Do these guys know what harm they do?
The dog walker is a weatherman, there we have the nub of the problem, what would a weatherman know about the weather if most of the forecasts of the past couple of years are to go by ? SS is dead right here, I have been to EGBO and told that viz was less than 100 m which was correct but if you stepped outside the airfield gate it was 9999, so who is to say what the viz was like, perhaps he flew over the fog from a nicer part of the country.
To quote Mr O'Leary (Ryanair CEO)
*expletives modified*
Yup. Weathermen for you.
I mean, it is absolutely bizarre that the people who can't tell us what the fu#*ing weather is next Tuesday can predict with absolute precision what the fu#*ing global temperatures will be in 100 years' time. It's horse#hit.
Yup. Weathermen for you.
Thread Starter
So a weatherman, quoting weather where he is (not predicting it, or giving a forecast or whatever) is demonised? And the pilot was just clearly unlucky, huh?
What a weird place this is. Just look at the photo.
Yep Epiphany, there's some on here that would tell you black was white. The pilot can't be a 'cock' for pissing about in stupid weather, oh no.
You'll all moan when the minimum visibility distances are increased. Again. Oh and by the way, flying around when you can't see isn't just illegal, it's dangerous.
What a weird place this is. Just look at the photo.
Yep Epiphany, there's some on here that would tell you black was white. The pilot can't be a 'cock' for pissing about in stupid weather, oh no.
You'll all moan when the minimum visibility distances are increased. Again. Oh and by the way, flying around when you can't see isn't just illegal, it's dangerous.
Last edited by 206 jock; 9th Dec 2010 at 22:40.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
If I had a quid every time I heard, 'Well the weathers ok here, why aren't you coming?', I'd have quite a few quid! Much the same as the times when I've heard "I can hear you but can't see you".
As for the photo, you have no idea when it was taken or on what. I can tell you that a just couple of hundred feet above, when I was around a little later, it was 8/8 blue.
Are you 2 really pilots?
Simon was quoting the weather given on a TAF given out at 060458Z that gave unpleasant weather all day. However the TAF at 061103Z was giving all the 9's and few at 3.
Highlighted even further on how even a metman can't always be a reliable witness in these events is when he starts quoting METARS from very much earlier in the day instead of a more up to date one such as METAR EGBB 061120Z VRB02KT 8000 NSC M03/M03 Q1002=
And how come he couldn't be more reliable with these reports considering he didn't make his 'report' until 05:24 the next morning?
Simon says that the ac landed around 11:15, 5 mins before Brums actual was giving 8km no sig cloud. I don't understand why Simon wasn't able to get hold of the TAF and METAR that were closest to the time of his concern.
What Simon doesn't seem to realise and this surprises me, is that vertical vis and slant vis are 2 totally different kettles of fish and as aviators 206 and Epith should know this. This is proved when Simon says, "It just so happened he descended through fog into 80m vis about 3-miles from EGBO at 1115, into an impossible landing area".
Don't forget that this is 80m forward vis according to the ground observer, however the vertical vis may well have been unlimited therefore possibly making the descent into the field possibly steep, but certainly not impossible at all.
206 Jock - This Pilot wasn't 'pissing about in stupid weather' as you put it, it seems to me that he made a good decision to do what he did rather than carry on. This should prove to be a good learning point to us all, better to bottle it when you see a landing site than to carry on in blind hope.
Regardless of how you or Epith feel about it, I think you'll find the CAA will not have a great deal to say about this, especially not in the way you want them to!
As for the photo, you have no idea when it was taken or on what. I can tell you that a just couple of hundred feet above, when I was around a little later, it was 8/8 blue.
Are you 2 really pilots?
Simon was quoting the weather given on a TAF given out at 060458Z that gave unpleasant weather all day. However the TAF at 061103Z was giving all the 9's and few at 3.
Highlighted even further on how even a metman can't always be a reliable witness in these events is when he starts quoting METARS from very much earlier in the day instead of a more up to date one such as METAR EGBB 061120Z VRB02KT 8000 NSC M03/M03 Q1002=
And how come he couldn't be more reliable with these reports considering he didn't make his 'report' until 05:24 the next morning?
Simon says that the ac landed around 11:15, 5 mins before Brums actual was giving 8km no sig cloud. I don't understand why Simon wasn't able to get hold of the TAF and METAR that were closest to the time of his concern.
What Simon doesn't seem to realise and this surprises me, is that vertical vis and slant vis are 2 totally different kettles of fish and as aviators 206 and Epith should know this. This is proved when Simon says, "It just so happened he descended through fog into 80m vis about 3-miles from EGBO at 1115, into an impossible landing area".
Don't forget that this is 80m forward vis according to the ground observer, however the vertical vis may well have been unlimited therefore possibly making the descent into the field possibly steep, but certainly not impossible at all.
206 Jock - This Pilot wasn't 'pissing about in stupid weather' as you put it, it seems to me that he made a good decision to do what he did rather than carry on. This should prove to be a good learning point to us all, better to bottle it when you see a landing site than to carry on in blind hope.
Regardless of how you or Epith feel about it, I think you'll find the CAA will not have a great deal to say about this, especially not in the way you want them to!
Sid,
Is that an echo I hear? Too bad others can't, maybe they need a hearing test!
Is that an echo I hear? Too bad others can't, maybe they need a hearing test!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 433 Likes
on
228 Posts
A few thoughts:
The weather man will be used to making met observations, they are paid to do so and to cast aspersions on the OP here is IMHO, unprofessional. The estimate of visibility by the OP is likely to be as good as one might expect anywhere; irrespective of the forecast or METAR for the nearest airfield(s).
The photo in the press report shows a single engined Squirrel helicopter. We do not know if this the actual aircraft in question and press reports are often completely erroneous in this respect.
However, in UK, no single engined helicopter is allowed to fly under IFR, and most are not fully equipped for IFR flight.
It is possible to hold a private or commercial pilot's helicopter licence without an instrument rating and in this case we do not know if the pilot held an IR.
The pilot has a legal obligation to ensure that any flight can be safely made; i.e. the weather is suitable in all respects. If the aircraft could not have landed at its planned destination, sufficient fuel should have been carried from the outset to divert to a suitable landing place under VFR.
From my own experience of dealing with the CAA about such landings, a school playing field is always classed as a congested area, irrespective of its location. A landing in a congested area requires a written permission from the CAA, i.e. exemption from Rule 5(3)(c), which costs £108!
In this case we do not know if such a permission was applied for and granted but if it was (i.e. the playing field was the intended destination), one requirement would have been that the landing site would have been secured i.e. children would not have been on the field, except under strict control by persons on the ground. Another condition always mandated by the CAA is that the landing must take place under VFR, i.e. the visibility must be 1500 metres at the time.
I think the CAA might well be interested in looking into the press report.
The weather man will be used to making met observations, they are paid to do so and to cast aspersions on the OP here is IMHO, unprofessional. The estimate of visibility by the OP is likely to be as good as one might expect anywhere; irrespective of the forecast or METAR for the nearest airfield(s).
The photo in the press report shows a single engined Squirrel helicopter. We do not know if this the actual aircraft in question and press reports are often completely erroneous in this respect.
However, in UK, no single engined helicopter is allowed to fly under IFR, and most are not fully equipped for IFR flight.
It is possible to hold a private or commercial pilot's helicopter licence without an instrument rating and in this case we do not know if the pilot held an IR.
The pilot has a legal obligation to ensure that any flight can be safely made; i.e. the weather is suitable in all respects. If the aircraft could not have landed at its planned destination, sufficient fuel should have been carried from the outset to divert to a suitable landing place under VFR.
From my own experience of dealing with the CAA about such landings, a school playing field is always classed as a congested area, irrespective of its location. A landing in a congested area requires a written permission from the CAA, i.e. exemption from Rule 5(3)(c), which costs £108!
In this case we do not know if such a permission was applied for and granted but if it was (i.e. the playing field was the intended destination), one requirement would have been that the landing site would have been secured i.e. children would not have been on the field, except under strict control by persons on the ground. Another condition always mandated by the CAA is that the landing must take place under VFR, i.e. the visibility must be 1500 metres at the time.
I think the CAA might well be interested in looking into the press report.
Given that the weather was evidently marginal and changing, the point is that this person managed to get into deteriorating conditions and the visibility went below VFR and continued to deteriorate.
As pointed out IFR is NOT an option. You are in sight of ground although the visibility is worsening.
As pointed out - VIS below 1500 metres you MUST land. What are the other options?
(a) Do you go back the way you came with the prospects of the conditions being worse than they were when you came that way?
(b) Do you decide to go up into it IMC (I hope not and illegal)
(c) Land. Just so happened to be a large area available even though it is a school playing field blah blah etc etc.
Which is the least dangerous?
As pointed out IFR is NOT an option. You are in sight of ground although the visibility is worsening.
As pointed out - VIS below 1500 metres you MUST land. What are the other options?
(a) Do you go back the way you came with the prospects of the conditions being worse than they were when you came that way?
(b) Do you decide to go up into it IMC (I hope not and illegal)
(c) Land. Just so happened to be a large area available even though it is a school playing field blah blah etc etc.
Which is the least dangerous?
(2) Subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), it is an offence to contravene, to permit the contravention of, or to fail to comply with, the Rules of the Air
(3) It is lawful for the Rules of the Air to be departed from to the extent necessary:
(a) for avoiding immediate danger;
(a) for avoiding immediate danger;
(5) If any departure from the Rules of the Air is made for the purpose of avoiding immediate danger, the commander of the aircraft must cause written detailed information about the departure, and of the circumstances giving rise to it, to be given within 10 days of the departure to the competent authority of the country in whose territory the departure was made or if the departure was made over the high seas, to the CAA.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 433 Likes
on
228 Posts
RVDT, Hence my comment about fuel reserves. The situation possibly wouldn't have occurred if more consideration had been given to the weather forecasts and weather diversions.
I wonder what fuel reserves were being carried and why the aircraft was landed off airport in poor visibility and freezing conditions.
Why did the pilot not divert to land at Birmingham airport instead? It's less than ten minutes flying time away.
Silsoe Sid, who is based there, said the conditions above the fog were very good and the conditions at the airport were suitable.
Pilots continue to get themselves into tight corners, especially in poor weather. That's when accidents happen and we all get tarred with the same brush. The general public see more evidence that helicopters are intrinsically dangerous. This is the last thing the industry needs, especially in an economic downturn.
Sometimes the most difficult thing about aviation is knowing when to cancel a trip. In my time I've known quite a few "yes-men" pilots, always full of good intentions to get a job done, who are now dead men.
The pilot in this incident will no doubt already have informed the CAA about the circumstances of his landing in a congested area, (unless he was already given a permission), hence my earlier reference to an MOR. If he has not, he shouldn't be totally surprised if they come asking for him to explain his actions.
I wonder what fuel reserves were being carried and why the aircraft was landed off airport in poor visibility and freezing conditions.
Why did the pilot not divert to land at Birmingham airport instead? It's less than ten minutes flying time away.
Silsoe Sid, who is based there, said the conditions above the fog were very good and the conditions at the airport were suitable.
Pilots continue to get themselves into tight corners, especially in poor weather. That's when accidents happen and we all get tarred with the same brush. The general public see more evidence that helicopters are intrinsically dangerous. This is the last thing the industry needs, especially in an economic downturn.
Sometimes the most difficult thing about aviation is knowing when to cancel a trip. In my time I've known quite a few "yes-men" pilots, always full of good intentions to get a job done, who are now dead men.
The pilot in this incident will no doubt already have informed the CAA about the circumstances of his landing in a congested area, (unless he was already given a permission), hence my earlier reference to an MOR. If he has not, he shouldn't be totally surprised if they come asking for him to explain his actions.
I for one wouldnt divert to Brum as that would involve being messed around by atc for god knows how long AND the need to fly over congested area ..... i think the pilot made right call ...just bad luck it was a school 
How many of us havent landed not knowing what the field is ? I once did it and ( luckily before i had closed down ) a load of prison guards came running across the field thinking it was a break out !! I repositioned pretty quick .
I dont think its a good thing to do and isnt helpful to our cause .....but it will happen now and again regardless of rules .....it just should happen often !!
( as for being guided by some random dog walker .....he may be a rabid anti and sending you towards the telephone lines .....)
How many of us havent landed not knowing what the field is ? I once did it and ( luckily before i had closed down ) a load of prison guards came running across the field thinking it was a break out !! I repositioned pretty quick .I dont think its a good thing to do and isnt helpful to our cause .....but it will happen now and again regardless of rules .....it just should happen often !!
( as for being guided by some random dog walker .....he may be a rabid anti and sending you towards the telephone lines .....)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get 'er Down!
Until I hear more about it, my default position is to side with the PILOT IN COMMAND over all monday morning co-pilot comments. The pilot did the right thing. GET 'ER DOWN! 
I've been there myself and I can assure you that anything that could have been posted here would not have carried one gram of weight in my decision.
"A landing in a congested area requires a written permission from the CAA". Really ShyTorque? Even in an emergency? You aren't suggesting that the pilot PLANNED to land in a school yard, are you?
206 jock, is it true that you once said "Doesn't that pilot know what harm he's doing by landing in the Hudson River"? Just wondering...
I've been there myself and I can assure you that anything that could have been posted here would not have carried one gram of weight in my decision.
"A landing in a congested area requires a written permission from the CAA". Really ShyTorque? Even in an emergency? You aren't suggesting that the pilot PLANNED to land in a school yard, are you?
206 jock, is it true that you once said "Doesn't that pilot know what harm he's doing by landing in the Hudson River"? Just wondering...
Last edited by fly911; 12th Dec 2010 at 11:55.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: LEAX, Spain
Age: 62
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fly911 is right. If in doubt, if viz is deteriorating fast, etc, etc, get her down. Afteral, that's what helicopters can do, so why not use that ability in timely fashion?
Or, as I think David Dixon once advised: 'If in doubt, chicken out!"
Happened to me due rapid fog formation, and I elected to follow David and my instructor's advice from years before,,,"Dan, make an early decision, not a late one, and thus give yourself time to make a nice unhurried touchdown somewhere...preferably near where you can get a cup of tea."
My R44 and I ended up nestled between miles of olive trees atop a Spanish hill, miles from anywhere. Notified ATC by phone, revised the flightplan and everyone was happy. Lifted out of there a few hours later. Never did find the farmer - or get a cup of tea - but I'm here to tell the tale. How many are not because they feared breaking a rule, pressed on and maybe later got accused of suffering 'get there'itis'?
Dan
Or, as I think David Dixon once advised: 'If in doubt, chicken out!"
Happened to me due rapid fog formation, and I elected to follow David and my instructor's advice from years before,,,"Dan, make an early decision, not a late one, and thus give yourself time to make a nice unhurried touchdown somewhere...preferably near where you can get a cup of tea."
My R44 and I ended up nestled between miles of olive trees atop a Spanish hill, miles from anywhere. Notified ATC by phone, revised the flightplan and everyone was happy. Lifted out of there a few hours later. Never did find the farmer - or get a cup of tea - but I'm here to tell the tale. How many are not because they feared breaking a rule, pressed on and maybe later got accused of suffering 'get there'itis'?
Dan
Last edited by Dantruck; 12th Dec 2010 at 12:46. Reason: sticky finger syndrome
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 433 Likes
on
228 Posts
"A landing in a congested area requires a written permission from the CAA". Really ShyTorque? Even in an emergency? You aren't suggesting that the pilot PLANNED to land in a school yard, are you?
Fog can develop and/or move very quickly . Starting an approach in deteriorating waether can end in landing in fog . The other day i tried to get out of my house as the fog was coming in ....as i started it was clear with fog around 500m away ...as i started to lift it came over me and i had to land again and abort ....all in 2 -3 minutes . If you were not in the heli you dont know the circumstances . There are a lot of armchair experts here who like nothing more than to slag off other pilots . Sad but true .
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other day i tried to get out of my house as the fog was coming in ....as i started it was clear with fog around 500m away ...as i started to lift it came over me and i had to land again and abort ....all in 2 -3 minutes
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. I am not a meteorologist, just a professional helicopter pilot. But I know about the formation and dissipation of fog and if I had looked out of my window and seen it forming 500m away I would either be closing the hangar doors and opening the garage doors or going back to bed and waiting for it to clear - not attempting to take-off.
I am sure you are the best But a really daft comment from you all the same ...there are many days up here when it is clear sky and all the 9.s with fog in the valleys ....that fog sometimes gets blown over the hills....sometimes it clears again quickly and sometimes it stays socked in ....IF you can escape before it engulfs you then you fly ...simple but i guess a true professional like you would just take the day off
Its arrogant posts like yours that would stop low timers daring to ask questions .....and even stop them landing in case its say a school field ??
I do not believe that any pfofessional would find a problem flying in 10+k of viz but within 1/2 k of a fog bank ... or maybe you just didnt understand the point ...
But a really daft comment from you all the same ...there are many days up here when it is clear sky and all the 9.s with fog in the valleys ....that fog sometimes gets blown over the hills....sometimes it clears again quickly and sometimes it stays socked in ....IF you can escape before it engulfs you then you fly ...simple but i guess a true professional like you would just take the day off Its arrogant posts like yours that would stop low timers daring to ask questions .....and even stop them landing in case its say a school field ??
I do not believe that any pfofessional would find a problem flying in 10+k of viz but within 1/2 k of a fog bank ... or maybe you just didnt understand the point ...