Confined off airport landing sites (again...)

[nellycopter]

It seems the last thread on this is now closed, which was 2002...
Question, as I have asked a few pilots / instructors at various airports/places all of whome seem to have different ideas.... On this......

So a private landing site which is not in a congested area, has a road 50mtrs to the south, wires 50 mtrs east a large garage 50 mtrs north,
And a neighbour 300mtrs east. Must be a confined area !!!!!

Is it legal to land here ! Or is it in breach of rule 5 ?
The garage is part of the landing site,
There is a small field between the neighbour and the clear way in from the east !!!! Subject to wind .....

I read a thread about the guy who was taken to court for overflying his neighbours house at 100ft,
I have no need at all to overfly my only neighbour for miles..... But wondered, what about overflying MY house at 100ft?
Or even ..... My garage ???
How do hotels manage to get round this when they are surrounded with such obsticals ?
And even worse, in most cases the marked 'H' at hotels is usually very close to the outdoor seating area, which I hate, I try to land further away... There's nothing worse that seeing napkins and the like flying all over as you come in...

Mods, apologies if there is an open thread on this...

Nelly

Devonshire arms, for example....... I choose to plonk it on the grass out the way, then along comes someone else to annoy everyone.....

[nellycopter]

I've just picked myself up off the floor with laughter.. After reading this from a closed thread....

Rule 5 means whatever the CAA want it to mean. If you have the misfortune to come to their attention for any reason it is one of several convenient vehicles to nail you in court. You cant argue with it cos its so vague. Just the way they like it.

'normal aviation practice'. What bollocks.


Edit

Oh yeah

'congested area'??? more bollocks

[nellycopter]

And what about this !????
Taken from a caa document..


(d) Balloons and helicopters over congested areas
(i) A balloon shall be exempt from the 1000 feet rule when landing because it is becalmed.
(ii) Any helicopter flying shall be exempt from the land clear rule.

[chopjock]

You can beat the campaign. I've won more than I've lost.

When ever I get investigated for low flying (a few times now) I usually say I was going to land but changed my mind.

Normal aviation practice? well I normally practice low flying all over the place.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Is it me or is there some confusion going on here between "confined" and "congested" landing sites? I'm not clear what is being asked.

[nellycopter]

Any of
It's called rule 5 ......
But what does it mean ??????

Why would it state what can't be done and then exempt helicopters from the land clear rule....
Does that mean a helicopter is exempt from the land clear rule, if an engine fails, into a confined area ! Which you most certainly will be overflying something or else it wouldn't be confined.... ???.

It was a simple question, as people I have asked have come up with different answers ... So thought I would ask some
Professionals their take on it.......... On here.....

[Chris Burke]

My understanding is rule 5 exempts you from the 500ft rule if taking off or landing, any landing, confined or not. Don't quote me on this but i'm sure for confined operations you can conduct a low recce at 300ft agl. I would choose not to fly over any buildings etc if I had the choice at that height.

As for the land clear rule, i think that goes out the window with an emergency like an engine failure on a single engine machine. But I guess that's why it exists to give you a chance of finding a spot somewhere to put her down. Though at 1000ft I'd imagine you'd have to think fast to put her down safe in a built up area.

It would seem the confusion my be as to how the rule applies to your circumstance as you described. Should be fine from what you say.

I think sometimes as a private pilot, which I am, it is easy to worry too much about breaking the rules and we then restrict what we do for fear of getting on the wrong side of the CAA. So long as the flight is safe, and well within yours and your machines limits then it should be fine.

Just my observations.

Chris

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by Chris Burke

As for the land clear rule, i think that goes out the window with an emergency like an engine failure on a single engine machine. But I guess that's why it exists to give you a chance of finding a spot somewhere to put her down. Though at 1000ft I'd imagine you'd have to think fast to put her down safe in a built up area.

Chris,

You are partly correct there. The 'land clear' rule does not 'go out the window with an engine failure on a single engine machine'. The land clear rule always applies. Like you go on to say, it is there so that if there is an engine failure, then there won't be further damage to people or property on the ground caused by the aircraft.

If you want to land in a confined area which is in a congested area (which is probably the root of nellycopter's confusion) then you will require a second engine (ie a twin) in order to allow a fly away in the case of a 'power unit failure'.

The rules in question:

Failure of power unit
An aircraft shall not be flown below such height as would enable it to make an emergency landing without causing danger to persons or property on the surface in the event of a power unit failure.



The land clear rule
An aircraft flying over a congested area of a city, town or settlement shall not fly below such height as would permit the aircraft to land clear of the congested area in the event of a power unit failure.

[Chris Burke]

Thanks for clarifying that . I think my wording let me down there.

Chris

[nellycopter]

ok - the 'Land clear rule' comes under the sub heading of
The low flying prohibitions ! and so does the 500 ft rule.

under the heading (3) Exemptions from the low flying prohibitions
is the Ambigious
'normal aviation practice' which no-one seems to understand......
but more supprisingly - which no one seems to be able to see - under section (d)(ii) of Exemptions from the low flying prohibitions is this !!!

ANY HELICOPTER FLYING SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM THE LAND CLEAR RULE !

I fully understand that i cant fly into the center of leeds in a single engine heli and land, but do wires, bulidings and a road and expecially flying over your own building, (so long as its not your own full of people office block..) prohibit landing >>??????

nelly

[nellycopter]

Amendment of Rule 5 of the UK Rules of the Air 1996
Low flying

5 (1) The prohibitions to be observed are

(a) An aircraft shall comply with the low flying prohibitions set out in paragraph (2) subject to the low flying exemptions set out in paragraph (3).
(b) Where an aircraft is flying in circumstances such that more than one of the low flying prohibitions apply it must fly at the greatest height required by any of the applicable prohibitions.
(2) The low flying prohibitions
(a) Failure of power unit
An aircraft shall not be flown below such height as would enable it, in the event of a power unit failure, to make an emergency landing without causing danger to persons or property on the surface.
(b) The 500 feet rule
Except with the permission in writing of the CAA, an aircraft shall not be flown closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure.
(c) The 1000 feet rule
Except with the permission in writing of the CAA, an aircraft flying over a congested area of a city town or settlement shall not fly below a height of 1,000 feet above the highest fixed obstacle within a horizontal radius of 600 metres of the aircraft.
(d) The land clear rule
An aircraft flying over a congested area of a city town or settlement shall not fly below such height as will permit, in the event of a power unit failure, the aircraft to land clear of the congested area.
(e) Flying over open air assemblies
Except with the permission in writing of the CAA, an aircraft shall not fly over an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons below:
(i) a height of 1,000 feet, or
(ii) such height as will permit, in the event of a power unit failure, the aircraft to alight clear of the assembly,
whichever is the higher.
(f) Landing and taking off near open air assemblies
An aircraft shall not land or take-off within 1,000 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons, except
(i) at an aerodrome, in accordance with procedures notified by the CAA, or
(ii) at a landing site other than an aerodrome, in accordance with procedures notified by the CAA and with the written permission of the organiser of the assembly.
(3) Exemptions from the low flying prohibitions
(a) Landing and taking off
(i) Any aircraft shall be exempt from any low flying prohibition in so far as it is flying in accordance with normal aviation practice for the purpose of taking off from, landing at or practising approaches to landing at or checking navigational aids or procedures at a Government or licensed aerodrome.
(ii) Any aircraft shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule when landing and taking-off in accordance with normal aviation practice.
(b) Captive balloons and kites
None of the low flying prohibitions shall apply to any captive balloon or kite.
(c) Special VFR clearance and notified routes
Any aircraft shall be exempt from the 1000 feet rule when flying on a special VFR flight, or when operating in accordance with the procedures notified for the route being flown; provided that when flying in accordance with this exemption landings may not be made at other than a licensed or Government aerodrome, unless the permission of the CAA has been obtained.
(d) Balloons and helicopters over congested areas
(i) A balloon shall be exempt from the 1000 feet rule when landing because it is becalmed.
(ii) Any helicopter flying shall be exempt from the land clear rule.
(e) Police air operator’s certificate
Any aircraft flying in accordance with the terms of a police air operator’s certificate shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule, the 1000 feet rule, the prohibition on flying over open air assemblies and the prohibition on landing and taking off near open air assemblies.
(f) Flying displays etc
An aircraft taking part in a flying display, air race or contest shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule when within a horizontal distance of 1,000 metres of the gathering of persons assembled to witness the event.
(g) Glider hill soaring
A glider when hill-soaring shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule.
(h) Picking up and dropping at an aerodrome
Any aircraft picking up or dropping tow ropes, banners or similar articles at an aerodrome shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule.
(i) Manoeuvring helicopters
A helicopter shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule when conducting manoeuvres in accordance with normal aviation practice, within the boundaries of a licensed or Government aerodrome, or at other sites with the permission of the CAA: provided that when flying in accordance with this exemption the helicopter must not be operated closer than 60 metres to persons, vessels vehicles or structures located outside the aerodrome or site.
(j) Dropping articles with CAA permission
(i) Any aircraft shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule when flying in accordance with article 56(3)(f) of the Order, and
(ii) Any aircraft shall be exempt from the 500 feet rule when flying in accordance with an aerial application certificate issued by the CAA under article 58 of the Order.
Note
(This note is not part of the amendment)

The exemption for manoeuvring helicopters, contained in Rule 5(3)(i) above, is a clarification of the status of helicopters conducting ground cushion manoeuvres, as currently contained in the CAA Official Record Series 4, Exemption No. 328. This does not apply to helicopters landing and taking off in accordance with normal aviation practice as provided under Rule 5(3)(a).

[John R81]

The construction of Rule 5 is to provide for multiple restrictions. It is envisaged that more than one restriction might apply, and if they do then the more restrictive rule applies (see 5(1)(b)).

The rules are contained in 5(2)(a-f), making five rules in all.
The exemptions to the rules in 5(2) are contained in 5(3).

Rule 5(3)(d)(ii) exempts Helicopters only (not any other form of aircraft) from the "Land Clear" rule contained in Rule 5(2)(d). That rule requires the pilot of an aircraft to fly at sufficient height to land clear of a congested area to land clear of the whole congested area in the event of failure of the power unit.

Rule 5(2)(a) is not the Land Clear rule, but it requires you to be able to land, in the event of a failure of the power unit, without causing damage to people or buildings. Sounds like a "Land Clear" rule, but it isn't what the legal "land Clear" rule says (see instead 5(2)(d) mentioned directly above).

Flying the heli-lanes, for example, means that you are in the congested area of London. You do not have to "Land clear" of the congested area (actually most everywhere inside the M25!) by autorotation!. However, you are not exempt from Rule 5(2)(a). So if you fly over a congested area and can autorotate to a [playing field, etc] then you are conforming with Rule 5(2)(a) and not conforming with 5(2)(d) but exempt from 5(2)(d) by reason of 5(3)(d)(ii). All is good.

Except for take-off and landing, if you come over a collection of buildings at low height such that you could not land without causing damage to people or buildings in the event of an emergency, you are not conforming with Rule 5(2)(a) and might be prosecuted for that offence even though you are exempt from the Land Clear rule (5(2)(d) that requires an aircraft to be able to land clear of the congested area).

If you are in take-off / landing at a private site you are exempt from all of the low flying rules IF your conduct is in accordance with "normal aviation practice" (Rule 5(3)(a)(ii)). Normal aviation practice does not mean "what I usually do" and allows a Court to consider whether what you have done [or have been accused of doing] is something that a competent pilot would be expected to have chosen to do. It is a similar concept to that applied in the motoring offence of "Driving without due care and attention". If you have to weave between power lines and fly under the last set to get into your field, for example, I suggest that you should expect to lose that argument.

[puntosaurus]

Nellycopter, you're not taking that exemption in context. The exemption is from the land clear rule is connected with the failure of a power unit, not for a regular landing.

You have two considerations in looking at your site. Can you guarantee that no persons or property on the ground will be damaged in the event of engine failure when using the site ? By the sounds of it, probably yes provided you don't fly over the buildings.

Secondly, and less clearly, is your site a congested area, which means in relation to a city, town or settlement, any area that is substantially used for residential, industrial, commercial, or recreational purposes ? Now I'd be hard pushed to call one house, one garage, one road and some wires a settlement, but it is debateable, especially if someone complains. Depends also on what the land associated with the garage is used for.

However, if you want certainty, apply to the CAA for an exemption to rule 5(c) under rule 6 (c)(ii). It costs just over £100 and you can do it for up to a year.

HTH.

[nellycopter]

Thanks for the replies,
John, I will find it out ... And post it.
I also read a safety sence leaflet which states that
Playing fields, recreational parks etc, are not counted as 'land clear safe areas 'in the event of an engine failure over a congested area....

Although I think we would all agree here that if the engine fails... And we get the Heli down without hurting anything or anybody then a job well done...

[nellycopter]

RULE 5 (1)(a)(iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii)

Remain clear of the CAA at all times......

[Two's in]

Don't forget the rules of common sense always trump the CAA rules, and you can get to those in two easy questions:

1. Do I need to do this?

2. Could it kill me (or someone else)?

It's worth spending as much effort on seeing if there is a more accessible and less hazardous (legally) landing site nearby, as it is trying to arrive at a predetermined conclusion about the suitability of the original landing site.

That's real Airmanship.

[jellycopter]

John R81

You stated :
"If you are in take-off / landing at a private site you are exempt from all of the low flying rules IF your conduct is in accordance with "normal aviation practice" (Rule 5(3)(a)(ii))". (my emphasis)

Just in case anyone takes what you mean literally, I'd like to correct your statement.

When taking off and landing at a private site (not licensed/government aerodrome), a pilot is ONLY exempt the 500ft rule. All other rules continue to apply; in particular the 'power unit failure rule' applies regardless of whether it's your own property you are over-flying. The 1000ft rule also applies unless SVFR or specifically exempted by the CAA (highly unlikely in a single engine heli).

JJ

[ShyTorque]

JJ is correct.

You need a "1,000 foot rule permission" i.e. 5(3)(c) permission to land in a congested area, even for a twin engined helicopter. That is, apart from at a government or licensed airfield, as per the rule wording, when permanent permission is deemed to have been granted as part of the airfield's licencing procedure.

It costs £113 at today's cost. I've a box file of the damned things and the CAA say that in times of high workload (I think that's all the time just now) it can take up to 28 days for them to process one. Thankfully, in my case the cost gets passed on but it can be a real pain if the flight is requested at short notice.

The CAA permission will include certain restrictions and parameters that are to be met. If you are caught landing in a congested area without a permission, you may well be prosecuted for illegal low flying (or tax evasion, depending on how you regard these things).

[nellycopter]

Thanks guys,
5.30 am coffee and more head boggling.....

How the hell can the 1000 ft rule still apply, unless SVFR, or caa approval ???
At a private site in a helicopter......

I think I need to start asking things in plain English !

Is the site I mention a confined area ?
Is the site I mention in a congested area ?
Is it legal to come in over the wires ? Not the road, house or garage, but be very close to them ?


What exactly do the caa mean by the statement
Any helicopter flying shall be exempt from the land clear rule.

I know they are all different questions,

Nelly

[jellycopter]

Nelly

Is the site I mention a confined area ?

Sounds like it from your description, but there is no legal reason why a pilot cannot land in a confined area. A confined area is normally considered as a site that doeas not permit either a normal approach or normal take-off profile.

Is the site I mention in a congested area ?

Is the site part of a town or settlement used for residential, commercial or recreational purposes? If so then yes.

Is it legal to come in over the wires ? Not the road, house or garage, but be very close to them ?

Yes provided you can gaurantee that in the event of your (single) power unit failure, you have the appropriate flight profile (energy), skills, and escape options to land without damaging persons or property on the surface. If you think that at any stage on the approach, if the engine stopped you'd probably sever the wires or roll the a/c over on touch down; thus putting a shed part of a rotor blade through your garage window or into next door's dog - then NO.

What exactly do the caa mean by the statement
Any helicopter flying shall be exempt from the land clear rule.

Unusually for the ANO, it means exactly what it says on the tin. If you are flying over a town or settlement (not below 1000ft above the highest obstacle within 600m of you flight path remember!) and the engine stops, you don't have to be able to autorotate until outside the town or settlement boundary if there are suitable open spaces to land within the town. You must still however posess the skills to be able to manoeuvre the heli successfully into said open space and conduct any landing without risk of damaging persons or property on the surface. simples.

As an aside, I once failed a candidates PPL(H) skills test as the student elected to use town centres as navigation features and proceeded to fly over them. When I questioned his logic he knew that he was able to autorotate into open spaces within the town and that was his plan if the engine stopped. However, later in the test when I gave him several PFLs into pre-nominated small fields, to represent football pitches within a town for example, he showed he clearly didn't have the skills to get the aircraft where he wanted it to go. His engine-off landing was another matter altogether and made his PFLs look inspired!

JJ

edited for typo