Sad incident at Palamar today

[Gordy]

Couple of rumors on the street----the most credible is he was landing on a dolly and missed, cut the TR off and started spinning.

2 dead----RIP

dJ8lY3-_xA4&sns=fb

[Nigel Osborn]

I saw this on Facebook from another angle, the rate of spinning was amazing. Don't know why he couldn't hack an engine.

[John Eacott]

I saw this on Facebook from another angle, the rate of spinning was amazing. Don't know why he couldn't hack an engine.

Maybe the occupants had been knocked unconscious? Do you have a link for the other video, Nigel?

The emergency services must have felt quite helpless, unable to get closer and risk serious injury from flying blades, etc :( Last time anything similar the firies spent ages smothering the intake with foam, but it took a lot to put the engine out. Pilot was unconscious, Wessex on the tie down pad at Culdrose.

[John R81]

The pilot is sat considerably forward of the mast and therefore "enjoys" a ride on a centrifuge. Thrown forward and sideways, with a G loading dependent on the rate of spin and the arm, he may not have been conscious after the initial contact between head / airframe.


As to what to do: would it be possible to use the fire truck to soak the engines and cause a flameout? Likely to be difficult enough with the machine stationary but would have the side effect of reducing fire risk.

[John Eacott]

r5E91CXbEGw

If he 'missed' the trolley landing then it's another reminder to those who create and use trolleys 'just' big enough to land upon without much room for error :hmm:

[chopjock]

Looks like a Squirrel with difficult to reach throttle lever.

[9Aplus]

@Johan R81
Right question, fire truck had enough time to cover whole "carousel" with foam. Another lesson learned hard way.
RIP for the souls on board...

[Thomas coupling]

At about a third of the way through, I thought for a moment that fuel was escaping and had been ignited and was about to fireball.

Nonetheless, I would suggest the RFFS has some deep soul searching to do regarding their (lack of) intervention in this instance.
It is blatantly obvious the aircrew are totally incapacitated and could do nothing.
A fire lance with a 50yd throw @ 400lts a minute would stop that spin immediately or at the very least put the engine(s) out.

Wouldn't want to be the fire chief that shift. :mad:

[[email protected]]

They have probably been trained to wait for movement to stop before exposing themselves to risk - sadly this is a case where they really should have thought past that training.

[Hughes500]

TC

Not sure that would stop it spinning would have to hit the tail or what is left of it in one place and keep it there. Even then there is some serious momentum there and not sure water would stop that !!!
Just hope they were out within seconds of that spin:eek:

[John R81]

Ultimately, was there a fire? Both videos end with a lot of jet fuel vapour escaping but no ignition that I can see, though the caption appears to claim a fire did occur.


If so then with fire crews attending considerably before any fire there must be questions to answer.

[Peter-RB]

The last big multi wheel drive fire tender I was stood against was literally built like a tank with armoured glass and big roll bars all around the cab front and side area, could the driver not have rammed it hard to break the blades off, I know spinning blade have huge inertia with them, but could that sort of attack/rescue have worked. or is it fear of the unknown that would have held people back..
But what a very sad outcome, simply though missing the dolly. poor chaps!,

[Fareastdriver]

None of the rescue services were helicopter pilots. The aircraft was spinning; they would not have known anything about the theory of tail rotors or torque reaction. To them it was an aircraft spinning out of control and their only option was to wait until either the pilot recovered it or it crashed.

They were there at the time; not sitting in a chair watching the video.

[John R81]

This says "Training Accident" - no mention of a dolly. "Practicing landing"


Two killed in helicopter crash at Palomar Airport identified - CBS News 8 - San Diego, CA News Station - KFMB Channel 8 (http://www.cbs8.com/story/30553994/two-killed-in-helicopter-crash-at-palomar-airport-identified)


Be aware that this article names the crew

[Thomas coupling]

Farest: They don't need to know torque theory. They do know that suffocating engine intakes - stops engines - stops the drive to the rotorblades.

I have a team of RFFS under me and they are stunned that these guys stood there and watched two pilots die.

John81: I notice:
According to the NTSB, the Astar helicopter is an advanced aircraft and requires an experienced pilot to fly it. They are still reviewing witness videos. .

Interesting. I wonder what they would make of an Apache / S92??

[John R81]

Evidence of extraterritorial visitation to our backwater of the Solar System.


But then, that's just the press

[ShyTorque]

I find that video terribly sad.
It must be one of the longest helicopter accidents ever. :(

[Lonewolf_50]

I don't understand the AS350. If the collective is at bottom, would that not yield "flat pitch" and thus prevent torque reaction?
What am I missing (I did notice the lack of a tail boom).

[Flyting]

Same thing happened a while back in Dubai but they were lucky to survive...
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/532473-helicopter-crash-dubai.html
After it hit the ground nobody could get near the aircraft as it spun around on the ground 100 to 200 times over more than five minutes as people looked on in horror (the pilot and HLO were unconscious)

[Thomas coupling]

I spoke to a Norwegian crew many many moons ago who hit cables crossing a Fjord. They impacted at the base of the tail cone just at the base of the upstrut supporting the entire TRGB section.

Within seconds, they recalled watching the TRGB section pass them down the side of the a/c before they were flung violently to one side of the cockpit as the a/c started spinning. They eventually managed to perform some semblance of borderline stability whilst still spinning slowly, in full EOL mode onto the water. Both survived. The co-pilot became unconscious almost the moment the spin established itself, but it was helped with him hitting the windscreen side strut with his head.
These AStar guys must have become unconscious within seconds and left some pitch on the blades for the helo to rotate so violently. They surely couldn't throttle back - even to FI never mind shut off.

I wouldnt have backed a hard object into that threshing machine for fear of an explosion. I would have expected my team to have dumped thousands of litres of foam at 80psi onto the cab and suffocated the engine intake of air.

The more I think about it, the more I think the fire crew were derelict in their duty.
What a sad waste of life.

A haunting video. RiP.

[Arm out the window]

I'm amazed it didn't just flip on its side after a couple of spins. Very hard to watch.

[rjtjrt]

Genuine question.
Would dumping thousands of litres of foam at 80psi onto the cab have caused crew to be unable to breath, if cabin open (windscreen gone, etc)?
Yes I know it may be only answer to a desperate problem but that may have been a reason fire crew hesitated.

[John Eacott]

As I mentioned previously, a Wessex which broke a tie-down on a power run took ages for a directed jet of foam to stop the engine: a matter of 5-10 minutes. The pilot was unconscious, the Wessex on its side, stationary, with all blades broken at the root, and the Gazelle engine valiantly flogging away despite a stream of foam straight into the intake. Admittedly many, many years ago with firefighting equipment unequal to the stuff we have now but a blanket 'area attack' foam may or may not have achieved much in the way of starving the engine or the occupants of oxygen. Especially given the movement of the Squirrel and the associated engine intake.

[Aesir]

Accidents like this supports the use of helmets for the pilot.

Notice the bystander comment "blood on the door" @ min
3:35

[Wageslave]

RJT, thank you, I was wondering when someone would make that all too obvious suggestion. It's far easier to suffocate a pilot with foam than a gas turbine which as we know is very reluctant to stop by this method even when stationary. When spinning like that you'd have no chance whatsoever.

As to backing vehicles into the thing, does anyone really imagine a firecrew would be daft enough to risk the flak and deluge of lawsuits that would inevitably follow? No way could you avoid being accused of hurting the crew. Anyway, how could they know without the advantage of 20/20 armchair hindsight what the alternative result might be in order to prompt such drastic last-ditch action? If you wanted to risk an "explosion" (sic) that would be a good way of going about it.

[Fareastdriver]

A pilot misses the trolley, loses the tail rotor and the aircraft spins itself to destruction killing the occupants.

It was all the fire crew's fault!

[OvertHawk]

As someone who was an airfield firefighter prior to becoming a helicopter pilot:

No way in hell would I have tried to physically block the aircraft with an appliance (armoured or not!). Massive risk to the appliance and it's occupants and huge risk to the occupants of the helicopter (who could still be alive and then be killed by the impact). And that's before we even consider the legal / liability consequences.

I would have thought very hard about foaming it - it would have been tempting indeed, but as others have said, i think the chances of it successfully suffocating the engine would be small in comparison to the risk of suffocating the occupants. I'd also have been very wary about the presence of the foam blanket making the surface slipperier and causing the aircraft to spin and slide more violently and unpredictably.

I find the criticism of the fire-crews quite harsh and unfair - this was a one-in-a-billion event that they were faced with.

OH

[SilsoeSid]

Bank CEO killed after crashing helicopter (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326210/Helicopter-crashed-killing-2-pilot-practiced-landings.html)

The pilot has been identified as (named), 65, who was chairman and CEO of (Bank).
Also killed was his friend, 60-year-old (named) of Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California. Both men died at the scene.

The bank's website says (name) had more than 25,000 hours of flight time and ratings to fly various types of airplanes and helicopters.

The San Diego County medical examiner's office said the helicopter's tail struck the ground during a landing on Wednesday shortly before 4.30pm after it spun out of control at McClellan-Palomar Airport in Carlsbad.

http://aviation-business-gazette.com/ (http://aviation-business-gazette.com/A10/B63/Pilot-Bruce-Allen-Erickson-Livingston-MT.html)

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is recognising (pilot) with inclusion in the prestigious FAA Airmen Certification Database.

The database, which appears on the agency's website at Federal Aviation Administration (http://www.faa.gov), names (pilot) and other certified pilots who have met or exceeded the high educational, licensing and medical standards established by the FAA.

:sad:

[Gordy]

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is recognising (pilot) with inclusion in the prestigious FAA Airmen Certification Database.

What a bunch of crap. EVERY pilot who meets the requirements for the issuance of a certificate or rating is in the database. There is nothing special about it, and BTW---the banks website does not mention how many hours he had.

There are two listings for Bruce Allen Erickson in the database, both with helicopter ratings, one appears to be current, the other is years old.

[Flying Bull]

Hi all,

its not the first spinning A-Star/helicopter.
Just wondering, if a little modifikation could prevent further accidents like that?
Thinking about a gravity activated engine cut off build in 90 degrees to the horizontal in some distance to the rotor mast - with a calculated/tested load for something like around 1 turn per second - which will be well outside the normal flying envelope.
May be a time delay could also be integrated - say 2 to 3 seconds, to make sure, the helicopter is really spinning out of pilot control?
Would give a higher survivability on the ground - and leaves you with autorotation in the air - which might be acceptable.
Any suggestions?

[JerryG]

I've never understood why collectives don't feature a guarded and last-resort "kill everything immediately" trigger, or perhaps they do now in the latest generation machines?

I really needed one of those during a running landing in a 109 that lacked drive to the tail rotor at the time. Thankfully I had a cameraman in the P2 seat who was able to chop the overhead throttles at the time that I REALLY needed both my hands on the flying controls. Without him I doubt I'd be here to tell the tale.

You guys can probably think of other circumstances in which you could have done with one of those?

[SilsoeSid]

I've never understood why collectives don't feature a guarded and last-resort "kill everything immediately" trigger,

Possibly because that's just what it would do :roll eyes:


So, if the fire service was to drench the ac with water/foam, given the design of the intake, how effective would that really have been?

[Fareastdriver]

Way back in the sixties and seventies in Malaysia we were having problems with our single Gnome Whirlwinds stopping which was a bit embarrassing over the jungle. A team from Westlands and Rolls Royce came out to see what the problem was. After the first, for Singapore, light shower of rain it was established by them that it was rain ingestion. We protested that it had happened when it hadn't rained for weeks so to prove their point they set up a trial.

We put a Whirlwind on the tie-down base and Roy Moxham, the Deputy Chief Test Pilot for Westland, and I carried out this trial. Roy did the business, I held the instant cutout so that I could kill the engine before it cooked itself. Rain was simulated by a fire tender in front of the aircraft with two fireman holding a fire hose in front of the open intake door. Their job was to direct the water directly into the intake of the engine.

We started it up and then increased the collective to normal cruise power, 400 lbs/hr. At the signal they turned on the high pressure hose using a mains supply as the base. This meant that the pump would run at its maximum rated quantity straight into the intake.

The engine shugged it off as if nothing had happened.

The collective was slowly reduced and at about flat pitch with the same water flow the engine started hunting about 1,000 rpm or so. After being at flat pitch for about twenty seconds the amplitude increased to such an extent that it was considered logical to shut it down as it was required for training that afternoon.

That was a high pressure fire hose directly into the intake. The Orions were washed when they returned from a sortie. They would taxi to the entrance to their dispersal where two fire engines would give the aircraft a thorough soaking from the front and side. Then they would continue to their parking spot.

Use foam or water to stop a runaway jet engine? Forget it.

The only use I have known where a fire hose is useful in a helicopter emergency was with the Bristol Sycamore. Should a droop stop fail on a Sycamore's rotor head it's blade would strike the boom on shutdown. There was a massive pad on the boom at the critical point that would encourage the blades to bounce over the boom but this was not 100% so an alternative system was used.

A fire engine would be positioned so that its hand held hose would point over the boom just before the pylon joint on the starboard side. The water would be turned on and then the pilot would closed down the engine. As the rotor decayed the errant blade would ride the water jet over the boom until the rotor was stationary.

The blades would then have to be removed as they were made of wood, dried out and then sent down to the tracking tower at Yeovil where they would be retracked as a set.

[Nigel Osborn]

With the S76, a fire hose would easily stop the engine. When water rinsing after a winch session over the sea, water was gently sprayed in at idle but if done too hard, the engine would stop.

[gator2]

Firehose idea seems pretty hopeless to me. With that spin rate how much foam/water do you think you could direct into the intake as it spun by you? Even the best wingshot I know would have a hard time figuring the lead on that shot, and duty cycle would be about 30%.

[nigelh]

So with all this time to think about it , we as a large group of professional pilots
don't know what the fire crew should have done . Don't you think it's a bit harsh to condemn them when they 1) are not familiar with the workings of helicopters and 2) had minutes to think about what to do .
I personally think that foam all over the aircraft and floor would have done little to stop a fuel fire and may have effectively lubricated the rough floor and made the aircraft spin even faster ... But who knows .
On first look I do like the idea of auto spool down to FI after x number of fast spins , especially if you could override it if you wanted to keep power .

[chopjock]

On first look I do like the idea of auto spool down to FI after x number of fast spins

Or do it properly and fit twist grip throttle control on the lever.

[AnFI]

shut down systems:
another thing to go wrong and activate when you don't want it to?


ceptripetal g:
I count 10revs per 12 sec
so that's about 5Radians per second

5^2=25
times by the radius guessing 2 meters?

gives accn 50m/s^2 or 5g

enough to incapacitate the pilot?
good reason to have tight seatbelts



questions:
were they killed by fire, subsequent to the video end?
was a guy thrown clear as the sound track implies - i guess not?

[Fareastdriver]

gives accn 50m/s^2 or 5g

As their bodies would be thrown forward under the negative G that should be sufficient to cause a massive brain haemorrhage which would kill them.

The same would have happened to the passengers on the Russian airliner as it pitched down and decelerated when the tail was blown off.

[Carps]

Full video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKyzBIuvF30

[Helilife100]

Dreadful, dreadful, dreadful. I am sorry I clicked on the video, it chilled me to the bone. I shall go into work on monday and continue to do my very best to see that the million ways for a helicopter man to die doesn't visit our hangar. I know it is impossible but I am going to try anyway. Rest in peace lads.

[Hot and Hi]

That video shifts the question from what could have stopped the spinning and whether the first responders should have done anything differently, to the question how did it all start.

I must admit I have done landings worse than that and you yank it back up in the air and try again. Like the mishap pilot did. There are are few critical seconds missing from this video (the camera man instinctively took shelter when things went pear shaped) but maybe you more experienced pilots can explain what happened. Was it ground resonance?

[mickjoebill]

There are are few critical seconds missing from this video (the camera man instinctively took shelter when things went pear shaped)
There are a few frames at around 54 seconds showing it nose very high pointing 180 degrees from initial direction and moving backwards and decending.
From this angle it looks like the tail was probably really stuffed into the ground and tail rotor and gearbox departed.


Below aerial video of the aftermath, including the extraodinarily graphic circular inscription made on the concrete.


http://youtu.be/AhOpnyaZMuE

Mickjoebill

[mixing lever]

Here is another angle on the actual accident leading to the spin.

LiveLeak.com - Helicopter crash and spins out of control

Sorry for the bad link.

[Lonewolf_50]

Here is another angle on the actual accident leading to the spin.

LiveLeak.com - Helicopter crash and spins out of control (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c8d_1448123557)

Sorry for the bad link.
Thanks for the link, and :{

[TacomaSailor]

Local San Diego TV news reports that a witness helicopter pilot says the accident crew was trying to land on a dolly (news report called it a "portable landing pad"), which had no chocks or brakes to secure the wheels. The dolly was moving about as the accident AC tried to land on it. The dolly moved forward when the skids contacted it and the TR struck the ground.

The recorded TV broadcast showed the TV reporter interviewing the witness pilot who is based at Palomar and knew the two victims. He was very clear about what he saw with the unsecured dolly wheels.

I've seen no subsequent verification of the report during the last 24-hours but it was "BREAKING NEWS" at 11 PM Friday here in San Diego.

[[email protected]]

It's difficult to see any 'dolly' in that video but it is quite clear that rapid application of fore and aft cyclic was what caused the tail to impact and then pitch the aircraft nose down.

Definitely not ground resonance Ho and Hi!

Sad waste of lives.

Correction - On closer inspection you can see an orange object that is mostly obscured by the vehicle.

[vaqueroaero]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but the question then becomes if he knew the cart was not chocked, he tried landing on it once why did he try it again? To save the aggravation of shutting down and then having start up again after it had been chocked?

Team 10: 'They didn't chock my cart' pilot said moments before helicopter spun out of control - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego (http://www.10news.com/news/team-10-they-didnt-chock-my-cart-pilot-said-moments-before-helicopter-spun-out-of-control)

[Wageslave]

The hesitant and indecisive way he was hovering around the dolly smacks to me of someone outside his comfort zone and implies a dolly that was perhaps too small for the job and almost certainly too small for the pilot. Dollies have often seemed far smaller to me than either common sense or even basic safety might call for and always seemed an unnecessarily risky way of saving the effort of moving a helo. The risk of settling half on and half off always seemed an unnecessary hazard.

I found it all too easy to land a Squirrel too far aft on a small platform as you sit ahead of even the most forward element of ground contact and probably with the forward edge of the dolly barely in sight below and behind, let alone the rear end way way out of sight that the Stbd spring is the first to contact.

[B407]

Decided long ago after reviewing a number of accident reports in which someone died and/or the helo was destroyed from a botched cart/dolly landing that I simply wouldnt do it. This is a risk that is easily avoided. Ops manual now prohibits this.

[aa777888]

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but the question then becomes if he knew the cart was not chocked, he tried landing on it once why did he try it again? To save the aggravation of shutting down and then having start up again after it had been chocked?

Team 10: 'They didn't chock my cart' pilot said moments before helicopter spun out of control - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

Craziness! If he was that determined, let the passenger out to chock it, or call the FBO and have somebody chock it. But land on it that way? :uhoh:

[audioguy]

The Team 10 video showing the operation of the cart has me wondering why on earth the top of the cart is painted a similar colour to tarmac?

[Gordy]

Craziness! If he was that determined, let the passenger out to chock it, or call the FBO and have somebody chock it.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing....note to self.....

[tistisnot]

Nail on the head there, Gordy ..... stopped to think, too ..... resistance to change, elf n safety, stop card - pah, perhaps not old and bold, but don't insult my ability nor years of experience ......

[Reely340]

Dollys seem to always have been rather dangerous landings spots,
another squirrel: in this case slipped off the platform and caught the platform with the right skid's rear snowskid:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vxi9iKOW04w
ASN Aircraft incident 18-JUN-2008 Aérospatiale AS 350B2 Ecureuil HB-XVB (http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=67862)

Then again, in that Swiss final accident report http://www.sust.admin.ch/pdfs/AV-berichte//2110.pdf on p.7
that dolly doesn't look inappropiately small, to me layman.
But that pilot clearly operated out of his comfort zone (as can be gleed from the fact that radio communication
with the tower changed from official english to local schwiezr-dütsch when he hesitantly acknowledged the request to land on the pad)

Btw. rather decisive ruling by swiss authority followed:
- starting with Oct. 15th 2008 it is illegal for airfield operators to offer publicly usable dollys
- effective same date said airfield operators (!) must ascertain that privately owner dollys be used only by pilots who can prove sufficient experience and training with helicopter platforms, by having been issued a respective permit by the swiss aviation authrority

[Agile]

Is it normal size for a dolly, look on the small size to me.
https://scontent-nrt1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-0/p180x540/12038300_927921210578311_3670167250852654243_n.jpg?oh=4d2193 1222b1f7c127400ae49e3da47c&oe=56F63E18


Second point why he didn`t give up to land on the dolly today?, after the first scare/miss I would land it on the ground and call it a day.
he is the CEO, get somebody to put it the hangar...

[Reely340]

From you pic it appears, that a squirrel driver does see neither the dolly nor his skids :ooh: unless he leans into the bubble window should there be one, that is. Shouldn't there be a bottom view window, somewhere at the right fwd. corner of the pilot seat's base ?

[Fun Police]

utility equipped machines have a vertical reference window to the right of the pilot seat as well as mirrors mounted to the nose so the pilot can see the hook/skids and if adjusted properly, the load. the mirrors are very useful when landing on small pads or logs etc and i am sure many of us have landed on pads similar in size to that dolly without incident. but then again, they probably weren't moving around...:ugh:

[Hot and Hi]

From the video you can see that the mishap helicopter didn't have skid mirrors.

It might have been easier to approach the dolly sideways, approaching it from the left. As opposed to approaching it head on, and overflying it (from the pilot's position) before touching down, hoping that it is still at the same place where you last saw it.

[chopjock]

It might have been easier to approach the dolly sideways, approaching it from the left.

Yes, and then "feeling" it down on the right and then the left skid gently, looks like he just dumped it down instead.

[Fareastdriver]

Make a bigger dolly.

[rugmuncher]

Maybe use a set of wheels.

http://www.paravion.com/products/compact-ground-handling-wheels/

[B407]

Or this:

Helitug (http://www.aviground.com/)

[JamaicaJoe]

Seems crazy to be trying to land on a napkin sized dolly when there are other much safer alternative products that can easily tow a chopper, once safely landed, into a hanger.

Is it an "ego" thing?

I recall trying to negotiate some small roof space in Miami for radio antennas where the president of the Savings & Loan skyscraper that was under construction insisted that the tiny roof would be for a helipad. Rumor was that he and another S&L buddy had a bet going as to who would be the first to land on it. Well he lost the bet because the Feds took the new bank, the just finished helipad, the helicopter the gold plated yacht, the gold plated staircases.

In the end, all he (D.P.) ever landed were some mashed potatoes serving lunch trays in prison. Probably saved his life.

[JamaicaJoe]

Cart painted grey?

Yeah I wondered that myself.

[Gordy]

I do not know the level of experience of the posters on here, but many of you are saying he should have landed, maybe got a bigger dolly, not painted it gray etc.....

The fact is, the dolly is a perfect size for an Astar, it is painted Gray, but there are landing marks in red---see the "T" in the pic below. It basically shows you where to line up the skids and the forward cross tube which can be CLEARLY seen from the pilot seat. Any professional pilot with the appropriate training should be able to land on this dolly. If you cannot, then do not apply for a job with me.

The problem is that in this industry, we all "Monday morning quarterback" from our experience level. I would certainly NOT expect a private pilot with less than 1,500 hours to have the skill set to land on this dolly---if you do, then great, but I would not EXPECT or require you to do it.

From the video previously posted, along with the audio, it would appear that this particular landing exceeded the skill set of the pilot. The equipment was NOT to blame.

https://scontent-nrt1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-0/p180x540/12038300_927921210578311_3670167250852654243_n.jpg?oh=4d2193 1222b1f7c127400ae49e3da47c&oe=56F63E18

[[email protected]]

Gordy - would you expect your pilots to do it without the dolly being chocked though?

[Cows getting bigger]

Let's create an accident. Just because some think it is safe, doesn't mean it is actually safe.

[malabo]

From a lifetime of dolly landings. From R22 to B212. Dolly's take skill, but they are the norm here, you do them with everything for your whole career. You've got to learn your references, and be able to lift without drift in any wind, and land the same way, looking straight down. Any doubt, land on the ground. Would I try it on an unchocked dolly? Sure, done that, but again a higher skill level required because you can't drop it on misaligned and then try to slide it into position.

From all the videos, this pilot had no idea where the dolly was when he dumped the pole. Two things wrong right there. Dolly wasn't moving and he banged the skids center on the aft edge. That's a long ways off.

Nothing wrong with the helicopter, nothing wrong with the dolly. Man's gotta know his limitations.

[tistisnot]

But there you go, Malabo ...... Elf n Safety risk assessment will say, there's a chance it will go wrong ..... therefore make sure it's chocked, full stop. It may insult your vast experience but the ops manual (if indeed one is required) will state - on account of the lowest common denominator, do it .......

[[email protected]]

Maybe we could have a dolly that was constantly moving - then only the very best super-pilots would be able to land on it and show the rest of us mortals just how brilliant they are:ugh:

A little bit of ego seems to go a long way in the wrong direction in the aviation industry.

[Gordy]

Crab:

Gordy - would you expect your pilots to do it without the dolly being chocked though?

Like I said in post #53: Hindsight is a wonderful thing....note to self.....

Cows getting bigger:

Let's create an accident. Just because some think it is safe, doesn't mean it is actually safe.

Not creating an accident----landing on a dolly is a safe operation for someone who has been trained in that skillset. Remember there are people out there who think that merely getting airborne in a helicopter is unsafe...... Just sayin.......

Malabo----right on.....

tistisnot:
the ops manual (if indeed one is required)

Not required for this operation unless one chooses to put it in a manual. This was a private pilot operation...therefore not required.

To everyone else.....Like I said, Like it or not, this is pure pilot error---do not blame the system.

[SASless]

One cannot legislate plain old commonsense.

We have had this argument for Years here at Rotorheads.

Landing on a Cart carries risk....even when done properly.

Trying to land on an un-chocked Cart...knowingly....is a bad mistake.....one this poor guy paid for with his Life.

Whether the "Rule" is written or merely "understood"....those that violate it do so at their own Risk.

The UK system has lots and lots of written rules....but the accident rate is comparable to the USA....so tell us again how all this Health and Safety protocols you have actually improve safety?

[Thomas coupling]

You'd have to remind us of the figures, like for like, SAS for us to confirm that, but I would suggest that the US EMS crash rate is in a world of its own..........

[Cows getting bigger]

When I were a lad, my dad taught me not to put my hand in the dog's mouth because one day it might bite. It seems to me that this particular dog occasionally bites. :sad:

[SASless]

With over 850 EMS Helicopters in the Country flying 24/7.....I would suggest the Risk Exposure is a bit greater than the rest of the World too.

You should recall I have been very vocal in my advocating for changes in the US EMS Helicopter Industry for a great many Years.

No need to preach to the Choir and you know it.

I would challenge you to prove the European HSE Mindset really does reduce the accident rate.

It would appear it does simply by ending that activity altogether thus achieving a Rate of "0" per flight hours.

[Gordy]

When I were a lad, my dad taught me not to put my hand in the dog's mouth because one day it might bite. It seems to me that this particular dog occasionally bites.

And so just just trying to land on flat ground----I believe there have been a few of those in the UK in the past few years.

Like I have said....it is a matter of having a certain skill set, and an understanding that everything we do in life has a certain amount of risk associated which cannot be mitigated.

[Thomas coupling]

It is a strange situation to be in: One can land normally on the apron or one can throw caution to the wind and land on a miniature raised and obscured platform....mmmm.

Gordy ALL risk can be mitigated. The ONLY certainty is death. The definition of life is to mitigate risk for as long as possible.

[SASless]

The other issue that does not get mentioned often when A-Splats crash is they most often BURN their occupants to death.

Continuing to use Certification Standards dating from the Mid-70's despite those Requirements allow for a very unsafe design as compared to modern Standards is a far more important issue than landing on Trolleys or not.

[handysnaks]

Before you get too smug TC, there were quite a few of us in the UK who spent quite a few years landing (in my case), a Twin squirrel or a 902 on very similar dollies, if it wasn't for the fact that the current aircraft supplier threw in a helilift we would probably still be doing it now! (They were always chocked though)!
Even so, I always thought that it had the potential to turn a perfectly manageable aircraft technical problem into a complete disaster should something untowards happen. I don't miss them a bit

[Fun Police]

SASLESS,
this appeared to be a perfectly serviceable aircraft that was crashed by the pilot. it did not burn either.
i dare say that the same guy would have had the same problem with the 407 that i am flying in the arctic right now, and he would have had to worry about the #2 bearing that apparently has still not been fixed.
regards
fp

[SASless]

The fact the Fire Wagon was yards away while the aircraft was spinning about round and round....added greatly to the lack of fire this time.

Check the Stats on the Astar and you will understand from whence I speak about its proclivity to turn itself into ashes following a survivable impact....and far too often killing its occupants in the process.


http://www.aviationlawmonitor.com/articles/helicopters/


http://www.9news.com/story/news/investigations/2015/07/27/flight--life-helicopter-crash-fuel-tank-airbus-safety/30752301/

[Fun Police]

but this one didn't...

or did the Fire Wagon have to spray it down? i did not see anything in the pictures that looked like foam or retardent at the scene. honestly, just asking...

fp

[tistisnot]

SAS ..... the sniping really does detract from your otherwise valid points about crashworthy fuel tanks

I have worked with Exxon, Chevron - they had stopped cards well ahead of the Europeans .... and their solution for preventing this accident would be simple - you wanna use a dolly, then chock it - and if I catch you not doing that, we'll sack you

[SASless]

The News Reports indicate the aircraft did catch fire and it was extinguished by the Crash Fire Crew.

That the aircraft continued to spin around for such a long time is what enabled the Crash Truck to be on scene and able to put out the fire as quickly as it did.

http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/11/18/helicopter-crashes-at-palomar-airport/

http://fox5sandiego.com/2015/11/19/men-killed-in-palomar-helicopter-crash-identified/

Tis.....Tis not sniping.....just asking if the burden of HSE Rules in the UK and Europe really prevent accidents to the extent the HSE Mob would want you to think.

The Collateral Damage such Rules (when in excess of need) do to competitiveness and efficiency is also a question that is begged.

Despite all the rules and regulations aimed at improving Safety.....we continue to be undone by those very same Rules.....as exemplified by the use of non-crashworthy fuel systems in new build but design aircraft such as the AStar and its plastic fuel tank.

[chopjock]

The News Reports indicate the aircraft did catch fire and it was extinguished by the Crash Fire Crew.

I didn't see any black smoke in the video.

[Thomas coupling]

SAS: I have looked again and again at the better video on page one and cannot see any intervention whatsoever from the fire crew. No extinguishant was used after the fuel spewed out towards the end and it then vapourised.
The news report probably refers to the fire tender spraying the cab after it all calmed down and they spotted fuel everywhere.

Why this never fireballed is anyone's guess but I still maintain that someone should have done something before it all ended so tragically (even if it was the pilots fault).

Handy - yes I recall doing landings on dollies in the early days - hairy!

[[email protected]]

Not sure what relevance UK HSE legislation has to an aircraft crash in the USA or to aircraft build standards??????

Yes, HSE can be a pain in the backside sometimes but usually because some over-zealous jobsworth applies rules without any thought. The legislation has improved safety in many areas but it was designed for industry not aviation.

[SASless]

The report quoted the "authorities" as to the Fire Brigade extinguishing a fire.

Until proven otherwise....I will go with that statement as confirming a fire existed at some point and the Crash Crew put it out very quickly as they were in the immediate vicinity of the spinning aircraft waiting for it to come to a rest.

So a question.....why do we still fly around in Astars with plastic Fuel Tanks despite knowing they are patently unsafe in a High Impact Crash and would not be allowed under current Certification Requirements?

Legally we can because of the way Aircraft Type Certificates are treated under Law.

If UK HSE Standards are so effective.....why has EC not been forced to install Crash Worthy Fuel Tanks in new build AStars?

In the USA....it is simple....the FAA ignores the NTSB and the Operators do not want to spend the money except perhaps in the case of Air Methods the nation's largest EMS Operator.

[MightyGem]

there were quite a few of us in the UK who spent quite a few years landing (in my case), a Twin squirrel or a 902 on very similar dollies
My very first Police duty, with a grand total of 5 hours on type, involved landing on a dolly. :eek:

[[email protected]]

If UK HSE Standards are so effective.....why has EC not been forced to install Crash Worthy Fuel Tanks in new build AStars?
Because the HSE has nothing to do with airworthiness as I said before.

If you are concerned about people getting injured working in the aviation environment with regards to slips, falls, noise and other hazards then HSE is there to protect them but as far as fuel tanks in an ASTAR it is not even close to their remit.

[SASless]

I think it is time to start giving medicine to the Dead......might prove to be more productive.

So you are wearing your hi-vis Vest, your Noise Cancelling Headset, natural fibre clothing, foot gear that covers your ankles, and your RAF Leather Gloves.....in your mid's 70's Certified AStar.

Remind me about this Safety Culture Concept again.

[handysnaks]

If UK HSE Standards are so effective.....why has EC not been forced to install Crash Worthy Fuel Tanks in new build AStars?

err....because they don't build them in the UK!!

disclaimer: The previous comment is not written to support the contention that
UK HSE Standards are so effective

[ShyTorque]

Surely it's more relevant to stick to discussion about the survival aspects (or very sadly, the lack of) of this particular accident which occurred in USA, not the UK.

In any case, it apppears this accident was almost certainly precipitated by pilot training/competence/confidence issues. Not anything to do with H&S issues outside the cockpit..

[RINKER]

I'm just a lowly PPLH with a fair amount of time and experience.
I used to land SA341 on a dolly a fair bit bigger than this. But always with safety
Pilot so no issues there.
Also rated on R44 and I remember getting access to an R44 which was kept on
a dolly. When I asked the owner if he wanted me checked out for landing on it
He said he was happy for me to do it as he knew of my flying experience.
However I wasn't confident without instruction so I paid an experienced
Instructor who also used them in his daily job to show the correct technique
Once he had done this I found it to be fine to do.
Even so,after using it a lot on one occaision when I returned to land by myself
The wind had got up from an unfavourable direction so without even risking it
I stuck the R44 on the grass by the hangar and phoned the owner and told him
I was not happy about putting on the dolly that day. He was happy with my
Decision and thanked me for it.
R

[Thomas coupling]

Two things led to the death (directly) of these people:

1. Lack of experience in landing on trolleys - hence his OVEr reaction every time he compensated for the dollies movement.
2. Not wearing a proper crash helmet.

As soon as he overcontrolled - driving the tail rotor into the tarmac, the chopper spun and the G forces smacked his head up against the cockpit rendering him unconscious.
The rest is contentious.

No-one fought any fires, no one rescued them. No fuel tanks errupted into a ball of fire, no FAA rules killed them.

Possibly one of the most tragic accidents I have ever seen, watching fellow professionals die very slowly in the most bizarre way??

[Gordy]

TC:

the G forces smacked his head up against the cockpit rendering him unconscious

Where is the autopsy report on that?

[Michael Gee]

25,000 hrs - practice landings - who had hands on ?

[[email protected]]

Where is the autopsy report on that? Not sure you need one - they were clearly incapacitated or they would have shut down the engine. Unless they both had heart attacks or strokes at the same time, the most likely cause is head injury leading to unconsciousness. Explain the lack of engine shutdown another way if you prefer.

SAS - not sure you are getting the message that UK HSE is irrelevant in this case or any other similar crash.

[n5296s]

@TC - to which I think should be added (1.5) not lowering the collective super-gently and testing for stability if there's even the slightest doubt about stability, or even if not.

You guys all have at least 10x the heli time and experience than I do, but this point seems kind of basic.

After hesitating for ages and clearly being uncomfortable with the landing, he then (I interpret, from the video) dropped the collective. Heli whaps back onto tail, cyclic shoved forward, residual lift brings nose up but then runs out, heli whaps back even harder, most likely breaking the tail rotor. THEN he yanks the collective, but since there's no tail rotor any more, it whips round (as we see from the one frame with the nose visible) and the rest follows.

Very sad. And amazing that it happened to someone with 25K hours. But then, it always is.

[Gordy]

the most likely cause is head injury leading to unconsciousness.

Explain the lack of engine shutdown another way if you prefer.

As previously noted:

ceptripetal g:
I count 10revs per 12 sec
so that's about 5 Radians per second

5^2=25
times by the radius guessing 2 meters?

gives accn 50m/s^2 or 5g

enough to incapacitate the pilot?

I suspect the sustained G forces killed them and prevented engine shutdown. Have you tried moving your arm in 5G?

[Thomas coupling]

Gordy: "Where's the autopsy report" you talk of. If you look at yourvideo in post #1, at minute 3:38, they notice blood on the door, as Aesir states in his post, too.

Thanks for the calcs- I was thinking about that this morning, on the train - 5G, not enough to kill you for a short period perhaps, but that - sustained and in persons of their age - and if it is proven - hitting the cockpit - almost certainly led to their incapacity preventing the driver from lowering the lever fully.

Do you know what is the strangest thing to come out of this? He lost control of a dynamically unstable vehicle, falling off a raised (moving?)platform causing the fragile undercarriage to collapse underneath him and STILL, the damn helo remained upright - allowing the rotors to spin. Who would have forecast the chances of the helo remaining upright, especially as it continues to beat the living daylight out of the underbelly of the a/c. In most other cases - surely the cab would have almost immediately rolled over onto its side and the rotors would have stopped instantaneously, thus stopping the sustained spin and possibly keeping both alive.

[krypton_john]

My thoughts too, TC. How did it stay upright and level? Surely the collective could not have stayed centered so how come the whole machine wasn't thrown on it's side, nose or tail?

[SASless]

TC....the last bit I fully agree with. Sod's Law can work in odd ways.


Crab....you and some others miss the point being made.

All the HSE Rules and Safety Measures taken under whatever motivation.....can be undone if there is a false underpinning caused by full compliance to related but separate rules and procedures.

We had a recent EMS crash of an AStar that resulted in an instantaneous post impact fire.

That the Crew had Helmets, Nomex Flight Suits, Leather Boots and Nomex Gloves but NO CRASH WORTHY FUEL SYSTEM...it became a fatal accident rather than a Survivable Accident.

I understand HSE is not of CAA doing necessarily....and that Aircraft Certification is not the HSE folks turf....but the two should be complimentary if it is to be applied to Aviation don't you think?

What we are talking about is a Comprehensive Approach to developing an Effective Safety Culture that must flow from the Top....down.....with feedback from the Bottom....up.

[Fun Police]

SASless, was that the accident where the a/c took off with the collective mounted hydraulic switch in the aft position? :ugh:

[whoknows idont]

Thanks for the calcs- I was thinking about that this morning, on the train - 5G, not enough to kill you for a short period perhaps, but that - sustained and in persons of their age - and if it is proven - hitting the cockpit - almost certainly led to their incapacity preventing the driver from lowering the lever fully.


Remember this would not be the regular fight-pilot's 5G pushing you into the seat and pushing the blood to your legs. This would be 5G pulling your torso and head forward and pushing the blood into your head. Whole different deal obviously. I'm pretty clueless about the physical side of this but I imagine there is some serious damage done to the soft parts inside your skull very quickly. :(

[SASless]

I don't think so.....but will check to see if I can find a decent account of it. I have posted some links either in this thread or another recently.

This Video is a good start.....contains some Statistics and information.

It does not give much specific information about individual crashes.

I am thinking the Seattle News Crash might have been the one you are thinking of with the Hydraulic Switch issue.



http://www.9news.com/story/news/investigations/2015/07/27/flight--life-helicopter-crash-fuel-tank-airbus-safety/30752301/

[n5296s]

-5G is no huge deal for a short time. That's 5G upwards, not sideways, but I don't really see that it would make a difference. The Pitts is rated for -5G which implies that people do it from time to time. -3G to -4G is fairly unpleasant but no more than that. In an outside loop you push a sustained -3G for 10-20 seconds. It gives me a headache especially after two or three, but that's all (which is why I don't do them any more).

A more likely explanation is that the sudden yaw whacked their heads against the cabin interior. Even then though... it wouldn't be any more violent than a tumble initiation (Lomcevak etc). I've had plenty of bruises from that but I don't think it would knock you unconscious.

Of course after whirling around like that for several minutes, it's no surprise there was blood. But in the first couple of seconds..?

All very odd.

[[email protected]]

5g laterally is a very different thing for the human body to contend with than 5g vertically - the neck becomes the weakest link with a few pounds of mass above it - remember Formula 1 drivers have neck braces to help them cope with much lower lateral forces.

A sudden spin would force the head outwards at an rate impossible to resist unless you are built like Arnie - instant head injury and incapacitation.

[ShyTorque]

The aircraft was very badly over controlled during the pre-impact, failed attempts at landing. Very surprising, if he had as much experience as reports have said (25,000 hours is a very high number for a helicopter pilot).

It made me wonder if the pilot was not securely strapped in from the beginning and perhaps got thrown forwards away from his seat. I've flown with a couple of pilots in the past who have only secured their lap belt, not the shoulder straps, not something I'd ever do.

It seems to me that a lot of torque was going through those rotors for it to remain spinning so rapidly for so long. If the pilot was "doubled up" in his seat and then pinned forward by rotational forces, he would have been unable to reach the controls properly.

Obviously, all is speculation at this stage and doubt the accident investigation will discover evidence, one way or the other.

A tragedy, whatever the cause.

[Gordy]

The reference to the 25,000 hours was supposedly on the bank website--it is not.

I think we can all agree this the pilot did not have 25,000 hours.

[Wageslave]

Are rotational forces alone at the level calculated above really enough to totally incapacitate a pilot, beyond the level to push the collective down and/or chop the throttle? I suspect that violent pitch excursions/impacts of which we saw only the first two on the video might have had a more severe effect.

[Nubian]

Gordy,

25000 hours reference here: https://www.americanbankmontana.com/business-banking/lending/aircraft-financing/
Allthough I find 25000 hours as a private pilot to be an extreme high number.... and could be a 0 too much...

Now, this was a private pilot Fixed-wing and helicopter, details can be found on FAA.gov airman info, open to anyone with a FAA license.
He was also rated on the CE550, which is the jet in the video where all goes to ****.
My bet is that he had a lot of his hours in fixed wing, and not so much in helicopters. The brand new B3e which he crashed, was reg'ed to him in October this year according to FAA. Maybe his first 350?!?
The friend that got killed was also a Private rated helicopter pilot as well, and could very well have got out and chocked the dolly without the pilot needing to shut down, if it was in fact moving about.

By the erratic over-controlling, practicing landings would be a sensible thing for this guy to do, but not on moving dollies.:ugh:

[megan]

I've flown with a couple of pilots in the past who have only secured their lap belt, not the shoulder straps,From what I have observed in the civil world, pilots who have inertia reels don't bother locking them - ever. Military, it was lock them for take off, landing, or at any other time when in a risk window, such as hoisting. Same rules for fixed wing.

[Hot and Hi]

I thought he whole idea of inertia reels was that they automatically lock on either the belt being pulled out quickly, or upon increased G forces acting upon them. This capability can very easily be observed or demonstrated even under normal operating conditions (unlike air bags where the G switch settings are so high that only a real accident should activate it).

None of the inertia reel seat belts I have ever seen in civilian aircraft or cars had a manual override lock.

[Fun Police]

The more i look at this accident and thread, the more i shake my head.
Even if this clown had managed to land on an unchocked dolly, what did he think would happen when he rolled the twist grip (it is a twist grip in a B3e) to the idle position. There is a very good chance that the whole works would start spinning on the ground causing an accident anyway. The flight manual states clearly to exercise caution on slippery surfaces and i can't imagine something more slippery than wheels on a hard surface!

:ugh:

[turbineturkey]

if you look at the video in quarter speed (in youtube in the cog setting in bottom right of vid u can slow it down) you can clearly see him tag the tail twice but it is not enough to snap the tail. if you go frame by frame you can
see after both contacts the tail is intact. also.. for those that fly a-stars we all know how strong that stinger is. if you go frame by frame it looks like the tail and TR are intact but there is such a strong forward cyclic correction that it gets into an extreme nose down attitude and may have had a MR stike? look at the video in slow mo and see what u see. i orig thought it was the TR becoming inop from the strike and that causing the spin but really doesn't look like it when viewed in slow-mo.

[Hot and Hi]

I agree with turbine turkey. The critical moment is not shown in the video, as the camera man took shelter when the pilot lost control.

[Michael Gee]

https://youtu.be/Ip_WqX8nmKY
Takes away some of the required skills - interesting engine off landings !

[Rigidhead]

Sasless,

Regarding older design and safety standards: If you take a look at the new EC 130 T2, the fuel tank is a totally different animal. The certification testing included a full tank drop test of 80 ft.
This system is going to be available on new B3 variants as well (and retrofittable by Service Bulletin on the B3)
When added to the Energy Attenuating seats that are standard, the aircraft has evolved greatly during it's life regarding occupant safety.
I am very interested to see how many operators carry out the upgrade.......

Regards,

Rigidhead

[Paul Cantrell]

As someone who was an airfield firefighter prior to becoming a helicopter pilot:

No way in hell would I have tried to physically block the aircraft with an appliance (armoured or not!). [...] I find the criticism of the fire-crews quite harsh and unfair - this was a one-in-a-billion event that they were faced with.

I agree with this - when I first saw the video I also felt like "why isn't anybody doing something" but then I thought about what would I have done had I been there and decided "pretty much what everybody did - wait for it to stop and then lend any assistance I could".

The problem here is that it was already on it's belly (maybe still part of the landing gear?) so the rotor is close to the ground, and it sure seemed to me that it could have tipped over at any point. Anyone under that disk would be asking to be decapitated.

I don't think there is any way you could drown that engine - you could only hit it for a fraction of a second on each rotation - I'd be surprised if you could kill an engine with that amount of water.

It sucks to say nothing could have been done, but realistically, I don't think there is anything that could have been done that wouldn't have risked making the situation much worse than it already was.

As for the cause - one of the videos I looked at seemed like only half the skid was on the dolly, so if that was the case, as soon as the pilot lowered collective it would roll back onto the tailboom which is exactly what it looks like happened. He didn't need to over control the cyclic to cause this - I think once he lowered collective without being sure he was on the dolly he sealed his fate. And I agree with the people that said: "if it was unchocked, why wouldn't you just land on the ramp?". There are the risks we can't control, and the risks we can, and that's one you definitely can control.

And really, landing on a dolly, unchocked or not, why would you ever commit to the landing until you were sure the skids were properly positioned, and even then, you need to take your time lowering collective so that you can abort the landing at any point. It sure looked like a rookie mistake to me. (I used to fly a 206 off a small dolly and it definitely pays to take your time).

[Mars]

14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, November 18, 2015 in Carlsbad, CA
Aircraft: AIRBUS HELICOPTERS AS350B3E, registration: N711BE
Injuries: 2 Fatal.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On November 18, 2015, about 1624 Pacific standard time, an Airbus Helicopters AS350B3E, N711BE, departed controlled flight while landing on a moveable helipad at Mc Clellan-Palomar Airport, Carlsbad, California. The pilot, who was the owner, was operating the helicopter under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91. The private pilot and private pilot-rated passenger were fatally injured; the helicopter sustained substantial damage. The local personal flight departed Carlsbad at 1411. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed.

The entire accident sequence was captured on airport security cameras and the mobile phone cameras of multiple witnesses.

The helicopter departed earlier in the day from the east end of the Premier Jet fixed base operator (FBO) ramp, which was located midfield on the south side of runway 6/24. After departure, line crew moved the helipad to the west end of the ramp.

Upon returning, the helicopter approached the airport from the northeast and was cleared to land on runway 24. It descended to midfield, turned left, and approached the ramp in a low hover via taxiway A3. The helicopter then followed taxiway A and began an approach to the helipad from the east and into the direction of the sun. The helicopter then landed short of the helipad, with the center of its skids making contact with the pad's front edge. The helicopter immediately rocked back and its tailskid struck the ground. The helicopter then began a series of back and forth oscillations, and the helipad broke free from the rear left chock, rotated to the right, and pivoted around its front right wheel. The helicopter spun with the helipad for the first quarter of the turn, and then rapidly climbed and rotated 270 degrees to the right. The helipad came to rest to the north, having revolved 180 degrees, and about 50 seconds later the helicopter landed on the tarmac east of the helipad, while partially straddling taxiway A and the ramp at a 45-degree angle.

For the next 2 1/2 minutes line crew re-secured the helipad, installing chocks on three of the four wheels. The helicopter then repositioned for an approach to the helipad from the west. During the next 4 1/2 minutes the helicopter made three landing attempts, getting to within 5 to 20 ft of the helipad. A video of the final landing attempt was captured by a witness, who was located about 130 ft south. He had observed the other landing attempts and was concerned that the helicopter may crash, so positioned himself behind a car at the corner of the FBO's hangar.

The video revealed that the helicopter again landed short of the pad, similar to the first landing attempt, rocking back and forth twice onto its tailskid. After the final strike, the helicopter pitched violently forward and out of view behind the hangar. Security cameras revealed that from here the helicopter spun 180 degrees to the left, and after reaching a 45-degree nose up attitude, the aft tailrotor and vertical stabilizer assembly struck the ground and separated. The helicopter bounced and rotated another 360 degrees before landing hard on its left side. Once on the ground, the main rotor blades and cabin continued to spin with the engine still running. The helicopter continued spinning for the next 5 minutes and 10 seconds while slowly sliding about 530 ft east along the ramp. The tailboom and horizontal stabilizer then separated and the helicopter rolled onto its side, shedding the main rotor blades. The engine continued operating for another 30 seconds while fire crew doused the helicopter. White smoke billowed from the engine's exhaust after the helicopter came to rest, but there was no indication of fire.

The pilot purchased the helicopter on October 29, 2015, but had flown demonstration and familiarization flights in it since September 20. According to the helicopter's maintenance records, those flights totaled about 8.8 hours, and were all conducted with a certified flight instructor present. He received an additional 2 hours of flight training on November 13.

According to friends and flight instructors who had flown with the pilot, he had previously owned a Bell 407, and the accident flight was the first he had flown in the AS350 series without a professional pilot present.

[Evil Twin]

A video of the final landing attempt was captured by a witness, who was located about 130 ft south. He had observed the other landing attempts and was concerned that the helicopter may crash, so positioned himself behind a car at the corner of the FBO's hangar.


Why the hell didn't someone get on the radio and reason with this bloke to put it on the ground? They seem to have had plenty of time to get the mobile phones out to film the demise of these poor people but, none at all to take a sensible course of action. For crying out loud it would have been safer to have gone and driven the trolley away to prevent him from trying again if he was having that much trouble.

[turboshaft]

So, contrary to claims made earlier in this thread, there was no post-event fire. And the helipad was chocked at the time of the final landing attempt.

Evil Twin -- Quite. The full timeline described in the report, including the sequence of events prior to the videos, makes for painful reading.

[SASless]

Turbo....those "claims" of Fire were made based upon news reports "Quoting Authorities"....as was stated at the time of the post.

I give as much credence to FAA Preliminary Reports as I do News Reports....and you would too if you had much experience with them.

Wait for the full report before you hang your hat on what is reported being exactly accurate.

This one may be closer to fact than some as they apparently had the benefit of the Airport Surveillance Video which would have given them a good view of the entire sequence.

I shall wait to read of the reporting about the state of the Air Frame and any comments it will have re fire.

I think we can accept there was no catastrophic fire as we have seen in so many Astar Crashes. At this point we do not know if this particular aircraft had the standard or crashworthy fuel Tank installed do we?

[Gordy]

The latest:

NTSB: Copter missed helipad 4 times before fatal crash | SanDiegoUnionTribune.com (http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/dec/01/carlsbad-helicopter-crash-ntsb-report/)

CARLSBAD — A helicopter pilot made repeated attempts to land at a Carlsbad airport last month before the aircraft spun out of control and crashed, killing him and a passenger, a federal report said.

The National Transportation Safety Board found that the helicopter ultimately missed the portable helipad, rocked wildly back and forth several times, spun in place for more than five minutes, and broke off the tail before being enveloped in a cloud of smoke.

Bruce Erickson, 65, of Rancho Santa Fe, had piloted the aircraft several times since September, but always before with a professional pilot present, the National Transportation Safety Board said in a preliminary report on the accident.

Erickson was president of American Bank in Montana and spent part of his time in Bozeman.

His passenger on Nov. 18 was Wayne Lewis, 60, of Cardiff by the Sea, a Realtor who was rated as a private pilot, not a professional, the NTSB said.

Erickson bought the Airbus helicopter on Oct. 29, the report said.

The entire sequence of events leading up to the disaster, including at least four landing attempts on the raised helipad, were caught on airport security cameras and several witnesses’ cellphone cameras.

The report said Erickson and Lewis took off from McClellan-Palomar Airport about 2:11 p.m. in clear weather. They returned a little more than two hours later and started to land at 4:24 p.m. on a helipad on a ramp in front of Premier Jet hangars.

A ground crew had rolled the wheeled helipad to the west end of the ramp. The helicopter approached the airport from the northeast, turned left and approached the ramp in a low hover. It approached the helipad from the east, facing the sun, and landed short.

The center of the skids touched the pad’s front edge, sending the helicopter “in a series of back-and-forth oscillations,” with its tail skid striking the ground, the report said. The impacts knocked the helipad loose from one of the chocks that was holding a wheel in place.

The pad began to spin on one front wheel, then the helicopter also began to spin. The copter then climbed, rotated, and 50 seconds later landed partly on the ramp at a 45-degree angle.

Crewmen re-secured the helipad by installing chocks on three of the four wheels. The pilot lifted off and approached the pad from the west this time. He made three more landing attempts in the next four and a half minutes, getting within five to 20 feet of the pad each time.

On the last approach, caught on video by a witness who stood behind a car for safety, the helicopter landed short of the pad again. The aircraft spun 180 degrees to the left as the nose went up and the tail rotor hit the ground and broke off.

The helicopter bounced, completely rotated once, then landed hard on its left side.

“Once on the ground, the main rotor blades and cabin continued to spin wih the engine still running. The helicopter continued spinning for the next 5 minutes and 10 seconds while slowly sliding about 530 feet east along the ramp,” the report said.

The tail boom, horizontal stabilizer and main rotor blades snapped off. The engine operated for 30 more seconds while fire crews doused the aircraft. White smoke billowed from the engine exhaust, but the craft did not catch fire, the report said.

By the time rescuers got to the helicopter cabin, the men inside were dead.

The NTSB said Erickson had flown demonstration and familiarization flights in that helicopter totaling about 8.8 hours since Sept. 20. All those flights were conducted with a certified flight instructor present. He had two additional hours of flight training on Nov. 13.

Friends and instructors told investigators that although Erickson had previously owned a Bell 407 helicopter, his final flight in the Airbus was his first time flying a helicopter one without a professional pilot present.

[ShyTorque]

Pilot ego over ability? What a terribly sad waste of two lives.

[Nubian]

According to friends and flight instructors who had flown with the pilot, he had previously owned a Bell 407, and the accident flight was the first he had flown in the AS350 series without a professional pilot present.

With that little experience in the B3, that size dollie, first time alone, what could possibly go wrong:eek::ugh::ugh:

But sadly, pretty close to what I had expected....

SAS,

In the video's you can clearly see fire while it's spinning, but it didn't fire-ball in the end. Only guessing that the drain would be pissing a little amount, but most likely no tank-rupture.

Shy,
Pilot ego over ability?

A bit similar to a Scottish ex WRC driver.....

[ShyTorque]

Plus a few others.. :(

[Wageslave]

ego over ability

Wow! Isn't that a little harsh? Not to mention rather self-righteous?

The guy was new to type but apparently had done substantial type training and (I surmise) was trying to carry out a procedure quite familiar on his previous type, albeit without the benefit of the comprehensive type training we'd get making that change in Europe. But he wasn't in Europe and different rules apply.

He's imagine he was perfectly capable of landing on a dolly as he had always been, wouldn't he? Is that so unreasonable? It might , in retrospect, prove to have been a bit ambitious to keep trying after the first scare but "ego over..."? That's probably not fair.

The position of skids on a dolly from the pilot's perspective is vastly different between a Bell206 (my experience) and a Squirrel and knowing Bells the family resemblance is likely to be very similar vis a vis pilot's position relative to skids. Even after years on the 355 I found placing the skids on a dolly invisible behind behind me which I rarely had to do a real challenge whereas on the Bell it was a doddle because you could actually see the damn thing.

Poor guy, I feel for him, and don't think hip-shooting accusations of "ego" are at all fair. Lack of experience probably, but to blame it on his ego seems to me, well, based on an excess of someone else's ego if you see what I mean.

I'd call it unfamiliarity. OK, he probably should have recognised he was out of his depth but failure to act on that can be down to many things beyond "ego". Determination, for instance. Or inexperience at trying a familiar manoeuvre in an unfamiliar type. From the description I feel he simply tried to land the Squirrel as he would have dome a Bell and came unstuck. It looks so obvious to me that he was using a Bell sight picture on that dolly. What else would you expect him to do if he hadn't been shown how, which I guess will prove to be the case?

Cut the poor bugger some slack?

[ShyTorque]

Cut the poor bugger some slack?Did you read the NTSB account? He killed himself and his passenger after repeated failed attempts to put it safely on the dolly. All he had to do was land alongside and be safe.

I spent three years landing an AS355 on a dolly, sometimes on an unlit helipad, so I do appreciate the difficulty.

[S70ALM]

That was a new AS-350BE (Airbus) that has a twist grip throttle that can bring the engine to idle and stop such rotation. It appears that full Nr was in effect the whole ride and that the pilot was keeping it level with cyclic (small movements and centered). All new production AStars have a poor mans CVR/FDR factory installed (Aperro) that could/should tell the story. Dollies are a high risk convenience with bad risk/reward ratios. Dollies take up hanger space, inhibit inspection, and can be deadly with a control or power problem on TO or landing.Bird comes with ground handling wheels, stick em on and push. Dolly caused this accident. Astars are the most difficult bird to put on dolly pads as PIC sits way forward of skids and often will land short if not trained properly. AS350 will ground resonance easily and has features to mitigate this tendency but a bouncy pad can negate the engineering. I fly a 2B1 Astar from a small pad for the last 5 years and know it is a bad idea but can't fight an ignorant city hall (management).