention 1914 (safety of life at sea) - in response to the Titanic
Article 34
says ships with radios fitted must maintain a listening watch
and
Article 37
says that ships are bound to respond to distress calls etc, etc.
ps, I tried to copy but I guess the doco was a picture copy.
Here is a few notes for the hapless CP to peruse. I knew that bound assistance for aircraft or vessels in distress related back to the Titanic, only because a distant rellie of mine (step grandfather) had informed (berated) me with such.
He had been a rad-tech responsible for fitting radios on board ships, sail the first voyage with it and instruct the crew in the operation and repair there-of. They used have one frequency only for all comms worldwide, a situation that extended well into the Great War as far as I am aware.
On that fateful night he was on a ship of the same company as Titanic’s and on watch, listening and relaying all night. The ship he was on was too distant to assist and next morning he put the story in the ships daily, roneoed paper.
He was summonsed to the captain’s cabin and told in NO uncertain terms that it was, a) preposterous and b) impossible and therefore he should withdraw the story. Of course when the ship berthed some days later there was no record of apology forthcoming from the skipper.
I guess each contracting state (in this case Britain) can do a search of their rules of the air and see where the Chicago convention and other agreements apply.
I certainly am aware as most everyone would be, that there have been actions against rescuing ‘enthusiasm’ when later it was found that, a) the ‘rescue’ contributed further to a medical condition and b) that no immediate threat to the victims life was then apparent. But in this case with a trained person on the job, it should be bollocks to that. I think the arguments would centre on the ‘currency’ of the medical qualification.
Here below is a sample of a few minutes at Google, all the best to flying lawyer etc. and yes happy to add to the hat should it be needed.
Surely an apology must soon be forthcoming from the owners / chiefs of the outfit involved, perhaps a return form of disapproval (MOR?) from the CAA to the CP and AOC holder.
TET
International Wireless Telegraph convention 1903 (Berlin)
Article 9
Wireless telegraph stations are bound to give absolute priority to calls of distress from ships, to similarly answer such calls and to take such action with regard thereto as may be required.
Wireless telegraph stations are bound to give absolute priority to calls of distress from ships, to similarly answer such calls and to take such action with regard thereto as may be required.
Regulation pertaining to Aerial Navigation, ParisOct 13 1919(superseded by the Chicago Convention)
Article 22
Aircraft of the contracting States shall be entitled to the same measures of assistance for landing, particularly in case of distress, as national aircraft.
Article 35
(c) The use of wireless telegraphy in air navigation, the establishment of the necessary wireless stations, and the observance of international wireless regulations.
Chicago Convention 1944 (This is our bible, well as far as my naïve impression extends)
Article -25
Aircraft in distress
Aircraft in Each contracting State undertakes to provide such
measures of assistance to aircraft in distress in its
territory as it may find practicable, and to permit,
subject to control by its own authorities, the owners
of the aircraft or authorities of the State in which
the aircraft is registered to provide such measures
of assistance as may be necessitated by the circumstances.
Each contracting State, when undertaking
search for missing aircraft, will collaborate in
coordinated measures which may be recommended from
time to time pursuant to this Convention.
SOLAS Convention 1914 (safety of life at sea) - in response to the Titanic
Article 34
says ships with radios fitted must maintain a listening watch
and
Article 37
says that ships are bound to respond to distress calls etc, etc.
ps, I tried to copy but I guess the doco was a picture copy.
Last edited by topendtorque; 16th Dec 2006 at 10:33. Reason: finger trouble - as usual.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: chester uk
Age: 53
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disbelief!!!
FI Top Marks , I think i would do the same. A+
CP Go to the bottom of the class AR
LE F- 
CAA Nothing would surprise me.
Flying Lawyer Top Marks again A+
Count me in to any whip-round for the FI by the sound of it,he might need all the help he can get , can anyone offer him a better job?
Chester
FI Top Marks , I think i would do the same. A+
CP Go to the bottom of the class AR
LE F- CAA Nothing would surprise me.
Flying Lawyer Top Marks again A+
Count me in to any whip-round for the FI by the sound of it,he might need all the help he can get , can anyone offer him a better job?
Chester
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: chester uk
Age: 53
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR?
Quote from CAA website
"The MOR scheme aims to prevent incidents and accidents by ensuring that relevant information on safety is reported, collected, stored, protected and disseminated.
It requires UK aviation professionals and approved and licensed organisations such as UK operators, maintenance organisations and air traffic service providers to report to the CAA all incidents which endangered or, if not corrected, would have endangered an aircraft, its occupants, or any other person."
How in this case did any aircraft become endangered because of the actions of the FI?
If he had not intervened the occupant would have been endangered but surely that is not the point of an MOR is it ?
Chester
"The MOR scheme aims to prevent incidents and accidents by ensuring that relevant information on safety is reported, collected, stored, protected and disseminated.
It requires UK aviation professionals and approved and licensed organisations such as UK operators, maintenance organisations and air traffic service providers to report to the CAA all incidents which endangered or, if not corrected, would have endangered an aircraft, its occupants, or any other person."
How in this case did any aircraft become endangered because of the actions of the FI?
If he had not intervened the occupant would have been endangered but surely that is not the point of an MOR is it ?
Chester
Sasless - thanks for all the flak I have taken on this thread thanks to you. I don't mind being flamed when I have commented on a thread but to receive incoming about a thread I hadn't read until today seems a tad unfair.
For the record, I think the FI did exactly what I would expect any aviator to do - however, if he had hovered over the top and tried to encourage the FW pilot to climb onto the skid I might have a different opinion
For the record, I think the FI did exactly what I would expect any aviator to do - however, if he had hovered over the top and tried to encourage the FW pilot to climb onto the skid I might have a different opinion
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tosh
I suppose this is a rumour network, but this is just bollocks.
There has never, ever, been any suggestion that Dominic would have to pay for any portion of this flight.
He has been roundly praised by his CP and his company for the action he took. Any pilot would do the same, and would be expected to do the same.
The company's CAA Flight Ops Inspector later raised the apparent AOC anomaly of the flight with the paramedic from the accident site to Goodwood. The company's owner maintains there can be no AOC aspect if, as is the case, the company paid for this portion of the flight. There the matter rests.
It would be unthinkable for the CAA to take action against the company on these grounds, and I don't think for a moment they will.
What is certain is that once again somebody's got the story twisted aound his head and the pprune rumour mill has traduced a company and a chief pilot. And you people complain about what you read in the newspapers.
There has never, ever, been any suggestion that Dominic would have to pay for any portion of this flight.
He has been roundly praised by his CP and his company for the action he took. Any pilot would do the same, and would be expected to do the same.
The company's CAA Flight Ops Inspector later raised the apparent AOC anomaly of the flight with the paramedic from the accident site to Goodwood. The company's owner maintains there can be no AOC aspect if, as is the case, the company paid for this portion of the flight. There the matter rests.
It would be unthinkable for the CAA to take action against the company on these grounds, and I don't think for a moment they will.
What is certain is that once again somebody's got the story twisted aound his head and the pprune rumour mill has traduced a company and a chief pilot. And you people complain about what you read in the newspapers.
Pat,
Perhaps someone close to the matter could have/shall set the record straight....I am sure this thread is not unknown to the principals involved.
The way I read this thread....folks are standing up for a fellow that was reported to have been or faced being badly treated for doing a good deed.
It may be rumour....but at least it is a believable rumour unfortunately.
Thus...the sensitivity of the subject.
Let's hope you are correct in that thought.
Perhaps someone close to the matter could have/shall set the record straight....I am sure this thread is not unknown to the principals involved.
The way I read this thread....folks are standing up for a fellow that was reported to have been or faced being badly treated for doing a good deed.
It may be rumour....but at least it is a believable rumour unfortunately.
Thus...the sensitivity of the subject.
It would be unthinkable for the CAA to take action against the company on these grounds, and I don't think for a moment they will.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pat,
Gauntlet accepted
My posts on this thread are factually correct. The information comes first hand from Dom.
Upon what do you base the assumption that I am mistaken?
Perhaps you'd like a contact number for Dom so you can confirm the facts for yourself?
Alternatively, as Fred Cross is aware of this situation perhaps you'd care to confirm things with him
Gauntlet accepted
My posts on this thread are factually correct. The information comes first hand from Dom.
Upon what do you base the assumption that I am mistaken?
Perhaps you'd like a contact number for Dom so you can confirm the facts for yourself?
Alternatively, as Fred Cross is aware of this situation perhaps you'd care to confirm things with him
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How far do you want to push this?
If intemperate words were spoken it was about the details of the story in the Surrey Mirror, not about the event or its sequel.
As to having someone directly involved contribute to this, why the hell should they?
PS: I have Dom's number. I flew with him recently.
If intemperate words were spoken it was about the details of the story in the Surrey Mirror, not about the event or its sequel.
As to having someone directly involved contribute to this, why the hell should they?
PS: I have Dom's number. I flew with him recently.
Last edited by Pat Malone; 17th Dec 2006 at 19:38.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I truly believe that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. What I posted earlier (in this post) was correct. However, we all make mistakes, and I agree that Mr. M.C's past should remain just that.
Last edited by nimbostratus; 16th Dec 2006 at 18:34. Reason: poor judgement in bringing up the past
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pat,
I feel I'm missing your problem. There was a certain implied irony in my reply to you.
As and when the situation changes you may rest assured updates will be forthcoming. Dom is a good friend of mine who (like many others) has worked (and still works) extremely hard to make a living out of aviation. He is in the early stages of his career and having given the matter careful thought I won't sit back and not publicly offer him my support. I am very aware of the potentially negative impact this may have for the company and CP concerned and I would never raise an issue such as this unless I was satisfied the information passed to me was genuine and accurate.
There WERE (no if's about it) a number of issues raised with Dom, most were trivial , and yes they did relate in part to some of the newspaper coverage. I chose to mention the point with the biggest negative effect on Dom, and this industry.
I've never suggested anybody from LHC should post on this thread.
I agree there is a lot of irrelevant content on this site (as is the case with many internet forums). I don't consider this matter trivial. You'll also note I don't post that often.
If you know Dom please speak with him. I'll be seeing Dom soon and will mention your objections, albeit he is not responsible for these posts. I'm looking out for a fellow aviator who is a valued friend. Flaming me for that won't change a thing.
I'm more than willing to provide you with who I am if you so wish
I feel I'm missing your problem. There was a certain implied irony in my reply to you.
As and when the situation changes you may rest assured updates will be forthcoming. Dom is a good friend of mine who (like many others) has worked (and still works) extremely hard to make a living out of aviation. He is in the early stages of his career and having given the matter careful thought I won't sit back and not publicly offer him my support. I am very aware of the potentially negative impact this may have for the company and CP concerned and I would never raise an issue such as this unless I was satisfied the information passed to me was genuine and accurate.
There WERE (no if's about it) a number of issues raised with Dom, most were trivial , and yes they did relate in part to some of the newspaper coverage. I chose to mention the point with the biggest negative effect on Dom, and this industry.
I've never suggested anybody from LHC should post on this thread.
I agree there is a lot of irrelevant content on this site (as is the case with many internet forums). I don't consider this matter trivial. You'll also note I don't post that often.
If you know Dom please speak with him. I'll be seeing Dom soon and will mention your objections, albeit he is not responsible for these posts. I'm looking out for a fellow aviator who is a valued friend. Flaming me for that won't change a thing.
I'm more than willing to provide you with who I am if you so wish
Last edited by Flingingwings; 16th Dec 2006 at 18:30.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 58
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do we really need to go down the line of persudo rumours about peoples pasts.
If this outing on PPrune has managed to change the companys mind on Dom's action's and removed the threat of the CAA. Brillant.
It's not going to help Dom at all if all the dirt on the CFI is brought up.
BTW Pat your on a looser, most of us at some point have been on the recieving end of bullying from employers. The story just rings to true. We are now into the stage of damage limitation for the company, who have taken a serious kicking.
If this outing on PPrune has managed to change the companys mind on Dom's action's and removed the threat of the CAA. Brillant.
It's not going to help Dom at all if all the dirt on the CFI is brought up.
BTW Pat your on a looser, most of us at some point have been on the recieving end of bullying from employers. The story just rings to true. We are now into the stage of damage limitation for the company, who have taken a serious kicking.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: here, there and everywhere
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
London Heli's Chief Pilot
I only have one question.
Is this the same chief pilot, who when working as a line pilot for a company based in Blackpool, but working on a rail contract based out of York, was disciplined for flying under power cables with senior directors on board (twice), and when the then Chief Pilot of that company recomended dismissal of the said pilot, the company chairman would not allow it resulting in that Chief Pilot resigning from that company due to his belief that the company did not take issues of safety seriously. This belief was further strengthened due to the fact that the said line pilot (?LHC CP) happened to be dating the sales director (company chairman favourite)
Is this the same chief pilot, who when working as a line pilot for a company based in Blackpool, but working on a rail contract based out of York, was disciplined for flying under power cables with senior directors on board (twice), and when the then Chief Pilot of that company recomended dismissal of the said pilot, the company chairman would not allow it resulting in that Chief Pilot resigning from that company due to his belief that the company did not take issues of safety seriously. This belief was further strengthened due to the fact that the said line pilot (?LHC CP) happened to be dating the sales director (company chairman favourite)
Flying under wires is not necessarily dangerous. We used to do it all the time spraying. The powerline boys must do it regularly... i for one would feel safer 20ft below the wires than 20ft above. I am quite sure that a jobsworth CP would get his knickers in a twist
some people want to take all the fun out of flying 
This thread is however extremely entertaining
some people want to take all the fun out of flying This thread is however extremely entertaining
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, well, well.
So they don't want the FI to pay anything after all.
It was all a misunderstanding.
Anyways, according to Pat Malone, it was the CAA guy who was the idiot.
"The company's CAA Flight Ops Inspector later raised the apparent AOC anomaly of the flight with the paramedic from the accident site to Goodwood."
plodpilot
If your story's true, sounds to me like that CP and this CP both enjoy making a big fuss about little things.
So they don't want the FI to pay anything after all.
It was all a misunderstanding.
Anyways, according to Pat Malone, it was the CAA guy who was the idiot.
"The company's CAA Flight Ops Inspector later raised the apparent AOC anomaly of the flight with the paramedic from the accident site to Goodwood."
plodpilot
If your story's true, sounds to me like that CP and this CP both enjoy making a big fuss about little things.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The skill of being a helicopter pilot also revolves about looking outside the square and very much paying attention to detail, oh and yes looking after your mates.
cheers tet
cheers tet