Footage of Blackhawk down in Fiji
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Endor
Age: 83
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the greatest of respect, I have an extremely low opinion of the senior ranks of all three services (with a few outstanding exceptions) and the military law system.
This opinion was formed by the squirming of the Navy after the Westralia fire and the subsequent machinations, since the cause of the fire was bleeding obvious to ANY marine engineeer.
The film was released for one reason and one reason only - to blacken the pilots name as a prelude to sheeting all the blame home to him
We have absolutely no idea what pressure the pilot was under and little details like that will be conveniently hidden, erased or remain unspoken. For all we know, and by way of example, the Pilot may have been instructed to return by a certain time "or else".
This opinion was formed by the squirming of the Navy after the Westralia fire and the subsequent machinations, since the cause of the fire was bleeding obvious to ANY marine engineeer.
The film was released for one reason and one reason only - to blacken the pilots name as a prelude to sheeting all the blame home to him
We have absolutely no idea what pressure the pilot was under and little details like that will be conveniently hidden, erased or remain unspoken. For all we know, and by way of example, the Pilot may have been instructed to return by a certain time "or else".
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets just wait and see ehh, anything else is inappropriate!!
However, there has been some interesting discussion on the value of standard risk management processes and perhaps other human factors and CRM training and the dilution of their effects over time without proper and continual reinforcement.
However, there has been some interesting discussion on the value of standard risk management processes and perhaps other human factors and CRM training and the dilution of their effects over time without proper and continual reinforcement.
Bottums Up
The article on P3 of The Australian (today Jun 20) starts, "Black Hawk 221 was hovering only metres above the deck of HMAS Kanimbla, a few seconds from landing, when it became clear something was wrong."
This statement does not accord with the footage shown. Is the footage complete, or is the statement flawed?
This statement does not accord with the footage shown. Is the footage complete, or is the statement flawed?
Unctuous states:
I tend to agree with other posters that the footage shouldn’t have been released – but now that it has been, it is interesting that Unctuous thought that it was simply an “animation.” I must admit when I initially looked at the footage I thought it was an animation as well.
I hope the inquiry looks at potential pilot incapacitation and also potential mechanical problems – control jamming etc. In other words, that minds are not made up too early as they have been in other inquiries.
If that animation of what happened on the stern of Kanimbla is anyways accurate, then all I can say is that both pilots, notwithstanding the tailwind approach, must have been high on waccy baccy.
.
Personally cannot believe that anybody would do anything vaguely approaching that sort of manic approach. And approaching with a 15 knot tailwind is just asking for a pronounced cyclic flare at the last moment, close in (i.e. just what you DON'T want).
.
Personally cannot believe that anybody would do anything vaguely approaching that sort of manic approach. And approaching with a 15 knot tailwind is just asking for a pronounced cyclic flare at the last moment, close in (i.e. just what you DON'T want).
I hope the inquiry looks at potential pilot incapacitation and also potential mechanical problems – control jamming etc. In other words, that minds are not made up too early as they have been in other inquiries.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hope the inquiry looks at potential pilot incapacitation and also potential mechanical problems – control jamming etc. In other words, that minds are not made up too early as they have been in other inquiries.
As with many contentious issues, it can be beneficial to look at the extremes to put the middle ground in better perspective.
In this case, the extremes would be to either release no information whatsoever to the public, or televise the whole inquiry and publish all the evidence and transcripts in full.
Obviously, neither of those is going to happen, so we're left with some middle path.
The responsibility then rests with the board to release what they consider should be in the public domain, and with the media to publish it in such a way as to be sensitive to the needs of the families whilst conveying information to the public.
If there are to be newspaper articles and still photographs, and there's no way there wouldn't be, then video too is a legitimate and useful way of informing the public about a newsworthy event.
As I've already stated, graphic portrayal of suffering isn't appropriate, but I don't believe this video falls in that voyeuristic category.
C150, you may not be interested in the planning aspects of the mission, but I am. Also, I don't land big helicopters on ships but sometimes land little ones on them, and I think there's relevance in the details of this accident to that, similarly for people who operate to rigs or indeed any platform.
Griffinblack, point noted about the discussion of authorisation procedures - however, as long as no-one's giving away any secrets, it seems fair to venture some opinions. This is a place where people say what they think, for what that's worth, and though I know some media outlets have quoted it here and there, the value of it as some kind of authoritative source is equivalent to 'I heard some bloke down the pub say ... '
In this case, the extremes would be to either release no information whatsoever to the public, or televise the whole inquiry and publish all the evidence and transcripts in full.
Obviously, neither of those is going to happen, so we're left with some middle path.
The responsibility then rests with the board to release what they consider should be in the public domain, and with the media to publish it in such a way as to be sensitive to the needs of the families whilst conveying information to the public.
If there are to be newspaper articles and still photographs, and there's no way there wouldn't be, then video too is a legitimate and useful way of informing the public about a newsworthy event.
As I've already stated, graphic portrayal of suffering isn't appropriate, but I don't believe this video falls in that voyeuristic category.
C150, you may not be interested in the planning aspects of the mission, but I am. Also, I don't land big helicopters on ships but sometimes land little ones on them, and I think there's relevance in the details of this accident to that, similarly for people who operate to rigs or indeed any platform.
Griffinblack, point noted about the discussion of authorisation procedures - however, as long as no-one's giving away any secrets, it seems fair to venture some opinions. This is a place where people say what they think, for what that's worth, and though I know some media outlets have quoted it here and there, the value of it as some kind of authoritative source is equivalent to 'I heard some bloke down the pub say ... '
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Wanna Be Up There...
Age: 53
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
AOTW
Point taken. But isn't that sort of information contained within the findings and recommendations? I strongly believe that these should be made public but the video has no such relevance.
Someone on this thread earlier said it was valuable to see how the tail snapped off, WTF??? Why is that valuable? Why is it necessary to see it?
I also hold the hierarchy of the Australian Military in some contempt for the way they handled the Westralia tragedy as well as the earlier disasters with Blackhawks and Seakings, so keeping them honest is of vital importance. The public inquiry will (hopefully) do that.
The releasing of the video adds nothing to keeping them honest and adds nothing to keeping our skies and military personnel safer.
C150, you may not be interested in the planning aspects of the mission, but I am. Also, I don't land big helicopters on ships but sometimes land little ones on them, and I think there's relevance in the details of this accident to that, similarly for people who operate to rigs or indeed any platform.
Someone on this thread earlier said it was valuable to see how the tail snapped off, WTF??? Why is that valuable? Why is it necessary to see it?
I also hold the hierarchy of the Australian Military in some contempt for the way they handled the Westralia tragedy as well as the earlier disasters with Blackhawks and Seakings, so keeping them honest is of vital importance. The public inquiry will (hopefully) do that.
The releasing of the video adds nothing to keeping them honest and adds nothing to keeping our skies and military personnel safer.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Obvious
Age: 78
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Air Safety Week (www.aviationtoday.com/asw/)
Blackhawk Crash Inquiry
.
An Australian Defence Force Blackhawk helicopter had been briefed to approach a ship's deck from a relative angle and with a tailwind component that virtually guaranteed an accident, an ADF Inquiry was told today. In a graphic video taken from the deck of the HMAS Kanimbla the aircraft is seen in the initial stage of its approach and then, in the final six seconds descending very rapidly, as it's in the grip of vortex ring or "settling with power". Courtesy of the 15kt tailwind, the aircraft was descending within its own rotor downwash. That's a condition where increased power tends to accelerate the aircraft in a downward direction, the only escape being to incline the rotor disc via a forward cyclic stick input and accelerate horizontally out of the vortex - height permitting.
.
In last November's accident off Fiji, the transition into the vortex ring condition was so rapid, it's likely that neither pilot realized it for what it was. After striking the deck hard and losing its tail-rotor, the rapidly rotating helo plunged off the far side of the deck into very deep water. Being an Army helo, the aircraft didn't have flotation gear and so the troopers onboard escaped from as deep as 30m beneath the surface. Two died in the accident. Asymmetric Vortex ring, causing a rapid unrecoverable roll, is also the acknowledged Nemesis of the USMC's tilt-rotor Osprey. The video-clip can be viewed at this link
.
An Australian Defence Force Blackhawk helicopter had been briefed to approach a ship's deck from a relative angle and with a tailwind component that virtually guaranteed an accident, an ADF Inquiry was told today. In a graphic video taken from the deck of the HMAS Kanimbla the aircraft is seen in the initial stage of its approach and then, in the final six seconds descending very rapidly, as it's in the grip of vortex ring or "settling with power". Courtesy of the 15kt tailwind, the aircraft was descending within its own rotor downwash. That's a condition where increased power tends to accelerate the aircraft in a downward direction, the only escape being to incline the rotor disc via a forward cyclic stick input and accelerate horizontally out of the vortex - height permitting.
.
In last November's accident off Fiji, the transition into the vortex ring condition was so rapid, it's likely that neither pilot realized it for what it was. After striking the deck hard and losing its tail-rotor, the rapidly rotating helo plunged off the far side of the deck into very deep water. Being an Army helo, the aircraft didn't have flotation gear and so the troopers onboard escaped from as deep as 30m beneath the surface. Two died in the accident. Asymmetric Vortex ring, causing a rapid unrecoverable roll, is also the acknowledged Nemesis of the USMC's tilt-rotor Osprey. The video-clip can be viewed at this link
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the Dog house
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an ex participant within "The ADF System" i.e. = More with Less for Longer -I firmly believe that the current Mil Risk assessment process is very much a tick and flick exercise - like so much in the ADF - which is after all a Can Do organisation! But that is another story.
In this case I think that the BOI has made up its mind - verdict = pilot error . By releasing this video footage the public / uninformed non pilot types can be led towards agreeing with such a conclusion. No such thing as bad publicity eh? All depends on what outcome you are trying to achieve.
What we really need to know is what pressures and failings as outlined in something like the Reason model this crew was affected by. Only then will anyone stop this happening again - maybe.
Whatever is discovered - at the end of the day it will all be about assigning responsibility for liability and $$$$$$$ money!!
DogGone
In this case I think that the BOI has made up its mind - verdict = pilot error . By releasing this video footage the public / uninformed non pilot types can be led towards agreeing with such a conclusion. No such thing as bad publicity eh? All depends on what outcome you are trying to achieve.
What we really need to know is what pressures and failings as outlined in something like the Reason model this crew was affected by. Only then will anyone stop this happening again - maybe.
Whatever is discovered - at the end of the day it will all be about assigning responsibility for liability and $$$$$$$ money!!
DogGone
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an ex suferer of the AVRM concept, I can only agree with the tick and flick concept. In the main my experience of it was that it was reverse engineered to achieve what was required up to a point. I must say however that when utilised in high profile and high risk events and brought to the attention of the higher authorities it actually halted needless and dangerous events.
What am I saying, it appears to me that the everyday use of AVRM by lines crews is flawed and given a scant respect. It should however be used for the rare occurrence of operating outside of normal SOP's, (which funnily enough does need to happen in the military). For most of your mil flying, ops should be contained within some form of SOP or similar. The risk should have been analysed well before the flight in the cold hard light of day and so long as the crew are operating within the SOP etc then there is no problem. In an SOP sortie, AVRM should not be an issue to discuss, other than that the level of risk appended is in conjuction with the level of risk able to be authorised.
As an aside, I don't think the release of the video does any good except for perhaps tarninshing the crew before the outcome of the enquiry. There is too little information available to be of significance to the viewer, but far too much to be a arm chair expert.
So of the "apparent facts" talked about here, I would hazard to guess that they bear little or no resemblance to what actually happended. Wait for the outcome...
I have my own opinions, after a fair bit of deck ops, but I will wait for all rather than part of the info before I make up my mind. And on that, I will probably never have all the data anyway...........
Let's just hope that this BOI achieves something meaningful, rather that the lack lustre efforts of previous BOI's.
What am I saying, it appears to me that the everyday use of AVRM by lines crews is flawed and given a scant respect. It should however be used for the rare occurrence of operating outside of normal SOP's, (which funnily enough does need to happen in the military). For most of your mil flying, ops should be contained within some form of SOP or similar. The risk should have been analysed well before the flight in the cold hard light of day and so long as the crew are operating within the SOP etc then there is no problem. In an SOP sortie, AVRM should not be an issue to discuss, other than that the level of risk appended is in conjuction with the level of risk able to be authorised.
As an aside, I don't think the release of the video does any good except for perhaps tarninshing the crew before the outcome of the enquiry. There is too little information available to be of significance to the viewer, but far too much to be a arm chair expert.
So of the "apparent facts" talked about here, I would hazard to guess that they bear little or no resemblance to what actually happended. Wait for the outcome...
I have my own opinions, after a fair bit of deck ops, but I will wait for all rather than part of the info before I make up my mind. And on that, I will probably never have all the data anyway...........
Let's just hope that this BOI achieves something meaningful, rather that the lack lustre efforts of previous BOI's.
