What really gets me about this sort of discussion, is that despite not knowing the full story, some are more than happy to hang, draw and quarter the pilot, quoting any rule that may be applicable, regardless of the situation that the pilots found themselves in. Others try to rationalise the circumstances and put themselves in the pilot in questions predicament.

There's a story somewhere about a fixed wing pilot that found himself in trouble. After going through the reference cards, manuals and trying different options piped up on the radio to ATC, "I have tried everything the books say, my training and experience told me and have clean run out of ideas, can you get hold of the AAIB and ask them what I should have done".

We get comments here such as "... but he should not have been there in the first place." which is all well and holier than though, however the pilot is now in that situation, and will deal with as best they can.


Getting to my point of this post, we also get comments in relation to experience, "I reckon a pilot with that much flying experience would have chosen to divert to Birmingham Airport instead."

May I refer you all back to June 2008...



...and the subsequent PPRuNe thread dennis-crashes

Only one person had the courage to question Dennis and was quickly told to go away.
Everyone else that commented supported Dennis. Others of us kept quiet, because of the obvious reaction there would be.
Later, Dennis admits the crash was caused because he got it 'all so wrong'.
Read the article and notice that after a catalogue of Swiss cheese hole lining up, a lot of basic schoolboy stuff in there, the impact with the ground was the inevitable result.
In his own words, a series of poor decisions.
We all know how experienced and respected in the industry Dennis is however...it still happened.


In this recent case, a decision to land, even though it was in a school playground, prevented anything more than a few excited schoolchildren and this thread on PPRuNe.

But what if the outcome had been a collision with those power cables in the fog (check out the chart just to the west), or an injured school child, who ran into the tail rotor? Airmanship involves knowing when to say enough is enough and not relying on luck to get by.

I can recall the names of two experienced pilots who got themselves into a corner with paying passengers on board, from which no-one came out. One of those accidents resulted in single engined aircraft being no longer allowed to fly in IMC. There was another high profile possible CFIT accident very recently. We really don't want any more.

Again, I look forward to reading the MOR which will no doubt exonerate this particular pilot.

I take it all in ShyTq and what you say makes perfect sense. It is amazing that nothing else happened here, even more so when looking at google maps and the location of the school itself and surroundings. Google Maps Street View for Pool House Road. There are 3 sets of pylons to the West :eek:

Perhaps he pressed on just that little bit too far, perhaps it was an early bottle out, or simply perhaps the screen got misty.
(The 350/355's demist is not particularly good IIRC).

I also look forward to reading the MOR, I don't know about exoneration though.

Epiphany: Gee, I was just going to say the same thing about the above comment.... But then I realized how much of a know-it-all that would make me sound like.

Can't let that one go Fly99.

Know-it-all? I don't think so. What I am is a professional helicopter pilot who is alarmed at the lack of airmanship demonstrated by some pilots and the attitude and lack of knowledge evident by others on this forum.

I am an ATPL(H) holder and I know, understand and operate my helicopter by Instrument Flight Rules. That's my job and what I get paid to do and my employer, crew and passengers expect me to know the rules.

Those of you (both commercial and private pilots) who fly visually should also know, understand and operate to Visual Flight Rules. These are written for the benefit and safety of all pilots and their passengers. These are not regulations that you can decide to follow when and if it suits your purpose. They are RULES.

Judging by comments here some pilots treat these rules as discretionary, which may explain the worrying number of UK VFR helicopter accidents and incidents in marginal weather conditions.

Let it go....
 

Epiphany: I've heard you say that a number of times and wonder why you can't find some IFR operators and pilots to criticize instead of coming across like you're putting down VFR pilots for not being as professional as you are. I would put a lot more stock in comments posted by pilots that routinely fly VFR like me than condesending comments like those that you've posted. I kind of view your comments as if they were posted by a starch wing commuter pilot. fly911 ATP/R CFII/R

Epiphany,

I thought you were going to "exit this increasingly depressing thread". :ok:

Anyhoo;
How do you know that he wasn't?
After all, Simon says, "I was positioned one side of a small 'valley' he was on the other and were almost at eye level with each other. I measured it out today and the distance from one side to the other is about 40m."

How on Earth is that an accurate measurement of the flight visibility? All that says is the he was 40m away from the ac.
Looking closely at mappage, that all sounds a bit suss. However, we know Simon was walking his dog and you may notice that all the footpaths that are on on the other side of what could be described as a valley, are funnily enough, about 1500m away!

And I think it has been mentioned before, but just to confirm the reliable 'eye witness account' you trust so much;
In one sentence he says. "he descended through fog into 80m vis about 3-miles from EGBO at 1115, into an impossible landing area", yet then tells us, "A few hand gestures later I managed to get him into an open field."
So what happened, do you really think he landed in that impossible area, saw Simon, took off again and was marshalled in the open field that Simon later found out was a school.
Vis so bad Simon didn't see the school that he marshalled the ac into? Come on!

So what is the truth?
We just don't know, and you are now happily prosecuting a case totally blind. However as you keep telling us that you always fly IFR, you must be used to that!

Epiphany;
Do you not find it strange that under IFR you can (below 3,000 feet AMSL, COCISS), fly in a flight visibility minimum of 800 metres.
How is that safer?

Planning to fly, and flying at or above 1,000 feet above the nearest obstacle within 5 nautical miles, can help more than a little.

Don't forget that just because a pilot holds an IR, he won't be flying under IFR all the time...

If I'd inadvertantly landed on school playing fields and then had any chance of taking off again, I certainly wouldn't stay overnight, for a number of reasons. Maybe this aircraft had a fault which caused the pilot to wait for engineering assistance (or maybe the pilot needed fresh underwear for some reason).

Getting back on the start of the topic for a sec... EGBO's a tricky one in fog, but it takes local knowledge or a very good eye indeed to know that. We sit in a bowl with some very damp ground to the south of us, so are very prone to fog which can set in for the whole day even when elsewhere clears. I think the fastest I've seen in the last month (let alone the last few years working there!) was CAVOK to 200m or less FG in 25 mins. Not one to play with. The AFISOs there are incredibly professional - they are unable to give official weather observations or forecasts but will use experience to have a quiet chat. Always worth asking them about OAT and dewpoint as well, remember the 2 degree rule...

Epiphany does!

To be fair to Epiphany he probably hasnt flown single vfr for some years and has forgotten that we , on a daily basis , set off on flights in the knowledge that we will have to divert around some weather at some point in the journey . In my experience one can almost always find a route around the worst and can get from A to B safely . As we dont have the option to go up and through it we have to go around it ...therfore one would try to find a route east or west which will put you into better weather . I wouldnt set off if the weather spread right across the country !! Until we get a weather report that covers all parts of the country then vfr pilots are always going to be going into the unknown to some extent as you can well have two areas giving cavok and poor wx in between . As this is not covered in training then some get better at reading between the lines than others .
ps i am planning vfr from Leeds to Shoreham tomorrow at 2pm ...can you tell me if it will be cavok the whole route ? Which route ? Thanks :ok:

You only fly in CAVOK conditions? Try via Florida

I'd be surprised if it was CAVOK along any part of the route :p

well then would you expect it to be a flight that Epiphany would undertake or would he think it was unprofessional ??!!

Interesting Nigel...so there's only CAVOK and poor weather?

If you look at all the TAFs on Orbifly (MET'MAP - ORBIFLY FLIGHT SCHOOL - IFR ET CPL AMERICAIN EN EUROPE - FAA IFR AND CPL IN EUROPE) you might be OK if you go West.

But if it all goes to pot, there's always a local school playing field to pop into :-). If it's a posh school term might have ended so you'll be fine.

206

If it is a really posh school they have a helipad ! ( See Millfield ):ok:
And no my kids dont go there

No, I do not think he would think that. I'm not sure why you posted that comment unless you are just trying to "have a go" at someone for no other reason than not agreeing with your own viewpoint.

VFR is VMC, under VFR flight rules. Carrying out a precautionary or forced landing for any reason, including weather, means that an MOR should be submitted.