True North 407 down in the Kimberleys

[Squeaks]

ABC Kimberley: (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/25/2374606.htm?site=kimberley)

A helicopter with seven people on board has crashed at Talbot Bay north of Derby in the Kimberley.

It is understood the Bell 407 helicopter crashed into the ocean shortly after taking off about 8:30am.

All onboard survived and managed to scramble to safety before the helicopter sank, but a female passenger required CPR and was flown to hospital in Broome where she is in a stable condition.

The Helicopter was operated by tourism company True North, which conducts flights into the Horizontal Falls area.

It is the second helicopter to crash in the Kimberley in two weeks.

Earlier this month four people were killed when an R44 helicopter crashed while on a 18 minute sight seeing flight to the Bungle Bungle Ranges.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau is investigating this latest incident.

[pohm1]

Perth Now. (http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,24402039-948,00.html)

P1 .

[ChopperFAN]

OMG... I cant belive it :sad:

I remember when that 407 arrived in Australia it was in Adelaide and i managed to get some pics of it before it went up to NT

Spent many years dreaming of the photos stuck to my wall... :8

As far as i know their 407 has floats fitted so any idea if they were inflated before it struck the water?

Simon

[NorthSeaTiger]

From Perth Now

"All those aboard were rescued within minutes of the crash but the pilot was not able to activate the aircraft's flotation device and it sunk in 30m of water."

So the floats were not deployed, citing engine failure as cause of crash.

NST

[R.OCKAPE]

Pilots initials ??

[DoinTime]

Hate to poke a stick in the eye but.... It is common practice in the off shore arena to arm the floats anytime you are below 300' and under 60kts, with hand on the collective ready to activate. As there is little time to react before hitting the water when under the above. Seeing as the True North is a boat I would hope they are using a similar practice, assuming they were taking off from the boat.

Sounds like a little complacency to me. You can not control when the donkey wants to quit, but you should be ready with the floats. especially in a single engine aircraft.

The fact that all 7 got out is welcoming news as that could of very easily been a different outcome.

DT

[wheatbix]

Sounds like a little complacency to me. You can not control when the donkey wants to quit, but you should be ready with the floats. especially in a single engine aircraft. I bet he will not be so complacent next time.

I'd be careful before you start pointing the finger straight away. You weren't there, and neither was I, so it would be unfair to speculate.

Every experience I've had and heard about this operator has shown nothing but their professionalism and attention to detail (including arming the floats at the appropriate time).

[206Fan]

Easy fellas, we don't want another thread like the S-76 thread, im to blame a bit aswel in it!

Glad to hear everyone got out of this one.. How does the floatation device work in the 407? Is there a button on the collective or a trigger like on the R44 Clipper??

[DoinTime]

Don't speculate???? :{That is all we have on this forum, as I doubt we will never know the real reason.

But Yes you are right, I am sure there was a very good reason why the floats were not inflated and I wait in anticipation to hear that, although I am sure I never will.

I am sure I am not the only person who has forgotten to arm the floats on approach or take off, especially when you are doing 30+ landings a day. oooppps sorry speculation... there I go again.:ooh:

The most professional and experienced pilots get complacent, in-fact they are more acceptable to it. Again I am more than likely way of base and no way mean to slander the pilot. Just curios to know why.

Davy,
There are usually two different types. A trigger on the bottom of the collective or a push button next to the arming switch. These are the two I have seen on the 407 and are designed so you do not have to remove your hand from the collective to activate, for obvious reasons. Both of course need to be armed to activate.

DT

[206Fan]

Ah cool..

Thanks DT :)

[gulliBell]

Floats not working when they're supposed to happens more often than what many might realize. Even on new multi-million dollar helicopters straight out of the factory. The floats might have been armed, and they might have been triggered, and they might not have worked. Obviously they didn't work here, for a reason that will be revealed at the subsequent enquiry.

[Capt Wally]

Not being a heli driver (wish I was at times though) & this is just a question only could the floats be automatically deployed with no other input from the user when say an engine failure/neg torque occurs? Obviously they would still need to be armed say for over water ops or dissarmed for training. Just reading the posts here suggest that there may or may not have been time to deploy them in the usual fashion in this case.
And finally although this will no doubt bring some "oh no not that question again" responses where would one best start to seek a heli ticket in ML?
I'll do the research but just wanted some advice from the 'troops' first
Tnxs


CW:)

[Nigel Osborn]

Wally
Some helicopters such as the 212 have the floats that inflate on entering the water, if armed of course. Some like the 350 may have the inflate button on the centre console, not too easy to reach if you're in a hurry! I always liked the fixed floats on the 206, at least you knew they were inflated! Having had 2 engine failures on take off, making a decent EOL was all I had to do.

[Squeaks]

Wally,

As Nigel says, some installations have an automatic system (water sensors, etc) when the floats are armed, but the 407 is a manual inflation, IIRC.

Strangely, True North's AOC specifically bans the use of fixed floats or floating hull in any of their aircraft. Quite the strangest Condition that I've ever seen in an AOC :confused: Only emergency floatation equipment is allowed, CASA AOC register. (http://www.casa.gov.au/casadata/aoc/displayaoc1.asp?srchinput=true+north&andchk=+and+&workgroup=all&rating=all&Location=all&heli=all&num_results=20&Search=Search) :suspect:

Also, to answer your query (Wally) about moving up in the world and going rotary, you can't do better than PHS at Moorabbin :ok:

[SASless]

There are any number of reasons why the floats did not inflate....some of which have nothing to do with complacency, pilot error, forgetfulness, or human error. As any experienced helicopter pilot or engineer knows....things that are supposed to go "pop"..."Swoosh"....sometimes do naught....or half naught.

Perhaps we should wait to hear from reliable sources what the cause of this lack of flotation was caused by.

Perhaps we can get Lappos to R and D us a boat hulled single engine Bell helicopter....thus floats would not be an issue. Wait a minute....Sikorsky already did that years ago!

[Squeaks]

It seems that the floats did work OK last time: 4 years ago (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/136329-true-north-407-down.html) :ooh:

[CYHeli]

Squeaks, I've flown with a couple of companies that had the same limitaton re floats on the AOC and at one Op we were always over water.
It's a strange one, but I believe that it relates to the CP and if they have a float endorsement or not, remembering that you have to have the endorsement before you can operate with fixed floats. Therefore if the CP doesn't have the endorsement, it wont appear on the AOC.

I also know of one school that did fixed float endorsements, but wouldn't sign the pilots off until they had a HUET!:=

The AOC bit is just speculation as I had asked once before, but couldn't get an answer.
Glad to hear everyone is okay.

[Nigel Osborn]

Sas
You suggesting that Nick should reserect the S62???? I spent 1001 happy hours flying one in Doha, great machine!!:ok:

[chook13!]

To mr dointime are you serious??? what armchair are you endorsed on???? Slanderous libelous and just plain stupidous comments are the things you hear on tv news stations when some clown reporter is trying to make a story out of stack when he knows nothing about it. a good competent and experianced friend of mine flies on True North and whether it be him another pilot or any other pilot in any other stack -clowns like you are not appreciated
doing nothing for the indiviiduals or the flying game itself. as other learned individuals point out further down the page there are a million other things that can cause floats not to inflate so pull your head in a keep childish and obviously uninformed comments like ''sounds like complacency'' to yourself.
are you actually a pilot?? Furthermore we in the early stages of stacks get snippets of news from people who are as informed on the subject as you obviously are, so the chinese wisper routines grow way out of control and next thing the pilot as you stated is at fault.. been there copped slanderous comments from people similar to you untrue unfair unjust and just really a comment on you not the pilot.

PS and i don't really care whether some words are not spelt right so don't bother pointing it out.


bw

[wheatbix]

Rumoured to be an engine failure straight after takeoff and that floats failed to delpoy. The whole incident was caught on video so I'm sure everything will come out. Pilot was RC. Good job in getting everyone out alive.

[DoinTime]

Chook,

Don't get you knickers in knot:=. Stop thinking all pilots are perfect. Just for you, I am currently flying a 407 off shore and have quite a few hundred hours on it. Resume on it's way, hopefully you can give me a job:}

It is a rumor web site. I am mealy offering a cause that may be in play why the floats did not inflate...not why the engine failed. Like others pointed out somethings do not go pop when you press the button, which is more than likely the case. I hope we get to know more. Seeing as you are close to the pilot maybe you can in-lighten me. If it was caught on video I am sure it will be on you tube soon enough.

I would also like to know what kind of FADEC failure would make him/her land in the water the time before. Sounds like (ooppps speculation coming):eek: If he was taking off the N1 would be around the high ninteis, so when the FADEC failed and went into manual it would have given him rotor droop when the N1 went to 90% where the throttle is set. Reason to put it in the water??? I don't know I was not there. I do not (like the recent event) know the details, like airspeed, Altitude, Weight, Weather etc etc. It has been a few years since that happened does anyone know where I can get the report on that one?

Come on Chook let it out:ok:

DT

[chook13!]

DT these are your words not mine ---"Sounds like a little complacency to me. You can not control when the donkey wants to quit, but you should be ready with the floats. especially in a single engine aircraft. I bet he will not be so complacent next time". With any due respect that is not 'an offer of a cause" that is you telling this forum that the pilot f--ked up. Yes indeed it is a rumour forum no doubt but where in that statement is that an offer of cause that a rumour network may find of assistance. From little things big things grow. Imagine if that was u here (the pilot) having the forum experts tell all and sundry that it was pilot error that the floats didn't inflate- how would you feel?? There is about 20 diferent maybes i would suggest that may have either prevented the pilot from punching off the floats or if he did that the floats actually activating but you say --' I bet he will not be so complacement next time!! You have no idea neither do i so why tell the forum that the pilot was complacement.

it appears my mate was not flying the machine but either way I will let the matter run its course and not insult him by ringing up asking his opinion (he wasn't there either). If you're a 407 driver why not instead of the previous ""expert"" opinion inform educate and not speculate (especially in a manner that is near libelous). Why not assist others who may end up in that situation or fly a 407 and list the possible reasons that may have led to the machiine going swimming. THATS what assists people, thats why people read crash comics (other than for the other dubious reasons)- to learn the whats and hows of helicopter bad things. Placing blame onto a pilot when nothing is known -whats that??
I am well qualifed in the field of aviation and other fields also but i have made many mistakes over time and realise fully that neither I nor anyone else are perfect as pilots but that does not mean that if my (or anyone elses ) machine goes pear shaped its mine or their fault automatically.

Just for a finish cause I am over it - just imagine its you who was flying that machine and imagine someone else wrote that and that someone from the media picked up that sentence (the complacency one) and suddenly the news said "industry sources say while the cause of the engine problem/ failure/ etc is not known, the pilots complacency during this phase of the flight nearly caused the deaths of the entire crew/ occupants of the helicopter" Do you reckon "Oh but its just a rumour forum" would placate you/ ya kids/ wife/ mum and dad/ company lawyers/ passenger lawyers etc.

Why would i want your resume?

[DoinTime]

Oh "lighten up Francis" go pick up the toys you threw out of the cot.

The resume was a joke.

I'm happy in the gulf for now...:bored:

DT

[chook13!]

good come back

[Mach.29]

Howd they get the injured person from Talbot Bay to the hospital?

[Mongrel Dog]

Float plane I believe

[Gas Producer]

What a great movie. Sgt Hulka . . . what a hero. Stripes, 1981.

[integrity]

As most of us seem to know, the boat they fly off is a holiday haven for the very rich and well-to-do. Price for a week? - more than most of us mortals can save in a year!

So...

Why would you spend so much money on your luxury vessel, getting it thru survey, adhereing to every maritime safety standard in the western world, marketing, crew, etc etc,, and then expose all of your mega-rich clients to the unavoidable critical phase of flight in a single over water?

Surely this will have done irrepairable damage to the operation? The clients would all easily pay the extra cost of twin-engined flight (after all it's a captive market - most are doing a one off spend big holiday in Oz, before jetting off to their other normal holiday haunts the rest of the year). If you heard the bar tabs that many of the clients rack up, it would give you some idea.

I think it is a clear case of should have gone twin. (That company owns a 145 anyway). A towering take off to a safe CDP would have stopped the salt water stinging the eyes! I'm not suggesting for a moment that twins are cheap, but with a clientelle like this I think it would, in hind-sight, be a no-brainer.

I too, know one of the pilots very well. And I too, have put a single in the drink. No dispertions on their actions at all! It all happens very very quickly, and those of us who have been there will tell you no-one can predict how you will act until it happens. Very glad all are alive and well, and lets hope this lifts the bar in this part of the industry and gets another twin well employed. :ok:

[Brian Abraham]

integrity, unfortunately the performance capabilities of a twin in the take off phase would still expose the occupants and aircraft to the risk of a ditching. Very few are capable of operating with full accountability, and they are of a size that would not be viable eg Puma, AB139. Helicopters such as the 212, 412 or S-76 don't even provide performance data on which to plan for accountability for a take off from a boat (unless things have changed). For the smaller twins forget it.

[JimL]

Brian,

You will forgive me if I disagree; several of the smaller and more modern twins are quite capable of providing such performance.

The Bell427/9, Grand, EC135, and MD 902 could provide this performance providing the deck was of ICAO Standard proportions.

Even if the deck was not compatible (or there were no performance graphs), the exposure would only be in the order of several seconds.

Jim

[Squeaks]

The Bell427/9, Grand, EC135, and MD 902 could provide this performance providing the deck was of ICAO Standard proportions.

And the EC145, one of which they've owned for some 4 years or so :hmm:

IIRC, originally purchased for the very safety reasons mooted here: but the lure of fire fighting contracts in NSW seem to have overruled all that, and the 407 was left to do the job for which it is (was?) not really suited.

Two ditchings in the same machine in 4 years off the same boat :( Absolutely amazing, even more so that there were no fatalities :=

[integrity]

Well said JimL, saves my big reply.

Good points Brian, but as we know, a good operator will apply their own limiting performance graphs to the particular operation (ambient conditions) to ensure fly-away accountability. (you don't use the same charts on an S76 out of Darwin, as you would on the same aircraft in Bass Strait.)

If the tour then only flys with five bums on board instead of seven, I'm sure no paying clients will complain when explained "why".

Brian, I'm guessing you are retired now. Hope it's going well. (We've shared a cockpit). Integrity.:)

[Ned-Air2Air]

I was under the impression that the reason they didnt use the 145 was because it wouldnt fit onto the boat.

Anyone know for sure.

[RVDT]

Things have changed. As an example -

EC135P2.

30 deg C

Sea Level

OEI/OGE Hover ~2630 kg

So that gives me 681 kg's available on the current aircraft.

Less pilot and 1 hour with reserves ~ 336 kg for pax. (/4 = 84 kg ea) Not bad.

It could be more but this aircraft is air conditioned, glass cockpit (dual), WSPS, SP/DPIFR, autopilot, pop out floats, FM radios, SatCom.....................

Engine failure - so what. 95% of the time we meet these conditions. The remaining 5% is flown Cat A. Why fly Cat A when you have OEI/OGE Hover performance?

It does operate off a boat and of course the reason you can't use Cat A procedures is that the deck doesn't meet the size required in the RFM Supplement. 15m x 15m is the minimum and it is 18 x 12. Apart from the deck dimensions everything else is Cat A (Engine Fire Ext, Rad Alt, AI and Search and landing light for night) and the performance would allow maximum weight for takeoff up to 36 deg C if the deck dimensions were 100% suitable in accordance with the RFM.

Cat A procedures can be simulated using "Training mode" where the analogue display simulates a failed engine. The digital indications show the real story and in fact both engines are operating normally. The procedure is very easy to fly and requires no great skill. Being able to do this without trying to break things or wear out engines instills a lot of confidence. Also the training mode will allow you to simulate "topping" the remaining engine and will allow the RRPM to droop to limits before automatically reverting to "normal". N1 Topping selection between 30 sec and 2.5 min power also functions in this mode.

Of course it goes without saying that this procedure must be closely adhered to with the RFM Supplement and the aircraft requires the correct engine software and modifications embodied. I think the aircraft in QLD had a spot of bother in this respect. :ugh:

The 145 would probably have no more performance in the same conditions as the engines would not have the same reserves of power when OEI.

[TheVelvetGlove]

Don't mean to hijack the thread, but are your guys really still using electric floats in light helicopters :eek: ? Is the Apical system not very popular down under?

[2leftskids]

There is no doubt that a modern twin with cat a accountability would be the preffered option I think it is worth looking at this operation from a geographical and historical perspective.

Up until about 99 or 2000 this operation was run by an external helicopter operator using a tired old 206 that was flat getting airborne at all on a bad day. While the rest of the operators in that part of the world were still operating 1960's vintage KH4s North Star charters bought and crewed a brand new air conditioned float equiped 407. So while in hindsight in 2008 from the comfort of an east coast computer it may look a little under done they have shown in the past that they are prepared to spend money on equipment where other operators weren't.

I'm not suggesting that the twin argument isn't valid however I do think in this case it is worth taking a balanced view.

[topendtorque]

perhaps if they had used the local drivers to crew it, who would have been very respectful of the local ambient furnace conditions, then the 407 donk may hve lasted longer?

[that chinese fella]

TET, thats a big call!

Do you have any infomation of the ATSB internal engine inspection that may have contributed to the reported power loss and hence your insightful correlation to pilot abuse?

[2leftskids]

Hey TET

They do use the local drivers. Every one of the guys that I know that flies for them started up there and have continued to work up there

[topendtorque]

only too happy to be corrected, i had heard that the machine was not a star performer in amongst the bucket brigade, down south. seriously struggled i heard.

no idea on atsb reports, i would think we would be waiting a while, it may still be soaking in fresh water?

[chook13!]

May be incorrect here (dointime is sure to know) but for topendtorques benefit does not the 407 remember any abuse a pilot may throw at it ie exceedences ? such as tq/ N1/ t4-tot?? and leave these for all to see (al la b3 etc) If so sorta makes topends point about local knowledge a little offtrack and (although as said happy to be corrected) more of a jealous comment and a display of lack of true north pilot background than a serious addition to the forum. i don't think any of the pilots who fly on the boat are on their first job- remember although this is an discussion board it is also a public forum and one may well think ok if i was in the pub with the guys in question would i be that brave or disprespecful to verbalise these in front of them (and others in earshot) .even if the 407 doesn't remember abuse do you really think that pilots will abuse a machine like your comment insinuated and that one of the top end gurus wouldn't?

just food for thought not an initiator of a slanging match

[CYHeli]

I think chook that if you re-read TET's last post, he was commenting on the a/c's performance whilst working fires (bucket brigade) and the impression is that the a/c was a slug (not a star performer).
I think he is saying that the a/c may have been tired, (?? how does a turbine get tired :confused:) before it got there.

The earlier post about locals not crewing it have been answered.

I wonder if my experience on B206 in hot conditions in Mildura would help get a job up north? DA of 3000' + in summer.

[chook13!]

""perhaps if they had used the local drivers to crew it, who would have been very respectful of the local ambient furnace conditions, then the 407 donk may hve lasted longer?""

CYheli the above is the comment by tet and that is a suggestion that the pilots are by choice or by lack of knowledge abusing the machine and this may have contributed to the engines failure. It also shows a distinct lack of understanding of the fundemantals of heat in particular and the management of a turbine engine. Without opening myself to the experts out there I think we can safely say that if a pilots looks out for the 3 limits on a engine and maintains it within these, the donk/ transmission doesn't care whether its in Antartica or top of Everest. All that happens is that you may be able to lift more in lower DA than high and a different limiting factor will probably be reached at differing DA's ie one may be tq limited at one DA and temped out at another. Sure a donk may for a given tq (ie load its lifting) may be able to run slower and burn less fuel (cooler) - and theoretically last "longer" or be in better condition at overhaul, but if its run within its limits and operated as a turbine probably would be when carrying passengers it can't be said to be abused. You do your performance figures for a given day load up accordingly and using your judgement based on the machine in use (if you are aware that it is a slug etc) vary the load to maintain the donk within its operating parameters. I am sure the blokes of TN are well aware of how much they can lift on days up there>> TET suggested by comments that the furnace conditions and the lack of local knowledge caused the engine failure and you suggest that the tired donk made it a **** lifter - who knows??

As stated the use of pilots from local is already covered and aknowledged by tet in his next post.




my whole point is and has been with my last posts in this subject that people should be very careful that the glass houses they live in don't get stones thrown at them back, ie be careful of how, why and what they criticise people espically when they have NO knowledge of the facts (are the accident investigators finishing their look see yet and is the report published?). As per my response before why comment when the knowledge level is low and think if the position was reversed would they be happy to have all and sundry read that their proffesionalism is in question. I am sure they would bitch like little kids if it were the other way. Why bother to coment at all

regards chook13

[CYHeli]

I agree with you chook, hence the reason that I posted about "how does a turbine get tired?" This was tongue in cheek. TET's suggestion, unless I am reading it wrong, was at some stage, someone over did a limit.
The point I was making, which really didn't matter, was that first TET had a go at the driver (not being a local), and then had a go at the a/c (it had a bad reprutation).
I have trusted TET's posts prior to this and I think he may have had a bad day himself or was just venting. I don't, or ever have, worked with the man, but he does seem to have his finger on the pulse.
We pilots are an impatient bunch and when something goes wrong (prang) we want to know what happened. Partly out of morbid curiousity and partly out of learning from it. There would be a few finger pointers who would say "I'd never do that!" with plenty of chest beating without really knowing just what went wrong.
Well done to those involved. :D The a/c didn't have every seat filled, so it looks like wgt was considered. There is a photo of a float inflated, so I hope the pilot got them off, but it just didn't hold.
And most importantly, everyone got out and those that needed help once outside, got it straight away! :ok:

Thread creep: - Aviation will be a very expensive place if everything was an IFR twin. There are calls for twin IFR for EMS, MPT, these marine based charter ops... TET will be calling for a twin for mustering soon.
Just because the flight takes the pax overwater, doesn't mean that they need to be in a twin.

[Squeaks]

Just because the flight takes the pax overwater, doesn't mean that they need to be in a twin.

But the company have a twin, which they (IIRC) originally purchased for the very reason that it was a better proposition for the ship operation :hmm:

Because the CP found that NSW Fire Ops is more attractive, the status quo returned to the 407 doing ship ops and the EC-145 contracting for fire fighting, instead of the other way round :rolleyes: FWIW, the 407 seemed to perform well enough back when it was used in NSW, no major issues with performance or with bucket lifts. But obviously a shiny new glass cockpit 145 is a major attraction, especially for all those dusty paddocks ;)

[chook13!]

Cyheli- roger your tongue in cheek ref tired donks (missed that- appologies) . sorta fail to see why people feel the need to slag others when facts are not known (ala TET and co) does not show a real supportive aviation (pilot) community- you'd think pilots versus (some) companies management and the poor treatment they sometimes receive would be enough to get pilots on the same team not using anonymous forums to take cheap shots at others when facts are not known and obviously levels of knowledge about subjects in general are sadly lacking

cheers
13

[chopperpug]

I have been sitting back and watching this thread, and everytime someone says 'Lets just wait and see what the investigators find out first before we open our mouths," I think, finally, I wonder if everyone who has written comments which could be taken to be slanderous and at the least offensive to those involved, will finally realise that it would be the decent thing to do.
Now, I know this is a rumour forum, and hypothesising these events is a great mental exercise which stimulates technical arguments we all benefit from, but you can do that without making uninformed personal opinions on the skill of the pilot.
I personally know all the TN boys, and have worked in the same area with these guys, seen how they operate, and have learnt a lot from them. The operator I was with still does use B206's to transfer people to and from some of the other cruise boats that operate along that coast, and probably will for some years to come. We have never had any incidents, or close calls, even though we operate close to the envelope the whole time. This is all down to the high standards of training and management the we had at the company.

To reiterate for TET, even though someone has already said, I found the comment that 'Perhaps they should use local pilots then' (As if it wouldnt have happened with his great insight if this were the case) highlight the fact that he (TET) has very little knowledge of the operator and the pilots. RC was actually one of the first pilots to operate turbines around the Kimberly, and started with the operator that originally provided the B206 to TN (My old operator). He has spent over a decade flying up there, and is well aware of the effect of heat and humidity, as maybe some others that comment on here are not.
I think perhaps TET if you were to meet him you might feel you had greivously put your foot in a place you would rather it not be. And if you have met him, you must have some personal grievences that make you feel this way, which given this is a 'Professional Pilots Rumour network' would be unprofessional to air.

I would hate to think how you would feel if you were to be in the same situation, and unable to comment due to company requirements and see someone saying the same sorts of things about you.

Anyway, I apologise for the rant, but RC is a friend, and a professional in what he does. All I am asking for is to put yourself in the same position and engage that lump between your ears before you open your mouth and have it fall out.
Chop.
(Theres a reason I don't post very often, I get carried away and don't stop typing)

[350boy]

Like chop I to have followed this story.I have worked alongside both RC and JR on several fire seasons in NSW over the years and both have a serious handle on how to fly that machine in all sorts of conditions.
Sometimes the things simply fail,**** happens so build a bridge and get the f%*& over it and rather than waste head space on some sort of witch hunt can the school kids leave the chat,unless you have something constructive to write DON'T BOTHER !.
Can I sence sour grapes here ?.

[topendtorque]

Lucky i've got at least a learners permit or I'd really be in the poo.:hmm:

[corella killer]

What a ******* Joke thanks to all that posted positively Facts!!!! The Pilot has never left the Kimberley 17 years. The twin was purchased for the fire seasons. The 407 was the best Equipt/Maintained ship in Aust and the engine was 719 hours out of overhaul, and its got a whole you could stick your ******* fist through!!! gee I wonder if I had 2 seconds from max power at 20 ft to sudden stop to fight a machine into the water with floats armed would I have time to think gee ive got to hit this button thats shrowded in this collective leave it to the experts to work out if there are any.

[Squeaks]

The twin was purchased for the fire seasons.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Of course it was :=

But I will confirm that the 407 was a great ship, and was also a good performer on the fires. Probably better for $=performance than the 145, especially allowing for capital costs ;)

[chook13!]

MMMMMMMM ah dointime and the odd other, are you starting to see a theme emerging here ref to the way pilots should speculate/ consider others/ support fellow pilots/ keep the knives in the draw etc. As stated PPrune is actually to do with PROFESSIONAL pilots, so why not support that theme and make professional statements and judgements or not make any statement at all if you can't be positive or based on any fact, because there is no positive in slander for the person holding the **** end of the stick. Just wait to you end up with a machine going pear shaped on you and see if the "chuck yeagers' (experts) out there begin the great credibilty slaughter on you.

13

[topendtorque]

WRT the 407. There is nothing suggestive about my comments other than to remind those who have never lived in the furnaces that often prevail in those areas, that forecast temperature conditions. I.E.35degrees C, will only apply to the up and flying height.

Get down and dirty in the gorges with reflected heat all round at Max AUW and peaking at 42 to 45 C in September or worse in November (plus four or five more C) when the sun is directly overhead and much care needs to be taken.

I have heard by this good news thread that only competant locally trained drivers operate TN. The only fact that I must go back to is that damage to engines is often cumulative, you say these guys are all aces, a fact that I am not disputing. I say a 407 is laying on the bottom of the ocean. What gives Einstein?

[chook13!]

your logic -near new donk, very exp pilots much local knowledge engine ****s itself is pilots fault.

your suggestion that a pilot who lives up there will make the donk last longer because those flying on tn don't live up there and therefore are less likely to understand a donk. the comment is nonsense becuase does not the machine itself register exceedences and futhermore you are no more likely to exceed a limit up there than Antartica. Thats why you have performance charts, you load to the chart and to the way the machine responds to DA. The temp datum for a donk is say 50 degrees up there and 20 in town, so what its 30 degrees hotter to start with, does one just ignore limits and exceed them by 30 degrees? and thus shorten the donks life?? does the man who lives up there know something that the rest of the pilot community does not. so what if its hot in a gorge? If you do not exceed engine parameters the donk should stay happy-
so would the local pilot still have a happy donk when the pilots (i think someone said one had 17yrs up there and another i know has substantial) would. very poor argument and whats more an argument based on what and for what reason??

[2leftskids]

Of course there are also a lot of components that are attached to the engine that may cause a failure or power loss regardless of how the engine has been treated. Throwing a compressor blade out the side is not the only way to stop an engine.

[DoinTime]

Well I must say it is good to see a lot of pilots voicing their support for the pilot flying, I applaud that.:D Yes chook, right you are.... I bit premature on my behalf and duly noted and apologies to the pilot in question. I guess I am just too used to seeing too many muppets flying around here with out a care in the world, thinking it is never going to happen to them. But that does not mean we can not all be a little complacent sometimes.

Like it was said before, if you are just commencing your takeoff from an elevated platform/Boat that is less than 100' high. You really do have a couple of seconds and you would more than likely break your finger on the button guard trying to fire the floats off.

As for a 407 in conditions between 40c and 50c, 100% humidity and at MGW the machine can still easily be flown with in limits by any competent driver wether they are a local or not. As for a single engine machine being used on a boat/over water..... I think the 407 is more than capable of doing just that, all in all it is a very reliable machine. When is comes to weight verses power you can not beat it.

I would much rather be flying over water in a single engine than over forrest/mountains/Fires any day. Yet people fly over mountains/forrest everyday with out a thought until they are over water, then it is crazy all of a sudden???.

So now the question is what happened to the engine?? Does anyone have the video or some photos??

DT

[chook13!]

Nice one dointime. Good stuff.


13

TET: ref this and "low flying at bathurst"

just think if the atsb had you working for them they would never need to investigate an accident cause you would already know the answer

[Ian Corrigible]

Would this be related to the True North ditching?

AIRWORTHINESS BULLETIN
Rolls Royce 250 Engine Outer AWB 72-003 Issue : 1
Combustion Case (OCC) Failure Date : 23 October 2008

1. Applicability

All Rolls Royce (RR) 250 Series engines with Outer Combustion Case (OCC) Part Number (P/N) 23030911 eligible for installation in all versions of model C28, C30, C40 engines installed in but not limited to, Eurocopter AS350; Bell 230, 206, 407 and Sikorsky S76 series helicopters.

2. Purpose

This AWB has been raised in co-ordination with the ATSB in order to urgently advise operators and maintainers of an unusual and catastrophic failure of the OCC of a RR 250 C47 engine. There is one CASA Service Difficulty Report (SDR) relating to a RR 250 C30 engine which also suffered similar OCC cracking.

3. Background

The ATSB is currently conducting an investigation into the burst rupture of an OCC. See Figure 1, below. The rupture occurred immediately after take-off, resulting in the complete engine power loss. This resulted in the helicopter, a Bell 407, ditching.

RR 250 C47B OCC Rupture failure (RH Side). At this point of the ATSB investigation, it appears the failure is likely to have originated from somewhere either under or adjacent to the reinforced area of the OCC ("the armpit area") on the inside bend of the duct, close to the welded seam. See Figures 2 & 3, which show cracking in the other side of the same OCC in which the rupture occurred.

CASA has one Service Difficulty Report of cracking in a C30 OCC, where cracking occurred under (or in) the same reinforced area located on the inside bend as the occurrence duct.

Since the ATSB investigation is in its early stages, it is more than likely that this AWB will be amended to include further recommendations as the ATSB investigation proceeds and additional information becomes available.

4. Recommendation

In order to detect cracking at the earliest opportunity, CASA urgently recommends that operators and maintainers immediately and frequently thereafter, conduct an inspection of the suspect areas of the duct, paying close attention to the area on inside bends of both sides of the duct.

Such inspections should be conducted using a suitable inspection technique, such as a close inspection using a 10X magnifying glass. One suggestion has been to apply a leak check bubble solution to the suspect area while motoring the engine, but CASA is open to proposals describing other inspection methods which may prove to be effective.

All instances of cracked OCC’s should be reported to CASA via the SDR system. This includes cracked OCC’s discovered during operation or overhaul, which may not have been previously reported. Such information will assist the ATSB in their investigation and allow CASA to develop a comprehensive response to the problem.

5. Enquiries

Enquiries with regard to the content of this Airworthiness Bulletin should be made via the direct link e-mail address:

[email protected]

Or in writing, to:

Airworthiness Engineering Group
Systems and New Technologies,
GPO Box 2005, Canberra, ACT, 2601

[that chinese fella]

It's really only amplifying what is already a known area of more detailed inspection. Inspection of this area is specifically called up in a standard 100 (or 150) hourly service. Nothing new here to any Allison (sorry, Rolls Royce if you dont mind) engineers.

It will be interesting to see if a pre-existing crack lead to the 'rupture'. And whether any daily engine trend checks was showing a rise in TOT and/or N1 prior to the incident.

Hey TET, care to retract your pilot slagging off, you might regain some credibility?

[chook13!]

Don't hold your breath "that chinese fella".

TET is apparently either planning his next pilot character assassination or been called as an expert witness somewhere due to his incredible ability to assess the causes of an accident (pilot fault) before anyone else on the planet or possibly even perhaps before it even occurs (??????)

[topendtorque]

A quick re run.

Post 37
perhaps if they had used the local drivers to crew it, who would have been very respectful of the local ambient furnace conditions, then the 407 donk may have lasted longer?

Post 40
only too happy to be corrected,



Post 53
you say these guys are all aces, a fact that I am not disputing


Chook : Just for your superior intellect, I’ve reposted the pertinent bits of my comments. Perhaps you may be able to use some of your observational skill and see if the last phrase on post 53 above means anything to you? Where you get the slagging bit from I am blessed if I know. A fact which was answered by CY here;

The earlier post about locals not crewing it have been answered.

I say again, that if there ever is anything out the back that is looking for a reason to go pop, then load it up with some unexpected and frequent super hi temps and you’ll more than likely know about it.  Southerners can hardly be expected to be aware of where the traps of such super heated air exists in the northern build up season. Nothing more, nothing less; I am thinking that leading you around is fairly easy, just like the way the aboriginals catch the bush turkeys in the wild! In fact I was even playing to your extremely superior deducing skills with this little gem:

What gives Einstein?


Personal abuse deleted: Senior Pilot

Have a nice day now, and like me and many others please do look forward to more of the ATSB engineering forensics.

tet

[chook13!]

Top end waffle

Got a few better things to do but for you I will make a few more comments this 1 last time.

Whether my intellect is above, same or lower than yours is of absolutely no relevance in this forum. BUT comments like:-
• “einstein bla bla”
• observational skills
• and the removal of personal abuse from your post

may show the balance though (what do ya think???????????????).

While this is a discussion forum (re; rumour network) it does not mean it is a forum that gives pilots, who after all should generally be on the same side, the right to unfairly and without basis ****can another pilot when things do pair shaped ESPECIALLY when the person who’s doing the ****canning appears to know nothing about the pilots involved and the running of the operation and obviously little about the aircraft (In this case these 3 things from your posts are things you do not know anything about) – sorta funny when you are the obvious expert in the “”top end””.
And whether you later retract or not, the damage (mainly to you) is already done- so why do it?

Secondly would not a reasonable person wait until details come to pass (ooh there as Airworthiness Bulletin on that donk) before making comment. That is fair, reasonable and respectful.

You then say how you look forward to the acc rep but above that (your last post) you still have to tell all how southerners don’t understand the furnace conditions, man – what the?

Most reasonable persons who for whatever reason chose to make comment that could be deemed untrue when it was discovered otherwise would probably say sorry guys I was out of line: you come up with “” you say these guys are all aces, a fact that I am not disputing"". I say a 407 is laying on the bottom of the ocean. What gives Einstein?”” You call that a retraction. One would think that seems to suggest “if the guys are so good how come the machine let go”

As per my post 53 a donk does not care about ambient temps 1 bit (once again I am pretty sure the 407 remembers exceedances) and you use the performance charts (or do you know those “aces” didn’t). You fly to the little gauges on the dash and that bit wad of paper you can never find a home for.


Ref where do I get the slagging bit from? Well sure seems to be a number of posts here questioning your motives from others ( see corrella killer for a start) I am sure he would be happy to have a chat with you.

Then of course you launch into another happy customer on low flying at Bathurst only to be right royally shown that just cause its in color it ain’t necessarily true, and you come back with “hope he a mustering rated pilot” and “not some fruit loop”.

Mate once again why question the professionalism and integrity of pilots on this forum (which is a PUBLIC FORUM) when facts are not known, suppositions are wrong (and proven to be so) and then continue to defend ones self.

Here’s another of your pearls of wisdom ---

“It invokes the question of what AOC allows this super low level flying at public events, after all the crowd went there to see cars crash not some fruit loop in a helicopter trying to turn them and him into statistics?

Do you think you need the university of gallahs, as you so elloquently put it, disecting any stack you may have??

Support not slag and for gods sake read up on gas turbines and the 407 manual.

that is the last
regards 13

[corella killer]

Hi sorry if my last post was out of line.
OK: but your veiled threat to tet is not acceptable: deleted!!!

SP

[Shawn Coyle]

The 407 FADEC does record all sorts of data, has an automatic 'event' recording and can be quite useful in sorting things out. But it only takes a data 'shot' every 1.2 seconds...
I've used it in an accident investigation and it was nothing short of amazing in sorting out what really happened.

[mickjoebill]

http://ww.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/bravery-awards-to-honour-65-courageous-australians-20100315-q6bs.html


Oz bravery awards announced today, two awards were given to sailors who rescued passengers trapped in the sinking helicopter.

Since the rescuers are given awards it underlines the danger the passengers and pilot were in...


"The next highest decoration, the Bravery Medal, will be awarded to 19 people.

Among them are Adrian Rigby and Luke Firth, cruise ship crewmen who dragged passengers from a ditched and sinking helicopter off the Kimberley coast in September 2008.

When the sightseeing chopper crashed into the sea after taking off from the ship in Talbot Bay, the pair dived in.

Four passengers and the pilot made it out, but two women were trapped in the capsized chopper with their seatbelts buckled, including an 87-year-old who had lost consciousness.

"So I dived in and the first thing my hand got to was her buckle. I couldn't believe it. It was a miracle," Mr Rigby said.

Mr Firth, meanwhile, repeatedly dived down to free the other woman whose seatbelt had become tangled."

Someone early in this thread suggested the accident had been filmed.
Any footage of the rescue would be valuable training aide.

Well done to the boat crew!


Mickjoebill

[2leftskids]

Accident report just released.

AO-2008-067 (http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2008/aair/ao-2008-067.aspx)

[blackstump]

to topendtorque
Now that the final report has come out about TN 407 stack perhaps you should take a little time to read the report and then go back thru your ridiculous slanderous (libelous) comments you chose to make on the subject. Comments that attacked the pilot (s) their knowledge of "matters top end" in relation to the operation of turbine engines (suggestion there from you that their lack of expert (yep the expertise you claimed to have) caused the damage to the donk and of course float deployment etc. etc.

A few points from the report:-

Eng fail to impact approx 3 sec.
pilot 6050 TT
on type 2362- (yeh probably had been abusing the machine for that long and not only getting away with it at a company level but also fooling the VEMD/ fadec etc.)
heres a good one even you should grasp- page 19--" RESULTS OF TESTING SHOWED A DEFICIENCY IN WIRE MESH PATCH"
ETC ETCYou get the jist here big guy.
Then after you have read the posts you bladed with- (before anyone knew the cause and what went on)- have a look at the other posters - chook etc who pointed out in no uncertain terms FACTUALLY how your lack of knowledge served to make you look even less of a 'fellow in the league of aviators' than your comment served in themselves.

Maybe you should be used as an example of how this public forum can potentially damage a person both publicly and amongst fellow (professional- look that one up pal) pilots, because I guarrantee more people will remember ill founded damaging comments than any others.

Please do not seek to raise yourself with cheap returns but show respect and put fingers to keyboard and appologise for those damaging comments you made to those you seeked to bring down in pursuit of your own illfounded diatribe.

regards
blackstump

[topendtorque]

Blackstump.

then go back thru your ridiculous comments

I did, you didn't, check post 60.

the machine was reported to me a slug, by a very reliable and high time pilot.

I have no intention of revealing the source, get over it.

Three seconds to work out how to pop the floats, when the discipline should have been one of the last included ""CONSIDERATIONS"" prior to lift off.

good god man, hate to drive with him in traffic when the lights go red.

get over it I say, or you'll blow a valve.

Have a lovely day.

tet

[blackstump]

I did, you didn't, check post 60.

and that said what???- damage already done and any retraction seems very similar to Bill Clintons "i did not have sex with that women" follow up statements.

the machine was reported to me a slug, by a very reliable and high time pilot.

what relevance is this at all ?????? (re ace pilots/ knowledge of top end furace conditions bla bla bla)

I have no intention of revealing the source, get over it.

who gives a **** about the source and inside information - it is of no relevance at all to the defamatory words- have a little reality check and think of how YOU WOULD FEEL IF HE SITUATION WAS REVERSED!

Three seconds to work out how to pop the floats, when the discipline should have been one of the last included ""CONSIDERATIONS"" prior to lift off.

were you in the cockpit at the time privy to actions reactions and stressors going on- yeh you would expect that banging off the floats would be a primary consideration but lets try- second 1- brain working and id that things are going pair shaped, second 2 look outside and see if the aircraft is clear of TN, second 3 collective is on the way down (from second .5 ish to 2 ish) , uh oh now on the way back up, machine is yawing (yep started immediately but in the process of gettting machine straight), ground rush, maybe passenger in front having a little bit of a yell and carry on, still accessing where TN is, and suddenly is second 3 gone and everyone is getting real wet-
Would you or I have done better- myself I dunno, you only the same situation would see the results of that, anyone else- who knows- the guy had 6000 odd hours- you continue to suggest he should have done better- yep in a perfect world the machine would have landed nicely on fully inflated floats- suppose he punched them on on second 2 , come second 3 do you reakon a fully developed set of floats would have been there for the aircraft to sit on?

good god man, hate to drive with him in traffic when the lights go red.

mate what a childish comment- once again you were not there so this is a direct insult to the man in question- why don't you ring him and ask him and this really is not a great comparison is it _ certainly shows a lack of maturity on your behalf and further reinforces your "down the guts with heaps of smoke" method of flaying reputations (more guns- don't worry about the plan/ or sense (your second name Bush / Blair of Howard by any chance?).
ONCE AGAIN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A REASONABLY HIGH TIME PILOT WHO PROBABLY DID THE BEST JOB HE COULD AT THE TIME IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES-
obviously you top end gurus versed in the ways of furnace like temps (RELEVANCE???), would do a better job than this - ??


get over it I say, or you'll blow a valve.

No valve to be blown at all just disbelief that you continue in your glass house embarrassing yourself while doing your best to run others down mmmm- what gives ah Einstein??

Public forum, lack of facts, poor knowledge base, axe to grind (?), lack of consideration for others, and so on = damage to reputations that do not need to be damaged. Get it???- probably not. And if you need further reinforcement go way back to the bathurst low flying where you once again got stuck in without a clue of the real facts or the job requirements then got shot down (embarrassing?) again.

Unleash yourself from the lofty glass towers of perfection you reside cause anyone of us is potentially just around the corner from a noteable getoff. One which will undoubtably be mentioned in this forum- do you want to be one who contributes to a culture of guilty 1st facts later? or do you want to either make reasonable, constructive comments that add to the knowledge level of forum participants, that cultivate a fair, constructive and supportive forum that potentially lends itself to assisting pilots (whether they have made best or worst desicions) to recover from the potential ordeals they may find themselves in?
Above all remember you may be next and at present I would think that having set a very very low standard you would be slaughtered on here- we wait with baited breath .......

blackstump
oh yeah -plenty of manuals on turbine theory out there
no more to be said really- your comments shall forever more be plastered here and serve as a resume to your attitude toward your fellow aviators and of course yourself- top of the class champ

[topendtorque]

Hey BS that a crafty name, do you live innit, uppit or beyondit?

Are you saying that CASA should go inspect the relevant Operator's AOC SOP's regarding emergencies during a standard every day tourist take off to see whether it is satisfactory in eliminating the possibility of drowning the pax when something serious happens, -- just then --?.

Sounds like you are saying that regardless of the drivers skill they WILL end up in the water if the engine stops just after take off, without floats, unless someone fitted permanent pumped up ones.

I am sure the operator will thank you for the lavish attention, they watch here you know, they're in the walls.:suspect::suspect:

Pressure on a tourist flight?? Reminds me of a cricket commentary years ago. The commentator was babbling on about the pressure the players were under, be geeees.

A guest in the radio box, an ex cricketer of renown and sptfire pilot from the BB, grabs the mike and says; "Pressure, you wanta have a Messerschmidt up your A##e, that's pressure."

Anyway, over to you Expert!

Cheers tet

[Freewheel]

Mods, we really need an emoticon for popcorn.....

[that chinese fella]

I reckon the frightening thing from that report is that you can have a 5 cm crack in the can and RR reckon it will have little effect on performance and that a trend check wont detect it....

I have seen smaller cracks than that drive TOT up so I am not quite convinced personally...

[blackstump]

tet - what the hell did your last post say?

why would one comment on someones user name (prepubescent or what)

[DEER CULLER]

Having read the report, I wonder if the manufacturers of the floats or CASA will do any tests to see what the time is for an average response to engine failure, to float deployment sufficent to be of use. 3 seconds seems very skinny to me. Given that its one thing in a sim when you are prepared, but entirely different when its all gone bang on a normal work day, with five sreaming people. My experience that screaming pax take a millisecond to get it all out, I bet there is a second worth of distraction just there. Surely in terms of height this accident was about as bad as it gets, related to response time Lucky the crew were all around.Great job by the pilot I say.