Tris:
Do your best to keep a thick skin, we all get a little defensive and the trouble we aircrew have is the sense that few people out there, for some reason or another, have a gripe (whether within our own company or by customer etc) we rarely hear any thanks but often feel the hot breath of some unhappy soul down our necks. Forgive the chronic defensiveness especially as this sort of subject can lead to aircrew being perceived (incorrectly) as borderline suicidal apathetic nut jobs by people who become aggressively involved in distribution of misinformation (not accusing of such).
The point that is being challenged in your comment is the ability to send "data back to the beach", (apologies if that's a misquote) as there is no facility to do so other than picking up a phone and describing to an engineer what the heli is doing. The analysis of HUMS data is carried out on return to base when the card is removed from the aircraft and downloaded to a HUMS desktop station. Also, the ability to detect a vibration related to this particular failure through your back side is borderline impossible until shortly before the failure itself takes place. Any excessive, or abnormal vibration associated with the gearbox would most likely result in the aircraft being shutdown on the rig, or if in flight: a great deal of arse puckering and brow sweat. Leading to the expectation that this information being distributed by the OIM is misleading (not necessarily their intention) when done so in the context of the accident as there is not any known connection between it and this report of vibration.
More likely would be a blade out of track/balance or some other less critical issue.
Hope this helps.
Interesting heard yesterday: apparently ConocoPhillips are not flying pumas anywhere in the world just now, until the AAIB have concluded their investigation. Busy old time for the S92s in ABZ?
Last edited by teej5536; 17th May 2012 at 11:03.