YouTube flight

GlennP · Post by **GlennP** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:31 pm

What do you think of this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFEjEoJ8T_M

Post by **gary stenhouse** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 7:56 pm

interesting flying looked a lot of fun though i am sure not uite the 500 ft rule

dave-mclaughlin · Post by **dave-mclaughlin** » Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:35 pm

The 500ft rule doesn't apply to a glider soaring a hill.

Not too sure what the people living in the houses would say - he looked quite close!!

Chris L · Post by **Chris L** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 5:56 pm

Cool vid.

ron freeman · Post by **ron freeman** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:13 pm

I feel sorry for the pilots who are responsible and we all get tarnished because of this idiot, to me he is just an adrenaline junkie and not a pilot

He's also probably shit himself a few times in the past so why not send a copy to the CAA and he can shit himself again

peter r · Post by **peter r** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:33 pm

In my opinion this pilot is enjoying a coastal flight in a very flatland area and if it was frowned upon it would have been deleted by the club that runs the local area. Yes he was too close to the houses ,but he wasn't hanging about . He covered quite a bit of ground in 4'53 minutes of video. This video is 2 years old so maybe all's well in Cromer for coastal window watching.

Peter r Apologies for the edit . Just read the posts on the video and the pilot says the wind was light for that day !!! The day before they where well above the town .

GlennP · Post by **GlennP** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:20 pm

I put the video up to see what people would say.

Some peoples assessment of risk is very different from others.

I stumbled upon this clip whilst looking for something else on YouTube.

None of us was there (except the pilot

) and I have no idea who the pilot is or his/her skill level/experience.

Can the part of the video past the people/houses and streetlamps technically be called ridge soaring? If not the 500ft rule might not save his ass. Was this part an extended glide with actual lift further on? Was this his aim do you think?

After my own recent excusrion I am wondering what people think motivated the pilot to attempt this flight?

At one point ,from the very narrow viewpoint a video gives, it looked like he had no landing options other than the lamp posts. There is a CCTV camera to the left of screen just after the pedestrian area. I wonder what the camera operator thought when he saw this guy come flying past

!

It's quite a spectacular video and I've watched it a few times with mouth open.

Dave Hume · Post by **Dave Hume** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:57 am

Looks like the guy just hasn't done the lesson yet on how to turn the thing.....

Dave Hume · Post by **Dave Hume** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:44 am

dave-mclaughlin wrote:The 500ft rule doesn't apply to a glider soaring a hill.

Not too sure what the people living in the houses would say - he looked quite close!!

It's arguable that he wasn't soaring a hill when he passed the houses as he was so low there wasn't really a hill at that point. I'd say he wasn't actually soaring at all but on a glide as he started at a height where there was a hill, didn't turn once and just got lower and lower.

I'm with Ronnie on this one, he's broken airlaw, and just to top it stupidly posted the evidence up on youtube.....

GlennP · Post by **GlennP** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:03 pm

Looks like the guy just hasn't done the lesson yet on how to turn the thing.....

Maybe turns were next weeks lesson?

Sergey · Post by **Sergey** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 12:56 pm

Dave Hume wrote:
dave-mclaughlin wrote:The 500ft rule doesn't apply to a glider soaring a hill.

Not too sure what the people living in the houses would say - he looked quite close!!

It's arguable that he wasn't soaring a hill when he passed the houses as he was so low there wasn't really a hill at that point. I'd say he wasn't actually soaring at all but on a glide as he started at a height where there was a hill, didn't turn once and just got lower and lower.

I'm with Ronnie on this one, he's broken airlaw, and just to top it stupidly posted the evidence up on youtube.....

Does 500ft rule apply during take-off and landing? Arguably the pilot was on his final approach for a lamp post

but got a low save back into ridge soaring mode.

I think he still was ridge soaring though, but if not then he was landing and 500ft doesn't apply either

GlennP · Post by **GlennP** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:36 pm

Hi Sergey,

Do you think a court might find that this pilot put himself in a position where he could not land safely. Does he pass the test of flying without endangering himself or others?

The 500ft rule on take off and landing is ONLY waived at aerodromes. Not outside someones house on the Cromer beachfront.

NO person shall through an act or omission endanger the safety of an
aircraft or person therein or cause or permit an aircraft to endanger the
safety of any person or property. That's airlaw too.

If flying above built up areas .....

Not less than:

i) 1000ft above obstacles within 2000ft Radius over built up area or
open air assembly

ii) Else where, when not specified not below 500ft above ground.

I think the main point is the danger to himself and others. The premiums for the BHPA must be pretty crippling to cover the whole sport for 3rd Party Liability. If someone can be proven to have acted recklessly I would presume there is a clause for cover to be null and void for that individual.

Perhaps our learned members could clarify that.

GlennP · Post by **GlennP** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 1:41 pm

Reckless endangerment.....that's it!

Fingers · Post by **Fingers** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 2:29 pm

String the bastard up and thrash him with sticks, its the only thing "pilots" understand. Thrash some sence into em, thats what I say.

crook_101 · Post by **crook_101** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:01 pm

Have to say that Finger's dog training technique usually works with newbies as well.......

For reference: http://www.nhpc.org.uk/nhpc/viewtopic.php?t=4794

Ian Jamieson

GlennP · Post by **GlennP** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:07 pm

I love your take on life Fingers!

It's been a good debate on this video. I like the point....

Arguably the pilot was on his final approach for a lamp post

Very funny!

GlennP · Post by **GlennP** » Tue Apr 28, 2009 3:20 pm

Does the stick technique apply to pilots aswell as newbies and animals or do we discriminate on this site which would be totally un PC.

Or should it be reserved for those who post 'exciting' flights on youtube?

NHPC Private and Public Forum

YouTube flight

YouTube flight

Obviously

coastal flying

Video

Lesson #2 Turns

Landing Spot

soaring past my window

String em up high

Stick Stick Stick