This is from the N.Y. Post, but seems to be a legit and accurate story.
A private citizen (an experienced firefighter and ex-sheriff) who owns his own helicopter flew over the flooded area, found and rescued several desperate victims. He was then told by a county official that the area was declared a restricted flight zone, and he would be arrested if he flew again to save anybody else.
HUH???
What the F?
Yes, big rescue operations need to be properly organized, and somebody needs to be in charge of aircraft safety regulations and stuff…but what the f? This guy actually found a couple stranded on a mountainside, rescued one of them, and was prevented from flying back to rescue the other.
Something doesn’t make sense.
More precisely—the pilot found the stranded husband and wife, told his co-pilot to get out of the helicopter so one of the stranded victims could sit in the copilot seat and be flown to safety, The pilot intended to fly back two more times, to take the remaining two guys (the stranded husband, and the copilot).
Instead, he was told to fly back, pick up his copilot, and LEAVE the stranded victim. HUH? How could you look somebody in the eye and say: “Sorry, buddy…I just rescued your wife, but now I’m not allowed to rescue you, so just stay here alone while I and my buddy leave…okay?”
Flight restrictions over emergency areas are pretty standard and authorities take the pretty seriously.
If you want to get into an area that has a flight restriction there are procedures for asking permission first.
I suspect part of the problem here was not asking permission. Likely the largest part of the problem.
The rules are there in no small part because some of the flight infrastructure in disaster zones can be compromised - I don’t know the details for this particular one but that could be a factor. Keep in mind that in the past journalists jockeying for position for photos have resulted in mid-air collisions, and that not everyone with a helicopter is an upstanding citizen intent on helping people, bad guys can get pilot licenses, too.
There are numerous private pilots who have been featured on various news outlets spending their own time and resources to help out. Presumably, they asked permission first and/or are coordinating with other folks.
We’re only hearing one side of this story, and I’m guessing the version we’re getting is leaving some facts out and heavily slanted towards one party.
I’m not finding any real news source for this story, only tabloids like the NY Post and blogs who are probably just copying each other. I have a feeling there’s more to this story besides recreational outrage.
In short, he had clearance to enter one specific area then his social media feed blew up with a whole bunch of other people wanting to be rescued so he went to other areas where he did not have clearance.
NB: replaced KC Fox link with original link local to NC.
There seems to be a disconnect of rational. In an emergency it’s all hands on deck to save lives.
It’s common for private boats to rescue people in flooded areas. They’re called the Cajun Navy in Louisiana.
Very few private individuals own helicopters. It wouldn’t be hard to register the people willing to help with Emergency Management.
I agree with the OP. WTH
This Lake Lure fire official should be required to attend a public meeting of the grieving families and explain why he condemned their loved ones to possibly die.
According to the article that @Skywatcher posted, he landed at a community center, on an unstable driveway (“then gingerly lowered his chopper down onto what was left of the couple’s concrete driveway. The flood waters had washed away most of the ground beneath it.”), & “in a parking lot at Boys Camp Road and Memorial Highway near the Lake Lure Flowering Bridge where he said he spotted a group of first responders gathered.”
These were all improvised LZs. Did anyone police them to make sure there wasn’t debris (trashcans?) that would go flying from the prop wash, possibly injuring people on the ground? Was there anyone around to make sure the public didn’t come racing over to the chopper to assist them with their (perceived) “emergency landing”? By his own admission he landed in a sketchy area that he was afraid to add even the weight of one person to his helicopter.
The article goes on to quote him again by stating that “Seidhom said the military helicopters sent to the area were too large to land in the tight confines of the debris fields and mountainsides where people need to be rescued.” How experienced is he in tight LZs? It’s much, much tougher to fly in tight areas with powerlines & trees & uneven ground that from a paved heliport pad with no obstacles for 100 yards in every direction.
Who was coordinating his search area & who did he report whom he recovered to. Those two people he took to the airport so they could fly home; did he notify anyone who they were, did he even get their names?
Separately, does a fire chief even have any authority to have a pilot arrested in an area that *doesn't* have a TFR?
I mean this does not seem outrageous to me. I mean generally private aviation is regulated up the wazoo, and I’m really ok with that. Private aviation in a disaster zone should absolutely be even more regulated than usual private aviation. Common sense absolutely says this is how it should work
So here’s the rub. They were “stranded”: presumably they were cut off with out power, with limited food or safe water. That really sucks, I would love someone to come rescue me in a helicopter in those circumstances. But it’s not rescuing someone who’s life is in imminent danger. If someone was about to be swept away by flood waters I would be ok with someone going “screw the regulations! I’m going in!” But this is not that.
Man arrives in heaven.
Man: What the hell, God? I drowned in some flood waters. I prayed to you and everything.
God: Yes, I heard your prayers and sent a helicopter to save you. What else did you want?
Man: What helicopter?
God: (Checks on a few things). Oh, sorry, guess I missed the NOTAM. Better luck next time.
I think that factors into it, too - if you’re saving someone in imminent danger of death that’s an entirely different matter. These people were uncomfortable but they weren’t in immediate danger. The pilot could have flown back to base, dropped off his passenger (that was a Robinson 44 pictured, you don’t need a co-pilot for that) so he could have room to pick people up without needing to leave anyone behind, and told the authorities what he was doing and it would probably have been fine. By picking up one person but leaving another behind he’s not really fixing the problem, there are still two people up on the mountain even if one of them is a different person.
I think this is why the private air wing is mostly dropping off supplies and not rescuing people - that’s being left for the pros who, in most cases, have much larger and more capable aircraft, and people trained to rescue people even in circumstances where the chopper can’t land.
Valid considerations. Unlike airplanes where everything has to be done at a minimum speed helicopters can hover and examine a landing zone fairly well before landing, but not everything is readily visible from the air. Hitting wires/cables/etc. can result in disaster, and the non-pilot public can be clueless about how to behave around aircraft.
I’m wondering if that had more to do with altitude than ground hazards. If that’s the case, though, it’s another reason to leave extractions to people like the National Guard.
That’s why those folks train in non-landing rescues that doesn’t require the aircraft to land, and have the equipment to do those safely. “Military helicopters are too large to land in this spot” is not a valid excuse.
In actual emergencies pilots are allowed to bend the rules but you’d better be able to justify yourself afterwards. If the pilot in question had rescued someone with, say, a serious head injury that needed immediate medical attention that might have been entirely different in the eyes of authorities because it was done to save a life. That’s very different than “we’re uncomfortable and need supplies”. If the situation was so dire that the piot had to leave his current passenger behind then he’s putting one person in danger to take someone else out of it. Rule one for rescues - don’t generate more people who need rescue. That only adds to the problem.
Sounds to me like the pilot from the OP was willing and able to fly, but doesn’t really know how things operate in these circumstances and wasn’t willing to play by the rules in effect.
I also wonder if he got belligerent/defensive when confronted, which would definitely not help with authorities.
Yup. Former Colorado Ground Search and Rescue person here. We where so anal that we even cut a special mark on the soles of our boots, so that if you did leave a foot print we could tell if it was one of ‘ours’. You take every precaution you can. This was before everyone could afford radios, and cell phones where non-existent.
I’m just imagining some guy with a helicopter flying around robbing people in the aftermath of a natural disaster. It’s so outrageously bad that it’s funny, probably right up until it actually happens.
This isn’t the same case as in the OP, but FEMA was also blocking flights trying to ship Starlink satellite terminals into North Carolina:
However, it has been resolved:
FEMA should probably do a better job engaging with private flights into the area. Yeah, the airspace needs to be managed, but private efforts have a significant role to play and there needs to be a clearer means for them to help.