US ‘Public Use’ aviation – what are the airworthiness implications?

[Heli-phile]

Why involve the Bush family in a rotorhead debate

Post deleted.

Why involve the Bush family in a rotorhead debate

Exactly: this is Rotorheads, not Jetblast

Senior Pilot
Rotorheads Moderator

[Jackonicko]

Senior Pilot,

Thanks!


Helimark,

Wouldn't it be safer if you were flying a twin with Class 1 performance?

Of course some object to the Police/Border Patrol/Forest Service use of ex-military helicopters for commercial reasons - the agencies aren't buying sparkly new helicopters which help (say) Bell's bottom line, and give business to a dealer, etc. That's not what I'd call a good reason.

But others object for more 'high minded' reasons. The airworthiness of (inevitably very old) ex-military aircraft, once they're being outside the military airworthiness and engineering environment is sometimes questionable, otherwise there'd be fewer restrictions on civilian operators using them.



Incidentally, I understand that one organisation which does not require CPLs in all of its flying 'billets' is the Border Patrol.

I believe that there have been questions about pilot quality in some areas of the Forest Service and some of its associated state-level bodies.

I quoted a report about one Sheriff's Department.

Some here acknowledge that there are a very, very few bad apples.

[MightyGem]

And like what Shawn said, a Police helicopter that both the pilot and observer who are policeman(women) make a more effective team.

Helimark, you can say that, because that's how you operate and it works for you, but you can't state it as a fact.

Consider: you have two Police officers in the aircraft one of whom is the pilot. When on scene searching for an offender, you have one officer who can devote nearly 100% of his time looking for that offender while the other could be using nearly 100% of his time being the pilot, depending on the circumstances, giving an effectivity rating of well under 200%

When we are on scene searching for an offender, I have two officers in the aircraft who can devote 100% of their time looking for the offender while I fly the aircraft. When the situation allows, I can also give some of my time, putting our effectivity rating well above the 200% mark.

Jackonicko.

In answer to your question about UK ASUs with one observer, unless they've changed recently, Devon and Cornwall are the only ones who fly with a single observer. How they manage a pursuit operating the camera, reading the map, doing the commentary, etc etc, only they could tell you.

[HeliMark]

Jackonicko, yes you are correct, and boy would I love that. Lets just not get into that time honored argument of the statistics on single vs. twin .

But reality of the budget game is that most departments do not want to spend the extra money for the twin helicopter and associated expenses. I know of one department that the budget for the helicopter division is over 30%. Not so sure the big wigs are willing to jack that up. Unless the federal government implements rules for twins, I doubt we will see it in our lifetime. Although I have heard some limited talk of wanting twins.

One thing that some people fail to realize is that the departments that receive these ex-military helicopters need to buy parts for them. And employ mechanics. Without the ability to get these helicopters, they would not have a helicopter division.

And yes, I agree that age does play a factor. Hard to regulate when to put the aircraft out to pasture. I know of one department that has ex-military aircrafts that have spent considerable amount of time on the ground due to mechanical issue's. And this department will not fly them unless all safety issue's are dealt with.

I think any civilian could operate an ex-military helicopter just as well as the government. My only explanation to that is you and I know that the government hates to give something to us. They only know how to take away .

Could not comment on the Forrest service. I am "carded" to work and fly them. Couldn't say what the requirements are, they have just come in and say ok for our experienced pilots.

MightyGem, yes it does work for us, but also consider this. Since I do not have the luxury of having a third person, my being a police officer gives us maybe a 105-140% effective unit. I know this is an ongoing disagreement, but knowing what my observer is looking for because I also know what is happening on the ground due to my experience only makes us a better unit.

[MightyGem]

but knowing what my observer is looking for because I also know what is happening on the ground due to my experience only makes us a better unit.

Agreed, but it didn't take me too long to figure out what was going on on the ground when I started this job. Just different ways of doing the same job.

[rick1128]

One other note about using a civilian pilot is liability. Police helicopters have been shot at numerous times. What is the department's liability if a civilian contract gets shot doing a police officer's job?

[darrenphughes]

Alright, so I know that this topic has been almost argued to death but I just got this headline in Vertical Magazine's daily news and thought it might give a good example of some of Chas' concerns in his initial post.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article...806020661/1661

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article...331190322/1661

I know this is probably just 1 or 2 jackass' at work(it does take a jackass pilot to shine a searchlight at another pilot on a night flight, doesn't it?) and everyone shouldn't be tarred with the same brush, but it might also highlight the need for some sort of better regulation. At least in the Sarasota Sheriff's Aviation Department.

[SASless]

Rick,

Good question....but ask Bristow and CHC what their liability is if a pilot gets shot in Nigeria!

Perhaps Chuks can give us some insight as he was very close to such an incident in Lagos one fine morning.