Millionaire helicopter pilots to ferry emergency services...
Helinut
My apologies just read your post, he is insured apparantly !
I am struggling to see an advantage in a human on a line to your cargo hook, can only assume it is for machine that dont have a winch and therefore is a last resort ! Would need to be pretty good as a longline pilot !
Just out of interst would you need CAA permission to pick up a human, after all you dont need permission to pick up a load on a hook ?
My apologies just read your post, he is insured apparantly !
I am struggling to see an advantage in a human on a line to your cargo hook, can only assume it is for machine that dont have a winch and therefore is a last resort ! Would need to be pretty good as a longline pilot !
Just out of interst would you need CAA permission to pick up a human, after all you dont need permission to pick up a load on a hook ?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Do I come here often?
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its Saturday night; I've just finished flying and above my desk are several feet of shelf space taken up by huge manuals all telling me various bits of my job, which is flying paying punters from one landing site to another (be it a hotel garden or Heathrow) I've flown SAR, offshore, ambulance and corporate and the common thing to all of them is the manuals. While they are also handy for propping open the office door on hot days and acting as an impromptu conference table they all tell me what to do and how to go about it. For an operation such as Mr P wants to carry out I would expect the manual with all the exemptions in it to be massive, and I for one would dearly like to know what the inhabitants of the Belgrano think of this idea, and whether he has applied for the exemptions.
On page one of this thread I commented on private owners and poor planning. Mr Paxton before you seek any more publicity sit down and discuss seriously with Hughes500 what you really want out of this, because CPL holder or not the moment you overstep the bounds under pressure from a fire chief dealing with a major emergency there are people employed in the Belgrano who will put you in a vice and squeeze until you squeak, a lot.
In the back of the mind of any pilot who flies for any emergency service is always the thought "its my responsibility and I may have to say NO at some point." It used to be called the big boys' decision, it is trained into the people who work in that type of flying and is designed to save the lives of them and their crew. Learning emergency flying by yourself, on the job is foolish, and the bit about "I did it to save lives" may not work too well in the subsequent enquiry. I believe that the bit about actions for the purpose of saving life (and I'm b
ered if I can find it in the ANO right now) applies only when it is an immediate action required then and there, not when you are sitting at home waiting for the call to launch the emergency fire putter-outer helicopter, that, like police and HEMs will require a long and interesting exemption list.
Or do you really just want some extra brownie points for you planning application?
SND
On page one of this thread I commented on private owners and poor planning. Mr Paxton before you seek any more publicity sit down and discuss seriously with Hughes500 what you really want out of this, because CPL holder or not the moment you overstep the bounds under pressure from a fire chief dealing with a major emergency there are people employed in the Belgrano who will put you in a vice and squeeze until you squeak, a lot.
In the back of the mind of any pilot who flies for any emergency service is always the thought "its my responsibility and I may have to say NO at some point." It used to be called the big boys' decision, it is trained into the people who work in that type of flying and is designed to save the lives of them and their crew. Learning emergency flying by yourself, on the job is foolish, and the bit about "I did it to save lives" may not work too well in the subsequent enquiry. I believe that the bit about actions for the purpose of saving life (and I'm b
ered if I can find it in the ANO right now) applies only when it is an immediate action required then and there, not when you are sitting at home waiting for the call to launch the emergency fire putter-outer helicopter, that, like police and HEMs will require a long and interesting exemption list.Or do you really just want some extra brownie points for you planning application?
SND
Last edited by Sir Niall Dementia; 1st Dec 2012 at 17:38.
Cockney: Hey buddy, welcome to my word of the year: PRAT. Here try it on...it suits you.
First, I suspect and pray and hope you aren't a member of the emergency services because you'd be a very poor rep for that industry if you were.
Like you and any other member of the public, We don't expect a collapsible stretcher to appear out of the motorcycle panniers either, now would we?
Oh, and where is the rider hiding that oxygen bottle - little tinker
No - "normal" people understand that motorcycle paramedics (and certainly NOT part time St John's bloody ambulance riders) occasioanlly arrive that little bit earlier than the big white van because they can negotiate traffic a "little" better (not much) because those blue lights on the meat wagon make mince meat of traffic anyway. AND when they get there (on those rare occasions a little earlier), they normally only have time to assess the situation ready for the meat wagon to arrive. They may deliver the odd drug or bandage, or even do some CPR and/or defibs but that's about it me old.
I can only speak for The Wales Ambulance Service but I dont recall either the driver of said ambulances ("technician") or most certainly not the other crew member: the "paramedic" being part time St John's Ambulance volunteers
I think you'll find a monstrous/cavernous difference between the former and the latter in terms of quals and also legal liabilities to deliver certain drugs.
Now for the funniest of them all - the remote surveillance bit. Question for you? Assume the UAV needs line of sight control and the RTC (RTA went out of use about 10yrs ago Cockney (so you're def. not a cop)) is, say, 10 or 15 miles away, who is going to get there first, the police chopper or the guy with the RC model and hand held controller in the back of his police BMW weaving through traffic, and then having to find somewhere to launch it close enough to commence ops in line of sight of the RTC?
Volunteers are ALWAYS welcome, but hear this. They need / cost extra resources because they have to be separately herded/controlled as they are unfamiliar with the local terrain. They, in themselves, whilst offering up their hard earned free time, become an additional risk and a real professional has to be diverted from his/her duties to safeguard these willing few to keep them safe too. This is the case with mountain rescues / the case with the missing girl in Machynlleth recently / the case with SkyWatch / the case with 7/7. Well meaning helicopter pilots (professionals in their own right) turn up full of vigour and enthusiasm, at the wrong separation height, wrong frequency / landing in the wrong area / blowing evidence everywhere / not keeping a close watch on other aerial support / inadvertently entering CAS / TRA's.........need I go on.
Now which of the emergency services do you fit into then Cockers me old?
Hughes 500: I wonder if subconsiously you are morally supporting your (not) buddy. I think you may prefer NOT to slap the loose cannon down but instead, massage his ego - indirectly of course. You seem to be advertising your wares as an examiner of other helo mortals and should as a consequence be very familiar, not only with the rules but also with the capabilities that choppers have to offer. You might even be lucky or savvy enough to have completed a Human Factor based course, albeit CRM or other related subject. The man needs telling - he needs a one way conversation. But I suspect you may pander to his wallet for future business blah blah.
Oh, nearly forgot, I dealt with aviation insurance companies for years during my 14 years a sa chief pilot for a police unit. If coppers think they know how to deal with crooks, you should read the small print on any insurance policy never mind that covering emergency operations. It is still IMPOSSIBLE to get cover for certain "activities" whilst operating aerial vehicles. ONE such example is for SE helos to KNOWINGLY remain insdie the dead man's curve. If JP stoofs whilst hovering at 100' over a factory in the middle of birmingham, because his pax is the chief fire guru for the W Mids, his Insurance company are going to walk away from that subsequent payout buddy, including the tens of millions he will be sued for after landing in a shopping mall car park.
I think this is what happened:
First, I suspect and pray and hope you aren't a member of the emergency services because you'd be a very poor rep for that industry if you were.
Like you and any other member of the public, We don't expect a collapsible stretcher to appear out of the motorcycle panniers either, now would we?
Oh, and where is the rider hiding that oxygen bottle - little tinker
No - "normal" people understand that motorcycle paramedics (and certainly NOT part time St John's bloody ambulance riders) occasioanlly arrive that little bit earlier than the big white van because they can negotiate traffic a "little" better (not much) because those blue lights on the meat wagon make mince meat of traffic anyway. AND when they get there (on those rare occasions a little earlier), they normally only have time to assess the situation ready for the meat wagon to arrive. They may deliver the odd drug or bandage, or even do some CPR and/or defibs but that's about it me old.
I can only speak for The Wales Ambulance Service but I dont recall either the driver of said ambulances ("technician") or most certainly not the other crew member: the "paramedic" being part time St John's Ambulance volunteers
I think you'll find a monstrous/cavernous difference between the former and the latter in terms of quals and also legal liabilities to deliver certain drugs.Now for the funniest of them all - the remote surveillance bit. Question for you? Assume the UAV needs line of sight control and the RTC (RTA went out of use about 10yrs ago Cockney (so you're def. not a cop)) is, say, 10 or 15 miles away, who is going to get there first, the police chopper or the guy with the RC model and hand held controller in the back of his police BMW weaving through traffic, and then having to find somewhere to launch it close enough to commence ops in line of sight of the RTC?
[Thank goodness you've arrived officer, we need urgent assistance, I think someone is trapped in a burning vehicle: "Erm excuse me madam, you are preventing me from launching my RC helicopter to film said RTC - kindly return to your (burning) vehicle and assistance will be along in a moment"].
Now which of the emergency services do you fit into then Cockers me old?
Hughes 500: I wonder if subconsiously you are morally supporting your (not) buddy. I think you may prefer NOT to slap the loose cannon down but instead, massage his ego - indirectly of course. You seem to be advertising your wares as an examiner of other helo mortals and should as a consequence be very familiar, not only with the rules but also with the capabilities that choppers have to offer. You might even be lucky or savvy enough to have completed a Human Factor based course, albeit CRM or other related subject. The man needs telling - he needs a one way conversation. But I suspect you may pander to his wallet for future business blah blah.
Oh, nearly forgot, I dealt with aviation insurance companies for years during my 14 years a sa chief pilot for a police unit. If coppers think they know how to deal with crooks, you should read the small print on any insurance policy never mind that covering emergency operations. It is still IMPOSSIBLE to get cover for certain "activities" whilst operating aerial vehicles. ONE such example is for SE helos to KNOWINGLY remain insdie the dead man's curve. If JP stoofs whilst hovering at 100' over a factory in the middle of birmingham, because his pax is the chief fire guru for the W Mids, his Insurance company are going to walk away from that subsequent payout buddy, including the tens of millions he will be sued for after landing in a shopping mall car park.
I think this is what happened:
JP, another Q for you from all the dissenters on PPrune? Oh, what the fu*k now Hughesy? Are you insured bud? Yep -course I am, I told them I'm painting my cab bright red, changing my HISL's to red and swinging my hose underneath my belly over the city at night.
Oh, OK JP, sorry to trouble you - I'll pass it on.
Oh, OK JP, sorry to trouble you - I'll pass it on.
Last edited by Thomas coupling; 1st Dec 2012 at 17:36.
SND
Worringly I dont actually think he needs any exemptions form The Belgrano" as i cant put a finger on any rule that would be broken. Very happy to eat humble pie here
I agree with the manuals though having both AOC and TRTO manuals and shortly ATO manuals for PPL and "sports NPL "as well as SMS manuals it does make me wonder !!!!
Worringly I dont actually think he needs any exemptions form The Belgrano" as i cant put a finger on any rule that would be broken. Very happy to eat humble pie here
I agree with the manuals though having both AOC and TRTO manuals and shortly ATO manuals for PPL and "sports NPL "as well as SMS manuals it does make me wonder !!!!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Do I come here often?
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hughes;
He'd definately need a couple From rule 5.
Probably some odds and sods from the Dangerous Goods rules.
The way he's going half a dozen from training requirements.
Possibly one or two dealing with mods and role changes on aircraft.
An appendix 7 "Self Auth Congested Area" clearance.
Thats for starters, at that rate he might as well go and get an AOC and then the CAA will tell him "none of this in a single mate; twins only."
Personally I love the idea, but then I've always loved daft ideas
SND
He'd definately need a couple From rule 5.
Probably some odds and sods from the Dangerous Goods rules.
The way he's going half a dozen from training requirements.
Possibly one or two dealing with mods and role changes on aircraft.
An appendix 7 "Self Auth Congested Area" clearance.
Thats for starters, at that rate he might as well go and get an AOC and then the CAA will tell him "none of this in a single mate; twins only."
Personally I love the idea, but then I've always loved daft ideas
SND
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Bristol
Age: 54
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By Cockney - 'Also, a revelation to many, a fair proportion of the ambulances and crews are run by part-time volunteers (St. John Ambulance ) No longer do they buy castoffs ,but new kit, fully trained personnel and these people are the equal of the full-timers directly employed regulars and are treated equally.'
Ha!!!! I'd wager a fair few State Registered paramedics, Technician's and ECA's would put up a good argument with you there!!!! Thomas Coupling has answered your points very well, but I'll add a few. I've only had one dealing with the Johnnies, at an RTC, and they were that bad with a casualty with c-spine pain, I took over, and I'm 'only' a Trauma Medic. Both of them had a load of pips on their shoulders too. Sure, I'll bet that some are good, but, the programme 'Party Paramedics', which followed them around at a festival was hilarious, with Johnnies straight out of Central Casting!! Walting Wannabes a lot of them I'm afraid. Well meaning, but not a patch on a trained professional. Incidently, RRV's, (cars and motorbikes), and Community Responders were only introduced to 'stop the clock' so that ambulance services can meet their govt. targets. As soon as one of these are on scene, the clock stops. Sad but true. You're not in the Johnnies yourself, are you? It would explain a bit.
This isn't a couple of your 'Fully Trained' volunteers is it?
Ha!!!! I'd wager a fair few State Registered paramedics, Technician's and ECA's would put up a good argument with you there!!!! Thomas Coupling has answered your points very well, but I'll add a few. I've only had one dealing with the Johnnies, at an RTC, and they were that bad with a casualty with c-spine pain, I took over, and I'm 'only' a Trauma Medic. Both of them had a load of pips on their shoulders too. Sure, I'll bet that some are good, but, the programme 'Party Paramedics', which followed them around at a festival was hilarious, with Johnnies straight out of Central Casting!! Walting Wannabes a lot of them I'm afraid. Well meaning, but not a patch on a trained professional. Incidently, RRV's, (cars and motorbikes), and Community Responders were only introduced to 'stop the clock' so that ambulance services can meet their govt. targets. As soon as one of these are on scene, the clock stops. Sad but true. You're not in the Johnnies yourself, are you? It would explain a bit.
This isn't a couple of your 'Fully Trained' volunteers is it?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,597
Received 450 Likes
on
239 Posts
Re the dope on a rope:
Try CAP393, ANGRs Part 17.
Just out of interst would you need CAA permission to pick up a human, after all you dont need permission to pick up a load on a hook ?
Worringly I dont actually think he needs any exemptions form The Belgrano" as i cant put a finger on any rule that would be broken.
Last edited by ShyTorque; 1st Dec 2012 at 18:23.
Tightgit
Regarding exemptions in the ANO 'for the purpose of saving life'. I believe this phrase is only to be found in artcles 128, 129 & 130. Which refer to the dropping of articles, people & parachutists. The general exemptions to rule 5 (which I think are rule 6). Do not include any exemptions for saving life.
Cockney Steve
I think you have had your answer, but the real reason for bikes and cars is
1 the ambulance services have to meet stringent time limits in responding to 999 calls. The clock is stopped by the arrival of the first responder. If they fail to meet these times they are fined massive amounts
In Buckinghamshire the ambulance service uses midwives and even first aides to respond to rural calls. As long as they are tasked by the service they can stop the clock. I think a Mr A Blair was the person behind those so called targets
2. The NHS is so strapped for cash we have fewer and fewer ambulances.
I won't respond to your comments about St Johns Ambulance volunteers. You are just completely and utterly wrong
I think you have had your answer, but the real reason for bikes and cars is
1 the ambulance services have to meet stringent time limits in responding to 999 calls. The clock is stopped by the arrival of the first responder. If they fail to meet these times they are fined massive amounts
In Buckinghamshire the ambulance service uses midwives and even first aides to respond to rural calls. As long as they are tasked by the service they can stop the clock. I think a Mr A Blair was the person behind those so called targets
2. The NHS is so strapped for cash we have fewer and fewer ambulances.
I won't respond to your comments about St Johns Ambulance volunteers. You are just completely and utterly wrong
TC
Not pandering to my wallet, quite frankly I charged him £ 300 to do his LPC this included £ 110 for a 6 hour return train journey plus 45 mins at my end twice,plus £ 18 to park the car, if that is pandering to my wallet I am in the wrong job. Quite frankly I would prefer to be in the loop I can temper some of what he wants to do with some advice, but I cant stop him. Would you prefer I have nothing to do with him ? Would that improve the situation ?
PS I really dont need to advertise on this forum or any where else
I still dont see what rules he is breaking if he does what he says
1. Recce of particular sites
2. Transporting specialist cutting gear
As long as he is not in a congested area he can do as he pleases, he isnt even breaking an aviation law by landing on someone elses property so doesnt need any exemption. As long as he doesnt break the 500 ft rule then I cant see a problem. Only runs into difficulty if he works in a congested area, mind you most of The CAA rules are open to interpretation.
Not pandering to my wallet, quite frankly I charged him £ 300 to do his LPC this included £ 110 for a 6 hour return train journey plus 45 mins at my end twice,plus £ 18 to park the car, if that is pandering to my wallet I am in the wrong job. Quite frankly I would prefer to be in the loop I can temper some of what he wants to do with some advice, but I cant stop him. Would you prefer I have nothing to do with him ? Would that improve the situation ?
PS I really dont need to advertise on this forum or any where else
I still dont see what rules he is breaking if he does what he says
1. Recce of particular sites
2. Transporting specialist cutting gear
As long as he is not in a congested area he can do as he pleases, he isnt even breaking an aviation law by landing on someone elses property so doesnt need any exemption. As long as he doesnt break the 500 ft rule then I cant see a problem. Only runs into difficulty if he works in a congested area, mind you most of The CAA rules are open to interpretation.
Shy
I dont think that that section covers it as it is to do with dropping. I read into that you have to release yourself from the ac ie jump out or be dropped. If you have a dope on the rope you are not droppig him you are landing him on the ground ! However you may not be able to pick him up or land him without an exemption from rule 5 1 d within 500 ft ( might have the ref wrong) unless the ac lands as well. had this with longlining and ground crew. caa view is that the ac hasnt landed if the hook touches the ground, has to be part of the ac, hence need the exemption from rule 5 for longlining
I dont think that that section covers it as it is to do with dropping. I read into that you have to release yourself from the ac ie jump out or be dropped. If you have a dope on the rope you are not droppig him you are landing him on the ground ! However you may not be able to pick him up or land him without an exemption from rule 5 1 d within 500 ft ( might have the ref wrong) unless the ac lands as well. had this with longlining and ground crew. caa view is that the ac hasnt landed if the hook touches the ground, has to be part of the ac, hence need the exemption from rule 5 for longlining
Hughes500: are you based in the UK????
Let's regroup and refresh:
Your bud wants to help the fire brigade by ferrying troops and or equipment - right? Does he also want to be able to carry the big cheese fire chief above the fire to get a gods eye view of things? Does he want to carry and deliver specialist equipment? Does he want to go further and douse the fire with his bucket?
Unleee he is fighting a fire in a shed in a field or a forest fire, he won't be of any use will he? Most "fires" that cause concern and/or require 'additional' resources like your friends chopper, are inside built up areas - buildings/factories, whatever. His services are very nearly NIL hovering above 500 feet in that case, unless he has a FLIR ball on board.
Any lower than that and he infringes the RULES. Landing in unsurveyed sites requires minimum dimensions and permission from the owner - more RULES.
Operating as an emergency services vehicle requires ME. More RULES.
Secondly, much of the firefighting equipment he may be required to carry could have cartridges fitted. They could include gas cannisters. He would have to comply with the Dangerous Goods Act. More RULES.
Dropping articles from an aircraft (water/equipment/people). More RULES.
Apart from these minor distractions he doesn't have any worries then?
I still feel that you haven't got a grip of the situation (the situation being that a non AOC operator will not be allowed to do any of this). CAA rules are NOT open to interpretation - believe that and you're on short finals for an interview with the CPS
This is a non starter - you "should" know that, enough people here have explained the pitfalls but you still go away umming and ahhing, fumbling around the edges of the law/rules/legislation.
Take him round the back of his helipad and stick his head under the water for a few minutes, slap him around a bit and tell him to WAKE UP.
Let's regroup and refresh:
Your bud wants to help the fire brigade by ferrying troops and or equipment - right? Does he also want to be able to carry the big cheese fire chief above the fire to get a gods eye view of things? Does he want to carry and deliver specialist equipment? Does he want to go further and douse the fire with his bucket?
Unleee he is fighting a fire in a shed in a field or a forest fire, he won't be of any use will he? Most "fires" that cause concern and/or require 'additional' resources like your friends chopper, are inside built up areas - buildings/factories, whatever. His services are very nearly NIL hovering above 500 feet in that case, unless he has a FLIR ball on board.
Any lower than that and he infringes the RULES. Landing in unsurveyed sites requires minimum dimensions and permission from the owner - more RULES.
Operating as an emergency services vehicle requires ME. More RULES.
Secondly, much of the firefighting equipment he may be required to carry could have cartridges fitted. They could include gas cannisters. He would have to comply with the Dangerous Goods Act. More RULES.
Dropping articles from an aircraft (water/equipment/people). More RULES.
Apart from these minor distractions he doesn't have any worries then?
I still feel that you haven't got a grip of the situation (the situation being that a non AOC operator will not be allowed to do any of this). CAA rules are NOT open to interpretation - believe that and you're on short finals for an interview with the CPS
This is a non starter - you "should" know that, enough people here have explained the pitfalls but you still go away umming and ahhing, fumbling around the edges of the law/rules/legislation.
Take him round the back of his helipad and stick his head under the water for a few minutes, slap him around a bit and tell him to WAKE UP.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,597
Received 450 Likes
on
239 Posts
Hughes 500,
We as individuals can interpret the rules as we wish in our own minds but what really matters is how the CAA interpret them. Did you read what I posted about the CAA prosecution of a pilot who inadvertently transported a worker under his helicopter? I wasn't making it up, it occurred at this time of year whilst Christmas trees were being moved as USLs. I know the company involved and also the pilot who was prosecuted.
This is the section of CAP393 I referred to:
Would the Fire Services be able to insure an employee flying as an underslung-ee? Would any firemen volunteer? If no volunteers were forthcoming, would the Fire Service be able to insist that their employees allowed themselves to be transported as underslung loads by an untrained, non-professional pilot? I think I can predict the stance of the unions.
We as individuals can interpret the rules as we wish in our own minds but what really matters is how the CAA interpret them. Did you read what I posted about the CAA prosecution of a pilot who inadvertently transported a worker under his helicopter? I wasn't making it up, it occurred at this time of year whilst Christmas trees were being moved as USLs. I know the company involved and also the pilot who was prosecuted.
This is the section of CAP393 I referred to:
Towing, picking up and raising of persons and articles
128 (1) Subject to the provisions of this article, an aircraft in flight must not, by means external to the aircraft, tow any article, other than a glider, or pick up or raise any person, animal or article, unless:
(a) there is a certificate of airworthiness issued or rendered valid for that aircraft under the law of the country in which the aircraft is registered; and
(b) that certificate or the flight manual for the aircraft includes an express provision that it may be used for that purpose.
128 (1) Subject to the provisions of this article, an aircraft in flight must not, by means external to the aircraft, tow any article, other than a glider, or pick up or raise any person, animal or article, unless:
(a) there is a certificate of airworthiness issued or rendered valid for that aircraft under the law of the country in which the aircraft is registered; and
(b) that certificate or the flight manual for the aircraft includes an express provision that it may be used for that purpose.
Last edited by ShyTorque; 3rd Dec 2012 at 13:17. Reason: Correction of typo error and addition of extract from CAP393.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Do I come here often?
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shy;
You've just (probably inadvertantly) hit one big nail on the head when you described him as an "untrained, non-professional pilot"
He holds a CPL (which country I have no idea) BUT he has never operated in a professional role. As far as any of us can tell he has never had to look beyond the basic exams and flight tests, with none of the training required of professionals to use the aircraft as a tool to do a job, and how you achieve that job working within current legislation.
He's already upset CAA with a breach of Rule 5 (Rule 5e) and that is a basic bit of knowledge dinned into any new CPL who is flying for a living.
The rules may on occasion be an ass, but ignorance of them is no defence.
I bet there's a team of former pro's sitting in Flight ops at the Belgrano laughing their socks off over this, biding their time until they think enough is enough, and that its time for a chat with both Mr Paxton and the fire chief concerned.
In the meantime we can all continue to speculate, after all that's what we're all here for isn't it?
SND
You've just (probably inadvertantly) hit one big nail on the head when you described him as an "untrained, non-professional pilot"
He holds a CPL (which country I have no idea) BUT he has never operated in a professional role. As far as any of us can tell he has never had to look beyond the basic exams and flight tests, with none of the training required of professionals to use the aircraft as a tool to do a job, and how you achieve that job working within current legislation.
He's already upset CAA with a breach of Rule 5 (Rule 5e) and that is a basic bit of knowledge dinned into any new CPL who is flying for a living.
The rules may on occasion be an ass, but ignorance of them is no defence.
I bet there's a team of former pro's sitting in Flight ops at the Belgrano laughing their socks off over this, biding their time until they think enough is enough, and that its time for a chat with both Mr Paxton and the fire chief concerned.
In the meantime we can all continue to speculate, after all that's what we're all here for isn't it?
SND
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,597
Received 450 Likes
on
239 Posts
You've just (probably inadvertantly) hit one big nail on the head when you described him as an "untrained, non-professional pilot"
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TC
Landing on private land without permission is no concern of the CAA.
dropping equipment/people from an aircraft?
I think you are over stretching your point of view there a little.
Landing in unsurveyed sites requires minimum dimensions and permission from the owner - more RULES.
Dropping articles from an aircraft (water/equipment/people)
I think you are over stretching your point of view there a little.
Last edited by chopjock; 3rd Dec 2012 at 15:32.
TC
You are right on everything you have said
By the way you do not need permission to drop water from a helicopter, speak to Keith Thomas ( about to retire)from The CAA if you dont believe me.
Shy
I stand corrected on lowering etc etc of humans, as you have pointed me to a different part of The ANO
To you both I have shown my reservations, TC in particular I dont actually think you read any of my posts that thoroughly. As it will obviously make you feel better I wont try and talk to him or advise against the things he wants to do, perhaps if you PM me I will send you his e mail address and you can spend your time going through things with him.
You are right on everything you have said
By the way you do not need permission to drop water from a helicopter, speak to Keith Thomas ( about to retire)from The CAA if you dont believe me.
Shy
I stand corrected on lowering etc etc of humans, as you have pointed me to a different part of The ANO
To you both I have shown my reservations, TC in particular I dont actually think you read any of my posts that thoroughly. As it will obviously make you feel better I wont try and talk to him or advise against the things he wants to do, perhaps if you PM me I will send you his e mail address and you can spend your time going through things with him.
Oh damn, don't go Hughesy, I'm just getting cosy. ChopJock has returnedand hopefully nigelh will 'pop' in later.
Damn - that means this thread will wither now.
Thanks for the opportunity though. If you need love and support here on pprune, you know who to talk to. Say hello to JP
ShyTq: That's my background - go find someone else's to use!
Damn - that means this thread will wither now.
Thanks for the opportunity though. If you need love and support here on pprune, you know who to talk to. Say hello to JP
ShyTq: That's my background - go find someone else's to use!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,597
Received 450 Likes
on
239 Posts
TC, OK, I would have included the rest but I decided not to, as it's not directly relevant...... 