Cockpit video of EMS helicopter landing at accident

[rotornut]

(Does anybody know where this is taken?)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ea8_1195784294

[molen]

It is an AS350-B3 with Air Methods markings.

[purge98]

Why was he in the avoid curve for so long?

[before landing check list]

It is rather difficult to see where he was exactly in relation to the avoid range if at all. You could not judge approach angle nor see the indicated airspeed. Besides the avoid curve is just that. You try to avoid it however there are some aspects where you cannot. You just use your best judgment to minimize the time there when possible and plan for ways out if things do not go as planned. It appeared to be a smooth approach.
Jerry

[Gomer Pylot]

Landing to an unprepared scene like that, the last thing you worry about is engine failure. The most likely thing to hurt you is wires or other unseen obstacles. The standard procedure is to make the approach very slowly, so you can stop if you see wires that are close. You can never trust the fire/police/other people on the scene to have seen and marked all the wires and obstacles. Making fast, shallow approaches to accident scenes will, sooner or later, hurt you.

[helonorth]

Looked like the way I'd do the approach if I had that job. Might add a
high recon, but he probably knew the area.

[helimutt]

Maybe he'd already done a hi recce?

[helopat]

Looked like a rock solid boresight approach to me.

[purge98]

"Landing to an unprepared scene like that, the last thing you worry about is engine failure".
I do hope you are not the HEMS pilot flying me to the hospital :uhoh:
I was always taught to expect an engine failure at any time during take-off or landing. If it then happens you are not taken by surprise. You are totally prepared to fly the appropriate OEI profile and not add to the death and destruction on the ground. A seconds hesitation could mean the difference between life and death.

[tottigol]

Purge, when you are flying a single engine aircraft like the one in the video, the OEI profile is called AUTOROTATION.:ugh: and to the ground you are going to go, more or less smoothly.

Someone above pretty much spelled it right, slow approach with no more than 300'/min rate of descent for the last 200' AND a stabilized approach to minimize the danger of VRS onset and give you plenty time to manouvre (as in go around) in case of unexpected obstacles.

[Revolutionary]

I am always amazed by the prominence people give to the possibility of an engine failure, sometimes to the exclusion of considering any other risk.

Once and for all, people: engine failure -in a well maintained and inspected aircraft- can be safely put at or near the bottom of your list of concerns.

Far more important are things like collision, wire strikes, weather, fatigue, CFIT etc. etc. Please, stop harping about engine failures -they hardly figure at all in accident statistics.

(Before anyone goes off on me: I'm not saying you shouldn't know what to do if the engine ever decides to throw in the towel; just that you would do well to make other safety concerns -human factors chief among them- your priority).

[before landing check list]

Good perspective.

[helicopterpilot]

For sure. When landing off airport, out on a scene like that, you should keep it "nice and slow". Wires and obstacles are much more of a threat in that kind of environment than the hypotethical engine failure.

[rotornut]

Right but engines do fail - I was a backseat passenger in a 206 when the engine quit.

[Devil 49]

Started flying 40 years ago, and I've had:
2 engine failures;
2 drive train failures;
And a control linkage failure.
Lots of "interesting" experiences, but the excitement occurs, on average, 1 event a year.
On the other hand, I'm in my seventh year of EMS, and I'm surprised and scared about once a week doing scene landings. Wires, signs, posts, rails, curbs, people, parts, trash, bodies, emergency crews and their equipment, rubberneckers, planning the approach and departure tracks, positioning the aircraft for efficiency and safety- these are things that are much higher priority and may present more immediate risk than an engine failure. Not to mention planning for the unfortunate potential that the aircraft might have to stay on the scene (The peace officer's smile is obviously an effort as he directs traffic around my busted bird).
Read the reports. For every power failure, you'll see hundreds- if not thousands- of non-power failure mishaps for every power failure incident- Avoid the more likely hazard. Yes, I fly to keep a survivable forced landing area to hand. But, I'll hang on the engine for a minute or two to be be safe, slow and careful in the final descent. It's a lot like combat priorities- if you stand to take hits flying a normal approach, it's less safe to do so.

[purge98]

Purge, when you are flying a single engine aircraft like the one in the video, the OEI profile is called AUTOROTATION. and to the ground you are going to go, more or less smoothly.
Thanks for that info. I never realised. I'll have to talk to my instructor about that.
From what I have gathered from this thread, I can now fly low and slow in the S300c as the engine won't quit on me :)
Isn't it illegal to fly single engine at night commercially :confused:
I only ask as the cars have their lights on. You can tell it is dusk as the cars are heading out of town. It will most certainly have been night once he/she had finished loading the injured and flown them to Hospital.

[Revolutionary]

In the US you can fly single-engine, commercially or otherwise, all night long.

[helicopterpilot]

Purge, nobody said you should fly low and slow just for the fun of it. As stated earlier it's a matter of priorities and risk management.

Of course you should avoid the shaded areas in the H/V diagram if you can. However, sometimes you have to operate within the curve in order to carry out your mission.

As for your question regarding SE commercial ops at night. The video is from the US - yes, it is legal there.

[Gaseous]

Flying helicopters is about prioritising risks and hopefully controlling the aircraft to achieve the lowest risk for the immediate future. At this phase of flight the avoid curve is pretty low on the list and some would argue it doesnt apply at all. I know nothing about HEMS but it looked pretty good to me.

[Helinut]

Purge,

Its called risk management.

Some national authorities are obsessed with engine failure, apparently pretty much to the exclusion of anything else. and that tends to distort some pilots' perceptions. However it is not a balanced way to look at things. Frequently, the risks of other things are much more significant.

[Oogle]

HOLY CRAP!!!!!!

It is just a simple video of a dusk EMS landing! Big deal!!!

As always, people getting on this forum after a simple post and picking the crap out of it in everyway they can. Get a life you blokes.

I myself thought the vision was great and it allows the younger pilots who see it a different perspective of a landing in a fairly well equipped cockpit.

To the Air Methods AS350 crew - well done and thanks for the vision. I hope the weather was OK for your trip with the patient back to the hospital :ok:

To everyone else knocking the crap out of it - pull your heads in and write some constructive :=

[purge98]

To everyone else knocking the crap out of it - pull your heads in and write some constructive
The pilot has a nice shiny helmet
Do pilots who fly single engine helicopters always wear helmets? Do they wear them because they are worried about having an engine failure and it will protect them in a crash?

[donut king]

Approach appeared nice and stable, no drastic flare. Very controlled rate of descent into an urban scene. No wires seen. No land crews appeared to rush to the a/c.


WELL EFFIN DONE!!

DK

[OverTq]

Bog standard approach, pilot wears a helmet AND has his visor down - looks very professional to me!

[Devil 49]

Purge, Ol' buddy, let it go. You fly the way you feel safest, but don't tell EMSers how to do a job you apparently are clueless of- and have no interest in learning about.
Yes, engine failures happen. "Power" failures are more common. When they happen, as infrequent as it is, you'd better have a workable survival plan. It may not always result in an undamaged aircraft- As it would from a 100' hover in an Astar- but it has to be survivable. In EMS, power failures are not the greatest hazard, so they're not the first priority for consideration in risk management. Look at the statistics.
I can't speak for Air Methods Corp., my employer, and the largest civilian helicopter EMS operator in the world, but our required flight profile supports my position. They insist that all approaches terminate in a slow vertical descent, from at least 50' above any obstructions.
They issue protective gear, helmets and Nomex, to protect flight personnel. I'm not, and nobody I know, is "worried" about an engine failure. The industry involves much greater risk to be managed than "power failures". Look at the statistics.

[tottigol]

Purge, to answer your question, yes.
All the pilots in the world flying a single engine helicopter wear a nice and shining helmet just like the one in the video, I am surprised you have not been made aware of that before.
Your instructor wears one too, doesn't he?:E

As a matter of fact you ought to wear a helmet as well, and the flight school where you are learning to fly ought to provide you one for free.
Make sure it is a brand new one and not one passed down from student to student, they do have tendency to wear out.
If they have not done so, they may be witholding from you.

[120torque]

Devil,
I have no experience in EMS, however, how on earth, especially in the USA culture of reducing liability does a EMS operator's procedure require you to make all approaches within the avoid curve ?

I see the logic of it's very very unlikely for engine failure and more likely of wires etc... causing accidents and being the safest approach but surely your company cannot insist on that approach.

????

[tottigol]

120TQ, can you describe an approach to land to a confined area? How many of the last 45 seconds and 200' would be in the shaded area of an HV diagram?
Where would you be more subject to VRS?

Air Methods (and other operators) were able to relocate the HV diagram from the Limitations section of the FM to the Performance section, for determined conditions.

Would having trees and other obstacles in the immediate vicinity of the LZ still render it a "firm and smooth" surface as more often specified at the bottom of the HV curve diagram?;)

[120torque]

hey, been there done it, will probably be back in the HV diagram shaded area again on next tight confined area & I like to make sure I'm clear of obstructions before hitting them aswell - a lot of the time it IS the safest option.
My point is - The day the engine does actually quit and the pilot (whoever it is) stuffs it and injures/kills people in the heli and possibly on the ground - is it then sole the responibility of the company who "insist" on approaches being performed in the HV shaded area or still with the PIC.

Surely it can only be the company's responsibility?? Yeah right!!! Does it actually state in the ops manual that all off airfield approaches should come to a 50' hover/very slow airspeed descent into the site ? (which I think is what Devil was saying - i may have mis understood.)

[Revolutionary]

"Air Methods (and other operators) were able to relocate the HV diagram from the Limitations section of the FM to the Performance section, for determined conditions"

Tottigol, what are you smoking? I have never seen a helicopter RFM with an H-V curve listed in the limitation section. Unbelievable how misguided some of you are.

[manfromuncle]

I think purge98 is taking the p*ss with his posts. One look at his 'homepage' explains it all.

[yellowbird135]

I see a lot of discussion on the HV diagram. I failed to see someone mentioning the windspeed at the time. I didn't see an airspeed in the vid.
Let's discuss and judge a little more:E

YB

[Devil 49]

120torque asked-
"Does it actually state in the ops manual that all off airfield approaches should come to a 50' hover/very slow airspeed descent into the site ? (which I think is what Devil was saying - i may have mis understood.)"

Most definitely, that is exactly what the GOM requires, quote-

"Rates of descent shall be kept below 200 feet per minute when less than 300 feet above the landing surface. Steep approach angles with a rate of descent greater than 200 feet per minute shall be avoided."

Power failures are NOT, repeat NOT the major danger during scene operations- obstructions are. "Wires are everywhere!" is the EMS mantra. The best way to encounter wires is with one's skids- better than wire cutters at the speeds one is at while on short, short final. The big drawback is that wires are really hard to see in a vertical. Generally, you don't look for wires, you look for the right of way and towers, poles, etc. But, I've seen wires come out of trees, going to and from nowhere that I can see.
Not to mention stumps, signs (especially hard to see), light poles, armco, etc. at the typical roadway scene.

[Gomer Pylot]

Accident scenes are absolutely filled with things that can hurt you, some of them stationary, some of them loose and ready to fly into the rotors. If you're slow enough, you can miss the stationary stuff when you finally see it, and sometimes keep the loose stuff from getting up into the rotor. Sometimes. And some of the worst landing areas I've ever been into have been hospital pads. Trees, wires, and poles everywhere, and I've even seen a windsock on a pole 30' high, directly in the only good approach path. They wanted to make sure it could be seen, don't you know. Yes, I'm always mindful of the possibility of engine failure, but it's not even close to the top of my list. I haven't been flying as long as Devil49, only 39.5 years, but I have never had an engine failure, during about 13,000 hours of flying. I may have one tomorrow, but I'll worry about that tomorrow. In the meantime, I'll be watching for all the other stuff trying to kill me.

[jayteeto]

Can I make some suggestions to all of you folk out there who are going on about this 'avoid curve'. Firstly, if you haven't done this type of job before, then please think twice before you post. It would be a fabulous video for this website if the pilot did a text book approach into the LS, avoiding the 'avoid', only to take out some power cables he missed in the recce because light was fading, then as he came to the hover, a billboard (see Virgin HEMS petrol station video) blew through the rotors, causing more casualties than you started with!!!!!
FFS, I have survived my current job for 4 years without mishap and my military career for many years without a major accident. Only 2 engine shutdowns, none at a critical time. The flight manual has an avoid area and Jayteeto has an avoid area as well. They do not always match up. To fly safely sometimes means more than a graph that is highly unlikely to happen. He seems to approach down the road, which may be the most sensible GIVEN THE ENVIRONMENT AND OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENT.
An approach to a high hover, 10 seconds looking for any loose bits blowing about, might be the best option.

[AirWon]

OK, you guys over the pond call it the "avoid" curve, we call it the H/V curve. Same bloody thing. To insist on using the word "avoid", really misses the point, because all the really useful, and fun stuff that we do happens right there.

Whoever came up with, " thou shalt not enter the avoid curve", must be an idiot. Yes, of course, don't hang around in it if you don't have to, but for God's sake, gents, go fly a Cessna if it bothers you that much. You just need to know when you're in it, how limited your options are when you are in it, and depending on where abouts you are in it, when you're in it, then this will determine how hurt you'll get if it suddenly stops being noisy.

The incorrect reference to it being in the limitations section earlier in this thread says it all. I know that this was corrected already by someone else, but it does speak volumes about the confusion that there seems to be amongst the less experienced.

Please excuse the ramble. Long day, post not proof read, and that Heineken just hit the spot.

Aloha.

[tottigol]

Rev and all, the Bell 412 H/V diagram normally resides in the RFM Limitations section, it may not be the same for all aircraft (as a matter of fact, the 430's H/V diagram IS in the performance section).
However, when flying the 412 at a reduced gross weight AND with wind coming from a more restrictive direction (IIRC 30 degrees either side of the nose), we can conduct operations where the H/V diagram is moved to the performance side of the manual.
We are talking 412 in EMS.
It's a more restricted envelope that allow us better performance.

I may not be explaining myself very well.

[Phil77]

Not having any EMS experience (therefore not "allowed" to speak up :() I quietly refer to the - to some probably well known - BK117 OEI hard landing that occured at one day of the last century:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XueYCRv7qCg&feature=related

Ok, not completely quiet:
they came in with two engines, lost one and still spread the skids; but looking at the outcome... actually they kinda made their intended spot hu? :ouch:

The H/V curve shouldn't be treated lightly except when other dangers are more prominent than an engine failure.
That beeing said, I would rather hit the wire slowly than at "normal" approach speed if the odds for an engine out are... I don't know; how many thousand hours to 1?


EDIT:
One more thing that came to mind: maybe you guys flying in europe don't realize it, but for some reason the americans don't like to bury their cables, they like 'em out in the open (I mean EVERY wire for every structure has its own pole it seems) - maybe that too makes pilots even more careful when landing on scene (you can actually see the wires in the background of the video)

[Gomer Pylot]

I can't speak for all of Europe, and nothing from recent experience, but in Germany they used to not only have the wires and poles in the open, but they painted both the poles and the wires green so they would blend in and not be a blight on the countryside.

[Phil77]

Point taken Gomer...
but you have to admit that for anybody who's occupation is not "helicopter pilot" the idea is quite pretty isn't it? :O

Besides, in the part I grew up in (the northwest) there are usually only the high-voltage lines out in the open, which are hard to camouflage due to their size?!

[eagle 86]

Yes risk management it is - engine failure at a scene is probably low down on the list of likely, nasty events. However in a twin a sensible profile should be flown in and out. I've been flying 40 plus years and apart from 12 months in the very early days when people on the ground did not appear to like the side I was playing for I've never had a major malfunction. But then all the good things like thorough pre-flights and, particularly, being very fussy whose helicopters you fly helps to mitigate the risks. I always ask non-aviators when they question the risk of engine/mechanical failure "How often do you suffer a mechanical problem that causes you to grind to a halt if you are driving a relatively new, WELL MAINTAINED car?"
GAGS
E86

[13snoopy]

To answer your question:
Here ya go!
http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JClhvZj8yn4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JClhvZj8yn4)
If this link doesn't take just do an "EMS Helicopter" search on YouTube and on about the 7th page or so of the search you'll see the video you've posted at the start of this thread.
It's entitled "Multiple Victim Accident" or something like that.
Says they are based in northern California.
Hope this helps. They have several other videos of landings and take-offs.

[purge98]

A very interesting thread this. A lot of different views.
Some people have answered in a cool and calm way and state their position while others CRM is obviously a problem and they go off the deep end.

The incorrect reference to it being in the limitations section earlier in this thread says it all. I know that this was corrected already by someone else, but it does speak volumes about the confusion that there seems to be amongst the less experienced.
I have never seen a helicopter RFM with an H-V curve listed in the limitation section. Unbelievable how misguided some of you are.

By the way the AS332L has the avoid curve in the Limitations section of the flight manual. I would have to assume that all Eurocopter types do as well. That is a lot of helicopters you obviously haven't seen the avoid curve of. Who is misguided/confused now?

One other thing...Why did the pilot leave the white strobe light on after landing?

This is not good practice, especially at night, as it can blind incoming folk. It destroys your night vision amongst other things.

[tacr2man]

''Let him who is without sin cast the first stone'':rolleyes:

[Gomer Pylot]

The location of the HV curve in the RFM depends on the size (read # seats) of the helicopter, at least for US regulations. Not all EC helicopters have it in the limitations section, by any means.

I leave my lights on after landing to try to make sure all the rubberneckers can see me. I turn off the landing and searchlights at night, but leave everything else on, especially the t/r light. Accident scenes are chaotic at best, and there is usually little if any security. I try to put out as much light as possible, both to make sure the pedestrians see me, and so I have a better chance of seeing them.

Purge, for someone without a license (your profile does say you're a wannabe) you seem to do a lot of criticizing of pilots, some of whom may have been flying for longer than you've been alive. Just an observation...

[JimL]

Part 29 helicopters have the HV Diagram in their limitations section; Part 27 helicopters do not.

Having the HV Diagram in the limitations section is a problem for Part 29 helicopters; the majority of them work in offshore operations where they are in the diagram during most take-off and landing profiles.

That is why both FAR 91 and JAR-OPS 3 alleviate from the effect of this limitation. FAR 91 for heliports constructed over water - in 91.9(d); and JAR-OPS in Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(c).

It has been known for some time that having, what amounts to, an operational limitation in Part 29 is unnecessarily limiting. It was put in about the time that Category A become a compulsory requirement for Part 29 helicopters.

Jim

[Phil77]

I'm not sure if that applies to other parts as well, but under FAR Part 135 the company's POI (principal operations inspector) can alleviate certain restrictions if they interfere with procedures vital to operations and work out a letter of agreement?!

I stand to be corrected.

[helicopterpilot]

Purge,
it's a short video, but I am impressed about all the little things you manage to criticize/question on it - come on, the strobe light was left on.. so? Honestly I think your shoes are bigger than your feet here :)

[purge98]

Honestly I think your shoes are bigger than your feet here
I hope so or they wouldn't fit :confused:

[helicopterpilot]

hehe. Point taken

[arismount]

>>This is not good practice, especially at night, as it can blind incoming folk. It destroys your night vision amongst other things.<<

Just had to respond to this one. Night vision is something that doesn't exist at a night scene. Multiple vehicles with red/white/blue flashing lights, strobes, searchlights, headlights, streetlights...you get the picture. I do agree however that leaving on the aircraft white strobe is poor form and might even be hazardous and disorienting when close to the ground/obstacles. I only use it when I'm concerned about other aircraft being a collision hazard...i.e. reported traffic I haven't yet seen, flying around busy airports, etc....then I turn it off as soon as I think things are "safe" again.

[jgregoire]

Do you know when this event occurred? Was it recent? Sorry, but I am unable to view the video due to the old operating system on this computer.