S92 OEI into Sumburgh

[Max Contingency]

North Sea helicopter in emergency landing at Sumburgh - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-38112703)

Usual BBC over dramatic headline of 'emergency landing"

FR24 shows 2 x S92 dispatched for down-manning the platform. Wing man overhauls the OEI aircraft and leaves him to his night overwater OEI transit and approach.

So to turn a non story into a meaningful discussion: would you shepherd the OEI aircraft on his diversion to nearest suitable or would you press on with your pax to original destination?

[RVDT]

over dramatic headline of 'emergency landing"

If an engine failure is in the EP's of the RFM they are probably correct?

So to turn a non story into a meaningful discussion: would you shepherd the OEI aircraft on his diversion to nearest suitable or would you press on with your pax to original destination?

Without knowledge of the exact circumstance - difficult to answer that one.

In the first instance as we now have a single engine helicopter out in the North Sea in the dark if you had the option you would possibly stay with them as a first priority. If they did end up in the Ogen you could at least tell somebody where they were and probably not much else?

[Nescafe]

If an engine failure is in the EP's of the RFM they are probably correct?

I have "Aux Batt Off" in my EOP, but it doesn't make it an emergency landing.

[Geoffersincornwall]

Nescafe

I guess our are flying an AW139. If not ignore my comments.

The RFM for the 139 is a technical document written exclusively for the certification process, hence now the clamour from all corners of industry for a Flight Crew Operations Manual. These are currently available for the EC 225 (RIP) and the S92 and will soon be available for the 139.

The RFM currently advises the reader to 'continue flight' in the event of a 'Main Battery Hot' event, likewise for the 'Alt Batt Hot'. Perhaps most astonishingly it says the same if both events occur simultaneously.

This goes to show that the the context of a malfunction/emergency is very important. With any of those Batt Hot events I would indeed continue fight but only if I was downwind in the circuit which is probably where the Flight Test Engineer who wrote the procedure was when he came up with the drill.

If there is a tendency in our industry I would like to change it is the apparent desire NOT to tell the world you have a problem. Even worse even when it is acknowledged by the crew that they have an issue and tell ATC they use mealy-mouthed words like:

"We are returning with a technical issue"

When challenged by the controller - "are you declaring an emergency" they still refuse to use the magic words PAN PAN.... PAN PAN... PAN PAN.

Why not??

G.

[serf]

North Sea helicopter in emergency landing at Sumburgh - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-38112703)

Usual BBC over dramatic headline of 'emergency landing"

FR24 shows 2 x S92 dispatched for down-manning the platform. Wing man overhauls the OEI aircraft and leaves him to his night overwater OEI transit and approach.

So to turn a non story into a meaningful discussion: would you shepherd the OEI aircraft on his diversion to nearest suitable or would you press on with your pax to original destination?

Maybe they were concerned about the runway possibly being fouled by the OEI aircraft.

[terminus mos]

Not really a big deal. In the airline world, there is usually 1x IFSD or engine problem / rejected takeoff about every 1.5 days somewhere.

[Frying Pan]

Agree, but the airline world is a MUCH bigger world.

Alas, the North Sea has had more than it's fair share of tradegy in recent years so any helicopter 'emergency' will make the news whatever the peers think.

[Democritus]

Not really a big deal..........

Hmm.....well, having had an engine shut down on me for no apparent reason on a dark, snowy, North Sea winter's night some 70 minutes from the nearest land I can assure you for me it was certainly a big deal....... but then I always was a 'what's going to happen next' kind of guy not a bold pilot who isn't phased by these happenings.

[sycamore]

Well,if I was the local CP,I`d invite the `other crew` for an early morning `coffee and biccies`,but no coffee or biccies, to explain their reasoning for not assisting the aircraft in` distress`....If that is what happened....even if the aircraft with the problem does`nt want assistance/declare an emergency ,etc,common sense and professional etiquette as a Captain should come first...

[Concentric]

Another snippet...


Double North Sea Drama As Helicopter Down-Manning Workers Makes Emergency Landing - Oil and Gas News (http://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/11628/double-north-sea-drama-as-helicopter-down-manning-workers-makes-emergency-landing/)

[Same again]

Flying a helicopter with one engine? Phew! Whatever next?

[MightyGem]

Maybe they were concerned about the runway possibly being fouled by the OEI aircraft.
Yes, I guess the second S92 would have a problem if it couldn't land on the runway. :rolleyes:

I would have stayed with the OEI.

[ScotiaQ]

It always amazes me (an overused word) but why would a HELICOPTER worry about a blocked runway on a huge airfield? It could land on the hardstanding outside the terminal building, bearing in mind how they land offshore. In fact, back in the day, helicopters did just that.

The second aircraft should have accompanied, given the conditions.

Can we please get a grip.

Sq

[krypton_john]

Would the OEI helicopter have been tracked by either radar or satellite? If so I'm wondering what value the second helicopter would have added?

[Max Contingency]

Would the OEI helicopter have been tracked by either radar or satellite? If so I'm wondering what value the second helicopter would have added?

Surprisingly, some very modern aircraft have their sat tracking system wired to the non essential bus bar that is shed in the event of OEI

[malabo]

Wasn't OEI, chip indication without secondary so just a roll back to idle. Can be rolled back up if required. Everything offshore these days is satellite tracked, with 30 sec frequency if you flip the "concerned" switch. Good call by the crew of the other aircraft, if they had loitered around in the dark trying to stay visual with the slower aircraft to only provide a location that is already well known, then they'd be in my office the next day.

Different strokes... this is a profession, not a support group.

[Scattercat]

I sometimes wish we had a "like" button on this forum. The last 6 posts deserve a "like". Common sense seems to be getting quite rare. :D:D

[gulliBell]

The non-essential bus gets shed OEI, really?

[212man]

The non-essential bus gets shed OEI, really?
The S92 does not have a non-essential bus and, regardless, does not shed any buses after an engine shutdown. It uses MGB driven generators - not engine starter/generators.

That said, you do come across some odd wiring examples on different types, as Max Con says. The one that really struck me was reading the Air Transat A330 report, where they dumped all their fuel out of a leaking pipe over the Atlantic, at night, and then dead-sticked into the Azores. The CVFDR was shed after the second flame out, so the investigators lost the last 30 min of the flight! Turns out that that's a standard practice, but now being addressed.

[ukv1145]

Very true, the S92 does not shed any busses OEI but will shed certain services upon a generator failure - AVC, No.1 Eng Anti-Ice etc.
Industry is slowly catching up with CVFDR problems in that most new CVFDR installations have an independent (battery) power supply to power them on the event of loss of main power.

[Max Contingency]

My S92 type rating has at least an inch of dust on it now so that's why I said "some very modern aircraft". Ah I miss the APU!

Didn't want to 'black cat' the discussion but I had the pleasure of a 120nm OEI (full shutdown) transit 2 weeks ago in an Italian machine with starter generators, and that's how I knew the Sat track was wired to a non essential busbar. When I looked afterwards, I could find no mention of this in the RFM supplement or component main manual.

[SASless]

Fouled Runway? I suppose landing on a taxiway did not enter into the discussion at some point.

Having an aircraft overhead in the event of a Ditching....had Ditching been a concern....would not be a bad thing.

Perhaps we are beginning to think we are Airplane Pilots and need long runways to land on when we come ashore.

[212man]

You don't 'foul a runway' by landing an S92 OEI! Why is that even being discussed? You simply taxi off and park and shutdown like any other flight.

[albatross]

Aside from which they were not OEI they reduced an engine to idle because of a chiplight.
They could, if twin engine power had been required, have returned the engine to "fly" on final.

[finalchecksplease]

Also have you guys looked at the aerodrome chart for Sumburgh (EGPB), loads of options especially for a helicopter in the very unlikely event (I agree with 212man & Albatross) of "fouling a rwy"

I'm not saying what the other helicopter did was wrong, without knowing all the facts you can't make a meaningful statement either way.

[Fareastdriver]

In the early days of the 332 we would have one flying back with an engine pulled back because of a spurious fire warning at least once a week.

Never bothered the papers.

[212man]

Aside from which they were not OEI they reduced an engine to idle because of a chiplight.
They could, if twin engine power had been required, have returned the engine to "fly" on final.
Plus, an S92 on one engine doesn't exactly 'limp home'. I remember overtaking a British AAC B212 and being told over the RT we were showing off - I paused a moment and replied "I assume you know we are single engined?" (Which we were, in TNG mode.)

[gmrwiz]

Any news/preliminary report about this incident?

[Variable Load]

Input chip caution came on, ECL followed and engine placed in idle. Caution extinguished after a while. Aircraft landed, no chip found. Aircraft returned to service.

Yawn.

[Fareastdriver]

Don't they have fuzz burners like the S76 did.

[Variable Load]

Yes it does. Six automatic attempts before the caution illuminates.

[FC80]

Ukv1145, what you've written is wrong - the 92 sheds no services at all with a single generator failure, I suspect what you are thinking of is what you would lose with a dual gen failure and reliance on the APU gen only.

[ukv1145]

FC80. Yes I badly worded my post. Double gen fail will shed services as you point out.
The SAR variant will shed services (SAR specific services) on a single gen fail. No services are shed OEI.

[NorthSeaTiger]

https://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/11763/chc-s92-helicopter-lands-on-one-engine-after-technical-difficulties

Did they find the brick in the washing machine ?

[Max Contingency]

"A loud bang followed by a noise that sounded like a brick going round in a washing machine coming from the engines. The noise was so concerning that one of the passengers approached the pilots to raise their concerns"

[Satcomm]

You don't 'foul a runway' by landing an S92 OEI! Why is that even being discussed? You simply taxi off and park and shutdown like any other flight.


As long as your operational engine doesn't calf on approach.

[roundwego]

Maybe their simulator training exercises all ended when the aircraft was on the ground and stopped on the runway. Maybe they were never trained to taxi the aircraft off the runway after an OEI landing in the sim ;)