The Heli pilot is in the wrong. Less he was filming an incident he should have been at a higher altitude.

Check the FAA restrictions on your area. It's a park right, so it's a populated area. At tree top level, any person in the area, house, car etc. he puts in grave harm. Should something mechanical happen to the heli, at that height there is no time for correction, auto rotation etc. He easily could have killed someone.

REPORT HIM TO THE FAA FOR UNSAFE FLYING PRACTICES. He knowing flew into harms way... You'll need the N number and or the news agency he works for. Looks like he needs to be grounded or fined.

Your club, if they want to use the park they need to work with the FAA to resolve this. Work with the City, and park service too. Tree top level is way too low for any civilian aircraft period. I'm sure a competing news agency would love to do a story about another news chopper endangering the public.

The previous poster is a little lost here. 1) As I noted in my original post, low does not necessarily mean unsafe. 2) Just because something is designated as a Park doesn't mean it has people, buildings etc... I can take you to a Park in the West end of the Phoenix Metro area that has a few hiking trails and one small parking lot. I has nearly as many square miles as the State of Rhode Island 3) you have no clue what the helicopter was doing at this altitude, and it doesn't matter. Maybe he was flying someone from the Parks Department[:-]

The helicopter probably should not have been this low. It would be a little insane to try to report this guy to the FAA. Right or wrong you will be bringing unnecessary attention to the model activities. It is very easy for the helicopter pilot to demonstrate he was at an altitude and airspeed to enable a safe landing in the event of an emergency.

Having been involved in investigating similar incidents in the Phoenix area as an AMA rep, I HIGHLY recommend a representative of the AMA or the club approach the TV station and EDUCATE them. On this note, send someone that has the ability to talk rationally and can speak to the issue. Don't send the dude with the ratty pickup, fuel soaked and epoxy laden jeans, jacket that weighs 30 pounds because of the patches and wearing a hat that would bring the HAZMAT Team if found on a bus stop bench. You get the idea.

Take the high road on the issue, be diplomatic and you'll keep your site a lot longer. Send Bubba to meet with them and you'll be flying a park flyer in your back yard. I speak from experience and have seen it done both ways.

Darwin N. Barrie
Chandler AZ

Just got off the phone with a retired NTSB inspector who informed me that this is purely the the responsibility of the helicopter pilot to avoid this area. The pilot is at fault.

If an accident were to happen where the RC model hit the plane the question would arise as to where the RC pilot was. Did the RC pilot have right to be there? Is it reasonable to assume that the general public would believe that there might at any time have a person at the park. If the answer is yes the NTSB would rule the incident as pilot error.

Right, even if the heli pilot was not in a restricted area, flying at speed 75 feet over the ground is unsafe.

As a pilot yourself you certainly understand that the probability of a news helicopter to be flying in a Restricted area is very low. And it is also fairly unlikely that model airplanes would be flying there either.

The FAA definition of Restricted Airspace:
As to the 75 foot comment, we have the post by a full size helicopter pilot with 1,000's of hours time who currently flies professionally who states that being low and fast does not in and of it self constitute an unsafe condition. But let's ignore him, after all the rest of us have no helicopter time, and most have likely never even been in a helicopter, so it is clear that we are far more qualified to determine what is safe or not while flying one.

This almost reminds me of folks declaring any shooting of paintballs at models was unsafe

This reminds me more of a scene from downtown Mayberry at Floyd's barbershop.

Yes news heli's are a pain and they do not seem to care where they fly or how low! and the young lady did a great job avoiding it, But RV7guy I think needs a 2nd and 3rd look at what he is saying! with is exspirence in both full and RC you can not ignore it. We all know if we ever do have a colision between RC and full it will be us that our grounded! Just my oppinion! like Just my oppinion of toaster pancakes, they are horrible! Bob


Have a great day! I know i'm going too!

I think we can all agree that no matter who's at fault if there is a collision it will be RC'ers that will take the big hit! If we will still be able to fly they will regulate it so bad that we wont want to anymore! Bob


Have a great day! I know i'm going too!

Dude, you are completely clueless. The only Restricted Areas are Military. Other areas can be designated as a TFR (Temporary Flight Restriction) which has its own guidelines based on the need. Some are completely restricted like one for POTUS. (President of the United States) or a minor restriction for a forrest fire or NASCAR race. There are a couple of more areas where special rules are in place, such as the Grand Canyon, certain Wilderness Areas etc.. So, the helicopter was NOT in a restricted area. Get it????

Secondly, I've already explained that 75 feet over the ground is not in itself dangerous. Have you ever been in a helicopter or have any idea what you are talking about? Never mind, you've already answered that.

Regarding your NTSB friend, do you want to provide his name for us? He does not have enough facts to make such a statement.

AGAIN, the helicopter is possibly not without some issue here. But, the model must always yield to the manned aircraft. ALWAYS, NO EXCEPTIONS. Now lets move on. Give this a rest, it is done and horse is getting beat over and over again.

Ok guys, let's discuss this issue without resorting to name calling, insults, or other types of attacks.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Ken

National parks and forest are a type of restricted area, not restricted airspace. Perhaps I should not have said restricted area but I meant any airspace that has restrictions. She did not say if the park was a federal park or not. And yes flying a helicopter at full speed 75 feet over the ground is considered unsafe, this unofficial incident is proof of that. Flying a helicopter at that height at a low speed which of course they are capable of is not.

I agree, but the term used in the AC and AMA rules is to give right of way. That to me does not mean that you yield unless it is obvious that you are going to cross flight paths. I do not think any model airplane pilot can be clear of that with our ground perspective, unless on opposite sides of the field, or if the full scale aircraft is well clear above the model airfield.

yhhhhuuuhh;
glacier girl refers to the aircraft in the original poster's avitar, and has no relation to the actual sex of the poster himself. and yes, he is a him.

Some parks have restrictions but only if they are so marked on the Sectional Charts. I doubt this is one of those areas or there wouldn't be model airplane activity.

Again, you are clueless as to the the operation of helicopters. Where do you get your information? And I quote you, "Yes flying a helicopter at full speed 75 ft over the ground is considered unsafe." This is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. So is your further statement that flying low and slow IS safe. It is just the opposite Pal.

There is this little chart in the Flight Manual for each helicopter. It is this manual that goes through much review before the aircraft is certified by the FAA. The chart is called the Height/Velocity curve. Or in real pilot lingo, the "Dead mans Curve." Without going into extreme detail, at 100ft the Astar that I fly you must be at 50 kts or greater to be OUT of the curve. Any speed above that is out of the curve any speed below that is IN the curve and would be unsafe as determined by the manufacturer based on certification testing. Interpolating the numbers, at 75 ft, the slowest I could go and be out of the curve would be 48kts. So, "full speed" is determined to be safe. The Bell H/V curve is very similar.

So, Sport Pilot, I suggest you get some knowledge and facts before you start spouting off as to what is safe and unsafe. Especially, in aircraft that you have no apparent qualifications in. Do you have a pilots license? If so, what? Experience?

This is my last post on this subject. Gotta go, someone just had a bad day and I've got to fly to the scene!!!

I hope you are not planning to fly low and fast, because as has been pointed out, that is unsafe. Sport Pilot says so and so does the un-named former NTSB inspector. Why anyone should take your opinion escapes me.

Sure, you have the time in type, the experience and background to know what you are talking about, but let's get serious here Pal, that is meaningless as it applies to a discussion in this forum! So take your facts, experience, and knowledge and leave us alone!!

I think the young lady asked a great question, and instead of us talking about how to make sure that we do not collied with a full scale airplane that I know with freedoms leaving us on a daily basis that it would be us ground pilots that loose the hobby we all love! But we are putting the blame game back and forth! To me it only makes sence that it would be us if posible to avoid a manned aircraft because life is always worth saving! A manned aircraft is just like us taking extreme care that we do not injur someone on the ground, its just not going to be a good day for the hobby if someone gets hurt! We all police each other at the fields we fly but more then once I have had someone where they should not have been, I do not want to lose this hobby and even more lose a life because of it! Maybe we can spend more time talking about whom we need to talk to or how we make sure that we can share the same airspace without anyone paying the ultimate price for it! I know the folks that work at the local airport and will Monday remind them that we are there and with summer coming will be there allot! Bob


Have a great day! I know i'm going too!

Back to the sidelines...............................

Kevin

That is completely off topic! Flying close to the ground is unsafe at speed because of the danger of obstacles. I would assume if you are flying below 50 Kts you would be either landing or transitioning to a hover, which would be OK. When I see helicopters flying from place to place they are usually well over 200 feet above and usually over 500. I know many are used to flying low, but a NASCAR driver is also used to driving inch's from each others bumper, but look how often professional NASCAR drivers rear end each other.

Sport Pilot - You know for a guy with ZERO time in helicopters you sure seem to think you know what you are talking about. Which clearly, you do not. I wonder, have you ever even been a passenger in a helicopter, let alone having any PIC time?? Real Flight 4.5 does not count.

Nice to see nothing has changed in this forum...Same people, same issues, same hijacked threads, and same personal attacks...

Back on task...I don't know squat about FAR's and the FAA regs...With the knowledge of many posters here I ponder to wander why we haven't referred to the AMA rules and regs being this is a AMA Discussion Forum...

OK...Right from the AMA Safety Regulations under General section:

5. I will not fly my model aircraft higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level, when within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying the airport operator. I will yield the right-of-way and avoid flying in the proximity of full-scale aircraft, utilizing a spotter when appropriate.

Website address is http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/105.pdf

That should answer the question as to who has the right of way regardless of what appears to be common sense.

The unfortunate concern is the Heli Pilot's decision to fly low to the ground regardless if we common folk or experts believe his action was unsafe. Set aside the Heli Pilot's decision, it is our responsibility (R/C Pilots) to yield to any full size aircraft, including landing until the airspace is clear. I have seen small aircraft (ultra-light) land at RC flying sites...Annoying yes, but we must yield...

If you are an AMA member, you signed an application stating you will follow these rules at all times...If not an AMA member, I recommend following the rule anyway...

As a citizen of the community, you could follow up with complaints to the FAA, News Company, or with the local city government office. Be careful of your complaints, the outcome may not be what you intended...Your complaint could raise questions about the R/C flying activity which could create new legislation to prevent R/C flying, regardless of the discipline the pilot may receive. In some communities, there are some folks in City councils waiting for an excuse to shut down flying sites.

I'm not saying to report it or not report it. That's a decision you should make based on you're assessment of the potential outcome...


LLD
Larry Diamond
AMA 5024

Why would you be annoyed by an ultralight landing at your field? This happened at our field many years ago and everyone was amused, young and old alike.

Some people fly competitively, some just like flying...I do both...I'm not a fan of ultra lights...But it's part of the rules, so I yield. There are also some people that don't have much time and drop in for a flight and go. If an ultra light is coming in or taking off, well nobody is flying R/C...

But yes to some it is cool...

LLD

Spill Cheeker aint wurkin....

CP
But did they do it safely and politely? [8D]


and more importantly, did they bring Lil Choc Donuts?

KE, it was an autogyro made out of stuff that you would buy at a hardware store.....completely "MickeyMouse" and scary looking up close. He was seen for about 5 years puttering North and South over our farm valley, then he went AWOL. It was pretty loud and very slow, IIRC he had a 350-400 cc Kowasaki engine in it.
With my health history, I'd rather not talk about doughnuts, pizza, lasagna, pork ribs, pickled pig's feet, bacon cheese burgers, etc. I do hear that a little bit of chocolate is good for you......like once a year after you pass a stress test.

I think I skimmed over this whole thing and it seems that there is a very big picture alot of people are missing, she said a key word, "park ranger". As far as I know, and I've been busted by a "park ranger" offroading in illegal areas, they are government officials, they do carry a side arm and are the national parks and rec department enforcement. When I was "stopped and sited" the ranger could care less about me and my friend trespassing, all he cared about was the wildlife impact, and I really do see his point and respected it and still do. But where did this park ranger get the athority to grant permission for model aviation flying from? I see all sides and play out many scenarios, let's just pretend that the model cub hit the chopper and nothing happened to the chopper, the guy flying the chopper would have some explaining to do and eventually he would be fined after the incident repot was filed and probibaly get fired, FAA would investigate and find the model airplane fliers and single out who did it and fine them for endangering life and limb. Plus the pilot would be pretty ornate about it and maybe even seek out who ever flew into the heli and costed him his job. The park rangers would be questioned and if they were found guilty of breaking the rules they would see fines and penelties too, and all model aircraft activity would be banned from all parks in the area, only reserved registered flying sites would be a safe haven for modelers. I'm pretty sure that if you did or anyone does hit a news chopper, there would be a story on the 5 o'clock news about dangerous model aircraft fliers and the havoc they reap on society. So it's a lose-lose scenario, and if the chopper goes down because of it, forget it, all model activity will be policed to the "T" in that county or even banned. In fact, I would almost be 100% positive that everybody would be fined heavily from the model aircraft pilot/owner all the way to the park rangers and their supervisors, not to mention the pilot if he lives the crash.
This is just the way it all plays out in real life, you may ask who is at fault, but the simple fact is everybody will be at fault and pay, just avoid full size if the moment arises, if they intentionally circle back and continue to endanger lives on the ground, get the nc numbers and report it to the local air traffic controllers and the athorities. note the time and estimated altitude with location. I could be wrong and this is going to get some fired up but in general, we will all lose if someone hits a full size anything carrying human life.