Helicopter down in NYC (Oct 2011)

[ATPMBA]

Just saw on the news a copter went down in the East River in NYC.

I think everyone got out OK and were taken to the hospital.

[Jarvy]

Latest reports say 1 didn't, can see most of the drama from my window. Jetranger 5 people on board, latest unreliable reports seem to hint at TR problems.
Latest news is that the 4 passengers where from the UK, 1 missing, 3 taken to hospital in very serious way and the pilot is ok and is helping with the recovery.

[Flying Lawyer]

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2011/10/05/alg_survivors.jpg



New York Daily News: Helicopter crashes in NYC East River; NYPD divers rescue survivors, one missing (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/10/04/2011-10-04_helicopter_goes_down_in_east_river_off_manhattan_nypd_div ers_rescue_three_surviv.html?r=topnews)

New York Times: Helicopter crashes in East River (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/nyregion/helicopter-crashes-in-east-river.html)

NEW YORK (AP) — A helicopter with five people aboard crashed into the East River on Tuesday afternoon after taking off from a launch pad on the riverbank, seriously injuring at least two people and leaving one missing.

The pilot and three others were pulled alive from the water by rescue crews shortly after the chopper went down. Authorities were searching for one other passenger, believed to be female, but the Bell 206 helicopter was submerged in the murky water, police spokesman Paul Browne said.

The private chopper went into the river off 34th Street in midtown Manhattan. It's unclear what happened, but witnesses reported it was sputtering and appeared to be in some type of mechanical distress.

A massive rescue effort was under way with a dozen boats and divers down into the cold, grey water.

The conditions of those who were rescued weren't immediately available. The fire department said at least two people on board were taken to area hospitals in serious condition.

Joy Garnett and her husband were on the dock waiting to take the East River ferry to Brooklyn when they heard the blades of a helicopter and saw it start to take off from the nearby helipad. She said she saw it do "a funny curlicue."

"I thought, 'Is that some daredevil move?'" she said. "But it was obviously out of control. The body spun around at least two or three times, and then it went down."

She said the chopper had lifted about 25 feet off the ground before it dropped into the water without much of a splash. It flipped over, and the blades were sticking up out of the river. She said people on the dock started throwing in life jackets and buoys. Two people came up out of the waves.

"It didn't make much noise," she said. "It was just a splash and sunk."

The weather was clear but a little windy Tuesday, with winds of 10 mph gusting to 20 mph and visibility of 10 miles, according to the weather station at LaGuardia airport. There were a few clouds at 3,500 feet above sea level, well above the typical flying altitude for helicopters.

Carlos Acevedo, of Puerto Rico, was with his wife at a nearby park area when they saw the helicopter go down.

"It sank fast," he said. "In seconds. Like the water was sucking it in."

Lau Kamg was leaving a dentist's office and was walking nearby when he saw the chopper go down, and he said it appeared to be in distress.

"The sound got my attention," he said. I saw it splash."

The chopper, a Bell 206 Jet Ranger, is one of the world's most popular helicopter models and was first flown in January 1966. They are light and highly maneuverable, making them popular with television stations and air taxi companies. A new one costs between $700,000 and $1.2 million.

On Aug. 8, 2009 a small plane collided with a helicopter over the Hudson River, on the other side of Manhattan, killing nine people, including five Italian tourists. A government safety panel found that an air traffic controller who was on a personal phone call had contributed to the accident.

The Federal Aviation Administration changed its rules for aircraft flying over New York City's rivers after that collision. Pilots must call out their positions on the radio and obey a 161 mph speed limit. Before the changes, such radio calls were optional.

Earlier that year, an Airbus 320 airliner landed in the Hudson after hitting birds and losing both engines shortly after taking off from LaGuardia Airport. The flight, U.S. Airways Flight 1549, became known as the Miracle on the Hudson plane.

The river has been closed to commercial boating traffic, the U.S. Coast Guard said.

[Gordy]

According to CBS, the 5th person has been recovered--no word on her condition.

CBS Live Video (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/live-video/)

[MikeNYC]

Reportedly 5th person is DOA.

Copter was N63Q, a JetRanger based in Linden NJ.

[Jarvy]

US army corps of engineers recovery boat on scene getting ready to lift the helicopter. Last person now recovered didn't look good. Pilots name has been released, he is ok and helping on the scene.

[timmcat]

BBC News - Helicopter falls into East River in New York City (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15176683)

(Apologies, thread already running in Rotorheads. I'll leave this here as a heads up or mods feel free to delete).


Link to Rotorheads Forum >>> http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/465430-helicopter-down-nyc.html

[G-UNYT]

BBC now reporting 1 fatality, confirmed via NY Mayor press conference. Condolences to all involved.

[Jarvy]

British family in area for a 40th birthday, the lady that died was the birthday girl, others are her partner and her parents. Pilot reports that something was wrong and he was trying to get back to the heliport. All very sad.
They are lifting it up now, so far the helicopter seems intact.

[mat777]

just seen on the bbc3 quick news - a helicopter carrying british people has reportedly crashed in an american river. does anyone know any more?

[gusting_45]

BBC reports 1 female passenger dead, recovered from wreck an hour after sinking into East River. 2 other female passengers in critical condition, 1 male passenger and pilot are stable.

Amateur (but perhaps reliable ) reports say Bell helicopter (206?) climbed to approx 25 feet, started spinning rapidly (tail rotor failure?) and then crashed into river having failed to get back to helipad.

[Peter PanPan]

Tragic accident: BBC News - Helicopter crashes into East River in New York City (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15176683)

My thoughts go out to the family...

[MikeNYC]

Helicopter recovered from river, and will be transported to an undisclosed location for investigation
http://images.smh.com.au/2011/10/05/2669746/chopper729-420x0.jpg

[ReverseFlight]

Sorry to hear about a tragedy for the birthday girl - thoughts are with her family.

I know it's too early to speculate about the cause of the accident, but from eye witness accounts it seems that the chopper started spinning as soon as she started to take off. Mechanical problems aside, my question is where was the wind coming from ? It's very hard to extract power and keep her stable in the hover near MTOW when the wind is swirling around the pier and could be coming from any direction or elevation. And did the pilot attempt transition or was it a max power takeoff ? It's awfully difficult to transition off a pier without ground effect and without sufficient airspeed the risk of low rrpm and LTE is high. I note however there is no coning of the remaining MR blade, according to the press pics.

Reminds me of two previous accidents - spot the similarities:
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/178582-nyc-longranger-crashes-into-river.html
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/179024-s-76-down-new-york.html

[industry insider]

Insiders are saying probable over-pitch or LTE

[rotorspeed]

Why no floats?

[hands_on123]

A private flight, not a Part 135 sightseeing one, so probably no requirement for them.

[misterbonkers]

It see that the front left door is closed and latched.

[topendtorque]

A private flight, not a Part 135 sightseeing one, so probably no requirement for them.


Life vests, are or are not required outside auto distance to land?? no sign of them either.

[Jarvy]

Wind at the time from the NW at about 15 mph.As the helicopter lifted off it departed to the east planing to turn to the south. On lifting it appears to have started spining and the pilot tried to make it back to the heliport but it hit the water before he could.
No life jackets or floats as not required. Pilot is a family friend of the passengers and it seems he had just picked them up for a little sight seeing.

[Swiss Cheese]

An awful tragedy, but one that the NTSB should be able to resolve in a fairly simple way, with the pilot and some of the passengers surviving.

I heard there were gusts, but not their strength. Gusts could have done to this Bell 206 what it did to the UK based EC 120 I flew earlier this year (see heli down at Redhill thread) - a variant of LTE.

Alternatively I have experienced tail rotor driveshaft bearing failure in certain Bell machines - with tell tale evidence.

Either way, I hope the survivors continue to recover, and an NTSB report is issued without delay.

[Jarvy]

As I said before wind from the NW at 15 but a news helicopter pilot reported gusts upto 25mph.

[Swiss Cheese]

Interesting that Part 91 flights like this can seemingly operate in the Manhattan area with very limited insurance cover (for passengers and third party liability)... as compared with Part 135 etc...

[MikeNYC]

Swiss Cheese, are you saying that insurance requirements should be higher for pilots to operate in certain types of airspace?

[ILblog]

it did to the UK based EC 120 I flew earlier this year (see heli down at Redhill thread) - a variant of LTE.

Sorry for offtopic. Any more info about LTE on EC120?

[MikeNYC]

Sorry for offtopic. Any more info about LTE on EC120?
Try here:
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/20002-fenestron-stall-fact-myth.html

[golfyankeesierra]

No life jackets or floats as not required.
Is a life jacket not a very cheap and basic lifesaver that any serious operator from river piers should consider to carry; whether or not mandated by authorities. Wonder what the insurers say...

[Vortex what...ouch!]

I took a sight seeing flight from there about 18 months ago. I was given a good pre flight brief and life jacket. The only bit I felt uncomfortable with, but being a helicopter pilot maybe a bit pessimistic, was the single engine over downtown Manhatten. I thought there was nowhere to go if the donk stepped out. It is all a bit rushed there though, so can see how weight and balance can catch them out.

[Jarvy]

This wasn't one of the normal sight seeing flights they only go from wall street now. This was a private flight the pilot was giving his friends a trip round Manhattan hence no life vests. Just like London if the donk quits then its a swim.

[MikeNYC]

The only bit I felt uncomfortable with, but being a helicopter pilot maybe a bit pessimistic, was the single engine over downtown Manhatten.
For the past few years, the NYC EDC and ERHC have agreed on two standard tours that the tour operators adhere to, neither of which go over downtown Manhattan save takeoff and landing. One route does cross a small part of upper Manhattan, at its most narrow point. Also, the tour operators here have popout floats (and provide pax with vests as you got). It's not true that there's nowhere to go... there is the river! One operator safely put down in the Hudson in 2007, suspecting mechanical failure.

[Vortex what...ouch!]

Mike, I'm sure cleverer minds than mine have looked at this, but on the flight I took there was no way to make the river in my opinion, even with the help of angels.

[EN48]

insurance requirements


What requirements would these be?

[MikeNYC]

Good catch, should have clarified as asking if he meant "having insurance should be required" etc.

[rick1128]

Having flown into the East River for 2 summers, I found the NW winds can make for some interesting times. With 15 to 25 Kt winds, the air flow can come over the buildings and then down along the west bank of the river. When added to the wind eddys coming around the buildings, it can be a little sporty. Without knowing more, I really do not want to second guess what the pilot did.

[parabellum]

As the flight was Private, not for hire or reward, I think the only personal insurance effected will be any policies the pax may have had themselves, (and may not include cover whilst flying in a private aircraft).

The aircraft will be covered by it's hull insurance, if not self insured by the owner.

The third party legal liability insurance, i.e. the cover for tall buildings etc. etc. is possibly a mandated amount, set by the FAA(?), and would probably be higher for flights around New York than somewhere out in the Mid West.

[EN48]

possibly a mandated amount, set by the FAA(?),

Been at this for a very long time and AFAIK no insurance of any kind mandated by the FAA, at least for Part 91 ops. Have I missed something?

[Saint Jack]

The provision of floats, liferaft and lifejackets may not be required by the prevailing regulations for this particular helicopter but that does not mean they're prohibited. Whatever happened to common sense? If you're operating a single-engine helicopter low and slow over water - regardless of the distance from shore - don't you need to consider all possibilites. This helicopter was clearly within autorotative distance from shore but its height, due to its proximity of the helipad, was of no use to the pilot.

So far, only 'golfyankeesierra' in his Post #27 seems to have grasped this.

[helihub]

http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2011/10/05/alg_helicopter-pulled-from-water.jpg

Fatal helicopter crash in East River has NYC politicians calling for a ban on aerial sightseeing tours (http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/10/05/2011-10-05_fatal_helicopter_crash_in_east_river_has_nyc_politicians_ calling_for_ban_on_aeri.html)

[JimBall]

As someone who has experienced the pax end of an NYC trip, and is a heli pilot, could anyone explain to me exactly what use floats would have been in this incident? The eyewitness reports vary from "upside down" to "nose first". If indeed the heli did go in at an angle, then floats would most likely have made the incident more violent - if the pilot had time to deploy them.
The death was maybe unavoidable. The victim was a large lady in the back of a 206. People next to her escaped. She didn't.
Surely, before the politicians get their knee-jerk going, the industry must ask a collective question. Are any public transport ops safe from such a location? Would a fully loaded twin do any better? I doubt it - and this incident may not be EF.
I refuse to be a speculator - but I hope all avenues will be exposed fairly and that tail rotor design & performance is given a thorough look.
And W&B.

[ReverseFlight]

JB, having floats and lifejackets is not about eliminating accidents but reducing the risk of death or injury to persons.

I should add that, further to my post #14, there was a time in the past when I did a lot of harbour scenic flights in a helicopter. Not only did it have pop-out floats, we insisted on everyone wearing the type of lifevest which would only inflate if commanded, rather than the marine variety which automatically deployed when in contact with water. The obvious reason is because an inflated lifejacket may hamper emergency egress from a submerged helicopter.

That said, passengers don't go through HUET training, do they ? Nor do they wear a helmet like I do - the head is probably the least protected part of the body in such circumstances.

[JimBall]

RF: "That said, passengers don't go through HUET training, do they ?"

My point exactly re "public transport". However I come from the school of "humans only designed for 8mph on land". Anything else is a personal risk and entirely up to that person. So long as the risks are explained to them.

Look at the total amount of pax on NY scenic flights vs. the number of incidents.

Proportionate should be the response by authorities and politicians. After all, we are talking about a country which allows its folk to carry arms.

[oggers]

Very sad accident.

When flying the London svfr routes one anticipates ditching in the case of a forced landing. But you could autorotate shoreside and take the opportunity to destroy some of the most expensive real estate in the world and perhaps a few bankers on a good day ;). So does common sense suggest you equip and brief the pax for ditching? No brainer.

Never been to NYC. But I imagine forced landing presents the same challenges but with more water available.

I should say I've no idea if these pax were briefed and equipped for a ditching. Just saying they should have been.

[Swiss Cheese]

LTE/Fenestron Stall is probably better described as Yaw Divergence - which puts it back squarely on the pedals, and the speed of the feet pushing them.

Minimum insurance requirements in the UK and EU are higher than the US for private heli operators, typically based on MTOW and type of operation. Over here, a Bell 206 would be carrying US$7m+ insurance for the pax and third party damage. I expect a fraction of that for a private Bell operator in NY/NJ.

Given the higher certainty of lawyers and legal action in the US from any aviation accident, it is interesting that the insurance available can be significantly less....

[mickjoebill]

JB, having floats and lifejackets is not about eliminating accidents but reducing the risk of death or injury to persons.
Here Here.

Having had mechanical issues in twins that required immediate landing, namely; one at night in the country, one at night over a city with a river, and the other over Southbank in London in daytime, it is a good idea to wear a life jacket if regardless of the number of engines, a significant part of the flight relies on ditching as the primary emergency landing site.

JB, perhaps if floats were available and had been deployed and even if the aircraft had ended up inverted but floating, it would have been easier to rescue the trapped passenger? Also if it is floating upside down there would be filtered daylight in the cabin which would aid self escape. The alternative of sinking into a state of near darkness makes for an immensely challenging escape to say the least.

Even if you do get out there is still the risk of hyperventilation, however it can be mitigated by a life jacket, especially one with a collar that supports the head and rolls the wearer upright.

I witnessed, at close hand, three people capsize a small row boat in very cold water and one of them hyperventalated which is a shocking sight, surprisingly violent and there is little hope if you can't keep your head out of the water because you continue to suck and pant uncontrollably even when your head is under the water.

In this case his (auto inflation) life jacket saved him by keeping his airway out of the water.

I took a HUET course after witnessing that and dont complain about immersion suits as they greatly reduce cold shock and hyperventilation.

Interestingly the guys who did not hyperventilate were rescued first as they swam to nearby boats which unfortunately blocked their path to the victim who needed the most urgent help.


Mickjoebill

[FH1100 Pilot]

I hesitate to weigh-in on this crash, but as someone who spent a lot of time doing sightseeing tours in grossed-out B-models and "straight" L-models out of E34th Street, I think I know a little about the subject.

First, let us acknowledge that witness statements can be extremely suspect. I've witnessed a couple of helicopter accidents in my life, and was always surprised at how different the recollection was from all the witnesses; even pilots sometimes get it wrong or remember inaccurately.

In a loaded 206B, you absolutely want to do an airspeed-over-altitude takeoff out of 34th Street. There are no obstacles to clear (other than the little bulkhead). You might not have the power (torque) to do otherwise (e.g. climb away). Let us assume that he was at or near MGW with five people and enough fuel for a decent ride around the city. (34th Street is listed as having jet fuel available, so he could have had very little fuel while planning on getting some more after the "tour.") The only thing to do is pull all available power and get try to get 45 knots as quickly as you can so you can start climbing.

Would floats have helped? Sure. Of course. Obviously. The (standard) trigger is millimeters away from my left index finger as I hold the collective. In an engine failure situation one could easily and quickly and without conscious thought blow the floats as the aircraft settled. One would not have to be Chuck Yeager to accomplish this.

But! Witnesses said that the aircraft was either spinning and/or did not enter the water level. They said it looked like the pilot was performing some "daredevil" maneuver. Huh? Okay, that points to a control issue. We are trained and conditioned to keep the aircraft level down near the ground (water).

The pilot in this case was reported to be "experienced" in the 206 with...umm...500 hours make/model. Okay, that's a fair amount and by that time he should know the aircraft and how it flies pretty well. Still, no self-respecting 206 pilot is going to pull some wild aerobatic stunt at such a low altitude as everyone agrees he was when the problem began. Nope, he would simply keep it level and cushion if the engine quits on takeoff.

Uncontrolled yaw (and the pitching that comes with it) is something else. Either tail rotor failure or the dreaded "LTE" that everybody worries about in a 206. But 206's do not get into LTE at sea level. I'm sorry, they just don't. Unless you're trying to hover at a high power setting with a really ripping wind from the right-rear, a 206 at sea level will always have enough tail rotor authority to get the job done.

From the condition of the aircraft as it was pulled out of the water, it sure looks to my uneducated eye that it went in under power: Trans broken from its mounts; one main rotor blade is broken off; and the tailboom is twisted.

But! The pilot has made statements (official and unofficial) that he had an "engine failure" right after takeoff. Here's a link to fairly comprehensive Daily Mail article:

New York helicopter pilot in crash that killed British tourist is 'convicted felon' | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2045612/New-York-helicopter-pilot-crash-killed-British-tourist-convicted-felon.html)

And of course the NTSB has just *had* to make their usual statement about how they've found no obvious signs of mechanical failure - as if the ONLY way an engine fails is by exploding. We know from bitter experience that Rolls Royce 250 engines have numerous failure modes, from outright quitting to decels. Governor failure, anyone? PC line failure? Compressor bearing failure? Come on. Even a partial power failure is just as good as a complete engine failure. If the engine won't maintain 100% rpm, you're going down. The NTSB should shut the hell up.

So we have all these conflicting things. And everybody and their mother is asking: WHAT THE HELL HAPPENED?! In this age of instant access to information, we want the answer NOW, by God. We deserve it!

Let's talk about floats for a second. The aircraft was not required to have emergency floats, period. It is obvious that in this case he *should* have had them. But every day, all over the world, single- and twin-engine helicopters without floats make approaches over water to heliports. I've done it many times; you probably have too. Doesn't make it right, and there is always an element of risk, even in a twin. In this most recent case the risks caught up with this pilot. I'm sure he is regretting that now.

Life jackets? They are USELESS unless they are worn. Having them "available" in a helicopter is a joke. There is usually not enough warning or time to put them on.)Let us admit that no matter what the specific FAR requirements are, the passengers should have been wearing PFDs. HOWEVER! Life jackets are of no use whatsoever if you cannot get out of the submerged helicopter. And even properly briefed passengers forget everything you tell them about how to unlatch the seatbelt when panic sets in. People freeze.

When I worked in the Gulf of Mexico for PHI, I carried nothing but people who had flown in helicopters many, many times. Still, sometimes we'd land on a platform and the front seat passenger would grapple and grope unsuccessfully for the seatbelt release, unable to locate it quickly. In every case I would turn to them and say, "Good thing we're not on fire, eh?" God only knows how that woman in N63Q reacted when she found herself suddenly trapped upside down in a helicopter in 70 degree water.

Finally, my opinion on what happened at 34th Street? He was heavy. He was perhaps not the most experienced 206 driver on the block. He was making a takeoff without the benefit of a headwind and, by most accounts a wind that was disadvantageous. Let's say the engine did not quit outright.

Remember how I said that 206's don't get into LTE? Well, that doesn't mean they won't spin. Huh? If you are already at 100% torque and a gust of wind causes you get a small uncommanded right yaw before acheiving ETL, pushing *more* left pedal will cause an overtorque. So we press gently on the left pedal at such high power settings. Once the ship starts to rotate, now you're in a bind. Armchair quarterbacks might say, "Just push the left pedal to the floor!!" Sure, easy, right? And that might have worked, but it also might have caused the MR to droop with the overtorque. You're between a rock and a hard place, and you only have a *very* short time to sort it all out. Once things start going wrong, they start going wrong fast! I'm just saying... That's why you need airspeed: To get the streamlining effect that comes with being above ETL. It sounds to me like the 34th Street pilot may not have gotten above ETL when it all began to unfold.

We do not know exactly what happened, other than whatever caused this event happened pretty quickly, the ship ended up in the water and a passenger died. That pilot will have to live with that for the rest of his life. No matter what was the primary cause (mechanical failure or pilot error), it's not something I'd want on my conscience.

[Tarman]

Excellent post FH1100, it's nice to read a balanced opinion from someone who has experience in both NYC tours and older JetRangers.
Out of all of the tours that take place from Downtown Heliports, how many are made by Private Pilots ?
Was this scenario a "one off" or is it common place ?

I know that PPL holders are effectively banned from flying into major Motor racing events and suchlike in the UK whilst commercial operations are taking place. Are they "tolerated" in the US ?

Tarman

[Sanus]

FH1100 - Excellent and well considered post.

I couldn't agree more about the carriage of life jackets. Some corporate helicopters even stow the lifejackets under or behind velcro'd seat cushions. No-one can access them until that passenger stands up. How the hell you're mean't to get to these in an emergency is beyond me. Absurd tokenism.

[S76Heavy]

FH1100 well done man, very good and readable post.

@ Sanus: but giving them lifejackets to wear and, God forbid, helmets, just tells them that what they are about to do is dangerous...that's bad for business :ugh:

[nigelh]

Tarman ...dont think you are totally right on that . The only event i know of where ppl,s are not allowed is the Grand Prix and even then they ARE allowed in before it gets too busy . I also think that if , even as a ppl , you are known to the helipad operators well and known to be used to such things they will let you in .

[tottigol]

Bob, on the spot as usual. May I add to what you mentioned at the end regarding overtorque and rotor droop: the main rotor ain't the only spinning part that slows down, down back at the other end the tail rotor slows down as well, and that kind of decreases its thrust, right?

[FH1100 Pilot]

May I add to what you mentioned at the end regarding overtorque and rotor droop: the main rotor ain't the only spinning part that slows down, down back at the other end the tail rotor slows down as well, and that kind of decreases its thrust, right?

You are correct, sir! :ok: Something many people fail to take into consideration.

But let's be honest- none of us knows what really happened there. Perhaps he did have a problem which resulted in a partial power-failure. Perhaps the thing was making noises or drooping or whatever, and he figured he could whip it around and get it back to the pad because he was so early in the takeoff run and was still close but it didn't work out. Who knows?

It would be really pompous of me to declare with certainty what really happened. But I can make an educated guess. Having done literally hundreds of takeoffs from that very heliport in all kinds of wind/weather conditions (and often at MGW/MAUW), I know what he was up against.

The safety of the NYC heliports is actually pretty good, all things considered. I notice that in order to come up with an actual list of crashes/accidents, the reporters had to go back to the 1980's. Very few fatalities in those 30 years as well.

As the event was unfolding, I was watching a live feed from one of the ENG helicopters covering the scene, which also had a (certain popular social network site that has the intials "FB") chat window on the side. People were boo-hooing about this "terrible tragedy." Not to be insensitive and certainly not meaning to minimize this event, I posted, "I wonder how many people were killed in horrible car crashes in the U.S. today?" As expected, there was no response. The news media treats every little aircraft incident like it's Tenerife all over again.

[OvertHawk]

FH1100

I don't think i have ever read posts on Pprune with which i agree more completely.

A good, sober, rational, reasonable appraisal :ok:

You have not future as a journo! :E

Safe flying
OH

[FH1100 Pilot]

I don't think i have ever read posts on PPRuNe with which i agree more completely...

Thank you, OvertHawk and all who replied. Kind words, much appreciated.

[FairWeatherFlyer]

JB, perhaps if floats were available and had been deployed and even if the aircraft had ended up inverted but floating, it would have been easier to rescue the trapped passenger?

I think most pilots would get out and then go back to pull out the passengers so keeping it near the surface makes a lot of sense. The previous (heavy) 206L deployed floats so it's clearly not an impossible task.

[rick1128]

I agree FH1100 an excellent post. Unfortunately, when dealing with passengers the required passenger briefing is many times ignored. The vest has to be put on to be of much use. In 1997 a BK operated by Colgate had a similar accident off the 60th St Heliport. With similar results unfortunately. And in 2005 a good friend of mine put a 76 into the GOM after losing both engines. Everyone got out and they were all wearing the PFD during the flight, however, the two people who were suppose to throw the raft out, decided they needed to get out more than the raft. From what I have seen and read so far, I don't believe the floats would have done much good. And as for insurance, it has been my experience that private owners in the turbine class tend to carry more insurance than other operators.

As for the old helicopter comment, it really isn't about the build date on the data tag, it is more about the hours,the type of operations done in it and how it has been taken care of. I have flown a couple of 206B's with over 11,000 hours on them. And them were still reasonably nice machines. At the other end of the scale, I have flown aircraft brand new from the factory, where I was not 100% sure I was going to get it home.

[Lonewolf_50]

FH1100: Very well said. :D If only the reporters who cover this event would read what you posted. Hope a few do.

Been a while since I flew Jet Rangers (~30 years). A question for those who fly them in and out of heliports:

Is it common practice to do a power margin check, (IGE and OGE, do I droop OGE?) before take off/transition when you are near to max gross (MTOW). (I would hope so).

Thinking through the flying problem confronting the pilot in leaving the heliport at that locaion.

Depending upon where the wind was from, it would seem that if you can't transition into the wind, what with all those buildings in the way, the conservative way out of the heliport is via "the downwind getaway" which would call for a gentle right pedal turn into the transition direction as one begins to accelerate away from the heliport. You are still at the mercy of the engine, vis a vis the HV diagram. That little bit of right pedal would reduce total power required slightly, and leave you with a slightly increased power margin as you move toward and through translational lift.

In re egress training: as noted above, even people with egress training have drowned / been trapped in a helicopter, during sudden landings in water ... for a variety of reasons. (RIP, Ed K. :{ ) .

EDIT: reviewed the comments on wind, and looked at orientation of heliport.

The weather was clear but a little windy Tuesday, with winds of 10 mph gusting to 20 mph and visibility of 10 miles, according to the weather station at LaGuardia airport.
Wind at the time from the NW at about 15 mph
As I said before wind from the NW at 15 but a news helicopter pilot reported gusts upto 25mph.
Having flown into the East River for 2 summers, I found the NW winds can make for some interesting times. With 15 to 25 Kt winds, the air flow can come over the buildings and then down along the west bank of the river. When added to the wind eddys coming around the buildings, it can be a little sporty.

Sporty indeed! :eek:

[EX-PJ]

As someone that has made hundreds of departures from the 34th street helipad over a 25+ year flying career in NY. I feared this very scenario more times then I can count. Departing in both single and twin engine helicopters both with and without floats.
One topic that has been discussed in the hangar today is the instantaneous transition from IGE hover over the pad to a OGE hover that takes place as the aircraft departs over the bulkhead of the river. Depending on the tide, the aircraft height above the water can be 3-6 feet. With a little tail wind this is problematic.

FAA has indicated damage to a tail rotor blade in some of their initial comments.
What if.......
On departure said 206B lowers the nose to depart the helipad, as the aircraft climbs slightly and begins to accelerate forward. Within feet the aircraft goes from a IGE hover to a OGE state and begins to settle. The pilot, already at a high power setting either 1, a slight amount of aft cyclic, clipping the tail rotor on the bulkhead. Or 2, the tail rotor blade makes contact with the water? I have not seen a clear picture of the stinger and lower vertical fin to see if they are damaged. I suspect water contact.
At this point the aircraft begins to spin (witness's see wild movement), and the rest is history.
From the cockpit the pilot knows the helicopter went from hovering, to flying, to settling, to sinking!
Just sayin'.

Tragic event. Helicopters are still the safest mode of transportation we humans have. Be safe my brothers.

[talkpedlar]

an intelligent, comprhensive reply..

My humble view on this (with 80+ E34th 206 sorties) is that, whilst the pilot may have had 500ish hours 206 experience, that experience may have been substantially airfield ops.

If so, and considering CG/WB and wind factors... this departure could have been extremely challenging.

Very sad all the same. TP

[XV666]

Helicopter pilot: I needed ten more seconds to save British tourist (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8812071/Helicopter-pilot-I-needed-ten-more-seconds-to-save-British-tourist.html)

The pilot of the helicopter that crashed into a New York river, killing a British tourist, has described how he came desperately close to saving her as it sank.

Paul Dudley said that he had repeatedly dived back underwater to try to open a door that would free Sonia Marra, who had been celebrating her 40th birthday in Manhattan.
"If I had had ten more seconds I could have saved her," Mr Dudley told a local televison news reporter, in his first public comment since his sightseeing helicopter plunged into the East River.

Mr Dudley, 56, and three other passengers – Miss Marra's girlfriend Helen Tamaki, her mother Harriet Nicholson and her stepfather Paul Nicholson – survived the crash, which came seconds after take-off.
Mrs Nicholson, 60, and Miss Tamaki, 43, remain in a critical condition after being dragged unconscious from the river. Mr Nicholson, 71, has stayed at their bedsides in a Manhattan hospital.
A post-mortem determined that Miss Marra, who was trapped underwater for more than 90 minutes, had drowned. Her body was eventually recovered by emergency service divers.

Mr Dudley has told friends and his wife that he believes that "engine failure" was to blame. Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board declined to disclose any early findings.

A group of New York politicians yesterday called for a total ban on tourist helicopters in the wake of the crash. Daniel Squadron, a state senator, said: "This tragedy is another clear sign: nonessential helicopters in Manhattan don't make sense for passengers, pilots, or local residents".
Mr Dudley told investigators that before taking a right-turn seconds before the crash, he considered turning left but realised he might hurtle into a "populated area" on Manhattan's streets.

[EESDL]

Gob-smacked - no floats, no lifejackets, no redundancy - no hope!!

[Sikpilot]

Nice post FH1100.

It seems to me, while he may have had a lot of hours in the B model, he did not have proper training for flying out of 34th street. From the pictures I saw of the passengers I wonder what his takeoff weight was. I would think he was very heavy. He needed an airspeed over altitude takeoff. I am thinking he pulled max power(and then some) and tried to climb when he should have gotten some running room off the pad, over the little bulkhead and then nosed it over a little bit towards the water and kept it in ground effect until his airspeed built up and then climbed slowly.

It's a scary thing lowering the nose when you are that close to the water but that's where the proper training comes in. Back in its heyday, Island helicopters did it like that all summer long in the old B models and straight L models.

I did hear today that the helicopter did come out of an annual inspection so there is always a chance something wasn't put back together correctly but I think it was a factor of weight, lack of airspeed and poor take off planning.

[Jarvy]

Just announced on the news that a second passenger has passed away.

[airborne_artist]

As has the third passenger.

Daily Mail link (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2048541/New-York-East-River-helicopter-crash-Briton-Harriet-Nicholson-die.html?ITO=1490)

[squib66]

died early on Sunday of 'respiratory complications of near-drowning,'

Makes you wonder about which survivability measures could have been beneficial.

[eastsidewillie]

haven't been on the net in a while (damn windows 7), but just two anecdotes......a few weeks after i started working at 34th st heliport, a pilot in a jet ranger "b" model, lost his engine over the hudson river at about canal street, made it back to 34 st, put it in the river just short of the heliport, he and two mechanics made it out ok......second was pilot on a sightseeing flight with a dauphine (they were bottom of the battle consripts from who knows where) had transmission start chewing itself up down around the brooklyn bridge.....brought it back to 34th st about 30 feet above the river, and actually managed to land it on the pad.....of course, he was an ex-tuskegee airman, so i guess he was used to problems; in his 70's, he was still cool as a cucumber, and only a half hour after landing did he come in to me in ops and start shaking (just a little).:D

[eastsidewillie]

best post i've read in a long, long time......covers all the bases, succinctly and intelligently. i've been off the net for several months due to windows7 problems, so i apologize for not responding sooner. now, slightly off the topic, from reading your post i have a feeling i've worked with you, as i "ran" 34th st from about 1982 to 1991, when we flew jet rangers, long rangers, etc. on sightseeing flights, new york helicopter, and a few commercial operators. since the early '90's, 34th st has been pretty much a parking lot for corporate big boys, so i figger you flew out of there during my time. having witnessed a few "incidents", i was pleased to read your commentary, and wish there were more such as you to analyze and hopefully improve flight safety measures.

[Dynamic Roller]

NTSB final report (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20111004X71245&ntsbno=ERA12MA005&akey=1)
Probable cause: (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20111004X71245&key=1)
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:

The pilot's failure to anticipate and correct for conditions (high gross weight, low indicated airspeed, and a right downwind turn) conducive to loss of tail rotor effectiveness (LTE), which resulted in LTE and an uncontrolled spin. Contributing to the accident was the pilot’s inadequate preflight planning, which resulted in the helicopter being in excess of its maximum allowable gross weight at takeoff.