PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Chinook - Still Hitting Back 3 (Merged)
View Single Post
Old 27th May 2009, 15:16
  #4524 (permalink)  
flipster
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bos,

If you are looking for chapter and verse - JSP 318 (as was, now JSP 550) will probably reflect the civilian UK AIP (Civ Air Pilot) of 'COCISOS' for VFR. I don't have a current copy of either, so I can't confirm. Although I have re-read my CAA VFR Guide - which confirms that 'COCISOS' is the VFR limit for helos.

However, both JSPs, GASOs and the UKMLFS Handbook would, most likely, have added slight further restrictions to viz and/or cloudbase for military ops and trg (possibly both different!!). So one could be legally VMC/VFR (iaw AIP/JSPs) but not complying with mil limits/orders for low-level. As I say, it would take a bit digging to find out what all these were in 1994. I will re-check my notes but if someone knows, please speak up!


That said, I think it is reasonable to assess that the weather over the sea was better than '1nm viz and 250ft cloudbase' (which is the most limiting I have heard so far for helos) and so, the weather was suitable for continuing at low-level over the sea. Over the coast, near to the mull, I suggest that this was not so - but remember it is very hard to accurately measure in-flight viz from within the cockpit. The WP change indicates to me that the crew were 'visual' and intending to stay away from culmulo/strato-granite. Something interfered with this intention - but we don't know what, nor why and certainly 'with no doubt whatsoever'.



Tuckunder

I am sorry you feel that we are going round in circles but some posters have not been around this thread for that long. So, please bear with us if we catch up with you old stagers.

I think Tuc has pointed out that there were serious concerns with the Mk2's airworthiness (not addressed by the BOI) and that this case (among others) has parallels with the recent Hercules and the Nimrod cases - where the MoD have admitted liability. If you can see a link and feel that there may be the need for further investigation, then write to your MP and Mr Charles Haddon-Cave QC at the Nimrod Review to express your concerns. I have.

2 QUESTIONS that I don't think have come up before.

1. At the time of the crash, did the Mk2 sim fully replicate the aircraft?

2. When had either of the pilots attended Flying Authorisers' Cse (FLAC) or the Flying Supervisors' Course (FSC) at IFS, as it was?

Last edited by flipster; 27th May 2009 at 16:12.
flipster is offline