Big brother is watching................

[SilsoeSid]

Thames Valley Police - Ports Unit

Examination of flights

Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act gives the police powers to examine any flight arriving or departing any airfield irrespective of its destination - this includes internal flights within the UK.

How can you help?

As a pilot/owner - by being aware of your responsibilities and complying with them.
By being vigilant and notifying us of anything suspicious.
By using the statutory and voluntary flight notification forms to assist us in monitoring General Aviation flights to and from the relevant areas.

Project Pegasus

Project Pegasus is a multi-agency initiative to enhance the reporting structure within the aviation community. The aim is to increase vigilance to make it more difficult for terrorists and organised criminals to operate across borders and to reduce illegal immigration and smuggling into the United Kingdom.

Perhaps in JTs case the hotel owner has simply been asked by the local police, as a landing site operator and therefore a member of the aviation community, to assist in Op Pegasus. And what is wrong anyway with things being ramped up a bit more with the Olympics closing rapidly from the horizon?

[SilsoeSid]

Silsoe .....cheap shot . We all happily tell ATC details going from an airport ...this has as much to do with knowing our probable route in the event we go missing .

Cheap shot! Nothing of the sort.
Of course I forgot, hotel owners, when expecting you to arrive at 1400hrs, will think nothing if you don't turn up.
How about making a point when booking in, of asking them to make enquiries if you don't appear! Much like the route cards walkers leave at pubs etc before going for a walk on the moors!

on a lighter note i see the police are going to demand that new recruits can at least spell their name to get onto the force ....a good move as there was no intelligence required at all previously ..........

And I will raise your lighter note to to add that you may well be surprised to find out how many recruits in recent years have degrees

[nigelh]

I agree ...If you book into a hotel with a landing time you would hope they may raise some alert ...just as with hill walkers . This is all sensible to me . If the hotel just want basic details of who , where from etc i see no problem .
The problem from my point of view was when the police would require you to notify them and then wait for them to come and interview you
I am aware that the drive to get better educated police into the force is slowly happening along with accelerated promotions ....all good stuff as we have all come across the thick ones who think they are robocop ......

[SilsoeSid]

I think if anyone needs educating these days, it's the pilots that JT hangs around with!

I can see the conversation now.

Hotel Manager "Excuse me sir, would you mind answering a few questions about your machine gun-toting, missile laden helicopter. I'm going to need your name, point of departure and purpose of your journey "

Pilot "No problem, Osama bin Laden, departed from a secret location somewhere in the U.K and the purpose of my visit - Terrorism."

Hotel Manager "Thank you sir, enjoy your stay."

As we all (well most of us) know, ObL has been dead for just over a year, which would cause the hotel manager to contact the police immediately as opposed to eventually informing them of the movement 'in due course'

[ShyTorque]

The point is that anyone intent on ill-deeds of terror probably wouldn't be using a hotel landing site, in any case.

[SilsoeSid]

That may well be true, and I guess a terrorist cell wouldn't dream of going on an outward bound course together either would they!

www.fas.org/irp/world/uk/july7review.pdf

Perhaps the previous lack of movement checks at sites such as hotels would have allowed the terrorist more freedom of movement for both training and meetings without the reporting constraints of an airfield!

Op Pegasus, surely we all have the responsibility to report anything suspicious rather than winge and moan saying things as ridiculous as "I'm not doing anything dodgy". You may well not be, but someone somewhere is!

In order to ask the right people the right questions, those same questions have to be asked to the wrong people.

[Thomas coupling]

Stop bleating you lot, will you! God - you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't!
Is it any skin off your nose to help the ploice in something like this? It's to do with the Olympics, of course it is - so it's in the public interest to assist.
If they did sod all and sat on their hands and the balloon went off - you lot would be the first to bitch and moan about cops doing nothing!!

get a life and take 2 minutes out of it to help towards public safety.
Rant over.

[ShyTorque]

In order to ask the right people the right questions, those same questions have to be asked to the wrong people.

Sid, agreed, I see both sides of this but as there is no effective way of confirming that the personal details given given are correct; so it's a nugatory system because it totally depends on the honesty of the individual. The people who need catching are obviously anything but honest and would obviously never be caught in this "trap"!

There is no legal requirement / mandate for anyone visiting a hotel to give correct personal details to a member of hotel staff i.e. there's no such offence of "giving false details to a hotel receptionist"! If there was a proper check in place, using immigration or police officers (which of course is totally impractical), the helicopter would just be landed somewhere other than at a hotel, at least after the first time someone asks for personal details of the occupants of evil intent!

It could be argued that a dishonest receptionist could pass details of those using a hotel landing pad to those wanting to "hitch a ride" on the day, shall we say. Who is vetting the hotel staff with access to this information and what security system is in place to protect any details passed to them....get my drift? *Edit: we have our own "personal security" system to consider. The personal details of who we fly around are kept very much "in house" with good reason. I'm very aware that passing "in confidence" details to a hotel receptionist, or sent by fax is a potential breach of that security.

It can surely be seen that this "security system/operation" is something put in place so that those who need to cover their backsides can say that something was put in place. It can do nothing to prevent a terrorist incident but as is often the case, it will make life more difficult for those going about their legal business on a daily basis.

Don't get me wrong, I'm as aware of the threat and as keen to help prevent it as anyone (probably more aware than most members of the public) but it does seem that the fear of an incident has the authorities running around in circles.

[A.Agincourt]

I do not see a problem here, following already in place required procedures - no big deal - reporting anything suspicious, could be an issue because I seriously doubt an appropriate and timely response. I operate all over the country including the Souf and have never been approached or involved with any of these people, in any way. Nor do I envisage that changing. As a matter of interest, the Holiday Inn at Garforth require similar information to be passed to the Police as mentioned by another poster referring to a spot in Lancashire. However, I can state clearly that this has been the case for quite a number of years to my personal knowledge and nothing to do with anything more recent. Why? You tell me.

[ShyTorque]

A.A, it's because they don't understand the actual legal requirement. As above, my point is, do you know who else gets to see (or could potentially see and act upon) the details you pass in advance to a hotel?

[A.Agincourt]

A.A, it's because they don't understand the actual legal requirement

Agreed and in fact they do not care.

As above, my point is, do you know who else gets to see (or could potentially see and act upon) the details you pass in advance to a hotel?

In all probability - nobody at all.

[SilsoeSid]

http://www.ffa.org.uk/documents/CAP428.pdf

CAP 428
Safety Standards at Unlicensed Aerodromes
(Including Helicopter Landing Sites)


2 Provide a movements log and ensure pilots always complete it. The local police and Customs and Excise will wish to check on flights in and out as may your local planning department if you are operating under the 28-day rule - Chapter 2, Paragraph 2.2 refers.

ShyTq

There is no legal requirement / mandate for anyone visiting a hotel to give correct personal details to a member of hotel staff i.e. there's no such offence of "giving false details to a hotel receptionist"!

I guess it would be like booking into a hotel as Mr Smith (as long as your name isn't Smith). Give all the false info you like, but the credit card will give your game away to the missus, as would the aircraft registration to the authorities.



What were those words, 'Im not doing anything dodgy' !!!!

[ShyTorque]

I guess it would be like booking into a hotel as Mr Smith (as long as your name isn't Smith). Give all the false info you like, but the credit card will give your game away to the missus, as would the aircraft registration to the authorities.

Sid, I'm afraid that's a little naive. Some hotels do not charge a landing fee. In any case, whatever the method of payment, it's certainly not mandatory to use a credit card and it's incorrect to assume that landing a helicopter obliges the use of any other hotel facilities needing payment.

How often do the hotel staff actually come out and check the aircraft registration (or that of your car, if driving into the carpark)? Never, in my experience. Would the average hotel staff even recognise the type of helicopter parked on the helipad? I know that they would not. There is no legal requirement for them to check, either.

As I said, my point is that the system depends entirely on the honesty of the individuals involved, which renders it ineffective for purpose. It will certainly enable the authorities to gain some peace of mind by monitoring law abiding citizens, but it will not prevent a non-law abiding citizen from doing anything he wishes.

[Agaricus bisporus]

I agree that this is a pointless system that can have no concieveable effect on terrorism as it simply cannot achieve its purpose and is therefore an ill-concieved pointless waste of time and manpower.
Thus it will inevitably be seen (rightly or wrongly) as having some otherhidden purpose which can only be
1)A pretence by the Police of "being seen to be doing something" - ie a bureaucratic pre-emptive arse-covering exercise which is probably close to the truth. It certainly displays all the signs of the sort of baseless assumptions that the Police make about subjects on which they posess zero knowledge and have't taken the trouble to find out or think about. (ie terrorists using a hotel site in the forst place, or being honest enough to give correct details if they did) If it wasn't so staggeringly naiive it would be hilarious.
2) Something more sinsiter in terms of big brother regulation of our established right to fly freely into private sites. Unlikely that the CAA would involve the Police in such a move, or that the Police would have the resources to co-operate.
3) A continuation of the all too common overstepping of reasonable Police powers under the blanket and untouchable excuse of the Anti Terrorism Act which is imho something to be very concerned about as they seem to feel they have the right to do almost anything without any justification when they invoke this. And that's scary in a democracy.

However unless memory fails surely there has been a requirement for many years (over 20) for the owners of unlicenced landing sites to maintain a record of movements so this sort of thing is hardly new, is it? Or has something changed?

[bladeslapper]

An extra £2bn in security costs for the Olympics....... Inevitably there will be some very silly examples of how to spend it !!

With a large contingent of the military and most of the UK's police deployed in London for the event - Not to mention a vast number of the world's press watching, why would you necessarily pick on a target in the hotspot of the city. There are plenty of of high profile targets around the Country, which will be relatively unguarded, but with the world press on hand to publicise your evil deeds.

Gathering information of who went where seems pretty pointless unless you really do have some means of collation and analysis. Surely far better to spend money on educating the public (not just aviation) of how to be 'vigilant'.

[ShyTorque]

Surely far better to spend money on educating the public (not just aviation) of how to be 'vigilant'.

But attempting to do so would be an admission that it's not already "taken care of" by other means.

The modus operandi seems to be: "Put something in place to cover the rear end, by proving we've at least thought about it and hope nothing actually happens".

[nigelh]

I can quite see the argument of people like TC about " just get on with it " etc etc and all for the greater good . That makes sense but dont forget that all the over regulation fron the CAA came creeping in in a similar way ...ie get on with it , it is for safety etc etc and look where we are now !
I said earlier that the police insisted i notify them when i am flying with guns on board and picking up fuel .....i refused ...but if that really now is "the law" it effectively means that most aoc flights taking people shooting will stop happening ( the fuzz will never get to you and inspect the guns , paperwork etc in under an hour )...thats a few million quid out of the Helicopter Pub Transport income for the year in one go !!! These things may look reasonable under the circumstances of the Olympics but please lets get some assurance that things go back to normal afterwards ........in my experience most temporary rules end up staying , we do not live in a country where the suits like giving up power remember that

[SilsoeSid]

Who mentioned landing fees?
My little (anal, annu, unalagee), tale, was one of that overnight 'business trip', booking in under a different name and a credit card slip that the poor lady at home will eventually notice :roll eyes:

How often do the hotel staff actually come out and check the aircraft registration (or that of your car, if driving into the carpark)? Never, in my experience.

When was the last time you put down an incorrect registration?

It amazes me that it seems there are a few professional aviators here prepared to bend rules without much thought or conscience. I really wonder how far that flexibility carries on into their aviation world.

Are some of you really so paranoid about people knowing who you are in your helicopter at the local hotel?

Here's a good one for you;
Of course, being pilots, the young sidleys assume we all know each other and in turn I know everyone else. As a habit I say hello to most people anyway.
This is great fun when having lunch for example at the local airfield. When an ac arrives, thanks to modern technology, I search the G-INFO database on the registration and find out the name of the owner. That's 'Dave' I tell them. "Really?" They say.
Watching the people get out of the ac, an owner can sometimes be identified and of course it can be quite easy to work out the most 'senior' aviator there anyway. A dead giveaway is the post flight walk around, not done by many casual aviators I add!
As they walk past I give a welcoming smile as say hello "David", good flight? Generally most most simply return the greeting and comment on the weather. Only twice has someone asked if we actually knew each other. All I say is that I thought we met at a fly at a few months ago at EGXX. Seemed to satisfy

Would it be alright if hotels just wrote down your registration without speaking to you and just passed that on info to the authorities? Surely that would prevent any , as JT says, feelings of being "slightly perturbed that my movements are potentially being recorded".

[SilsoeSid]

I agree that this is a pointless system that can have no concieveable effect on terrorism as it simply cannot achieve its purpose and is therefore an ill-concieved pointless waste of time and manpower.

Isn't it about being seen to be doing something and in turn disrupting any undesirable activity? Prevention better than cure and all that. Don't give these people the intelligence they don't have. If any part of their well rehearsed plan doesn't go right on the day, they cannot adapt to the change.

[ShyTorque]

I would have thought it better to do something effective, rather than wasting time and effort.

P.S. Shouldn't you be out here helping to wash the helicopter, or is it big breakfast time?

Sid, I've never had cause to make any false statement and so never have, but my point is that anyone could do so because the system isn't in place to prevent that from happening.

As far as real security is concerned! Let's put this in black and white for the hard of hearing...

I go about my lawful business, flying folk around the country. I make all the required bookings. The authorities can check up on me, as they obviously want to. Nothing is gained because I'm a law abiding citizen, so are my pax.

So I plan to go to a hotel to drop off some passengers. The hotel requires, in advance, my flight details. I send them, as requested. They now have details of my aircraft type, who I am, who my pax are, where I've come from and where I'm going. So they now know the capabilities of the aircraft as it arrives, including its range. They also know what date/time I'm arriving and how long I'll be there. There is no security at the hotel landing site. It's next to the public car park.....

Do you not see an issue here? Is that information kept secure? Have the hotel staff been security vetted?

From my point of view; my operation is more secure in reality, by not passing this information to anyone who might have evil intent.