IHST Interim Recommendations

[sox6]

Intersting mini-report:
http://ihst.org/images/stories/documents/liptak%20jhsat%20interim%20safety%20recommendations_final.do c

Seven recommendations (in no particular order).

1. – Promote the adoption of Safety Management Systems in the helicopter community.
2. – More consistent and comprehensive NTSB involvement and investigation needed in helicopter accidents.

3. – Reestablish the collection of worldwide helicopter fleet hour data as previously performed by the FAA.

4. – Establish a helicopter safety website to disseminate important information

5. – Use proximity detection equipment in helicopters.

6. – Use flight recording devices and cockpit image recording systems in
helicopters.

7. – Develop a strategy to improve pilot Aeronautical Decision Making.

Rotorhead oinions desired.

[Jolly Green]

1. What do they mean by "Safety Management Systems" in this context? The capitalization leads me to believe that this is some formal program defined somewhere.

2. NTSB is overwhelmed and underfunded for the number of accidents they supposedly investigate. What about other nations' equivalents? There is some hope that the FAA can be shamed into improvements based on other investigations. I hope the rest of the world isn't counting on the U.S. government to take a leadership role in rotorcraft safety.

Agree with the rest.

[Revolutionary]

"6. – Use flight recording devices and cockpit image recording systems in
helicopters"

What a waste of money that would be. Most helicopter crashes are no great mysteries that require such data to pinpoint the cause. I can think of a lot of better ways to spend all that dough:

EVS or NVG equipment, autopilot, radar altimeters, TCAS, wire detection systems and inflight WX downlinks come to mind.

[zalt]

JG

1 - SMS is probably as per the defined 'recommended practice' just introduced into ICAO Annex 6 that becomes an international 'standard' in 2009. Transport Canada have been pretty active and have introduced regulations already. Hopefully other countries will learn from TC's mistakes.

2 - The big IHST idea seems to be that the IHST project itself takes the collective lead. There doesn't seem to be much stomach in the FAA for taking action from what I heard at HAI. The NTSB briefly looked like it might while Dick Healing was on the Board.

JG 2 & Rev 6
I think it is a little unrealistic for them to hope for an 80% reduction in accidents within 10 years if so many of the interim recommendations are to gather more data on future accidents and also flying hours (no 3) to get accident rates. It does rather undermine the analysis done to date if there are so many unknowns.

They make a good point that if there is to be thought to fitting recorders, then applying fixed wing crash standards will make them too heavey & costly for the majority of helicopters.

Unless thy can get true lightweight, low cost semi-hardened recorders, if they want to meet their target I tend to agree with Revolutionary that if extra kit is to be fitted on aircraft it should be to increase the safety of the aircraft its fitted to NOT to increase the safety of other aircraft IF that aircraft has an accident (which in the US is still dependent on the NTSB actually becoming more active in the investigations).

Having said that there are many 'unexplained' accidents, especially offshore. The NTSB board have just issued the probable cause for this GOM 206L3 accident which killed 3 in Jun 2005.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=DFW06FAMS1&rpt=fa
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=DFW06FAMS1&rpt=fi

After 14 months all they can manage is:

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows. Undetermined. The aircraft is missing.

Pretty pathetic.

[Daysleeper]

After 14 months all they can manage is:

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows. Undetermined. The aircraft is missing.

Pretty pathetic.

What do you expect miracles? No wreckage no other evidence what do they have to work with.

[zalt]

Perhaps that conclusion a little quicker? I wonder if there was a seabed search with sidescan sonar? Three deaths seems to justify a bit of expense. Though of course that expense could be cut if there was a 15 minute (rather than 30 min) flight following reports. That feels like a recommendation even without the wreckage. Plus no flightplan filed. Another?

[SASless]

What does a Sonar Pinger cost?

I loved the response in the ELT question......."?!

That closely follows company response given by telephone....."Take off Time unknown"

Does Industrial require the pilots to sign off a fuel point logbook for each fuelling and document the results of fuel sample checks?

Did anyone check the fuel facilities used by the aircraft?

Was the only investigation done by telephone?

Did the NTSB tell Industrial something along the line of...."Let us know if/when you find the aircraft."?

Sounds kinda like a 412 fatal crash in Nigeria....for the amount of investigation being done.

[Daysleeper]

Well I would say 4 days of searching by the USCG sounds pretty thourough. These reports follow a standard format and only if a new technique was used would the search be detailed. 4 days would allow enough time for surface ships to be used.
As for the operator continuing to search after the govt have stopped - not unusual.
As for ELT? Again seems reasonable, the answer to the next 2 questions ELT activated and ELT assisted in search are definately NO so the answer to the question ELT fitted would have to wait until the wreckage could be examined. Only there is no wreckage.