Helicopter reported down in the GOM

[SASless]

Radio news reported a seach on-going for occupants of a helicopter that has crashed into the GOM. One survivor recovered so far and four others missing.

No other details known.

[IntheTin]

RLC Sas. Hope the other 4 are OK. :(

Link here ; Local News: Helicopter carrying five goes down in Gulf; One rescued | one, carrying, rescued - Local News - (http://www.kfdm.com/news/one_29139___article.html/carrying_rescued.html)

[Ned-Air2Air]

This is unbelievable, how many helos have to sink in the GOM before someone does something about it.

I know in the military they have a safety stand down for a period of time and look at all their procedures etc, maybe its something the GOM operators could do.

[SASless]

The air temperature was about 36 degrees, with water temperatures at 62 degrees around the time of the crash, said Donovan Landreneau, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Lake Charles, La. Wind was blowing from the west at 23 knots, and there was a small craft advisory in effect.

It was snowing in New Orleans today folks....some of Al Gore's global warming in action.

A fine day to go flying over water without survival suits.....probably in a single engine aircraft to boot!

[ayaarr]

does an extra engine compensate for pilot error or pressure ?

[gwelo shamwari]

Most, if not all the major operators have stand down procedures in the gulf. I believe that singles and twins where not flying for Bristow this morning due to the inclement weather.

However it was reported that this operator was operating. Its a sad situation with needless loss of life and another black mark on GOMEX aviation.

Last heard that one survivor was rescued but later died at the coast guard station. Two others where found deceased with another two still missing. No word if the pilot was found.

God be with their families in their hour of need.

[SASless]

That second engine compensates for the failure of the first engine....and might prevent having to take a swim in rough, cold, water.

http://drudgereport.com/snow.jpg

[ayaarr]

Yes.

I apologise.

I re read the news link which confirmed an engine failure was the cause of the accident

[212man]

I re read the news link which confirmed an engine failure was the cause of the accident

Really? I must be going blind. "pilot failed to check in" and "an event took place" were the only pertinent statements I could see. We don't even know what type it was, so can't discuss the merits of singles versus twins!

Regardless, it's very sad news :(

[zalt]

Sad news indeed.

212man - I think there may have been some sarcasm in ayarr's post.

The real a irony is that if the airframe has sunk the chances of it being recovered by the operator or NTSB are low so understanding why may be imposssible.

RLC are currently growing by 50% by the purchase of a big proportion of Air Logistics single engined fleet. Rotorcraft Leasing Company L.L.C. (http://www.rotorcraftleasing.net/aboutus.htm)

Can anyone confirm the aircraft type? 206B?

[GeorgeMandes]

As someone that flew back and forth across forty miles of Cook Inlet today from Homer to Lake Clark, with temps just above 0 F, a west wind of 20 knots above 200 feet agl, and snow over the Alaska Range, I would love to see 36 F, and water remp of 62 F. I was wearing an immersion suit, had a raft and was on pop out floats, but still had no interest in using that equipment.

I don't know the rest of the weather situation, but frankly the reported weather in itself doesn't sound unreasonable.

[Blade Wake]

Heard all perished and pilot highly experienced in the GOM. Think it was an L3 or L4, found upside down with pop up floats deployed. RIP.

[Gomer Pylot]

Safety stand-down for the entire GOM??? You must be joking, Ned. The chances of that are less than nil. The chances of even one operator standing down are just about nil. Money talks, and everything else walks.

[SASless]

George,

If you think the weather in the GOM at the time of the accident was not so bad....ask yourself this question....what are the chances of the aircraft remaining up right following a ditching?

Assuming the aircraft rolls over....and you now find yourself in the water without an immersion suit....with air temps just above freezing...and the water temperature at 64 degrees....just what are your survival times?

With the wave heights, wind, and the aircraft rolling over....what are the chances they even deployed the life raft...much less got into thing?

If you are going flying over water....you must also consider the wave height as the sea may just not be a suitable place to make a forced landing.

That just applies to a "controlled forced landing" with minimum impact forces.



Safety Stand Down for the entire GOM?

How many operators now? How many aircraft is it......over 400?

[Shell Management]

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/local/search_continues_for_wreckage_of_helicopter_crash_that_likel y_killed_five_12-11-2008.html (http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/local/search_continues_for_wreckage_of_helicopter_crash_that_likel y_killed_five_12-11-2008.html)

Low survival time and delayed emergency response.

[SASless]

Now let's make an assumption here....water temp 54 degrees F, air temp about 36 degrees F....no immersion suit, no life raft, but issue inflatable life vests deployed.

Position reports due every 15 minutes....but not followed up upon immediately.....and in this case....after local efforts failed to locate the aircraft on an 18 mile flight from its base.....at approximately two hours after the aircraft went missing....the Search Call is issued.

Response time for the USCG....probably 15-30 minutes.....

Oh.....what was your expected survival time at the outset in this situation.....oh yeah....about 15 minutes!

Do I see a slight problem in the Oil Company/Helicopter Operator logic here?

[unstable load]

SASless,

Am I correct in the assumption that immersion suits are not used with those water temperatures?

Condolences to all the families and friends at this dark time.

[SASless]

Gomer Pylot would be better placed to tell us what the GOM practices are re immersion suits and water conditions.

I know some operators do limit flight operations based upon sea surface state and wind levels for single engine aircraft....but it is not an industry wide practice to my knowledge.

As to immersion suits....unless I am horribly wrong...there are none in the GOM.

[Lt.Fubar]

Reading posts here, or accidents reports, I wonder - who is doing accounting for those operators ? Because it is apparently profitable for them to loose machines and people, than have a reliable communication equipment, and safety gear.

And BTW that 15 minutes survival estimate isn't correct, even without protective equipment, average male could survive up to an hour in those conditions... But calling for Coasties two hours after loosing contact is pure nonsense. After that period of time, there were very little chances of finding anyone alive, actually zero to finding someone who could survive till the next day.

[Shell Management]

Fubar

You are playing ostrich. You need to consider the effect of cold shock, followed by the sea spray & windchill. Based on the met data in the press report conditions were equivalent to North Sea summer conditions where an immersion suit and multiple layers would be required for the passengers.

See page 17 here: http://www.ukooa.co.uk/downloadabledocs/271/8.%20Sue_Coleshaw_SRK_Coleshaw.pdf

And remember that you need a survival time to be at least 1.5 times the best rescue time.

If this aircraft was bought from Air Logistics (N180AL) does that mean it had sat tracking and ALERTS?

[SASless]

We must also remember the USCG relies mainly upon surface craft for search and rescue....as aircraft are tasked with other duties more often than not since 9/11 and advent of the "War on Drugs".

My recollection of previous searches for downed commercial helicopters relied upon non-government sources for the bulk of the search effort as the Coasties are very few and far between despite the frequency of SAR call outs in the GOM.

That is the price we pay for multiple demands for limited resources.

[Lt.Fubar]

@Shell Management

I'm well aware of the cold and trauma shock in this kind of situation, as well as any injuries cuts this time severely (internal bleeding gives 2% chances of making through 1 hour in any conditions). I know the subject well enough to know those conditions were bad for flying without immersion suits. But the "up to one hour" is not my personal estimate. I actually ask a friend who is a trained professional in maritime rescue operations, gave him all the data we know about weather at that time, clothing according to the weather, but no dry suit, and asked him for his best shot, for best case scenario, average male - he gave me 30 minutes, to 1 hour... 2 hours absolute max if someone would be exceptionally tough.

I'm not even trying to go here arguing about the helicopter type, its equipment for such flight, and crew survival gear - those issues are obvious to us. It's just interesting procedure of this operator to call for rescue service after the time for finding people alive - runs out.

[SASless]

Fubar,

That is not the question that is being begged.

I would suggest the better question is why this situation is allowed to exist at all?

Where is the FAA, the insurance companies, and the pilot's unions regards such an important safety issue?

I know where the oil companies are.....talking to the actuaries to get the probability data and cost figures for such losses....so they can be factored into their calculation of the "Cost of Doing Business".

Safety to an oil company is merely risk analysis and costing.....human lives do not matter despite all the propaganda they put out to the contrary.

Elsewise....there would be a much stronger movement towards real safety improvements than is evidenced in the GOM.

[Shell Management]

SASless - I would beg to differ on the issue of human lives, not every oil company is equal.

However it is about time that US industry (oil companies and operators) started making safety progress rather than safety excuses in the GOM.

[Lt.Fubar]

Fubar,

That is not the question that is being begged.Sorry, misunderstood Shell's point.
I would suggest the better question is why this situation is allowed to exist at all?

Where is the FAA, the insurance companies...That is really good question, but I'm afraid there is no answer.

...and the pilot's unions regards such an important safety issue? Now, this is different.

I don't know much about you, but from what I know, you're "raised" by military - i.e. "The Church of St. Murphy" - which say that, what can happen - will eventually happen, but it will be worse and at different time, than we suspect. Well my whole life I was raised with military folks that attended the same church - therefore our attention to procedures and safety equipment is probably somewhat similar.

Now, after some time being exposed to the pure civy side of helicopter aviation. I'm slowly realizing, that there are many people who don't perceive things like me - the "airliner captain" type, with polyester, white, short sleeve, starched shirt, for whom flight helmet and nomex jump suit is unthinkable disgrace. I may be jumping to conclusions here, and maybe putting a stick into hornets nest. But maybe... just maybe, to many pilots just don't care ? The "it can't happen to me" syndrome at work ?

[zalt]

Overflight of helicopter crash in Sabine Pass, Texas (FOR RELEASE) (http://cgvi.uscg.mil/media/main.php?g2_itemId=433317)

Short bit of footage. Four of six float bags inflated, but only one cross tube visble. Looks like the fuselage may have been ripped off as the cross tube is upright.

Fubar its not clear - do you wear a white poly shirt or not?

Certainly many GOM pilots work on the basis that accidents happen to the other guy.:ugh:

[Ned-Air2Air]

Someone previously mentioned the unions and why arent they up in arms about the safety record in the GOM.

Judging by all their own trumpet blowing when the strikes were going on previously, shouldnt they be threatening go go on strike if the safety issues arent being addressed as these guys getting killed are their members I presume, or do they only start making noises when there is the possibility that they might stop getting their membership dues.

The PHPA has been awfully quiet since the strikes and yet pilots are still getting killed. I would have thought that keeping their members safe would have been a no brainer for any association.

[tottigol]

The crashed helicopter does not belong to a company with union representation.
This company lately purchased most of Bristow Group's Airl Logistic aged singles (including the one that crashed).
This company does have a reputation for all kinds of shortcuts (albeit not determined whether that was a factor in this accident) and a safety record to match.

I also believe this company "leases" flight following services from one other well organized operator.

Shell, satellite tracking is only used by the major three operators in the Gulf of Mexico.


Specifically to this episode, there was an occurrence last year (or earlier this year) where delayed rescue brought the demise of more than one passenger due to water temperature.
At least one operator was courageous enough to suspend single engine and PCII operations when water temperature dropped below a certain point or wave height exceeded 14'.
Because of this decision at least one customer left for a different vendor, showing that the safety mentality only belongs to the major oil companies (at least on paper).

Immersion suits in the Gulf of Mexico? Yeah and I am the King of Spain writing here in disguise.
Remember we are operating smack in the middle of "Oil Barons" territory, and THAT mentality is prevailing.

[zalt]

tottigol your post raises more questions than answers.

"The crashed helicopter does not belong to a company with union representation."

But do the unions make any real effort on safety elsewhere?

"I also believe this company "leases" flight following services from one other well organized operator."

Who is that? One could guess Air Log if they have a deal for aircraft from them

"Shell, satellite tracking is only used by the major three operators in the Gulf of Mexico. Specifically to this episode, there was an occurrence last year (or earlier this year) where delayed rescue brought the demise of more than one passenger due to water temperature."

This was an AL aircraft on Dec 29. That WAS fitted with sat tracking and there was a similar delay before rescue.

"At least one operator was courageous enough to suspend single engine and PCII operations when water temperature dropped below a certain point or wave height exceeded 14'."

Who was the operator? They deserve recognition.

"Because of this decision at least one customer left for a different vendor, showing that the safety mentality only belongs to the major oil companies (at least on paper)."

Who was the customer? They deserve to be named and shamed.

"Remember we are operating smack in the middle of "Oil Barons" territory, and THAT mentality is prevailing."

Just becuase the GOM is stuck in the 1970s doesnt mean you have to wear flares for ever.

[Bravo73]

Fubar its not clear - do you wear a white poly shirt or not?


No, he doesn't. (Or, at least, not the type that you mean.)

Occupation: student/engineer/programmer

[SASless]

Zalt,

You ever try to strike a blow for improved safety in the GOM?

Even with union supportfor the pilots at the organized companies....sticking one's neck out can be fraught with peril.

I agree with you that one can switch to cords or levi's vice flares but....the new breeches come with a price tag.

In the past....I got a very terse message after I made a post where I wondered what it would feel like to be a manager that knew he would lose one to three pilots per year....every year....and how you can stand to look at yourself in the mirror in the morning unless you knew you had done absolutely everything possible to prevent those accidents from happening.

I certainly meant no insult to any one particular person.....but I certainly trod on some very tender corns. The comment was meant to be philosophical and not personal.

There are operators that do not have fatal accidents or do so very rarely where some seem to have them on a frequent basis. All we have to do is look at the EMS industry for that.

Developing a safety environment dedicated to eliminating fatal accidents that is embraced by all those involved is a very complex and apparently impossible task as evidenced by the Gulf of Mexico Offshore Industry.

[js0987]

When I worked in Abu Dhabi in the mid 70's I read an interesting article about hypothermia research. Up until the mid 70's the only real research on hypothermia had been done by the Nazi's in WW2. The University of Vancouver did modern research and determined the areas of the body that were most vunerable to heat loss. Out of the research came the Thermo-float jacket. It looks like a ski jacket but is made or neoprene and has a pair of shorts that can be unfolded.

Fast forward a couple of years, and I'm flying my little 206 100 miles offshore in the Gulf of Mexico with the temperatures in the 30's and I'm thinking, I need one of those jackets. When I finally got ahold of one I wore it when temps got cold, and it was wonderful since the 206's had no heat. A little problem though. Temps would be in say the 30's and by noon the temps would be pushing 60. That's the gulf. Needless to say the jacket was way too warm and off it came. Still I carried it for many years until I sort of outgrew it and flew twins full time.

I once asked Carry Howard, who was Mobile Oil's helicopter guy about their policy on survival suits. He told me the policy was if you flew in a latitude above about Philadelphia you needed one, south of that you didn't. Pretty general policy.

Today's high was in the mid 60's and by Sunday the temps will be back in the 70's. Like it or not, its tough to push cold weather survival in the gulf. I would suggest the Thermo-float type jackets. Interesting footnote for those who knew Dar. He tried a business in the early 80's selling the Thremo-float jackets. He called it SOS - Spalty Offshore Survival. Didn't work. He not only couldn't interest the operators, he couldn't sell any of them to the pilots, they weren't interested.

It will be interesting the see the facts of this tragic accident, whether hypotermia play a part. In the meantime, for those who are concerned, don't wait for the industry or the operators to solve the problem, solve it yourself.

[SASless]

We had the Mustang jacket made in Canada and wore them on the North Sea and later when working fror ERA on the Cook Inlet in Alaska. I wore mine while doing bush flying in Alaska in a Hughes 500D where I flew over water in the Shumagin Islands near Sandpoint, Ak. Loved the thing! They make wonderful pillows for use during a safety nap too.

[Gomer Pylot]

I've never seen nor even heard rumors of immersion suits anywhere in the GOM. Helicopter operators do what the customers require. If the oil companies require immersion suits, suspending operations during inclement weather, or anything else, the operators will comply. Since the oil companies apparently don't care, neither do the operators, and short-term cheap is the name of the game, just as it is with the oil companies and pretty much every other company for the past 20+ years. IMO that's one of the primary causes of the present economic crisis.

There are no FAA regulations concerning offshore flights regarding temperature or sea state, so the FAA has no authority to prohibit them without changing the regulations.

The unions are effectively powerless, and have little if any capability to influence operations. Helicopter pilots, at least in the US, simply refuse to stick together for the common good.

[John Eacott]

About 1978 we agitated for immersion suits in the Brent Field, with singularly little support from (BEAS/Bristow) management. We were mostly ex RN, and had absorbed a small amount of training about surviving the Northern NS in winter; after a while we were issued Mustang jackets. Great protection in the winter, but FA use in a ditching helicopter as the positive buoyancy would have trapped the wearer, negating any survival assets the jacket might otherwise have provided :uhoh:

BAH (or was it Bristow) then had an S61 ditch whilst returning with a medevac patient, and the crew and patient nearly died from exposure before rescue. The P1 was revived after winching, IIRC, having 'died' from hypothermia: all on board were in shirt sleeves, as per normal, with the heater turned up.

Within a week we were required to provide size requirements for goon suits, which arrived within a few more weeks. Maybe this lesson hasn't filtered across the Atlantic :confused:

[leading edge]

John

I think it was Bristow, G-BBHN Lee Smith was the Pilot.

[Brian Abraham]

Mentioning safety and oil company in the same sentence is an oxymoron. All they're interested in is production, the means by which that is achieved is not a concern. The levels of management that call the shots sit in an office with a revolving door. They occupy said office for a period of probably three years max and then move on to an out of country position. If something blows up the manager responsible for instituting whatever practice it was that lead to the event is no longer in the country and no longer accountable. The new boy on whose watch it happened can fairly say "I didn't know, haven't been in the job long enough to get a handle". Their interest is in not rocking the boat, getting a good pay rise through coming in under budget and moving on up the greasy pole to the next promotion. Remember how you come in under budget? - spend as little as possible on infra structure, maintenance, training etc etc

Pilots as a group don't have the industrial muscle to force any issue. Esso in Australia in fact made their pilots staff, and as such are subject to a yearly appraisal to set their remuneration, as I was told, "You will do as you are told", as in, don't bother us with the legal niceties as to how to conduct operations.

We are just spinning wheels by having this discussion. We had a thread on GOM offshore safety here http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/165406-gom-offshore-safety.html in Feb, 2005.
In that thread I wrote in regard to a 76 ditching in the GOM 6 Sep, 2005. "12 POB, aircraft floating on its side and were unable to get the life raft out of the cabin. Captain only had one chamber in his life jacket due to a leak and so had trouble keeping his head above water. The bit that got me though was a Coast Guard fixed wing was launched 4 hours and 54 minutes after the accident to begin a search and found the survivors 25 minutes later. A rescue helo was called and arrived on scene 25 minutes later. Finally rescued after being in the water for 7 hours and 20 minutes in their life jackets. A good part of the time had been night – ditched at 1605, last survivor out of the water at 2325. 5 were seriously injured and 7 with minor. Words fail…………..SAR?" Damn good SAR backup you poor souls have plying your trade there in the GOM. Why don't the oil companies provide their own dedicated SAR with the density of traffic out there? Just being rhetorical for I full well know the answer.
Accident report here DFW05MA230 (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20051128X01894&key=1)

[eivissa]

I have two questions concerning that last accident:
Have they found out what caused the failure of both engines in that last accident and what is the reason that SAR has been launched with such a long delay?

cheers eivissa.

[Farmer 1]

I'm glad to say it's not like that on the North Sea at all. The oil companies always put safety first, above everything else.

Until it becomes inconvenient, of course.

[SASless]

Well now....time for Shell Management to weigh in here and tell us again how oil companies....at least one anyway...care about the Human Cost of oil operations.

It would appear by some of the responses from long serving offshore pilots there appears to be a contradiction between the perceptions we hold and what our customers say is the situation.

As politicians know....perception is reality.

Somehow the mental image of Beaudreaux trying to figure out how to squeeze his sleek frame into a poopy suit with all his bling bling, big watches, and multiple rings intact......well let's don't go there. There's probably too many moving parts on the suits for Beaudreaux, Bubba, and Earl to figure out anyway.

[Shell Management]

SASless

You made a point earlier about twin engined helicopters. Some oil companies use them exclusively in the GOM now. That is surely a sign of being prepared to put money towards safety. External liferafts are increasingly a standard with certain oil companies as is HUMS, HOMP etc.

Brian

Several oil companies have already signed up for the SAR service from Cougar and full credit to bp for bringing that aircraft in to do a job no US operator could do.



Not all offshore customers are equal as many of you know, especially in the production management sector, which is probably the most cost focused anywhere. The last two cold water survival accidents (RLC & Air Log) both featured production management work.


On the issue of the slow response, I wonder if it there is an over-reliance on technology. See this presentation that discusses this problem from an oil company emergency perspective:
http://www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/downloadabledocs/267/4.%20Graham_Baxter_Shell.pdf


It certainly time that more lessons from the North Sea and other advanced regions are accepted in the US,

[SASless]

I would suggest our FAA learn some lessons from the CAA however I would be terrified they would learn the wrong ones.

Our FAA does need to find the cojones to force safety changes that would effectively (cost, resuts, and ease of implementation) improve the safety environment in the GOM.

That being said....it would take a major change to the FAA in order for that to happen. The FAA is airplane-centric and helicopters and helicopter folks are not given the emphasis they should within the FAA itself. The path to advancement within the FAA falls to the airplane side of the house and not to the helicopter side.

FAR's are written around airplanes, airplane operations, and often ignore the differences between airplanes and helicopter operations.

Insurance companies are the most effective way of achieving change in my view. If your insurance rates sky rocket in the absence of some of the more commonsense improvements then it becomes a matter of cost and as we know...minimum cost is the cornerstone of modern business.

Large corporations being self insured prevents that from being effective in all cases as well.

[alouette3]

Just responding to Ned-Air2 Air about Unions:

The US helicopter pilots who are unionized are organized under the Railway Labour Act.This was enacted essentially to maintain continuity of an essential service even during times of industrial dispute. When the airlines started unionizing, they were put under the RLA as were the helicopter and shipping companies. What this means is that all these transportation companies are consideresd essential services for the US economy and therefore there is a 'no strike' clause in the contracts they sign. In other words, for the duration of the contract (typically 3 years), the Union agrees not to strike and the company agrees not to lockout.Disputes are resolved through arbitration or mediation.So there you have it.
I will agree that ,like ALPA and BALPA, unions should have a very strong voice in safety matters. But ,for that to happen,the management must agree to partner with the unions and accept their role in this issue. Unfortunately, in the US in general, and, in helicopter companies here in particular, Union is still a five letter word.
Alt3.

[tottigol]

Oh boy!
Shell, Cougar helicopter has but ONE S-92 based out of GAO way in the Eastern Gulf Region (perhaps with a back-up S61N), far too little to cover any significant area, especially if not part of an integrated system.
I believe BP is paying for this service, but BP has a scheduled service to their major proiducing locations off-shore.

Shell, if the cost of human life is appreciated by the Oil Companies, why are they allowing conditions in air transportation in the Gulf of Mexico (I am not privy to details concerning marine transportation, by my guess would be the same) to lag back to the sixties or seventies?
The answer is........Unions.
Not the Pilots unions beware, but offshore oil workers unions.
simply put, in the Gulf there are none while in the North Sea those unions are very very strong considering they are in Europe.
The BV-234 virtually disappeared from the passenger transportation scene after the tragic accident in the North Sea, were the Oil Companies involved? Yes, but only to the extent that their unionized workers REFUSED to even sit in one of the Vertols.

When your average offshore oil worker eats nutria and celebrates on Bud Lite you see where the advantages for the Oil Companies lay, otherwise how do you explain that OGP was supposedly behind a redesign requirement for the S-76D fuselage but yet is absolutely absent from the safety aspect of offshore air transportation in the GOM?

So in the end the answer to our questions that arise identical every time there is a crash involving the loss of human life, that answer is also always the same: money and mentality.:(

And sadly this applies to the HEMS industry of this great Country of "ours" as well.

[SASless]

The USCG operates HH-65 Dolphins (150nm range/ 4 Hour endurance) from Corpus Christi, Houston, New Orleans, and Mobile.

The HH-60's operate out of Mobile....which is at the far eastern end of the oil patch thus quite removed from the area of most operations.

That does not consider any Cutter based aircraft that might be in the oil patch.

The USCG relies upon surface vessels for its SAR function to a greater degree than they do helicopters.

The helicopters are assisted by three different types of airplanes primarily Falcons and Hercs.

[FH1100 Pilot]

tottigol rhetorically asked:Shell, if the cost of human life is appreciated by the Oil Companies, why are they allowing conditions in air transportation in the Gulf of Mexico (I am not privy to details concerning marine transportation, by my guess would be the same) to lag back to the sixties or seventies?
Tottigol, the oil companies absolutely do "appreciate" the cost of human life. It's just that...this may be uncomfortable to speak about...they put a definable price on it. We might not like it, but it is what it is.

In other words, if it was the intention of "the oil companies" that not one single life would be lost in the Gulf of Mexico (or anywhere else), then you'd see safety really, truly become the Number One priority.

But let's be honest: A certain number of deaths (or losses) are acceptable. When that number gets too high, of if the number can be attributed to a particular and/or specific cause, then "something" will be done.

But it's hard to find a real common thread in all of the fatal accidents in the GOM. You can call for two engines, or full-IFR capability, or immersion suits, or...whatever. But it's still not going to prevent all of the accidents. The Risk Management departments of the oil companies know this.

It's far too early to even begin speculating about what went wrong with N180AL. He got the floats out but quite obviously hit the water with enough lateral speed to rip them right off the ship (so something very bad was happening to be sure). We can, and probably should look at the response times and procedures.

But there is no magic wand that can be waved and suddenly make the GOM "safe." It is not the North Sea; in fact it is quite different and demands a different set of operating criterea.

I know that it seems like the GOM accident rate is "just too high" lately. And perhaps it is. But we must look at the big picture. And requiring twin-engine, Cat-A and IFR-capable helicopters with passengers in "poopy suits" for every little "field ship" job just isn't going to work, no matter how much we might want it to.

[unstable load]

But let's be honest: A certain number of deaths (or losses) are acceptable.

Sadly you are right, but I would have thought that increasing the chances of survivability in order to try to minimise the number of those "losses" would be approached with some vigour?

Or is this some form of ego trip where the guys sit in the pubs after work patting themselves on the back for working in the most dangerous sector of the oil patch and living to talk about it today? :ugh:

[Brian Abraham]

I have two questions concerning that last accident:
Have they found out what caused the failure of both engines in that last accident and what is the reason that SAR has been launched with such a long delay?
A very good question/s evissa. Shell would have at his disposal the answers.

[Hell Man]

PHi and Bristow 'Holding Hands' in opposing US government bid to improve GOM safety:

Helicopter companies fight new law (http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/111094534.html)?

LAFAYETTE — Two large helicopter companies that serve the offshore industry are fighting a new state law that would require personal location devices for oil-and-gas workers being transported to platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.

PHI and Bristow argue in a federal lawsuit filed last week in Lafayette that the law is an improper and unnecessary intrusion by the state into the realm of aviation regulation, which is generally handled by the federal government.

The law, intended to make it easier to find workers after a crash in the Gulf, was passed by the Legislature this year and is scheduled to take effect in January.

The new safety regulation was dubbed “Jacob’s Law,” named after 26-year-old Jacob Matt, of Jennings, an offshore worker whose body was not found until four days after a 2008 helicopter crash off Sabine Pass near the Texas-Louisiana border.

The legislation was sponsored by state Rep. John Guinn, R-Jennings, who said Tuesday that he pushed the safety requirement at the behest of Matt’s family and other offshore workers in his south Louisiana district.

He said the personal location devices could help search crews find downed workers in time to save their lives.

“If it happens 1 mile offshore, you’re kind of looking for a piece of black pepper in a barnyard,” Guinn said.

He said that “with the technology available today, it’s a shame we don’t already have this implemented.”

PHI Chief Administrative Officer Richard Rovinelli said the Lafayette-based helicopter company is not opposed to new safety equipment but that any new regulations should be developed in collaboration with the offshore transportation industry and federal aviation officials.

“We recognize the state was trying to do the right thing,” Rovinelli said.

He said PHI has made safety a priority and already uses satellite-based flight tracking of helicopters and stocks the helicopters with life rafts equipped with location devices.

The legal challenge by PHI and Bristow centers on the argument that the state should not be entering the federal realm of aviation regulation.

But attorneys for the companies also argue in court filings that the safety regulation could tarnish the image of the offshore transportation business by leading customers to believe the law was needed to address an unsafe operation.

The attorneys further argue that if the companies do not employ personal location devices in other states that customers outside of Louisiana might perceive “an indifference towards the safety of non-Louisiana passengers.”

[zalt]

The ghosts of Air Log and Suggins still walks the corridors of ARA and LFT.

You would think that they would learn!

Air Log one pax dead DFW08FA053 (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20071231X02014&key=1)

PHI deep water swim DFW07LA011 (http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20061101X01599&key=1)

[js0987]

So do all passengers that fly in Canada and the North Sea all carry their own PLB's?

Do Canadian Provincesor local British councils have the power to set aviation rules and regulations?

Curious as to how that all works.

[Brilliant Stuff]

In the North Sea they do carry individual PLBs.

[js0987]

Is that mandated by the CAA or is it a customer requirement?

[zalt]

The oil companies provide them to meet their legal safety case obligations to enable a timely rescue. A radio beacon is a lot more effective as a search and locate tool than a dye pack, christmas tree light bulb and whistle, especially at night (which is when Bristow's last GOM death occurred 3 years ago).

Nice to see PHI and Bristow are really pushing the IHST agenda on this - NOT:

2theadvocate.com | News | State officials delay enforcing ?Jacob?s Law? — Baton Rouge, LA (http://www.2theadvocate.com/news/112227804.html)

So they have cheerfully managed to delay the enforcement of state law to require equipment that at least one of them is using elsewhere in the world.

I wonder what the supposed FAA initiative is?

For more on the RLC accident 2 years ago see:
Inadvertent Encounter | Flight Safety Foundation (http://flightsafety.org/aerosafety-world-magazine/november-2010/inadvertent-encounter)

[UCLogic]

Would really recommend some further reading on this site and other forums with regard to the problems some types of PLBs (including some of the ones selected and foisted on the industry so far by O & G companies) cause for the reliable detection and safe rescue of persons in the water.

This jogs my mind into thinking:

a)May be this is why Bristow and PHI maybe against these specific devices.

b)Does anyone know if they maybe advocating other alternative more suitable devices

UCLogic

[zalt]

There seem to be options that do work and getting ordered by these companies at the same time they are making legal challenges in the US:

Mobilarm to supply VHF Locator Beacons to Bristow Helicopters Australia (http://www.helihub.com/2010/11/04/mobilarm-to-supply-vhf-locator-beacons-to-bristow-helicopters-australia)

Mobilarm has announced that it has secured a significant new contract to supply its VHF Locator Beacons to Bristow Helicopters Australia (part of the Bristow Group) as the sole contractor to BHP Billiton Petroleum for offshore personnel transfers by helicopter in Australia. In the initial order, Mobilarm will supply 50 of its innovative V100 VHF beacons for integration into the RFD Beaufort MK28 lifejackets to be worn by all BHP Billiton Petroleum personnel during transfers to offshore platforms in the Western Australian North West region.
In many European countries, including the United Kingdom, the use of Personal Locator Beacons (PLB) is mandatory for all offshore helicopter transfers, with approximately 5,000 PLBs in use throughout the offshore oil and gas industry per day. Although mandatory use is not stipulated in Australia, BHP is keen to ensure the highest standards of safety are achieved and has become the first Australian company to insist on the use of marine-based PLBs for its employees transferring to offshore platforms by helicopter.
The Mobilarm beacon purchase comes as a result of a major test of emergency response systems conducted by BHP Petroleum off Exmouth, Western Australia earlier this year as reported in the National Offshore Petroleum Safety Authority (NOPSA) September newsletter. The two emergency response exercises, both involving offshore helicopter-based scenarios, were designed to test various aspects of the Operator’s emergency response and marine capability including recovery and response times and the use of PLB technology.
The goal of both scenarios was to test response times against the Operator’s Search and Rescue Performance Standards and to assess the search and rescue competencies of participants, equipment, systems and processes. Subsequent to the exercise, an Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA) Search and Rescue Working Group has been formed to investigate a consortium approach with other Exmouth Sub-basin Operators, furthering the establishment of a standby emergency rescue and recovery vessel and opportunities for mutual support in emergency events.
“BHP’s initiative to implement marine based PLBs represents a significant development in personnel safety for offshore helicopter transfers in Australia,” comments Lindsay Lyon, CEO of the Perth, Western Australia based Mobilarm. “While the aircraft is legally required to carry 406 MHz Emergency Locator Transponders (ELT), like 406 MHz EPIRBs, these devices only provide the location of the downed aircraft, not the individual escaped personnel. The significant advantage of the Mobilarm V100 VHF Locator Beacon over ELT and EPIRBs is its unique ability to alert local rescue assets directly and provide those already closest to the incident with the location and tracking data of each and every crash survivor.”
The Mobilarm V100 is an adaptable Maritime Survivor Locating Device. The pocket-sized unit can be attached to clothing or seamlessly integrated into lifejackets to provide individual alerting capability in a man overboard event. The device is automatically water-activated if the wearer falls overboard, sending out a man overboard distress alert and real time GPS coordinates of the casualty’s current position via VHF DSC. The signal is also transmitted in a synthesized voice on VHF channel 16, making recovery by the casualty’s parent vessel, Fast Rescue Craft or any other marine assets in the vicinity, extremely efficient. Since the probability of survival at sea is directly related to the length of time in the water, alerting nearby vessels or other marine assets immediately will bring about a faster and more effective rescue.


PHI fly BHP in the GOM.

[Aser]

It's so sad... just 18nm out...

What about HEED's in the GOM?? I'm just back from HUET training in a warm swimming pool and being inverted with cold water shock I know I'd need the heed...

R.I.P. :sad:

[js0987]

So - PLB's are required by customers (oil companies) for all passengers in Canada, the North Sea, and by BHP in Australia. There is the common thread. Its a customer requirement and you can bet they pay for them.

The reason that PHI and Bristow are fighting the proposed state law is simple and unfortunately overlooked in the thread. It's not being fought because its not a good idea, it is - it's being fought because of the legal precedent that it would set. Allowing states to set regulations for aircraft operating in their states would be a nightmare. For example - lets say you are in your 76 flying out of Texas and when you get offshore the customer tells you he needs to send a man in to a base in Louisiana. Do you refuse? Do you risk being stopped by a state inspector upon landing in Louisiana and not having the state mandated widget? We're talking PLB's not widgets - you say. One thing that is universal. Give a government entity power over one thing and soon its tenticles will grow.
Another example - since the law would mandate PLB's for persons flying offshore from Louisiana, would that require airlines who fly from New Orleans to say Cancun Mexico have a PLB for all passengers? The scenarios are endless.

Anyway. Having local governments set aviation regulations is not the answer. Its all on the oil companies. If they want it - its will be done.

[RVDT]

Wasn't there some problem with PLB's with the EC 225 ditching in the North Sea contributing to issues with locating people?

A PLB only needs to have it's antenna a few inches underwater and it doesn't work.

I see the Mobilarm uses a different technology but again if several are transmitting at once? It seems to use Marine VHF DSC. I seem to remember DCS being very slow to be adopted in the US.

Four portable locator beacons were carried in the helicopter, but these could not be used to their maximum effectiveness because other locator beacons being worn by the passengers in the form of special wrist watches suppressed the signals from more powerful beacons. The beacons were also "unlikely to be orientated and positioned optimally to maximise their broadcast signal," said the AAIB.
The AAIB has concluded that the wrist-worn beacons 'inhibited' the operations of the more powerful emergency beacons, ultimately slowing the recovery operation.

Article here (http://www.shephard.co.uk/news/rotorhub-com/aaib-studies-beacon-issues-following-bond-ec225-ditching/3205/)

[zalt]

The text of the state law, passed back in June is here:

http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/streamdocument.asp?did=722316

It does also include a requirement for a PFD, not currently required in practice by FAA for helicopters in the GOM.

Its no different in concept from the sort of survivability rules in Alaska.

It seems the UK has resolved its problems:
Selected Press Release - Oil & Gas UK (http://www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/news/news.cfm/newsid/476)

Personal locator beacons to be back in use from Monday, 8 February 2010
Oil & Gas UK can today (4 February 2010) confirm that personal locator beacons will be progressively reintroduced on North Sea helicopter flights from Monday, 8 February 2010.

The reintroduction will take place on 3 consecutive weekends, with the Aberdeen hub being the first to receive the equipment on Monday, 8 February, followed by the Southern North Sea helicopter hubs and Scatsa in Shetland. The beacon reintroduced on these hubs is the Sea Marshall AU9-HT, which has been approved by the CAA and tested extensively for inadvertent operation and interference with helicopter systems.

For Liverpool Bay, the Rhotheta RT-B77 (also CAA approved and tested) is currently being manufactured and will be rolled out as soon as the required quantities are available.

Robert Paterson, Oil & Gas UK’s health and safety director, explained: “As PLBs are still being manufactured, it is not feasible to reintroduce these across the entire industry at once, however we felt it important to start the roll out as soon as possible, and this means doing it by individual hubs.

“Not only have the technical difficulties with PLBs interfering with other transmitters been resolved, we have also adopted much more robust life-jacket mounted PLBs, which will drastically decrease the likelihood of inadvertent operation during a flight. In addition, we have prepared a training DVD on the correct use of the beacons which each worker has to watch before boarding the helicopter.”




As already noted, on the Turkish accident thread, most fixed ELTs in the GOM fail to go off anyway.

Clearly some one has changed their tune from 2005:

Personal Locator Beacons (PLBs) may be the newest safety-related device to generate attention of offshore helicopter operators, which want to back up the Emergency Locator Transmitters (ELTs) on their helicopters. For instance, Bristow Aviation carries two ELTs in each helicopter and one mounted on the external airframe that automatically deploys upon impact. As yet, Bristow has no requirements for PLBs, but the technology is generating keen interest among several operators. McMurdo Pains Wessex Inc. a leading manufacturer of Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (EPIRB), offers its FastFind Plus PLB with or without built-in GPS capability. Measuring less than 6-in. long and weighing 9 ounces, the FastFind Plus can fit easily into a life-vest. The device is 406 MHz compliant, which means it is more effective in deep water operations than early-model PLBs operating only on 121.5 MHz homing frequency.

FastFind offers both frequencies. The PLB also transmits the letter "P" distress signal, which tells rescuers that this is a PLB from a civil operator, not a military operator.

According to the NOAA SARSAT website, which lists all the rescues resulting from 406 MHz signals, there were several rescues of fishing and sailing vessels in the Gulf of Mexico. None involved helicopters or airplanes.

This statistic aside, offshore operators and the watchful petroleum industry may soon seriously consider FastFind Plus, said James Chandler, vice president OF McMurdo Pains Wessex, USA. The U.S. Coast Guard has ordered 14,500 units.

Aviation Today :: An Offshore Lifeline (http://www.aviationtoday.com/regions/usa/An-Offshore-Lifeline_1541.html)

Just a thought, isn't more likely their will be multiple beacons after a ship sinks?