Helicopter Long Line hits Power Cable and causes Fireball in Hong Kong

[Runway101]

Another incident has been reported in Hong Kong today. I believe the helicopter involved is a Lama from Heliservices (HK) Ltd, but I have no confirmation of this. The report didn't mention anything about the well-being of the helicopter or the pilot.

RTHK (http://www.rthk.org.hk/rthk/news/englishnews/20110103/news_20110103_56_724190.htm) reports:

A 62-year-old worker is fighting for his life in hospital after being struck by an electric fireball in Fanling. Police say he was with another worker on the hilltop of Kau Lung Hang when the cable of a helicopter, which was winching building material, struck an overhead power line. A fireball erupted and fell to the ground striking him. He suffered burns to 40 percent of his body. Emergency units were called but overhead power lines in the area made it impossible for a Government Flying Service helicopter to land. Eventually, firemen had to carry the injured man downhill. His fellow worker suffered burns to his face. Both men were workers for a CLP Power contractor hired to carry out works in the area.

[sarbird]

From another thread:

R.OCKAPE

capable and professional procedures

one in particular was in a Lama at the end of a 200' line


Anything you want to tell us?

[bigskyheli]

If this report is true, this is the second such incident in the last 8 weeks. The previous incident resulted with the long line wrapped around the transmission line and tower knocking out the power.
Heliservices has had five different Chief Pilots in the last 20 months and four out of five pilots leave. Three out of the four were the companies most experienced long line pilots.
Rumor has it that after the last power line incident, the companies General Manager was removed from his post after the CAD informed him he was to have no further involvement in the companies operations.
Will be a busy time for the CAD this week.

[AirWon]

I have no dog in this fight but am curious as to how much experience this company has in the powerline construction business. Where do their pilots come from?

[ShyTorque]

I know they have been operating since at least 1993. They have employed quite a number of ex-pats, often from NZ or Australia.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

HeliServices were a mature op on t'other side of the airfield at Sek Kong way back in 1981, when I first saw them. An ex-28 Sqn gentleman working for them had an empty net wrap itself around his tail rotor the following year, but generally they were considered a good, professional bunch

[R.OCKAPE]

being an ex employee of HS and 7000 km's from HK I can't comment on this incident

I regret my post on the GFS incident and apologise for such

safe flying all

[Chi Sin Gei Si]

I have no dog in this fight but am curious as to how much experience this company has in the powerline construction business. Where do their pilots come from?


No dog? Strange question then. Google shall giveth... Heliservices - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliservices) and Heliservices (HK) Ltd. Over 30 years of Aviation Excellence. (http://www.heliservices.com.hk/)

Given that they have essentially connected all of HK to the grid over the last 25 years, the company CV is OK. Pilots from all over the world, and some of the best lifting pilots I've seen.

I know some guys from there, and of course they're up against the usual pressures of commercial work.

Interestingly, I know the ground crews are contracted (the client's people, not the company's). They are given a short course on safety and procedures before the job and then let loose, with a single (powerless) company staff overseeing. This sometimes has caused problems since the ground crews then don't fully appreciate the risks, and do things like standing right under the approach or departure path or similar faux pas which we would all take as basic 101 stuff.

It's true, there has been some significant movemement recently, both upstairs and on the shop floor.

That's not speculation at all, just an observation that sometimes, things might not be how they seem without the facts....

S2kxto3zBqg

Let's wait and see...

(Still 2 incidents in as many weeks...that's not good press for the HK helo industry which is in fact pretty well (and tightly) regulated. Coincidence I think, rather than incompetence. Tell that to the press though...:ugh:)

[VSOP]

We, in my country, since two years ago and until last October, working with us, had a very good man, and more, a very good professional pilot, who decided to go to take over a poisition, like, something as chief pilot on that company.
Guess what.
Is back in Europe now.
Why ? I don't know.
But as I can understand, that it is not the right place for a person like him.
For sure our DOV will desire to have him with us for the next fire fighting season.
My 2 cents.
VSOP

[demon_duck]

VSOP

Pity he didn't tell anyone he was leaving.

VERY Professional!

I'm sure the HS management will appreciate the confirmation.

[HKPAX]

A major shareholder of Heliservices (the Kadoorie family) is also a major shareholder of CLP. CLP has faced very significant safety issues before (prolly not through any material fault of their own, as power generation and transmission have inherent risks) but I do recall they fell out badly with their own lawyer over a previous fatality at one of their power stations - the lawyer seemingly felt obliged to disclose things told to him in confidence and got his a*se sued off him.

I hope CAD investigates this very thoroughly, without fear, favour or affection, and wish the injured men a speedy recovery.

[bigskyheli]

What does a "single powerless ground crew" have to do with the two incidents of pilots wrapping their long lines around power lines in the last two months?
There has been significant movement in the experienced pilot core in the last few months as well as in the senior management level. Rumor has it that the company also recently had their AOC suspended by the CAD for a significant number of MOR's. If true, the CAD obviously had concerns about the company's ability to continue to do their job as safely as they had been, for numerous years. As the saying goes " where there's smoke, there's fire".

[Chi Sin Gei Si]

What does a "single powerless ground crew" have to do with the two incidents of pilots wrapping their long lines around power lines in the last two months?



Bigskyheli,

Not a lot from the 'pilotiing' point of view. The two incidents are serious from a flight operations point of view and hopefully will be properly investigated.

My point is from an overall operational point of view where some risks the pilot's take as part of their daily lives just can't be mitigated for various reasons.

The point is more that in the business there are known risks. We mitigate those by putting in place safety measures. If everyone involved is not totally on board with those safety measures ...

...as in the case of say a lone ground crewman who decides to eat his chow fan (rice) leaning against the telegraph pole for a bit of shade, (which is live and right under the departure path of the helicopter which is working) - despite being told in the safety briefing to stay clear from that area and by the company staff member)...

....then the fault for the incident is not soley the pilot's. No?

I guess the point I'm trying to make is we just don't have enough facts to jump right in an slate the pilots or even the operation. They are just one part of a complicated 'swiss cheese' right?

[Gordy]

I have no interest in the politics of this thread what so ever...I read it out of general interest...I do however, lose respect for those that start revealing names......

Always thought this was an "anonymous" forum for those that wanted. Obviously my name is Gordy...I also post under a different name...hmmmm....but I think it is "un-cool" to reveal someones true identity...take it to PM's if you have an issue with someone and feel the need to call them out..

Added-----My post is irrelevant now as the post to which I was referring has been deleted.

[paco]

"VSOP

Pity he didn't tell anyone he was leaving.

VERY Professional!

I'm sure the HS management will appreciate the confirmation."


There are two sides to every story. Knowing the pilot concerned I feel sure there would have been a good reason. I have twice worked for companies that didn't deserve notice, maybe this was one of those cases.

Phil

[bigskyheli]

I agree with you that the long lining role is complicated and that it is impossible to mitigtate out all of the possible hazards completely. The HS ground crews work hard to keep the clients ground crew on the safe side of the op. When HS works on the power lines the work is spread out over long distances and the HS ground crew is not at the drop off sites but only at the pick up staging area. The customer ground crew is at the drop off site usually located very close to the tower in order to receive and hook up the loads. The crew wouldn't be relaxing against the pole eating their lunch. Wrapping the long line around the transmission line would likely have nothing to do with the ground crew but unfortunately most likely pilot error. This type of work is very challenging and can be unforgiving. I know as I have also made mistakes performing this type of work and have flown away knowing that it was a close call. I am sure the company and the CAD will investigate and make changes where needed. My concerns have already been expressed regarding the exodus of experienced employees over a short period of time and I would hope the company looks at this seriously as well when determining what needs to be done to make the company as safe as it can be doing the dangerous type of work they undertake. I most likely worked with the crew that were injured and wish them all the best in their recovery.

[Chi Sin Gei Si]

BigSkyHeli,

That's all fair enough. You know the operation and risks far better than me.

Snagging the powerline is possibly an error...possibly only the pilot's. The injury and it getting to the newspapers and radio, and even this forum, might or might not have been the pilot's error, depending on factors unknown to us.

It never ceases to amaze me the speculation and presumptions that are posted after every incident. In this thread it was the suggestion of the current politics in the company as being cause of possible decline in standards which led to this incident!

Yet, there is absolutely no evidence posted thus far on that matter which link the two...I guess that's why its called a 'rumour network'.

My example was not the best, but it was meant to be a wild card; a 'what if it actually had nothing to do with the politics and standards but simply was one of those things? Or even a 'non-newsworthy' incident made worse by factors totally beyond the control of the pilot and operator? Say, a careless ground crew.

Why am I interested? I know many of the drivers in the area. Every helicopter incident in HK, inevitably becomes unproportionally big news in a small town, and only damages the industry's freedom as CAD regulate tighter, and ultimately makes it harder for mates and colleagues to earn a crust...or in the case of HKAC, enjoy themselves. (That's why I cringe when I see the R22s hotdogging around Sai Kung - - but that's another topic!

Having to explain to friends why there is a helicopter in the habour, a bus, a resevoir today doesn't help support promotion of our proffession or passion, whether it be utility, passengers, tours or free flight. And they're lucky...they have me to give them as straight a story as I can. Joe Public only can rely on the media, who in turn seem to rely on guess work and forums like this for their news.

Discussion like we've just seen here (and in GFS thread) does nothing to help, especially with lack of evidence as to the cause.

That's me done on this! HNY.

[bigskyheli]

Maybe better yet it should be called the opinion network. LOL. I appreciate that this is only my opinion and certainly expect it to be challenged, debated, and possibly, even proved wrong once all the facts are in.
HNY to you as well.

[alpineflyers]

Accidents do not happen by themselves. I have been slinging (over 75,000 rotations in LAMAs, 205´s, 350´s...) in mountains up to very high altitudes without accident for more than 10 years. There are ways to avoid such as happened in HK, but only if you adopt a different look at things. It sounds to me like you are trying to find excuses. Go a different route if your does not work. Check your OM and change it, I think it is necessary. Ground crew should never be from another company and there must always be one at point A and one at point B - with radio contact to the pilot. If you can´t afford this, forget operating in this environment, it will cost you more than you gain.

[Chi Sin Gei Si]

alpine,

Thanks. Wow! All really impressed down here, I can tell you. (Be careful though...you don't want to tempt fate do you?)

Actually, not trying to make excuses. I don't know anymore the cause of this than you do (or joe bloggs does). That's my only point. Not enough facts yet. Let's not make them up. That's all I'm saying.

I'll let another person comment on the recomended operating procedures for this kind of work. I am not worthy enough to do so.

Ciao!

[General Lama]

What is the reason for the staff turnover? There must be something significant if both the management and crews are making a move.

I have seen 2 ads posted earlier in January. One for a new Chief Pilot and one for 'Experienced long line pilots...based in Asia....Lama experience preferred.' Not aware of too many Lama operators in Asia.

[gapito]

Hi there VSOP,
It seems to me that we work for the same company! And yes, I agree with you; it would be better to have that friend of ours in the next fire fighting season than to have a spanish kamov pilot with some 3000 hours (pencil flight time, of course!).
At least we know him and he knows the country, the company and the guys.

[ReverseFlight]

Yeah, better than hiring guys who cook their engines over the fire:

http://www.cad.gov.hk/reports/B-HRN%20Preliminary%20Report%202-2011_eng.pdf

[Runway101]

The preliminary report is out:

http://www.cad.gov.hk/reports/B-HJV%20Preliminary%20Report%203-2011_Eng.pdf

No mention of hitting a power cable in the report.

[rotorpol]

Funny coincidence
Hi there VSOP,
It seems to me that we work for the same company! And yes, I agree with you; it would be better to have that friend of ours in the next fire fighting season than to have a spanish kamov pilot with some 3000 hours (pencil flight time, of course!).
At least we know him and he knows the country, the company and the guys.


Well Mr Portuguese version of Bluethunder has delighted us with ones of those fantastic, first post by the way,hope not the last, replies full of education, knowledge of the matter, and in other words sad comment towards spanish pilots, regardless of what we fly.:=

Please some more respect and manners are needed to be part of a civilised forum.
Cheers

[mollydooker]

There is no mention of the long line contacting the transmission line in the preliminary report as the CAD have two investigate and sort out two very different versions of what happened.

The pilot's statement claims that the transmission lines arced across to the helicopter's long line creating the fireball and that the long line never came into contact with the transmission line.

The injured workers and other ground workers claim that the long line contacted the transmission line causing a large fireball which fell to the ground.

The local cantonese news footage taken shortly after the accident includes interviews with workers stating the long line contacted the transmission line. This footage also shows a lengthy section of the long lines protective cover hanging from the transmission line.

Guess will see what the CAD thinks after they complete their investigation of the long line to see if they feel it came into contact with the transmission line.

[General Lama]

Did they find out what happened? I am sure that there are several operators that work in close proximity to power lines that could benefit from the findings in this incident. I sure hope that it doesn't get 'swept under the rug'. In the name of safety, if there are any official results, please post them.

GL

[bigskyheli]

General Lama,

No final report yet on the CAD site. Interesting though that the latest rumor has the company applying to the CAD to have the same pilot involved in the accident appointed to the position of Chief Pilot. Understand that the CAD responded to the company that inlight of this pilots recent accident, they would not be an acceptable candidate for CP. Seems after months of advertising around the world they still cannot find anyone interested in taking on this challenge.

[Runway101]

I didn't realize that the CAD has a direct say in who can and cannot be a chief pilot (other than via regulations).

[General Lama]

The CAD sure takes their time. It has almost been 3 months since the original post?! Nothing like efficiency. At this rate, the same incident could have happened several times. Some things never cease to amaze.

[mollydooker]

3 months certainly is a long time. We know the HK CAD have had the long line examined and certainly by now would have determined if it did, or did not contact the transmission line. Captain Chameleon claims the transmission lines flashed over and blames the electric long line. The ground workers claim the long line contacted the transmission line. Come on HK CAD what is the result of your 3 month investigation? If you have found that the electric long line is the cause of the fireball as Captain Chameleon claims then let the industry know so this knowledge can prevent it from happening again. If it was caused by pilot error with the long line coming in direct contact with the transmission line then let the industry know. Either way 3 months is too long for an answer.

[General Lama]

Tick, Tock, Tick, Tock.............

[Chi Sin Gei Si]

General Lama,

The time frame doesn't surprise me. Not only do you have to factor in any political wrangling, and classic local bureaucracy and cultural hurdles (I didn't say face saving) , the ICAO requirements aren't exactly slight, when it comes to investigating accidents.

Find the link to Annex 13. - Aircraft Accident And Investigation

http://www.airsafety.com.au/trinvbil/C619icao.pdf

Additionally, find below some extracts from that document. 4.1 lists all the States who must be informed. In this incident, presumably registry and operator are the same. Still that leaves ICAO and France to be sent a wad of papers (to be left on some penpushers desk until ready to be looked at), looked at, and then sent back - probably all by regular post, and probably because the penpusher doesn't know where Hong Kong is, it will go via China (the idiot probably put Hong Kong, CHINA on the envelope), or by surface mail!

6.2 says no one but HKCAD can release ANYTHING until the Final report. I can't see HKCAD releasing anything either.

And 6.6 says they should 'try' to get a final report out in 12 months.

So wind up your clock and sit back. I wouldn't expect anything before 12 months from HKCAD.

:)

What is disconcerting is that 4/9 Preliminary Reports and 3/5 Final Reports on the CAD's web page concern helicopters. That's quite an alarming ratio given the volume of aviation there.
----------------------------------------------------------

4.1 The State of Occurrence shall forward a notification
of an accident or serious incident with a minimum of delay
and by the most suitable and quickest means available to:
a) the State of Registry;
b) the State of the Operator;
c) the State of Design;
d) the State of Manufacture; and
e) the International Civil Aviation Organization, when the
aircraft involved is of a maximum mass of over
2 250 kg.

6.2 States shall not circulate, publish or give access to a
draft report or any part thereof, or any documents obtained
during an investigation of an accident or incident, without the
express consent of the State which conducted the investigation,
unless such reports or documents have already been published
or released by that latter State.


6.6
Recommendation.— The State conducting the

investigation should release the Final Report in the shortest

possible time and, if possible, within twelve months of the date
of the occurrence. If the report cannot be released within
twelve months, the State conducting the investigation should
release an interim report on each anniversary of the
occurrence, detailing the progress of the investigation and any




safety issues raised.

[General Lama]

Time goes on....I guess it is time to wind up my clock in anticipation.

[Runway101]

The final report has been out since March:

http://www.cad.gov.hk/reports/B-HJV%20Accident%20Bulletin%202.2012%20_Eng_-Final.pdf

Surprise, surprise:

Expert advice from the PolyU further indicated that if an external object had come sufficiently close to the Phase L2 conductor and an earthed object, a short circuit may occur, causing a flashover. Based on these findings, the investigation team estimated that at the time of the accident, the longline might have come close enough to the Phase L2 conductor to trigger a fault current to flow from the conductor to an earthed object, causing a flashover. Other possible causes including transient surges of electricity in the CLP’s electrical system and lightning strikes were also considered, however on further investigation, these possibilities had been ruled out.

[mollydooker]

20 centimeters or less required to cause a flash over....... So why was the pilot so close to the line? The company's operating procedures as well as HK regulations for working around energized power lines requires a distance much greater than 20 centimeters to provide for a safe operation.
Good old Captain Chameleon, proving once again, in her own words " I am the most experienced pilot here" :D

[west lakes]

Looking at the last photo, whoever thought that having a drop zone that close to a live 132kV circuit really needs their head examined. Whilst I understand there are severe access difficulties, a minimum safe distance for that sort of work should be in the range of 10s of meters or the circuit should be dead & earthed.

Whilst the report talks of 20 cm distance, that would be in ideal conditions the distance would be a good bit higher in damp conditions. In UK electricity ops the minimum safe distance at the voltage is 1.4m (IIRC)

Though there is a lot of responsibility with the heli ops, the power line owners also should bear a major responsibility for setting the trap in the first place.

[mollydooker]

Clearly the minimum safe distance was not followed. I am sure most if not all of us have experienced some customers wishing to be that much closer to make it easier for them, or to carry heavier loads than the numbers dictate. Easier often means more risk. It is the professional pilots responsibility to not be pressured into the trap. Explain why to the customer, and complete the work in the safest possible manner for the ground personnel, aircrew, and aircraft.