Narrative:

Departed the ZZZ airport on a repositioning flight to provide medical support. As I approached the ZZZ1 straight with the bridge in sight it was discovered that the large wires that transverse the bridge were obscured in fog as well as the terrain on both sides. I was late to the event because of a duty time issue from the previous day's shift. As a single pilot IFR pilot in an aircraft equipped as such I could have returned towards ZZZ. I could have gotten a pop-up clearance and shot an approach into ZZZ2 and then transited VFR. I made a choice at that point to fly under the bridge. Thinking that going IFR would have delayed me even more affecting the start of the days events. My actions generated a call to our company dispatch center from ZZZ3 center who were originally called by state highway development agency. They were extremely concerned with my action due to the construction of the new bridge. They stated that there was seismic work taking place as well as personnel and cables hanging off the bridge at certain times. State highway development agency also noted that there were closures to marine navigation at certain times because of this work. Had I been aware of the bridge activities and closures I would have never placed personnel, my crew or aircraft in such a situation. It is not unusual for helicopter's to fly around and under local bridges on sight-seeing operations, as well as other commercial flts. The navigation closure information available to the marine community is not published or listed for the aviation community. As a constant NOTAM watcher, and having checked NOTAMS that day, nothing was listed about the bridge activities. As a local operator it would be great to have this information available to us so that we could avoid duplicating my actions. In discussions with state highway development agency we agreed as a company to notify other like operators about the local hazard. In conclusion, my company being a single pilot IFR EMS helicopter operator has no real reason to fly under local bridges. With our capabilities the operation I undertook plays no part in our day to day operations. I, as a pilot, made a wrong personal decision to do what I did. My decision comes from a past of flying VFR and what I did being an only option. The only positive things to come out of this is that nobody was hurt, and that we discovered that there is a lack of information disclosure about the bridge activities and marine closures. I hope that giving you this information, as well as our company's disclosure of the incident to the FAA, that we might be able to change the way information is given to those in the aviation community, specifically the helicopter operators. Any local bridge or marine hazard that could affect low level helicopter operations.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A HELI PLT, IN THE INTEREST OF SAVING TIME AND TROUBLE, FLEW UNDER A PUBLICLY TRAVELED BRIDGE ENRTE TO HIS DEST.

Narrative: DEPARTED THE ZZZ ARPT ON A REPOSITIONING FLT TO PROVIDE MEDICAL SUPPORT. AS I APCHED THE ZZZ1 STRAIGHT WITH THE BRIDGE IN SIGHT IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE LARGE WIRES THAT TRANSVERSE THE BRIDGE WERE OBSCURED IN FOG AS WELL AS THE TERRAIN ON BOTH SIDES. I WAS LATE TO THE EVENT BECAUSE OF A DUTY TIME ISSUE FROM THE PREVIOUS DAY'S SHIFT. AS A SINGLE PLT IFR PLT IN AN ACFT EQUIPPED AS SUCH I COULD HAVE RETURNED TOWARDS ZZZ. I COULD HAVE GOTTEN A POP-UP CLRNC AND SHOT AN APCH INTO ZZZ2 AND THEN TRANSITED VFR. I MADE A CHOICE AT THAT POINT TO FLY UNDER THE BRIDGE. THINKING THAT GOING IFR WOULD HAVE DELAYED ME EVEN MORE AFFECTING THE START OF THE DAYS EVENTS. MY ACTIONS GENERATED A CALL TO OUR COMPANY DISPATCH CTR FROM ZZZ3 CTR WHO WERE ORIGINALLY CALLED BY STATE HWY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY. THEY WERE EXTREMELY CONCERNED WITH MY ACTION DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW BRIDGE. THEY STATED THAT THERE WAS SEISMIC WORK TAKING PLACE AS WELL AS PERSONNEL AND CABLES HANGING OFF THE BRIDGE AT CERTAIN TIMES. STATE HWY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ALSO NOTED THAT THERE WERE CLOSURES TO MARINE NAV AT CERTAIN TIMES BECAUSE OF THIS WORK. HAD I BEEN AWARE OF THE BRIDGE ACTIVITIES AND CLOSURES I WOULD HAVE NEVER PLACED PERSONNEL, MY CREW OR ACFT IN SUCH A SIT. IT IS NOT UNUSUAL FOR HELI'S TO FLY AROUND AND UNDER LCL BRIDGES ON SIGHT-SEEING OPS, AS WELL AS OTHER COMMERCIAL FLTS. THE NAV CLOSURE INFO AVAILABLE TO THE MARINE COMMUNITY IS NOT PUBLISHED OR LISTED FOR THE AVIATION COMMUNITY. AS A CONSTANT NOTAM WATCHER, AND HAVING CHKED NOTAMS THAT DAY, NOTHING WAS LISTED ABOUT THE BRIDGE ACTIVITIES. AS A LCL OPERATOR IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE THIS INFO AVAILABLE TO US SO THAT WE COULD AVOID DUPLICATING MY ACTIONS. IN DISCUSSIONS WITH STATE HWY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY WE AGREED AS A COMPANY TO NOTIFY OTHER LIKE OPERATORS ABOUT THE LCL HAZARD. IN CONCLUSION, MY COMPANY BEING A SINGLE PLT IFR EMS HELI OPERATOR HAS NO REAL REASON TO FLY UNDER LCL BRIDGES. WITH OUR CAPABILITIES THE OP I UNDERTOOK PLAYS NO PART IN OUR DAY TO DAY OPS. I, AS A PLT, MADE A WRONG PERSONAL DECISION TO DO WHAT I DID. MY DECISION COMES FROM A PAST OF FLYING VFR AND WHAT I DID BEING AN ONLY OPTION. THE ONLY POSITIVE THINGS TO COME OUT OF THIS IS THAT NOBODY WAS HURT, AND THAT WE DISCOVERED THAT THERE IS A LACK OF INFO DISCLOSURE ABOUT THE BRIDGE ACTIVITIES AND MARINE CLOSURES. I HOPE THAT GIVING YOU THIS INFO, AS WELL AS OUR COMPANY'S DISCLOSURE OF THE INCIDENT TO THE FAA, THAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE WAY INFO IS GIVEN TO THOSE IN THE AVIATION COMMUNITY, SPECIFICALLY THE HELI OPERATORS. ANY LCL BRIDGE OR MARINE HAZARD THAT COULD AFFECT LOW LEVEL HELI OPS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.