a380heavy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 220 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 12134 times:
Sky News is reporting a helicopter has hit a crane in the Vauxhall area of central London and has crashed. No word on survivors but a ploom of smoke is now being shown.
Update: eyewitnesses saying aircraft plummeted straight down on to a road and has hit 2 cars.
EGPH From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 205 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 11893 times:
Just for anyone not having access to any of the live coverage the helicopter hit the crane in very low visibility conditions due to low lying mist.
Further update: One eyewitness reports that a number of cars were passing as the helicopter hit the road and it is "highly likely" that there were ground injuries or fatalities.
edina From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 714 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 11609 times:
I'm can't confirm whether this is definite, but it would seem that Battersea Heliport is currently closed. I live directly under one of the approach path, approximately 1.5 miles away, and since 0800 the have been no movements overhead.
Worked on - Caravelle Mercure A300 A320 F27 SD3-60 BAe146 747-100/200/400 DC10-30 767 777 737-400 757 A319 A321
It hit a crane at the under construction St George Wharf tower, I think it's around 180m tall and close to completion making it the tallest structure in that area of London.
shamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6107 posts, RR: 15 Reply 10, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10828 times:
Here's a photo from Sky News.
It's difficult to see the top of the tower through the fog right now but the fog was much worse earlier so the crane would have been completely invisible.
Quoting seansasLCY (Reply 9):
Lots of people on the radio are saying that the crane never had lights on.
The crane had a red navigation light, the tower itself was also lit during the night but at 8am in foggy conditions I'm not sure how effective these would have been. The Shard for example is completely invisible in fog, you can't even see it's very bright lights at the top when this happens.
captcufflinks From UK - England, joined Dec 2012, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10532 times:
Very tragic indeed.
I do wonder why he was flying this morning. If he was under VFR then there's no chance he had the visibility for it. If he was under IFR then why the heck wasn't he at MSA?
I was supposed to be up in the air first thing but there was no chance I could have done it with the weather the way it was.
I suspect we shall learn more in the coming hours and days.
EGPH From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 205 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10428 times:
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe has just confirmed that the helicopter was landing rather than departing and was diverting to Battersea Heliport not details on where it was originally going.
Routing update: A police news conference just taken place has confirmed the helicopter routing as Redhill Aerodrome to Elstree Aerodrome with a diversion to Battersea necessary (no reason for diversion needed)
News reports seem to suggest that the crane did have lights on it but there have been suggestions they were not operating/working at the time of the crash. The building under construction did apparently have internal lighting on throughout the night though.
planejamie From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2011, 572 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 10022 times:
This is very tragic. I'm going to rule out terrorism first and foremost purely because I do not feel this was a deliberate act, I know a lot of news sources are citing that as the reason behind it.
As a private pilot I'm no expert however I do know that any area of London on a chart has many different layers of airspace. Chances are the MSA would've put them into airspace it wouldn't be authorised to operate in. So the helicopter would've been IFR. Even with a thick mist/fog, early morning/sunrise could have made it difficult to see the lights on the crane if there were any. I should also add a friend of mine has told me there was a NOTAM issued about the crane being there.
I think this is a very tragic accident (and I stress the word accident) and my thoughts are with the pilot, people on the ground and their families.
CaptCufflinks From UK - England, joined Dec 2012, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9977 times:
Quoting bueb0g (Reply 13):
RIP to those lost. Does anyone know if cranes like that usually have anti collision lights on the end of the arm, like towers do?
Only if the obstruction is 500 feet above ground level.
If it is 300 feet AGL then it will be published in the ENR section of the AIP. If permanent, or there for a long time, it will also be displayed on aeronautical charts specific to the area. Between 300-500 ft AGL lighting is not mandatory.
CaptCufflinks From UK - England, joined Dec 2012, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9711 times:
Quoting planejamie (Reply 15): Chances are the MSA would've put them into airspace it wouldn't be authorised to operate in. So the helicopter would've been IFR.
If they were IFR, then they have to abide by the MSA, thus meaning they would have had clearance into the higher air spaces. You can't be flying an IFR flight and not be cleared into various higher classes of airspace in this country.
I think you might be suggesting he was VFR and therefore not cleared into airspace which is why he wasn't abiding by and MSA restriction. This only brings us back to my original point questioning why he was flying VFR I'm the weather that was present, which was bad this morning.
EGPH offers an answer though:
Quoting EGPH (Reply 14): Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe has just confirmed that the helicopter was landing rather than departing and was diverting to Battersea Heliport not details on where it was originally going.
Perhaps he lost VFR and looked for a way to safety, hence the diversion.
Bthebest From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 432 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9628 times:
Quoting planejamie (Reply 15): I know a lot of news sources are citing that as the reason behind it.
Really? all the ones I've seen have made clear there were no terrorism links.
Quoting planejamie (Reply 15): Even with a thick mist/fog, early morning/sunrise could have made it difficult to see the lights on the crane if there were any.
That is true. What I'm confused about is that the weather minimum for operating to/from Battersea are 1000m visibility and 600ft cloud level. LCY reported 700m and 100ft BKN at 8am (when the crash occurred). I could understand the visibility being different at Battersea but doubt the cloud level would be significantly different, especially as eyewitnesses have reported very low cloud/fog. Why was he given clearance to approach?
Quoting CaptCufflinks (Reply 17): Perhaps he lost VFR and looked for a way to safety, hence the diversion.
If that was the case, not sure why he was flying over central London between Redhill and Elstree. Direct routing takes you nowhere near!
bongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3019 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9459 times:
Quoting Bthebest (Reply 18): Quoting CaptCufflinks (Reply 17):
Perhaps he lost VFR and looked for a way to safety, hence the diversion.
If that was the case, not sure why he was flying over central London between Redhill and Elstree. Direct routing takes you nowhere near!
By my reckoning the accident spot is more or less on the direct line between Redhill and Elstree. If (and its pure assumption on my part) the weather was closing in, the logical solution might be to descend onto the Thames, then follow the river westwards to Battersea
CaptCufflinks From UK - England, joined Dec 2012, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9375 times:
Quoting Bthebest (Reply 18): If that was the case, not sure why he was flying over central London between Redhill and Elstree. Direct routing takes you nowhere near!
Sorry, but that is just wrong.
Battersea is just to the east of the direct line between the two places. Map enclosed FYI:
The red line is the direct, approximate, route between the two aerodromes the black circle is the approximate location of Battersea.
Bthebest From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 432 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 9007 times:
Still 10 miles out on a 50 mile flight but I suppose there aren't any other places to divert to really.
Still interesting that he was approaching from the east, but until we know the exact reasons for the diversion can't really pinpoint anything. Will just have to wait a few weeks for the AAIB report.
blobby3 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2011, 4 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 8858 times:
Regarding the question of direct route across London I believe there is a restriction on flying directly over central London due to proximity of LHR and LCY. I believe there are defined helicopter routes in various directions to cross London so I think its unlikely it would have planned to fly directly from Redhill to Elstree.
One of the routes (H4?) runs along the Thames so if it was, as has been reported, diverting to Battersea Heliport due to the fog then it would have had to get there by flying along that route. Odd that it approached from the East I agree but who knows.
Very sorry for the family of the people killed and injured, could have been a lot worse but thats no consolation to them.
Bthebest From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 432 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (4 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8186 times:
Quoting blobby3 (Reply 23): One of the routes (H4?) runs along the Thames
Correct, but like you said that's from the east, i would have expected H3/7/10 from the west for the Redhill-Elstree routing. I doubt his cross London routing would have taken him any further east as that would interfere with LCY. Will definitely be interesting when the full details come out.
25 GF777: Shouldn't a NOTAM be issued about such new construction, giving it is a new building which is something might be new to the pilot or maybe just forgot
26 kaitak: Any update on the heli's ID; all I have found was that it was an Agusta 109. Any registration known? (BBC) Radio 4 said that it had requested permissi
27 Bthebest: it was, twice. Depends if he is VFR or IFR at the time. Cloudbase was reported to be as low as 100ft.
28 Bthebest: Some reports it is G-CRST, with some pictures of debris matching livery. The pilot was flying for charter company Rotormotion.
29 EGPH: As a slight aside on this, does anyone know roughly how low airliners on approach to the 27s at LHR fly over central London? Couple of time I've been
30 TimRees: Aircraft usually intercept the 27 ILSs at 3000ft at around 10 nautical miles or further out. If turned in short than that they descend to 2500ft but t
31 71Zulu: Pilot was Pete Barnes, over 12,000 hrs and flew in movie films, RIP http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...helicopter-crash-pilot-pete-barnes
32 trent1000: Is this thread relevant to civil aviation? This was an accident at a construction site, not a scheduled passenger flight. Newsworthy, yes, but I wonde
33 alberchico: you do realize that it was a civil helicopter involved in a crash right ???
34 DiamondFlyer: And this, is why I only use A.net for a laugh. The sheer ignorance of people on here is amazing. -DiamondFlyer
35 AR385: You only use it for a laugh? Too bad. If you took the time to use it for more than that, you would realize that most of the important breaking news i
36 DiamondFlyer: It also is full of utter non-sense. And people who think that Civil Aviation is nothing but airliners. Don't get me wrong, there is good material her
37 bueb0g: Don't know about you, but to me, an accident involving a civil, commercial aircraft seems pretty relevant to civil aviation. It's not all 747s...
38 Bthebest: Civil aircraft, civil airspace, scheduled flight. There's also the implications it may have on the wider ranging civil aviation community in terms of
39 trent1000: OK, so I've been flamed for something I didn't realise. I thought it broke forum rules to be nasty and disrespectful to others on threads... Look, I
40 Bthebest: I'm sure no one meant to be mean, but there is enough information in the thread to establish the details and its relevance
41 gulfstream650: So the crane operator was late for work because he overslept. Lucky!
42 buyantukhaa: I tried to find the locations of the heliport and the accident, and got confused - the Thames has an S-curve in between the two, but the orientation o
43 blobby3: For those interested there is some more information published by the AAIB on this accident. Apologies if this is posted elsewhere. This has some addit
44 bthebest: I had a good read through that and some interesting points. One thing I don't understand is that while requesting Battersea he was told to hold along
45 bongodog1964: Having read the initial staement of facts I tend to agree with you. When this happened people couldn't quite work out the route the helicopter had ta
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 220 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 4848 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2007, 719 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6107 posts, 
From Norway, joined Oct 2007, 1330 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Dec 2012, 78 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Feb 2005, 2937 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
