Super Puma down central North Sea Feb 2009

[T4 Risen]

Looks like a super puma has ditched 120 miles offshore, breaking news on BBC...

[Vortex what...ouch!]

BBC NEWS | UK | Scotland | North East/N Isles | Helicopter ditches in North Sea (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/north_east/7898093.stm)

A helicopter, understood to have up to 20 people on board, has ditched on approach to an installation in the North Sea.

The Super Puma was believed to have ditched on approach to an installation 120 miles east of Aberdeen. The alarm was raised just before 1900 GMT.

Three helicopters - including two in-field aircraft and a Sea King from RAF Lossiemouth - are heading to the scene.

A Nimrod from RAF Kinloss has also been scrambled.

The alarm was raised just before 1900 GMT.

There is currently no information on those on board the ditched aircraft.

[Special 25]

Believe it is a Bond aircraft operating to the Etap. Thinking of all you guys. Hopeful for a positive outcome. Not a religeous man but prayers being said

S25

[VeeAny]

Hoping for a good outcome, not religious either but I'll make an exception today.

[Spacer]

Fingers crossed :(

[Odi]

BBC News 24 saying it is the ETAP and ditched approx 500 metres short on approach.

Hoping for the best...

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Hi Special 25,

How do you know/where did you hear it was a Bond Ship??

[T4 Risen]

Rumour has it that it is a bond machine......

[coatimundi]

All personnel now recovered from sea to winch chopper (3) and the rest on a rescue vessel.

Edit - the control Nimrod says all personnel accounted for.

Listening from a nearby installation...

[Odi]

Here's hoping...

[Vertical T/O]

Quicker than Sky and BBC. Brilliant. Hope all are well. Congrats to rescuers. Fair play.

[coatimundi]

Sounds very good now, all rescue vessels being stood down. No reports yet on condition of survivors but the radio traffic is very positive.

[Special 25]

Well whoever got Jigsaw up and running and managed to convince the accountants needs a pat on the back - I'll certainly buy them a beer or two. Here's hoping and good work chaps !

[stausen]

BBC says "All onboard have been rescued and are safe and well"

[detgnome]

BBC now reporting all rescued

[coalface]

A good result from a bad event. Well done to all involved.

The big question now will be was it a controlled ditching or a crash into the sea.

[coatimundi]

Confirm from offshore radio traffic that all personnel are safe and do not require immediate evacuation to a hospital, they are now discussing how to get the 15 on the rescue vessel up to the platform.

[VeeAny]

Good news, well done to the rescuers.:D:D

[Clever Richard]

Thankfully it appears all involved have been rescued. I'm sure I'm not the only one who had a heart stopping moment on checking the BBC website because some c*ck has included a headline from the Morecambe Bay crash in 2006 saying '6 dead in rig helicopter crash'.

Well done to the rescuers.

CD

[Toohey29]

have been told that it is G-REDU EC225........

[Rotorhead412]

Any idea o the pilots flying up there?

Nice work to all involved, both PIC's and rescuers!

[T4 Risen]

all sounds positive!!!
weldone to all involved!!! maybe this will help to justify more SAR machines covering the oil and gas routes...

Any one heard if they got a mayday out?
T4

[PoloJamie]

Shivver went through my spine when I first read the headline on BBC News, then checked here....it's great everyone has been rescued safely.

It appears that DU is the only Super Puma which is registered directly to Bond Offshore, the others are leased...

[rottweiler]

coatimundi Thanks for that, very accurate reporting. Who needs the BBC when your around.

[coatimundi]

Report from rescue chopper (Rescue 51) just now, the a/c in question is floating upright but appears to be missing the tail boom.

I am about 30 NM from the scene, all the guys on my rig have been crowding the radio room for news! We didn't get a Mayday from the chopper (I'm on a different airband frequency to ETAP traffic), we got the news from ETAP Control on Ch16

[rb2147]

If all 18 were recovered from life rafts that would suggest a controlled ditching rather than crash/CFIT/disorientation etc. Well done crew if this is the case.
Will 225 be grounded pending further investigation??

[detgnome]

Small point, Rescue 51 is the Nimrod

[T4 Risen]

upright and floating??? hats off to the crew if it was a controlled ditching at night in those conditions....

[Horror box]

What a relief. As I turned on my computer I was greeted with the headline of "18 dead in North Sea helicopter crash". My heart was in my mouth, as I thought what may have happened. Thankfully i checked in here and found it was a case of journalistic bullsh1t. I don't care what happened right now, I am sure we in the industry will hear all sorts in the next few days/weeks, just very glad that 18 families have not lost their loved ones. Very well done to all involved in the recovery and rescue. As mentioned earlier, maybe we could do with a few more.

[Special 25]

Would be curious to know how quickly rescue helicopters were on the scene. I dare say the incident was over before any Lossie helicopters got there. Maybe even before the Nimrod !

But yes, another offshore helicopter would be a benefit to cover the Fulmar / Elgin areas. Well done everyone and hope the crew / pax aren't too shaken up.

[Horror box]

I would say a particular well done to the rescue crews, given the weather. I have been flying ARA's all week due to the weather and have gone around on minima on a couple in the last couple of nights and days.
In some sectors there is no immediate SAR cover, so i wonder what the result would have been there.

[Newforest2]

And the link is.......

BBC NEWS | Scotland | North East/N Isles | All rescued as helicopter ditches (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7898093.stm)

[IMCAuto]

First of all I would like to offer a massive pat on the back to all those involved in the rescue and to the crew who got the thing down under really poor conditions at night!!
Secondly, I'm glad to see that the bean counters have lost out this time. Every second counts and I'm sure that the close proximty of the JIGSAW crew played a massive part in such a successful outcome. Well Done!!

[rb2147]

Only guessing, but ditching 500m from destination (ETAP) the safety/work boat would be first on scene.
As Helimutt reports, todays weather offshore CNS was light winds, 2-3m swells.
This would enable a successful boat recovery from the liferafts.

The best guarantee of offshore safety is the multiplicity of resources and responses both Mil and Civ.

[ShyTorque]

Seen the Sky News photo of the aircraft in question. It's apparently a Hong Kong Government Flying Service L2 Puma........

Acording to a well know aviation expert (who was wheeled out of a wardrobe, dusted down and kickstarted), the cause was possibly a navigational error due to fog. The aircraft was flown 120 miles offshore to miss a school when fuel ran a bit short. The crew were winched into the sea. :8

Seriously though, hugely relieved to hear that everyone is safe. :)

[TiPwEiGhT]

Hats off to the crew!

TiP

[TipCap]

Having been around the North Sea for more years than I would admit to, I am so pleased that everyone came out of this unfortunate accident OK. I was flying today and there was poor vis around the Central part of the North Sea. The most important thing is that they are all alive. We have to thank whoever you believe in for that

[Rotorchic]

Glad all are safe

[mini]

"Great news, all ok"

All that needs to be said right now. :ok:

[Aser]

I can only say... :D:D:D

Best regards
Aser

[malabo]

They beat the odds to get everyone out and into rafts on a dark night, my congrats to all. Aircraft stayed upright in 2-3 m waves, so another big plus there.

Lots of talk of the benefit of Jigsaw, but apart from reporting back that the aircraft was floating and didn't have a tailboom, exactly what else did they do? Seems to me the workboat picked everyone up out of the rafts.

So EASA grounds the EC155, nobody wants the 76C++ until they solve the PHI crash, and now the EC225 does its best imitation of a GOM R44. Just what are we safe to fly in?

[Cwhizz]

Well done to crew, pax and rescue services. Good to hear all ok.

[Aser]

Off-topic
Malabo, can you give a reference for the 155 grounding?

Regards
Aser

[malabo]

EASA Airworthiness Directives Publishing Tool (http://ad.easa.europa.eu/)


# 2009-0035-E

[TRC]

Just caught up with this.....

Well done to all involved.

It'll be interesting to find out what happened, but I'm very glad that all ended well.

[tistisnot]

What tosh you speak. The UNS-1D on the EC155 has a software glitch, the S76 in general, not the S76C++ alone may have a problem with windscreen, and the Puma successfully carried out the mitigating safety procedures for flight in a rotorcraft operating in hostile conditions. Scare-mongerer!

[Camper Van Basten]

and now the EC225 does its best imitation of a GOM R44. Just what are we safe to fly in?

You're safe to fly in the EC 225, it did exactly what it says on the tin. If tonights events don't prove that to you, you shouldn't be flying at all.

And while we wait for the investigation as to why this accident happened, I'm happy to applaud the crew, passengers and rescue team who got through a very testing experience without any loss of life.


Good work fellas. :D

[unstable load]

Just woke up on the other side of the world and had a shock from the BBC then got on here and feeling much better now.

Well done to all involved! It goes to show that dedicated cover is an expensive toy to pay for until you need it.

[DeltaFree]

:ok: Well done to all involved, a happy resolution to a potential disaster. I am curious to know though. Why did only 3 get winched? Worsening weather, downwash affecting the dinghy? Both mentioned but what was the reason? So a rescue boat did the rest, how? Was it the notorious Dacon scoop? Would the outcome have been quite as satisfactory if there had been a bigger swell? I don't like too much "what if"ing, but is tonight's great result always repeatable? :confused:

[Camper Van Basten]

I believe the three that were airlifted back were in one liferaft, the other fifteen picked up by boat were in another. It will all become clearer in the coming days and weeks.

[rotorrookie]

Does anyone know how the weather conditions where like?
perhaps another lightning strike like in 1995 with the Bristow Puma...?????

[SASless]

Where's the eye witness that heard the aircraft sputtering as it plunged to earth barely missing that school house ShyT mentioned? If the auto pilot was engaged we must consider tail icing as the cause....right?

[leading edge]

The aircraft is a nice shiny new EC225 leased by Bond from ERA in Lake Charles Louisiana.

[Daysleeper]

The aircraft is a nice shiny new EC225

Not any more it isn't :hmm:

[the beater]

BBC reporting that in the next half-hour they will have an expert on to explain what happened. Wonder who that will be, possibly the usual suspect?
I do hope so. What's the odds on their explanation involving incorrectly set flaps? Or a faulty AHRS/drag damper interface cable causing overheating of the gascolator?
Glad to hear they missed the school though.

[on21]

I've just seen the expert. He was probably an expert in 1952, did anybody else notice he nearly said anti G suit! Quality

[MyTarget]

:D:D:D well done to the crew and the rescue services!

[Brom]

Expert? Really... who dug him up?

[Max Shutterspeed]

Just watching the media. The same skills used as the Hudson River Airbus, apparently...

Good to see the crew are heroes for narrowly avoiding the nearby school full of children playing outside:ok:

[OffshoreHeli]

The Sky News expert stated that we have auto hover in the Pumas because he did when he was in the Forces flying Sea Kings. Doh!:ugh:

[MyTarget]

Its not Crab is it!:}

[Droopy]

Obviously well done all round, but looking at the TI recording I'd have to dispute the 2-3 metre sea report; looks pretty much flat calm to me.

[[email protected]]

No, my wife's too titty to be a preacher:) (with apologies to the Two Ronnies and their spoonerism sketch):ok:

Good result all round - nice FLIR footage.

[whoateallthepies]

Crab
does that make you a shining wit? (Sorry, couldn't resist it).

As someone currently on 225s I wait with bated breath to see what put them in the North Sea.

Meanwhile congratulations to the crew and to the rescue services. Good job.

[HeliCraig]

Seems like an expertly well done job by all involved. Well done, and all the best to crew / pax / emergency services. :ok:

Be interested to know how The AAIB / Bond will get the machine back. I presume if it hasn't yet sank they will lift it onto a boat? If it has sank, does anybody know how they will go about getting it back up?

[HeliCraig]

Anyone who may or may not be out that way know if it is still floating now?

[ROTORVATION]

Happen to know the Co-Pilot very well, we learnt to fly together in the mis 90's at Liverpool, then he worked for me for a brief period to relieve the excess workload I was suffering from in 2007. A top bloke, and someone you would want around you in a tight situation!

I'll be up to Aberdeen to have a pint with you soon mate!

[offshore_taxidriver]

Northsound radio reported this morning that a stricken 'Sea Puma' was down in the North Sea :ugh:....... The spoilers probably didn't auotmatically deploy whilst attempting to land......:rolleyes:

[AAKEE]

EC225, MTOW about 10.300-10.500kg ?

So without payload and perhaps low on fuel 6-7tons?

We had one Superpuma ditch in sweden 2005, it floated for almost one whole day until it was lifted. The floats seems to keep the air so I guess it would continue to float for a long time, at least as long as the sea wont turn it upside down.

[leading edge]

Mutt

Probably about 14,000 lbs empty + return fuel not used or somewhere around there anyway.

[K48]

Well there could have been a school of fish hurt... Sky missed that opportunaty.....:E

Congrats to the crew..! Proves all that training is on track...

[TRC]

Well, the TV reports couldn't use their full repertoire of air crash adjectives this time, but I noticed that at least one station managed to get 'plunge' into their headlines.

Again, well done to all.

[jemax]

Good job by all, especially at night.

Just thinking on a what would I do basis, if conducting an ARA they would have been at 300ft and would have completed Finals checks, hence landing gear would be down.

Procedure for water landing would be gear up floats inflated. So if time was of the essence what would be the implications if any of firing the floats with gear down. Would it be imperitive to get gear up before firing the floats. Or would it be feasable to raise the gear once the floats have inflated.
Also what actually are the implications of landing on water with gear down, other than drag on the water.

Once again good job by all the pilots, safety crew and pax

[jock04]

Sky News :ugh:

In one sentence it's 3 crew, 15 pax, next sentence it's 2 crew 16 pax. Great start!
"....could ultimately be a criminal investigtion....."



Ex navy pilot thinks "it was probably mechanical"

BP head of flying ops apparently speaking to Sky at 11.30 GMT


Glad all are safe & well

[coalface]

Jemax,

Floats can be inflated with gear up or down on the AS332/EC225. Some will argue that gear down in the water may help with stability but I can't see it making a material difference.

I will be interested to see if the crew inflated the floats before hitting the water or if they were inflated by the automatic inflation system on contact with water.

Shame the tail boom broke off as it will have sunk and that is where the CVR/FDR is located. Hope the weather stays calm enough over the next few days to recover the aircraft and tailboom.

Best wishes to the crew who will be going through lengthy debriefings by all and sundry.

[Horror box]

Just thinking on a what would I do basis, if conducting an ARA they would have been at 300ft and would have completed Finals checks, hence landing gear would be down.

Procedure for water landing would be gear up floats inflated. So if time was of the essence what would be the implications if any of firing the floats with gear down. Would it be imperitive to get gear up before firing the floats. Or would it be feasable to raise the gear once the floats have inflated.
Also what actually are the implications of landing on water with gear down, other than drag on the water.

Wow - way too much going through your head in a situation!!:}
If i remember correctly, and it was a little while ago now, on the Puma you could certainly fire the floats with the gear down, without any drama. In fact chances are that is exactly what you would do. When shuttling around our procedure is with the gear remaining down, so in the event of a ditching you are probably not going to take it up. I don't remember the procedure even involving raising the gear before ditching in the Puma, but I maybe wrong. Certainly in the S92 SOP's you leave the gear well alone. It states that operation of the gear (up or down) can damage the floats, although you are not supposed to inflate the floats until on the water, so leave well alone. So answer - probably not imperative to get the gear up. Raising gear while floats inflated - i would advise against it. Implications of landing on water, gear down - few. Yes a bit more drag, but probably not a huge amount, and the main wheels are aft of the CG (hopefully!), so shouldn't cause any pitch fwd issues. Actually may even stabilise things a bit.

[whoateallthepies]

Who is "Capt. Pete Thomas", wheeled out by Sky as an "expert"?

He is described as "ex-Navy". How much North Sea/ 225 flying has he done?

He shares with us his "gut feeling" about what happened. How dare he. I hope Rotorheads who know him will make him feel suitably embarrassed.

[turbinemonkey]

The dive support vessel CSO Wellservicer is currently standing by to possibly salvage the "ditched" aircraft, which is still floating at the moment but now upside down. Apparently an expert is due to fly out to the vessel to assist.

[TRC]

Who is "Capt. Pete Thomas", wheeled out by Sky as an "expert"?

Can't answer that, but if he is ever on Mastermind his specialist subject would be 'The Bloody Obvious'.

He is quoted here (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Helicopter-Ditches-In-North-Sea-Near-BP-Oil-Rig-Pilot-Made-Good-Decision-To-Land-On-Water/Article/200902315225650?lpos=UK_News_News_Your_Way_Region_8&lid=NewsYourWay_ARTICLE_15225650_Helicopter_Ditches_In_North _Sea_Near_BP_Oil_Rig%3A_Pilot_Made_Good_Decision_To_Land_On_ Water):

"Capt Thomas added that while he did not want to speculate on causes, there must have been good reason for putting the craft down on the sea"


and about the pilot:


"He would have utilised the whole crew"

What - the co-pilot as well?

Wonderful.

Just found this from him:

"It was a controlled ditching - more controlled than the recent Hudson River landing.
"It was an informed decision."

So the Hudson ditching was neither under control or an 'informed decision'.

Eh?

[joechill1888]

As I write an expert on SKY is demonstrating what probably happened with a Lego chopper.

I kid you not

[teeteringhead]

Hey ShyTorque .... you don't moonlight for the Daily mail do you?? ;)

[rondun]

As I write an expert on SKY is demonstrating what probably happened with a Lego chopper.

Ah, but it's not just any Lego helicopter.

It's one made by his son Jack and is "almost identical to a Super Puma."

It has the same "red things" to take the ice away and a modified door so it's easier to get in and out.

[Firefly01]

Congrats to all involved in the safe rescue of a potentially disasterous event. :D

[ShyTorque]

Hey ShyTorque .... you don't moonlight for the Daily mail do you??

I'm open to all offers..

I've even got two Airfix models - I could hang them up in the background while I'm being interviewed on TV. Mind you, one's of the Scharnhorst and the other is a Wellington bomber... ;)

[heli-cal]

Perhaps the Lego tailboom detached, hence SKY's graphic reconstruction. :8

When Sky conduct accident investigation's with Lego helicopters, laugh, when the AAIB do it, worry! :}

[offshore_taxidriver]

The dive support vessel CSO Wellservicer is currently standing by to possibly salvage the "ditched" aircraft


The Wellservicer is indeed being used to salvage the aircraft, as it was carrying out work for BP in the area. Apparently the gear is down and there were plans to lift the aircraft onto deck by putting slings and shackles around the gear. I think that plan may have changed and it is preferable for the helicopter to sink in order for divers to properly secure the aircraft with slings in order to prevent further damage when lifting.

[R44-pilot]

STATE OF THE ART RECONSTRUCTION!

Super Puma Reconstruction. (http://s534.photobucket.com/albums/ee347/spidey692003/SUPER PUMA RECONSTRUCTION/?action=view&current=CIMG1286.flv)

P.s watch it all the way through..... :}

[K48]

Isn't the salvage process to lift by crane onto deck by rotor head if still upright..??

I hear the tail is missing... Any real info from a Bondite?

Guys, the media is the way it is. It's always crap but is there any need to get so emotional about it....? You have to ask what if one of us had been called up? All the media want is someone to talk to.... chill.. ... :zzz:zzz:

[jamier]

Hi all

Just to say great job by the crew and glad everyone got off safely my dad is offshore in the irish sea/morecambe bay area so each time i hear about something like this happening it hits a little closer to home.

Question ive got is what is JIGSAW?

Thanks

Jamie

[offshore_taxidriver]

Isn't the salvage process to lift by crane onto deck by rotor head if still upright..??



Well seawater adds a fair bit of weight to the lift so I am not sure if the rotor head could cope with the stress. If anyone has seen the video of G-TIGK being salvaged.... it wasn't very dignified!

[HeliComparator]

Flight Man Supplement 14 (Flotation gear) says " Emergency ditching is authorised with the landing gear extended or retracted"

Apparently it was floating upside down for a while (minus tailboom) whilst they spent 5 hours carrying out a risk assessment on recovery (you can't be too careful you know), now its sunk.

HC

ps - now know it didn't sink yet!

[diginagain]

Jamier, some background info on JIGSAW is at Bond Offshore | Corporate Case Study | Energy Digital (http://www.execdigital.co.uk/Energy/Bond-Offshore-_6528.aspx)

[T4 Risen]

I know BALPA are looking for volunteers to become a media contact that they can call on in just these events...would make alot more sense to have somebody currently flying either type or environment to comment instead of getting the "experts" involved......

Any info on possible cause at all??

T4

[ElcRico]

Does anyone have a link to an official government website where I can view a report on this event. I haven't had much luck finding anything.

Thanks in advance

[darrenphughes]

Preliminary probably isn't published yet. It's only been 1 day since the event.

[ElcRico]

Thanks darrenphughes,

Do you know where it would be posted when a report is ready?

[ElcRico]

Thanks helimutt

[TRC]

ElcRico

Eventually, the AAIB will issue an accident bulletin.

They might issue an interim if there is something important to report before then.

Air Accidents Investigation: Home (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/home/index.cfm)

[Camper Van Basten]

The BBC have kindly let this expert give his views...

BBC NEWS | Scotland | North East/N Isles | 'Nobody likes helicopter flights' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7899579.stm) :rolleyes:


"I've been in several choppers that have been flying along normally and then you hear a sudden noise and everybody looks round wondering 'what was that?'. The next minute the chopper drops a couple of hundred feet.

:mad:

[coalface]

Local paper reporting passengers as saying;

"We thought it was just a hard landing until the water started pouring in"

Sounds as though there was no warning given to the passengers.

Is there any information yet as to whether this was a controlled ditching or an unintentional descent into the water?

[The Governor]

That comment could also mean they likened the landing to hard landings they had experienced in the past as they would undoubtably have in their time travelling to and from the platfroms. I would imagine the similarity ended as it got wet.

Doesn't necessarilty mean no warning was given. However, until clear evidence is received it is useless to speculate on areas where errors may or may not have been made.

Don't jump to the most exciting conclusion or you;re doing the same job as the experts you deride on TV.

The reason they don't get people who know what they are talking about is current North Sea pilots don't jump onto the TV and start blathering and speculating when they would rather wait and get the actual information in good time when a report is produced in the cold light of day. In that way we can all learn lessons and make offshore flying safer.

[Brilliant Stuff]

Congratulations to the crew!!!! Well Done!! :D:D:D:D

[SASless]

If the media is looking...I am available.

After all....I have an opinion on everything...and am usually well un-informed thus suited for the task.

Where's the makeup room?:E

[diginagain]

coalface, given the media's record on selected reporting, it would be all too easy for the local rag to leave out a statement from one of the pax along the lines of "The pilot made a 'brace, brace, brace' call on the PA....", wouldn't it?

Well done to all involved, from someone with a vested interest in getting home safely next week. Lets wait for the professionals to tell us what happened, eh?

[Tamazi]

Further to a couple of earlier postings - I was yet again gobsmacked by the GMTV "girlie" reporter who managed in three sentences to plunge and plummet as well as liken the incident to the Hudson River Airbus! What ARE they like!

[malabo]

Brilliant Stuff Congratulations to the crew!!!! Well Done!!

Er, yes for the actions after they were bobbing around in the dark ocean phase. For what happened before I'll hold my applause until we have more information. No briefing to the passengers doesn't help make the ditching sound like a planned event. Let's wait and see whether it was CFIT or not, and if it was CFIT then there is a whole other world of technology and SOP's and training to analyze before pasting it on the pilots.

If all that money, two pilots, gadgets and gizmos, fancy EFIS displays, EGPWS, don't help keep it out of the water, then why spend 30 mil on one? If the selling point of an aircraft is how well it floats on the surface after it goes into the water, then I suggest that the manufacturers have gone in the wrong direction. I'll take the one that doesn't end up in the water, thank you. Yeah, the old 61 could bob pretty good too.

[gizmocat]

Granted, but the 61 was specifically designed to do that, was it not?

[darrenphughes]

No briefing to the passengers doesn't help make the ditching sound like a planned event.

Who said there was no briefing to the passengers? Someone paraphrasing a media reporter? Not very solid now, is it?

[Horror box]

And it has started.............stop the clock!!!!!

[newfieboy]

I thought the CBC here in Canada had it about right, then they went on to describe the aircraft as the same as Cougar use out of St Johns, last time I looked Cougar were S92. Ive been in remote camp for last 5 weeks so maybe Cougar switched back to Puma;s since I left home. gotta love the media:D:D Not as amusing as Skye with their lego variant though, thats just classic........

[T4 Risen]

i missed the lego land enactment.....dont suppose anyone has a utube link???:ok:

[TRC]

newfieboy

I think that Cougar is the name given to the military version of the 332 - the 535. :8

So they were sort of right. All the same family - ish.

[obnoxio f*ckwit]

I assume this use of the 'Super Puma' tag doesn't mean they're ceasing use of the Super Puma (332) but of the Super Puma MKII+(225)


As I'm working tomorrow, I think you may be right!

[GKaplan]

TRC,
I think newfieboy was refering to the Cougar company (here (http://www.cougar.ca/)), not to the aircraft type...
and it's 532, not 535 ;)

[TRC]

You're right about the 535/532 - sorry :\

[EESDL]

Well done one and all for a great evac!

[CARLOS82]

Hello

Congratulations for the crew:ok: and the SAR:ok: teams. Good job.
"That others may live"
Anyone know what is the ditching cause.



FlySafe

[Freewheel]

SAS,

Sounds like you're perfect for the job. They can edit out the bits involving your personal knowledge of the subject.

Whirls, does makeup need the compact, the trowel or the shovel?

[papa68]

I now no longer need to read PPRuNe in regard to this thread. This informative video has it all covered.

P68:ok:

[SASless]

FW....you plainly have not met Whirls. She keeps several cosmetic makers working two shifts.

She is kinda like that Tammy Faye Baker lady....when they took off her make up one day...they found Jimmy Hoffa!

[Whirlygig]

Somebody is asking for a thick ear :}

As for armchair experts? Well, I used to be a pert so I could do the job. Maybe the crew need a PR guru (I'm cheaper than Max Clifford).

Well done guys :ok:

Cheers

Whirls

[leading edge]

TRC

AS332 L2 Civil = AS532 Military

EC225 Civil = EC 725 Military

Cougar = company in Canada using S-92s to fly to the Hibernia Field

Cougar = name given to AS532 (but I don't think its given to the EC725)

[Freewheel]

Whirls,

As a CPL, you're overqualified.


SAS,

Could Amelia Earhart be found after your first appearance?


To divert briefly to topic for a moment (who'da thought!) - For all souls to have survived shows that whatever went wrong, something went right too.

[Gunship]

Apparently it was floating upside down for a while (minus tailboom) whilst they spent 5 hours carrying out a risk assessment on recovery (you can't be too careful you know), now its sunk.


Not according to the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/feb/20/scotland-helicopter-crash) ..

Initially kept upright by large flotation bags which inflated on impact, the helicopter overturned yesterday afternoon. Bond suspended the recovery operation last night and lashed the aircraft to a supply vessel, Caledonian Vision, hoping to resume efforts this morning.

[HeliComparator]

Gunship - it seems I believed one too many rumours! The aircraft is still floating upside down - pictures on the telly this morning.

HC

[Brilliant Stuff]

Sorry Malabo , but I am an optimist and I used to work for Bond a long time ago and I know people who work for Bond now which tells me they have very good training. What ever the problem was which had them end in the drink they must have done something right in order to land the helicopter safely in the drink and then get everyone out safely. Though I am sure that the pax will have been a huge help since they are after all well prepared for such an unlucky incident and always mindful of the dangers.

Therefore I stand by my comment. Well Done chaps!

Lets wait for the AAIB to do they stuff.

[skadi]

Cougar = name given to AS532 (but I don't think its given to the EC725)

The EC 735 is called Caracal

skadi

[LTNABZ]

Perhaps to be taken with a pinch of the briney, but

"Ahighly advanced £135 million initiative, known as Jigsaw and drawn up by the oil industry to improve search and rescue, was said by union representatives to have been abandoned as rescuers battled tough conditions. The majority of the stranded workers were rescued by a standard oil support vessel which had been in the area. Three people were airlifted to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary"

Oilmen didn't realise helicopter was in sea - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article5769633.ece)

[ShyTorque]

I think you lot should stop pestering poor Whirls.

Anyone who knows her realises that you can't look as good as that using makeup alone.

As for the flotation gear.... I think that might be real, too. ;)

[outhouse]

Looking through the thread above, the various responses re the successful ditching and the safe rescue of all concerned plus the usual drifting off subject, I would like to add a little myself.

The basic cause of the incidence is by now known, the debriefing of the crew by the AIB inspectors and the company representatives would have established this and they will now be investigating the detail. The recovery of the airframe will follow and the investigation into any technical cause will become public in time.

As with any similar event, speculation within the public sector normally follows quickly, this may be informed but generally is not, therefore care is needed and it is refreshing that in this case no speculation is presently being voiced.

Time moves on and the safety of North Sea operations gets better, the improvement in equipment and legislation over the years since the beginning in the 1970”s shows in the reduction of incidents of this type. However it dose bring home the nature of the job and the continuing risk that is still a feature of those that fly the line.

Outhouse.

[Overt Auk]

Should anyone be interested, I see that National Geographic are showing a timely re-run of the G-TIGK incident tomorrow at 1300Z

O.A.

[malabo]

Outhouse, you are guilty of what you are preaching against.
".....no speculation is presently being voiced...... Any event resulting in a controlled ditching into a hostile environment resulting in a 100% success and safe recovery of all passengers and crew shows a high skill level and the crew deserve congratulation."

See, you are already speculating that it was a controlled ditching, when in fact the sparse evidence we have so far is to the contrary.

On your last statement, legislation and technology have certainly had the intent and potential to improve safety, but have pilot training and procedures kept up?

[KG86]

The total absence of 'didn't he do well' type of press conference so far, either from the company or the passengers, suggests to me that a 'controlled ditching' might not have been the case.

I have no inside knowledge but, hey, this is a professional pilot 'rumour' network after all!

[rotorspeed]

I must say, I do find it strange that nearly 48 hours after the event, with thankfully all crew and passengers 100% safe and well, there is absolutely no mention or rumour of any cause whatsoever. Somebody must have had a very good idea pretty quickly. There have been lots of plaudits for the crew on this thread, but it would be nice to know what if any mechanical failure they actually had to deal with.

[212man]

I'm sure they could hazard a fair guess, though;)

[FredFri]

The EC 735 is called Caracal


The French Air Force calls it Caracal (there was an internal consultation to chose a name after it entered service) but I am not sure if anybody else does.

As far as I know, even the French Army just calls it the EC725.

[Special 25]

And whats worse than that ................

ITV Teletext Service today


PILOT TOLD TO PHONE WIFE FIRST

The pilot of a North Sea Helicopter which crashed in the North Sea 125 Miles off Aberdeen wanted to call his office before his wife after he was rescued.

"XYZ" asked his rescuers for his employers telephone number so he could let them know what had happened.

When asked if he had phoned his wife he said "I haven't actually", and was promptly told to do so.






Talk about kicking a man when he's down !!! At least we know there can't be anything too serious going on in the world !

[SASless]

First Duty is to your employer in that kind of situation I would think....followed immediately by the call to the Missus....telling her to forget calling the Life Insurance company and boyfriend.

[mad_jock]

The first number I would phone is BALPA emergency number, Second Company then family.

[Geoffersincornwall]

anybody got Max Clifford's number............??????????
:}

[rb2147]

Watched Grampian TV news at 1800. Still no news....!!

[Papa.Mike]

Jeffrey Archer probably still has Max's telephone number. Hi, Geoffers, how's Italy?
P.

[papa68]

Apologies for the thread creep but all this talk of the Caracal warranted a quick search. Check out Caracal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caracal) if your like me and learn what little French you know vicariously through the Eurocopter naming system. Handsome devil the Caracal me thinks...

Now that I think about it, I'd know :mad: all about North American Indians if it wasn't for Bell helicopters.;)

Back to topic, I do think it rather curious that no public acknowledgment of the crews efforts has been forthcoming (apart from within this forum) and the EC225 fleet has not been grounded. Make of that as you will...

Regardless, much good has or will come of it. It will provide a gentle reminder of the inherent dangers involved and give a much needed nudge towards ever improving safety measures such as Jigsaw etc. The MAIN thing of course is the passengers and crew all made it out without loss of life or limb. For that, we should grateful.

P68:O

[SASless]

Papa,

It is the US Army that names all of its helicopters after Native American Nations (PC for Indian Tribes!).

[papa68]

SASless,

You're absolutely correct. Given I flew a Black Hawk for few years, you'd think I would remember. Perhaps I'm trying to block out my time with the ADF.:confused:

Read into that what you will...

P68:O

[Noah Zark.]

I'm just back from a few days hols in Edinburgh, during which all of this drama unfolded. As already said, very well done to the crew and rescuers.
What really chocked me off was that as the event became less and less of a disaster, the t.v. companies were getting more and more desperate for an angle on it, and yesterday one of the regional companies actually had the widow of a Piper Alpha victim, against a backdrop of footage of Piper Alpha as it burned, asking her what this latest incident made her feel like.
How sick is that? :yuk:

[nbl]

Where are the CVR/FDR/HUMS ( or whatever it is called in this a/c ) fitted?
Hopefully not the tail boom!

[zalt]

The CVR & FDR are in the tailboom.

[the beater]

Earlier on in the thread it was stated that the CVR/FDR are in the tailboom which, presumably is on the sea bed. It surely can't be that difficult to recover though, there must be ROVs or divers that can operate at that depth. The name of the captain is now public knowledge as he has been named by the newspapers.

[outhouse]

Malabo,
I have edited my post to remove the untimely speculation that I included. Regarding the training question, I do feel that the type and quality of training provided to flight crews has improved over the years, the use of simulation has allowed a greater exposure to crews and a chance to experience situations that previously were not possible in the training environment. Has it kept up with today’s needs, I leave others to answer that one.
Outhouse.

[HeliEng]

MSN news are now reporting that the aircraft hit something in the fog:

Crash copter 'hit something in fog' - , - Latest news & weather forecasts - MSN News UK (http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/article.aspx?cp-documentid=14426364)

[212man]

That'll be the water I guess......:

[Aser]

I think a long time ago there was another 225 ditching in Malaysia...?
I remember something about an hyd. leak into the cockpit...

CAN'T FIND THE THREAD :ugh:

Regards
Aser

[212man]

aser, that was a 332L2 with a hydraulic fire.

[JimL]

Mitchaa,

Far too many assumptions there.

Jim

[vee_why]

The press have now named one of the pilots involved, including his address.

[HeliEng]

Another report from BBC:

BBC NEWS | Scotland | North East/N Isles | Helicopter survivor recalls crash (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/7903194.stm)

[the beater]

Why would the CVR part of the CVFDR be of no use? The voice recording will be of what was actually said rather than what the pilots recall being said during what must have been a stressful experience. It may also be of use to determine other info such as engine and rotor speeds. It's also possible that the hums data may be corrupted; how 'crashworthy' is the hums system?

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

I think the fact that on the 4th day after the event all EC225s are still flying as normal and AAIB/Type Certificate holder on scene and on the case it is a fair assumption to rule out a mechanical failure!!!!!

Listening/reading to all eyewitness accounts I for one have not lost any faith in the machine I operate for the moment.

This is not just about rumours, its about making a valued judgement to continue as normal pending the outcome of the inquiry.

The HUMs system has done a fairly robust job in erradicating in-service rotable component failures. It is downloaded and analysed after each and every flight.

Whatever happend that night the crew should be commended for their safe and successful evacuation in what all of us who operate over the sea know... is the ultimate nightmare scenario!!

I just hope the aim is not to BLAME.....but to learn as much as we can from the incident.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Am I alone left wondering how it can be that 4 days after the event, with 2 walking talking flight crew, the deafining silence from across the runway at ABZ is utterly astounding.

I suspect that the Management of that AOC are doing their utmost to "protect/hide" someone or something.

I have no idea who/what it can be that they are trying to protect. But I will tell you that its is not me, the 500 other flight crew who are beating up the HMRs across the NS at night in ****e WX, or the passengers that we have been flying over the past 4 days.

We all have a moral obligation to release information in interests of other peoples safety.

I fully accept where the crew have been lost that the investigators will at times have a devil of a job coming to the correct conclusions, but in this case they must surely know whether it was a controlled ditching in response to a malfunction....or otherwise.

As they have chosen to remain silent I will reach my own intermidiate conclusions but if it becomes clear they have hidden something for the past 4 days that may impact on my safety, the safety of other crews and our passengers - it is utterly unforgivable.

For the touchy-touchy-feely-feely amongst you who think speaking the unspoken is not fair or right at this time this post is simply not for you.

The truth may be painful....but it will only come out in the end!!!!!

[nbl]

Have BP re-instated flights with the 225?

[griffothefog]

I have crashed an aircraft and walked away when the tail rotor seperated in flight.... It is not a pleasant experience :( Regardless of the cause of this accident when it washes up, the crew and passengers will never be the same again... I suspect most speculators on this thread are fortunate enough NOT to have had the misfortune of a serious accident in their careers..... Spare a thought for the poor bastards that now have and wait for the AAIB report. :ok:

[LTNABZ]

HeliEng posted

"MSN news are now reporting that the aircraft hit something in the fog:

Crash copter 'hit something in fog' - , - Latest news & weather forecasts - MSN News UK (http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/article.aspx?cp-documentid=14426364) "

Speculation of course, but could that have been the tail coming off? Would have possibly felt like an impact. Would also perhaps explain the lack of warning from the crew as they will have been busy trying to stop it spinning round ?

[Special 25]

The EC225 that ditched on approach to the ETAP platform on Wednesday has finally been recovered to a support vessel and will be recovered to Aberdeen harbour shortly. The airframe is then expected to be transferred to Farnborough for a detailed examination.

To my knowledge the tail cone and 'Black Box' has not been located and / or recovered.


Please can we start a new thread on this incident and keep this one clear of all the mud throwing that seems to have swamped the other. This one for all evidence and genuine information on this important event please.

S25

[the beater]

I'm sure that the investigation team will make the decision to ground these types of aircraft IF and WHEN it becomes apparent that there was a mechanical malfunction that could affect the safe flying of other airframes. Note my use of capitals!
No reputable company would jeopordise the safe operation of their aircraft if this could be better effected by the release of pertinant information.
The AAIB have an excellent reputation worldwide, and this is due, in no small part, to the meticulous manner in which EVIDENCE is used to obtain the facts.

[Big Tudor]

DOUBLEBOGEY
In the Bristow incident that I referred to people were VERY quick to start making statements on the possible reasons (or not) for the accident. They were proved to be VERY wrong. Maybe people have learned from this and would rather verify facts BEFORE they release them. Wrong information can be fatal.

And, for what it is worth, no I don't strap one of EC's finest to my @rse. However, family and friends do on a regular basis and I have more than a passing interest in why this particular accident happened. And with over 20 years in aviation I also have a lot of faith in the AAIB to respond appropriately.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Hi Big Tudor,

I am not sure if you fly at all, forgive me if you do, but the issue is whether the AC let them down. Lets reverse the argument.

I HOPE THE AC DID NOT LET THEM DOWN.

Not because I want to blame the crew.....but because all the movers and shakers up here are peddling the line that we should continue to operate the 225 and the remaining 332 family without a single shred of evidence provided to us that THIS DECISION IS VALID.

Get the point now!

A single line statement woiuld do....hell I'll make one up

WE DO NOT BELIEVE AT THIS TIME THAT IT WAS AN AIRCRAFT AIRWORTHINESS ISSUE.

ENDEX, wait the obligatory period for the AAIB to release a very proper and thorough report in about 1 years time.

[rufus.t.firefly]

Have any of the other operators of this helicopter type issued any statements to existing customers whilst it continues in daily service , inorder to placate the relevant personnel and offshore troops :confused:

[Droopystop]

Double Bogie,

As far as I can asertain, they only recovered the aircraft today and the back of a dive support vessel is not the place to start the investigation. Until there is evidence to justify grounding the fleet, EC nor the operators can justify grounding the aircraft.

Similarly I doubt a type can be grounded on the statements of aircrew, pax and observers. The fact there was no mayday or tannoy brief would indicate the crew were too busy flying to know what had caused their predicament.

[Wizzard]

Mmm... I thought the CVFDR was in the cargo bay and not down the tail boom. Could be wrong though.

Wiz

[the beater]

Ignoring the fact that the pilot was probably a human...
What professional would take off in:
ICING conditions outwith the A/C icing clearance;
areas of known LIGHTNING (or LIGHTENING (sic) activity);
with a forecast that suggested LINE SQUALLS and;
WIND SHEAR, using;
INCORRECT PROCEDURES;
not to mention not taking account of the COLD GAS FLARING;
or the RIG TURBINE EFFLUX

So, that just leaves incapacitation, then. Or birdstrike.

Sorted.

[Oldlae]

I do not understand why the CVFDR is installed in the tailboom, if true. It should be in the hull not in an area which can be detached. The unit should have a underwater beacon attached to aid recovery, so hopefully, it should be found eventually.

[VeeAny]

A couple of thoughts

Some AOC operators have it written in their Ops Manuals that crew are to be quarantined after an accident or incident, this may explain why no one at company seems to know anything.

I had a look and the AAIB special bulletin on G-BLUN took over a month to release, so perhaps a couple of days after the fact is being a bit over optimistic, yes they probably have an idea, but what are they supposed to do ? publish their feelings without much supporting evidence and then get criticised for releasing incorrect information.

Regardless of what actually happened and I have no idea what did, one thing to think about is that although the crew are alive and well and may well make credible witnesses, I was recently on a course with a pilot who put a 10 tonne plus helicopter into the sea, he had the presence of mind to write up what happened while he was in hospital later that day, his was a controlled ditching for a given reason, when they fished it out of the sea what he thought had happened wasn't quite how he recalled it even though he specifically spent the time to write it up. I think that has a lesson for all of us who may be involved in aircraft accidents. In particular with regard to jumping to conclusions (or the lack of them).

I sincerely doubt any North Sea operator with the spotlight on them like this would withhold flight safety information relating to a type the competition operates, there may be communications behind the scenes that no one knows about yet, but it would be good for the guys who have to get in them and fly them to know what they think is going on.

If (big If) there is no communication between the operators, you would imagine they have noticed that this has happened, someone, somewhere must have decided its not a problem for their fleets to keep flying as it would be more than embarassing to find out later there was a flight safety issue and they kept on flying, and yes I am playing devils advocate here, but I don't expect the senior managers of one operator decide whether the others keep on flying, if the others are bothered they would surely stop of their own accord.

And before anyone asks, I have no North Sea experience , and have never flown anything bigger than a 109, I am just trying to look at this with a balanced set of eyes (and perhaps failing).

GS

PS I Wholeheartedly disagree with the media bringing the captains personal life into this, if it is an issue that really is for the AAIB to look at, not them. I am sure that we all have in our personal lives stuff that the whole country has no bloody business knowing about.

[heli-cal]

BBC Radio 4 News just announced that the fuselage has been recovered, and is being sent to Hampshire for the investigation.

[heli49]

The SSCVFDR is located in the tail boom on EC225.
Why ? Eurocopter says in the training manual "Location: Inside tail boom to minimize damage in case of crash"

[flyer43]

Very well put and seconded on all scores. Correct information is far better than knee jerk response, and getting that information can take time.
Most companies have in place a crew quarantine and info management policy to try to avoid the knee jerk answers getting into the media.
Let's hope that some useful info does get released soon, and let's also hope that this thread can stay a little more on track from now on.

[normally watching]

I don't normally post on these types of forums however often an avid reader. So please forgive me to intrude onto this thread with my first post.

In my work I have a fair experience of working along side Bond Offshore and other oil industry helicopter operators, I have had the pleasure of meeting the Captain in question on a number of occasions and found him to be a very polite and courteous guy who I feel is thoroughly professional.

I find it abhorrent that he and his families personal matters have been dished out by the gutterpress, that is a private matter that should remain that way unless the AAIB feel it does somehow be a factor, even then the details need not be wholly public.

I do think that the lack of some form of statement from either the AAIB or Bond is not doing anyone any favours at this time. I realise that it can be best to wait until all areas have been investigated and then release the findings but this incident is attracting a lot of attention.
Articles like the one above about the WX fax does not help the industry, the Pax and relatives of those Pax when they travel using these machines.
I know, like many, that an actual WX report at 1200 does not mean that it will be the same at 1230 or 1300. Not everyone who is reading these "news" stories will comprehend that and the inaccuracy of the article: "conditions were CLEAR" a forecast using the past tense and the statement to the effect that forecasts are produced by rigs and not ACTUAL reports as is the case.

The end of the article is an inference that Pilots & Crews are under pressure to complete their task despite the WX or other factors that may affect safety. I do know from personal experience Bond and their Pilots do not operate like that nor do Bristow & CHC for that matter (and I'm sure other operators). To the outside world these kind of articles read like the industry is operating with a do it or be damned attitude and screw safety.

The silence speaks volumes, unfortunately the speaking is being done by the ill educated gossip monger's flogging bog paper to be.

Surely after this amount of time there must be a focus for the investigation, even if it's not a single factor. Or if there isn't a focus there can surely be some form of statement "The cause is unclear, All avenues are being investigated we hope to issue a further statement in x days".
Even now on Bonds glossy, image concious, website under their News section there is nothing. Not even a piece to say that there has been an incident but all persons are safe and well and it is being investigated etc. etc.

It really doesn't make the situation look professional. There can surely be some unspinned, unbull****ted, short, simplistic statement to be put out by now.

My drivel is over. Whatever **** happened out there, well done to all involved to bring this to a happy conclusion.......well, maybe not the hull underwriters happy conclusion:eek:

[gulliBell]

It's such a shame that the ship went under. Surely, considering it was so close to a platform, and the calm sea, someone in authority could at least have had the presence of mind to have it towed to the platform and lifted out of the sea with a crane. Or at least secured upright on the water by the crane until they'd been through their hazard analyse's.

Anyway, that aside. I wonder what the PF/PNF procedures are for arrival at the bottom of an instrument approach in poor weather. Does the PF hand over to the PNF before the minima if the PNF calls visual, and remain on instruments until landing. Thus the PNF for the approach becomes the PF for the landing. Or once visual is called, do both pilots look outside from that point until landing?

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Hi NW,

I agree with everything you have said!!!

SENIOR PILOT I am Happy to see this thread "pruned" back to provide sensible discussion of the real debate which is all I was interested in, but may I ask why the post about the Pilots family remains on this thread?

It is irrelevant, and makes us all look callous, uncaring, and unproffessional and it is no excuse to claim it is already in the press TWO WRONGS DO NOT MAKE A RIGHT.

Could I ask you to please review that post and consider its removal out of respect to the crewmember involved.

Thanking you.

[bigglesbutler]

It's such a shame that the ship went under.

The airframe was recovered to aberdeen, only the tail sank.

Does the PF hand over to the PNF before the minima if the PNF calls visual, and remain on instruments until landing. Thus the PNF for the approach becomes the PF for the landing. Or once visual is called, do both pilots look outside from that point until landing?

On a genuine ARA day, ie down to minima our training is for one pilot to remain on instruments until decision point and beyond until PF is propery visual, incase of going back into IMC. North Sea pilots know how it can change within a couple of hundred meters so they will play it safe if there is any doubt.

Si

[gulliBell]

That being the case then, if as it turns out the PIC happens to be the one to remain on instruments until the 2IC lands visually, how many PIC's out there are entirely comfortable not looking outside, at least to some extent, to see what's going on whilst the 2IC is landing the aircraft in poor viz? Or in practice is there a scan of some sort going on here where the PIC is looking outside to monitor the approach, and cross referencing to the instruments?

Surely with the proximity of obstacles at the platform, and the risk of departure from optimal approach profile due to poor seeing conditions (depth perception and illusions), wouldn't it be more prudent for both pilots to be looking outside? As a NFP PIC in these circumstances I'd be very uncomfortable arriving at the platform without actually observing what's going on outside.

[Special 25]

Guillibell


I would point out that the North Sea at night in limited viz is a very difficult environment to operate in. As PIC, I am quite happy 'looking in' until the very last minute. Trying to take over visually too early with inadequate or limited visual references is a very testing experience. At those times, it is the crew member on instruments that will be the one to ensure the aircraft isn't sinking towards the water or losing airspeed. You certainly won't pick up those cues looking outside.

[Horror box]

I would point out that the North Sea at night in limited viz is a very difficult environment to operate in. As PIC, I am quite happy 'looking in' until the very last minute. Trying to take over visually too early with inadequate or limited visual references is a very testing experience. At those times, it is the crew member on instruments that will be the one to ensure the aircraft isn't sinking towards the water or losing airspeed. You certainly won't pick up those cues looking outside.

Totally agree. I am quite sure that most of us (myself included) who fly offshore at night have become SD due to trying to fly with visual references too early. Results of this can be varied usually we simply recognise straight away, and revert to instruments. What needs to be established is that it is not always entirely clear cut as to why or when you look up. Yes we fly to MAPT, but very often you are visual before, and we are all different and have differing abilities, and then the weather varies. So many variables make this a judgement call very often. Procedures differ from operator to operator, but the human condition is always involved. It is very difficult to make a 100% solid procedure here, especially when hand over of control may or may not be required. Recognition of the condition of SD is the key, but in practice very difficult, as it has a habit of creeping up on you. There is always the go-around option, and we hopefully all do this - no shame there. This is a simplistic view though. Throw in some more factors. There IS commercial pressure - FACT. There are cultural issues in the industry. this may be the simple perceived innocent comments from the customer, supposedly in jest about the operator. Weather reporting from the customer can be unreliable, we all know that. Add some fatigue, take away the nice daylight, put some loud noise in, have some unnecessary chatter in the background on 2 radios slowing down x-cockpit comms, add in a caution light, maybe something in the water with a light on. I could go on and on. My point being is that it is a very difficult environment, and there are constant distractions from all directions, many of which unpredictable and nothing the crew can do anything about. There is a lot going on in the cockpit. So whatever the cause of this was, blaming is not the answer. The crew are highly trained, and certainly did not plan to end up in the situation they did. None of us are risk takers. Those who are pointing fingers are showing a serious naivety of offshore operations. Statements about the lack of a warning and a mayday are frankly ridiculous. 500m from a rig at 300ft in fog, you dont have much time to brief the pax, put out a mayday, set 7700 then sort the aircraft out. Priority is always FTFA - fly the f###ing aircraft first, all else after. You may get to check the RADALT and call flare if you are lucky. There will be no single factor here. As with most accidents it will be a very long chain, and the poor crew are just a part in that chain, and unfortunately for them the most public part.

[bigglesbutler]

One point to add for those outside the north sea, is that the pilot flynig isn't always the Captain (PIC). If the rig (dependant on wind and other obstacles) is on the left then the Co-Pilot will do the talk down then actual landing with the captain flying the approach. This can be changed dependant on the experience of the crew, but would mean a more complicated hand over at the "bottom" (decision point).

I will echo HB about the fact we don't take chances or risks as we are taking people to work, not saving lives (i.e. SAR).

[Limpopo]

Bond have started flying their EC225s again today. Doesn't appear to be operating on a BP flight looking at their flight schedule on the web.

[mark one eyeball]

I flew the Super Puma when it first came on the North Sea in the early 80's.
Designed for 145kt cruising speed.....it took a long time for everyone concerned to realise that this helicopter, it's gearbox and transmission train was being overly stressed....many gearbox changes later they reduced its speed.

I remember many incidents and accidents then with this type and unfortunately the incidents and accidents continue.

Flying the AS332L was not always an enjoyable experience for me as we lost one quite early due to the inclined hinge pin coming loose and the inclined driveshaft cover opening up into the tail rotor, amazingly no-one was killed (G-TIGD).

In my view the Super Puma on the North Sea has had a great deal of luck.

I would not say that this helicopter has had a sound history of safety, look back and see for yourself how many serious incidents and accidents it has had.

Continued good luck for those who have to fly in it!:(

[Special 25]

Mark One Eyeball

I think that's slightly harsh. I accept you have your doubts and have seen the history of the Super Puma on the North Sea, but as an aircraft type, it really has an exceptionally good track record. I don't think I know of a single type that has entered service without some inherent faults that have been solved with engineering fixes over the following years.

Thats why I think the EC225 was always a good choice for the North Sea, being a further development of an existing proven design, with a solid design pedigree you can trace back to the original Puma in the 70's. The pilots certainly seem to love it and you don't hear many complaints especially when it comes to night flying or landing at Aberdeen in the fog !!

[Droopy]

Weren't the early gearbox problems due to the 332 being thrashed around everywhere at take-off rating [or some similarly high setting]?

[ShyTorque]

I understand the 332 on its introduction, used the same main rotor gearbox as the RAF's HC1 model. The HC1s were not fitted with a torquemeter and limited to 15.5 degrees Collective Pitch for takeoff and hover in temperate climates, with further restrictions in other phases of flight. We seldom had MRG problems (or engine problems with the old Turmo IIIC4, for that matter).

I was informed that the 332s were flying using the equivalent of 16 and 16.5 degrees CP. On hearing this I assumed that the gearboxes were modified to take extra power. We later heard that they weren't.... if that's true perhaps it's not surprising that there were some reliability issues.

[T4 Risen]

I also agree with HB about the added problems of flying ARA's at night in poor vis. The only part i do not agree with is the commercial pressure. I have never felt any commercial pressure to operate a flight. If i do not want to go then I dont go...that is my decision as a captain, and that is the decision they pay me to make. Yes i will explore ever avenue before deciding to delay/cancel a flight but will not be pushed to make a decision based on a commercial issue.

and with regard to the safety of the super puma.......yes it has had its fair share of incidents/accidents over the years and teething troubles at the begining are the same for every new aircraft entering a role. Look at the number of flights/hours flown since they first came into service on the north sea compared to the number of accidents incidents and i think you will find it a very safe machine..........if it wasnt i would not be too keen on strapping one to my butt each day and flogging around the north sea in all types of weather day or night!!!:)

[Horror box]

T4 - just to add to and clarify my point earlier about commercial pressure. I am certainly pleased that you do not feel the commercial pressure, but some do, and I must point out that I did not mean specifically the crew. Commercial pressure is probably felt more in the hangar and in the ops rooms than us stick monkeys. Fortunately I think these days the companies do a good job of protecting the flying crews, but I have seen many cases of commercial pressure manifesting itself in ops, even recently, especially now in financially difficult times. Incorrect lighting on decks or incorrect deck design as an example. We may be used to it, but we all know it is wrong, and commercial pressure is for management to get the job done anyway without making too much of a fuss. It doesn't normally present itself as a big issue, as we know/hope the oil company will sort it eventually, but as I said everything is a very long chain.

[T4 Risen]

fair point...:ok:

[rotorrookie]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3487/3301886068_293edbac82.jpg?v=0

[Hiduly Damper]

Sorry for a timely reminder here but some people are suggesting SAR crews will risk all beyond that of a transport pilot because lives are at risk. Returning home to our families is as important as anybody else.
While we will push further then CAT allows we will not risk our lives needlessly. If we can help we will push ourselves to the limit to do so. Beyond that your on your own. I personnaly have a wife and 2 kids to think about!

Well done to the crew and passengers of the 225. Regardless of reason for being there you made the job of the SAR crews on scene 100% easier.

[heli-cal]

http://i666.photobucket.com/albums/vv29/helixpteron/Heli_491374a.jpg

http://i666.photobucket.com/albums/vv29/helixpteron/_45495762_super_puma_offshore_46628.jpg

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Looks like they made a real effort to "Load" that carefully onto the boat.

[skadi]

The belly of this unlucky heli with all the dents looks like the impact on the water was pretty hard? Or am i wrong?

skadi

[windowseatplease]

Errr, can someone explain the last picture??

[gulliBell]

No point trying to rebuild it now :ugh: bet the insurance company was happy with the recovery effort :{ might as well go buy a new one.

[eivissa]

Errr, can someone explain the last picture??

Looks like the rear part of the aircraft where the tailboom seems to have separated from the fuselage.

[HeliComparator]

Errr, can someone explain the last picture??

Its the point where the tailboom detached, ie where the composite intermediate structure is attached to the aluminium tailboom (frame 9000 IIRC). Looks like a few score marks on the side, but surely they were acquired during the recovery.

HC

[Droopystop]

Have they found the rest of the tail boom yet?

[SASless]

It looks like the tail boom snapped off vice being chopped off by the MR blades.

[bigglesbutler]

Iagree with helimutt, the FLIR video shows all five blades intact with the aircraft floating on the sea. All the damage must have been done on recovery or when it rolled over.

Si

[flyer43]

helimutt & bigglesbutler

If you read his response more carefully, I think you should see that is what SASless is implying. "It looks like the tail boom snapped off vice being chopped off by the MR blades."

[Sailor Vee]

No point trying to rebuild it now Don't agree, when I was picking up a stretched C model from Marignane, there was a Kuwaiti 332 brought in after Saddam's crowd had used it for target practice and bulldozer lessons, that was flying again 6 months later! Have you seen the waiting list for new 225s?

[bigglesbutler]

Flyer43 ok point taken, I misunderstood SASless.

[Oldlae]

I am concerned that the tailboom has not yet been found, it is possible that being openended sand has filled it masking the underwater locator beacon signals. Don't know what the weather is like there nor the make up of the sea floor.

[normalbloke]

"Errr, can someone explain the last picture??"


"Guv, there appears to be a bit missing"

[ScotiaQ]

The tail boom is due into Aberdeen Harbour this evening.

[malabo]

Oil-canned belly, no damage to the blades, tailboom snapped off, gear was down but aircraft remained upright, floats inflated and still well attached to the fuselage. Since this is PPRUNE and not a court of law, I am free to speculate and don't have to wait for an official report.

My read is a high-speed vertical descent with little forward motion. Kind of what you'd get with a vortex-ring state. Aircraft hits water hard enough to oil-can the belly and snapping the tailboom off. Bug-eyed pilot has the collective up so high the coning of the blades keeps them from whacking the tail. Water sense switches activate the auto float inflation. If the floats had already been inflated before impact you'd likely see one or two torn up. Any forward speed and that turtle-lovin Puma wouldn't have remained upright.

Any passengers booking chiropractor visits?

[Horror box]

Malabo - yes this is a rumor network, and yes you have a right to state your theories, however ill-informed and damaging they may be. You have already proved this on most threads relating to previous helicopter accidents on this forum. I would like to remind you though, that whilst freedom of expression is something we all hold dear, do not forget the damage you comments may cause, and I would urge you to exercise a little restraint in you condemnation at this stage. Journalists readily trawl here and quote in their writings, as do relatives and victims of accidents and you serve to do no good to our industry with your conceited comments. Just my tuppence - and i don't expect you to agree!

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Hi Horror Box,

I see nothing in Malabo's post that sounds like "Condemnation", (I presume you are alluding to condemnation of the crew) the sequence of events he describes could be caused by many things outwith the crews control such as FDCs AHRS type instrument and display failures that would produce a similar result.

When the is so little "Factual" information to be used other than the graphic account that the dammaged aircraft provides itself in the pictures and the stony silence from the Powers that Be people will speculate.

Happily nobody was really injured in the incident so I think we do have some freedom of expression without finger pointing.

I think we call all agree that the tail did not fall off in flight as the result would have been very very different as the CG goes for a ball of chalk and the yaw rate would have torn the AC apart on contact with the water......

We could all be AAIB Investigators if we try hard enough!!!

[Brom]

Water sense switches activate the auto float inflation.

Really? When did Eurocopter fit this to the Puma?

[Tuckunder]

A few years ago, I was the subject of castigation and villification by a a great many so called SAR experts when I was the Commander of a SAR mission that went badly wrong. My character was assassinated and my ability was described as SH1t by so many experts who obviously new me well?? This was at a time when I was beating myself up anyway. My wife banned me from looking at Prune because of the harm it was doing. NO ONE KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED ON WEDNESDAY NIGHT other than the crew and I would guess members of the AAIB. Give these guys a break and if you wish to speculate do it in private rather than hang these guys on at best flimsy evidence for us the illinformed. If this turns out to be crew error then I am very sorry for these guys because we are all human.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

To try and lighten the mood on this thread and stop the SP (Moderator) from fragging me......

SPECULATION!!!

A few years ago a very senior NS Collegue and mentor told me a story of when he was a SAR Pilot (Wessex I think) in the Royal Navy (Join the Navy and Never leave your freinds "behind").

He was called out after a particularly embullient dinner in the mess feeling a bit stuffed on stilton and biccies to a resue on a particularly dark and stormy night.

On arriving overhead the scene he began his winching op getting bumped about by squalls and spray.

About 20 minutes into the job, in total darkness and no visible horizon, he suddenly, and without any warning Barfed up on his own instrument panel. The resulting Unusual Attitude and high state of arousal was apparently nothing in comparison to the fury and disgust of the Engineers when he signed the now vomit stren AC back in at the hangar.

So, back to specualtion, maybe the whole incident was caused by a "Dodgy Prawn" from the ETAP galley (Now thats libbelous!!!!)

DB

[UCLogic]

The Automatic Float Deployment System (AFDS) has been flying on the Super Puma series since 1996, it was around for about a year or so earlier on a limited number of aircraft while under development.
It was a Bristow development which was I think designed after a previous 332 accident whilst shuttling between rigs in bad weather, has been certified for the 332L/L1/L2 & EC225 series and is available for the S76 series. The system is I understand available to be fitted by Eurocopter and Sikorsky if a customer requests it, or as an aftermarket solution from Bristow.
To follow on from Malabo; as far as I know it has an inbuilt time delay to ensure energy attenuation prior to deployment of the floats to prevent them being ripped from the aircraft if they inflate too early.
Who knows if they were deployed by the crew or by the automatic system (be interesting to find out) but by all the evidence it does appear that they deployed correctly by whichever method and were effective in preventing a total catastrophe.

[Special 25]

As you say ......... Most Bond aircraft are fitted with the Bristow system of AFDS, but the 225's are coming with the Eurocopter version of the same. I assume it is fitted under licence but not sure - Its a basically identical system.

Either way, depending on the final outcome and investigation, I am not aware of any aircraft ditching previously, without the floats already inflated. If it were the case that this was an unintentional ditching, and this aircraft remained upright with floats deployed, that would be a huge testament to the system.

[HeliComparator]

but the 225's are coming with the Eurocopter version of the same. I assume it is fitted under licence but not sure - Its a basically identical system.


No, the AFDS mod fitted to Bristow EC225s is the same Bristow mod that is fitted to the 332Ls etc, with a duplex electronics pack that requires at least 2 float switches to operate before firing, and a short delay.

All other 225s with AFDS have Eurocopter's mod which is less clever - a simplex system, and requiring only 1 float switch activated to fire the floats, so a few false activations, and there is no delay between the switch and firing the floats.

HC

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45505000/jpg/_45505851_helitail.jpg

Piccy of the tailboom!!!!

[AndyJB32]

I realise this is a rumour network, but surely it's very niave to expect the company involved to put out an official statement at this point. Less than 72 hours after the incident (post #176), Bond were being criticised for not having issued anything to the general public. Sure the offshore companies have a moral and legal responsiblity to communicate with other users of the aircraft, as well as the aircraft manufacturers, if they discover a safety issue. I'd like to think they also have a moral responsibilty to their employees welfare, which includes not making any statements which may cause them any additional stress at what will be a very unpleasant time for them. At this early stage if Bond were to issue a statement, it would inevitably be very vague due to lack of all the facts as the investiagtion has only just begun. What exactly would this achieve apart from cause speculation due to the lack of any specifics in the statement regarding cause? At this point the AAIB will know at least as much, and probably more, about the incident than the operator. If there is any pressing need for a statement to come out on the issue of aircraft safety, then i'd assume that it would be published immediately by them. I know that if i were involved in any kind of accident i'd appreciate the support of my employers at least until the full facts came out.

[helimutt]

Nothing like having your name in lights!!! :ok:

[SASless]

Andy,

Do you think for one second the company will really support you after an accident? When you find yourself in court defending against a civil proceeding....do you think the "company" will provide "you" legal counsel?

Be realistic here....the "company" will protect you to the extent it protects "it" and not a bit beyond that.

When it comes to accepting liability every company has very rounded shoulders!

[Geoffersincornwall]

SAS - you are so right. I remember one poor sod who had a conversation with his boss along the lines........

"well boss, when do we have the next meeting with our lawyers so that we can discuss my defence?"

"Listen son," said the suited leader of men, "the lawyer we spoke to yesterday is OUR lawyer...... not YOUR lawyer, you need to find your own."

You can imagine the look on his face, to use the expression 'crestfallen' is an understatement to say the least. Until that moment he thought that he was the member of a 'team' and that we were all in it together. Fat chance. If they think you might have screwed up then they're off like a scalded cat and to be honest you can't blame them. It all part of the game but nobody explains that to you when thay pat you on the back and say 'welcome on board'. It's sad though, nonetheless.

G :{

[AAKEE]

I am not aware of any aircraft ditching previously, without the floats already inflatedWe had an AS332 ditch in swedish air force in 2005, they did not deploy the floats until the heli already was down on the water. They hit the sea with high vertical speed, low airspeed and high nose. Tail boom broke of and sank. Heli stayed on surface, did not turn upside down.

[Edit] Haverirapport - HKP 10 - H91 (http://www.helikopterpiloten.se/2008/09/09/haverirapport-hkp-10-h91/) (pic of the heli)

http://www.helikopterpiloten.se/wp-content/plugins/nextgen-gallery/nggshow.php?pid=572&width=&height=&mode=

[AndyJB32]

hello, i think if any off us get to the point where we're in civil court defending our actions, then we had better have our own independent legal cover. However, at the initial stage of an investigation, unless it was clear that i'd messed up, i'd expect some form of support from my work. Even if that support is merely not putting out a statement that may suggest the crews' responsibility for the accident.
Andy

[NorthSeaTiger]

AAKEE , what was the cause of the Swedish incident ?

NST

[SASless]

Andy,

Ye who expects nothing out of life is rarely disappointed!

Hope springs eternal!

Wish in one hand....spit in the other...see which one fills up first!

I have some beautiful waterfront property in Florida to sell you!

Read my post and think about what I said.....they will protect/support you right up to the instant it is no longer in "their" interests....then you can count on dancing your own jig. There are creatures on this planet that will eat their own young to survive....the helicopter industry is no different in that regard.

[ODEN]

NST, the Swedish accident was CFIT

[bast0n]

Wots CFIT?

Can some one publish a list of acronyms used by these forii?

Oh Gosh, now someone's going to ask what an acronym is.:rolleyes:

[bb in ca]

CFIT - Controlled Flight into Terrain
CFIT(W) - Controlled Flight into Terrain (Water)

[Camper Van Basten]

Talking of acronyms, anyone know what EGPWS stands for? :suspect:

[drakkar]

Ground Proximity Warning System

Part of the Terrain Awareness and Warning System, the GPWS function is a function providing alerts for excessive terrain closure rate, inadvertent descents, altitude loss after takeoff, excessive bank angle or pitch attitude as well as excessive descent below an ILS Glide-Slope.

Drakkar

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

I think it means "Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System"

It doesn't just calculate the distance from lumpy bits but speed vector, AC attitude, ROD trends in an effort to "Predict" a potential CFIT (or W).

Andy BJ - I take your point but all of us currently flying over the sea at night believe that to release not even a hint of what might have caused it, despite 2 walking talking crewmembers is unforgivable given their ongoing responsibilites to their existing customers and passengers, their own pilots and the other AOC operators providing similar services.

I have every sympathy for the crew, there by the grace of god an all that....but I think as airman we owe it too all concerned to get at least a statement out...and please do not miss the point here...

EVEN IF IT IS - "WE HAVE ABSOLUTLEY NO IDEA AT THIS TIME"

We can all speculate..I know I have and come up with an interim conclusion,. As intelligent people we owe it to ourselves to evaluate what has happened and consider carefully any immediate response that we may have...I know I have.

Worrying unduly about the state of the crew is not ever in the best interests of the passengers and sets us right back into the dark ages. We all run the risk of having an incident but surely our first and foremost concern must be the ongoing safety of the operation.

I am sorry if it upsets anyone but I think it is total bullsh**t to adopt the wall of silence we are all currently experiencing.

Shame on them and I feel sorry for their PAX who are (as are our PAX) asking the same question every single day at the heliport - WHAT CAUSED IT. The PAX are not idiots, they all say the same thing - WHAT DID THE PILOTS SAY HAPPENED??? It is a shocking indictment of management culture that we cannot answer them!!!

[TipCap]

Fair points DB and Helimutt. Hopefully now AAIB have all the bits and statements etc, something will be said in the not too distant future. Like everyone, I get asked the question, not just by my passengers but by people who know I am "in the trade". All I can respond, is that I don't fly the 225, just the Mk 1's (Yes I know thats a bit of a smoke screen), and that, hopefully we will hear something soon. What more can you say?

[Droopystop]

Double Bogie,

At risk of descending this thread into a downward spiral, please don't assume that all North Sea pilots think the silence is wrong and that the tail didn't come off in flight - (I AM NOT SAYING IT DID OR IT DIDN'T - I DON'T CARE AT THIS STAGE). I am quite happy to give the powers that be time to work it out and tell us when they are ready.

For those of us who fly in that environment, on that type else where and those that maintain it, it is time as professionals to look at all the maybes and do what we can to prevent something similar happening to us. It would be a shame to fixate on only one of the possible causes.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Droopystop,

You need to look at the Tail Rotor blades, smashed beyond repair, caused at a wild guess, by rotating at speed prior to impact with the water!!!!

Nobody is focusing on anything right now cos nobody "Knows" anything other than what can be conjectured from the images we have seen.

I am not an aerdynamic specialist, but if the tail "fell off" inflight I am convinced that the resulting yaw rate, coupled with a massive unfavourable change in the CG (way beyond the limits) would cause a far less favourable outcome than a main fuselgae, sat upright on its floats and the ensuing orderly evacuation.

Whilst this is a rumour network surely it may also accommodate the odd calculated speculation.

Make of what you see.......what you will.

In my considered view it hit the sea intact. The question remains what made it hit the sea?

The silence, as ever, deafening from those who must by now have a fairly good idea of at least what started the incident.

However, If I am in minority of a few, so be it, but to not press hard for information is surely the biggest dis-service to all concerned.

[rb2147]

Rumour has it all will be revealed on Friday.

[AndyJB32]

I think we're all equally keen for info to come out, just that some of us (myself included) are happy to wait until there is something worthwhile to say, and hopefully then the info that comes out is accurate.

Andy

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Squib I do not mean to be rude but please cut the cryptic crap. I do not wnat to get clipped by the MOD so I am being nice now.

I see after just one day...the investagators into the Turkish crash (FAA assisted according to the R&N thread) have released a statement claiming possible engine malfunction.

Here we are almost 10 days later and not a peep on the 225.

All those with the luxury of patience (ie not flying a 332) please feel free to leap in with your pointless crys for endless patience and you will be ignored.

Anyone who does fly a 332 and thinks the stunning silnce is OK lets hear from you. (East Side boys under duress need not apply).

DB

[papa68]

All,

I have been keeping tabs on this post for the last few days and I can't help but be bemused by some of the posts on this thread.

On the one hand, we deplore the media and their rush to get a story (often at the expense of the truth) in order to satisfy the public's need to know straight away. On the other, some of us appear to have to know something (no matter what) in the interests of safety. DOUBLE BOGEY has been particularly vocal in this regard.

I do agree that it is rather odd that absolutely nothing has been released by way of a statement etc. However, I would rather hear nothing that just mere speculation. We already have that in this forum, courtesy of some very informed individuals and some not so informed. I have already made some (I hope) informed judgements on what may have occurred but am patient enough to wait for something more definitive.

DOUBLE BOGEY - for what's worth, I think you're being a little emotive. The investigation will reveal all in good time. The fact that nothing has come out as yet suggests that we can probably (please all note the use of the word probably) rule mechanical failure. But again, I choose to wait for official word. In the meantime, I don't expect us all to suddenly fall out of the sky.

And for the record, I fly both the 332 and the 225 and I am not sitting around more concerned for my safety as a result of this accident until the investigators prove I should be.

And here's the rub... it might take some time to prove such.

P68:O

[Limpopo]

Any news likely today? I understand that Bond were briefing both Bristow and CHC management on the accident. I see the CAA cancelled G-REDU as PWFU yesterday (Permanently Withdrawn From use).

[heli1]

No official news yet but a little bird told me that the tail fell off after the crash because the a/c settled tail down and the boom filled with water.....the weight and wave motion then broke it off.

[Special 25]

There has been a meeting today to discuss the cause of the accident. I wasn't able to attend unfortuntely, but I know there were reps from Bristow & CHC, then a meeting for the Bond pilots.

I know that the initial conclusion is pilot error, so Double Bogey and crowd can rest assured that as expected, the 225's / Super Pumas are fine. As to the actual detail, hopefully someone who was there can maybe fill in some of the blanks as to what the pilots did and why this approach went so badly wrong.

Were there any plans to change the ARA profile at night or any other changes suggested to eliminate this sort of accident happening again and to help the rest of us make safer approaches at night ??

[outhouse]

Thanks Special 25, a good informed update. Look forward to further informed advisories on the thread.

outhouse

[rb2147]

I understand, Bond, invited Bristow and CHC Engineering reps on Wednesday for a meeting/briefing re this accident. Based on HUMS data ( I guess??)... the other two operators were reassured that before the accident"... all a/c systems were operating normally..!

Today's meeting was, I believe, for the Operations reps. Everyone throughout this period has been operating 332/225's normally. (except for BP).

Conclusions??

Can only assume that briefing papers/public statements for the parties involved are being scrutinised by the the legal beagles before anyone sticks their head above the parapet.

It's Friday afternoon ...... perhaps by Monday then?

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Hi Special 25, assuming your post is correct that is good news from the helicopters point of view. Lets hope the investigation does not centre too much on blaming the crew and looks a little more closely at the procedures involved especially the use, or otherwsie, of the automatics an aspect of NS operations which I believe is not properly mandated for.

A good start would be some absolute minimum altitudes and speeds over the sea, at night, that cannot be breached until the crew "Call the Ball" (The rugby ball that is...or fat egg)...being the properly formed shape of the helideck lights confirmed by both crew before any further descent is initiated.

This simple provision would at least provide crews with a bit of air above the sea, and maintain the airspeed when manouvring in the initial stages of an approach.

There extreme optical illusions that we see at night in some conditions leading us to think at times the platform, at distance, can appear to be up amongst the stars.

Personally I would like to see the end of "visual manouvring" at night with all approaches conforming to the ARA template, with aboslute minimum altitudes and airspeeds applied until the very latter stages when "The Ball" is called - even when shuttling!! It takes a little more time but in my view is far safer.

The lack of these procedures and restrictions may ultimatley have led to the incident we have seen. I just hope that the Authority and Inverstigators realise that once a crew has elected to manouvre visually at night, which we are currently allowed to do, the first hole in the swiss cheese has already aligned itself!!

Ultimatley the crew may not be at fault at all and that the lack of adequate procedures, especially the interface with mandated automatics, should be blamed for these types of incident!!

I wish all involved the very best of luck and hope for honest and sound judegment on behalf of the investigators.

[HeliComparator]

I know that the initial conclusion is pilot error

Could we not call it a "human factors accident"? Pilot error is such a simplistic term - there are often problems with procedures, oversight, training etc behind this sort of accident. PE implies that the pilots and only the pilots were to blame. That is unfair.

HC

[HeliComparator]

DB

Generally I agree with what you say, for the 225 the best way to operate at night is to keep the automatics engaged, slow right down if not much wind (min coupled IAS 30kts) until you have the site picture (your rugby ball), only then disengage and fly the last bit manually - by then you are close to the destination so the visual references are better. That's what I teach.

But I wouldn't go so far as to say "no turning" - there is nothing wrong with turning either in heading hold, or with manual cyclic input, provided you are coupled in ALT and IAS.

But with no guidance from the manufacturer or the CAA, each Operator will have different procedures, some might be better than others.

Since Bond have both L2s (OK but not brilliant autopilot) and 225s and I think the crews are dual rated (?), perhaps they decided to have a common policy for use of the automatics, which would be less than optimised to the 225. One good reason why I have always maintained that dual rating on the various AS332L family members is not the safest way to do things, its only the most commercially expedient way.

HC

[MyTarget]

Personally I would like to see the end of "visual manouvring" at night with all approaches conforming to the ARA template, with aboslute minimum altitudes and airspeeds applied until the very latter stages when "The Ball" is called - even when shuttling!! It takes a little more time but in my view is far safer.

The ball??? I can't find that any where in the OMA,B or C!:uhoh: