US TV Choppers Crash Covering Car Chase

What I am trying to say is coordination, in this very instance, will be beneficial. But, say if Channel A needs to user the chopper cover the Labour Party "Rock The Vote" Concert (I am making the event up), and Channel B needs to use the chopper to cover the sinking of a derelict ship, and both happens at the same time, coordination will simply melt down.

In the US, it is the responsibility of news helicopters to maintain visual separation when covering such events. The incident in question is being investigated, but so far, there have been no indications of any FAA regulations being violated.

Gallunach, I'm sorry if I paraphrased your position incorrectly.

Not if they still have a chopper (or more!) each, but before sending them out to a breaking news story, have a quick (2 min) conference call to see who has the resources in place to get pictures quicker (is there a chopper already in the air or fueled up and ready to go?) and get them to cover the initial stages. Review that co-ordination as the story develops to see if between them they need to increase the amount of resources covering the story.

BTW, it should be clear to everyone that no local TV station will give up its helicopter because of this. Helicopters are a vital part of newsgathering, especially in a market as big as Phoenix. If pool helicopters are ever adopted, it will only be for limited-scale news events such as car chases and small fires where that would increase safety without reducing the stations' editorial independence.

If this is the case, maybe the FAA also need to investigate whether they need to bring more regulation of these flights. I find it almost scary that the FAA consider two helicopters colliding to not be a violation of one or more of their regulations

Especially considering the amount of FAA / JAA regulation there is in place regarding the type of bolts and nuts you must use to attach cameras to helicopters (use the wrong type of nut and your helicopter's license to fly is invalid).

edit: I agree, and would not expect any station to give up it's own helicopter (or any resource they currently have available to them), but I would hope this incident will encourage them to consider the possibility of sharing these resources (and using other stations where available) more wisely.

Maybe a compromise would be to have one nominated (perhaps police) helicopter which is directly following the chase providing a feed to the other news channels. Then if any other news helicopters wish to cover the story they should be forced to keep at least one horizontal mile (if that makes sense) away from any police helicopters and the 'nominated' helicopters at all times.

In theory if they're force to stay a distance away then they're less likely to be clumped together in a small airspace, and therefore reducing the probability of a repeat accident. Also with a nominated helicopter providing a feed some news channels might not bother sending up their own helicopter, thus fewer taking up airspace.

There's no reason why they shouldn't have their own helicopters so they could cover events, just not sending them to the same events.

In this case Channel A sends its copter to the concert and B to the ship and then if necessary pool the pictures.

This happens over here on virtuall a daily basis, to save news organisations duplicating resources and causing chaos in sensitive or logistically problematic areas

I suppose the UK view could be seen as slightly hypocritical, particularly when you consider how many helicopters are used to cover events such as the Prime Minister driving from Downing Street to Buckingham Palace or the transport of a terror suspect from jail to court. Yes, these events are more managable than a car chase as it is a pre-determined route, but is there the need for at least 3 choppers to cover such an event?

I'm just loving how the term "newsgathering" is being used by some of you guys in relation to this incident.

Don't think it is hypocritical at all. Helicopters have a specific role to play in both aerial camera and aerial radio links roles in TV production. They can be used safely and effectively in these roles - providing common sense is used and safety is ALWAYS the most important aspect considered by all involved - whether in the helicopters, or deploying them/producing them.

Coverage of sporting events like the London Marathon have historically required multiple helicopters - as did shows like Treasure Hunt (Anneka was in one helicopter, another was kept permanently in the air to provide a mid-point for her talkback to and from the studio)

Covering the journey of a new PM between Downing St and the Palace is an iconic and key aspect of the Election coverage, as that journey and meeting are significant elements of our democratic process (as the Queen asks the newly-elected PM to form her government) and a very nice way of ending the election coverage. The coverage is planned carefully - and flightplans logged with all relevant authorities as helicopters over the palace and Number 10 are not exactly a "free for all" Not sure this can be compared to live car-chases...

I'm not suggesting that something like that is not covered, but just that surely it would make sense to pool the coverage, particularly when you consider the first half of Gordon Brown's first speech as PM was almost drowned out by helicopter noise

I also continue to be surprised by coverage of terrorists in custody being transported, I don't know if editors are hoping for an audacious rescue attempt one day but showing the exact location of the prison van isn't half encouraging one!