H1 Helipad Access

[freck]

Most hospital landing pads where most helicopters in Canada work (Rural) don't have pads directly on the buildings. I would agree with you to a point but if the pad is beside the hospital I'm sure it could be done safely without endangering the public.

[robottxt]

If you land at Hospital heli pad, no body will come outside to meet you. They will call an ambulance or fire department. You don't just show up at a hospital.

 

 

HAC "ONLY" represents owners interests. HAC does not care about killing pilots or the public, its only interest is protecting there members pocket books and current business model from change. HAC is the cancer that keeps the Canadian helicopter industry from moving into the future.

[vortex]

HAC "ONLY" represents owners interests. HAC does not care about killing pilots or the public, its only interest is protecting there members pocket books and current business model from change. HAC is the cancer that keeps the Canadian helicopter industry from moving into the future.

Wow. You must have a firm grasp on all issues relating to operating helicopters in Canada and some really good ideas on how to make the industry better. Please enlighten us...

 

[Reddog]

If you go in and attempt to land on a Cat A only helipad and ANYTHING happens, the first thing that will happen is the insurance company will abandon you and your company and then in the ensuing litigation YOU will be the first on the list followed by your company. I don't know if you have ever watched a bunch of lawyers tear apart some pilots who were 'just doing the right thing', I have. It wasn't pretty and the pilots looked like fools.

 

In a court case doing the right thing is no defence for 'Endangering the public and breaking TC Regulations'.

 

It ain't right but it is reality.

 

RD

[R0T0R]

General Lee,

 

I totally get your point but remember that that decision is hard when the kid next to you is coding and you're taking him away from help toward that parking lot. That's not the case all the time but I'll never forget the kid that died next to me. It will haunt me forever.

[Freewheel]

The defence of "necessity" is a legitimate defence (as per 9.4 of Aviation enforcement Policy Manual) to any contravention of any Canadian Aviation Regulation.

 

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/publications/tp13794-chapter9-2525.htm

 

Of course, one would need to prove/establish that the contravention was necessary to avoid an immediate greater danger (in particular, death or injury).

[robottxt]

You land to save a human life, great. Then you have to depart in a single, from an H1 heli pad. Better call TC before you depart and get a waiver. Just a minor detail.

[Reddog]

The problem with the 'Necessity' defence is that a pilot is not competent to make a medical decision.

 

RD

[Freewheel]

The problem with the 'Necessity' defence is that a pilot is not competent to make a medical decision.RD

That is true. Like many critical decisions we make...I'll make that decision on the fly depending on the situation. I'm talking about a "one-off" situation not regular air ambulance flights. Obviously, some cases will be more obvious than others. I know the defence is available, and since the CARs put most decisions like this in the hands of the PIC, I'd argue the intent of the defence is not to require a diagnosis from a medical professional.

 

If I'm lucky enough to have a paramedic or doctor on board (in a situation I deem to be sufficiently serious) I'd consult with them; if not I'll take my chances and go to tribunal if need be.

[Reddog]

And this is how that would read at the Tribunal,

 

'Freewheel did knowingly disregard a TC regulation after make a medical diagnosis that he acknowledges he is not competent to make'.

 

How do you think that will play out?

 

RD