AW139 G-LBAL helicopter crash in Gillingham, Norfolk
The military even did it
In the hover, checks T&Ps, full power with 10 degrees nose down, hold heading and wait for speed and height to build up. Civilians have to do group A departures which means that they have to be able to see and use their emergency landing zone up to V1; which is around 40 knots. On a vertical departure the decision height would be around 80 feet where one must be able to reject back to the takeoff point or fly away visually.
Popping out of fog at 100 ft. is straightforward enough, I've done it, but not in civilian life.
But those guys couldn't have done a CAT A (PC1) profile since they didn't have the clear area ahead nor a cleared helipad environment - and, unless I am mistaken, since they were operating as a private helicopter, they weren't obliged to do so either.
As it happens, 10 degrees nose down and full power (if they had held it until V1 and rotated) would have probably been safer than what they actually did.
As it happens, 10 degrees nose down and full power (if they had held it until V1 and rotated) would have probably been safer than what they actually did.
Why doesn't everyone just stop this speculation and shut up for a couple of hours. Disgraceful behaviour - especially with all the negative
Vibes
Vibes
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BB, what's there to speculate? Probably one of the most technologically capable aircraft available and it was flown into the ground.
Sure, there's lots of causal/contributory factors and lessons to be learnt; many of us here completely understand the scenario the crew found themselves in. However, if only one person is saved because he remembers this AAIB report and the associated crew room discussion then that must be a good thing.
FFS. We have a professional obligation to address the issue.
Sure, there's lots of causal/contributory factors and lessons to be learnt; many of us here completely understand the scenario the crew found themselves in. However, if only one person is saved because he remembers this AAIB report and the associated crew room discussion then that must be a good thing.
I don’t mind telling you i’m not **** very happy about lifting out of here
Bucaneer Bill - what speculation? The evidence is there in black and white in the bulletin.
The only speculation is whether it was a somatogravic illusion or just inattention to the Attitude Indicator that caused them to get such a nose down attitude and crash.
The only speculation is whether it was a somatogravic illusion or just inattention to the Attitude Indicator that caused them to get such a nose down attitude and crash.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 431 Likes
on
227 Posts
This accident was very close to home, not least because this section of the industry is relatively small and I was personally acquainted with the pilots. The pressure of having an ambitious aircraft owner (and your salary payer) sitting in the cabin as a passenger can be extreme.
The answer to this problem is knowing when to decline to fly.
It's difficult, especially if you have a young family and a mortgage to consider, but I see it like this: The aircraft owner has the ability to sack me, which would be inconvenient but probably temporary. The CAA has the ability to pull my licence, which would hurt a lot more. However, there are always other jobs out there, flying or otherwise. But only I have the ability to "bust my own ass" in a helicopter and that of everyone on board. I have no intention of ever doing the latter and any decision I need to make in that respect overrides the aircraft owner's personal demands or the requirements of the CAA (or whoever's turn it is to make the rules this year).
To correct what Fareastdriver wrote about "Cat A" performance; there is no legal requirement for a private operator to comply with those rules for departure. That type of takeoff is not required, albeit best practice in most situations.
The answer to this problem is knowing when to decline to fly.
It's difficult, especially if you have a young family and a mortgage to consider, but I see it like this: The aircraft owner has the ability to sack me, which would be inconvenient but probably temporary. The CAA has the ability to pull my licence, which would hurt a lot more. However, there are always other jobs out there, flying or otherwise. But only I have the ability to "bust my own ass" in a helicopter and that of everyone on board. I have no intention of ever doing the latter and any decision I need to make in that respect overrides the aircraft owner's personal demands or the requirements of the CAA (or whoever's turn it is to make the rules this year).
To correct what Fareastdriver wrote about "Cat A" performance; there is no legal requirement for a private operator to comply with those rules for departure. That type of takeoff is not required, albeit best practice in most situations.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4 once i agree with crab.
its the elephant in the room - not all the bs...
its basic prioritisation and if the bs is allowed to get in the way of real risk management then we are all lost
its the elephant in the room - not all the bs...
its basic prioritisation and if the bs is allowed to get in the way of real risk management then we are all lost
When Pilots weigh the Rule more important than Commonsense....this kind of thing is what happens.
No matter the reason why the decisions made were made....we need to narrow the focus upon the situation and how to best cope with the conditions extant.
Scooting along the ground in the dark and fog at a pretty darn good clip does not afford much room for error does it?
Had a Towering Takeoff on Instruments from the Ground been made....with very slight changes in Attitude, Roll, and Acceleration...perhaps this might have turned out better than it did.
That gets you up and away from the ground and obstacles....and a VIP configured Aircraft should not be hurting for power....thus it should have a decent ROC until well clear of the Obstacles and perhaps even out of the Fog depending upon how thick that ground based weather stuff was at the time.
Ya'll over there seem to get wrapped around the axle far too often when you start arguing about the Rules, Procedures, Exemptions, Waivers, etc.
Commonsense should be pretty early on in deciding what to do when it comes to the reality bit of flying in ugly conditions.
No matter the reason why the decisions made were made....we need to narrow the focus upon the situation and how to best cope with the conditions extant.
Scooting along the ground in the dark and fog at a pretty darn good clip does not afford much room for error does it?
Had a Towering Takeoff on Instruments from the Ground been made....with very slight changes in Attitude, Roll, and Acceleration...perhaps this might have turned out better than it did.
That gets you up and away from the ground and obstacles....and a VIP configured Aircraft should not be hurting for power....thus it should have a decent ROC until well clear of the Obstacles and perhaps even out of the Fog depending upon how thick that ground based weather stuff was at the time.
Ya'll over there seem to get wrapped around the axle far too often when you start arguing about the Rules, Procedures, Exemptions, Waivers, etc.
Commonsense should be pretty early on in deciding what to do when it comes to the reality bit of flying in ugly conditions.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conclusion
Opportunities to reduce the likelihood of such an event, presented by the report into the operator’s previous fatal accident, appeared not to have been taken.
Opportunities to reduce the likelihood of such an event, presented by the report into the operator’s previous fatal accident, appeared not to have been taken.
Sasless - it would seem that neither of these poor guys had ever been taught or shown a vertical departure on instruments because the system doesn't seem to recognise flight on instruments below Vmini.
So, they were never taught it, never practised it, have never been tested on it. A simple manouevere that every military pilot will have utilised at some point.
What a waste of lives.
So, they were never taught it, never practised it, have never been tested on it. A simple manouevere that every military pilot will have utilised at some point.
What a waste of lives.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
To amplify what ShyTorque said, and for any younger (i.e. less experienced) pilots out there who may end up in a similar position, the safest decision in my experience is often the most inconvenient one, especially when it comes to potentially losing your job. The first paragraph of the report sounds just like a typical charter/corporate job, especially at Alton Towers!
I have been thrown off many jobs in the past, particularly those where refuelling with the engine running and nobody at the controls was involved to save all of 5 minutes, yet I still got work afterwards, as did many of my colleagues, including the guy who told Prince Andrew there would be no flight when there was fog involved - and everyone from the top downwards (who should have known better) was pressurising him like mad.
I've always loved this quote from Enoch Powell - "I have never taken disagreement as an indication that I am wroong." That goes for passengers, too.
Sorry for the hijack, I just felt the point ought to be made.
crab - even in a 212 (based on the Huey, as this was demonstrated to me by a Huey training pilot), if you do what you think is a vertical takeoff, you will be transitioning at some point if you don't check back on the cyclic. I agree - it has to be shown to you.
Phil
I have been thrown off many jobs in the past, particularly those where refuelling with the engine running and nobody at the controls was involved to save all of 5 minutes, yet I still got work afterwards, as did many of my colleagues, including the guy who told Prince Andrew there would be no flight when there was fog involved - and everyone from the top downwards (who should have known better) was pressurising him like mad.
I've always loved this quote from Enoch Powell - "I have never taken disagreement as an indication that I am wroong." That goes for passengers, too.
Sorry for the hijack, I just felt the point ought to be made.
crab - even in a 212 (based on the Huey, as this was demonstrated to me by a Huey training pilot), if you do what you think is a vertical takeoff, you will be transitioning at some point if you don't check back on the cyclic. I agree - it has to be shown to you.
Phil
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 431 Likes
on
227 Posts
Not a hijack, Paco. This is the "nub" of the situation. There are sometimes situations where a "good" captain will decline to fly whereas a "bad" one might not. Problem is, in the eyes of some private employers, the good and the bad are seen in the opposite sense. All that counts is whether or not the flight takes place. If the flight goes ahead, irrespective of the weather, the captain was a good chap. If it doesn't, he wasn't.
The bad captain (the real one) might get away with it every time, or one day he might not.
It's a fine line to tread between getting the job done and having a serious accident because one tried just a little too hard. This is why we have rules and regulations. Unfortunately, the rules, where they exist, aren't perfect and even if they were, they are often unenforceable in private operations.
Captaincy, in its true sense, requires great strength of character, in that sticking to the rules and not pushing one's luck too far may result in dismissal.
As I have often said, especially in this role and environment, knowing when to say "No" is the most difficult part of the job.
As one helicopter owner once said to me after I declined a flight for weather reasons, "Well, Chalky would have gone"! Chalky was one of his previous helicopter pilots.
But then, Chalky always went, irrespective .... so in the eyes of the boss, he was the good pilot. I wasn't as good. But on the other hand, I was safe, and legal.
I eventually resigned from that job, btw.
The bad captain (the real one) might get away with it every time, or one day he might not.
It's a fine line to tread between getting the job done and having a serious accident because one tried just a little too hard. This is why we have rules and regulations. Unfortunately, the rules, where they exist, aren't perfect and even if they were, they are often unenforceable in private operations.
Captaincy, in its true sense, requires great strength of character, in that sticking to the rules and not pushing one's luck too far may result in dismissal.
As I have often said, especially in this role and environment, knowing when to say "No" is the most difficult part of the job.
As one helicopter owner once said to me after I declined a flight for weather reasons, "Well, Chalky would have gone"! Chalky was one of his previous helicopter pilots.
But then, Chalky always went, irrespective .... so in the eyes of the boss, he was the good pilot. I wasn't as good. But on the other hand, I was safe, and legal.
I eventually resigned from that job, btw.
crab - even in a 212 (based on the Huey, as this was demonstrated to me by a Huey training pilot), if you do what you think is a vertical takeoff, you will be transitioning at some point if you don't check back on the cyclic. I agree - it has to be shown to you
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Do I come here often?
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab;
There is another side to the training. I was civvie trained in the 80's and the IMC towering take-off was part of the syllabus. Flying off-shore in 61, 76 and 332 we were in regular practise as sometimes it was the only safe way to leave a rig, after one nasty night event we started an IRR behind the screens with the aircraft flying backwards at 10-15kt. Now I see new pilots coming through who have been taught to pass a set piece test on known routes and airports (I hold IR for planks and rotary and for both tests I had no idea of where we were going until the examiner told me in the brief) The new guys know lots of legal stuff, but in their transit of the sausage machine they don't get taught a lot of what we used to call airmanship and the tricks of the trade. One recent joiner here, an ex mil guy had to be taught a lot of basic IF that no longer appears in the syllabus, or isn't taught due to lack of time.
Like ShyT I knew these guys, but, I wonder in 2 300 hours and 1 800 hours, mainly without much supervision how much they had learned over their original courses. A friend of mine was in G-HAUG when it hit a mountain. This was not an operation I would have wanted to fly on, as people we should be learning all the time, as pilots we usually are, but we seem to find educating owners/operators intimidating. I've said before on here, our owners/customers listen to their lawyers/accountantsand bankers, we are proffesional advisors in the same way, its just our advice keeps them alive.
There also has to be a management of expectation. The rich bloke in the back may have bought an all singing IFR helicopter and hired an IFR crew, but there comes a time when taking all of that kit and all those qualifications into the air is just silly. I suspect no lessons were learned from the G-HAUG crash, possibly because they weren't properly explained, and the attitude of "If you can't do it I'll get someone who can" still prevailed.
SND
There is another side to the training. I was civvie trained in the 80's and the IMC towering take-off was part of the syllabus. Flying off-shore in 61, 76 and 332 we were in regular practise as sometimes it was the only safe way to leave a rig, after one nasty night event we started an IRR behind the screens with the aircraft flying backwards at 10-15kt. Now I see new pilots coming through who have been taught to pass a set piece test on known routes and airports (I hold IR for planks and rotary and for both tests I had no idea of where we were going until the examiner told me in the brief) The new guys know lots of legal stuff, but in their transit of the sausage machine they don't get taught a lot of what we used to call airmanship and the tricks of the trade. One recent joiner here, an ex mil guy had to be taught a lot of basic IF that no longer appears in the syllabus, or isn't taught due to lack of time.
Like ShyT I knew these guys, but, I wonder in 2 300 hours and 1 800 hours, mainly without much supervision how much they had learned over their original courses. A friend of mine was in G-HAUG when it hit a mountain. This was not an operation I would have wanted to fly on, as people we should be learning all the time, as pilots we usually are, but we seem to find educating owners/operators intimidating. I've said before on here, our owners/customers listen to their lawyers/accountantsand bankers, we are proffesional advisors in the same way, its just our advice keeps them alive.
There also has to be a management of expectation. The rich bloke in the back may have bought an all singing IFR helicopter and hired an IFR crew, but there comes a time when taking all of that kit and all those qualifications into the air is just silly. I suspect no lessons were learned from the G-HAUG crash, possibly because they weren't properly explained, and the attitude of "If you can't do it I'll get someone who can" still prevailed.
SND
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Location, location - is very important when buying a house.
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Phil and SND, alas not much appears to have changed since the deaths of Matthew Harding and Philip Carter. Again, the commercial pressure was perhaps too much. And of course, without proper knowledge but perhaps the A109 into the crane in London.
Ironically the 'private operations' does seem to circumvent some of the rules which are in place to avoid such accidents.
Ironically the 'private operations' does seem to circumvent some of the rules which are in place to avoid such accidents.
Sir Niall - that is what I find so frustrating about this accident - I know that the technique was used on the rigs so how is it that it doesn't feature in the civilian IR?
As you say - within the corporate world of small helicopter operators, where is the progression, supervision and mentoring that takes a new CPL or ATPL pilot onward and upward in the big learning curve that is aviation?
I'd be interested to know what Service your recent ex-mil joiner was from but I think I can make an educated guess.
As you say - within the corporate world of small helicopter operators, where is the progression, supervision and mentoring that takes a new CPL or ATPL pilot onward and upward in the big learning curve that is aviation?
I'd be interested to know what Service your recent ex-mil joiner was from but I think I can make an educated guess.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Do I come here often?
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab;
I have been trying to get a mentoring scheme together for some time, but it is very frustrating. Anyone interested in helping or asking please pm me.
SND
I have been trying to get a mentoring scheme together for some time, but it is very frustrating. Anyone interested in helping or asking please pm me.
SND
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 67
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A common factor that seems to be emerging is the lack of a formal briefing before flight in these private operations. Familiarity perhaps breeds a casual approach when you are flying the same aircraft and with the same crew members day after day.
"I'll just take it straight up until we pop out the fog", or words to that effect do not constitute a briefing. No point in having both pairs of eyes outside the cockpit in fog, someone should have been watching the instruments from the ground up. "Nose down" is hardly unambiguous, does that mean the nose is too low, or get the nose down?
Flying is unforgiving. Use of checklists, proper risk assessment and a formal briefing may seem a faff, but they save lives when things start to go wrong.
"I'll just take it straight up until we pop out the fog", or words to that effect do not constitute a briefing. No point in having both pairs of eyes outside the cockpit in fog, someone should have been watching the instruments from the ground up. "Nose down" is hardly unambiguous, does that mean the nose is too low, or get the nose down?
Flying is unforgiving. Use of checklists, proper risk assessment and a formal briefing may seem a faff, but they save lives when things start to go wrong.