Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Night HEMS Ops - Twin or Single?

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Night HEMS Ops - Twin or Single?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27th Jul 2003, 20:20
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Greenwich
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question HEMS Night Operations - Twin or Single

Hi fellow aviators: At the risk of bringing up this touchy subject I am interested to know what the general feeling is out there amongst HEMS pilots (Night Commanders) regarding the replacement of twin engine helicopters with singles - much pressure is being put on us by the manufactures to go the single route in efforts to capitalise on a sector of the market previously untouched - presently EU standards are pushing to have singles band for night time HEMS operations !

Have any studies been done in this regard and if so where can one get hold of them.

I am presently under much pressure to change our excisting 24 hr operations to a single engine fleet - we presently work under the most extreme of HEMS conditions. Interestingly, as is always the case, the pressure is coming from those ill informed of the exact nature of the type of work at hand and dangers involved - their argument being based purely on financial considerations. My pilots are not 'happy campers' at the moment facing these recommendations.......lets hear what the rest of you have to say.

Thanks guys !

Last edited by ROTO; 28th Jul 2003 at 01:41.
ROTO is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2003, 20:47
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Off the Planet
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ROTO:

If your question is about the UK it is a waste of a thread!

Even if it is addressed at somewhere else in Europe it still smells like a wind-up.
Mars is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2003, 21:06
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,290
Received 517 Likes on 215 Posts
Needs some better smelling bait me thinks!
SASless is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2003, 01:38
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Greenwich
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lets get to the point ! Extensive studies have been conducted to establish the safety margins between twin and single engine turbine helicopters.

I am interested to know what studies, if any, have been conducted between twin and single engine helicopters in HEMS "Night Operations' category..................if you are a HEMS pilot you'll know exactly where I am coming from - awaiting your comments.
ROTO is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2003, 02:40
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: LEAX, Spain
Age: 62
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not sure, but I doubt you'll find a study as specific as that.

Suggest you go chat to people like Native American Air Ambulance and other US hems operators. They'll give you the 'you're more likely to suffer a failure in one of the other single components' argument Day or night - what difference?

Maybe you can inform us a little more Mr ROTO...?
Dantruck is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2003, 02:48
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: N2832W8100
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Roto, you say your from Greenwich, I will assume that is Greenwhich U.K In which case, you are hardly going to be flying Single engine HEMs cause you are not allowed flyover London, which won't be much use to anyone!
autosync is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2003, 07:22
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Australia
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I hope this is a wind up.

“much pressure is being put on us by the manufactures to go the single route in efforts to capitalise on a sector of the market previously untouched”

Huh? What manufacturer is putting pressure on you to get out of your, and I’m assuming, current twins?

I am also assuming you’re a Chief Pilot of an existing 24 hr twin engined EMS operation in the UK “under the most extreme of HEMS conditions” and therefore also assuming a fair percentage of your flight time is under the IFR?
If that’s the case, and you need to ask the question you have posted on this forum, it’s time to get out.
Leave the Chief Pilots position to someone who knows what their doing, and who can safely run that EMS operation.

Gentlemen, this is a windup.


P.S. I’d love to come and see the “singles band for night time HEMS operations” where they playing?
Av8r is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2003, 18:17
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
ROTO: Methinks you are a teenager messing about with this web site
You are 'current' on 7 types at the moment...busy little tinker!
JAR states 3 is the max for a HEMS driver...oops caught you out..

Have another go...............


try: "compulsory wearing of parachutes in all helos over 1130kg"

Thomas coupling is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2003, 23:55
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: oceanside
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i think the " hi fellow aviators" line should have been the first sign that "roto" may not be up to snuff.
dr
chopperdr is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2003, 21:17
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Paramedics join night Single Engine copter ban

See the article. What does PPRUNE think?

http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.a...5E3102,00.html
NickLappos is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2003, 21:51
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up Am I in the minority here?...

I'm probably gunna get clobbered for this, but I think they have a point if their concern relates to relying solely on the pilot's visibility without proper instruments to navigate during limited visibility... especially if called out to the bush. Now, if the concern was single engine vs. twins... find new medics. However, additional instruments and an instrument rating is a reasonable control measure to ask for.

(ducking for cover)
RDRickster is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2003, 21:57
  #12 (permalink)  
High Nr
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Premierbeatme is a bit Ac/Dc

After killing 9 people in less than 3 years, one must ask why should any Medico make it 10????

And those 9 fatalities were either crew or patients. [Killed, not dead from previous injuries]

Premier Beatie is a wimp......he knows that he must fund the local services with proper machines and staff…hence money....but he is a typical Australian politician...a born liar...and by is own words, wont take the responsibility.

And there will be more.....until someone says enough.......And the regulator, CASA has been totally culpable in their lack of sincere regulation of these activities. Let’s have flexi days, short weeks and many many meetings, but that Queensland thing can wait.

CASA is totally responsible.....and through that idiot Minister to Howard himself.

There will be more, unless the Regulator sets the standard that the local folk can follow.

But they didn't, can't and won't.
 
Old 11th Nov 2003, 00:35
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N20,W99
Age: 53
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's not only about the Medics . . .

All around the world there are pilots operating single engine helicopters where an engine failure would mean almost certain tragedy.

Just now after the helicopter accident we had here last week legislators are talking about the safety of single engine helicopters over the city, police, TV and all the new 407's and 350's around.

As you will see in the pic below this is probably one of the worst places in the world to have an engine fail, just in that picture there are 9 heliports and all of them get used at least once a day, some like the the most visible one have more than 10 single engine ops a day, look at the pic, and imagine if the engine were to fail in one of those at day or night, you will either end up bouncing on top a building, hitting wires or people.

But on the other side we have never had an engine failure related accident in a single.

The worst accidents have always been twins, we have had S76's, Bell 222's, AS355's, 212's and a twin engine Bell 206 go down in the past years,

Accidents in singles have been few, actually 3, one hit an antenna AS350, B206 that got into VRS while maneuvering abruptly during a police chase near the building in the pic, and the last one the heavy B206JR 15 days ago.

So to me its not really about single or twin, my personal opinion is they are statistically equally likely to have a failure.

I think it has to do more with things like, GOOD MAINTENANCE, Company SOP's and Management, Pilot experience under difficult situations, etc.

Today there are many things to help you make single engine ops safer, engine HUMS equipment, newer more powerful helicopters like the 407, 350B3, and others.

I would much rather fly a well impeccably maintained 407 than any old, marginally maintained twin.

BlenderPilot is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2003, 01:50
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Single Engine" is really used as shorthand and would better be described as "simple". As others have identified, the provision of an autopilot/stab, radionav systems flight instruments and pilots with instrument capability and currency are the critical requirements for reducing the night time accidents.
Helinut is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2003, 01:57
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see the distinction, but think the effort is misdirected. Why not call for what is needed, instead of using code words that will assure they won't get what they want?
NickLappos is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2003, 02:10
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 48 Deg South
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
High NR - You say they need to give agencies better equipment.

What about QES and their 412s ??


Autorotate is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2003, 02:17
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I dont see the report as having been written very clearly. It initially states "Meetings of ambulance officers in central Queensland yesterday voted to allow paramedics to refuse to fly in single-engine helicopters which rely on a pilot's visibility and not instruments to navigate" which infers that single engine aircraft are inherently dangerous at night.

Shouldnt the Union Rep spokesman Steve Crowe rather have said he expected a decision within a week on whether other paramedics would endorse the total ban on night flying in helicopters that do not meet a minimum equipment level for night flying.
Nigd3 is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2003, 02:42
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: AB, Canada
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We seem to be in agreement that requesting a stabilized IFR platform is what they mean, and a reasonable request.

I'm still of the opinion that with all other things being equal a twin is safer. I'm quite aware of the stats and the scenarios, but when you lose 50% of your power you still have more options that losing 100%. I wouldn't be here anymore if I flew singles. With that in mind, I think it's reasonable to ask for a twin for an operation that spends a lot of time hovering over hostile surfaces, with lives on the line, and with other professionals on board.

I do see a bit of hypocrisy saying all that while I know that firefighting, longlining, etc. is routinely done on singles. In those cases, it's really just the pilot that accepts the risk, one would argue risk that is a part of the job. To make a rule that all commercial work be done on twins would initially hurt the industry, likely beyond recovery for many. Eventually, though, the need would rise to the cost, the experience level would all be on twins, so perhaps we'd start seeing comparable stats and know certainly whether twins are or are not safer.


One last thought: When we start blaming the lack of equipment on board for an accident, I contend that the blame is misdirected. If the equipment was not sufficient for the mission, then the mission shouldn't have happened, making the primary cause judgement.

Matthew.
heedm is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2003, 02:58
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 445
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Heedm

Good points.

Just one thing, if the regs arent in place to determine what the equipment required is to complete the mission, so the pilot can make a judgement, therefore make the primary cause lack of clear definition?

If there are EMS flights being conducted with varying levels of helicopter avionics, does that not mean there are no set standards for the operators and pilots to adhere to?

This is a genuine question by the way? I may be being naive but surely there are some guidelines and rules from CASA for these sort of ops?
Nigd3 is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2003, 05:34
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: australia
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think we should read "single engine" as meaning "single pilot".

It has nothing to do with the number of engines, none of the rescue accidents has resulted from an engine failure except where the aircraft ran out of fuel.

The problem is that we have a modern fleet of aircraft with quality pilots at the controls coming to grief at night. The predominant feature of these accidents is that the machines and pilots are instrumented and trained to NIGHT VFR standards but are flying into IMC.

In some cases it has been shown that reasonable standard operating procedures and/or recurrent training was next to non exsistent.
deeper is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

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