OH You New York Girls....Can't You Dance The Polka!

[SASless]

Blackhawks and Seahawks have different foot prints young Fella!

https://youtu.be/LdLjE-KrfpU

[[email protected]]

So what were the two f**kwits sat in the doors doing??? Admiring the view and just saying 'Tail clear left' without actually checking???

[Vertical Freedom]

2 x Pilots + 2 x Observers......impressive :ugh:

[helonorth]

So what were the two f**kwits sat in the doors doing??? Admiring the view and just saying 'Tail clear left' without actually checking???
You're assuming the two guys in front asked. That tailwheel sure didn't put up much of a fight.

[SASless]

If they were looking for "traffic"....they were "Clear Left!".

I wonder why if they were going to turn right....why did they crowd the left side of the taxi way? After all they knew they would be be swinging the Tail in that direction.

I would have crowded the right side and swung the tail away from the nearest obstacle.

Fortunately no one got hurt.

I am reliably informed that the Black Hawk tail wheel assembly was designed to a MilSpec that requires vertical load tolerances but not so much lateral forces.

The video seems to confirm that.

[[email protected]]

You're assuming the two guys in front asked. No, I'm assuming that anyone in the cabin is part of the crew and should be doing their job, not waiting to be asked.

[SASless]

Crab,

As usual....a question for you is how do you know what was said...not said...and if the guy driving initiated the turn incorrectly....how was the crew in the back supposed to prevent that? Rotor Blade Clearance was not an issue.

Does/Did your cabin crew tell you how to drive your Sea King?

I can imagine Jones in the cabin did not ever tell you when to move your Tail Rotor Yaw Control Pedals and at some point assumed you bright enough to know when to do so while taxiing on a heliport....and you would not have been too happy had he done so.

I can see this as being a simple case of a handling error that was avoidable but some complacency crept into the mix as the aircraft was on an open Heliport Operating Area and the guy driving lost situational awareness and made a move that was not anticipated by anyone other then himself.

Put a stop watch to the video and time the interval from the first signs of the aircraft turning to the impact....how long did the crewman have to recognize a problem, and warn the Pilot? I don't think there time enough for anyone to have stopped the unsafe act once that pedal movement began and contact with the barrier.

[Um... lifting...]

Sitting in the open door legs a-dangle is all very romantic, until you get crushed from the shins down.

I suspect there will be plenty to be deconstructed from this incident at the safety standaround.

[twinstar_ca]

I flew out of wall street on a tourist flight... how would that incident affect operations?? everything get shut down for a period of time until the machine was moved?

[tottigol]

Did that just happen?
That looks like a NAVY MH-60S, it's likely that the pilot(s) were used to the short wheelbase version.

[[email protected]]

SAS - the clue as to how switched off the guys in the cabin were is in their physical positions - as Um lifting points out, not very professional - kneeling in the door or lying on the floor would be safer.

Yes, you would assume that the person with their hands and feet on the controls would know how to ground taxy and a simple, one-sentence crew brief could have put everyone on the same page and prevented embarrassment.

However, I have been in the back of a few US Mil Blackhawks and crew co-operation was woefully lacking - a definite us and them partition between front and rear crew, with the latter being mostly ignored.

Without hearing the intercom conversations, one has to assume culpability lies with the handling pilot and, depending on which side he was sitting, the non-handling pilot - but sharp rearcrew could have realised what was about to happen and mentioned how close the edge of the pad was.

[Flying Bull]

Just lift into a hover an reassamble 😜
Just joking 😉

[helonorth]

SAS - the clue as to how switched off the guys in the cabin were is in their physical positions - as Um lifting points out, not very professional - kneeling in the door or lying on the floor would be safer.

Yes, you would assume that the person with their hands and feet on the controls would know how to ground taxy and a simple, one-sentence crew brief could have put everyone on the same page and prevented embarrassment.

However, I have been in the back of a few US Mil Blackhawks and crew co-operation was woefully lacking - a definite us and them partition between front and rear crew, with the latter being mostly ignored.

Without hearing the intercom conversations, one has to assume culpability lies with the handling pilot and, depending on which side he was sitting, the non-handling pilot - but sharp rearcrew could have realised what was about to happen and mentioned how close the edge of the pad was.
So many things wrong with this post.

[[email protected]]

So many things wrong with this post. actually wrong or just things you don't like?

[SASless]

Crab,

Pretty broad brush you wield in your comments.

I thought it was the Brown Jobs that had Blimps!

[fijdor]

Is it me or simply an optical illusion but at the end before he hits the tailwheel it seems the aircraft is going to go left and the tail starts swinging slowly right and all of a sudden, change of mind from the pilot and the tail starts swing left rapidly as if he realized he was going the wrong way and hit the tailwheel ??

JD

[Matvey]

I'm curious why the pilot turned to the right in the first place. The Wall Street heliport is set up like a T, and the helicopter (which was the second of two to depart) was taxiing from the long arm of the T to the H-pad at the end to depart, but that would have required a left turn. See: https://goo.gl/maps/SJaRh6ME2Ns for orientation.

As far as what happened to the pad - it continued functioning normally for the most part. The broken helicopter sat where you see it at the end of the video for about a week.

Each of the pads can be landed on directly, and that's what happened. The H was out of service and the two landing spots closest to the corner also appeared to be closed, but everything else functioned as normal, with the tourist flights (407s, AS350s, H120s) using the long arm of the T and the larger corporates (S76, A139) landing directly on the two spots closest to the terminal.

After a week or so, a crew showed up to remove the blades and fold the tail, and then the whole thing was craned onto a barge and brought over to a pier right next to Newark Airport. No idea if it's being repaired in a hangar at Newark or if it was loaded onto a plane and flown back to Norfolk from there.

[[email protected]]

Pretty broad brush you wield in your comments. Maybe, but like everyone else here, I can only go on what I see - and what I see is a serviceable helicopter being turned (temporarily) into a heap of junk performing a very straightforward task.

Someone in the crew didn't do their job properly - maybe all of them - I'm just considering various factors that could have caused that accident. If you don't consider the possibilities, how can you prevent that sort of thing happening again?

I certainly don't want to be the one to end up in charge of such a fiasco so I am making mental notes to self to ensure my CRM is up to scratch, even when performing 'basic' manoeuvres.

[Al-bert]

I certainly don't want to be the one to end up in charge of such a fiasco so I am making mental notes to self to ensure my CRM is up to scratch, even when performing 'basic' manoeuvres.

I always preferred the term 'crew cooperation' rather than viewing the crew as a resource to be managed - it seemed to work ok, for me :}

[[email protected]]

Me too but you have to move with the times - I'm sure it might even be called something else by now!

I have been saved many times by alert rear-crew especially in the SARForce:ok:

[FD2]

Very good assessment SASless - I don't think even a fully operational SAR crew could have been quick enough to scream a warning to the handling pilot to stop him taxiing off the taxiway/runway.

[[email protected]]

But someone in the crew might have questioned his route to the parking spot and reminded him he was close to the edge before he pushed the yaw pedal.

Are you trying to suggest this wasn't a f**k-up by the whole crew and just blame the pilot?

[JohnDixson]

Judging by yesterday's article in the WSJ:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-navy-to-file-negligent-homicide-charges-in-two-asia-ship-collisions-1516159389,
and reading the micro critiques posted here, lord knows where this might be headed. I mean, maybe this crew needs Clarence Darrow Jr or Johnnie Cochran?

[FD2]

I've watched the video upteen times and it appears to show a slow left turn which would have kept the tail wheel on the runway before a large input of right boot whisks it off. Even if the crewman ('f*ckwit') sitting in the left hand doorway had appreciated the situation he wouldn't have had time to stop it with a warning shout once the right turn started. We of course have no idea what was actually going on inside the aircraft, have we?
At the distance the aircraft was from the video camera it is hard to tell just exactly how close to the edge the aircraft actually was and even if the crewman had already warned the handling pilot there's no knowing if he was ignored or even heard over, perhaps, ATC chatter. In short I think it's easy to jump to conclusions but not advisable without knowing all the facts.

[[email protected]]

I think you are just making up excuses for the frankly inexcusable - they just had to taxy the helo from the landing point to the parking spot and they are supposed to be a well-trained military crew.

[havoc]

There was an army Blackhawk incident, the blades hit a hangar.
The crewmen on that side during the interview response to the question Why did you not say something if you seen that the blades were going to hit the hangar?

"He never listened to me before. Didn't think he would start then."

[FD2]

Not making excuses for them - I'm sure they can do that for themselves. Of course it was a mess, but I think it would be reasonable to hear what actually went on inside that aircraft before leaping to conclusions. That might have some bearing on whether it was 'inexcusable' or not - IMHO.

[OFBSLF]

So I wonder what the pilot's new callsign will be. Taildragger?

[FD2]

Very good OFBSLF.

[OFBSLF]

Sadly, I stole it from somewhere else...

[Ascend Charlie]

No, it would be "Trackless" because his @rse was dragging on the ground and wiped out his tracks.

[megan]

crab, you not suggesting they get the civvies in to do a proper job? :E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkDjY3Zs_hE

Never point fingers, may be you next.

[Same again]

Hardly a good comparison. This was an offshore machine with no rear crew.

[[email protected]]

Not making excuses for them - I'm sure they can do that for themselves. Of course it was a mess, but I think it would be reasonable to hear what actually went on inside that aircraft before leaping to conclusions. That might have some bearing on whether it was 'inexcusable' or not - IMHO. Given that they all seemed to be in their normal crew positions at a pretty low level of arousal, what could be going on inside the aircraft to cause such a mistake other than an outbreak of 'dullness'.

Not even the busiest ATC RT should divert the HPs attention from driving the aircraft safely so, unless one of the crew casually mentioned that he had been sleeping with the HP's wife/partner/significant other, just as he was about to manoeuvre into the parking slot, it is difficult to imagine why professional aircrew should have dropped their guard so significantly.

It could have been much worse if the TR had struck as well.

Never point fingers, may be you next. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, all the pretending in the world won't stop it being a duck.

I am very well aware that it could happen to me, hence my earlier comments about using it as a wake-up call to self - the flight isn't over until you are back in the crewroom.

[FD2]

How do you know what their 'arousal level' was? I can see two people in the back on dispatcher harnesses who are sitting in their respective doorways. You still haven't given a clue as to how you actually know what else was going on in the aircraft, apart from supposing an 'outbreak of dullness' from watching a distant video clip. You obviously have more intuition than me to see what was happening in all the crew positions (four is it?), on the intercom, on the radio and their state of alertness (or arousal). Maybe I need a new P.C., which can see these things for me too!

All I think I can see is that a sudden yaw input, probably without any warning to the crew, put the tail over the edge, probably too quickly for the 'f*ckwit' in the left doorway to say anything to stop it.

Maybe a proper board of enquiry will determine the facts and dish out the appropriate punishment(s) rather than someone supposing an outbreak of 'dullness' being the cause.

[megan]

Hardly a good comparison. This was an offshore machine with no rear crew.I suggest you have a good rethink, how does the lack of a rear crew give absolution. The only time I've needed a rear crew was for firing the guns and winching. Didn't even have them for sling loading. Mind you they were helpful giving clearances into tight holes for medevacs when trimming the shrubbery with main rotor was a necessity.

[[email protected]]

How do you know what their 'arousal level' was? I can see two people in the back on dispatcher harnesses who are sitting in their respective doorways There is your first clue - sitting there, feet dangling, no head movement for clearances, no looking under or above (lookout).

The second clue is the lazy left turn, which is what puts the aircraft closer to the edge before the coup de grace of the hard right turn that does the damage.

Are you saying a crew with a high level of arousal wouldn't have appreciated the proximity of the tailwheel to the edge before the right turn or that there was an obvious right turn coming in order to get to the parking spot?

No, I don't have super-intution or a mega PC, but after 35 years in multi-crew military helicopters, I have a pretty good idea how things are supposed to go - and that ain't it.

[FD2]

I think you should just calm down and let those in authority in this case decide on the real facts as opposed to assuming all the things you have - even though you're no doubt an expert after so many years flying experience - which I'm not questioning. Would the slow left turn have taken them over the edge if continued without the sharp right turn?

Maybe the leg danglers in the back might have assumed that the pilots were competent to carry out a simple ground taxiing manoeuvre. Was it a SAR aircraft with a fully SAR trained crew? I have/had over 35 years experience in both large military multi crew and large civilian aircraft but I would still think it right that the crew be judged by the appropriate authorities rather than being declared guilty on the evidence of a video clip on a website.

[[email protected]]

Maybe the leg danglers in the back might have assumed that the pilots were competent to carry out a simple ground taxiing manoeuvre.That is just the sort of complacency I mean - the old safety adage that ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME seems appropriate.

The left turn was clearly used for positioning, presumably to get into wind for the line up to the parking spot - which the right turn was meant to achieve.

The 'authorities' will doubtless use the video clip as part of their investigation and there is an outside chance that there may be extenuating circumstances in the cause of this accident but I won't be holding my breath.

How many flight safety courses and seminars have you been to where the root cause of an accident/incident is immediately obvious from the first look? I've done plenty although some turn out to be even more of a f**kup than first glance might show.

Not being part of the US Military, I won't get to see the accident report or investigation so I stand by my assumptions/observations until proved otherwise.

[FD2]

You've reached your own opinion on it crab and I dare say mine wouldn't be so dissimilar but yes, there may well be extenuating circumstances.

As you say, we are unlikely to get to know the outcome of the investigation but I believe that so much on the internet these days flies in the face of natural justice, no matter how experienced those making the online judgements might be.

If the authorities decide to court martial some or all of the crew then that's as it should be, but if that does happen at least they will have had their day in court, which is just as it should be.

[Same again]

I suggest you have a good rethink, how does the lack of a rear crew give absolution. The only time I've needed a rear crew was for firing the guns and winching. Didn't even have them for sling loading. Mind you they were helpful giving clearances into tight holes for medevacs when trimming the shrubbery with main rotor was a necessity.

There will never be absolution. However, having an alert, well-trained rear crew who know their job and understand their worth in a fully integrated crew will go a very long way in preventing this kind of cringe-worthy event.

I'll bet the rear crews were lining up to fly with you Maverick.

[SASless]

Not being part of the US Military


Gee....imagine that!

Sure had us fooled for a bit!

[megan]

I'll bet the rear crews were lining up to fly with you MaverickGot them home in one piece every time, even a gunner who took one in the back and another in the neck, he lived, and none the worse for wear. :ok:

I get somewhat amused watching the EMS helo programs on telly where the back seat is counting down the height above the ground to the pilot, it has its place, but on a designated helipad, runway, tarmac, taxiway? You need a back seater to ground taxi on a strip of tarmac some 62 feet (85 feet overall) in width (Wall street) in a Blackhawk? Even with his lack of currency, SAS could get his beloved Chinook down there, safely, and unaided.

[Same again]

You need a back seater to ground taxi on a strip of tarmac some 62 feet (85 feet overall) in width (Wall street) in a Blackhawk?

Well the Skygod in the front seat of this one obviously didn't think so either. Where you a CRM instructor too by any chance?

[[email protected]]

Gee....imagine that!

Sure had us fooled for a bit!couldn't lower my standards old boy ;)

[SASless]

Even with his lack of currency, SAS could get his beloved Chinook down there, safely, and unaided.

Perhaps...but the Crew in the back would have been part of the process per our procedures.

[JohnDixson]

Perhaps as in this video, SAS?

Warrior Stories: Larry Murphy | Military.com (http://www.military.com/video/forces/army/soldiers-story-larry-murphy/4109431716001)

Oops, forgot to add the following. I contacted a retired USN O-6, aviator. He had a lot of post USN experience doing remote marketing helicopter flyin as well. In answer to my question re USN taxi policy in a non-standard USN environment, his response was: " Navy policy re taxi directing was up to the a/c commander when at remote sites."

[megan]

Well the Skygod in the front seat of this one obviously didn't think so eitherI'm glad you have so readily discovered the cause. SOPs they work to I have no idea, and from the postings nobody else here does either. The job of the nut holding the wheel is to ask if he has doubts, guys in the back, if you have them, are not mind readers. Question would be what the PM was doing, and did he know the PF was about to make a right turn? One of the troubles in military is cockpit gradient, often with a senior guy who has little recency.

As I said in my first post, "Never point fingers, may be you next" making the lead item in the evening news. Everyone I know has made a cock up of greater or lesser proportions, and so have you all.Where you a CRM instructor too by any chanceNo, but I know how to spell "were" if it helps you. :p

I'm wondering how in the world all those lads/lasses taxiing Pumas, 92s, 76s etc about our congested airports manage without backseaters, and all those fixed wing? Best ask for a pay rise for all that added responsibility, doing two jobs at once. :p

SAS, you let me down, I was singing your praises. :oh:

[The Nr Fairy]

Not being part of the US Military, I won't get to see the accident report or investigation.

A good start for the US Navy is http://safety.navylive.dodlive.mil/approach-magazine/ and there are equivalents for the US Air Force and US Army too. This particular incident might not make it into there but there's all sorts of FS nuggets to glean.

[SASless]

I have flown that wonderful Chinook single crew....for a single circuit....so I suppose I could have left off the mention of the rest of the crew as it was an exception that disproved the Rule.

It was not that great a leap from being an Instructor with two new Students in a Conversion Course but we always had at least one rear crew even on those trips.

For those who talk of Cockpit Gradient....think about that for a moment.

A young Warrant Officer Instructor and Studes ranking up to LTCol.

Or...young Warrant Officer flying Operational missions with the Unit Commander who was not authorized to be an Aircraft Commander.

Lets not overthink this shall we.

The Handling Pilot made a bad turn and knocked off the Tail Wheel...things happened despite the best training and well thought out policies and procedures.

Things happen fast sometimes that all the planning and SOP's cannot prevent.

All this video does is to prove even on what appears to be an open Heliport...there are obstacles that can be a threat to the safe operation of the aircraft.

There is not one of us out here that has not had a close call of some kind despite thinking ourselves as being the consummate professional.

Perhaps just watching the video and thinking....I shall never do that on purpose, is all we need to learn from it.

[twinstar_ca]

well said, SASless....

[Same again]

I'm wondering how in the world all those lads/lasses taxiing Pumas, 92s, 76s etc about our congested airports manage without backseaters, and all those fixed wing?

Possibly the same reason that airliners do not have cabin crew hanging out the doors. Some aircraft operate in environments w(h)ere rear crew are needed. It helps if the pilots actually take notice of them.

[[email protected]]

As with the Kegworth crash where it was quite clear to the cabin crew which engine was on fire but the flight crew still shut down the wrong one......

[megan]

Some aircraft operate in environments w(h)ere rear crew are neededAgreed, but to taxi a Blackhawk on the Wall Street pad is not one of them, just my humble opinion.

SAS, your comment about overthinking missed the bit where I said no one here knows the cause. My comment about gradient was a thought about an experience as a newly minted given the task to ferry a extremely senior officer, highly credentialed as a pilot, but a long, long time ago. Orders from CO were to let him fly. In the cruise over water and low RPM came on, had wound off the throttle (Huey).

[JohnDixson]

Megan, going back to my conversation with the retired USN O-6, who also has a lot of time in UH-60A’s and L’s, was the project pilot for the MH-60k and has a lot of 60B time: his observation was that 1) if that were a 60B, there would not have been an accident and thus 2) he therefore guessed that the pilot was perhaps an experienced 60B pilot and forgot where he/she was. Made me re-look at the video and I think he has a point.

[megan]

Could well be right John, and more than plausible. The old saying “There's more than one way to skin a cat” could be altered to “There's more than one way to cause an accident.” That though is prompted by a guy telling the story of trouble while landing a Beech 18. Shortly after touchdown one of his legs locked up and the aircraft started pointing to that side of the runway, managed to maintain control by his useful leg using the brake to get the nose back. His point was if the very worse had happened and he not survived, investigators would have put it down to loss of control, but been scratching their heads how a highly experienced pilot in type lost control in benign circumstances.

[[email protected]]

Presumably, when a pilot changes from one model to the other, there is some training involved which would concentrate on the differences between the two - especially something important like 'where the wheels are'.

If it turns out the pilot was regularly swapping between Seahawk and Blackhawk (maintenance or test pilot for example) then it may be slightly more forgivable but still a major awareness error.

[SASless]

Crab,

Do you have a copy of a CFS or other OCU Training Syllabus that includes a segment entitled......"Where the Bloody Wheels Are"?

I suppose you are suggesting the US Navy just throws a set of Keys at a Pilot and tells him/her they can take a Cab out for the day.

[JohnDixson]

Crab, sorry for the nit, but the USN doesn’t have/operate any Blackhawks. They have Seahawk B’s ( actually now replaced by R’s ) H’s and F’s with the forward tail wheel, and then S’s ( Knighthawk ) with the aft tail wheel. Have no idea if they mix/match pilots-very doubtful, as the missions/equipment are different. However, staffing an S unit with some folks who have experience in the other models wouldn’t be unusual, I’d think.

[[email protected]]

Sas - I have seen, read and taught sections of various syllabi entitled 'Ground Taxying' on several types and the purpose is to build awareness of turning techniques, turning circle, braking techniques and most definitely 'where the bloody wheels are' in relation to the pilot:ok:

It looks from the video that it is a US Navy aircraft - 616 Sqn? - and since it has the rear tailwheel, I presume it is therefore an S model.

So a pilot coming from B, H or F models would still have some training before being let loose in an S ( maybe this was an OCU sortie teaching a new convertee) and therefore should know exactly what he is flying and what its ground taxying characteristics are.

Still looking for some mitigation in respect of the f**kup:ok:

[SASless]

Crab,

That is interesting.

On your favorite aircraft...the SeaKing....could you look out the cockpit and see the forward landing gear?

I know for a fact you could not see the Tail Wheel from the Cockpit.

How did you "know" where the Tail Wheel "was" while doing this taxi training.

Better yet...how did you teach the Students where the Tail Wheel "was"?

Chinook pilots have a problem in learning that as none of the wheels can be seen from the Cockpit....much like most Boeing Airplanes extant.

So...I wonder....is it more an art than science when it comes to this "knowing where the wheels are" thing. Don't we develop a "feel" for the wheels through experience and in some cases the less artful among us never do develop that "feel"?

[MightyGem]

Still looking for some mitigation in respect of the f**kup
Just a momentary lapse in concentration while doing a mundane everyday task. Typical HF incident.

We've all been there, done that(or will do) to some extent.

[[email protected]]

Sas, you can, during a walkround, show the distance from the cockpit to the tailwheel and then, when sat in the cockpit, get the pilot to visualise where it is.

The size of the parking spots meant that you could quite quickly establish where the front of the circle needed to be, in order to get the tailwheel just inside it.

It does become a 'feel' thing, just like knowing the width of your car and what space you can go through in it.

Knowing where the wheels are is the same as having someone stand under the edge of the rotor disc so so can visualise how far it is from you and therefore establish clearances for the MR.

Also like knowing where your tail is in a single pilot helo so you can descend into a confined area safely.

Not rocket science:ok:

[SASless]

Crab,

At a place called Tay Ninh, in a land far away, at the C-130 Turn-Around Ramp (Load/Unload Ramp), there were some wooden Light Poles along the edge of the Ramp. A friend was tasked to pull onto the edge of the ramp and load some Classified Cargo.

Knowing it would be a close fit, he stopped short of the Ramp, briefed the Crew of his intentions, dispatched the Crew Chief to act as a Ground Guide.

The Crew Chief, who was a very sharp fellow....and standing about Six Foot Six Inches tall was very easy to see. He stationed himself about an arm's length away from the nearest Pole and began to guide the Aircraft to its parking place.

Being as how Tay Ninh was a Tactical base with PSP Matting for the ramp and it being dry season....and the surrounds being very dry, dusty, red laterite soil....the Chinook began to kick up a lot of dust.

Squarely into the Ground Guides eyes...he used one hand to clear an eye...but unfortunately made a couple of "Continue ahead" hand signs....and the Forward Blades cut off the Wooden Pole about a foot above his Hand..and not much more above his lofty noggin.

Write off a set of Rotor Blades, one Light Pole, and a pair of GI issue underwear all in short order. No one got hurt....the aircraft got some extra attention by the maintenance section, and the crew got a lot of grief from the rest of the crews.

Enough that the Unit Commander took no official action.

All it takes is a moment's lapse in attention despite the best efforts of a crew and calamity can occur.

At Unit Reunions we still enjoy hearing the story especially when it is the ground guide telling it from his perspective.

[[email protected]]

All it takes is a moment's lapse in attention despite the best efforts of a crew and calamity can occur. Agreed, and in a high workload scenario or in difficult conditions that lapse can have dire consequences but pilots do human factors training and should be armed against such lapses in benign scenarios such as this.

Apparently, more car accidents happen within 5 minutes of the persons home than anywhere else - perhaps an indication that how ever vigilant we are on the drive back from work, we tend to relax when we think it is nearly done - perhaps a parallel to draw with landing and taxying in - don't switch off until the rotors have stopped.

[SASless]

It is the "benign" times that get us usually....as if we are on our guard....we are paying far more attention to what is going on.

It is the old White,Yellow, Red Zone concept of mental alertness thing.

[[email protected]]

So we are all singing from the same hymn sheet except the guy driving the Blackhawk :ok:

[megan]

A lot of quotes apply crab. I'll bet a penny to a pound that the most critical person viewing the video is the driver concerned.

By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest. Confucius

Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. Will Rogers

I made decisions that I regret, and I took them as learning experiences... I'm human, not perfect, like anybody else. Queen Latifah

Experience is a good teacher, but she sends in terrific bills. Minna Antrim

But it's a journey and the sad thing is you only learn from experience, so as much as someone can tell you things, you have to go out there and make your own mistakes in order to learn. Emma Watson

[JimL]

Crab,

The Touchdown Positioning Circle should always be 0.5D of the design helicopter. This ensures that the helicopter undercarriage always fits onto the minimum dimension TLOF - i.e. the surface area (which, in ICAO should be no smaller than 0.83D).

With this aircraft (and the EC360), the rear wheel does not sit inside the circle - nor is it intended to (just as some nose wheels do not). It is these considerations that have driven the minimum size of TLOFs. When the TPDM(C) is correctly drawn/positioned, the pilot can trust that the wheels are correctly contained on the surface of the heliport when sitting on the bum-line (the inner circumference of the circle).

It is exceptionally difficult designing a turning circle lead-in line that will fit all helicopters; for stands that have turning on the ground, the area required, is left to the manufacturer to define for that reason.

There have been occasions (in my time) when the rear-wheel of the S61 has been 'dropped' off the back of a helideck.

Jim

[[email protected]]

Let us consider that the pilot may or may not have been familiar with the heliport in this case:

If he was familiar then the limitations of the taxy area should not have come as a surprise and he would have realised that turning left before turning right would put the tail wheel perilously close to the edge.

If he wasn't familiar, then a certain amount of caution would have been prudent and using the rest of the crew to assist would have been professional.

Either way there is no excuse for trashing an aircraft in this way.

But it's a journey and the sad thing is you only learn from experience, so as much as someone can tell you things, you have to go out there and make your own mistakes in order to learn. Emma Watson

- Megan, I think we moved away from that idea in aviation many years ago since it costs a lot in lives and equipment - the whole point of a Safety Management System is that we learn from other people's mistakes and use training, both in the air and on the ground, to prevent accidents like this - it was wholly avoidable.

To err is human - we all know that and acknowledge our own frailty but, while everyone makes mistakes, let's not pretend that crashing a helicopter (because that is what he did) is the same as breaking a glass or bumping another car in the car park (Parisian parking) - this mistake will cost a lot of taxpayers dollars and could easily have been much worse.

The crew f**ked up for whatever reason, in a situation that they really, really shouldn't have done and will doubtless suffer the consequences and wonder why they (collectively and individually) didn't put slightly more effort into a pretty simple task and avoid the ignominy of being 'that crew who tore off the tailwheel while taxying and ended up on youtube'.

[SASless]

we learn from other people's mistakes and use training, both in the air and on the ground, to prevent accidents like this


Errrrr....wrong! We learn OF other people's mistakes and the intent is for us to learn from them.

All learning and training is limited by the degree to which it is utilized in Operations and is limited in effectiveness only to the degree such learning and training equates to the context it was provided.

As Jim L notes....the Bum Line is supposed to be the answer.

Question for Jim L...how does the Bum Line work for Tandem Cockpits like the Huey Cobra, Apache, and other such helicopters as compared to say a MD 500.

One size does not fit all despite what Government tries to tell us.

Likewise training in/for Standardized Environments is fine....but then those cookbook solutions do not last long when a non-standardized environment is encountered.

Look at Rotorhead's list of Threads right now and you can see the proof of that.


Training and Standardized Procedures are a good start but it also has to assume there is that most important factor called "Judgement" or the far more rare thing called "plain old commonsense" are part of the equation.

Humans ain't perfect....that is why things like this tail wheel loss happen.


As Will Rogers once said:

There are three kinds of men.

The one that learns by reading.

The few who learn by observation.

The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.

[Lonewolf_50]

Having flown and taxied both tail wheel configs, I'll just say that SA was still in the ready room during that taxiing evolution.

For those of you ridiculing the aircrew, I'll offer a point of view for you: the maneuver from the front end caught the back end guy on the port side by surprise. Putting that another way, the guy in the back isn't expecting that move (the turn so soon) so it's not unusual to have that "surprise" effect cut into the fractions of a second that an ICS transmission "tail wheel clearance!" or "stop turn" can get through a pilot's ears and into his brain housing unit.

[Fareastdriver]

I always thought that if you had a taxiing accident you had to buy a round in the bar.

[SASless]

Wrong Navy Old Chap....only Ice Cream Machines:= on the US Gray Funnel Line.

[[email protected]]

Errrrr....wrong! We learn OF other people's mistakes and the intent is for us to learn from them. eerrm pointless semantics Sas and as far as Will Rogers wisdom goes - that third class shouldn't be allowed in a cockpit, that's why there is a selection process for military training.

Lonewolf - I am not ridiculing the aircrew, I don't think what they did is amusing or jokeworthy but, as you say, the SA was still in the readyroom and there is no real reason why it should have been.

Whether the front to rear (and back again) communications broke down for technical, cultural or institutional reasons, it clearly did break down. Whether the pilot didn't indicate his intentions adequately or the rearcrew didn't hear, didn't care or didn't know better is up to the accident investigation team to determine but none of that excuses the fact it did happen and it happened to a US Navy crew who really should be better than that.

Bum lines are great, right up to the point when they aren't for your particular type of aircraft.

[Lonewolf_50]

Lonewolf - I am not ridiculing the aircrew I read the second post in this thread as you doing just that, but thanks for clearing up your intent.

[SASless]

The crew f**ked up for whatever reason, in a situation that they really, really shouldn't have done and will doubtless suffer the consequences and wonder why they (collectively and individually) didn't put slightly more effort into a pretty simple task and avoid the ignominy of being 'that crew who tore off the tailwheel while taxying and ended up on youtube'.



Nope...no Sir Ree Bob....I am glad he is not ridiculing the Crew.

I ponder what ridicule would sound like?

Crab probably does not grasp that sometimes Monkey's do fall out of trees.

[megan]

I am not ridiculing the aircrew, I don't think what they did is amusing or jokeworthy but, as you say, the SA was still in the readyroom and there is no real reason why it should have beenSA can be lost for innumerable reasons. Try this one that happened in our unit prior to my arrival.

Huey sitting on PSP in the revetment doing the cool down run. PIC dropped an item into the chin bubble, so hopped out leaving the co pilot to complete shut down. In attempting to retrieve dropped item he pushed a pedal full forward to gain access, with the result the tail boom slammed into the revetment wall. Experienced pilot at the end of a long day. Fatigue, dehydration, low blood sugar, awareness of CoF PSP and skids, in a rush to the loo? Who knows? RN QHI graduate.

As for the SA being in the ready room on the Wall St. incident, lets wait and see. There are many issues that can arise to detract from optimum personal performance, even in a seemingly simple evolution. Problems at home being just one.

[[email protected]]

My comment in post 2 was simply a reaction to the video and calling them f**wits was shorthand for persons displaying professional skills that could easily have led them to receive a posthumous Darwin award.

If the aircraft had hit harder (TR contact) or rolled more (MR contact) we could easily have been talking serious injuries or fatalities in this case - would we really still be banging on about how 'accidents happen', 'gotta make mistakes to learn' and other hoary old chestnuts to try to remove blame from the crew?

Reality check - all they had to do was land, taxy in and park - in a no-threat environment, day, nice weather, no urgent operational pressures (judging from the relaxed demeanor of the rearcrew), no other aircraft, no technical emergency (again, crew very relaxed) and between them they ripped the tailwheel off the aircraft.

If it wasn't the US Navy, would we have such defence of the crew?

[SASless]

The aircraft lost a tail wheel, no rotor blades hit anything, the aircraft received some relatively minor damage, no one got hurt, and no other property, aircraft got damaged, and no people got hurt or killed.

Crab....when you find yourself in a hole....the immediate action in self rescue is to simply quit digging.

Put down your shovel.:=

Ask yourself the question: If it had been an RAF SAR Sea King....would I have said what I did the way I did in tone and manner?

We all know the answer so you do not have to tell us what your answer to yourself is.

I for one, found the video to have some real value for humor (particularly as no one got hurt).

To consider what the Handling Pilot was thinking as He called for the Shut Down Checklist and had to remark that they could omit any action re the Tail Wheel Lock....well, that makes me laugh out loud.

I don't care which service or operator the aircraft belonged to as anyone of us could make such a mistake or something similar.

[[email protected]]

Sas - I don't think I am the one in the hole - you seem reluctant to move with the times as far as Flight Safety goes.

Modern Safety Management Systems (SMS) try to capture data from the 'near misses' and learn the lessons before enough near misses result in a proper accident.

If you refuse to acknowledge that this crew did something wrong and don't try to identify it, you are passing up an opportunity to avoid an accident further down the line.

If that means the crew are embarrassed or sanctioned then so be it - better that than mopping up the mess when another crew make the same mistake with added vigour and trash themselves as well as the aircraft.

SAR crews make mistakes, just like anyone else, but if there are extenuating or mitigating factors - operational pressure, technical failure etc then you can say they did the best job in the circumstances and move on.

If people make the mistake because they were lazy, negligent, arrogant, uncurrent or even poorly trained, you are obliged to take action to rectify the shortcomings by whatever means is deemed suitable.


The aircraft lost a tail wheel, no rotor blades hit anything, the aircraft received some relatively minor damage, no one got hurt, and no other property, aircraft got damaged, and no people got hurt or killed. this time...............

Calling this accident 'real value for humour' is at best schadenfreude and in no way puts you on the moral high ground or at the edge of the hole looking down.

[Lonewolf_50]

crab: it's easier to laugh at a mistake when nobody got hurt, see the title of the thread. Light hearted is OK. Our safety center used to publish the mishap of the week messages with a wry sense of humor ingrained.


On the serious side there seem to me to be two CRM issues to address or learn from.

1. Both pilots up front having a grasp of their TW clearance and the area they were taxiing in, which I am going to guess was an unfamiliar field for them.



2. Pilot to crewman briefing on tail clearance in unfamiliar field, in terms of 'heads up' calls ... (A friend of mine once ran his tail rotor into a fence at an unfamiliar field, 80's, and our wing put out a pretty extensive 'lessons learned' file on that issue a few weeks later).

That's my takeaway from only having that video as evidence, having flown that config of helicopter, and not being privy to any other material.


Quite frankly, the tone of a few of your posts has bordered on 'up on a high horse' but that doesn't get me all wound up since I've been enjoying your contributions for some years here on Rotorheads.
I know the quality of the messenger.

[[email protected]]

Lonewolf - thank you for your comments and I thoroughly agree with your points 1 and 2:ok:

On the subject of tone, it is a problem of the written word in the hands of non-gifted writers like me, that what is written with one intention is easily interpreted in a different way by others.

It is sometimes difficult to let go from my past roles as a Squadron Training Officer and Flight Safety Officer charged with maintaining standards and professionalism on an operational unit.

If the crew involved in this accident had been one of mine, they certainly would have been listened to in order to establish why it happened but also re-briefed on areas where they might have let themselves down.
:ok:

[[email protected]]

Oh yes, your tone is soooo much better....