PPRuNe Forums


Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14th Mar 2014, 18:35   #81 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Milton Keynes & Abuja
Posts: 21
I don't believe it was a commercial flight.
Stuart Hughes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 18:40   #82 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 54
Posts: 1,863
The BBC are reporting that he wanted a refund for the helicopter from AW because of a list of technical malfunctions. Was in court this week?????
jayteeto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 18:50   #83 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Quote:
FSX, On the subject you raise,BBC Look East this lunchtime showed footage of the aircraft taking off from Gillingham Hall.It struck me that it looked potentially quite tricky.They were using the lawn of the house and the whole site was surrounded by mature tall trees.I would imagine that in poor visibility it would be very easy to clip a branch on your way out.
Something like G-EMAU at Welford ?
PAX_Britannica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 18:52   #84 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: England
Posts: 260
Technical issues.

So why was he still using it if he thought there were technical issues?
I hope the media don't try and blame this on technical issues with the aircraft like they tried to blame the Bournemouth 109 on sabotage.
The industry is having a bad enough time as it is.
jeepys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 19:29   #85 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Heart of Darkness
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Stuart Hughes I don't believe it was a commercial flight.
I don't think the reply was about whether the flight was on an AOC or a "private" flight.

My reading of the comment was that it was aimed at the pressures placed on any captain (whether rotary or fixed wing) in a small-fleet operation.

Often job security is non-existent, because if you do not comply with commercial demands, the beneficial owner will find another more compliant captain.

I have no idea whether this was the case here, but I hold my hand up and say that I am guilty of taking unreasonable risks to keep my own (fixed-wing) job because there is so little work out there at the moment.
Trim Stab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 19:37   #86 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 235
Ok so I have only been flying corporate for the last nine years and have had on occasion pressure to fly in bad weather and said no , and never had any problems there after . As the pilot in command you have a legal responsibility for the safety and well being of the passengers and crew even if one of them is you're boss !

If one of my employers decided they no longer wanted my services that's fine but if I was dropped over a single incidence where I would not fly due weather then I would have grounds to take legal action. What might be helpful is a standard employment contract from the caa for freelances to use when working in the corporate environment to clearly state to the employer who has final say with wether to fly or not .

CBS
CRAZYBROADSWORD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 19:44   #87 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Heart of Darkness
Posts: 1,644
I agree CBSW but the huge expense and risk of taking legal action against an enormously wealthy and powerful employer, and the tiny compensation that is payable if you do happen to win, do not guarantee finding another job afterwards!
Trim Stab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 19:57   #88 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Middle East
Posts: 8
Fair one CBS. The pressures must be higher for Captains if they know that if they get fired, they would have to pay the training agreement (bond) back to Haughey Air as I believe many have done previously.
BeeTee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 20:22   #89 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Heart of Darkness
Posts: 1,644
BeeTee - again no idea if this was the contractual situation here, but it is becoming common in FW private flying too that captain has to "tender for bids" to "provide flying services", through his own one-man "company", thereby giving the beneficial owner (usually through another offshore holding company) to terminate services on any pretext. It is a convenient arrangement that absolves the wealthy from paying health insurance, social security, pensions or any of the other expenses involved in employing a professional pilot.
Trim Stab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 20:50   #90 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 409
It's been the case for many years that pilot jobs are hard to come by, it's natural that once you've got one you want to hang on to it, and saying no, either to the client or boss certainly isn't easy.
If an employer has a reputation for not holding onto pilots due to Ts & Cs, it would seem logical that after a while the stream of experienced and rated people who will say no will dry up and there's a danger you'll get what your asking for....people around you who are frightened to say no. Not saying that is the case here, in fact this wealthy owner, unlike many, invested in the latest aircraft and had 2 pilot crewing.
Art of flight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 21:14   #91 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 51
Posts: 74
Developing: AW139 G-LBAL helicopter crash in Gillingham, Norfolk

...And was looking for a new pilot every six month...
Harry the Hun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 21:17   #92 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 235
Art of flight .

I completely agree with you there is always someone who will fly the machines no ones else will or take the risk others don't but then what is the answer ? Just except the fact that every year a certain number of people will be killed in circumstances that the rest of us say we would never get into .

Personally I would like to see the currency requirements made much more stringent drop the 90 day rule and bring in a 30 day rule for night and imc, force owners to allow their pilots regular opportunities to practice important skills .

Also be open minded to new technology such as IR cameras and synthetic vision anything that might allow a pilot to " see " where they are going

CBS
CRAZYBROADSWORD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 21:18   #93 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 499
It's a lot easier for the plank wing fraternity to say no in general. ATC and weather limits for airports. It's easy to see why rich clients can put pressure on pilots. Not that I'm implying that happened recently in a corporate helicopter accident in a major capital city or anywhere....
high spirits is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 21:28   #94 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 88
It would be interesting to know what was the departure time filled on the GAR Report against the actual take off time,
Tailboom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 21:40   #95 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: daworld
Posts: 516
CBS, this machine was equipped with LLTV/Thermal imaging. You can see the camera mounted on the belly under the pilots seat.
Was it on or not? Who knows. You'll have to wait for the FDR readout.
noooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 22:08   #96 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Blackpool
Posts: 1
Aviation experts

I heard some good comments on pilot pressure, to " get the job done" there were also some comments that were less than useful.
I knew both pilots well. They were professional and committed to their job.
Risk management is the priority. Pilot skill is important, but less of an issue these days, although currency is key, to managing a complex aircraft.
These guys were current and skillful, in their operation.
I'm gutted and deeply upset of our, and their loved ones loss.
That is the priority now. Not speculating, using our so called "aviation expertise"
God bless you Carl and Lee.
It was a privilege knowing you.
God Bless.
Andy.
cameron429 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th Mar 2014, 22:32   #97 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 469
From the Guardian

helihub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th Mar 2014, 01:49   #98 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 202
Quote:
Maybe the CAA need to raise the helicopter visibility minima's altogether?
Some prosecutions of operators/pilots doing VFR in blatant IMC might help.
FairWeatherFlyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th Mar 2014, 04:04   #99 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Napa
Posts: 20
I thought the 139 could shoot a 6 degree approach to any spot in space and come to a perfect hover without coming on the control. True or false? The EC145 can do this right?
HeliNomad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th Mar 2014, 06:55   #100 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 423
Sad as this crash is, I feel not more than a little annoyed that some are suggesting yet more regulation within the industry. With respect to weather minima, the rules are already in place.
Whilst weather is likely to be a significant factor in this crash, it hasn't yet been proven to be the case.

I'm surprised only one person seems to have picked up on the 'undamaged' tail rotor. It looks to me like the main rotor was probably under power at the time of impact and although the impact appears to be nose first, the tail rotor seems to have touched the ground and I'm surprised it appears to be unscathed. It's not as though the AW139 doesn't have a history of T/R problems.

Please, no more calls for more regulation - let's stick to, and if necessary, enforce the rules that are already in place.

JJ
jellycopter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1