On the topic of CFIT style accidents. Apart from the development of our own SOPs and amending of checklists with the intention of making aircraft operation as safe as possible. I think the aircraft OEM’s have still much work left to do to help improve helicopter flight safety.
Should you be unlucky to still fly in an older machine the use of a RADALT bug might be the only system available to alert the crew of it’s proximity to either water or terrain and that’s not much of a safety net. I’m fortunate to operate a modern aircraft that provides far more S/A, largely thanks to it’s EGPWS, which is an improvement albeit with the odd spurious or unnecessary warnings from time to time, but I think we could do with more system improvements to aid S/A and safety.
Ultimately this accident occurred after the aircraft departed a desirable part of the flight envelope into the undesired for reasons yet to be determined. Should a crew not spot this development, why can’t the aircraft systems alert them? Or better why can’t they intervene? Or even better….do both?
During instrument approaches a programmable airspeed alert bug or/and vertical speed alert bug with ability to temporarily suspend the warning could be introduced to help alert a crew of an aircrafts departure from a desired segment of the flight envelope thus improving S/A. I’m thinking of a setting for either low airspeed or high rate of descent, which in addition to the present EGPWS modes could be useful.
The ability to temporarily suspend the protection is useful to prevent unnecessary warnings that merely desensitise the crew to warnings. Personally I believe this desensitisation to warnings is hugely underrated. The key is to get the warning when you absolutely positively need it; a point lost on far to many pilots, operators and perhaps OEMs who seem all to happy to hear them……it really bugs me…..boom boom!
As an example of a potential design oversight, the aircraft I fly can be flown coupled through it’s alert bug for RAD ALT whilst in a coupled hover mode……I’d love to know why? I think the AFCS demanded reference should always stop at the alert “safety” bug as the pilot will have set the radalt alert bug with the intention to remain above it. Should the pilot need to go lower they can always take control manually and do so.
Extra automation could help. I’m sure this has probably been already considered by the OEMs, but why not have an auto go-around function? Many generic helicopters can’t presently “couple up” at low airspeeds. But the aircraft is able to perfectly record data all the way to its demise. Clearly there are parts of the flight envelope you do not want to be in whilst operating close to water or terrain. So why don’t the OEMs provide an option to equip aircraft with an automatic AFCS “get out of jail card” upon detection of its occupancy in the undesired bitty of the aircraft flight envelope. To costly?
Soz if already discussed, been occupied.
Pig
Last edited by IFR Piglet; 9th Sep 2013 at 19:59.