Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By Ibra
#1870962
James Chan wrote:My simple mind thinks FL90 would make a better transit altitude! :)


They need to go IFR for FL90 with all equipments & approvals (or IMC with all skills & risks), not something I would fancy in helicopters and more importantly, where is the fun in that? 500ft agl is close to our hearts & ears, you are in great company just relax and enjoy :lol:
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1870977
It's certainly fun to enjoy any scenery at low level, but there's going to be military reasons to 1) need to transport tonnes of "stuff" that can't be practically transported by other means 2) need to move this "stuff" at low level, and 3) perhaps risk annoying anyone on the ground who is noise sensitive.

With each helicopter taking up to about 10 tonnes, I can count about 10-15 of them every month. Which probably means 100 tonnes in and out . That's an awful lot of "stuff" moved!
#1870981
James Chan wrote:Not really a GA question, but does anyone have a contact email in the MOD or webpage who can explain the reason why so many Chinooks need to fly along the Thames around 1,000-3,000ft at various hours of the day and night?

My simple mind thinks FL90 would make a better transit altitude! :)

I don't wish to tell you because if I did, I'd have to kill you. :twisted:
By the way, why don't you take a look at the Heathrow helicopter route structure. :wall:
#1870982
James Chan wrote:It's certainly fun to enjoy any scenery at low level, but there's going to be military reasons to 1) need to transport tonnes of "stuff" that can't be practically transported by other means 2) need to move this "stuff" at low level, and 3) perhaps risk annoying anyone on the ground who is noise sensitive.

With each helicopter taking up to about 10 tonnes, I can count about 10-15 of them every month. Which probably means 100 tonnes in and out . That's an awful lot of "stuff" moved!

I've observed Chinooks carrying 3 underslung loads at a time passing just north of my home near Bagshot and on one occasion, I saw a Scorpion type tank being carried which had either come through the heli routes or had been lifted out of Chelsea Barracks.
One of the main aims of Chinook flying is to practice low flying and here I'm talking about well below 500ft agl; I once went on a trip out of Farnborough where we operated in a valley near Lambourne (Berks) practicing landings on sloping ground then flew under some 25 Kva power lines .
I'm glad these guys are here to fly around at low level as to me, anything like this represents freedom so just stop bitching about it. :guns:
Rob P, Ophelia Gently liked this
By Hooligan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1870985
10-15 a month is one every two or three days. Hardly excessive and the Chinook, while a distinctive sound, is hardly the noisiest helicopter belting around over London - various civvy 109s, Dauphins and the Met's EC145s, plus the aerial camera ship Squirrels favoured by the propaganda, sorry, news channels all seem a lot noisier and way more frequent to me.

I like seeing my tax dollars being put to good use!
User avatar
By AndyR
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1870992
We often have Chinooks low level between us and the South Downs (a gap of less than a mile) well below the ridgeline and at night. Occasionally have seen a silhouette but the sound is, I find, reassuring.

What a strange subject to object to. London is full of noise and has helicopters over it all day at low level. If people want to moan about it that's their prerogative but a few Chinooks?
#1871006
We often have Chinooks low level between us and the South Downs (a gap of less than a mile) well below the ridgeline and at night. Occasionally have seen a silhouette but the sound is, I find, reassuring.


At a time before we had remotely realistic simulators, it wasn’t unusual to fly from Poole Harbour (for example) up to Scotland at night, never rising above 150’. Ops were able to trace the aircraft’s progress from the phone calls.

Fewer complaints of course when we flew over the North Sea from East Anglia to Jutland at night at 50’.

Recent history has shown that such skills are necessary and the capability hugely significant. Because politicians and enemies have a habit of placing our young men and women in situations that require both.

Of course the same is true for all military training, though the public are utterly oblivious to much of the rest.
kanga, Ian Melville, AndyR and 1 others liked this
User avatar
By James Chan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1871011
Did anyone say they were moving “stuff”?


Well I thought that's sort of implied because it would probably be a bit strange to fly such helicopters empty for similar reasons why one wouldn't fly a 737/747 empty and at less than a few thousand feet.

I'm aware of the low-level helicopter routes, but I thought they were for mainly for us civilian folk in helis to use - the military do not have to follow if an operational need arose.

And during this period of restricted international travel, there isn't much air traffic going into the majors either so flying higher if possible shouldn’t upset anyone.

anything like this represents freedom so just stop bitching about it


It is not me who's annoyed by the noise but I’ll gladly pass on the rude message.

They also wondered whether it was a replenishment of London’s surface to air missile defence systems. Heavy weapons that cannot get too high in the atmosphere because of its unstable chemical properties.

And yes, nobody wants a 9/11 event in London.
By Hooligan
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1871036
All you need to point out to whoever is complaining is that the Chinooks and other mil helicopters over London are performing legitimate military tasks and that they should be greeted with smiles and waves. Our armed services do a tremendous job, quite often in extremely difficult circumstances - Afghanistan should be fresh in everyone's mind surely - and we should be grateful for those who choose to serve, not moan about them.
kanga, James Chan, Ibra and 2 others liked this
User avatar
By kanga
#1871039
I recall lecturing at an establishment with a very secure perimeter, with a visitor car park in the centre, surrounded by old (and, apparently, 'listed') buildings. Visitors were told to leave their cars unlocked with keys in the ignition. The space was just big enough for a Chinook or (then) Puma to alight. If one was coming in (possibly at VERY short notice), people working in adjacent buildings were tasked with jumping into the cars and quickly driving them off into adjacent roads to clear the alighting area; and it was regularly rehearsed.
Hooligan, townleyc liked this
By Rjk983
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1871066
A4 Pacific wrote:
I trust they know what they are doing and whatever that is it is in my best interests.


It’s not that long ago I shook hands with a chinook pilot who had three DFCs! There are a number of others with the same award, and plenty with significant medals to their names. They are easily the most decorated fleet in the Royal Air Force currently, and won’t have been outshone by many, ever? The aircraft’s capability is immense.

Like I said. Sleep safe, they’re on our side.


Not to do them down at all. Always good to hear a friendly wokka when you need one…

But “ever?” - I think the Lancaster fleet may have a claim here, also the spit and hurricane, typhoon, etc