RULES AND LAWS | 63 ed to mark the TLOF, wind direction indicator, potentially obstructive trees, nearby hospital buildings and a church with waterproof LEDs suitable for outdoor use. LEDs are long-lasting, use very little electricity and require barely any maintenance. Their colour can also be determined by a central controller. That does, however, mean that no one is quite sure whether the TLOF markings should remain green as they are now or change to orange (as is common elsewhere), or whether different colours should be used for night-flight operations with night vision goggles (NVG) as NVG do not render all light frequencies with equal clarity. But it is possible to easily adapt the colours should this be deemed necessary. Due to the specific conditions of the location, the size of the TLOF had to be kept down to just 10.80 m x 10.80 m, which I believe constitutes the minimum space required to land a helicopter and load/unload a patient. For night-flight operations the TLOF was marked with LED lines at the corners and with three ground-recessed luminaires between each of the LED lines. The illuminated TLOF can be seen very clearly at night. The strip lights in particular ensure that the touchdown zone is very clearly marked. To the south of the TLOF the terrain rises relatively sharply and at the top of the elevation is a power supply line. Therefore this side of the TLOF is marked with red lights as an optical warning to not fly over this line. All the other lights are green. Information including a map and precise description of the landing area has been sent to all the major helicopter operators. The responsible regulatory authorities were kept informed during every phase of the project. The assessment at the final inspection was very positive and ended with the remark that this landing area could certainly be ap-
proved in line with Section 6. The total cost of the remote switching device and complete lighting system for the TLOF, wind direction indicator and all obstructions was around €25,000. This should be an entirely manageable sum for most clinics.
Summary The revision of the Air Traffic Act (LuftVG) is, in principle, correct and desirable. However, it should not automatically outlaw helicopter landing pads that do not comply with Section 6 of the act. If existing landing areas that comply with Section 25(2.2) are optimised and adapted to the actual needs of helicopter crews, we could quickly ensure a large number of eminently usable and safe helicopter landing pads within a short space of time. Regular inspections combined with time-restricted approvals would ensure landing pads stay in relatively good condition, thus guaranteeing a high level of flight safety. This would be a fairly quick way to counter the risk of around 88 percent of all hospital landing pads in Germany having to close. It would be possible without much political intervention, civic involvement or press scrutiny and without hospitals having to invest large sums, and a high degree of safety could be achieved within a short time. Hospitals, particularly those with a high patient transfer rate, that decide to construct new buildings should take advantage of the opportunity to install new landing pads that are compliant with Section 6 of the LuftVG on the roof (e.g. on top of a multi-storey car park). This would mean that helicopter landing pads at hospitals would gradually evolve from simply being compliant with Section 25(2.2) of the LuftVG to becoming fully-fledged Section 6-approved landing pads. Fig. 5: LEDs are long-lasting, use very little electricity and require barely any maintenance (Photograph: DRF Luftrettung)
3 · 2011 I Vol. 1 I AirRescue I 63