RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 25, 2016 There were a couple of BTP/NR displays at shows I attended last year. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 Too much hype and media coverage hasn't helped with some of the "track trespassing" .. or don't they realise that the loco should be out and about for a good few years... If one were to get injured no doubt one of the no win no fee crew would turn up to say that their client wasn't aware railways are dangerous... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Here's one for you. Appears to be taken by one of the more k**bish people out today.https://twitter.com/JSimonCar/status/702782227722141696Regards, Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 (edited) Here's one for you. Appears to be taken by one of the more k**bish people out today. https://twitter.com/JSimonCar/status/702782227722141696 Regards, Matt BTP should charge this guy and anyone else in it.. His profile reads "Partner, Father, Son, Friend.". Can we add Dick to that as well Edited February 25, 2016 by newbryford Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold BoD Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 25, 2016 Very surprised she wasn't hit by a drone along with everything else that's gone on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold russ p Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 25, 2016 BTP should charge this guy and anyone else in it.. His profile reads "Partner, Father, Son, Friend.". Can we add Dick to that as well You're right, the BTP basically have evidence on their plate. There's no excuse for not prosecuting them. This would serve as a warning not just to this lot but also to the idiots on 37 hauled tours that can't behave, if they thought BTP were serious they might not hang themselves out of the windows! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 I was rather surprised at how low the helicopter got when it was hidden behind the loco. I thought they couldn't come below 500'. Jamie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewartingram Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 To be honest, a stepladder and a VERY long lens would have been useful. She stopped about 1/2 mile short of the crossing to take on water. When she set off, she created the most tremendous cloud of steam, which drifted up ahead and across all four lines, which she burst through before throttling back for the red signal at Holme junction. Conington fen is about as backwater as can be, but there must have been 90-100 people there. Holme was practically impassable, with cars parked halfway back to Yaxley and hundreds upon hundreds of spectators. I didn't spot any stupid behaviour, apart from some very inconsiderate parking and obliviousness to traffic on the roads. some people had climbed the banks up tot he fences - there were a few NR and BTP people knocking about though. I was "just down the road" at the AHB on the narrow road into the woods/nature reserve. Had to chuckle though. The crossing and lane were awash with spectators, I would geusitmate (largely by the attire and camera, also their positions) about 30% were ferroequinologists, the remainder were Jo Public. When I finally got over the crossing I had to park about 400yds away and walk back. Then this older gent in a little car parks up about 100yds from the crossing, his other half gets out and walks to the crossing with tablet in hand (just like most of the Jo/Joanne Publics). He sat there, with his little diesel engine clattering away for over 45 minutes, which I thought would be great for those trying to video 60103. Meanwhile she was at the barriers, along with all the others. After Scotsman had passed she ambled back to the car and he asked her "did you get it?", to which she replied "not really, it was a bit of a let down, couldn't really see much". Not surprised as she was that close! Meanwhile I was back beyond his car and got some half decent shots, not really as good as I would have liked but made the best of the situation. When I get chance I'll post some. Stewart 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Here's one for you. Appears to be taken by one of the more k**bish people out today. https://twitter.com/JSimonCar/status/702782227722141696 Regards, Matt I can say on Twitter what I got into trouble for saying on here (the comment about the trespassers not the one about the immigrants 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250BOB Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Don't live close enough to nip out and see FS these past couple of days. But watched as much as I could on news clips. BUT.....ITS WHISTLE SOUNDS RUBBISH.??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 You're right, the BTP basically have evidence on their plate. There's no excuse for not prosecuting them. This would serve as a warning not just to this lot but also to the idiots on 37 hauled tours that can't behave, if they thought BTP were serious they might not hang themselves out of the windows! I won't disclose names, but I know the person who blew the whistle on those "Window Hangers" on the 37 tour, through a friend on mine. That person only complained as it meant there was no free window for them to do the same. Regards, Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekstuart Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 All those people down the side of the ECML waiting to see a HST.How disappointed they must have been to see an old steam engine instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 ...I might have considered going to look but was washing my hair....let me know once sanity resumes. Dave 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 I was rather surprised at how low the helicopter got when it was hidden behind the loco. I thought they couldn't come below 500'. Jamie I was astonished when I saw that earlier on. My understanding is that it can be below 500' where an area is not populated but cannot be within 500' of a person, vehicle or structure. I would say that measurement was disregarded by the pilot. I'd estimate the groundspeed around 50kts about 25' off the deck within 200' of OLE and a capacity train; not much of a safety margin if there was a mechanical issue. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Martin Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Here's one for you. Appears to be taken by one of the more k**bish people out today. https://twitter.com/JSimonCar/status/702782227722141696 Regards, Matt Holy Crap! I watched that and I thought "look at them all right up to the tracks", but it wasn't until the end that I twigged that some of them are actually in the four-foot! Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 I was astonished when I saw that earlier on. My understanding is that it can be below 500' where an area is not populated but cannot be within 500' of a person, vehicle or structure. I would say that measurement was disregarded by the pilot. FScot_BBC.jpg I'd estimate the groundspeed around 50kts about 25' off the deck within 200' of OLE and a capacity train; not much of a safety margin if there was a mechanical issue. It's the BBC helicopter, so that's got to be Ok - hasn't it? Cheers, Mick 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Due to the special way it's funded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 I was astonished when I saw that earlier on. My understanding is that it can be below 500' where an area is not populated but cannot be within 500' of a person, vehicle or structure. I would say that measurement was disregarded by the pilot. FScot_BBC.jpg I'd estimate the groundspeed around 50kts about 25' off the deck within 200' of OLE and a capacity train; not much of a safety margin if there was a mechanical issue. Thanks for posting that Andy. That's clear enough to read that it was the BBC News helicopter. Not very good for the major public broadcaster. Jamie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71 Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 It's the BBC helicopter, so that's got to be Ok - hasn't it? Cheers, Mick ....'Blatantly Barking Crew' I presume. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium newbryford Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 Holy Crap! I watched that and I thought "look at them all right up to the tracks", but it wasn't until the end that I twigged that some of them are actually in the four-foot! Jim Complete with two greens on the southbound slow and fast lines........... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekstuart Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 Resumes? That would imply it had been here in the first place. ...I might have considered going to look but was washing my hair....let me know once sanity resumes. Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jamie92208 Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 Complete with two greens on the southbound slow and fast lines...........I've now submitted a formal complaint to the BBC. I wonder how much attention will be paid to it. I'm not going to lose any sleep though as I have much more important things to do concerning modelling. Jamie 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekstuart Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 There are two main rules regarding low altitude flights."A helicopter shall not fly below such a height as would enable it to alight without danger to persons or property on the surface, in the event of an engine failure." "Unless a helicopter is taking off or landing in accordance with normal aviation practice, no helicopter may fly closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure." The former CANNOT get a dispensation by the CAA under any circumstances. The aircraft has to have the speed/altitude to be able to be steered from a hazard (in this case they were surrounded by open space, so that's OK). The latter can receive dispensation for a number of reasons- aerial photography being amongst them (powerline inspection, air ambulance, testing, landing on authorised heli pads in built up areas etc are other examples). CAA will not usually grant such dispensation to single engined aircraft, especially if it is piston driven. This aircraft shown is a twin turbine aircraft and will, no doubt, have received dispensation. Note that 500ft is a reference to a hazard and does not mean altitude. In the photo, I would agree with Andy that 200ft seems reasonable- which is the lower limit that the CAA can grant dispensation for.When I first was learning to fly I found that the time spent studying rules and regs was around 3-4 times that spent with my hands on the controls. I was astonished when I saw that earlier on. My understanding is that it can be below 500' where an area is not populated but cannot be within 500' of a person, vehicle or structure. I would say that measurement was disregarded by the pilot. I'd estimate the groundspeed around 50kts about 25' off the deck within 200' of OLE and a capacity train; not much of a safety margin if there was a mechanical issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekstuart Posted February 25, 2016 Share Posted February 25, 2016 (edited) Formal complaint over what? What have they done? If this is about the helicopter- they don't operate it. It's probably on contract from someone like Castle Air. EDIT: Ah, yes. The helicopter. If you really- and I mean really- want to make a formal complaint then it should be addressed to the Civil Aviation Authority. But they will just repeat what I wrote above. I've now submitted a formal complaint to the BBC. I wonder how much attention will be paid to it. I'm not going to lose any sleep though as I have much more important things to do concerning modelling.Jamie Edited February 25, 2016 by Derekstuart Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium ColinK Posted February 25, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted February 25, 2016 This should have run in front of Scotsman. 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now