Winches on Police/Airambulance helis?

[Thomas coupling]

Sorry - am I talking to pilots who are not commercially orientated?
I do apologise if thats the case.
I'll spell it out once more:

Winching in commercial helicopters is controlled by the europeans OK? JAR Ops 3 (3.005(h) I think).
You don't go to EASA as a single entity and say: I think we need a winch so can you change your rules for me please???

Secondly - IF the helicopter you fly, cannot hover on one engine whilst winching , the authorities say you cannot do it. IF you fly Pumas or Lynx, the chances are you're mil, therefore you are not subject to the same rules!

There are NO civilian light twins in the UK that can hover SSE whilst winching (except maybe the 109S) Certainly you could make a 902 or 135 hover SSE but you'd have to strip it out and it wouldnt be godd for man nor beast then would it??

Do you understand the difference now? remember, AA's and Police helicopters are passenger flying commercial operations. Just like BA or Virgin!!!lol.

Civilian SAR (S61 etc) winch train SSE.

[[email protected]]

So where do you draw the line when you have a winch fitted to an air ambulance (I am ignoring any special ops type winching the police may or may not want to do)?
Given that you are very unlikely to remain SSE when winching for real, how does this sit against the present requirement for Cat A performance when carrying a casualty?
When will the limited training given to the crews prove to be insufficient for a job they decide to attempt? And given the limited training, how will they recognise a job that is beyond their capabilities.
Will the paramedics want to be exposed to the additional and very real risks of being winched in and out of difficult areas?
Winching is straightforward when everything is going in your favour - the training is needed so you can cope when it is not - why else do a conversion to type or a base and line check? If an aircraft works as advertised it is easy to fly but who would be happy with that level of competence when your life depends on the crew?
I am not being overly defensive of SAR but rather concerned that a simplistic view of what can be a difficult and hazardous procedure (even by day overland) will lead AA operators to take on jobs they are not adequately prepared for.

TC my point was the number of paramedics able to work in the back on the casualty and the ease with which it can be achieved.

[MINself]

Yes, aren't there any exemptions issued by the CAA alleviating any JAR Ops 3 operators from having to have class 1 performance at all times?

I beileve that the UK CAA do give exemptions to certain operators under certain circumstances and certainly ADAC, a German HEMS/AA operator in have winches fitted to their HEMS/AA aircraft and train monthly with them contrary to JAR Ops 3, maybe the German CAA have granted ADAC an exemption .

Any European Police/HEMS winch equiped operator care to comment.

Exemptions are granted by national authorities for just these circustances not just because civil Police/HEMS operators have never winched therefore they won't ever be allowed to winch. Its all down to the case put forward by the operator to be allowed to winch against JAR Ops 3 Performance 1 criteria. RTegulations change all the time.

[MINself]

I think the questions you ask could be directed at any aviation operation, when it comes to it the decision making process in arriving at whether you winch or not has to be taken case by case and those involved in Police/HEMS work I'm sure appreciate the extra risk. Alot of other countries already have winches fitted to their Police/HEMS aircraft and operate perfectly well with them, alongside conventional SAR not instead of.

With a good initial, continuation training regime and robust SOPs winching could be just as a useful capability with a Police or Air Ambulance operator and their decision to use it I'm sure would not be entered into any more lightly than a military or civilain SAR unit, I suppose its the knowing of ones limits and that applies whether you have a winch fitted or not.

[What Limits]

IIRC its more to do with the fact that in UK the Police/HEMS aircraft are certificated in the Public Transport Category, thus JAR OPS 3 applies in full.

Subject to confirmation from our European buddies, I think that they have a para-public category that exempts them from certain provisions of the regulations.

Regulations can change, but only slowly and painfully. I believe the Met Poliice intend to apply for a change to allow them to winch. Good for them.

There is a document that says that the Emergency Services are no longer to plan to use Military assets to assist in incidents. Thats why there is continuing work to expand the role of Police/HEMS in this country.

[jayteeto]

I understand the bit about civil ops and operating to passenger carrying regulations 100%.
What I was hinting at was the 'mission creep' to cover requirements to hold a fast roping/winching etc capability in some forces. I think that once you get to the stage of roping people into major incidents you become paramilitary. In a recent paper exercise, we received a simulated call to operate at an incident in town. I simulated a refusal, stating that I would be putting my passengers and the general public at risk. It didn't go down well, but the management realised we were not the Air Cavalry!! I think some people have modelled their future plans on a visit stateside. Remember folks, just because a policeman gets promoted to the top, doesn't mean he knows anything about civil ops.

[Flaxton Flyer]

Thomas Coupling wrote -

"Secondly - IF the helicopter you fly, cannot hover on one engine whilst winching , the authorities say you cannot do it. IF you fly Pumas or Lynx, the chances are you're mil, therefore you are not subject to the same rules!

There are NO civilian light twins in the UK that can hover SSE whilst winching (except maybe the 109S) Certainly you could make a 902 or 135 hover SSE but you'd have to strip it out and it wouldnt be godd for man nor beast then would it??"

The problem isn't that you can't winch from these aircraft - Jar Ops 3 allows alleviation from the Perf A requirements when hoisting at a HEMS operating site - but that you can't use these exemptions for training flights.

So, if somebody went and stripped out a 902 / 135 and did the training on that, there is no reason why they then couldn't hoist for real at a HEMS job. Maybe a role for East Mids "spare" 902??

Or maybe somebody could build a simulator rig - does it say anywhere that the training has to be done in an actual aircraft?

As to why an AA would want to do it..well I think we all know that the Mil are happy to help out with winching - if they are available - which is not always the case.

[tacr2man]

Am I right in believing that a seaking is marginal SSE hover?

[fone_effect]

IMHO I think that the Police using winches is a bit of a red herring. I have found that Police Officers will not climb a fence over 6 feet or ascend a ladder to look on a roof due to the health and safety legislation in place, not the bobbies lack of commitment but due to supervisors applying the law. Therefore dangling from a winch, connected to a helicopter which is not in SSE conditions would be out of the question.

[Bertie Thruster]

I'm ready!
http://www.luh-explorer.com/LUH_Hoist_DemoSmall.wmv
Add floats, 50/50 charity arrangements with the RNLI. (Add some MRT type charity funding, if any hills in the area) One or two more bases, every few miles around UK. Leave the dodgy 240 mile out to sea jobs and the night over water hover stuff to the big boys and girls.
Three o' clock. Target sighted!

[whinetyler]

No winches on any police or hems a/c in UK - sorry.

Met fitted with hard points but not winches.

I think the met have actually purchased one winch!

[MINself]

Couldn't agree more, those 240 miles off the coast jobs, into the middle of a black night low level over a huge sea, looking for a small craft with 10 mins fuel reserve will always be the preserve of those brave and a little bit crazy SAR boys and girls .

Not when considered against sitting in front of mindless TV consuming your own body weight in biscuits and waiting and waiting and waiting for something to happen.... please let the next phone call not be another wrong number.

[keepin it in trim]

tacr2man
it is not a case of the sea king being marginal sse in the hover, at anything over 3000lbs of fuel and less than 15kts of wind in a 50ft hover over water it is not sse in the hover.
you can go higher and try to get a "fly away" situation, and overland, depending on a number of factors, you can mostly manage to be flyaway. However, that is the aircraft in a "fly away" position, not necessarily anyone on the end of the wire in a "fly away" position!
Coming back to the point, the problem is not the winching when not sse, it is legislation, adequate training for what you want to do, an acceptance of a degree of risk in such operations... oh, and don't forget someone fronting up the cash to make it all happen.

[Mr_G_Box]

UK Police are ANO

TC, whilst I fully agree that Police Observers are passengers, the aircraft are not operated under EASA but ANO, hence all the problems last year with changing airwortiness certificates when using relief aircraft. Therefore it would be up to the CAA to decide if winching was a go/no go, particularly as it is already addressed in the PAOM Part One (Sect5, Chap 6, para 2). I believe that all the Met 145's are fitted for winch but they only have purchased one winch to fit as required.

[Thomas coupling]

G Box - Take it from me that the CAA have decided that winching will fall under JAR 3.005(h). It is therefore an EASA issue.
The MET have 3 x 145's ALL with hard points, but only ONE winch, which for the time being is collecting dust in their hangar.

Until/unless they:

(a) get the rules changed - very unlikely. [One unit against EASA, from a country (UK) which doesnt want to go full blown EASA. Where all other european units dont need to comply with JAR 3 anyway???].
(b) change their operating status - possible and in my opinion the only way fwd. (Paramilitary).
(c) use an a/c that can comply with 3005(h) in toto.

Flaxton Flyer - well said and possibly the most intelligent of responses so far!
One can undertake winching (in anger) due to the exemption which is annexed to 3005h. [HEMS site]. And like other acts of heroism - the 'authorities' (to some extent), allow for "heroic" actions:

Police helo picking persons off a flooded camp site caravan roof.
Police helo dragging a female suicide (attempt) ashore.
Police picking person out of lake prior to drowning.
HEMS picking person off car roof stranded in flash flooded river.

All of these have been "accepted" by the CAA but behind the scenes, communications between the Police, ambulance authorities/Home Office and CAA were RED HOT!
It is frowned upon because the emergency services helicopters in this country are not REPEAT not paramilitary rescue vehicles like ALL those in Europe. We are unique in that we are public transport aircraft operating under a (P) AOC. We have to comply like every other AOC operator in the UK. Our only exemptions are weather and height related - none of which DIRECTLY affect the safety of our passengers.

Great topic.

[SARREMF]

Dooh,

I said I wouldn't say anything but.....

This is an area I have looked in to very closely of late - the JAR Ops 3, EASA and CAA. State Aircraft - in which case rules can be CAA. Or, non state aircraft and rules have to be EASA. Now I wasn't looking for AA or Police but for main category SAR aircraft - crab, your job! It looks like that will be EASA. However, I think I remember somewhere in that EU directive that said the CAA [i.e. national authority] could dispensate. However, I think the CAA might have said they will NOT - which is where the confusion creeps in. Will have to look it up when back at work and print the low down.

[MINself]

It may be that you are correct and that (b) is the only way to go when it comes to allowing Police/HEMS winch training and ops, especially for training as a spare stripped out aircraft just for training? when training in this sectors is pretty much a non event as it is!

The exemptions governing using HEMS sites are many and if life saving of course operators are allowed to step outside the ANO and JAR. Wouldn't it seem reasonable then that you have to be allowed to train too and this is where I think the operators and/or getting the weight of public opinion behind this will cause exemptions/paramilitaries regulations to be written to allow winch training/ops to happen. Tightly controlled and limited but never the less winching.

One unit against EASA, well I suppose it depends on the size of the unit and who they have bating for them.

I'm sure this will make things "hot" for some time, whether or not Police/HEMS winching will happen eventually, if theres a will... to cut through the red tape forest

[hemsmedic]

Back to the begining

Originally Posted by [email protected]

I hear a rumour that one or more police or air ambulance operators are planning to fit winches to their aircraft.

My questions are 1 Why? and

2. When will it be used and by whom?

From an AA point of view

1) To further reduce the amount of time it takes to get a resource to the patient, ORCON dominates everything amblance like.

2) Whenever the heli can't land due to the 2d rule.

IMHO it'll never happen with the current platforms used in UK HEMS. This has got nothing to do with the CAA, JAR Ops, etc but simply down to the fact that there it's a failry tight job working in the back of a 902, 135 as it is let alone when you have a litter swining into it. Add to this trying to get the casualty in single handed as your opo will still be hanging around outside or even worse still on the ground, H+S will be all over it like a rash qouting lifting and handling policy breaches.

SAR winch because they can't land, AA's can so there is little point in winches. I know that if I really needed a winch lift then the local SAR will oblidge jobs permiting.

[Arctic Tern]

Wow, so many people getting all 'precious' about winching/hoisting. A hoist has many uses - not all associated with SAR, so let's forget any idea that the Police ASUs or the AAs are going to steal work from the brave lads/lasses on MilSAR or MCA SAR. Frankly the type of jobs that the S61s and Sea Kings are best at are far too demanding in terms of range/payload/hoisting for the smaller 902/135/109/145. 'Horses for courses'. Having said that, there is a growing interest in employing smaller hoist fitted helicopters in the Urban SAR environment (whatever that means), and the occasional use of a hoist to deploy personnel or recover a casualty is perfectly achievable. Of course there is a training burden - nobody is suggesting that hoisting can be achieved by 'ab-initios' with only a few cycles under their belts; however, there is also no requirement to spend 15 - 20 hrs a month practising Decks, Drums, AFCS Ops, Sits, NVG, etc. Lets put this in perspective. Once a helicopter unit (Police or AA) has received a basic HHO course and properly grasped the idea of good hoist husbandry, effective risk mitigation, and good H&S awareness, there is no reason why they shouldn't conduct hoisting ops. Now the CAA have got a difficult task when it comes to dealing with exemptions to the regs, etc: principally because there is no State legislation that covers hoist training. That said, JAR-OPS 3.005(h) is a good benchmark and one that will be applied if required.
For those guys in RAF SAR who are getting all defensive - I sympathise. I share your dissatisfaction with the current situation and hate seeing those people at the MCA picking over the bones of what has been a wonderfully professional SAR service for many years. But please don't get carried away with the idea that only MilSAR pilots and rearcrew can do hoisting. There are many small civvy operators in Europe who are using BK117/EC135/EC145/A109 to conduct thousands of rescues a year in the Alps and other mountain areas. Stop burrying your heads in the sand and recognise that other operators have something to offer.

[tecpilot]

It's part of my job to train hoisting and shorthaul crews on light twins. All police and HEMS crews.
At first JAR isn't JAR in different countries. In some countries like Austria, Germany, Switzerland or the Czech Rep. police work isn't a part of JAR-OPS 3. Therefore the crews and authorities doesn't have much interest in JAR-OPS regulations. The most common reason of this exceptions are the costs. It's absolute ok to give more costs to the civ operators but please not to the public area! And how could i add more stringent rules to police units if in some countries the SAR job (including hoisting) is still done with mil single engine helicopters?
Second, the authorities are allways right and in accordance to JAR-OPS 3 they could allways take their own view to the things. Therefore they can decide what is HEMS, what is SAR, what is police work and under which regulations the operator have to work. And it's simple to cut out the police job from JAR OPS. Just a few words on an official national paper...
Third, in some JAA countries they have not the latest Amd of OPS 3 in use and still operating under Amd.1. And in Amd.1 there was no 3005 (h) Hoist Operation part! This is the situation as example in Germany. Therefore the ADAC doesn't work with hoists under JAA rules and doesn't train his crews "monthly" like MinSelf means. (Any 6 months they have a training). But they are safe, because they have very experienced crews, just a few guys in rotation on each affected base and they do such missions regularly and often. And thats the conditions to make such an operation safe and not any JAR rules. I do not see enough missions to be safe for the most police units.
If we restrict hoist ops to helicopters able to hover on an engine failure why we restrict not the whole flying to this ships? An engine failure during hoisting is a really very difficult situation, but it's the same situation like hovering over a canyon or between high obstacles/buildings, flying into a dense populated city? No more hoisting ops with singles?

Once a helicopter unit (Police or AA) has received a basic HHO course and properly grasped the idea of good hoist husbandry, effective risk mitigation, and good H&S awareness, there is no reason why they shouldn't conduct hoisting ops.

No, not my opinion. Training and real life rescue missions are different things.
If you give a person or a unit a basic HHO course and push them out to real life, than this unfortunate guys are coming under real pressure. Imagine, lot of money burned in the course and equipment, but only limited personal experience. A big pressure will comes up to do such missions. This pressure will affect the decisions made by the crew members and/or the unit commander in an unsafe way. In rescue business we have a lot of accidents due to such pressure. And in relationship to the mission circumstances it is not possible in basic courses to train all the real life circumstances. AND TO STAY CURRENT!!! My experiences are the following: A crew needs some real missions to get the brains clear, to understand and to deal with pressure and mission circumstances, to know the equipment and the limits in real life.
I have seens some units "searching" hard for any possibility to use their new and expensive toys. In one case they used a hoist to lift an uninjured person out from a place not more than 5 safe minutes to go and ordered a second unit helicopter to take a good video for the public of the "rescue".