PM
If I could discuss some of the facts and assumptions made in your email:
I sensed in the original post that the question had been asked because a Captain had exercised discretion and taken a cross cockpit landing. I saw the thread as an interesting discussion based on that assumption (that assumption could have been wrong and the thread is no less interesting for that).
(The use of his also implies her.)
Let’s get one issue out of the way - this is a thread about two pilot operations and the comments about single pilot are not therefore relevant - let’s leave them for another thread.
In my opinion (with some experience), all approaches (at least in the final stages) should be flown by the pilot with the obstructions on his side - as indicated by Chopper Jog. The only exception could be an occasion when a risk assessment indicates that an alternative would be less risky. (No rule required this is a matter of good judgement and CRM.)
Hopefully, most decks have a bum line or a marker where, if the pilot position is correct, best obstacle clearance is obtained (and maintained). A deck where a pilot has to eyeball the edge of the deck to ensure the wheels are on the deck is an unacceptable risk to the pilot, operator and the oil company. Even if this is the case, the PH can be conned to the safest position by the NHP whilst ensuring that clearance from obstructions is maintained.
No operator should allow a situation where a pilot in a two-pilot crew is not up to par - except in the case of sudden illness. Even if that is the judgement of the Captain, taking control and doing a cross cockpit landing does nothing to assist in the development of the other pilot, or improve the state of mind of either.
Whilst your comment about pilot view in the S61 v the S76 is true, a cross cockpit landing in either could pose an unnecessary risk.
I too can think of a number of accidents where a pilot ran into obstructions on his side - none of which would have been prevented by a cross cockpit landing.
For the question raised by gnow on straight-in approaches, no there is no JAA rule precluding it but I recommend a visit to the accident investigation web sites which are replete with example of approaches which ended with the pilot striking the tail, ADELT, tail rotor etc.
If you work for a JAR-OPS operator, you might read JAR-OPS 3, IEM OPS 3.517(b) - Procedures for continued operations to helidecks (pages 2-H-5 and on) which gives guidance on most of the issues of deck landing and take-off - not the least of which is the preservation of options that would be closed to the pilot on a straight-in approach. Remember that most of these landings are in Performance Class 2 with exposure.
An enjoyable and important thread!
Mars
Last edited by Mars; 15th August 2003 at 02:06.