COASTGUARD AW189 WRECKS A BACK GARDEN

[nomorehelosforme]

A coastguard helicopter did considerable damage to a back garden near a hospital helipad near Portsmouth, the property owner, a retired navy engineer is not happy as this isn't the first time he has had damage caused by downdraft.Retired Royal Navy engineer and his magistrate wife are 'furious' after Coastguard helicopter taking off from hospital destroys their gardenA retired Royal Navy engineer and his magistrate wife are 'furious' after an emergency services helicopter blew down their garden wall.

Stuart and Cassie Ellins were left distraught after their back garden was 'turned upside-down' by the downdraft of the Coastguard aircraft launching from the nearby helipad.

An investigation has now been launched and other residents on the street - where average house prices are £450,000 - say 'serious questions need to be answered.'

Mr and Mrs Ellins' are fearful for their own safety and feel 'sick' when they think about what might have happened if one of their grandchildren had been in the garden at the time.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7776153/Couple-furious-Coastguard-helicopter-taking-hospital-destroys-garden.html

[jimf671]

I expect the e-goat and arrse headlines will read "Matelot Fails FOD Check".


Both the Qinetiq Post Implementation Report on the UK SAR Helicopter Service contract and an EASA NPA have made references to the state of the landing facilities at "Public Interest Sites" of which this is an example. We have known since 31st January 1953 that the helicopter was to become an important tool for saving lives but we still struggle to adapt our national infrastructure to accommodate it successfully.

[Gordy]

A slight adjustment in flight path to avoid overflight of the homes would be an easy solution. I cannot believe they flew over the homes in the first place.

[Planet Basher]

Lessons will be learnt....some time.

[ShyTorque]

The solution is the provision of proper helipads in less congested areas.

[nomorehelosforme]

The solution is the provision of proper helipads in less congested areas.

Agreed but sometimes difficult as most hospitals are in build up areas

[jimf671]

Agreed but sometimes difficult as most hospitals are in build up areas

The reason it is difficult is because of the lack of brain power applied during the planning and design. When people were building hospitals in the UK 30 or 40 years ago it was already apparent that the helicopter was playing an ever-increasing role in the transport of critically ill persons. NHS management, architects, civil engineers, local authority planners and politicians should have been able to start getting a grip of this way back then. But here we are, 66 years after the first dedicated SAR squadron was formed, with world-class SAR and dozens of air ambulance aircraft, unable to ensure best use of these aircraft to create the best outcome for the patients.

[ShyTorque]

What Jim said! There remains a sad legacy of misunderstanding of the capabilities and limitations of rotary wing aircraft, by those very organisations that could best benefit from their use.

[[email protected]]

Surely a quick, vertical departure would ensure the downwash stays clear?

If the garden was directly downwind from the pad and they stayed in a low hover for a while then it could possibly be an issue but I don't believe they flew low over the garden - the public are notoriously bad at judging heights where aircraft are concerned, especially when they are trying to over-egg a complaint which is probably more about noise than anything else.

[sycamore]

IT`s probably a good job it wasn`t an 11 tonne Seaking . then...The brickwork seems to have been made by an amateur,compared to the fencework further down the garden...As to his grandchildren,they should be briefed to `get indoors` if
a helo is nearby/ appears...
Likewise,I would expect the helo crew to use proper techniques on t/o and landing to minimise noise and downdraught.
Look at `streetview` and obviously it`s `upmarket,with Mercs/suv`s galore/double garages/multiple cars in driveways...the thought that a helo may have to be using the hospital on a lifesaving mission ,literally` goes over their heads`...!!r
A good EX-Naval officer should remember being taught to "Lash-up and stow", but then he may have only operated on a" stone frigate..."...
Rather like ex-RAF Officers buying houses near airfields,and then complaining about the noise....!!!!

later...perhaps he should go down to the CG Helo unit and have an `amicable discussion` about the situation ,rather that `whingeing` to the Press........

[ShyTorque]

Likewise,I would expect the helo crew to use proper techniques on t/o and landing to minimise noise and downdraught.

Unfortunately, flying Class A profiles (e.g. crosswind limits and not downwind) might mean those factors are not always the highest priority.

[jeepys]

Unfortunately, flying Class A profiles (e.g. crosswind limits and not downwind) might mean those factors are not always the highest priority.

The problem is the vertical cat A profile itself for the 189. A slow climb to 110ft TDP does not take into account the carnage going on beneath you. This is not the first and it won't be the last especially if we are always expecting a donk to stop at a critical point. Maybe we need to look at the reliability of modern engines versus damage created due to take off profiles.

[detgnome]

PC1 profiles are fixed by the RFM and PC1 profiles are demanded for hostile/congested HLSs by CAP 999. The operators hands are tied by the OEM and the regulator.

[jimf671]

"Any new hospital landing site that had not been in use before 28.10.2014 is expected to be designed with due considerations to the Air OPS helicopter performance rules. New hospital landing sites are not eligible to any derogation."
EASA proposal, currently in process.

[jeepys]

Yes I appreciate the regs but perhaps AW need to invest more time into developing a better cat A profile. The 139 didn't have a confined area profile until some years into production.

[Flying Bull]

sycamore wrote what I also think, a normal autumn storm could also blown away that brick walls, which seems to have had no proper fundament at all...
As an engineer he should have done better...

[nomorehelosforme]

sycamore wrote what I also think, a normal autumn storm could also blown away that brick walls, which seems to have had no proper fundament at all...
As an engineer he should have done better...

Flying Bull, no criticism but possibly lost in translation, I’m sure you meant foundation. If anyone cares to read the comments at the end of the news article there is much criticism of his DIY Landscape that fell to pieces with some helicopter downdraft, there have been numerous storms and gales recently along that coast... shoody workmanship might be at fault, just saying.

[swh]

The photos show a wooden paling fence between brick piers. Each brick piers sitting on a single concrete paver approx 500x250 mm. The pavers sitting on top of an artificial timber deck. No foundation into the ground at all for the piers.

The helicopter was not this issue, their grand children and the public were at risk with that fence all the time. As the piers were just sitting on a paver, someone could have leaned on a pier and it could fall over.

[[email protected]]

I would be interested to know how many noise complaints come from this person and his neighbours - I suspect quite a lot - and I'm sure they will have been told that the helicopters are performing vital lifesaving duties and they should just suck it up.

So it comes as no surprise if they try to use this 'devastation' to either gain financial recompense or try to force the MCA/NHS to use a different landing site - right up until one of their friends or family needs urgent transport to A&E.

I am not up to speed with CAP 999 but do they have to use PC1 profiles when they only have the crew on board? ISTR it used to talk about that not being required until the departure from the rescue scene (ie with cas on board) but I haven't operated to it so I could well be mistaken.

[[email protected]]

I can answer my own question as 999 (if 2014 is the current edition) mandates PC1 when operating to and from a heliport at a hospital that is located in a hostile congested environment. - As Detgnome correctly posted - and only allows PC2 at a SAR operating site.

[ShyTorque]

Crab, in my experience of gaining permissions for congested area HLS operations, the CAA always require PC1.

Despite some “experts” on this forum claiming that no such permission is required, even for a single....

[lead and lag]

Unless it’s a hospital site that comes under ‘Public Interest dispenstion’ then PC1 is required - or so I believe to be the case

[MightyGem]

Each brick piers sitting on a single concrete paver approx 500x250 mm.
I think that those "concrete pavers" were the caps on top of the piers. There is a low brick wall on the far edge of the decking which the piers were probably attached to. Having said that, probably not the best type of construction given the leverage affect that the wind would exert on the bricks, when you think that most fence posts go 2 or 3 feet into the ground.

[Fareastdriver]

If a helicopter's downwash can push over a fence then so can a couple of aggressive drunks.

Not a lot of use.

[detgnome]

The problem with mandating PC1 for hostile congested is that the aircraft performance and profile only represent part of the whole PC1 requirement. The other part relates to the HLS environment. I'm happy to be corrected here, but my understanding has been that there are requirements for the obstacle environment to fulfil PC1 to enable a successful flyaway post TDP. Elevated HLSs should, in theory, be ok (might depend on direction, natch), but a ground level HLS probably doesn't meet the requirements unless it has significant areas of wide open space.

This does beg the question as to why PC1 is required by the CAA, but in reality cannot actually be fulfilled. As an aside, does HEMS have a similar requirement?

[ShyTorque]

Detgnome, the requirements of the obstacle (free) environment are normally taken into account in the PC1 profiles.

(I'm not qualified on this exact type but I don't see why there should be any major differences from others from the same manufacturer, which I am qualified to operate).

[jeepys]

Detgnome, the requirements of the obstacle (free) environment are normally taken into account in the PC1 profiles.

(I'm not qualified on this exact type but I don't see why there should be any major differences from others from the same manufacturer, which I am qualified to operate).

The only vertical PC1 departure for the 189 is a slow vertical climb to 110ft, pause, "are we going", yes okay TDP.
At present there is no confined area profile like other AW types. Hopefully with more shouting from customers the company will develop more profiles.

[Hot_LZ]

I admire the optimism but there still isn’t a PC1 clear area departure without trying to be a airliner!

Without big orders Leonardo are simply not willing to invest in new profiles.

LZ

[ShyTorque]

LZ,

A running takeoff, then!

[JimL]

Detnome, you furnish the requirements quite accurately and then come to an odd conclusion.

There is a requirement for sufficient space for the continued take-off following an engine failure after TDP but that space does not have to be on the surface (or even within the bounds of the heliport).

It has to be above the level of the obstructions in the departure direction regardless if the heliport is on the surface or elevated.

That might be an issue for the AW189 with a TDP at 110ft and a dropdown just less than that, but not for other helicopter types which have variable TDPs.

Jim

[the coyote]

Well explained JimL.

In our A139 HEMS operations, all the hospital landing sites that mandate PC1 are surveyed with the appropriate approach/departure tracks and (almost always variable) TDP's/LDP's published according to the obstacle data.

Doesn't the AW189 have variable TDP's and LDP's? That to me seems hugely restrictive operationally if its the case.

[Fareastdriver]

When I was a professional helicopter pilot you arrived at a landing site you looked round to see what effect your downwash would have on the surrounding area. With this in mind you would tailor you approach to ensure that there was minimum disruption to the local scenery. Departure was in the same vein. Pick a route, sort out which departure profile was safest and launch from there.

Nowadays pilots look at a departure chart,. ignore the terrain and create general mayhem.

[ShyTorque]

FED,
that’s a rather offensive over-generalisation!

[FC80]

When I was a professional helicopter pilot you arrived at a landing site you looked round to see what effect your downwash would have on the surrounding area. With this in mind you would tailor you approach to ensure that there was minimum disruption to the local scenery. Departure was in the same vein. Pick a route, sort out which departure profile was safest and launch from there.

Nowadays pilots look at a departure chart,. ignore the terrain and create general mayhem.

Please, tell us more about how fantastic you were and how awful we are nowadays.

’The older I get, the better I was.’

:rolleyes:

[Fareastdriver]

No excuses. Forty three years and 16,500 hrs as a helicopter pilot.

[the coyote]

Never take your brain and common sense out of the equation.
There's a rule mandating PC1 at some places, but there's also a rule saying thou shalt not cause damage or hazard with your downwash. Pick your rule. For me, big chance of damage Vs very small chance of engine failure is an easy choice. I've lifted stuff with downwash and had the heart in the mouth moment wondering if it'll come through the main or tail rotor.

[FC80]

No excuses. Forty three years and 16,500 hrs as a helicopter pilot.

Nobody cares :ok:

[PilotEpisode]

Nobody cares :ok:

Play nicely guys! :)

[nomorehelosforme]

Play nicely guys! :)

Welcome to PPRuNe, expect no mercy here, it’s every man, women and child for themselves..