24th Feb 2016: EC 135 crash in northern germany

[skadi]

Sad news.
A EC135 of the german federal police crashed at about 20:00 LT in the northern part of germany, about 2nm east of their homebase Fuhlendorf. Two fatalities and one with serious injuries.

Helikopter-Absturz ? Zwei Tote und ein Schwerverletzter / Schleswig-Holstein / Aktuelle Nachrichten Schleswig-Holstein / News - KN - Kieler Nachrichten (http://www.kn-online.de/News/Aktuelle-Nachrichten-Schleswig-Holstein/Schleswig-Holstein/Hasenmoor-Drei-Schwerverletzte-nach-Helikopter-Absturz)

http://www.bild.de/news/2016/news/news-eilmeldung-hubschrauber-44706906.bild.html

The pilot transmitted an unreadable call short prior the accident. The wreck looks like an almost vertical impact

skadi

[Spunk]

Sad news.:(:(:(

Right next door

More News (http://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/schleswig-holstein/Zwei-Tote-nach-Hubschrauber-Absturz-bei-Bimoehlen,hasenmoor102.html)

[ShyTorque]

Tragic incident and a startling photo. It looks like the rotor blades failed downwards after suffering a massive vertical impact, possibly with little rotational speed. It immediately brings another remarkably similar accident to mind.

[helihub]

https://www.ndr.de/nachrichten/schleswig-holstein/absturz460_v-vierspaltig.jpg

[blackdog7]

Any accounts of the reports in English?
Thanks

Sorry to hear of this.....

[John R81]

In Bimöhlen in Bad Bramstedt ( Kreis Segeberg ) a helicopter of the Federal Police crashed with three occupants. The 33 -year-old co-pilot and a 42 year old companion died. The 31 year old pilot suffered serious injuries, according to police, and was taken to hospital . The EC135 helicopter crashed at 20:00 and was completely destroyed. In the morning, Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière ( CDU ) was on the scene .


Machine was on training flight


" My thoughts and deepest condolences are with the families of those killed and seriously injured colleagues ," said de Maiziere on Thursday night . He is responsible as interior minister for the Federal Police . Even Prime Minister Torsten Albig expressed shock : " I am shocked by this tragedy that has two men of the Federal Police taken so suddenly and abruptly from life " , the SPD politician said this morning . " I hope that the downed pilot of the helicopter survived the disaster .


At the crash site the country Interior Minister Stefan Studt and Secretary Manuela Söller - Winkler ( both SPD ) are now located beside de Maizière .


Crash near road and soccer field


The accident site is a field only about 20 meters from a road which leads to Bimöhlen. A few hundred meters away is a football field, in use at the time of the crash. An eyewitness told NDR 1 Welle Nord : " I was surprised that the machine is flown so low without headlight. Then the helicopter crashed in a circular motion . . " Bystanders were " probably not injured " , according to police .


The machine belonged to the squadron in Fuhlendorf in Bad Bramstedt, based not far from the crash site. "The occupants of the helicopter were on a training flight and were launched in Fuhlendorf," said police spokeswoman Silke Westphal.


Was there an emergency?


In addition to the Criminal Bad Segeberg also two members of the Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU) Braunschweig arrived on the scene during the night. They find the black box, which records data of the flight and voices in the cockpit, and are now trying to reconstruct how the accident happened. In addition, they would investigate the wreck, said BFU spokesman Germout Friday on Friday morning. First, it is a matter to determine whether conclusions on the cause of the crash are possible from the location of the wreck. So one can detect whether the rotor was turning.


Whether there has been an emergency call shortly before the crash, is still open. "I can neither confirm nor deny," Westphal said. Pending final results, it will "certainly take several days.

[Spunk]

More pics here (http://www.abendblatt.de/region/schleswig-holstein/article207091037/Hubschrauber-Absturz-Crew-nahm-an-SEK-Uebung-teil.html)

In the article they mention that the helicopter participated in a special forces training exercise, supporting the ground unit with their IR camera. They are said to have been hovering in 120-130 m prior coming down. They've been airborne for @ 50 minutes and were heading home to the nearby homebase.

According to the BFU (German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation) weather was no issue.

[The Sultan]

Weren't the Germans the ones that stopped autorotation training on the EC-135 as dangerous/damaging to the aircraft? We should expect an increase of losses in the U.S.Army due to similar incidents now that they train on on the EC-145.

The Sultan

[hueyracer]

That is correct.

This issue only occurs if pilots can not handle an autorotation well (like Students do).

The EC135 and EC145 can autorotate quiet well, but the margin for errors is not big-in a "real" auto, this would not matter, as it has no effect on the autorotation itself......

[Flyting]

This issue only occurs if pilots can not handle an autorotation well (like Students do).
Well, that's why there is a suitably trained instructor there...
Students are those who are training for a PPL. Pilots training onto A/C like the 135/145 for police/EMS should have a few hours under their belt!

Not a shot at you Hueyracer, but at the person who did away with autorotation training!!! Save a bit on training but pay a lot for an accident and not to mention the loss of life.

When I did my training onto twins - when I asked the instructor for a few auto's, he said what for...:ugh: You won't do an auto, you have a spare engine to fly on!
Because I don't want to be a rock falling out of the sky!!!

[hueyracer]

Totally on your site there (where are you flying now?)...

But the margin for errors (that leads to a damage on the rotor blades) is so small, that the instructors do not have enough time to jump in...and what good does it do if a military pilot never flies a full on auto to the ground?

Ab-initio training on twins does not make any sense at all....but thats a whole different topic....

Curious to find out whether a technical snag, or pilots error was the cause of the above mentioned accident?

[Spunk]

The aircraft was equipped with a cockpit voice recorder and a HUMS. That might help to find out what happened.

[skadi]

Weren't the Germans the ones that stopped autorotation training on the EC-135 as dangerous/damaging to the aircraft? We should expect an increase of losses in the U.S.Army due to similar incidents now that they train on on the EC-145.

The Sultan

The problem of ARs with the 135 is the construction of those hinge- and bearingless rotorblades. The low RRPM in the final phase of AR ( cushion prior touchdown ) has caused cracks at the controlcuffs when doing excessive amounts of ARs during training. ARs with powerrecovery are therefore no problem. The 145 has different blades ( like BK117/ BO105 ) and are not effected by these problems.

skadi

[skadi]

The aircraft was equipped with a cockpit voice recorder and a HUMS. That might help to find out what happened.

And the pilot will give detailed information after his hopefully quick recovery...

skadi

[tecpilot]

Looks for me like the attempt to do an autorotation. A vertical impact without any airspeed, low rotor speed and without any turning on a field. Airframe vertical collapse. No debris wide distributed around. Fenestron, tail boom and airframe in a direct line. Flat skids but still attached to the frame. No slip marks on ground. Pilot was able to control the a/c at least in bank and direction. But wasn't able to break the rate of descent on the last meters.

May be the known Rad Alt failure due to the shed bus problem without generators after the loss or the switch off of the engines. Can't see good chances to open the very unfortunately placed shed bus switch in pitch black night and dark cockpit while wearing NVGs autorotating from a few hundred feets. Additionally the 2D view through the NVGs.

But thats the final stage of this accident, there must be something before.

[QTG]

In 2001, a certain UK operator suggested to Eurocopter that they might like to move the Shed Bus switch to a position more suitable for rapid operation in the event of a double engine failure. The response was that it was inconceivable that a double engine failure could occur!

The switch stayed where it was.

[hueyracer]

I am just guessing now-but to me, it does not look like an autorotation gone wrong....it looks more like VRS....

Maybe they tried a "high hover", then started to descend, got into VRS-and could not recover?

The investigation will show.......

[alouette]

What if someone pointed a laser at them...

[John R81]

I don't buy high-hover then VRS. That would mean the engines are operating and the rotor would be at full speed at impact. Upon impact, and you can see the effect of that on the structure, the blades would have contacted parts of the machine / the ground, shattered, and fragments would have flown for a considerable distance.


The condition now of the rotors suggest to me a very low energy state at the time of impact.

[Cabby]

Have the UK police fitted cockpit voice recorders and HUMS following the Glasgow crash? It was a AAIB recommendation I believe.
How many EC135's have crashed since they were introduced?

[SilsoeSid]

Have the UK police fitted cockpit voice recorders and HUMS following the Glasgow crash? It was a AAIB recommendation I believe.

"Safety Recommendations
4.1 Safety Recommendations
The following Safety Recommendations have been made:
.
.
Safety Recommendation 2015-031
It is recommended that, when the Civil Aviation Authority require a radio altimeter to be fitted to a helicopter operating under a Police Air Operator’s Certificate, it also stipulates that the equipment is capable of being powered in all phases of flight, including emergency situations, without intervention by the crew.

Safety Recommendation 2015 - 032
It is recommended that the Civil Aviation Authority requires all helicopters operating under a Police Air Operators Certificate, and first issued with an individual Certificate of Airworthiness before 1 January 2018, to be equipped with a recording capability that captures data, audio and images in crash survivable memory. They should, as far as reasonably practicable, record at least the parameters specified in The Air Navigation Order, Schedule 4, Scale SS(1) or SS(3) as appropriate. They should be capable of recording at least the last two hours of (a) communications by the crew, including Police Observers carried in support of the helicopter’s operation, and (b) images of the cockpit environment. The image recordings should have sufficient coverage, quality and frame rate characteristics to include actions by the crew, control selections and instrument displays that are not captured by the data recorder. The audio and image recorders should be capable of operating for at least 10 minutes after the loss of the normal electrical supply.

Safety Recommendation 2015-033
It is recommended that the Civil Aviation Authority requires all helicopters operating under a Police Air Operators Certificate, and first issued with an individual Certificate of Airworthiness on or after 1 January 2018, to be fitted with flight recorders that record data, audio and images in crash-survivable memory. These should record at least the parameters specified in The Air Navigation Order, Schedule 4, Scale SS(1) or SS(3), as appropriate. They should be capable of recording at least the last two hours of (a) communications by the crew, including Police Observers carried in support of the helicopter’s operation, and (b) cockpit image recordings. The image recordings should have sufficient coverage, quality and frame rate characteristics to include control selections and instrument displays that are not captured by the other data recorders. The audio and image recorders should be capable of operating for at least 10 minutes after the loss of the normal electrical supply."


The answer to the question is No.

Isn't it something that I have equipment in my car, bought off the shelf from Maplins, that would cover the above recommendations (apart from the Rad Alt).


How many EC135's have crashed since they (the recommendations) were introduced?

Since 23 October 2015 there have been 3 'crashes' involving the 135 series.;
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/dblist.php?AcType=EC35

Private - Australia
Jordan Public Security Department - Jordan
Bundespolizei - Germany

The only one that the recommendations would apply to, apparently already had the recommended kit fitted. (see Spunk's post above)


recommend
rɛkəˈmɛnd
verb
past tense: recommended; past participle: recommended
1.
put forward (someone or something) with approval as being suitable for a particular purpose or role.
2.
archaic
commend or entrust someone or something to (someone).

[yellowbird135]

It's very quiet on this subject.......not something I'm used to on this forum.....usually lots of opinions on every subject, but not so on this one....
Any (preliminary) findings to be expected from BFU anytime soon?:confused:

[Thracian]

Until now there's nothing new. Even in the german aviation forums I usually track (flugzeugforum.de, helionline.de, ...) there's nothing.

Well, I know a guy at the BFU and just sent him an email about the progress of the investigation. Now I'm waiting for his response.

Thracian

[tecpilot]

It's a federal police a/c in the land of the manufacturer and in the land with the greatest EC135 fleet. 3 important reasons for the quitness. Nobody there wants wild speculations in public about that mission and the crash.

No informations will come out of this closed circle of accident board, police officers and manufacturer before the investigations are finished. A preliminary Report can be awaited in some months.

[Max Power 3503e]

No post crash fire...

[skadi]

No post crash fire...

If you want to suggest "no fuel" , the bladdertanks of the 135 are crashresistant, there were several crashes where it was prooved.

skadi

[Thracian]

A preliminary Report can be awaited in some months.
Yep, according to my "source", the monthly bulletin (in which all incidents of a month are described with a preliminary result or the current state of the investigations) for February will be published somewhere in May, maybe June.

Thracian

[SilsoeSid]

Thracian, any chance of finding a source with some actual information? ;)

In the meantime, I'll be having omlettes with Harry Palmer :suspect:

90lPCeOoIqs

[Thracian]

Thracian, any chance of finding a source with some actual information?


Sid, he said that they already have worked out a scenario as "most likely" according to the available data and the progress of the investigation, but in his first response he unfortunately didn´t tell me any details...
Waiting for his second;)


And as I´m currently not living in Braunschweig (the city where the BFU is located) anymore, I´m not able to meet him for a beer or two at the airport restaurant.
Next time I´ll be visiting Germany again, the bulletin should already be published


Thracian

[SilsoeSid]

It's very quiet on this subject.......not something I'm used to on this forum.....usually lots of opinions on every subject, but not so on this one....

Probably because we don't want to have to go through all the same things again, such as;


May be the known Rad Alt failure due to the shed bus problem without generators after the loss or the switch off of the engines. Can't see good chances to open the very unfortunately placed shed bus switch in pitch black night and dark cockpit while wearing NVGs autorotating from a few hundred feets. Additionally the 2D view through the NVGs.

I notice that it was another T2+ :hmm:

[SilsoeSid]

May be the known Rad Alt failure due to the shed bus problem without generators after the loss or the switch off of the engines. Can't see good chances to open the very unfortunately placed shed bus switch in pitch black night and dark cockpit while wearing NVGs autorotating from a few hundred feets. Additionally the 2D view through the NVGs.

Sorry, what was the problem with the shed bus?

[skadi]

Deleted

skadi

[SilsoeSid]

... is it really different in the T2+ and if so, why?

[skadi]

... is it really different in the T2+ and if so, why?

No, it isn't!

skadi

[SilsoeSid]

So how come the Rad Alt on the P2+ is on the Essential Bus Bar?

[SilsoeSid]

D-HVBB is serial number 0146.

G-SASA - 0147
G-SCAA - 0151
G-BZRS - 0166
G-GWAA - 0174
G-KRNW - 0175
(G-WCAO - 0204)

Are we to assume that these airframes lose their rad alt in the event of both generators going offline? At what stage in the production line was the rad alt placed on the Ess Bus Bar and what caused that change?

Air ambulances are now more involved with night/24hr ops: will there be any retro changes or is there now so much money in the aa world that they can simply buy a different airframe :ooh:


(well, someone said it was quiet here):ok:

[yellowbird135]

Thanks Sid,

I truly appreciate it:ok:

[Spunk]

Is the Rad Alt discussion really worth being looked at in an area where AGL is more or less the same as MSL?

[SilsoeSid]

"Check height"

Is the Rad Alt discussion really worth being looked at in an area where AGL is more or less the same as MSL?

I think that little bit of 'more or less' might sometimes make quite a big difference.

Do Bar Alts give audio clues these days and the lag reduced to such a degree that in auto or in high rod that you would consider it more beneficial than a rad alt in areas of low lying ground?

Be interesting to hear how the Dutch would undertake autos at night in Mr S's world.

[SilsoeSid]

Is the Rad Alt discussion really worth being looked at in an area where AGL is more or less the same as MSL?

S, with the average elevation around Bad Bramstedt (http://www.floodmap.net/Elevation/ElevationMap/?gi=2953537) being 12 metres / 49 feet, and some sites (http://www.mapmyrun.com/de/bad-bramstedt-schleswig-holstein/bad-bramstedt-route-1945139) reporting areas of 18.74 metres / 62 feet, how would you substantiate your statement quoted above?

[hueyracer]

I don´t know how autos are taught in the police nowadays (if at all-full autos to the ground are not a requirement any more, as pilots train on MET directly, which alleviates the requirements), but when i learned to fly (in the military), autos were done by looking outside-with the Radar ALT giving you some assistance, but we were not flying relying on them (or even waiting for an audio feed)...

[SilsoeSid]

… at night?

[Spunk]

Easy Sid, not all questions in a forum are meant to be cynical. Sometimes a question is just what it is: a question.
I'm not IFR rated nor do I have any NVG experience (if at all the crew was operating under NVG), consequently I haven't seen too many RAD ALT.
So dear Sid, subject to your approval, may I ask my question once more: does it really make any difference or would a landing light or even a night sun AND looking outside AND / OR a call-out from the Co based on a bar altimeter be more suitable (IF the RAD ALT issue has anything to do with THIS accident at all)?

[MightyGem]

OR a call-out from the Co based on a bar altimeter be more suitable
Not really. Bar Alts have an allowable error of +/- 50ft(IIRC), altimeter settings(in the UK anyway) are based on forecast pressure so may not necessarily give 100% accuracy, plus the co pilot would have to know the height of the ground above the altimeter setting datum and subtract that from the reading on the bar alt to know when they were getting near the ground.

A Rad Alt is far more accurate and gives your height above the ground so no need to be doing sums in a time of high stress.

[SilsoeSid]

So, you take off from the base with the bar alt reading zero, after all it has been said in that area "AGL is more or less MSL".

You're flying around the area, on the way back to base for example, and both engines go quiet ... what is the elevation of the ground below you? 49 feet, 62 feet, or perhaps higher. At what bar alt height would you begin the flare?

The mention of nitesun and rotating landing lights is totally irrelevant as you can bet your bottom dollar that the high load nitesun will be pointing backwards, will take three attempts to spark up from the controller in the back operated by the rear crew member and the rotating landing lamp will be in the wrong place ... and you probably aren't going to start moving that around.

The fixed landing lamp will be pointing in its usual place, which will be handy, however just as it begins to give a bit of ground definition, around the point at which you begin the flare, the ground goes dark again. The next time you see the illuminated ground is when you are cushioning on.

The rad alt will give you a pretty accurate height above the ground/ water/ trees/ rooftops on which to base your plan of action.

[John Eacott]

Sid,

You could surmise with the same degree of authority that the radalt will only show what you are currently passing above, and not the sheer cliff face or group of buildings 50 feet in front of you. The UK use of QFE, against the more widespread use of QNH, can be a limiting factor in this sort of assessment IMO. Flying on QNH from my experience has created a better overall judgement of height above ground if for no other reason that you are always aware that your baralt is referenced to sea level.

And for night ops my steerable searchlight/landing light would either be extended, or if retracted I would know the exact number of seconds to run it out to the optimum position. Just one of those idiosyncrasies that I built up over the years.

Now for the discussion on whether you should flare at the bottom of an IMC or night auto, or pull pitch and run on.

[megan]

Now for the discussion on whether you should flare at the bottom of an IMC or night auto, or pull pitch and run onWhat is taught regarding this these days? 50 years ago the navy taught 35 knot run on.

[SilsoeSid]

You could surmise with the same degree of authority that the radalt will only show what you are currently passing above,
Isn't that just the information you need?

and not the sheer cliff face or group of buildings 50 feet in front of you.
... which would be the same cliff or building if your reference was the bar alt.

Flying on QNH from my experience has created a better overall judgement of height above ground if for no other reason that you are always aware that your baralt is referenced to sea level.
Interesting, which is all well and good if you immediately know the elevation of the local terrain below you to the nearest 100ft or so.
The rad alt has to be more useful as it doesn't give you a 'better judgement' of your height above the ground, it tells you.

And for night ops my steerable searchlight/landing light would either be extended, or if retracted I would know the exact number of seconds to run it out to the optimum position. Just one of those idiosyncrasies that I built up over the years.

How many seconds is that John?
I know for the 135 it is 'my 5 seconds' from stowed to the set forward position and then maybe a couple more to move it from the straight ahead position to somewhere more handy. (no control when it is in transition)
Ooops, no steerable LL on doub eng fail :ooh:


Now for the discussion on whether you should flare at the bottom of an IMC or night auto, or pull pitch and run on.
Join in -
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/336287-night-autorotation-training.html

[SilsoeSid]

yellowbird135, is this ok?
:ok:

[John Eacott]

Sid,

If there is rising ground ahead, not seen in the dark, where would be the advantage of a radalt over a baralt? Of course it is more accurate for where you are, but sometimes I'm not sure that your thinking is as lateral as it could be.

The time to extend your landing lamp depends on aircraft type, as does which busbar provides the power. Not all helicopters lose the landing lamp with a double engine failure.

[SilsoeSid]

If there is rising ground ahead, not seen in the dark, where would be the advantage of a radalt over a baralt? Of course it is more accurate for where you are, but sometimes I'm not sure that your thinking is as lateral as it could be.

The advantage of a rad alt over a bar alt in this situation, imho, is that it's going to tell me fairly accurately how high I am over the ground that I am about to attempt the final stage of my engine off landing to.

I don't know about you, but my thinking is that a rad alt will tell me when I'm approaching 500', 200' then 100' and says, 'you know what Sid, best you start moving that thar stick & lever ... rather than a landing lamp giving me just enough info that says, 'well here's the ground Sid, whatcha going to do in the next 3 seconds to get out of this' or a bar alt that says, 'well Sid, if you were over the water you'll be getting wet just about .. now!'

Not all helicopters lose the landing lamp with a double engine failure.
I don't think any do, do they?

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

Agree with Sid's points in the posts above.

In this sad case, there was no building or cliff ahead. They very nearly made it successfully onto the ground. We don't know yet if the RadAlt is a factor in the outcome, but I would suggest that if this crew did have and use the RadAlt information, it was that which allowed one of the crew to survive. If they didn't have it, they might all have survived had they had the information.

Sincere condolences to the families and best of luck to the surviving crew member for his/her recovery.

[Rotate too late]

I echo the sentiments of the previous two posters, I'd also like to congratulate people on a far more professional/mature approach to this tragic incident on this thread. Having observed the Shoreham thread over on the mil forum, some of it quite shameful considering the loss of life.

[yellowbird135]

yellowbird135, is this ok?

Absolutely....I read and try to learn from it....and in general, I appreciate your views.....for your professional knowledge, and also for entertainment value....:D

[Thomas coupling]

Silsoe and yellowbird, to be pedantic, however - in reality the RAD ALT is a history gauge. It canot tell you what is coming, it is telling you what height the land was that just passed underneath its beam. Rely totally on rad alt and you will be behind the eight ball for sure.

EOL @ night - pot luck.........Strathclyde et al.

[SilsoeSid]

Quite right TC, and to be even more pedanticer, couldn't we say that everything we see is historic :ok:

I think you'd agree though that it would be better to have a slightly historic indication of the surface that we have just flown over, calculated and indicated for us by the rad alt, than having to remember the topography and every contour line of that area; and then have to work out an historic elevation of that surface based on the QNH, that may have changed up or down while on the task ... at the same time handling a double engine failure ... at night :eek:

[[email protected]]

You might find that the rad alt produces a cone rather than a line-beam and the T/R processes the returns to an average result.

Flaring the aircraft would give the result a slight bias as to what was ahead of you rather than what you had just passed over.

[tecpilot]

Just as reminder, EC135 pilots are teached in the actual SIMs to do a night auto according to the indication of the radalt. And the RFM tells the altitude to flare. As any pilot should know, baralt can't used on autos because of the long indication lag despite a non useful pressure setting.

[yellowbird135]

AR at night:

Once in the flare the Rad Alt indication is no longer top of my priority list....I mean I now spend most of my time outside to get my visual references right (hopefully). Rad Alt audio still helpfull though.... Maybe had time in the descent to set the decision bug to 50' or something like that as an additional clue....

[SilsoeSid]

Too true yb135, once in the flare the rad alt has already done it's job; on the way down she's working as a good, quick, easy to see reference to when you're approaching that c100ft. :ok:

[haihio]

Has anyone got any new news on this?

[Nescafe]

Night autos-
1. Landing light to on.
2. If you don't like what you see, landing light to off.

[Flying Bull]

Hi all

http://www.bfu-web.de/DE/Publikationen/Bulletins/2016/Bulletin2016-02.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

page 12 following - findings to the accident.
The pilot increased the distance to a groundtarget sideslipping with a groundspeed of about 30 knots when the helicopter slowly turned sideways and increased turnrate, when going through 90 degrees - resulting in four and a half turns, before crashing with a high rate of decend.

[EDML]

No. He flew 1100 hours incl. the type rating since 2009.


He flew 35h since Nov. 2015.

[EDML]

I don't know if the German federal Police does recurrent training in the simulator.


They do not fly a lot, too - 1100 hours in 7 years is not a lot for a professional pilot.

[Jet Ranger]

Yes, they do. BPOL has their own EC135/155 sims..., also they can use ADAC's EC135 FFS...

JR

[EDML]

Correct, I do not understand that either.


Especially as Autos are usually not done on the EC135 due to high stress on the blades.

[ATN]

JR

Are you sure BPOL have their own 155 sim ?
I know of only one worlwide and it is in France.

ATN

[Hot and Hi]

Hi all

http://www.bfu-web.de/DE/Publikationen/Bulletins/2016/Bulletin2016-02.pdf?__blob=publicationFile

page 12 following - findings to the accident.
The pilot increased the distance to a groundtarget sideslipping with a groundspeed of about 30 knots when the helicopter slowly turned sideways and increased turnrate, when going through 90 degrees - resulting in four and a half turns, before crashing with a high rate of decend.
Yes, actually turning clock-wise (to the right) as a torque reaction. And instead of immediately applying full left pedal to arrest the yaw rate, the pilot flying - upon realising the uncommanded yaw - decreased left pedal and actually applied right pedal.

The non-flying PIC apparently did not take over controls, neither did he call "left pedal". Rather he called "speed, speed, speed" (meaning "increase forward speed"), which as we all know is only the second or third response to uncommanded yaw (the primary response is to arrest the yaw with full, sustained opposite pedal, and - under certain circumstances - reduce power).

While it is a well-documented Fenestron issue that pilots do not apply enough, or quickly enough, or long enough, opposite pedal (but rather too little, too late), the pilot's response here of applying the *wrong* pedal is note-worthy.

The interim report implicitly links this wrong response to a German Police internal Safety Notice published a week before this accident (which was in force at the time of the accident and has since been corrected) which instructed to fly out of uncommanded right yaw by increasing forward speed and applying right (sic!) pedal.

The said Safety Notice was published after another police EC135 on 6 Feb 2016 encountered uncommanded right yaw. In that case the pilot was trying to transition from a high hover (1200' AGL) to forward flight by increasing power i.e. collective (as if transitioning in ground effect from a hover to forward flight) instead of simply applying FWD cyclic. Again, the helicopter behaved as expected with a torque reaction to the right.

However, instead of realising his/her mistake (of applying power instead of FWD cyclic) the pilot attributed the right yaw to the legendary "Fenestron stall" (which, as avid PPRUNE readers would conclude, doesn't exist). Hence the advise to reduce TR blade angle of attack by reducing TR power pedal (this in the EC 135 case that means less left rudder).

To rub this in: Not only did the pilot not realise his/her mistake at the moment when it happened in flight, but the incident was used to create the before-mentioned Safety Notice that established those unorthodox procedures to combat the legendary "Fenestron Stall".

The interim report implies that the actions or beliefs of both pilots of the occurrence helicopter (resulting in neither pilot taking corrective action to stop the yaw) were informed by this ill-fated Safety Notice that was circulated to all police pilots only a week before the accident.

[LastMinute]

I’m a little confused by the BFU bulletin.

They note that they found the Fenestron drive shaft broken.

Then they summarise that: “The on-site examination found no evidence of any technical defect in the helicopter, either in the Fenestron drivetrain or any impediment to the controls.”

They go on to report that manufacturer test pilots reconstructing the accident flight were able to arrest a right yaw without difficulty, both with left pedal input and by reducing power and increasing forward air speed to fly out of it. That only seems relevant if the Fenestron was working.

Then at the back they reference the RFM emergency procedures for tail rotor drive failure. That only seems relevant if the Fenestron was not working.

So did the drive shaft break in flight, or as a result of the crash? If it remained intact in flight, what could cause the right yaw seen in the UMS data – starting slowly and increasing in speed until it seemingly became unrecoverable?

[EDML]

The drive shaft for the fenestron broke when the helicopter crashed.

[EDML]

I don't think that was the problem here - flying sideways to the left decreases the needed tail rotor thrust on the EC135.

[Jet Ranger]

@ATN

I'm talking about FNPT II (not the FFS), and I'm sure for EC135, but not sure about the 155 (I think it is there). Three years ago, they were finishing new trng facility at St. Augustin, talk was about FNPT's for all their types (135/155/332L1), but I don't know if they've finished everything yet.

JR

[SimFlightTest]

BPOL has their own sims for EC135, EC155, and AS332.

[Spunk]

Pilot flying with a total time of 377 hours, NVG Training just finished, ceiling of 600ft, operating under NVG at 400 ft at night, pilot non-flying with a total time of 1247 hours ...
Sorry to say but that doesn't sound like the right combo for that kind of mission.