Private Site Landings
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,634
Received 513 Likes
on
273 Posts
place a 2p coin on your landing site
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Goathland
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Article 155 of the ANO
'Congested area' in relation to a city, town or settlement, means any area which is
substantially used for residential, industrial, commercial or recreational purposes"
OK - to throw a spanner in the works.
Would farm land be "commercial" then, as its used totally for a commercial purpose?
And would moorland or common land be "recreational" given the right to rome act (UK)
Kevin.
'Congested area' in relation to a city, town or settlement, means any area which is
substantially used for residential, industrial, commercial or recreational purposes"
OK - to throw a spanner in the works.
Would farm land be "commercial" then, as its used totally for a commercial purpose?
And would moorland or common land be "recreational" given the right to rome act (UK)
Kevin.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,634
Received 513 Likes
on
273 Posts
And would moorland or common land be "recreational" given the right to rome act (UK)
When in Rome.... do you have a right?
Better red than ...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
right to rome act (UK)
The Right to Rome established the EU.
Or was it 'turn right now to get to Rome or carry straight on for Pisa?"
h-r
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These discussions are all interesting(?) intellectual exercises that we Brits seem to spend endless time wrestling over. It goes with our knee jerk response to regulate everything that moves and require planning permission for those things that don't. 
Lets go back to basics - what is (or should be) the point or intention of Rule 5?
Presumably it is to keep land-based people and property safe from us lot. Perhaps we should look at interpreting Rule 5 in that light?
The CAA's instinctive approach is to always try and extend the coverage of the existing and indeed future regulations. I have often heard people say that they argue that a golf course is a congested area etc. However, I believe that this rather silly interpretation has never actually been confirmed in a court of law. Until it has, then it remains nothing but the CAA's desired interpretation (if that is what they really say).
The point is well made by the not wholly serious suggestion above that farming is a commercial activity and moorlands are sports grounds.........
The CAA have lost a number of cases that they have taken over Rule 5.
Lets go back to basics - what is (or should be) the point or intention of Rule 5?
Presumably it is to keep land-based people and property safe from us lot. Perhaps we should look at interpreting Rule 5 in that light?
The CAA's instinctive approach is to always try and extend the coverage of the existing and indeed future regulations. I have often heard people say that they argue that a golf course is a congested area etc. However, I believe that this rather silly interpretation has never actually been confirmed in a court of law. Until it has, then it remains nothing but the CAA's desired interpretation (if that is what they really say).
The point is well made by the not wholly serious suggestion above that farming is a commercial activity and moorlands are sports grounds.........
The CAA have lost a number of cases that they have taken over Rule 5.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
helinut
interpreting Rule 5 is what the problem is. the whole industry the courts and the caa interpret Rule 5 differently
why why cant the caa interpret it for us instead of reams and reams of goobledegook then we could all follow what ever the rule is
Presumably it is to keep land-based people and property safe from us lot. Perhaps we should look at interpreting Rule 5 in that light?
why why cant the caa interpret it for us instead of reams and reams of goobledegook then we could all follow what ever the rule is
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England... what's left of it...
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why why cant the caa interpret it for us instead of reams and reams of goobledegook then we could all follow what ever the rule is
Yes... but it should be defined, as opposed to interpreted, by the CAA. If it can't be defined then how can they ever police or prosecute it?
Surely they could produce clear drawings, as someone suggested in a post above? 3-D orthographic type views with coloured translucent overlays would not be too hard. Maybe in the future, just giving an OS reference could automatically produce the printed plans with the detail superimposed... when it's worth someone's time to develop the software.
How's about keeping the status quo? If a pilot infringes rule 5 in good faith having made a plausible interpretation of the wording, how successful, or indeed necessary, would any subsequent prosecution be. If there are sufficent 'grey' areas, then surely there is sufficient defence in court.
I expect most pilots on here haven't been prosecuted, or threatened with prosecution, for rule 5 infringements - so by deduction, we must be doing something right.
Or am I being overly naieve?
I expect most pilots on here haven't been prosecuted, or threatened with prosecution, for rule 5 infringements - so by deduction, we must be doing something right.
Or am I being overly naieve?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Read all the CAA prosecutions here
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...90&pageid=6484
Only two for rule 5 [for helis], in the last 12 months.
I think unless you blatantly break rule 5 (eg flying low over large gathering of people, or landing somewhere extremely congested), the chances of being prosecuted are tiny.
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...90&pageid=6484
Only two for rule 5 [for helis], in the last 12 months.
I think unless you blatantly break rule 5 (eg flying low over large gathering of people, or landing somewhere extremely congested), the chances of being prosecuted are tiny.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England... what's left of it...
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How's about keeping the status quo?
Read all the CAA prosecutions here
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...90&pageid=6484
Only two for rule 5 [for helis], in the last 12 months
http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?ca...90&pageid=6484
Only two for rule 5 [for helis], in the last 12 months
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 5 nM S of TNT, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 698
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is a congested area exemption valid for one occasion only or do they have a validity period? And does a yard which is used for parking lorries overnight but is empty during the day count as congested for use during the day time only, ie when is is empty? I have such a yard right between my new office building with possible adjacent helipad site and open fields.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Valid for as long as you ask for it to be valid, up to one year. If you don't ask, you'll get it for a single occasion ! Re. your question, as Shy suggests, cross their palm with silver (used to be £94) and they'll tell you, any other advice on this forum or elsewhere is worth exactly what you paid for it.
Re those CAA prosecutions, seems that Dangerous Goods is a popular infringement. I'd love to know more, and how do they get caught !
Re those CAA prosecutions, seems that Dangerous Goods is a popular infringement. I'd love to know more, and how do they get caught !
