CAA UK prosecutions
CRAB - I have always had respect for your posts with the exception of this thread where you seem determined to convince yourself and me that the rules are rubbish. I am intrigued. What message are you trying to convey!!
As for speeding - you were the one who put yourself on a pedestal, claiming that you never broke any rules at all - and that any rules that one didn't agree with could be appealed against in an appropriately legal fashion. By implication therefore you won't exceed the speed limit and will be actively lobbying parliament to repeal the legislation.
Now I will admit to speeding, in the firm belief that it doesn't necessarily make me a dangerous driver but by your logic that makes me a danger to the public who shouldn't be allowed to drive on the roads and certainly not teach my 2 sons to drive since I would be influencing them to break the law as well!
Perhaps the issue here is one of necessary, as opposed to unnecessary, risk.
An example already used is the HV diagram: the FAA stick to their ruling (issuing a policy letter on the issue) that this is a limitation for certain categories of Part 29 helicopter. It is not for Part 27!
As is well known (it has been discussed endlessly on PPRune) offshore operations will occasionally be conducted within the HV diagram - it is an element of exposure. Because this is a necessary disregard of the limitation, the Authorities legitimise the practice by providing alleviation in Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(b) (the FAA do the same in FAR 91.9(d)). There are many examples of such alleviations in HEMS and SAR. In these cases the Authority has undertaken a risk assessment and legitimised the practice.
However, even though such practices are legitimate, the operator/pilot are not given carte blanche and are expected to apply risk assessment to any situation to establish whether the use of alleviation is necessary.
In the recent report on the Myanmar S76C++ it would appear that there was a choice over the procedure to be used. Perhaps it was not necessary for the passengers to be exposed when there was another course of action.
It would appear from this thread that some pilots open themselves to unnecessary risk - in this group we might put the pilot who flies in inappropriate weather.
This does not extend to those pilots who's role require them to be inside the HV curve. For them such risk has been factored into the risk reward calculation and deemed to be acceptable.
Jim
An example already used is the HV diagram: the FAA stick to their ruling (issuing a policy letter on the issue) that this is a limitation for certain categories of Part 29 helicopter. It is not for Part 27!
As is well known (it has been discussed endlessly on PPRune) offshore operations will occasionally be conducted within the HV diagram - it is an element of exposure. Because this is a necessary disregard of the limitation, the Authorities legitimise the practice by providing alleviation in Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(b) (the FAA do the same in FAR 91.9(d)). There are many examples of such alleviations in HEMS and SAR. In these cases the Authority has undertaken a risk assessment and legitimised the practice.
However, even though such practices are legitimate, the operator/pilot are not given carte blanche and are expected to apply risk assessment to any situation to establish whether the use of alleviation is necessary.
In the recent report on the Myanmar S76C++ it would appear that there was a choice over the procedure to be used. Perhaps it was not necessary for the passengers to be exposed when there was another course of action.
It would appear from this thread that some pilots open themselves to unnecessary risk - in this group we might put the pilot who flies in inappropriate weather.
This does not extend to those pilots who's role require them to be inside the HV curve. For them such risk has been factored into the risk reward calculation and deemed to be acceptable.
Jim
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
H500 - A fully loaded AS355 would probably not survive a VTOL Helipad CTO. An AS355 at the Group A Mass should clear the take-off surface by at least 35 feet. Of course as TRE(H) you would know that.
CRAB - Gloves OFF - Which rules do you think/believe rubbish?? Lets hear some substance instead of the endless blabbering bleats which serve no real purpose. I am willing to review my position if you can describe a rule that really does not make sense!!!
CRAB - Gloves OFF - Which rules do you think/believe rubbish?? Lets hear some substance instead of the endless blabbering bleats which serve no real purpose. I am willing to review my position if you can describe a rule that really does not make sense!!!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Air Navigation (Restriction of Flying)(Glastonbury) Regulations 2011
were in force from 22 to 25 June 2011. A NOTAM and AIC were published in
the usual way. On Sunday 26 June,
were in force from 22 to 25 June 2011. A NOTAM and AIC were published in
the usual way. On Sunday 26 June,
So, what the hell am i missing?...... restriction is stated as 22nd. to 25 th.....Offence alleged on 26th.
Am I living on a different planet?.....Not a chopper-jock or even a humble PPL....but i've flown RC flingwings to the crash-site and likewise Planks.....please enlighten me as to how he commited an offence the day after the restriction expired.
DB...your first post you came across as arrogant, conceited and smug....glad to see youhave toned it down a bit, gives you a lot more credibility.....not that my opinion accounts for much!
carry on, girls!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
MIGHTY GEM,
I was involved in Police /HEMS in the very early 90s when both disciplines were extermely busy. 4 years of HEMS averaging around 3-5 missions a day was not unusual. Having said this many of those missions were "Secondary" tasks such as transfers or filling in gaps in the Road Ambulance Network. Not all "Blood and Guts" My first Night shift at NEASU we did 14 tasks!!!
Probaly also a bit of poetic licence. I remember adding it all up once and I am sure it came out at around the 3,500. Having siad that I remember telling my kids that I had escaped from a "simulated" submarine at HMS dolphin with a free ascent from 100m. Swore blind it was true!!! Then the little monkeys googled it and turned out is was a 100' so heh-ho the memory plays tricks!!
I have told myself a million times not to exagerate"!!!!
I was involved in Police /HEMS in the very early 90s when both disciplines were extermely busy. 4 years of HEMS averaging around 3-5 missions a day was not unusual. Having said this many of those missions were "Secondary" tasks such as transfers or filling in gaps in the Road Ambulance Network. Not all "Blood and Guts" My first Night shift at NEASU we did 14 tasks!!!
Probaly also a bit of poetic licence. I remember adding it all up once and I am sure it came out at around the 3,500. Having siad that I remember telling my kids that I had escaped from a "simulated" submarine at HMS dolphin with a free ascent from 100m. Swore blind it was true!!! Then the little monkeys googled it and turned out is was a 100' so heh-ho the memory plays tricks!!
I have told myself a million times not to exagerate"!!!!
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
Cockney Steve,
That's probably because I am arrogant, concieted and smug and I am "trying" to tone it down a bit!!
We all have our cross to bear/bare/baar!!! (jeez) my spelling!!!
Thanks for the encouragment!!
DB
That's probably because I am arrogant, concieted and smug and I am "trying" to tone it down a bit!!
We all have our cross to bear/bare/baar!!! (jeez) my spelling!!!
Thanks for the encouragment!!
DB
My God DB ......you are not a robot after all !! I have to admit that after all the hot air has spilled from your sails you appear ...... Well , almost human 
DB - now we have seen your human side, perhaps you would like to continue the catharsis by admitting you do, in fact, break speed limits when you drive
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
CRAB - I decline your offer to admit to breaking law. This thread is about prosecutions and your initial contribution is that some of the rules are rubbish. I have asked you to quantify that statement by explaining which rules you do not like. This is reasonable, I think!!
So instead of trashing me for wanting to comply (which by the way is what I am paid to do), please explain why you do not want to comply.
I am human and genuinly interested in your answer AND I am prepared to modify my view should you produce something compelling!!
Come on CRAB, surely you have some substance to you or are you really just an empty vessel bleating to the masses cos you think it makes you sound informed or influential!!!
So instead of trashing me for wanting to comply (which by the way is what I am paid to do), please explain why you do not want to comply.
I am human and genuinly interested in your answer AND I am prepared to modify my view should you produce something compelling!!
Come on CRAB, surely you have some substance to you or are you really just an empty vessel bleating to the masses cos you think it makes you sound informed or influential!!!
Oh dear, and your rehabilitation was going so well....
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[A quick sidestep, here to CAA v Mann
So, what the hell am i missing?...... restriction is stated as 22nd. to 25 th.....Offence alleged on 26th.
Am I living on a different planet?.....Not a chopper-jock or even a humble PPL....but i've flown RC flingwings to the crash-site and likewise Planks.....please enlighten me as to how he commited an offence the day after the restriction expired.
So, what the hell am i missing?...... restriction is stated as 22nd. to 25 th.....Offence alleged on 26th.
Am I living on a different planet?.....Not a chopper-jock or even a humble PPL....but i've flown RC flingwings to the crash-site and likewise Planks.....please enlighten me as to how he commited an offence the day after the restriction expired.
Err, -no takers?...I'm really struggling with the concept of "commiting an offence the day AFTER IT CEASED TO BE AN OFFENCE"
Re cockney steve
Think it is a misprint on the dates of the NOTAM, Finished on the 27th
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...0110223_en.pdf
Think it is a misprint on the dates of the NOTAM, Finished on the 27th
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2...0110223_en.pdf
Last edited by Redland; 15th Nov 2012 at 11:53.
Come on Crab ...Rome wasnt built in a day . This is going to be a long process!!
DB .... How about the rule where in say a squirrel you need approx 150 m with no obstacle ... Ie if you have a large lawn you cannot take off over a 4ft fence ....I would , and do regularly , but for aoc it is illegal !! Surely you cannot say it is in any way unsafe to even hovver taxi over it .. Can you??
DB .... How about the rule where in say a squirrel you need approx 150 m with no obstacle ... Ie if you have a large lawn you cannot take off over a 4ft fence ....I would , and do regularly , but for aoc it is illegal !! Surely you cannot say it is in any way unsafe to even hovver taxi over it .. Can you??
Nigel I think you are missing the point.
Is it dangerous? Depends what the 4ft fence is made out of, how sturdy it is, helicopter performance, weight and how likely you view an EFATO.
If you believe its never going to happen to you then carry on, maybe take up smoking 80 a day and live happily ever after.
Sure that rule might look silly but it looks a lot more silly piling in with 20 people on board, that die in a subsequent fuel fire after the fuel tank ruptured. The rule makers might have seen this issue and hence why you can do it privately within the law...
Is it dangerous? Depends what the 4ft fence is made out of, how sturdy it is, helicopter performance, weight and how likely you view an EFATO.
If you believe its never going to happen to you then carry on, maybe take up smoking 80 a day and live happily ever after.
Sure that rule might look silly but it looks a lot more silly piling in with 20 people on board, that die in a subsequent fuel fire after the fuel tank ruptured. The rule makers might have seen this issue and hence why you can do it privately within the law...
Nigel, you keep banging on but this is not illegal under JAR-OPS 3.540(b).
To conduct such discussions, it is always an advantage to know and understand the regulations.
Until you or Crab can actually quote a rule which is superfluous or plain stupid, it is extremely difficult for us to stop beating our wives.
Jim
To conduct such discussions, it is always an advantage to know and understand the regulations.
Until you or Crab can actually quote a rule which is superfluous or plain stupid, it is extremely difficult for us to stop beating our wives.
Jim
Fair point .... I must admit I have never actually read the rule book !!!!
I just know that I was going to do a job from a large garden ( on an aoc ) and
Was then told it was not possible due to some piddly little fence 100 m away !!!!
I then did the job from the same site privately .... I am very sorry but I really do
not see a fence as dangerous . If you hovver taxi over it where on earth is the
danger !!!!! It's just ridiculous ..... Sorry but that is my opinion !!!
I just know that I was going to do a job from a large garden ( on an aoc ) and
Was then told it was not possible due to some piddly little fence 100 m away !!!!
I then did the job from the same site privately .... I am very sorry but I really do
not see a fence as dangerous . If you hovver taxi over it where on earth is the
danger !!!!! It's just ridiculous ..... Sorry but that is my opinion !!!
nigelh - you can hover taxi over the fence as long as the area you are hover taxiing to then meets the required dimensions (and the fence is not high enough that you have to go into the avoid curve to get over it...!) or hover taxi at a speed that means you can go higher over the fence.
Total take-off distance required for the AS350 PC3 is a long one! first 3rd needs to be obstacle free, remaining 2/3rds should be frangible (not sure if sheep are classed as frangible).
You see there are ways and means. Of course you could just hover taxi from passenger pick up point to passenger drop off point
Oh, and as for daft rules;
September 16th - to renew my R22 = 2hrs dual + LPC.
September 17th - redo the whole type rating
Total take-off distance required for the AS350 PC3 is a long one! first 3rd needs to be obstacle free, remaining 2/3rds should be frangible (not sure if sheep are classed as frangible).
You see there are ways and means. Of course you could just hover taxi from passenger pick up point to passenger drop off point
Oh, and as for daft rules;
September 16th - to renew my R22 = 2hrs dual + LPC.
September 17th - redo the whole type rating