Hope they don't ground it as the UK Search & Rescue system depend on them now that the AB139 isn't working either !
A fairly contentious comment on two fronts...
The UK SAR system does not depend on the S92. It is merely one element of a multi agency / platform system. If required to, either the RAF/ RN may be asked to cover for the Coast Guard within the constraints of their own manning / serviceability issues, as they have before, (just like the coastguard have helped out the military before) or the contractor will, as they have done in the past for the 139, provide alternative assets.
secondly, if in due course, the S92 is grounded then it will be for specific safety reasons. In which case I would argue that the safety of the crew(s) is of greater importance than the effect it may or may not have on the UK SAR system.
I appreciate Special that the comment was probably just a throw away line but in the present climate everything on these threads is being scrutinised by the media.
Fair point and comment withdrawn - Had forgotten about the press !
Yes, it was meant as just a throw-away line, especially as I'm not really sure of the status of the AB139 right now. I guess not the right time for frivilous comments either - Apologies ! S 25
After looking at the flight data available on line and the noting the point that they turned back to the shore, how close were they to the destination rig?
I was thinking the same and tried to figure it out:
The last flight of the same aircraft on flightaware.com between CYYT and the platform had a duration of 1:15.
They departed at 11:47 Z and declared the emergency at 12:15 Z. That's 27 min, so not even half way before they turned around and flew for another 10 min (or 17nm).
The media reports indicate an airliner saw the aircraft only minutes (expendable statement) after the crash already upside down... did it capsized after a somewhat successful ditching? Maybe the survivor was/will be able to tell; on TV he seemed to be conscious when they loaded him into the ambulance.
Last edited by Phil77 : 13th March 2009 at 21:39.
Reason: include quotation
Phil77
That’s the worrying bit, the short time frame from turn round till the event.
The voice recording will give some info however the recovery of the airframe and CVR+ FDR will be a critical event in the investigation. So how deep is the water in the area and what is the commitment to recover?
How is it possible for a state of the art S-92 to go down only 7 minutes after a MGB oil pressure loss, bypass or no bypass. It is not possible according to Sikorsky reps. But still it did!! Have we not been told the truth about the MGB weakness?
Any technical history before the flight?
Praying for more survivors
Last edited by AirJockey : 13th March 2009 at 22:42.
Air Jockey - The chance of any more survivors are slim to none. The suits would have given them about 24 hours protection but that time has come and gone now, so things are not good.
The search for 16 missing passengers of a helicopter crash off the coast of Newfoundland will end Friday evening, because officials say "the likelihood of finding survivors is no longer there."
13/03/2009 3:53:47 PM
A helicopter travelling from St. John's to the Hibernia offshore oil platform and operated by Cougar Helicopters ditched after experiencing technical problems, Thursday, March 12, 2009. The search continues Friday, March 13, 2009.
The announcement comes more than 30 hours after a chopper heading to an oil platform crashed into frigid waters with 18 people on board.
One survivor was rescued from the water on Thursday and is being treated in hospital for his injuries. One death has been confirmed but 16 others are now presumed dead.
"It appears there are no survivors," said the Joint Rescue Co-ordination Centre's Maj. Denis McGuire, adding that rescue crews had repeatedly searched a massive area of open water with no sign of life.
The search will officially end at 7:30 p.m. local time.
The operation will now be handed over to the Transportation Safety Board and the RCMP, who will conduct a missing persons investigation.
The chopper crashed and sank in 120 metres of water, and left a debris trail of about six kilometres.
Crash details
The helicopter was en route from St. John's to the Hibernia platform when the pilot reported mechanical troubles and turned back towards St. John's.
The chopper issued a distress call, and eight minutes later, went into the water.
"Mechanical problems were reported and we don't know of what nature," said Julie Leroux, spokesperson for the Transportation Safety Board.
It is believed that the pilot was "ditching" the aircraft, that is, making an attempt to intentionally crash-land the helicopter due to the mechanical problem.
The crew of a Provincial Airlines plane flew over the area within a few minutes of the crash and reported that the helicopter was floating upside down. The helicopter sunk shortly afterwards.
The missing aircraft is operated by Cougar Helicopters in St. John's.
Tragic; new equipment, professionally trained crew, company with an excellent safety record and leaders in the offshore support industry, passengers and crew trained on egress with all the right survival gear. What can I say-
I sit now with a heavy heart, at home in St Johns after having walked up my trail with my wife to throw a wreath in the ocean at 19.30local. Gods speed lads and lassies of this fair Isle, you will never be forgotten.
To you Mr Burt, my absolute and utter respects, to the way you handled the media at such a tough time, JJ and all the crews, we have done nothing but pray for your loss .
I fell very privaledged, when home, to live under the flight path of such a profesional operation.
Having read about considerations of loss of lubrication of the main transmission (though I am certainly not speculating, because I know nothing of this event) I am reminded of the concerns of a similar nature associated with the fixed wing LearFan of the early '80's. That aircraft had two engines driving one propeller, so it's intended redundancy of powerplants were considered in the context of a helicopter.
The gearbox design, included a block of wax within, which would melt at a suitably high temperature after oil loss for whatever reason. Cast into the wax were spring loaded electrical contacts, which closed once the wax melted. The closed contacts told the pilot that the gearbox was now being lubricated by the wax, and down would be good.
I hope we learn a lesson, which makes the cost seem, in the slightest way, bearable.
I just want to let you all know that my prayers are with you all. My condolences to the families of the crew and passengers. I wish you strength to help sustain you with your sorrow and pain during this terrible time. Guys, hang in there, be strong and know my thoughts are with you all!
While flying Hueys for Uncle Sam the resident Bell rep advised the main transmission was good for either 30 or 60 minutes dry run, forget which. Had occasion to put it to the test and flew one for 15 minutes minus oil. Maintenance arrived fixed the problem (blown filter seal), filled with oil and they (not me) flew it home.
The certification requirement for dry run capability is contained in FAR 29.927, the relevent portion being
(c) Lubrication system failure. For lubrication systems required for proper operation of rotor drive systems, the following apply:
(1) Category A. Unless such failures are extremely remote, it must be shown by test that any failure which results in loss of lubricant in any normal use lubrication system will not prevent continued safe operation, although not necessarily without damage, at a torque and rotational speed prescribed by the applicant for continued flight, for at least 30 minutes after perception by the flightcrew of the lubrication system failure or loss of lubricant.
It is an uneviable position to be in should you have knowledge of the requirement, for you are presented with the dilemma do I follow the checklist and toss it in the water in sea conditions which make survival problematic, or take a punt and continue flight (SHORT) to a known safe haven (safe haven being defined as calmer water (lee side of ship perhaps), beach etc etc).
PS: A T-53-13 will run at take off power for 2 minutes minus oil. Thanks Mr Lycoming
I like many sat up and checked the news reports and prayed there would be reports of living victims recovered. That did not happen. I know there are many like me that are grieving the loss of the people aboard the Cougar flight.
My thoughts and prayers go out to those who have lost loved ones in this tragedy.
What concerns me about this tragedy is that much has been said about the survival suits, the cold seas, the MGB, but what is missing is anything about the float system. One member mentioned something about the retrofit, but really, in those seas, without the floats going off, there is little time for the persons to get out without the aircraft filling up with water. If, like what has been alluded to, the aircraft crashed without any control, then floats may not have helped. If, however, the pilots were able to have some control and put the aircraft in without much airspeed and somewhat upright, then rolling over, we must have a float system assist the evacuation. I don't want to sound like this is the only issue, but just that the Canadian Cormorant that went down a few years ago, the egress lighting didn't go on as a result of the DC battery being ripped out. The result was that crew members in the back did not have any lighting to emergency exits. As aircrew, I am trusting that equipment installed on board should work when needed the most. I hope that Cougar's crews and pax didn't perish because of malfunctioning safety equipment.
Myt condolences to the families in the communities of Newfoundland and Canada waiting patiently for answers.
(not me) flew it home.
Linear Mode
