Kimberley crash 26th August 2014

[John Eacott]

Kimberley chopper crash: Helicopter pilot killed at remote pastoral station
(http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-26/pilot-killed-in-chopper-crash-at-kimberley-pastoral-station/5697366?&section=news)
A 34-year-old pilot has been killed in a helicopter crash at a remote pastoral station in the Kimberley.

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) said the R22 was on a ferry flight between Yeeda Station and Springvale Station, north of Halls Creek, on Monday afternoon.

Police said when the pilot failed to return at 6pm (AWST) yesterday, three other helicopters began searching but could not find the aircraft.

It was located about 7:30am today, about 30 nautical miles from Springvale Station.

Police said the helicopter had crashed and caught fire, killing the pilot.

The ATSB said two investigators from Perth would travel to the site and spend two days recovering items for examination, including the helicopter's maintenance documentation and records.

Local police were also on their way to the scene.

A report will be prepared for the coroner.

Springvale Station is about 48 kilometres north of Halls Creek and 84 kilometres south west of Warmun in the Kimberley region.

It is the second fatal helicopter incident at Springvale Station in five years.

On May 5, 2009, two Robinson Helicopter Company R22s collided in midair about 15 kilometres south-east of the station, claiming the lives of Australian Troy Wareham, 37, and New Zealander Matthew Funnell, 39.

Both had taken off from the station just prior to sunrise that morning to carry out some mustering.

The ATSB found the converging flight paths of the helicopters, pilot fatigue and glare from the rising sun were all contributing factors.

[topendtorque]

very dark there at 6PM WST, flying East, at height I hear, instrument, GPS lights, a while to think about it before the sudden stop.

[Ag-Rotor]

Always thought you worked hard enough in the daylight that night was for resting, drinking etc. A lesson hard learned I guess.

[topendtorque]

In response to this story a friend from deep south of WA told me he knew of 3 muster pilots who succumbed to the same ailment and another who was not a muster pilot. Also of another who currently has a practice of it, even down to getting lost landing at the wrong station refuelling and carrying on when the original flight could have occurred in daylight in fifteen minutes. Clearly we will read about that bloke someday to.

Over the years I have known of quite some, often the response when one asks why is, "Oh, he had it hanging on the wall." Well bugger me, how do they get stopped at doing it cos it's not them that suffers when they wipe themselves out?

I really don't know what to think, certainly it is dang stupid to contemplate it without both training and equipped panel, but teaching a couple of easy tricks to people how to save themselves leads me to think then more of it will happen.The big trouble is they will not recognise the difference between tricks and reality when you have to land and swag it and they will not be prepared for that as we used to be with basic stuff like adequate water, tucker, swag, good radio (nowadays a sat phone) and matches to keep you warm.

Perhaps there could be some mandatory very cheap shock techniques that they should all go thru every couple of years to bring it home, say standing in a room being slowly darkened and with a shifting image of the horizon as it slowly fades being projected onto a wall in front of them, but have the floor lined with beds of nails so when they fall it hurts. Some more reality like standing by with a big stick to beat them with when they are on the floor because they didn't call out to stop in time might be a good idea as well, then hit them with the full wall image of a grieving woman and kids to contemplate.

One of the big troubles is that these blokes are not professional aviators with accomplished professional airman-ship and downright refuse to seek or acknowledge such traits.

tet.

[Ag-Rotor]

Over the years I have done a fair bit of Frost Protection and Cherry drying in the night and I have to fly on Frost this coming week, always a nervous time still. I hold a NVFR and the training process for that rating confirmed to me that you should not be flying around at night at any time other than over a city or a well lit up area.

[onetrack]

Perhaps there are similarities here?

Investigation: AO-2011-087 - Collision with terrain - Robinson R22 helicopter, VH-YOL, 14 km north-west of Fitzroy Crossing, WA, 27 July 2011 (http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2011/aair/ao-2011-087.aspx)

This statement alone, from the 2011 crash report above, should raise concern;

"The ATSB has investigated four occurrences where day VFR-equipped R22 helicopters have been operated at night. Each of those occurrences resulted in the aircraft impacting terrain with fatal consequences."

[Ag-Rotor]

Non Professional aviators and private operations. Unless there is an AOC to bear pressure and responsibilities there seems to be no regulation. A station pilot (employee ) being killed flying at night in a day VFR helicopter would attract the attention of Work Safe I would presume.

[lelebebbel]

Plenty of owner/operators with AOCs doing the same stuff, too.

Typical scenario: Finish the job at last light, but then you are supposed to start at the next station 100 miles away at first light. So you gotta ferry it over there in the dark, right?

"No worries, I got away with it the last 5 times I did this".

Except this time it's a new moon (as it was in this latest accident, by the way)

"Oh well that's what the landing lights are for".


....

This wasn't the first time this has happened, and it won't be the last.

One of the big troubles is that these blokes are not professional aviators with accomplished professional airman-ship and downright refuse to seek or acknowledge such traits.

That right there is the core of the problem. A lot of these pilots wouldn't even refer to themselves as pilots. They operate helicopters the same way one would operate a motorbike.

[CYHeli]

I also wonder about the 3 helicopters that set off looking for him when he hadn't turned up.

[John Eacott]

Collision with terrain involving Robinson R22 helicopter, VH-YPC, 70 km north west of Halls Creek, WA on 25 August 2014 (http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2014/aair/ao-2014-144.aspx)

What happened
On the afternoon of 25 August 2014, the pilots of two Robinson R22 helicopters were ferrying the helicopters from Yeeda to Springvale via a refuelling stop at Leopold Downs, within the Kimberley region of Western Australia. The pilot who was ahead by about 10 NM (18 km) arrived at Springvale about 40 minutes after last light but the pilot of the second helicopter, registered VH‑YPC, did not arrive as expected.
A search using helicopters began early the next morning and the overdue helicopter was soon found in a seriously damaged state, close to the intended track and 25 NM (46 km) west of Springvale. The pilot had been fatally injured.

What the ATSB found
The ATSB found that the pilot of VH-YPC, who did not hold a night visual flight rules (VFR) rating or instrument rating, continued flying towards the destination after last light (end of civil twilight), then in dark night conditions without local ground lighting, inadvertently allowed the helicopter to descend into terrain.

Safety message
This accident highlights the inherent high risk of night flying in remote areas due to the absence or degradation of the visual references for establishing an aircraft’s attitude and position. This risk is increased to unacceptable levels when night flying is attempted by pilots without night VFR or instrument flying qualifications. To avoid the usually fatal consequences of disorientation, day VFR pilots need to plan to arrive at their destination at least 10 minutes before last light and to have a realistic ‘Plan B’ to use when it becomes apparent that an intended flight cannot be completed in daylight. It is important, also, for operators and others involved in the operation of aircraft to actively support safety-first pilot decision making.
The ATSB is concerned about the frequency of accidents – many fatal – that involve pilots flying with reduced visual cues. This has been highlighted on the ATSB website as a SafetyWatch priority along with a number of strategies to help manage the risk and links to relevant safety resources.



Chopper pilots urged to land before last light, following Kimberley crash investigation (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-17/kimberley-crash-report/5973452)

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has released its findings on a helicopter crash in the Kimberley region of Western Australia.

On August 25th, two Robinson-22 aircraft were making their way from Yeeda to Springvale Stations, when one failed to arrive after dark.

The ATSB's report indicates that the missing helicopter crashed at high speed, about 46 kilometres west of Springvale.

34-year-old pilot and father, Justin McDonald, was killed as a result.

ATSB Manager of Aviation Safety Investigations, Ian Sangston, says flying after last light was a contributing factor in the accident.

"The key finding was that the pilot, who did not hold a visual flight rules (VFR) rating, or an instrument rating, continued towards his destination after last light, and then into dark night conditions, without any local ground lighting," he said.

"Unfortunately the pilot inadvertently allowed the helicopter to descend into terrain.

"It's very important in such conditions, for people to take safe options and to make sure they're appropriately qualified and their helicopters are appropriately equipped."

Mr Sangston said he was unsure just how many pastoral chopper pilots may be operating without night qualifications.

"It's a hard question, I'd probably say the majority of pilots would hold a night VFR rating, but as to the pastoral industry in the north and west of Australia, I don't know if that proportion would be as high."

Due to the risk of disorientation, regulations require pilots with day VFR ratings to arrive at least 10 minutes before last light.

If pilots believe they cannot complete a journey within that timeframe, the ATSB encourages having a realistic 'plan B' in place.

"If the pilot feels they can't meet this requirement, they really need to be thinking about do they need to be making the flight," Mr Sangston said.

"In this example, the pilots landed to refuel and they were concerned about the headwind they were flying into and the time it was taking to get there, but they still took off.

"So what we're trying to say is if you're able to stay at an intermediary position, why not take the safe option and do that.

"Know your limitations and avoid flying in conditions with reduced visual cues."

Mr Sangston said the Bureau continues to see a consistent number of accidents, in which flying in dark night conditions remains the chief cause.

"Between 1993 and 2012 there were 26 accidents in Australia in night conditions," he said.

"There were another 10 accidents where there was inadvertent flight into cloud and these 36 accidents resulted in 58 deaths, nearly all of them occurred in night flight.

"So yes, it's very much a focus of ours."

No safety recommendations were made as a result of the ATSB's investigation and the report states that its findings 'should not be read as apportioning blame or liability to any particular organisation or individual.'

[Shawn Coyle]

Unless you're over a built-up area with cultural lighting, there is no such thing as Night VFR...
Look for old definitions of visual flight rules that include the ability to orient the aircraft by reference to the surface....
Can't see the surface? Can't orient the aircraft.
Wish the authorities would wake up and change the definition of VFR.

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

Why change the rules ? If the existing ones where followed all would have been fine , by making new rules all you are going to do is make it harder for those who actually follow them .

[rotorspeed]

Prior to 2012 in the UK all night flying was subject to IFR but then the regulations were changed following an EASA directive and night VFR flying has been permitted. Whilst the requirement includes "to be in sight of the surface" just what this means at night is hard to really define. Does it mean beneath you, or anywhere you can see something fixed - usually lights? And that can change quickly, with weather you can't often see, particularly as ground illumination becomes scanty. So night flying has plenty of scope for trouble when permitted under VFR.

[heliduck]

The examples discussed above are not relative to what the rules say, the aviation industry in Australia (particularly mustering) is littered with tombstones from people who fly at night in unequipped aircraft without the appropriate training. They are not following the rules anyway, so why does it matter what the rules say?

[topendtorque]

That Heliduck is the core issue isn't it? The rules here are simple, do not fly at night in a non equipped aircraft. The other discussions about what is and is not NVFR outside a lit up area are very valid and I agree with those sentiments. One of our major EMS operators ban NVFR in less than 1/4 moon condition and those guys are fully IFR equipped.

If we can get them to stop when they should, but how?

[SilsoeSid]

Again it's into a grey discussion we go.

Totally agree with rs;
Prior to 2012 in the UK all night flying was subject to IFR but then the regulations were changed following an EASA directive and night VFR flying has been permitted. Whilst the requirement includes "to be in sight of the surface" just what this means at night is hard to really define. Does it mean beneath you, or anywhere you can see something fixed - usually lights? And that can change quickly, with weather you can't often see, particularly as ground illumination becomes scanty. So night flying has plenty of scope for trouble when permitted under VFR.

It's nice being in sight of the surface, however is that the distant village lights twinkling or maybe it's the stars? Are the instruments too bright, is the iPad (other makes available) moving map/chart too bright, how much do we actually see outside flying night VFR? All well and good sitting in our armchairs, but throw in a little turbulence, a bit of weather, no moon, cockpit lighting and maybe a little bit of pressure and a distraction or two, and that in 'sight of the surface' wording becomes greyer and greyer. Of course we don't want more restrictions, however night VFR is a different kettle of fish to day VFR

Personally, despite having an autopilot with all the full IF fit, gucci couplings etc. if I can't see a discernible horizon en route, I'm not continuing. I'm fortunate that I'm in a position where I can easily say no, however I appreciate others aren't in the same fortunate position and this is where the problems begin.

I don't have a full solution, except the obvious, which is the costly & mainly prohibitive one of IR's. I'm not sure that restricting night flying to IR's is the route, however a limited IF course/training may be a safer and ££ better solution for most. As always, until an incident occurs I can't imagine changes.

[heliduck]

I think your previous suggestion of simulation would help TET, but it would need to be done regularly as we tend to get bolder with time. Unfortunately experience is something we get immediately after we need it.

[[email protected]]

Does CASA not have Ops inspectors who are mandated to check out mustering operations?

Do the operators have to maintain logs of where and when their aircraft fly? Surely that could be made auditable (subject to unscrupulous falsification of course) such that illegal night flights in non-equipped aircraft by non-rated pilots should be relatively easy to spot and therefore police?

There must be a way of weeding out the 'excessive risk takers' but I guess it starts with a culture change which will have to come from regulation. Either that or CASA just accepts the Darwinesque nature of CFIT as a natural selection for mustering pilots.

[MightyGem]

Personally, despite having an autopilot with all the full IF fit, gucci couplings etc. if I can't see a discernible horizon en route, I'm not continuing. I'm fortunate that I'm in a position where I can easily say no, however I appreciate others aren't in the same fortunate position and this is where the problems begin.

Now that you're liable for tasking out in the Shires at o'dark thirty, you really need to push for NVGs, Sid. Or have you already done so and been told it's too difficult/costly?

[SilsoeSid]

We've had the gogs for at least 2 years now MG .... :oh:

[ReverseFlight]

"Close Call" story time. I know too well because I've been in the situation of trying to land after dark but without having been trained to do do.

It was exactly last light when I reached my landing site, which was a reasonably well-lighted open space in the middle of a city. At that time I was not yet NVFR rated and, as I came in to land, started to focus on the lighted part at the bottom of the landing beam. It was the classic tunnel vision / black hole as the surrounding terrain turned dark to the eye due to contrast. I tried hard to spot the pad but everything else turned pitch black except for the landing beam. I had lost all peripheral visual references. It was a scary moment, never to be repeated again. I hope fellow pilots can also learn from my experience and survive.

Next time, if I don't like what I see, I'd switch off the lights. :)

[topendtorque]

Crab, your questions are spot on.

From what I can recall most if not all of the accidents relate to private operations, even though they may be of more than a 2 or 3 machine operation. That is not to say that all commercial ops are blemish free.

Our FOI's are very very thin on the ground and their CASA resources so tight it is despicable. Further they are saddled with trying to come to terms with a new set of regulations which are mostly in limbo, that is we are going from old to new, the gate is shut behind us but there is no way with the new as yet do much of our C&T.

It is a space worth watching as our previous CASA CEO has been mooted to pick up the top job in ICAO, I do not envy all of you the potential outcomes over there when one looks at the mess left behind him here.

Like his predecessor he was well referenced speaking in aviation experience but came from a military background mostly where the nuances of making for user friendly rules in a corporate and thus practical sense are foreign to him. One could say. just a fly by might contractor looking for a few more kudos, not, a real professional aviator.

Mostly it is very difficult to audit these sorts of flights when you envisage one or two active FOI in the whole bush area which is from Geraldton WA right around to Rockhampton Qld and north of a straight line between those points, trying to do something about that and also the routine day ops where people endemically under record and just genuinely operate like cowboys, particularly WRT conducting illegal commercial ops..

It is a culture problem, a massive one. These blokes are taught the Air Leg well enough "to pass an exam" full well in the knowledge they won't be tested on it ever again, until -- that dark night.

Unless we can successfully migrate to the new CSAR Part 61 and other parts some of which are still being written and we have as mooted, more C&T types who operate as sub ATO / FOI type people we will never have the resources.

As in illustration under my AOC we do Ag day only, but there is only one Ag Rated C&T person under the new regs in the whole country to check out those pilots. We are still grappling with whether the pilots need to be checked out in all types the pilots do ag in or just for the ag rating to cover all types. I don't know whether that person is night ag rated which if not leaves that sector in limbo.

I don't think this one person is rated an all ag types used here. This conundrum has existed since September when the new Part 61 was enacted so there is only eight months for those pilots to become recurrently checked under the 12 months requirement.
We cannot write out mustering endorsements at the moment I believe and most of us will spend the entire wet season reading the new regs trying work our way through them and also supposedly rewriting our Ops Manuals every time a new CSAR part relative to our operations becomes enacted. This I have been told by my FOI might occur once a year for each of the next 4 or 5 years. A rewrite comes out at between 3 to $4,000,00 a hit not to mention the time it takes us.

It is a great impost on those of use who try to follow the rules and once again a great promotion for easy street for our far less cost hindered illegal opposition, which provides for more illegality etc., etc., etc..

[MightyGem]

We've had the gogs for at least 2 years now MG
Then you won't have many problems seeing a horizon. :E

[SilsoeSid]

We've had the gogs for at least 2 years now MG

Then you won't have many problems seeing a horizon. :E

I said we had them, not that we are able to use them :eek:

[540DEGREE TorqueTurn]

Johnny,tet so your a legend ag man now ? ......Really

Isn't this like the 1 who points the finger at someone always has 3 fingers pointing back at them !!

As for going on about these mustering no idea no airmanship just past the exam that will do blah blah blah , how many of these work / do / everything that you mentioned in your very well written self absorbed (let's **** on everyone else and for God sake don't look at me ) approach about? , at a guess I think it was around 40 working for your 'ag "😳😃😃aoc
And 1 actually doing ag for himself , the rest exactly what your talking about .

You never let yourself down mate keep it up .

[topendtorque]

hi nathan, i think it was only ever yourself and gossip munger turkeys like you who ever propogated the stories of 40, or more. whoever it was i heard they or you, raised casa's curiosity, so i got a request. i went in with six guns blazing, straight to the SA boss, gave them the list and asked him directly to in future please call me first if they have problem instead of listening to hearsay. no we only have five ag rated pilots which is five more than the outfit you used to work for,, although i see where they advertise AG, furthermore we are fully certified to legallly do it in the NT.
seeing as you are so full of advice why don't you suggest a few ideas to stop this carnage?

[MightyGem]

I said we had them, not that we are able to use them
That's a bit of a bu88er. :{