Helicopter Crash Central London
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We do not know that Battersea did not try to or even actually make contact with PB. We know that he did not make contact with Battersea. The AAIB report will say if Battersea made any transmissions, and (hopefully) what radio frequency PB had selected.
Typically, though, on being passed to another frequency I have to change my set and make the opening call. The new handler will wait for me, else how does he know I have changed my frequency?
Typically, though, on being passed to another frequency I have to change my set and make the opening call. The new handler will wait for me, else how does he know I have changed my frequency?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
What does one do presented with a light one wasn't expecting to see? Commonsense tells us we've not 'planned' or 'expected' to fly into a crane or a building! My reaction, and I'd guess, the instant reaction of an unexpected light is WTF!? If you check the rules, an instant response of up, down left or right isn't clear to the pilot.
The relevant rule says that where two aircraft are approaching head on, each turns right to avoid the other. Most pilots would instinctively turn to avoid anything ahead, especially if already at low level.
The rules also state that pilots needing to avoid should not pass directly below, or above another aircraft.
In PB's case, he would have been given a maximum altitude to fly, probably 1,000 feet QNH.
Last edited by ShyTorque; 18th Jan 2013 at 17:37. Reason: to clarify
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..... so considering he heliport is perhaps a 1/4 mile away....
Last edited by TRC; 18th Jan 2013 at 17:40. Reason: added the out of sight bit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShyTorque
Sorry about that. I didn't mean to be discourteous, but there was a system problem - my pc or pprune or my fingers or whatever. Sure, I hear your pov. I meant this as a general discussion...I'm sure there is no 'right' or 'wrong' answer. It's a balance. 
(if you read the post in full you should see it was me who posted your quote).
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real question should be about how an AOC positioning flight ended-up launching in such conditions whilst the rest of us had a quick look at Carol the weather girl on BBC Breakfast, rolled over and hit the snooze button on our alarm clocks. The cloud was on/close to the deck, the forecasts were bad, the A109 does not have an icing clearance and it was rather cold.
All the other stuff about frequencies, procedures, controllers, lack of obstruction lights etc is noise and only contributes some rather thin layers of the proverbial Swiss cheese.
Of course, I may be completely wrong.
All the other stuff about frequencies, procedures, controllers, lack of obstruction lights etc is noise and only contributes some rather thin layers of the proverbial Swiss cheese.
Of course, I may be completely wrong.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
757 hopeful, 1/4 of a mile? Please check your navigation!
Battersea heliport is slightly more than 2nm from Vauxhall Bridge, the reporting point. Hence the requirement for the frequency change at that point; it's on the edge of the ATZ.
Due to topography, the Battersea controller would not have line of sight with an aircraft at Vauxhall.
Battersea heliport is slightly more than 2nm from Vauxhall Bridge, the reporting point. Hence the requirement for the frequency change at that point; it's on the edge of the ATZ.
Due to topography, the Battersea controller would not have line of sight with an aircraft at Vauxhall.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
757Hopeful
Do not forget an airport can only give weather conditions at their airport. They have no clue other than other aircraft reports what conditions are away from the airport.
Especially around a water situation with concrete or brick buildings alongside side the river and varying temperature changes conditions can change dramatically over the space of a few hundred yards ie on one side of the river you could have perfect VFR on the other side standing fog or low cloud.
Do not forget an airport can only give weather conditions at their airport. They have no clue other than other aircraft reports what conditions are away from the airport.
Especially around a water situation with concrete or brick buildings alongside side the river and varying temperature changes conditions can change dramatically over the space of a few hundred yards ie on one side of the river you could have perfect VFR on the other side standing fog or low cloud.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShyTorque --
Hmmmm...Maybe I see it a bit differently as I also do marine (ocean). I do cars trains and buses as well. And bicycles. Just for the purpose of this reply, suppose I am flying directly towards you, you are on my nose. We are talking visual only. I see your white, your green and your red. And hopefully vice versa. How do I 'notice' you? I mean, what draws your presence to my attention?...
Lemain, Are you not familiar with the rules of the air? I ask because you seem to be trying to put this in context of shipping.
The relevant rule says that where two aircraft are approaching head on, each turns right to avoid the other. Most pilots would instinctively turn to avoid anything ahead, especially if already at low level.
The rules also state that pilots needing to avoid should not pass directly below, or above another aircraft.
The relevant rule says that where two aircraft are approaching head on, each turns right to avoid the other. Most pilots would instinctively turn to avoid anything ahead, especially if already at low level.
The rules also state that pilots needing to avoid should not pass directly below, or above another aircraft.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Greenwich
Age: 35
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to Google Earth, a straight line distance from the crane in question to Battersea Heliport is about 2.1nm. - and out of sight from the control tower I expect, due to buildings in the way.
757 hopeful, 1/4 of a mile? Please check your navigation!
Battersea heliport is slightly more than 2nm from Vauxhall Bridge, the reporting point. Hence the requirement for the frequency change at that point; it's on the edge of the ATZ.
Due to topography, the Battersea controller would not have line of sight with an aircraft at Vauxhall.
Battersea heliport is slightly more than 2nm from Vauxhall Bridge, the reporting point. Hence the requirement for the frequency change at that point; it's on the edge of the ATZ.
Due to topography, the Battersea controller would not have line of sight with an aircraft at Vauxhall.
757Hopeful
Do not forget an airport can only give weather conditions at their airport. They have no clue other than other aircraft reports what conditions are away from the airport.
Especially around a water situation with concrete or brick buildings alongside side the river and varying temperature changes conditions can change dramatically over the space of a few hundred yards ie on one side of the river you could have perfect VFR on the other side standing fog or low cloud.
Pace
Do not forget an airport can only give weather conditions at their airport. They have no clue other than other aircraft reports what conditions are away from the airport.
Especially around a water situation with concrete or brick buildings alongside side the river and varying temperature changes conditions can change dramatically over the space of a few hundred yards ie on one side of the river you could have perfect VFR on the other side standing fog or low cloud.
Pace
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By all accounts the heli did not declare an emergency, so considering he heliport is perhaps a 1/4 mile away? The controller would have seen both visually and by looking at the metar that the weather was not suitable.
With regards to the weather; if it is below the prescribed minima the heliport is closed.It's that simple. There are plenty of visibility points and a cloudbase recorder to assist he ATCO in doing the met obs.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Lemain, if another aircraft was coming directly towards me, you wouldn't normally see a white navigation light because that would be the tail light.
If you fly, you should know this - it's part of basic air law, which all pilots, irrespective of the type of licence, are required to pass an exam in. Normally before first solo.
Whatever I saw directly ahead, in normal circumstances I would turn right.
If you fly, you should know this - it's part of basic air law, which all pilots, irrespective of the type of licence, are required to pass an exam in. Normally before first solo.
Whatever I saw directly ahead, in normal circumstances I would turn right.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Canada
Age: 53
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lemain:
Used them? Not deliberately, but they have certainly helped me. No way to know for sure if the extra second(s) was the difference but I'm glad I had it!
Mixture:
The reality is that, if one were to just "put it down" in downtown London, their @ss would be (the proverbial) grass.
Lets use our risk matrix:
1. precautionary landing: consequences significant (job in jeopardy, CAA action, adverse media coverage, blow to ego) and likelihood 100%. Worse if the a/c was damaged in the landing, a pedestrian was struck by debris, or a looky-loo driver had an accident!
2. press on: consequences dire (accident? or less) but likelihood very (extremely) low (been here before, know the area, got a plan)
Most pilots, who got where they are by being confident in themselves, would see less risk in #2. All the hindsight in the world on here won't change that.
I highlighted one line from above: does anyone really think that after a precautionary in the downtown the result would be positive???? Give me a break!
Usually the situation 'feels' controllable until very near the end, that is why it is so hard to call it off. Once the decision to launch is made, options begin to fade away. That first early go/no go is the big safety gate!
That said, when I first looked at the weather posted on pprune (can't locate it now) it looked like just another marginal VFR day, except maybe for the freezing fog. Without local area knowledge I might hesitate. For him, I expect it was just another day.
There are many issues that MIGHT have had an impact. Too many posters on here pick one and then spend endless effort trying to prove why theirs is the best, if not the only, explanation. It becomes a question of WHO is right, not WHAT is right. Hmmmm, what regular training that most pilots get covers this??
I expect the AAIB will find a very complex chain with simple causes, no earth-shattering conclusions or revelations.
For me: the flight was marginal but considered doable with a back-up plan/diversion (he was considered skilled, professional, experienced). Encountered the bad wx but client and boss would be happy that he tried (my suspicion of motivation, not malicious). A SPIFR ship in marginal wx so was likely coupled and flying faster than would have been if hand-flying (been there done that). Distracted at a critical time by radio (freq change, call, pos'n report, gps check) and hit an object that was difficult to see in the circumstances.
None of us is infallible. We are all diminished by the loss.
Seriously, has anyone here used lights while flying professionally for collision avoidance?
Mixture:
Quote:
yeah of course.. any heli can just land at will in a park in inner city london, have a smoke and wait for the weather to clear up.
And its attitudes like that are contributing factors towards accidents....the red-mist, press-on effect !
You made a bad call on the weather. Its closed in around you. You know you're about to hit an area of London that you would rather not be in under cover of cloud and potential ice.
Assuming you have exhausted all other viable options, don't press-on, put the damn thing down ..... I'm sure the CAA would much rather see you do that than end up hitting a crane.
Infact, didn't someone link to a AIC pink on the subject ? You might want to read it..... P146/2012 issued 20 December 2012.
yeah of course.. any heli can just land at will in a park in inner city london, have a smoke and wait for the weather to clear up.
And its attitudes like that are contributing factors towards accidents....the red-mist, press-on effect !
You made a bad call on the weather. Its closed in around you. You know you're about to hit an area of London that you would rather not be in under cover of cloud and potential ice.
Assuming you have exhausted all other viable options, don't press-on, put the damn thing down ..... I'm sure the CAA would much rather see you do that than end up hitting a crane.
Infact, didn't someone link to a AIC pink on the subject ? You might want to read it..... P146/2012 issued 20 December 2012.
Lets use our risk matrix:
1. precautionary landing: consequences significant (job in jeopardy, CAA action, adverse media coverage, blow to ego) and likelihood 100%. Worse if the a/c was damaged in the landing, a pedestrian was struck by debris, or a looky-loo driver had an accident!
2. press on: consequences dire (accident? or less) but likelihood very (extremely) low (been here before, know the area, got a plan)
Most pilots, who got where they are by being confident in themselves, would see less risk in #2. All the hindsight in the world on here won't change that.
I highlighted one line from above: does anyone really think that after a precautionary in the downtown the result would be positive???? Give me a break!
Usually the situation 'feels' controllable until very near the end, that is why it is so hard to call it off. Once the decision to launch is made, options begin to fade away. That first early go/no go is the big safety gate!
That said, when I first looked at the weather posted on pprune (can't locate it now) it looked like just another marginal VFR day, except maybe for the freezing fog. Without local area knowledge I might hesitate. For him, I expect it was just another day.
There are many issues that MIGHT have had an impact. Too many posters on here pick one and then spend endless effort trying to prove why theirs is the best, if not the only, explanation. It becomes a question of WHO is right, not WHAT is right. Hmmmm, what regular training that most pilots get covers this??
I expect the AAIB will find a very complex chain with simple causes, no earth-shattering conclusions or revelations.
For me: the flight was marginal but considered doable with a back-up plan/diversion (he was considered skilled, professional, experienced). Encountered the bad wx but client and boss would be happy that he tried (my suspicion of motivation, not malicious). A SPIFR ship in marginal wx so was likely coupled and flying faster than would have been if hand-flying (been there done that). Distracted at a critical time by radio (freq change, call, pos'n report, gps check) and hit an object that was difficult to see in the circumstances.
None of us is infallible. We are all diminished by the loss.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lemain, if another aircraft was coming directly towards me, you wouldn't normally see a white navigation light because that would be the tail light.
If you fly, you should know this - it's part of basic air law, which all pilots, irrespective of the type of licence, are required to pass an exam in. Normally before first solo.
Whatever I saw directly ahead, in normal circumstances I would turn right.
If you fly, you should know this - it's part of basic air law, which all pilots, irrespective of the type of licence, are required to pass an exam in. Normally before first solo.
Whatever I saw directly ahead, in normal circumstances I would turn right.
If you feel it'd be OK to debate without being so confrontational then it'd be more enjoyable but if not, I'm cool with that too.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point(s) by air police (post #249). This vid is also interesting, if rather long! High points 'buzzing' 027L at Heathrow around 6 - 7mins in, then the ride down the meander of the Thames ~12/13mins in. Main point being, along routing of the river, well away from tall buildings.
Last edited by sAx_R54; 18th Jan 2013 at 19:39.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pilot apprentice --
Yup, I can relate to that but hand on heart, were you somewhere where you shouldn't have been? Off track for any reason, 'excusable' or just plain 'error' - we ALL make errors imo and the biggest risk is to be in denial of that to ourselves. Presumably someone didn't build a tower block between your takeoff and your near-miss? 
You planned your route and using whatever nav system - visual or electronic - you gave yourself an appropriate margin left and right, and terrain clearance. So the very fact you were presented with those lights is a wake up call. You didn't plan it right, your instruments were wrong, you lost attention, the charts were wrong.... and so on. Which is not a personal criticism, if you're human we're in the same tribe
Used them? Not deliberately, but they have certainly helped me. No way to know for sure if the extra second(s) was the difference but I'm glad I had it!
You planned your route and using whatever nav system - visual or electronic - you gave yourself an appropriate margin left and right, and terrain clearance. So the very fact you were presented with those lights is a wake up call. You didn't plan it right, your instruments were wrong, you lost attention, the charts were wrong.... and so on. Which is not a personal criticism, if you're human we're in the same tribe
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lemain,
it's pretty clear that you are taking marine contexts into aviation, and to some degree i can understand your percetions.
as a couple of points you mention as follows:
ok as i had posted previously, and i'll repost here:
so yes ligting of an obstruction is beneficial, seeing the light obstruction, the piolt would interpret that as appropriate and corrective action.
lighting on an obstruction is not counter productive, it's very productive. no, an aircraft should not be so close to a structure as to cause immenent threat, but thats where lighting fits in, it provides an additional layer safety to a potential circumstance that could result in a catstrophic event.
a heli cannot, as shy torque, a heli pilot himself has addressed merely stop, hang around and do something else, further to that the specific airmass the pilot is in is moving also which could further make the situation more critical.
in your shipping context, a ship cannot merely stop and decide which way its going to go around a reef, the mass of water it is in is moving also which under lack of power control could cause the very situation attempting to be avoided.
further to that, yes ships have GPS and many other systems, but harbour entrances still lit bouys going into harbour entrances, they do not absolve the situation of catastrophic outcomes, but they provide another layer of safety to prevent such.
like i posted, a tower crane costs upwards of a couple of hundred thousand, probably way more, way way more. a couple of hundred on lighting provides a very effective and cheap safety margin.
it's pretty clear that you are taking marine contexts into aviation, and to some degree i can understand your percetions.
as a couple of points you mention as follows:
To be frank, I think that's counter-productive. What does one do presented with a light one wasn't expecting to see? Commonsense tells us we've not 'planned' or 'expected' to fly into a crane or a building! My reaction, and I'd guess, the instant reaction of an unexpected light is WTF!? If you check the rules, an instant response of up, down left or right isn't clear to the pilot. The marine cardinal system is better
Maybe I see it a bit differently as I also do marine (ocean). I do cars trains and buses as well. And bicycles. Just for the purpose of this reply, suppose I am flying directly towards you, you are on my nose. We are talking visual only. I see your white, your green and your red. And hopefully vice versa. How do I 'notice' you? I mean, what draws your presence to my attention?...
What drew your attention to the light(s)? Suppose there seemed to be flashing lights associated with the group? What might you consider 'normal circumstances' or what would be 'abnormal circumstances' and would you react differently in 'normal' and 'abnormal' circumstances? With a closing speed of a couple of hundred knots in a Cessna, you haven't got a lot of time to ponder.... I suppose you could hover in a helicopter and ponder
FAR-AIM Section 2 Air Navigation and Obstruction Lighting.
-2-3. Obstruction Lights
a. Obstructions are marked/lighted to warn airmen of their presence during daytime and nighttime conditions. They may be marked/lighted in any of the following combinations:
1. Aviation Red Obstruction Lights. Flashing aviation red beacons (20 to 40 flashes per minute) and steady burning aviation red lights during nighttime operation. Aviation orange and white paint is used for daytime marking.
2. Medium Intensity Flashing White Obstruction Lights. Medium intensity flashing white obstruction lights may be used during daytime and twilight with automatically selected reduced intensity for nighttime operation. When this system is used on structures 500 feet (153m) AGL or less in height, other methods of marking and lighting the structure may be omitted. Aviation orange and white paint is always required for daytime marking on structures exceeding 500 feet (153m) AGL. This system is not normally installed on structures less than 200 feet (61m) AGL.
3. High Intensity White Obstruction Lights.Flashing high intensity white lights during daytime with reduced intensity for twilight and nighttime operation. When this type system is used, the marking of structures with red obstruction lights and aviation orange and white paint may be omitted.
4. Dual Lighting. A combination of flashing aviation red beacons and steady burning aviation red lights for nighttime operation and flashing high intensity white lights for daytime operation. Aviation orange and white paint may be omitted.
5. Catenary Lighting. Lighted markers are available for increased night conspicuity of high-voltage (69KV or higher) transmission line catenary wires. Lighted markers provide conspicuity both day and night.
b. Medium intensity omnidirectional flashing white lighting system provides conspicuity both day and night on catenary support structures. The unique sequential/simultaneous flashing light system alerts pilots of the associated catenary wires.
c. High intensity flashing white lights are being used to identify some supporting structures of overhead transmission lines located across rivers, chasms, gorges, etc. These lights flash in a middle, top, lower light sequence at approximately 60 flashes per minute. The top light is normally installed near the top of the supporting structure, while the lower light indicates the approximate lower portion of the wire span. The lights are beamed towards the companion structure and identify the area of the wire span.
d. High intensity flashing white lights are also employed to identify tall structures, such as chimneys and towers, as obstructions to air navigation. The lights provide a 360 degree coverage about the structure at 40 flashes per minute and consist of from one to seven levels of lights depending upon the height of the structure. Where more than one level is used the vertical banks flash simultaneously.
-2-3. Obstruction Lights
a. Obstructions are marked/lighted to warn airmen of their presence during daytime and nighttime conditions. They may be marked/lighted in any of the following combinations:
1. Aviation Red Obstruction Lights. Flashing aviation red beacons (20 to 40 flashes per minute) and steady burning aviation red lights during nighttime operation. Aviation orange and white paint is used for daytime marking.
2. Medium Intensity Flashing White Obstruction Lights. Medium intensity flashing white obstruction lights may be used during daytime and twilight with automatically selected reduced intensity for nighttime operation. When this system is used on structures 500 feet (153m) AGL or less in height, other methods of marking and lighting the structure may be omitted. Aviation orange and white paint is always required for daytime marking on structures exceeding 500 feet (153m) AGL. This system is not normally installed on structures less than 200 feet (61m) AGL.
3. High Intensity White Obstruction Lights.Flashing high intensity white lights during daytime with reduced intensity for twilight and nighttime operation. When this type system is used, the marking of structures with red obstruction lights and aviation orange and white paint may be omitted.
4. Dual Lighting. A combination of flashing aviation red beacons and steady burning aviation red lights for nighttime operation and flashing high intensity white lights for daytime operation. Aviation orange and white paint may be omitted.
5. Catenary Lighting. Lighted markers are available for increased night conspicuity of high-voltage (69KV or higher) transmission line catenary wires. Lighted markers provide conspicuity both day and night.
b. Medium intensity omnidirectional flashing white lighting system provides conspicuity both day and night on catenary support structures. The unique sequential/simultaneous flashing light system alerts pilots of the associated catenary wires.
c. High intensity flashing white lights are being used to identify some supporting structures of overhead transmission lines located across rivers, chasms, gorges, etc. These lights flash in a middle, top, lower light sequence at approximately 60 flashes per minute. The top light is normally installed near the top of the supporting structure, while the lower light indicates the approximate lower portion of the wire span. The lights are beamed towards the companion structure and identify the area of the wire span.
d. High intensity flashing white lights are also employed to identify tall structures, such as chimneys and towers, as obstructions to air navigation. The lights provide a 360 degree coverage about the structure at 40 flashes per minute and consist of from one to seven levels of lights depending upon the height of the structure. Where more than one level is used the vertical banks flash simultaneously.
lighting on an obstruction is not counter productive, it's very productive. no, an aircraft should not be so close to a structure as to cause immenent threat, but thats where lighting fits in, it provides an additional layer safety to a potential circumstance that could result in a catstrophic event.
a heli cannot, as shy torque, a heli pilot himself has addressed merely stop, hang around and do something else, further to that the specific airmass the pilot is in is moving also which could further make the situation more critical.
in your shipping context, a ship cannot merely stop and decide which way its going to go around a reef, the mass of water it is in is moving also which under lack of power control could cause the very situation attempting to be avoided.
further to that, yes ships have GPS and many other systems, but harbour entrances still lit bouys going into harbour entrances, they do not absolve the situation of catastrophic outcomes, but they provide another layer of safety to prevent such.
like i posted, a tower crane costs upwards of a couple of hundred thousand, probably way more, way way more. a couple of hundred on lighting provides a very effective and cheap safety margin.
Last edited by stuckgear; 18th Jan 2013 at 20:02.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you again, stuckgear, for posting the FAR regs for Air Nav and Obstruction Lighting. It says it all, really. Point 3, Flashing high intensity white lights during daytime, yes please. Which is why in low viz I alway turn on my strobes, extra precaution cost very little. To quibble about light pollution over London is absurd.
757 hopeful raised a few points. He wonders if Battersea would be trying to contact the A109; but any attempts to do so would have to be limited, so as not to obstruct the frequency. Also Battersea can only report visual conditions at the airport. And can they really close it down if conditions are bad? that might be just when a refuge is badly needed.
Satcop says that Battersea has a cloudbase recorder to assist with met observations; I wonder how on earth that could work in rising or drifting fog?
At our gliding club, which takes a keen interest in cloudbase, we normally have to send an instructor up the wire first to see at what height the glider vanishes...
757 hopeful raised a few points. He wonders if Battersea would be trying to contact the A109; but any attempts to do so would have to be limited, so as not to obstruct the frequency. Also Battersea can only report visual conditions at the airport. And can they really close it down if conditions are bad? that might be just when a refuge is badly needed.
Satcop says that Battersea has a cloudbase recorder to assist with met observations; I wonder how on earth that could work in rising or drifting fog?
At our gliding club, which takes a keen interest in cloudbase, we normally have to send an instructor up the wire first to see at what height the glider vanishes...
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Lemain,
A lecturer of mine from forty years ago used to use a phrase like that when he had been caught out himself. From a few things you've written, it appeared that you know little about basic aviation law.
Let's assume instead you were trying to catch me out with a scenario that could not happen. The answer lies in the knowledge of the rules.
There has been a tragic loss of life. This thread (and the one on Rotorheads) has produced a whole lot of false information from armchair "Aviation experts" to the point of nonsense (I thought I'd never say Jim Ferguson isn't so bad after all...but..).
I've tried to post a few facts, from my own directly relevant and current knowledge of the profession; hopefully giving a little balance.
As I already posted, in the one you didn't fully read, I wrote that this accident was very close to home in my particular case. I will await the AAIB report with interest because the fallout from it (and there will be some, I'm sure) is very pertinent to all of us who fly in this sometimes extremely demanding role.
I do have my own theory about what could have happened; my colleagues in the same part of the profession will also have theirs.
I politely suggest you start another thread if you want to debate aircraft lighting; I have no desire to do so here. Thanks.
"Great, I have your attention"
Let's assume instead you were trying to catch me out with a scenario that could not happen. The answer lies in the knowledge of the rules.
There has been a tragic loss of life. This thread (and the one on Rotorheads) has produced a whole lot of false information from armchair "Aviation experts" to the point of nonsense (I thought I'd never say Jim Ferguson isn't so bad after all...but..).
I've tried to post a few facts, from my own directly relevant and current knowledge of the profession; hopefully giving a little balance.
As I already posted, in the one you didn't fully read, I wrote that this accident was very close to home in my particular case. I will await the AAIB report with interest because the fallout from it (and there will be some, I'm sure) is very pertinent to all of us who fly in this sometimes extremely demanding role.
I do have my own theory about what could have happened; my colleagues in the same part of the profession will also have theirs.
I politely suggest you start another thread if you want to debate aircraft lighting; I have no desire to do so here. Thanks.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stuckgear -- That's a big long post with lots of re-posting. I'm happy to come back to any point you want to discuss but may I please focus, just now, on how 'you', the oncoming pilot, will notice my existence? Or the existence of a crane or a building?
For me it tends to be flashing or occulting lights. Solids are good for orientation and identification but they are very easy to miss, especially in the air. Less so at sea, oddly.
So what do you think about flashing lights? And the rules? And do you immediately turn right?
For me it tends to be flashing or occulting lights. Solids are good for orientation and identification but they are very easy to miss, especially in the air. Less so at sea, oddly.
So what do you think about flashing lights? And the rules? And do you immediately turn right?