PHI Nearly Loses Another S-76
Thread Starter
Who ever said flying lessons came cheap!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mutt,
That is outrageous. I carried you through your type rating and your poker game (fold, fold, fold, bluff & fold). It's time you stood on your own two feet!!
Gloves off for round 2...
That is outrageous. I carried you through your type rating and your poker game (fold, fold, fold, bluff & fold). It's time you stood on your own two feet!!
Gloves off for round 2...
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Years ago when we were operating Puma 330Js to rigs in the South China Sea, one of our pilots would always complain of an unexplained sudden loss of power on approach to a certain helideck. It turned out that when the wind was blowing from a certain direction, the helideck would be smack downwind of 3 big turbine exhausts. We did a plume study and discovered that the exhaust gases caused the temperature above the helideck to be up to 10 degrees hotter when the wind was from a certain sector.
I was just wondering if this may be the case in the GoM incident too.
I was just wondering if this may be the case in the GoM incident too.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: alabama
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A++ plenty of power??????????????? hummm!
someone said: "The S76A++ has the engines of a C, but the max gross weight of an A, and thus lots of power available. It may have the best power/weight ratio of any S76 variant, and I've never come close to running out of power in one, even in the summer"....
a) the 76 a++s I flew, sweated like a whore in church in summer time, when flying it in GOM and you need to be well aware of what you're doing and where you're going or your feet will get wet....I personally haven't seen all this power available you were mantioning!!!!
b) PHI loves steep approaches, at least with a++'s!!! they fly it almost on the upper side of the dead man curve if you will.....better fat and slow than skinny and fast when you work off shore...agree?...within reasons...
c) **** happens...yes crew coordination, experience, good stickness and ops manual, will definitely help you to stay dry but lets not forget the conditions in GOM sometimes and specifically, (792P sounds to me like apache 2 or 3) some pilot tend to undervalue some type of sorties, just because they're considered of minor intrest and stationed in "bad locations" (fourchon)...so, HF or other factors?..da fight is on...
a) the 76 a++s I flew, sweated like a whore in church in summer time, when flying it in GOM and you need to be well aware of what you're doing and where you're going or your feet will get wet....I personally haven't seen all this power available you were mantioning!!!!
b) PHI loves steep approaches, at least with a++'s!!! they fly it almost on the upper side of the dead man curve if you will.....better fat and slow than skinny and fast when you work off shore...agree?...within reasons...
c) **** happens...yes crew coordination, experience, good stickness and ops manual, will definitely help you to stay dry but lets not forget the conditions in GOM sometimes and specifically, (792P sounds to me like apache 2 or 3) some pilot tend to undervalue some type of sorties, just because they're considered of minor intrest and stationed in "bad locations" (fourchon)...so, HF or other factors?..da fight is on...
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Down a Jitty
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it really was at ST308 on the "Tarantula" then exhaust gases would not be the case, the deck is high and away from any outlets. The only obstructions being a couple of well placed!!! cranes.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA prelim turned up yesterday, April 3.
IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: N792P Make/Model: SK76 Description: SIKORSKY
Date: 03/24/2009 Time: 1635
Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Minor
LOCATION
City: OIL RIG State: LA Country: US
DESCRIPTION
THE RIGHT MAIN GEAR COLLAPSED DURING LANDING TO AN OFFSHORE PLATFORM, CREW
REPORTED TURBULENT CONDITIONS DURING THE FINAL STAGE OF LANDING.
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 2 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 8 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
WEATHER: UNK
OTHER DATA
Activity: Business Phase: Landing Operation: OTHER
FAA FSDO: BATON ROUGE, LA (SW03) Entry date: 04/03/2009
IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: N792P Make/Model: SK76 Description: SIKORSKY
Date: 03/24/2009 Time: 1635
Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Minor
LOCATION
City: OIL RIG State: LA Country: US
DESCRIPTION
THE RIGHT MAIN GEAR COLLAPSED DURING LANDING TO AN OFFSHORE PLATFORM, CREW
REPORTED TURBULENT CONDITIONS DURING THE FINAL STAGE OF LANDING.
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 2 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 8 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
WEATHER: UNK
OTHER DATA
Activity: Business Phase: Landing Operation: OTHER
FAA FSDO: BATON ROUGE, LA (SW03) Entry date: 04/03/2009
Thread Starter
Kinda like skipped over the landed short bit.....with a fair bit of forward speed sufficient to fold that main gear!
Already sounds like someone was getting some ducks lined up!
Already sounds like someone was getting some ducks lined up!
The Training Department at PHI is the best in the business. They try very, very hard to standardize procedures, get everyone to fly alike. A problem that I saw during the 13 years when I was there, and evidently still exists, is that pilots nod and "yes sir" their way through Recurrent, then go out and do it their way in the field. And if "their way" is different from what Training has just tried to pound into their heads, well, too bad.
Helicopter pilots are such renegades. Don't try to deny it!
I can almost guarantee you - in fact I'd put money on it - that PHI does not preach or teach shallow platform approaches, especially in an S-76. But there are still too many guys around with the, "Look, I know what they told you in Training, but this is the way *I'VE* been doing it all these years" attitude.
But no matter whether the approach was shallow or steep, it very obviously ended with one of the mains off the platform, instead of three feet from the edge as the Ops Manual requires. Aim-points are great...unless you put yourself in the center of the aim point and forget that there's still thirty feet of helicopter behind you.
Sh*t happens. Embarassing all around.
Helicopter pilots are such renegades. Don't try to deny it!
I can almost guarantee you - in fact I'd put money on it - that PHI does not preach or teach shallow platform approaches, especially in an S-76. But there are still too many guys around with the, "Look, I know what they told you in Training, but this is the way *I'VE* been doing it all these years" attitude.
But no matter whether the approach was shallow or steep, it very obviously ended with one of the mains off the platform, instead of three feet from the edge as the Ops Manual requires. Aim-points are great...unless you put yourself in the center of the aim point and forget that there's still thirty feet of helicopter behind you.
Sh*t happens. Embarassing all around.
Someone once told me that there was a sign in the arrivals office of a California offshore platform that read "We don't care how you did it in the gulf you will do it correctly here".
Thread Starter
With the turnover rate in GOM companies in general and PHI in particular....there should not be much "old time thinking" left!
Or do the old farts run off the new kids?
Or do the old farts run off the new kids?
The whole point about aiming marks (touchdown and positioning markers - TD/PM) is that they know and understand about what's in front and what's behind.
No having/using them appears to fly in the face of safety.
One of the reasons for the HAPS profile, is that it protects the pilot from the probability of this type of incident/accident.
Jim
No having/using them appears to fly in the face of safety.
One of the reasons for the HAPS profile, is that it protects the pilot from the probability of this type of incident/accident.
Jim
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many traps abound for the offshore pilot. Have seen, and myself, come to grief landing on a platform due to wind shadow or being caught by a higher deck temperature than expected (Esso Australia couldn't afford temp gauges). Saw a highly respected pilot leave 20 foot skid marks on a deck because he was caught out, the impact was sufficient to lock the inertia reels. No fault of his, was the way business was done.
SASless:
SAS, the turnover issue at PHI was always with the least-senior pilots. PHI always enjoyed a core group of senior pilots (about half) who'd been there forever and weren't going anywhere but in a pine box. There was a big, ever-widening gap in age between this core group and the younger guys who kept rotating in and out.
Also, PHI always put two very senior pilots in their "big ships." Contrast this to Era, where new-hires are generally installed as SIC for a while. This was always a big selling point for PHI ("Two highly-experienced Captains for your passengers!") but did little to hand down the expertise and knowledge from one generation to the next via mentoring. In fact, at PHI that was almost non-existent. (I understand that it has changed since I've been gone.)
In 2001 (the last year for which I had current figures when I left the company), fully *HALF* of PHI's 530 pilots were age 50 or older. Only a handful (and I mean quite literally only five or six) were over 60. And of those, only two were actual line pilots. This told me that as line pilots, we helicopter guys are pretty much done by age 60, regulations or not.
It also did not take a scientist of rocketry to see that by 2010 or so PHI would have just about lost all of their Viet Nam-era vets.
Consider: If a kid was 21 in Vietnam in 1970, say, that would make him 60 today. Of course, the Army kept cranking out helicopter pilots well into the 1970's. But even if a kid was 21 in 1975, that would still make him 55 now. Tick-tock-tick-tock... (And let's not even talk about the older pilots who've transferred over to more stable EMS jobs just to get away from the horrible GOM lifestyle of being away from home for half your life - which PHI, laughably, thinks is such a benefit.)
The experience is being lost. Not to take anything away from the less senior pilots, but having a guy with a mere 5 years or so of GOM experience as PIC of an S-92 and an SIC with even less than that is not ideal. And it's certainly not what PHI has always enjoyed. But it's going to happen.
The sad thing was that PHI didn't seem to care. When I would try to point it out to them...well, they just didn't want to know. It was never a problem in the past, wasn't right then, and would not be a problem in the future.
We'll see.
Q: So who are flying the PHI big ships now?
A: The very few (and rapidly diminishing) "old timers."
I'd be curious to see the pilot roster at other big companies, to find out just exactly how many pilots are still flying at age 60+. (I certainly don't want to be - I've got seven years to go.)
With the turnover rate in GOM companies in general and PHI in particular....there should not be much "old time thinking" left!
Or do the old farts run off the new kids?
Or do the old farts run off the new kids?
Also, PHI always put two very senior pilots in their "big ships." Contrast this to Era, where new-hires are generally installed as SIC for a while. This was always a big selling point for PHI ("Two highly-experienced Captains for your passengers!") but did little to hand down the expertise and knowledge from one generation to the next via mentoring. In fact, at PHI that was almost non-existent. (I understand that it has changed since I've been gone.)
In 2001 (the last year for which I had current figures when I left the company), fully *HALF* of PHI's 530 pilots were age 50 or older. Only a handful (and I mean quite literally only five or six) were over 60. And of those, only two were actual line pilots. This told me that as line pilots, we helicopter guys are pretty much done by age 60, regulations or not.
It also did not take a scientist of rocketry to see that by 2010 or so PHI would have just about lost all of their Viet Nam-era vets.
Consider: If a kid was 21 in Vietnam in 1970, say, that would make him 60 today. Of course, the Army kept cranking out helicopter pilots well into the 1970's. But even if a kid was 21 in 1975, that would still make him 55 now. Tick-tock-tick-tock... (And let's not even talk about the older pilots who've transferred over to more stable EMS jobs just to get away from the horrible GOM lifestyle of being away from home for half your life - which PHI, laughably, thinks is such a benefit.)
The experience is being lost. Not to take anything away from the less senior pilots, but having a guy with a mere 5 years or so of GOM experience as PIC of an S-92 and an SIC with even less than that is not ideal. And it's certainly not what PHI has always enjoyed. But it's going to happen.
The sad thing was that PHI didn't seem to care. When I would try to point it out to them...well, they just didn't want to know. It was never a problem in the past, wasn't right then, and would not be a problem in the future.
We'll see.
Q: So who are flying the PHI big ships now?
A: The very few (and rapidly diminishing) "old timers."
I'd be curious to see the pilot roster at other big companies, to find out just exactly how many pilots are still flying at age 60+. (I certainly don't want to be - I've got seven years to go.)
Thread Starter
Turn over is a problem for Air Log as well. The GOM life is not for everyone....as it has many down sides that offset the warm loving management-working staff relationship that was so prevalent for so long.
It makes perfect sense to man two crew helicopters with two senior guys.....yeah right!
The problem is if you put a young whipper snapper in the other seat with the intent to mentor his progress in the business and after he gets his experience in the bigger machine....he bolts for greener pastures then the company loses.
Keep the newbies in the Jetrangers and after a year or so....they bolt for EMS jobs in twins.....the company loses.
Guys get married and start a family....realize they are gone more than half the time and.....they bolt for other pastures.
After a guy wears out the second or third car commuting at his own expense to the job.....and he bolts for other pastures.
In the meanstwhile....the operators brag about the "new trailers" they stick a half dozen guys into. What they ought to do is issue one size tables and chairs....the same for little ship drivers and big ship drivers...at least they would have standardized furniture.
Do they still wear the khaki plumbers uniform with the guys name on a patch over the pocket?
The GOM operators are going to wake up one day and figure out how to retain good people and finally use some of the turnover cost to fund improvements that will cut down on the turnover. That or they will finally run out of new hires and then what?
It makes perfect sense to man two crew helicopters with two senior guys.....yeah right!
The problem is if you put a young whipper snapper in the other seat with the intent to mentor his progress in the business and after he gets his experience in the bigger machine....he bolts for greener pastures then the company loses.
Keep the newbies in the Jetrangers and after a year or so....they bolt for EMS jobs in twins.....the company loses.
Guys get married and start a family....realize they are gone more than half the time and.....they bolt for other pastures.
After a guy wears out the second or third car commuting at his own expense to the job.....and he bolts for other pastures.
In the meanstwhile....the operators brag about the "new trailers" they stick a half dozen guys into. What they ought to do is issue one size tables and chairs....the same for little ship drivers and big ship drivers...at least they would have standardized furniture.
Do they still wear the khaki plumbers uniform with the guys name on a patch over the pocket?
The GOM operators are going to wake up one day and figure out how to retain good people and finally use some of the turnover cost to fund improvements that will cut down on the turnover. That or they will finally run out of new hires and then what?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Home by the Sea
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Do they still wear the khaki plumbers uniform with the guys name on a patch over the pocket?"
Id quit straight away if i were forced to wear such clothes,disgusting.
How can the pilots be taken seriously?
Other than that the post made alot of sense. Touring is not for everyone and certainly not for ever.
Id quit straight away if i were forced to wear such clothes,disgusting.
How can the pilots be taken seriously?
Other than that the post made alot of sense. Touring is not for everyone and certainly not for ever.
Last edited by This aint Jim Beam; 6th Apr 2009 at 02:20. Reason: Real bad spelling
SAS, I agree with nearly everything you said.
Exception: PHI tried to not put more than four guys in the new trailers. Only rarely would they put five. I mean, give them credit, they really tried. (This may all have changed post-Katrina, I don't know. I do know that they were cognizant of those quality-of-life issues and tried very hard to make them better.)
I have heard from guys at RLC that they are stuck 6-to-a-trailer (a single-wide trailer, remember), which is just pathetic in my opinion.
I had discussion with senior PHI management in which they would...super-secret-off-the-record-if-you-ever-repeat-this-I'll-kill-you agree with my contention that GOM pilots should be making *more* than their EMS counterparts.
But you know how that would go over. The union (of which I was a member of the first Negotiating Committee!) and the company would have none of it. "Pilots are pilots."
Well, yes and no.
EMS has always been deemed a "more prestigious" assignment while GOM flyers were considered nothing more than a bunch of bubbas in flying pickemup trucks. To a degree, PHI itself fostered this image - or at least did nothing to dispell it.
Even if nobody is willing to admit it out loud, the GOM lifestyle is a hardship. It is. PHI's attitude has always been, "It's not for everybody," and we can all agree on that because it's true. But it would be "for" more people if the pay/benefits were commensurate with the increased demands of the job. Like I said, those within PHI management who privately recognized this admitted there was little they could do to change the paradigm without upsetting a huge applecart. Their decision was simply to live with the high turnover of GOM pilots.
I honestly believe that PHI thinks they will never run out of new hires.
Era's recent offer of travel pay was a step in the right direction. But more needs to be done.
What does turnover cost? Well, the evidence is that the cost is not a problem for operators. For one thing, training expenses are tax deductible, so the whole training department is a write off. Secondly, the new-hire and recurrent training is FAA-mandated, so there's no getting around having the department to begin with.
We can conclude that "high turnover" is simply not a problem for operators like PHI. If it was, they'd do something about it.
But what are the real costs of high turnover? Inexperienced S-76 pilots who can't even land on a platform without sticking one of the gear legs in the fence? Inept SIC's who can't even find the windshield wiper switch, causing a distraction for the PIC that ends up with a perfectly good S-76 flying into the water? These are horribly embarassing incidents for the company.
They're going to get worse.
[EDIT] To This Ain't Jim Beam: The uniform doesn't make the man. I've always said that I would wear a clown suit - round, red nose...big, floppy shoes and all if the company supplied it. I do not care, and the brown PHI uniform never had any negative influence on how I viewed myself or how I did my job, as it should be with any professional. Pilots who are that concerned with their self-image should probably not go to work for companies like PHI.)
Exception: PHI tried to not put more than four guys in the new trailers. Only rarely would they put five. I mean, give them credit, they really tried. (This may all have changed post-Katrina, I don't know. I do know that they were cognizant of those quality-of-life issues and tried very hard to make them better.)
I have heard from guys at RLC that they are stuck 6-to-a-trailer (a single-wide trailer, remember), which is just pathetic in my opinion.
I had discussion with senior PHI management in which they would...super-secret-off-the-record-if-you-ever-repeat-this-I'll-kill-you agree with my contention that GOM pilots should be making *more* than their EMS counterparts.
But you know how that would go over. The union (of which I was a member of the first Negotiating Committee!) and the company would have none of it. "Pilots are pilots."
Well, yes and no.
EMS has always been deemed a "more prestigious" assignment while GOM flyers were considered nothing more than a bunch of bubbas in flying pickemup trucks. To a degree, PHI itself fostered this image - or at least did nothing to dispell it.
Even if nobody is willing to admit it out loud, the GOM lifestyle is a hardship. It is. PHI's attitude has always been, "It's not for everybody," and we can all agree on that because it's true. But it would be "for" more people if the pay/benefits were commensurate with the increased demands of the job. Like I said, those within PHI management who privately recognized this admitted there was little they could do to change the paradigm without upsetting a huge applecart. Their decision was simply to live with the high turnover of GOM pilots.
I honestly believe that PHI thinks they will never run out of new hires.
Era's recent offer of travel pay was a step in the right direction. But more needs to be done.
What does turnover cost? Well, the evidence is that the cost is not a problem for operators. For one thing, training expenses are tax deductible, so the whole training department is a write off. Secondly, the new-hire and recurrent training is FAA-mandated, so there's no getting around having the department to begin with.
We can conclude that "high turnover" is simply not a problem for operators like PHI. If it was, they'd do something about it.
But what are the real costs of high turnover? Inexperienced S-76 pilots who can't even land on a platform without sticking one of the gear legs in the fence? Inept SIC's who can't even find the windshield wiper switch, causing a distraction for the PIC that ends up with a perfectly good S-76 flying into the water? These are horribly embarassing incidents for the company.
They're going to get worse.
[EDIT] To This Ain't Jim Beam: The uniform doesn't make the man. I've always said that I would wear a clown suit - round, red nose...big, floppy shoes and all if the company supplied it. I do not care, and the brown PHI uniform never had any negative influence on how I viewed myself or how I did my job, as it should be with any professional. Pilots who are that concerned with their self-image should probably not go to work for companies like PHI.)
Thread Starter
I love the now famous quote by Bob Suggs, founder of PHI......as confirmed by Vern Albert, the PHI Chief Pilot for many years. Taken from a 2005 Interview by HAI.
A story was told.....
Bob was on a recruiting trip to Bourbon Street in New Orleans.
He saw what looked to be a helicopter pilot laying face down in the gutter, covered in once consumed beer and pizza, trousers soaked from wetting himself.
Bob tapped the drunk on the shoulder and asked if he wanted to fly for PHI....to be told...."Piss off Bob....I am on time off!"
And yes, Bob Suggs did make the
famous quote: "I can get all the
pilots I need out of the gutters on
Bourbon street," but those words
have been taken out of context.
famous quote: "I can get all the
pilots I need out of the gutters on
Bourbon street," but those words
have been taken out of context.
Bob was on a recruiting trip to Bourbon Street in New Orleans.
He saw what looked to be a helicopter pilot laying face down in the gutter, covered in once consumed beer and pizza, trousers soaked from wetting himself.
Bob tapped the drunk on the shoulder and asked if he wanted to fly for PHI....to be told...."Piss off Bob....I am on time off!"
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has anybody considered airflow reversal over the helideck at low level? I encountered this many moons ago whilst approaching a North Sea platform in a Bell 212 at close to max gross weight. In the last 20-30 feet of the steep approach, the rod suddenly increased and the aircraft made a "positive arrival" in the middle of the helideck despite the smart application of full power.
Investigations later on showed that with a 10-15 knot wind from a particular direction, due to the obstructions around and under the deck, including eflux from some turbines, the airflow over the helildeck curled steeply backwards over the downwind side of the helildeck producing a 10-15 knot tailwind in the very last stages of the approach.
Had I been using the low & slow or "fast and furious" technique, the outcome might have been much the same as the one in this thread.
It's not possible from the photos to see whether there is an air-gap under the helideck, but has anybody looked at this aspect?
Investigations later on showed that with a 10-15 knot wind from a particular direction, due to the obstructions around and under the deck, including eflux from some turbines, the airflow over the helildeck curled steeply backwards over the downwind side of the helildeck producing a 10-15 knot tailwind in the very last stages of the approach.
Had I been using the low & slow or "fast and furious" technique, the outcome might have been much the same as the one in this thread.
It's not possible from the photos to see whether there is an air-gap under the helideck, but has anybody looked at this aspect?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Age: 55
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with FH Pilot, PHI is a good company and their training dept. is outstanding. I enjoyed my time with them (though short) but for me, it was all about the money. I couldn't afford to support my family on their income flying S-76s. Hopefully they'll be able to get some experience out of their pilots for the future but the new guys (me included) don't have half the time of some of the senior pilots. Someone mentioned before, "tick, tock, tick, tock." Yep, the clock is ticking.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 740PH Make/Model: B407 Description: Bell 407
Date: 03/29/2009 Time: 1900
Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Minor
LOCATION
City: LAKE CHARLES State: LA Country: US
DESCRIPTION
N740PH, A BELL 407 ROTORCRAFT, WHILE LANDING ON AN OIL PLATFORM, STRUCK A
FENCE; GULF OF MEXICO, 120 MILES FROM LAKE CHARLES, LA
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 3 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
WEATHER: NOT REPORTED
OTHER DATA
Activity: Business Phase: Landing Operation: OTHER
FAA FSDO: BATON ROUGE, LA (SW03) Entry date: 04/06/2009
Regis#: 740PH Make/Model: B407 Description: Bell 407
Date: 03/29/2009 Time: 1900
Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Minor
LOCATION
City: LAKE CHARLES State: LA Country: US
DESCRIPTION
N740PH, A BELL 407 ROTORCRAFT, WHILE LANDING ON AN OIL PLATFORM, STRUCK A
FENCE; GULF OF MEXICO, 120 MILES FROM LAKE CHARLES, LA
INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 3 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
WEATHER: NOT REPORTED
OTHER DATA
Activity: Business Phase: Landing Operation: OTHER
FAA FSDO: BATON ROUGE, LA (SW03) Entry date: 04/06/2009