Some very interesting comments about this accident. Thought I would add my .02 cents worth since I am someone who spends most of my time strapped into the back of Helos doing air to air shoots and in fact I have been flying with the crews of FlyNYON since its inception some 6 years ago. Here are my thoughts and observations.
I have seen comments from people saying that this operation was just a way to beat the air tour operations rules. Sorry but totally disagree and I know that for a fact. Pat Day who started NYON, previously NYonAir was and is an avid photographer. He would use their own AS355 at the beginning to go and shoot aerial photos of NYC for a stock library they had back then and also sell the images to clients who wanted unique aerial perspectives of NYC. He then had many people approach them wanting to shoot that same type of image - so they started doing photo flights where Pat would take along one or two others and they would all capture some cool images. I was one of the originals when that was happening. It was offering photographers a unique way of shooting photos of NYC. It was NEVER about trying to circumvent the rules associated with Part 135 tour operators as some on here have stated.
The comment from this photographer who has been after his 15 mins of fame by doing stories and blogs about how he was in the other helicopter about how they didn't brief pax about where the cutter was I find very hard to believe as I have seen, sat through and watched the briefings many many times. My guess is he was told but he was focused on something else and didn't listen. Me - I have been guilty of that myself. Complacency can bite you in the ass - the I have done this many times before and know where stuff is so no need to listen to this bit. Knowing the staff that NYON have based at Kearny Heliport I doubt that any would have not explained this to the pax. However the caveat on this is that I dont know the Liberty pilots that they use when their own machines are busy. Liberty have a lot of pilots and I personally only flew with them maybe once or twice and the ones I did fly with explained everything in detail, however I cant speak for them all.
While I would never be attached into a helicopter the way NYON have their pax anchored they are also caught between a rock and a hard place. Pat and all the team there including the chief pilot, line pilots, owners and staff take safety 110% seriously. They know the risks of what is happening - people who have never flown in a helicopter being harnessed in and you hope to christ that none of them want to have a come to Jesus moment and decide to go free falling. The method they have them anchored in reduces the risk immensely in having one of the harnesses come loose or them inadvertently coming out of it. BUT that has the downside in a situation like this of being able to get out in a hurry in an emergency. I have my own personal device for cutting webbing and from time to time I practice grabbing it and pretending to do it just so I am familiar with where it is located and what I need to do. Do I think these pax could have done this while upside down in the water, after the shock of having an auto into freezing cold water - being blunt not a ****s show. But they obviously had to weigh up the risks - which had a higher priority - stopping someone coming loose of their harness 2000ft up over NYC or catering to what could happen if a heli went down. I cant or wouldn't answer that on their behalf as thats something they decided on.
In regards to peoples comments about being in seatbelts as well. On EVERY flight I have done, whether its been flying on and air to air shoot in NYC or shooting with RFS on the fires in Australia I have ALWAYS been instructed to sit on a seat (if there was one) and have my seatbelt buckled for take off and landing. Once airborne I was advised I could remove the seatbelt and rely on my harness. NYON was the same. All takeoffs and landings from Kearny or NYC helipads I had my harness on and would sit on the seat with my seatbelt on. On the NYON flights there would be one person sitting on the front seat and two people on the floor either side in the back. All would be tethered into hard points on the aircraft floor. The tether straps are adjustable and would be tightened so that the chances of anyone being able to accidentally slip out would be slim. However saying that there have been cases of pax who loosened themselves off and leant out just to get a "cool" shot. When the pilots of those flights saw that they pax was explained in very blunt and certain terms what they thought of that and they would either sit down and follow the rules or the heli was on its way back.
The comment about the tether being caught around the fuel control lever got me thinking if this was actually possible. I checked with a friend who flies AS350s and he said technically it is possible however would be interested to know where the photographers harness in the front seat was connected to as there is absolutely NO way the tether from one of the photographers in the back seat could become wrapped around the FCL in the front as they all tether behind the pax and are anchored behind them by the back bulkhead.
Many people on here are confusing what NYON do with normal air to air cameraman saying it should just be one cameraman and a director in there etc. Sorry but you are on completely the wrong track. These are dedicated photo flights where you have five photographers onboard shooting images of NYC - also they aren't just the selfie brigade - there are a lot of actual commercial photographers who go along on these flights to shoot scenics of NYC - its a lot cheaper for them than chartering the helicopter just by themselves. Yes the selfie brigade is a big part of the business but not the majority. We only see the instagram images out there because this part of their clientele is very much into social media. Other high profile photographers images do pop up on social media but as a business related post not a "hey look at me" type post. Do I agree with the open door flights for photographers like this - yes and no. Yes because I think its something pretty amazing to be able to view and shoot photos of a city like NY or Miami or Las Vegas from the open door of a helicopter. No - and I say that because even though NYON conduct thorough briefings for the pax I still think they dont understand fully the risks associated with what they are doing. I have been doing this now for nearly 30 years and even now when I go flying I still think about the "what ifs". I am always looking out for other traffic in case we end ups in the same airspace. When I am in a single I am always checking in with the pilot how we are off for fuel (reason for that is we nearly ran out of gas on one shoot). Maybe its just me getting older that I become more aware of the risks. Back when I was the age of those who lost their lives I was more bullet proof and nothing mattered except the fun I was having.
BIGGEST thing I took away from this accident was if I was in a similar situation could I get out. The answer to that would probably be NO. Reason for that is up until now I have always used a harness that has me carabenered onto an aircraft hard point and with a squeeze and release type carabiner that attaches to the back of my harness. I did HUET training some time ago but unless you are up to speed ie: do it every year or so I dont think you would be able to get out of an upside down heli in the water. Yesterday after reading John Eacotts post and editing some photos I shot of the Helitrek BK117 crew in Australia I researched the aircrew harness that has the emergency ripcord type option that with one hard pull on the handle will separate me from the tether. I contacted the manufacturer and placed an order for one. While Priority 1 and ARS make great crewman harnesses which is what I have been using to date, this accident made me realise I want one that is VERY easy to get out of should something happen. On some recent shoots I have been 30-40 mins offshore in a single and I got to thinking about where I was attached, could I have got out easily enough and the answer each time was a resounding NO - something I will admit I never gave much though on until Sunday. So for me this harness will now become standard, it will be like an Amex card - never leave home without it.
So finally my thoughts on where NYON should go from here - it is the USA and these flights will continue. This is what I would do and these are just my thoughts.
1. ALL flights over NYC will go back to using the AS355 twin (please no more single vs twin commentary)
like they had in the beginning. Had they been in the 355 then this thread would not exist. Yes I realise other issues could happen that the second engine would make no difference but in this case it would.
2. Remove and burn every one of those current harnesses they have. Replace them with the harness I mentioned above that give pax a quick and easy way to detach themselves from the aircraft.
3. When water temp is below X degrees then look at using immersion suits - explain its for added safety if something goes wrong. Like someone said they are not that cumbersome these days so its an option.
4. If Option 3 isn't possible then cease doing flights when water temp is below X degrees.
5. Maybe include a fully trained NYON staff member to oversee everything in the back. Give them access to some sort of device that could jettison all attachments of the pax should something happen.
Anyway thats just my 0.2 cents worth. Prob missed a bunch of stuff but decided to put my thoughts down as this accident bought home our own mortality, especially since people like myself, Mike from Vertical, Lyn from Rotorcraft Pro etc spend a LOT of time in the back of different machines in different environments.
Ned