Two helicopters involved in fatal Argentinean mid-air

[Ian Corrigible]

At least ten killed after two helicopters filming TV show in Argentina collide (http://www.independent.ie/world-news/americas/at-least-ten-killed-after-two-helicopters-filming-tv-show-in-argentina-collide-31053658.html)

The images appear to show an AStar: La Rioja State Government operates a single AS350 B3 (/H125...), while the Gobierno de la Provincia de Santiago del Estero operates an AS350 B3 (/H125), EC145, Bell 206 and Bell 407.

[mickjoebill]

What is the altitude at the location?
More here...
Three French sports personalities die in Argentina helicopter crash - BBC News (http://m.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-31809231)

Ten ...:{

[mickjoebill]

Local Tv station, TN, with stills prior to accident.
Also names of the victims.

http://vod.tn.com.ar/vod/tn/tn/2015/03/10/accidente-360.mp4/playlist.m3u8

[laurenson]

Realy bad news...:sad:
The LIDAR System from AW sould be instaled on all aircraft, il will help to save life...
Obstacle Proximity Lidar System - DETAIL - AgustaWestland (http://www.agustawestland.com/-/obstacle-proximity-lidar-system)

[[email protected]]

Terrible accident - looks like possible disorientation in dust if it was immediately after take off from the site pictured.

[wiggy]

crab

French TV currently quoting eyewitnesses saying the accident occurred just after take-off, but to be fair no speculation as to cause.

As stated in mickjoebill's link three high profile French sporting personalities killed so it's been the main item on all broadcast media this morning...five other French nationals also lost (TV team) plus two Argentinian pilots.

http://www.france24.com/fr/20150310-reactions-monde-sport-endeuille-mort-champions-arthaud-muffat-vastine/

[HeliHenri]

No dust :(

Video: así fue el accidente de helicópteros en La Rioja | Tragedia aérea en La Rioja - Infobae (http://www.infobae.com/2015/03/10/1714935-video-asi-fue-el-accidente-helicopteros-la-rioja)

[chopcat]

What are we seeing at 15s into the footage flying towards us?

[Ripline]

Looks like birds in the tree - spooked by the downdraft.

Maybe one flew the wrong way & became FOD for the lower machine?

[jimjim1]

As stated, at about 15s in to video.

Formation take off, one hit tree tops?, ...


http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy118/jimjim146/Argentina-heli1_1.png




http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy118/jimjim146/Argentina-heli2_1.png

[sleeper]

Looks like they got too close and had a midaircollision.

[nyker]

Very Sad, RIP

[wiggy]

French TV are now showing the same footage but better quality than the internet feeds above, though not HD...

From that footage it appears to me that there's no significant dust, the helicopters are a considerable distance both beyond and above the trees and also well clear of any birds seen in the footage.

[G0ULI]

Watching the video several times, it looks like both helicopters were flying normally without any obvious faults. A flock of birds rises from the trees but all appear to be heading away from the aircraft. The nearest helicopter appears to commence a turn to the left and impacts the further helicopter which continued to travel in a more or less straight line until the impact. If the pilot in the nearest helicopter was flying in the right hand seat, there is the possibility that he couldn't see the other helicopter before commencing to turn. Looks like it may just be a case of a brief loss of situational awareness possibly compounded by the passengers and film crew looking for the best angles to film.

[SilsoeSid]

AtBDReverCQ

Imho, lookng from about the 10 sec point, it is fairly windy and the aircraft appear to be some way from the tree that the birds emerge from.
The aircraft seem to be moving away from the camera, and the 'lower' ac appears to be climbing.
:(

[wiggy]

GOULI

Only other thought I have, having seen the video now several times (stuck at French airport waiting for flight), is that it's really hard to work the aspect out - I wonder if there's also vertical element to this i.e. was it a case of one aircraft climbing into the underside of the higher one?

Anyhow that's enough speculation from me.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

If it were a briefed formation, it looks like the #2 climbed into the lead.
Failure to maintain separation by the lower, rearward helicopter, who obviously had the responsibility to do so.

[Helilog56]

A very tragic and unnecessary loss of life....:(

[Gemini Twin]

Shocking and totally unnecessary.

[[email protected]]

Very sad, I was hoping the dust might have been some mitigation but it would appear not.

[kilfeder]

I'm a television director who has often used helicopters in filming, including air to air. The director's job is to get the best shots possible, and often this means getting as close as possible. This conflicts with a helicopter pilot's job, which is to fly as required while making sure everyone is completely safe. BBC News - French sports stars killed in Argentina crash (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-31811885)

[Lonewolf_50]

If it were a briefed formation, it looks like the #2 climbed into the lead. Failure to maintain separation by the lower, rearward helicopter, who obviously had the responsibility to do so. Fox, when I used to teach helicopter formation, wing was "stepped up" from lead.
:{
RIP, very sad.

[Wirbelsturm]

Lonewolf,

Totally agree, second aircraft always either above or laterally offset from the lead.

Unfortunately this looks like a camera 'sweep' shot.

Edited to add: Many years ago a very experienced examiner warned me during my training that photography and filming would get me into the most trouble trying to get 'that shot' and always to take extra care during photo shoots. Very wise advice indeed.

Very sad. Condolences to all.

[Gemini Twin]

kilfeder:
It may be the directors job "to get the best shoots in the air by getting as close as possible" but this CANNOT "conflict with the pilot's job" whose primary and over riding responsibility is to ensure safety of flight.

[Same again]

Therein lies a recurring problem with helicopter filming GT. The helicopter company want the prestigious contract that gives them media exposure so they try to accommodate the wishes of the producers. If this involves close formation flying then that is what they will push for. Unless the pilots are assertive, that pressure results in rushed, unbriefed formation flying by pilots who have little experience of it.

I am not suggesting that is what happened in this case but I have seen it time and time again.

[Fareastdriver]

It will be interesting to see what was being recorded by any cameras on board.

[OFBSLF]

I'm a television director who has often used helicopters in filming, including air to air. The director's job is to get the best shots possible, and often this means getting as close as possible.

Just use a longer lens.

[mickjoebill]

From current evidence it is not possible to determine if they were shooting air to air from an open door.
Whilst it would not be unusual, we can't be sure yet if they were manouvering under the direction of the camera crew to perform for the ground or cockpit cameras.

French TV, amongst others, sometimes installs the front left seat backwards, when occupied this restricts the pilot view to the left.

(Outside of war zones) it is very rare for camera crew to be killed on the ground, for instance just one fatality in a decade in the usa. Yet under the stewardship of a highly regulated industry and usually flown by highly experienced mature commercial pilots we lose crew, year in year out shooting aerials.

The most common denominator in aerial filming accidents is not mechanical failure or genuine accident such as a bird strike, but pilots flying the shot directed by the TV crew.

In my view many of these accidents could have been avoided with more planning and better oversight of the flight.


In this case, two pilots, three celebrities, five foreign airborn tv crew, numerous cameras on the ground and in the air, two helicopters and up to three spoken languages, what could possibly go wrong?

If it transpires that either helicopter was under close direction of tv crew then the role of the production company in planning and managing the flight should be investigated. For their sake I hope one of the (reported) eighty TV crew was a designated aerial coordinator.

The production team have returned home, but with due respect and by means of illustrating the significant investment at play, had only a pilot, director and cameraman been killed the programm would have continued.

That's show business, where far too often, flights of fancy end in fatalities.


Mickjoebill

[chopjock]

Just use a longer lens.

Longer lenses shake more and harder to focus.

[Hedge36]

Longer lenses shake more and harder to focus.


Oddly enough, so too does the disintegration of the aircraft.

[RVDT]

Pretty simple what happened.

Failed to maintain their own separation.

Blind spot to blind spot.

Higher machine can't see down and behind and the lower one cannot see up and left. Pilot in RH seat.

Sad operational fail.

PS Contrary to the statements preceding my guess is the tree is about 300 metres closer to the camera.

[PastTense]

One eyewitness:
David Ocampo said: "One of the helicopters sounded as if it was firing off shots or experiencing small explosions that were completely out of place.

There were about five metres between the two of them, but the one in front seemed to stop and that caught my attention. 'The other one smashed into it from behind with its propellor after trying to swerve to avoid it and fell to the ground and exploded. The earth shook when they fell.

I rushed towards it to see if there were any survivors but it was just a ball of flame. 'I couldn't see anything really, just smoke and the tail of one of the two helicopters between the bushes." Moment helicopters carrying French Dropped stars smash into each other killing ten | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2987375/Moment-helicopters-carrying-French-Dropped-stars-smash-killing-ten.html)

So perhaps the first helicopter had mechanical difficulty and the second ran into it. "Five metres between the two of them"? Unbelievably close.

[Dynamic Roller]

This video (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/10/ten-dead-in-apparent-helicopter-crash-in-argentina) seems sharper than others I have seen.

[coveyducks]

Having just seen the footage again on the news I am wondering if it was birds. Possibly debris from a blade strike with the tree?
The eye witness report reports loud noises which could have been a blade strike.
The natural reaction would have been a rapid move away from the strike which would have taken it directly into the other aircraft.
A tragic accident no doubt partially attributed to the pressure of the TV role and wanting it to "Look Good"!

Having just watched DR link I now don't think it was a blade strike.

The far a/c seems to be turning right as the near one veers left.

Let's hope more information will be forthcoming so that a similar incident can be avoided!

[Thomas coupling]

How very very sad. And unavoidable too.
IMO I observe the lower a/c being below, back and to the right of the higher a/c. It then climbs and banks into the overtaken a/c. This is a blind spot (albeit transiently) for the lower pilot.
Nothing whatsoever to do with smoke, wind or birds. I would wager a years salary that the lower pilot lost SA. :uhoh: RiP.

[mickjoebill]

Some basic aerial filming info for the non aviators interested in this sad incident.

There is a still image that shows the aircraft with the striped tail, with its left rear door fully open whilst at 5ft agl, apparently on take off and just a few minutes before the crash.
This indicates a cameraman in the back left seat, ready to film out of the open door.
Back left door is obviously not ideal for pilot's situational awareness if he is flying from front right..but for those that don't known, a sliding door is not always fitted on both sides.

This aircraft did not have a sliding door on the right (pilot) side.

http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article5302635.ece/alternates/s615/Helicopter-Crash.jpg
It is pictured to the right of the other aircraft (the one with skid basket) both at time of take off and when airborne so it is reasonable to assume they were shooting.

Another reason to shoot out the left side is that the direction of travel can't always be controlled. Continuity of screen direction often dictates the aircraft must always be heading in the same direction i.e. left to right. Combined with wind direction and position of sun, it means the left hand side is the best option 50% of the time.
However for "jump in and go" flights, using cameramen who have been filming on the ground then jump into the helicopter, there is not enough time nor information to figure out which side is best.
Such flights that occupy a small time portion of a long shooting day, can be terribly pressured for pilot, director and cameramen, especially if the crew are running late.


IMO I observe the lower a/c being below, back and to the right of the higher a/c. It then climbs and banks into the overtaken a/c. This is a blind spot (albeit transiently) for the lower pilot.

I see something different... the higher aircraft seems to bank left into the path of the other aircraft, I reckon the (slightly) lower aircraft could have climbed maybe 50ft? in the two seconds before impact (use the tree as a datum point) Perhaps the plan was that the higher aircraft (filming out left door?) was to fly slightly ahead then over the subject aircraft? or in an attempt to shoot a tracking shot, the higher craft crept too close and the lower pilot didn't get out of the way in time and there was a miscommunication between the cameraman and pilots as to relative positions.

Hard to imagine that in the preceding 20 seconds that lower pilot was not aware of the others position? Whereas the higher aircraft would have been partially blind especially if camera crew were leaning into the open rear door and whoever was in the front seat also probably shooting or taking stills and blocking the view out of the left front.
(note it is not 100% clear yet which helicopter had the tv crew)

The higher aircraft appears to slow down, but this is the optical effect of the turn in my view.
Hard to be sure.

Generally the good form is that the subject aircraft stays straight and level and the camera ship manoeuvres around it.

Due to the high profile of some of those who perished and regardless of the cause, I hope that the unique risks of aerial filming will be bought to the fore and identified as an inherent risk that should be mitigated.

The crew who were killed were pilots Juan Carlos Castillo and Roberto Abate, Brice Gilbert (cameraman) Laurent Sbasnik (director), Lucy Mei-Dalby (journalist), Volodya Guinard (project manager) and Edouard Gilles (sound engineer)

Brice leaves behind his wife of two years and son of two months.


Mickjoebill

[probes]

That's sad reading, mickjoebill.

And shooting for (another stupid?) reality. Called "Dropped".

A few minutes after take-off, around 5pm on Monday, while the two helicopters were flying in parallel lines, one of them unexpectedly deviated from its course and collided with the other. The first helicopter was filming the second one which was transporting the cast. Amongst the victims, were the three sporting personalities (Florence Arthaud, Camille Muffat and Alexis Vastine), five technical crew members who have been collaborating with us on many productions (Laurent Sbasnik, Lucie Mei-Dalby, Volodia Guinard, Brice Guilbert and Edouard Gilles) and two highly experienced pilots (Juan Carlos Castillo and Roberto Abate).

[The Old Fat One]

And shooting for (another stupid?) reality. Called "Dropped".

This.

A tragic and unnecessary loss of life of talented people seeking profit from the dumbing down of Western civilization.

Sometimes the world really does seem a depressing place.

[Frying Pan]

Agreed. A terrible tragedy which could have been avoided.

Unfortunately, I also fear the backlash will be against helicopter operations and filming and not against the concept of reality TV.

[PAX_Britannica]

Longer lenses shake more and harder to focus.
I guess your're not familiar with cameras, so:
- You have lots of light, so stop down the camera, making focus less sensitive
- Turn on the "truck mode" stabilisation on the lens. You have a stabilised lens, right ?
- Shoot 4kP60 and stabilise more in post [production]

Alternatively:
- Make your shooting budget cover legal costs for dead talent, crew, and replacement talent/crew/helicopters
- Make sure the relevant jurisdictions don't open you to wearing an orange suit for a few years.

[chopjock]

PAX B
I guess your're not familiar with cameras, so:
- You have lots of light, so stop down the camera, making focus less sensitive
- Turn on the "truck mode" stabilisation on the lens. You have a stabilised lens, right ?
- Shoot 4kP60 and stabilise more in post [production]


Except there is still a need to be as close as possible for better results. What you are suggesting would help the situation a little, but no director would want to be so far away that the hand held shots are un usable in the name of safety.
So close as possible and remain safe, plus what you said is the way to do it if you can not go with a gimbal that is.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

two highly experienced pilots

It's their formation training and experience that's relevant, not their total hours. They appear to be doing stuff which is against Lonewolf's standard safe practice.

Personally, I've done one photoshoot (FW) in the civvy world, having had the luxury of a very carefully briefed one in the RAF (with experienced aviation photographer and aircrew) as a model.

One has to do a lot of prep work as pilot, and be prepared to say no at any time. Being unsighted at any time is a complete no-no.

I also had the benefit of wise words from a very experienced back seater who had had 2 friends killed doing a photoshoot. He told me it was potentially the most dangerous thing in flying, as you were being directed by enthusiastic amateurs (in an aviation sense).

[choppertop]

Unfortunately, I also fear the backlash will be against helicopter operations and filming and not against the concept of reality TV.

Yes, reality TV. Very, very dangerous and silly. Blame it.

:ugh:

[farmpilot]

Or get a cineflex and be far away - a much better choice.

[Lonewolf_50]

FWIW:
Not understanding their photo mission, and thus what pics they were trying to take, one could still envision how one plans, and take precautions, if a given shot requires wing to be stepped down so that the picture is "looking up" at lead.

First thing, of course, is to recognize that it increases risk of lost sight etc.

If one is going to be "stepped down" as wing, the communications between lead and wing "where are you? - I am here!?" ("Two rotor diameters out at 4 o'clock, low" for example) has to be more frequent so that neither pilot loses SA, and so that maneuvers are made with sufficient safety margin.

As Fox pointed out, it is very important for briefing/planning, and the "go no go" decisions that the camera crew may hear need to be briefed to them, and explained why.

IMO, this would help the camera crew as they try to set up/frame their shots, if they know where their limits are.

Anyway, whatever internal comms were inside each helicopter, and between pilots, will be unknown until any CVR evidence comes to light.

Tragic loss of life. :uhoh:

[helonorth]

You fellas sure can beat something to death. I saw two helicopters collide because somebody wasn't paying attention to what they were doing.

[Max Shutterspeed]

FWIW:
Not understanding their photo mission, and thus what pics they were trying to take, one could still envision how one plans, and take precautions, if a given shot requires wing to be stepped down so that the picture is "looking up" at lead.

First thing, of course, is to recognize that it increases risk of lost sight etc.

If one is going to be "stepped down" as wing, the communications between lead and wing "where are you? - I am here!?" ("Two rotor diameters out at 4 o'clock, low" for example) has to be more frequent so that neither pilot loses SA, and so that maneuvers are made with sufficient safety margin.

As Fox pointed out, it is very important for briefing/planning, and the "go no go" decisions that the camera crew may hear need to be briefed to them, and explained why.

IMO, this would help the camera crew as they try to set up/frame their shots, if they know where their limits are.

Anyway, whatever internal comms were inside each helicopter, and between pilots, will be unknown until any CVR evidence comes to light.

Tragic loss of life

Some good points. I can image the reason for the 'stepped down' shot was to shot the rotor disc and backdrop, a flattering shot.

But if such close formation was deemed essential for the filming, why have the two aircraft full of ten people? Have as few people aboard for a shot like that. Better still, spend the money on a few hours of Cineflex and shoot an awful lot of B Roll from a safe distance and benefit from rock solid, safe shots of both helicopters.

I imagine there will be hell to pay for this, but it won't bring back the people.

So very sad.

[TrakBall]

There really is no substitute for experience on the part of the pilot. I'm a videographer and enthusiastic amateur but I'm not crazy and always defer to the pilot.

I got to shoot aerials of New York City on an amazingly clear morning with both a Tyler nose and Tyler door mount in a helicopter piloted by Al Cerullo. We spent more time discussing and briefing shots than rolling videotape but it was more than time well spent since we got some amazing footage. We also had to bust one of the shots we wanted since there were too many birds and there was a high probability of bird strikes.

Bottom line is there is no substitute for a professional pilot experienced in aerial photography and doing everything with the right equipment. Unfortunately, in this instance the pilots-which I'm sure were experienced-appear to not have had lots of experience with aerial photography work and it is unknown if the production company had the right equipment.

Sincere condolences to the families of all the victims.

TB

[Frying Pan]

Yes, reality TV. Very, very dangerous and silly. Blame it.

Your words mate not mine. :=

All I'm suggesting is that as much as these unfortunate reality shows go on, the producers and 'celebrities' may well be more hesitant to go down the helicopter route of filming.

[TWT]

Anyway, whatever internal comms were inside each helicopter, and between pilots, will be unknown until any CVR evidence comes to light

Do AS350's have CVR's (even as an option) ?

[oldbeefer]

When looking at various singles for the military school in the UK, one aspect of the 350 that was not liked was the lack of perspex in the roof above the LHS. It made the view up and left from the RHS extremely limited.

The company were persuaded to fit two larger areas of transparencies to both left and right of the roof.

[Fake Sealion]

After running the video several times I thought initially that the lower/further aircraft commenced a right turn into the path of the other. However looking again it now appears that there is indeed a vertical element to this in that the two machines were not side by side but rather one climbed into the other.

You can only imagine the distractions which may have affected the pilot concerned.

[Ian Corrigible]

Do AS350's have CVR's (even as an option) ?
Several options, including the Appareo ALERTS Vision 1000 (https://www.appareo.com/aviation/flight-data-monitoring/vision-1000/) (now fitted as standard, but only in recent years) and the North Flight Data Systems (/Outerlink Global Solutions) OVVR/CV²R (http://www.northfds.com/products.html).

I/C

[TWT]

Thanks Ian

[Nubian]

From the serial numbers of the 2 helicopters involved, it seems as 1 of them being a B3e, which has the Vision1000 installed as a standard. The other machine might have the system as well as an option.
Not too sure how good these cameras cope with fire, but if it survived, there should be a minimum of 2 hours audio and video(2MP) and several hours of flight parameters.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

I used to do a lot of film work. A film crew who sat down with company and pilot(s) a few weeks before a job and planned it thoroughly always earned my respect. The ones that always worried me were the spur of the moment guys, and the BBC were by far the worst. Little or no brief (programme always secret) Thinking they could magic arm a camera somewhere on the outside with no concept of airflow, wanting formation flying or something a little daring with pax on board. One bright spark turned up with a Robbo 44 with the doors off to film close formation with me in a 109E over central London, the Robbo pilot had never flown formation in his 350 hours and the director thought we were wimps (and voiced it loudly to the film crew) when we told him what he wanted was both stupid and illegal and that the clearances to make it legal would take weeks.

Another director decided to reduce the separation between my disc and a boom camera to about 8 inches despite me briefing the operator to stay a good three feet off. Eventually I shut down, called her boss and asked him at what point in my life she had been given charge of my safety. Later that day she became even more stupid, I flew straight back to base and filed an MOR on her behaviour. I understand she was quite miffed when she was sacked that evening. two days later we finished the job with an absolutely superb director.

Filming, like marriage should never be undertaken lightly. Both can really screw you up.

SND

[Vertical Freedom]

Shocking tragedy to see & avoid.......Rest in Peace Blessed Souls

[yellowtriumph]

Was there ever any conclusion as to the cause of this accident?

[BOBAKAT]

i make short : Old pilot don't see the other one due to the sun shine...

[yellowtriumph]

i make short : Old pilot don't see the other one due to the sun shine...

I’m not sure I understand your post, is that the verdict of the official report? Does anyone have a link to any reports?

[Mee3]

I’m not sure I understand your post, is that the verdict of the official report? Does anyone have a link to any reports?
Not due to sun shine, but due to blind spot.

The verdict was that the mission was not well coordinate aka unplanned before the flight.

The vision camera survived and gave sufficient 3D coordinate to reconstruct the flight path. Do not have the report but seen the full simulation some year ago.

[HeliHenri]

.
Final report : https://www.jiaac.gob.ar/files/88-15.pdf
.

[yellowtriumph]

Thank you.