Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Gyrocopter involved in murder charge

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Gyrocopter involved in murder charge

Old 15th Mar 2009, 18:34
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Somerset
Age: 77
Posts: 635
Trying to blame horse's desire to buck and bolt on flying machines is just flat silly
No one is, you old colonial you! It is just one of many. Horses appear to have brains about the same size as a pheasants. (sorry to any pheasants on this thread)
bast0n is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2009, 18:34
  #142 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 369
Horses, and livestock in general, do become accustomed to disturbance. Here in the South of England, where helicopter low flying is a normal everyday occurrence, horses and other livestock quickly get used to the noise.

The one thing that I know really does spook even a well-acclimatised horse, is the sudden arrival of something noisy. If they hear it coming from afar, they seem not to be particularly perturbed as a rule.

We've lost livestock (cattle) from being spooked. They've run into fences en masse and suffered severe injuries, usually badly torn udders from running into barbed wire. The main culprits have been very low flying military jets, which appear to come from nowhere, although the occasional very, very low flying Chinook has caused the odd problem.

Generally, if aircraft stay above about 1000 to 1500ft I really don't think most animals will be too bothered, although I certainly believe that we are well-advised (in the interest of being good neighbours) to keep as far away from livestock as we reasonably can.

VP
VP959 is offline  
Old 15th Mar 2009, 18:42
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,347
bast0n,

That is Ex-Colonial if you please.

Recall, we asked you very nicely to leave and after a bit of debate , we showed you and your Hessian friends to the door and handed you your hat and coat.
SASless is online now  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 08:55
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Oman
Posts: 363
Thought I'd posted this already.


You had. It wasn't funny then, and it still isn't

Senior Pilot
Rotorheads Moderator
whoateallthepies is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 10:57
  #145 (permalink)  

Hovering AND talking
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 54
Posts: 5,711
Yes, you did. And it got deleted, just as, hopefully, it will get deleted again!!

Cheers

Whirls
Whirlygig is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 12:55
  #146 (permalink)  
Red On, Green On
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 20
Posts: 6,487
Bringing this back OT. I'm told that the video is horribly clear. The aircraft set off, from a standstill, towards him, and mowed him down head-on. The aircraft passenger is a well-known animal rights activist with a long and repulsive list of convictions.

The video was shot by a third anti, who was doing a ground support/handling role.
airborne_artist is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 15:00
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: here
Posts: 221
Sorry - off topic and my bold...

I have to fly an MD 500 ifr , airways ,Min Alt FL 12 to cross Egypt next month , no deviation no vfr . Same for Sudan , Ethiopia etc etc
Have to eh? Hard life for some

HTC
herman the crab is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 15:59
  #148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 884
Hmmmm....bearing in mind the cost of props and rotor blades ,would any sane person risk deliberately damaging them ??
Just a thought.
heli1 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 16:19
  #149 (permalink)  
Red On, Green On
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 20
Posts: 6,487
Hmmmm....bearing in mind the cost of props and rotor blades ,would any sane person risk deliberately damaging them ??
Who says he was sane at the time? It sounds like it could be a horrible attack of red mist, if the story I have been told is true.
airborne_artist is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 16:32
  #150 (permalink)  

Hovering AND talking
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 54
Posts: 5,711
bearing in mind the cost of props and rotor blades ,would any sane person risk deliberately damaging them ??
Would any sane person decapitate another?

If what is rumoured is true, then the cost of his blades was not top of his priority list; neither was the consequences of taking another man's life so violently.

Cheers

Whirls
Whirlygig is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 16:45
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,347
It takes two to fight!

Just because you decide to jump into a well does not mean the Good Lord is bound to fetch you out!

Either/Both parties involved could have avoided this event by using a bit of commonsense.

I fault both of them equally in that regard.

Perhaps both sides in the Hunt/No-Hunt camps will take note of the loss of a life and come to their senses otherwise this will not be the last person killed or maimed as a result of gross stupidity on both sides.
SASless is online now  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 16:48
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Coventry/Edinburgh
Posts: 19
I haven't read the whole of this topic as I don't have that much free time. Have tried to get through the majority of the 'neutral' information and ignore the 'obviously biassed' where possible. This leads me to the question of how on earth will it be possible to get a 'neutral' jury if this is going to court as a murder trial. From those who have posted on here, I would suggest the majority have a view which is already biassed because of their existing views on hunting.
Keith_P is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 17:19
  #153 (permalink)  
ANW
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 108
Bringing this back OT. I'm told that the video is horribly clear. The aircraft set off, from a standstill, towards him, and mowed him down head-on.
An alternative reading of your wording might be ...... the aircraft was taxiing and the huntsman, totally and irresponsibly oblivious to any danger, continued to advance towards it to have the aforementioned confrontation with the occupant. No sane person would venture anywhere near one when the engine is running, for obvious reasons. It is extremely foolish to do otherwise.

Long Marston airfield - ICAO code EGBL, and its in the vfr flight guides as a long establish airfield.


Subject to adhering to the operational legalities of the ANO, any aircraft can be used to monitor activities. The Antis may have had a good reason to check the activities of this particular hunt, acting on information they have received. Radar equipped Fishery protection and quota monitoring aircraft are low flying daily, gathering shipping information for possible infringements and prosecution. So why not a hunt surveillance fleet, paid for by the government, if police authorities claim their budgets will not allow them to do this work? Gathering evidence by use of any aerial or ground platform is perfectly legal. That the subject(s) being filmed won't like it, is another matter. The Courts and the Government ask for evidence of wrong-doing before they will act. How is one to obtain said evidence? Especially if the Police, as servants of the Law will not act?

There is an assumption being made here (and elsewhere) that the Gyro 'buzzed' the hunt. This conjures up scenes of James Bond and Little Nellie zipping through the hedgerows, guns a blazing, which some newspaper reporters would have the casual reader believe. Did it? I don't know. Was it following the hunt at a legal height? I don't know, I was not there. Were you? The pilot will be aware of the height rules and would be a fool to break them in this situation, where he knows witnesses are present. The Government have said they want evidence: this is one legitimate way to gather such evidence; the Police could have used their helicopter, but they appear to prefer to leave it to others to gather evidence for them - conveniently at other people's expense. Would the hunt complain about the police aerial surveillance of their activities? After all such aerial and ground monitoring of crowds takes place, for example, every weekend at top league football matches.


As to monitor events. The Police air support units and other agencies do this everyday of the week 24/7/365. Bringing it down to ground level, we are surrounded by CCTV cameras checking how many times we sneeze. No Nigelh, if the Police cannot or more likely, will not, monitor all activities to gather evidence, not just hunting related, then it is left to the individual or others to do the work the police are paid to do. Just like a friend of mine has installed CCTV overlooking the neighbourhood area he resides in which, for 10 years of police in-action, has been the scene of drug dealing. Despite residents informing the local police and passing on car registrations, nothing has been done (10 years). With the installation of private initiative CCTV, the dealers and customers (in their nice Bentleys, Range Rovers etc) moved elsewhere, when confronted and informed of the CCTV monitoring. Now it is someone else's problem in a different area. Meanwhile the Chief Constable had other things on his mind.

Aerial monitoring has been around for decades. Local councils use this to check on illegal buildings in your back gardens which do not have planning consent. The tax man uses it to check on local farmers who are storing caravans over winter and not declaring their income for doing so - and I know of one girl who is employed full time by the Revenue just to read newspaper adverts and follow up as a pretend caravanner to see if the farmers are declaring their additional income. Aerial monitoring is and has been a fact of life since the Battlefields of WWI and earlier. Some here say it is a form of harassment. Then so is a gang of policemen manning revenue earning speed traps cameras - harassed motorists of course being easy pickings, unlike having to expend police funds to deal with drug dealers.

Talking of heated revenge, anyone recall the incident when the Merseyside Police helicopter was set on fire on the main terminal apron at Liverpool Airport, by the bad guys it had been monitoring? Similarly a parked helicopter, identical to the one in use by the Manchester police at the time, was peppered with gun shot whilst parked at Barton airfield - only it was not the police machine, but a night-stopping private owner, who happened to have a similar machine. It is not only 'height' that people cannot get right.

This video may be of interest.
ANW is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 17:48
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,347
Basil,

Excuse me but when did the airfield become a part of the hunt site?

The man drove cross country to beard the pilot at his aircraft did he not?

ANW,

Despite agreeing with most of what you said....just why is it imperative for anti-hunters to perform aerial surveillance upon the Hunt? If they have a complaint then call the Police.

If they are worried about animals being killed perhaps they could save far more by getting involved in rescuing abandoned domestic critters that are facing the death penalty if not adopted.
SASless is online now  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 18:34
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Cotswolds
Age: 63
Posts: 1,261
Airborne Artist

Who are we to judge on hearsay of what is on a video?

The way thing are told leave as much impression as the words themselves.

The aircraft set off, from a standstill, towards him, and mowed him down head-on. The aircraft passenger is a well-known animal rights activist with a long and repulsive list of convictions.

Was the engine already running? Did it start off on the taxi way? Was the intention to avoid the upcoming fight and take off? How much time elapsed from the moment the gyro started moving till the collision occurred? Did either party take avoidance action? Did the terrain allow for avoiding action?

Or was it how the wording was selected above?

It s a horrible situation but neither the hunter nor the hunted should be convicted at this time
vanHorck is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 19:44
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Stottesdon
Posts: 4
Perhaps both sides in the Hunt/No-Hunt camps will take note of the loss of a life and come to their senses otherwise this will not be the last person killed or maimed as a result of gross stupidity on both sides.
One would hope that would be the case - sadly, I fear not - particularly when an AR activist on another site posted: "the tactic of scaring a horse so it will throw the rider is I believe legitamate, but I would never purposefuly hurt them."

Gathering evidence by use of any aerial or ground platform is perfectly legal. That the subject(s) being filmed won't like it, is another matter.
Try going to your local park and filming young children at play and see how long it is before a policeman turns up to arrest you. These so-called monitors are constantly filming children out hunting (and screaming foul-mouthed abuse at them!) Funnily enough, their parents DON'T like it!
JanetGeorge is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 20:07
  #157 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The front end and about 50ft up
Posts: 510
Crikey ANW, that was quite a post!

I don't particularly object to professional pilots representing lawful authority enforcing the law through aerial surveillance.

I do object to amateur pilots representing extremist groups enforcing their own personal agendas through vigilanteism and using aircraft to harass other citizens.

Without even wanting to get started on the pro/anti hunt debate, I think this sort of vigilante air force is a recipe for disaster and I hope that the police, CAA, and all responsible members of the aviation community would stamp hard on this sort of activity before it becomes commonplace.
Fg Off Max Stout is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 20:52
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: France
Posts: 239
I don't particularly object to professional pilots representing lawful authority enforcing the law through aerial surveillance. I do object to amateur pilots representing extremist groups enforcing their own personal agendas through vigilanteism and using aircraft to harass other citizens.
I am surprised it took so long to get round to this point, but I think it is the most interesting. I agree entirely, and I am surprised that they allow it today. If this sort of thing isn't stopped quickly you will have situations like pro-lifers hovering over abortion clinics, then pro-choicers monitoring them -- a recipe for mid air collisions. Today it is a small number, probably because people with licenses prefer to pass their time doing other things, but if political groups see that it works they will start sending their people to get flying lessons.
deltayankee is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 20:59
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The front end and about 50ft up
Posts: 510
Aaah, a return of sponsored flying training - not all bad then! [JOKE]
Fg Off Max Stout is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2009, 21:01
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: East in the hills
Age: 57
Posts: 123
Without stating the obvious, this is a live case and there is a serious danger of this thread becoming predudicial to a forthcoming trial which could cause action to be taken against the individuals posting the information and also the forum. Be very careful in posting anything relating to live trials, especially evidence. If it is not already in the papers (who employ teams of lawers to ensure they dont predjudice), then it should not be posted. To my knowledge, the content of the video has not been released and will be pivotal to a forthcoming trial. Any jury reading some of the above posts above would have already had their minds made up for them!

I know we all want to know what happened but i am afraid that will have to wait till the trial and jurys outcome, probably many months away.
Remember numbers of the media along with (no doubt) Crown court judges are members of this forum.
staplefordheli is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.