Helicopter down outside Leicester City Football Club

[Simplythebeast]

News coming in that the helicopter owned by the owner of Leicester City has crashed into the car park after taking off at the end of the match, No other details yet.

[helicrazi]

The helicopter of Leicester City owner Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha has crashed outside the King Power Stadium following the Foxes' Premier League match against West Ham

The incident occurred in the club car park with eye witnesses saying police cars, ambulances and security were frantically rushing around the stadium.

Pictures immediately after the crash showed a huge fire outside the ground.

Leicester police said in a statement: "We are dealing with an incident in the vicinity of the King Power Stadium. Emergency services are aware and dealing

[SWBKCB]

BT Sport where covering the match live, and they've just gone off air as the stadium is being evacuated

[timmcat]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x600/fb_img_1540670808464_166cf22338655367d85099127b09e5177fa94e2 2.jpg

From the club's FB page.

[nomorehelosforme]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-46006470

Looks very serious

[renort]

Where does it mention any deaths reported?

Probability is high but not confirmed.

Anyone know the type and probable capacity?

G-VSKP AW169

[Cabby]

Sky news video. Fire was put out after 20mins according to tv news.
https://news.sky.com/story/helicopter-crash-outside-leicester-city-stadium-11537872

[nomorehelosforme]

BBC show a 109 G-LCFC

[Sir Niall Dementia]

BBC show a 109 G-LCFC


Used to be. Been an AW169 for 2 years

SND

[KPax]

Watched the after football show it was a 169, ac departed then just outside the stadium was seen to spin to the ground according to eye witnesses, tail rotor problem already mentioned.

[KNIEVEL77]

Sky news reporting the helicopter can hold 20 passengers.

[Murty]

Sky news reporting the helicopter can hold 20 passengers.

7-10 is the more likely capacity.

[jeepys]

20 pax. It's not a 189

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Sky news reporting the helicopter can hold 20 passengers.

Also reporting "the engine stopped and it dropped like a stone" from an eyewitness on BBC. Usual load of media s**t and speculation. As LCFC Chairman is a nice bloke from memories of flying him some time ago, and a colleague of many of us was in the front seat, and as yet no-one knows their condition I do wish the media would just stick to facts rather than guesswork.

SND

[KNIEVEL77]

Having seen this helicopter take off many times from the King Power I believe it usually has two crew.

[TheWrongTrousers]

And some of us are praying it’s not those two friends...

[anchorhold]

Of course the usual speculation from 'eye witness' such as tail rotor failing or engine failure. Of course this was a night departure with all the usual risks that helicopter crews face on such departures, plus in this case departing from a flood lit area, into the dark with twenty four 'pylons' (probably unlit) on top of the stadium structure.

[KNIEVEL77]

And some of us are praying it’s not those two friends...

I have seen various different crew members fly the machine over the last few months however who ever it is, I’m sure our thoughts are with them.

[er340790]

BBC:

One witness said he saw Leicester's goalkeeper Kasper Schmeichel run out towards the crashed helicopter.

[gulliBell]

You can also hear on the radio in that recording somebody on-scene reporting "I can't get to the pilot, no"

[gulliBell]

Reports on Twitter that the owner Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha was on board the accident helicopter.

[Super VC-10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Leicester_City_F.C._helicopter_crash

[NumptyAussie]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-46006470

[c53204]

Sky news reporting the helicopter can hold 20 passengers.

BBC reported that the helicopter cost £2m new.

[Dick Smith]

Incredibly sad. I own and operate a complex twin engined helicopter and when something like this happens I say -“ when will this happen to me “ or “when will I do that”.

I hope we can get an answer as to what was the cause so further similar accidents can be prevented. I also ask that only those with real facts on the matter post on this thread.

[gulliBell]

BBC reported that the helicopter cost £2m new.

They are definitely under-done on that number. More like 6m+ GBP for a new one.

[gulliBell]

...I own and operate a complex twin engined helicopter and when something like this happens...



Eye witness accounts indicate sudden loss of TR drive...and that's about the worst place I can think of for that malfunction to happen. Yes, very sad, and very unlucky. A minute or two later with more height and more airspeed and the outcome might well have been different.

[Turco]

Come on guys and girls, The most of us on this forum are professional aviators.
All the BBC reports that I've read so far on this accident have been written by reporters with absolutley no aviation experiance whatsoever.
As professionals, dont get sucked into the eye witness accounts and ficticious reporting then make poor assumptions on what has gone wrong here.
The AW 169 is a sophisticated machine, Like its 2 big brothers, A lot of things need to go wrong in a hurry to cause a catastophic failure resulting in an accident.
Leave it to the AAIB now to find the real cause so we can all learn valuable lessons.

[silverelise]

The statement from Leicestershire Police says (my bold) "Enquiries to establish the exact circumstances of the collision are ongoing."
Unusual choice of word or are they suggesting the aircraft struck/was struck by something before reaching the ground?

[OvertHawk]

The statement from Leicestershire Police says (my bold) "Enquiries to establish the exact circumstances of the collision are ongoing."
Unusual choice of word or are they suggesting the aircraft struck/was struck by something before reaching the ground?

"Collision" is a generic police term that they use instead of "Accident". eg - "Road traffic Collision". They use it regardless of the circumstances.

I would not therefore describe its use in this case as unusual nor would I particularly read anything into it at this point.

[ETOPS]

Unusual choice of word

This is part of our new Police vocabulary in the UK. They used to refer to "Road Traffic Accidents" or RTAs but now use the term "Road Traffic Collision" RTC. This is because vehicle incidents are sometimes not "accidental" but criminal thus they are trying not to pre-label the event.
Seen this word in a number of recent light aircraft incidents.

[aeroskipper]

The statement from Leicestershire Police says (my bold) "Enquiries to establish the exact circumstances of the collision are ongoing."
Unusual choice of word or are they suggesting the aircraft struck/was struck by something before reaching the ground?

..in their maybe too early lateral ascend, could they have accidentally hit one of those high/tall light-towers sitting on top of the stadium - and thereby damaged the tail-rotor?
They are most probably looking into this matter.

[wiggy]

Maybe, maybe not, but as has been said at this stage in proceedings there is no value at all at reading any significance into the fact that the UK police used the word collision.

[AAKEE]

Maybe, maybe not, but as has been said at this stage in proceedings there is no value at all at reading any significance into the fact that the UK police used the word collision.

Exactly. Not really the time to discuss but to minimize thread drift around what word the police used, Ground Collision is an aviation term, for example used in the term GCAS.

[wiggy]

Sky News now reporting (their source in turn is Reuters), 5 total on board, including the Leicester City owner. No comment being made on fate of the same.

[Navy_Adversary]

Some supporters leaving the ground last night are reporting a drone flying around the Stadium, however one report says the drone was grounded before the helicopter departed.

[Simplythebeast]

..in their maybe too early lateral ascend, could they have accidentally hit one of those high/tall light-towers sitting on top of the stadium - and thereby damaged the tail-rotor?
They are most probably looking into this matter.
im sure ‘they’ will be looking at all possibilities and speculation is completely pointless.

[Wycombe]

Some supporters leaving the ground last night are reporting a drone flying around the Stadium, however one report says the drone was grounded before the helicopter departed.

Drone for overhead TV shots? One would surely hope this is properly co-ordinated (especially if the rotary presence is regular as is being suggested) and that that is a red herring.

[airsound]

Reuters reporting five on board:
LEICESTER, England (Reuters) - Leicester City soccer club owner Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha, a Thai tycoon, was among five people who were in a helicopter which crashed in a ball of flames after a Premier League match on Saturday, a source close to the club said. Also on board were one of Vichai’s two daughters, two pilots and a fifth person whose identity was not immediately known, the source said on Sunday.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-soccer-england-lei-crash/thai-leicester-city-owner-four-others-were-on-crashed-helicopter-source-idUKKCN1N204J

airsound

[mickjoebill]

..in their maybe too early lateral ascend, could they have accidentally hit one of those high/tall light-towers sitting on top of the stadium - and thereby damaged the tail-rotor?
They are most probably looking into this matter.

The stadium lights are fixed to the roof, rather than tall towers.


Mjb

[runway30]

Drone for overhead TV shots? One would surely hope this is properly co-ordinated (especially if the rotary presence is regular as is being suggested) and that that is a red herring.

Leicestershire Police have a drone that they can deploy at football matches if required. Not known if it was flying at this match.

[falcon900]

It is surprising to me that an aircraft of this size could land on the grass playing surface without damaging it or at least affecting its suitability for top class football. I’m not suggesting it has any bearing on the tragic events which have unfolded, just a stray thought.

[silverelise]

It is surprising to me that an aircraft of this size could land on the grass playing surface without damaging it or at least affecting its suitability for top class football. I’m not suggesting it has any bearing on the tragic events which have unfolded, just a stray thought.

I believe that pre-game it lands outside of the stadium and the passengers are conveyed the final distance by car it's only after the game it lands on the pitch. Generally there is a game played on the pitch once a week or so.

[HarryMann]

Surprised this sort of operation is even countenounced on a regular basis esp. at night

[SFIM]

Surprised this sort of operation us even countenounced on a regular basis esp. at night

there is nothing wrong with this type of operation and this really isn’t the time for this when there is no clue what happened.

[ORAC]

Five on board were the owner, his daughter, another guest and the two pilots.

[helispeediii]

god bless them all im sure I know the pilots, have flown many hours in 109 with them! again lets not invent reasons for the accident god bless heli speediii

[chips101]

Thank you helicrazi. If a helicopter had more height and speed and the tail rotor failed are there options. Again I do not want to cause thread drift.

[Misformonkey]

https://youtu.be/2On58NfaSXg
is that a normal take-off technique to reverse whilst climbing out? I would have expected a normal tower type ascent to the transition to forward flight. I’m from an rotary wing background but haven’t seen this before.

[mercuray]

SFIM. This is Forum for aviation professionals. Accordingly,it is perfectly appropriate for other members to put forward PURELY informal comment as to whether this sort of operation is even "countenounced on a regular basis especially at night". Many of my own aircrew colleagues have also openly stated that they too are currently somewhat confused about such a Regular Operation. Naturally the authorities will be do their formal work on all aspects of this very sad event. Far more to the point is that so little from The "Press" seems to be concerned that apparently 4 other POB also perished in this accident. Human Life should not be so much more important just because one of the victims is a billionaire owner of a football club. ALL those on board deserve exactly the SAME amount of Attention; Respect and Sorrow at this time.They too have families. I am confident that The Chairman of Leicester Football Club would be the first to agree with me. I am now 68,so I remember when not Everything was so shamelessly Linked to Fame and Fortune. This is simply a sport;a game of football,and now is not the time to be focusing on FOOTBALL,but ALL of the 5 HUMANS whom have just perished in an horrific aviation accident. I assure you that AIB will have commenced their investigations almost immediately. Like other great Clubs before them,Leicester FC did NOT DIE last night,and will come back in sombre mood,but I suspect more united and determined than ever. The Fans will see to that.

[helicrazi]

Yep, normal technique

[Axel-Flo]

I haven’t flown helicopters for years now but I’d guess if you’ve nowhere else to go backing up gives you a forward and down option in the event of a catastrophic failure before you comit yourself to go. The stadium right in front of you would probably be a worse option.

[barbados sky]

is that a normal take-off technique to reverse whilst climbing out? I would have expected a normal tower type ascent to the transition to forward flight. I’m from an rotary wing background but haven’t seen this before.

Yes, its not an uncommon procedure for a PC1 type take off, it keeps the reject area in front of the aircraft until committed.

[jayteeto]

Is this allowed? Yes
why did they move up and back, not towering? Because that’s the approved departure technique. Very rare to go straight up if you have an obstruction on departure path.

ie. That’s how it’s done properly

[wokawoka]

https://youtu.be/2On58NfaSXg
is that a normal take-off technique to reverse whilst climbing out? I would have expected a normal tower type ascent to the transition to forward flight. I’m from an rotary wing background but haven’t seen this before.

This is a standard technique in commercial ops. You drift up and back keeping sight of the landing site so that if you have an engine failure on transition you can drift down to the site. Especially relevant in oil rig operations.

[industry insider]

Especially relevant in oil rig operations.

Really? Never done that type of take off from any rig or platform offshore in my 40 almost years in the industry. I learn something everyday.

[meleagertoo]

is that a normal take-off technique to reverse whilst climbing out?



Perfectly normal. The technique was originally intended for use from a restricted area where category "A" performance was required - ie land or fly away from a single engine failure. The reversing element was to allow the pilot to retain sight of the pad through the chin window as he climbed to the critical height from which he could dive on speed and fly away if an engine failed. Prior to that point a descent onto the still visible pad is accomplished on the remaining engine.
It was, afaik, introduced in the UK in via the offshore oil industry as mentioned above and was adopted on land for use on helipads that did not allow a conventional acceleration, transition and run-on, typcally needing 5-600m of flat ground for a light twin. It lends itself to use on elevated pads, eg rooftop sites and also to sites surrounded by tall obstacles such as trees or even stadium roofs
For this technique to work successfully it may require the machine to be below a calculated weight for performance reasons.

[jackharr]

Far more to the point is that so little from The "Press" seems to be concerned that apparently 4 other POB also perished in this accident. Human Life should not be so much more important just because one of the victims is a billionaire owner of a football club. ALL those on board deserve exactly the SAME amount of Attention; I agree entirely with that comment.

[aox]

Far more to the point is that so little from The "Press" seems to be concerned that apparently 4 other POB also perished in this accident. Human Life should not be so much more important just because one of the victims is a billionaire owner of a football club. ALL those on board deserve exactly the SAME amount of Attention; Respect and Sorrow at this time.They too have families.

For some time last night there were even denials that the owner was on board, which might imply that a rhetorical question why no quotable comment yet by the owner, so where is he, hadn't occurred to those writers and some editors. Even early on it was obviously a strong chance of fatal to whoever was in it, but as you say a bit too much focus on yes or no about just one.

[PPI Zulu]

https://youtu.be/2On58NfaSXg
is that a normal take-off technique to reverse whilst climbing out? I would have expected a normal tower type ascent to the transition to forward flight. I’m from an rotary wing background but haven’t seen this before.

It very much depends on what is approved for that Type in the RFM which, in turn, is finalised and approved during certification.

Even two Variants of the Type may have two different profiles. The AS332L2 Super Puma, for instance, has a backwards climb profile in its helipad departure. However, The EC225 Super Puma has a vertical (straight up) profile.

[finalchecksplease]

Offshore oil & gas drifting up & back is a big no no, like Industry Insider I've never done a take-off profile like that from an offshore rig / platform in my 20+ years flying offshore oil & gas.
Onshore some aircraft have a vertical profile like that, don't know if the AW169 has that profile in its RFM.

[thelad]

Sky news shows day light photos from the air of the burnt out airframe, all chard except a door looking section 7-8 feet away still with paint. Looks like 2 windows, could that be a escape hatch? Never been in a 169.

[jeepys]

There was a suggestion that a possible TR failure could have been to blame. In these situations it doesn't really matter what profile you do whilst in the T/O phase. Only a suggestion like I say.

[Aucky]

Offshore oil & gas drifting up & back is a big no no, like Industry Insider I've never done a take-off profile like that from an offshore rig / platform in my 20+ years flying offshore oil & gas.
Onshore some aircraft have a vertical profile like that, don't know if the AW169 has that profile in its RFM.

This is because offshore profiles aren’t generally PC1, they are PC2 or PC2E and make use of a drop down below the deck edge in the event of an OEI fly away. The AW169 has a number of PC1 profiles suitable for ground based departures factoring obstacles above the take off surface, one of which utilises a very steep rearwards climb up to a maximum allowable TDP of 400ft above the surface which may be used appropriately for a site like a stadium, so long as the critical obstacles don’t exceed 265ft above the take off surface.

[2016parks]

I understand that in an incident like this one might well perish from the crash alone. But one might also perish from an ensuing fuel fire. I know that Robertson Fuel Systems, for one, makes fuel tanks that are more crash resistant. The Robertson tanks are available for at least some civil aircraft; I can’t tell from their website if the AW 169 is one of those. Was it available for this aircraft? Anyone here have experience or knowledge as to this type of system and its effect? If you were wealthy and owned a helicopter, would you specify such?

[skadi]

Sky news shows day light photos from the air of the burnt out airframe, all chard expect a door looking section 7-8 feet away still with paint. Looks like 2 windows, could that be a escape hatch? Never been in a 169.

It looks like one of the rear sliding doors...

skadi

[industry insider]

Aucky

This is because offshore profiles aren’t generally PC1,

No it’s not, some are PC1. it’s even simpler than that, it’s so that you don’t reverse into the rig and crash.

[silverelise]

FWIW I've grabbed an image from Google maps and using the various photos on the news feeds identified the place (point B) where the aircraft came down. They really didn't get very far at all and would have had almost no height to play with even if they had any control. RIP.

http://i.imgur.com/MLgA6ksh.jpg (https://imgur.com/MLgA6ks)

[tistisnot]

Aucky



No it’s not, some are PC1. it’s even simpler than that, it’s so that you don’t reverse into the rig and crash.

Well, if we're being pickety ..... he said 'generally' and I have done it from UMI's with no obstructions above deck, but the helideck was smaller than 1D, so there .....

[Giboman]

From the video immediately after the crash the gear seems to be up. The gear doors are still closed and there doesn't appear to be significant impact damage. No gear to soften the impact and no resistance to stop it spinning and flipping.

I thought there was I minimum altitude of 500' before transitioning into toward flight in residential/built up areas?

[airsound]

If Wikipedia is to be believed, this is the first AW169 accident. Anyone know otherwise?

airsound

Edited to add - just seen a tweet in which Leonardo Helos states just that - Leonardo Helicopters is ready to support the AAIB with their investigation to determine the cause of this accident. This is the first ever accident involving an AW169 helicopter

[ShyTorque]

From the video immediately after the crash the gear seems to be up. The gear doors are still closed and there doesn't appear to be significant impact damage. No gear to soften the impact and no resistance to stop it spinning and flipping.

I thought there was I minimum altitude of 500' before transitioning into toward flight in residential/built up areas?

The last sentence is total nonsense. Why did you think that?

[heli1]

Well done to "Puma crew member Jim Rowlands" quoted on BBC ,for doing us all a favour by rubbishinghelicopters and speculating on the cause. Hope its worth his seconds of fame.
lets wait for the AAIB professionals please everyone.

[OnePerRev]

I understand that in an incident like this one might well perish from the crash alone. But one might also perish from an ensuing fuel fire. I know that Robertson Fuel Systems, for one, makes fuel tanks that are more crash resistant. The Robertson tanks are available for at least some civil aircraft; I can’t tell from their website if the AW 169 is one of those. Was it available for this aircraft? Anyone here have experience or knowledge as to this type of system and its effect? If you were wealthy and owned a helicopter, would you specify such?

You are very correct, and this is not a new observation. US Army (USAAMRL) did a very comprehensive study of aviation crashes particularly in Korean and Vietnam wars, and determined that a significant majority of the deaths were from the heat of the ensuing fire. Crashworthiness standards were created for fuel systems that do not apply to commercial rotorcraft, but have resulted in minimal loss of fuel in aircraft since the late 1970's such as H-60 and later. The movie "BlackHawk Down" would not have been a story if not for such survivability features inherent in the design. Includes for example crash resistant tanks, self-closing connections and valves for fuel systems. Some commercial helicopters include this capability, but it is not without additional cost and weight penalty. Therefore people purchasing VIP helicopters may not really be in tune to the available technology to them, nor the very real importance. I am not aware if such options are available for this model helicopter, probably not. To be sure also, we do not know details of this case, including impact velocity, which can render crashworthy systems ineffective anyway. Again, the statistical reality is that the loss of life was likely due to fire, much as an over water mishap results tragically in death by drowning.

[Aucky]

No it’s not, some are PC1. it’s even simpler than that, it’s so that you don’t reverse into the rig and crash.

happy to be corrected - I’m not an offshore pilot however my main point was that this type of helipad departure is completely typical of onshore PC1 profiles on most light-medium twins, and the fact it’s not used offshore doesn’t imply a great deal in this context. It’s actually the only approved PC1 profile in the AW169 for a site of this sort with significant obstacles encircling it.

[nomorehelosforme]

Is there any reason that there has been no official confirmation of who was on board?

[Nige321]

Is there any reason that there has been no official confirmation of who was on board?

Maybe there's several greiving families, here and in the far east, that need to be informed before you are... :ugh:

[TeeS]

Well done to "Puma crew member Jim Rowlands" quoted on BBC ,for doing us all a favour by rubbishinghelicopters and speculating on the cause. Hope its worth his seconds of fame.
lets wait for the AAIB professionals please everyone.

A "UAV & DRONE TRAINING PROFESSIONAL" according to my quick google search heli1!!

Cheers

TeeS

[Crosswind Limits]

I know of two pilots on that particular operation for the owner of Leicester City. From a purely selfish perspective I hope it isn’t them. RIP to those that perished.

[212man]

A "UAV & DRONE TRAINING PROFESSIONAL" according to my quick google search heli1!!

Cheers

TeeS

A quick look on LinkedIn shows the full details - Ex-RAF Puma/Griphon Crewman then a bunch of other stuff followed after leaving.

[SASless]

Nige321......If there was a "Like" Button here at pprune....I would be using it right now in response to your Post!:D

[chopjock]

mel
Perfectly normal. The technique was originally intended for use from a restricted area where category "A" performance was required - ie land or fly away from a single engine failure. The reversing element was to allow the pilot to retain sight of the pad through the chin window as he climbed to the critical height from which he could dive on speed and fly away if an engine failed. Prior to that point a descent onto the still visible pad is accomplished on the remaining engine.

That's all well and good in catering for a loss of a power unit when you have two engines, however it increases the time the tail rotor is under high stresses and there is only one tail rotor!
Looks like it backed out into a tail wind too...?

[Sir Korsky]

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/832x648/cata_603e65c4ea74c823f851df6495d63b41d50a03ed.png

comparison 139 confined area t/o profile. Sorry if image quality poor.

[dingo9]

A tragic incident indeed and only a proper investigation will shed light on what happened. Looking at the crash site and given I think the wind was north, north westerly on that day. It looks like a down wind transition? Another hole in the cheese maybe.

[EESDL]

CatA/Class1/PerfA - whatever it’s called -as we all know here - any performance figures are invalid if you have a tailwind.
condolances to all

[OvertHawk]

A tragic incident indeed and only a proper investigation will shed light on what happened. Looking at the crash site and given I think the wind was north, north westerly on that day. It looks like a down wind transition? Another hole in the cheese maybe.

Unless the failure occurred whilst he was still in the up and back segment and before he had begun his transition into forward flight. In which case he would have been pointing into a NNW wind as would be expected (assuming that google earth image is North up.)

[dingo9]

Unless the failure occurred whilst he was still in the up and back segment and before he had begun his transition into forward flight. In which case he would have been pointing into a NNW wind as would be expected (assuming that google earth image is North up.)

very true. Or there was a considerable period of fight for control and then all bets are off where they would end up.

[Thomas coupling]

If the alleged is true and this new aircraft did suffer a tail rotor failure of sorts, it begs the question, was this a material failure or maintenance?
T/O from the stadium will confuse the wind direction and only when clearing the bowl would the true wind affect the a/c.
Whatever - an alleged TRF at a critical height (probably inside this twins dead mans curve, will almost certainly result in bad news.
RiP to all souls onboard.

[chopjock]

Unless the failure occurred whilst he was still in the up and back segment and before he had begun his transition into forward flight. In which case he would have been pointing into a NNW wind as would be expected (assuming that google earth image is North up.)

No I think you are confused. The video shows the helicopter backing up into wind with nose pointing down wind...

https://youtu.be/2On58NfaSXg

[Livesinafield]

Fixed wing pilot here, no speculation just purely interested...what is the procedure for a Tail rotor failure at low level like this?? What are the gotchas etc

Thanks

[Bell_ringer]

No I think you are confused. The video shows the helicopter backing up into wind with nose pointing down wind...

Inside a stadium (bowl) the wind direction can be unrelated to what is reported outside.

[helicrazi]

Fixed wing pilot here, no speculation just purely interested...what is the procedure for a Tail rotor failure at low level like this?? What are the gotchas etc

Thanks

Dump the collective, engines off, cushion landing, im sure someone thinks its possible, maybe if you know its coming.

In reality, startle effect, low level, at night, its unimaginable..

[Bell_ringer]

Fixed wing pilot here, no speculation just purely interested...what is the procedure for a Tail rotor failure at low level like this?? What are the gotchas etc

Thanks

Inside a stadium? Make sure your loved ones have your insurance details and hope that it's your lucky day.

[Sloppy Link]

Fixed wing pilot here, no speculation just purely interested...what is the procedure for a Tail rotor failure at low level like this?? What are the gotchas etc

Thanks

Lower collective to cancel torque effect thereby preventing spin. Push nose down to gain forward airspeed, generally, above 70kts will keep enough of an airflow over the airframe to keep it straight and then feed collective back in to arrest rate of decent. Find suitable landing site, perform engine off landing.
To do all that, a considerable amount of height is required (500' plus but sure someone cleverer than me will correct) which, on current knowledge, wasn't there, and of course, there is the pilot reaction time to factor in, my experience is simulator based where I either knew it was coming or was highly tuned to something was coming.
High power (collective) setting, 200' or so and no/little airspeed.....that would be a challenge, even if you knew it was coming.

[dingo9]

Inside a stadium (bowl) the wind direction can be unrelated to what is reported outside.
correct. But you need the wind in the transition. You transition above the stadium, ideally 100’ + above the stadium. The wind here is significant and pretty true. On the day 15-20kts... 0kts in the stadium to an almost instant tailwind... uncomfortable at best, high AUM/power limited?

[Livesinafield]

Thanks for the info chaps, so I assume this is an event you practice in your yearly Sims? Like we do with V1 cuts...but as you say you know what's coming and you know exactly how it will behave...different game in the real world

[anchorhold]

No so far away in 1998, the East Midlands Police Air Support Unit helicopter suffered a fatality based on a flawed night departure procedure. as a result it had to put in placed a safe departure and arrival procedure for operations so that there were external references and means collision avoidance for departure and arrivals at night. The report can be found at:

https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/eurocopter-as355n-ecureuil-ii-g-emau-9-oct-1998-at-approximately-2305-hours

It strikes me if you need to reverse before going into transition, then departing out of a football ground is not the best idea. Ironically the surrounding area has multiple suitable sites for a dedicated LCFC heliport, and also being ideal for a heliport for the Leicester Royal Infirmary which currently does not have a dedicated heliport. Likewise a westerly prevailing wind departure over the river and meadows would avoid overflight of congested areas.

[jeepys]

Reverse before transition is a recommended profile for AW types. It's a good congested area profile based on OEI considerations but nothing can be written for drive failure (if this is a possible cause).
Yes it would be safer to depart from a great long runway free of obstacles but it's a helicopter. That's what they do.

[Bell_ringer]

Would imagine that stadium has good cctv coverage so the chain of events is properly recorded.

[Torquetalk]

Thanks for the info chaps, so I assume this is an event you practice in your yearly Sims? Like we do with V1 cuts...but as you say you know what's coming and you know exactly how it will behave...different game in the real world

On that type, anti-torque system failures would form part of initial and recurrent training. But if this was indeed an anti-torque failure, this particular situation would not only require great skill, but also a huge amount of luck to manage successfully. The pilots would have found themselves in a grave situation, at night, in a congested environment, and with no height or airspeed. It doesn’t get much worse. The football field itself may have been the only safe environment to land onto, being lit, flat and obstacle-free. But I doubt if the crew were in a position to make that decision.

I don‘t understand how either a vertical profile or take-off from a heliport have any bearing here. Anti-torque failure just after TDP from a heliport in a congested environment at night. Seriously, what are you chances?

Condolences to family, friends and colleagues. What a terrible accident.

[heli1]

GBB...I don't think members of the helicopter community should be suggesting " helicopters are inherently dangerous" or that you "can't recover from a tail rotor failure".Ive been flying helicopters for over 40 years, practised autorotation after a tail rotor failure 100s of times and never been involved in an accident. We should all be talking about how safe helicopters are these days ,not talking them down.

[dingo9]

Torquetorque. I think the line of inquiry this rumour network is currently going down, and I stress RUMOUR\CONJECTURE is that the tail rotor failed due to it hitting something, either ac backing up and clipping something or for whatever reason a decent post TDP and again tail rotor strike. Pure tail rotor drive failure would be very rare and unlucky- but not impossible.

[Torquetalk]

Torquetorque. I think the line of inquiry this rumour network is currently going down, and I stress RUMOUR\CONJECTURE is that the tail rotor failed due to it hitting something, either ac backing up and clipping something or for whatever reason a decent post TDP and again tail rotor strike. Pure tail rotor drive failure would be very rare and unlucky- but not impossible.

My post was in response to Livesinfiled‘s question. From the video the pilot seems aware of the surroundings and to have positioned and climbed accordingly during take-off. I really cannot see any reason to speculate about clipping something.

[KiwiNedNZ]

It looks taking off from a bottom of a bucket IT IS NOT normal operations - Maybe you should do some research before making that comment. These crews have been picking up the owner from that same place week after week after week for many years so actually it IS normal operations for them,.

[jeepys]

For those that think a recovery from TR failure in such a situation where you are low (<400ft), climbing vertical or backup t/o profile using lots of power is as simple as entering autorotation and guiding the a/c to a landing site then I challenge you to have a go in a realistic sim. Not at 1000ft doing 60 kts in the day. Make it 200ft with 100% torque at night and for realism throw in a 3 second delay. Let me know how you get on.
These types of operations are normal, of course they are. Helicopters fly these profiles in challenging conditions every day so please don't think this was an abnormal operation.
If you are referring to the poorly powered heavy twin 206 that ran out power then it's not the same as a complete TR failure which is a POSSIBLE consideration here.

[chopjock]

These crews have been picking up the owner from that same place week after week after week for many years so actually it IS normal operations for them,

I wonder if that was a contributing factor. The wind usually comes from the same place week after week after week. Except this time it didn't.

[ShyTorque]

I wonder if that was a contributing factor. The wind usually comes from the same place week after week after week. Except this time it didn't.

But also bear in mind that they had very recently landed.

[thelad]

It looks like one of the rear sliding doors...

skadi
yea it does, looks like the R/H Side door but looks like the impact hit the L/H side.

[dingo9]

But also bear in mind that they had very recently landed.
if you watch the video is shows them doing a 180’ spot turn. Which if they landed into wind would now put them down wind. That is assuming when they landed they didn’t turn.. would need to see all the footage to be sure. However looking at google earth there are some nasty 200’+ wires to the north. Departing into a prevailing SW’ly down the river valley along the open ground would be a much more appealing departure direction.

[chopjock]

But also bear in mind that they had very recently landed.


Yes and were seen still facing into wind before lifting. Why on earth do a 180 turn to depart downwind?

[LeicesterFox]

Just to let anyone know that doesn't realise, the video isn't from last night, you can see the Champions League hoardings in the background. And the 'final moments' video is also not from last night.

[ShyTorque]

Yes and were seen still facing into wind before lifting. Why on earth do a 180 turn to depart downwind?

I really can't provide an answer to that. Perhaps the wind velocity wasn't seen as the over-riding factor. It's not totally out of the ordinary to have to depart downwind because that's the only way out of a landing site. For private ops, "Cat A" isn't a mandatory requirement, although it is preferable, for obvious reasons.

[horizon flyer]

In one of the pictures of the wreck, correct me if I am wrong, but I think one of the tail rotor blades can be seen and it is in one piece and not bent. From this one could assume no collision with a fixed object and not under power when it hit the ground.

So may be a failure in the transmission. Did anybody else notice this?

[OvertHawk]

I really can't provide an answer to that. Perhaps the wind velocity wasn't seen as the over-riding factor. It's not totally out of the ordinary to have to depart downwind because that's the only way out of a landing site. For private ops, "Cat A" isn't a mandatory requirement, although it is preferable, for obvious reasons.

It is invariably a requirement of a Rule 5 Congested area permission though, Shy, regardless of whether or not you're private.

[Cabby]

Sky news have published the police statement at 22.09.
May they all RIP.
https://news.sky.com/story/live-leicester-city-owner-confirmed-dead-in-helicopter-crash-11538203

[Davef68]

It’s not anywhere I can find on their website. Don’t prolong the agony, post a link. Sadly, my own fears have already been confirmed outwith this forum.


https://leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2018/10/28/king-power-stadium-incident-five-believed-dead

(https://leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2018/10/28/king-power-stadium-incident-five-believed-dead) The five people were on board the helicopter when the incident happened. While formal identification has not yet taken place, they are believed to be Leicester City Football Club chairman Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha, two members of his staff, Nursara Suknamai and Kaveporn Punpare, pilot Eric Swaffer and passenger Izabela Roza Lechowicz.

I beleive the passenger was also a pilot.

[ShyTorque]

In one of the pictures of the wreck, correct me if I am wrong, but I think one of the tail rotor blades can be seen and it is in one piece and not bent. From this one could assume no collision with a fixed object and not under power when it hit the ground.

So may be a failure in the transmission. Did anybody else notice this?

I thought I could make out all three.

[SASless]

It is there.....just read the latest update that lists the names.

[ShyTorque]

It is invariably a requirement of a Rule 5 Congested area permission though, Shy, regardless of whether or not you're private.

Agreed!.....

[meleagertoo]

Yes and were seen still facing into wind before lifting. Why on earth do a 180 turn to depart downwind?
My feelings too. Expediency?
It seems clear they made a towering departure facing downwind, encountering a tailwind component of perhaps 15-20 Kts once they came above the shelter of the stadium roof.
That being the case I suggest that if - and I emphasise IF, a tailrotor failure occurred the scant chance of a recovery from a higher power condtion than a high hover at that height goes from scant to zip. However another more feasible scenario crosses my mind.

It would be very useful to know about the tail rotor authority/control characteristics of this type in high power, downwind conditions at a representative weight. Anyone familiar on type care to comment?

It seems to me that the combination of a sudden onset downwind exposure followed by a spiralling, out of control descent is perhaps more likely to be relevant than the highly unlikely coincidence of a t/r failure just at that critical point. This followed by a rapid dump of the collective in an attempt to recover Nr would fit with an eyewitness reporting a gear-crunching noise (I paraphrase) - perhaps blade stall - followed by relative silence as pitch is reduced.

I can easily visualise a scenario where a tailwind surprises you at 300ft, high power and downwind with the result we've all seen. A bootful of pedal to stop the yaw, a natural grab at the lever to curb the suddden descent and all of a sudden you're spinning, overpitched, Nr plummeting...

I hope to hell this doesn't turn out to be another pressonitis event like Battersea or Gillingham but I'm not holding my breath.

Any input on that downwind tail rotor authority?

Whatever the cause this accident is so in the public eye that helicopters in general are taking vast amounts of abuse (ignorant abuse but damaging nonetheless) in the media and net. If we are unlucky ths sort of hysteria could well lead to irrational knee-jerk reactions similar to those that all but destroyed vintage jet displays and virtually eradicated inland airshows altogether after Shoreham. I sincerely hope my fears are unfounded.

My other feeling is that some of the TV coverage of their departure seems to end rather abruptly. I'd expect the camera to keep rolling until the helo had disappeared from sight so there may well be good, high definition video of the event in the hands of the authorities. Equally I'd be astonished if there are not several amateur videos from outside the stadium that haven't seen the light yet. They may well help.

[Cabby]

https://leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2018/10/28/king-power-stadium-incident-five-believed-dead


I beleive the passenger was also a pilot. (https://leics.police.uk/news-appeals/news/2018/10/28/king-power-stadium-incident-five-believed-dead)

And they were partners as mentioned in the press below. Eric was also an examiner was well as a pilot.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7601124/leicester-city-helicopter-crash-owner-vichai-srivaddhanaprabha-dead/

[dibdab]

Eric Swaffer was a respected Jet and Heli pilot and Izabela Lechowicz was a Pilot and instructor if any one has BBC contacts please can they get them to show the respect a fellow aviator deserves not to be listed as a passenger. Of course the BBC dont allow comments on some of their posts. Sad day for business aviation when it loses two professionals at work....

[gulliBell]

In one of the pictures of the wreck...one of the tail rotor blades can be seen and it is in one piece and not bent. From this one could assume no collision with a fixed object and not under power when it hit the ground.

So may be a failure in the transmission...

Not a failure of the transmission as such, but a sudden failure to transmit power to the TR for whatever reason i.e. a disconnect somewhere in the drive train. A disconnect can happen for any number of various reasons. There are of course a few other possible causes for loss of direction control.

I'm curious why the take-off procedure commenced from the middle of the pitch, leaving usable take-off path behind the aircraft (not-withstanding backing up slightly during the initial ascent).

[anchorhold]

Dibdab, the way I read it, this flight it was single crew, making the person in the left hand seat not part of the operating crew, if she was I might have concerns. The fact she is an accomplished fixed wing pilot in her own right has no bearing on this flight, if she is not part of the crew component she is listed as PAX, hence that is the way the police will have listed her.

[mickjoebill]

if any one has BBC contacts please can they get them to show the respect a fellow aviator ....
It is possible to make contact with all of the large news organisations. Ask for the “news desk” If quizzed by the operator about the nature of the call, simply say you have a news tip regarding the X incident. Dont be ratty as they will be under pressure.Far more productive than posting here. I would go as far as to say that if you are highly experienced on type, calling them immediately after an accident to offer your expertise is likely to improve the quality of reporting and so help the aviation community. Perhaps there is a role for an aviation related association to be a go to? In the early stages joiurnos need to fill column inches, it is just as easy to fill with educational facts than speculation.

[mickjoebill]

Aircraft was pictured lying on its left side immediately after the accident.
The left rear sliding door?? is pictured removed and no obvious effects of smoke or direct flame contact.

Are the rear doors jettesonable?

I’m speculating, was the door removed in the accident phase (by either passengers or through impact), or in the fire fighting/rescue phase.

Spare a thought for those two policemen who attempted a rescue.

Mjb

[gulliBell]

...But if this was indeed an anti-torque failure, this particular situation would not only require great skill, but also a huge amount of luck to manage successfully...

Agreed. If the helicopter is rapidly spinning the pilot no longer has any meaningful directional control with cyclic. You pretty much just arrive at the scene of the accident. All the pilot can do is with the collective control, lower to preserve NR until impact is imminent and then full pull at the bottom, and shutting down the engines at some point before then.

[WHBM]

Dibdab, the way I read it, this flight it was single crew, making the person in the left hand seat not part of the operating crew, if she was I might have concerns. The fact she is an accomplished fixed wing pilot in her own right has no bearing on this flight, if she is not part of the crew component she is listed as PAX, hence that is the way the police will have listed her.
The emphasis in the BBC news report on "Passenger" in notable, not used for the other occupants. I wonder if this term came from the AAIB, as I have encountered them emphasising "Passenger" in another situation.

Was she in uniform ? The Sun newspaper has a photo of the two of them together in a flight deck in uniform.

[John Eacott]

I've had a loss of TR at night in a (very) high hover in a twin, single pilot: it is survivable with quick reactions and a set of spread crosstubes. I'm unable to find the confirmation of wind direction to sustain the comments about a downwind component to the take off, can anyone verify this please? If that is the case then could there be a LTRE involved when leaving the stadium?

To the earlier comments about back up departures, these have been common for well over 40 years and were part of some operators' SOPs in the North Sea back in the 70s. One well known S61N operator even had that departure as a requirement from the Shetland main runway!

For those unaware of the safety criteria for such a departure it is to ensure the return to the departure point in the event of a rejected T/O before TDP, after which sufficient height is available to transition into Vtoss and climb away. Comments about the stadium being not suitable/unusual/etc would be those not exposed to the full range of helicopter operations throughout their flying careers.

[gulliBell]

..Comments about the stadium being not suitable/unusual/etc would be those not exposed to the full range of helicopter operations throughout their flying careers.

JE, on this rare occasion I don't agree with you on that point. If this had become a routine on-going operation I think there was something broken in the approvals process that permitted it. Take a car ride instead - 5/10/15/20 minutes or whatever by road - and meet the helicopter somewhere other than inside the confines of a public event at a stadium.

[gulliBell]

...It seems to me that the combination of a sudden onset downwind exposure followed by a spiralling, out of control descent is perhaps more likely to be relevant than the highly unlikely coincidence of a t/r failure just at that critical point. This followed by a rapid dump of the collective in an attempt to recover Nr would fit with an eyewitness reporting a gear-crunching noise (I paraphrase) - perhaps blade stall - followed by relative silence as pitch is reduced.


Rapid dump of collective is entirely consistent pilot response to sudden TR drive failure, primarily to reduce rate of rotation and not so much to preserve NR (when the TR drive lets go shifts all the power availability to the MR and none to the TR).
Gear crunching noise has nothing to do with blade stall and (more likely) everything to do with a broken TR drive shaft flailing around or a TRGB or IGB grinding itself to pieces.
Relative silence not because pitch is reduced, more likely because of pilot actioned engine shut down following TR drive failure.
I do agree however that the wind direction may be a critical factor in what happened here, and struggle with the thought that sudden TR drive failure happened at the worst possible moment.

[Sikpilot]

Can someone confirm if this was a single pilot flight or was the girlfriend a rated copilot. I would think a rated copilot would be required and have their hands on the throttles for this kind of takeoff to insure that there would be an immediate reduction of the throttles in case of a TRF.

[mercuray]

The chances of meeting this same helicopter,as in a crash, if one had elected to go by car, must be next to Zero ! I am no expert on Rotary Ops,but I was just surrounded by a few that are and they are in agreement that this will likely uncover serious shortcomings and that many malfunctions could have been dealt with if this departure was operated from a pad that ticked all of the boxes. On 1 Caveat that it will not turn out to be "Catostrophic Failure. Even then,I am sure that this particular Operation will be terminated in the future. Not sure when a helicopter last crashed on to a car on the road system.( when it has lots of Altitude to its advantage). I vaguely knew one of the casualties that died in the helicopter that crashed DOWN in London some years ago ! Rotary Flying surely must also have the IMMEDIATE departure and arrival CONE as the point of maximum danger and risk ? As a non-expert,I need to be convinced that the same result would have occured if this helicopter had lifted from a wide open space,as opposed to the bottom of a bucket ! ( Not my Invention of terminology). Sorry,but that is the area/phase that bothers me and those who have now gone home ! Anyway,I will follow it with interest...

[gulliBell]

...I would think a rated copilot would be required and have their hands on the throttles for this kind of takeoff to insure that there would be an immediate reduction of the throttles in case of a TRF.

Definitely not.

[meleagertoo]

gullibell

I don't disagree with your statement #136 but I really wonder how much time anyone has in such an event to think of shutting down the engines - let alone actually doing it. The whole event took scant seconds, there just isn't enough time to do these things, surely? Anyway the infinitessimal statistical chance of a t/r failure occurring at that critical moment is so vanishinglky unlikely that we should really be thinking of more prosaic reasons for the accident.

I restate lhe possibility of LTRE as we know they transitioned up onto a fairly strong tailwind tht possiblt struck suddenly with all the ramifications that includes. This is surely vastly more likely to be the cause of an accident than an exceptionally unlikely yet co-incidental tail rotor failure?

What does scare me is the possibiity - indeed the likelyhood that this accident will do to helo ops what Shorerham did to airshows and vintage jet displays as the CAA is cowed by self-imposed paranoia and meeja pressure to "Do Something".
The levels of ignorant, unnformed and plain vindictive misinformatuon about helicopters being bandied about on news sites and the interweb
is breathtaking.
We should be very aware of this lest we live to regret just lying down and taking it in the future.

I ask again, AW169 experienced pilots please tell us about t/r authority in a significant tailwind.

[John Eacott]

JE, on this rare occasion I don't agree with you on that point. If this had become a routine on-going operation I think there was something broken in the approvals process that permitted it. Take a car ride instead - 5/10/15/20 minutes or whatever by road - and meet the helicopter somewhere other than inside the confines of a public event at a stadium.

Fair call if it was a full (or partially full) stadium, but photos and videos seem to indicate that the helicopter movement(s) were out of an empty ground? Even the car parks outside seem devoid of crowds, but I accept that regular ops can instill a degree of complacency to risk management. There is a fine balance to be made, and where would be considered a suitable alternative without a long drive for the owner of the machine? Many, if not most, wealthy owners buy their helicopters for convenience and time savings; introducing car transfers can soon reduce the convenience factor and the appeal of a private helicopter.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Actually relative silence could be very telling. The TR produces a huge amount of the noise of a helicopter. If it stops that noise goes, often followed by the engines as the pilot stops them. I had a drive failure 23 years ago, the lack of TR noise was even noticeable inside the aircraft and oddly the remaining part of the ride much smoother without all the vibration from the back end. Mine was a drive shaft failure close to the main box so we were spared the sound of the shaft flailing.

Also had had a loss of TR authority on short final to a congested area, class one caused by a teleflex problem. The recovery aged me a lot, it was a very aggressive manoeuvre at low level, back to a run on at an airfield. But as soon as I realised I had a little control I knew it was workable so long as I remembered the training.

Last night’s pilot was an instructor and examiner and very talented aviator, if such a pilot crashes then the rest of us will really struggle.

In the sim, expecting things to go wrong a failure in the cruise can be hard work, effectively in the transition a lot of things are going to happen very fast, with good training and skill luck is still going to play a big part.

Waiting for pax today a colleague and I saw a drone shot from this morning in which all 3 TR blades appeared attached and from the angle of the shot undamaged.

SND

[Horace Blok]

Thankfully, the169 is fitted with FDR / CVR. Hope they're intact.

[gulliBell]

..I don't disagree with your statement #136 but I really wonder how much time anyone has in such an event to think of shutting down the engines - let alone actually doing it. The whole event took scant seconds, there just isn't enough time to do these things, surely? Anyway the infinitessimal statistical chance of a t/r failure occurring at that critical moment is so vanishinglky unlikely that we should really be thinking of more prosaic reasons for the accident...

TR drive failure leaves you in absolute no doubt what malfunction you are dealing with, and the required response to that comes with training and practice and should be instinctive, and needs virtually no amount of thinking. There is always time to lower the collective as the first step. Height determines what time you have available to shut down the engines. It doesn't take long to shut down 2 engines, just need to rotate 2 switches i.e. just a few seconds. Height is also the key factor in the outcome. If you have height and your auto-rotations are OK you're in with a fighting chance. If you don't have height the outcome becomes less pilot skill dependent, you're just going to arrive at the scene of the accident very quickly without many choices in the matter. And yes, you might not have time to shut down the engines (the reason you must shut down the engines is to prevent rapid spinning immediately prior to ground contact when collective application is required to reduce rate of descent).

A sudden loss of TR drive without prior indications is exceedingly rare, I only know of one previous instance (B412 in Gulf of Mexico, it rolled inverted but the crew had height to do something about it, and nothing at the bottom to crash into except open water).

The flip side is a loss of directional control caused by something other than a TR control/drive problem which is mis-diagnosed as a TR drive malfunction (this happened in China recently). Unlikely in this instance given the experience of the pilot.

Actually we really don't need to think about any reasons for the accident at this point. Anything we might say is just speculation.

[SASless]

Actually we really don't need to think about any reasons for the accident at this point. Anything we might say is just speculation.

That generalization does not take into account pprune precedent re such matters.

[gulliBell]

..In the sim, expecting things to go wrong a failure in the cruise can be hard work, effectively in the transition a lot of things are going to happen very fast, with good training and skill luck is still going to play a big part.


Yes, that's right. The most difficult part is that initial transition and MR speed control. Practice is required, and the only place you can do that is the simulator. Attempting to simulate it in flight doesn't come remotely close to what the real malfunction would look like.

[Sikpilot]

Definitely not.

Can you please expand on that? Is it not a good idea to have a set of hands on the throttles for that maneuver? Was a pax in the other front seat or was a helicopter rated pilot in the other front seat? I can't see why a complex twin like that would not have 2 highly trained pilots flying, especially in and out of a highly visible confined area, at night with VIP's.

[gulliBell]

Can you please expand on that? Is it not a good idea to have a set of hands on the throttles for that maneuver? Was a pax in the other front seat or was a helicopter rated pilot in the other front seat? I can't see why a complex twin like that would not have 2 highly trained pilots flying, especially in and out of a highly visible confined area, at night with VIP's.

There is no malfunction in a helicopter that requires an immediate shutdown of an engine, so having a set of hands on an engine control during a flight maneuver is pointless. Whether the crew comprises one or 2 pilots is equally a RFM and regulatory matter. If either requires it, it's required. If only one pilot is required it then becomes the choice of the operator or client whether a 2nd pilot is carried. Having a 2nd pilot on board when a 2nd pilot is not required is extra weight which is unhelpful if you are performance limited. Having a crew of 2 pilots at night is operationally sensible...but I'd rather have the performance to zoom out of a tight spot rather than the extra weight of a 2nd pilot. Tell the boss he has to drive somewhere else and have the helicopter meet him there, rather then struggle out of a confined area...even if you could zoom out of a confined area OEI at night I'd be inclined to suggest the boss to take that drive.

In this instance, my guess, having a 2nd pilot onboard would have had little bearing on the outcome.

[Nescafe]

The crew of the 139 that lost the TRGB on/just after rotation in Hong Kong managed to recognise the problem, get the engines off and successfully ditch. Not impossible for a well trained and coordinated crew, but fortune favoured them with a clear if somewhat wet area to touch down .
Here’s hoping to never finding out how well I’d do.

[Old Farang]

I know that I should not bother, but people have lost their lives in this accident and still there are idiots that write crap like the following:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6326849/Was-doomed-helicopter-stuck-dead-mans-curve.html
He may have been caught in a 'dead man's curve' - a dangerous situation even for experienced pilots
A dead man's curve is when the aircraft flies too slowly and at too low an altitude to shut down the engines

[ROTOR BLAST]

The AW169 has no throttles. It has dual channel FADEC control per engine and no manual reversion switches on the collective.

[ReverseFlight]

Sorry to digress a little in this thread.

Reminds me of an accident in 2005 which can been seen on Youtube - search under "Helicopter Crash at Stadium a Bell 206 Twin Ranger Chopper Crashes in Bullfighting Ring Madrid Spain".

[tartare]

I may have missed it in earlier posts - but have there been any comments as to what the wind was like around the stadium at the time?

[malabo]

Experienced pilot experienced with the mission, modern helicopter with all the latest technology. Occam's Razor (that good monk from Surrey) would suggest nothing mechanical "failed". The backup profile is related to PC1 and only addresses an engine failure (statistically insignificant) but nevertheless an airline industry mantra for regulators to focus on. And in itself it isn't harmful if you have bags of power and unless you back into something. A statistician might argue that the extended exposure and resultant velocity in the wrong direction negates any possible benefit of maintaining a reject area in view, but the Jim Lyons of the world have already beat this one to death. Likewise a tail rotor failing in a modern aircraft is statistically not a factor. I don't know the tailwind limitations of a 169, but design criteria is usually 30 knots, and the same pilot was just in and coming back out, so no unknowns there. I've flown out of stadiums, they are large, well-lit, and with good references, my idea of low risk. The AAIB does excellent work and will methodically arrive at a cause in good time - it is unfortunate that they still get so many accidents like this to investigate.

[tartare]

Yep - very puzzling accident.
Clearly a highly experienced pilot apparently operating to SOPs - LTRE wouldn't seem to be a factor.
An almost brand new and very sophisticated machine - that one would assume was impeccably maintained.
Could there have been some sort of one off assembly or manufacturing fault that caused a catastrophic drive shaft or gearbox failure?
But then you'd think there'd be multiple independent checks of components at time of assembly?
Very strange...

[atakacs]

I don't have anything to add on this sad accident itself (I agree that it is somewhat baffling at this stage - but I'm sure this very modern aircraft was equipped with all sorts of recorders that will yield useful input to the investigation) but, not living in the UK, I muss confess that I am surprised that this sort of operation would be allowed on what seems to be regular basis.
Is it really possible to get authorisation to land your helicopter pretty much wherever you want ? I would have thought that one would need to use designated helipads ?
I am not implying anything here - just curious about what the regulations are.

[BigEndBob]

North and north easterly winds here in the Midlands so lifting out with a tailwind crosswind across the top of the stadium?
And what are those metal triangle structures above the stadium, could they have struck tail rotor on one of those?
The tail rotor looks relatively intact, barely spinning on ground contact, but the tips have caught something.

[anchorhold]

We know that P1 was a FI(H) but there are questions to be asked about the role of the occupancy of the pax in the left hand seat?

(a) As all ready mentioned was she in a pilot's uniform, if so why?
(b) Under public transport operations would the collective and control column not be removed from the left hand side?
(c) Was this in anyway an instructional flight, to which the owner was not aware?
(d) Why would this flight not be operated at all times to public transport standards and with a two man (person) crew?

In respect of bigendbob, the possibility of lifting out from the stadium in still air and transitioning into a tailwind really does raise the possibility of the aircraft striking the roof structure. No doubt engineers will inspect this soon and give us a better idea of what happened.

[silverelise]

Can someone confirm if this was a single pilot flight or was the girlfriend a rated copilot. I would think a rated copilot would be required and have their hands on the throttles for this kind of takeoff to insure that there would be an immediate reduction of the throttles in case of a TRF.

Izabela Lechowicz was a fixed wing pilot (Gulfstream 450/550) not a rotary. I think the media are jumping on the fact that she was a pilot and assuming she was a co pilot on this flight.

[mickjoebill]

From the bystander videos, the flood-lit compound is a walk-though on match days, linking the main car park with the staff car park. It appears that there were no cars parked there.
The portable flood light was on and remains beside the wreckage.

The compound is a split level of approx 2 feet, with a low wall separating the two levels.
The tail rotor with gearbox separated and is on the upper level, a few feet to the right of the tail which appears to have impacted the low wall.

The video shows the two policemen did their best with a 1.5Kg extinguisher and bare hands, god bless them.

The compound appears to be the clearest spot for some distance, it is surrounded by occupied car parks, a treed reserve, and industrial buildings.

Mjb

[MATELO]

Just a quick ask for info following something a witness said.

If the main rotor failed, could it stop straight away?? & would t/r put the helicopter in a spin if that was still working??

thanks.

[BigEndBob]

East Mids nearest to Leicester.

EGNX 272120Z 34011KT 9999 BKN025 04/00 Q1019=
EGNX 272050Z 35012KT 9999 BKN024 04/M00 Q1018=
EGNX 272020Z 34011KT 9999 BKN025 04/M01 Q1018=
EGNX 271950Z 35011KT 9999 BKN025 04/M00 Q1018=
EGNX 271920Z 34011KT 9999 BKN026 04/M00 Q1018=
EGNX 271850Z 36008KT 320V040 9999 BKN028 05/00 Q1018=

Cold evening so just a few hundred feet up wind could be 20 kts plus.

[HarryMann]

Here we go again in the press... Hero pilot steers helicopter away from crowds/city/hotel/school
"Witnesses said...."

[BigEndBob]

An Army parachutist told me they hated doing display jumps into stadiums because of wind shear.

[tartare]

Here we go again in the press... Hero pilot steers helicopter away from crowds/city/hotel/school
"Witnesses said...."

Well in this case it appears he might have.

[BigEndBob]

Would be interesting if the club has a model of the stadium, then the AAIB could put it in a wind tunnel and see the effects of wind shear across the top of the stadium.

[Davef68]

North and north easterly winds here in the Midlands so lifting out with a tailwind crosswind across the top of the stadium?
And what are those metal triangle structures above the stadium, could they have struck tail rotor on one of those?
.

The triangles are the cantilever supports for the roof - means a clear sightline for spectators

[gulliBell]

..If the main rotor failed, could it stop straight away?? & would t/r put the helicopter in a spin if that was still working??

1. You mean, can the main rotor stop/seize in flight? Yes, and if it does the main rotor head with blades attached will shear off and fly away to wherever they end up. So in this instance not applicable.
2. Yes. For example, TR servo fail to full extension/retraction will cause it to spin one way or the other (very unlikely however, the other servo would probably need to have an undetected internal leak as well).

[EESDL]

Irrespective of the cause I imagine there are many pilots contemplating why oh why billionaires and/or their staff accept pseudo 2-crew ops?
I have to admit that several years ago I sat ‘in the left’ to give the impression of 2 pilot ops for a corporate job - but atleast I was an ATPL(H), PIC on similar sized machine and it was a day VFR.
Not for one minute am I saying that the end result would have been any different if it was operated by a qualified ‘crew’ but why would the flight not have been operated as such - for all sorts of reasons?
Are we (the industry) our own worst enemy?
I also hasten to add that this ‘practice’ is not just restricted to rotary as a recent biz-jet ‘overun’ Incident in US has highlighted

[Barcli]

Irrespective of the cause I imagine there are many pilots contemplating why oh why billionaires and/or their staff accept pseudo 2-crew ops?
I have to admit that several years ago I sat ‘in the left’ to give the impression of 2 pilot ops for a corporate job - but atleast I was an ATPL(H), PIC on similar sized machine and it was a day VFR.
Not for one minute am I saying that the end result would have been any different if it was operated by a qualified ‘crew’ but why would the flight not have been operated as such - for all sorts of reasons?
Are we (the industry) our own worst enemy?
I also hasten to add that this ‘practice’ is not just restricted to rotary as a recent biz-jet ‘overun’ Incident in US has highlighted



Its been going on for years , although I believe now stopped in the airline world - Loganair Twin Otters around Scotland had " Pilots assistant" for years. The KingAir 200 was another in the VIP world. I have flown 2 crew in a Navajo PA31 because the customer insisted on it ( The other "pilot" was a passenger). there are lots of examples.

[Reely340]

Firstly I'm merely a recreational S300C Pilot, who only once could experience a Cat-A takeoff demonstration during someone's EC135 rating renewal. (of course during daylight, at an airfiled)
I can't help but challenge the departure. I would have recommended/conducted
a) a vertical towering take off at the farthest possible place of the stadium so that the "Cat-A emergency path in front of me" would be as long as possible,
b) and of course from a position where the vertical takeoff would render the AC in headwind, once above stadium height..
Reasons:
Climbing vertically, the necessary amount of attitude change to "emergency nose down" is less than when being in the nose up "climb backwards portion" of a CAT-A dep.
Being at the farthest possible downwind position at takeoff would give me the longes possible headwind emergency escape.

Pls point out any errors in my "suggested" stadium takeoff.

[JerryG]

I have some points to throw into the pot. I don't mean to imply they have any relevance to this accident but are perhaps useful while everyone is thinking TR. Many years ago I lost drive to the TR in an A109 Mk1. I was in the cruise at 5,000' when it went. Here are the things I learned …

Although I instantly and without a doubt knew what it was, I found it hard to shake off (I'm talking fractions of a second here) the parallel conviction that I had somehow caused it and that there might be an action I could take that would reverse it. It ultimately turned out to be a crystalline fracture that originated during manufacture, so that obviously wasn't the case.
I'd been filming at low level and low speed all day over the Isle of Skye but fate (good fate) dictated that it sheared in forward flight; when the big fin of the 109 would have put the TR at minimum stress.
My usually appalling memory speeded up to a level it's never operated at before or since. In a handful of seconds I recalled, processed and prioritised literally every piece of paper and conversation I'd ever been exposed to about tail rotors. If you'd asked me to recall most of them ten minutes earlier I couldn't have done it. It's all buried in there somewhere!
I had the luxury of experimenting with this new flying machine for over 25 minutes during my descending transit to Teeside airport for a running landing. During that time I realised I was going to run out of hands at the critical moment. I therefore had to train my left seat passenger, a film producer, to shut down the engines from the overhead panel when I called for it. Thankfully he was a good learner as there was no way I could have taken my left hand off the collective at that moment.
Final tip - the speed at which the nose swung through the runway heading when the throttles were chopped defied belief. I had allocated 10 feet as the chop height, in reality left it until 5 feet, and still only just had time to get it down onto the tarmac before it had swung too far to avoid a roll-over.


In the end, if I'm honest, there was an awful lot of luck involved.

[Reely340]

Another thing that amazes me while reading the posts in this thread are the numerous suggestions the a/c ended up in tailwind once it cleared the stadium walls.
These clearly can only be wrong speculations. Would one consider any takeoff, being towering or Cat-A, that has the a/c end up in tailwind after the climb, gross neglect?
Given the crew's reputation I can't imagine any condition, that would have them choose a climb into tailwind, or am I just a PPL(H) missing something?

[gulliBell]

Well in this case it appears he might have.

I'd like to think so, but the reality of sudden TR drive failure at 200' with high power and low airspeed, and at night, the world outside starts spinning at such a rate that you can't comprehend what's outside, and you have no sensible directional control of the helicopter, and no amount of conscious effort will head you where you might wish to go. You just arrive at the scene of the accident wherever the course of events takes you. Even the most skilled pilot almost becomes a passenger. The best you can hope for is to drop the collective to the floor, shut off the engines, apply collective when ground contact is imminent, and do your best to keep it upright with cyclic. You most certainly will not be able to steer it in any direction of choice if it is spinning all the way down. If you have height and speed in your favor then you have more options.

[BigEndBob]

One would assume it would spin downwind, as looks in this case.
Or would point of failure cause a resonance or bias as it pitches up and down.

[gulliBell]

..I can't imagine any condition, that would have them choose a climb into tailwind...

You'd only do it with a tail wind if you had a significant power margin, and the direction of take-off afforded you the lowest obstacle that needed to be cleared. And even then, I'd be doing it into wind (and in any event the RFM prohibits the Ground Level Back-up Take Procedure with a tail wind component).

[FlightlessParrot]

Is there any reason that there has been no official confirmation of who was on board?

The police do not normally report the names of fatalities until next of kin have been informed. For this to happen, there needs to be positive identification. Press reports say that the fire took 20 minutes to put out. In these circumstances, identification would have been challenging.
RIP

[gulliBell]

...For this to happen, there needs to be positive identification...


Not really. The passenger manifest is sufficient. Positive identification in all likelihood wouldn't have happened yet.

[gulliBell]

- hitting an obstacle on departure (main rotor or tail rotor)


To my untrained eye that TR looks like it's whacked something whilst under power.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/429x326/screen_shot_2018_10_29_at_17_32_26_ad0fd4d14ab4d9e5d542b67f9 cf30448c27acda7.png

[Dawdler]

There has been some comment on the decision to take off from a inside the stadium. Two things strike me. This has been standard practice for this flight for many years, so I would imagine most scenarios would have been considered. Secondly operating in confined spaces would appear to be part of standard training for helicopter pilots. Near where I was working a few years ago, there was a copse with a small clearing in the middle. Regularly we would see helicopter training flights drop into the clearing and manoeuvre inside. There wasn't much room and occasionally we would hear twigs being broken... So I imagine that a pilot of the experience involved in this flight would have had the competence required to conduct the take off. Further it appears that as reported earlier in this thread that the video which has attracted much comment was not filmed on the night of the accident.

[SASless]

The usual suspects are making statements of certainty already.....as is their habit...despite knowing nothing of what caused the accident.

Would you rocking chair experts give it a rest and at least have the courtesy to stipulate that you are working off pure fantasy.

Perhaps ya'll might just put a sock in it until some real facts are provided where by you might begin to have a reasonable basis for your conjecture.

Yes....this is pprune but even that does not excuse some of the posts being. made.

[Reely340]

There has been some comment on the decision to take off from a inside the stadium. Two things strike me. This has been standard practice for this flight for many years, so I would imagine most scenarios would have been considered. Secondly operating in confined spaces would appear to be part of standard training for helicopter pilots. Near where I was working a few years ago, there was a copse with a small clearing in the middle. Regularly we would see helicopter training flights drop into the clearing and manoeuvre inside. There wasn't much room and occasionally we would hear twigs being broken... So I imagine that a pilot of the experience involved in this flight would have had the competence required to conduct the take off. Further it appears that as reported earlier in this thread that the video which has attracted much comment was not filmed on the night of the accident.All true.
At my prof.check in 2017 the FI had me land in a clearing in the woods and do a towering takeoff.
Of course it was the size of two tennis courts as he's the owner of the ATO and the helos, so he positively does not want me whack any twigs.

The video just proves that there were departures done from the stadium as vertical takeoffs as well as Cat-A departures. What is missing is
- actual takeoff position and type done that night
- reliable information about wind right above/around the stadium,
- the information flow (phone,hand signals, word-of-mouth, online internet-lookup of rooft-top stadium weather station, close by ATC, whatever) of wind parameters to the crew
hence the enormous amount of specualtion. But thats what PPRuNe is designed for, right?
Those who only want "official" facts should resort to the AAIB website.

[ShyTorque]

Not really. The passenger manifest is sufficient. Positive identification in all likelihood wouldn't have happened yet.

There was unlikely to have been a requirement for a passenger manifest.

[OvertHawk]

Not really. The passenger manifest is sufficient. Positive identification in all likelihood wouldn't have happened yet.

Do you really for one second imagine that there was a pax manifest for that flight? Private VVIP transfer involving no international element? I'd be utterly stunned if there was any kind of manifest. There might be a trail of emails before the flight with the proposed pax list but as to who actually turns up and gets on? It can be anybody's guess. Just shove em in and go.

I'm not saying it's right but I am saying that it's the way it is for the vast majority of private / corporate helicopter flights in UK.

[staplefordheli]

In
reply to those questioning , nothing unusual in the flight from the KP happens nearly every home game
As a regular supporter myself the chairman is often in and out the stadium and nearby Belvoir drive training ground surrounded by houses and structures

We have also had for the remembrance game Griffins landing with the match ball and taking off in a packed stadium
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7RLg9iIXNk

One thing no one has mentioned is the huge number of swans and geese that overfly the whole area being right next to the river Soar and nature reserves. I am sure AAIB will already have a fairly good idea if this was the case as the flight envelope is in a very compact area to South East corner covered by decent CCTV around the ground and scores of nearby buildings. If there was a TR collision with a structure on the stadium (the support pillars are not that high above the roof line and there are no lighting towers and the national grid lines are well away from where it was operating at the front North and west of the stadium or object in the air although the fact the AAIB press conf due for 0900 is now over 3 hrs late sounds like something in the initial brief is being still worked on or cleared for release As some have brought up, there are drones up during and after the games but I would have expected them to be grounded while the helicopter is operating Again AAIB will already know if it was a drone. After the Clutha tragedy though, nothing is going to be a quick answer


UPDATE AAIB progress link just released https://www.gov.uk/government/news/update-on-leicester-helicopter-accident-g-vskp

[737James]

I was at the game on Saturday and confirm two facts the Police Drone was in action but was down a long time before the helicopter arrived, Wind conditions were good from what i remember and the footage on this thread is old footage as the club now has large video screens at each end of the pitch which are not in these videos.

On match days the owner flies into another location and is then driven to the ground but unsure where the Helicopter waits not sure if it goes to Leicester airport and then goes into the stadium once the area has been cleared. The arrival and departure was delayed on Saturday as there was some crowd trouble after the game.

From the aerial footage that has been released I firmly believe that there was no strike with a fixed object as no area is cordoned off for the AAIB and a number of witness have confirmed that it cleared the top of the stadium with ease.

[SASless]

Empty 412.....no shortage of power there is there?

[anchorhold]

OvertHawk... Are you saying that for this flight a flight plan would not be filled?

[pilot_tolip]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/update-on-leicester-helicopter-accident-g-vskp

Update on Leicester helicopter accident (G-VSKP)

On Saturday night, an accident involving an AW169 helicopter at King Power Stadium, Leicester, was reported to us.

Published 29 October 2018
From:
Air Accidents Investigation Branch
A team of AAIB inspectors and support staff travelled to Leicester on Saturday night, with further inspectors travelling yesterday morning. Last night, the police said they believe that tragically all five people on board the aircraft died in the accident.

We have inspectors here from all four air accident investigation disciplines: engineering, operations, flight data and human factors.

We recovered the digital flight data recorder (voice and data) on Sunday afternoon and one of our inspectors travelled back to Farnborough with the recorder the same evening. Today, our inspectors in Farnborough will start working on the recorder, which was subject to intense heat as a result of the post-accident fire.

Our inspectors are continuing to work with the police on site. We expect to be here until the end of the week, at which point we will transport the wreckage to our specialist facilities in Farnborough for more detailed examination. In the meantime, we are still gathering evidence as part of our investigation.

Witnesses to the accident, particularly with videos or photographs, are urged to contact Leicestershire Police on 101, quoting incident number 546 of 27 October 2019.

[gulliBell]

Do you really for one second imagine that there was a pax manifest for that flight?.

Not a contemporaneous one, but one derived from resources after the event. Point being, no way would positive identification have occurred so soon after the accident (given the post accident fire, nature of the likely injuries, access to dental records, etc).

[OvertHawk]

OvertHawk... Are you saying that for this flight a flight plan would not be filled?

No - that's not what I'm saying at all (I don't know whether a FP was or was not filed). But a flight plan is not a passenger manifest. A flight plan has numbers on board but not names.

[meleagertoo]

Another thing that amazes me while reading the posts in this thread are the numerous suggestions the a/c ended up in tailwind once it cleared the stadium walls.
These clearly can only be wrong speculations. Would one consider any takeoff, being towering or Cat-A, that has the a/c end up in tailwind after the climb, gross neglect?
Given the crew's reputation I can't imagine any condition, that would have them choose a climb into tailwind, or am I just a PPL(H) missing something?
Why do you assert these are wrong speculations when the METARS published above and all met info available shows hte area subject to a moderate breeze from the NW?
I agree it seems unlikely anyone would perform this transition knowingly with a 20Kt tailwind so the implication is that it the pilot mistook or misunderstood the wind strength above the stadium or else judged it sufficiently slight to be acceptable.
It is also worth noting that a departure to the SE takes place over somewhat more open and considerably less residential areas and doesn't involve a noisy 180' turn over the city itself. A considerate pilot would quite likely factor that into his departure plan too.

I'd still like to hear type-familiar pilots' comments on t/r effectiveness in downwind high power situations.

[Genghis the Engineer]

It would be unusual to file a flight plan for a short distance trip of this nature, VFR and staying within the UK. If there was a planned IFR leg, or it was going outside of the UK mainland, more likely. But, as Overt says, it doesn't give names (quite often the Captain's name and mobile number is appended, but that's not a legal requirement).

If something was going outside of Great Britain (note the term) then a GAR form is required, and that does list passenger names

G

[GrayHorizonsHeli]

with the numerous witness accounts that it was spinning, i would tend to believe these accounts at this point.
as for noises, perception is always variable depending on the person and location etc.

With the clear photo showing TR Blade damage, it would indicate the obvious. It hit something at some point.
Should the impact have been the initial start of this scenario it would appear the damage wasn't severe enough to lose blades, however, it could have been sufficient enough to lose its drive.
I dont know how robust the 169 TR drive is, but other accident/incident aircraft I have seen had sheered drive keys, sheared coupling rivets, twisted shafts and complete flex coupling failures.

Without a doubt, the investigators will focus on this damage being at the beginning of the incident, or at the end of it. Either scenario is possible at this point.

[Squadgy]

We know that P1 was a FI(H) but there are questions to be asked about the role of the occupancy of the pax in the left hand seat?



Was the ‘pax’ in the left hand seat ? What side does the P1 normally sit in an Aw169 ?

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1242x845/b92504ca_03a5_4d21_ad49_cd0bb2a129e5_dba8697e26f2326464a0635 b9972b5a6a4d64e93.jpeg

[Dawdler]

Normally P1-RHS

[aox]

To my untrained eye that TR looks like it's whacked something whilst under power.

It's touching the ground.

The investigators will determine what it hit (another object; the ground) and when.

[dmba]

To my untrained eye that TR looks like it's whacked something whilst under power.




The ground?

[GrayHorizonsHeli]

not necessarily the ground.
I know it's a poor picture under magnification, but there's no dirt, grass or other ground debris embedded into the damage area.

it sustained enough damage that it was turning with sufficient inertia when it struck an object. One witness account i believe said the rotor wasn't turning, so if that is true, then the impact was early on in the incident.

[Torquetalk]

Firstly I'm merely a recreational S300C Pilot, who only once could experience a Cat-A takeoff demonstration during someone's EC135 rating renewal. (of course during daylight, at an airfiled)
I can't help but challenge the departure. I would have recommended/conducted
a) a vertical towering take off at the farthest possible place of the stadium so that the "Cat-A emergency path in front of me" would be as long as possible,
b) and of course from a position where the vertical takeoff would render the AC in headwind, once above stadium height..
Reasons:
Climbing vertically, the necessary amount of attitude change to "emergency nose down" is less than when being in the nose up "climb backwards portion" of a CAT-A dep.

A towering take-off is not a CAT A profile. You wouldn’t normally do one in a ME helicopter unless there was an issue with power available, in which case, you might be asking what went wrong at the planning stage. If you were power limited and used a towering take-off, you would clearly run out of acceleration from ground effect before being able to safely gain forward airspeed in that environment. If you had the power to climb out, there is no advantage of that profile over a steady vertical climb at a weight and power setting allowing you to climb OGE.

The biggest risk of choosing a far end departure would be of losing situational awareness and hitting the roof of the stadium with a part of the aircraft you cannot see. The lateral and vertical references are not close in so there is a considerable risk of drift. The pilot of the incident aircraft had the pitch markings for lateral reference (and probably cockpit indication of drift too). He would also have been able to control the angle of his departure from these reference on the ground. If you are already well back and drift backwards unwittingly during the take-off, the distance to the obstacles behind and above would be further reduced increasing the obstacle collision risk. Objectively, this is probably the biggest risk during such a departure. One other consideration is that the AW169 would have been able to conduct a controlled rejected take-off in the event of power loss and do this with less distance required than an S300.

[aox]

not necessarily the ground.
I know it's a poor picture under magnification, but there's no dirt, grass or other ground debris embedded into the damage area.

it sustained enough damage that it was turning with sufficient inertia when it struck an object. One witness account i believe said the rotor wasn't turning, so if that is true, then the impact was early on in the incident.
Jesus wept, why are so many people trying to play amateur detective?

The ground it is on appears to be flat concrete, perhaps half derelict for a while, with pieces of broken concrete and some plant matter (such as might grow up through joints in old concrete) nearby.

But I'd distrust even that cursory look at one picture and it may turn out to be quite flat compacted soil.

Any impact can produce witness marks on both items, such as scratches in the rotor which may match scrapes on the other object, with paint fragments left on one or both objects.

I say again, leave it to the professional investigators, with access to far better evidence than a telephoto lens picture, video from a different day, fourth rate guesses based on third hand rumour of what some unidentified person may have said, miscellaneous other stuff.

​​​​​​

[Helisweet]

Hi,

looks something like this tail rotor strike, but on takeoff:

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

Stadium lights can blind pilots during take off maneouver. Those white posts are not iluminated and very high.

Tail boom catastrofic failure like the ones in AW139 would be really scary but improbable due to manufacturer experience.

[Aifreeman]

Thats it. Climbing out of floodlit daylight to darkness, he probably couldn't see anything, especially as they approach the ground.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

AOX. its a rumour network! Rumours are OK...……..apparently!

[Reely340]

A towering take-off is a SE profile. You wouldn’t normally do one in a ME helicopter unless there was an issue with power available, in which case, you might be asking what went wrong at the planning stage. If you were power limited and used a towering take-off, you would clearly run out of acceleration from ground effect before being able to safely gain forward airspeed in that environment. If you had the power to climb out, there is no advantage of that profile over a steady vertical climb at a weight and power setting allowing you to climb OGE. Onyl partly understood. In both towering and Cat-A, you are at nil or negative horizontal speed and need to pick up forward speed to try and flare.
I merely suggested the towering (vertical) takeoff to reduce risk of drift at night, (which definitely is an issue with Cat-A backwards climb).
I must admit I don't know the crosssection of such a stadium:
when the inner roof tips are arched far inwards then climbing in any other location than smack dab in the middle of the stadium would be asking for building contact, I can see that.

The biggest risk of choosing a far end departure would be of losing situational awareness and hitting the roof of the stadium with a part of the aircraft you cannot see. The lateral and vertical references are not close in so there is a considerable risk of drift. The pilot of the incident aircraft had the pitch markings for lateral reference (and probably cockpit indication of drift too). He would also have been able to control the angle of his departure from these reference on the ground. If you are already well back and drift backwards unwittingly during the take-off, the distance to the obstacles behind and above would be further reduced increasing the obstacle collision risk. Objectively, this is probably the biggest risk during such a departure. One other consideration is that the AW169 would have been able to conduct a controlled rejected take-off in the event of power loss and do this with less distance required than an S300.

My take is that climbing vertically or Cat-A style for whatever reason into a tailwind location nils TR failue recovery.
With the TR "gone", MR torque and tailwind will do to the airframe whatever they see fit, nullifying any Cat-A dep. "recovery options".
That is if there are any "recovery" options at all for "serious TR loss at the end of a Cat-A climb in confined locations", I doubt that, any takers?

So taking one step back, I'd say this accident is a case of "vanity killed the cat", considering that right outside his stadium there are plenty of better, not confined takeoff spots.
Given that fact that even the PPRuNe pros here have confirmed that in this kind of scenario a serious TR failure is next to impolssible to recover, and comparing alternatives right outside the stadium one can't help but wonder why this kind of showing-off departure got green lighted in the first place.

[Cabby]

How many AW169's are operating in the UK?
Have any AW169 operators received an AD from Augusta Westland relating to checking the TR or transmission drive train since the crash?

A brief search of previous AW169 AD's didn't bring up much with it being a new type. Nothing related to the TR or drive train that I could see?
The second AD AD 2018 -0197 was published on the 5th Sept 2018, and relates to the Emergency Exit Windows.

B/E Aerospace Fischer GmbH Attendant Seats and Pilot (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgad.nsf/AOCADSearch/6A998F21A4EDA6BB862582EB004B0858?OpenDocument)

https://services.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/ROTOR/AW169/2017-0255.pdf

https://services.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/ROTOR/AW169/2018-0197.pdf

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-09-13/pdf/2018-19736.pdf

[Torquetalk]

Very little is known about this accident so I am not going to engage with your speculation about variables which may or may not have contributed. But you did ask a question about the profile, which I chose to answer. For what it is worth I will also rise to the bait on your comment that a take-off inside the stadium was influenced by vanity rather than good decision-making:

The stadium was a well-lit, large, controlled environment with a flat, well- prepared surface. Got a lot going for it over the options outside the stadium I would say.

[aox]

AOX. its a rumour network! Rumours are OK...……..apparently!
Well, the rumour about tall floodlight towers has been shown to be false, as the lights are in the front edge of the stand roof, as already mentioned here yesterday, and as seen on video of takeoff, yet now someone is suggesting it again.

The much speculated tail rotor has been anything between failed and already stationary while still in the air, or damaged by hitting the ground while still turning.

The hero pilot has been fighting the controls until the last moment, avoiding hitting the huge crowds, despite that the takeoff is about an hour after the end of the match, by which time most of them are at home, in the pub, or a few miles away by car ...

Proper accident diagnosis doesn't involve rumour.
​

[Reely340]

The stadium was a well-lit, large, controlled environment with a flat, well- prepared surface. Got a lot going for it over the options outside the stadium I would say.
So staistically speaking at night a stadium departure IS the better choice compared to the "parking lot" outside, understood.

[Captivep]

The Daily Mail has just published this, apparently new, CCTV footage (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6329635/Dramatic-CCTV-captures-moment-Leicester-owners-helicopter-crash.html#v-5191905337251873927):

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6329635/Dramatic-CCTV-captures-moment-Leicester-owners-helicopter-crash.html

[asdf1234]

Onyl partly understood. In both towering and Cat-A, you are at nil or negative horizontal speed and need to pick up forward speed to try and flare.
I merely suggested the towering (vertical) takeoff to reduce risk of drift at night, (which definitely is an issue with Cat-A backwards climb).
I must admit I don't know the crosssection of such a stadium:
when the inner roof tips are arched far inwards then climbing in any other location than smack dab in the middle of the stadium would be asking for building contact, I can see that.



My take is that climbing vertically or Cat-A style for whatever reason into a tailwind location nils TR failue recovery.
With the TR "gone", MR torque and tailwind will do to the airframe whatever they see fit, nullifying any Cat-A dep. "recovery options".
That is if there are any "recovery" options at all for "serious TR loss at the end of a Cat-A climb in confined locations", I doubt that, any takers?

So taking one step back, I'd say this accident is a case of "vanity killed the cat", considering that right outside his stadium there are plenty of better, not confined takeoff spots.
Given that fact that even the PPRuNe pros here have confirmed that in this kind of scenario a serious TR failure is next to impolssible to recover, and comparing alternatives right outside the stadium one can't help but wonder why this kind of showing-off departure got green lighted in the first place.

We have to assume the operator of the helicopter had previously undertaken a detailed risk assessment of the landing/take-off site and had concluded that a CAT A rearwards climb out was an appropriate manoeuvre for the helicopter, payload and weather conditions. Equally we must assume that the operator communicated all of this to the pilot on the day and that the pilot had current knowledge of the operator's SOPs for this site. I note the AAIB have dispatched 4 teams to the site, one of which is the Operations Team so this aspect will be thoroughly investigated. Until we know otherwise it seems reasonable to assume that the pilot was operating in accordance with the limitations set out in the operator's SOP's for this site and that those SOP's were put together after rigorous risk assessment and analysis.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Well done the Daily Mail, the preceding advert was at least in bad taste.

It certanly shows a normal back up, then loses sight of the machine before it reappears out of control.

I’d recommend caution before viewing. It is not nice.

SND

[bbrown1664]

Well done the Daily Mail, the preceding advert was at least in bad taste.

It certanly shows a normal back up, then loses sight of the machine before it reappears out of control.

I’d recommend caution before viewing. It is not nice.

SND

It also appears that the aircraft was on fire before it hit the ground
Having watched the video again following replies below, I would agree, it looks like the aircraft lights.

[aox]

It also appears that the aircraft was on fire before it hit the ground
I didn't assume that.

It's bright from other background lighting as it climbs, and about the same descending. There's a much brighter flicker, but this could be a forward facing landing light lining up with the camera for an instant. Think of a lighthouse on the coast, and watch again.

[Dawdler]

I didn't assume that.

It's bright from other background lighting as it climbs, and about the same descending. There's a much brighter flicker, but this could be a forward facing landing light lining up with the camera for an instant. Think of a lighthouse on the coast, and watch again.

It also appears that the aircraft didn't come into contact with the stadium roof.

[skadi]

It also appears that the aircraft was on fire before it hit the ground

I would suggest it's the landing light.

I think the theory of a tailwind influence could also been ruled out , as the helicopter seems to be on a normal climbout way above the arena.

skadi

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Looks like something went catastrophically wrong close to TDP.
At least it seems to prove the Pilot did not hit the Stadium on the way back.
Sobering video as a lot of us do this technique everyday, in one form or another.

[mickjoebill]

It also appears that the aircraft was on fire before it hit the ground

Caution.
Landing and nav lights can appear this way on cctv cameras in low light mode.

The large light flare is accompanied by a seperate and distinct flare on the tail.

mjb

[ShyTorque]

OvertHawk... Are you saying that for this flight a flight plan would not be filled?

There is no requirement to file a flight plan for this type of flight.

[birmingham]

To my untrained eye that TR looks like it's whacked something whilst under power.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/429x326/screen_shot_2018_10_29_at_17_32_26_ad0fd4d14ab4d9e5d542b67f9 cf30448c27acda7.png
Well I agree it has definitely hit something and it does look like it has been sheared off.

But that on its own doesn't help. The picture alone can't explain if the damage was; a potential cause of the accident, or simply caused by the accident. The impact with the ground will also have been very violent and it could for example have been sheered off by the main rotor blades.

For the picture to be meaningful we need to know when it happened and what it hit.

The AAIB will be able to determine the correct sequence of events as there will be traces of whatever it hit on both the rotor and external objects.

[FlightSpanner]

Also studying the picture I keep asking why the TGB is orientated to the bottom of the aircraft, you can even see one blade bent over what is either the stab or a small wall / lip. I guess this could have happened on impact but worse is that it came detached in flight, perhaps the blade damage could have been an impact with the H-stab?

[dingo9]

The footage has steered me away from the tailwind theory I must admit. As rare as they are it does look like a TR failure I must admit. Hopefully there will be an early initial report especially if the CVFDR is sound.

[EESDL]

As for the discussion re departure from stadiums v Carpark etc -
The risk assessment and sop for this regular site will be in the operators’ Part NCC Ops Manual.
Personally, if I had the performance I’d opt for large secure lit stadium rather than a crisp-packet strewn car park anytime

[Bell_ringer]

I didn't assume that.

It's bright from other background lighting as it climbs, and about the same descending. There's a much brighter flicker, but this could be a forward facing landing light lining up with the camera for an instant. Think of a lighthouse on the coast, and watch again.

The camera footage is in night mode (infrared).
That's not easy to watch, something catastrophic happened out of frame, unlikely anyone would have survived that impact.

[737James]

I have today spoken to a friend who is a freelance cameraman for BT sport who although did witness the collision with the ground did not pay that much notice to the helicopter lifting off as such a regular thing at Leicester games. But he does clearly remember a noise before it went out of control which he described as a grinding noise like when you try and put a car into reverse while driving along he has confirmed that BT do have more footage of it lifting out of the stadium which has been passed to the Police

[NRDK]

Very tragic result, which I fear the AAIB will find several areas of concern. Unless Leonardo have a different CAT A confined area profile from the AW139, then he was in between that profile and a back-up profile(something that would not have worked going out of that stadium.

Stadium top obstacles? Wind direction? Why the gear up before VTOSS? At a crucial stage of flight the Pilot selected gear up(collective hand used) If he didn’t select the gear up, then a non-rated ‘passenger’ in the left seat, reach across the center console to make the selection? Swiss cheese model.... plus bad luck. Damned bad luck.

[GrayHorizonsHeli]

Jesus wept, why are so many people trying to play amateur detective?

The ground it is on appears to be flat concrete, perhaps half derelict for a while, with pieces of broken concrete and some plant matter (such as might grow up through joints in old concrete) nearby.

But I'd distrust even that cursory look at one picture and it may turn out to be quite flat compacted soil.

Any impact can produce witness marks on both items, such as scratches in the rotor which may match scrapes on the other object, with paint fragments left on one or both objects.

I say again, leave it to the professional investigators, with access to far better evidence than a telephoto lens picture, video from a different day, fourth rate guesses based on third hand rumour of what some unidentified person may have said, miscellaneous other stuff.

​​​​​​
since you quoted me, I'll offer up my personal experience that I have been involved in many component inspections that have been in accidents. I'm not some bloke guessing here. I've seen plenty of damaged parts in my career. I have been involved in some accident investigations because of my experience, those investigators ask questions because they dont have the answer. My experience and other like me, have helped them find their answers. So while you might lump me into the category of amateur detective, I have a bit more experience than that.
I know the limitations of what a picture can offer, but I see in that picture evidence that offers alot of information to the possible cause, and alot for post incident.

[Arcal76]

He was into the wind...Look at the flags on the video......
And beside that, nobody does a Cat A take-off tailwind, it is head wind, crosswind with a head wind component....
You can climb to 400ft like that.....the confined area is 100ft to 400 ft TDP....
And it is a stadium, do you need something bigger when you have a huge flat surface with all reference you need to land?????
All those PPruners who can already determine everything.....
Painful !

[rotorgoat]

If it is indeed a TR failure, does it beg the question on new FADEC types, the need for a crash handle to cut the engines to give you half a chance? Centrifugal forces trying to unguard those tiny switches? Sad day!

[Bell_ringer]

If it is indeed a TR failure, does it beg the question on new FADEC types, the need for a crash handle to cut the engines to give you half a chance? Centrifugal forces trying to unguard those tiny switches? Sad day!

At that altitude and low forward speed, what chance do you have chopping the throttle?

[John Eacott]

If it is indeed a TR failure, does it beg the question on new FADEC types, the need for a crash handle to cut the engines to give you half a chance? Centrifugal forces trying to unguard those tiny switches? Sad day!



Lower the collective; that reduces power and torque (the tail rotor is an anti-torque rotor, remember?) without ‘cutting the engines’.

I’ll also step in and comment on the building concept that a vast soccer stadium is somehow a ‘confined area’; I don’t agree. It has plenty of visual clues, is a massive open space and is in no way a confined area: that’s a small clearing surrounded by high obstacles, usually 3-4 rotor diameters or less.

Departure profiles are i.a.w. the manufacturer profiles as published, not made up on the spot. Second guessing by some here is not helpful to the understanding of what happened when they foster a false belief to visitors and press who reference Rotorheads whenever there is a serious accident such as this.

[stormin norman]

I agree with previous posts on the reverse departure .I would be looking for tail rotor strike marks on the stadium structure.

[ethicalconundrum]

I've formed some theories on this too, but more important to me is a step back at a larger picture in terms of avoidance. My flight-time was in the armed forces. I never flew in combat, or anything close to it. All training sorties, and some general ferrying of people here and there, with the obvious check-rides. Much later in life, I taught a course in business ethics at the undergrad level. I found that what it came down to was what I term 'situational ethics'. Applying some of the means-test to this flight and crash, I'd like to bring up a couple of things surrounding the decision-making of the flight in question.

1. What profiles I would fly during training, and check-ride would be far more discrete and cautious than the profile I would choose in a combat situation(would the mission likely fail if the profile were not flown?). In the case of this flight, I would want to know the pressure for completing this flight from the pilots perspective concerning his job, and his continued position. i.e. if he should decide the profile is not suitable for the mission what would happen to him for rejecting the flight profile?
2. If this profile were an established recurring run, and they had not had any issues previous, was the profile the best-case to complete the mission?
3. What cost-benefit would there be to an alternate landing site, and what customer impact would that have?
4. Knowing the risk of the low/slow regime of flight that helicopter pilots typically minimize, the greater exposure here would the pilot have done more prior to the flight approach to accept or reject based on; day/night, wind, visibility, weight, time to alternate. Maybe some other critical path decisions that I'm not familiar with on this ship, relating to how it handles the unusual(or normal, if that is the case) flight regimes.

These are the things that everyone who pulls pitch would probably consider, but the most important to me would be the perceived, or potential pressure to complete the flight, given the risks that are present, and the alternatives available. One of the tests I was given on a check ride was the choice to drop materiel right on the defensible position and NOT pick up casualties, or to fly another 250-300 meters, and land in a suitable(but still tight) LZ, offload smartly, and pick up what I could to get out of harm's way. It was one of the tests which got me thinking along the lines of alternatives, and the risks, which seem to be increasing, or might have been rationalized along the way as the flight profile was done repeatedly. If the previous 6 or 8 or 15 flights had been made with this profile successfully, there is every reason to believe that this one would work out. However, it is no guarantee that the next profile would proceed much better in terms of escape actions, should the feces hit the rotational air moving device, at the worst possible time(backward flight, OGE, non-translation speed, paying pax, night, wind, etc). I will say with no illusions that based on what I've read here, and seen on the few videos, this profile gives me the willies. I don't like having the willies with a stick between my legs, and my feet on the pedals.

[63000 Triple Zilch]

I posted on here several months ago as I had lost friends in the Grand Canyon accident where an incident would have been survivable had the helicopter not turned into a fireball on impact. On the face of it this seems another accident where the fatalities are caused, not by the impact but the subsequent fireball! Did this helicopter have a self sealing fuel system installed? Would it have been a survivable accident if it had not turned into an inferno immediately on impact? How many more people have to be lost before EASA insists that it is retro fitted? This seems to be a known issue that is not being addressed. I cannot believe that if this was a problem on fixed wing pax carrying a/c it would have been addressed by now. The Manchester B737 disaster caused a rethink on all aspects of A/C susceptibility to fire issues. I would hope that this might cause a rethink over mandating self sealing fuel systems on ALL helicopters.

[malabo]

Anything from Leonardo yet, statement, inspection or AD? Is the type grounded in the EU or UK? Any labor union passengers, or the seemingly at risk “wealthy class”, refusing to fly in it?

[jayteeto]

Jeez, there's some real guff being posted on here by so called 'experts'. The flight manual gives you a handful of profiles that will work in pretty much all normal situations and the pilot flies them, as he appeared to do CORRECTLY on the video (only an guess). He doesn't make it up as he goes along because it isn't a check ride FFS. The EC135 has a modified profile that fits a stadium type departure perfectly, I guess the 169 does as well.
It's a single pilot aircraft, so the copilot is a red herring on all your wacky theories. Those pilots who DO THIS JOB understand the reason that single pilot aircraft have copilots that are non type rated. It's common practice in the industry when customers request a 2nd crew member in the front.
Lowering the lever pretty much removes the torque, but engines down is a big bonus.
The fact is that this helicopter had a critical failure at the worst possible moment; I would hazard a guess that HEMS pilots, Corporate pilots Offshore pilots, or any pilots! would struggle to get away with this one. I for one would not fancy my chances. Remember the Sully Hudson River incident?? It could be done, but the startle effect would work against you.
Sometimes life just deals you a sh*t hand and even the best can fail to pull it off

[asdf1234]

You need to look at the video again. The helicopter dropped out of the sky from somewhere between 300ft and 400ft agl . The subsequent fire had nothing to do with the survivability of the crew and passengers.

[jymil]

I seem to remember a few AW139 tail rotor issues early in it's life?
Yes, but in those accidents, the tail was completely severed, which wasn't the case here.

[henra]

The footage has steered me away from the tailwind theory I must admit. As rare as they are it does look like a TR failure I must admit. Hopefully there will be an early initial report especially if the CVFDR is sound.

Does neither look like it hit something on climbout nor does it look like a tailwind hitting when leaving the 'Bowl' caused it.
What I find a bit strange is that it didn't seem to start accelerating into a forward direction even after being already quite high above the stadium. It seems to have come down several seconds later relatively close to where it left the picture of the CCTV.

[henra]

On the face of it this seems another accident where the fatalities are caused, not by the impact but the subsequent fireball! Did this helicopter have a self sealing fuel system installed? .
Did you watch the CCTV???
Survivable???
At that RoD?
No way.

[Misformonkey]

Does neither look like it hit something on climbout nor does it look like a tailwind hitting when leaving the 'Bowl' caused it.
What I find a bit strange is that it didn't seem to start accelerating into a forward direction even after being already quite high above the stadium. It seems to have come down several seconds later relatively close to where it left the picture of the CCTV.
you can see it starts to transition into fwd flight and moves out of picture before coming back into frame for an instant but appears to be rotating at that point. Would the pilot attempted to selected engine condition levers/switches to ground idle or off with the collective still pretty high? The ROD just seemed really high, possible low NR?

I’ve seen relatively minimal damage to TRBs which completely severed a TRDS so I’d be surprised if it made contact with the stadium and continued the climb.

[gulliBell]

..Would it have been a survivable accident if it had not turned into an inferno immediately on impact?..



I don't think so. Look at the sink rate. Impact with the ground at that vertical speed is probably not survivable, even in a helicopter with impeccable crash-worthy design.

Looking at the CCTV video the helicopter had ample climb performance coming out of the stadium, there did not appear to be any downwind, there appeared to be ample clearance from obstacles, the helicopter disappears out of view and then reappears, spinning to the right, nose pitched down, and dropping like a stone. That is sudden TR drive failure at high power setting, probably with the collective full down after the failure. The pilot wasn't steering that thing away from anything, absolutely impossible at that rate of rotation. Probably not enough time to shut down the engines before impact, or even find/reach the switch to do it.

[KNIEVEL77]

I don't think so. Look at the sink rate. Impact with the ground at that vertical speed is probably not survivable, even in a helicopter with impeccable crash-worthy design.

Looking at the CCTV video the helicopter had ample climb performance coming out of the stadium, there did not appear to be any downwind, there appeared to be ample clearance from obstacles, the helicopter disappears out of view and then reappears, spinning to the right, nose pitched down, and dropping like a stone. That is sudden TR drive failure at high power setting, probably with the collective full down after the failure. The pilot wasn't steering that thing away from anything, absolutely impossible at that rate of rotation. Probably not enough time to shut down the engines before impact, or even find/reach the switch to do it.

I totally agree. I know the area well and I believe it was sheer luck that the helicopter ended up on the only piece of ground not occupied by cars, buildings or persons.

[nimby]

If it is indeed a TR failure, does it beg the question on new FADEC types, the need for a crash handle to cut the engines to give you half a chance? Centrifugal forces trying to unguard those tiny switches? Sad day!
Good point, but how do you detect it reliably and without false positives? Lowering the collective is always going to be first on the to-do list.

[sycamore]

Is there any requirement to have a fire service vehicle nearby when landing in a confined public place...?

[Cabby]

I believe this a/c was only a couple of years old. Which firm carried out the maintenance on it in the UK?

https://farm9.static.flickr.com/8865/28236767072_221b26e9f3_b.jpg

G-VKSP
Aircraft Data G-VSKP, 2016 AgustaWestland AW-169 C/N 69018 (http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/G-VSKP.html)

[Cabby]

Could be one of 3 maintenance organisations in the UK.
https://www.businessairnews.com/hb_aircraftpage.html?recnum=AW169

[Old Boeing Driver]

Would this aircraft have had video as well as voice recording?

[What-ho Squiffy!]

From the CCTV vision, at or shortly after TDP, the helicopter dipped nose down and spun to the right, and entered into a high rate of descent. It's clear what the helicopter did, but there could be a few causes, like main or tail rotor control malfunction/hardover, physical failure of the tail rotor or drive, MGB failure, engine(s) failed resulting in a MR overpitch and loss of control, pilot incapacitation and consequent control loss due excessive inputs or (least likely) deliberate inputs from the pilot to crash. Crew responses to all these possibilities are different - suffice to say that when this machine malfunctioned there was no hope of recovery or steering in any direction as it descended at a very high rate to the ground. Appears the TR stayed with the helicopter until impact - unlikely it "fell off", even though the response of the machine is identical to what would happen if the the tail fell off.

Root cause is unknown - made worse by the fact that this is a near-new modern helicopter - and this will be watched carefully by all operators of Leonardo products world wide. This will be a much anticipated investigation, and one I sincerely hope is conclusive. Vale Khun Vichai and all POB.

[OnePerRev]

From the CCTV vision, at or shortly after TDP, the helicopter dipped nose down and spun to the right, and entered into a high rate of descent. It's clear what the helicopter did, but there could be a few causes,...

Maybe just my eyes on a grainy CCTV video, but it is not so clear to me that it turned right. Looks to me like it was yawing to the left before impact. Yes, we are speculating, and investigators will do their work.. Since this machine has a CCW main rotor as viewed from above, then tail thrust in hover provides a left yaw input. Most tail rotor are designed and rigged with "neutral bias" that provides some of this anti-torque, that would help in a loss of tail control (not loss of tail thrust), to enable a run-on landing. If control was lost, with drive still intact, then a reduction in main rotor collective would result in excessive "anti-torque", in this case left yaw. Too late to pull back power and collective perhaps. Such a crash would typically result in impact on the blades. In this case the top, blackened tail blade is sheared near the hub, the right one is damaged closer to the tip. Given all the information publicly received, it appears to me (my initial opinion/ speculation only) a Flight Control problem rather than a drive problem. Such issues can take time to sort out, particularly in full AFCS, where the data recorder may yield a related, but indirect, parameter of interest.

[gulliBell]

1. like main or tail rotor control malfunction/hardover,
2. physical failure of the tail rotor or drive,
3. MGB failure,
4. engine(s) failed resulting in a MR overpitch and loss of control,
5. pilot incapacitation and consequent control loss due excessive inputs or (least likely) deliberate inputs from the pilot to crash.
6. even though the response of the machine is identical to what would happen if the the tail fell off.


1. No. This is clearly loss of TR drive, not TR control.
2. Yes.
3. No (unless the TR drive output on the MGB failed).
4. No.
5. No. He's lowered the collective in response to the failure (you can see the rate of rotation decreasing slightly as it descends).
6. You're saying that if the tail fell off, with all that weight suddenly missing so far from the CofG, it would respond identically to if the tail just lost drive but didn't fall off?

[gulliBell]

..particularly in full AFCS...

Absolutely impossible for any AFCS malfunction to cause a helicopter to do that.

[What-ho Squiffy!]

1. No. This is clearly loss of TR drive, not TR control.
2. Yes.
3. No (unless the TR drive output on the MGB failed).
4. No.
5. No. He's lowered the collective in response to the failure (you can see the rate of rotation decreasing slightly as it descends).
6. You're saying that if the tail fell off, with all that weight suddenly missing so far from the CofG, it would respond identically to if the tail just lost drive but didn't fall off?
1. Clearly? I would like to know how you can tell the difference.
2. Perhaps.
3. That's what I am talking about.
4. You ever tried to fly a helicopter with no NR? NR & TGT = the staff of life.
5. "He's lowered the collective" has he?? If I was going to deliberately crash (NOT saying this is the case here, so stand down your pitchforks) , I'd dump the collective. So, no logic to your conclusion.
6. From what I saw, the helicopter pitched down and yawed. That's what happens when the tail falls off, so I can see how people have come to that conclusion.

[gulliBell]

1. Yeah sure, worst case TR control malfunction with the TR servo going full extension/retraction would likely not result in the high yaw rate seen on the CCTV.
4. Yeah sure, no NR and she falls out of the sky. But if you've hauled in full collective and sucked the NR out of the system (NR might go as low as 70% with both engines at topping??) the MR is still providing lift, and the TR is still providing some thrust, and you shouldn't get that high rate vertical descent, nor that very high yaw rate seen in the CCTV.
5. Yeah, I reckon....the power has been reduced evidenced by the initial high yaw rate reducing as it descends (the vertical fin is having more influence against the reduced engine TQ).
6. When you suddenly lose TR thrust the nose pitches down. The tail doesn't need to fall off for the nose to pitch down. This is the part many pilots have difficulty with in practicing this malfunction (The logic in my conclusion is I've done it hundreds of times). The instinctive reaction is for the pilot to lower collective and apply aft cyclic to counter the pitch down. This causes the NR to go off the scale, and I'm talking 130%+.

[rattle]

Question from a PPL(H). Would autopilot ever be engaged on this sort of departure? At the top of the reverse climb? If there's a malfunction, does the computer compensate? How quickly can you disengage? Would it be used to allow the night blindness to settle having climbed out of a bowl lit for TV cameras into a night sky? It doesn't look sadly as there was ANY time to do anything but still interested to know the procedure for such eventualities.