NYC Longranger crashes into river
Guest
Posts: n/a
I was just thinking that NRfairy - If you think of all the hundreds of weekly movements from the Manhattan heliports then 3 accidents since the early 90's in the vicinity doesn't seem worth dragging out to me - but we're not the egg shell treading public are we?
Speaking of press accuracy, I notice that this particular Bell runs on diesel !
Gentleman Aviator
And the BBC last night were talking about a Bell Long Range helicopter......
....... not with that many pax methinks
....... not with that many pax methinks
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Desert Rat
Age: 53
Posts: 675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LongRanger
Everybody was lucky and walked away... I think the news channels make too much a deal of it. I have seen the news cast on one of those channels where one lady couldn't even spell out the words...Just a bad day that ended lucky...So actually it was a good day. What you all think? A good landing is whereby everyone walks away. Comments please. 
Does that rule out "swims away"?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Australia
Age: 47
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking of the press...i had a tour group the other day ring and ask if our helicopter was going to crash like the one in new york did! 
...they were clearly distressed about it...i calmly gave them some facts about flying and the jetranger 
they ended up going on the flight and absolutely loved it!....but it goes to show you how much the press affects our industry perception..
...they were clearly distressed about it...i calmly gave them some facts about flying and the jetranger they ended up going on the flight and absolutely loved it!....but it goes to show you how much the press affects our industry perception..
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Journos are only interested in selling newspapers.
eg None of the reports I saw mentioned that Helicopter Flight Service had been operating tours in the Manhattan area for 20 years without a single incident or accident until this - even though that declaration appeared on the company's website. (It's been removed now, but it was there at the time journos were doing their 'research'.)
They whip up fear for the sake of a 'Shock! Horror! story without any regard to the consequences. Journos made a major contribution to the eventual demise of Concorde. Ironically, British newspapers were the worst offenders, even though Concorde was a significant success story for BA.
eg None of the reports I saw mentioned that Helicopter Flight Service had been operating tours in the Manhattan area for 20 years without a single incident or accident until this - even though that declaration appeared on the company's website. (It's been removed now, but it was there at the time journos were doing their 'research'.)
They whip up fear for the sake of a 'Shock! Horror! story without any regard to the consequences. Journos made a major contribution to the eventual demise of Concorde. Ironically, British newspapers were the worst offenders, even though Concorde was a significant success story for BA.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The same could be said about somebody falling from the top of the Empire State building. He was alright until he hit the ground!
Journalists always do look for sensationalism, but an operator is not necessarily safe because it hasn't experienced a fatal accident in however many years. It is the way in which an operator manages its operations that should be the milestone of safety.
Having said that, I have no knowledge of this particular operator.
Journalists always do look for sensationalism, but an operator is not necessarily safe because it hasn't experienced a fatal accident in however many years. It is the way in which an operator manages its operations that should be the milestone of safety.
Having said that, I have no knowledge of this particular operator.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Suppose it could but if nobody's fallen off the Empire State building for 20 years I guess their safety management ain't bad.
Funny how some folk in the industry just have to argue when something positive is said here.
Funny how some folk in the industry just have to argue when something positive is said here.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Age: 72
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bronx
At the risk of continuing to appear argumentative, there is a substantial difference between a good safety record and good safety management. Some companies manage to work for umpteen years without anything going wrong, but this is often down to the comittment and dilligence of the people working for it, rather than due to good safety management. Change some of the people and hey presto.....
I wasn't arguing with Heliport, I was just expressing my thoughts, something which I believe we are encouraged to do on PPRUNE.
If you re-read the start of my second paragraph, I think that you will find that I was agreeing with Heliport's statement. I myself have suffered at the hands of a rather zealous reporter who managed to concentrate all the little negatives into one big one. Once the wrong message has been expressed to the masses, it takes ages to right the wrongdoing, and it is often virtually impossible to do so. "It has to be true, it was in the Daily Wotsit!"
Heliport does a magnificent job of tempering the threads on this site, and long may it continue.
At the risk of continuing to appear argumentative, there is a substantial difference between a good safety record and good safety management. Some companies manage to work for umpteen years without anything going wrong, but this is often down to the comittment and dilligence of the people working for it, rather than due to good safety management. Change some of the people and hey presto.....
I wasn't arguing with Heliport, I was just expressing my thoughts, something which I believe we are encouraged to do on PPRUNE.
If you re-read the start of my second paragraph, I think that you will find that I was agreeing with Heliport's statement. I myself have suffered at the hands of a rather zealous reporter who managed to concentrate all the little negatives into one big one. Once the wrong message has been expressed to the masses, it takes ages to right the wrongdoing, and it is often virtually impossible to do so. "It has to be true, it was in the Daily Wotsit!"
Heliport does a magnificent job of tempering the threads on this site, and long may it continue.
NYC East River JetRanger Crash Report
NTSB Identification: NYC05FA099.
The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact Records Management Division
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, June 14, 2005 in New York, NY
Probable Cause Approval Date: 2/28/2006
Aircraft: Bell 206L, registration: N78TD
Injuries: 1 Serious, 6 Minor.
The helicopter landed at the heliport with approximately 220 lbs. of fuel on board. At that time, the helicopter was oriented to north, with a light westerly wind. The helicopter was on the ground for 2 to 3 minutes while ground personnel boarded passengers for a sightseeing flight. The helicopter lifted up to a hover and initially turned left 90 degrees toward west, but the wind was from the northeast at approximately 5 knots. When the pilot realized the wind was from the other direction, he then turned right about 270 degrees.
The pilot initiated a southeasterly takeoff run, oriented about a 160-degree heading. During the approximate 275-foot takeoff run, the skids contacted the ground at least once as the pilot attempted to increase forward speed. The pilot felt like the helicopter did not have full power during the takeoff run; however, the pilot and passengers did not recall any cockpit warnings or anomalies.
The helicopter did not gain altitude as it neared the end of the heliport, and the tailrotor struck the edge of the pier as the helicopter descended towards the water. The helicopter subsequently impacted the water and rolled inverted.
Examination of the helicopter did not reveal any pre-impact mechanical malfunctions. The pilot did not ask passengers their weight, and did not have a scale at the heliport. Rather, he estimated the weight and balance. For the accident flight, he estimated 150 lbs. per person, as there were three male passengers, and three female passengers. However, the average weight of the passengers was approximately 188 lbs. The weight of the occupants and the weight of the fuel revealed that the helicopter was about 222 lbs. overweight at the time of the accident; not including the weight of clothing, personal effects, and baggage. In addition to being over the maximum gross weight, the helicopter was at or beyond its performance limits for the environmental conditions, and the takeoff was attempted with a light left crosswind or quartering tailwind.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot's inadequate preflight planning, which resulted in an attempted takeoff with an overweight helicopter, and subsequent impact with a pier and water. Factors were a high ambient temperature and unfavorable winds.
They ping him for not having a set of scales at the heliport.....well gosh, darn!
The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact Records Management Division
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, June 14, 2005 in New York, NY
Probable Cause Approval Date: 2/28/2006
Aircraft: Bell 206L, registration: N78TD
Injuries: 1 Serious, 6 Minor.
The helicopter landed at the heliport with approximately 220 lbs. of fuel on board. At that time, the helicopter was oriented to north, with a light westerly wind. The helicopter was on the ground for 2 to 3 minutes while ground personnel boarded passengers for a sightseeing flight. The helicopter lifted up to a hover and initially turned left 90 degrees toward west, but the wind was from the northeast at approximately 5 knots. When the pilot realized the wind was from the other direction, he then turned right about 270 degrees.
The pilot initiated a southeasterly takeoff run, oriented about a 160-degree heading. During the approximate 275-foot takeoff run, the skids contacted the ground at least once as the pilot attempted to increase forward speed. The pilot felt like the helicopter did not have full power during the takeoff run; however, the pilot and passengers did not recall any cockpit warnings or anomalies.
The helicopter did not gain altitude as it neared the end of the heliport, and the tailrotor struck the edge of the pier as the helicopter descended towards the water. The helicopter subsequently impacted the water and rolled inverted.
Examination of the helicopter did not reveal any pre-impact mechanical malfunctions. The pilot did not ask passengers their weight, and did not have a scale at the heliport. Rather, he estimated the weight and balance. For the accident flight, he estimated 150 lbs. per person, as there were three male passengers, and three female passengers. However, the average weight of the passengers was approximately 188 lbs. The weight of the occupants and the weight of the fuel revealed that the helicopter was about 222 lbs. overweight at the time of the accident; not including the weight of clothing, personal effects, and baggage. In addition to being over the maximum gross weight, the helicopter was at or beyond its performance limits for the environmental conditions, and the takeoff was attempted with a light left crosswind or quartering tailwind.
The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot's inadequate preflight planning, which resulted in an attempted takeoff with an overweight helicopter, and subsequent impact with a pier and water. Factors were a high ambient temperature and unfavorable winds.
They ping him for not having a set of scales at the heliport.....well gosh, darn!
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having taken just such a trip in November, the guys in the 'terminal' asked us all our weight (approx) and assigned us seats accordingly.
Maybe lessons have been learned, or maybe different operators have different standards ??
Maybe lessons have been learned, or maybe different operators have different standards ??
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
asked us all our weight (approx) and assigned us seats accordingly.
It makes a difference in the helicopter world. Some Carrriers, thankfully, are making folks pay to block a seat if they are obviously the size of a baby elephant.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Region 5 / Region 4 / and sometimes Region 8?
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure makes me appreciate the scales on the floor at the passenger check in counter at work. 
(not to mention the computerized w&b program etc...)
(not to mention the computerized w&b program etc...)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scales or no scales, you've got to be pretty stupid (or turning a blind eye to the likely facts) to misjudge weights of pax by an average of 38 lb (17kg), especially when you know you're operating near MTOW.
Surely most of us can eyeball estimate 95% of pax's weight within 20lb/10kg even if we don't want to ask - which is often not preferable. And if we can't - well a set of scales had better be used then!
In fact I do keep a set for occasional use either when getting near MTOW and need helipad performance, or just to cross-check against estimations from time to time.
Surely most of us can eyeball estimate 95% of pax's weight within 20lb/10kg even if we don't want to ask - which is often not preferable. And if we can't - well a set of scales had better be used then!
In fact I do keep a set for occasional use either when getting near MTOW and need helipad performance, or just to cross-check against estimations from time to time.
Last edited by rotorspeed; 10th Mar 2006 at 13:20.
