RNZAF UH-1H crash
Thread Starter
RNZAF UH-1H crash
How dreadfully sad.
Worried about the expense of staying in a hotel, a decision was made to fly before dawn.
End result of a sequence of many events - a UH-1H crash and three deaths.
Makes you feel for the RNZAF - a group of professionals trying to do their best, but woefully under-resourced and under funded, even with the A109s and NH90s - when they are worried about overnight accommodation costs for their aircrews.
Worried about the expense of staying in a hotel, a decision was made to fly before dawn.
End result of a sequence of many events - a UH-1H crash and three deaths.
Makes you feel for the RNZAF - a group of professionals trying to do their best, but woefully under-resourced and under funded, even with the A109s and NH90s - when they are worried about overnight accommodation costs for their aircrews.
Very sad, yes.
The part about there being no training manuals due to under-resourcing sounds a bit odd, though - what's the story there? Is the report implying that the people who should be managing and producing that stuff are too busy with tasking, or are there other factors in play?
It seems the authorisation process must have been ineffective in this case, too, if the bits about the inadequate training and qualifications of various crew are true.
I worked with Graham Lintott many moons ago and found him to be a good operator with a lot of cred and integrity (as per most of the 3 Sqn people at that det); it seems the organisation he was presiding over at the time of the accident has suffered a funding-induced decline, if that article's telling it properly.
If the situation is as bad as is alluded to, is it just money, or what?
The part about there being no training manuals due to under-resourcing sounds a bit odd, though - what's the story there? Is the report implying that the people who should be managing and producing that stuff are too busy with tasking, or are there other factors in play?
It seems the authorisation process must have been ineffective in this case, too, if the bits about the inadequate training and qualifications of various crew are true.
I worked with Graham Lintott many moons ago and found him to be a good operator with a lot of cred and integrity (as per most of the 3 Sqn people at that det); it seems the organisation he was presiding over at the time of the accident has suffered a funding-induced decline, if that article's telling it properly.
If the situation is as bad as is alluded to, is it just money, or what?
Thread Starter
I think you're right about lack of money - probably the root cause.
Have never met Lintott, but those I know speak highly of him.
There's a general perception in NZ that defence is a waste of money, because
the country is so far away it'll never be attacked and Australia is nearby, therefore there's long term lack of investment well below regional peers as a percentage of GDP, which inevitably leads to downgrading of operational capability and cost saving being a primary focus.
Without pointing the finger at anyone - it shows how bad things have become when three young guys die in part because someone was worried about a relatively small hotel bill.
They punch well above their weight with some pretty outdated equipment.
Have never met Lintott, but those I know speak highly of him.
There's a general perception in NZ that defence is a waste of money, because
the country is so far away it'll never be attacked and Australia is nearby, therefore there's long term lack of investment well below regional peers as a percentage of GDP, which inevitably leads to downgrading of operational capability and cost saving being a primary focus.
Without pointing the finger at anyone - it shows how bad things have become when three young guys die in part because someone was worried about a relatively small hotel bill.
They punch well above their weight with some pretty outdated equipment.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was told once that the NZDF only really has a DF (Navy, Air Force)
because of the huge area of sea / ocean / fisheries it has to patrol.
Everything else is irrelevant for the reasons you pointed out
although what they do they do well.
because of the huge area of sea / ocean / fisheries it has to patrol.
Everything else is irrelevant for the reasons you pointed out
although what they do they do well.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am afraid it is not only New Zealand who has this penny pinching attitude.
Most Air forces are faced with the Bean Counter calling the shots in areas that they are not qualified and so safety takes a back seat. When things go wrong it is hard for a non bean counter like myself, to compare the saving made with the total loss of life and injury.
The armed forces is something the polies like to have but when are tight do not want to help save the situation by making an effort in regard to their own wants.
Australia has just gone through a defence cost saving exercise where we no longer can do the job that is expected. Whilst this situation is on the boil, our PM get another pay rise (the third I believe) but this time is to the tune of $90,000.
This nonsense will only stop when we are involved in a major conflict.
Regards
Col
Most Air forces are faced with the Bean Counter calling the shots in areas that they are not qualified and so safety takes a back seat. When things go wrong it is hard for a non bean counter like myself, to compare the saving made with the total loss of life and injury.
The armed forces is something the polies like to have but when are tight do not want to help save the situation by making an effort in regard to their own wants.
Australia has just gone through a defence cost saving exercise where we no longer can do the job that is expected. Whilst this situation is on the boil, our PM get another pay rise (the third I believe) but this time is to the tune of $90,000.
This nonsense will only stop when we are involved in a major conflict.
Regards
Col
A lack of resources is one thing, but I guess what I'm getting at is that the article implies (or so it seems) a drop in standards, failures of training and authorisation processes, as well as pressure to launch in adverse conditions, given where the crews were at in terms of training and preparation for what they were being asked to do, to save a few bucks.
As I said, the Kiwi crews I worked with in the past came across as having high personal and professional standards, which doesn't gel with these comments about their system not being up to scratch in terms of maintaining such standards.
From the article:
Newspaper reports can get it pretty wrong, as we all know, so I'm not trying to pontificate about what should or shouldn't be done - just seems that things sound pretty crook if that's how it really is these days.
As I said, the Kiwi crews I worked with in the past came across as having high personal and professional standards, which doesn't gel with these comments about their system not being up to scratch in terms of maintaining such standards.
From the article:
The report cited training problems with instrument flying and night vision goggles.
It found there were no instructor manuals or guides because of "resourcing" issues.
This was "common with most RNZAF flying units".
The report said four of the six pilots in the three helicopters did not have adequate flying qualifications for the flight, and the lead pilot was not qualified to lead the formation.
It found there were no instructor manuals or guides because of "resourcing" issues.
This was "common with most RNZAF flying units".
The report said four of the six pilots in the three helicopters did not have adequate flying qualifications for the flight, and the lead pilot was not qualified to lead the formation.
Thread Starter
Herkman - true - in UK as well.
Still have memories of walking into the mess at RAF Valley many years ago, after a flight.
To a civvy oik - it looked spartan and run-down in the extreme, and still remember the guys were munching on girl guide biscuits and drinking tea out of stained white cups.
Had just been up in a small jet which looked brand new and shiny black from the outside, but on climbing up into the office, everything was scratched, bashed, worn, faded and very well used.
People who accuse armed forces of wasting money need to spend a little time with those at the sharp end.
Still have memories of walking into the mess at RAF Valley many years ago, after a flight.
To a civvy oik - it looked spartan and run-down in the extreme, and still remember the guys were munching on girl guide biscuits and drinking tea out of stained white cups.
Had just been up in a small jet which looked brand new and shiny black from the outside, but on climbing up into the office, everything was scratched, bashed, worn, faded and very well used.
People who accuse armed forces of wasting money need to spend a little time with those at the sharp end.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread ran here shortly after the accident
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/413...-3-killed.html
I have a copy of the official report should any one be interested. Send a PM with your email addy that will accept attachments.
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/413...-3-killed.html
I have a copy of the official report should any one be interested. Send a PM with your email addy that will accept attachments.
Such a terrible accident
I hope commanders in all flying units take note of this. How many times do we need to push the limits of crew duty and beyond to save some trivial amount of money that has to come out of a different bucket.
I hope commanders in all flying units take note of this. How many times do we need to push the limits of crew duty and beyond to save some trivial amount of money that has to come out of a different bucket.
In 2008 the RAF Air Staff conducted a Capability Health Check which identified, amongst other things, the impact at point of delivery (hangar floor, cockpit, office) of accumulated risk from unconnected and unrelated change programmes - many of which were outwith the control of the RAF. Morover, becasue fo skills dilution in many areas, risk was being taken on areas where risk had already been taken (ie cutting corner on corners that had, err, already been cut, if you get my drift).
The findings of the study correlate very very closely with the RNZAF observations; the tragedy is that it has taken 3 fatalities to highlight impact of accumulated risk.
The findings of the study correlate very very closely with the RNZAF observations; the tragedy is that it has taken 3 fatalities to highlight impact of accumulated risk.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Official report here (2mb)
http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/downloads/pdf...06_UPDATED.pdf
Really eye opening, lots of failures all the way up the command chain and a history of bad decision making being shown within the Sqn, events covered up or not reported, or only reported later when evidence came to light.
Have a read, its long, around 100 pages but there is a lot of lessons in it.
http://www.nzdf.mil.nz/downloads/pdf...06_UPDATED.pdf
Really eye opening, lots of failures all the way up the command chain and a history of bad decision making being shown within the Sqn, events covered up or not reported, or only reported later when evidence came to light.
Have a read, its long, around 100 pages but there is a lot of lessons in it.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Age: 84
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Newspaper reports can get it pretty wrong, as we all know, so I'm not trying to pontificate about what should or shouldn't be done - just seems that things sound pretty crook if that's how it really is these days.
The Wellington hotel cost has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on anything as operations conducted from Ohakea, which is a mere 90 miles away, have NEVER required such accommodation. The flight in question has been carried out many, many times.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oxenos,
Although I don't know, it may be that a turn about toward land was initiated in the belief that the landward turn would have offered more visual references for the crews, who at the time hadn't IF aborted. Just a guess.
A sad loss.
Although I don't know, it may be that a turn about toward land was initiated in the belief that the landward turn would have offered more visual references for the crews, who at the time hadn't IF aborted. Just a guess.
A sad loss.
Last edited by Odigron; 28th Nov 2012 at 14:15.
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there no end to the recent crash reports involving un/under-qualified and over-confident helicopter aircrew? Whether it's the Puma in Catterick, the SAR heli in Almeria, the guy at the slate mine in Cumbria or this appalling read (and that list is just off the top of my head), the story doesn't seem to change all that much. For God's sake guys, wise up.
Last edited by onesquaremetre; 28th Nov 2012 at 16:58.
Thread Starter
Not being a helicopter pilot or intending to cast blame - can someone explain to me why - when finding oneself inadvertently in IMC, and not sure if you are still below MSA, the immediate procedure is not to slow to as near to stationary, pull collective and climb near vertically to above MSA?
Is it because of the difficulty of maintaining level flight IMC in a rotary wing aircraft; having only flow one once, they're difficult enough to hover VFR.
Why persist in maintaining forward speed in IMC, even at a relatively slow 60 knots?A web search seems to suggest there is a factor called Vmini - instrument flight minimum speed, and also assume that a feeling of `the leans' may be made worse by a rapid deceleration from cruise at say 120 knots to a much slower speed.
Even for special tactics trained military pilots, it must have been nightmarish - down at 200 feet or lower in a wobbly old Huey, Radalt set to 50 feet, in the dark, on NVGs, with State Highway 1 and township lights and big hills on one side, and a huge black hole where the ocean is on the other. And then to go IMC... poor buggers.
Is it because of the difficulty of maintaining level flight IMC in a rotary wing aircraft; having only flow one once, they're difficult enough to hover VFR.
Why persist in maintaining forward speed in IMC, even at a relatively slow 60 knots?A web search seems to suggest there is a factor called Vmini - instrument flight minimum speed, and also assume that a feeling of `the leans' may be made worse by a rapid deceleration from cruise at say 120 knots to a much slower speed.
Even for special tactics trained military pilots, it must have been nightmarish - down at 200 feet or lower in a wobbly old Huey, Radalt set to 50 feet, in the dark, on NVGs, with State Highway 1 and township lights and big hills on one side, and a huge black hole where the ocean is on the other. And then to go IMC... poor buggers.
Last edited by tartare; 28th Nov 2012 at 21:56.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: North Arm Cove, NSW, Australia
Age: 86
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Affordable defence spending
Hello Herkman; re your post #5.
I cannot abide the clamour for increased defence spending in Australia that is largely driven by a big lobby with associated vested interests. What is not being challenged by most analysts is the dysfunctional defence realm and multiple inappropriate hardware acquisitions, both generating huge waste of funding.
Relating any national expenditure to GDP is just accounting trickery because the cost of any government activity has to be funded from revenue. Consider the table (for Year 2010) at the following link: Comparison Defense Budgets & Military Spending Top Countries. Australia rated quite high compared with some other nations that have more active military commitments. US revenue for 2010 was $2.2trillion and about $700billion of defence related expenditure represented 31 percent of government income, which is a major reason for their parlous economic situation. They of course endeavour to coerce increased defence spending by other nations to help keep their powerful military-industrial complex ticking along and large European arms conglomerates act similarly.
Have to disagree with you Mate. It is not the recent supposed cost-savings initiative that has debilitated ADF capabilities; that stems from mismanagement at political/Public Service/military levels. In my view, the defence realm cannot expect preferential treatment above many other competing national imperatives. Australian defence expenditure would be quite adequate if pegged at 7.5 percent of revenue and taxpayer funding just has to be better managed.
The tip of a very big iceberg is only just beginning to show for the ADF. The operating costs for much of the dubious merit hardware being acquired are going to soar compared with other platforms being unnecessarily shed. ADF and RNZAF Iroquois for example were readily deployable by C-130 for regional contingencies, were also very cost-effective with significant upgrade available for less than $2million per airframe. However, the hugely expensive (and relatively unproven) medium lift MRH-90 requires C-17 airlift and costs perhaps 5 times the Iroquois to operate per flying hour. Whether aircrew will be able to get adequate flying to maintain proficiency is another question.
Methinks worldwide economic stagnation is looming and Australia in particular will be appreciably affected, leaving the Federal Government no choice but to raise taxes. Under such circumstances, it seems unlikely that either of the major political parties would commit to increasing defence expenditure.
I cannot abide the clamour for increased defence spending in Australia that is largely driven by a big lobby with associated vested interests. What is not being challenged by most analysts is the dysfunctional defence realm and multiple inappropriate hardware acquisitions, both generating huge waste of funding.
Relating any national expenditure to GDP is just accounting trickery because the cost of any government activity has to be funded from revenue. Consider the table (for Year 2010) at the following link: Comparison Defense Budgets & Military Spending Top Countries. Australia rated quite high compared with some other nations that have more active military commitments. US revenue for 2010 was $2.2trillion and about $700billion of defence related expenditure represented 31 percent of government income, which is a major reason for their parlous economic situation. They of course endeavour to coerce increased defence spending by other nations to help keep their powerful military-industrial complex ticking along and large European arms conglomerates act similarly.
Australia has just gone through a defence cost saving exercise where we no longer can do the job that is expected.
The tip of a very big iceberg is only just beginning to show for the ADF. The operating costs for much of the dubious merit hardware being acquired are going to soar compared with other platforms being unnecessarily shed. ADF and RNZAF Iroquois for example were readily deployable by C-130 for regional contingencies, were also very cost-effective with significant upgrade available for less than $2million per airframe. However, the hugely expensive (and relatively unproven) medium lift MRH-90 requires C-17 airlift and costs perhaps 5 times the Iroquois to operate per flying hour. Whether aircrew will be able to get adequate flying to maintain proficiency is another question.
This nonsense will only stop when we are involved in a major conflict.
Last edited by Bushranger 71; 28th Nov 2012 at 22:31. Reason: Grammar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we hadn't wasted so much money on various bits of equipment
or on modifying equipment that maybe we should have bought
"off the shelf" maybe we wouldn't be in such a state.
.
or on modifying equipment that maybe we should have bought
"off the shelf" maybe we wouldn't be in such a state.
.