Jump to content

Apartment Fire Put Out By Great Slave 212


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Good that someone did a little creative thinking and got the job done.

 

Sure there are risks involved, but heck, there are risks involved with the local fire departments too.

 

(I know Drydens Volunteer fire brigade's motto was" Haven't lost a basement yet!")

 

Anyways, good job, and done within regs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Permissible Low Altitude Flight

 

602.15 (1) A person may operate an aircraft at altitudes and distances less than those specified in subsection 602.14(2) where the aircraft is operated at altitudes and distances that are no less than necessary for the purposes of the operation in which the aircraft is engaged, the aircraft is operated without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface and the aircraft is operated

 

(a) for the purpose of a police operation that is conducted in the service of a police authority;

 

(B) for the purpose of saving human life;

 

© for fire-fighting or air ambulance operations;

 

(d) for the purpose of the administration of the Fisheries Act or the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act;

 

(e) for the purpose of the administration of the national or provincial parks; or

 

(f) for the purpose of flight inspection.

 

 

"aerial work zone within a built-up area"

 

The word "within" in this context has been interpreted to mean substantially surrounded by the built-up area. In practical terms this would mean that a landing site would have to be surrounded on all four sides or at least to the point that a landing aircraft would overfly a structure at some point, or fly close enough to create a hazard. As an example, a landing site on the edge of a town or on a shoreline would not require an authorization if the landing could be accomplished without overflying a structure or creating a hazard to any property.

 

 

Yup, you're right. Very clear. All I see are two buildings and a bunch of trees.

I hate to be the guy spoutin' out regs, but he did a kick *** job and should be commended for it.

 

DC

 

I guess you didn't notice the on lookers ambulances all parked near the apt. The Reg says,

no less than necessary for the purposes of the operation in which the aircraft is engaged, the aircraft is operated without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface. Flying with a bucket on, over a building cars or people, creates a hazard where there wasn't one before. I am not saying he didn't do a good job, what I am saying is what if. What if the bucket had snagged on the balconey, what if he had an engine failure, what if the bucket unhooked? He would go from hero to zero in a heart beat and since it appears he was less than 500 feet from the buildings or onlookers then this would also apply,

 

602.16 Flights over Open-air Assemblies of Persons or Built-up Areas - Helicopters with External Loads

(1) No person shall operate a helicopter that is carrying a Class A, B or C external load over an open-air assembly of persons.

(2) Except where authorized under Section 603.66 or 702.22, no person shall operate a helicopter that is carrying a Class A, B or C external load over a built-up area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man you better do some Regulation searching there boys... CARs 600 is for General Aviation, I don't think GS Operates under Part 600 of the CARs I would believe they are a 702/703 Operator

 

Unless your a private operator you and your OC must operate under that part of the CARs... Nothing states you can go charging into a built up area with a class b load!!!!

 

I see enforcement coming!

 

Great try though!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest bag swinnger
I guess you didn't notice the on lookers ambulances all parked near the apt. The Reg says,

no less than necessary for the purposes of the operation in which the aircraft is engaged, the aircraft is operated without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface. Flying with a bucket on, over a building cars or people, creates a hazard where there wasn't one before. I am not saying he didn't do a good job, what I am saying is what if. What if the bucket had snagged on the balconey, what if he had an engine failure, what if the bucket unhooked? He would go from hero to zero in a heart beat and since it appears he was less than 500 feet from the buildings or onlookers then this would also apply,

 

Holy crap! I hadn't considered any of that before, I may just have to get out of flying... just to be safe. :rolleyes:

you can't possibly be a pilot, how would you ever engage the starter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess you didn't notice the on lookers ambulances all parked near the apt. The Reg says,

no less than necessary for the purposes of the operation in which the aircraft is engaged, the aircraft is operated without creating a hazard to persons or property on the surface. Flying with a bucket on, over a building cars or people, creates a hazard where there wasn't one before. I am not saying he didn't do a good job, what I am saying is what if. What if the bucket had snagged on the balconey, what if he had an engine failure, what if the bucket unhooked? He would go from hero to zero in a heart beat.

 

 

 

 

What if, what if...if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. By your reasoning when a 747 approaches over the city to an international airport he has created a hazard where there wasn't one before.

 

Simply put yer wrong and it was a good thing you didn't get the call to fight the fire because some people probably wouldn't have a place to sleep. Glad this pilot knew the regs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if, what if...if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle. By your reasoning when a 747 approaches over the city to an international airport he has created a hazard where there wasn't one before.

 

Simply put yer wrong and it was a good thing you didn't get the call to fight the fire because some people probably wouldn't have a place to sleep. Glad this pilot knew the regs.

 

Well actually simply put you are, try reading this especially the except part,

 

602.12 Overflight of Built-up Areas or Open-air Assemblies of Persons during Take-offs, Approaches and Landings

(1) For the purposes of this Section and Sections 602.14 and 602.15, an aircraft shall be deemed to be operated over a built-up area or over an open-air assembly of persons if the built-up area or open-air assembly of persons is within a horizontal distance of

(a) 500 feet from a helicopter or balloon;

(B 2,000 feet from an aircraft other than a helicopter or balloon.

(2) Except at an airport, heliport or military aerodrome, no person shall conduct a take-off, approach or landing in an aircraft over a built-up area or over an open-air assembly of persons, in a manner that is likely to create a hazard to persons or property.

(3) Except at an airport, heliport or military aerodrome, no person shall conduct a take-off, approach or landing in an aircraft over a built-up area or over an open-air assembly of persons unless that aircraft will be operated at an altitude from which, in the event of an engine failure or any other emergency necessitating an immediate landing, the aircraft can land without creating a hazard to persons or property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...