NYC helicopter crash 10th June 2019

[timmcat]

Twitter buzzing with reports of a helicopter crashing into a high rise building in NYC...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/10/helicopter-crashes-into-building-in-midtown-manhattan.html

[Old Boeing Driver]

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-helicopter-crash-midtown-20190610-yrgqgkqmvveibjhzqsqz3unezm-story.html

[SASless]

News of a helicopter having a hard landing and subsequent fire on top of a high rise building being reported.



https://www.foxnews.com/us/helicopter-crashes-into-building-in-new-york-city-fire-officials-say

[WillFlyForCheese]

Twitter buzzing with reports of a helicopter crashing into a high rise building in NYC...

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/10/helicopter-crashes-into-building-in-midtown-manhattan.html

A hard landing on top of a high-rise in NYC . . .

Hope all are okay.

[nomorehelosforme]

More news here, apparently one dead, accident happened on a 54 story building on 7th Ave, Midtown, Manhattan. Looks a bit more than hard landing judging by the smoke at the top of the building.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7125425/Plane-crashes-building-Midtown-Manhattan.html

[MPN11]

One of the 'talking heads' on CNN said they don't use rooftop helipads any more in NYC, so one assumes some tech reason for putting it down there.

One fatal reported.

[tottigol]

Scud runner, hit the building south of Central Park.
KLGA now calling 1/2SM RA FG OVC005 17/16
Top of building are in clouds.

[PastTense]

Only one person was aboard the aircraft when it crashed on the roof of 787 Seventh Avenue at 51st Street at 1:43 p.m, city officials said. That person was reported to have been killed, according to a senior city official.

A police official characterized the incident as a “hard landing.’’
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/nyregion/helicopter-crash-nyc.html

[GrayHorizonsHeli]

i heard that other helicopters werent flying because of the weather.
Cant wait to hear more about this and glad there werent many more casualties.


RIP to the pilot and condolences to his family

[Undertow]

This is claimed to be footage of the "helicopter flying erratically before the crash"

Edit: It's on twitter: For a repost of it by a journalist on twitter search "@MatthewKeysLive" as I can't post a link

https://twitter.com/CooperLawrence/status/1138151396996521984

[SansAnhedral]

CBS reporting A109E

[ShyTorque]

That appears to show what might be a recovery from loss of control in cloud. If so, why it went back into cloud again is inexplicable.

[MikeNYC]

Agusta 109, N200BK. Based at Linden/KLDJ.

[nomorehelosforme]

N200BK seen here and a brief FAA statement

https://www.helis.com/database/cn/30625/

[MikeNYC]

Photos from the rooftop of 787 7th Avenue
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1125x1371/img_6987_c615257a91d00ed28cc687ab9f4f3085a604022d.jpg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1125x1476/img_6986_a5703dcf41df9123eeeb0f60c2197bad10f1732f.jpg

[SASless]

Shy wins the "First to determine the cause of an accident" prize.

[ShyTorque]

Then again, I might be last.

[mickjoebill]

The Instagram account thingswendysees posted (and apparently shot) the previous linked video showing an aircraft diving.

There is also a second video showing a similar aircraft at low level, perhaps having just taken off and climbing into wind and cloud. I can’t determine the order in which the videos were shot.

The videos were posted at about the time the aircraft crashed at approx 13.43hrs



Mjb

[MikeNYC]

I was also sent an (unverified) track log showing a departure from E34th and maneuvers that would coincide with one of the videos posted. The log terminates possibly for lack of ADSB or MLAT coverage, but isn't the accident location.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/483x497/jlprjvwzly_1d2d51aa3e3d8a286b0381b5392e6ad80758e099.png

[gulliBell]

It wouldn't make sense to climb back up into IMC after a successful recovery from inadvertent IMC, particularly as it shouldn't have been difficult to remain clear of cloud and return to the point of departure. Maybe a technical malfunction with the aircraft resulting in compromised control authority? Even that one is hard to contemplate if there was no radio call to broadcast that fact. Pilot incapacitation is another possibility. Not much left of it to work out what might have gone wrong.

[PastTense]

After an early review of evidence, investigators believe that the pilot had been stuck on the ground at the 34th Street heliport along the East River because of poor weather, but saw an opening and headed for his base in New Jersey by traveling south along the river, according to a senior city official who was briefed on the preliminary findings but not authorized to discuss them publicly. At the time, the cloud ceiling was about 700 feet. Shortly after taking off, however, the pilot changed course, apparently intending to go back to the heliport. Instead, the helicopter rose into the clouds and flew at high speed into the roof of the Midtown building. The height of the roof was roughly the same as the cloud ceiling.

The pilot was not qualified to fly using only instruments, the official said, cautioning that the investigation was still at an early stage. There apparently were no radio communications between the pilot and any air traffic control towers in the vicinity, the official said...

The accident happened only 11 minutes after the helicopter took off from the heliport. The helicopter’s home base was an airport in Linden, N.J., where Paul Dudley, the airport manager, identified the pilot as Tim McCormack. He said Mr. McCormack worked for American Continental Properties, a real estate concern that said he had flown for the company for five years. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/nyregion/helicopter-crash-nyc.html

[Robbiee]

On ABC news they're saying the pilot was having some kind of problem and chose to set it down on top of the building to save lives on the ground, and people are calling him a hero and the greatest pilot ever!

Other reports talk about VFR into IMC and he simply crashed into the building because he was too low scuddrunning.

Never seen so much speculation so quickly before!

[mickjoebill]

The webtrack and the two instagram videos suggest three seperate, controlled climbs into cloudbase



Mjb

[EGMA]

Trying to stay legal instead of trying to stay alive?

[MajorLemond]

Awful news. I don’t know a lot about a109’s but is this type usually fitted with an autopilot?

[treadigraph]

Looking at Webtrak (https://webtrak.emsbk.com/panynj4), there is another erratic flight path in the same area for a couple of minutes before the one MikeNYC has kindly posted. At one point airspeed is shown with a minus figure. I wonder if the video was taken between the two segments?

Sorry, can't post a screen grab of it.

[Milo C]

Why the first thing that comes to my mind is this?
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422f5d7ed915d1374000581/3-2014_G-CRST.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi_sfr44-DiAhXOblAKHX1EBiEQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw0w5eWcav7SRYClHoq8ORVB (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422f5d7ed915d1374000581/3-2014_G-CRST.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi_sfr44-DiAhXOblAKHX1EBiEQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw0w5eWcav7SRYClHoq8ORVB)

Agusta A109E, G-CRST Near Vauxhall Bridge, Central London on 16 January 2013

[mickjoebill]

Looking at Webtrak (https://webtrak.emsbk.com/panynj4), there is another erratic flight path in the same area for a couple of minutes before the one MikeNYC has kindly posted. At one point airspeed is shown with a minus figure. I wonder if the video was taken between the two segments?

Sorry, can't post a screen grab of it.

There is a second video on the Instagram account.

Mjb

[treadigraph]

Sorry, missed a whole bunch of posts there. Should have had my morning coffee first.

[nomorehelosforme]

Additional information, pictures and most of the previously posted videos all here in one news report.

As mentioned by others I am at a loss as to why he flew back into the cloud having only just got out of it once, surely having seen the river the option would have been to head back to to the helicopter pad, or had he lost all sense of orientation at this point?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7125425/Plane-crashes-building-Midtown-Manhattan.html

[aa777888]

Perhaps the pilot was suffering from a sudden medical problem (e.g. stroke, etc.)? Because his actions certainly make no sense, and the helicopter appeared to be flying OK (leaving aside the dive out of the cloud which, guessing, was pilot induced). Scud running over the water to get where he was going would probably have worked just fine. But to launch over the city, through the TFR, etc?

[Sir Korsky]

Scud running over the water to get where he was going would probably have worked just fine. But to launch over the city, through the TFR, etc?

the pilot may have found a few bridges in the way

[SASless]

American Drive By Media at its best!

Please read the Weather Minima that CBS thinks is required for VFR......and remember New York is supposed to be the home of the best news reporting in the United States.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/helicopter-crash-nyc-pilot-tim-mccormack-was-not-certified-to-fly-bad-weather-2019-06-11/?fbclid=IwAR1v_kQxhvwElBRLgOice78gonur6ZYErQTSkozmAzup27d0qb 3gn6OnaMI


The rules require at least 3 miles of visibility and that the sky is clear of clouds for daytime flights. ​​​​​​​

[gulliBell]

I don't believe for a second there was any intention to land on that elevated roof top, whatever the deceased pilot's brother suggests in that CBS report. It's either arrived there because it was out of control, or the pilot didn't know it was there and flew in to it under control.

[B2N2]

FAA reports he had no Instrument rating.
Looks like he pushed his boundaries one too many times.

[mickjoebill]

Additional information, pictures and most of the previously posted videos all here in one news report.

As mentioned by others I am at a loss as to why he flew back into the cloud having only just got out of it once, surely having seen the river the option would have been to head back to to the helicopter pad, or had he lost all sense of orientation at this point?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7125425/Plane-crashes-building-Midtown-Manhattan.html

The flightpath in the graphic in this article is not verified and is at odds with the webtrack. The article does not mention or link to the second video on Instagram.

They can’t be bothered researching the exact time of crash so generalise it happed just before 2pm. ect ect


mjb

[SLFMS]

I don't believe for a second there was any intention to land on that elevated roof top, whatever the deceased pilot's brother suggests in that CBS report. It's either arrived there because it was out of control, or the pilot didn't know it was there and flew in to it under control.

gullibell I agree. Just a layman talking here but the impact looks suspiciously contained. Looking at the damage to the gangway on the building it looks a lot like what I'd imagine a vertical impact at great speed to be. Perhaps in an dive attitude similar to the recovery from the clouds shown in the video.
Weather may have changed from the accident time but roof top photos show top of the building clearly in the clouds. I'd be surprised if he could see the top of the building until the very last instance.

[nigelh]

Very strange as he was definitely Vfr after his dive and 700 ft is not exactly scud running ... must be more to it .

[gulliBell]

I'd like to know what the weather at intended destination was reported when contemplating departing his safely parked position whilst waiting for the weather to improve.

[dragon6172]

I'd like to know what the weather at intended destination was reported when contemplating departing his safely parked position whilst waiting for the weather to improve.
1335 local reported weather at Linden, NJ airport was 1.5 miles, 600 overcast with drizzle, wind calm.

[MikeNYC]

1335 local reported weather at Linden, NJ airport was 1.5 miles, 600 overcast with drizzle, wind calm.
I was on the ground at Linden airport all day Monday. There were almost no aircraft flying, and the WX was indeed miserable. Driving home from work over the Verrazano Bridge, I was entirely in fog and had trouble reading exit signs over the highway.

[gulliBell]

In that case, why launch from the safely parked position if the destination was 1.5/600 overcast with drizzle? Seems very odd.

[Robbiee]

In that case, why launch from the safely parked position if the destination was 1.5/600 overcast with drizzle? Seems very odd.

That my friend is the sixty-four thousand dollar queston!

[megan]

In that case, why launch from the safely parked position if the destination was 1.5/600 overcast with drizzle? Seems very odd.Gethomeitis?, casualties are many.

[chopjock]

It would appear he successfully dived to recover once so perhaps he thought he could get away with it again...

[212man]

It would appear he successfully dived to recover once so perhaps he thought he could get away with it again...

Pretty sure it was the other way around - he recovered from the dive (that would have been the result of loss of control in IMC)

[Scardy]

It would appear he successfully dived to recover once so perhaps he thought he could get away with it again...

Oh my goodness, although we will never know his decision making process to think one of getting away with again send chills down my spine. It must have been a terrifying realization he would not get away with it the second time. RIP

[nomorehelosforme]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/helicopter-pilot-who-crashed-nyc-skyscraper-shouldn-t-have-been-n1016041

[SASless]

Reading some of the posts here reminds me of an old Greek Proverb....."I should smell my hand and know what you are thinking!".

Not one of you are ever going to know what the poor guy was thinking......not ever.

Stick to noting facts....information that is un-ambiguous....and if you insist....offer an opinion on that.

I used to believe Aviators had analytical makeups.....but it appears the gene pool has been contaminated somehow.

Is that a byproduct of people learning to fly on Robinsons instead fo helicopters I wonder.


This folks is absolutely not how to represent our Industry:


Barbara Kaiser, an aviation expert with the training and safety firm Rotor World, said that a ban on nonemergency air traffic was a good way to keep pilots without proper training from causing “collateral damage.”

“It could have been a thousand times worse,” she said.

Look up this outfit and make use of their contact info to tell them what "You" think about her comment.

[aa777888]

Stick to noting facts....information that is un-ambiguous....and if you insist....offer an opinion on that.
We still don't know if this pilot had a medical problem (and might not ever, depending on the condition of the remains). It is hard to fathom how someone who passed a commercial pilot checkride and was operating a helicopter of that caliber could make such poor choices. It seems more likely such a pilot would happily scud run (probably legally, 1/2 mile and clear of clouds and all that, and tell me nobody here hasn't done that) and run into a sailboat mast than assertively climb into the mung, twice (at least).

Is that a byproduct of people learning to fly on Robinsons instead fo helicopters I wonder.
It's a legitimate point to consider but I wish you would present it in a less juvenile way. Regardless, I disagree. Indeed, it is generally the opposite, because you are taught to fly rather conservatively, with greater respect for weather, wind, turbulence, density altitude, and so on. Because you have to in a Robinson. On the other hand, from the sidelines (because I will be forever stuck in Robinson-land) I have seen some evidence that when folks transition into their first turbine gig they get a little drunk with power, so to speak, doing a lot of max. performance departures, etc., etc. There could be some feeling of invulnerability there given the vast difference in performance. While that might lead to certain types of bad outcomes, it should still not play into IMC related negligence.

This folks is absolutely not how to represent our Industry
Referring to Kaiser's statement: definitely agree with you on that!!! :ugh:

[gulliBell]

Look up this outfit and make use of their contact info to tell them what "You" think about her comment.

Maybe. But before saying too much, just check who she's married to. He's probably not a guy you wanna upset.

https://www.unionleader.com/news/health/retired-navy-seal-to-regain-footing-with-help-from-a/article_94343ebd-cf4d-53f5-b061-fd505b3c66ad.html

[gulliBell]

We still don't know if this pilot had a medical problem...

It's the only half-sensible explanation.

[SASless]

Gulli,

He is a remarkable fellow no doubt.

But if you know SEAL's you understand they know the value of critiques.

They also understand making sure the community looks after its image.

The American Helicopter Industry (as this tragedy occurred in the United States) has an image problem in general, the EMS industry for sure does

His Wife's comments, if quoted correctly (as I noted in my first post on this) certainly does. not help in promoting our Industry....does it?

I suggested to them she ensure she was correctly quoted by the media and take measures to correct them if they were relay correctly what she was trying to say.

Earlier in the Thread I pointed out how lame the American Media is...and posted the example of how shallow they are.

I wonder if her Hubby and I were in Mogadishu at the same time....I probably came after his time.

[Robbiee]

It's a legitimate point to consider but I wish you would present it in a less juvenile way. Regardless, I disagree. Indeed, it is generally the opposite, because you are taught to fly rather conservatively, with greater respect for weather, wind, turbulence, density altitude, and so on. Because you have to in a Robinson.

To use an accident involving a 109 to further the juvenille Robbophobia amongst the internet experts is just a testament to the true character of these types!


On the other hand, from the sidelines (because I will be forever stuck in Robinson-land) I have seen some evidence that when folks transition into their first turbine gig they get a little drunk with power, so to speak, doing a lot of max. performance departures, etc., etc. There could be some feeling of invulnerability there given the vast difference in performance. While that might lead to certain types of bad outcomes, it should still not play into IMC related negligence.


This was not my exerience when I climbed into my first turbine,...or second.

[nomorehelosforme]

Robbiee, you really do have a chip on your shoulder....get over it.

[CMFlieger]

That my friend is the sixty-four thousand dollar queston!
Could have been motivated by money. There is very little ramp space at any of the Heliports on Manhattan so they do not want you to park there. It is mainly a drop off and leave environment. I am told that the parking rate is $100 for every 15 minutes. He was already parked there for four hours.

Many things can lead people into making poor decisions.

[CMFlieger]

We still don't know if this pilot had a medical problem (and might not ever, depending on the condition of the remains). It is hard to fathom how someone who passed a commercial pilot checkride and was operating a helicopter of that caliber could make such poor choices. It seems more likely such a pilot would happily scud run (probably legally, 1/2 mile and clear of clouds and all that, and tell me nobody here hasn't done that) and run into a sailboat mast than assertively climb into the mung, twice (at least).

A review of his information on the FAA registry indicates that he had a special issuance medical. At his age that could be for a number of things but it is something to consider. The stress he was under could have triggered a medical event.

There was very little left of the helicopter. It was quite an inferno up there and there is very little left. The only recognizable thing is a small section of tail boom. I doubt they will be able to determine much from the remains. He was essentially cremated.

[malabo]

Is low level airspace (below 1300') departing E34th class G? I'm almost sure there are helicopter routing conventions published, anybody have them at hand? Seems easy enough with the weather reported and as seen in the videos for local experienced pilot to takeoff, follow the east river down, hopping over the bridges, past the Statue of Liberty, and around the south side of EWR to get into Linden. You guys can call it scud running, but most of the VFR world gets around that way, legal limit is 1/2 mile and clear of cloud, practically I like a little more with the obstructions around, and the conditions were well above that. And good luck trying to do the same thing IFR in NYC airspace, Linden only has an RNAV approach and the limits are higher than you'd need to "scud run" (love that expression, probably coined by Phoenix AZ pilots that once saw a cloud in the sky). Why the hell would he be climbing up into cloud and turning inland instead of following the river?

Hey SASless, I was in Mog in '94.

[SASless]

Hey SASless, I was in Mog in '94.

PM sent just now.

[RVDT]

If indeed he was heading to Linden - seems to be a strange direction to go.

Out of 34th down the East River over the bridges to the Verrazano and then South and up the river to Linden.

SkyVector (https://skyvector.com) has the NYC Heli charts for review.

[aa777888]

The TAC and heli charts can be had here in PDF format:

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/vfr/

I think he'd have to stay below 700AGL in the Special Flight Rules Area to stay in Class G and enjoy 1/2 mile-clear-of-clouds minimums. I'm sure someone with NYC experience (not me) will chime in.

[TurboArrowDriver]

MikeNYC -- please check your PM inbox for a request.

[Jack Carson]

A few years back I received a SPIFR qualification in the A-109E. At the time, the specific autopilot installed by Agusta had a limitation on the use of the take off/go around mode. Specifically, a placard limited the use to airspeeds greater than 120 KIAS. Attempted use at 70KIAS resulted in some very extreme attitude excursions. Has anyone one else experienced this?

[SLFMS]

I'm not sure the fact the aircraft was flown into cloud after flying out of it definitively shows a medical event. It may indicated this. It may also be that the pilot did not know how to fly appropriately in that situation or had used techniques like dives to regain visual reference in the past. As someone else mentioned maybe there were other personal stresses like losing a new job because of making an emergency landing on the water front or fear of regulatory restrictions or repercussions. Just because the pilot was flying an exec 109 does not mean that he would not make what may seem an irrational mistake.
Having no idea what the Pilots experience is I would not presume it was not medical or mechanical but you also can not ignore the fact that based off previous examples there is a reasonable chance it was inadvertent IMC. I mean no disrespect to the Pilot or his family and perhaps if I knew him and his background and experience I might be stating it was clearly medical too. It seems in this instance it would be good to keep an open mind until the accident report is released. Given the post accident fire I suspect the report will state that medical incapacitation could not be determined or ruled out.

Did anyone else see the article claiming the Pilot had radioed he was lost shortly before the impact? Could be poor or sensational reporting, also could be an actual leak.

[Kiwi500]

Yes Helimutt, I’m sure a lot of us agree. While many of us have had at least a few hundred in a Robbie, some may have a few ON a Robbie as they have stated. Possibly in the spare room on a second hand tailboom with a saddle on while looking in a mirror.....and reminiscing about how good our buddies told us we once were, in between prolific spells of posting that is. I’ve never owned a Robbie (other makes yes) but they are a helicopter. And for those not able to pursue the military route, a lot of skills were hopefully learnt that made them better drivers of bigger (and supposedly superior) machines.

[Robbiee]

Does it really matter what he trained in? I mean seriously, nobody goes from a Robby directly to a 109!

[Thud_and_Blunder]

I mean seriously, nobody goes from a Robby directly to a 109!

I had the privilege while working for my previous employer of training several pilots who came to us from their CPL(H) training on R22s, often in the States, to do their turbine, twin and IR training. In our case they flew EC135s, but a school at the same airfield offered precisely the same types of course on the A109.

Several of these students were every bit as good as the ex-Military, turbine-all-the-way candidates for whom we offered the last 2 of the courses I mentioned above. Notwithstanding the limitations of the Robinson family, what it CAN produce is pilots with an acute awareness of power limitations, the importance of RRPM control and a constant need to monitor the situation/plan for the worst. I've never flown the type myself, and don't wish to, but I acknowledge that it has been the choice of some very good pilots who will go on to be the future of our industry.

[Non-PC Plod]

Does it really matter what he trained in? I mean seriously, nobody goes from a Robby directly to a 109!


er....yes they do! Some pilots in training right now where I work having done exactly that. Some go from a R44 to Aw139 too!

[Robbiee]

er....yes they do! Some pilots in training right now where I work having done exactly that. Some go from a R44 to Aw139 too!

In what part of Narnia do you work?

[nomorehelosforme]

Please Ladies and Gentlemen,

This thread is based around a very serious incident, the cause of which willl probably never be proven and speculation will continue.

That aside maybe this this thread is not one that we would wish to drag any Robinson criticism into, weather it be the aircraft or training. Yes I and others have views, but I don’t think they are in anyway relevant on this thread .

[Robbiee]

I had the privilege while working for my previous employer of training several pilots who came to us from their CPL(H) training on R22s, often in the States, to do their turbine, twin and IR training. In our case they flew EC135s, but a school at the same airfield offered precisely the same types of course on the A109.

Several of these students were every bit as good as the ex-Military, turbine-all-the-way candidates for whom we offered the last 2 of the courses I mentioned above. Notwithstanding the limitations of the Robinson family, what it CAN produce is pilots with an acute awareness of power limitations, the importance of RRPM control and a constant need to monitor the situation/plan for the worst. I've never flown the type myself, and don't wish to, but I acknowledge that it has been the choice of some very good pilots who will go on to be the future of our industry.

I'm not knocking the quality of Robby trained pilots. Its just that here in the States a Robby guy is generally going to start his turbine career in something more like a Jet Ranger or Astar, before being let into something like a 109.

However, anyone can fly anything at a school, where they are paying to fly.

[Senior Pilot]

Why are some Rotorheads choosing to wreck this thread with such off topic posts?

Fair warning: time off for anyone continuing such rants.

[Non-PC Plod]

In what part of Narnia do you work?

You would be surprised. If a developing country thinks it should have a helicopter service, it rounds up a bunch of police/army/air force recruits, sends them to Florida to learn English/ get a CPL(H). Next stop - type rating course for the big shiny new machines at the factory.
It can be a bit stressful for the TRI who has got to get them to an acceptable level of competence in the hours allocated. (There may not always be a skill test as an independent check, because we are not talking about FAA or EASA here)

[Robbiee]

You would be surprised. If a developing country thinks it should have a helicopter service, it rounds up a bunch of police/army/air force recruits, sends them to Florida to learn English/ get a CPL(H). Next stop - type rating course for the big shiny new machines at the factory.
It can be a bit stressful for the TRI who has got to get them to an acceptable level of competence in the hours allocated. (There may not always be a skill test as an independent check, because we are not talking about FAA or EASA here)

Sometimes I forget that not everyone has regulations to deal with. Still, I'm sure this NYC pilot had some other models in between his initial training and that 109.

Sad thing is, we'll probably never know what really happened.

[MikeNYC]

Unverified but local rumor is that the aircraft was inverted at the time it impacted the building, and it was a high vertical speed impact.

[nomorehelosforme]

Unverified but local rumor is that the aircraft was inverted at the time it impacted the building, and it was a high vertical speed impact.

Similar to the first dive out of the clouds?

[MikeNYC]

Similar to the first dive out of the clouds?

The first dive out of the clouds (from one of the cell phone videos taken over the East River) appeared to show a steep descent angle, but not inverted. Supposedly the wreckage pattern on the roof indicates the aircraft was inverted, or at least impacted over 90 degrees from level.

[Airbubba]

NTSB Preliminary Report:

Location: New York, NY
Accident Number: ERA19FA191
Date & Time: 06/10/2019, 1340 EDT
Registration: N200B
Aircraft: Agusta A109
Injuries: 1 Fatal Flight
Conducted Under: Part 91: General Aviation - Executive/Corporate

On June 10, 2019, about 1340 eastern daylight time, an Agusta A109E helicopter, N200BK, was destroyed when it impacted the roof of a building in New York, New York. The commercial pilot was fatally injured. Day instrument meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the corporate flight, which was conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91. The flight departed from the East 34th street heliport (6N5), New York, New York, about 1330 and was destined for Linden Airport (LDJ), Linden, New Jersey.

On the morning of the accident, the pilot and a pilot-rated passenger departed the Bel-Aire heliport (NY46), Amenia, New York, about 1030. They stopped briefly at Hudson Valley Regional Airport (POU), Poughkeepsie, New York, for fuel, then flew to 6N5 and arrived about 1130. According to the pilot-rated passenger, the flight was uneventful.

According to personnel at Atlantic Aviation, the fixed-base-operator at 6N5, the pilot-rated passenger was at the controls as the helicopter landed. He departed the heliport by car, while the accident pilot remained at 6N5. The accident pilot waited in the lounge for about 2 hours. While there, he was continuously checking weather conditions using his tablet computer. Prior to departing, he mentioned to the staff that he saw a "twenty-minute window to make it out."

According to preliminary tracking data obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the helicopter departed 6N5 and initially few south over the East River, before changing course northward. About 5-7 minutes after departure, the pilot contacted Atlantic Aviation and made a request to return to the heliport. He was advised to land on pad No. 4. The pilot then radioed that he "did not know where he was." The helicopter flew erratically over the East River, changed course and altitude several times before making a 270° turn, which approached 6N5 from the west. About 500 ft west of 6N5, at an altitude of 600-700 ft mean sea level (msl), the helicopter reversed course, and flew erratically over Manhattan, before impacting a roof of the 54-story building at 787 7th Avenue. The last recorded position of the helicopter was about 0.1 nautical mile southeast of the building at an altitude of about 1,570 ft msl. The overall height of the building above the street was about 790 ft msl, with the roof section where the helicopter came to rest (below the exterior walls and catwalks surrounding the perimeter of the roof), at an altitude of about 765 ft msl.

A witness recorded video of a portion of the flight as the helicopter was flying in and out of clouds. The helicopter descended rapidly from the clouds in a nose down pitch attitude, appeared to initially transition to a level pitch attitude before climbing into the overcast cloud ceiling and out of view.

Examination of the wreckage on the rooftop revealed that all major components of the helicopter were present at the accident site and were confined to an area approximately 100 ft long and 20 ft wide, oriented on a heading of about 300° magnetic. Small pieces of debris were recovered from the 50th floor level and street level. The helicopter was severely fragmented and partially consumed by a post-impact fire. All four main rotor blades were fragmented. Remnants of two main rotor blades remained attached to the rotor hub, the other two blades were separated from the hub. All exhibited leading edge damage. The main rotor gearbox was impact damaged, partially fragmented, and could not be turned by hand. The tail rotor blades, hub, and gearbox remained largely intact. One tail rotor blade exhibited a leading-edge gouge, the other blade tip was fracture separated and exhibited thermal damage. The tail rotor driveshaft was fractured in several locations; an 8 ft section remained attached to the tail rotor gearbox. The tail rotor shaft and blades rotated freely when turned by hand. While most of the flight control components were identified, flight control continuity could not be determined due to impact damage and extreme fragmentation of the airframe. All three landing gear actuators were in the down position.

The left engine was broken into two sections at the reduction gearbox. The compressor impeller rotated freely by hand, several blades exhibited leading edge damage and several blade tips were bent in the direction opposite of rotation. The power turbine shaft was fractured, consistent with overload and exhibited twisting features and rotational scoring. The fuel management module was damaged, separated from the engine control gearbox, and its control was oriented in the "flight" position.

The right engine was mostly intact and exhibited thermal damage. The compressor impeller would not rotate; its blades exhibited leading edge damage and were not bent. Debris was found ingested downstream of the compressor discharge area, consistent with engine operation. The driveshaft between the right engine and the main gearbox was fracture separated in a twisted pattern. The fuel management module was damaged, partially separated from the engine control gearbox, and its control was oriented in the "flight" position.

The throttle quadrant was found loose and separated from its mount. The control cable ends were not found. Although both levers were found in the "MAX" position, their position at the time of impact could not be confirmed.

The twin engine, 7-seat helicopter was manufactured in 2000. It was equipped with two 549horsepower, Pratt & Whitney Canada PW206C engines. The most recent documented inspection was completed on May 21, 2019, which was a 50 hour/30-day inspection. At that time the helicopter had accrued a total of 3,939 flight hours. Both engines had accrued about 570 hours since overhaul.

According to FAA airman records, the pilot held a commercial pilot certificate with a helicopter rating, which was issued on September 24, 2004. He also held a flight instructor certificate with helicopter rating, which was issued on June 20, 2018. He did not have an instrument rating. His most recent FAA second-class medical certificate was issued on May 15, 2019, at which time he reported 2,805 hours of total flight experience.

At 1351, the weather conditions at a reporting station located in Central Park about 1 mile northeast of the accident site, at an elevation of 156 ft msl, included an overcast ceiling at 500 ft above ground level, visibility 1.25 statute miles in rain and mist, temperature 18° C, dew point 7° C, wind from 070° at 8 knots, altimeter setting 30.05 inches of mercury. According to 14 CFR Part 91.155, basic visual flight rules weather minimums for helicopters operating from the surface to 1,200 ft msl were 1/2-statute mile visibility, and remain clear of clouds.
The helicopter was retained for further examination.

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information Aircraft Make: Agusta Registration: N200BK Model/Series: A109 E Aircraft Category: Helicopter Amateur Built: No Operator: N200bk Inc Operating Certificate(s) Held: None

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan Conditions at Accident Site: Instrument Conditions Condition of Light: Day Observation Facility, Elevation: NYC, 156 ft msl Observation Time: 1351 EDT Distance from Accident Site: 1 Nautical Miles Temperature/Dew Point: 18°C / 17°C Lowest Cloud Condition: Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 8 knots / , 70° Lowest Ceiling: Overcast / 500 ft agl Visibility: 1.25 Miles Altimeter Setting: 30.05 inches Hg

Type of Flight Plan Filed: None Departure Point: New York, NY (6N5) Destination: Linden, NJ (LDJ)

Wreckage and Impact Information Crew Injuries: 1 Fatal Aircraft Damage: Destroyed Passenger Injuries: N/A Aircraft Fire: On-Ground

Ground Injuries: N/A Aircraft Explosion: None Total Injuries: 1 Fatal Latitude, Longitude: 40.761667, -73.981944

Administrative Information Investigator In Charge (IIC): Douglass P Brazy Additional Participating Persons: David Gerlach; FAA/AVP-100; Washington, DC Christopher Lemieux; Leonardo Helicopters; Philidelphia, PA Merryn Spielman; Pratt & Whitney of Canada; Longueuil, QC Note: The NTSB traveled to the scene of this accident.

[gulliBell]

The big mystery still remains, he got out of the cloud at one point, and then climbed back up into it. The radio comms as reported would suggest this was not a medical incapacitation.

[Non-PC Plod]

The big mystery still remains, he got out of the cloud at one point, and then climbed back up into it. The radio comms as reported would suggest this was not a medical incapacitation.
Maybe he was trying to fly on instruments at that point. Whatever, he would have had no clear horizon outside, so not surprising he had no SA.

[gulliBell]

It doesn't make sense for a non-instrument rated pilot, after experiencing IMC and then extracting himself successfully from that situation, to then go and put himself in the same situation again. The concept of self preservation should be overwhelming once regaining VMC I would have thought. In any event, can the A109 at least do HDG and ALT hold? Or was there no autopilot on this one?

[NutLoose]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/pilot-who-crashed-helicopter-onto-nyc-building-did-not-know-where-he-was-report/ar-AADqlBR

[evil7]

Quote - „He decided to crash onto the roof of the high-rise building on 7th Avenue between 51st and 52nd Streets to put "other lives first," his family said in a statement after the crash“.

How heartbreaking! I would ask why he decided to crash a fully operational helicopter?
Sometimes you have to call a tree a tree - He f.....ed up big time!!!

[gulliBell]

Family just put a positive spin on it in their hour of grief. Yep, heartbreaking for sure. 'Aint no way he had any intention of crashing on the roof of that building. It just happened to be in the way of where he was going, only he didn't know it. As for the news report the helicopter was seriously damaged; well, that is the overstatement of understatements.

[JimEli]

It doesn't make sense for a non-instrument rated pilot, after experiencing IMC and then extracting himself successfully from that situation, to then go and put himself in the same situation again...

Incapacitating Spatial Disorientation

[mickjoebill]

Incapacitating Spatial Disorientation

After checking with the videographer regarding the two videos, I’m 90% confident

Aircraft was filmed from approx 1 kilometer from the helipad, exiting clouds in a dive, the aircraft then climbed back heading North into the cloud base adjacent the helipad. A short time later, under 90 seconds judging by the changing position of the ferry, (which is only visible in the full height versions of the videos) and comments by the videographer that he returned within seconds, he is filmed south of the camera position near the power station in a low hover where he then climbs again into cloud base heading North.

Three climbs into the cloud base.
Two occasions passing by the helipad.
Low hover opposite a landmark power station.

EAOE
mjb

[noooby]

It doesn't make sense for a non-instrument rated pilot, after experiencing IMC and then extracting himself successfully from that situation, to then go and put himself in the same situation again. The concept of self preservation should be overwhelming once regaining VMC I would have thought. In any event, can the A109 at least do HDG and ALT hold? Or was there no autopilot on this one?

You can't get a 109E without autopilot. Basic equipment. Alt holt, Airspeed hold, Nav hold, Heading hold are all standard.

[gulliBell]

That makes this even more inexplicable.

[Hot and Hi]

After checking with the videographer regarding the two videos, I’m 90% confident

Aircraft was filmed from approx 1 kilometer from the helipad, exiting clouds in a dive, the aircraft then climbed back heading North into the cloud base adjacent the helipad. A short time later, under 90 seconds judging by the changing position of the ferry, (which is only visible in the full height versions of the videos) and comments by the videographer that he returned within seconds, he is filmed south of the camera position near the power station in a low hover where he then climbs again into cloud base heading North.

Three climbs into the cloud base.
Two occasions passing by the helipad.
Low hover opposite a landmark power station.

EAOE
mjb
90% confident of what?

[mickjoebill]

90% confident of what?
Of the order in which the events occurred as described and that the helipad was within visible range every time the helicopter went past the camera.


mjb

[sprag47]

Apparently no one wants to go here, but surely the NTSB is investigating a possible suicide. Possible. As others have noted this event is inexplicable. A fairly experienced pilot with probably dozens or more ops from the E 34th St heliport, who's been flying corporate equipment around NYC for years gets lost minutes after departing the heliport? Then climbs into the ovcst and dives nearly vertically...yes, it could be a medical anomaly, but something ain't right here. I'm not buying spatial disorientation.

[gulliBell]

I'm not buying spatial disorientation either.

[havick]

Apparently no one wants to go here, but surely the NTSB is investigating a possible suicide. Possible. As others have noted this event is inexplicable. A fairly experienced pilot with probably dozens or more ops from the E 34th St heliport, who's been flying corporate equipment around NYC for years gets lost minutes after departing the heliport? Then climbs into the ovcst and dives nearly vertically...yes, it could be a medical anomaly, but something ain't right here. I'm not buying spatial disorientation.

Pilot may have been Experienced flying those routes VFR, not experienced flying in IMC.

[sprag47]

There was no reason for him to climb into IMC in the clouds. He had no instrument rating and he hadn't filed. By all accounts he was experienced flying VFR around NYC, and probably had experience flying low-level VFR (scud running) along the East River and over the harbor...it's what we can legally do in rotorcraft. A typical scenario in low ceiling/vis would be depart the heliport to take a look, fly low and slow down the river and if things look too crappy make a 180 and retrace the route back up to the heliport and call it a day. Why would any experienced pilot climb into the ceiling and then make a near-vertical dive? He did a lot of erratic, inexplicable maneuvering during this brief flight...especially turning west INTO downtown Manhattan. The East River is a big ole landmark that would have led him right back to the heliport.

[gulliBell]

Why he was IMC is the question that needs an answer. Particularly when he started out in VMC, and gained VMC after being IMC, and then went IMC again. And it would seem, got VMC again before going IMC for a 3rd time in a short space of time. Obviously he shouldn't have gone IMC the first time, because he was not IFR qualified, nor was he following an IFR procedure. It doesn't make sense to give it a go when you're not qualified to do it, just to save the $100/15 minute parking fee.

[havick]

Why he was IMC is the question that needs an answer. Particularly when he started out in VMC, and gained VMC after being IMC, and then went IMC again. And it would seem, got VMC again before going IMC for a 3rd time in a short space of time. Obviously he shouldn't have gone IMC the first time, because he was not IFR qualified, nor was he following an IFR procedure. It doesn't make sense to give it a go when you're not qualified to do it, just to save the $100/15 minute parking fee.

People do strange things when under stress. It’s not surprising to see a VFR pilot re-enter IMC after gaining VMC.

[gulliBell]

As a CFII I find it extraordinarily surprising that a VFR pilot would re-enter IMC after gaining VMC.

[havick]

As a CFII I find it extraordinarily surprising that a VFR pilot would re-enter IMC after gaining VMC.

I don’t find it surprising at all.

[sprag47]

I vote for "extraordinarily surprising."

[ApolloHeli]

As a CFII I find it extraordinarily surprising that a VFR pilot would re-enter IMC after gaining VMC.
Here's a recent example of it (https://www.aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=211652) - scud-running along in VMC, then abruptly climbing into IMC (probably due to disorientation in the poor weather). What is odd is that even with AP it doesn't seem like the NYC pilot tried to use it.

[Hot and Hi]

Here's a recent example of it (https://www.aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=211652) - scud-running along in VMC, then abruptly climbing into IMC (probably due to disorientation in the poor weather). What is odd is that even with AP it doesn't seem like the NYC pilot tried to use it.
I support the surprise expressed by some of us here is about the re-entering IMC a second time after re-gaining VMC coming out of IMC.

[Robbiee]

I support the surprise expressed by some of us here is about the re-entering IMC a second time after re-gaining VMC coming out of IMC.

If he were perhaps staring at the artificial horizon. but also disoriented (and/or stressed) to the point where his brain wasn't interpreting what the gage was telling him, then perhaps he didn't realize he was climbing back in?

,...at least that's kinda what happened to me once.

[SASless]

During the descent seen in the video....the aircraft appeared to be traveling quite fast....and it seemed it was approaching some low cloud or fog.

Could it be something as simple as trying to slow down and the pitch up took him back into cloud.

From the collateral information it does appear he was "lost" despite being very close to his takeoff point and in an area he knew well.

Also....there are two ways to use the "Direct To" feature on a GPS....one is for your Destination....and the other is to your Departure Point.

In poor weather....using your Take Off Point as the waypoint and flying the reciprocal track away from the Take Off Point towards your destination allows you a very quick way of getting turned around if you encounter deteriorating weather.

Linden, New Jersey was not that far away.

Had the Pilot followed the shoreline at a low altitude and slow ground speed and used all of his navaids....perhaps this tragedy might have been avoided.

[JimEli]

I support the surprise expressed by some of us here is about the re-entering IMC a second time after re-gaining VMC coming out of IMC.



I don't believe its hard to explain at all. Incapacitating Spatial Disorientation, where a pilot knows that he is disoriented but fails or is incapable of taking the proper corrective action. Maybe a somatogravic illusion (among others)? Does anyone doubt this pilot’s disorientation? It’s never a requirement to be completely IMC for SD, and recovery is not necessarily instantaneous. USAF paper which gives examples of ISD located here (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/aam/cami/library/online_libraries/aerospace_medicine/sd/media/MP-086-18.pdf).

[Non-PC Plod]

I don't believe its hard to explain at all. Incapacitating Spatial Disorientation, where a pilot knows that he is disoriented but fails or is incapable of taking the proper corrective action. Maybe a somatogravic illusion (among others)? Does anyone doubt this pilot’s disorientation? It’s never a requirement to be completely IMC for SD, and recovery is not necessarily instantaneous. USAF paper which gives examples of ISD located here (https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/aam/cami/library/online_libraries/aerospace_medicine/sd/media/MP-086-18.pdf).

Looks to me extremely likely that it was disorientation. For everyone who seems amazed that he did not regain control after "regaining VMC" - remember, what happened is that the helicopter became visible intermittently from a point on the ground. That means that IF, the pilot was looking in the correct direction, he could have seen a patch of terra firma , (maybe through a hole in the clouds). That does not mean he had a horizon, knew the attitude or position of the helicopter, and its not sufficient for a regain of situational awareness. So, was it really VMC?

[gulliBell]

Except that, the abrupt pull up when the helicopter is seen emerging from the bottom of the cloud the first time around strongly suggests he had a good visual reference to complete that manoeuvre.

[havick]

Except that, the abrupt pull up when the helicopter is seen emerging from the bottom of the cloud the first time around strongly suggests he had a good visual reference to complete that manoeuvre.

You're making the assumption that the pilot was making rational decisions when he was completely lost and very likely highly stressed.

[ShyTorque]

It's not impossible that the extreme attitudes reached had toppled one or both of the aircraft main gyros, so even if he tried to use the AI he would have been on a hiding to nothing.

[mickjoebill]

The second video is published on the Instagram account thingswendysees and is not widely distributed.
It shows the aircraft in level slow clockwise tight turn approx 150ft AGL, less than 200 ft from the river bank and very near the Edison power facility, then a climb North, back past camera and toward the accident site.

Note that original videos were shot in portrait mode, but are cropped for Instagram.
The full height videos show a ferry (or ferries) sailing South down river toward camera, which may corroborate the photographers recollection that the aircraft returned very shortly after the recording of the first video ceased.

https://instagram.com/thingswendysees?igshid=1p6xp0n8bd5zv

Mjb

[sprag47]

Mjb, any idea how close the Edison plant is to 6N5?

[Hot and Hi]

Something doesn't add up here. I mean, the wx looks quite flyable. Viz at last 2000; ceiling 300, 400 ft, maybe down to 200 at some patches You may not reach your destination, but you can try. You can give it a go, slow but steady, and return to base if it gets hairy. It's not like as if the wx closed in behind him. And the pilot seems very much in control of his machine, stable hover etc as shown in the second video (the earlier one in the time line).

[sprag47]

I wrote pretty much this same opinion in earlier posts. This wasn't a 200-hour pilot that suddenly found himself at 6N5 facing some crappy wx. And the reported wx was 500 and 1.25 miles vis.....the video supports this.

[[email protected]]

Intermittent IMC is far more dangerous and disorientating than full IMC as you have conflicting information between the instruments and the fleeting glimpses of the ground or cloud base - the human brain is hardwired to prefer visual information cues even if they are not telling the whole truth with regards to the horizon or the vertical.

Get on instruments - stay on instruments.

[sprag47]

No need for him to ever look at the flight instruments...he was in VMC, just look at the East River and shoreline and fly back to the heliport. I just don't understand why so many here are hard-over for "lost and disoriented."

[gulliBell]

...Get on instruments - stay on instruments.

Unless you don't hold an IR, as in this case. Get visual, stay visual.

[mickjoebill]

And the pilot seems very much in control of his machine, stable hover etc as shown in the second video (the earlier one in the time line).

I’ve not been able to verify the order, so am interested if anyone has further info about timeline.

The evidence in favour that the hover video is second in the timeline is

1/The tracking data posted earlier shows a flight track that appears to match the hover video and ceases over the city near the crash site.

2/The position of a ferry sailing toward indicates the hover video was taken after the dive video.(if it is the same ferry in both shots)

But this is not conclusive evidence, as are messages from the videographer.

Note: the recently built ferry terminal (late 2018) pictured in the hover video is not present in some older google earth images.

mjb

[Robbiee]

No need for him to ever look at the flight instruments...he was in VMC, just look at the East River and shoreline and fly back to the heliport. I just don't understand why so many here are hard-over for "lost and disoriented."

Because, as the report stated, he "did not know whre he was".

[Hot and Hi]

Because, as the report stated, he "did not know whre he was".
Sometimes when flying in very bad viz a pilot might not exactly know where they are on the map (as he/she is missing the big picture). Shouldn’t really be an issue these days with moving map apps. But many people become complacent and don’t whip out their iPad for just a local flight. Then they might get lost.

This does not imply spatial disorientation. Let’s not confuse for a second those two!

Fact remains, it was 2000 m viz, ceiling 500. Perfect day for flying along the shoreline (or between the buildings, there is enough space, might not be entirely legal though in NYC).

Something doesn’t add up.

[havick]

Fact remains, it was 2000 m viz, ceiling 500. Perfect day for flying along the shoreline (or between the buildings, there is enough space, might not be entirely legal though in NYC).


Sounds good in theory, right up until a VFR only pilot goes IIMC.

[[email protected]]

Unless you don't hold an IR, as in this case. Get visual, stay visual. but if you don't hold an IR, don't go flying in poor weather - 2000m viz and 500 cloudbase is not good VFR weather.

[Bell_ringer]

Capable people can do silly things under extreme stress, its a fault of the human condition, something everyone learns about but chooses to ignore.
You will never know what went on in that cockpit, until such a time that all light aircraft capture telemetry data for analysis.
The finer details of what went on are mostly irrelevant, the outcome was set once the decision to leave the pad was made.
if you choose to operate in marginal conditions under the hopes that superior skills and aircraft capability will save the day, then accidents like this will continue to happen.
There is a general belief that helicopters are immune to weather, after all you can always just turnaround or land. That only works if you make the call early enough.
Staying on the pad and paying those parking fees would have been far less costly.

[SASless]

500/1SM is legal VFR....and adequate for day visual flight in a helicopter.

As said by others....stay visual, follow the river or a highway that keeps you oriented and ;provides visual references to control the helicopter.

The rub is when the weather drops below that.....then what do you do is key.

[[email protected]]

I didn't say it wasn't legal - it wouldn't be in UK - just that it is not good as it leaves you few options other than to descend, often into an obstacle-rich environment around built-up areas..

We all know that you don't get uniform conditions in poor weather - best to assume the 500' and 2miles is the best you are likely to see rather than the worst and plan accordingly.

[Robbiee]

Fact remains, it was 2000 m viz, ceiling 500. Perfect day for flying along the shoreline (or between the buildings, there is enough space, might not be entirely legal though in NYC).


That's what you call a perfect day? You guys sure do have a cavalier attitude about the weather.

[Bell_ringer]

That's what you call a perfect day? You guys sure do have a cavalier attitude about the weather.

I suspect H&H was being a bit tongue in cheek.
500ft and 2000m isn't tanning at the beach weather, but it shouldn't get you killed if the human computer is operating correctly.
Operating in a narrow urban corridor doesn't leave much room for error or manoeuvring if suddenly you find yourself in decreasing minima or when the bucket of superior skills runs empty.

[Robbiee]

I suspect H&H was being a bit tongue in cheek.
500ft and 2000m isn't tanning at the beach weather, but it shouldn't get you killed if the human computer is operating correctly.
Operating in a narrow urban corridor doesn't leave much room for error or manoeuvring if suddenly you find yourself in decreasing minima or when the bucket of superior skills runs empty.

I thought maybe he was being sarcastic, but another dude mentioned those conditions as "adequate" for flying a helicopter, so its hard to tell just what you all are willing to try and stay VFR in?

[Bell_ringer]

another dude mentioned those conditions as "adequate" for flying a helicopter, so its hard to tell just what you all are willing to try and stay VFR in?

No one said where, or for what ops, those conditions are adequate.
What is ok for one environment, may not be for another.

[SASless]

Folks....deal with facts please.

The flight was done in the USA and FAA Rules apply....not CAA Rules as apply in the UK.

Take a minute and google "US FAR Part 91, VFR Flight Rules"......read what it says.

Then google to find a VFR Sectional Map for the NYC area and study the airspace depictions for the intended flight.

That will give you a basis to begin discussing the "what if's" that pertain to this tragedy.

I have flown many a mile in ugly weather....VFR....in the USA and the UK and understand the Rules in both places.

Do you?

Would I have departed from the heliport as did this poor fellow....probably not due to the fact it was NYC alone.

Whenever I flew anywhere in that region....I tried to avoid places like NYC, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington DC, Boston....etc.

Matter of fact....I refuse to drive in those places unless it is to pass through on an Interstate Highway and then I carefully choose my route and time of travel or just don't go.

I did my minimum VFR flying (I am loathe to call it Rudscunning due to the visceral reaction from some. here who get all crazy to hear that term used.....).

What I did do was pick my time, place, route, and weather to do it in.

It can be done safely, legally, and without un-due risk to self or others....but you must be thinking about what you are doing...and have a Plan B...C...D.....before you light off the engine.

Plan B is upon encountering deteriorating or unforeseen weather conditions....is to land out or turn around and get back to better weather....which ever is safest and quickest.

Know your limits...and do not hesitate to say "No!" or knock it off when it gets down to your limits.

Speed is critical....visibility determines speed and height....always go slow enough to avoid obstacles and maintain solid contact with the ground.

If you find yourself getting nervous or anxious....you just passed your "limit".....and that means you delayed your decision too long.

[Robbiee]

No one said where, or for what ops, those conditions are adequate.
What is ok for one environment, may not be for another.

Well my mistake then. I just assumed he was referring to the topic location.

[Gordy]

That's what you call a perfect day? You guys sure do have a cavalier attitude about the weather.
Some of us fly in this weather all day long...our business and people's homes depend on it. It is good weather under a certain set of parameters, do not blindly say that we are "cavalier". I would not expect a private pilot or a recently certified commercial pilot to be flying in this, but with the correct training, it is not a problem.

[SASless]

Lots of fairy tales going around eh, Shy.....aren't you a bit old to believe in them?

[Robbiee]

Some of us fly in this weather all day long...our business and people's homes depend on it. It is good weather under a certain set of parameters, do not blindly say that we are "cavalier". I would not expect a private pilot or a recently certified commercial pilot to be flying in this, but with the correct training, it is not a problem.

Sorry, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Scudd-running is just fine for those of you who are specifically trainined for it because your job depends on that skill.

,...'cause yeah, that's what we're talking about here :rolleyes:

[SASless]

Robbiee,

You miss the point altogether.....it is not your job that depends upon it....but rather your life and that of your passengers.

Doing something safely and within the limits set forth by your OpSpecs, FAR's, and Company SOP's does not in any way suggest being "cavalier".

I have refused to fly in weather that met the letter of the law and rule...because it exceeded my personal limits.

I am sure all professional pilots with any experience in the business have done that....as they well should.

[Robbiee]

Robbiee,

You miss the point altogether.....it is not your job that depends upon it....but rather your life and that of your passengers.

Doing something safely and within the limits set forth by your OpSpecs, FAR's, and Company SOP's does not in any way suggest being "cavalier".

I have refused to fly in weather that met the letter of the law and rule...because it exceeded my personal limits.

I am sure all professional pilots with any experience in the business have done that....as they well should.

It just seems like the attitude here is,...Well I fly in those conditions all the time and its no big deal, so why couldn't he?

[Bell_ringer]

It just seems like the attitude here is,...Well I fly in those conditions all the time and its no big deal, so why couldn't he?

Perhaps you are reading more into it. The sentiment I am getting is that on paper, and from the video, the conditions should have been survivable or at worst allowed a safe return to base.
I keep wondering what may have contributed to the situation, for example could the cockpit have fogged up or was it just the results of having exceeded personal limits?

[Washeduprotorgypsy]

CIty girls are usually impressed by helicopters , as they become ex wives generally less so. One has to wonder if an amorous or some other kind of bravado fog contributed to this event.

Another angle being; he was as comfortable with IMC and bad weather as the deceased Russian fellow featured on YouTube smoking a cigarette and covering the AI with a sticky note.

The weather is bad but not unworkable. A perfect cover for "stunting". I am sure the coffee in the pilots lounge was strong but I have trouble believing it was completely panic inducing to the point of losing all ability to tell the difference between the river and surrounding built up area. Being trapped in featureless foothills with a low ceiling between passes is another story.

Unconsciousness typically occurs before a vfr rated pilot decides to climb back into IMC conditions after soiling himself from having the luck to survive the first encounter. Landing in the low rise district might have its share of questions and paperwork, but to find oneself again at the top of the high rise district? I question if the weather was as formidable mental barrier as we'd like to believe for this pilot.

[Winnie]

Robbiee , Gordy is anything but cavalier, and if properly trained, flying in **** weather isn't a big deal, but you HAVE TO respect when to stop, when to turn around and when to put down safely, if you don't then obviously it is dangerous.

[Robbiee]

Robbiee , Gordy is anything but cavalier, and if properly trained, flying in **** weather isn't a big deal, but you HAVE TO respect when to stop, when to turn around and when to put down safely, if you don't then obviously it is dangerous.

Its like this dude, I've got around 360 night hours, with about 180 of that xc. Almost all of that is over water at some point with a few out over the butt-crack nowhere desert. However, when a guy crashed his 44 on a night inter-island flight in Hawaii, I wasn't going to say, "Well I fly at night over water all the time, so it couldn't have been disorientation that killed him,...must have been something else, 'cause those conditions are perfectly adequate". That would have made me look cavalier about the conditions.,...and a bit like an insensitive jerk.

But then I'm closer to that guy in experience, so I can relate, which seems to be an issue here from time to time. Its like these high time guys can't seperate what they do, and their experience from lower time pilots who didn't take the same path to becoming a pilot as they did.

Yeah, to a guy who flies in low visibility and low ceilings all the time this accident makes no sense, so they come on here projecting this cavalier attitude about the weather because they can't seem to get that to this guy, flying in those conditions was not normal. Its an empathy problem here.

He wasn't going out to fight a fire. He wasn't a Coast Guard pilot headed into a hurricane to rescue a boater. He was just a guy who dropped off a passenger, then wanted to get home. If you look at it from his point of view, then getting disoriented looks perfectly plausible.

He's sitting around waiting for it to get better. After a couple hours finds what he thinks is a 20 min window he can use to get home. He jumps in and takes off, but shortly thereafter it gets worse and he radios he wants to come back. Then he radios he doesn't know where he is. From my experience he got disoriented. Sure, he could have had a stroke right after takeoff, **** does happen, but if that had been me in that cockpit, I'd be dead too.

[sprag47]

Man, this thread is hopeless...like a dog chasing its tail. Subject pilot was not a low-time helicopter pilot (2800+ hrs). He was a professional corporate pilot being paid to fly a sophisticated, twin-engine aircraft. He had operated out of 6N5 FOR YEARS, he was a NY resident, and practically speaking he was flying in his "back yard". The wx was 500 and 1 but a couple minutes after takeoff he doesn't know where he is.
I'm done here.

[SASless]

We Dinosaurs were young'uns at some point in our many years of existence.....we got old through a fair amount of luck, some skill, and being able to know when to sit in a safe place, drink coffee, and whine about everything under the Sun.

Perhaps, even....we may have also learned from others who were ahead of us on the path so that we did not have to trod in every muddy puddle to figure out how deep they were.

We ain't knocking you young folks....but we are trying to pass along some hard leaned lessons....some of which we were given free of charge....some we paid a Beer Tariff to obtain...and some we figured out all by ourselves usually scaring ourselves frightless in the process.

I always fiigured I could learn from everyone I flew with....or worked alongside.....and I did most times.

One cannot be a Master of all things in this flying game....but you can be very darn good at what you do.

That is. how you get old and cantankerous.....which beats not getting old.

[JimEli]

Man, this thread is hopeless...like a dog chasing its tail. Subject pilot was not a low-time helicopter pilot (2800+ hrs). He was a professional corporate pilot being paid to fly a sophisticated, twin-engine aircraft. He had operated out of 6N5 FOR YEARS, he was a NY resident, and practically speaking he was flying in his "back yard". The wx was 500 and 1 but a couple minutes after takeoff he doesn't know where he is.
I'm done here.

He might have been a moderately experienced pilot, without an instrument rating attempting to operate in weather categorically classified as IFR (below MVFR). I don't believe anyone has ever suggested he was lost. However, several have thought he became spatially disoriented.

[sprag47]

No, no one suggested he was lost, the pilot stated HIMSELF he was "lost" over 123.075 to the heliport Unicom.

He might have been a moderately experienced pilot, without an instrument rating attempting to operate in weather categorically classified as IFR (below MVFR). I don't believe anyone has ever suggested he was lost. However, several have thought he became spatially disoriented.

Per the NTSB pre-lim the PILOT radioed that "he didn't know where he was."

[MikeNYC]

Seems many people are missing the BR (Mist) note when evaluating that the reported 500' overcast is "not that bad".

As I noted up-thread, I drove over the Verrazano Bridge both ways that day, and both ways I was driving in cloud, unable to easily read highway exit signs on the bridge. The peak of the bridge road deck is only 230' MSL. Sure, there's some local weather that happens in that part of the harbor but it's fair to say the weather was terrible.

[SASless]

Mike gives us firsthand information re the weather.

If he said it was really bad.....it was really bad.

The video shows it to an uneven and varying kind of cloud, mist, and fog.

We have to remember it is what the pilot can see outside the windscreen of the helicopter....or side windows or chin bubbles....that matters.

I think we can all agree the Pilot found himself in weather that caused him to crash instead of being able to land safely somewhere either by making a visual approach and landing or an instrument approach and visual landing.

From his radio transmissions and the radar track....we also can assume he was "lost" in a place he knew well.

After that....we are all guessing at what transpired in the cockpit.

[Bell_ringer]

After that....we are all guessing at what transpired in the cockpit.

How does the saying go. There are no new accidents, we just keep trying to perfect the old ones.

[wrench1]

Another fly or lose your job event...?

According to the pilot’s girlfriend, during the evening before and on the day of the accident, the pilot was concerned about the weather for the flight from Amenia to 6N5, and from 6N5 to LDJ. As the pilot was preparing the helicopter for the flight from Amenia, he informed his brother that he was nervous about the flight due to the poor weather conditions. His brother suggested that he not fly the trip, the pilot responded that “[the pilot-rated passenger] is making me fly.” About 1200, during a telephone conversation while at 6N5, the pilot told his girlfriend that he had a “window” to reposition the helicopter to LDJ, and also said that he “shouldn’t be flying, but had to…”

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/99586/pdf