SAR S-92 Missing Ireland

[Red5ive]

Can you confirm western face? Previous communications have said the area of interest is to the east?

Look at marine traffic and you will see

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C7rawrTX0AAmb58.jpg

[JimJim10]

If it intended to land at Blacksod before continuing on to the rescue site, there would have been no need to take off heavy.

I disagree based on the difference between the amount of fuel available at Dublin Airport and amount available at Blacksod. You would fuel heavy at Dublin and top-up whatever you've burnt at Blacksod to give you as much time as possible over the atlantic.

[JimJim10]

Doesn't the RTE report assume all the Coastguard S92's have the same spec'

Is it strange that Sligo-based R118 helicopter had been tasked at 9.40pm on Monday night to go 241km west and
R116 left Dublin at 11.02pm.
Wouldn't that mean R116 was then about two hours twenty behind R118, if you assume about an hour to get to the west coast doing about 100kts.

Not particularly. Tasking time would seem to me to be the time the coastguard picked up the phone and called the helicopter. Actual departure time of R118 could be anywhere from 10-30mins after that. Ill assume 30mins due to heavy refuelling and a departure of @ 2210
Actual departure time of R116 is known as @2300 after heavy refuel, so tasking time of say 30mins previous @2230.

The 40mins (approx) separation would (to me) be accounted for with trying to deal with the Irish military who couldn't provide top cover on the night.

[JimJim10]

Rescue 118 was tasked at that time but went from Sligo direct to Blacksod to refuel before heading to the ship, I would have thought that top cover should have the two S92s travelling together and not to be so far behind.

I had forgotten that point....R118 would have fuelled full at Sligo (again more fuel available there) and topped-up at Blacksod. That top-up detour again reduced the amount of time R116 would have been behind R118.

[pfm1000]

Can you confirm western face? Previous communications have said the area of interest is to the east?

Looks like an error in the report....confusion probably caused by the fact that the tail contact was with the western side of the island but the helicopter ultimately sank on the eastern side.

[mr velo]

A lot of coastline activity by SAR helicopter and RNLI lifeboats in the past 2 hours or so. Huge area being searched.

[[email protected]]

So it is quite possible that they knew Blackrock was there, used it as an IP for a teardrop letdown, flew out to the West and then turned inbound, got 'visual' (no NVD) benath and then manoeuvered towards Blacksod but hit Blackrock, lost the TR and ended up in the water.

[El Bunto]

Very extensive search currently underway around Achill Island and the mainland coastline. Several vessels and SAR helis too, checking every inlet and bay.
No information as to cause, perhaps routine due to the first day of decent weather.

[SimonK]

I suspect you may be right Crab. I guess it will all come out very soon anyway. RIP.

[Red5ive]

Katie Hannon (https://twitter.com/KatieGHannon) of RTE did the Primetime report mentioned previously, made this comment:

Katie Hannon‏Verified account @KatieGHannon (https://twitter.com/KatieGHannon) 15h15 hours ago (https://twitter.com/KatieGHannon/status/845054950409424897)

@rheadon (https://twitter.com/rheadon) @RTE_PrimeTime (https://twitter.com/RTE_PrimeTime) I agree. That's why we were v careful not to engage in speculation. Report only referred to facts we could verify.

https://twitter.com/KatieGHannon/status/845054950409424897


Dives on wreckage begin off Blackrock island
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-search-dives-on-wreckage-begin-off-blackrock-island-1.3023182


Useful links:

Pat McGrath rtenews -
https://twitter.com/patmcgrath

#blacksod (https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&vertical=default&q=black%20sod&src=tyah)

#R116 (https://twitter.com/hashtag/r116?f=tweets&vertical=default&src=hash)

#Rescue116 (https://twitter.com/hashtag/rescue116?f=tweets&vertical=news&src=hash)

[Eyesee]

Flight recorder recovered according to Rte news

[Thunderbirdsix]

Black box flight recorder has been recovered in very good condition it will be taken to the UK for analysis, no mention yet of the crew

[Ber Nooly]

https://www.periscope.tv/patmcgrath/1mrGmeYZEjDGy?autoplay&t=4

[albatross]

Ber Nooly
If doing an ARA approach...No Radar target On the Radar...no approach.
GPS waypoints are secondary when doing an ARA. Radar is primary.
Offset away from target at 1 1/2 miles ..you do not approach the target straight on.
Loose the target ...overshoot now..with a further turn away.
Get to ARA min range and not visual ..overshoot now with a further turn away.
In my experience You don't need to play with tilt once established inbound. Gain sometimes but not often.
I think you are wandering down the wrong trail here.
What caused this tragedy is a mystery.
They have recovered the "Black Box" so hopefully we will find out further info soon.
Most folks here just want our missing brothers back. I pray they are recovered soon.
You admit to having no experience using a WX radar in GMap or any other mode so why are you speculating about it.
Not being mean ..just frustrated with a lot of the rumours, innuendo and hearsay flying around here in the last couple of days.
Please remember that there are bereaved family and friends looking at this thread, also be aware of the ever sensationalistic supposed "Gentlemen of the Press" looking for something interesting to print.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

BER NOOLY I don't read anyone posting that they are 100% confident of anything. What most experienced crews are trying to tell you is there are procedures that should be followed and it's difficult to accept this crew would not follow them. The radar is a fairly simple device with obvious operating requirements and limitations. All experienced crews know this so they are struggling with your continued reference to it.

However, it is rumour network so anyone can post what they like including speculation but it may irritate some people when you do.

[Mech1111]

Body of Coast Guard pilot Mark Duffy found inside wreckage of crashed Rescue 116 helicopter in Co Mayo - Irish Mirror Online (http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/body-coast-guard-pilot-mark-10094353)

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

BER NOOLY, are you struggling with the English language? I am implying nothing. I am expressing an opinion that it's hard for me to believe a simple mistake like wrongly programmed Nav kit OR mishandling the radar would be a possibility in a SAR crew such as this one. That's all. Nothing more because I know nothing.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

BER NOOLY there are unwritten rules which you should follow. The first is to show some respect for fellow aviators who have succumbed to the difficult environment that they operate in. The second is to show some restraint in your speculations.

Your last post included examples of previous flight crew errors leading to accidents and loss of life. How would you feel if your it was your friends, family, loved ones missing at the moment reading your last post.

The definition of an idiot, is failure to learn!

[Democritus]

"A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss things that affect them". It would be good to get back on track.

[Senior Pilot]

I notice another of my posts has been deleted. Guess this thread is only for rotorheads.

Your questions, whilst interesting, are detracting from a specific thread and would be better placed elsewhere. Others have hinted that you restrain from off topic tangents, hence I have deleted such posts and will continue to do so where appropriate.

This is not open for discussion.

[OttoRotate]

Body of Coast Guard pilot Mark Duffy found inside wreckage of crashed Rescue 116 helicopter in Co Mayo - Irish Mirror Online (http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/body-coast-guard-pilot-mark-10094353)
Well there's one small step towards a piece of sorely needed resolution. Shame they had to use the small window of time they had to pull the recorder out of the sea, but he will be brought to rest soon.

The article says they are still working to locate the final two crew members. It sounds like the airframe may have split at the cockpit bulkhead. If the tail transition remained attached to the cabin, they might be able to follow the signal from the #2 CVFDR to their location.

[Red5ive]

Gardai confirm one crew member found on wreckage of R116. Identity not confirmed. No word on two other crew as yet.https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/845419942908452864

Briefing at Blacksod. Investigators confirm crew member located in cockpit of #Rescue116. Say not possible to confirm ID at this stage.https://twitter.com/11SchillRob/status/845420029084684290

Short video of the press conference
https://twitter.com/EdCartyPA/status/845427398078279680

Short video - black box recovered
https://twitter.com/EdCartyPA/status/845349048215375873

RTE news said they are working through the night at the recovery site.

Search area to be extended off Mayo coast

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/coast-guard-search-body-located-in-cockpit-of-rescue-116-1.3023993

[Turkeyslapper]

Firstly, tragic and hopefully the cause is determined in a timely fashion.

A previous post suggested no NVD being used .... is that standard for the Irish guys n gals? Are they just not equipped with them? Elected not to use them?

[SASless]

In this day and age.....not to have NVG's for SAR Ops in dirty weather really makes One wonder. Night flying without them really just isn't Night flying it is flying in the Dark?

[gulliBell]

To my speculative thinking there can only be one of three grossly simplistic explanations, each of which ultimately will be explained by many pages of a final accident report:
1. They thought they were somewhere other than where they were;
2. They knew where they were but were unaware of their own true height, or the true height of the obstacle they hit;
3. They knew where they were but something suddenly went seriously wrong with the helicopter requiring an immediately landing.
Experience of a crew doesn't necessarily protect from some types of human factors reasons that lead to accidents.

I do contemplate why all those rescue assets were dispatched in the first place, at night and in bad weather, in response to a fisherman who had, what appears to be, a non-life threatening or otherwise medical non-time critical laceration injury to his thumb.

[rotorspeed]

Is that really correct that the injury being rescued was a just a badly lacerated thumb? Assuming so, how could this warrant the enormous cost of R118 attending?

But even more importantly, how on earth could the equally enormous cost of a second S-92 also being despatched to provide top cover begin to be justified? Apart from the cost, the awful tragedy of R116 demonstrates the massively greater potential price of sending aircraft out on difficult missions, particularly on bad weather nights.

[Outwest]

I do contemplate why all those rescue assets were dispatched in the first place, at night and in bad weather, in response to a fisherman who had, what appears to be, a non-life threatening or otherwise medical non-time critical laceration injury to his thumb.

If this indeed was the reason for this SAR mission I can't imagine the guilt that fisherman or those who made the request must be feeling now.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

I really do not think focusing on the otigin of the task is helpful or relevant. The Coastguard have a mission capability and a contract with the Irish Government, to launch when requested. If you have never worked SAR or HEMS, the line between "Serious Injuries" and minor is not ever clear.A lacerated hand, with exposed bone and sinew, bleeding profusely, is a serious injury and if the vessel is 2 days out in a difficult sea the situation is much clearer.

However, the mission of this helicopter was to support the first helicopter and in that respect their mission is essential and valid under the assumed operating criteria.

Finally I am sure the fisherman himself played no part in the decision to launch SAR assets. Better we stick to the circumstances of accident rather than start blaming the reason it was flying.

Otherwise we would have to blame the Tenerife 747 Accident on the passengers cos the B*****ds went on holidays instead of working.

[pilot and apprentice]

I really do not think focusing on the otigin of the task is helpful or relevant. The Coastguard have a mission capability and a contract with the Irish Government, to launch when requested. If you have never worked SAR or HEMS, the line between "Serious Injuries" and minor is not ever clear.A lacerated hand, with exposed bone and sinew, bleeding profusely, is a serious injury and if the vessel is 2 days out in a difficult sea the situation is much clearer.

However, the mission of this helicopter was to support the first helicopter and in that respect their mission is essential and valid under the assumed operating criteria.

Finally I am sure the fisherman himself played no part in the decision to launch SAR assets. Better we stick to the circumstances of accident rather than start blaming the reason it was flying.

Otherwise we would have to blame the Tenerife 747 Accident on the passengers cos the B*****ds went on holidays instead of working.

Well said.

[The SAR RC]

I was told some time ago that their transition to NVG would take place in 2014. Did that not happen?

[[email protected]]

DB - :ok::ok:

[heliski22]

Well said.


Ditto...! :ok::ok:

[rotorspeed]

DB
It probably won't surprise you to know that I've never been involved in SAR missions, so could you expand on what the role of top cover is, and what determines the necessity of its use - presumably not all SAR flights require another helicopter as back up?

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

DB
It probably won't surprise you to know that I've never been involved in SAR missions, so could you expand on what the role of top cover is, and what determines the necessity of its use - presumably not all SAR flights require another helicopter as back up?

Hi Rotorspeed, my experience is MIL/HEMS/OFFSHORE/POLICE with very limited SAR Experience. However, CRAB could be considered our resident SAR Expert. Maybe he would be better placed to answer your question.

[ukv1145]

Otto. Only 1 CVFDR fitted to these machines.

[Search&Rescue]

Well said.

Totally agree. And R116 most likely acted also as a back up for R118 during those bad weather conditions...

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Rotor speed, Knowledge and Experience are 2 different things. I have the knowledge of the reason why top cover is required but little experience of it. Hence my deferral to Crab, who has both.

[Ed Winchester]

Alternatively, you could read the rest of the thread, which already contains the information on 'top cover' that you seek.

[IRCG SMC WHITEY]

Obviously Rotorspeed has little understanding of SAR environment. Top Cover is used to provide communications cover and safety back to the Helo undertaking the SAR mission or MEDIVAC as in this sad case. 150Nm+ from land and down at 100ft approx above sea level there is no ATC comms.
The history of Top Cover off west coast of Ireland goes back a long way back to the time of the Nimrod. Since its demise we have used Irish Air Corps assets - Casa and which ever fixed wing A/C was available.

[gulliBell]

I really do not think focusing on the otigin of the task is helpful or relevant....

...A lacerated hand, with exposed bone and sinew, bleeding profusely, is a serious injury and if the vessel is 2 days out in a difficult sea the situation is much clearer.


I wasn't focusing, I was contemplating.
It was reported in the media - for what it's worth - that the injury to the fisherman was a laceration to the tip of a thumb, and the injury was relatively minor that didn't necessitate urgent transport to hospital.
From what I understand from the media report, the Captain of the fishing boat requested evacuation of the injured fisherman, rather than set sail for port, and it was on this basis that the SAR effort was scrambled.

[gulliBell]

Not coming from a SAR background, and for the enlightenment of others here like me, I'm curious to what extent the helicopter crew are involved in the initial decision making process to launch on a mission. Or are they told to go, and they just go? Presumably they are told of the nature of the injury of the patient. If they are told "not life threatening" is it open to the SAR crew to suggest, for example, as the safest option in the circumstances, for the Captain of the vessel to sail towards port and the helicopter will rendezvous with them at first light?

[buzz66]

As I have said before the Auto Scaling feature of the Moving Map would make both Blackrock & Blacksod look almost identical during the last 5 NM approach.
Blackrock is not on the Terrain Database....I don't believe that for a second.
You also can't display TAWS & Radar on the same Screen, it's one or the other.
EGPWS inhibited during approach is also bull****. A rapid rising Terrain during approach will still give warning, given the steep angle of this rock it most likely won't be enough time. The Crew can however disable the Terrain Warning.
Not sure if it has an Obstacle Database? If it does then it's quite possible they have inhibited the Warning because the Lighthouse would annoy the Crap out of them. Maybe now you can start to see the plausibility.
If the MPFDR Data shows the Auto Pilot was engaged and NAV Mode selected during the Tear Drop then it's a forgone conclusion Blackrock was the destination selected on the FMS. Couple that with the Altitude Profile, and then you can tell if the destination was intended or not.

So your SAR machines are not NVIS equipped. I bet they will be very shortly.
Pretty sure the Flight Following will also get a Giddy Up.
Vertical Profile Radar could also be handy.

[pfm1000]

If the MPFDR Data shows the Auto Pilot was engaged and NAV Mode selected during the Tear Drop then it's a forgone conclusion Blackrock was the destination selected on the FMS.

Apologies if this is a stupid question but if Blackrock was the destination in the FMS and Auto Pilot was engaged would AP have flown them in to contact with the island ?

[helicrazi]

It does what you tell it to. If you ask it to fly into something, it will obey.

[albatross]

Not coming from a SAR background, and for the enlightenment of others here like me, I'm curious to what extent the helicopter crew are involved in the initial decision making process to launch on a mission. Or are they told to go, and they just go? Presumably they are told of the nature of the injury of the patient. If they are told "not life threatening" is it open to the SAR crew to suggest, for example, as the safest option in the circumstances, for the Captain of the vessel to sail towards port and the helicopter will rendezvous with them at first light?


Not sure how it works in SAR but when I worked for an Air Ambulance we were not told the patient status but simply asked "Can you respond to a call to XXXX?" We made our go/no go decision based upon operational factors such as Aircraft / crew status and weather.
This was because we did want to put undo pressure on the crew. After we accepted the flight the paramedics would get the patient status. We did not want something like "The patient is a cute 5 year old with serious injuries" to affect the decision to launch or not.
I am sure someone with actual knowledge as to SAR procedures will be able to better respond to your question.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Gullible, I can only tell you how HEMS works. The Medical agency is responsible for tasking the aircraft. Sometimes all the details are known and sometimes not. SAR, being a more senior service having been around longer than HEMS I am sure operates on a similar basis.

It's easy in hindsight to be critical of the urgency of any task. However, most emergency services are pre-disposed to launch rather than conduct unofficial triage to avoid the risks of ending up with a fatality after they have declined to respond.

As an EMS pilot I am not medically qualified to make those calls and so rely on the expertise and more crucially, the established protocols of the medical teams to make the launch decision. Sometimes it is overkill (excuse the pun). Most times it is not.

I am not interested in the medical details of this incident until in the air and I suspect prior to launch, neither were this crew. They would simply be responding to the tasking agencies call and get on with it. Fast reaction is the principle and too many opinions in the process would just slow the whole thing down.

I doubt the skipper of the boat would make a commercial decision over the welfare of his crew. Fishing boat crews are a tight knit group. They would have made the call to protect the persons interests. Also I would pay lip services to reports in the press.

Finally, don't forget SAR crews train regularly and I feel sure the conditions on the night would have not stopped them training. The risks are always there. However, if this was a training flight I doubt we would be saying training should be banned because of the risks.

I am sure they will be lessons learned from this but I doubt it would alter launch criteria or the need for top cover as I for one, do not believe they are relevant. Or to put it another way, doing so rather accepts the likelihood of such events and by preventing the flight you avoid the event.

There will be a root cause to this accident just like all the others before this one. Finding it and evaluating that root cause to reduce or even eradicate that risk is far better than mitigating the risks by preventing such flights from occurring.

Apologies Albatross, I missed your post. I think you describe the principles and reasons behind an EMS launch better than I did.

[Bayerische]

I have been following this thread since the beginning as I was genuinely saddened to hear of the loss of R116. Condolences to all involved.

I have the utmost respect for the SAR community, these guys do fantastic work.

Here is more info on the fisherman's injury. The decision to launch is not made by the IRCG but by medical staff at Cork University Hospital based on the information given to them. Doctors will generally err on the side of caution if they are to be held responsible. The accuracy of the information they receive from the fishing boat is another factor. It seems the helicopter crews don't have much of a say in the decision.

Miscommunication over severity of fisherman's injury responsible for last journey of R116 (http://www.thejournal.ie/coastguard-injury-miscommunication-dara-fitzpatrick-3296348-Mar2017/)

[catch21]

While somewhat tangential, for information I was a coastguard for four years, operational lifeboat crew with the RNLI for ten years, and a launching authority for the RNLI for a further two years. The coastguard requested the lifeboat to launch with full disclosure of the material facts. The decision was based on the nature of the problem as well as weather, etc. Not once in my 16 years SAR experience (handling approx 100 calls per year) was the offer declined, in fact in many cases the response was strengthened with a "both boats" launch to provide what could be regarded as the equivalent of "top cover".

[Same again]

The initial call from the IRCG co-ordinator would have been along the lines of "We have a wet job (offshore task) for you. An injured crewman on board a fishing vessel approx 100nm (or whatever) west of Blacksod at co-ordinates (L&L). The injury is to his hand and the ship's Captain is requesting that he be taken to hospital."

It is then up to the SAR crew to obtain as much information as possible regarding position, type of vessel, time the accident occurred, more details of the injury and patient, weather at the scene, etc, etc. Most experienced co-ordinators would already have this information available.

The crew then decide whether or not to accept the task. Unless the vessel is out of range or the weather is such that it would prevent the flight from operating (bearing in mind that there are usually no prescribed minimum weather limits for SAR flights) the task would normally be accepted.

If, however, conditions are marginal, out of range and/or the winchman paramedic feels that the injury is not life-threatening and can wait, then the crew can delay or decline the task.

I have done this on a number of occassions when the combination is poor weather/long range and a non-life threatening injury. However I always make sure that as much information as is available is collected and the whole crew are happy with the decision. It is our bums that are strapped to the seats but equally we have to live with the decision.

[Shackman]

IRCG
The history of Top Cover off west coast of Ireland goes back a long way back to the time of the Nimrod

It goes back a lot further than that - I was doing top cover in a Shackleton for both Whirlwinds and Wessex to the West of Ireland before the Nimrod came into service. However, I didn't realise the warm fuzzy glow it gives you until I was the one in the Wessex a few years later. Later still, the assets deployed off Cork for the Air India Accident meant that while I was out there in a Chinook for 6 hours we had at various times 2 x Nimrods, 2 x USAF C-130s and others. Admittedly they were also assisting in the search, and sending us to look at anything significant (anyone remember the cabbage patch doll?), but if anything had happened to us - and the further you go from land the more every strange noise, turbulence, change in Ts or Ps gets the heart rate going - they're there for us as well. Bobbing in the oggin is much better in a large multi seat dinghy courtesy of a Lindholm container (unless it hits you on the head!).

[Search&Rescue]

The initial call from the IRCG co-ordinator would have been along the lines of "We have a wet job (offshore task) for you. An injured crewman on board a fishing vessel approx 100nm (or whatever) west of Blacksod at co-ordinates (L&L). The injury is to his hand and the ship's Captain is requesting that he be taken to hospital."

It is then up to the SAR crew to obtain as much information as possible regarding position, type of vessel, time the accident occurred, more details of the injury and patient, weather at the scene, etc, etc. Most experienced co-ordinators would already have this information available.

The crew then decide whether or not to accept the task. Unless the vessel is out of range or the weather is such that it would prevent the flight from operating (bearing in mind that there are usually no prescribed minimum weather limits for SAR flights) the task would normally be accepted.

If, however, conditions are marginal, out of range and/or the winchman paramedic feels that the injury is not life-threatening and can wait, then the crew can delay or decline the task.

I have done this on a number of occassions when the combination is poor weather/long range and a non-life threatening injury. However I always make sure that as much information as is available is collected and the whole crew are happy with the decision. It is our bums that are strapped to the seats but equally we have to live with the decision.

Same again

Thanks for the good info! Just curious: What is your recommendation concerning radar usage? I mean tilt; do you have kind of "standard setting" when using GMAP mode?

[Al-bert]

IRCG


It goes back a lot further than that - I was doing top cover in a Shackleton for both Whirlwinds and Wessex to the West of Ireland before the Nimrod came into service. However, I didn't realise the warm fuzzy glow it gives you until I was the one in the Wessex a few years later. Later still, the assets deployed off Cork for the Air India Accident meant that while I was out there in a Chinook for 6 hours we had at various times 2 x Nimrods, 2 x USAF C-130s and others. Admittedly they were also assisting in the search, and sending us to look at anything significant (anyone remember the cabbage patch doll?), but if anything had happened to us - and the further you go from land the more every strange noise, turbulence, change in Ts or Ps gets the heart rate going - they're their for us as well. Bobbing in the oggin is much better in a large multi seat dinghy courtesy of a Lindholm container (unless it hits you on the head!).

What Shackman said, (X 22 yrs):ok::ok::ok:

S&R What is your recommendation concerning radar usage? I would recommend a Seaking search radar and a competent RADOP...but, nostalgia isn't what it used to be!

[malabo]

Commercially contracted civilian SAR: you get what you contract for and it is up to the operator to set SOP's and standards to operate successfully and safely with what has been specified. If top cover is provided then you don't need any long range comms (like the fishboat must have had to call for SAR), though I find that lack of capability odd. NVG is a complete and complex (expensive) program, takes time and money.
An instrument approach to either of the two west coast refueling stations would be another cost that can be saved by expecting the aircraft to cloud break on their own some distance away and drive in low-level while avoiding obstacles in the dark and weather. The commercial ARA letdowns for open ocean oil platforms have a number of restrictions and guidelines in the interest of safety, they were never meant for a shore landing. In the commercial world if no IP you'd have another established procedure to come down safely to a specific point, if nothing seen the gear up and back to your alternate.

[Jimi182]

RTE noting that recovery of the body in cockpit byou ROV was unsuccessful. No other bodies noted in the wreckage. Searches have taken place as far north as Downpatrick Head. Very sad.

[pfm1000]

RTE noting that recovery of the body in cockpit byou ROV was unsuccessful. No other bodies noted in the wreckage. Searches have taken place as far north as Downpatrick Head. Very sad.

At this point I wonder will they elect to lift the cockpit wreckage by the crane they have on site.

[Same again]

What is your recommendation concerning radar usage? I mean tilt; do you have kind of "standard setting" when using GMAP mode?

SAR Radar/FLIR approaches normally start from an MSA of 1500'. Initially down to 200' using the AP Transition Down function. During the RFA the Pilot Monitoring is adjusting the radar to give the best possible returns and giving a verbal picture and headings to the pilot flying. The FLIR operator is observing the track ahead and confirming these headings are clear. Once at 200' and inbound to the final approach point the search radar is fine-tuned. Final approach checks are now carried out before engaging the Transition Down to Hover function that will automatically descend the aircraft to the minimum height set.

Unlike an offshore O&G type of ARA, there is no defined Mapt as the aircraft is now at the minimum height (say 50') with a groundspeed at whatever the operator sets (normally 10 kts or vessel speed plus 10 knots). A missed approach procedure will have been pre-briefed in the event that there is no visual contact at minimum range. This involves changing the heading to a safe one using the AP and engaging the Tansition Up function that sets a pre-determined height and speed. The climb-out flight path is cleared using the search radar, FLIR and/or NVG.

[mini]

the winchman paramedic feels that the injury is not life-threatening[/B] and can wait, then the crew can delay or decline the task.

I have done this on a number of occassions when the combination is poor weather/long range and a non-life threatening injury. However I always make sure that as much information as is available is collected and the whole crew are happy with the decision. It is our bums that are strapped to the seats but equally we have to live with the decision. ]

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, are you saying the winchman/paramedic makes the go/no go call? My understanding was that a Medical Doctor decided on the need for urgent hospital transfer, the request for transfer was the made to the CG, with fly/no fly being the Pilots decision?

[rotorspeed]

Given the information from Bayerische in post 571, which confirms that the thumb injury was quite modest, the patient even only needing road ambulance from Blacksod, it is clear a review of the injury assessment and SAR dispatch process should follow - and I'm sure will. One can see the difficulty of getting accurate information from particularly small vessels with poor English spoken though. I guess ideally there would be a satellite link to send images and medical info across. Anyone know what technology is used now - and could be used in future?

[Red5ive]

Granuaile back at Blackrock, working through the night.

Sea 10 C. Wind 5 kts.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:-10/centery:54/zoom:11#

[gulliBell]

The media report in The Irish Times I read said the Captain of the UK registered fishing boat declared a "PAN PAN MEDICO" on VHF radio relayed by the Irish Coast Guard which allowed him to talk directly to a doctor at the hospital. The doctor advised the Irish Coast Guard based on the information received from the Captain. They must have understood the thumb to have been severed to warrant evacuation by helicopter. But it wasn't severed, and thus it was open for the fishing boat to proceed to port.

It turns out this same fisherman was injured, and evacuated by helicopter from another boat, in the North Sea nine months ago. Fishing is obviously a dangerous profession.

[Same again]

Obtaining accurate medical information on the casualty and the severity of the injury is often an issue, particularly when English is not the mother tongue of the crew. Often the fishing fleets in the Atlantic are not from home shores.

Which is why declining a task on the basis of sketchy information is a concern. Ideally - as in this case - a shore-based doctor can advise, or in the case of large cruise ships, a doctor is part of the crew. Lacking this, the advice of our own Paramedic is invaluable and helps in the decision making process.

It is ultimately the Commander's (often both pilots are Captains) responsibility to make the go/no go decision but I want to be happy that, either way, the other crew believe we are making the correct decision.

[henra]

Given the information from Bayerische in post 571, which confirms that the thumb injury was quite modest, the patient even only needing road ambulance from Blacksod, it is clear a review of the injury assessment and SAR dispatch process should follow - and I'm sure will.



Even if this was the case the accident could have also happened if this was a training mission. I'm not sure this is the right path to pursue when trying to learn lessons from this tragedy. Flying (and thus training) less frequently under challenging conditions doesn't make the job less risky. Compared to other missions/training scenarios this one wasn't even particularly challenging/risky. That is what makes it so mysterious.
There will be more to learn from CVR/FDR.

[buzz66]

Moot point.(Happy Now)....Might as well say if only the Aircraft wasn't serviceable. I wouldn't have taken off.
It was tasked and it happened, stay on track.
It's a SAR Heli

[El Bunto]

Re: questions around lack of NVG etc, there is a tender request in the EU Journal at present for third-party heli-SAR consultancy to the Irish Coastguard to liaise between them and CHC and to advise on matters of contractual adherence, future strategy, regulation, practices and equipment.

The CHC contract is currently at its mid-point so it makes sense to start looking forward to the next big supply tender. However I do wonder if it will move back from private sector to a more integrated state-provided package. The 2012 contract award was controversial at the time and will be no less so in five years.

[Red5ive]

Body recovered from R116
https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/845951476543475712

[rotorspeed]

Henra
I was not suggesting at all that the potentially unnecessary despatching of R166 was anything to do with the cause of the accident - which of course it wasn't. I raised the issue as a separate, though related, point. The reality is the no doubt generally excellent SAR services are funded by tax payers and as such need to continually look to provide best value for money. It is quite possible that investment in improved information communication with vessels might help this process - which in itself would protect the SAR industry. I can see that even unnecessary missions are still good training, but there is clearly a limit to how much of this is sensible.

Buzz66 - as above, you misunderstood my post.

[Red5ive]

Gardai have confirmed that the body recovered from R116 is that of Captain Mark Duffy. Search for his two colleagues continues.
https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/845951476543475712

https://www.rte.ie/news/regional/2017/0326/862655-coast-guard-mayo/

Heartbreaking.

[smcc63]

RIP Captain Mark Duffy

[gulliBell]

..Why did Dara make it out but not the other crew? If she was conscious, the impact was survivable. Perhaps further escape training of SAR crews will be looked at in finer detail?


Simply because the crash dynamics may have been more favourable to some than others. In car crashes some passengers come out unscathed, whilst others are fatally injured. Aircraft accidents are no different.

[Ber Nooly]

They will be using inflatable airbags to try to raise the wreckage to search for the remaining two crew members this morning.

[gulliBell]

I wonder why they just don't manually pop the floats and let it float to the surface by itself...probably a good technical reason why...I don't know.

[NumptyAussie]

Probably because the machine is spread over an area the size of a football field

[catch21]

I wonder why they just don't manually pop the floats and let it float to the surface by itself...probably a good technical reason why...I don't know.

Would the arming devices still be serviceable after prolonged submersion? Also you have no control over the lift at all, even if it works, I'd imagine it would pop up like a cork disturbing valuable evidence.

[G0ULI]

gulliBell

The reason that popping the floats won't work is that the aircraft is lying under 40 metres of water. The air pressure required to inflate a float at that depth is four times that at the surface, so the volume of gas required to just provide bouyancy at depth is four times greater that that required at the surface due to compression effects. The floats would burst on the way up in all likelyhood.

The standard method of recovery is to use open ended bags that are filled with just sufficient air to supply bouyancy. The volume of gas in the bags is adjusted by divers as the object is brought to the surface to strictly control the rate of ascent. An uncontrolled rise to the surface would be dangerous to personnel in the water, surface recovery vessels and risks further damaging or losing the object being recovered.

Bouyancy bags have been used for centuries as a way of recovering heavy valuable objects such as bronze cannon from the sea, so the methods are well understood even if they seem a bit low tech for the modern era of remotely controlled submarines.

[212man]

Would the arming devices still be serviceable after prolonged submersion? Also you have no control over the lift at all, even if it works, I'd imagine it would pop up like a cork disturbing valuable evidence.

Not sure they would inflate at that depth? (though I agree with your other points)

[OttoRotate]

I wonder why they just don't manually pop the floats and let it float to the surface by itself...probably a good technical reason why...I don't know.
It's possible the bags went off as soon as the immersion switches were exposed to water if the system was armed. This is unlikely, but could explain spreading of the wreckage.

Assuming the bags are uninflated, the system is electrically actuated, and since it sounds like the circuit breaker panels in the cockpit are separated from the rest of the wreckage, the system would not function even if it was triggered.

The primary reason this wouldn't be entertained as a viable solution is because the floats are not designed to raise a broken airframe from under water, but are rather intended to keep an intact airframe (and it's occupants) safely on the surface. Raising anything from the bottom of the sea is a delicate and calculated exercise. Float bags are placed at key points to maintain the structure's orientation as it is raised, and are slowly inflated to control the rate of ascent. This prevents the structure from shifting and further disintegrating, which would risk losing important information that would aid the investigation, as well as making a big mess to clean up.

If we go full mythbusters on this idea, lets assume a perfectly good S92 is sitting in 40m of water with a fully functional emergency flotation system. The float bottles are serviced with a nitrogen and helium mix to around 2500PSIG. I don't know the exact number offhand, but I think the floats are around 5PSIG when fully inflated. So while the pressure at 40m is around 60psi, the bags might still inflate enough to raise the aircraft to the surface. Again, though, I think the weight of the QCA (rotorhead and MGB) would cause it to flip upside-down along the way.

[AAKEE]

If we go full mythbusters on this idea, lets assume a perfectly good S92 is sitting in 40m of water with a fully functional emergency flotation system. The float bottles are serviced with a nitrogen and helium mix to around 2500PSIG. I don't know the exact number offhand, but I think the floats are around 5PSIG when fully inflated. So while the pressure at 40m is around 60psi, the bags might still inflate enough to raise the aircraft to the surface. Again, though, I think the weight of the QCA (rotorhead and MGB) would cause it to flip upside-down along the way.

Actually, the total pressure at 40m depth would make a 5psi at surface only fill the floats to 27%, making the lifting force only 27% of the 'on surface floating force'.
As we can be sure that the floats don't work now, and that that way of lifting stuff in water would be a bad idea, its only a theoretical discussion. Nevertheless, could be nice to know, cause the same fenomena applies also to inflatable floating jackets and so on( not exactly 27%, but the principle)

[LAXX5]

Actually the float bottles are filled with just nitrogen and the bags are inflated to 3.5 psi.

[Viper 7]

Obtaining accurate medical information on the casualty and the severity of the injury is often an issue, particularly when English is not the mother tongue of the crew. Often the fishing fleets in the Atlantic are not from home shores.

Which is why declining a task on the basis of sketchy information is a concern. Ideally - as in this case - a shore-based doctor can advise, or in the case of large cruise ships, a doctor is part of the crew. Lacking this, the advice of our own Paramedic is invaluable and helps in the decision making process.

It is ultimately the Commander's (often both pilots are Captains) responsibility to make the go/no go decision but I want to be happy that, either way, the other crew believe we are making the correct decision.



For those who are not involved in SAR - here's how the tasking process works for us:


In Canada, at JRCC Halifax, the radio-medical consultations are (or were when I was a RCAF SMC there) routed to a contracted civilian Doctor in the provincial health care system who takes what information may be gleaned, often through a language barrier, and makes a decision whether the injury is worthy of a helo extraction.


The SMC then contacts (frequently conference calls) a RCAF Flight Surgeon who either concurs with the decision or not. The idea being that, unlike the civilian Doc, the RCAF Doc understands the risks associated with a helo hoist extraction and can therefore make an educated risk assessment. If the RCAF Doc concurs that a helo extraction is warranted then the helo crew is fully briefed with all details of the injury and tasked with the mission.


With the knowledge of the level of injury, the aircraft commander and crew then assesses the weather, aircraft, crew, mission and threats; they make a yea/nea decision and either spin up and go or make a plan for when they can go in the future - when the weather/range to vessel or whatever has changed (risk level, essentially) enough to make mission success most likely.


Did we have what I considered unwarranted missions? Definitely.


Am I a Doctor? No.


I have, however, had my hands on the controls and my guys on a hoist in risk/return situations that I would describe as...asymmetric. Maybe we should be hoisting more doctors from boats at night in sea state 5, 180NM out! :p


To my knowledge our EMS/lifeflight crews are not briefed on the details of the injury until they make the weather call to accept the mission, but I'm sure there is a Canuck air ambulance guy out there who can confirm that.


We almost always send a fixed wing top cover platform out with the rescue bird to provide eyes on in case of an accident as well as a comms platform. We use Hercs here (for the moment) and they will commonly orbit and drop flares to try to give a horizon for hoisting. It works sometimes.


I find the idea of the SARTech/Flight Engineer (hoist operator) having a say in the go/no go decision interesting but I think it would only work when you're on top the vessel with the door open, hook in hand and they can see what they are getting into. Even then I don't think it would work as it's been my experience that those guys will jump into lava to rescue someone.

[212man]

cause the same fenomena applies also to inflatable floating jackets and so on( not exactly 27%, but the principle

Yes, as described by survivors from the Australian SF Blackhawk accident who, escaping at some depth and pulling the life jacket inflation tabs, experienced the shock of finding nothing happened and they had to swim to the surface!

[Red5ive]

NS dives concluded at Blackrock for the night. Resuming in the am. Plans to carry out partial lift of R116 wreckage tomorrow afternoon.
https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/846452798589992960

[Same again]

I find the idea of the SARTech/Flight Engineer (hoist operator) having a say in the go/no go decision interesting but I think it would only work when you're on top the vessel with the door open, hook in hand and they can see what they are getting into. Even then I don't think it would work as it's been my experience that those guys will jump into lava to rescue someone.

I find it 'interesting' that you would NOT involve the Tech Crew in the go/no go decision making process. We call it CRM.

[Maclovin]

Previously when helicopters have ditched in the North Sea they have been recovered by a dive support vessel using its main crane or if close enough to a platform, the platforms crane has been used. It would usually be done in a single lift so I'm guessing the lift bags are being used to move the wreckage further away from Blackrock for the safety of the recovery vessel. Even though the water depth is 40 meters, the wreckage is only 60 meters from the rock which would be quite close, even for a vessel with 'dynamic positioning' such as the Grainneuaille -particularly in a lazy Atlantic swell.

[Red5ive]

Naval Service divers have successfully attached a number of lifting bags to the wreckage of Coast Guard Rescue Helicopter 116.
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0327/862805-coast-guard-blacksod/

[ukv1145]

Actually the float bottles are filled with just nitrogen and the bags are inflated to 3.5 psi.

Nitrogen OR Helium, the bottles generally come from the OEM filled with helium and is an option in the AMM (slightly different charge pressures apply) final bag pressure is dependant on temperature and gas type.

[[email protected]]

Same again - the Canadian SAR-techs are a different breed - as Viper 7 said they would dive into molten lava - it's just the way they operate.

Therefore, although he is part of the crew, his default position is to go regardless which makes his CRM input somewhat skewed and he is unlikely to be the 'voice of reason' that leads you to stand down.

[Same again]

Give me the experienced, professional voice of reason over a molten lava diver anyday.

[Fareastdriver]

Until your are looking up at the winchman.

[LAXX5]

Nitrogen OR Helium, the bottles generally come from the OEM filled with helium and is an option in the AMM (slightly different charge pressures apply) final bag pressure is dependent on temperature and gas type.

My original reply was to a comment about the bottles being mixed nitrogen and helium.
Per the AMM:
HELIUM AND NITROGEN CANNOT BE MIXED IN THE SAME FLOTATION
BOTTLE. IF OPERATOR SWITCHES FROM HELIUM TO NITROGEN,
BOTTLE MUST BE COMPLETELY EVACUATED BEFORE BEING FILLED
WITH NITROGEN.
HELIUM CHARGED BOTTLES AND NITROGEN CHARGED BOTTLES CANNOT
BE INSTALLED ON THE SAME HELICOPTER, ALL FLOTATION
BOTTLES MUST BE FILLED WITH SAME INFLATION MEDIUM.

Bag operating pressure at standard day conditions is 3.5 psi but yes could vary due to atmospheric conditions. Just trying to be accurate not argumentative, too much of that on these sites already.

[Same again]

Until your are looking up at the winchman.

Listening to concerns of the whole crew will go a good way to avoiding that unhappy scenario. Commonly referred to as CRM or, to be more specific, SAR CRM.

[mickjoebill]

Yes, as described by survivors from the Australian SF Blackhawk accident who, escaping at some depth and pulling the life jacket inflation tabs, experienced the shock of finding nothing happened and they had to swim to the surface!
No doubt if it was cheap and easy we would have it.
How much more air would be required to achieve lift off at a given depth? Is it as simple as another bottle or same bottle design under more pressure? As life vest rises to the surface and water pressure reduces, a relief valve could release air pressure?
Too hard? Too expensive?

Mickjoebill

[noooby]

Viper 7, the Canada EMS outfit that I have dealings with have a policy of the drivers not knowing the condition of the patient after pickup.

Dispatch will tell them what the callout is (car v truck and first responder assessment for instance), but once the patient is onboard, there is no communication of the patients condition with those driving so as to to prevent "get there fast or they die" from influencing crew decisions that may compromise safety.

Don't know if that is standard in Canadian EMS ops, but that is how they work. Those up front fly from A to B as per SOP's. Those in back care for the patient.

[Red5ive]

Operation to lift R116 cancelled due to spring tides and the impact they're having on the effort. Resume am weather permitting.
https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/846790689153265665

[smcc63]

http://nlb.g2b.info/docs/GLA_Helicopter_Services_2015_-_CIL_Landing_Site_Register.pdf

Relevant pages 16 and 24,
Protocol for Irish lights Helicopters landing at Blackrock and Blacksod

[SASless]

Nooby,

Really? So when the Neo-Nate Team trundles out an Isolette.....the Flight Crew cannot tweak to it being a Preemie?

I have operated in both regimes...."Tell and Don't Tell! but the end result is you know pretty much what is going on.

That is where the Pilot(s) have to make business decisions....purely professional decisions based upon the information at hand that enter into that decision such as Weather, current and forecast, whether other operations have rejected the call, and so forth and so on.

Condition of the Patient and the possible outcome of Helicopter EMS intervention received or denied, has nothing to do with that decision.

Pilots (and Crew) have to accept that People die every day in this World and before the advent of Helicopters....rode in ground ambulances....and lived or died as it happened.

We set professional limits for a reason.....and we should use our preset Matrix to determine if we go....or don't go based upon those criteria. That is what makes us Professionals.

That doesn't mean we are heartless......and it doesn't mean we sometimes have regrets or second thoughts....but when you make the decision in that professional manner you know you did so correctly.

I shall pose a rhetorical question that calls for no posted answer.

Losing the Tip of a finger....and being in pain by itself is generally not life threatening.

What if the Crew of 116 and 118 had decided to wait till Daylight to make the flight....and in the mean while the Trawler had headed towards shore. How might this have turned out?

[noooby]

SAS, as you'll see in my comment, the crew know what they are picking up, just not the extent of injuries or condition of the patient.

Not all Premies in Isolettes are in critical condition, some are being transferred to a better facility or one closer to family location.

Once onboard, there is no communication between front and back with regard to the condition of the patient.

That is just how they do it at this particular outfit.

Sorry about the thread drift.

[mini]

I shall pose a rhetorical question that calls for no posted answer.

Losing the Tip of a finger....and being in pain by itself is generally not life threatening.

What if the Crew of 116 and 118 had decided to wait till Daylight to make the flight....and in the mean while the Trawler had headed towards shore. How might this have turned out?

In the mean time, septicaemia - which I read somewhere was the reason for the consulted Doc's nod to an airlift - gets an Eight hour headstart...

Given the now ubiquitous litigious culture, what Doc isn't going to call worst case scenario?

[What-ho Squiffy!]

No doubt if it was cheap and easy we would have it.
Mickjoebill

That's a pretty cynical comment.

[Scattercat]

This issue of crews having some information on the patient's condition and possibly being influenced to "push the limits" misses the point. All aviation is a risk v gain decision & SAR / EMS is often at the extremis of those decisions. Higher risks & higher gains. As someone who has done a fair bit of both, I believe that I (we) can only make an informed decision when I have all of the relevant information. I don't need to know every clinical detail anymore than the tasking agency needs to know all of the operational aspects, but without some information I only have half of the equation. What is required though, is the culture of being able to maintain a professional decision making process, regardless of the emotive, "this 2 year old child will die if you don't go" influence. I have made "no-go" decisions and people have perished as I'm sure many here will have had to. I have also made plenty of "go" decisions that have pushed myself and my crew close to the limits & people have been saved.
Accidents will happen & when they do, it is right & proper that we analyse what could have been done better, but we should be doing that anyway. The argument that R118 & R116 shouldn't have been tasked for an injury that may or may not have been life-threatening misses the point. It could be argued that this accident would still have occurred if the mission was to save a boatload of cute children. Let's focus on the cause of this tragic accident and work on ways to mitigate those risks that are inherent in our line of work.
I will say it one last time .... in my opinion, NVD's are a "must" technology for this type of work. Having done plenty with & plenty without, I wouldn't want to go back to doing what the crew of R116 were doing without the aid of NVD.

[malabo]

in my opinion, NVD's are a "must" technology for this type of work

Well, the IAA and operator disagree with all of you. No NVD, yet a cloud break at night at a rocky shoreline and driving in the dark at a few hundred feet looking for a helipad was risk-assessed as acceptable even for a routine refuelling stop. NVD was not specified in the contract and the successful bidder was under no obligation at his own financial burden to provide it. If the next contract has NVD then I'm sure the successful bidder will provide them and the appropriate procedures to match.

Thankfully, the IAA has the experience of the UK AAIB assisting it, so no doubt the root causes will be found in due course. As in the Sumburgh accident, I'd be interested in how the procedures utilized the installed equipment, the automation and training to ensure a safe operation, including when to reject and return to base. Has the operator changed any procedures in the interim, or are they waiting for an official IAA/AAIB report?

[[email protected]]

Scattercat - Well said:ok:

Malabo - I expect there are lots of people (Irish Govt, Irish CG, CHC and Sikorsky) who are nervously waiting for any interim report.

ISTR the CG were looking at NVD when they still had the S61 so it is a disgrace that it wasn't specified in the S-92 contract.

[Duchess_Driver]

Crew on tragic Rescue 116 never got emergency warning it was about to crash due to technical glitch (http://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/newsireland/crew-on-tragic-rescue-116-never-got-emergency-warning-it-was-about-to-crash-due-to-technical-glitch/ar-BByWM3E?li=AAmb2oK&ocid=spartandhp)

Again, the Mirror....

[Search&Rescue]

This issue of crews having some information on the patient's condition and possibly being influenced to "push the limits" misses the point. All aviation is a risk v gain decision & SAR / EMS is often at the extremis of those decisions. Higher risks & higher gains. As someone who has done a fair bit of both, I believe that I (we) can only make an informed decision when I have all of the relevant information. I don't need to know every clinical detail anymore than the tasking agency needs to know all of the operational aspects, but without some information I only have half of the equation. What is required though, is the culture of being able to maintain a professional decision making process, regardless of the emotive, "this 2 year old child will die if you don't go" influence. I have made "no-go" decisions and people have perished as I'm sure many here will have had to. I have also made plenty of "go" decisions that have pushed myself and my crew close to the limits & people have been saved.
Accidents will happen & when they do, it is right & proper that we analyse what could have been done better, but we should be doing that anyway. The argument that R118 & R116 shouldn't have been tasked for an injury that may or may not have been life-threatening misses the point. It could be argued that this accident would still have occurred if the mission was to save a boatload of cute children. Let's focus on the cause of this tragic accident and work on ways to mitigate those risks that are inherent in our line of work.
I will say it one last time .... in my opinion, NVD's are a "must" technology for this type of work. Having done plenty with & plenty without, I wouldn't want to go back to doing what the crew of R116 were doing without the aid of NVD.

I couldn't agree more... 👍

[Geoffersincornwall]

In 1998 I was operating an S61 SAR-cab out of Shannon with DF as my copilot. We were called out in the middle of a dark and horrid night to a Inishmore, one of the Aran Islands in Galway Bay. There was a man with chest injuries in need of immediate hospitalisation so we planned and conducted a low level landfall in weather that was absolutely on the limits. The run in towards the landing site beside the harbour was extremely difficult and was made even more difficult because the nearby lighthouse was still operating. Its fingers of light rotated beneath us creating a painful optical illusion that very nearly had me abandoning the approach. Thanks to the coolness of my colleagues we completed the mission without incident but ever since then I have often wondered about NVGs. Would they have made the mission safer? Would they have delivered the goods in close proximity of the lighthouse? Perhaps someone with actual NVG experience can enlighten me.

G.

[tu154]

Thankfully, the IAA has the experience of the UK AAIB assisting it

An small but significant point, the AAIU have complete responsibility for the investigation, which would include the regulatory environment. The IAA being the regulator.

[[email protected]]

Would they have made the mission safer? Would they have delivered the goods in close proximity of the lighthouse? yes, possibly not in those days with 1st or 2nd gen tubes where a bright light could completely close down the goggles, but with modern tubes most definitely safer.

[fagin's goat]

Does anyone know what the current policy in CHC Ireland (and other SAR operators) is with regard to the rear crew being strapped into a seat for approach, take off and landing?

[The SAR RC]

Well, the IAA and operator disagree with all of you. No NVD, yet a cloud break at night at a rocky shoreline and driving in the dark at a few hundred feet looking for a helipad was risk-assessed as acceptable even for a routine refuelling stop.

Well good morning and welcome to 2017.

Fagin's Goat - it depends on the operator and the circumstances. If you're at an airfield with ATC to give clearances then the rearcrew may well strap in but if you're off airfield and/or it's a sloping ground/confined area landing then the rearcrew will be on their harnesses providing clearances. If it was me approachimg Blacksod at night, I'd be on my harness in the door. But I'd also have my goggles down.

[El Bunto]

ISTR the CG were looking at NVD when they still had the S61 so it is a disgrace that it wasn't specified in the S-92 contract.

Isn't it more disgraceful that CHC didn't provide it for their crews if it's now considered a safety-of-flight issue?

The ICG is the functional requirements owner ( i.e. the parameters of the SAR operations ), not the technical or safety requirements owner. Compliance with applicable certification, maintenance and safety standards is the only relevant metric for the tender.

The contract also failed to specify the installation of a cyclic control or windscreen, but I don't think we criticise the ICG over that oversight.

[gulliBell]

yes, possibly not in those days with 1st or 2nd gen tubes where a bright light could completely close down the goggles, but with modern tubes most definitely safer.

We had 3rd gen tubes in 1986, so you'd think the civilian world would at least have them, or better, by 1998.

[gulliBell]

Isn't it more disgraceful that CHC didn't provide it for their crews if it's now considered a safety-of-flight issue?..

Whilst I'm not a fanboi of CHC, I disagree with this sentiment. The operator provides an aircraft as per a contract specification, and crews operate the aircraft in accordance with their training and operating procedures laid down by the operator, the regulator, and the client. Operating procedures take into account the aircraft configuration, role equipment, operating environment and many other things.

You might say many "if only" things...if only the doctor knew from the outset the minor nature of the injury they may not have launched until daylight, "if only" the FMS navigation database had the correct height of the blacksod lighthouse, "if only" they had NVG. The thing is, you plan according to the operational situation; no point wishing you had something you don't have, just deal with the cards you've been dealt with.

[John R81]

I am with guliBell on this. The aircraft and equipment is specified in the contract, and that is what is provided. If the task is not safe without NVG then the crew will not launch. That is the standard of service provision specified in the contract.

[jimf671]

Agreed. In the example of the neighbouring UK SAR Helicopter Service, there is now a contract with a requirement for a low light capability "in low light conditions down to 2 mlux."

That only came about after 44 years of dodgy contracts.

If anyone has to take a kicking over the late arrival of NVG then it should be the coastguard authorities and governments who have sat on their hands over technical specs for civilian SAR on both these islands for too long.

The £15k a head is only the start, and with specialist cockpit requirements, ITAR restrictions and monster training costs, no contractor could possibly do this on their own.

[snakepit]

We had 3rd gen tubes in 1986, so you'd think the civilian world would at least have them, or better, by 1998.

And Crab, it's not the generation of tubes that prevents "blooming" rather it is whether they have "auto gating" or not. E.G. 2nd gen tubes with auto gating are better in urban or well lit situations. 3rd gen work further into the IR spectrum so would be better in V dark regions. Of course if you have the cash the 3rd gen with auto gating is where you want to be.

[roscoe1]

All the talk about NVG's is well and good but I'm more concerned about the comments that , 1. there may not have been a moving map display in the cockpit and 2. the rock they hit might not have been in the data base even if they had #1. Is there any definitive information on either of these things? Both seem unimaginably sad and unfortunate to me if there is truth to either one. Did I miss something?

[dClbydalpha]

Can anyone explain why there is a suspicion that Blackrock is not in the terrain database.

[Ber Nooly]

Can anyone explain why there is a suspicion that Blackrock is not in the terrain database.

It was stated officially a few days ago. I can't remember the source.

[roscoe1]

Crew on tragic Rescue 116 never got emergency warning it was about to crash due to technical glitch (http://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/newsireland/crew-on-tragic-rescue-116-never-got-emergency-warning-it-was-about-to-crash-due-to-technical-glitch/ar-BByWM3E?li=AAmb2oK&ocid=spartandhp)

Again, the Mirror....

From this news article above. Perhaps I misunderstood and this was simply someone putting out an unlikely but possible scenario which I mistook for something more.....

[oleary]

Isn't it more disgraceful that CHC didn't provide it for their crews if it's now considered a safety-of-flight issue?

The ICG is the functional requirements owner ( i.e. the parameters of the SAR operations ), not the technical or safety requirements owner. Compliance with applicable certification, maintenance and safety standards is the only relevant metric for the tender.

The contract also failed to specify the installation of a cyclic control or windscreen, but I don't think we criticise the ICG over that oversight.

Sir, you display a significant lack of knowledge about how our industry works.

[pumaboy]

I'm sorry if this sounds a stupid question and maybe off topic, but why is that an offshore Vessel with a more suitable crane and ROV equipment that is capable of lifting the wreck from the seabed is not being used as these vessels have done these jobs before and it is not likely these is a shortage of these vessels , if this was the North Sea the wreck would have been lifted as it now 3 weeks since the accident and there is still 2 crew members missing. I'm thinking more for the families waiting for there loved ones to be brought home and laid to rest.

[IRCG SMC WHITEY]

pumaboy
The ILV Granuaile is more than adequate for the task. However the seabed topography and tidal stream around this rock coupled with 3mr+ swell due to spring tides do not help.

[dClbydalpha]

It was stated officially a few days ago. I can't remember the source.

And I've searched all I can and have not found an official statement, I've found 3rd hand quotes of anonymous sources. I'm trying to find a technical resource that would support it. If anyone can point me in the right direction I'd appreciate it.

[albatross]

Perhaps someone, perhaps an actual pilot, could look at the terrain database for the area.
Sorry just POd about all this "He says , she says" BS.

[Maclovin]

Pumaboy makes a fair point. In 2009 a dive support vessel recovered a Superpuma from 100 meters of water in the Millar field in the North Sea in under 2 days. But they were not using navy divers breathing air, with a bottom time of 10 mins. They were using teams of commercial saturation divers which gave them the capability to keep the divers working at depth around the clock continuously until the task was completed. While the Grainneuail is more than capable of lifting 7 tonnes from the seabed she is not equipped to support saturation divers. I think Pumaboy is correct in his assertion that the wreck would be recovered by now in the North Sea (which btw isn't exactly renowned for calm weather or slack tides). You have to wonder if naval service divers and the Grainneuail are the right choice for this particular task, given the depth and the restrictions of their capabilities, and the fact that time is a factor where families are concerned.

[Ber Nooly]

It was mentioned in RTE's Primetime program on March 23rd. Watch it back here.

https://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/2017/0324/862274-prime-time/#

[Red5ive]

And I've searched all I can and have not found an official statement, I've found 3rd hand quotes of anonymous sources. I'm trying to find a technical resource that would support it. If anyone can point me in the right direction I'd appreciate it.

Go back to the RTE Primetime report a few pages back. They said they didn't say anything they couldn't verify.

[HeliZimba]

Does anyone here have the current IAA-published VFR Aeronautical chart for the west of Ireland? If so, does it show Blackrock as a lighthouse or a lighthouse on a 300ft obstacle?
I know this may be a low-tech approach compared to EGPWS, NVG etc but just wondering.
Thanks.

[Red5ive]

I'm sorry if this sounds a stupid question and maybe off topic, but why is that an offshore Vessel with a more suitable crane and ROV equipment that is capable of lifting the wreck from the seabed is not being used as these vessels have done these jobs before and it is not likely these is a shortage of these vessels , if this was the North Sea the wreck would have been lifted as it now 3 weeks since the accident and there is still 2 crew members missing. I'm thinking more for the families waiting for there loved ones to be brought home and laid to rest.

The ILV “Granuaile” has previously worked with Irish Navy, CoastGuard, Marine Institute etc on other vessel recovery operations. Ship has dynamic positioning which helps it stay on scene longer.

If you look back at RTEs Pat McGrath twitter (https://twitter.com/patmcgrath) look how many times hey had to pull divers because they tides were dangerous. Some local fishermen have mentioned 6m swells.

On the five day Atlantic forecast, doesn't look good till Saturday with what looks like a bit of storm following the next day.
http://www.met.ie/forecasts/5day-ireland.asp (click wave on the right)

[jimf671]

The big bad north sea eh? First, this is the Atlantic. Big boys' waves. Second, the bottom of the NS is general flat soft and predictable. Third, most of the aircraft needing recovered from the NS have not hit anything hard either above or below the water.

[gulliBell]

Perhaps someone, perhaps an actual pilot, could look at the terrain database for the area.


For what it's worth, I put Blackrock as a user waypoint in the Garmin 500W nav trainer and flew at it at 30kts and 200' from 3nm out and didn't get a terrain warning as I flew over the waypoint. I say, for what it's worth, because the nav system in the S92 would be far more advanced and up-to-date than a 500W.

[dClbydalpha]

So I've watched the Primetime piece. I now understand why the suspicion exists that Blackrock wasn't in the database. However that report is still a "has learned" statement with no who or even how it was learned. A statement attributed to a manufacturer or user would be more credible.

GulliBell - thanks for that. That is the kind of thing I would expect a reputable source to do.

[Duchess_Driver]

Does anyone here have the current IAA-published VFR Aeronautical chart for the west of Ireland? If so, does it show Blackrock as a lighthouse or a lighthouse on a 300ft obstacle?

I know this may be a low-tech approach compared to EGPWS, NVG etc but just wondering.
Thanks.

Yes, they are.

Blackrock 282' and lighthouse symbol.
Blacksod Pier 43' and lighthouse symbol.

However, I would challenge the use of the word "current VFR".... the last chart issued was some time ago.

There are a number of workshops going on at this time to clarify/redesign the IAA VFR chart as it is notoriously cluttered.

[Langball]

Pumaboy makes a fair point. In 2009 a dive support vessel recovered a Superpuma from 100 meters of water in the Millar field in the North Sea in under 2 days. But they were not using navy divers breathing air, with a bottom time of 10 mins. They were using teams of commercial saturation divers which gave them the capability to keep the divers working at depth around the clock continuously until the task was completed. While the Grainneuail is more than capable of lifting 7 tonnes from the seabed she is not equipped to support saturation divers. I think Pumaboy is correct in his assertion that the wreck would be recovered by now in the North Sea (which btw isn't exactly renowned for calm weather or slack tides). You have to wonder if naval service divers and the Grainneuail are the right choice for this particular task, given the depth and the restrictions of their capabilities, and the fact that time is a factor where families are concerned.

Couldn't agree more. A proper DSV has dynamic position so it can 'hover' in a fixed position close to a hazard (rock, platform etc.) and withstand significant weather (wind, waves, current etc.) due to powerful engines and bow/azimuth thrusters. The dive bell is 'heave compensated' so the divers are immune to the heave of the vessel due to the waves. And the saturation divers can stay on the bottom for hours. The vessel would have the job done is a day or two.

[BookwormPete]

Couldn't agree more. A proper DSV has dynamic position so it can 'hover' in a fixed position close to a hazard (rock, platform etc.) and withstand significant weather (wind, waves, current etc.) due to powerful engines and bow/azimuth thrusters. The dive bell is 'heave compensated' so the divers are immune to the heave of the vessel due to the waves. And the saturation divers can stay on the bottom for hours. The vessel would have the job done is a day or two.

The Granuaille is equipped with dynamic positioning, that is why she is on station. However the conditions on the seabed are atrocious. The tide barrels through the gap between Blackrock and Parrot rock where the wreckage is located. The senior officer of the navy dive team likened it to 'diving on a flagpole in a gale'. The divers have great difficulty staying in place. Saturation divers would equally quickly become exhausted under those conditions. If they lift the fuselage off the seabed it would immediately swing sideways in the strong current and anything that fell out would be swept away. That is why the plan was to tilt the fuselage sideways using airbags but without actually lifting it clear of the seabed, in order to search underneath it. However due to the conditions mentioned, they are now considering that a straight lift may be their only option.

Rescue 116 wreckage may be lifted in search for crew (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-wreckage-may-be-lifted-in-search-for-crew-1.3029648)

[Maclovin]

To put it simply, if the task here were a search of a ships hull, blowing up a mine or assaulting a beach at night there would be nobody better than the navy divers because that is what they are trained for, equipped for, and do regularly. Heavy lifting in deep water is clearly not their forte(which is no reflection on them). Commercial divers carry out multiple heavy lifts from deep water, per shift in all sorts of weather and tides. Its what they do day in, day out. Its their bread and butter. In fact they wouldn't even consider this a 'heavy' lift. Yes the navy will figure it out and probably achieve it but nowhere near as quickly or efficiently as the guys who do this type of task daily. Its not about North Sea vs Atlantic, military vs civilian, big boys waves vs little boys waves or anything else, its about using the correct tool for the job. As langball correctly pointed out, when a saturation diving bell is lowered to the seabed there is a 'heave compensation' system to mitigate against swell. Yes sat divers are somewhat subject to the effects of tide but nowhere near what a surface diver is. In 40 meters of water the surface diver has 40 meters plus of umbilical chord out, with the tide acting on the full length of it which acts like a parachute dragging him off the job and making work impossible. The saturation diver only has the distance from the bell to the job of umbilical out which might only be a few meters. The vessel can be moved to orientate the bell relative to the work so that his umbilical is in line with the tide if need be so he isn't getting dragged off. Crucially though, Diving from the surface with no decompression gives the navy divers only 10 minutes from the time they leave surface to the time they leave bottom. By the time they get to job, orientate themselves and figure out whats what, they must leave almost immediately. It is considerably more dangerous and difficult. Saturation divers can stay on the job indefinitely and even go back to the bell for a rest if they get tired. Surface diving is far more weather and tide sensitive for multiple reasons. There is a reason commercial divers and DSV's are used to recover downed helicopters in the UK. And there is a reason almost all work with any degree of technicality, carried out deeper than about 16 meters is done using saturation. As pumaboy said time is of the essence here.

[simfly]

Maclovin, The incident you refer to earlier in 2009 was actually about 10 miles off the coast rather than at the Miller, I think if my memory is correct the vessel involved in recovery was the same that was only a couple of miles away and witnessed the incident as it happened? Not much issue with swell, current and fairly shallow waters so was a much easier job.

[El Bunto]

Sir, you display a significant lack of knowledge about how our industry works. I appreciate your honest response, and I concur. I am from the software side of industry, not the flying side.

So can you explain why an operator wouldn't provide NVG for crews in NVG-compatible helicopters? Why would it be beholden on the Coastguard to tell them to do it?

Certification requirements? Training? Surely it can't be cost given that these are $20 million aircraft flown by crews on six-figure salaries, the cost of NVG would be negligible in return for the benefits.

[gulliBell]

...So can you explain why an operator wouldn't provide NVG for crews in NVG-compatible helicopters...the cost of NVG would be negligible in return for the benefits.

The cost isn't negligible. Capital cost for hardware acquisition, cost for crew initial and recurrent NVG training, cost of on-going maintenance of the NVG hardware, cost of updating all the operational documents and obtaining required approvals, etc etc...these aren't costs that an operator would pay for out of their own generosity if it's not a specification of the contract. The client gets what they pay for, and usually not much more. That's simple business economics.

[superdexta]

The big bad north sea eh? First, this is the Atlantic. Big boys' waves. Second, the bottom of the NS is general flat soft and predictable. Third, most of the aircraft needing recovered from the NS have not hit anything hard either above or below the water.

What he said...^^.

Totally different to North Sea. Sea state + weather + vertical coastline (sea surge)+ rocky seabed

[Red5ive]

Tides still blocking efforts to access R116 wreckage today. Further attempts not likely until the weekend, when conditions due to ease.
https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/847419713588035584

[pumaboy]

I'm not going to get in heated argument here there is a time and place for this, my point was getting the job done as quickly as possible with the right tools for the recovery of R116 but it is taking far too long after 3 weeks were still no nearer in the recovery of the wreckage, there may will be evidence on the wreckage the longer it stay's done there the more quickly it is going to disappear, I totally agree with Maclovin here with regards to Navy divers and Commercial divers and fully support him on this subject, there is a time. And place for Navy divers they are not experts in recovering downed helicopters and this is not the time for them at the moment, Commercial divers have recovered many downed helicopters in the North Sea and of the coast of Sumburgh where the environment was as challenging and hostile with rocky surfaces and it did not take 3 weeks to recover. As far as I'm aware there are far more capable DSV's in the offshore industry capable of lifting R116 in far more efficient time with the right tools for the job, time is running out and families patience must be running out the longer they wait.

Now the news has come that there is a further delay in the recovery operation earliest the weekend.

[snakepit]

All the talk about NVG's is well and good but I'm more concerned about the comments that , 1. there may not have been a moving map display in the cockpit and 2. the rock they hit might not have been in the data base even if they had #1. Is there any definitive information on either of these things? Both seem unimaginably sad and unfortunate to me if there is truth to either one. Did I miss something?

From my post 295

Question - were the 4 aircraft that were transferred from the CHC UK Interim SAR contract also updated to have EuroNav? When they served the contract in the UK they were not fitted with EuroNav in the front so there may be a difference in aircraft modification states across the fleet. The lack of mapping in the front of 4 of the 5 aircraft might mean slightly different procedures are required depending upon which aircraft the crews are in.

There has been no reply and I can understand the reason why Roscoe 1.

The RTE article that mentions the lack of Blackrock in the EGPWS, also claims the aircraft were fitted with Euronav in the front? But I believe they were just recycling the same information from the article about the kit on the one S92A that came direct from Sikorsky for the contract (they even use the same pictures). Of course the 4 ex Interim SAR S92As from the UK could have been modified post export to Ireland, but if not then they did not have digital mapping in the cockpit.

[Langball]

The Granuaille is equipped with dynamic positioning, that is why she is on station. However the conditions on the seabed are atrocious. The tide barrels through the gap between Blackrock and Parrot rock where the wreckage is located. The senior officer of the navy dive team likened it to 'diving on a flagpole in a gale'. The divers have great difficulty staying in place. Saturation divers would equally quickly become exhausted under those conditions. If they lift the fuselage off the seabed it would immediately swing sideways in the strong current and anything that fell out would be swept away. That is why the plan was to tilt the fuselage sideways using airbags but without actually lifting it clear of the seabed, in order to search underneath it. However due to the conditions mentioned, they are now considering that a straight lift may be their only option.

Rescue 116 wreckage may be lifted in search for crew (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-wreckage-may-be-lifted-in-search-for-crew-1.3029648)

I hear what you are saying about the tides. But tides come and go, and there will be a period every day when there is no tidal current. With a sat diver you can be sure the diver is ready to work at this exact time, even if he has to break off when the tide is running at max. So there is very little risk of him missing a dive because the current is slack but the waves high. No disrespect to the Naval divers, but they are totally hamstrung by using air diving techniques at this water depth.

[Red5ive]

I'm not going to get in heated argument here there is a time and place for this, my point was getting the job done as quickly as possible with the right tools for the recovery of R116 but it is taking far too long after 3 weeks were still no nearer in the recovery of the wreckage, there may will be evidence on the wreckage the longer it stay's done there the more quickly it is going to disappear,

Especially if the weather deteriorates further.

Time it took to discover crash site is another issue that maybe should be revisited.

[SASless]

I hear what you are saying about the tides. But tides come and go, and there will be a period every day when there is no tidal current.

Unless the Tide thing is different in Ireland than the rest of the World....that should be "periods".

[Beaucoup Movement]

I have to say that I agree with pumaboy & Red5ive, time is of the essence here. Must be horrible & frustrating for the families waiting so long for the remaining 2 crewman to be found for closure & ultimately the reason behind the crash.

[A Real Pin]

Ocean Challenger tug has left Castletownbere to assist in recovery of #Rescue116 wreckage

The 35 metre Ocean Challenger tug, operated by Bere Island based salvage experts Atlantic Towage & Marine, has departed Castletownbere Harbour tonight bound for Blacksod Bay to assist in the operation to recover the main wreckage of Rescue 116 and according to Marine Traffic is expected on scene over the weekend to join the Naval Diving Team currently on site..

Search co-ordinators have indicated that they now plan to lift the wreckage to the surface using the Ocean Challenger and other vessels on scene over the weekend when swells ease.

Naval Service divers will assist in the effort, which will allow for the inspection of an area below the helicopter that has been inaccessible since the crash over two weeks ago.

Plans to move the wreckage of Coast Guard Rescue Helicopter 116 using inflatable lifting bags were abandoned in recent days due to the large swell conditions at sea.

The mid sized tug will be positioned directly above the site, so the five-tonne wreckage can be taken from the water from a depth of 40 metres.

In 2014 Atlantic Towage & Marine successfully retrieved the 4 tonne keel of the yacht Rambler 100 from a depth of 75 metres off the Fastnet Rock in similar conditions to the Rescue 116 accident site at Blackrock island..

[Maclovin]

"Maclovin, The incident you refer to earlier in 2009 was actually about 10 miles off the coast rather than at the Miller, I think if my memory is correct the vessel involved in recovery was the same that was only a couple of miles away and witnessed the incident as it happened? Not much issue with swell, current and fairly shallow waters so was a much easier job."

Simfly, the point I'm trying to make, is that sat divers should be used here instead of air divers precisely BECAUSE the conditions at blackrock are so difficult. Sat divers can work safely in much worse weather and tide conditions than surface divers on air, and for much longer.
Incidentally the helicopter crash in 2009 was witnessed by the crew of a supply boat which went straight to the scene to search for survivors. The DSV Bibby Topaz was mobilised subsequently from the forties field for the recovery. Apologies to all for the drift.

[pumaboy]

I Totally agree Maclovin, in the 2009 accident the Super Puma was witnessed by the crew of a Norwegian PSV Normand Aurora and recovered by the DSV Bobby Topaz with DP2 built in 2004 purpose built for heavy construction offshore, I think it is about time now to bring in the experts it is taking to long as the vessel involved at the moment the Granuaille is 18 years old and has only DP 1 she does have a mon pool for diving operations and is not equipped to carry this operation out I also agree with Maclovin with regards to Sat Divers can work at longer periods in a safer condition and are used to working at deeper depths with changing currents, the authorities should now be looking to draft much more capable equipment to recover the R116 and the 2 missing crews if they are still in in the wreckage, the operation is taking to long and is also disrespectful for the families of the missing crews members, there is also the question if R116 did suffer a technical fault then what about the remaining S-92's that are still flying this has to be solved quickly as the longer the airframe remains in the water then any evidence of technical fault that was there may not there due to salt water corrosion and tidal currents.

[roscoe1]

Snakepit,
Thanks. I guess I just need to wait and see what the resolution of this accident is. Speculation is wrought with red herrings most of the time. Still, it is nearly impossible to resist if you are in any way close to the possibility of being an a similar scenario. My guess is that unless they find clear evidence of a mechanical failure, we will never know the details of exactly how these people lost their lives. We will only have contributing factors that when added up put them in that space at that time. Please push for digital map displays and NVGs. More folks have probably lost their lives for lack of these than for not doing a good preflight inspection. Money is no object if you insist.

[Red5ive]

I the authorities should now be looking to draft much more capable equipment to recover the R116 and the 2 missing crews if they are still in in the wreckage,

They aren't in the wreckage.

[cncpc]

They aren't in the wreckage.
Has that been acknowledged, Red5?

[G0ULI]

Frustrating as it may be to those seeking answers, this is a recovery operation, not a rescue. The data recorders have been recovered which should go a long way to determining the cause.

While recovery of the remainder of the wreckage and/or casualties is highly desireable, neither justify risking the loss of further lives if conditions are too dangerous. It is just as important to know where to draw the line when attempting these types of recovery as it is to keep an aircraft on the ground when the weather conditions dictate.

Exercising patience and extreme caution are the only way to proceed with this operation and an acceptance that sometimes the sea refuses to yield its' secrets.

[pumaboy]

I have not heard the 2 remaining crew members are not in the wreckage........ it was speculated that after some searching of the main fuselage that the 2 remaining crew members could not be located but then the weather deteriorated and the search was called off.

[pumaboy]

Frustrating as it may be to those seeking answers, this is a recovery operation, not a rescue. The data recorders have been recovered which should go a long way to determining the cause.

While recovery of the remainder of the wreckage and/or casualties is highly desireable, neither justify risking the loss of further lives if conditions are too dangerous. It is just as important to know where to draw the line when attempting these types of recovery as it is to keep an aircraft on the ground when the weather conditions dictate.

Exercising patience and extreme caution are the only way to proceed with this operation and an acceptance that sometimes the sea refuses to yield its' secrets.

Frustrating as it may be but there are questions that have to be answered especially if it finds out the R 116 suffered some sort of Technical malfunction and is it fleet line problem there are families waiting for the loved ones to be laid rest and in piece we are nearly into week 4 and all we have right now is a whole load of what if's and speculation and that the a/c was at the location of Blackrock that is all we have right now, I appreciate that conditions are dangerous out there but we are still no nearer to know what has happened to R116 time is running out questions have to be answered.

[Apate]

Frustrating as it may be but there are questions that have to be answered especially if it finds out the R 116 suffered some sort of Technical malfunction and is it fleet line problem there are families waiting for the loved ones to be laid rest and in piece we are nearly into week 4 and all we have right now is a whole load of what if's and speculation and that the a/c was at the location of Blackrock that is all we have right now, I appreciate that conditions are dangerous out there but we are still no nearer to know what has happened to R116 time is running out questions have to be answered.

That is one heck of a long sentence :eek: Obviously grammar isn't a strong point ;)

[industry insider]

The data recorders have been recovered which should go a long way to determining the cause.

Voice and Data recorders have been with AAIB for nearly a week. The longer the silence, the less likely the suspicion of mechanical failure.

[Red5ive]

Has that been acknowledged, Red5?

Friday, March 24, 2017

Gardaí have confirmed a body have been discovered on board the wreckage of the Rescue 116 aircraft.

Officials also said that the other two crew members of the R116 have not yet been located, but that operations will continue overnight.Latest: Gardaí confirm a body has been found in the R116 | Irish Examiner (http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/latest-gardai-confirm-a-body-has-been-found-in-the-r116-782976.html)

Gardaí confirm body of one Rescue 116 crew member located in wreckage. Search for his colleagues ongoing.https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/845437570653831170

All other sources say pretty much the same since then.

It was hoped that when they tried a partial lift to look underneath the wreckage they might find something.

[gulliBell]

..I appreciate that conditions are dangerous out there but we are still no nearer to know what has happened to R116 time is running out questions have to be answered.

I'm not sure how it is that time is running out...this is a recovery operation and the responsible authorities are dealing with it as they see fit.

They should have a pretty good idea what happened once the CVR/FDR is processed by the AAIB, and considering they've had it about a week it, something more definitive should be known soon.

[pumaboy]

That is one heck of a long sentence :eek: Obviously grammar isn't a strong point ;)

English is not my first language..........

[Red5ive]

Search teams prepared to lift wreckage of crashed helicopter Rescue 116

An attempt to tilt the aircraft, using inflatable lifting bags, had to be abandoned when conditions proved too challenging for Naval Service divers to operate in.


Now, search co-ordinators plan to lift the wreckage directly from the sea bed and bring it to the surface.


Search teams are anxious to see if there is any trace of the missing crew members in an area directly underneath the wreckage.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0401/864358-search-teams-hoping-to-lift-wreckage-of-rescue-116/

Probably have about 24 hours before swells rise again and the next chance of a calm sea is sometime after Wednesday.
http://met.ie/forecasts/5day-ireland.asp

[Red5ive]

Joseph O'Connor paying tribute with his powerful poem 'Rescue 116'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQiKQtVIvFQ

[Cyclic Hotline]

No mechanical anomolies detected in initial FDR/CVR analysis.

Rescue 116 crash: ?No mechanical anomalies? in analysis of data (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-crash-no-mechanical-anomalies-in-analysis-of-data-1.3033549)

[Red5ive]

"An initial analysis has been conducted of the data retrieved from the helicopter’s Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) and the Multi-Purpose Flight Recorder (MPFR). No mechanical anomalies have been identified during this initial analysis,"
https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0401/864358-search-teams-hoping-to-lift-wreckage-of-rescue-116/

[Cyclic Hotline]

Does anyone know if the FMS installed in this machine have an alphabetic database, which would automatically jump to the next entered location as the identifier is entered?

For example, BlackRock would appear before BlackSod in a predictive alphabetic sequence as it autocompletes as the letters are selected in comparison to the existing database?

I'm not familiar with the configuration or equipment installed in these helicopters.

[helicrazi]

Does anyone know if the FMS installed in this machine have an alphabetic database, which would automatically jump to the next entered location as the identifier is entered?

For example, BlackRock would appear before BlackSod in a predictive alphabetic sequence as it autocompletes as the letters are selected in comparison to the existing database?

I'm not familiar with the configuration or equipment installed in these helicopters.

No doesn't happen

However R is next to S on the key pad. So if it were BlackR or BlackS it's only a finger tap apart. However I have no idea what they are called in this particular database.

[albatross]

BROK and BSOD would make more sense in my world.
I have no idea as to what the naming convention is in place in the ICG operation.
Many operations have oft used fixed waypoints as a permanent part of the nav database they subscibe to. Things like company approved approaches are also incorporated.
Having said that we are entering the world of needless speculation.

Just hoping we get the missing home to their families soon.

[The SAR RC]

Looking at the picture of Blackrock at the start of the RTE news report a few posts ago. That's a big lump of rock. You've got to ask if their radar was working. That would have been an enormous radar return.

[HeliComparator]

"No mechanical anomalies" is I suppose a blessing to my home patch of the N Sea where the S92 is currently ubiquitous, but I guess the corollary to that is that it was CFIT. Such a shame, but it does reinforce the point I was trying to make many pages ago, that IFR approaches off-airfield do carry a relatively high risk. They are probably intrinsically safe in theory, but add in human factors and there are more opportunities for human error to creep in. As I said earlier, I do feel that SAR crews and their dispatchers sometimes don't really appreciate this, and perhaps need to be more mindful of it when carrying out a role that is not life-or-death. Let's be clear, these types of approaches are "safe", (whatever that means), but not "as safe" as an airfield IFR approach.

In the early days of the N Sea we used to climb up rig legs, hover taxi in fog to Unst etc, and these things were relatively safe - "its a helicopter". But not safe enough, and now we are no longer allowed to do it.

[HeliComparator]

Looking at the picture of Blackrock at the start of the RTE news report a few posts ago. That's a big lump of rock. You've got to ask if their radar was working. That would have been an enormous radar return.

Is it that easy to tell the difference between a big lump of rock and a heavy rain shower? And of course the radar doesn't tell you the height of the rock.

[helicrazi]

Is it that easy to tell the difference between a big lump of rock and a heavy rain shower? And of course the radar doesn't tell you the height of the rock.

Yes there's a difference

[HeliComparator]

Yes there's a difference

Are you going to tell us what it is?

[helicrazi]

Are you going to tell us what it is?

Shape, size, colour change at different ranges, showers tend to change colour as they get closer or you closer to them.

Wasn't it low cloud and fog that night? Would you be expecting a heavy shower in those conditions with a red return?

For an approach to land I would also have GMAP or GMAP 2 selected, so the return the radar is showing is most likely to be of the solid kind.

[HeliComparator]

Shape, size, colour change at different ranges, showers tend to change colour as they get closer or you closer to them.

Wasn't it low cloud and fog that night? Would you be expecting a heavy shower in those conditions with a red return?

For an approach to land I would also have GMAP or GMAP 2 selected, so the return the radar is showing is most likely to be of the solid kind.

My point is that yes there are differences, but fairly minor ones as you describe. It is therefore not impossible that they disregarded the return as being weather (despite the actual weather being as you say) - or at least it is as valid an explanation as the radar being U/S. If the radar had actually been U/S, would they have continued with the approach?

[albatross]

Everybody play nice please.

[helicrazi]

My point is that yes there are differences, but fairly minor ones as you describe. It is therefore not impossible that they disregarded the return as being weather (despite the actual weather being as you say) - or at least it is as valid an explanation as the radar being U/S. If the radar had actually been U/S, would they have continued with the approach?

Can't imagine a scenario where you would decend IMC to get visual underneath knowing the radar is U/S? Other than a greater emergency and lack of other options...

[HeliComparator]

Everybody play nice please.

I thought we were? If it transpires that it was crew error, would you rather it was blamed on that specific crew, or that they were the victims of the culture, custom and practice of SAR?

[cncpc]

Is there any information on the lat long of the vessel that at one point, both machines were heading to? So far, all we hear is 150 west of Ireland.

I ask because from the track almost out of Dublin, but certainly leaving the Mayo shore, R116 was pointing directly at Blackrock. Either their heading was for the ship, and Blackrock was coincidentally directly underneath on the outbound, or they were heading to Blackrock.

If that is the ship track, it may mean that at the point where they couldn't raise R118, the crew made the decision to abandon the top cover mission at least for the time being, and go to Blacksod for fuel.

Various scenarios being discussed are then in play.

I do think that what their intention was heading west from Achill, I think it was, is important.

I haven't seen that track map for a while, but it seems that they jogged to starboard just as they came on the rock, before tracking again on the same heading.

Has anybody got R118's track?

[albatross]

I thought we were? If it transpires that it was crew error, would you rather it was blamed on that specific crew, or that they were the victims of the culture, custom and practice of SAR?

No insult was implied or intended towards anyone.
Sorry if you thought I had.

I would like that they find out exactly what happened and correct the problems that caused this tragedy.

The list of folks We have lost in this business is long enough already.

[Ber Nooly]

Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU) Statement in relation to R116 Investigation

The Chief Inspector of Air Accidents, Mr. Jurgen Whyte, in conjunction with the appointed Investigator-in-Charge, Mr. Paul Farrell, wish to make the following statement.

The AAIU is keenly aware of the loss and grief of the families, friends and colleagues of the crew of R116 and extends its condolences to all concerned. The AAIU continues to work with other agencies to locate and recover the two missing crew members.

The AAIU is mindful that Sikorsky S-92A helicopters are in operation around the world in a variety of roles, including Search and Rescue. Following an event such as this, many operators and agencies are anxious to learn if any matters are identified during the ongoing investigation that may require immediate safety actions.

The Investigation is still at a preliminary stage. However, an initial analysis has been conducted of the data retrieved from the helicopter’s Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) and the Multi-Purpose Flight Recorder (MPFR). No mechanical anomalies have been identified during this initial analysis.

The AAIU Investigation is ongoing and a Preliminary Report will be issued in the near future.

Ends

[The SAR RC]

I thought we were? If it transpires that it was crew error, would you rather it was blamed on that specific crew, or that they were the victims of the culture, custom and practice of SAR?

HC

You're trolling. If you've never done SAR it's unlikely that you'll ever appreciate how crews carry out their dynamic risk assessments. The 'blame' options you refer to are rarely so binary.

What was asked of this crew should have been well within the capabilities of an experienced SAR crew. How they ended up hitting that rock with what we have to assume was a serviceable radar is beyond me. Maybe some CVR clues will feature in a preliminary report.

[obnoxio f*ckwit]

Perhaps they did see land on the radar, and it didn't raise any questions because if they thought they were at Blacksod they would be expecting to see land on the radar.

In the cold light of day I'm sure we could discuss at length the shape of the coast etc, but at that time of the morning they may not have been quite so assiduous.

Edited to add: as stated in the post above, the CVR will hopefully shed some light.

[Thunderbirdsix]

This morning Navy divers succeded in attaching a lifting harness to the fuselage of Rescue 116, they hope to have it raised to the surface this Evening ,it will be a slow process due to the weather on scene with force 5 to 6 wind

[The SAR RC]

Perhaps they did see land on the radar, and it didn't raise any questions because if they thought they were at Blacksod they would be expecting to see land on the radar.

Yes, you may be right. Before anyone asks, they must have at least thought they had a serviceable radar. To attempt an approach at night into Blacksod in poor weather without NVD, a moving map display or a radar would not be a smart move.

[HeliComparator]

HC

You're trolling. If you've never done SAR it's unlikely that you'll ever appreciate how crews carry out their dynamic risk assessments. The 'blame' options you refer to are rarely so binary.

What was asked of this crew should have been well within the capabilities of an experienced SAR crew. How they ended up hitting that rock with what we have to assume was a serviceable radar is beyond me. Maybe some CVR clues will feature in a preliminary report.

Presumably by "trolling" you mean having a different opinion from you? In which case you are correct. An "institution" (if SAR can be called that) that sticks its fingers in its ears to any input that is not from "one of the boys" is, as in any other branch of almost anything, doomed to fail to progress. Sometimes external input is irellevant or plain wrong, but sometimes it is valuable.

[HeliComparator]

I have it on good information that there was no mix up between Blacksod and Blackrock and that the flight over/beyond/around blackrock was standard approach to Blacksod.

Someone touched on it earlier, the original flight track looks like it may have planned to go straight to the fishing vessel, they then decided to refuel at Blacksod and in doing so looped back, approached Blackrock from the West in order to use it for approach to Blacksod.

All makes sense to me, what doesn't make sense is an experienced crew simply getting mixed up between Blacksod and Blackrock or the locations being entered wrong in the FMS.

Touching on the update released. I wonder if they did get a HUMS download from the actual accident flight or whether they are referring to the flight previous. I have a feeling the S92 system is the same as the Airbus system where the card session needs closing (by way of Engines powering down) For example, I'm certain if a HUMS card is removed from the card slot mid flight, there wouldn't be any data on it. They were not able to download the EC225 or indeed the AS332L2 accident data, only the data from the flight previous. I would also imagine that if they did manage to somehow get the HUMS data downloaded, there would be huge jumps in the data from the impact with blackrock to the loss of the tail and the time it took to strike the water, all that would have been recorded on the graphs.

Certainly pointing towards a CFIT from their update though.

I'm not sure that the HUMS data is that relevant if the FDR shows that the helicopter's flight path was as expected for the control inputs.

[pumaboy]

I'm not sure that the HUMS data is that relevant if the FDR shows that the helicopter's flight path was as expected for the control inputs.

I was actually thinking the same thing regarding the HUMS data. Plus the question is the HUMS data received from the accident flight or from the previous flight, I have doubts....... something smells here.....

[pfm1000]

I have it on good information that there was no mix up between Blacksod and Blackrock and that the flight over/beyond/around blackrock was standard approach to Blacksod.

Standard altitude?

[rjsquirrel]

I am told that 92 HUMS data is downloadable regardless, unlike the reported shortfall of other HUMS systems. Also, the 92 HUMS is said to have hundreds of parameters, including those normally part of the crash recorder data stream, so much of the aircraft activity besides system health is probably available as duplicate data.
One question: Is it standard practice to have no formal instrument approach like LPV or GPS to standard refuel heliports in Ireland or elsewhere? Do aircraft normally fly ad hoc instrument procedures in near zero zero conditions (other than overwater SAR rescue approaches)? And more to the point, will they in the future?

[pumaboy]

Admittedly I've never used the new S92 SGBA HUMS system although was experienced with the old EuroHUMS and MPGS/M'arms.

Quite a lot of reports of late flights out of Aberdeen recently due to HUMS test flight requirements due to no data captures though (S92). I presume it was similar to the Airbus systems where no closure of the card meant no download.

Regardless, they may or may not be reporting the status from the accident flight, whether they have the card or not and whether it's in any fit state to be downloaded. They haven't lifted the wreckage yet, only cut the pilot free, so unless the diving team retrieved the card along with the body then I presume it would still be with the wreckage.

Pfm1000, that's the golden question. Along with airspeed if the last data track recordings are accurate.
As the divers have only been down at minute intervals due to bad weather and have only retrieved the Second Pilot my guess is that the HUMS card is still with in the cockpit, and would imagines it is not easy to retrieve with mechanical equipment, so I would imagine the HUMS card will be recovered along with the remaining wreckage.

[SASless]

I am thinking the S-92 Hums tracks 420 items..... or has the capability to do so.

[HeliComparator]

I am told that 92 HUMS data is downloadable regardless, unlike the reported shortfall of other HUMS systems. Also, the 92 HUMS is said to have hundreds of parameters, including those normally part of the crash recorder data stream, so much of the aircraft activity besides system health is probably available as duplicate data.


Coincidentally an ex-colleague engineer pitched up at the gliding club on Friday and I took him for a flight in my glider. We discussed the vulnerability of having a near-all-S92 fleet, and one of the things he volunteered was the flakiness of the S92 HUMS system. Lots of delayed morning departures because an air test was required because the system had failed to acquire the necessary parameters during the previous day's flying. So I wouldn't crow about it too much. It may be capable of recording lots of stuff but that is only useful if it actually does record it!

[Apate]

Coincidentally an ex-colleague engineer pitched up at the gliding club on Friday and I took him for a flight in my glider. We discussed the vulnerability of having a near-all-S92 fleet, and one of the things he volunteered was the flakiness of the S92 HUMS system. Lots of delayed morning departures because an air test was required because the system had failed to acquire the necessary parameters during the previous day's flying. So I wouldn't crow about it too much. It may be capable of recording lots of stuff but that is only useful if it actually does record it!

Must be a Bristow problem, as that's not something the other two operators are experiencing :E

[HeliComparator]

Must be a Bristow problem, as that's not something the other two operators are experiencing :E

Yea right! Where have I heard that before? (OK, it was from AH and it's previous incarnations!)

Anyway, do the other operators bother that much about HUMS data? (Ouch!)

[SASless]

HC....just once I would like to see you leave off the gratuitous bull**** and simply discuss a technical issue in a professional manner?

At some point you must get over your Butt Hurt over the grounding of the 225 after the two catastrophic Main Gear Box failures.

Put on your Big Boy Y-fronts and get over it!

[Apate]

HC

Seriously though, the other two operators are not having issues with S92 HUMS downloads. They are both doing things correctly and thoroughly, so if Bristow are having issues it is obviously an internal problem.

Of course you are free to discount my statement, as we all know Bristow and the 225 are the only "gods" in town :ugh:

[Red5ive]

R116 wreckage lifted. Still no trace of two missing crew members.
https://twitter.com/patmcgrath/status/848604734651019264

[pumaboy]

Lets hope they find the 2 remaining crew members quickly so they can be laid to rest.

[rotorspeed]

Mitchaa
I'm really struggling to think why a standard approach to Blacksod would be via Blackrock, as you say you think happened. If it was good VFR you'd not need the Blackrock light as you'd have Blacksod. And if you were IFR why choose a rock to pass over that was 300ft higher than anything else within several miles? It's not as if it had a VOR or NDB on it. Seems a bit of a stretch to think it was perhaps because you could identify it on radar better than anywhere closer. And then surely backed up GPS would be more reliable anyway? Ideas - anyone?

[HeliComparator]

HC

Seriously though, the other two operators are not having issues with S92 HUMS downloads. They are both doing things correctly and thoroughly, so if Bristow are having issues it is obviously an internal problem.

Of course you are free to discount my statement, as we all know Bristow and the 225 are the only "gods" in town :ugh:

Ok well I thought I had heard this rumour before, but as I said it was recently volunteered to me by a young engineer with no particular axe to grind. Maybe it is a false rumour and/or maybe it is, inexplicably, a Bristow-only issue. Unfortunately (?) I am no longer close enough to the coal face to have a first-hand opinion.

[Red5ive]

Mitchaa
I'm really struggling to think why a standard approach to Blacksod would be via Blackrock, as you say you think happened. If it was good VFR you'd not need the Blackrock light as you'd have Blacksod. And if you were IFR why choose a rock to pass over that was 300ft higher than anything else within several miles? It's not as if it had a VOR or NDB on it. Seems a bit of a stretch to think it was perhaps because you could identify it on radar better than anywhere closer. And then surely backed up GPS would be more reliable anyway? Ideas - anyone?

If you look at past tracks of R118 to Blacksod, maybe it will indicate a standard approach.

[BookwormPete]

The fuselage has now been lifted and is on board the Granuaille. No sign of the missing crew.

Wreckage of Coast Guard helicopter R116 lifted from sea (http://www.rte.ie/news/connacht/2017/0402/864539-helicopter-rescue-116/)

[helicrazi]

HC, from what I hear from from a few friends of mine, not just a Bristows issue, quite a few delayed flights being reported from the hummingbirds with HUMS test flights being the reason.

Bristows and Scotia use the new SGBA software and as far as I'm aware, Babcock use the old software (and limited to 3FH downloads) - There may be a few bugs in the new Software if it's 2 out of the 3 that are having problems with HUMS delays.

Babcock limited to 3FH, really? Someone better tell them!!!

[HeliComparator]

HC, from what I hear from from a few friends of mine, not just a Bristows issue, quite a few delayed flights being reported from the hummingbirds with HUMS test flights being the reason.

Bristows and Scotia use the new SGBA software and as far as I'm aware, Babcock use the old software (and limited to 3FH downloads) - There may be a few bugs in the new Software if it's 2 out of the 3 that are having problems with HUMS delays.

Thanks for corroborating, there didn't seem any reason for my engineer chum to be making it up. Although not really relevant to this accident, I suppose.

[Sanus]

With SGBA and a temperature plug you've got 10 hours. I cannot believe anyone on the North Sea doesn't have both by now.

[Apate]

With SGBA and a temperature plug you've got 10 hours. I cannot believe anyone on the North Sea doesn't have both by now.

Correct :ok:

[Apate]

Interesting to know Sanus, i wasn't aware of that.

To be fair, 6FH in the North Sea environment is probably enough anyway, I can't think of any occasions where the aircraft would need more than 6FH between downloads?

I believe all operators are working to 6 hours.

[ukv1145]

Just to clarify. SGBA and temp plug give you 10hrs max between TRPCS visual (borescope) inspections but do not lift the 6hr HUMS download requirement.

[cncpc]

If you look at past tracks of R118 to Blacksod, maybe it will indicate a standard approach.

Where do you find those past tracks?

[Red5ive]

Where do you find those past tracks?

Marine Traffic, might need paid account to access all data you want
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:290919/mmsi:250002902/imo:0/vessel:SAR_250002902


‘Deep disappointment’ at failure to find missing Rescue 116 airmen
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/deep-disappointment-at-failure-to-find-missing-rescue-116-airmen-1.3034179

[Thunderbirdsix]

The wreckage of the Irish Coast Guard helicopter which crashed last month has been recovered from the sea.
Dive teams still haven't managed to locate the two missing crew members, Ciaran Smith and Paul Ormsby, but searchers say they won't give up.
The Irish Coast Guard's Gerard O'Flynn says the fuselage from Rescue 116 has now been lifted on board the Irish Lights' vessel the Granuaile.
that was picked up by a tug, by a company based in Bere Island in Cork. They were working with us over the last day or two.
"It's been transferred onto the Granuaile and is now in the custody of the Air Accident Investigation Unit and they will determine it's final location to facilitate their own investigation," he said.
Addressing the media after last night's operation, Jurgen Whyte from the Air Accident Investigation Unit said lifting the wreckage was a difficult and hazardous operation, which required special skills.
"What we did actually retrieve is the rotor head, the main gearbox, one engine, and associated wreckage around that.
"It was what we expected to lift. The lifting was a really extreme and hazardous environment and I really have to compliment all the people that were involved," he said

http://www.breakingnews.ie/remote/media.central.ie/media/images/g/GranuaileBlacksodRescue116_large.jpg?width=600&s=bn-784183


The Granuaile arrives back into Blacksod, Co. Mayo, Ireland, with wreckage from Coastguard helicopter Rescue 116 onboard. Photo: Brian Lawless/PA Wire

[Loquatious]

Red5ive, track is depicted on post #105.
For me, outbound track is commensurate with an attempted let-down around Blackrock.
I would go with that rather than a turnback from a track out to the vessel.
Haven't seen anyone come back with info on vessel location either.

Mitchaa, I haven't seen altitudes published, what is your source?

[skadi]

What is the current status of the irish SAR system? Up to this sad event there were 4 bases with 5 helicopter, so one spare aircraft. Will they get another S92 in short notice to cope for AOG?

skadi

[Red5ive]

Red5ive, track is depicted on post #105.
For me, outbound track is commensurate with an attempted let-down around Blackrock.
I would go with that rather than a turnback from a track out to the vessel.
Haven't seen anyone come back with info on vessel location either.


cncpc was looking for the Blacksod approach that they normally do.

[jimf671]

There will be no shortage of secondhand high spec SAR aircraft in a nearby territory during the next 16 months.

[[email protected]]

Ah yes, isn't one flight having to give up S-92 in favour of the contracted AW189?

[jimf671]

Two flights.

Two AW139 from CHC at Lee stood down a few days ago. Another from Portland shortly. In the Bristow stand-in fleet there are four S-92A and four A139. In some cases there will be a bit of musical chairs going on internally. Also, none of this is really news, so some in the industry may have had their eye on these for a while. I would still expect these changes to generate opportunities for a fleet seeking to fill a gap.

[cncpc]

cncpc was looking for the Blacksod approach that they normally do.

Yes, that is one thing, however it seems that at Dublin departure the aircraft was outbound direct the vessel. If that is true, then it is coincidence that Blackrock was below the track. Given the considerable head start R118 had out of Sligo, R116 stopping at Blacksod to refuel would have placed it far behind R118 and the top cover intent would at best have meant a com link as R118 returned.

At some point, it is apparent that neither R116 or Shannon relay attempts can raise R118 and the intention then becomes to land at Blacksod. There seems to be some evidence that that convo with Shannon took place at some time from crossing the Achill shore outbound to around Blackrock. Followed by the change in plan to go in and fuel at Blacksod, and the turn.

At that same point, there is a reprogramming of the FMS. Assuming an approach briefing.

Or they never intended to go direct the ship, and that was the approach to Blacksod. I'm one of those who find it hard to comprehend why an approach with a letdown would have a 300 foot rock in it at all, given that there was a whole ocean out there with nothing to hit.

The last heading does seem to point pretty well into the middle of Blacksod Bay.

Hopefully the CVR will clarify most of this.

[PC767]

The missing crew members is awful news for their families. I wonder if Mark tried to keep some minimum of control whilst ordering the others to jump clear.

Here in Ireland the crew and their families remain very much in everybody's thoughts.

[gulliBell]

...I wonder if Mark tried to keep some minimum of control whilst ordering the others to jump clear..

No chance. Once the tail rotor suddenly departs the scene, especially at night, and when you're that close to the ground, everybody becomes a passenger. There would have been no plan or action to jump clear. They weren't even able to get out an emergency radio call things happened so quickly.

[tu154]

Some of the Aberdeen crew change aircraft are equipped with a sliding main pax door. I was told in the past it was so they could be reconfigured as a spare SAR aircraft for Ireland if required.

[SASless]

The Sea, very much like the Air, can be a cruel thing.

[Duchess_Driver]

The missing crew members is awful news for their families.

Seconded. However, surely questions now need to be asked about PLB's and why they either (a) wern't carried or (b) didn't f**king work!

Fingers crossed they're found soon.

[noooby]

PLB's are manually activated. You need to be conscious for them to work.

[gulliBell]

Yep. Not only conscious, but in a physically capable and mindful state to activate it.

[Duchess_Driver]

Yep. Not only conscious, but in a physically capable and mindful state to activate it.

...and yet my Ryanair life jacket has a little light on it that illuminates on contact with water.

I do find it strange that in this day and age, my phone can tell me where I am yet we can't give these chaps and chappesses a simple PLB that is water activated or is automatically fired on an accelerometer.

[coyote_ie]

...and yet my Ryanair life jacket has a little light on it that illuminates on contact with water.

I do find it strange that in this day and age, my phone can tell me where I am yet we can't give these chaps and chappesses a simple PLB that is water activated or is automatically fired on an accelerometer.

No NVGs and now it appears they were equipped with PLBs that required manual activation rather than Saltwater! my guess this all comes down to COST:mad::mad:

If this is the case I Hope all this will come out in the AAIU investigation.

[SASless]

If you are in a flooded cabin or cockpit and your Flotation Device inflates....how does that help?

That would probably cause you to become trapped and drown you!

[helicrazi]

If you are in a flooded cabin or cockpit and your Flotation Device inflates....how does that help?

That would probably cause you to become trapped and drown you!



Unless I missed it, no one has mentioned jackets inflating upon immersion, only a light illuminating and PLB's activating?

[albatross]

Just out of curiousity I googled water activated PLB and could not find any.
Anyone know of a source/manufacturer?
Found lots of PLBs but none that were auto activated in water.
Even found a yatching mag article which stated that while epirbs were automatic "legislation" prohibits water activated PLBs.

[HeliComparator]

In any case, if you are unfortunately trapped underwater, a water-activated PLB would be pointless even as an aid to recovering bodies due to the fact that VHF radio doesn't propagate well through seawater. I suppose you could carry sonar pingers but that seems a bit morbid.

[Thomas coupling]

So whats the latest assumption with this crash then?

Hover taxi to land - pulls up at the last moment to avoid rocks ahead and strikes the TR - yes?

[albatross]

In any case, if you are unfortunately trapped underwater, a water-activated PLB would be pointless even as an aid to recovering bodies due to the fact that VHF radio doesn't propagate well through seawater. I suppose you could carry sonar pingers but that seems a bit morbid.

Very true..I was just curious as to if water activated PLBs actually are available.
It may be useful technology in the case of a ditching where folks are floating but injured or hypothermic and therefore unable to manually activate a PLB.

[HeliComparator]

Very true..I was just curious as to if water activated PLBs actually are available.
It may be useful technology in the case of a ditching where folks are floating but injured or hypothermic and therefore unable to manually activate a PLB.

In the N Sea this is handled by an ADELT - although survivors on the surface drift away from the fuselage, hopefully the ADELT drifts at a not too dissimilar rate. That said they don't have a great track record of actually activating when needed! I've no idea whether the Irish SAR aircraft have them, but it would seem sensible.

[albatross]

In the N Sea this is handled by an ADELT - although survivors on the surface drift away from the fuselage, hopefully the ADELT drifts at a not too dissimilar rate. That said they don't have a great track record of actually activating when needed! I've no idea whether the Irish SAR aircraft have them, but it would seem sensible.

Looked at some photos...of Irish SAR 92s ...ADELT on port side of the tailboom just FWD of the registration.
Usual spot for one on the 92.

[cncpc]

So whats the latest assumption with this crash then?

Hover taxi to land - pulls up at the last moment to avoid rocks ahead and strikes the TR - yes?

The last info seen here seems to be 70 kts down to 9 kts at 270 feet.

[dieseldo]

The apparent lack of success from deployed ADELT's is baffling. I know of one case where a beacon fell from a thousand feet on land and worked perfectly.

[dClbydalpha]

I presume a water activated PLB would have to be protected from rain? Oh and from any water in the cabin when hoisting. Also I presume the rescue diver wouldn't have one.

[Concentric]

Just out of curiousity I googled water activated PLB and could not find any.
Anyone know of a source/manufacturer?
Found lots of PLBs but none that were auto activated in water.
Even found a yatching mag article which stated that while epirbs were automatic "legislation" prohibits water activated PLBs.
Automatic PLBs have been standard issue for NS Oil pax for many years. Sea Marshal is one make though there are others. Nowadays they are built into the lifejacket which for aviation is manual-inflate only.

[albatross]

Thanks Concentric...just what I needed to know.

Should have known all that. Just having a senior morning I guess.

[Special 25]

I understand that unlike the Sea Marshall which is just a basic PLB (local reception), modern aircrew PLB's all transmit direct to satellite with a GPS position. The COSPAS - SARSAT system will receive a PLB and triangulate the position within a short period of time - Before that, it should have a GPS position from the device - Within a few mins, Search & Rescue all over the world will be alerted and your Ops Centre will be getting a call to know that you are potentially in trouble.

Unlike local 121.5 / AIS PLB's, these sorts of beacons are not allowed to have automatic transmission. They have to be manually activated - by law.

[lowfat]

I think you will find that the pax plb's caused a big problem on one of the recent numerous puma ditchings. To the point that they confused the system and one of the crash recommendations was to remove then from the pax.
Im sure someone will be along to correct me.

found it

https://stv.tv/news/scotland/105022-super-puma-accident-experts-deliver-report/

[[email protected]]

Special - a 406Mhz beacon is what you are talking about and they send a databurst transmission every 50 seconds or so in two hexadecimalgroups. One has the identity of the beacon (they are required to be registered) and the second has the GPS position in it. They also transmit a continuous 121.5 tone.

It isn't triangulation - that is what the old satellite system used and it could give large errors.

The data is downloaded to an earth station (Land User Terminal) when the satellite is in view of it.

Lowfat - yes, in that case the'smart' beacons from the aircraft didn't transmit because they recognised an apparent stronger signal (the wrist beacons) and didn't operate properly.

[Red5ive]

Granuaile waited till just before midnight to dock in Galway. Probably better to offload wreckage in the dark of night.

Coast Guard extends search area for two missing crew

It also plans to resume sub-sea scans of the helicopter crash site 13km west of the north Mayo coast when weather settles on Thursday.

Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU), which plans to examine it at its facility in Gormanston, Co Meath. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-coast-guard-extends-search-area-for-two-missing-crew-1.3036814

[Gadgetman496]

Granuaile waited till just before midnight to dock in Galway. Probably better to offload wreckage in the dark of night. I think it said in one of the newspaper articles the AAIU will move it to a big shed near Dublin.


She had to wait for the high tide, nothing sinister about the timing. Alot of rock as you enter Galway.

http://puu.sh/v9y1z/8edbfff0c4.JPG

[Red5ive]

She had to wait for the high tide, nothing sinister about the timing. Alot of rock as you enter Galway.



That and wait for a space to dock.

The less photo's of the wreckage in the media, the better for those affected by the crash.

[[email protected]]

Industry Insider - interestingly, the blurb on those beacons highlights that the AIS function is line of sight only - your line of sight from sea level (ie MOB) is extremely limited, especially in a big sea. These beacons don't transmit on 406Mhz so they don't have the satellite capability that they seem to imply and 121.5 isn't monitored by satellite any more, just used for homing by SAR.

[dClbydalpha]

The regulations require 406 PLBs to be manually activated. My assumption is that this is due to the need to avoid inadvertent activation.

Should we now be creating a system for remote activated PLBs?

[RVDT]

With regard to all the waffle about COSPAS SARSAT, PLB's etc etc.

If it wasn't for AIS which is an optional fitment and not for safety of flight you would possibly STILL be looking for this aircraft.

ADELT didn't work.

ELT didn't work and not possible underwater anyway.

Radar track - outside coverage?

I may have missed something?

Something to think about for the future.

[ukv1145]

With regard to all the waffle about COSPAS SARSAT, PLB's etc etc.

If it wasn't for AIS which is an optional fitment and not for safety of flight you would possibly STILL be looking for this aircraft.

ADELT didn't work.

ELT didn't work and not possible underwater anyway.

Radar track - outside coverage?

I may have missed something?

Something to think about for the future.

Missed the operators own flight following system. CHC certainly had this fitted to the SAR cabs. It will have had a higher sample rate than AIS and is GPS/Satcomm based rather than the VHF line of sight of AIS. CHC used to use Skytrac, not sure if they still do. Obviously won't have heard much of this as the data will be password protected and not in the public domain.