The guy that flies over South Park

biko

I think then someone (else) will have to make an official complaint at Mill Street.

Mrs OBumble

Discodog wrote: »

That he abides by the regulations.

Shure'n this is Ireland, no one does that here.

Discodog

mulbot wrote: »

Under exemption you can,as far as I know

Where does it say that?

Tommy Kelly

biko wrote: »

So what would people like to happen?

* He stops flying in or around the city?
* He stops carrying passengers?
* He is shipped off to Dublin or somewhere else?

Going by a few on here and their farmer buddies - him to fly into an ESB wire and to be shot down with a double barrel.

Discodog

biko wrote: »

I think then someone (else) will have to make an official complaint at Mill Street.

I suspect that the authorities already have received complaints.

Discodog

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Shure'n this is Ireland, no one does that here.

Pilots do. Aviation regulations are followed to the letter. I suspect that this guy & maybe others are misunderstanding the regulations.

The exemption may allow you to fly but it doesn't exempt you from abiding with aviation law.

mulbot

Discodog wrote: »

Where does it say that?

The air regulations apply to FLPA pilots under which they have to obey the regulations-however if you are holding an exemption those regulations don't apply(a grey area?)- you can see what regulations apply to a pilot holding an FLPA license on that link you sent a while back

Discodog

Discodog wrote: »

Pilots do. Aviation regulations are followed to the letter. I suspect that this guy & maybe others are misunderstanding the regulations.

The exemption may allow you to fly but it doesn't exempt you from abiding with aviation law.

His videos reference Mrs. Murphy or whoever enjoying their free flight. I'd say he is well aware of any regulations.

Discodog

mulbot wrote: »

The air regulations apply to FLPA pilots under which they have to obey the regulations-however if you are holding an exemption those regulations don't apply(a grey area?)- you can see what regulations apply to a pilot holding an FLPA license on that link you sent a while back

Yes. What I asked for was where, in writing, does it say that the regulations don't apply to someone holding an exemption ?

granturismo

How about a few kite flying events on his routes... the kite flying will not interfere with any legal aviation activity.

Discodog

I just looked again at the regulations & I can't see any grey areas.

The Irish Air Laws below apply to FLPA Pilots.
1. Have a current Class 2 medical cert.

2. All Flights must be conducted in daylight Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and in Class G air- space below 3,000ft above Mean Sea Level (AMSL).

3. Any flights made under the exemption shall be in compliance with the requirements of the airworthiness Standards Department of the Authority.

4. Your pilot log book and Exemption shall be made available within a reasonable period to: a. An authorised Officer of the Authority. b. A member of the Garda. c. An officer of the Customs and Excise.


5. No flight shall be made for hire or reward or for any valuable consideration.

6. The pilot shall maintain a record of all flights made under this exemption in a suitable log book.

7. No passenger may be carried on any flight.

8. Any accident involving substantial injury or death of any person or substantial damage to the equipment being used for flying shall be reported in writing to the Authority, irrespective of any liability to report the same information to the Air Accident Unit of the Department of Transport.

9. No flight may be made at any height over: a. Any town, City or built-up area. b. Any area of commercial, residential or recreational use. c. Any open air assembly of persons, whether gathered in connection with an event of public entertainment or otherwise.

10. The exemption shall only be valid while the insurance cover is in force.

11. These exemptions are valid for one year and need to be renewed and renewal can be refused at any time by the Authority.

*The above Air Law can change from time to time and its your responsibility to be fully aware, ignorance of the law is no defence in a court of law.

The Law clearly refers to those holding exemptions - where is the grey area ?

jjpep

biko wrote: »

So what would people like to happen?

* He stops flying in or around the city?
* He stops carrying passengers?
* He is shipped off to Dublin or somewhere else?

The first option would be fine.

mulbot

Discodog wrote: »

I just looked again at the regulations & I can't see any grey areas.

The Irish Air Laws below apply to FLPA Pilots.
1. Have a current Class 2 medical cert.

2. All Flights must be conducted in daylight Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and in Class G air- space below 3,000ft above Mean Sea Level (AMSL).

3. Any flights made under the exemption shall be in compliance with the requirements of the airworthiness Standards Department of the Authority.

4. Your pilot log book and Exemption shall be made available within a reasonable period to: a. An authorised Officer of the Authority. b. A member of the Garda. c. An officer of the Customs and Excise.


5. No flight shall be made for hire or reward or for any valuable consideration.

6. The pilot shall maintain a record of all flights made under this exemption in a suitable log book.

7. No passenger may be carried on any flight.

8. Any accident involving substantial injury or death of any person or substantial damage to the equipment being used for flying shall be reported in writing to the Authority, irrespective of any liability to report the same information to the Air Accident Unit of the Department of Transport.

9. No flight may be made at any height over: a. Any town, City or built-up area. b. Any area of commercial, residential or recreational use. c. Any open air assembly of persons, whether gathered in connection with an event of public entertainment or otherwise.

10. The exemption shall only be valid while the insurance cover is in force.

11. These exemptions are valid for one year and need to be renewed and renewal can be refused at any time by the Authority.

*The above Air Law can change from time to time and its your responsibility to be fully aware, ignorance of the law is no defence in a court of law.

The Law clearly refers to those holding exemptions - where is the grey area ?

If you have an exemption you are not classed as a FLPA pilot,so points no.5,7 and 9 are not applicable(this represents some of the grey areas)

Discodog

mulbot wrote: »

If you have an exemption you are not classed as a FLPA pilot,so points no.5,7 and 9 are not applicable(this represents some of the grey areas)

So where would I find the proof that an exempted pilot isn't a FLPA pilot given that a Paramotor is a Foot Launched Powered Aircraft?

mulbot

Discodog wrote: »

So where would I find the proof that an exempted pilot isn't a FLPA pilot given that a Paramotor is a Foot Launched Powered Aircraft?

The exemption issued from the IAA is the proof-If you don't hold an exemption and are legally flying under IAA approved instructor you become an FLPA pilot-If you have qualified elsewhere you can apply for an exemption but are not recognized as an FLPA pilot-it's very simple

tonyhiggins

mulbot wrote: »

The exemption issued from the IAA is the proof-If you don't hold an exemption and are legally flying under IAA approved instructor you become an FLPA pilot-If you have qualified elsewhere you can apply for an exemption but are not recognized as an FLPA pilot-it's very simple

Soooo... does this mean he definitely shouldn't have passengers, be over urban areas etc? Slightly confused.

mulbot

tonyhiggins wrote: »

Soooo... does this mean he definitely shouldn't have passengers, be over urban areas etc? Slightly confused.

If you are not a FLPA pilot then the regulations of the FLPA don't apply-He can carry passengers if he wants

Discodog

tonyhiggins wrote: »

Soooo... does this mean he definitely shouldn't have passengers, be over urban areas etc? Slightly confused.

The paramotor fliers say that they are allowed to do more without a license than with one.

It's a bit like saying that, as a learner driver, you can drive unaccompanied but when you pass your test you can't.

tonyhiggins

Discodog wrote: »

The paramotor fliers say that they are allowed to do more without a license than with one.

It's a bit like saying that, as a learner driver, you can drive unaccompanied but when you pass your test you can't.

And with that analogy, he's not only a learner driver, but a learner driver giving folks lifts on the motorway, and perhaps for payment..

mulbot

tonyhiggins wrote: »

And with that analogy, he's not only a learner driver, but a learner driver giving folks lifts on the motorway, and perhaps for payment..

If he is a qualified pilot then it's not equivalent to being a learner driver

tonyhiggins

mulbot wrote: »

If he is a qualified pilot then it's not equivalent to being a learner driver

Anyone know if he is? And in that case then, what regulations would apply to him?

jjpep

Regardless if he's a qualified pilot or not, or if there is some loophole or whatever - surely a small bit of comon sense would dicate that he shouldn't be flying over built up areas. Even just for his safety even if he doesn't give a rats about anyone else.

mulbot

jjpep wrote: »

Regardless if he's a qualified pilot or not, or if there is some loophole or whatever - surely a small bit of comon sense would dicate that he shouldn't be flying over built up areas. Even just for his safety even if he doesn't give a rats about anyone else.

Of course,I agree. If he does be flying very low continuously over people,then yea that would be stupid and annoying-They are noisy!, But if it's only at take-off and landing and flying out away from people I wouldn't see it as being a problem

Tommy Kelly

jjpep wrote: »

Regardless if he's a qualified pilot or not, or if there is some loophole or whatever - surely a small bit of comon sense would dicate that he shouldn't be flying over built up areas. Even just for his safety even if he doesn't give a rats about anyone else.

Common sense would dictate that drones being operated in similar areas or indeed more built up area that what this man is flying in should not be allowed. I don't see a big hulabaloo being made about them.

Personally I think this man and his parachute with a fan should be left alone. The amount of assumptions and allegations being made about him on this thread is a pure joke or just another sign of the times we're living in.

mulbot

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

Common sense would dictate that drones being operated in similar areas or indeed more built up area that what this man is flying in should not be allowed. I don't see a big hulabaloo being made about them.

Personally I think this man and his parachute with a fan should be left alone. The amount of assumptions and allegations being made about him on this thread is a pure joke or just another sign of the times we're living in.

Well said!

jjpep

Its kinda odd to me that you can see the inherent dangers and inconvenience in having drones flying over built up areas but not in something thsts much bigger and therefore with the greater potential for causing harm.

inisboffin

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

Common sense would dictate that drones being operated in similar areas or indeed more built up area that what this man is flying in should not be allowed. I don't see a big hulabaloo being made about them.

Personally I think this man and his parachute with a fan should be left alone. The amount of assumptions and allegations being made about him on this thread is a pure joke or just another sign of the times we're living in.

If a drone fell out of the sky or hit an electric line, there would be waaay less damage done than a man (or a man and his passenger) falling. Also he was flying over a feicin HOUSING estate, low enough to sound like a lawnmower in the front garden. Eye/ear witness fact, no allegation here!

Discodog

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

Common sense would dictate that drones being operated in similar areas or indeed more built up area that what this man is flying in should not be allowed. I don't see a big hulabaloo being made about them.

Personally I think this man and his parachute with a fan should be left alone. The amount of assumptions and allegations being made about him on this thread is a pure joke or just another sign of the times we're living in.

Most of the "assumptions" here are eye witness accounts. I am an aviation enthusiast & airshow supporter but he flies in a dangerous manner.

mulbot

inisboffin wrote: »

If a drone fell out of the sky or hit an electric line, there would be waaay less damage done than a man (or a man and his passenger) falling. Also he was flying over a feicin HOUSING estate, low enough to sound like a lawnmower in the front garden. Eye/ear witness fact, no allegation here!

You can say the same about any aircraft falling out of the sky,no reason to see any bigger risk as to why a guy flying a paramotor will suddenly drop out of the sky-Anyway, does he not fly off away to the side of people rather than over?

inisboffin

mulbot wrote: »

You can say the same about any aircraft falling out of the sky,no reason to see any bigger risk as to why a guy flying a paramotor will suddenly drop out of the sky-Anyway, does he not fly off away to the side of people rather than over?

Not the same from my POV. There's no flight path that I know of where this guy flew and certainly no craft where a child could hit them in catapult range, no noise pollution the same where he was and no, he flew directly over people. If he did come crashing down and (hopefully but unlikely) survived doing only property damage, who would pay for it? He is flying closer to power lines than any commercial plane could.

beach_walker

I'm amazed he's still getting away with it. Had more than one walk down the swamp where his lawnmower went overhead (albeit just about, that guy can fly low). I figured he was just out for hoovering up the FB likes (with all the selfies) but apparently he's taking people up for money? Fuk that tbh.

mulbot

inisboffin wrote: »

Not the same from my POV. There's no flight path that I know of where this guy flew and certainly no craft where a child could hit them in catapult range, no noise pollution the same where he was and no, he flew directly over people. If he did come crashing down and (hopefully but unlikely) survived doing only property damage, who would pay for it? He is flying closer to power lines than any commercial plane could.

We at times fly over people,even on our isolated flying areas,and on most cross country flights,you will fly near or over residential areas, you have insurance cover also- I found videos on YouTube of him and I don't see him doing anything like what's been said here

inisboffin

mulbot wrote: »

We at times fly over people,even on our isolated flying areas,and on most cross country flights,you will fly near or over residential areas, you have insurance cover also- I found videos on YouTube of him and I don't see him doing anything like what's been said here

Will his insurance cover accidental death for a passenger, for damage to property, for injuring parties on the ground? I don't know what type of insurance he has. I get that in the odd circumstance he may have to fly over a residential area, but not circle it, nor that low. If I see it again I will take footage. He's going to wreck it for people that are being respectful with their flying.

Tommy Kelly

inisboffin wrote: »

If a drone fell out of the sky or hit an electric line, there would be waaay less damage done than a man (or a man and his passenger) falling. Also he was flying over a feicin HOUSING estate, low enough to sound like a lawnmower in the front garden. Eye/ear witness fact, no allegation here!

There was a documentary on Channel 4 there not so long ago about drones and the problems they are causing in built up areas in the UK. One example of what damage they can cause was a 4 year old girl playing away in her back garden losing the sight in one eye as a result of the next door neighbour 20 yards away losing control of his drone. There were other examples as well.

There's no facts on here either. Just a few random people with funny and strange usernames claiming a man and his actions on a paramotor are a danger to the general public in Galway.

When someone fires up a video clip or something then we'll start talking about facts.

dilallio

I've spotted him flying low along the prom, zig-zagging around the lamposts. that was on a Sunday afternoon when the road was busy with traffic. He was either trying to impress or scare his unfortunate passenger.

Tommy Kelly

Discodog wrote: »

Most of the "assumptions" here are eye witness accounts. I am an aviation enthusiast & airshow supporter but he flies in a dangerous manner.

There'd probably be more of a chance of a serious accident or fatality even, at an airshow with these highly trained pilots and their F16 and Tornado bombers tearing around the skies over built up areas than the man in question here and his paramotor.

I baffled that no one has pulled out a phone and recorded him acting the clown yet. Especially these days when people can't seem to take a dump without pulling out their phones and letting the world know.

jjpep

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

There'd probably be more of a chance of a serious accident or fatality even, at an airshow with these highly trained pilots and their F16 and Tornado bombers tearing around the skies over built up areas than the man in question here and his paramotor.

I baffled that no one has pulled out a phone and recorded him acting the clown yet. Especially these days when people can't seem to take a dump without pulling out their phones and letting the world know.

So is it your contention that he's not flying dangerously like others here have described (and I've seen as well) - that everybody is exaggerating?

You also do understand that a para glider is bigger than a drone - something which you see as quite dangerous.

inisboffin

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

There was a documentary on Channel 4 there not so long ago about drones and the problems they are causing in built up areas in the UK. One example of what damage they can cause was a 4 year old girl playing away in her back garden losing the sight in one eye as a result of the next door neighbour 20 yards away losing control of his drone. There were other examples as well.

.

So your argument is that a much tinier craft is capable of doing damage while also flying low over a built up area? :rolleyes:

biko

I read about a model that was hit in the face with a drone.

To the mattresses!

mulbot

In fairness,you cannot compare drones and paragliders/motors,hangliders etc-

Tommy Kelly

jjpep wrote: »

So is it your contention that he's not flying dangerously like others here have described (and I've seen as well) - that everybody is exaggerating?

You also do understand that a para glider is bigger than a drone - something which you see as quite dangerous.

Correct. You're all making a mountain out of a molehill. You are all yapping away there saying you've seen this and you've seen that and can't back a bit of it up. Like a bunch of aul' ones bitching and gossiping in a hairdressers on Saturday morning.

ned14

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

Correct. You're all making a mountain out of a molehill. You are all yapping away there saying you've seen this and you've seen that and can't back a bit of it up. Like a bunch of aul' ones bitching and gossiping in a hairdressers on Saturday morning.

There is a video... posted already:
http://vimeo.com/119797303

The King of Moo

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

Correct. You're all making a mountain out of a molehill. You are all yapping away there saying you've seen this and you've seen that and can't back a bit of it up. Like a bunch of aul' ones bitching and gossiping in a hairdressers on Saturday morning.

I don't get how you can acknowledge the potential harm of drones, but not extrapolate that this much larger machine could do more damage.
It doesn't mean that he definitely will cause an accident, but the potential is there, especially if he continues to fly low near lots of people and lampposts which he could get tangled up in.

I don't think one need be hysterical to express concern over him.

Plus the droning sound is just annoying.

beach_walker

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

Correct. You're all making a mountain out of a molehill. You are all yapping away there saying you've seen this and you've seen that and can't back a bit of it up.

I wasn't aware I'd need to back up my claims when seeing it tbh. As said, I've only seen him twice and am no longer resident in Galway. If I whipped out the phone everytime I saw someone acting the tosspot I wouldn't be long filling my storage up

But yeah we're all making it up, it's a grand conspiracy!

beach_walker

ned14 wrote: »

There is a video... posted already:
http://vimeo.com/119797303

*hands up* That was me and some of the other posters here, it was a false flag op to frame yer man. I can't live with the guilt anymore.

mulbot

That video shows nothing in relation to what's said about him on the thread,he's out to the front of that walkway,no dangerous manoeuvres to be seen.

granturismo

mulbot wrote: »

That video shows nothing in relation to what's said about him on the thread,he's out to the front of that walkway,no dangerous manoeuvres to be seen.

At the start of the video, he's flying too low, too close to the pedestrians and too close to the lamp posts.

mulbot

granturismo wrote: »

At the start of the video, he's flying too low, too close to the pedestrians and too close to the lamp posts.

Totally disagree,he's higher than the posts by a considerable amount and not even directly over them,nor is he over any pedestrians,.Do you know if he's just after taking off in the video,obviously doing landings and takeoffs you will be low at both stages

I'm not arguing one way or the other about this but what are peoples major worries that will go wrong?

Its paragliding so if the engine stops he will just gently drop down and land? I just watched the video posted there and I was expecting him to be zooming around fast and swooping but it all looks really slow and controlled. Like I couldn't see any sudden catastrophic crash happening.

granturismo

mulbot wrote: »

Totally disagree,he's higher than the posts by a considerable amount and not even directly over them,nor is he over any pedestrians,.Do you know if he's just after taking off in the video,obviously doing landings and takeoffs you will be low at both stages

Are you familiar with the location at all? There is no suitable place for him to take off anywhere nearby.

He is directly overhead of pedestrians at the very start of the video.

There is a noticeable difference in his altitude at the start and end of this brief video.