Cumbria Helicopter crash discussion

[Epiphany]

A sad loss. Noticeable lack of speculation here. Any reasons? Apart from condolences this is a place we can all learn valuable lessons.

[Epiphany]

Then we will have to disagree on that.

[Savoia]

.
Epiphany: I happen to agree with you but, I've noticed since joining PPRuNE just over 9 months ago, that PPRuNers are somewhat reticent to speculate on accidents/incidents (and I would have to say that this is especially the case when the event has taken place in the British Isles).

Part of this could be the large pecentage of UK readers on Rotorheads and the closer proximity therefore to domestic events - there are certain sensitivities which are quickly offended when someone takes a stab at what 'might have happened'.

I've noticed that in the past PPRuNers have started separate threads where speculation/probable causes can be discussed without offending those connected to the incident.

This thread seems to have focussed on being a tribute to someone who was clearly a great man but, like you, I always seek to derive understanding/lessons from tragedy .. just in case it might save someone else. In this regard I tender the following: I've read on the Gazelle thread that the Astazou is one of the most reliable turbines ever built - someone, somewhere said it had never experienced a failure (unlikely, but even if its somewhere close to the truth still makes it an impressive piece of kit). Assuming that LFB was in 'ship-shape' condition then I think (given the met report for the area) there is only one probable cause to consider.

Having said that .. one never knows. The AAIB could discover something totally unexpected. Nevertheless, such tragedies are always an opportunity to remind ourselves of the importance of maintaining safety and vigilance.

S.

[Epiphany]

This is not a forum for NOK. It is a forum for pilots. If I owned a Gazelle I might be concerned. If I owned a Gazelle and I know that this accident happened at last light in bad weather then I may be less concerned. I will expect the AAIB report in 2012 at the earliest.

[fisbangwollop]

Epiphany......No speculation because of the respect that most folk that knew Mark had of him....he was a character indeed but I guess one of the UK's most experianced mountain pilot's....after all he has commuted to work for the past 6 years on a near daily basis when weather permitted.

As for speculation lets not even go there.....in time I guess we can all read the relevant reports..............I for one though will miss his enthusiastic and cheery voice over the airwaves of "Scottish Information"

[SilsoeSid]

fishbangwollop,

I wouldn't go that way if I were you.
Even the very experienced Austrian Air Force instructor on our High Altitude Mountain Landing Course nearly piled in during a famil, and that was while we were still in the low mountains! I think I learnt that morning what my last words are going to be!

SS

[SilsoeSid]

Aren't comments like fishbangwallops;

"No speculation because of the respect that most folk that knew Mark had of him....he was a character indeed but I guess one of the UK's most experianced mountain pilot's....after all he has commuted to work for the past 6 years on a near daily basis when weather permitted."

the reverse of any speculation and therefore just as bad as any speculation itself?

[Epiphany]

Degraded Visual Environment & Loss of Control on Vimeo

I am not suggesting that flying in hilly terrain in reduced visibility had anything to do with this tragic accident but here is a link to remind those who may be interested of the dangers involved.

I for one would like to see less of these accidents that seem to occur on a regular basis.

[Savoia]

I for one would like to see less of these accidents that seem to occur on a regular basis.
Couldn't agree more. The number of dear friends I have lost over the years has been intollerable and the number of friends who have lost their nearest and dearest has been a painful thing to watch.

The truth is that not every driver has had an ephiphany when it comes to taking risks with wx. Mine came in '92 in PNG after losing six friends over a 12 month period in wx-related fatalities.

Just yesterday on the Nostalgia (G-TALY) thread I posted some historical blurb about G-BAKS and included the AAIB report (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/dft_avsafety_pdf_501372.pdf) documenting her CFIT. It makes for glum reading but .. the story was (sadly) predictable and follows about 20 others I can recall off the top of my head. The bottom line is, when VFR, we can never win out against a battle with weather.

S.

[toptobottom]

The fact is, the weather was shocking. Dark, poor viz, sleet and very gusty, high winds. Mark was an accomplished pilot and knew his machine and the surrounding area intimately, but there's little doubt in my mind that the Wx was a contributing factor. I've been to Honister many times and even the slightest wind is funneled down the valley which can catch the unwary off guard. If he had a technical problem, there would have been few choices when it came to getting down safely, even if it was VMC. Apparently, the crash site was just 200m away from the pad, so just a few seconds after lifting. If I was asked to speculate, I'd guess it was a technical problem, but given those conditions and low height over that terrain, poor Mark wasn't given much of a chance.

And for the record, I also have no doubt that Mark will be looking down on this thread and smiling. He'd be amused by the speculation :ok:

[SilsoeSid]

The fact is, the weather was shocking. Dark, poor viz, sleet and very gusty, high winds. Mark was an accomplished pilot and knew his machine and the surrounding area intimately, but there's little doubt in my mind that the Wx was a contributing factor. I've been to Honister many times and even the slightest wind is funneled down the valley which can catch the unwary off guard.


If I was asked to speculate, I'd guess it was a technical problem,


Isn't that a prime example of the problems of speculation!

[toptobottom]

Prime example? Yes.

Problem? No.

[Epiphany]

Toptobottom. Thanks. That information combined with SS's videos are all I need to form my own opinion - which I am perfectly entitled to being the crass individual that I am.

Savoia - my own Epiphany was as an airgunner in a Lynx in Germany in 1982 when we hit the top of trees on a ridge line in cloud on a VFR flight. That pilot is now dead as are many more of my friends including AJ last year. The fact that a pilot of his experience can end up spread across a hillside shows that we can all make mistakes.

Weather plays a significant part in all of these accidents and most could be avoided with a simple glance out of the window and a check of the local conditions.

[toptobottom]

Of course; everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, I wouldn't rely on the YT vids to form yours. Mark wasn't averse to taking risks and he enjoyed showing off, but without an audience and in adverse conditions, I can't think of anyone I'd rather have to fly me through those mountains.

[SilsoeSid]

without an audience and in adverse conditions, I can't think of anyone I'd rather have to fly me through those mountains.

Would that be apart from the person that decided not to go flying?

[toptobottom]

SS

The decision whether to fly or not is a different issue. The point I'm making is that Mark was a sound pilot and one should judge neither his decision process that night, nor his flying ability on some random YT clips.

[JimL]

I'm sorry but I do not understand the desire to gag pilots who wish to express their views about the environment/situation surrounding any accident.

The usefulness of debate can be illustrated by the Cougar accident thread where a number of misconceptions (about the capabilities of the aircraft, the necessity to listen to and understand previous lessons, the requirement to follow checks lists, and the dangers of ignoring escalating failures) were discussed - and all before the accident report was published.

It is a tribute to the contributions in that thread (and others) that it was referred to by the accident investigators.

Once a report is published, pilots with fertile minds no longer see the need to apply their deductive skills to finding the cause of the accident.

Bearing in mind that attitude/culture can play a large part in accidents, I think that the videos might have a bearing on the cause. I am reminded of the first responses to the Colin McRae accident and the attempt on that thread to silence speculation.

Jim

[Gordy]

Epiphany....I am with you. However I will not speculate openly as obviously it is frowned upon here.

Funny thing how every crash in recent years in the UK was piloted by "excellent", "conscientious", pilots who never pushed the limits. Seems like all of those who push the limits, or are bad pilots never crash.

Seems like speculation is all around us. The police normally only arrest those that they "believe" are guilty based upon their views and evidence collected. Some people are even proven innocent----but at some point in the chain, someone "speculated" that they were guilty of something.

For the record---If I ever crash, I beg all of you to speculate. Look at all the possible factors and if they point to me flying in bad weather, or some other act that I may have committed, then feel free to call me an ass---even if I perish in the accident--I have thick skin. Why you ask? Because, there may be some young pilot reading and can learn from a "speculated" mistake. If it turns out there was a mechanical issue, then learn from that too.

Someone more famous than me, (and I do not know who), once wrote:

The person who never made a mistake, never learnt anything.

Mistakes are for learning.

[fisbangwollop]

Its sad that after a week of people not speculating but only giving their thoughts on what a great character and person Mark was, that the last day has once again turned into the usual PPRUNE speculation...please to those folk that didnt know Mark respect those of us and his family and leave the speculation behind.......Weather could have been a factor but so could mechanical failure....I guess in the fullness of time we can all read the AIB report...in the mean time please lets just respect the person that Mark was and remember the happiness and fun he brought into many folks life!!

[Gordy]

Brassed Off

This is all well and good whilst you are alive and kicking but if heaven forbid it was you then I am sure your loved ones would not be happy to see speculation from some of the wooden tops on this forum.

While I agree with you to some respect, let me say that I have discussed this issue with my loved ones. They are in agreement, so much so, that I actually have an envelope of instructions that I have gone over with certain ones of them. (Kind of like a living will if you want). One of the instructions gives my username and password to various websites, (including this one), where they will post statements which will encourage "sensible speculation" and they direct certain trusted people to post what ever facts they have available. Maybe the way it should be done is to have two threads---one for the condolences, and one for the speculation and discussion. To take it one step further that I had not thought of till now---what if it was a "guided on-line discussion" with a learned and well respected person as moderator?

This may sound morbid, but I believe we work or play in an environment that has certain risks. My loved ones know the risks I take and are at least practically prepared for the "worst case" even though they obviously will not be emotionally prepared. Through out my many years in this industry, I have lost many friends and acquaintances, and because of the "taboo" about speculating accident causes, by the time the result comes in, 99% of the people out there do not learn anything. So I stand by my wishes that people speculate----while it is fresh in their minds.

I believe there is a way to speculate and discuss in a respectful manner. Just like flying----tis all about the planning.

[Epiphany]

Brassed off.

What you seem to forget is that this is a professional pilots rumour forum. This is a place where pilots should be free to speculate on accidents and by doing so possibly open up the eyes of newer pilots to some of the many hazards associated with helicopter flying.

In this particular case I am told that the accident occurred at last light in low visibility and bad weather in hilly terrain. It was flown by a 'type A' personality who has been filmed flying his helicopter in a questionable fashion and was trying to get home. The pilot was a not rated for flight in IMC and neither was the helicopter. The photographs of the accident show a high speed forward impact with terrain.

Now despite these facts it might be revealed that the helicopter suffered a mechanical failure which resulted in the accident. This will be revealed in the AAIB report some time in the future when everyone except the pilots family will have forgotten about this.

I didn't know the pilot but even if I did it should be no reason not to speculate on the causes. Helicopters do not fly into hillsides on their own. If I knew the pilot and his family I would have called to his home by now with my condolences and any practical help that I could give but it wouldn't prevent me from having an opinion on the causes and if his wife asked for my professional opinion I would tell her - as I hope that my pilot friends would do with my wife. Wives know their husbands better then we think.

One sad prediction I can make is that more pilots this year will die from flying into terrain in low visibility in perfectly serviceable helicopters leaving behind grieving families. Quite possibly someone reading this now. If debating the causes of this particular accident makes just one of them think twice about trying to get squeeze through the hills in IMC to get home then it has served its purpose.

[fisbangwollop]

Epiphany.....Please stop the speculation, lets just report the facts as we know..!!

Those are.... Mark Weir was the happiest,loving,most generous and hard working person anyone could have met.

His life was brought to a sudden and tragic end when his helicopter impacted with the ground.

Those are the known facts....anything else is pure speculation and to be honest disturbs those folk ( myself included) that knew Mark well.

[Savoia]

.If debating the causes of this particular accident makes just one of them think twice about trying to squeeze through the hills in IMC to get home then it has served its purpose.

Hear hear!


S.

[SilsoeSid]

Epiphany, I totally agree with your last post.

Fishbang, Whatever your interpretation of the facts, the aircraft took off in bad weather and was flown into the ground. It doesn't appear to have landed under any form of control, a straight pile in, perhaps we would expect the tail to hit the ground first if any sudden low level avoiding action was taken at that speed/height.

If you think the AAIB is going to base any report on what we here speculate on, you're wrong.

If this reminds us of the perils of bad weather, and stops any of us pushing it just a little bit too much, then we have all learnt from it.

[Bravo73]

.
Readers please then allow 'speculators' to speculate here and let 'speculators' refrain from speculating on the tribute thread!


Interesting that the yootoob vids were left in the 'tribute' thread, rather than copied across to the 'speculation' thread... :confused:

[lugs4744]

Gordy,

Mistakes are for learning.


Couldn't agree more, however what you learn depends on the facts surrounding the mistake.

If people "learn" from their own interpetation of an event there is no guarantee what you are learning is correct, that is the whole point of having a team of trained experts dedicated to publishing all the facts from an incident, so that all others have the right information to reduce the risk of the same event occuring again or even other events occuring due to preconceived misconceptions.

Epiphany commented on having to wait till 2012 for the aaib report for the facts and seemed to hint towards not being too concerned about the incident if the weather conditions were harsh.A concerning comment to say the least, a prejudgment of the situation (granted based on experience and knowledge of the industry) but without possession of all the facts, a prejudgment nonetheless. It's these types of actions that human factors is trying to overcome.
Are you saying that if the flying conditions were good your concerns would lead you to not fly? What if someone posted some duff info regarding a particular part of the aircraft? Would you insist the engineers focus their attention towards it(possibly increasing their workload or shifting attention) or even refrain from using something because your confidence in the system has diminished even though it turns out to be nothing more than hearsay?

It matters not how long the facts take to come out as long as they are thorough and correct when they do, altering your beliefs and/or actions based on anything else before that time is at best foolish, at worse dangerous.

[SilsoeSid]

Good point Bravo73,

When you put the vids together with the location of the crash site, 200 metres south-east of the Honister slate mine, and have a look at google maps, its very hard not to speculate. :uhoh:

Dare I mention 'Suckers Gap'?

[fisbangwollop]

Silsoesid...Whatever your interpretation of the facts, the aircraft took off in bad weather and was flown into the ground. It doesn't appear to have landed under any form of control, a straight pile in, perhaps we would expect the tail to hit the ground first if any sudden low level avoiding action was taken at that speed/height.



Yes you can speculate but you seem convinced that because the weather was bad that must have been the cause!!!!! What are you going to gain by your constant reffering to the weather? We all know it was wild windy dark and wet but that does not mean that was a factor.......we have also to accept it could have been mechanical failure or indeed pilot error...maybe we will never know...so be honest at this stage what can you learn from your constant speculation.....only time hopefully will tell!!

[Gordy]

Fishbangwallop

Mark Weir was the happiest,loving,most generous and hard working person anyone could have met.

Those are the known facts

Correct me if I am wrong, but your statement is NOT FACT. It is OPINION. You just lost any argument you might have had.

lugs4744

If people "learn" from their own interpetation of an event there is no guarantee what you are learning is correct,

reduce the risk of the same event occuring again

I think Epiphany answered this in the way I was trying to....

If debating the causes of this particular accident makes just one of them think twice about trying to get squeeze through the hills in IMC to get home then it has served its purpose.

Onto your next point:

What if someone posted some duff info regarding a particular part of the aircraft? Would you insist the engineers focus their attention towards it

Yes I would.....I would tell my mechanic that I heard a rumor that "part y" might have failed and ask his opinion and ask him to check ours. I would be remiss in my duties if I did not.

It matters not how long the facts take to come out as long as they are thorough and correct when they do, altering your beliefs and/or actions based on anything else before that time is at best foolish, at worse dangerous.

Do you REALLY believe that. I guarantee that every nuclear power plant in California is looking at their back up cooling systems right now--maybe they should wait for the facts in a few years.

I always thought this site was called

http://www.pprune.org/images/misc/pplogonew3.gif

Maybe we are all getting our words mixed up. From now on we will all start our speculations with the words; RUMOR HAS IT, I notice that nobody has been dis-respectful, and more importantly the mods have not stopped any of the rumors and speculation. I applaud them.

[hands_on123]

How many times have we been here before on pprune? (answer: many)

pilot crashes...weather not great..fatalities..he was an all round 'good bloke'..tributes..someone dares to suggest it was CFIT...cue lots of upset posts saying 'it could have been a mechanical problem'...discussion eventually dies down...1-2 years later report is issued...no aircraft defects...CFIT.

The simple fact is that if a helicopter crashes and the weather at the time isn't great then 90% of the time the pilot decided to fly in weather that was not suitable and/or beyond their personal, or the aircraft's limits - and they got caught out.

Spend an afternoon reading some AAIB reports - not many mechanical defects, but an awful lot of people flying a perfectly servicable helicopter into the ground.

I'm not saying this was the cause of this accident, but...how many times have we been here before? (particulary with private owners and non-AOC flights).

[lugs4744]

Your point about the cooling towers is missing the mark, the facts are already known about the cooling towers due to the people still working there and trying to recover from the problems they are witnessing.The causes to what is happening right now are not in dispute and so other plants can start taking action right away.

Unfortunately in some instances there is no way of getting to the cause of an incident right away and, granted some information may come to light during the investigation which is of course released and if there is any doubt about safety further action is taken, such as grounding fleet.

As for your engineer I would hope he would take it upon himself to get in contact with someone with more knowledge of the situation than a pilot with a whim,
such as the investigators or the manufacturer.What do you expect him to do?there may be no inspection procedure for what you want him to take a look at, the problem may even have originated somewhere else, what is he supposed to sign this off iaw?If the engineer came to you and said that he heard from a thread that a crash was caused due to a fault with the autopilot system would you fly with it off or would you seek clarification?Turning off your autopilot increases your workload and risk factor as does getting engineers to carry out needless inspections

Like I said before, engineers have enough to do without being distracted by pilots with a problem that is based on nothing but hearsay.If the investigators or manufacturer say otherwise and issue a formal inspection then fine.

If you have inormation that is substantiated and can be verified then of course this needs to be passed on to everyone concerned in the shortest time possible, any other info has the potential to do more harm than good.
Please do not think I am questioning your intentions, I am not.

Information is a source of learning. But unless it is organized, processed, and available to the right people in a format for decision making, it is a burden, not a benefit. (http://thinkexist.com/quotation/information_is_a_source_of_learning-but_unless_it/226524.html) William Pollard.

[zorab64]

fbw. . . you seem convinced that because the weather was bad that must have been the cause!
I would strongly suggest the weather is never the "cause" of an accident, but it is, invariably, a "factor", despite what you believe. There is no doubt that poor weather, and/or low light, mean a pilot has more work to do than flying around in 8/8ths blue - which, sadly, is why a significant number of helicopter fatal accidents occur when just such "factors" are in place.

It's poor decisions, and/or discipline, and/or ability, of both pilots and engineers, along with that old chestnut, luck (or running out of it), that actually "cause" accidents. That's not me criticising the individual here, or elsewhere, but it is based on AAIB findings, which you may wish to regard more "fact"ualy.

Precious sensitivites should be left aside as, notwithstanding what a fabulous chap/gal an individual may have been (I'm talking generic accidents, rather than specific, and didn't know Mark), I've lost enough pilot friends & aquaintances over the years to know that they would have wished me to use my professional understanding of known "factors" to speculate on an accident, in order to improve my own chances, having learnt lessons from happened, or may have happened, to them. One should not need to wait many months for an AAIB report to learn lessons which could, through this type of forum and the input & experience of many professionals, have been learnt earlier.

If speculation & discussion help to persuade another pilot to think twice, before venturing into a potentially fatal unknown, it actually doesn't matter if it turns out to be wrong in a particular case - all that's needed is for others to think twice. Whilst AAIB reports may delve into the facts of fatal accidents, they can never report the mindset of the deceased - unlike the excellent "I learnt about flying from that" articles that used to be published by the military and which taught many others lessons, including, invariably, the writer - as he'd lived to tell the tale! It's learning from these personal experiences that add to the constitution of the professional pilot - and yes, private pilots can are often "professional" too.

The sky has always been/is/will be a risky environment, a "fact" of which our nearest & dearest should be more than aware. As helicopter pilots, we try to become masters of continuous risk-assessing, however much we may thumb our noses at certain areas of "elf & safety"!

The one mantra that I always keep at the back of my mind is from a flight safety poster I saw many years ago. I may not have got the words quite right, but the message is clear. "Flight Safety is no accident, however, the sky, even more so than the sea, is spectaculary unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

I'd concur with Gordy, SS & 123's comments.

[TRC]

"Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
— Captain A. G. Lamplugh, British Aviation Insurance Group, London. c. early 1930's

[Thomas coupling]

Hear hear Zorab.
I've had my tangles with the moderators on a number of occasions on and offline! But prais where praise is due, the whole site is run very professionally and I for one wouldn't want to see it change.

Which brings me to the main issue: PPrune MUST remain just that and oldies like ourselves need to remind one off visitors (and that is the majority of complainants) that an enormous amount of information is transferred/learned/gleaned, call it what you will, by speculating about a crash. Bu the time the accident report comes out, the story is old and forgotten by most The lessons learned will have faded into the background (not always but often).
The time to talk is NOW while the memory is fresh.

My second observation is this: Most (again not all) dissenters are not cab drivers. Consequently they fail to understand how the rest of the "fraternity" thinks. We the operators do, on the other hand and as Gordy rightly stated, we would expect, even demand that this sort of speculation goes on. It's part of being a pilot - black humour, rumour mongering, speculation etc etc. It is normal - long may it be so.

Finally - my two penneth worth. Statistically this has CFIT written all over it. I have attended a handfull of these and been first on scene - most of the pilots were not professional pilots, but vocational ones who were trying to enjoy the excitement of flying their machines in their spare time or to assist with their commuting to/from work. The problem is......flying is a perishable skill and requires constant practice almost daily...and that's just to stay confident/competent in good weather. If circumstances change (night/bad weather/mechanical problems/lost/unwell or unfit to fly)...it's a whole new ball game and not for the fainthearted.
Accidents happen and in our industry - more so. That's why it's not a straight forward as it looks.

Good idea to split the two threads.................RIP pal:sad:

[fisbangwollop]

Thomas Coupling...you seem happy to critisise this accident as it involved a non commercial pilot....what were your thoughts after AJ's accident??

[SilsoeSid]

Fishbang,
Yes you can speculate but you seem convinced that because the weather was bad that must have been the cause!!!!! What are you going to gain by your constant reffering to the weather? We all know it was wild windy dark and wet but that does not mean that was a factor.......

I'm not saying it was the cause, but it must have been a huge factor.


Read what toptobottom said earlier;
The fact is, the weather was shocking. Dark, poor viz, sleet and very gusty, high winds. Mark was an accomplished pilot and knew his machine and the surrounding area intimately, but there's little doubt in my mind that the Wx was a contributing factor. I've been to Honister many times and even the slightest wind is funneled down the valley which can catch the unwary off guard.

Some other possible factors;

(have a look at google street view and stand by thge 20% sign looking SE)
The weather was bad, but maybe a cars headlights pointed the way down the dark valley showing the way, a way the pilot was familiar with, but the lights disappeared shortly after transitioning....theres another possible factor.

Why on such a bad night did he drive from a job in Keswick (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDEQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.grough.co.uk%2Fmagazine%2F2011%2F03%2F1 5%2Fmark-weirs-final-words-before-helicopter-crash-i-love-you&ei=hvKETcf3LJSyhAecv6XABA&usg=AFQjCNEJV9EMHr6yPpRDmzt0cXMcd7-ofg) to the mine and get into the helicopter to fly home rather than just simply drive home.... there's another possible factor.

Any pressing engagements that night.....another possible factor.

Long tiring day at work followed by a dark wet drive back to the mine & paperwork...other possible factors.

Had he eaten since breakfast...another possible factor.


With every cause, there's a whole shedful of factors that are behind it all. by the way, Single pilot CRM is often scoffed at by some in this community, lets hope this will change some minds.

[SilsoeSid]

http://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/other/the-mark-weir-philosophy-better-to-live-a-day-like-a-tiger-than-life-as-a-mouse- (http://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/other/the-mark-weir-philosophy-better-to-live-a-day-like-a-tiger-than-life-as-a-mouse-1.816926?referrerPath=news/machine_gun_cops_close_main_carlisle_road_for_court_hearing)

Mark Weir, the owner of Honister Slate Mine, once remarked that is better to live like a tiger for a day than a mouse for life. The words could have been his epitaph.

Entrepreneurial, daredevil, maverick and visionary are just some of the adjectives which spring to mind when his name is mentioned.

Speaking less than a year ago, he said: “My proudest achievement is that I am still alive.

But his business acumen was bound up with a disregard for authority.Earlier this year he illegally dropped a paraglider from his helicopter at 10,000ft and was fined £400 when footage of the stunt was posted online.

He also had a long-running feud with the Lake District National Park Authority, which accused him of flouting planning law at Owerhouse, High Mosser.But Mr Weir was not the type of man to let little things like rules stand in the way of his vision.

He said: “I have had the national park and National Trust against me, trying to get me to stop operations, but I had to ignore them because I knew what I was doing was right.”

[Helinut]

This thread does not, nor does it try to replace a host of formal events that follow tragedies such as this one. However, as an example of its type, it has already raised some interesting issues about the host of factors that will always go to create the conditions for such a terrible event, and I have learned (or remembered) some things. Many of those elements will never be raised or discussed in any formal event such as an AAIB report. This does not mean that they are not important. Those of us who actually are pilots know that all sorts of "soft" factors affect the outcome of flights and flight incidents. It is only by thinking of these things that we keep reminding ourselves about how important these soft factors are, and try to improve our future decision making. Of course there is a degree of speculation, but that is one of the things that helps us to maintain the personal discipline that makes us professional pilots. That process is assisted by forums such as this one, in my view.

I don't see the thing in terms of "good" or "bad" or "dangerous" pilots. Those who do think that way, or imply that others do have a rather shallow view of such things. On a particular occasion, any pilot can make mistakes and poor decisions that reduce the barriers to an accident and contribute to that accident. I want to know as much as I can about why those bad decisions were made. There is also almost always a degree of chance about the outcome too, but no pilot can entirely control those.

I know far too many friends and colleagues who I considered as "good" pilots who are now dead. Any thoughts that I have about the circumstances of their deaths does not mean that I changed my view of them as individuals. It does not mean that I have anything other than sadness for the terrible grief caused and frustration at the waste that follows from all such accidents.

I need to know as much as I can about as many accidents and near misses as I can find out about: in that sense I am infinitely curious. As a professional pilot I owe it to those who I fly with to do that. I know that there but for the grace of (a) god, go I.

I am in favour of the way that PPRUNE frequently separates the posts about a particular accident into the normal 2 threads. That seems to me to be appropriate.

I am truly sorry if anyone close to a dead pilot is upset by such discussions that take place. It is voluntary to come on this forum and read the posts on a particular thread which is clearly a forum for professional pilots. That is particularly true where the threads are separated. Discussions on these sorts of threads may prevent accidents: we will never know when, but that makes them worthwhile in my view. Perhaps those close to pilots killed in such accidents may take some comfort from knowing that the discussions about the accident that befell "their" pilot could prevent another accident.

[helihub]

SilsoeSid

I think you have the right approach here - raising a wide number of possibilities like the possibility of pressing engagements to consider as factors rather than being an armchair investigator. Another one to consider would be why had he departed to the East towards Seatoller, rather than northwest towards home?

The other quote from that article you provided the link to
He said: “I have had the national park and National Trust against me, trying to get me to stop operations, but I had to ignore them because I knew what I was doing was right.”

That could be a big factor if it translated into a disregard for flight safety, a disregard for the operational envelope of the Gazelle as a helicopter type, etc.

[ShyTorque]

Speaking as an ex military QHI, with quite a few hours instructing on the Gazelle, another factor that should be considered by the AAIB, in view of the weather, is the possibility of the canopy misting up inside, either just before, or just after, lift off. It can be a killer, not only in the Gazelle. It is seldom mentioned in accident reports because the evidence quite literally, evaporates.

[Flyting]

I too want to learn from other pilots mistakes, better that than first hand, and I personally find PPrune an excellent source and wealth of imformation, imformative discussions and excellent video examples of what not to do and when not to fly... Perfect example today http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/446200-brainfarts-gotta-hate-em.html...



Someone elses mistakes on a particular day begin a discusion and several factors and speculations are raised, whether they are relevant or not to that particular accident/incident, which gets me thinking and like you say, reminds me of all those things we learnt way back and not so long ago. So far on this thread alone I have been reminded of and got me thinking of the following again:
Weather
CRM
Decision making
Pilot attitude/type personality
Having had a good meal
The days events
Wind screens misting up
......
Please Pruners..... Don't stop any discussions about any accident, no matter how close they are to home. You are reminding me/us all of the dangers involved in our chosen paths and and the attitudes and decisions we have to make on a daily basis. Even if the facts come out as something completely different, I have learnt something from someones speculation, which I hope, will make me make the right decision, and thus make me a better pilot.


As a profession working pilot we have to do CRM courses yearly, which I look forward to, as it's done with pilots that are opened up to discussions about past accidents, and the "speculations" that come out are all reminders of what could have gone wrong and when not to fly, and then discussed properly. "Single pilot CRM is often scoffed at by some in this community" -Silsoesid, What about Private Pilots CRM...??? My part of the world, this is not even thought about. So many accidents could be prevented in the PPL community if they only knew... Fixed wing PPL pilots have flying clubs where things like this can be discussed, but find me a Helicopter pilot's flying club...!

[Torquetalk]

After several posts praising the extraordinary talent and excellence of the dead pilot it was inevitable that other PPruners would question such unqualified remarks: when a pilot takes off alone in bad weather in the mountains and crashes the cause is unlikley to be bad luck. As another poster has said: we've been here before. And we'll be here again, sadly.

To those who would have everyone shut up "and wait for the report", please join chorus of rolled eyes at the sad inevitability of over-confident pilots flying to their deaths. Defending bad flying decisions is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[SilsoeSid]

Nice one ShyTq and that rotary knob was hard to get moving if it hadn't been used in a while. Being up in the roof, it wasn't in the most handy of places, I take it the civ/Hung versions also have the heat/demist up there?
The 355 is renowned for misting and even in the 135 the screen mists up occasionally when putting the demist on (yes, even with disconnecting the pipes during the comp wash !)


Flyting, sorry yes, for Single Pilot CRM also read Private Pilot CRM . A Commercial pilot flying solo would still be attending regular CRM courses. I know that some Midlands heliflying schools actively encourage their private students/pilots to attend CRM courses. :ok:


For those that mock CRM for single pilots with comments such as, 'I'll give myself a good talking to' or 'That didn't quite go right, I'll give myself a good telling off!' might like to occasionally think about saying to themselves, 'Do I really want to go flying in this!'

[md 600 driver]

Shy
you got me thinking with that one "demist/heater round knob "
so i went to the hanger and checked

marks helicopter was a american sourced gazelle prepared for the american market you can tell this by the tail drive covers on the tail boom and it also was of the rigid skid type not like the uk military or yugo types, i also own one of these american types and guess what there is no heater/demist round knob fitted to mine [cant be certain for sure that mark didnt have one though ]

i shal look into the possibility of having a heater /demist fitted these types of helicopter normally have the aircon fitted but most get removed due to extra weight when not required in warmer areas of the states

marks helicopter was also one of the very few that had the IFR Flight package [341 AMR 0345] fitted

steve

[Thomas coupling]

Fantastic posts keep it up.

Fisbang: As an air traffic controller I greatly admire your talents. Please don't denigrate mine. I know the environment this man was flying in, like the back of my hand, I flew it, I taught it, I lived in it. Failing mechanical problems, there is NO other reason a perfectly serviceable aircraft crashes into terra firma.

Pilot error accounts for >70% of all air crashes.

I saw your interest in the McCrae accident. There are pilots out there who think that just because they are good at their main profession, then they must (QED) be good at flying too.
This is yet another example of a spectacular exception to that rule.

The first law of aviation: KNOW YOUR LIMITS.

He's not the first and he certainly won't be the last private pilot who thinks there is a short cut to experience.

[Senior Pilot]

marks helicopter was a american sourced gazelle prepared for the american market you can tell this by the tail drive covers on the tail boom and it also was of the rigid skid type not like the uk military or yugo types, i also own one of these american types and guess what there is no heater/demist round knob fitted to mine [cant be certain for sure that mark didnt have one though ]


The videos posted on the condolences thread have a number of internal cockpit shots: someone with better knowledge of the Gazelle may be able to tell whether the demist is fitted or not? The first video shows internal misting of the right hand windows, from about 3:20 onwards:

YouTube - Honister Gazelle Helicopter - Part 1 of 2

YouTube - Honister Slate Mine - Gazelle helicopter part 2 of 2

YouTube - Meghan's 18th Helicopter Flight

[SilsoeSid]

SP,

The first video at 57 secs shows the roof panel quite clearly.
Just to the right of the circular red knobbed lever is the heater/demist rotary knob. (if that is its purpose on this particular cab) As I mentioned before, it can be a bit of a bu&&er sometimes if not used regularly. However I think you can hear the air bleed in the background later if it's not noise from the window.

Interesting to note the rotorbrake position is half of the 'normal' applied position and has no gate to release, it was simply pushed forward.

Other notes, seatbelts, what kind are they, just the normal civ lapstraps?; dual controls with the girl in the front hands on, albeit following through when taking off but later appears to be flying it herself; windscreen wiper, lack of ;

It seems that the duals tend to be a regular fitment;

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4135/4954022850_b7c1d1656d.jpg

http://www.aircraftimages.net/pics/6/6768_800.jpg
:eek:

[zorab64]

Uh Oh, concurring with TC again, but glad to see this thread is now back on track to discuss possible contributary factors, sensibly - providing potentially useful info or reminders to most who read it.

I'd concur with SS (#39), re possible misting, when selecting 135 de-mist but a couple of issues that might help resolve this:
a) do a hot rinse, rather than a cold one - that way you don't need to disconnect the pipes, and
b) if the subsequent drying run is done i.a.w. FLM, de-mist is selected and will clear any misting caused by water finding its way into the wrong places!
The exception to the above is, often, when the aircraft's been left out in cold wet/damp weather for many hours & the screen's misted up - a "factor" some (Police) units mitigate by keeping the aircraft in the hangar (where they're lucky enough to be able to), jacked up on helilift & ready to go. The extra time taken to get airborne is invariably the same as waiting for the screen to clear, but is safer by a massive factor, as it never exerts any pressure to get airborne before the screen's fully cleared.

As for single pilot CRM - GASIL safety evenings, held round the country, can often provide a useful forum to discuss Flight Safety and allow pilots to "open up" to those things that they might have concerns about, & feel unable to discuss elsewhere. I reckon it's as near to CRM as you might get without taking formal instruction.

[VeeAny]

For those who scoff at single pilot CRM, consider it single pilot safety awareness and have a word with yourselves (no pun intended but when I re-read this it made me chuckle).

The only good thing that comes out of aircraft accidents is the possibility that they may prevent someone else from having the same thing happen to them.

Regardless of the actual cause of this accident, I have learnt quite a bit from reading this thread and the usual industry discussion after an event like this, I know now that the Gazelle is prone to internal misting problems and have heard the idea from two completely unrelated but very experienced sources, one of them on here and one on the phone the other day.

[ShyTorque]

Wet clothing on a cool night can very quickly cause the inside of the canopy to mist completely up and Sod's law says it happens just as the pilot lifts. As I said, especially in dark conditions, this can be a killer in seconds.

During my time as CP on a police ASU I instigated the use of a simple ceramic element fan heater in the helicopter.

We ran a cable reel from an RCD socket in the hangar to the aircraft. The heater was placed on the left hand side cockpit floor. It kept the aircraft warm inside and solved the misting problem.

To prevent the crew launching with the power cable still attached (!) the reel was placed on the front seat (so the front observer would have to remove it before he got in), and an A4 sized warning placard was hung from the rotor brake handle.

I am not speculating that canopy misting occurred in this case, but from my own experience I would say it is a possibility.

[zorab64]

SS (#53) - I think you'll find some answers, re your seatbelt question, if you look at the videos again.
In Meghan's birthday flight, there would appear to be shoulder straps, but neither pilot or LHS pax, (slate mine, part 2) are wearing them. Similarly, on your posted photos, the LHS pax is again not wearing shoulder straps.

The real question is, if 4 or 5 point harnesses are fitted, why are they not being worn?? If they had been fitted and had been replaced with lap straps only, one can only presume it would have been due to the cost of replacement vs a misunderstnding of the potential benefits. Possibly an inadviseable economy, although looking at the crash site (and little likelyhood of helmets being worn, from the video evidence), it would not have made much difference, sadly.

I'll leave others to comment on the legality & style of flying in the videos - but a CRM course might attach a label to it! :mad:

[fisbangwollop]

Thomas ....Fisbang: As an air traffic controller I greatly admire your talents. Please don't denigrate mine. I know the environment this man was flying in, like the back of my hand, I flew it, I taught it, I lived in it. Failing mechanical problems, there is NO other reason a perfectly serviceable aircraft crashes into

Sorry if I touched a raw nerve...you also touched one of mine.....I knew Mark and often spoke on a daily basis through my job.....unlike many he always thought it to be a good idea to talk to someone whilst operating in a remote environment.
The first time I visited him the weather at Honister was typical .....wet and windy with the rain horizontal not vertical.....on that day YUHEI his first Gazelle had been left tucked up at home.....Mark's comment was dont be silly no one flies in the mountains in this weather!!
I have followed post's re accidents for a few years now....I understand peoples concerns to find a reason before the AAIB come up with their findings but to be honest these reasons are only pure speculation and nothing more than that....just read the sh1t that was talked after the BAW038 landed short at EGLL and you will see what I mean.
To be honst the day I learnt of the accident my first thoughts to were of the weather that prevailed the night before....strong wind with associated rotor and possible downdraughts off Fleetwith Pike,sleet rain and poor light conditions...not ideal conditions to be flying in but not surely the only cause of the accident.
I really do start to wonder though when all you so called experts start to mouth off...!! What really are you trying to achieve....surely its not rocket scince to say flying in the mountains has its risk's......flying in poor weather also has risk's....flying at all indeed has risk's......I know the only true way to learn is from other folks mistakes.....someone mentioned earlier about the old "Air Clues" days and articles like " I learned about flying from that"
I am sorry if I have ruffled your feathers but to be honest I am still hurting at losing a good friend....a friend whom was both appreciated and loved by many.......I know for sure he will be looking down on this debate and having a good chuckle at some comments that are being made.......and tomorrow when he is laid to rest I know most of Cumbria will be there to pay their respect......maybe for a day you could do that to??

[SilsoeSid]

Fishbang;
The first time I visited him the weather at Honister was typical .....wet and windy with the rain horizontal not vertical.....on that day YUHEI his first Gazelle had been left tucked up at home.....Mark's comment was dont be silly no one flies in the mountains in this weather!!

So why did he do just that on this particular night then?

[Gordy]

Lugs4744

Sorry, I missed your last response.

Your point about the cooling towers is missing the mark, the facts are already known about the cooling towers

And we all know about flying in bad weather. Still, it does no harm to take another look, or review ones own procedures.

As for your engineer I would hope he would take it upon himself to get in contact with someone with more knowledge of the situation than a pilot with a whim,

Nope, if I had a concern, we would go look at it together. Maybe over there in the UK you do not work together like that. I work for a small company with only a couple of me mechanics and pilots. We do lunch together, (I know---shock/horror, mixing with greezy hand types, but guess what? It fosters a relationship where we all learn and can go to each other with a "hunch".

I recall back in February, where I was test flying my aircraft, (track and balance), and it "did not "feel right". We spent a few hours tweaking here and there, adjusting control rods and weights etc, with the net result of zero change on the chadwick, yet it felt better. Such is the relationship when one works with their mechanics.

Like I said before, engineers have enough to do without being distracted by pilots with a problem that is based on nothing but hearsay.

Hmmmm....they need us, we need them. There are plenty documented accounts out there of people who "had a hunch". I for one would not trade my mechanics. They listen and yet they will also tell me when I am being a dumba$$.

My advice: Get to know your mechaincs.

[zorab64]

fisbang - I'm sorry for your loss, but I'm afraid TC is likely to be proved closer to hitting the nail on the head than you, IMHO.

For those of us actual pilots who have (legally) flown helicopters (incl Gazelles) low-level; have read in some depth the reports of others who made poor judgements while doing the same; have learnt, from AAIB reports (& possibly pprune contributors?), enough to still be alive; have some understanding of the mindset of helicopter pilots, their type (from a CRM point of view), attitudes and attitude to risk; and have watched a few of those videos posted earlier; I'd suggest that any conclusion is significantly weighted towards TC's diagnosis? [I refer the honourable member to the last para of my previous post!]

Respect suggests that sensitive friends/aquaintances of the dear-departed should possibly keep their eyes off this thread for a few days, and let the rest of us get on with the business of flying safely and helping others to do the same where we can. :ok:

[SilsoeSid]

Fishbang, it's not a matter of ruffling feathers, maybe it's a misunderstanding.


To put it into the context of how I see it, lets say we are on the same CRM course and are shown 3 videos;

YouTube - Helicopter taking off...

YouTube - Gazelle Helicopter

YouTube - Helicopter take off at Honnester Pass


We were then told that in each video the pilot was the same.

We were then shown this news link BBC News - Pilot killed in Cumbria helicopter crash (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-12685523)


...then this picture, adding that it was taken 200m from the helipad;

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/51594000/jpg/_51594737_crashscene.jpg

...and we were then asked the question, "Is anyone surprised?"..

Do you honestly think anyone in the room would be?





Now throw in the weather, time of day, character traits and all the other previously mentioned factors and maybe you can see where I'm coming from.

[fisbangwollop]

Zorab.......At no time have I said the cause of the accident was not the weather....it could have been and probably was a great factor but until the investigation is done we will never know for sure....so anything that is posted here is pure conjecture and guess work......the only good bit of advice I have picked up here so far is the theory of canopy misting...something I guess not many had thought about but on a wet and cold night when the occupant was probablly soaking wet prior to entering the aircraft one well worth thinking about.

[SilsoeSid]

the only good bit of advice I have picked up here so far is the theory of canopy misting.

What about seemingly very nice people telling you one thing and then doing exactly the opposite?

[fisbangwollop]

Silsoesid....Now throw in the weather, time of day, character traits and all the other previously mentioned factors and maybe you can see where I'm coming from.

By character traits what do you mean......did you know and understand him as a person or are you judging him by what you read in the press....if I worked for Marks legal team I would like to challange that statement on the grounds of slander!! It seems you will not be happy till your theory of poor judgement is proven.....please just continue to post your thoughts as I am sure some will take heed from them and realise what sort of a person you are......in the mean time I will be happy to wait the AAIB outcome if one can be found.

[Gordy]

Fishbangwallop:

Watch this:

YouTube - b-52 crash (longer version)

Then Read THIS (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Fairchild_Air_Force_Base_B-52_crash) ...... you may understand what we are talking about. Look at factor # 1 in the pre-amble, emphasis added:

The subsequent investigation concluded that the chain of events leading to the crash was primarily attributable to three factors: Holland's personality and behavior, USAF leaders' delayed reactions to earlier incidents involving Holland, and the sequence of events during the aircraft's final flight.

[SilsoeSid]

Character traits that I have read;

His wife,
‘hard to live with, strong-willed and argumentative’
sometimes absent-mindedly driving over her roses as he rushed about in a digger doing jobs

His mother;
“He used to laugh and get frustrated by officialdom.

Himself;
“I had to ignore them because I knew what I was doing was right.”

Articles;
But his business acumen was bound up with a disregard for authority.

Earlier this year he illegally dropped a paraglider from his helicopter at 10,000ft and was fined £400 when footage of the stunt was posted online.

Mr Weir was not the type of man to let little things like rules stand in the way of his vision.


Would the legal team really be able to do me for slander?
I am merely repeating from published material in the public domain quotes from his own family and an incident already on the 'legal register'.


Fishbang, you may well have met Mark, but when you met him was it a dark wet windy night after a hard days work and a drive through the bad weather with possibly a pile of paperwork to sort out? Or was it with your wife on a day when he could drop everything and spent the next 2 hours with you? Was there also time to be bundled into a Jeep and driven up the mountain side and into the mine. Was there even more time to show you how roof slates were fashioned by hand.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not for one second doubting that Mark was a great character to be around, just that at this particular time something made him phone his wife, tell her that he loved her, get into the aircraft and take off.


Have you had a Look at a bigger picture, or even CAP737 ?

[SilsoeSid]

More to Gordys post,

B52CRSH2 (http://www.rob.com/pix/B52_crash/B52CRSH2)
I know its only a website, but;

I knew Bud Holland having worked in Tanker Stan/Eval just down the hall from him for over a year. Impressions of events are always different depending on if you know the person or not. He was one of the nicest people I knew.

I flew and worked with Bud at K.I. Sawyer AFB. He was a super person and great pilot. Unfortunately, he got into a position, even with his great skill, he couldn't get out of. He is saving lives today. This accident is a case study in major airline human factors training.

He was planning on retiring the following month, he had nothing to prove so why would he go and "show off"? He knew how to push the limits but would never endanger his crew.

etc


Hard to understand how these things happen to good folk isn't it fbw?

[zorab64]

fisbang - you may not have said weather was the cause, but you did rule it out as a factor.
We all know it was wild windy dark and wet but that does not mean that was a factor
It WAS a factor, and invariably is, that's a FACT!

By character traits what do you mean......did you know and understand him as a person or are you judging him by what you read in the press....
One should not necessarily believe the press, who so frequently make a hash of reporting aviation incidents/accidents in their desire to publish anything they think might make "juicy" copy.

Professional or experienced pilots do not need to know the individual to make comments on the "character traits" most specifically demonstrated by video "evidence" posted online, but added to by many of those who have posted in tribute. The fact that so many have mentioned (positively) how he used to thumb his nose at authority, does not necessarily translate into a positive, as far as piloting is concerned.

There appears little doubt that this fellow was a significant character in the area; a friend to many; and the arbiter of many good works in his, sadly shortened, life. Tomorrow will demonstrate the affection that many had for him & one would hope will be a full celebration of a life well lived. RIP.

Sadly, when the dust has settled, people will be reminded that history is littered with other "well-respected, larger-than-life, glass half full, characters" who've met tragic ends, and where subsequent evidence so often paints a picture that includes colours beyond the spectrum of those viewed in life!

[and just as I get back from business to post this, I note SS is on the same wavelength!]

[Droopy]

Is it known whether there was someone to see the aircraft off? To crash unnoticed close to the mine would seem to indicate not...

[fisbangwollop]

Well sorry guys.....looks like I will step back now and let you profesionals debate the cause of Marks demise....when you have come to your conclusions maybe you could pass on your findings to the AAIB....I am affraid I dont suffer fools gladly so please excuse me now I have a funeral to attend.

[Flyting]

So often, PPL's do favours that professionals should be doing, where they obviously don't have the skill or training for, pushing that limit beyond their capabilities that little extra every time.
CRM reminds us as commercial pilots to take that step back and reassess ones attitudes and adjust it back to where we should be as pilots - and this is lacking in the PPL circus.
How often does a PP have a flight test? - NOT OFTEN ENOUGH :ugh:
How many hours does a PP have to fly every year to stay current? - NOT ENOUGH :ugh::ugh:
What CRM training does a PP have to do? - NOTHING :ugh::ugh::ugh:
How often do PP crash......................!!!
One day, CAA will wake up to this fact and start putting harsher restrictions on PPL's making it all a bit safer out there, as was done for C&ATPL's... But hey, what you don't know can't hurt you...:}

Could you imagine where this discussion would be going if he had had three kids in the helicopter with him at the time... I would think that a lot of people would have a very different opinion.

[fisbangwollop]

Droopy..Is it known whether there was someone to see the aircraft off? To crash unnoticed close to the mine would seem to indicate not...

There we go again...more assumptions! Mark took off about 1900, the wreckage was found at 0100 the next day.....So tell me, what time did he crash???

[fisbangwollop]

zorab...One should not necessarily believe the press, who so frequently make a hash of reporting aviation incidents/accidents in their desire to publish anything they think might make "juicy" copy.



I can confirm that indeed.....last month I gave evidence at the Colin McCrae fatal accident inquiry...if you read the "Sun" the next day they had totally reversed the evidence I gave as I guess it sounded a wee bit more juicy!!!

[toptobottom]

fisbang
At the risk of sounding judgmental, it seems to me as though the relationship you built with Mark during the frequent RT and subsequent meeting, has made you unreasonably defensive when it comes to hearing the views of experienced pilots, both professional and private. This thread is for the exchange of views on the factors that may have led to this unfortunate incident. The original thread, is for tributes, etc. If you're not prepared to accept the views or share in the speculation posted by others on this thread, then with the greatest respect, stay away!

I also knew Mark quite well. He would be the first to admit he took risks, although he didn't rate those risks in quite the same way as some of those around him. I remember him telling me about the time when he arrived to greet a BBC film crew at Honister, coming over a blind crest at zero level, then climbing vertically, wing over, followed by a vertical dive into the valley ending with a quick stop over the pad. He was proud of it and I wasn't the first to tell him he was an accident waiting to happen, but he'd laugh and it was obvious he enjoyed breaking 'the rules'. After all, what could possibly go wrong?

I've lost several mates in flying accidents over the years; only one was a victim of a pure and catastrophic mechanical failure. All the others, despite their experience, would regularly push their luck and would get away with it, time and time again. 'Pushing their luck' became habitual and their egos soared. They secretly enjoyed their reputation for being mavericks. Then one day, another circumstance or two unexpectedly crept into the equation; bad weather, tech problem, whatever. By then though, their ego had developed into a sense of invincibility and it was likely that they were not even aware of the seriousness of the situation until it was too late.

Anyway, back to the point. We know Mark definitely flouted the rule book and was always pushing the boundaries, but even he wouldn't have lifted (on his own and with no audience to play to) unless he was confident he could fly home safely. His ego may have affected his confidence and therefore decision making, but given the proximity of the crash site, I'm sure bad weather wasn't the only factor.

Didn't Mark's Gazelle have SAS fitted?

[toptobottom]

Mark took off about 1900, the wreckage was found at 0100 the next day.....So tell me, what time did he crash???

Given the weather and time of day, I can't imagine he was going on a sight-seeing trip, so isn't it reasonable to assume that the crash occurred a few seconds after he lifted?!

[Gordy]

Fishbang...

In the words of toptobottom, who could not have put it any better:

fisbang
This thread is for the exchange of views on the factors that may have led to this unfortunate incident. The original thread, is for tributes, etc. If you're not prepared to accept the views or share in the speculation posted by others on this thread, then with the greatest respect, stay away!

I concur....

[SilsoeSid]

How do we know he took off around 7pm?

[toptobottom]

That was in the prepared statement (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/445106-cumbria-helicopter-crash-tributes-condolences-post6294940.html#post6294940)from the family and staff at the mine (at the start of the original thread). I think Mark phone Jan just before he lifted.

[SilsoeSid]

Thanks ttb,

I was just wondering if the departure time came from a member of staff that was there, or an educated guess, which then got me to think (while doing the post roast washing up) about something fishbang said earlier,

I knew Mark and often spoke on a daily basis through my job.....unlike many he always thought it to be a good idea to talk to someone whilst operating in a remote environment.

It's a pity that there wasn't some local flight following setup or LS supervision, because if there was someone at the LS which was only 200m downwind of the crash site might have heard something. Failing that, perhaps the minimum of a receiver that staff could monitor. Perhaps a Mayday was called on the selected freq in the hope of someone listening.

But in reality, I guess that is a bit to much to ask and I accept is totally in hindsight. However, Police Air Ops changed the flight following system after the crash seconds after take off at East Mids, perhaps this incident will do the same.

[chopjock]

Flyting
How often do PP crash......................!!!

How often to commercial pilots crash?

Are you suggesting that private pilots crash more often than commercials do?

[md 600 driver]

ss
the actual time was on the cctv at the mine showing the departure the aaib has a copy of this

steve

[fisbangwollop]

Silsoe....It's a pity that there wasn't some local flight following setup or LS supervision

There is.....thats how I used to speak to him often " Scottish Information" The only problem is as you are probably aware VHF comms are line of sight so once he entered the Honister Pass I would lose comms from my TX/RX site in southern Scotland.

Topbottom....Given the weather and time of day, I can't imagine he was going on a sight-seeing trip, so isn't it reasonable to assume that the crash occurred a few seconds after he lifted?!

One thing we never do in ATC is assume "It makes asses of u and me".....no, I guess he was not on a sight-seeing trip but may have flown north west down the valley before for what ever reason turning back.......its more than likely though he did crash seconds after take-off but surely you get my drift......all those of you that have commented and tried to put the pilot down by making press quotes and showing what you feel are dodgy flights as shown on youtube are making your judgements on assumptions!!! something we in aviation should never do...and no I am not upset at your comments because I knew Mark, just upset at your comments because you base none of them on known fact...its always the same on pprune when an accident happens...the gouls normally come out with their know better comments..!!!

[Bravo73]

.....no, I guess he was not on a sight-seeing trip but may have flown north west down the valley before for what ever reason turning back.......its more than likely though he did crash seconds after take-off but <snip>


Erm, isn't that speculation? :confused:

[SilsoeSid]

MD600, very interesting thanks.


FIshbang;
It's a pity that there wasn't some local flight following setup or LS supervision
There is.....thats how I used to speak to him often " Scottish Information" The only problem is as you are probably aware VHF comms are line of sight so once he entered the Honister Pass I would lose comms from my TX/RX site in southern Scotland.

Exactly what I mean fb, a 'local flight follow' ie when in the Pass, a member of staff monitoring the take off/initial transition until Scottish are contacted. Monitoring same freq from office maybe.

I think we all know about assuming thank you, however sometimes assumption can be a good thing.
For example, 'I assume that if I go too far around this valley with this low level cloud, it will close up behind me'.


Aren't you assuming that because he was a very nice & decent chap, and by all accounts a good pilot that knew the area well, that the cause was mechanical failure?
I'd also like to know what your assumption of his flying ability is based on.

[nomorehelosforme]

Please can the coordinator in future split threads between tributes and speculation, relating to any fatalities!!!

[Gordy]

nomorehelosforme

Please can the coordinator in future split threads between tributes and speculation, relating to any fatalities!!!

It was----long time ago....maybe you are on the wrong thread.

Condolences (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/445106-cumbria-helicopter-crash-tributes-condolences.html)

[Flyting]

Woke up this morning thinking of this again, and something that hasn't been mentioned is that any number of incapacitating medical problems could have cause this aircraft to fly itself directly into the ground. I guess it's another report we'll have to wait for...

[toptobottom]

Fisbang

I am not upset at your comments because I knew Mark, just upset at your comments because you base none of them on known fact...
spec·u·la·tion [spek-yuh-ley-shuhhttp://sp.dictionary.com/dictstatic/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngn] - noun. Conjectural consideration of a matter; conjecture or surmise: a report based on speculation rather than facts.


Speculation is the whole point of this thread!! I fear we are in a loop with you. Once again, if you don't like what you read on this thread, then with the greatest respect, please stop reading it!

I'd count Mark as a mate, but I don't believe anything's been written here about his character or behaviour that isn't fact and those facts have fuelled useful speculation about what may have gone wrong, to the benefit of all those PPRuNers interested in flight safety.

TTB

PS Shame I couldn't get to Keswick this afternoon as I would have liked to have seen Mark off. The bugger still owes me £50!! :}

[zorab64]

fisbang - your pomposity over "assume" is quite un-necessary here.
what you feel are dodgy flights
The style of flying demonstrated by a number of videos does not, to a professional pilot, indicate the most responsible attitude to risk in the aviation environment - fact, based on available evidence, not assumption. I think all professional comments on here would assume he did not, in dark & blustery conditions, with no audience or passengers (thank goodness) take off in a similar style. However, evidence is in place to do more than assume that the decision to take off in such conditions may have been flawed.

It's possible, of course, that he took off safely & sensibly, found conditions worse than expected, made an attempt to turn back but came to grief in the ensuing turn/return (perfect conditions for disorientation) - given his knowledge of the local area & conditions, it might still question the decision to lift if his training/ability/currency, in safely recovering from such a situation, were at all in doubt. It's also possible that he was affected by cockpit misting - which would question either the decision to lift before the cockpit was completely demisted (if, indeed, the system was fitted), or the decision to lift at all, especially if it wasn't. Flyting - you have another valid point, which should not be discounted, as it won't be by AAIB.

All of the comments notwithstanding, the bottom line is that PPLs, especially, have fewer legal requirements, & therefore possibly inclination, to make themselves more aware of the risks, through CRM-type training, than those that are placed on professional pilots. This may change? I, for one, would be pleased to include PPLs in our annual CRM training - it makes for a different mix of attitudes and can only enhance & enrich everybody's understanding of the ways we look at aviation.

ghoul - person un-naturally interested in death
goul - first part of goulash, a strongly flavoured meat stew!

[Exo.]

Flyting, yes, reminds me of the article in the "Fatal Traps for Helicopter Pilots" Book, in which an experienced (and extrememly safety conscious) Senior Commercial Pilot; lost consciousness in a 206 in Australia, a week or two after suffering a ball hitting him in the head (when playing with his son).

Such apparently random, and implausible, factors also need to be considered, however unlikely.

But to all who take the time to look over this thread, must surely come away with the sense that the saying "There are no old bold pilots", is just as likely to apply to oneself; as to anybody discussed in the threads themselves.

We see people who take greater risks than are necessary on the roads every day; and we see the results of many of them in crashes and accidents. It is statistically proven that those who take unnecessary risks are more likely to have an accident. Why should this be any different in any other situation?

One thing I've taken from this thread in particular is the idea of getting our Chief Pilot (who does our CRM courses), to do an evening CRM course in the summer for our club's private pilots. Set it up with a barbecue, keep it sufficiently brief and interesting, and provide materials for them to take away. Thanks for the suggestion.

[toptobottom]

Exo. - I'm up for that and I'm sure you'll easily get a good crowd to come along too. Don't forget to invite fisbangwallop :ok:

[Michael Gee]

Mark and I nearly did a deal on a Gazelle together.
I have read and thought much about this friends accident and as an Ex Army Gazelle pilot and ex Gazelle owner/pilot the problem might have been the dreaded fuel cap not on.
If due to distraction that cap is left off then the start/hover are without trouble but on transitioning away the fuel is sucked out of the filler neck and dumping neat Jet A1 into the Astazoe. That puts out the fire and its then where do we go now - Question might be - did he refuel at Honister before leaving that evening ?- a probability.
Still thinking about you Mark

[Thomas coupling]

Chojock: I for one would definitely agree that (pro rata) more PP's crash than do CP's. I'd stake a years salary on it bud.

Fishbang: I know you're upset about your colleague, but understand, please, that Pprune is here to serve a purpose and it does that very well. Don't keep harping on about us all second guessing. Isn't that what pilots do best?
Hey. Life's a bitch then you either marry one or die:D

That fuel cap issue: Saw it happen in dispersal once. The helo refuelled, started with cap hanging off and there was an enormous flame out!
I thought the cap had been modified since then -no?

[md 600 driver]

TC

the fuel cap has not been modified

at the end of last year a ex uk mil gazelle flamed out because of a loose cap and had a very hard landing

micheal
Ex Army Gazelle and ex Gazelle owner/pilot

i know you were a ex mil pilot but i didnt know you was a ex mil gazelle

steve

[sycamore]

A few more thoughts to add in the hope that others who fly privately may consider if they are tempted with getting airborne under similar conditions.
Sunset was at 18.02 ,civil twilight at 18.36, and nautical twilight at 17.18 ; with overcast and rain it would be darker earlier,and also shadowed by the surrounding terrain. Technically `night` flying is IFR,advisable to file a flight plan,especially in `hostile terrain`,and a Safety Altitude in the area of 4000ft+.Given the weather,it would also possibly include icing maybe even at the mine site.It would also have meant an earlier alert to the Rescue/MRT Services....
Aircraft equipment; from the Y-T videos, it appears the aircraft had a comprehensive colour GPS,and flight instruments, but did it have a radar altimeter at all ?Did it have a SAS/ASE fitted ? Was the pitot heat working,as most people never bother using it? It did not have windscreen wipers,and unless one has treated the windscreen with a `rain-dispersant`at regular intervals,then rain will not clear until about 40-50 kts IAS(also on Y-T).The wipers were never `brilliant`,as it`s a compound curved surface,and Aerospatiale/WHL adapted Renault/peugeot ones,(back in early 70`s when I tested Gazelles). Misting-up inside is quite familiar to most helo pilot`s getting wet and then getting into a helo,and the Gaz is no exception,requiring the heater/blower on as soon as the engine is started,but also only being effective once you have a lot of power on.
Looking at other videos of the aircraft at the mine,it does not appear to be `secured`,ie tip-socks,engine covers etc,if the weather deteriorates..If ,as stated elsewhere,Mr Weir had driven from Keswick to the mine ,possibly worried about the aircraft being left insecure overnight,could that have been a reason to decide to fly home ?
Also ,as he operated into a `dusty` environment,although it has an engine filter fitted,with being left in the wet,is there a possibility that the filters may have accumulated water inside,when combined with a large power demand on take-off and attitude changes,could have caused a flame-out ?? I admit ,I don`t know the type of filter,but I know of other systems that required a bypass if flying in rain.
UK Regulations also require S-ENG.helos to be fitted with 2 landing lights, or flares,As this was Hungarian regd.,do the same rules apply ? Did it have an extra landing lamp,preferably with wide and narrow beams ?
How many helo pilots who fly at night regularly practice autos at night,to an unlit airfield just using the landing lights ? What techniques are they taught ?
Mr Weir also appeared to be in the habit of flying without his shoulder straps fastened,and his front seat passengers as well.
There is also the possibility of `disorientation after take-off`,possibly due to starting and lifting-off in an area that is well-lit(maybe it was or not),and then going into a `black-hole`,with no `night-vision` acclimatisation,rain on windscreen,possibly misted up,even without the possibility of a mechanical malfunction.
Then there is the selection of route;the shortest route would be West from the mine,but the valley is narrow,and the weather may well be funnelling into it.Alternatively,he may have considered that if he had driven from Keswick,that going back down to Seatoller,Borrowdale,Derwent water,and Bassenthwaite,and then West to home may have,as the valleys are wider,and following the road would possibly have been a better weather route. Nevertheless,going in either direction was putting himself between `rocks and a hard-place`.
This may all seem judgemental, but only to get any pilot to think twice about the danger of operating at night,crap weather,and under pressure,either real or perceived. Fit FLIR,radar,NVG,and a Nitesun if you really want to do it..

[fisbangwollop]

Sycamore....Nice post with some very good points raised!! One gets the feeling just like the McCrae accident we will never know the whole truth?? :-(

[sycamore]

F-B-W,thanks ;I had a couple of `disturbed` nights after reading the initial reports,then the Y-T stuff,and then Googling` the routes.

[Tailboom]

I've been reading this thread with great interest, my Dad was killed in 1976 by CFIT, when I learned to fly I promised myself not to fly in bad weather, but as we all know it happens !

I think that we all learn from threads like this, its certainly made me think about some of the flying ive done, I'd be very interested in carrying out a CRM course, another good saying I've learnt through the years is "learn by the mistakes of others, you might not live long enough to make them all yourself !!"

If all this speculation has achieved, is to make some one think twice about risk taking then it has to be a good thing.

I did not know Mark, but after reading about him I'm sure that he would totally agree that if this speculation saves somebody's life then I'm sure he would be pleased, even if the cause of this terrible tragedy was caused by some error he may have made. We've all made them !

I encourage the Students I teach to read all the accident reports they can, if they can gain a little insight into any of them its been a worth while exercise.

When they keep on asking " well why can't we fly in cloud" I try to explain the outcome but encourage them to read the AAIB report on the Bertie Fisher, Steve Hislop, the Mathew Harding accident and many more including my Dad over the years.

I enjoy flying at night but I've had a few tense moments recently which I havn't enjoyed, I decided to land a R44 I was flying home in at one of my palls houses after I'd picked up a 45knt head wind in the mountains in South Wales the other night, for all of you that havn't tried it, I can tell you flying at night in quite severe turbelance on your own in the mountains really concentrates the mind, years ago I would have pressed on, boy I'm glad I didn't !!

[Thomas coupling]

In the mountains at night in a single piston engined aircraft......errrm?
Obviously you awoke from that scenario glad you hadn't broken every rule in the CAA book.

[toptobottom]

TC


In the mountains at night in a single piston engined aircraft......errrm?
Obviously you awoke from that scenario glad you hadn't broken every rule in the CAA book.

What rules are you referring to?

[Tailboom]

I can't see what rules were broken, vis was great, Helicopter was night equiped, I'm current with a night rating and Instructor night rating ????

[Thomas coupling]

1500m horizontally from cloud
Clear of cloud, with the surface in sight and in a flight visibility of at least 1500m.

Tell me how this is achieved at night in the mountains? Unless of course he's on goggles:eek:

I bet he also didnt book CANP?

Unless of course you mean you flew 'over' the mountains and not in amongst it all.

Anyone who flies in amongst serious cumulo granite at night in wind >30kts even in a light or even medium helo - is asking for trouble.

[toptobottom]

TC - I think you need to go back to school mate. Tailboom says the vis was great, so he was flying within VMC weather minima :confused:

Also, I don't understand the significance of your point about SEP at night? Are you a pilot?!

[nigelh]

TC. You try to be Mr Rule Book but you always get it so wrong !!!! Of course it's completely illegal to fly SE at night without a spare engine , nvg , radar and of course lots of gold on your shoulders....happy now ? ..........
On the subject of PPl,s personally I have found that quite a few ppl,s standard of flying are well up there with cpl,s and sometimes better . Having a cpl doesn't mean you are better than average in flying skills and there are a lot of ppl,s consistently doing more challenging flying than a lot of cpl taxi drivers ......I would still rather fly with a ppl with 2000 hrs than a cpl with 200 !!!

ps how much is your salary ? Would like to know to see if its worth having the bet with you :ok:

[2244206]

TC. Having read through this thread and some of your other posts on other threads I have to agree with nigelh. You really are being a TC here. Not really sure what your agenda is here and what you hope to gain but the more you seem to type the more you make yourself a joke!

[SilsoeSid]

On the subject of PPl,s personally I have found that quite a few ppl,s standard of flying are well up there with cpl,s and sometimes better . Having a cpl doesn't mean you are better than average in flying skills and there are a lot of ppl,s consistently doing more challenging flying than a lot of cpl taxi drivers ......I would still rather fly with a ppl with 2000 hrs than a cpl with 200 !!!


Is it really all to do with a standard of flying, is it not the attitude to flying that counts?

Another way of looking at it would be that the 2,000hr PPL could well have got into some very bad habits. The 200hr CPL would still be very conciencous, remembering his instructors methods and teachings operators procedures and fear of LoL/employment if he was to make a mistake.

Don't forget there are good and bad in both camps, but I know who I'd rather fly with aswell ;)

Can I just confirm that all flights at night outside controlled airspace are IFR!

I can tell you flying at night in quite severe turbelance on your own in the mountains really concentrates the mind, years ago I would have pressed on, boy I'm glad I didn't !!

Minimum height
29 Without prejudice to the provisions of rule 5, in order to comply with the Instrument
Flight Rules an aircraft shall not fly at a height of less than 1000 feet above the highest
obstacle within a distance of 5 nautical miles of the aircraft unless:
(a) it is necessary for the aircraft to do so in order to take off or land;
(b) the aircraft is flying on a route notified for the purposes of this rule;
(c) the aircraft has been otherwise authorised by the competent authority; or
(d) the aircraft is flying at an altitude not exceeding 3000 feet above mean sea level
and remains clear of cloud and in sight of the surface.


Quadrantal rule and semi-circular rule
30 (1) Subject to paragraph (2), in order to comply with the Instrument Flight Rules, an
aircraft when in level flight above 3000 feet above mean sea level or above the
appropriate transition altitude, whichever is the higher, shall be flown at a level
appropriate to its magnetic track, in accordance with the appropriate Table set forth
in this rule


At night in the mountains!!!:eek:

[fisbangwollop]

I would have to agree with the latest post's about Mr Thomas Coupling...he really is coming across as a "Total C..t"......not only is he happy to spout total bollocks on this thread but has even managed to open his big mouth on Mark's condolence thread.....I for one am sure I dont know him and hopefully never will!!

Silsoe......Maybe in Tailboom's explanation the following exception prevailed.
(a) it is necessary for the aircraft to do so in order to take off or land;

[SilsoeSid]

...and also perhaps the cociss.


However, how long is an approach to land?

I enjoy flying at night but I've had a few tense moments recently which I havn't enjoyed, I decided to land a R44 I was flying home in at one of my palls houses after I'd picked up a 45knt head wind in the mountains in South Wales the other night,

Sounds like he was flying in the mountains and then decided to land! Slightly different than being below a minimum height ... 'in order to land'.

[Thomas coupling]

Chill out lads.
I tried to keep it short re the regs for flying in mountains at night because this isn't the thread to talk about it - or so I thought.
Silsoe has done the deed for me:[Thanks SS].
To fly "mountainous terrain" (definition of mountains in the UK: 2000 AMSL) at night you have to comply with IFR regs number 29 (>1000' within 5NM). It is advised that this be increased to 2000' near peaks reaching 3000'.
That means that normally in the UK you can't fly in amongst the mountains at night. So, as I said - he must or should be flying OVER the fu**ing mountains. If he was flying IN the mountains he was illegal....OK everybody. Anyone disagree?? (toptobottom??).

Fisbangwuzzy: Grow up and stop wingeing....look at the facts for once.

Can we return to thread now.............................................

[toptobottom]

TC

Your hastily edited original post and now excuses for 'keep[ing] it short' isn't fooling anyone I'm afraid. Also, your attitude and language on this forum are so unprofessional, I'm not sure you should even be on here - your contribution thus far hasn't added any value, as far as I can see. I enjoy PPRuNe because I enjoy learning from those with more experience than me; I suggest you park your ego, shut your gob and try and do the same.

TTB

[SilsoeSid]

http://www.aopa.org/asf/publications/sa23.pdf

VFR-only pilots should seriously consider postponing a night mountain flight until daylight hours, even in good weather.


http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/srg_gasil07of2009.pdf

If you intend venturing into the mountains, obtain guidance from those with considerable experience of such flying in your own type of aviation.


http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ga_srg_09webSSL23.pdf

HOW ACCIDENTS HAPPEN
COMMON SCENARIOS IN A CAA REVIEW:
a) Controlled Flight Into Terrain

In a controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) accident the pilot does not lose control, and the aircraft has not failed. They simply fly into the ground, often hills or mountains. The pilots who had fatal CFIT accidents were typically over fifty years old, and very experienced. More than a third were flying in their home base local area, and accidents were not restricted to mountainous regions. Of all CFIT accidents, 82% included unwise reaction to weather conditions (such as continuing to fly into worsening weather) and 64% had not adhered to their MSA (if they had calculated one at all), trying to get ‘below the weather’, or hoping to confirm their position. More than a third found out too late that they had made an error in navigation.



http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/aip/current/aic/EG_Circ_2008_P_082_en.pdf

The aim of this Circular is to remind pilots of the basic theory of airflow over high ground, to describe the effect of the airflow on
aircraft in flight and to offer advice on avoiding or minimising the various hazards that may be encountered. This Circular is divided into
three parts accordingly :
Part 1 - Meteorology
Part 2 - Flying Aspects
Part 3 - Advice to Pilots


http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/aip/current/aic/EG_Circ_2006_P_122_en.pdf

Training in procedures that include all relevant points described above will help promote a healthy 'CFIT Avoidance' attitude. Good crew co-operation - Crew Resource Management (CRM) to use a familiar term - will add value.


http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/aip/current/aic/EG_Circ_2007_P_100_en.pdf

HELICOPTER FLIGHT IN DEGRADED VISUAL CONDITIONS

[SilsoeSid]

Tailboom;

Are you telling us that as an instructor, your pre-flight met brief didn't tell you about the 45kt winds? What did your pre-flight brief consist of?
I don't know what time of night your flight was, but Cardiff/Swansea/Bristol/Caernarfon would have given you enough weather information in order to make a sensible descision.

No met facilities at Caernarfon I hear you say, well a lot of smaller airfields have automated syatems 24/7, such as Caernarfon Airport Weather (http://www.caernarfonairport.co.uk/weather.htm)
or if the winds were a concern Wind Map - Britain Observations (http://www.xcweather.co.uk/)

[SilsoeSid]

Can anyone remember the permitted combinations of door removal?

[toptobottom]

SS - interesting reading your post #112 - thanks. "Over 50, very experienced and in the local area'. Familiarity (and over confidence) breeds contempt... And you're quite right about IFR rules outside CAS at night - in VMC.

Re Tailboom's story, I wouldn't be too harsh! I don't know what pre-flights he did, but we've all been caught out and IMO he did the right thing and avoided the possibility of becoming another statistic by putting it down.

[toptobottom]

This (http://cumbrialive.tv/loadplayer-Mark.htm?config1=file/get/MartinCampbell-ATributeToAFriend769.m4v)is interesting - Mark describing how he's learned to remain calm when faced with unexpectedly challenging situations...

[SilsoeSid]

ttb,

That is one scary video! :eek:

Interestingly, as Mark mentions Jim Lovell in the vid, Gene Cernan (Last man on the Moon) crashed a helicopter while flying over water. Lovell was chairman of the investigation board.
Cernan's '71 Helo (http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites/Cernan-Helo-1971.htm)

Regarding his 1971 helicopter accident: in later accounts, one of which was written by Cernan himself in an autobiography, it is revealed that Cernan was flying too low and showing off for nearby boaters. Cernan often describes the experience as "Mr. Toad's Wild Ride."

[toptobottom]

SS

My definition of 'caught out'? In this context, I'd say suddenly finding myself in an uncomfortable situation I wasn't expecting (for whatever reason). It happens and I don't believe there's a soul amongst us who hasn't been there. The really important things are (i) knowing what the appropriate escape plan is, (ii) escaping successfully (!), (iii) learning from it and (iv) making sure you take all reasonable steps to ensure you don't find yourself in that situation again - unless you're qualified to deal with it.

We don't know why tailboom found himself outside his comfort zone/flying ability, whatever. Maybe the met was wrong? But he did the right thing and survived to share his experience on here. I'm sure he's learned from the experience; he shouldn't be flamed for it!

[SilsoeSid]

Fair enough. Sorry I got rid of that post as your vid link is so much more 'interesting' and clear cut!

Just my thought that 45 kt winds not being on the met or not even realising that winds on the way towards the mountains would get more turbulent, is one of surprise.

[SilsoeSid]

Better to live a day like a tiger than life as a mouse - Mark Weir (http://cumbrialive.tv/loadplayer-Mark.htm?config1=file/get/MartinCampbell-ATributeToAFriend769.m4v)

I was wondering... during the paper round (us mere drivers dont get paid as much as the owners here, or so they keep reminding us ;) )... what is the definition, in the eyes of those on this thread, of display flying? (no looking at the CAA website first!)

[SilsoeSid]

The rule breaking video;

YouTube - Infinite tumbles UK WR attempt and a tribute to Mark Weir

[md 600 driver]

ss
Yes mark got procecuted by the caa for the para drop

but where in this topic has any one said what licence he held

he could have a DA, he could have a instrument and cpl maybe even a atpl or just a night rating , one thing for sure l he was not a pilot with HM gov thats obvious otherwise he couldnt do any wrong in your eyes

but one thing he definately was , a very experienced mountain helicopter pilot with thousands of hours, for the last 10 years or so he has flown from home to work daily in the mountains

yes maybe a crm course may have saved his life but that didnt help the few cpls that flew high profile people over the last few years that have bought it no names but we all know who they were

just because he is a helicopter owner you have assumed he is a PPL unfortunately mark isnt here to stand his corner

i dont know what licence he had therefore i am not going to assume anything

and i am not knocking ex mil either as that would mean i knock my self

he was a pilot that may have made a mistake like any of us
maybe even you

[SilsoeSid]

MD,

I don't think you'll find me having a go at PPL's and you will not find me on any one side in the mil-civ debate. I haven't even assumed that Mark was a PPL holder, so I don't know what that post is all about.

I think you have assumed that I have assumed all these things, which I haven't.
If you read fishbangs earlier post about assumption, you seem to have fallen into the 'making an ass out of yourself' catagory ;)

[Coconutty]

No-one knows (yet) what the cause of this tragedy was.

Some have sprung to Mark's defence out of their personal knowledge of him as an extremely experienced pilot, suggesting that mechanical failure could have been the cause, (it could), while others have suggested that the weather is more likely to have been the main factor. (Which it could have).

Of course, had there been a mechanical failure or similar problem, then poor visibility and bad weather conditions might only exacerbate the situation, compared to the same problem in gin clear weather.

We just don't KNOW ( yet ) what went wrong, but one thing is clear, and that is that IF the decision had been made NOT to fly, then the aircraft would not have crashed.

With hindsight it is all to easy to make such a statement after the event. I didn't know Mark but after seeing the wreckage up close, I was reminded of another CRM training course quote :

"I'd rather be on the ground wishing I were flying, than be flying and wishing I were on the ground."

A good one to think of before raising the pole.

RIP

Coconutty

[SilsoeSid]

A bit of light reading if you like stats;

Helicopter Safety | UK Helicopter Accident Trends (http://www.helicoptersafety.org/trends.asp)

[fisbangwollop]

Silsoe...the only person's making an ass on this forum are yourself and Mr T coupling....both of you with constant attempts at trying to put Mark down....your constant posting's of utube clips of what IN YOUR EYES are dangerous manouver's and practice's......Of course I guess you have never made a mistake in all your life as being Ex mil you guys dont do that of course!!!.... I really am now getting fed up with your constant drivel as it real has no bearing on any debate towards air safety.

[Bravo73]

your constant posting's of utube clips of what IN YOUR EYES are dangerous manouver's and practice's......

Actually, fbw, it's not just SS & TC who have formed these opinions about MW's flying from the various youtube videos. I imagine that most professional helicopter pilots who have watched the videos are forming similar opinions.

[Gordy]

Actually, fbw, it's not just SS & TC who have formed these opinions about MW's flying from the various youtube videos. I imagine that most professional helicopter pilots who have watched the videos are forming similar opinions.

I did....add me to the list.

[Thomas coupling]

I've seen enough after those live feeds to your vids SS.
Jazzy music, home vids, illegal aerobatic maonuevres, illegal aerial activities dropping pax, comparisons to astronauts, carpe diem.........and so it goes on.

This 'character' if I am to remain polite, obviously sees his life as one big action movie in which he played the lead role.

Dead man walking........................

I'm sure there are CRMI's out there who are already appropriating this material for their next presentation.

Thank goodness for SS and Gordy's input. I thought for a while that airmanship had gone gone out the window and the place was full of amateur aviators in denial:ugh: [Not forgetting the token mushroom].
If only 1 pilot has learned from this charade. Job done.

Please desist from responding guys - move on, Mark has.

[Senior Pilot]

Silsoe...the only person's making an ass on this forum are yourself and Mr T coupling....both of you with constant attempts at trying to put Mark down....your constant posting's of utube clips of what IN YOUR EYES are dangerous manouver's and practice's......Of course I guess you have never made a mistake in all your life as being Ex mil you guys dont do that of course!!!.... I really am now getting fed up with your constant drivel as it real has no bearing on any debate towards air safety.

fbw,

Much as we understand your affinity to Mark, your attempts to prevent debate on this accident (on both threads) does your standing very little good. SS, TC, Coconutty, Gordy and many others here are respected and professional pilots giving their time and their experience to the benefit of others. There are some salutary lessons to be learnt and to deny them is doing nothing to advance flight safety.

As already said by others, if this discussion can help to prevent even one accident, it is worthwhile. As a professional pilot I agree with the opinions made as a result of watching the videos and reading of Mark's personality and temperament: refusing to discuss them will not help anyone.

[SilsoeSid]

Sorry fishbang, I was only bringing to the attention to others some examples of, from my point of view, how not to conduct yourself, especially in the public eye.


If you are after a bite, here goes; it won't be nice

I defy anyone not to watch the videos of Mark flying and not say, "There's an accident waiting to happen". Anyone from the aviation world that saw him fly like this should have had a word, no matter how good a bloke he was. That's one of the main problems in the aviation world, we tend not to speak up even when we know something is wrong. CRM covers that aspect and I have a prime example that I bring up on various courses, involving a very experienced Austrian Air Force Colonel, an experience Danish Fennec pilot and an experienced UK Lynx pilot, none of whom said anything when it started to go wrong! I know, I was there!

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP403.PDF
Flying Display - Any flying activity deliberately performed for the purpose of providing an exhibition or entertainment at an advertised event open to the public. (Article 255 of the ANO)

The 'tribute video' was taken at a public event and I would bet my bottom dollar that there was no display authorisation from the CAA and he was flying with the purpose of exhibition/entertainment. Watch the video again and notice that at 1:10 he isn't quite sure what manouevre he's going to do next.

It seems to me that Mark had a total disregard for flight safety, you know, that thing that I and many others try to instil in others. The take off or the rear door open on the 'tribute video' shows that!

If I hear the phrase 'We've all done it ourselves' again I will scream.

Yes we have, but only once. I have, only once gambled with the Chipmunk fuel consumption on a navex, only once 'gone for it' on a solo nav around Salisbury plan, only once flown the General that extra 5 mins to get another photo that left me flying over primary jungle with my arse chewing the Gazelle seat trying to reach fuel. Only once having met the General from his flight, entered Polish airspace from Berlin with General, ADC and P2 on board with worsening weather, being told we were under IFR and had to climb to 5,000' with the met from the exercise CP at the other end reported as clearing! Afterwards the General said he was ok with the flight, but wouldn't have objected to a night in Berlin!

Yes I have also been caught out with the weather, but landed early in a field near Shepshed, no need to push an extra mile or 2 to E.Mids airport. Then there was the airframe icing in Norway with the homing antennae waving like a fast wavey thing. But thats caught out!

Because of all these learning moments, I have been confident enough to stand up to authority and for example stopped the flight of 4 Gazelles pressing on from Yorkshire to Cornwall in bad November weather, even if it meant the boss was going to have to continue in a Lynx and be late for briefing by the bigwigs. The next day in the mess, many said that was the right descision, it wasn't a nice trip. Pity nobody stood with me at the time. (before CRM courses)

Because of these learning moments, I refused a Comp A task from Cornwall to Hereford because of bad weather in the early hours. I was told by 'authority' the met was ok, I checked with the mobile met unit, it was ****e. I was told it would be ok to leave under radar control and do a LWNA letdown over the severn East of Cardiff and then snurgle onwards. Straight away I went to the pax who had already been loaded onto the aircraft and told him that he was going to have to go by road and explained, that way 'authority wasn't going to come up with any other idiotic ideas to other pilots. The pax fully understood and thanked me anyway!

Then there's the standing up to authority when told it would be ok to fly a cab with a slight fuel leak, into the mission pod down, to the maintenance base. It is one thing to be told by senior engineering managers that it would be ok and for your company chiefs to say it's ok and then still refuse to go even if there was a shortage of duty engineers and a quick job. It was only when an observer put his foot down and took the ac offline that calmed the night down!
In the cool light of day, funnily enough, everyone understood why I refused. When you are asked, 'are you refusing to fly the aircraft to 'maint base'', you do tend to worry about your job, but if it did go wrong, who would have stood up and said, 'Yes I said it was going to be ok'...no-one!

It's simple things that save lives, watch the take off on the 'tribute video' or any of the vids. It used to be Tq Nc T4 CWP, but judging by the videos, Mark never carried out after take off checks. I am reminded of the time we took off and the P2 said 'Tq Nc T4 CWP', to which I replied, so you haven't noticed the Tq meter failure then!
I wonder what other checks weren't done, that may have been noticed and may even have prevented this incident! I am reminded of one of the guys on my APC walking out of the crewroom for a trip and coming back in 5 mins later. On the walk round he found a pitch change rod not connected!


Yes we all make mistakes and most of us learn from them, some of us pass on our mistakes and a few of us go out of our way to ensure others find out about not only our mistakes, but also those of others.

As much of a good guy Mark was, he was a Flight Safety nightmare and a danger to himself and others, let down by those around him who didn't have the courage to tell him to be a bit more careful, not from a legal point of view, but more importantly from a life saving point of view.




Sorry if that was a bit hard to hear fishbang, but you have missed the point of this thread which has been separated from the tributes and condolences thread for a very good reason and if you want to take me to court for what I have just said, I will happily appear.


The main thing is, and it's the cliche of cliches I know, but if my bite has saved one more life, wether it's PPL, CPL, ATPL, Mil, Civ, H or A then that's a good thing....isn't it?

[SilsoeSid]

A pleasing thing to see on this thread, is that many of the names here sometimes don't always see eye to eye on a lot of matters, but his thread however, seems to have brought us all together in a common cause.

It's a real shame that Mark had to die to enable such a huge discussion about Flight Safety and I'm sure all our thoughts are with his family and friends.


Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
Sunward I've climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
Of sun-split clouds, — and done a hundred things
You have not dreamed of — wheeled and soared and swung
High in the sunlit silence. Hov'ring there,
I've chased the shouting wind along, and flung
My eager craft through footless halls of air. . . .

Up, up the long, delirious burning blue
I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace
Where never lark, or ever eagle flew —
And, while with silent, lifting mind I've trod
The high untrespassed sanctity of space,
Put out my hand, and touched the face of God.

— John Gillespie Magee, Jr

RiP

[TRC]

Well said and well explained, SS. (and Gordy).

[Epiphany]

The main thing is, and it's the cliche of cliches I know, but if my bite has saved one more life, wether it's PPL, CPL, ATPL, Mil, Civ, H or A then that's a good thing....isn't it?

Yes SS - it most certainly is. Unfortunately judging by some of the posts here there are those who will always remain unconvinced. I am also horrified by the videos but more so by some peoples attitude that they are somehow 'normal'. They are not and will certainly be part of this CRMI's next presentation.

[Droopy]

Add my name to Bravo 73's list...

[Tailboom]

Guys this thread is supposed to be about what might have happened in Marks accident, lets try and get back to it, I'm sorry now that I mentioned my night flight, but just to clarify a few details

I live in South Wales, we are surrounded by mountains over 2000ft, its always windy here, its not very often that the wind is under 15knts. I'm not suggesting that I know it all, but ive been flying in,around and over these mountains now for nearly 20 years, and I always expect the unexpected !!
I'm not being a smart ass but before I go anywhere I check the Notams + the weather especially the 214 spot winds which I find most accurate.
On the night in question I flew down from Huddersfield to Aberporth then back into South Wales the wind was forecast to be 20knts, unfortuanatly it increased in an isolated area to plus 40knts
As for the weather forecast once past Cardiff there are no other Airfields available for a forecast, Pembrey is automated, most of the others Swansea + Haverfordwest are closed by 5pm
In the night I like to always be at least 1000/1500ft above the highest object whether it be a City or Mountain, that normally means, that I'm at least 3000ft +, and fly Quadrangle Rules
As I stated earlier, normally I would have pressed on, and would have been quite pleased with myself when I got home, but on this occasion, I'd had enough and was very pleased with my decision to land, even rang my ex wife to pick me up !!!!!!

Now back to the thread, a pall of mine came up with an interseting comment this morning, he said that although the Gazelle is quick machine it seemed like a short distance from the take off point to end in such a high speed impact, he suggested that maybe the Helicopter took off down the Valley, didn't like what the weather was like and perhaps he was returning to his landing site.

[OvertHawk]

You can stick me on that list as well, sadly.

[SilsoeSid]

In the night I like to always be at least 1000/1500ft above the highest object whether it be a City or Mountain, that normally means, that I'm at least 3000ft +, and fly Quadrangle RulesIt's not a matter of wanting to be, you shall be, and you'll keep 5 miles away from the highest obstacle aswell! :ugh:


As I stated earlier, normally I would have pressed on, and would have been quite pleased with myself when I got home,Shouldn't that be, 'if I got home'! :ugh:




I won't give up :8

[zorab64]

Firstly - I'm in tune with TC, SS, Gordy etc.

In addition to my previous posts, however, md 600 raised another issue - but where in this topic has any one said what licence he held
he could have a DA, he could have a instrument and cpl maybe even a atpl or just a night rating , one thing for sure l he was not a pilot with HM gov thats obvious otherwise he couldnt do any wrong in your eyes Licence, ability or background make little difference, it's all to do with the style of flying , whether it's legal and/or sensible & whether he had any real idea of the risks.
As has been mentioned, you will find professional PPLs and less-than-professional AT/CPLs, just as you do in any profession - lawers / builders / doctors, etc. Sadly, in this case there's a multitude of evidence that would indicate that the style of flying was frequently somewhat less than responsible, safe and/or legal.

What some people have unfortunately regarded in a positive light . . . he was very generous.....even treating pax to a spot of low level was known in the military, especially when un-authorised, as "wazzing" and could result in disciplinary action if discovered. Authorised low-level training had strict controls (& I imagine still does) - weather/briefing/pre descent checks/height limitations/understanding consequences of emergencies at low level etc. - a risk-managed exercise that enabled pilots to discover both piloting & aircraft limits, ready for the day in battle when they might need both - as I did. Sadly, as so often in gung-ho young pilots, it was normally when more two or more limits (piloting, weather, aircraft or legal) were exceded at the same time that things had a habit of going wrong, often with fatal consequences.

Whilst the military appreciated the benefits, but made every effort to minimise the risks, inherrent in low flying, it was a necessary part of the job & appropriate training was therefore in place. However, it's not a regime that's encouraged, or generally allowed, in General Aviation, unless you're inspecting pipelines, railways, pylons etc, as there's little need to spend time close to the ground, unless landing or taking off. Height just gives you a bit more time to sort things out, as a general rule. Those who do work in the low level environment tend to be older, experienced, pilots who have a bit more to loose than the same "invincible" individual in his twenties - I know, I was there, I did it, BUT, like SS & others, I learnt, sometimes by scaring myself, that it wasn't the key to a long life!

Low level flying is exciting for the simple reason that it's dangerous - it follows Dr Johnson's (1709-1784) mantra that "the prospect of hanging sharpens the mind wonderfully" - for "hanging", read "death", in the low flying environment. :eek:

Whilst some have slated Tailboom's actions in South Wales, I'd have to agree that it's better to admit a slight error of judgement, whatever the consequences from this community, than be asking God why he couldn't log on to pprune, just one last time, to explain!!

[SilsoeSid]

Nice one Zobra,

I think you explain nicely perhaps why some get a bit upset when an ex-mil pilot raises his head and makes comment. I think it's the attitude of risk awareness that is hammered into them throughout their career that highlights some risks that are not necessarily apparent to others.
It's not a 'better than' attitude, its more of a 'what if' attitude.

I especially like you highlighting, 'Sadly, as so often in gung-ho young pilots, it was normally when more two or more limits (piloting, weather, aircraft or legal) were exceded at the same time that things had a habit of going wrong, often with fatal consequences'.

Can I just add that it's not necessarily just the young. :\


Can you 'quote' MDs comment for those that missed it.

[Cactus99]

SS, excellent post, I hope a few people on here read and re-read that post a few times.:D

Im not a heli pilot, but to me, those videos make my skin crawl. To me he is a risk taker, and conducting a regular operation in mountanous terrain, esp at night with him at the helm was always going to end this way. Just a matter of when, not if.

Theres a few on here who are letting their emotions get in the way of flight safety, but as the saying goes, the truth always hurts!

FBW, you are respected on these forums by a lot of people, please dont spoil that reputation.:=

Safe flying!

Edit: thankfully no one else was onboard at the time!

[malaprop]

Zorab64, re the generosity and low flying I do apologise for the poor quality of my sarcasm.

[fisbangwollop]

OK guys maybe time for me to call a halt...:rolleyes:Cactus thanks for your kind words.:ok:

I guess my judgement has been clouded somewhat by be-friending Mark as one of my top customers, not only that but the fact he was a bludy good bloke and one in a million. :DNot only that despite what others felt he had more experiance at mountain flying gained over the past 10 years than many will achieve in a life-time.

My main concern when I came to this post was that folk seemed to be jumping to conclusion's....yes the weather was **** and I must admit when I first was told of the accident that was the first thing that came into my mind. Rather than jump to conclusions though I would rather wait to see the full facts.

Its always the same on PPRUNE when an accident happens.....the experts and do gooders crawl out from the undergrowth and spout off their feelings....in some cases they talk sense in others....well as I said earlier just follow the post's after the BAW 777 landed short at EGLL.:ugh:

The problem I have with all of this is that most folk on PPRUNE remain annonymous....the likes of TC and SS, what they say is probabally all good stuff after years spent in aviation, that said though for all I know they may indeed be bus conducters or train drivers!!:confused:

Anyway what ever...through my job I have met some great folk, to be honest you rotary boys and girls are some of the best, :ok:its because of that that I do indeed get attatched and it hurts badly when things go wrong and some are lost....so from now on I will leave you all in peace....I am sorry if I have ruffled some feathers but I guess you all old and ugly enough to cope with that....one thing for sure I dont suffer fools glady:= so I guess in a way a little like Mark I am always keen to let the world know my feelings!!

OK so then that's about it....I now have a Moody 38 to get launched :pso its off to the sea for me.....that air is far too bludy dangerous!!

Good luck to you all and safe flying. :cool::cool::cool:

[SilsoeSid]

Before you bang out fishbang,

Not only that despite what others felt he had more experiance at mountain flying gained over the past 10 years than many will achieve in a life-time.

There is a huge difference between being experienced in mountain flying and flying a-b in mountainous terrain 6 days a week for 10 years. Would Mark for example be able to brief a Squadron of helicopter pilots before they go mountain flying training in Saillagouse on the different techniques and 'gotchas'. ?

I would be interested to know on which of the many mountain flying courses available in the UK he attended or instructed/passed his knowledge on, or was this experience learnt on the job !



The problem I have with all of this is that most folk on PPRUNE remain annonymous....the likes of TC and SS, what they say is probabally all good stuff after years spent in aviation, that said though for all I know they may indeed be bus conducters or train drivers!! :confused:

I don't think you'll find it hard to discover who SS is.
He isn't one to hide behind a username, google silsoesid for example, oh dear don't go looking at that helitorque profile, you may be dissapointed that I'm not driving the No5 into town :p

The way he likes to look at it is that if people know who he is, his posts have a certain substance to them :ok:



Please don't stop reading this thread fishbang, we appreciate your input, but in the kindest way I don't think you are looking at it from an aviators point of view. Hopefully we can all learn from this and I know personally how hard it is to see the picture when you lose a family friend. G-BLUN (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/sites/aaib/publications/formal_reports/7_2008_g_blun.cfm)


With changes nationally, one day soon I may well find myself a bit further North than usual and be calling for your help.
Until then, all the best and happy sailing :)
SS

[Thomas coupling]

30yrs aviation
17yrs in FAA of which 3 in N America teaching mountain flying. Waterbird.
3 tours Sharks display team. QHI. CFS agent.
13yrs Police/HEMS. CP N Wales Police, flying the most varied and demanding areas anywhere in the UK. CRMI.
Type rated on 11 a/c.
Now running a training service for some of the best rotary pilots in the world.

If anyone wants to to organise an aviation workshop / pi**up evening in a local pub in the NW, count me in, I can even arrange a visit to the sharp end ;)

I accept your apology fishbangwheeze.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Sir Nialll Dementia;

9 500 rotary hours
3 300 fixed wing

ATPL/H/IR (incl 620 Gazelle)
ATPL/A/IR

Currently senior pilot in a corporate operation.

I met Mark a couple of times, I never flew with him, but was concerned at some of the manouvres I watched.
3 years ago an old friend who had worked (not as a pilot) in civvy helicopter aviation rang me and told me that she had just been introduced to Mark and that he was carrying out pleasure flying (in his Gazelle) at an event she was attending (a corporate jolly)
She questioned whether it was legal in a machine of that registration, and what his license was (apparently a CPL). She watched the first trip and refused an opportunity to fly on one of the later trips that day. (there were ten more flights, all as "exciting" as the first)
She contacted CAA enforcements and was told that the aircraft and pilot were familiar to them from other reports.
Mark struck me as a risk taker, you don't get involved with what he did at Honister without that trait, sadly many such people believe that success in one area of your life will lead to success in all areas (and in this job I've met a few of them) The unseen menace of severe windshear/downdraughting can happen in the Honister area, I met it myself in an S76 a couple of years ago, coming past the mine with full power on we were going down whether we wanted to or not. At night, possibly in iffy weather it could have been a serious handful.

FBW. Your grief is understandable. Most of us on this forum who make a living flying helicopters have a list of friends who have ended their careers in some pretty spectacular ways (I've got a course photo with an awful lot of faces Tip-exed out), from an early stage we get used to sitting in the crewroom/pub/ at a keyboard questioning how the hell they did it, it may seem callous, but that questioning may help us to learn and stay alive. As a well known contributor to PPrune your views will always be respected because in your job you are one of the pros we rely on, don't be hard on us when we start trying to work out what went wrong.

SND

[zorab64]

30+ years & 5,000+ rotary hours, (to maintain some level of anonimity, a subject I've touched on before) but I trust my posts are balanced enough to speak for themselves.

FBW - Concur with others that your contributions have been valuable. They've helped to stir discussion and encourage others to raise issues that may not otherwise have emerged - enjoy the sailing but don't pull the plug on pprune.

Fly/Sail (& walk sideways!) carefully :ok:

[Old and Horrified]

Speaking for my son (CPL(H), 250 hours including about 40 on B206, looking for work - well you have to start somewhere) we find discussions such as this on Pprune hugely valuable as a way of learning how to be a better, safer pilot. Thanks to all of you.

[nigelh]

There is wazzing around and there is dangerous flying possibly above the ability of the pilot or the aircraft . Low flying , torque turns etc could be called wazzing around and would get scorn from loads of pilots on here ...but when planned , just like crop spraying , can be perfectly safe but look exciting . I have done my fair share of that , like many people , but at least i was trained to do it . I must admit i had not seen many of the videos and thought this was a typical pprune bash against someone having some fun .
Some of you here just have a v poor bedside manner ( typically Mil i know !!) and immediately get peoples backs up re cpl,s , millions of hrs etc just look at the fuss over the R66 take off .....it may have been showy offy but it was not dangerous in my view .....we have to accept that some people obey rules and others push them . I have employed and flown with many mil pilots , some with more hrs incl combat than most of you ....they still wazzed around when the time was right . Having said that i have to admit , having seen the videos etc i would not have flown in the back seat and i was misguided being defensive .

[[email protected]]

Cracking thread chaps - it is sad that someone has to die in order that such wisdom, as espoused by SS, TC et al, is listened to - I hope that any PPL/CPL/ATPL perusing this thread will read and inwardly digest so that they don't have to learn the same lessons the hard way.

I place myself with some of the older and bolder here - 30 years mil flying, 8000 hrs, 3000 hrs instructional and side wholeheartedly with their analysis of Mark's (slightly flawed) personality as applicable to aviation matters.

RIP Mark, sadly you are not the first nor, even more sadly, will you be the last.

[Flyting]

I for one am extremely greatfull for everybody who contributes to Rotorheads, whether experienced of not. We as helicopter pilots have very little interaction between each other, being away on jobs mostly, regarding safety and flying (besides the yearly CRM when we all get together) and I for one find PPruNe the perfect place for this. The amount of informative and helpfull information that gets given freely here is increadible and I applaud those giving it. I learnt early in my career from a great man, who died in a helicopter crash low level - due to mechanical failure, that there is one thing that is free in life....INFORMATION, so pass it on as you are helping someone whether you know it or not.

As I have mentioned before, the amount of thinking that this thread has given me, is increadibly.
Keep it coming people.... You're saving lives.... Don't think of it as "if only one person thinks twice...." There are a lots of US thinking twice, and benifiting from discussions like this.

PPruNe Rotorheads is a site that I check in with everyday, like the met/notam etc, as you never know when you might miss something of importance that you might benefit from on todays flight...

Now 10 yrs in aviation with 3000 hrs, 80% spent in the curve!!! with hands securely on the controls thinking "what if" and trying to keep it as safe as possible...
Thank you again everybody... :D :D :D

[Thomas coupling]

What a refreshing start to the day after reading that Flyting. :D Even with all your hours you still feel humbled by whats going on in the aviation world.
None of us stops learning - ever. We should all hope to benefit from other peoples good and bad experiences.
Hope to see you contributing more often in future?

[jumpseater]

SND
She watched the first trip and refused an opportunity to fly on one of the later trips that day. (there were ten more flights, all as "exciting" as the first)

This rang a bell for me, a few years ago I was at an airfield watching a similar helicopter 'experience' day. There was one pilot I watched whom I thought was pushing it, and I opted not to fly with him but with his colleage. I mentioned the 'spirited' flying to the other pilot and said something 'none of that messing about please', and he said I don't fly like that anyway. I had a brilliant trip. A few years later the other pilot was dead from a weather related accident. Unfortunately I wasn't surprised at all, but plenty of others were from resultant web postings. By all accounts he too was a nice bloke. An aviation mate lived near the accident site, and could recall the night in question, he was surprised the aircraft was flying where it was at the time of the accident too. On the basis of the vids, the experience above and hours of watching low flying, fast jet and rotary, regretably I too would be 'Bravo73' +1.

These sorts of threads are invaluable, even for non-aircrew like myself. Theres plenty of info to be shared both on and off forum as I have done with people here in rotorheads and other parts of the site. Every days a learning day.

js, 28 years of assorted aviation experience.

[toptobottom]

Flyting
I for one am extremely greatfull for everybody who contributes to Rotorheads, whether experienced of not.

Isn't this the whole point of PPRuNe - to learn? It certainly is for me.

There are all sorts on this forum: PPLs, CPLs, ATPLs, owners/operators, engineers, ATCs, CAA staff, journalists, insurers, instructors, students, handlers and so on. Some have lots of hours, some have none. Some ferry VIPs around, some spray crops, some go to war. Some sit in armchairs waiting to flick peanuts at the first opportunity. Not one of us will ever know it all, but if you're interested in learning then IMO there isn't a better place to do it.

If someone posts an opinion in good faith, then they shouldn't be flamed for it - that will just stifle debate. If someone posts an experience that they know was wrong, they should be thanked for sharing that experience so others can learn from it, not lambasted and labelled an idiot! If an opinion can be changed for the better through someone else's experience, then use this forum to educate with a mature and measured response instead of the pompous and emotional rhetoric that so often ensues? We will all learn and become safer pilots.

We still don't know what went wrong for Mark although we have our suspicions; hopefully time will tell. I am also grateful to have learned a lot from this thread, so at least something +ve has come out of Mark's death. :ok:

[500e]

I tend to read aaib & faa reports, if people with a lot more hours experience than me get it wrong, it's not going to be a problem for me personally to screw up big time.

[OvertHawk]

It's the old cliche - learn from the mistakes of others because you won't have time to make them all yourself!

Flysafe everyone
OH

[hands_on123]

Mark Weir obituary | Education | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/apr/08/mark-weir-obituary)

extract:

A careful and experienced pilot, he also had an adventurous streak that led to a £400 fine in January 2011 for an unauthorised stunt, dropping the champion paraglider Felix Rodriguez from 3,050m (10,000ft) to perform an "infinite tumble" at last year's Lakes Charity Classic airshow.

[Art of flight]

Certainly looks like Mark lived life to the full and helped others along the way (30 employees at the mine amongst other ventures). I offer no opinion on the circumstances of his death, just sadness at another loss and I just count myself lucky to still be around when so many of my friends have gone the way of Mark for all manner of reasons.

I probably bite off as much as I can chew a couple of times a year, if I didn't my employer would soon get the idea I was turning down do-able jobs too often. I just wish I knew which 'couple of times' in advance.

Safe flying all.

[SilsoeSid]

From the same article;

Among many local tributes, the writer and broadcaster Eric Robson, who chairs Cumbria Tourism, spoke of the "tremendous joy" Weir brought through ideas that he "pushed through when everyone else was saying you can't do that or you'll never get away with it".

Eventually, you don't !

Interesting report ahead ;)

[toptobottom]

Mark Weir documentary (http://officeemail.co.uk/mailer/display.php?M=184004&C=68527dcef71dd446c2c443e7e0c0240c&S=676&L=209&N=589), 2100 this Sunday (23rd Oct) on BBC4 for those who may be interested

[stringfellow]

wow, an incredibly powerful documentary. rip.

[SilsoeSid]

Missed it, but downloading for later.

Saw a minutes worth around the 45 minute mark (the sheep). His comments and attitude about risk....sums it all up really !

[Bravo73]

Mark Weir documentary (http://officeemail.co.uk/mailer/display.php?M=184004&C=68527dcef71dd446c2c443e7e0c0240c&S=676&L=209&N=589), 2100 this Sunday (23rd Oct) on BBC4 for those who may be interested

Now on iPlayer (for those in the UK):

BBC iPlayer - Tales from the National Parks: The Lake District (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016dr0x/Tales_from_the_National_Parks_The_Lake_District/)

[toptobottom]

clicky (http://www.identitycloaker.com/)for those who aren't in the UK

[fisbangwollop]

Silsoesid..His comments and attitude about risk....sums it all up really !

Christ man you still at it???....leave the guy in peace FFS!! :ugh:

[SASless]

The instant one knows it all....and cannot learn from others....it is time to hang up your headset!

I always took the approach to flying that I could learn from anyone of any skill level or experience background. I made it through a career of flying without an accident or chargeable incident...mostly due to lots of luck but also as a direct result of being willing to listen to anyone...and learn.

I don't believe I ever met Mark Weir....but he seems a very interesting fellow.

Aviation never progressed without someone being willing to try the new and different. After all....isn't flying supposed to good fun now and then?

Running afoul of the authorities having done so does not in itself connote being "wrong", "negligent", or in anyway "dangerous". Lord knows...one has to be a Philidelphia Lawyer to keep up on all the Regs, Rules, and Policies the Crats Agin Aviation seem to publish by the Ream. Even with the very best of intentions one can step on a crack in the sidewalk.

Without having full knowledge of the circumstances (causes) of an event....I find it objectionable for anyone to criticize an individual particularly when they are unable to defend themselves.

Add me to the list with Gordy and the rest of the Gang.

[SilsoeSid]

Silsoesid..
Quote:
His comments and attitude about risk....sums it all up really !
Christ man you still at it???....leave the guy in peace FFS!! :ugh:

On this thread Yes!
If you want tributes and condolences may I suggest you post on the relevant thread. :ugh:

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/445106-cumbria-helicopter-crash-tributes-condolences.html

As I said earlier on this thread "It's a real shame that Mark had to die to enable such a huge discussion about Flight Safety and I'm sure all our thoughts are with his family and friends."

[toptobottom]

At last... (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Aerospatiale%20SA.341G%20Gazelle%20HA-LFB%2010-12.pdf)

[JimBall]

For all our regulations, we have a system which is flawed and must be corrected. The facts in the AAIB report speak for themselves. If this aircraft had killed and injured people other than the pilot, the CAA would have a severe public problem on their hands.
I think what I'm saying is that aircraft based in EASA land must be maintained in EASA land. And maybe the same should apply to pilots.

[ShyTorque]

It's difficult to know what to say to that AAIB report....except that there is more to being a good pilot than stick and rudder skills. In aviation, the rules are usually there for a reason.

Appalling!

[md 600 driver]

jim ball

I think what I'm saying is that aircraft based in EASA land must be maintained in EASA land. And maybe the same should apply to pilots.
i dont understand your comment above the pilot had a licence [uk] from easa land as you put it, and the aircraft was from easa land and maintained in easa land ?

[212man]

Depends on how you interpret 'maintained!' Timexed components and falsified Form 1s don't really count! Neither does flying outside of your licence priviliges count as using a UK/JAR licence.

[Anthony Supplebottom]

the pilot had a licence [uk]

So he was flying a hungarian registered heli with a uk licence?

[[email protected]]

It's like a flag of convenience on a merchant vessel designed to get around safety regulations in one country by registering it in another.

Darwinian selection in action I'm afraid - and not for the first time:(

As shy says it is not all about stick and rudder skills - a mil pilot with 2-3 years operational experience would not have just jumped into the air and cuffed it like that.

[TRC]

So he was flying a hungarian registered heli with a uk licence?
From the AAIB report:

He held a crew member certificate issued by the Hungarian Civil Aviation Administration which validated his PPL for flight in Hungarian-registered aircraft.

[JimBall]

md 600: I stand corrected. Hungary joined the EU in 2004.
But still the system is flawed. And I honestly don't know how we can guard against faked papers and wrong components and pilots with the wrong records & qualifications.
All I know is that if this type of event kills innocents, things will change rapidly.
Making all UK-based aircraft use approved UK maintenance organisations would at least help to stop the rot. And if the "flag of convenience" doesn't like it - then the aircraft cannot be based here.

[lowfat]

The level of disregard of regulations from the pilot reminds me of the Mccrae crash.

Perhaps the nanny state should prohibit ALL private helicopters!

[ShyTorque]

Perhaps the nanny state should prohibit ALL private helicopters!

No, many PPLH holders are very conscientious and rule abiding. Also, many privately owned helicopters are flown by professional licence holders. ;)

[Helinut]

A tragic loss of life, and so unnecessary.

It is tempting to respond to any tragedy by contemplating new regulation. Usually what happens is that those who abide by the regulations end up having to jump through more, higher hoops and do more admin, and incur extra cost (and do less flying). Sadly, those who choose to ignore rules (generally created at least partly for their own benefit) will choose not to join (the rule following club), and at intervals will have "accidents".

There is a steady trickle of these accidents involving pilots (usually PPLs) who know better. The nature of helicopter flying is likely to attract them, because of the freedom associated with this sort of flying. It is the same thing that attracts us. Classic, almost archetypal examples of a pilot type, for CRM study consideration.

The only good thing about this event was that there were no passengers.

[John R81]

Lowfat - what are you drinking? Get a grip, man!

Some motorcyclists crash for stupid reasons = do you want a ban?
Some swimmers drown for stupid reasons = do you want a ban?
Some horse riders die for sor stupid reasons = do you want a ban?


I have a PPL(H).
I have 2 aircraft - maintained in the UK to full commercial standard.
I have not crashed, busted airspace, bent an airframe, come close to bending an airframe

Why do you tar me with the same brush?

Go through the whole of the AAIB reports (over a period, I did read all of them to see what I could learn). Commercial operators sometimes do stupid things too, and sometimes they die. Do you propose to ban all Private and all commercial pilots?

:ugh:

[chopjock]

Ok, so wrong paperwork and poor maintenance. The crash was not related to either of these.
This was pilot error, pure and simple.
Nothing to do with where it was registered or maintained.

[lowfat]

But you are not in the news are you? John

The Law abiding are always punished because of the :-

reckless

Arrogant

Cheapskates

At least commercial operators are regularly audited by both the feds and customers . If this helicopter had been audited by the feds (as they can audit any craft in the uk) perhaps this chancer would still be alive.Not flying but still alive.

[misterbonkers]

Chopjock - the keyword is 'attitude'.

What's my attitude towards flying?

What's your attitude towards flying?

If we don't know each other we can only make assessments from evidence out there. We may get things wrong. We may occasionally break/push the rule book. Does that make us bad people or pilots? Habitually breaking, flaunting and ignoring rules does make us bad pilots because as a pilot we are the captain and we are duty bound to conduct ourselves in an appropriate manner - captaincy and airmanship includes a wide range of things that clearly, from the report were either missed or ignored by the pilot concerned.

Complacency is one of the biggest killers!

[toptobottom]

Finding a legal 'loophole' like this is one thing. Not being diligent and conscientious when it comes to maintenance and administration is another.

Neither of these things necessarily kills people, as pointed out in the AAIB report. However, if this behaviour is symptomatic of an attitude that also reflects a lack of respect for those things that do kill people, then the issue is in a different category altogether.

Once again (as is so often the case), ego got in the way of common sense and ability. It sounds very much as though the screen misted up and/or Mark went IMC. I know the crash site quite well and without moonlight, it's absolutely pitch black at night. Add high winds, heavy rain, an unqualified pilot for whom 'no' isn't an option, and the cast is set for an inevitable outcome. He isn't the first and he won't be the last.

PS When Mark bought HA-LFB, he tried to sell me his previous Gazelle. Insurance through the UK was prohibitive and so the full details of the license/insurance 'loophole' and the availability of cheap spares, was explained. I didn't buy the aircraft. There are a few PPRuNers who know far more about this than me, including md 600 driver, who is probably the most knowledgable.

PPS I saw HA-LFB in the black hangar at Farnborough while the investigation was being conducted. It looked like a car that had been through a crushing machine. The AAIB has done a great job reconstructing the last movements with the limited available evidence.

[Torquetalk]

The pilot completed a licence proficiency check with a freelance examiner, formerly a British military pilot, in July 2010. The examiner stated that he had conducted a number of proficiency checks with the pilot in recent years and considered him to be of above average flying ability, adding that his skill level was similar to that of a British military helicopter pilot of two or three years operational experience.


This is reminiscent of the comments made by the examiner following Paul Spencer's death. That was also a PPL(H) Gazelle accident. Any connection here?

TT

[jetbox 21]

TT, Mark Weir an experienced pilot with a lot of hours & very capable of flying a Gazelle, Paul Spencer freshly qualified very low hours.
I cant see any conection other than same ship ??

[Torquetalk]

A question posed is just that. If there is no connection, that is, the same examiner is not involved, good.

If on the other hand it is the same examiner then I do see reason to raise the matter. So before you wag your finger at me, please clarify if Mark Weir and Paul Spencer were trained and/or examined by the same person.

TT

[jayteeto]

There are LOTS of ex-mil examiners. That said, even if it was the same man, that means absolutely nothing. Cowboys present themselves for tests and training knowing exactly what is expected of them. They 'play the game' for a day or two, then head off into the sunset to be cowboys again. You can only examine what you see.

[Thomas coupling]

I remember, vividly, the defending actions of several contributors towards this "pilot". Bet they aren't smiling now.
This individual serves to remind those out there who sail close to the wind - you will get your come uppance. Graveyards are littered with them.

You live by the sword and you die by the sword.......who's next :mad:

[Torquetalk]

jayteeto,

If it were another examiner, then it would just be an odd coincidence. But were it to be the same examiner, telling the AAIB how impressed they were by the competence of another dead PPL(H) then I find it downright strange.

The differences between Mark Weir and Paul Spencer accidents isn't important. Shared similarities is. One of them was a dangerous trait of invulnerability. If somebody is cocky and has a perception of their abilities at odds with reality, they needed bringing down a peg or two. The last thing they need is to be told how good they are.

Of course, there is no evidence that one or more people told these pilots personally that they were of a 2-3 year operational military pilot standard in the one case, or that they were at a CPL standard in the other. But is it likely that they didn't?

TT

[John R81]

Lowfat - you were suggesting a ban on all private helicopters. What has that to dow ith your last post concerning audits etc?

My machines are private and I fly PPL
My machines are properly maintained AND I would not allow any maintenance organisation to do less than a perfect job.

I know of someone who bought a machine just after its 12-year inspection. Performed by a professional and audited maintenance firm. Only it turned out shortly after (when the gearbox failed a couple of tens of flying hours later) that the professional and audited firm had not actually performed the work they had been paid to do (and billed for). The gearbox had not been dismantled and the innards had not been inspected; one bearing was at the end of its life and started to make metal. The machine had falsified paperwork from a professional and audited firm, and the owner had paid for work not done.

"Banning private machines" just makes you sound to me like a troll.

TTB and Misterbonkers have it right in my view; it's all about having a professional attitude and nothing to do with PPL / CPL etc.

[Coconutty]

Like many, I read the AAIB report, and thought,
"In this day and age, How can that have been allowed to happen ?"

Then I drew an analogy with driving a car on the roads :
How do you stop people driving on a road without a Licence,
or in a car that is unroadworthy / not legal to be driven on a road ?

Answer - You can't, BUT you can try to minimise it from happening by educating
those that might be tempted as to the consequences, and then by enforcing the Law.

Lots of drivers do get caught, then they are prosecuted, get fined, go to prison, have their cars seized and crushed etc.
Hopefully the punishment they receive deters them and others from doing the same again.
There are lots ( but not as many as there used to be ) of Police Officers out there actively looking for them,
assisted by cameras that read car number plates, and databases that alert them to any wrong doing.

Who is out there actively looking at preventing pilots from flying when they shouldn't be,
or checking aircraft that are flying when they shouldn't be in the air ?

Perhaps no further regulation is needed, after all if the pilot of the Gazelle in this incident had followed the exisiting regulations,
this incident would not have happened, so perhaps a little more checking that exisiting regulations are being complied with wouldn't be a bad thing ?

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[Flyting]

Quite frankly, I believe it is up to us pilots to put the word out about bad maintenance orginizations, bad maintenace, bad machines.....and BAD PILOTS...! Various CAA's around the world have anonymous reporting proceesures just for those guys...USE THEM...You'll be saving the rest of us.

I have flown a few dodgy machines and had experience with some bad maintenance organizations and helicopter operation, and I let all my fellow friends and pilots know exactly what I felt about it.

We've got to keep ourselves safe...

[Helinut]

I am sure that you are right Flyting about warning of poor/dangerous organisations/pilots. In the world of controlled operations that can have a significant effect. Private owners/PPLs are more difficult ,not because they are likely to be worse, but because there is less control/oversight.

Unless they have changed, the UK CAA is pretty passive about enforcement. It pretty much wants someone to complain and provide all the evidence before it will take an interest. It feels like the FOIs and enforcement branch never talk to each other. Some intelligence or risk-based enforcement might help.

[Savoia]

Flyting I tend to agree with you for as much as Coconutty's query is valid we know that budgetary provision for policing general (or even commercial) aviation operations is unlikely in the near future.

However, my preferred approach is to speak to offenders in person before taking further action. Sometimes their transgressions are performed in ignorance (sometimes among newbies for example) and once alerted of their shortcomings are willing to improve. Others, when facing the possibility of further action will be motivated to change while some may offer a dismissal which includes the phrase "Foxtrot Oscar" and in which case one has no alternative but to take it to the next level.

.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-CjmfYlJqhbU/UHg5Z-IoRwI/AAAAAAAAJ3U/5sRCuEyYEkA/s577/Warning%2520Sign.png


.

[md 600 driver]

torquetalk

Paul spencer was a UK - CPL/ ATPL Fixed wing pilot who did a PPL /h licence

[Torquetalk]

md,

I know. And his fixed wing experince gave him a level of comfort in the helicopter which did not match his experience basis. Having a basic mastery of low speed manouvres does not equip you to go and do what he did in the circumstances he did it. Both sad and maddening.

TT

[toptobottom]

TCI remember, vividly, the defending actions of several contributors towards this "pilot". Bet they aren't smiling now.

Was this some form of contest for you? I don't think you'll find there were any contributors smiling on this thread - except probably you :yuk:

[Pittsextra]

TTB - I actually think this is the kind of post being hinted at:-

The decision whether to fly or not is a different issue. The point I'm making is that Mark was a sound pilot and one should judge neither his decision process that night, nor his flying ability on some random YT clips.

Actually you can make a judgement on not just someones flying ability but their motivations and mental attitude from much of the published material.

You might decide to suggest that the judgement is wrong but never the less. In a thread of 10 pages what is quite interesting is that some people seem to "get it" within the first moments while others defend this insanity to the bitter end.

Jim, Reno, P51 or Mark, Cumbria, Gazelle. Same, same.

[fisbangwollop]

Through my job in ATC I got to know Mark very well. To be honest he was one of the nicest and most charming people that I have ever met had the privelage to meet.

He was a great Father and a great rock to his partner.

From reading this AAIB report I realise now that maybe he mucked up in a big way......he was a cavalier person that maybe in aviation does not fit too well.....but did that make him a bad person?.....I think not.....to those of you on this forum that choose to make slanderous statements against Mark I wonder how you sleep peacefully at night? I for sure know Mark had more friends and supporters than you ever will.......he turned Honister slate mine from nothing to the tourist attraction that it is today.......lets just hope we can all learn from Mark's mistakes.....I am sure if we can,Mark would appreciatte that.....

[Pittsextra]

FBW - I'm sure he was all the things to you that you say.

Did it make him a bad person, etc, etc who is to judge. The guy lost his life and a family lost this man that you say was a good man. That is a heavy price to pay.

Its the mental side rather than the physical side thats the biggest danger in aviation. As has been said elsewhere and before on this thread it doesn't take "balls" or "skill" to take your brain out and to be reckless.

Your attitude (and those with similar) in terms of the defence of the man does nothing to really discourage what ultimately wrapped him up.

In fact when you start throwing around threatening terms - as you did in the early years - like "slanderous" it is truely remarkable how far even aviation professionals will go in defence and for what?

This guy was out of control with a disregard for his own safety and that of others. Someone should have taken this guy aside years ago and had a strong word.

[toptobottom]

Pitts

You missed my point which was that I don't think anyone contributing to this thread found anything amusing in it.

However, ask 100 car drivers if they think they're a good driver, and 90 will say yes. What does that mean? They may be technically competent, but then drive too fast for the conditions, making them a poor driver. Technically, I believe Mark was competent, but as has been said a dozen times, it was his mental approach that was flawed. Whatever, I wouldn't judge a case until I'd heard the facts.

The most important thing is that others learn from his error. I personally know of 4 pilots who 'had a word' with Mark, but I don't think anything would have reset his ego except maybe an accident he could have walked away from. Then again, that could have simply fuelled his feeling of invicibility.

[heli-cal]

Like McCrae, Weir only stopped his recklessly negligent and illegal flying when he was physically unable to continue.

At least he didn't kill any innocents.

[Thomas coupling]

TTB: Is there a tiny streak of weir in you perhaps: Please accept that from the initial warning signs (when this story went live) it was blatantly apparent he was oblivious to criticism when it came to anything to do with his outlook in aviation. Simply accept that your defence of this individual was untennable in light of the results of the AAIB.
"Technically I believe Mark was competent". Sorry - have you read the same report that I just read?
It goes onto list his incompetence in maintaining the a/c log book. His unadulterated removal of the fire warning panel in the cockpit because ot wasn't working properly. His fiddling of night flying log book entries. His turning of a blind eye when the maintenance organisation didn't do their jobs properly.

All this is "technical" stuff. Why are you still defending this "crook".
If he'd offered your family a trip in his helicopter as a jolly whilst on holiday with his family and the worst happened....would you be defending him then?

Cough to it TTB, it's OK to admit one has anothers traits wrong - it's normal.

The man was a dangerous liability and I wonder if this pervaded other parts of his life - but lnow's not the time nor place to discuss that.

Pittsextra: bang on.

[md 600 driver]

TC did you also read the report ??
where did it say??

in maintaining the a/c log book.

His unadulterated removal of the fire warning panel in the cockpit because ot wasn't working properly. [[strong words it said there was a fire warning device fitted when the aircraft was under faa control i am not sure if all authoritys mandated this upgrade i have flown aircraft on uk register with no fire warning ever been fitted and i think all serbian gazelles [the source of the 111B engine ]] dont have any fire warning fitted , ]] so maybe it was not required anyway

His fiddling of night flying log book entries. [[ i thought the report said no log book was found]]

His turning of a blind eye when the maintenance organisation didn't do their jobs properly. cant even find reference to this

also when you flew uk military military gazelles did you know that your engine the 111n2 was also not a certifable engine similar to the 111B

i think everyone knows why marks accident happened , it was a major error of judgement which mark paid the ultimate price i would also like to think if mark had a passenger the flight would not have happened as i think the risk factor would have been too much

cant this be put to bed once and for all and it be a reminder to all of us about pushing the envelope and when not to fly

and yes i was one of them that had a quiet word with mark and i also have to live with thought i should could have said more !!!!

[toptobottom]

TC - I really can't be bothered to get into an argument with you because, to be quite honest, I don't think you're bright enough to have a sensible one.

Please don't misunderstand the context of 'technically'; it doesn't mean 'mechanically'.

One last thing, I'd quickly edit your last post if I were you. Accusing someone of being a crook on a public forum might be considered by some (not least Mark's family its legal advisors) to be libellous. Even though the individual has passed away, you could still find yourself being sued for defamation.

Here's a link (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=defamation&l=1) to save you looking these up.

[uk104]

Hi All,

I find it quite sad to read a thread with such venom of a fellow aviator . We are all here I hope because of our love in flying and in this forum especially the rotating kind!
Lesson's learned for me have been very personal . it has brought home the risk and reward decisions we make every time the rotor turns and having a young family it really cuts close to the bone. I for one have changed a few things in my flying that this most unfortunate accident has highlighted and I can only give my deepest condolences to Mark's family and cherished friends . I can only hope we can maybe look at bit deeper into ourselves before bashing the keyboards and people we probably do not know and instead use this invaluable resource of knowledge to help each other instead.

[toptobottom]

uk104, well said - see my post #150, before the AAIB report was published. I would hope that the vast majority of subscribers are here to learn and not troll.

I think that all that has been said on this thread is all that can be said , so this will be my last post.

Isn't this the whole point of PPRuNe - to learn? It certainly is for me.

There are all sorts on this forum: PPLs, CPLs, ATPLs, owners/operators, engineers, ATCs, CAA staff, journalists, insurers, instructors, students, handlers and so on. Some have lots of hours, some have none. Some ferry VIPs around, some spray crops, some go to war. Some sit in armchairs waiting to flick peanuts at the first opportunity. Not one of us will ever know it all, but if you're interested in learning then IMO there isn't a better place to do it.

If someone posts an opinion in good faith, then they shouldn't be flamed for it - that will just stifle debate. If someone posts an experience that they know was wrong, they should be thanked for sharing that experience so others can learn from it, not lambasted and labelled an idiot. If an opinion can be changed for the better through someone else's experience, then use this forum to educate with a mature and measured response instead of the pompous and emotional rhetoric that so often ensues. We will all learn and become safer pilots.

We still don't know what went wrong for Mark although we have our suspicions; hopefully time will tell. I am also grateful to have learned a lot from this thread, so at least something +ve has come out of Mark's death.

[M1900]

TtB
You cannot libel the dead - they cannot sue, and neither can their family.
Witness the open season on Jimmy Savile the past few weeks.

[stringfellow]

Well said uk 104, and ttb above all this is a great place to learn things.

I think one piece of context we need to remember when we talk about missing log books and unauthorised parts is this. Mark used his gazelle like a land rover. He was constantly running round with spare parts for diggers and generators (the mine had no mains electric)... day in day out. Now can you really see youself filling in a log book every time you nip to the shops in your car, or checking that the brake linings the garage fits are genuine??? I don't support what he did, and don't agree with it. But if you consider the context of him using this machine day after day i hope it gives a broader understanding of the man.

The work his family are doing to maintain his legacy is outstanding and would thoroughly reccommend a day out at the mine. RIP.

[Exo.]

Now can you really see youself filling in a log book every time you nip to the shops in your car, or checking that the brake linings the garage fits are genuine?

Really?

Perhaps next time I fly 12 times in a single day I should just ignore the logbook and draw a big line through the techlog, putting in just the landing time at the end and not really bothering to fill any other bits in.

It's just that attitude to short cut that cause the problems. If you are flying a machine like this, you should ensure you are satisfied every single flight, that all the paperwork is complete. If you are flying on short hops with that regularity, it is all the more important that you ensure you retain the checks, balances and discipline of procedure each and every time you fly.

Lest you start to think those checks are not important, and they start getting skipped in ever greater magnitude.

[Pittsextra]

Hang on, I can't speak for the other people who post on here but here is some context and my "beef".

This thread has been around for 18 months and it wasn't until around a year after the shunt that the "official" version of events was reported.

Ironically - as is the case with very many accidents reported on pprune - the initial feelings are pretty much bourne out by these official reports. Yet in the first instances people who hold very valid views tend to get shouted down.

It is surely better to encourage a debate than stifle it and come on lets not play with semantics there were no records, there was no rating and whilst aircraft didn't actually fail, as far as can be told, with the maintenance record as it was its not an aircraft i'd want to sign for.

That is deeply uncool.

Giving an "out" is suggesting that there is a margin and there isn't. Some people have tried to talk about some wild spirit and courage to fly like that etc etc etc. It takes no courage to be the biggest fool, it just takes foolishness.

"A superior pilot uses his superior judgment to avoid situations that would require the use of his superior skills"

Its pure cheese but kind of fits, thing is people suggest there should be some respect shown to this guy but what respect was he showing his peers with his record keeping, maintenance and attitude to flying even before he had his prang. Nevermind that what respect did he have for his family that he has sadly left behind?

Honestly it is staggering and flying like this does none of us any favours.

Edited to add:- actually you know when the record keeping etc is so poor one wonders why bother having a licence at all? I mean if its all such a rotten chore and everyone knows less than you - why not just have a go? Forget night rating and IR... forget a PPL just throw some cash at a salesman and see how it goes? Does that work any better for people that think its ok to be casual??

No?? OK so where do you draw the line?

[stringfellow]

Exo.

If you take a closer look at my quote you will notice i stated that i don't support the view of avoiding paper work... it creates too many head aches down the line.

What i was trying to achieve was to add context to the debate by reminding people that this machine was on the go day in day out, and yeah you may fill in every last line of your tech log, and so do i... but we dont live in a perfect world do we.

If we were all equal by god wouldn't life be boring.

[toptobottom]

M1900

The relatives of the deceased can sue for libel if it can be proved that defamation of the dead affects the relatives' own reputation as well. Mark's family were (and are) heavily involved in the continued development of Honister Slate Mine. In this case, the family could also have a go at TC arguing malicious falsehood.

[stringfellow]

Pittsextra..

I agree 100% with you. Ever since i started to view these forums i have been mystified why it is scorned upon to discuss an accident prior to report being published. And im not alone. Debate is a great platform for learning... even if indeed all the speculation turns out wrong.... knowledge is gained. And as you alluded in the most part the speculation is not a million miles from the truth.

[fisbangwollop]

TC.....:=:=:=

[md 600 driver]

Exo stringfellow
Where does it say the tech log wasn't filled in ?

[stringfellow]

600... my mistake or perhaps i was quoting from elsewhere but i meant pilots log book not tech log... as none were found and hours could not be verified.

[Pittsextra]

Where does it say the tech log wasn't filled in ?

The AAIB report doesn't refer. However it does say, amoungst other things:-


No current pilot, engine or airframe logbooks were
found in the UK, preventing confirmation of the flight hours accrued. The total hours counter on the instrument panel did not match the recorded hours supplied by the Hungarian operator.


So without wanting to be smug I'd say if they weren't found in the UK either they were in a secret place OR they weren't filled in.

The AAIB report also says in relation to maintenance that:-


Maintenance work had been completed to change components without the knowledge of the approved maintenance organisation responsible for the aircraft. No record was found of who carried out this work or whether they had the appropriate training and approvals



Fluid levels within various components on the helicopter were found to be much lower than expected, with no obvious
leaks identified. This might indicate poor maintenance practices or missed maintenance checks

[ShyTorque]

If a professional pilot opened a slate mine as a hobby but ignored safety checks and daily maintenance, used unapproved parts on his machines, was not qualified to operate in the way he did then ended up having a fatal accident (even though he was surely a nice bloke with a family and had made a mint as a pilot), what could we expect professional miners to say?

[jumpseater]

The relatives of the deceased can sue for libel if it can be proved that defamation of the dead affects the relatives' own reputation as well.

Some people need to calm down a bit. No reference has been made to the rellies reputation or specifically that of the business, just to the late MW.

However if any of the rellies were legally involved in the helicopters operation and objected to that comment, then they too in the defence against that comment, would have to answer for the 'discrepancies', eg ex mil unservicable items fitted to the aircraft and no records of time lifed component useage over three years. Whilst the comment may seem harsh, the definition of it is 'dishonest', which could reasonably be applied to fitting unserviceable bits I'd suggest. They'd also be up against 'fair comment' i.e. if the statement was a view that a reasonable person could have held.

Regarding log filling, tech or otherwise, I don't feel there's any excuse for not doing so at the end of the day, even if its a busy multi sector day. Pencil and a reporters notebook kept in the cockpit, its not that difficult is it?

[Thomas coupling]

TTB: touched a raw nerve did we?

This thread together with the report should be classroom reading for all future CRM / human factor presentations (together with the damning footage of his aerial exploits).
With luck and a following wind it has already slowed other cowboys down sufficiently to reconsider their attitude towards committing aviation. Unfortunately for the rest - we await their demise and future debate on Pprune about their propensity to defy the fundamental laws of physics and common sense.

Try not to respond TTB....try hard......:}

[ppheli]

what could we expect professional miners to say

ShyTorque - view the following video and I reckon you could have a bash at answering this question for yourself

cqdIN_h1zFg

[heli-cal]

Weir certainly has his fan boy's, talking up his abilities, making ridiculous threats.

Accept the fact that his actual abilities as a pilot got him where he is today.

TC nailed it.

This thread together with the report should be classroom reading for all future CRM / human factor presentations (together with the damning footage of his aerial exploits).
With luck and a following wind it has already slowed other cowboys down sufficiently to reconsider their attitude towards committing aviation. Unfortunately for the rest - we await their demise and future debate on Pprune about their propensity to defy the fundamental laws of physics and common sense.

[John R81]

Ppheli

I used the same technique to get my excavator up an icy road - 33% slope - a couple of years back. Not sure what the relevance is to flying heli's.

[Hughes500]

ppheli

What are you on? There is nothing wrong with pulling a digger up a hill like that, done everyday all over the world, in fact people pull landrovers up steep hills in competitions, even Top Gear tried it !
I am not condoning his piloting / command abilities as that has been answered.

[Cylinder Head]

I agree with TC that the accident report should be standard reading for CRM/TEM purposes but the AAIB publish the detail maintaining anonymity with the intention that others should focus on the circumstances, not the individual and that we may all learn from the mistakes. Rather than using the forum to attack the deceased, shouldn't we all focus on the lessons to be learned - in this case the dangers of complacency.
Complacency is one of the biggest threats to pilots and is a contributor in some degree to most accidents. When under pressure we are working at high levels of capacity and all the time we are hacking it, the message to self is you're doing great ! Who can honestly say that they have never overstepped the mark and pushed it a bit further than may have been wise and scared themselves. Those still here have obviously got away with it so far. Rather than use this forum to slag off individuals, wouldn't it be better to think how we might identify moments of complacency in our own flying careers and share how we changed our mind set to eliminate it.

[jayteeto]

I've been to the slate mine, he did a great job getting things on course, commendable. Friends of mine who knew Mark spoke very highly of him as a businessman and as a real character. However, I am with TC on this one, any member of the public who reads this report, aviation knowledge or not, would not find comments libellous. Just obvious. So So Sooo sad, but true.

[Thomas coupling]

JT2: Thanks for your support - coming from someone who has actually been closer to the hub than most in this instance having visited the site etc. Appreciate it.

I am going to make one more comment about this issue (and then I'm done with this debacle) as I feel there is STILL some element of sympathy out there with MW:

This individual didn't simply have a bad day, or drop his guard, or fall foul of some external circumstances beyond his control.
This man (in his aviation guise) was a serial gambler with complete and utter disregard for conformity/legislation/rules. His attitude as a PILOT was completely and utterly unprofessional in EVERY respect. He genuinely believed he was above reproach. For him - it was all one big adventure and rules were for lesser mortals. He cuffed it at every twist and turn. This was NOT a man who was unlucky occasionally.
He was a clever calculating strategist in business which made him appear "successful" on face value. I'm sure it's true.
When he entered the world of aviation, his safety nets were removed and whilst employing the same tactics, it meant he was on borrowed time and nothing or no-one could alter the outcome.

Please don't confuse this man with other pilots who occasionally 'get it wrong', miscalculate the weather sometimes, misjudge a technique etc. These people normally have their house in order whilst they are experiencing a temporary glitch. Most pilots who make mistakes - learn from them! For MW each survivable 'mistake' simply fuelled his invincibility.
Look at the Gazelle display video.
Look at the para-jumper video.
Look at the digger being dragged up the slope video (where he nonchalantly leans up against the bucket whilst the cab was in a precarious position on the slope). MW had probaly never heard of H&S.
He's invincible and the laws of physics don't apply to him.

This man was unique - let's hope aviation stays that way.:(

[fisbangwollop]

Thomas Coupling......I followed your comments shortly after Mark's accident, I also follow them now, I have also followed your comments made in various post's on other subjects previous to all of this. What can I say but sadly your comments often show arrogance and contempt towards your fellow human's....I guess there are folk out there that think your a star and love you dearly but sadly I have to say I am not one of them.

So I think it would be fair to both Mark's family and friends (and yes I am one of those) that you can now leave Mark in peace...I for one would be glad if you could do that.

[vfr440]

TC : Absolutely right :ooh:. Sadly.............. - VFR

[Sir Niall Dementia]

FBW;

You queried an attitude towards AJ's crash in an earlier post, he was a great mate who like Mark Weir had an accident. Unlike Mark he had a good idea of the rules and regs. The AAIB report brings utter disgrace on MW. He had already brought himself to the attention of the CAA on more than one occasion for stepping outside the rules. His behaviour with this helicopter was utterly indefensible. Stupid, arrogant risk taking has no place in aviation, in my view he was little better than Vince of Dundee Golf Course fame. As for those who feel guilt that they should have said something (or something more to him) don't, he obviously knew it all and I doubt he would have listened.

As for his experience level, when on earth did a few hundred hour pilot count as very experienced, there are pro's on this forum with tens of thousands of hours who count themselves merely experienced.

SND

[ShyTorque]

FBW,

As a businessman (him, not me), I admire folks like MW. I could be in business too, but decided for the sake of my family that a steady salary was my better option and I've stayed flying full time for a living, for thirty five years.

However, "corner cutting" in business does not carry the same ultimate risks as those taken in aviation,and in particular with regard to helicopters.

Some of us here have taken calculated risks in aviation, including myself, but for far better reasons than simply getting home quicker than by car.

He was a big risk taker in helicopter aviation (whether he realised it or not) and paid the ultimate price, simple as that.

If there are lessons to be learned from this tragedy, let others learn from that.

[paco]

FBW - not that TC needs any help from me, but that particular machine was spotted not too far before the incident concerned by a very experienced examiner who happened to be in Dunsfold at the same time, who took photos of the large cracks in the rotor blades, the clumsy wiring that held the cowlings and stabiliser together etc etc. On being asked where to get fuel, said examiner asked where the helicopter had come from, because surely fuel could be obtained at the same place on the way back.

It hadn't stopped, but had come all the way from Honiston with five hefty people on board. The comment was "You don't know anything about Gazelles, mate, they will haul anything you throw at them".

Not surprising there were cracks in the blades, then (ones that you could put several matchsticks in at once). This kind of mindest is not welcome in aviation.

Phil

[md 600 driver]

paco

i am surprised at you
surely you know the fuel burn in a gazelle honister to dunsfold is 225 nm, he should be able to go 120 mph , as also his was a ex faa spec gazelle it should have had a add tank as they came standard, which would give him more than enough fuel for what should have been a 2 hour journey

also you must not have met mark i would never in a month of sundays called him hefty or was it him and 5 hefty people ?

if they were hefty he could have been overloaded

the verticle stabiliser is held on by a screw and the horizontal by a bolt i couldnt see how that could be held on by wire

cowlings could be lockwired or even wired together

the rotor blades having cracks in as he said i couldnt see that at all knowing how the blades are made maybe it was the plastic blade tape?

[paco]

Him + 5 I am told, but I don't know the particular gazelle involved, or whether it had seats for that many. The stabiliser was held on by a crooked bolt. The point I was making wasn't about fuel burn, it was whether it was overloaded and the general state of the machine considering it was likely working hard for its living. Does the landing site at Honiston allow for a decent takeoff or would it have been vertical?

It certainly wasn't blade tape.

phil

[Pittsextra]

MD - its kind of irrelevant now isn't it?

Previously you asked

Where does it say the tech log wasn't filled in ?


Yet in the official report it says




No current pilot, engine or airframe logbooks were
found in the UK, preventing confirmation of the flight hours accrued. The total hours counter on the instrument panel did not match the recorded hours supplied by the Hungarian operator.

Doesn't this sum up the attitude to things?

[md 600 driver]

pitts

No current pilot, engine or airframe logbooks were
found in the UK, preventing confirmation of the flight hours accrued. The total hours counter on the instrument panel did not match the recorded hours supplied by the Hungarian operator

i would have expected the engine log book and the airframe books to be out of the uk ,at the maintainance company in hungary [where are your engine and airframe books? ]

the pilot log book may have been in the helicopter and blown away it was a bleak night very windy

paco
the gazelle has 2 front seats and you can fit 3 people in back it would be very cosy with 3 hefty people ,with 4 hefty people impossible but it is a 5 person helicopter inc pilot

at honister it would be a normal takeoff not verticle

[[email protected]]

IPS should give around 120 kts at 2.5 kg/min or 150 kg/hour so somewhere around 300 Kg for the trip plus 5 x 90kg pilot and pax = 750 kg.

If he kept inside the 1800kg MAUM - perhaps there are variations on the civ ones but mil std was 1800kg with the optimised fenestron and 1900kg for AAC NI use - the dry weight of the aircraft would have to be 1050 kg. Given that even he is unlikely to have arrived with no fuel left on board - 40kg used to be the MLA for brit mil, that gives just over 1000kg which is quite light for a mil Gaz IIRC but the advertised dry weight is circa 950kg. So it is feasible that he wasn't actually overloaded on that trip but he must have got airborne very close to MAUM.

However, since we know the sort of operator he was I wouldn't be surprised if he spent his cruise time at MPS since he wouldn't have the torquemeter light flashing at him as it didn't have a bulb.

God only know what state the rotor blade tie bars were in with no servicing and lots of abuse.

[Pittsextra]

MD600 - you are just taking the mickey now. I fly a rented helicopter but own a fixed wing aircraft. Its "G" registered with maintenance in the UK. Its not complicated and there is no attempt by me to find any "work around" with regard to either my own or my aircrafts licencing.

I can't be bothered to cut and paste all of the damning comments in the AAIB report when it comes to the shed this guy was flying and given the AAIB comments regarding his flying hours in 2007 and 2009 if his personal flying logbook had been in the helicopter then it was little more than a random number generator.

[Grenville Fortescue]

I for one shall be supporting any effort by the UK CAA to:

a) Ensure that any privately owned and operated helicopter domiciled within the borders of the United Kingdom for more than 12 months be registered here.

b) Offer a dispensation to the above for an additional 12 months provided there is justifiable cause and that the helicopter be removed from the borders of the United Kingdom before the expiry of the additional 12 months. Helicopters utilising this maximum 24 month stay shall not be permitted remain within the United Kingdom (on future visits) for a period exceeding 5 days thereafter.

c) Promote private pilot competency through an annual flight test with a CAA certified examiner who possess a minimum of 5000 hours total time and a minimum of 500 hours on the type in which the flight test is conducted.

I am writing to the CAA with the above recommendation.

Anyone wishing to support this recommendation can similarly write to the CAA at:

The Safety Regulation Group
United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority
Aviation House
Gatwick Airport South
West Sussex
RH6 0YR


Action not words.

GF

[chopjock]

GF
I am writing to the CAA with the above recommendation.

Anyone wishing to support this recommendation can similarly write to the CAA at:

Talk about a knee jerk reaction :rolleyes:

What about the hundreds of law abiding owners then?

[Grenville Fortescue]

You are saying that law abiding owners object to having their helicopter placed on the UK register and in performing a quality flight test once a year?

Tough is my answer.

[ericferret]

The suggestion that if aircraft were registered and maintained in the UK this type of thing wouldn't happen is sadly far from the truth.

Talk to any of the maintenance engineers who have been around for a while and you will hear horror stories from all of them related to UK owned and registered aircraft.

I give just a few examples.

Aircraft owner who went on at length about the amount of time he was flying in preparation for the helicopter championships. Aircraft came in for annual and not a single minute recorded for the period.

Owner who inadvertantly left his log book where it could be read. Discrepancy of over a 100% between it and the aircraft log book.

Owner who believed the starting performance wasn't good enough, as soon as the aircraft was away from maintenance he installed a second battery and home made cabling which he removed again before returning the aircraft to maintenace.

Gazelle with a log card for a gearbox support where it was clear that the serial number on the log card had been changed (different type face).

Enstrom where the owner had replaced the rubber sleeves at the tail drive shaft bearings with garden hose!!!!!!!!

Fatal accident in which the AAIB were unable to determine where the main rotor thrust bearing had come from. not a factory part.

Owner found adjusting the autopilot after the aircraft had left maintenace

Owner who had car phone installed in aircraft by local car spares shop who drilled holes all over the structure to accomodate cables and aerial.

Accident in which the tail rotor was not recovered, shortly after the owner had contacted maintenace asking about how to remove the tail rotor.

Sadly a number of private owners lack the "culture" of safety and honesty that is a requirement to safely operate helicopters. They certainly dont care about the next guy who buys the aircraft. In addition it is clear they have no consideration for the maintenance engineers who have a legal responsibilty for the work they carry out and are the first port of call for the AAIB and the CAA when a smoking hole appears in the ground.


And just one more

Owner who was advised to bring in a maintenace engineer as no qualified engineer was on site. Flew aircraft away and it crashed on route due to the mechanical problem he had complained about.

"Only one careful owner mate and really low hours, a bargain"

[Planemike]

A couple of comments:------

1). "Hard cases make bad law"........ Always feel it wise to sit down and consider before rushing into promulgating new law i.e. avoid knee jerk reaction.

2). As in many aspects of life these days it is not more laws and regulations that is required, but rather apply rigorously those that we already have. There is a very high probability MW would still be with us had he stuck to the existing rules.

Planemike

[Grenville Fortescue]

Just to get this straight, the consensus is that there is no difference in terms of actual safety whether or not a helicopter is operated according to UK rules and regulations and say, for example, Hungarian rules and regulations and that there is no benefit whatsoever of bringing long-staying UK domiciled aircraft under British law?

In other words, John Smith who has a British registered helicopter is under no obligation to do anything different than Fred Bloggs who has a Hungarian registered helicopter? And both helicopters (UK based) will be required to meet identical standards of airworthiness and both helicopters will be exposed to identical levels of aviation authority compliance?

I find this difficult to believe.

[JTobias]

Grenville,

I've thus far not entered into this thread, but in terms of your suggestion that a certified examiner should have 5,000 hours and a minimum of 500 hours on type, is a little steep don't you think?

There are probably not many examiners in the country that would actually fit that criteria now. I currently struggle to find an examiner to undertake my current LPC, often having to travel to take it. I'm pretty certain that the examiners I have used in the past do not have that amount of time, with the exception of one, who I know does have it. Personally, I think the requirement for an LPC each year should be relaxed for pilots who are flying regularly. Possibly reduced to every other year if your flight time exceeds 50 hours per annum??? Let's not forget, that the LPC only demonstrates that the pilot is competent at that exact moment, and does not have any bearing on the flying style of the pilot when an examiner is not on board the aircraft.

Whilst I'm here, I am somewhat amazed at the diverse attitude that some owner/operators take when it comes to their own paperwork and maintenance etc. I complete my tech log and my log book contemporaneously and I would never fly the aircraft out of it's hours or if my LPC had expired. I'm certain that I have 'challenged the envelope' a few times when I'm flying and I'm probably guilty of the odd "showboating" however when I compare my interpretation of these against videos I have seen of others or AAIB reports of incidents, I'm an angel of the skies !

This incident is very regrettable and I hope that it further advances the safety cause of pilots to fly safe.

Joel :ok:

[paco]

Grenville - I can't understand what you are saying :(

Even if it is a Hungarian machine, under ICAO (in theory) it should meet a minimum standard. I'm prepared to believe the Hungarians would ba s shocked as we are about the state this machine was in, but it was all drawn to the attention of the UK CAA and ignored. The premise behind ICAO/EASA or whatever is that there should be an acceptable minimum anywhere you go. In theory :)

Phil

PS - further to my previous post, for the sake of accuracy, there were 5 people in it, and it was also running with unidentified oil. The photos I mentioned were pulled in by the AAIB.

[Grenville Fortescue]

Tobias, you would appear to be a sensible (compliant) operator and which is good.

paco, The premise behind ICAO/EASA or whatever is that there should be an acceptable minimum anywhere you go. In theory and which seems to be the problem.

How do foreign aviation authorities establish levels of compliance for aircraft based outside of their physical territory? Do they have a budget to send inspectors around the world to check-up on the aircraft abroad?

[ShyTorque]

the pilot log book may have been in the helicopter and blown away it was a bleak night very windy

So we are expected to believe that the pilot was so very conscientious that he kept his personal logbook in the aircraft, presumably so he could immediately complete it after every flight? And it blew away from the wreckage? Perhaps not the best idea, to carry one's personal log book then, if flying in strong winds in the dark, in hilly terrain.

[paco]

"How do foreign aviation authorities establish levels of compliance for aircraft based outside of their physical territory? Do they have a budget to send inspectors around the world to check-up on the aircraft abroad?"

No, but they should be able to rely on the local guys to ground it.

Phil

[ericferret]

In respect of the CAA monitoring aircraft standards this hardly occurs anymore.

In the early eighties a surveyor would check every aircraft at C of A time.

In the last 14 years I have seen two surveyors!!!!!!!
You knew who your local surveyor was and he knew you.
If you look at the midlands there were area offices in Doncaster, Coventry, East Midlands Airport and Derby. Probably over 20 in total for the UK, there are now 6.

They rely totally on the integrity of the maintenance organisations.

So the bottom line is often the licensed engineer on the shop floor refusing to sign for dubious aircraft.

[Grenville Fortescue]

So what is being said here is that there was no oversight as to how this helicopter was being flown or serviced and the fact that it was on a foreign register only served to assure the CAA that it was none of their business?

[Nubian]

Grenville Fortescue,

Before you go on and send your recommendations to the CAA.

Ask yourself this:

Did this accident happen due to the:

1. Nationality of the helicopter?
2. The maintenance state of the helicopter?
3. The pilots lack of loggbooks, papers etc.??

OR

4. Did this happen due to one individual pilot, which disregarded CURRENT rules and regulations, and flew past his capabilities, became disoriented and killed himself???

The pilot in question would have done the EXACT same thing with a G-reg'ed machine..

This is the same argumentation as it was in the Colin Mcrae thread a few years back.
Then it was also a big focus on the ''papers'' of CM, incl. logbooks, but it WASN't why he crashed. His machine was G-reg'ed...


Businessmen, rally-drivers etc. and other ''Championes'' or successful people(not ALL ofcourse), which gets their license and a helicopter, tend to being used to being very good at their respective occupations/hobbies and automatically think that counts for them while flying as well.

The problem here is: ATTITUDE towards flying and awareness of own capabilities.

Just for the record, there are some pilot's out there with all the papers in order, flying both Private and Commercial, aircrafts with correct papers and in good conditions and are accidents waiting to happen due to this.:ugh:

As JTobias nailed above:
Let's not forget, that the LPC only demonstrates that the pilot is competent at that exact moment, and does not have any bearing on the flying style of the pilot when an examiner is not on board the aircraft.

[Grenville Fortescue]

I have put my letter on hold.

What can be done about renegade pilots and flagrant disregard for maintenance standards?

This is the 21st century - why are we getting caught-out like this?

[ericferret]

On one occasion I had cause to report a comercial operator for falsifying aircraft records. I reported this to the CAA enforcement branch who did not want to know.

On a separate occasion I reported an owner flying an R22 with a main rotor gearbox fault, and I quote

"Well if he flies it past our office window we might take some action"

The truth is that a lot of the great safety record we have in the UK is down to the integrity and honesty of pilots and engineers involved in the business. Who are in the majority.

Individuals with the attitudes alluded to in the posts above undermine us all and risk a far more draconian system being put in place.

Look at the american system. Would you want to have your licence supended on the spot and a multi thousand euro fine imposed for what currently would probably entail a slapped wrist and an hour on the naughty step!!!!!