Pilots suspended after North Sea helicopter lands on wrong platform
En-route change? too easy. Try it at 200' in a B747 overshooting from JFK in a snowstorm and heading off to a place you have never even seen before!
(and dealing with US ATC and 400 pax at the same time).
You seem to have a bit of a hang up over fixed-wing flying? Jealous maybe?
And before you ask, yes back in the sixties I flew the WS55-III to rigs with no working nav aids at all!
(Just to add, landing on the wrong rig or platform in those days would simply cost a lot of beer, no inquiry).
(and dealing with US ATC and 400 pax at the same time).
You seem to have a bit of a hang up over fixed-wing flying? Jealous maybe?
And before you ask, yes back in the sixties I flew the WS55-III to rigs with no working nav aids at all!
(Just to add, landing on the wrong rig or platform in those days would simply cost a lot of beer, no inquiry).
Helicopters have to divert too. No big deal. But imagine being within 10 mins or so of your destination only to be told that the pax would quite like to land at a different destination also about 10 mins away, and then another, and then another, each within 5 mins flying time.
If I were jealous of FW flying I would have taken it up, well presuming you don't mean the real fw flying aka gliding that I do? No, my point was that in heli-world we put with difficulties that other branches of aviation wouldn't accept.
No working navaids? But surely you had the ball of string to wind back in again to find "home"?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
I cannot believe some of the criticism of the crew OR that. Their management choose to suspend them.
Wrong rig landings usually occur from a mindset that starts early in the flight or planning.
While it seems incredulous, giving the very poor labelling of rigs, very short visual acquisition time during landing available to the PF and the myriad of distractions to the crew during landing its a wonder we do not have more of them.
I feel very sorry for this crew and wish them best luck. Have been there......almost on several occasions over the past few decades and only saved by radio call from the destination rig.
Big flipping deal. No one died. No one got injured just the poor crews pride. Come on Bond grow a pair and accept that the offshore crews have a difficult task to do and sometimes they make mistakes.
DB
Wrong rig landings usually occur from a mindset that starts early in the flight or planning.
While it seems incredulous, giving the very poor labelling of rigs, very short visual acquisition time during landing available to the PF and the myriad of distractions to the crew during landing its a wonder we do not have more of them.
I feel very sorry for this crew and wish them best luck. Have been there......almost on several occasions over the past few decades and only saved by radio call from the destination rig.
Big flipping deal. No one died. No one got injured just the poor crews pride. Come on Bond grow a pair and accept that the offshore crews have a difficult task to do and sometimes they make mistakes.
DB
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HC,
I would imagine using an offset Waypoint routine from a known point in the Database would be out of the question would it?
We will never get away from finger error but double checking entries before punching "Direct" would help I assume.
Landing on the wrong Deck is not the same as landing on the wrong Airport as Airports usually stay pretty much in the same place. Granted Platforms don't wander about very often either.
Rigs, Boats, Barges, and Ships are a slightly different matter.
Ah yes.....400 Pesky peeved Pax.....gets rather crowded in a 74's Cockpit then I would assume!
I would imagine using an offset Waypoint routine from a known point in the Database would be out of the question would it?
We will never get away from finger error but double checking entries before punching "Direct" would help I assume.
Landing on the wrong Deck is not the same as landing on the wrong Airport as Airports usually stay pretty much in the same place. Granted Platforms don't wander about very often either.
Rigs, Boats, Barges, and Ships are a slightly different matter.
Ah yes.....400 Pesky peeved Pax.....gets rather crowded in a 74's Cockpit then I would assume!
And on the guano thing, once you have filed a few ASRs and nothing at all has happened, you tend to lose interest in trying to "fix it".
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South East Asia
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIS
There is technology available these days to enable ships to identify each other by electronic means. The marine version of the aviation transponder is called AIS and it is fitted on nearly all vessels. If an AIS receiver was installed in all offshore helicopter cockpits, and integrated with the radar display, a positive identification of the installation could be achieved electronically before every landing. Problem solved.
An AIS (receiver) should be an OGP equipment standard.
An AIS (receiver) should be an OGP equipment standard.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DB
Do you not think the customer paying for two possibly 80K+ pilots might not expect a little better prior planning as you mention, more situational awareness, and less complacency? They certainly seem to be the party describing these WDL's as unacceptable.
Another piece of machinery possibly .... but which code, which name - ICAO, IATA, maritime or FMS ..... plenty of scope there for error as well. Rig plate photos showing the actual markings are a help - as ever the Mk 1 eye-ball still acts as the final defence at present .... markings, helideck crew in position etc?
Another piece of machinery possibly .... but which code, which name - ICAO, IATA, maritime or FMS ..... plenty of scope there for error as well. Rig plate photos showing the actual markings are a help - as ever the Mk 1 eye-ball still acts as the final defence at present .... markings, helideck crew in position etc?
This may well be a case of "everything went well under disguise".
I thought there were more than merely visual procedures in place to prevent this from happening, what about radio contact with the destination.
Weather permitting, a notorious customer requires a full 360 degress flight around the structure before landing.
Weather not permitting, if shooting an ARA, the destination has to be matched by the radar target.
Did the crew actually get a green deck or permission to land before landing?
I think there were likely other people sleeping at the wheel rather than just the pilots.
This could have been a potentially disastrous error had the structure been flaring or venting or some of the other stuff they do offshore when they do not want helos around.
I thought there were more than merely visual procedures in place to prevent this from happening, what about radio contact with the destination.
Weather permitting, a notorious customer requires a full 360 degress flight around the structure before landing.
Weather not permitting, if shooting an ARA, the destination has to be matched by the radar target.
Did the crew actually get a green deck or permission to land before landing?
I think there were likely other people sleeping at the wheel rather than just the pilots.
This could have been a potentially disastrous error had the structure been flaring or venting or some of the other stuff they do offshore when they do not want helos around.
Their destination, Buzzard, was 30 n.m. from Peterhead which is probably where they coasted out. It was a clear day so depending on their height they could well have seen their destination at that point. The jackup, where they landed instead of a platform, was nine miles from their destination. Should that have been laterally offset that would mean that they departed offshore with an 18 degrees track error, if it was in line it would have been a 4 minute timing error. Dinosaurs like me were taught that on leaving an en-route point you checked that you were on the right track and the next ETA was as expected. I suppose nowadays the autopilot or FMS are so infallible there is no point in looking out.
There's a saying that an offshore pilot has either landed on the wrong rig or is going to. That's a myth. The only time when it is possibly excusable is during a multi platform shuttle where they fly leg 12 instead of leg 11 which was when it was demonstrated to me. I cannot remember more than one or two occasions where somebody has landed on the wrong installation having departed from a land base and they then got their arse severely kicked.
Since my particular episode I not have only ensured that it was the right helideck but also that the deck crew were present. I have had enough experience of getting deck clearance whilst the deck crew were being mustered.
I'm sorry that this old fogy has to comment like this. Homo Sapiens in it's present form is only 55,000 years old. We dinosaurs lasted for 135 million years. It was not our fault that a chunk of high speed rock decided to create the Caribbean.
There's a saying that an offshore pilot has either landed on the wrong rig or is going to. That's a myth. The only time when it is possibly excusable is during a multi platform shuttle where they fly leg 12 instead of leg 11 which was when it was demonstrated to me. I cannot remember more than one or two occasions where somebody has landed on the wrong installation having departed from a land base and they then got their arse severely kicked.
Since my particular episode I not have only ensured that it was the right helideck but also that the deck crew were present. I have had enough experience of getting deck clearance whilst the deck crew were being mustered.
I'm sorry that this old fogy has to comment like this. Homo Sapiens in it's present form is only 55,000 years old. We dinosaurs lasted for 135 million years. It was not our fault that a chunk of high speed rock decided to create the Caribbean.
It would be nice if we could wait for the conclusion of the investigation rather than hanging these guys out to dry without knowing the facts first? 
and no, I don't work for Bond, but I am a professional doing the same job, and although I have never had the misfortune of landing on the wrong rig,I have nearly done that...Line training newbie, ****e weather, no name visible on deck due to some guano,coupled with mist, no name on side, other platform(nui) so close, looks the same and just beyond first target, last minute change by client to go to first nui then to second(when bus stopping was allowed) struggling co-jo...short finals, deck clearance given (by other rig HLO) not being able to see us etc...bang, very short finals, *ollocks, going around...
No doubt there would be some on here that would be calling for my head not knowing the circumstances, facts or how difficult it can be line training, etc. Now I don't know the facts of this case, I am not saying the weather was crap or they were training etc we don't know the reasons yet so give the guys a break.
I count myself as a good aviator, conciencious and professional and never take any risks, BUT, for those calling for their heads, we ALL are capable of mistakes, just think carefully back in your careers when you did something wrong and "just " got away with it!!!!!
and no, I don't work for Bond, but I am a professional doing the same job, and although I have never had the misfortune of landing on the wrong rig,I have nearly done that...Line training newbie, ****e weather, no name visible on deck due to some guano,coupled with mist, no name on side, other platform(nui) so close, looks the same and just beyond first target, last minute change by client to go to first nui then to second(when bus stopping was allowed) struggling co-jo...short finals, deck clearance given (by other rig HLO) not being able to see us etc...bang, very short finals, *ollocks, going around...
No doubt there would be some on here that would be calling for my head not knowing the circumstances, facts or how difficult it can be line training, etc. Now I don't know the facts of this case, I am not saying the weather was crap or they were training etc we don't know the reasons yet so give the guys a break.
I count myself as a good aviator, conciencious and professional and never take any risks, BUT, for those calling for their heads, we ALL are capable of mistakes, just think carefully back in your careers when you did something wrong and "just " got away with it!!!!!
Their destination, Buzzard, was 30 n.m. from Peterhead which is probably where they coasted out. It was a clear day so depending on their height they could well have seen their destination at that point. The jackup, where they landed instead of a platform, was nine miles from their destination. Should that have been laterally offset that would mean that they departed offshore with an 18 degrees track error, if it was in line it would have been a 4 minute timing error. Dinosaurs like me were taught that on leaving an en-route point you checked that you were on the right track and the next ETA was as expected. I suppose nowadays the autopilot or FMS are so infallible there is no point in looking out.
Or, are you just making yet more assumptions?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was trying to think in my foxed wing world what would be the best method of stopping a recurrence.
Yes we could change the SOP's etc etc which is what the NAA will want.
But realistically.
Public humiliation in front of their peers.
Followed by a weekend washing aircraft would be far more effective ensuring nobody will do it again.
Yes we could change the SOP's etc etc which is what the NAA will want.
But realistically.
Public humiliation in front of their peers.
Followed by a weekend washing aircraft would be far more effective ensuring nobody will do it again.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
TISTISNOT
The one time I nearly did it we planned to land at X, lots of considerations for X and then at the last minute changed to destination Y a few miles away, rush rush slightly fatigued. Outbound lots of changes and information. Brain still geared to landing on X. Made approach to X. Both me and P2 convinced we were OK until HLO......er aren't you coming to us at Y you seem to approaching X. Opps!
That's the kind of thing that happens when repetition, dynamics, fatigue and change management conspire to shaft you.
The crew will have had something conspire to screw them up one way or the other.
No doubt the desk jockeys will get their pound of leash out of the crew.
What the f***k happened to the no blame culture in offshore operations?
The one time I nearly did it we planned to land at X, lots of considerations for X and then at the last minute changed to destination Y a few miles away, rush rush slightly fatigued. Outbound lots of changes and information. Brain still geared to landing on X. Made approach to X. Both me and P2 convinced we were OK until HLO......er aren't you coming to us at Y you seem to approaching X. Opps!
That's the kind of thing that happens when repetition, dynamics, fatigue and change management conspire to shaft you.
The crew will have had something conspire to screw them up one way or the other.
No doubt the desk jockeys will get their pound of leash out of the crew.
What the f***k happened to the no blame culture in offshore operations?
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Ogba
Age: 53
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought most companies (like Bristow), these days have a just culture, which is very different from a no-blame culture. Even with a supposedly just culture, I've heard that certain Bristow Nigeria managers have said 'nobody puts a serviceable helicopter in the water on my watch and gets away with it' and 'the next crew to land on the wrong deck will be sacked'
I'm sure that Bond will be operating a just culture model and if that's the case, even if the crew are found to be in some way to blame, as long as it was not malicious, they will not be sacked (though they may have their Captaincy removed for a period of time and/or be subject to additional training).
As has been said, people should wait for the result of the investigation which I'm sure is already underway, before throwing stones at the crew.
I'm sure that Bond will be operating a just culture model and if that's the case, even if the crew are found to be in some way to blame, as long as it was not malicious, they will not be sacked (though they may have their Captaincy removed for a period of time and/or be subject to additional training).
As has been said, people should wait for the result of the investigation which I'm sure is already underway, before throwing stones at the crew.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KN,
I suppose it is "Just" so long as it is a published policy and is followed through on when said event occurs. After all, fair warning had been given.
That beats the old policy of Secret Handshakes and Management supporting Management even when Management knew Management was wrong.
What's the odds of this particular Crew ever making the same kind of mistake again if they only endure a week long suspension and a Hats On-No Tea interview with the Boss Fellah and being told to go back to Work?
What is more important is everyone else who was not in that Cockpit learning a lesson from what happened. We might laugh at the poor guy's but deep down we should fully understand it could be us next time unless we pay better attention to what we are doing.
I suppose it is "Just" so long as it is a published policy and is followed through on when said event occurs. After all, fair warning had been given.
That beats the old policy of Secret Handshakes and Management supporting Management even when Management knew Management was wrong.
What's the odds of this particular Crew ever making the same kind of mistake again if they only endure a week long suspension and a Hats On-No Tea interview with the Boss Fellah and being told to go back to Work?
What is more important is everyone else who was not in that Cockpit learning a lesson from what happened. We might laugh at the poor guy's but deep down we should fully understand it could be us next time unless we pay better attention to what we are doing.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boudreaux Bob
Ah yes.....400 Pesky peeved Pax.....gets rather crowded in a 74's Cockpit then I would assume!
Passengers get very snotty if you don't talk to them very soon after a GA, when you would much rather be doing more important things, they write nasty letters to management etc., say they were 'ignored', 'no one told us anything', 'we were all frightened', 'never fly your airline again' etc. etc.
(Sorry for the side track guys and gals).
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Aer
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is that the modern safety culture wants HAZOBS which are conducted before a campaign. In these sessions, the oil company SMEs are expected to put barriers in place to show that Hazard A or B is managed to ALARP.
Landing on an unmanned helideck is seen as a big sin "what happens if the helicopter lands on the deck and the crane is moving or it crashes and there is no helideck crew"
The oil company aviation adviser, busily trying to defend himself, the pilots and the helicopter company against an ever increasing number of self appointed armchair experts dreaming up ever more ridiculous scenarios has to trot out the usual barriers, FMS, flight planning, positive ID on final approach, etc.
The facilitators (paid by the word probably) then try to encourage the group to think of even more ridiculous scenarios to justify why landing on the wrong deck is a sin just short of murder. No one to man the fire monitors for the helicopter coming in to land if it's on fire, or the wheels won't come down etc. they don't realise that helicopters don't land offshore with known problems unless there is no alternative.
So the facilitators wind up the non experts who want to be experts because they once flew a model helicopter and before you know it, everyone is an expert and landing on the wrong helideck is immortalised as a sin, it self perpetuates over a few HAZOBS and we are where we are.
That's why the crew is suspended. As HC says, no big deal, a red face and bruised pride but it's not the sin it is made out to be. But because of the number of instant experts, even the strongest oil company Aviation Advisor finds it hard to reduce the hysteria.
Landing on an unmanned helideck is seen as a big sin "what happens if the helicopter lands on the deck and the crane is moving or it crashes and there is no helideck crew"
The oil company aviation adviser, busily trying to defend himself, the pilots and the helicopter company against an ever increasing number of self appointed armchair experts dreaming up ever more ridiculous scenarios has to trot out the usual barriers, FMS, flight planning, positive ID on final approach, etc.
The facilitators (paid by the word probably) then try to encourage the group to think of even more ridiculous scenarios to justify why landing on the wrong deck is a sin just short of murder. No one to man the fire monitors for the helicopter coming in to land if it's on fire, or the wheels won't come down etc. they don't realise that helicopters don't land offshore with known problems unless there is no alternative.
So the facilitators wind up the non experts who want to be experts because they once flew a model helicopter and before you know it, everyone is an expert and landing on the wrong helideck is immortalised as a sin, it self perpetuates over a few HAZOBS and we are where we are.
That's why the crew is suspended. As HC says, no big deal, a red face and bruised pride but it's not the sin it is made out to be. But because of the number of instant experts, even the strongest oil company Aviation Advisor finds it hard to reduce the hysteria.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
terminus mos
But surely your SMS or safety case considers exactly the same - and puts your own barriers in place before the nasty aviation advisor has to point it out ..... you just won't escape it in this modern era whether you like it or not
(Just to add, landing on the wrong rig or platform in those days would simply cost a lot of beer, no inquiry).
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope than when the word "suspended" is used by the company it really means just placed off roster to enable interviews to take place. And with any luck, the investigation will go along the line of why did this crew believe they were in the correct place? Did the company's method foresee this possibility? Were the company's SOPs a help or a hindrance? Who else saw that this was going pear shaped? What systems are in place to prevent this from happening? Did the rig see their approach? Unless we can see things from this crew's perspective, we will learn little. And the hang'em high brigade can do us all a favour and remain in their mud huts - they have no place in the modern world. I also do hope these guys go straight back to work, should they wish to do so. Suspension, demoting, fining, "retraining" will do nothing to prevent reoccurrence - it only pleases myopic idiots and Daily Mail readers.
PM
PM