Two killed in A109 near Bournemouth - AAIB report published
controller:
I'm not a 109 man, but if it's got electrickery such as EFIS then I would hazard a guess that backup mechanical instruments were fitted somewhere.
However, it seems to me that even backup instruments wouldn't have helped in this situation.
I'm not a 109 man, but if it's got electrickery such as EFIS then I would hazard a guess that backup mechanical instruments were fitted somewhere.
However, it seems to me that even backup instruments wouldn't have helped in this situation.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh HeliEng..
In almost 30 years this AAIB report is the most comprehensive (and convincing) I have read. The loss of a well-liked and respected fellow-aviator - and of course his passenger - should not cloud balanced judgment. To claim to a "standard AAIB cop-out" is an unfair and unwarranted slur against probably the world's finest agencies in the field of aircraft accident investigation. (I have absolutely connection with them by the way). bm
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ask the voices!
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BoeingMEL,
I am really pleased that you feel this way about this report.
I DON'T
And I am not the only one.
In my post I also followed up my comment with "but I'm bias" and I am not trying to hide this, and I have also stated that it is my opinion (which I am allowed).
But I am not alone. I have spoken to more than one person who shares my sceptisism of the report.
I am really pleased that you feel this way about this report.
I DON'T
And I am not the only one.
In my post I also followed up my comment with "but I'm bias" and I am not trying to hide this, and I have also stated that it is my opinion (which I am allowed).
But I am not alone. I have spoken to more than one person who shares my sceptisism of the report.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HeliEng
I can understand your distress at the loss of a friend, and you're obviously entitled to accept or reject the conclusions, but your comment "a standard AAIB cop out" is very unfair. The conclusions in this case may be right or may be wrong - I'm not in a position to say. However, what I am able to say, based on close analysis of many AAIB reports over many years during the course of my work, is that there is no such thing as a 'standard AAIB cop-out'.
I'm not suggesting AAIB inspectors are infallible, any more than the rest of us, but they genuinely do everything they can, using their skills and experience, to discover the cause or causes of an accident. If, at the conclusion of their investigations, they aren't satisfied they have established the cause(s) then they say so.
I have enormous respect for both the expertise of the investigators and the total integrity of the AAIB as a body.
Over the years, I've read two reports with which I've strongly disagreed; both fatal accident investigations and coincidentally in other countries. One concluded pilot error - I felt, and am still convinced 20 plus years later, that they must have missed something. The other was inconclusive but offered a number of possible factors that may have combined to cause the accident which included a very gentle suggestion of possible pilot error. Inconceivable. Shouldn't even have been included as a possibility. It may or may not be a coincidence that, in both cases, the pilot was a very close friend.
I can understand your distress at the loss of a friend, and you're obviously entitled to accept or reject the conclusions, but your comment "a standard AAIB cop out" is very unfair. The conclusions in this case may be right or may be wrong - I'm not in a position to say. However, what I am able to say, based on close analysis of many AAIB reports over many years during the course of my work, is that there is no such thing as a 'standard AAIB cop-out'.
I'm not suggesting AAIB inspectors are infallible, any more than the rest of us, but they genuinely do everything they can, using their skills and experience, to discover the cause or causes of an accident. If, at the conclusion of their investigations, they aren't satisfied they have established the cause(s) then they say so.
I have enormous respect for both the expertise of the investigators and the total integrity of the AAIB as a body.
Over the years, I've read two reports with which I've strongly disagreed; both fatal accident investigations and coincidentally in other countries. One concluded pilot error - I felt, and am still convinced 20 plus years later, that they must have missed something. The other was inconclusive but offered a number of possible factors that may have combined to cause the accident which included a very gentle suggestion of possible pilot error. Inconceivable. Shouldn't even have been included as a possibility. It may or may not be a coincidence that, in both cases, the pilot was a very close friend.
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 12th Jun 2005 at 18:32.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Pierre et Miquelon
Age: 68
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HeliEng,
Many of us who have been in this industry for many years have lost close friends and have been unable to believe what happened to them, especially if we believe their skills to have been above average. However, it's a sad fact that even great aviators sometimes get into situations they are unable to cope with, especially if it's a situation with which they have neither the training nor recency to draw on to help when it all suddenly gets close to the point of nom return. As an instrument examiner of many years I have found many experienced and capable pilots who have been unable to cope even in situations they were pretty much expecting in an instrument training or check flight. I have been in simulator checks which, had they been in real helicopters would have ended in the total loss of the aircraft and all its occupants when trying to cope with even very simple emergencies which shouldn't have been life-threatening. Sometimes the greatest pressure put on a pilot is by himself. It's sad but true.
I also have the greatest of respect for the AAIB. I agree, with FL that they, like any other body, are not infallible and I accept the fact that you admit to being biased in this case. However, if you or any of the other people you speak of, have anything to back up your scepticism surely you shoud bring it to the attention of the authorities or try, withinn the forum rules, to air it here so other may try and help to bring it to the attention of the authorities. I am truly sorry you have lost a close friend and I hope that if you have anything to bring to bear on the situation you will try and get the investigation reopened. From my experience I think it's unlikely and you'll just have to try and move on. I'm sorry for the loss of your friend - a fatal accident is a sad event for any aviator, even more so when it involves someone you respected and to whom you were close.
Many of us who have been in this industry for many years have lost close friends and have been unable to believe what happened to them, especially if we believe their skills to have been above average. However, it's a sad fact that even great aviators sometimes get into situations they are unable to cope with, especially if it's a situation with which they have neither the training nor recency to draw on to help when it all suddenly gets close to the point of nom return. As an instrument examiner of many years I have found many experienced and capable pilots who have been unable to cope even in situations they were pretty much expecting in an instrument training or check flight. I have been in simulator checks which, had they been in real helicopters would have ended in the total loss of the aircraft and all its occupants when trying to cope with even very simple emergencies which shouldn't have been life-threatening. Sometimes the greatest pressure put on a pilot is by himself. It's sad but true.
I also have the greatest of respect for the AAIB. I agree, with FL that they, like any other body, are not infallible and I accept the fact that you admit to being biased in this case. However, if you or any of the other people you speak of, have anything to back up your scepticism surely you shoud bring it to the attention of the authorities or try, withinn the forum rules, to air it here so other may try and help to bring it to the attention of the authorities. I am truly sorry you have lost a close friend and I hope that if you have anything to bring to bear on the situation you will try and get the investigation reopened. From my experience I think it's unlikely and you'll just have to try and move on. I'm sorry for the loss of your friend - a fatal accident is a sad event for any aviator, even more so when it involves someone you respected and to whom you were close.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ask the voices!
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
anjouan,
I have to say, with no disrespect to any other Ppruners, that your post has made the most sense to me, and I fully take on board what you say.
FL,
I hear what you are saying, but like I said before, it is my opinion, and to it I am entitled. At no point have I said that anything within my posts are fact. I have stated at all points that I am biased and it is just my opinion.
I am almost wishing I hadn't made my earlier posts. I was being honest and giving my opinion and now I am having to try and justify my opinion and to be honest I can't.
It is very hard losing a friend and a colleague, but something that I have had to deal with more than once.
I do not know what it is about the report that I do not believe it just does not ring true. Something isn't right.
There seems just no point in continuing this circular arguement. There really is no solution as everything here is personal opinion.
RIP Max, you will never be forgotten
Regards
Helieng
I have to say, with no disrespect to any other Ppruners, that your post has made the most sense to me, and I fully take on board what you say.
FL,
I hear what you are saying, but like I said before, it is my opinion, and to it I am entitled. At no point have I said that anything within my posts are fact. I have stated at all points that I am biased and it is just my opinion.
I am almost wishing I hadn't made my earlier posts. I was being honest and giving my opinion and now I am having to try and justify my opinion and to be honest I can't.
It is very hard losing a friend and a colleague, but something that I have had to deal with more than once.
I do not know what it is about the report that I do not believe it just does not ring true. Something isn't right.
There seems just no point in continuing this circular arguement. There really is no solution as everything here is personal opinion.
RIP Max, you will never be forgotten
Regards
Helieng
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 51
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The purpose of an AAIB is to learn from the mistakes of others, as we all know that we wuill not live long enough to make all them ourselves.
Few pilots are naturally cautious people; we are made so by training and by regulation.
A perfectly serviceable helicopter crashed killing both on board. It is very sad, and I know people who really do miss the pilot. But some pilot error must be at fault, as the aircraft hit the ground that all his skills should have had him trying to avoid. We can all take it as a warning, and remember Max by being more careful every time we fly that we don't let a situation deteriorate to the point we don't have an escape option that is within our capabilities. Many of us have, I am sure, flown when any significant deterioration in the weather fom forecast would have put us either outside our abilities or outside the privileges of our licences - I know I have been involved in such a flight, although not as Captain. Remember this warning of the possible results, even for those of us that got away with it that time.
Few pilots are naturally cautious people; we are made so by training and by regulation.
A perfectly serviceable helicopter crashed killing both on board. It is very sad, and I know people who really do miss the pilot. But some pilot error must be at fault, as the aircraft hit the ground that all his skills should have had him trying to avoid. We can all take it as a warning, and remember Max by being more careful every time we fly that we don't let a situation deteriorate to the point we don't have an escape option that is within our capabilities. Many of us have, I am sure, flown when any significant deterioration in the weather fom forecast would have put us either outside our abilities or outside the privileges of our licences - I know I have been involved in such a flight, although not as Captain. Remember this warning of the possible results, even for those of us that got away with it that time.
Last edited by Send Clowns; 12th Jun 2005 at 21:48.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the posts on this thread, I see that Max was a popular and capable pilot. I sympathise with those who lost a friend.
I have found myself at a similar loss on several occasions and I too found it difficult to completely support the findings of the subsequent investigations and on reading the reports referred to in this thread, I think I know why.
I agree that the AAIB are professional and very thorough, and their remit is to advise where they see fault and to suggest corrective measures. They have a wealth of expertise and resources at hand, therefore, we should learn from what they say.
I have found, however, that where the cause of an accident is not supported by unquestionable evidence, there is a tendency towards phraseology that implies pilot error or inability. They may well be right, nonetheless, if they make assumptions which indicate pilot error in a case where pilot error is unproven, then surely they must also state that their findings are inconclusive based on the fact that they don't REALLY know EXACTLY what happened, they just believe that it happened that way.
As pilots, we seem to be guilty unless proven innocent, I think it should be the other way around.
TM
I have found myself at a similar loss on several occasions and I too found it difficult to completely support the findings of the subsequent investigations and on reading the reports referred to in this thread, I think I know why.
I agree that the AAIB are professional and very thorough, and their remit is to advise where they see fault and to suggest corrective measures. They have a wealth of expertise and resources at hand, therefore, we should learn from what they say.
I have found, however, that where the cause of an accident is not supported by unquestionable evidence, there is a tendency towards phraseology that implies pilot error or inability. They may well be right, nonetheless, if they make assumptions which indicate pilot error in a case where pilot error is unproven, then surely they must also state that their findings are inconclusive based on the fact that they don't REALLY know EXACTLY what happened, they just believe that it happened that way.
As pilots, we seem to be guilty unless proven innocent, I think it should be the other way around.
TM
Guest
Posts: n/a
ok, assuming the cockpit looked like this, what exactly would be dead if there was a "screen failure"? just the electronic screens?
so that would leave an attitude indicator/airspeed indicator/altimeter/vsi all working?
how would most people cope with this in night imc? i would like to think any instrument rated pilot (i believe this pilot had an FAA IR) would have the sense to revert to the "old fashioned" scan of the instruments to keep straight and level?
im not criticizing this pilot or theorizing about this particular case, i'm just using this case as a starting point for a discussion
Looks like it's only got the two EFIS screens, so if they go, it leaves the pitot/statics and the standby AI/AH.
Presumably there is a standby compass somewhere as well.
Better red than ...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Based on this fit, if the EFIS is "out" then would there be a VOR/LOC in operation (assuming established on the localiser and on glideslope in night/ poor vis conditions at the time?
Are the pitot and static port instruments are clustered for easy scanning (in this fit out) ?
Are the pitot and static port instruments are clustered for easy scanning (in this fit out) ?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the Edge
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helicopter-redeye
Once your EFIS screens go that’s it! (But it would want to be a pretty bad day at the office.)
You’re back to your static instruments and compass.
Each EFIS has the capability to enter the “COMPOSITE” mode and will automatically do so on failure. This provides a compressed version of the EADI and the EHSI on a single display.
Once your EFIS screens go that’s it! (But it would want to be a pretty bad day at the office.)
You’re back to your static instruments and compass.
Each EFIS has the capability to enter the “COMPOSITE” mode and will automatically do so on failure. This provides a compressed version of the EADI and the EHSI on a single display.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
This is beginning, IMHO, to sound like aviation version of the Diana, Princess of Wales case.
------------------------------------------------------
Todays Times;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...849392,00.html
Air crash lawyer ‘in fear of his life’
Dipesh Gadher, Transport Correspondent
A MILLIONAIRE lawyer with close links to a jailed Russian oil tycoon received death threats before he was killed in a helicopter crash, an inquest is likely to hear this week.
A friend is expected to say in court that Stephen Curtis feared for his life and possibly the welfare of his wife and teenage daughter. Curtis, 45, a legal adviser to Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the jailed former head of the Yukos oil company, died when his Augusta 109 helicopter plunged into a field near Bournemouth airport, Dorset, in March last year. The pilot, Max Radford, was also killed.
An Air Accidents Investigation Branch report found no evidence of foul play and appeared to blame the crash on Radford, who had “probably become disorientated” in poor weather conditions.
Despite the findings, speculation about events leading up to Curtis’s death has been intense. Several media reports quoted unnamed associates of the lawyer saying that Curtis believed his life was at risk from individuals in Russia.
Radford’s parents say the investigation report is “a whitewash” and their son was “a very experienced pilot”.
A three-day inquest, involving a jury sitting before a coroner in Bournemouth, will begin tomorrow. It will hear evidence from up to 16 witnesses, including Curtis’s friend whose name has not been disclosed. Most of the witnesses are believed to be technical experts, including an explosives specialist. Curtis’s widow, Sarah, has provided a written statement.
Her late husband, who lived in a £5m castle in Portland, Dorset, took control of Yukos after Khodorkovsky fell out with President Vladimir Putin. The Russian oligarch was arrested on suspicion of tax evasion and fraud in 2003. Curtis had helped to set up a network of offshore accounts for Yukos, a former state-owned company.
----------------------------------------------
Perhaps a copy of this thread should be presented to the inquiry. Seems to tell a tale or two!
------------------------------------------------------
Todays Times;
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...849392,00.html
Air crash lawyer ‘in fear of his life’
Dipesh Gadher, Transport Correspondent
A MILLIONAIRE lawyer with close links to a jailed Russian oil tycoon received death threats before he was killed in a helicopter crash, an inquest is likely to hear this week.
A friend is expected to say in court that Stephen Curtis feared for his life and possibly the welfare of his wife and teenage daughter. Curtis, 45, a legal adviser to Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the jailed former head of the Yukos oil company, died when his Augusta 109 helicopter plunged into a field near Bournemouth airport, Dorset, in March last year. The pilot, Max Radford, was also killed.
An Air Accidents Investigation Branch report found no evidence of foul play and appeared to blame the crash on Radford, who had “probably become disorientated” in poor weather conditions.
Despite the findings, speculation about events leading up to Curtis’s death has been intense. Several media reports quoted unnamed associates of the lawyer saying that Curtis believed his life was at risk from individuals in Russia.
Radford’s parents say the investigation report is “a whitewash” and their son was “a very experienced pilot”.
A three-day inquest, involving a jury sitting before a coroner in Bournemouth, will begin tomorrow. It will hear evidence from up to 16 witnesses, including Curtis’s friend whose name has not been disclosed. Most of the witnesses are believed to be technical experts, including an explosives specialist. Curtis’s widow, Sarah, has provided a written statement.
Her late husband, who lived in a £5m castle in Portland, Dorset, took control of Yukos after Khodorkovsky fell out with President Vladimir Putin. The Russian oligarch was arrested on suspicion of tax evasion and fraud in 2003. Curtis had helped to set up a network of offshore accounts for Yukos, a former state-owned company.
----------------------------------------------
Perhaps a copy of this thread should be presented to the inquiry. Seems to tell a tale or two!
SS:
No need to show the thread, just send a copy of the accident report.
Unusually, the AAIB looked for - and didn't find - evidence of "unauthorised interference".
No need to show the thread, just send a copy of the accident report.
Unusually, the AAIB looked for - and didn't find - evidence of "unauthorised interference".
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Ask the voices!
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another report from Bournemouth local paper regarding the accident and the inquest.
Newspaper Report
Newspaper Report