Yes, sometimes blindly following the rules isn't the best option - airmanship always trumps rulebooks in such scenarios. I also wonder if they were trying to follow the checklist rather than doing it from memory - that might explain the delay.
The NATOPs procedure may have been written for experiencing vibrations on start up rather than on landing.
FWIW,
The NATOPS procedure for
Unusual Vibrations On Deck is singular in its response:
1. Collective — Lower.
2. PCLs — OFF.
3. Rotor brake — Apply as required.
The procedure is a Critical Memory Item (CMI), and the steps are expected to be performed immediately, without reference to the checklist.
It probably considers the complicated nature of shipboard operations and the severe safety implications of a helicopter suddenly becoming airborne on a busy deck.
However, a NATOPS FM copy I reviewed includes the option of going airborne in a previous section referencing ground resonance (possibly in an unstated reference to non-shipboard operations):
“If ground resonance should occur, primary consideration should be given to getting the helicopter airborne. If this is impossible, immediately reduce collective pitch, place the PCLs to OFF, and apply the rotor and wheel brakes.”
Since the Navy’s Command Investigation only addresses a potential equipment modification, I assume becoming airborne is not an option:
“Helicopter PCL location in the upper center console is not ideally located for quick securing of the engine in an emergency. Recommend NA VAIR direct a review of emergency procedures and equipment to determine whether it is possible to enable a quicker and easier PCL response during a ground resonance event.”