Low Level River Run.....

[gwk]

Yup, why bother to learn from the mistakes of others, when you can just go do as you please and post it on youtube.

What a pair of stunning, er make that cunning stunts.

 

 

 

Geez, did I really say that out loud!

[jetbox]

You guys are all missing the bigger issue: that aircraft needs to be strobed!!!

[Guest Bullet Remington]

hemmoroids, although uncomfortable are actually good for you...

 

you don't sit around on you a$$ cuz they hurt so much. :punk:

 

TS:

 

Huh?? Obviously you've never had them and tried to work on the heaving deck of a destroy , lying on yer back, in the middle of the Atlantic, trying to get the "Haul-Down probe down on a Sea Pig!!

 

There'si no way that those freakin things can EVER be jutified as being good for ya! And they AREn'T caused by sitting on yer a$$!!

 

Ask a bunch of weight lifters/ vocalists. and long shore man how they got em!! I wouldn't wish em on my worst enema ...er emeny!! :shock:

 

Oh the agony!! Now i gotta take another t3!! :down:

[Guest Bullet Remington]

You guys are all missing the bigger issue: that aircraft needs to be strobed!!!

 

It's a Jetbox! those danged things should come from the factory with a strbe kit part of the Type certificate!!

[old dog]

What, exactly, did he do wrong?

 

He broke no CARs regs as there is no law against low flying outside of a built up area.

 

He was simply having a bit of fun in his chosen profession.

 

But was it unsafe?

 

I recall many flights for the Department of Fisheries where you fly down a river at 30 knots and 50' (usually downwind) so they could count fish.

 

I also recall endless hours at 20' and 30 knots doing powerline patrol for BC Hydro with no place to go if the engine quit. How is that any different?

 

None of this type of flying is any different than what this guy did - and he at least had some airsepeed.

 

Jerry Cutler

[TwistedSpar]

TS:

 

Huh?? Obviously you've never had them and tried to work on the heaving deck of a destroy , lying on yer back, in the middle of the Atlantic, trying to get the "Haul-Down probe down on a Sea Pig!!

 

There'si no way that those freakin things can EVER be jutified as being good for ya! And they AREn'T caused by sitting on yer a$$!!

 

Ask a bunch of weight lifters/ vocalists. and long shore man how they got em!! I wouldn't wish em on my worst enema ...er emeny!! :shock:

 

Oh the agony!! Now i gotta take another t3!! :down:

 

I got to the "lying on yer back" and the "probe" comment.....and stopped reading at that point...probes and hemmoroids is no go territory for me.... :shock:

 

[Taco Bell]

The Boyz at Fish and Wildlife might have more to say about this than Transport as that canyon is full of goats (and kids in the spring) and they frown on them being traumatized by the likes of us.

[Over-Talk]

I don't want to take a side in this discussion as there's plenty of good opinions already,

but Old Dog asked,.....

"What, exactly, did he do wrong?

He broke no CARs regs as there is no law against low flying outside of a built up area."

 

However, we should probably consider CAR 602.01,

"No person shall operate an aircraft in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger the life or property of any person."

 

"any person" would include the pilot and anyone else on board.

 

By the sheer nature and risks of our job, this Regulation would preclude any of us from working if the words negligent and reckless weren't included.

 

Yes, most of us have hovered up a river counting fish..........(and we will become fish if the engine quits), but was there a better way to do the job?

Were we negligent? I don't think so.

Did that pilot in the video have another route/altitude/speed to travel up that canyon?

Could he be found "negligent"??

 

How about "reckless"??

This is usually defined as not regarding the consequences of an action.

Did the pilot consider the consequences??

 

Why are some of you upset about this video ??

One writer said he would do it in his own helicopter, but not if he was flying someone elses. What's the difference?

There's a lot of guys standing on opposite soap-boxes here......but why do you feel that way?

 

Is the pilot endangering himself unnecessarily by being so low?

Or is he over-straining the helicopter frame and components?

Or is he breaking a law?

 

I have no opinion in this post....I just want feedback on why you guys feel this flying was safe and acceptable, or unacceptable and it's the pilot that should be strobed!!

 

OT

 

 

 

[BRZRKR]

I said i'd do it in my own but not the companies for the same reasons i'll do 200 km in my truck, but not the companies, or go joy riding or 4x4ing in my own, but not the companies. Anything that could give the boss an excuse to be pissed off is something I avoid. Why poke a sleeping bear? That's way more dangerous than the flying.

[jetbox]

Anything that could give the boss an excuse to be pissed off is something I avoid. Why poke a sleeping bear? That's way more dangerous than the flying.

 

It's not about pissing off the boss, it's about respecting his property. If you ask him if he minds you hot dogging his helicopter/pick up truck/ wife etc and he says "sure" then go at it. If you know he would have a problem with it, then don't do it. Plain and simple.