USCG stuck: Bodega Bay

[John Eacott]

Could happen to any of us, but extracting the Dauphin from that will be interesting :cool:

Coast Guard Helicopter Used In Boy’s Bodega Bay Rescue Now Stuck (http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/11/12/coast-guard-helicopter-used-in-bodega-bay-rescue-now-stuck/)

http://cbssanfran.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/bodega-chopper.jpg

BODEGA BAY (CBS SF) – The Coast Guard helicopter that helped rescue Sebastion Johnson, the 4-year-old boy who tumbled more than 200 feet down a cliff at Bodega Head, was itself stuck after the incident.
Heavy fog forced the helicopter to land on a slope during the rescue, and the angle it’s now stuck in makes it unsafe to lift off.
The Coast Guard is now devising a new plan on how to move it.
The boy’s mother said her son fell off a cliff as she was walking with him on a trail, Bodega Bay Fire Protection District Fire Chief Sean Grinnell said.
He was in serious condition at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital in Oakland Tuesday.

[sixman]

Wow what a great rescue. My thoughts and prayers to the boy and his family. May he find a full recovery.

As for the stranded helo, I hope they devise a plan to recover the equipment. If not, no worries. It's always worth sacrificing equipment and property to save a life. Well done to the crew.

The U.S. Coast Guard is a fantastic service as evidenced by this story along with countless others, both told and untold.

[verticalspin]

Maybe hire this Austrian EMS pilot to recover the MH-65, looks like he has some experience with tricky slopes.
RSc5mRTHdVY

Bravo Zulu to the crew for a successful rescue.
Semper paratus!

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

A Coast Guard HH-65 Dolphin landed on a grassy bluff at Bodega Bay, California and it's said to be undamaged but it "can't take off" for unspecified safety reasons. They are talking about trucking it out. This seems very odd, can I ask you experts what the safety issue is? Here's an article with a good photo, or google Coast Guard helicopter Bodega Bay for others.

[Flying Bull]

Hi,

the angle the helicopter is stuked exceeds the slope limts given by the manufacture.
Further, you´re not sure, weather you can clear the stuck gear without problems and might have a pivot point for dynamic rollover.

Dragging out isn´t a good idea, cause the undercarriage isn´t designed to be draged through dirt.
I would dig down and use a hydraulik jack to level the helicopter, put a plank underneath the landing gear, remove the jack and fly the bird away....

Greetings Flying Bull

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

OK. There is easy access to the site, and no shortage of equipment or materials nearby. I'm puzzled why it took more than a couple of hours. I forgot the link, here it is.
Rescue helicopter grounded at Bodega Head | The Press Democrat (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/3100680-181/rescue-helicopter-grounded-at-bodega)

[nonsense]

http://cbssanfran.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/bodega-chopper.jpg

"Heavy fog forced the helicopter to land on a slope during the rescue, and the angle it’s now stuck in makes it unsafe to lift off." (http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/11/12/coast-guard-helicopter-used-in-bodega-bay-rescue-now-stuck/)

"The helicopter touched down on soft, sloping ground and began to sink in, preventing a safe take off, Coast Guard spokeswoman Loumania Stewart said." (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/11/13/coast-guard-rescue-helicopter-grounded-at-bodega-head.html)

"It was unclear why it couldn't be flown away. Officials said it was not damaged."
(I was going to link that to the recent discussion about slope limits for takeoff, but I couldn't find it)

[cattletruck]

The risk of dynamic rollover precludes any attempt to unstick oneself from the bog, better to jack it up and stick some wooden planks under the wheels, but even that carries its risks.

I'm sure those on the scene will do the right thing eventually.

[sycamore]

CH-47,or CH-53...can`t be that difficult...

[skadi]

According to the pic in here they already pulled it to level ground:

Rescue helicopter grounded at Bodega Head | The Press Democrat (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/3100680-181/rescue-helicopter-grounded-at-bodega)

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/csp/mediapool/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=eIf3tYZaInr83dp M$8JXpM$daE2N3K4ZzOUsqbU5sYtb4O6ootUKmtLZXzS$mUNZWCsjLu883Yg n4B49Lvm9bPe2QeMKQdVeZmXF$9l$4uCZ8QDXhaHEp3rvzXRJFdy0KqPHLoM evcTLo3h8xh70Y6N_U_CryOsw6FTOdKL_jpQ-&CONTENTTYPE=image/jpeg

So why dont they want it to fly away now?

skadi

[Ian Corrigible]

"Bodega Bay...Bodega Bay?! Oh, no! We've got to get out of here -- now! Damn! Hurry!"

http://i.imgur.com/tnRz9SY.jpg

:E

I/C

[OvertHawk]

PrivatePilotRadarTech

Regarding "why it did not take a couple of hours" as there was "lots of equipment nearby"???

This is not the kind of job you should rush, or need to rush. The aircraft is safe - why screw it up by rushing? Getting this wrong will wreck the aircraft and risk lives. As for equipment nearby - i imagine that would not have included a (highly specialised) set of jacks for a Dauphin / Dolphin!

[MightyGem]

Had the same with an Army Lynx when the downhill skid sank in soft ground, putting the a/c out of limits. Took the crew ages to dig out from under the uphill skid to get back in limits. :mad:

[glendalegoon]

call JOE PATRONE...he got that 707 unstuck just in time...shouldn't be hard.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

OvertHawk

Regarding "rushing" the job of flying the CG Dolphin out of there, it got stuck on Monday and was still there on Wednesday. San Francisco is just a 1.5 hr drive away. Not a lot of rushing going on. I did find an interesting quote: "We were digging behind the main landing gear to safely roll it back down the hill onto the path to get it onto more level ground," US Coast Guard Chief Aviation Maintenance Technician David Blowers said. That explains part of my puzzlement, the first photos I saw showed the Dolphin on the path, looking very flyable, not where it set down. I should add that we're in a 3 yr drought. Might be a little mud out there, but not much, as you can see from the photo that Skadi posted.

[Gordy]

Bodega Bay has water nearby..... California as a whole my have a drought, but I can assure you the Bay and nearby surrounding area is wet.

[as365n4]

Dragging out isn´t a good idea, cause the undercarriage isn´t designed to be draged through dirt. :*

Why not?

There is an De-Bogging kit listed in the ICO Chapter 13-10-...
and there is a procedure in the AMM Chapter 09-10-... which tells the Engineers how to use it.

It's not an difficult task and can be done forward or backwards, depends which direction is easier to access. ;)

The Landing Gear is designed and tested for these kind of "accidents"!

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

Here's an article on the resolution- it flew out at 4:30 pm Wednesday, so it sat there for about 48 hours.
Helicopter stuck after cliff rescue now back at | The Press Democrat (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/news/3110052-181/helicopter-stuck-after-cliff-rescue?page=1)

There seems to be some rivalry between the Coast Guard and our Sheriff's helicopter crews. You might enjoy reading this harrowing tale:
Sonoma County helicopter pilot honored for daring rescue | The Press Democrat (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/home/3100937-181/sonoma-county-helicopter-pilot-honored)

[Um... lifting...]

Glad to see they got out of it OK. As to night cliff rescues in N. California...

Both sailing vessels made it through the night safely.

Date of incident: 12 July 1994

Crash related deaths:
LT Laurence B. Williams (CG Aviator #2887)
LT Mark E. Koteek (CG Aviator #3113)
ASMCS Peter A. Leeman (CG Rescue Swimmer #147)
AM1 Michael R. Gill

Air Station the aircraft and/or crew were assigned to:
Air Station Humboldt Bay, CA

Aircraft type and Coast Guard tail number:
Aérospatiale HH-65A Dolphin, 6541

Location of the incident: Shelter Cove, CA

Description of the incident:
This crew was responding to a grounded sailing vessel. It was dark and the weather was poor as this crew attempted to descend through the fog to assist the vessel in distress. The helicopter impacted the side of a cliff and the entire crew was lost.

Date of incident: 8 June 1997

Crash related deaths:
LT Jeffrey F. Crane (CG Aviator #3188)
LTJG Charles W. Thigpen IV (CG Aviator #3310)
AD3 Richard L. Hughes
ASM3 James G. Caines (CG Rescue Swimmer #425)

Air Station the aircraft and/or crew were assigned to:
Air Station Humboldt Bay, CA

Aircraft type and tail number:
Aérospatiale HH-65A Dolphin, 6549

Location of the incident: At sea off the coast of Northern California

Description of the incident:
Responding to a sailing vessel taking on water at night the crew of CG-6549 perished in poor weather conditions and high seas. It is believed that the aircraft impacted the water while attempting to make an approach to the vessel.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

It's a dangerous business. The local sheriff dept has lost 3 helicopters too:
Angel-1 crashed in 1977 while returning to the airport after searching for a lost child, killing Sgt. Wilkinson.

Angel-2 crashed in October of 1980, killing both deputy sheriff’s aboard, Brent Jameson and Bliss Magley, as they were returning to the airport following a late night call-out for an officer involved shooting.

In 1981 the county purchased a new MD 500D dubbed “Henry-1”, the name still used today. This helicopter was troubled with numerous mechanical problems including five emergency landings due to engine failure. The final emergency landing in the summer of 1982 left the helicopter severely damaged on tidal rocks North of Jenner.

[[email protected]]

It's a dangerous business. No it's not - those were 3 avoidable CFITs.

[500e]

Can hear the incoming Crab :sad:
Still a sad loss of life

[inputshaft]

I did an exchange tour with the USCG, not long after the two accidents in the mid 90s, a couple of Air Stations north from Humboldt Bay.

I agree with Crab 100% on this one. SAR is only dangerous if you go out ill prepared and lacking in judgement because of deficiencies in training. The Coast Guard I saw at the time was so risk averse in the training environment, and therefore the training was so limited, that it failed to properly prepare the crews for the environment they had to operate in.

Good and brave people, nevertheless.

[Helilog56]

Good and brave perhaps....but not very bright either!!!!!:ugh:

[inputshaft]

Not really sure what you mean there Helilog, or what exactly you comment on, so I hope I'm responding appropriately.

Actually, a lot of them were very bright and experienced individuals, but good judgement doesn't only come from within. It comes from having seen similar situations in training and filters down from the whole ethos of the organization you serve in.

[Boudreaux Bob]

Just exactly how does One teach "Judgement"?

If we consider the latest round of CFIT crashes in the UK, combine them with the ever constant roll call of the same in the US EMS Industry, and juxtapose any number of otherwise avoidable crashes like say the R-44 losing a Tail Rotor to a fuel mat......I would offer the Rotorcraft World does not do a very good job of it in general.

This "Judgement" thing does not stop with CFIT....it applies to each and every one of us as we go about our daily business.

Essentially, is it not the art of knowing when to say "NO!"?

No, the weather is beyond MY mininums!

No, that maintenance practice is insufficient to guarantee safety!

No, the Regulation does not prevent stupid conduct!

No, I shall not put myself and others at Risk just because the Rules, Regulations, and Boss tell me I can....and will!

Just what is this thing called "Judgement" anyway?

It seems a very nebulous term that has many variations around the World.

[Helilog56]

CFIT is 100% avoidable....since when is training required for common sense?

[inputshaft]

Really Helilog56?

So being able to get into an inlet in a rocky coastline, at night, in an onshore "50kt fog", or establishing a stable night hover 50 miles offshore with rapidly changing sea references and no horizon, is something you're just born with?

I"ll have to defer to your obviously greater knowledge and experience on that one.

That's the kind of CFIT we're talking about here, not cruising along at 2000ft until you're stupid enough to hit a hill.

[[email protected]]

Good and brave perhaps....but not very bright either!!!!! a bit harsh there helilog - if your operating authority won't let you train for such conditions yet expects you to perform rescues in the same conditions then there is a certain inevitability about the outcome - very sad.

Train hard, fight easy is an excellent maxim.

[Helilog56]

Harsh perhaps, and yes all to sad.....but, is one that naïve, not to realize approaching conditions and turn back no matter what your operating authority or rules state?
And yes, I Have spent the better part of 38 years, flying from the Beaufort Sea to South America on its shores and mountains, and am very, very aware of what conditions are like and how quickly they can change. Training, crew resource management, and guidance/ mentoring is something I truly believe in, but it still does not ensure common sense or good judgement with some people.

[[email protected]]

Training, crew resource management, and guidance/ mentoring is something I truly believe in, but it still does not ensure common sense or good judgement with some people. Very true Helilog but there is often a sense of duty when employed on Search and Rescue operations that can skew that judgement and lead people to accept higher risks because lives are at stake.

The trouble is, if you have never trained in those conditions, it is easier to be optimistic about your chances of success because you don't realise how hazardous the environment you are about to enter actually is.

As inputshaft highlights - a risk-averse management structure doesn't actually make things safer....far from it because you then allow inadequately trained crews to put themselves at greater risk - unwittingly because they don't really understand the risks - than if they had been exposed to those risks, in a controlled fashion, during training.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

I went out to Bodega Head today and looked over the site where the CG Dolphin was stuck. As I guessed, no mud whatsoever. No ruts. There were a lot of faint tire tracks in the grass at what I figure was the landing site, but no sign of any digging there. The only evidence of digging was at the path, where they widened it to make a flat spot to take off. It looks to me like the sole issue was the slope, which is probably 10%. They literally picked the steepest place around to land, while there were flat areas within 100 yds/meters, two gravel parking lots and a flat paved road within 1000'/300 meters. I expect better judgment than this. The boy who fell off the cliff was rescued and transported to the hospital by local firefighters (who deal with these incidents on a regular basis). He's still in a coma.

[SuperF]

Obviously the crew had that bit of common sense to pick, on the ground anywhere, rather than try to find somewhere better, and end up another bunch of guys that pushed on and killed themselves. I guess that they got to that, oh $hit situation, saw a landing spot, put it down reassessed, oh well that's us done boys, shut it down we are walking from here.

I was told when training, it's better to be on the ground wishing you were flying, then in the air wishing you were on the ground...

[Vie sans frontieres]

PrivtPilotRadarTech

I expect better judgment than this (sic)

What is the basis for this expectation? Are you their boss, their examiner or their regulator? Which one?

Slopes can be deceptive at night when you first recce them. But I imagine you know that. :hmm:

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

SuperF- they were under no pressure to land. They were there to transport an injured child, they could have hoisted him aboard as he was already in a rescue basket. They failed to complete their mission and disabled their aircraft for 48 hrs, while many better options were readily available- flat ground nearby, two gravel parking lots, a paved road, using the hoist and aborting the landing.

Vie sans frontieres (sic) Their pay comes out of my pocket. This is what they are supposed to be doing, it doesn't seem too much to expect them to choose a safe landing spot when so many were available. In the USA, we call that judgment. I was in the USAF, I would have been in a lot of trouble if I'd disabled my equipment for 48 hrs.

[Vie sans frontieres]

PrivtPilotRadarTech


In Britain we have a feature called the Daily Mail/Mail Online comments page where people with similar views to yourself are most welcome.

[diginagain]

... they were under no pressure to land.I guess you must have missed this bit in the article:
Heavy fog forced the helicopter to land on a slope during the rescue

[icedriver]

You f#€k one goat!

[Boudreaux Bob]

Private Pilot/Radar Tech....flight crew paychecks come out of your very own pocket? Really?

Do tell us how the accounting for that takes place....you get an Invoice each pay period or something?

Now here I sit, thinking what it must have been like that night....near zero vis in Fog in some unloved terrain and the Crew elects to park it right where they are based upon Safety Considerations....and you think they "failed"?

Yeah Right!

[JohnDixson]

BB, ( and others ), could it be that the crew involved knew that when they made a judgment call like this, they were certain of being backed up by their boss?

The hypothetical leader says to the aviators: Look, you are trained professionals and used to succeeding in flexible circumstances, BUT, if you are uncertain and have second thoughts about a particular operation, at any phase of it, stop it and call me. Tell whoever that I called it off. We will then figure out what to do next, and I can handle the heat from upstairs.

As some very experienced contributors have noted here, realistic training and experience in the mission are necessary factors in advancing the quality of a pilot's judgment, and all I add is that an environment of feeling able to say knock it off without repercussion might further enable that judgment.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

Here's a google maps link which shows the situation.
https://goo.gl/maps/rlDlK
It's not the middle of nowhere, it's a very popular spot. Note the parking lots. Note the paved roads. The spot they chose to land is at bottom center, between the two trails. The boy fell off the cliff at bottom center.

Diginagain, love that quote:
"Heavy fog forced the helicopter to land on a slope during the rescue "

Um... no. How does fog force one to land on a slope? As opposed to a parking lot 300 yds/meters away? Critics, no problem. Thankfully, I'm never going to fly with you. This is a "controlled flight into terrain" situation, completely avoidable.

Here's another local war story, where the pilot took two nurses with him:
Untitled Page (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20040108X00032&ntsbno=LAX04FA076&akey=1)

With great power comes great responsibility. And a man has to know his limitations.

[diginagain]

Um... no. How does fog force one to land on a slope? As opposed to a parking lot 300 yds/meters away?Perhaps you are assuming that they could see the parking lot. Or perhaps I'm assuming that the vis was dropping so rapidly that they took the decision to land where they did, while they could.

Thankfully, I'm never going to fly with you.Yes, I'm quite relieved too.

And a man has to know his limitations. Great quote. So why won't you accept that, on the day, someone did, and put the cab down where he judged to be safe?

[Boudreaux Bob]

John,

I am solidly on the side of the Crew in this. They landed safely. The Aircraft is fine. They are fine. The Casualty is in Hospital.

It all worked out in the end with no harm done.

It could very easily have gone horribly wrong but they made the right decision and parked the machine.

Bravo Zulu!

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

I'm assuming that the crew had a gps at least as good as the $99 gps I have, which would show the terrain and roads in the vicinity of the accident. That 4 yr old boy had a compound fracture, among other severe injuries, and received a blood transfusion as soon as he got to the hospital- by road. Because the helicopter couldn't fly. What part of that is it that you don't understand? It wasn't a trivial mistake.

[Helilog56]

As pointed out....the flight crew exercised great judgement in landing the aircraft...nobody hurt, aircraft not damaged....kudos to the crew for a job well done. :D

[SuperF]

Prvtpltradartech, I'm curious. Would you have preferred that the crew pushed on, so that the flight report turned out like the other one you posted, where the pilot took two nurses with him in the accident?

At least that way the poor kid wouldn't be in a coma. Instead he would be DEAD! :ugh:

And if that is what you call a CFIT situation, then I'm guilty of it, quite regularly, most days. I control my flight all the way down into the terrain, then I shut down. It's CFIT accidents that we are concerned about, not CFIT situations.

[[email protected]]

Prvtpltradartech - I am guessing you have never been a commercial or professional pilot as you don't seem to understand the responsibilities of the captain of the aircraft - they start with the safety of his crew, then his aircraft and then completing the mission.

This captain made exactly the right decision - hover taxying in fog is fraught with dangers, not least the wires that most definitely are NOT marked on your GPS.

[Boudreaux Bob]

Private Pilot is cut out to be a genuine rooting tooting US Helicopter EMS Pilot of the Old School.....the kind that forgets there was a time (and still is actually) that Injured People ride Ground Ambulances to the Trauma Center before there were Helicopters and the Attached Gods.

[JohnDixson]

Crab and BB, does it seem like the pilots who have been thru experiences akin to this are the ones who ( as I do as well ) agree that the Coasties made the smart call? I will admit to being a little influenced by contact with that group over 39 years off and on. Before even reading about the weather in play here, my inclination would have been that if a USCG pilot called it off, thats all one needed to judge the conditions.

Supportive Anecdote:

Got a call from a pilot who was in a country south of the border with a brand new S-76 sold into a head of state operation. he was doing some transition training and wound up doing a mission with the President aboard. Getting close to the destination, they ran into a situation wherein there was a really large rainstorm that had enveloped the destination and wasn't moving. No navaids or the like and it was beside a large mountain. Rather than hovering up the road in the storm, he put the machine down beside the road and called for ground transport.

I submitted this action for a safety award ( a reasonable, but spendable one ) which the pilot received and which we used at the next Safety Stand Down to emphasize the principle that several others have proposed here: when the PIC makes a decision that the circumstances do not warrant further flight, that decision ought to, and will be supported.

Some may know the pilot involved, as he has had a long and respected career. Art Tobey came to SA having been the Ch Pilot at SF Airways in their S-61 operation. Not an amateur instrument pilot either. His word and opinion were always listened to. Certainly one of SA's finest.

There is another possibility here, which may have been in play. The original news story mentioned the machine being on an angle not safe for takeoff, or words to that effect. Have no idea what the slope limits are for the 365, but if the pilot put it down, let it settle on the gear at flat pitch, and noticed that the attitude indicator showed a roll attitude a degree or two over their published limit, that may have complicated things. Does not change my assessment of their decision one whit.

[ShyTorque]

I'm assuming that the crew had a gps at least as good as the $99 gps I have, which would show the terrain and roads in the vicinity of the accident.

What a naive thing to post. Since when does a GPS allow the pilot to hover taxi around in fog? :ugh:

[Helilog56]

Armchair quarterbacks know all don't they.....:rolleyes:

[Boudreaux Bob]

Art Tobey is a true Gentleman and very much a "real" helicopter pilot!:D

[CharlieOneSix]

Here's another Bravo Zulu to the crew for not pushing on and thereby exercising true airmanship. Hopefully PrivtPilotRadarTech will take on board and learn from the posts of professional pilots who unlike him have been there and done that.

Art Tobey - super guy! I was on my honeymoon in Florida back in 1982 and he and I got mightily pissed one night, much to the displeasure of my now ex-wife!

[Boudreaux Bob]

Art did have a knack for leading in the occasional "Drunk Front".....sadly I was always easily led!:E

[Um... lifting...]

Back when flying the orange machines, had a similar situation landing on some poor grazing land in light fog on a moonless night. We were following a beacon from a light airplane crash.

I defy any pilot over rural and rocky land (such as N. California) to determine from the air the slope of any wee bit of terrain + / - 10º for those points where the landing gear will contact the surface at night, in fog. $99 must go a long way for a GPS in any part of the world that will spit out that kind of data.

The terrain in our case was dusty hardpan, and it was a volcanic island, so it tended to be higher in the middle than on the edges. We could see the crashed airplane, and we concluded (rightly, as it turned out) that they had flown into the upsloping terrain. We had no Doppler, so the landing was visual and on NVGs. Flew a no-hover approach to a spot the crew agreed looked "pretty flat" and monitored the attitude until the collective was full down. We were lucky, as it all came in below 10º, though if memory serves, not much below, and we didn't shut down.

We had a plan to pull pitch and do the approach again had it turned out to be steeper than we hoped (based upon what the attitude was as we lowered the collective), as hovering around in scrub & hardpan in dark, dusty fog on an island on NVGs is as good a way to crash a helicopter as any other I've heard.

At least during my USCG days, it was considered appallingly poor form to criticize the actions of a crew when that crew wasn't handy to defend those actions.

Did we do ours correctly? No idea, and there was some lively and beery debate in the wardroom about it (and in which we joined in), but in the end we got one fellow to a proper trauma unit (the other fellow died on impact or shortly thereafter) and didn't bend the airframe so I lose no sleep about it either way.

Oh, and why did the airplane crash occur in the first place? CFII and student out on a night IFR training flight. Planned an approach to a private airport that was closed at night, so couldn't do the approach. We assume (but do not know) that they lost situational awareness while figuring out what to do next and flew into terrain. The fellow who died was the student. So far as I know, the CFII chose to take up another line of work.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

This is very entertaining, and occasionally educational. I thank the poster who answered my question, explaining that the problem keeping the CG Dolphin from taking off was excessive slope. Regarding the "dense fog", here's a photo from the scene.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/csp/mediapool/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=rEkmmdz_1bvBtqS zTImZAs$daE2N3K4ZzOUsqbU5sYthKnR67f8yuIcxoXLtjPUvWCsjLu883Yg n4B49Lvm9bPe2QeMKQdVeZmXF$9l$4uCZ8QDXhaHEp3rvzXRJFdy0KqPHLoM evcTLo3h8xh70Y6N_U_CryOsw6FTOdKL_jpQ-&CONTENTTYPE=image/jpeg
See any dense fog? Maybe the hot air from the Rotorheads forum dissipated it, and dried the "mud" the Dolphin was stuck in. Now I was quite interested in learning something new about flying. I thought Rotorheads would share some wisdom. I learned that they are mostly blowhards with little technical knowledge, incapable of simply calling a spade a spade. Not a problem, in the field of electronics we call spades spades, and strive to learn from mistakes. So I learned about the Four Ws: Wind, Wires, Way In, Way Out, and the Four Ss: Size, Shape, Slope, Surface. So the CG crew failed two of those, Way Out and Slope. I will leave you with some words of wisdom from James McCollough, Test Pilot for Bell.
"The limiting factor to any slope landing is cyclic control margin. If the pilot determines that he is approaching the limit of lateral cyclic control margin prior to being firmly planted on the slope with collective reduced to low power it is his responsibility to abort the landing attempt."
None of you mentioned that. Now you know. I feel like I may have saved some lives today.

[Boudreaux Bob]

Since you are quite the all knowing of all things to do with helicopters....care to enlighten us about other limitations that apply to Slope Landings? There are more than a few that apply and they vary by which direction one lands on a Slope you know.

There are different limitations imposed by the design of the aircraft as well too....but then I am so sure you know all that anyway....but just left them out for brevity sakes!

If one lands with the nose pointed uphill...where does Lateral Cyclic enter into the equation?

If you are going to play the "Troll"....at least be a reasonably educated Troll will you?

[Um... lifting...]

None of you mentioned that.

Actually, I did.

In the world of electronics, one usually has an opportunity to remove the component and reinstall it while seated comfortably at the bench, unless one is not versed in one's craft and goes around installing components into energized circuits.

In the world of night helicopter SAR (of which I only have a couple decades of experience) the do-over is frequently not an option.

I suspect that Mr. McCollough of Bell (since you're bandying his name about so freely) might even concede that a laden SAR aircraft alighting upon a slope of unknown pitch just might exceed its slope limitations settling upon the struts at night, upon which the prudent course of action would be to remain in place.

I have 4000 hours of experience in the very type (and indeed probably a few hundred hours in the very airframe) these pilots were flying and yet I don't feel sufficiently informed to second-guess any of their actions.

But yet you do? :ugh:

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

BS Bob- I'm not a BS'er. I put it right in my handle, I'm just a private pilot. But the basic concept of landing is the same: look for a good place to land. If you realize it's a bad place to land, abort. I've done that. That's what this CG pilot should have done. James McCollough had the cojones to say "it is [the pilot's] responsibility to abort the landing attempt" in this circumstance and so do I. You should grow a pair.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

Um Lifting,
I apologize, you DID reference the correct procedure for landing on a slope: "We had a plan to pull pitch and do the approach again had it turned out to be steeper than we hoped (based upon what the attitude was as we lowered the collective)"

That is exactly what the CG pilot should have done. Why can't you bring yourself to speak that truth?

But then you proceed to blow it:
"I suspect that Mr. McCollough of Bell (since you're bandying his name about so freely) might even concede that a laden SAR aircraft alighting upon a slope of unknown pitch just might exceed its slope limitations settling upon the struts at night."

That's why Mr. McCollough is an authority, and you're not. He chose his words well: "If the pilot determines that he is APPROACHING the limit of lateral cyclic control margin... it is his responsibilityto abort the landing attempt." That was the safe thing to do, and no big deal to try again nearby. But they proceeded with an unsafe landing and it resulted in mission failure, and a SAR helicopter that was out of service for 48 hrs. Those are facts. If the slope had been steeper they could have had a dynamic rollover. It was completely unnecessary, as there were many safe, flat areas to land nearby and firefighters already on scene to point them out.
You have 4000 hrs in type? This fellow SAR pilot (http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20040108X00032&ntsbno=LAX04FA076&akey=1) had 12,858 hours in rotorcraft. I'm not impressed with his judgment, or yours.

[Helilog56]

So I have over 21,000 hours rotorcraft....big deal. Does that make me an expert, hardly. The learning curve as a pilot continues to the day one hangs up the helmet (or headset). I actually feel sorry for you pprt .....your condescending attitude with what you consider your superior knowledge is a dangerous attitude when it comes to airmanship.....I wish you safe flying, because your naive enough to get yourself into some serious trouble without knowing it if you actually do fly....mind you, your probably a sunny Sunday plank driver anyways.

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

Helilog56- I have zero hours in rotorcraft. Does that mean I don't have common sense, hardly. Maybe you haven't been following along, but learning is what I've been doing, and safety is what I'm advocating. I feel sorry for YOU, I'll soon depart this blizzard of BS and you'll still be up to your neck.

It's very simple. They picked an unsafe place to land when there were safe places nearby. Having picked and unsafe place they should have aborted the landing and tried elsewhere. You don't need 20,000 hours in rotorcraft to see the truth in that.

I've obviously broken a taboo by criticizing this landing, but I see that as your problem, not mine. Professionals? Not as I define professional. Now this guy is professional (http://www.bellhelicopter.com/MungoBlobs/675/612/Vol%2018%20number%204%20-En.pdf).

[CharlieOneSix]

What!! You have zero hours in rotorcraft and yet you seem to think your opinions based on zero experience are more valid than the professional pilots on here who, as I have said before, have been there and done that.

Your criticisms of the manner in which the Coast Guard pilots concerned were doing their job is as valid as me using 'common sense' and criticising the manner in which a brain surgeon carries out his profession. Zero validity!

I flew helicopters for just under 40 years, both military and civil. I was still learning about my profession until the day I retired. As I didn't have enough time to make all the possible mistakes myself I tried to learn from the mistakes of others and to recognise when things were being done well. These Coast Guard guys didn't make a error, they made the correct decisions. One thing I never did is to take advice from an armchair troll like you, PrivtPilotRadarTech, about how to do my job.

Guys, haven't we fed this troll enough? He's never going to accept anything we say and we are achieving nothing. This thread is dead as far as I am concerned so I'm off to the next one.

[rantanplane]

PrivPil:

the landing was definitely safe, the only injured person has fallen off the verge of a cliff…

In this case the airframe is not broken, apparently not even a scratch.
Why? Perhaps because the crew tried to avoid unsafe actions, either aborting the landing or taking off from an unsafe position in marginal weather conditions? The decision is always with the pilot(s) and need to be respected.
The aircraft and crew are required for the next rescue as well.

If you doubt then don't. Every pilot, either professional or not, has the very own skills and limitation, on that day in that moment and situation, which he or she needs to understand and respect.

Please tell everybody again what you believe is common sense.

[JohnDixson]

PPRT referenced the Jim McCullough article:

" If the pilot determines that he is approaching the limit of lateral cyclic control margin prior to being firmly planted on the slope with collective reduced to low power it is his responsibility to abort the landing attempt."

Certainly conservative and safe advice, but there is some official guidance at odds with his writing as promulgated by the US Army for the UTTAS design which I will paraphrase. The Army required those competing aircraft to land at 12 degree slopes from any angle and 15 degree slopes laterally. Full control was allowed to be used. Full control was in fact required for the left wheel upslope condition. I believe we used full aft control for the nose down slope ( at most forward CG ) as well.

Guess we were being absolutely unprofessional. Didn't know any better. Shucks.

[Boudreaux Bob]

Fortunately Pprune provides for the ultimate Safety Device when it comes to Trolls. Done....not to hear from this guy again. :roll eyes:

In Radar Tech terms....I just turned the Gain Control to eliminate bogus returns.

[busdriver02]

PVTPLT,

Something to consider while you're learning: We weren't there.

If the fog was blamed, I have to assume they couldn't see the better landing options. Likewise, I assume they knew they were right at the limit for their slope limitations and chose to continue the landing. All that makes me think they were concerned that the fog was getting worse and were at risk of losing control of the aircraft. What I don't know is the particular avionics fit on that aircraft or the maintenance status, I also don't know if the pilot was already starting to experience spatial disorientation; all of which would play into the a decision to land vice perform an ITO, declare an emergency and fly home IFR.

For you to dig up a flight manual quote without asking about all the factors that actually affect in flight decisions shows your inexperience. In any event like this there is rarely black and white, things are mostly grey. At the end of the day, this worked out good. That doesn't mean there isn't learning to be had or things to do different next time, but hand wringing about unprofessional behavior based on what your non-flight approved GPS shows is not helpful for anyone.

I suggest you learn to listen more, speak less and ask questions from those more experienced than you before passing judgement. You may be on to something despite others experience, but you need to do the due diligence to make sure you're right before telling the emperor he's naked. When you don't, you get what you have here; the experienced folks ignore you.

Busdriver

[Gordy]

PrivtPilotRadarTech

Do you work for Sonoma County SO?

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

Gordy- good question. No, I have nothing to do with the sheriff, don't know any of them, etc. The helicopter crew seems very effective, they do a lot with what they have. Perhaps you read this article, which I linked previously:
Sonoma County helicopter pilot honored for daring rescue | The Press Democrat (http://www.pressdemocrat.com/home/3100937-181/sonoma-county-helicopter-pilot-honored)
They flew 250 miles to do a rescue the Coasties refused to complete, and now the pilot has been named "Pilot of the Year". It was a stranded SAR team he rescued; imagine how that played out in the SAR community.

Here are some photos showing the lay of the land at the Bodega Bay incident. The first one shows where the Coasties landed and took off, the people in the background are at the cliff edge. The sheriff happened to fly by, the photo was taken beside a paved rd. (you have to copy and paste those links, they don't seem to work when clicked)

http://1drv.ms/1vuyE7z (http://www.pprune.org/<iframe src=)
The next one shows the flat ground to the right of the first photo. I could have landed my Cessna there. You can see the tracks the firefighters left.

http://1drv.ms/1vuA9mi (http://www.pprune.org/<iframe src=)
You boys take a good look at that. Good news- the 4 yr old boy has regained consciousness. Astounding.

http://1drv.ms/1vuyE7z

[Gordy]

I read the article about the SCSO and disagree with their decision to attempt the rescue even though this time it worked out. I believe their risk assessment was flawed or they did not do one. I believe they may have been driven by other factors.

Ass to the Coast Guard Landing---You still don't get it---you were NOT on the aircraft when it landed and are basing your views on a photo taken after the landing. The pilot in command made a decision to land and, stuck by it and no harm was done. He may not have seen the flat field. I will tell you that it is extremely difficult to find flat ground sometimes.

The fog moves quickly in that area....we do NOT know the exact conditions when he landed.

And before you say that I know not of what I speak---I flew in the Bay Area for 8 years full time. I was a pilot with the Contra Costa County Sheriff Department and actually flew the Sonoma guys on a ride along in our 407 BEFORE they bought theirs. I applied for a job with them and chose not to pursue it further after visiting and getting an idea of their "culture". (Admittedly this was 15 years ago--things may have changed).

[SuperF]

privat pilot, why don't you go out to that place in the middle of a foggy windy night, turn off your car lights, turn the flash off on your camera, then take some photos and see how good they turn out. that is pretty much what you can see out of a helicopter at night.

better still, once you are there, keep your lights off, turn your GPS on, windows up, get someone in the car to point a torch at your eyes flick it on and off occasionally, and squirt the windscreen washer occasionally. now while all that is happening, slowly cruise around that area at a slow helicopter speed of about 40-60 kts. thats about 45-70 miles an hour, after you have done that, come back on here and tell us all how easy it was and that those useless pilots should have killed themselves trying to move a helicopter that HAD ALREADY LANDED SAFELY!!!

[lelebebbel]

Forget it people, that guy is hopeless. 0 hours rotorcraft but knows all about it, despite a couple hundred thousand hours of combined experience on here all violently disagreeing. This sort of ignorance is beyond all discussion, that's just a case for the ignore function.

[Helilog56]

For a guy that said "I'm going to depart this blizzard of BS", you still can't help yourself. For a self professed intellect pprt, your broadcasting "moron"....

[SuperF]

You have to thank the guy tho. He's done something that I haven't seen happen in all the time I've been reading these forums. He's got almost every pilot on here to agree! We've got the Brits, Europeans, Americans, Canadians, Ozzies and Kiwis all agreeing on something.:D

[Old Age Pilot]

I've never been able to really understand where these people come from or indeed, why they get hooked on a particular story and get so wound up about it.

There's a few names on here that clearly state themselves as non-pilots or non-experts, yet have this furiously aggressive adamancy in certain controversial incidents. These 'names' all seem to be relatively newly registered. Maybe they're all the same person? Who knows.

What I do know, is that these people exhibit classic signs of being the exact kind of person I would never wish to fly with.

To me, this bloke lost his argument when he said:

I'm assuming that the crew had a gps at least as good as the $99 gps I have, which would show the terrain and roads in the vicinity of the accident.

In the world of aviation, one has to have humility and bags of humbleness to truly learn and live. The arrogant and prideful tend to hurt themselves at some point or another. Or worse; hurt somebody else.

Relax, guys. Don't get yourselves wound up. This person is either simply a troll having a lot of weird fun winding people up, or actually has more knowledge on this incident than is letting on. After all, who in their right sane mind, could possibly have an opinion so strong about how events unfolded when they were not there to see them!? I'm no rocket scientist, but I know that things quite often didn't happen the way one assumes they did. In fact, if you really truly found out how the holes in the swiss cheese did line up, you may be completely surprised!

To make judgements based on no first hand knowledge is folly.

Be nice to each other. It really does make the world a nicer place :ok:

[rantanplane]

perhaps Priv Pil comments should be analyzed in depth with all respect to his personality.

How many crashes have to do with ignorance and lack of situational awareness, just recently with some very experienced professional pilots? How often have unexperienced pilots crashes because they have just done what they have been told to do or expected to do, or put themselves under pressure because others did something they wanted to do as well?

I remember a great article by an fw airline pilot . He counted all crashes and incidents where the superior judgement by HUMANS and their very individual skills saved their lives and hundreds of others - in most cases based on long experience but thats not everything one needs to be a safe pilot :hmm:

If pilots (and all other people) are not allowed to trust their individual judgement? I think we, really we altogether as humans, have lost completely.

btw, Super F, if you split between Brits and Europeans please separate the Austrians as well..:E

[[email protected]]

I thought you had a little corporal with a dodgy moustache for that back in the 1930s;););)

[rantanplane]

oh yes the little corporal and all the flies following the brown **** ... a good example for a responsible, sane and solid decision making process within some sort of a cooperate culture.. but surely it wasn't a crash what happened the following decade..:roll eyes:

[PrivtPilotRadarTech]

Helilog56, yes, I'm reminded of that Al Pacino line:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPw-3e_pzqU

But this is it, last post here. I've put it simply, I've posted links and photos, I've backed up my opinions by quoting an expert. I get a few glimmers of comprehension, but mostly a blizzard of BS. "You need special jacks!" "There was dense fog!" "It was stuck in mud!" "You can't criticize the pilot's judgment, it's not done!" None of that was true, and of course most of the drivel was ad hominem insults with no attempt to address the facts. Boring and unprofessional.

Why am I interested in this incident? It's local, in a very popular place that I've hiked and photographed many times, so I know it better than any of you. I wondered why an undamaged $10 million airframe was sitting there on a broad, treeless, grassy slope. I learned the key word was "slope" and read a tutorial about landing a rotorcraft on a slope. It was quite interesting, I enjoy technical explanations and the science of flight.

I saw the photos and videos shot at the scene, which showed it lit up like a Christmas tree by the firefighters, and good visibility at ground level. I also knew it was parched out there, and later verified it: no mud whatsoever. There were lots of flat places to land, even paved roads and two gravel parking lots 300 yds/meters away, so there was no need to do a slope landing, or even land in a field.

So why was that airframe stuck there? PILOT ERROR. Why was it stuck there for 2 days? That's on the commander. My commander would have had that asset back in service ASAP.

So it's dark, there's a fog layer, wind out of the NW. Your mission is to transport a severely injured 4 yr old boy to the hospital. What do you do? Well heck, I'd land in the friggin' parking lot.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3029071,-123.0578792,123m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en

This being 2014, I've no doubt the CG has gps with terrain and surely bird's eye view. Just punch those numbers in, it's a clear shot in from the NE. No terrain, trees, or wires, 130' elevation. There's even a privy there, in case my PILOT ERROR comment caused someone to have a bowel movement.

Mission accomplished.

[nyker]

You just don't get it!

[Um... lifting...]

You know, you're right. I suggest you take some meaningful action. To do otherwise would be to shirk your civic duty as a taxpayer and responsible citizen. Why dither around on a message board with a bunch of people who don't appreciate your genius. Yeah, how can it possibly be important what conditions were like at 0200 that night? You've got a single snapshot of a bunch of idling vehicles surrounded by hot lamps! You've hiked there! You could have landed your Cessna there!

Because, dammit, you want some action. Some heads should roll!

Why, you have made a determination of PILOT ERROR! That SOB should have his wings pulled. I'm impressed by this rapid determination of causal factor. While I'm not real familiar with RAF procedures, I suspect crab also is breathless with the alacrity of this finding and may be forwarding your data on to the UK for further study. Normally in the hidebound services in the U.S. of A. it takes convening a mishap board with a minimum of command-level (and usually higher) oversight. Authorization at the flag level for access to the FDR & CVR, a reconstruction of the accident usually with the technical assistance of the NTSB, blood & urine draws from all the crew members, sworn & witnessed statements from the crew members and as many witnesses as you can get your hands on, numerous site visits, simulator reconstructions, and a number of other details I'd have to dig into a manual to remember. It also usually takes (at a bare minimum) weeks for a causal factor determination to be made. And here you've done it with a quick mid-day stroll and the rest from the comfort of your own home with the help of a basic article from HeliProps!

The only fly in the ointment I see here is that determination of PILOT ERROR also requires one thing that we don't have. AN ACCIDENT OR INCIDENT!

But hey, what do I know? Write an actual letter to the following address, and sign it, with your name.

USCG AIR STATION
SFO International Airport
Building 1020
San Francisco, CA 94128
Attn: Commanding Officer

To personalize it, you should start your salutation with: "Dear CDR Campbell,"

Further to this, you should send advance copies to:

RADM Joseph Servidio of the 11th Coast Guard District in Alameda as well as your Congressman, whoever that may be. You don't want these damned aviators protecting their own. You want some damned accountability.

Be certain to advise them that based upon your vast experience as a radar technician (pay grade E-5) in the USAF in the early 1970s and your FAA Private Pilot Certificate Airplane Single-Engine Land without Instrument Rating that you feel qualified to discuss the allocation, manning, maintenance, salvage, deployment, and operation of SRR rotary-wing assets in the maritime and littoral environment, night-aided or otherwise. Tell them of your experience flying on NVGs, spotting wires and estimating angle from the horizontal of off-airport terrain with a degree of precision of + / - 3º. You're a prodigy!

Further advise them that you know precisely how their cockpits are kitted out (which is interesting, because I am retired from that service and even I don't know precisely how their cockpits are kitted out these days, but I can assure you that all the kit you think they have I had nothing of the kind in that aircraft for reasons I'm not going to go into, though I had a number of things you haven't mentioned).

I'm sure you'll find them receptive to your insights. In fact, I'd not be surprised if they call you into SFO for breakfast and the morning OPS briefing. Also be sure to tell them how many airframes they ought to have at SFO. Of course, that would require you to know how many are there now, which is a fact I suspect is not in your possession.

If you're not willing to do this, then you are precisely what most of us believe you to be, and you should go back under your bridge.

[Helilog56]

Yes pprt....mission accomplished alright....you went from moron to stupid moron with another lame attempt to validate your opinion....please keep up the good work.

[rantanplane]

PILOT ERROR is verboten. This chap is so right. Better get my grandfathers friend out again, the little corporal with the mustache. He will sort things out. What shouldn't be MUST NOT BE. Over and out. Final call.
I am now convinced I should stop flying ASAP. I do little mistakes all the time. Well that's what I think. As I understand I am not absolutely perfect, I now know that my flying is simply a matter of continuous PILOT ERROR. Oh dear.
But thanks so much to this chap.
I am also selling my car and push bike and will stay in bed all day. :zzz:

[212man]

Umm...lifting...., thanks - I enjoyed that :ok:

[[email protected]]

I suppose I had better inform the AAIB in UK that they are now obsolete and defunct since anyone wanting to know the cause of any incident (even one that didn't happen) just needs to email PrivyPilotRdrTwat and ask him ..........

[Boudreaux Bob]

Perhaps Private, Shell Management, The Sultan, an FH could form a Consultancy as they sure seem to have all the answers.:rolleyes:

[megan]

Um... lifting... :D:D Superb post. Here was I thinking 40 years a poling taught me nothjin.

Grammer police still have a job though. :hmm:

[chopjock]

Perhaps Private, Shell Management, The Sultan, an FH could form a Consultancy

What about me?

ShyT
Since when does a GPS allow the pilot to hover taxi around in fog?

When grovelling around low level / hover taxying etc, a gps can be very useful when you can not see any landmarks.