Flying a person from a helicopter

[kerry davies]

Who are they answerable to besides themselves? Who knows better than them what the risks are? Risk Management is not risk elimination and HSE make specific note of "important recreational and learning activities". There is no such thing as a totally risk-free society and in fact some risks are to be welcomed. This professional performance is easier to RA than a public bungee jump because we know the participants are super fit and trained to the Nth degree yet we throw random members of the public off bridges.

 

We have a major problem when we think "once something unfortunate happens" because with these guys it always does and always will happen. Wallendas have been falling out of the sky and dying since 1790. They ain't gonna stop any time soon.

 

Next up? March 4th Nicaragua, Nik has found his active volcano to wirewalk live on TV.

[ImagineerTom]

(I'm really just trying to extract some useful info from this thread...)

 

I have answered that point - the answer is literally a lifetime of training in a highly specific skill that is only ever applied in highly specific circumstances, highly controlled and supported by people (and equipment) who similarly have insanely high levels of experience and practice at this highly niche skill.

 

There’s a reason why almost every touring circus tent in the world has a roof/rigging points At the same height and kingpoles on identical spacing - circus mastered global standardisation of entertainment technologies decades ago

[Junior8]

Can I recommend Cyril Mills book on Bertram Mills Circus Chapter 8 as an elementary introduction?

[paulears]

The trouble Tom is that lifetime of doing it really doesn't mean you won't make a silly mistake. Indeed, after teaching certain essential safe practices for a long time, when doing an emergency callout at 3am, in the rain, in a huge hurry, I hurt myself - quite badly, and it was totally my fault and I just did it. I don't remember precise details but was not the poor lady who died in Gt Yarmouth at the circus a seasoned performer, who for some reason, simply forgot to attach herself before falling?

 

For the record - I'm not insinuating anything about the people who did it. Quite the reverse actually. I am assuming the stunt was safe and planned - my query is simply how somebody would convince a body like our CAA that such a stunt is controlled and safe. I'm not a complete plonker, and managed to complete our usual risk assessments when dealing with circus artistes. I simply don't understand what safety systems are actually in use in this example. If we are NOT seeing hidden safety features, then they must be not only simple, but maybe something that could be used by others outside of circus?

 

I'm imagining a Production Manager or similar person tasked with safety. Real safety, not paper pushing. What would they be seeing to convince them the risk has been managed?

 

It would need to be something acceptable to whoever was the representative of the production company. The FAA won't allow jury rigged camera mounts on fixed wing or rotary aircraft, the mounts need approval and licenced fitting. Yet we're expected to believe they are perfectly happy attaching people to aircraft?

 

This is what I'd like to understand. The fitness of a person, and their muscle power is perhaps fine hung from a waist belt - but how about if they're unconscious?

 

I'd also be very surprised if an emergency landing with a person hanging could ever be deemed safe? As for dumping a living person, I wonder how they word the disclaimers.

 

My own dealings with the CAA on really quite straightforward requests have been far from smooth, I wonder how something that a risk assessment presents as a worst case death reduced to serious injury would be approved?

I get circus have their own way of doing things, but this makes a very uneven playing field.

[ImagineerTom]

when doing an emergency callout at 3am, in the rain, in a huge hurry, I hurt myself - quite badly

 

Again the issue here is that you’re not understanding the circus world and mindset - a circus performer would have flat out refused to be in the situation you found yourself in. Numerous times (on corporate gigs) I’ve had circus performers come to me and say they simply can’t perform- I’ve made sure they are paid and I have fought for them tooth and nail with the client to make sure they aren’t penalised because they weren’t happy with the performance conditions.

 

There are around 40 circus’s working In the uk, two shows per day, each show with at least 6 “”death defying”” acts in them - that’s 175,000 people “””risking their lives””” per year and yet the circus industry in the uk has one fatality or serious injury every 10-15 years. It’s clear that the processes and safety protocols the industry has are league ahead of other branches of showbizness and that the paperwork we use is more than adequate

[themadhippy]

There are around 40 circus’s working In the uk, two shows per day, each show with at least 6 “”death defying”” acts in them - that’s 175,000 people

Is it? I make it 240 people,maybe 480 if its a 2 person act.I doubt theres 175000 people employed in the whole of the uk circus,thats a lot of caravans.

[kerry davies]

Why should the CAA get involved, Paul? The aircraft is governed but not people doing stunts above waterways or the Sarasota HQ of circus flyers. The CAA don't cover free fall parachuting and they certainly don't get involved in

Even the Army Parachuting Association now have a wingsuit branch and that is infinitely more risky than a professional aerialist.

 

You can even getinsurance for stunt and circus performers though whether the amateurs of the Extreme Ironing Bureau are insured I don't know. I used to be insured doing the fire spectaculars with explosives and with the right approach did the paperwork for an event in a SSSI which was in an AONB inside the National Park in a nature reserve. The fact is that each and every such stunt is unique and individual so the risk management for each is unique and bespoke. You cannot just take bits of the RA for use "outside of circus".

 

The question then is why aren't your RA's already unique and individual for each operation by each person? I could even create an RA for Seano's overweight 50 year old electrician trapeze artist. The playing field is meant to be uneven, individual unique people are uneven.

Edited January 21, 2020 by kerry davies

[ImagineerTom]

There are around 40 circus’s working In the uk, two shows per day, each show with at least 6 “”death defying”” acts in them - that’s 175,000 people

Is it? I make it 240 people,maybe 480 if its a 2 person act.I doubt theres 175000 people employed in the whole of the uk circus,thats a lot of caravans.

 

Well since you’re being picky I should have stated 175,000 person/risks per year

[paulears]

I get the impression the circus industry appear to have very different standards and monitoring. From the outside, just very generous interpretations of risk. The performer who died in I think 2003 was thought to have fell when she feinted? Nobody was quite sure how she managed to fall - but she did.

 

 

Kerry - the CAA involvement is with items attached to aircraft. I doubt they are interested in the end product, but they certainly are interested in the things attached to aircraft and who does the attachments. They get involved in methods to prevent things falling from aircraft. I believe the pilot in charge has this responsibility before flight. The FAA run similar schemes and have oversight in the US.

 

I've had some info back from a helicopter flying friend of mine and an underslung load from a helicopter here requires advance planning and permission from the CAA, and flying over populated areas may be prohibited. Permission may be granted, but on individual application.

 

The CAA control is the Air Navigation Order - section 65 which covers picking up and raising people and articles.

 

I'd like to assume the American stunt was done safely - I'm just not sure what Circus considers safe would convince me. That doesn't matter until it becomes something I have to sign off. I would need convincing with more than being told it was safe.

 

My friend was confused by the wind and bird strike comments, as they're quite common and even moderate sidewinds can set a suspended load oscillating which is very hard for the pilot to counteract.

 

I get the impression that circus is safe because circus people say it is, and have hundreds of years of experience in convincing people. Any non-circus concern is simply overstated and not applicable to circus.

 

I know Tom and others will be very strong in their disagreement with this - but are there double standards for safety in circus, or with circus performing? Can we really be sure that dropping a short distance onto a safety attached to a waist belt is adequate for maintaining safety? I don't understand the physical stamina and experience of the person matters if they are unconscious? Somebody feints - hardly a rare thing, and that's OK safety risk assessment wise?

 

I'm reading this as 'well, yes I suppose it's possible they could really be hurt, but we're tough experienced circus folk, so it's OK'.

 

I have to reject this as just unacceptable in our current protected working environment.

[david.elsbury]

I get the impression the circus industry appear to be very arrogant

I fixed that for you ;) :)

[kerry davies]

I think we just have to agree to disagree though what you would suggest as a solution would be interesting.

 

This is a Guardian article that may put it better but while reading bear in mind that 6.5% of all those who summit Everest die, one in 100,000 skydivers do not survive and in 2016 the very niche spot of base jumping saw 31 deaths. Circus actually gave us harnesses and safety wires and netting and fall arrest technology. We tend to take lessons from them, not the other way around.

[Seano]

Somebody feints - hardly a rare thing, and that's OK safety risk assessment wise?

 

Apparently so, because there are lots of situations in lots of jobs where somebody suddenly and unexpectedly losing consciousness would result in deaths and injuries and there's no effective control measure against that.

 

That's why there are health requirements to hold a driving licence, which are somewhat stricter for bus and truck drivers. Epilepsy, diabetes, heart disease and so on can all disqualify you from driving. If you find it upsetting that a trapeze artist who faints might not survive and the only control measure in place is that they're healthy enough that they probably won't - how do you feel about bus drivers?

 

ps: With feigned apologies for pedantry (see what I did there), please note the spelling: faint/feint

[Junior8]

Leaving aside the particulars of this case you simply have to accept that people, especially aerialists, do know what they are doing in what seem high risk situations. In terms of perceived risk though take the Wall of Death for example. If you did a RA for that the most risky stage I'd guess would be on the road taking it from one venue to another, the next pulling it down, the next building it up and the last by a country mile actually riding it for the skilled performer. (The same people do the lot by the way) At the performance stage all the variables are pretty well known and controlled for. Gerry de Roy was still working at 82! In fact the only accident with a wall I can remember in years is an owner tripping over or falling off the lorry I can't recall which when building up. You might accept such self-regulation as unacceptable but the plain fact is that given the number of circus/speciality performances to incidents it works. Largely because the performers are fitted with a desire to simply go on living and the circus owners a commitment to running a safe show. Again I recommend Cyril Mills' (no relation) book for an insight into this area. Edited January 22, 2020 by Junior8

[Brian]

I get the impression that circus is safe because circus people say it is, and have hundreds of years of experience in convincing people. Any non-circus concern is simply overstated and not applicable to circus.

 

...and can prove what they do is safe because the statistics prove it to be so.

[ImagineerTom]

I get the impression the circus industry appear to have very different standards and monitoring.

You're right, it's much much stricter - every time a circus pops up in the town park (except shows of under 450 people capacity) they will have had to submit hundreds of pages of safety paperwork, structural engineer calculations, certificates, risk assesments, method statements and all the other documentation required to PROOVE that what they are doing is safe. It gives me a heart attack to walk in to concert/theatre gigs and see people who are working 18 hour days for weeks at a time being expected to master dozens of quite technical skills and build complicated structures and cable runs that have never been independantly scrutinised, checked or specifically inspected and signed off by an outsider and often doing so under the influence of various strengths of narcotics and intoxicants.

 

I've had some info back from a helicopter flying friend of mine and an underslung load from a helicopter here requires advance planning and permission from the CAA, and flying over populated areas may be prohibited. Permission may be granted, but on individual application.

The reason these stunts tend to be done in other countries is precisely because they have very active (and experienced) pilots who earn their daily living lifting odd loads with a helicopter.

 

My friend was confused by the wind and bird strike comments, as they're quite common and even moderate sidewinds can set a suspended load oscillating which is very hard for the pilot to counteract.

the downdraft from a copter is very good at deflecting minor to moderate wind and flying birds. However you are misunderstanding the mindset of the circus/stunt performer - if there are strong enough winds that the performer doesn't benefit from the protection then the stunt isn't done.....

 

but are there double standards for safety in circus, or with circus performing?

We are subjected to the same H&S laws as anyone else, but the industry is also filled with people who have exceptional levels of speciality leagues more precise and practised than any roll I can think of in the theatre world and wholes whole mindset (and literal life and career) is focused on being 100% fit, able and safe to perform the highly specialist skill they have mastered in the very specific conditions it has been developed to be performed in.

I don't understand the physical stamina and experience of the person matters if they are unconscious? Somebody feints - hardly a rare thing, and that's OK safety risk assessment wise?

Because someone who spends their whole life hanging at weird angles / upside down is physically better able to cope with being hung at a weird angle whether they are conscious or not than someone who does an hour of rigging once per month and who has blacked out for the first time whilst still slightly hungover from the night before. Also EVERY circus "safety line" isn't a static point as used in theatre /arena rigging - every safety we use is designed so that if someone has a problem they can be gotten to the ground as quickly as possible. In a circus tent a performer who blacks out on a flying trapeze and falls into the safety system is on the ground and surrounded by colleagues/experts in about 5 seconds. In that helicopter stunt I can see clear empty patches of ground at virtually every point on the route; if she had somehow completely lost consciousness and couldn't self rescue then she would have been on the ground (and thus off the harness) in much less than 30 seconds. Everything in theatre relating to an unconscious person in a harness is based on the premise they are not an athlete, that they are already tired, that it takes time for colleagues to harness up and get across to them and that it then takes even more time to transfer them from the static point they are attached to on to a lower-able one to get them to the ground. The circus method and mindset is leagues more safe and efficient at dealing with the problem than the theatre one