Canadian Cormorant

[petec]

Anyone got any news on the Crash of the Canadian SAR?
Nothing on Rotorhub. Nothing on Canadian news sites either.

[Compressorstall]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060713.wchoppercrash0713/BNStory/National/home

[petec]

Absolutely gutted.

[aspinwing]

Different sources
http://www.canadaeast.com/cp/national/article2.php?articleID=20673
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2006/07/13/scotia-crash.html
RIP

[Acey ducey]

Hopefully it's not the tail rotor or this will be bad news for the FAA Merlins.
The loss of the crew members is tragic.
Gone but never forgotten.
RIP lads.

[rugmuncher]

One more article:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1152784685627&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home

courtesty of :http://www.thestar.com/images/star/nav/star_banner.gif

[sprucemoose]

Acey,

Perhaps more than a tad insensitive of you to speculate about possible causes while offering condolences?

RIP

[dangermouse]

EE

Why do you assume that WHL personnel are so callous that human lives don't matter?, do you really expect someone to knowlingly put aircrew lives in danger for any reason, let alone a cost one. Every crash reflects poorly on WHL products (whether or not WHLs 'fault') so there is not benefit in the long run.

As you are so 'experienced' and knowledgable about the 101 do you think that 20 years experience by test crews who have (and continue to) fly beyond any release you see count for nothing or what about the Boscombe crews who produce your RTS (not WHL), they check it all so they are part of the grand conspiracy as well I assume...:=

BTW the pics of the Cormorant show a complete tail rotor so just shutup and get back in your little box until you know what you have something worthwhile to add. The cause of the crash is not known and b******t like yours does no one any good.

DM

[ZH844]

Well said DM - EE you are a t**t!

[Spurlash2]

The IPT have said that the aircraft sank in 300’ of water and that the tail boom detached. The pics that I have seen show the tail boom complete, with the cockpit area missing from about the area just aft of the cockpit.

The IPT would appear to be misinformed.

My condolences to all the families at this difficult time.

[MReyn24050]

The IPT have said that the aircraft sank in 300’ of water and that the tail boom detached. The pics that I have seen show the tail boom complete, with the cockpit area missing from about the area just aft of the cockpit.
The IPT would appear to be misinformed.
My condolences to all the families at this difficult time.

Any chance of sharing them? I am sure the Merlin IPT would be very interested.

[AvTech]

I'd be interested to know who in the IPT gave that gem of info'. The EAs were briefed at 08:30 thursday that the ac was upright in shallow water and that there was no indication of cause at that time. The EAs were also requested by their boss not to discuss/speculate without facts ie photographs and as far as I know thats been the case. 1st photos arrived within couple of hours showing tail intact.

[Spurlash2]

MReyn24050

The pics no longer appear at the site originally seen.

I am led to believe that the IPT is aware.

The a/c looked straight and true, although upside down on the recovery vessel, apart from the missing front end.

[Sensible Garage]

Flight safety investigator Major Michel Pilon said the wreckage of the CH-149 Cormorant was also found essentially in one piece, with the exception of the parts of the nose, the five main rotor blades and one section of the tail rotor blade. Those pieces were located separately. Investigators are still looking for some smaller sections of the helicopter.

[Bronx]

More info and picture link (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=234547)

B.

[Bismark]

Sensible (or far from it),

Your highlighted comment re the tail rotor is uncalled for speculation. Both pilots survived and the fleet have not been grounded so let the investigators do their work!

[[email protected]]

I think the RTS produced by boscombe and based on manufacturers data is about flight envelope limits and how the aircraft can be used by military pilots; it has little to do with testing the integrity and construction of the TR and other components. If the aircraft behaves itself during the testing period but the TR self destructs after 1000 hrs then it comes back to poor design and manufacture.

BTW I am not suggesting the Cormorant crash was TR induced, in fact from the pictures on the Rotorheads forum it would seem to indicate the opposite.

[Paradism]

Crab
I notice you mention "poor design and manufacture". That may of course be the case or it may be a good design poorly manufactured or even a poor design well manufactured. Or it may be good design and good manufacture and the cause of the accident was something else altogether.

Time will tell.

[[email protected]]

Very true paradism - my point was the the RTS process does not deal with those aspects unless the aircraft shows up performance defects or inadequacies that can be attributed to component failures.

[Sensible Garage]

Bismark,

only copy pasted new rep, speculation by newspaper...

[SASless]

Is it just me? I find the photo to raise some questions about the Tail Rotor. One blade is missing a bit, another is bent mid-span and the others seem mostly intact. If that T/R was being driven when it hit the water....would one not expect more damage and about the same damage on each of the blades?

[dangermouse]

Actually why are we focusing on the tail rotor when after all the 5 main rotorblades aren't there, surely that's the cause ?

(the above posted in 'jest' to show that uninformed spceculation is just that)

SAS, it doesnt necessarily follow that the tail rotor would be that damaged, if the aircraft rolled to the right and the MRB hit the water first the tail rotor would be stopped or moving slowly by the time it hit the water (speculation again)

The RTS covers all aspects of the aircraft operation and maintenance, anything arising from a design change or mod is approved (or at least checked)by the EA, especially if it imposes a maintenance burden. Manufacturers don't actually have the authority to unilaterally apply actions to any aircraft without MoD approval (in the UK at least).

Knowing the construction of the 101 in detail I would hypothesis that the amount of nose damage seen in the pics was caused by the recovery team, the 'failure' point is at the main lift frame (ie the strongest bit of the aircraft) not at a module joint, as always until we all know all the facts we know nothing

As an aside I am sure that if it had been a TR problem we would have heard about it by now!!! (you couldnt keep that news quiet and there are parties around that would spread news like that everywhere)

DM

[Oggin Dodger]

Having seen the photos and some of the bits from both of the RN Merlin crashes, first impressions are terribly bad for making any assumptions. The crash at Culdrose which dropped in from a 30 foot hover after a tail rotor failure looked a right mess whilst the aircraft up at BUTEC which had things falling off it and breaking up all over the place was essentially in one piece when it ditched. I suggest you stop speculating on the evidence of one long range, partially obscured photograph and wait for the experts to do their job.

[ch135146]

Reading this today made me quite angry:

http://http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/516287.html

The link is to a front page story in the Halifax, Nova Scotia, Chronicle Herald newspaper. The article is titled, "Expert suspects pilot error."

The so-called expert is "a former Royal Navy helicopter and jet pilot," named Peter Jago.

Jago, who "examined photos of the downed chopper and read eyewitness accounts said he suspects human error caused the crash."

"If it was an engine failure, the guy would have immediately hauled back and would have settled into the sea," (Jago) said from California. "I am certain that they must have flown into the sea because they were in an extreme nose-down attitude."

The website of the Florida helicopter firm ( http://www.tigercopter.com/pilots/peterjago.html) which employs him as an occasional pilot contains a link to his own company's site. There, his biography say this:

"...having served in the British Royal Navy as an Executive Officer and as a Pilot of both jet fighters and helicopters in the 1960s. He was also 'lent' to the U.S. Navy for two years as one of the first 'Topgun' instructors at Miramar Naval Air Station in San Diego."

What's the gen on this man, he who thinks he can look at initial press reports and then be "certain" about events during a helicopter crash an ocean away?
:yuk:

Disclosure: I proudly flew with some of the crew members of that Commorant, in my previous life as a CF pilot.

[sirsaltyhelmet]

Looks like it wasn't the tail rotor then

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=0a250937-06a6-4761-a142-3d5e9e18ba31&k=34454 (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=0a250937-06a6-4761-a142-3d5e9e18ba31&k=34454)

[Huron Topp]

The folks did a great job at the Memorial. Bravo Zulu.

[Mr-AEO]

:( Sad days for families of crew. RIP peeps.