Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

SAR S-92 Missing Ireland

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

SAR S-92 Missing Ireland

Old 25th Mar 2017, 11:47
  #541 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wanaka, NZ
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Not coming from a SAR background, and for the enlightenment of others here like me, I'm curious to what extent the helicopter crew are involved in the initial decision making process to launch on a mission. Or are they told to go, and they just go? Presumably they are told of the nature of the injury of the patient. If they are told "not life threatening" is it open to the SAR crew to suggest, for example, as the safest option in the circumstances, for the Captain of the vessel to sail towards port and the helicopter will rendezvous with them at first light?
gulliBell is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 11:59
  #542 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: **** You
Age: 74
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As I have said before the Auto Scaling feature of the Moving Map would make both Blackrock & Blacksod look almost identical during the last 5 NM approach.
Blackrock is not on the Terrain Database....I don't believe that for a second.
You also can't display TAWS & Radar on the same Screen, it's one or the other.
EGPWS inhibited during approach is also bull****. A rapid rising Terrain during approach will still give warning, given the steep angle of this rock it most likely won't be enough time. The Crew can however disable the Terrain Warning.
Not sure if it has an Obstacle Database? If it does then it's quite possible they have inhibited the Warning because the Lighthouse would annoy the Crap out of them. Maybe now you can start to see the plausibility.
If the MPFDR Data shows the Auto Pilot was engaged and NAV Mode selected during the Tear Drop then it's a forgone conclusion Blackrock was the destination selected on the FMS. Couple that with the Altitude Profile, and then you can tell if the destination was intended or not.

So your SAR machines are not NVIS equipped. I bet they will be very shortly.
Pretty sure the Flight Following will also get a Giddy Up.
Vertical Profile Radar could also be handy.

Last edited by buzz66; 25th Mar 2017 at 12:41.
buzz66 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 12:56
  #543 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by buzz66
If the MPFDR Data shows the Auto Pilot was engaged and NAV Mode selected during the Tear Drop then it's a forgone conclusion Blackrock was the destination selected on the FMS.
Apologies if this is a stupid question but if Blackrock was the destination in the FMS and Auto Pilot was engaged would AP have flown them in to contact with the island ?
pfm1000 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 12:58
  #544 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 509
Received 17 Likes on 11 Posts
It does what you tell it to. If you ask it to fly into something, it will obey.
helicrazi is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 12:59
  #545 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,724
Received 138 Likes on 67 Posts
Originally Posted by gulliBell
Not coming from a SAR background, and for the enlightenment of others here like me, I'm curious to what extent the helicopter crew are involved in the initial decision making process to launch on a mission. Or are they told to go, and they just go? Presumably they are told of the nature of the injury of the patient. If they are told "not life threatening" is it open to the SAR crew to suggest, for example, as the safest option in the circumstances, for the Captain of the vessel to sail towards port and the helicopter will rendezvous with them at first light?

Not sure how it works in SAR but when I worked for an Air Ambulance we were not told the patient status but simply asked "Can you respond to a call to XXXX?" We made our go/no go decision based upon operational factors such as Aircraft / crew status and weather.
This was because we did want to put undo pressure on the crew. After we accepted the flight the paramedics would get the patient status. We did not want something like "The patient is a cute 5 year old with serious injuries" to affect the decision to launch or not.
I am sure someone with actual knowledge as to SAR procedures will be able to better respond to your question.
albatross is online now  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 13:14
  #546 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 4 Posts
Gullible, I can only tell you how HEMS works. The Medical agency is responsible for tasking the aircraft. Sometimes all the details are known and sometimes not. SAR, being a more senior service having been around longer than HEMS I am sure operates on a similar basis.

It's easy in hindsight to be critical of the urgency of any task. However, most emergency services are pre-disposed to launch rather than conduct unofficial triage to avoid the risks of ending up with a fatality after they have declined to respond.

As an EMS pilot I am not medically qualified to make those calls and so rely on the expertise and more crucially, the established protocols of the medical teams to make the launch decision. Sometimes it is overkill (excuse the pun). Most times it is not.

I am not interested in the medical details of this incident until in the air and I suspect prior to launch, neither were this crew. They would simply be responding to the tasking agencies call and get on with it. Fast reaction is the principle and too many opinions in the process would just slow the whole thing down.

I doubt the skipper of the boat would make a commercial decision over the welfare of his crew. Fishing boat crews are a tight knit group. They would have made the call to protect the persons interests. Also I would pay lip services to reports in the press.

Finally, don't forget SAR crews train regularly and I feel sure the conditions on the night would have not stopped them training. The risks are always there. However, if this was a training flight I doubt we would be saying training should be banned because of the risks.

I am sure they will be lessons learned from this but I doubt it would alter launch criteria or the need for top cover as I for one, do not believe they are relevant. Or to put it another way, doing so rather accepts the likelihood of such events and by preventing the flight you avoid the event.

There will be a root cause to this accident just like all the others before this one. Finding it and evaluating that root cause to reduce or even eradicate that risk is far better than mitigating the risks by preventing such flights from occurring.

Apologies Albatross, I missed your post. I think you describe the principles and reasons behind an EMS launch better than I did.
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 13:16
  #547 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Up there
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have been following this thread since the beginning as I was genuinely saddened to hear of the loss of R116. Condolences to all involved.

I have the utmost respect for the SAR community, these guys do fantastic work.

Here is more info on the fisherman's injury. The decision to launch is not made by the IRCG but by medical staff at Cork University Hospital based on the information given to them. Doctors will generally err on the side of caution if they are to be held responsible. The accuracy of the information they receive from the fishing boat is another factor. It seems the helicopter crews don't have much of a say in the decision.

Miscommunication over severity of fisherman's injury responsible for last journey of R116
Bayerische is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 13:22
  #548 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: South Coast, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
While somewhat tangential, for information I was a coastguard for four years, operational lifeboat crew with the RNLI for ten years, and a launching authority for the RNLI for a further two years. The coastguard requested the lifeboat to launch with full disclosure of the material facts. The decision was based on the nature of the problem as well as weather, etc. Not once in my 16 years SAR experience (handling approx 100 calls per year) was the offer declined, in fact in many cases the response was strengthened with a "both boats" launch to provide what could be regarded as the equivalent of "top cover".
catch21 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 14:32
  #549 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Out West
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The initial call from the IRCG co-ordinator would have been along the lines of "We have a wet job (offshore task) for you. An injured crewman on board a fishing vessel approx 100nm (or whatever) west of Blacksod at co-ordinates (L&L). The injury is to his hand and the ship's Captain is requesting that he be taken to hospital."

It is then up to the SAR crew to obtain as much information as possible regarding position, type of vessel, time the accident occurred, more details of the injury and patient, weather at the scene, etc, etc. Most experienced co-ordinators would already have this information available.

The crew then decide whether or not to accept the task. Unless the vessel is out of range or the weather is such that it would prevent the flight from operating (bearing in mind that there are usually no prescribed minimum weather limits for SAR flights) the task would normally be accepted.

If, however, conditions are marginal, out of range and/or the winchman paramedic feels that the injury is not life-threatening and can wait, then the crew can delay or decline the task.

I have done this on a number of occassions when the combination is poor weather/long range and a non-life threatening injury. However I always make sure that as much information as is available is collected and the whole crew are happy with the decision. It is our bums that are strapped to the seats but equally we have to live with the decision.
Same again is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 16:09
  #550 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Once a Squirrel Heaven (or hell!), Shropshire UK
Posts: 831
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
IRCG
The history of Top Cover off west coast of Ireland goes back a long way back to the time of the Nimrod
It goes back a lot further than that - I was doing top cover in a Shackleton for both Whirlwinds and Wessex to the West of Ireland before the Nimrod came into service. However, I didn't realise the warm fuzzy glow it gives you until I was the one in the Wessex a few years later. Later still, the assets deployed off Cork for the Air India Accident meant that while I was out there in a Chinook for 6 hours we had at various times 2 x Nimrods, 2 x USAF C-130s and others. Admittedly they were also assisting in the search, and sending us to look at anything significant (anyone remember the cabbage patch doll?), but if anything had happened to us - and the further you go from land the more every strange noise, turbulence, change in Ts or Ps gets the heart rate going - they're there for us as well. Bobbing in the oggin is much better in a large multi seat dinghy courtesy of a Lindholm container (unless it hits you on the head!).

Last edited by Shackman; 26th Mar 2017 at 12:17. Reason: sp!
Shackman is online now  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 18:46
  #551 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere by the Baltic Sea
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Same again
The initial call from the IRCG co-ordinator would have been along the lines of "We have a wet job (offshore task) for you. An injured crewman on board a fishing vessel approx 100nm (or whatever) west of Blacksod at co-ordinates (L&L). The injury is to his hand and the ship's Captain is requesting that he be taken to hospital."

It is then up to the SAR crew to obtain as much information as possible regarding position, type of vessel, time the accident occurred, more details of the injury and patient, weather at the scene, etc, etc. Most experienced co-ordinators would already have this information available.

The crew then decide whether or not to accept the task. Unless the vessel is out of range or the weather is such that it would prevent the flight from operating (bearing in mind that there are usually no prescribed minimum weather limits for SAR flights) the task would normally be accepted.

If, however, conditions are marginal, out of range and/or the winchman paramedic feels that the injury is not life-threatening and can wait, then the crew can delay or decline the task.

I have done this on a number of occassions when the combination is poor weather/long range and a non-life threatening injury. However I always make sure that as much information as is available is collected and the whole crew are happy with the decision. It is our bums that are strapped to the seats but equally we have to live with the decision.
Same again

Thanks for the good info! Just curious: What is your recommendation concerning radar usage? I mean tilt; do you have kind of "standard setting" when using GMAP mode?
Search&Rescue is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 18:56
  #552 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 464
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shackman
IRCG


It goes back a lot further than that - I was doing top cover in a Shackleton for both Whirlwinds and Wessex to the West of Ireland before the Nimrod came into service. However, I didn't realise the warm fuzzy glow it gives you until I was the one in the Wessex a few years later. Later still, the assets deployed off Cork for the Air India Accident meant that while I was out there in a Chinook for 6 hours we had at various times 2 x Nimrods, 2 x USAF C-130s and others. Admittedly they were also assisting in the search, and sending us to look at anything significant (anyone remember the cabbage patch doll?), but if anything had happened to us - and the further you go from land the more every strange noise, turbulence, change in Ts or Ps gets the heart rate going - they're their for us as well. Bobbing in the oggin is much better in a large multi seat dinghy courtesy of a Lindholm container (unless it hits you on the head!).
What Shackman said, (X 22 yrs)

S&R
What is your recommendation concerning radar usage?
I would recommend a Seaking search radar and a competent RADOP...but, nostalgia isn't what it used to be!

Last edited by Al-bert; 25th Mar 2017 at 19:07.
Al-bert is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 19:02
  #553 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 714
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts
Commercially contracted civilian SAR: you get what you contract for and it is up to the operator to set SOP's and standards to operate successfully and safely with what has been specified. If top cover is provided then you don't need any long range comms (like the fishboat must have had to call for SAR), though I find that lack of capability odd. NVG is a complete and complex (expensive) program, takes time and money.
An instrument approach to either of the two west coast refueling stations would be another cost that can be saved by expecting the aircraft to cloud break on their own some distance away and drive in low-level while avoiding obstacles in the dark and weather. The commercial ARA letdowns for open ocean oil platforms have a number of restrictions and guidelines in the interest of safety, they were never meant for a shore landing. In the commercial world if no IP you'd have another established procedure to come down safely to a specific point, if nothing seen the gear up and back to your alternate.

Last edited by malabo; 25th Mar 2017 at 21:39.
malabo is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 19:30
  #554 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Holywood, Co. Down
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RTE noting that recovery of the body in cockpit byou ROV was unsuccessful. No other bodies noted in the wreckage. Searches have taken place as far north as Downpatrick Head. Very sad.
Jimi182 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 21:58
  #555 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jimi182
RTE noting that recovery of the body in cockpit byou ROV was unsuccessful. No other bodies noted in the wreckage. Searches have taken place as far north as Downpatrick Head. Very sad.
At this point I wonder will they elect to lift the cockpit wreckage by the crane they have on site.
pfm1000 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 22:54
  #556 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Out West
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
What is your recommendation concerning radar usage? I mean tilt; do you have kind of "standard setting" when using GMAP mode?
SAR Radar/FLIR approaches normally start from an MSA of 1500'. Initially down to 200' using the AP Transition Down function. During the RFA the Pilot Monitoring is adjusting the radar to give the best possible returns and giving a verbal picture and headings to the pilot flying. The FLIR operator is observing the track ahead and confirming these headings are clear. Once at 200' and inbound to the final approach point the search radar is fine-tuned. Final approach checks are now carried out before engaging the Transition Down to Hover function that will automatically descend the aircraft to the minimum height set.

Unlike an offshore O&G type of ARA, there is no defined Mapt as the aircraft is now at the minimum height (say 50') with a groundspeed at whatever the operator sets (normally 10 kts or vessel speed plus 10 knots). A missed approach procedure will have been pre-briefed in the event that there is no visual contact at minimum range. This involves changing the heading to a safe one using the AP and engaging the Tansition Up function that sets a pre-determined height and speed. The climb-out flight path is cleared using the search radar, FLIR and/or NVG.

Last edited by Same again; 26th Mar 2017 at 08:20. Reason: Clarity.
Same again is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2017, 23:24
  #557 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Global Vagabond
Posts: 637
Received 30 Likes on 2 Posts
[quoteThe initial call from the IRCG co-ordinator would have been along the lines of "We have a wet job (offshore task) for you. An injured crewman on board a fishing vessel approx 100nm (or whatever) west of Blacksod at co-ordinates (L&L). The injury is to his hand and the ship's Captain is requesting that he be taken to hospital."

It is then up to the SAR crew to obtain as much information as possible regarding position, type of vessel, time the accident occurred, more details of the injury and patient, weather at the scene, etc, etc. Most experienced co-ordinators would already have this information available.

The crew then decide whether or not to accept the task. Unless the vessel is out of range or the weather is such that it would prevent the flight from operating (bearing in mind that there are usually no prescribed minimum weather limits for SAR flights) the task would normally be accepted.

If, however, conditions are marginal, out of range and/or the winchman paramedic feels that the injury is not life-threatening and can wait, then the crew can delay or decline the task.

I have done this on a number of occassions when the combination is poor weather/long range and a non-life threatening injury. However I always make sure that as much information as is available is collected and the whole crew are happy with the decision. It is our bums that are strapped to the seats but equally we have to live with the decision. ][/quote]

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, are you saying the winchman/paramedic makes the go/no go call? My understanding was that a Medical Doctor decided on the need for urgent hospital transfer, the request for transfer was the made to the CG, with fly/no fly being the Pilots decision?
mini is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2017, 01:03
  #558 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Given the information from Bayerische in post 571, which confirms that the thumb injury was quite modest, the patient even only needing road ambulance from Blacksod, it is clear a review of the injury assessment and SAR dispatch process should follow - and I'm sure will. One can see the difficulty of getting accurate information from particularly small vessels with poor English spoken though. I guess ideally there would be a satellite link to send images and medical info across. Anyone know what technology is used now - and could be used in future?
rotorspeed is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2017, 01:33
  #559 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: EU
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Granuaile back at Blackrock, working through the night.

Sea 10 C. Wind 5 kts.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais...ry:54/zoom:11#
Red5ive is offline  
Old 26th Mar 2017, 01:58
  #560 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wanaka, NZ
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
The media report in The Irish Times I read said the Captain of the UK registered fishing boat declared a "PAN PAN MEDICO" on VHF radio relayed by the Irish Coast Guard which allowed him to talk directly to a doctor at the hospital. The doctor advised the Irish Coast Guard based on the information received from the Captain. They must have understood the thumb to have been severed to warrant evacuation by helicopter. But it wasn't severed, and thus it was open for the fishing boat to proceed to port.

It turns out this same fisherman was injured, and evacuated by helicopter from another boat, in the North Sea nine months ago. Fishing is obviously a dangerous profession.
gulliBell is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.