Helicopter Crash Central London
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Sky reporting that NATS state that the aircraft had been receiving a service earlier, but was not receiving a service at the time of the accident.
Last edited by ORAC; 16th Jan 2013 at 09:53.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever rules he was trying to fly to, he was indisputably in IMC. Probably the one indisputable fact we have right now.
Highly likely he was flying with a GPS. GPS glitches and deliberate jamming/corruption is well known and documented. But that is just conjecture.
Highly likely he was flying with a GPS. GPS glitches and deliberate jamming/corruption is well known and documented. But that is just conjecture.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Southampton
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pictures of the helicopter involved from the Castle Air site:
http://www.castleair.co.uk/1997-agus...er-g-crst.html
http://www.castleair.co.uk/1997-agus...er-g-crst.html
But in all seriousness... I would think London IMC is not the place to be for an eggbeater, no matter the gadgets on board or the experience of the crew.
Whatever rules he was trying to fly to, he was indisputably in IMC. Probably the one indisputable fact we have right now.
Highly likely he was flying with a GPS.
Highly likely he was flying with a GPS.
Lets have the Experts find out what happened first, before authorities start re-writing the rules which have served us well for so long.
Knee jerk reactions are to be avoided (i hope) until the report, and its findings, are published.
Last edited by eman_resu; 16th Jan 2013 at 10:05.
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Moray
Age: 52
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pictures of the helicopter involved from the Castle Air site:
http://www.castleair.co.uk/1997-agus...er-g-crst.html
http://www.castleair.co.uk/1997-agus...er-g-crst.html
Photo Search Results | Airliners.net
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Farnborough
Age: 32
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think it's wise to post information about an aircraft as the authorities haven't confirmed names of the casualties.
Last edited by AeroMad; 16th Jan 2013 at 10:23.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,663
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
re-writing the rules which have served us well for so long.
But then I'm not a heli pilot, so if one cares to correct me, I'll bow to their wisdom !
More bang for your buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 82
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good set of photos from the Telegraph:
Helicopter crash in pictures: aircraft hits crane in Vauxhall, south London - Telegraph
Helicopter crash in pictures: aircraft hits crane in Vauxhall, south London - Telegraph
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Statements like these are really conjecture at the moment, and highly likely to be deliberately interpreted by the media to improve their sales, creating the usual scare stories.
Lets have the Experts find out what happened first, before authorities start re-writing the rules which have served us well for so long.
Knee jerk reactions are to be avoided (i hope) until the report, and its findings, are published.
Lets have the Experts find out what happened first, before authorities start re-writing the rules which have served us well for so long.
Knee jerk reactions are to be avoided (i hope) until the report, and its findings, are published.
Unlike the "aviation expert" just on Radio 5 who seems to think that an appropriately configured a/c should be OK in those conditions, and after all the police helicopter can fly in any conditions, so maybe the pilot was just caught out. THAT is silly conjecture, and not very expert to boot.
Last edited by eltonioni; 16th Jan 2013 at 10:14.
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: huj
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would give the pilot the benefit of the doubt. He's unlikely to been in IMC, you have to assume he stayed below the cloud base to the extent you can and of course horizontal visibility was probably not ideal.
He was probably perfectly aware of the building in his path and the crane. But perhaps the jib wasn't visible until it was too late and he just clipped it.
No doubt all will be clear when the radar track is examined and possibly the onboard GPS data if it survived.
It's far too soon to be condemming the pilot or suggesting he was scud running.
My own speculative version is that he was transitting normally albeit in less than ideal conditions, was lower than ideal but clear of the buildings. The jib was mostly in cloud and he either forgot about it or was closer than he believed. I'd say the investigation will reveal he hit the very tip of the jib.
He was probably perfectly aware of the building in his path and the crane. But perhaps the jib wasn't visible until it was too late and he just clipped it.
No doubt all will be clear when the radar track is examined and possibly the onboard GPS data if it survived.
It's far too soon to be condemming the pilot or suggesting he was scud running.
My own speculative version is that he was transitting normally albeit in less than ideal conditions, was lower than ideal but clear of the buildings. The jib was mostly in cloud and he either forgot about it or was closer than he believed. I'd say the investigation will reveal he hit the very tip of the jib.
Pictures 14 & 16 show the visibility quite clearly to be low
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: looking out of the window
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helicopter could have been flying VFR.
Rules for helicopters operating below 3000ft allow VFR flight so long as they stay clear of cloud and have the surface in sight
Rules for helicopters operating below 3000ft allow VFR flight so long as they stay clear of cloud and have the surface in sight
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Greenwich
Age: 35
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes they do - But this also depends on the time the photo's were taken, compared to the visibility at the time of the accident
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
eman_resu
Fair comment, but this is an Internet forum. People like to chat, talk, chew-over and speculate. They'll be a whole mix from the supremely well qualified to comment down to the muck-stirrers and even media muck-stirrers no doubt. In between they'll be all the shades twixt black and white. So maybe, let's just stop commenting and speculating until the official report comes out. Reminds me of the pre-1990 days... Still, subject to taking anything on any Internet forum with liberal NaCl, steer your way though the mud and delight when you find the occasional pearl, or diamond And enjoy the freedom that the Internet in general and this forum in particular grants - freedom of speech and freedom to speculate.
BTW: As I'm sure you know, there is a difference between VFR and VMC, and a difference between IFR and IMC. For the media listening in, I can also reveal that it's possible to be IFR in VMC. All very confusing, innit?
Lets have the Experts find out what happened first, before authorities start re-writing the rules which have served us well for so long.
BTW: As I'm sure you know, there is a difference between VFR and VMC, and a difference between IFR and IMC. For the media listening in, I can also reveal that it's possible to be IFR in VMC. All very confusing, innit?