PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions-91/)
-   -   Bell ditching off Newcastle (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/625288-bell-ditching-off-newcastle.html)

wheels_down 6th Sep 2019 12:47

Bell ditching off Newcastle
 
Reports of a Bell down off Newcastle.

Was on Base for 30 at Williamstown but appeared to have positioned for a ditching just off the sand dunes.

The weather is quite poor gusting 30 to 40.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....76d5c9d52.jpeg

Captain Garmin 6th Sep 2019 21:36


TBM-Legend 6th Sep 2019 22:42

The AMSA thing is a joke when it has to fly the jet from Melbourne to Williamtown area to effect a search. Four aircraft to cover Australia. Think about it...


mcoates 6th Sep 2019 23:17

I have flown across this beach a number of times and it is a white pointer shark breeding spot.

I was flying once in an Allegro LSA and the shadow of my fuselage passed over the top of one of the very large sharks sitting just outside of the breakers. The shark was longer than the shadow of a 6.5 m long fuselage !! And because of Newcastle being so close you are only at 500 feet AGL passing through the area as a VFR aircraft...... makes you think. After this I went had a look on Google to find out more about the location and the sharks being there and I also found out that there are multiple gamefishing, land based, world records in this area and several boat based world records. There are some really big sharks in this area.

Not the very best place to be ditching, you not only have the problems of landing in the ocean but then you have problems of getting picked off swimming to shore. Fingers crossed for a good outcome.

Looking at the lifelike tracking for the rescue aircraft doesn't really make much sense either. This aircraft went missing at around 6:30 PM last night and the rescue aircraft didn't leave Melbourne until 730 this morning ? What am I missing

BigPapi 6th Sep 2019 23:34

TV news reporting this morning that search ongoing, no wreckage or occupants located yet.

wardie 6th Sep 2019 23:41

The Bombardier jet was searching last night at least up to midnight and returned to Melb to refuel and swap crew.

Currently Westpac 2 is hovering in an area about 5km SSE of Fishermans bay and has been there for a while with CL60 orbiting that location.

hawk_eye 6th Sep 2019 23:46

Don’t the RAAF have a Search and Rescue helicopter at NTL for when the fighters are doing training over water?

It appears as though the jet was sent to NTL last night...https://flightaware.com/live/flight/...018Z/YMEN/YWLM

Squawk7700 6th Sep 2019 23:51


Originally Posted by TBM-Legend (Post 10563756)
The AMSA thing is a joke when it has to fly the jet from Melbourne to Williamtown area to effect a search. Four aircraft to cover Australia. Think about it...

Yes and no... being a jet it’s very fast. If it’s sitting there idle with crew at the ready, they are up there in no time.

logansi 7th Sep 2019 00:20

Reported to be five onboard, aircraft was flying from Brisbane to Bankstown, stopped for fuel at Coffs Harbour

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...40972a23a67121

Duck Pilot 7th Sep 2019 00:37

The article is behind a paywall.

5 POB flying from Brisbane to Sydney in a Bell 205 is a bit unusual, not that I’m saying there is anything wrong with it. Quicker in a jet and a lot cheaper. Maybe they were doing a scenic.

Horatio Leafblower 7th Sep 2019 00:42

Hi Duck
It's a Huey (UH-1H) not a Jetranger...

...and god only knows what it was doing but as a single engine experimental ex-mil helo, it's not on a charter.

logansi 7th Sep 2019 01:07


Originally Posted by Duck Pilot (Post 10563815)
The article is behind a paywall.

5 POB flying from Brisbane to Sydney in a Bell 205 is a bit unusual, not that I’m saying there is anything wrong with it. Quicker in a jet and a lot cheaper. Maybe they were doing a scenic.

Five people are missing and a major search operation is underway after a helicopter faded off the radar off the coast of Port Stephens overnight.

The privately owned Bell UH1 helicopter, known as a “Huey”, went missing in destructive winds and storms about 6:30pm last night.

According to police, the helicopter, which had five people on board, went missing in the vicinity of Anna Bay.

There has been sightings of debris and oil in the water as the search for the aircraft resumed on Saturday, an Australian Maritime Safety Authority spokesman said.

But due to poor conditions nothing else had been spotted.

It is believed the private helicopter had taken off from Brisbane, stopped in Coffs Harbour to refuel and was flying to Bankstown Airport when it disappeared.

A search involving the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, police and marine rescue was conducted last night and was due to resume at 7am today.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...40972a23a67121

gulliBell 7th Sep 2019 01:43

The data points in that ALT/GS plot are odd. Going from 60 kts to 160 kts, and then zero kts, in the space of a few minutes...there must be 60+ kts worth of tail wind as the UH-1H typically only does 100 kts IAS. With a turn into wind followed by a turn downwind again. And all those altitude changes. Makes you wonder what they might have been doing, must have been a wild ride.

megan 7th Sep 2019 04:19


as a single engine experimental ex-mil helo, it's not on a charter
Brisbane Helicopters used the aircraft for joyrides

Bell UH1H Huey Warbird flights. Get to da Choppa Book your seats now for our upcoming Huey flights Co Pilot seat Observer seats Troop seats Gunner seats

aroa 7th Sep 2019 06:28

'Up there in no time'... Anyone alive in the water under those temps and conditions are not going to last for long.
VERY quick time is of the essence.*
RIP the 5

* Remember Bass Strait.

Ascend Charlie 7th Sep 2019 06:50

A rate of descent of 9000ft/min before disappearing off radar suggests a lack of control and would be unlikely to be survivable. Perhaps a mast bump from the turbulent ride or chop off the tail boom.

flying-spike 7th Sep 2019 09:08

Aaand cue Dick Smith
 

Originally Posted by mcoates (Post 10563778)
I have flown across this beach a number of times and it is a white pointer shark breeding spot.

I was flying once in an Allegro LSA and the shadow of my fuselage passed over the top of one of the very large sharks sitting just outside of the breakers. The shark was longer than the shadow of a 6.5 m long fuselage !! And because of Newcastle being so close you are only at 500 feet AGL passing through the area as a VFR aircraft...... makes you think. After this I went had a look on Google to find out more about the location and the sharks being there and I also found out that there are multiple gamefishing, land based, world records in this area and several boat based world records. There are some really big sharks in this area.

Not the very best place to be ditching, you not only have the problems of landing in the ocean but then you have problems of getting picked off swimming to shore. Fingers crossed for a good outcome.

Looking at the lifelike tracking for the rescue aircraft doesn't really make much sense either. This aircraft went missing at around 6:30 PM last night and the rescue aircraft didn't leave Melbourne until 730 this morning ? What am I missing

It will plainly be the fault of the airspace.

roundsounds 7th Sep 2019 10:42


Originally Posted by gulliBell (Post 10563833)
The data points in that ALT/GS plot are odd. Going from 60 kts to 160 kts, and then zero kts, in the space of a few minutes...there must be 60+ kts worth of tail wind as the UH-1H typically only does 100 kts IAS. With a turn into wind followed by a turn downwind again. And all those altitude changes. Makes you wonder what they might have been doing, must have been a wild ride.

Perhaps a Pitot / Static system fault?

Capt Fathom 7th Sep 2019 11:21

Perhaps Flightradar is not that accurate over short time frames!

Lead Balloon 7th Sep 2019 11:21

Or perhaps the 60kt winds that were blowing and the associated mechanical turbulence at around 500’?

markis10 7th Sep 2019 20:26


Originally Posted by Horatio Leafblower (Post 10563816)
Hi Duck
It's a Huey (UH-1H) not a Jetranger...

...and god only knows what it was doing but as a single engine experimental ex-mil helo, it's not on a charter.

Pretty sure Duck was across it mentioning the Bell 205, the civil ver of the UH1

megan 7th Sep 2019 23:33

It's not a 205, but a UH-1H, as said by Horatio. (Just to be pedantic ;))

UH-1H TCDS http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...%20Rev%202.pdf

205 TCDS https://web.archive.org/web/20110608...4FILE/H1SW.pdf

gulliBell 7th Sep 2019 23:59

Compliance with Note 17 of the UH-1H TCDS might be difficult to explain in this instance.

Ascend Charlie 8th Sep 2019 00:42

And while we are hanging off the edge of our chairs, waiting for Gullibell to tell us what Note 17 says, here is a short commercial break....

Duck Pilot 8th Sep 2019 00:44

Sadly the person who can probably explain why pax were on board was the pilot, if any of what has been mentioned above is true.

Wonder how the insurance company will react once the dust settles and the final report has been published?


gulliBell 8th Sep 2019 01:18


Originally Posted by Ascend Charlie (Post 10564555)
..waiting for Gullibell to tell us what Note 17 says....

It says:
"No person may be carried in this helicopter during fight unless that person is essential to the purpose of the flight".


megan 8th Sep 2019 02:38

CASR Part 132

4.3 Carrying passengers

4.3.1 Limited category aircraft may carry passengers in a private flight, a cost-sharing flight or an adventure flight. Adventure flights are a popular tourist attraction and can offset the, sometimes considerable, costs of operating and maintaining a warbird or historic aircraft.

4.3.2 No more than six persons (including crew) may be carried on a WHR aircraft, regardless of the seating capacity of the aircraft.

4.3.3 If a WHR aircraft has a seating capacity in excess of six, an application may be made in writing, or as otherwise directed, to an administering authority for approval to carry a greater number than six. The outcome will depend on the type of aircraft involved and a comprehensive risk assessment that would be required as part of the consideration of such an application. Any approval granted will not exceed the aircraft’s designed seating capacity.
All legal on the face of it.

havick 8th Sep 2019 02:52

Going by the avionics fit out as posted on the rotorheads thread, it doesn’t look like this Aircraft was appropriately equipped for NVFR let alone two pilot IFR. Which ponders the question what was the aircraft doing out in the dark over water?

megan 8th Sep 2019 05:12

Certainly not the standard UH-1H instrument panel, missing the nice big attitude indicator and HSI, replaced by an iPad, wonder what that displayed? Centre console is missing all the lovely radio gear as well.

Photo courtesy of zhishengji751 and John Eacott on Rotorheads.


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....4ef67084bc.png

The original

Squawk7700 8th Sep 2019 07:50


There are devices such as the iLevil and Aeolus Talos, but it would be be highly not recommend to rely on them. I’d hate to think the that they did or for anyone to consider fitting one as a primary instrument, despite an aircraft being experimental, limited or otherwise.

I also note that in the pic that their iPad is not plugged in. The better attitude products with external sensors used a wired USB data cable connection.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....b96e064309.png

This is the Talos device that I use. It does NOT use the gyros in the iPad.

Professional Amateur 8th Sep 2019 09:01

There is likely an AI under the Ipad. A photo from however many week or months ago of the panel isnt really proof let alone indicative of what they had when flying.

.....they may have been on goggles and therefore legal vfr with differing weather and alt restrictions.

Squawk7700 8th Sep 2019 09:44


Originally Posted by Professional Amateur (Post 10564734)
There is likely an AI under the Ipad. A photo from however many week or months ago of the panel isnt really proof let alone indicative of what they had when flying.

.....they may have been on goggles and therefore legal vfr with differing weather and alt restrictions.

Look closely at the picture. The previously fitted instruments have been blanked out behind the iPad.

Nipper 8th Sep 2019 10:29


.....they may have been on goggles and therefore legal vfr with differing weather and alt restrictions.
Aircraft fit doesn't meet the requirements for "goggles".

Ascend Charlie 8th Sep 2019 22:55

If you are putting in a flight plan, the Huey acft type goes in as a B05 or BH05 - can't remember which.

Fris B. Fairing 9th Sep 2019 00:10

The manufacturer regards the UH-1D & UH-1H as the Bell Model 205. The data plate would probably say:
Manufacturer's Model 205
Customer's Model UH-1H

megan 9th Sep 2019 00:46

AC, the flight plan designator for all Iroquois models is UH1, thats 204/205/210/all UH-1 variants, etc

212 - B212
412 - B412
206 - B06 (probably the one you're thinking of)

You're correct Fris.
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....214e8eca2e.jpg

Professional Amateur 9th Sep 2019 03:20

Squak7700...I see what you mean. Yeah thats a bit nasty if flown at night without an AI.

Nipper...ok. Not sure what civ gog requirements are regarding instruments. Nvfr instrument requirements I guess....which it doesn't meet then.

Squawk7700 9th Sep 2019 03:51


Originally Posted by Professional Amateur (Post 10565282)
Nipper...ok. Not sure what civ gog requirements are regarding instruments. Nvfr instrument requirements I guess....which it doesn't meet then.

There’s an AH over on the left. Massive parralax error though, assuming it was working. Not much else needed for NVFR it there’s a VOR or proper GPS fitted.


Dick Smith 9th Sep 2019 04:11

What was the ATC clearance the pilot was following?

Interesting that the aircraft started to turn left at the same place pilots are often asked to hold.

Why the silence about the clearance details?

Dick Smith 9th Sep 2019 04:18

Wheels down, on your first post you say:


“Was on Base for 30 at Williamtown but appeared to have positioned for a ditching just off the sand dunes.”
Wheels down, have you had some information on this from air traffic control or are you just surmising it? I notice that the aircraft started to turn left at the normal holding point at Anna Bay.

Can anyone verify the clearance details that were provided by Willy ATC?


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:45.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.