PC1 Operations Offshore

[oldrotorhead]

Is anyone able to advise if they are aware of any operations being conducted (commercially of course) to offshore destinations such as platforms, rigs, drill ships etc and also to any other types of ships during Marine Pilot Transfer Operations, where the aircraft is being flown in Performance Class 1 and whereEmergency Flotation is NOT fitted or required to be fitted to the aircraft?
If there are any such operations being carried out, which particular aircraft models are doing the job if you know?
Additionally, for such operations to a ship, such as a Bulk Ore Carrier for example (such as a Panamax ship) where land on ops are being done, what category of helipad would the hatch on the deck be categorised as from a CAT A aspect? ie. VTOL, elevated platform, etc?
How about for land on ops to a smaller vessel with obstructions such as cranes?
If anyone can shed some light on this request it would be appreciated.

[industry insider]

Real PC1, I doubt it. But if operations are with a twin within 50nm of land, can't floats be omitted anyway?

[212man]

Here's the rule for JAR Operators:

JAR-OPS 3.843 All helicopters on flights over water - Ditching
(a) An operator shall not operate a helicopter
in Performance Class 1 or 2 on a flight over water
in a hostile environment at a distance from land
corresponding to more than 10 minutes flying
time at normal cruise speed unless that helicopter
is so designed for landing on water or is
certificated in accordance with ditching
provisions.

(b) An operator shall not operate a helicopter
in Performance Class 1 or 2 on a flight over water
in a non-hostile environment at a distance from
land corresponding to more than 10 minutes
flying time at normal cruise speed unless that
helicopter is; so designed for landing on water; or
is certificated in accordance with ditching
provisions; or is fitted with emergency flotation
equipment.

As for your other questions about decks on Bulk Ore carriers etc, the guidelines are in the International Chamber of Shipping helicopter operations guide. Helidecks - in general - are covered by ICAO Annex 14 Vol II.

[oldrotorhead]

Thanks for the replies so far. Let's assume we are operating in the Australian offshore environment and in scenarios offshore ranging from say 10nm or less from land right out to say 150nm offshore to ships on MPT Ops primarily rather than to platforms or rigs...
Are Cat A ops (with PC 1 or PC 2 either for that matter) feasible or even legal to a ship, especially say in real crap w/x by night and let's say with very sub optimal sea states and ship conditions with roll, etc. In other words, a definite "hostile" environment.....
Does that set the context a bit better?
Thanks.

[paco]

I believe everything on the N Sea is PC2, shortly to be changed to a slightly lesser form of PC1 that includes a selection of exposure times to be chosen by the customer.

The environment shouldn't matter, except when it intereferes with the requirements, such as performance data in the flight manual, size of landing site, weather and power in the engines, plus whatever else is in the flight manual. Mind you, you might want that level of safety......

When it comes to landing site areas, PC2 allows you to hop over the fence so to speak, while still using a CAT A machine for max protection (Cat A refers to airworthiness, not performance).

phil

[oldrotorhead]

The original question is whether the operation could or should happen without emergency flotation fitted.......

[S76Heavy]

It has been said before that engine failure is not the only reason helicopters end up in the water, so why even attempt to fly any distance over the water without the proper emergency kit?

[Um... lifting...]

It's difficult enough to meet the criteria for PC1 for even an ad hoc flight like a one-time VIP trip offshore. We've done that from time to time when (for example) a VVIP was unwilling to wear the personal survival gear. Otherwise, PC2.

But managing PC1 with a high pax demand day after day? Savings from not installing the float kit would probably be rapidly outpaced by the payload loss, lack of flexibility to lower deck heights and the costs if it ever goes wrong.

[albatross]

I don't think that you should call offshore a non hostile environment if operating without floats:
Hostile environment definition:
An environment in which:
a. a safe forced landing cannot be accomplished because
the surface is inadequate; or
b. the aircraft occupants cannot be adequately protected
from the elements; or
c. search and rescue response is not provided consistent
with anticipated exposure; or
d. there is an unacceptable risk of endangering persons or
property on the ground

No Floats = 0 time to deploy a raft

So if you ditch for whatever reason without floats the helicopter is going to roll over and sink "without a bubble" it is unlikely that the pax and crew are all going to exit safely so:a safe forced landing is not possible even in the most benign sea state and if Search and Rescue is not there very, very quickly to rescue your remaining pax and perhaps your good self as you float around in the water fending off the local marine predators -even warm water can lead to hypothermia B and C are also a given.

Just curious but why would you want to operate overwater without floats, rafts, jackets ect. anyway?
Relying on the statistical non-probability of an emergency which will lead to a ditching is of little comfort if you become a statistical anomaly:{

There are not, I believe, too many helicopters which will allow PC1 with any reasonable payload / fuel combination.

PC2E or PC2 seem a more likely scenario.

[212man]

I'm no expert on CASA rules, but a search reveals CAO 20.11 which contains the following:

5.3 Helicopter flotation systems
5.3.1 A single engine helicopter engaged in passenger carrying charter operations shall be equipped with an approved flotation system whenever the helicopter is operated beyond autorotative gliding distance from land. However, when following a helicopter access lane prescribed in AIP-ERSA, or when departing from or landing at a helicopter landing site in accordance with a normal navigational procedure for departing from or landing at that site, an approved flotation system is not required.

5.3.2 A single engine helicopter engaged in regular public transport operations shall be equipped with an approved flotation system whenever the helicopter is operated beyond autorotative gliding distance from land.

5.3.3 A multi-engine helicopter engaged in passenger carrying charter or regular public transport operations over water and which is not operated in accordance with one-engine-inoperative accountability procedures shall be equipped with an approved flotation system.

My bold text would seem to indicate it may be possible to operate without floats.

[NRDK]

Apart from the OEI bit, how many other emergencies in your EOP's require a land immediately? (In your case 'ditch'). What totally cheap, unprofessional outfit would even go here in today's market. What self respecting pilot would for that matter?

[oldrotorhead]

212man, you are right on with your reference to CAO20.11, regarding aircraft operating over water with OEI accountability not being required to be equipped with floats. That is the whole point of my thread really as I'm trying to ascertain what that really means in the fair dinkum, 150nm off shore, middle of the night, 50 knots across the deck, crap turbulence and spray everywhere, and your landing area pitching and rolling like a real bitch scenario............
Hence my question - I think OEI accountability in the overwater scenario means just that. ie. PC1 not PC2 or PC2 with "exposure", noting by the way that current Aussie ME helicopter performance standards are enshrined in a CASA 2005 'Policy" document and are not yet in regulations. If you are operating to CAT A procedures either PC1 or PC 2 over land, then any "forced landing" you may wind up having to carry out at least will be onto an area where you aint gonna immediately sink ("without a bubble" as someone above so eloquently put it!)
So, again to my original question - are there any aircraft currently doing this kind of op here in Australia and if so, what type and model can do it please?
Maybe there is someone from CASA lurking here on pprune with an opinion....?

[Um... lifting...]

Apart from the OEI bit, how many other emergencies in your EOP's require a land immediately?

About 4.

And it's about 4 not apart from the OEI bit as well. Nary a one of the land immediately emergencies in my checklist are OEI, and I do fly one of the candidate types for this hypothetical situation.

They're all drivetrain / control or fires.

Which is why deepwater operations without flotation are, in my view, less optimal than having a cup of tea.

[2beers]

Just another clarification:

PC1 requires a surveyed area where all obstacles in the takeoff path has been taken into account. The dynamic environment in offshore flying has obstacles (boats) moving around and it is impossible to publish a PC1 departure for any offshore helideck, hence PC2 enhanced. Which is a PC1 takeoff without the requirement for a surveyed takeoff path.

/2beers

[Halfrhovee]

This is an interesting thread as it raises two distinct concepts:

1. Can full OEI accountability occur offshore? The answer would go something like unless you are are taking off and landing offshore to a floating runway long enough and wide enough to simulate PC1 onshore you are then left with a situation of being PC 2 or PC 2 with exposure or PC 2 enhanced, I.e. you do not have full OEI accountability offshore (bring your own floating runway sufficient to cope with an OEI situation at the weight and temperature corresponding to your respective CAT A chart from your respective RFM) and,

2. As 212 man has correctly stated,

5.3.3 A multi-engine helicopter engaged in passenger carrying charter or regular public transport operations over water and which is not operated in accordance with one-engine-inoperative accountability procedures shall be equipped with an approved flotation system.

It seems then that Passenger carrying charter operations are a no go unless OEI accountability is assured unless an approved equipped flotation system is available.......

So that leaves no floats fitted to a multi engine helicopter must be a private operation where the operator owns its own aircraft and transports its own employees etc. given what has been discussed in the thread about the cost of safety and the significant layer of safety that a flotation system provides offshore for all sorts of contingencies (not just OEI).....transmission, tail rotor, fire, electrical fire, primary servos etc....

The real question is who or what operator would entertain an operation where operating offshore flotation equipment was not considered as standard kit for this type of operation? Considering that a ditching scenario without floats affords limited or no ability to extricate ones self from a downed helicopter.

100 nm from land, night, swollen sea, limited or no SAR aircraft on line that can adequately reach the crash site ( a sunken crash site?). I think the BOI would ask some serious questions about the level of risk management applied to this scenario.

IMHO, just some thoughts....

:=

[That lights normal!]

...unless you are are taking off and landing offshore to a floating runway long enough and wide enough to simulate PC1 onshore you are then left with a situation of being PC 2 or PC 2 with exposure or PC 2 enhanced, I.e. you do not have full OEI accountability offshore (bring your own floating runway sufficient to cope with an OEI situation at the weight and temperature corresponding to your respective CAT A chart from your respective RFM)

What about the scenerio where a CAT A/PC1 helipad procedure are published?
Even a HV diagram with no "avoid area" at the operating weight?

The Q seemed to be was it possible/legal, not whether people think it's prudent.

TLN

[Halfrhovee]

Hey TLN, absolutely agree with your comment ref fixed installation, surveyed clear area both on approach and departure, free from turbulence and the requisite 5:1 drop down I.e. a floating helipad or helipad at surface, however.....

Could there ever be a situation where a moving deck (vessel, ship etc ) was able to be PC1 compliant? This is where I'm headed.

Thanks

HRV

:)

[industry insider]

Halfrhovee

You are not correct. A floating runway is not necessary.

Full PC1 can be flown offshore in certain aircraft in certain conditions at certain weights. My company demands PC1 operations for some aspects of offshore operations, even with floats fitted.

[Halfrhovee]

Thanks Industry Insider. Had this info at hand already. What I wanted was a forum insider to detail what you have said publicly i.e. that a certain weights and certain conditions (temp and wind factoring), PC1 could be offered or not offered depending upon if these conditions were met. Thus at close to max AUW with increased temp and little to no wind (RFM dependant) PC1 is not an option (most machines I have operated fall into this category. The weights we're operating at with high ambient temps at SL).

This is what I'm after as operating close to max AUW with high ambient temps at SL with little to no wind WITHOUT floats fitted may cause embarrassment if OEI on approach or just after rotation from a moving deck regardless of the legalities of type of operation i.e. passenger carrying charter or private operation.

Thanks for the input.

[HeliTester]

Anyone heard any more about the PC2d (Defined Limited Exposure) concept for offshore helideck operations that was discussed at the December 2010 Fourth EASA Rotorcraft Symposium in Cologne?