Chip warnings
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chip warnings
ATCO question time!
If you get a gearbox/engine chip warning light would you declare an emergency? As an ATCO we have always been trained that this would be at least a PAN call, but recently this was disproved when someone didn't even declare it as a minor tech problem. Is there a definitive answer?
Thanks.
If you get a gearbox/engine chip warning light would you declare an emergency? As an ATCO we have always been trained that this would be at least a PAN call, but recently this was disproved when someone didn't even declare it as a minor tech problem. Is there a definitive answer?
Thanks.
SOP in the R22 for a gearbox / chip warning light is an immediate forced landing under power if accompanied by noice/vibration, otherwise "land as soon as practicable" which I will interpret here as the same thing.
Personally, I'd make at least a PAN, perhaps a MAYDAY, to anyone who I was talking to - better to let someone know I'm having a potentially lethal problem - if you screw up people know you're in trouble, and if the worst comes to the worst then the accident investigators have a starting point !
Personally, I'd make at least a PAN, perhaps a MAYDAY, to anyone who I was talking to - better to let someone know I'm having a potentially lethal problem - if you screw up people know you're in trouble, and if the worst comes to the worst then the accident investigators have a starting point !
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I understand it, "land as soon as practical" means land somewhere sensible in the next few minutes, ie a field near a road and a phone, or an airfield if you're close and can get there quickly. Not really an emergency if there's no vibration or similar, but you want to make sure of that, preferably on the ground. So I guess it's borderline as to whether that would be a PAN call, but I think I'd make it one too.
But that's thinking down here. Up there, I'd probably be so concerned with getting on the ground that I'd forget the usual radio formalities and just try and land safely!
But that's thinking down here. Up there, I'd probably be so concerned with getting on the ground that I'd forget the usual radio formalities and just try and land safely!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: perth
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATCO? could you elaborate? Im not that up to date with these abbreviations.
Chip lights can be as serious as any emergency if you do nothing about them. In some twin helicopters an amber chip light on dictates an engine shut down, in singles it gives you mental preparation for what youre going to do. The chip light can be your best friend, particularly in a single. The flight manual will tell you what to do, follow it to the letter. PAN calls and MAYDAYS don't cost you anything, better to tell someone what you are seeing, it helps, and mentally prepare yourself for what ifs, what if this happens, what if this happens, have I done this.. have I done that.
I dont consider a chip light on a gearbox or engine a minor tech problem, in the air its better to get the thing on the ground ASAP and make a phone call. Ive had a few chip lights, beleive me, get it on the ground and make that PAN call, it costs you nothing,
[ 02 January 2002: Message edited by: sling load ]</p>
Chip lights can be as serious as any emergency if you do nothing about them. In some twin helicopters an amber chip light on dictates an engine shut down, in singles it gives you mental preparation for what youre going to do. The chip light can be your best friend, particularly in a single. The flight manual will tell you what to do, follow it to the letter. PAN calls and MAYDAYS don't cost you anything, better to tell someone what you are seeing, it helps, and mentally prepare yourself for what ifs, what if this happens, what if this happens, have I done this.. have I done that.
I dont consider a chip light on a gearbox or engine a minor tech problem, in the air its better to get the thing on the ground ASAP and make a phone call. Ive had a few chip lights, beleive me, get it on the ground and make that PAN call, it costs you nothing,
[ 02 January 2002: Message edited by: sling load ]</p>
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to elaborate on Buzz's question...
Our traffic is the twin engined stuff of the North Sea variety. Most of us are aware of the more common problems a helicopter can suffer, with a engine/gearbox chip warning (but not an associated shut down) being a relatively common one, however an immediate landing is generally not an option given the watery nature of the task. In the Northern North Sea we have four calls for returning/diverting a flight - Mayday and Pan plus Minor Technical Problem for something wrong but less severe and then company reasons (exactly what it sounds like). In the past, chip warning diversions have been declared as a Pan, Minor Tech or nothing at all which can place the ATCO in a difficult position when it comes to deciding which catagory of alert to place the emergency services on. At the opposite and of the scale, one div'd back a few days ago due to "autopilot failure" and declared a Minor Tech Problem. According to our book that is an automatic Fire Service call-out, but we decided that would be overkill - so we do actually think about these things.
Although we understand implications of publicity for this operation, such variations in the opinions of crew can make our decision making at this critical time for both us and you significantly more difficult - a more standard approach to something like chip warnings would be very useful.
Our traffic is the twin engined stuff of the North Sea variety. Most of us are aware of the more common problems a helicopter can suffer, with a engine/gearbox chip warning (but not an associated shut down) being a relatively common one, however an immediate landing is generally not an option given the watery nature of the task. In the Northern North Sea we have four calls for returning/diverting a flight - Mayday and Pan plus Minor Technical Problem for something wrong but less severe and then company reasons (exactly what it sounds like). In the past, chip warning diversions have been declared as a Pan, Minor Tech or nothing at all which can place the ATCO in a difficult position when it comes to deciding which catagory of alert to place the emergency services on. At the opposite and of the scale, one div'd back a few days ago due to "autopilot failure" and declared a Minor Tech Problem. According to our book that is an automatic Fire Service call-out, but we decided that would be overkill - so we do actually think about these things.
Although we understand implications of publicity for this operation, such variations in the opinions of crew can make our decision making at this critical time for both us and you significantly more difficult - a more standard approach to something like chip warnings would be very useful.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A big Thank You to an 'ATCO' for starting a most interesting topic.
Chip warnings can and do indicate anything from a spurios mis-detection to an imminent major nasty. They should never be taken lightly and, I believe, warrant an immediate 'PAN' call. This to be upgraded immediately to 'MAYDAY' at the first onset of noise and/or vibration. In twin-engine helo's, an engine chip requires the affected engine offloaded, brought back to 'Idle' or shut down. Reverting from twin to single-engine status always demands a 'Pan' in my book.
What is interesting are my observations as a North Sea helicopter Simulator instructor. Even in the 'Box' most pilots demonstrated a marked reluctance to press the transmit and utter the 'Pan' or 'Mayday' word even with a Fire warning. I always made the point at debrief that, once alerted, the ATCO at the other end of the ether would give you his immediate and undivided attention, batting firmly on your side until your safety had been assured. On a black night out over the oggin, always good to know they were (are) there.
Chip warnings can and do indicate anything from a spurios mis-detection to an imminent major nasty. They should never be taken lightly and, I believe, warrant an immediate 'PAN' call. This to be upgraded immediately to 'MAYDAY' at the first onset of noise and/or vibration. In twin-engine helo's, an engine chip requires the affected engine offloaded, brought back to 'Idle' or shut down. Reverting from twin to single-engine status always demands a 'Pan' in my book.
What is interesting are my observations as a North Sea helicopter Simulator instructor. Even in the 'Box' most pilots demonstrated a marked reluctance to press the transmit and utter the 'Pan' or 'Mayday' word even with a Fire warning. I always made the point at debrief that, once alerted, the ATCO at the other end of the ether would give you his immediate and undivided attention, batting firmly on your side until your safety had been assured. On a black night out over the oggin, always good to know they were (are) there.
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hopefully this does not qualify as a highjacking of a thread as the information contained in this post is directly applicable.
The generation of a chip light could be from the metallic fuzz generated by the break-in in of a new trannie or an engine, it may be a false alarm and then again it may indicate the impending failure of a part within the lubricated systems of the equipment that is being monitored. If the chip light is for real or illuminated for another reason then by all means follow your operational procedure. However if there is a catastrophic failure at hand then depending where it is may or may not dictate what happens next and how fast it happens.
There is a means of detecting impending failure long before the generation of chips and chunks and that is SOAP or Spectrometric Oil Analysis Program. This system if you are not familiar with it requires the periodic sampling of the oil and sending it to a laboratory that is equipped with the necessary equipment to measure the build up of wear metals in the oil. The wear metals are actually a part of the oil and the oil then becomes an organo-metalic compound which can be measured to detect the specific wear metals which in turn can tell you what type of component is wearing and at what rate. The rate is monitored as a part of the test and when it is determined that the suspected part is wearing at too rapid a rate the lab strongly suggests that the gear box or the engine be removed and inspected internally. Frequent filter changes will help but frequent oil changes will not as the oil change will dump the metal chips in the sump but it does not help in detecting the presence of wear metals. If you find chips and chunks in the oil when it is being drained then it is already too late. In the next flight it is possible that you can suffer a catastrophic failure. As a scientific test they placed chips in new oil samples and the SOAP test could not detect them. Using old oil and those same chips the SOAP test detected the wear metals but not the chips.
The generation of a chip light could be from the metallic fuzz generated by the break-in in of a new trannie or an engine, it may be a false alarm and then again it may indicate the impending failure of a part within the lubricated systems of the equipment that is being monitored. If the chip light is for real or illuminated for another reason then by all means follow your operational procedure. However if there is a catastrophic failure at hand then depending where it is may or may not dictate what happens next and how fast it happens.
There is a means of detecting impending failure long before the generation of chips and chunks and that is SOAP or Spectrometric Oil Analysis Program. This system if you are not familiar with it requires the periodic sampling of the oil and sending it to a laboratory that is equipped with the necessary equipment to measure the build up of wear metals in the oil. The wear metals are actually a part of the oil and the oil then becomes an organo-metalic compound which can be measured to detect the specific wear metals which in turn can tell you what type of component is wearing and at what rate. The rate is monitored as a part of the test and when it is determined that the suspected part is wearing at too rapid a rate the lab strongly suggests that the gear box or the engine be removed and inspected internally. Frequent filter changes will help but frequent oil changes will not as the oil change will dump the metal chips in the sump but it does not help in detecting the presence of wear metals. If you find chips and chunks in the oil when it is being drained then it is already too late. In the next flight it is possible that you can suffer a catastrophic failure. As a scientific test they placed chips in new oil samples and the SOAP test could not detect them. Using old oil and those same chips the SOAP test detected the wear metals but not the chips.
While carrying out pre departure checks on a BO 105 the number one engine chip light came on. Within ten minutes the duty engineer had the chip in front of me with a quarter inch ball bearing sat on it.
With the engine in a stand an attempt to rotate the engine caused another ball bearing to exit the chip plug location and head across the hangar.
With the compressor removed one of the main gears could be seen to have a half ball bearing sized hole in a tooth.
This engine had seconds to live and so might you if you do not give chip lights the respect they deserve.
With the engine in a stand an attempt to rotate the engine caused another ball bearing to exit the chip plug location and head across the hangar.
With the compressor removed one of the main gears could be seen to have a half ball bearing sized hole in a tooth.
This engine had seconds to live and so might you if you do not give chip lights the respect they deserve.
"Just a pilot"
Ordinarily, I won't PAN or declare an emergency for a "chip" caution (unless there are secondary indications of trouble) providing the RFM doesn't require an immediate change of plan.
Even the RFM can confuse you unless you understand the authors terminology. I consider the following as useful definitions:
Land immediately-Survival in doubt with continued flight. Right now, right here...
Land as soon as possible-Continued flight not recommended. Put the aircraft down as soon as suitable, safe site available. That flat place over there, for instance...
Land as soon as practical-One may continue the flight-everything you do will be second guessed by an official investigation-you'd better be right if things go wrong. If the destination is suitable and appropriate...
Even the RFM can confuse you unless you understand the authors terminology. I consider the following as useful definitions:
Land immediately-Survival in doubt with continued flight. Right now, right here...
Land as soon as possible-Continued flight not recommended. Put the aircraft down as soon as suitable, safe site available. That flat place over there, for instance...
Land as soon as practical-One may continue the flight-everything you do will be second guessed by an official investigation-you'd better be right if things go wrong. If the destination is suitable and appropriate...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Although chip lights are not generally of themselves emergencies (engine chips are an exception) always follow the flight manual, which governs what the experts believe.
Having written a fair share of emergency procedures, generally land as soon as practicle means an airport/heliport, "Possible" means a golf course or similar, and "immediately" means IMMEDIATELY (not necessarily ditch if the sea state and temp are of themselves life threatening.
Declaring an emergency is a good thing for most deviations from the norm. It is not admitting that you are chicken, it clears the mind of controllers and the like, who sometimes place helicopters near whaledung priority-wise, and it explains to folks what is happening as things sometimes turn to worms. I have investigated too many accidents where a declaration would have made the difference between surviving and not.
Of course, if you declare for a hangnail, or some such truck, you buy in the bar on the hill near Stratford!
Having written a fair share of emergency procedures, generally land as soon as practicle means an airport/heliport, "Possible" means a golf course or similar, and "immediately" means IMMEDIATELY (not necessarily ditch if the sea state and temp are of themselves life threatening.
Declaring an emergency is a good thing for most deviations from the norm. It is not admitting that you are chicken, it clears the mind of controllers and the like, who sometimes place helicopters near whaledung priority-wise, and it explains to folks what is happening as things sometimes turn to worms. I have investigated too many accidents where a declaration would have made the difference between surviving and not.
Of course, if you declare for a hangnail, or some such truck, you buy in the bar on the hill near Stratford!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A further question...
Are all chip detectors the same? Are the chip detectors in the tail of my R22 the same as those in the main box of an S76, or are mine less sophisticated (and by extension, possibly less reliable)?
Are all chip detectors the same? Are the chip detectors in the tail of my R22 the same as those in the main box of an S76, or are mine less sophisticated (and by extension, possibly less reliable)?
Guest
Posts: n/a
t'aint natural,
There are many types of detectors, basically into three classes:
Plain vanilla mag chip, where a simple bridged contact lights the light. Can be with holding circuit to flag the momentary chip passing by.
Fuzz burn chip plug, where a capacitor dumps a charge into the chip to burn it if it is small stuff, to prevent the fuzz from alarming anyone.
temp and chip combination, where either a chip or a high temp can light one light, or a separate light for each.
Sikorsky helos generally have fuzz burn temp/chip lights. I'll wage the Robinson family has the less sophisticated plugs.
New technologies are being developed, with mag inspection of the oil as it flows thru the system, using a coil to pick up the changing magnetic signature of the oil.
There are many types of detectors, basically into three classes:
Plain vanilla mag chip, where a simple bridged contact lights the light. Can be with holding circuit to flag the momentary chip passing by.
Fuzz burn chip plug, where a capacitor dumps a charge into the chip to burn it if it is small stuff, to prevent the fuzz from alarming anyone.
temp and chip combination, where either a chip or a high temp can light one light, or a separate light for each.
Sikorsky helos generally have fuzz burn temp/chip lights. I'll wage the Robinson family has the less sophisticated plugs.
New technologies are being developed, with mag inspection of the oil as it flows thru the system, using a coil to pick up the changing magnetic signature of the oil.
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, heres one some have heard before. "Urgency of the Emergency". Some of the postings above seem a bit cavalier to me. I have had a few and "Landing as soon as......." has a meaning. Its nice to know things were just fuzz, but the lights are there for a purpose. Different procedures for different aircraft, dictate get the thing down and check it out. Also as some above have said, its not necessary to roll the aircraft in a ball of fire, just because of a light. For me, it means get it on the ground now, safely and check it out. Fly it from there after someone in the Maintenance end has blessed it.
[ 03 January 2002: Message edited by: B Sousa ]</p>
[ 03 January 2002: Message edited by: B Sousa ]</p>
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the BK117, an engine chip light necessitates an engine shut down. I had one when I was first endorsed on the machine, coming home with a full load of pax(9), I did the appropriate thing and shut it down, I then radioed home. Shortly there after, it was advised that I restart the engine prior to landing.
Many pilots that I have talked to since have held varied and interesting views about it. Some feel that there should be no if's or butt's, do what the manual says and leave the engine shut down. Others say that there is far more risk rolling up the machine trying to land OEI at MAUW (Max Gross) compared to just having a chip light.
It is a good discussion point, and has merrit on both sides. I personally believe that you should err on the side of the flight manual while I sit here, but while I am flying along with a full load of pax on a dark and stormy I may decide on a different coarse of action depending on the circumstances, as is my job. Opinions????
On a second point, the AS350 has what seems to be a unique setup whereby you can push the caution panel test button while a light is on to see if it is a valid indication (light goes out if it is I believe). Are there any other types of aircraft that use this test ?
Cheers
[ 04 January 2002: Message edited by: rotorque ]
[ 10 January 2002: Message edited by: rotorque ]</p>
Many pilots that I have talked to since have held varied and interesting views about it. Some feel that there should be no if's or butt's, do what the manual says and leave the engine shut down. Others say that there is far more risk rolling up the machine trying to land OEI at MAUW (Max Gross) compared to just having a chip light.
It is a good discussion point, and has merrit on both sides. I personally believe that you should err on the side of the flight manual while I sit here, but while I am flying along with a full load of pax on a dark and stormy I may decide on a different coarse of action depending on the circumstances, as is my job. Opinions????
On a second point, the AS350 has what seems to be a unique setup whereby you can push the caution panel test button while a light is on to see if it is a valid indication (light goes out if it is I believe). Are there any other types of aircraft that use this test ?
Cheers
[ 04 January 2002: Message edited by: rotorque ]
[ 10 January 2002: Message edited by: rotorque ]</p>
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sunrise, Fl. U.S.A.
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice thread!
The R-22 has test switches to verify the circuit, but they are not the burn type detectors, seem to be a standard mag type.
A chip light for me means I'm lowering collective and looking for a place to set down, always better to look at it on the ground.
I have had spurious chip indications on the HH-1N's, and the gearboxes were refilled and then the aircraft ran again, the Robbie POH specifies something similar for a new gearbox giving possible break in fuzz indications.
But the truth is, if you are in flight and get a chip light, you can't make that determination in the air, you can listen for noise but realistically you land ASAP, and let the mech's sort it out. Anything else is (IMO) poor judgement.
As far as declaring an emergency, I believe I would (not PAN), for if we take the indication as true, a major gearbox failure is to follow soon.
I want all the assistance now, a clear route to where ever I'm going (if that decision is made) or at least they will know where I'm about to set it down to get ground crews rolling.
[ 03 January 2002: Message edited by: RW-1 ]</p>
The R-22 has test switches to verify the circuit, but they are not the burn type detectors, seem to be a standard mag type.
A chip light for me means I'm lowering collective and looking for a place to set down, always better to look at it on the ground.
I have had spurious chip indications on the HH-1N's, and the gearboxes were refilled and then the aircraft ran again, the Robbie POH specifies something similar for a new gearbox giving possible break in fuzz indications.
But the truth is, if you are in flight and get a chip light, you can't make that determination in the air, you can listen for noise but realistically you land ASAP, and let the mech's sort it out. Anything else is (IMO) poor judgement.
As far as declaring an emergency, I believe I would (not PAN), for if we take the indication as true, a major gearbox failure is to follow soon.
I want all the assistance now, a clear route to where ever I'm going (if that decision is made) or at least they will know where I'm about to set it down to get ground crews rolling.
[ 03 January 2002: Message edited by: RW-1 ]</p>
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting thread.
I have to agree with Nick (and others) who say know what the flight manual recommends for each caution or warning light, and err on the side of safety. I've helped write some flight manuals, and I can tell you that a lot of debate, analysis, and testing goes into the emergency procedures. If you think you can second guess all this, while flying a helicopter, you're kidding yourself. Carry out the FLM procedure, and after you land start second guessing. Look at it, think about it, and then decide what to do.
Concerning "land as soon as...", this is where the pilot alone can make the decision. As one earlier post suggested, think about the worst result of the warning light (like a seized tranny, exploding engine, etc.), and only continue flight if landing right now looks worse. This is when having more than one engine can really extend your options.
I have to agree with Nick (and others) who say know what the flight manual recommends for each caution or warning light, and err on the side of safety. I've helped write some flight manuals, and I can tell you that a lot of debate, analysis, and testing goes into the emergency procedures. If you think you can second guess all this, while flying a helicopter, you're kidding yourself. Carry out the FLM procedure, and after you land start second guessing. Look at it, think about it, and then decide what to do.
Concerning "land as soon as...", this is where the pilot alone can make the decision. As one earlier post suggested, think about the worst result of the warning light (like a seized tranny, exploding engine, etc.), and only continue flight if landing right now looks worse. This is when having more than one engine can really extend your options.
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To illustrate how fast things can go wrong just read on:
An Italian SH3-D was cruising along at several thousand feet above the water. The pilot indicated that he had a chip light in his main transmission. A second or so later he heard a loud bang and the helicopter shuddered. The torque level went up on his left engine and he shut it down but even with no fuel to the engine the free turbine kept running. It took about twenty seconds for him to autorotate to the water and later he and his crew were recovered along with the helicopter.
The engine was sent to GE and the main transmission was sent to Agusta for analysis of the problem. It was found that the outer ring of the left freewheeling unit had fractured and parts got into the gear mesh and also causing the freewheeling unit to jam and allowing it to be back driven by the other engine and the transmission during the autorotation. The friction levels were so intense that many of the parts of the freewheeling unit were either worn down or were welded to each other allowing the engine to be back driven..
The chip light illuminated several seconds prior to the internal fracture of the freewheeling unit and the welding and the wear took place in about twenty seconds. Not all chip light illuminations are like this but any time one does illuminate follow your operational procedures and don’t hesitate to make your situation known to the flight controllers.
An Italian SH3-D was cruising along at several thousand feet above the water. The pilot indicated that he had a chip light in his main transmission. A second or so later he heard a loud bang and the helicopter shuddered. The torque level went up on his left engine and he shut it down but even with no fuel to the engine the free turbine kept running. It took about twenty seconds for him to autorotate to the water and later he and his crew were recovered along with the helicopter.
The engine was sent to GE and the main transmission was sent to Agusta for analysis of the problem. It was found that the outer ring of the left freewheeling unit had fractured and parts got into the gear mesh and also causing the freewheeling unit to jam and allowing it to be back driven by the other engine and the transmission during the autorotation. The friction levels were so intense that many of the parts of the freewheeling unit were either worn down or were welded to each other allowing the engine to be back driven..
The chip light illuminated several seconds prior to the internal fracture of the freewheeling unit and the welding and the wear took place in about twenty seconds. Not all chip light illuminations are like this but any time one does illuminate follow your operational procedures and don’t hesitate to make your situation known to the flight controllers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys for all your answers. I understand chip warnings a whole lot better now! I get the impression that the general concensus is to get the thing on the deck ASAP! Proving once again that Pprune is a valuable learning tool for all of us.
The question was brought up as there seems to be a reluctance up here in saying the words PAN PAN or, heaven forbid, MAYDAY! Most diversions back these days appear to be for "company reasons". This worries me for a couple of reasons, the main one being that if I know you are in trouble, or have a situation that may develop into trouble, then I can start doing something about it now. Alert SAR, emergency services, alternate fields, etc. If I have given these people the "heads up" that something may be going wrong, then the response time will be cut accordingly if it does go to a ball of chalk. I personally do not want to be controlling someone who is diverting back for company reasons to suddenly turn to me and say we are ditching, although you will still get the same amount of help it may take longer to get there.
Without wishing to appear impertinent, could I ask why there is this reluctance to call PAN or MAYDAY in N.Sea airspace? Is it something that we are doing that you feel we over react? Or is it the usual inaccurate reporting from the P+J that you are trying to avoid?
The question was brought up as there seems to be a reluctance up here in saying the words PAN PAN or, heaven forbid, MAYDAY! Most diversions back these days appear to be for "company reasons". This worries me for a couple of reasons, the main one being that if I know you are in trouble, or have a situation that may develop into trouble, then I can start doing something about it now. Alert SAR, emergency services, alternate fields, etc. If I have given these people the "heads up" that something may be going wrong, then the response time will be cut accordingly if it does go to a ball of chalk. I personally do not want to be controlling someone who is diverting back for company reasons to suddenly turn to me and say we are ditching, although you will still get the same amount of help it may take longer to get there.
Without wishing to appear impertinent, could I ask why there is this reluctance to call PAN or MAYDAY in N.Sea airspace? Is it something that we are doing that you feel we over react? Or is it the usual inaccurate reporting from the P+J that you are trying to avoid?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Buzzlightyear,
I would like to add that in general, the overreaction to chip lights may have cost as many problems as those that are for good cause.
Horror stories aside, the statistics show that most lights are caused by small stuff, and true failures are not imminent. This means that one should follow the RFM, but try to deal with the landing as cooly as possible, and without undue reaction to that darn yellow light that seems to be getting brighter.
For every helicopter-falling-apart-gonna-die story are scores where the plug is cleaned off and the aircraft goes back into service for hundreds of hours.
As pilots, we are tested by our ability to behave as if everything is just fine when we want to be anywhere but in the machine!
I would like to add that in general, the overreaction to chip lights may have cost as many problems as those that are for good cause.
Horror stories aside, the statistics show that most lights are caused by small stuff, and true failures are not imminent. This means that one should follow the RFM, but try to deal with the landing as cooly as possible, and without undue reaction to that darn yellow light that seems to be getting brighter.
For every helicopter-falling-apart-gonna-die story are scores where the plug is cleaned off and the aircraft goes back into service for hundreds of hours.
As pilots, we are tested by our ability to behave as if everything is just fine when we want to be anywhere but in the machine!
Well said Nick.
To rotortorque: You have raised a very interesting, and in my neck of the woods often discussed point. And on the BK-117 too! For my two cents worth, I believe the Flight Manual and I follow it as much as is sensible - and I say sensible because the flight manual is the best advice possible BUT no procedure can hope to coverc every eventualtiy - thus sometimes (and very rarely IMHO) the flight manual may not be the absolute best course of action.
I think you have provided such an example. With the 9 pax on board, day VFR, and a good known grass strip nearby, I am following the flight manual and shutting down the engine, just like you. On a dark & stormy IFR night over the mountains with 9 pax, I am considering my options, and am more likely to reduce the engine to idle and continue to monitor for secondaries with much vigilance. IMHO, anyone who says that they "are more likely to roll it up in an OEI landing" than suffer a catastrophic chip is in need of a proper endorsement on the type, and much more emergency procedures training!! <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
I think the engine restart and use of the engine for landing could be justified if the landing area you HAVE (as opposed to chose) to use is unsuitable for a run on - another example of deviating from the flight manual only when prudent.
To ATCO: The reluctance to PAN/MAYDAY is strange. it is certainly not restricted to the North Sea, nor chip lights. A good example (of very many) was the Aloha Airlines accident when the whole top of the 737 peeled off in flight from just behind the cockpit to near the leading edges of the wing roots, and almost from floor level to floor level!! The crew managed to control the aircraft, even pulling off an emergency diversion, descent, and finally a flapless single engine landing to save all but one (a hostess who was sucked out the hole). BUT despite several requests from ATC over the remaining 15 - 20 mins of flight, they did not declare a mayday or pan and as a result, the fleet of abulances required were not activated until the ATC guy saw (to his disbelief) the extent of damage to the aircraft.
Could it be that fact that during simulated emergencies, the trainee does not actually make a call, thus in the real case - he/she reverts to what was experienced in training?
For me: I am always a PAN for chips and a MAYDAY with secondaries. Costs me nothin. Can cancel on the ground. Makes sure that someone is looking if the chip turns nasty close to the ground.
To rotortorque: You have raised a very interesting, and in my neck of the woods often discussed point. And on the BK-117 too! For my two cents worth, I believe the Flight Manual and I follow it as much as is sensible - and I say sensible because the flight manual is the best advice possible BUT no procedure can hope to coverc every eventualtiy - thus sometimes (and very rarely IMHO) the flight manual may not be the absolute best course of action.
I think you have provided such an example. With the 9 pax on board, day VFR, and a good known grass strip nearby, I am following the flight manual and shutting down the engine, just like you. On a dark & stormy IFR night over the mountains with 9 pax, I am considering my options, and am more likely to reduce the engine to idle and continue to monitor for secondaries with much vigilance. IMHO, anyone who says that they "are more likely to roll it up in an OEI landing" than suffer a catastrophic chip is in need of a proper endorsement on the type, and much more emergency procedures training!! <img src="eek.gif" border="0">
I think the engine restart and use of the engine for landing could be justified if the landing area you HAVE (as opposed to chose) to use is unsuitable for a run on - another example of deviating from the flight manual only when prudent.
To ATCO: The reluctance to PAN/MAYDAY is strange. it is certainly not restricted to the North Sea, nor chip lights. A good example (of very many) was the Aloha Airlines accident when the whole top of the 737 peeled off in flight from just behind the cockpit to near the leading edges of the wing roots, and almost from floor level to floor level!! The crew managed to control the aircraft, even pulling off an emergency diversion, descent, and finally a flapless single engine landing to save all but one (a hostess who was sucked out the hole). BUT despite several requests from ATC over the remaining 15 - 20 mins of flight, they did not declare a mayday or pan and as a result, the fleet of abulances required were not activated until the ATC guy saw (to his disbelief) the extent of damage to the aircraft.
Could it be that fact that during simulated emergencies, the trainee does not actually make a call, thus in the real case - he/she reverts to what was experienced in training?
For me: I am always a PAN for chips and a MAYDAY with secondaries. Costs me nothin. Can cancel on the ground. Makes sure that someone is looking if the chip turns nasty close to the ground.