Hovering Hidiot

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Loads at field today, and who should reappear ? The village idiot that's who, as some of you may know we had an incident with an heli a few years ago. CAA where involved, its happening again. Our field is a mown field in the midst of rape, wheat and willow crops. We have been there almost 20 years, police heli lots of civilian heli's and fixed wing pass by frequently, all give us a wide berth.

This fella is a local business man, he knows we are there, today he's straight over strip repeatedly, hovering, doing low hard turns, the mans a moron. Modellers like photography, some have expensive camera's at field, today they did. We have dozens of photo's of his behaviour and his registration.

He only stopped doing it, when it dawned on him we had camera's on him. Tuesday contact CAA see what they say

John

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

Hi John,

definitely sounds like a job for the CAA. They need to "have a word"

BEB

[Phil 9]

obviously he is doing it out of spite

Any evidence you can get should go to the CAA. Hopefully a warning from them maybe enough to stop him

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

In a nutshell Phil

He knows we will give way and is bullying us, hes hovering over centre of strip. photo's reg and something like 25 people to confirm it.

John

[Phil 9]

yes you will give way but his actions are still reckless. He could easily put his aircraft in the line of sight of a flying model and the rc pilot the model could go anywhere.

 

Edited By Phil 9 on 03/05/2014 21:37:20

[John Privett]

If he's lower than 500 feet (ok, technically just closer than 500 feet from people, vehicles, structures) and he's not landing or taking off then he's in for an "interesting" time with the CAA - unless he has received a specific exemption to fly over you, which seems unlikely!

It's summarised in CAP 393 and it's the Rules of the Air Regulations 2007, Section 53 Rule 5 that states the Low flying prohibitions, specifically (3)(b) which states;

The 500 feet rule
Except with the written permission of the CAA, an aircraft shall not be flown closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure.

Rule 6 lists the exemptions - basically landing or taking off, police helicopters, captive balloons & kites, flying displays, glider hill-soaring, manoeuvring within a licensed aerodrome.

Edited By John Privett on 03/05/2014 23:17:59

[Shaunie]

Surprised you didn't phone it straight in to the CAA and log it as an airmiss!

I'm sure he thinks he's being clever but I think this counts as reckless endangerment, his aircraft and yours.

I think (hope) the CAA will take a very dim view of this.

Let us know the outcome.

Shaunie.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I would have thought a prompt report to the police would be in order. From your description he clearly endangered the people at the field and if he came within 500 feet of you - unless he was on a normal landing approach he was surely contravening the ANO even without the reckless behaviour.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Got committee meeting Monday, want to do it correctly. Camera has recorded time and date. Clearly shows his reg, been through this before. A properly worded e-mail with our co ordinates, provide as much information as possible and we still have paperwork on file from the last incident. Will send BMFA an e mail also, so its all on record

John

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

I know that several forum members are serving or ex-policemen and they would be better placed to advise on what is only an opinion but I suspect that the best approach would be to make a report at the time of the incident or as soon as practical after the event.

It might be argued that you were insufficiently concerned by any real danger to report it immediately? Could a clever lawyer argue that the photos were misleading and (as there's history) your club was being malicious?

What happened the last time? Did the CAA take any action or was there insufficient evidence on that occasion?

Edited By Martin Harris on 03/05/2014 23:44:01

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Classed as a near miss, have documents

This heli is an expensive bit of kit, call me cynical but when you have that kind of money, I would rather go to CAA with it than local. Residents have made complaints in the past, maybe they dont know of CAA. As modellers we do.

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Difficult to see how the police would have any alternative to involving the CAA if a report of people being endangered by illegal flying was made - especially with photographic evidence. If you were put in danger, why wouldn't you report it immediately? That question might be significant to any investigation...

Anyone out there able to comment from an informed viewpoint?

[Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator]

The problem is, with the greatest respect to all policemen on here, most policemen wouldn't be aware of the law in this area - its hardly mainstream!

Its very likely that the offender isn't either. Most people, helicopter pilots and most policemen included, don't realise that the under the auspices of the CAA model aircraft are just "aircraft" - exactly the same as his helicopter. You both share the air. I suspect most members of the general public (and probably your resident idiot helicopter pilot) will see this as "these guys with their toys need to keep out of the way of a "real" aircraft"

So on balance - I think John has it right. Report the incident with supporting evidence to CAA, copy in BMFA so they know what you are doing and can step in to help if needed.

BEB

[cymaz]

Could you not put the culprit on YouTube and shame him that way? Or would he boast about it?

[Phil 9]

Posted by Martin Harris on 03/05/2014 23:39:25:

I know that several forum members are serving or ex-policemen and they would be better placed to advise on what is only an opinion but I suspect that the best approach would be to make a report at the time of the incident or as soon as practical after the event.

It might be argued that you were insufficiently concerned by any real danger to report it immediately? Could a clever lawyer argue that the photos were misleading and (as there's history) your club was being malicious?

What happened the last time? Did the CAA take any action or was there insufficient evidence on that occasion?

Edited By Martin Harris on 03/05/2014 23:44:01

I clever lawyer may argue that if the CAA prosecute but it might not have to be taken that far. A warning may be sufficient to stop him doing it again. I would imagine that the club members just want that behaviour to stop as an outcome from this rather than a prosecution. From the description above it sounds like the perpetrator put his own aircraft in more danger than to those on the ground. but it is still reckless flying

[Ross Clarkson]

Sounds like John is going down the correct procedure on reporting this and fully agree with BEB's comments.

John, you mention photos but did anybody video it? If not, make sure somebody does next time. A photo paints a picture but a video makes the Sistine Chapels roof come to life.

[Kevin Wilson]

Is there an chance this chap is just misguided?

He may have thought he was giving you your very own 100% flying display.

You seemed to be enjoying it so much that you were all taking photos!

Probably not, but there are always two sides to any incident.

Is his house within audible range? Did someone fly inadvertently close to him one day? Was there a bright young man given a frosty reception in the past, never to be seen again?

I wonder what is making him pick on you.

For whatever reason, I am sure a word from CAA will realign him.

[David Gilder]

Out of curiosity,
Has the club arranged for a NOTAM to be active at the location.
This would at least give ALL pilots notification of model flying at the location upto a specified height and radius.
At least he couldnt claim not to know about you then!!

Looking forward to the results on this one!!

[avtur]

If you want to know a bit more about the aircraft and its owner enter the registration into "G INFO", which is a publicly accessible database of all UK registered aircraft.

If you enter 'ginfo' into Google you'll get a link straight to it, it is on the CAA website.

Unlike car registration details the details for aircraft and owner are in the public domain, all pilots should know this and be aware that anyone can take the registration and trace the owner.

I would report to the CAA as soon as possible, their website may have information on how to report.

 

 

Edited By avtur on 04/05/2014 13:37:27

[David Hardaker]

John

I may have missed it, but no-one seems to have suggested having a word face to face with the offending pilot to hear his side of the situation and his reasoning.

He may be under the illusion that everyone is highly impressed with his flying.

If he is still oblivious, THEN go down the official complaint route. CAA take a very hard line on offenders and fines are substantial, as was recently seen when a quad did some low-flying and unwisely took some pics of a sensitive target.

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Thanks for info Avtur, have done so.

David He puts lives at risk and our club, he has a pilots licence, he knows what he's doing.

Thanks all John

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

A little update, the club decided CAA, so today it was reported to them and BMFA.

Not something we wanted, but after considering all previous behaviour felt we had no choice, cant say i'm not a bit anxious about It, but enough's enough. G info gave us loads of stuff and led to us finding some very interesting previous things out. Cheers Avtur. Notam is being looked at, we are not sure if this is a permanent option, so we have sought advice. Also turns out its a different fella to last time. No names or details or i'll get my legs slapped.

John

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

Well the wheels are in motion, CAA are looking into it. I can't give any details other than telling you, i e-mailed Manny Williamson at BMFA, I received a prompt reply and the club was offered support and told the BMFA would help out if needed. So on behalf of Don valley, a public thank you to Manny and the BMFA

John

[Olly P]

Just as well there wasn't anyone flying anything small and quick in the area at the time - if he comes in and lingers over the strip then the model can't do a safe approach and land (minimum seperation applies), fine, until you get low on fuel or 'Amps'

Not only direct endangerment, but also causing risk to other pilots - if you can't land then you are at risk of an off field landing.

Finally note, he isn't just breaking the rules regarding min heights etc, but also those regarding the 'inference with an operational Airfield....'

[john stones 1 - Moderator]

The gent who's dealing with CAA stuff is a smart lad, he has done his research and sent a good report in (google earth and photo's). Whatever the outcome, I think there is much less chance of a major incident, avoiding that is our only goal.

John