Blade strike GOM (incl pics)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the move...
Age: 58
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blade strike GOM (incl pics)
I was sent these photos recently and the story goes of a B206 and B407 that met on a deck while one had blades turning...
I don't know the truth of the story or of how long ago it happened (or didn't).
Can anyone fill in the gaps?
Debris.
I don't know the truth of the story or of how long ago it happened (or didn't).
Can anyone fill in the gaps?
Debris.
Last edited by CYHeli; 31st Mar 2008 at 02:58. Reason: Fixing photo links
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand it happened less than a week ago. 206 on deck with blades tied down, 407 came in to land alongside and ..... hey presto! Luckily for the 407 it managed to complete its landing with little more than mashed up blades and dented pride......
2 heli's on a 40 foot deck doesn't leave a lot of room........ mind you, those newly shortened blades on the 407 should make it a bit easier next time.....
2 heli's on a 40 foot deck doesn't leave a lot of room........ mind you, those newly shortened blades on the 407 should make it a bit easier next time.....
Don't suppose he'll be doing that again...
And for the 407, it will be more than a new set of blades as that's a sudden stoppage. I suppose the 206L will just need a new blade, mast, grip, straps, exhaust stack and some cosmetic work on the cowlings. Like someone above said, expensive.
Let's see the pics of them being lifted off the deck and put on a barge.
And for the 407, it will be more than a new set of blades as that's a sudden stoppage. I suppose the 206L will just need a new blade, mast, grip, straps, exhaust stack and some cosmetic work on the cowlings. Like someone above said, expensive.
Let's see the pics of them being lifted off the deck and put on a barge.
"Just a pilot"
Been a while, but the deck markings indicate a 40' landing surface, yes? Does this refer to the longest side?
The images make the deck look a lot smaller than 40'.
Wonder what made the pilot lose his disk edge, the difference between the usual 10' clearance and a strike is considerable.
I've put many a small ship on a 40' deck with somebody else already there. I've aborted a bunch, to.
The images make the deck look a lot smaller than 40'.
Wonder what made the pilot lose his disk edge, the difference between the usual 10' clearance and a strike is considerable.
I've put many a small ship on a 40' deck with somebody else already there. I've aborted a bunch, to.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Off the Planet
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why just blame the pilot?
The ICAO Standard for helidecks is 1D - according to an FAA AC:
Who was dumb enough to program him to go there?
Who is to blame? In order: the regulator; the operator; the oil company; and finally the pilot.
What happened to the proposal to introduce Safety Management Systems!
Mars
The ICAO Standard for helidecks is 1D - according to an FAA AC:
The D of the Bell 407 is 41.8ft;
The width of the Bell L3 skids are 7.7ft.
The proposed new Standard for (small) helidecks is 1RDThe RD of the Bell 407 is 35ft
Even with this proposed new Standard the obstacle free area will still have to be 1DWho was dumb enough to program him to go there?
Who is to blame? In order: the regulator; the operator; the oil company; and finally the pilot.
What happened to the proposal to introduce Safety Management Systems!
Mars
Mars,
Please refrain from using logic, reason, and facts when posting here! It only confuses the argument.
The GOM is in the land of Nod when it comes to safety.....so long as the Company Man gets his daily newspaper then everything is good to go.
Please refrain from using logic, reason, and facts when posting here! It only confuses the argument.
The GOM is in the land of Nod when it comes to safety.....so long as the Company Man gets his daily newspaper then everything is good to go.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't claim to have ever been near anything that flash, and I don't know at what point in the landing the strike occurred, but given the rather sudden reduction in disc area & RPM, I'm a bit impressed the 407's right-side up and on the deck at all 
.
.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N20,W99
Age: 53
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard from inside sources that the 206's blade was untied and it rotated into the 407's rotor disk as it landed, sounds very possible to me. I know a lot of people have said the blade is tied, but if it had been before, don't you assume the impact that cut the blade off would have at least ripped the tie downs????!!!!!!
BTW that plattform looks really crummy!! Reminds me of the movie Waterworld, but it is tipical of the nickel and dime offshore ops that that helicopter company supports.
BTW that plattform looks really crummy!! Reminds me of the movie Waterworld, but it is tipical of the nickel and dime offshore ops that that helicopter company supports.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The markings indicate that the deck is square. If it weren't, the markings should be 12/40x30, or whatever the other edge is. Looks like a former Shell platform, sold who knows how many times since the original owner got rid of it. Small companies are now sucking whatever they can get out of the formation, and not spending a dollar they don't have to, on anything. Paint is expensive, don't you know.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Europe
Age: 45
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a surprise considering the company involved.
Its safety record and operating practices have long been know to be the worst in the biz.
Just terrified that I am flying around in the same sky as them.
TGZ
Its safety record and operating practices have long been know to be the worst in the biz.
Just terrified that I am flying around in the same sky as them.
TGZ
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen the commonly used hook tie-downs come off as the blade bounces in wind or down wash. Then the blade could swing unimpeeded.
Saw that happen once at Houston as I hovered an S-76 into a pad, I stopped short and watched the blade swing into my path. A real wake-up call.
Saw that happen once at Houston as I hovered an S-76 into a pad, I stopped short and watched the blade swing into my path. A real wake-up call.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Woodlands, Texas
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Helideck 40 foot wide.
2. 206L parked as close to the edge as possible to permit another aircraft to land. Nice job, but bad policy. One helicopter per helipad will stop rotorblade interface such as in this case.
3. 407 with 35 foot rotor diameter attempts to slide in next to the 206L, best guess 1 to 1.5 foot margin between 407 rotor tip and 206 mast.
Accident cause easy to determine. Excuse me, but the FAA has adopted a feckless approach to the issues and will not call this an accident! Only an incident, right guys?
Contributing factors? Too many to talk about:
The same causes of accidents have been happening for over 45 years in the Gulf. We are conditioning new pilots to accept the existing standards (as they are), which will perpetuate the same attitudes that will continue to rack up more accidents..oops. Sorry "ïncidents". Ya gotta kill people to be an accident, don't you.
2. 206L parked as close to the edge as possible to permit another aircraft to land. Nice job, but bad policy. One helicopter per helipad will stop rotorblade interface such as in this case.
3. 407 with 35 foot rotor diameter attempts to slide in next to the 206L, best guess 1 to 1.5 foot margin between 407 rotor tip and 206 mast.
Accident cause easy to determine. Excuse me, but the FAA has adopted a feckless approach to the issues and will not call this an accident! Only an incident, right guys?
Contributing factors? Too many to talk about:
- Corporate safety policy of AOC - I'll be polite; lacking.
- Corporate oversight of daily operations - missing
- Pressure or approval by customer to land 2 aircraft in the same space - priceless!
- FAA allowing this company to continnue operating without demanding changes in operating practices, (The rest of you don't have room to snicker.. you've done or are still pulling the sames stunts)
- American Petroleum Institute acceptance of this practice as well as their lack of safe practices which permit non complaint helidecks to an international standard (ICAO Anx 14, Vol 2), not to mention basic common-sense recommendations such as painting a helidck and keeping the deck clear of equipment (other helicopters, tool boxes, sunbathers, etc). Oh yeah, I forgot, you said it was going to cost over $2 BN to upgrade all the decks. !) Bull... 2) The sheep are jumping off the cliff, as you save a coulpe of dollars for your membership.
- Small, wildcat companies that operate on dime, can spell safety, but have to look up the word.
- The rest of you fill in the rest of the list.
The same causes of accidents have been happening for over 45 years in the Gulf. We are conditioning new pilots to accept the existing standards (as they are), which will perpetuate the same attitudes that will continue to rack up more accidents..oops. Sorry "ïncidents". Ya gotta kill people to be an accident, don't you.
I stand to be corrected, but
A 206 is 7,8 feet wide at the skids, so if parked to the very right it will reach (round up) 8 feet into the pad.
Tie blades.
A 407 is (round) 9 feet wide on the skids.
The mast sits in the middle of those 9 feet-> 4,5.
The blade is 17,5 feet long.
So if parked to the very left the blade will reach 22 feet into the pad.
Add 8 for the 206 and you have used 30 feet of space, so there should be 10 feet or 3 meters of space between the two aircraft.
Well, if you don't tie the 206 down and allow 18,5 feet of blade to reach into the pad you will fall 4,3 feet short.
A 206 is 7,8 feet wide at the skids, so if parked to the very right it will reach (round up) 8 feet into the pad.
Tie blades.
A 407 is (round) 9 feet wide on the skids.
The mast sits in the middle of those 9 feet-> 4,5.
The blade is 17,5 feet long.
So if parked to the very left the blade will reach 22 feet into the pad.
Add 8 for the 206 and you have used 30 feet of space, so there should be 10 feet or 3 meters of space between the two aircraft.
Well, if you don't tie the 206 down and allow 18,5 feet of blade to reach into the pad you will fall 4,3 feet short.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a 40 foot deck, there is plenty of room to land a 407 (shorter blades than a 206) beside a 206 with the blades tied down, parked with the skids 3' from the edge of the deck. I've done it thousands of times in a 206, and never came close to the other aircraft. If you can't control the aircraft well enough to keep it from hitting another on that deck, you shouldn't be flying helicopters in the GOM. It's done every day, and it's not unsafe if the pilots have average competence. If you can't hold a 206 or a 407 within 3 feet of a spot, you simply don't have the skills necessary for a commercial pilot. Hiring low-time pilots with zero offshore experience, and no experience at all other than CFI time in the traffic pattern, will lead to things like this, though. There are good reasons flight training in the US is much cheaper than anywhere else, and the main one is that the training is done by CFIs with no other experience, and less than 500 hours total time. They work as a CFI until they get enough time to get a real job, where they finally learn to fly, or don't. The system has a long history, and won't change any time soon.
One thing you need to learn very quickly is that the blades on the 206 have to be securely tied, and you have to keep an eye on it as you land. If the blades come loose, you're screwed. You have to trust the other pilot to do a competent job of tying the blades.
One thing you need to learn very quickly is that the blades on the 206 have to be securely tied, and you have to keep an eye on it as you land. If the blades come loose, you're screwed. You have to trust the other pilot to do a competent job of tying the blades.
Just a thought...
...but perhaps in addition to tying down the main rotor, have a secondary strap securing the tail rotor to the vertical stab. Not only will it save the T/R trunnion from damage, it will keep the main rotor from rotating should the tie downs come loose.
The obvious preferred solution is having the pad to oneself, however.
Looking at the photos again, it is truly amazing the 407 was able to land upright.
The obvious preferred solution is having the pad to oneself, however.
Looking at the photos again, it is truly amazing the 407 was able to land upright.
Last edited by inthegreen; 18th Aug 2007 at 07:43. Reason: Adding another comment
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Off the Planet
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gomer Pylot:
Your response cannot go uncommented because it epitomises the problem that exists in the GOM. The discussion on this thread exists not because of speculation about what could happen with non-compliant helidecks, but in the light of two recent accidents that have already occurred.
If the irony is taken out of Tailspin Charlie's post, it can be seen that it contains those changes which may be required to reduce the present high level of accidents in the GOM. The one element that was not specifically mentioned (but was implicit) was the issue of culture - e.g. that Goodgrief's and Gomer's posts are concerned with arithmetic and skill rather than a change of attitude towards safety.
If, as Gomer implies, the level of experience in the GOM is likely to fall, then it becomes more important that the tolerances, inherent in international standard compliant decks and procedures, are applied.
TT briefly introduces cost of compliance; although this deck was not compliant (40ft deck 42ft D), it was mitigated by a 1D obstacle clear area. With the 206 on the deck, this safety margin was totally eroded. Now compare the cost of that accident with that of not having the 206 on the deck - appears to me to be a no-brainer. (If forgot to mention that in the previous accident - also with a non-compliant deck - the helicopter was a total write-off.)
Mars
Your response cannot go uncommented because it epitomises the problem that exists in the GOM. The discussion on this thread exists not because of speculation about what could happen with non-compliant helidecks, but in the light of two recent accidents that have already occurred.
If the irony is taken out of Tailspin Charlie's post, it can be seen that it contains those changes which may be required to reduce the present high level of accidents in the GOM. The one element that was not specifically mentioned (but was implicit) was the issue of culture - e.g. that Goodgrief's and Gomer's posts are concerned with arithmetic and skill rather than a change of attitude towards safety.
If, as Gomer implies, the level of experience in the GOM is likely to fall, then it becomes more important that the tolerances, inherent in international standard compliant decks and procedures, are applied.
TT briefly introduces cost of compliance; although this deck was not compliant (40ft deck 42ft D), it was mitigated by a 1D obstacle clear area. With the 206 on the deck, this safety margin was totally eroded. Now compare the cost of that accident with that of not having the 206 on the deck - appears to me to be a no-brainer. (If forgot to mention that in the previous accident - also with a non-compliant deck - the helicopter was a total write-off.)
Mars
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Woodlands, Texas
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gomer,
You mentioned one of the challenges to risk mitigation in the GOM; low-time pilots with limited or no experience in the oil patch. A good point. A prudent company would recognize that risk and make chanegs to reduce the exposure through policy adjustment. I.e. don't land two helicopters on a deck. I flew in the GOM for over 14 years without problems, can hover as good as the next guy, but not everyone is a good as you and many others. But, just because we can hover on a dime in a 30 knot crosswind while eating a sandwich, doesn't mean we should have to do that.
Old guys like me are retiring and heading for the golf course, being replaced by low-time pilots. Nothing wrong with that. We were all in that position at one time. There needs to be an industry cultural change in how helicopters operate in the GOM, or we will continue to maintain our high level of accidents. The air operators have made a lot of improvements over the last 15 years, but those companies not in the top three in the Gulf operate on a shoe-string in order to compete for the smaller oil company business. A much more difficult exercise in cultural change.
The culture of reducing operational risks is an ongoing process in every facet of any industry, especially aviation. There is a two tier system of safety in the GOM, or two levels of safety practices. HSAC has identified the problems, root causes, and mitigating processes to increase the opportunity for you and the rest to go home alive after a work hitch. But, HSAc can only recommend. API refuses to spend money to improve helidck requirements, and the FAA washes their hands of it all.
These types of accients will continue unless a drastic change in the safety culture of GOM aviation takes place. We've had all the lip service over these many years. It is time to raise the standards to catch up with Europe, Australia, and the former Soviet Union to name a few.
You mentioned one of the challenges to risk mitigation in the GOM; low-time pilots with limited or no experience in the oil patch. A good point. A prudent company would recognize that risk and make chanegs to reduce the exposure through policy adjustment. I.e. don't land two helicopters on a deck. I flew in the GOM for over 14 years without problems, can hover as good as the next guy, but not everyone is a good as you and many others. But, just because we can hover on a dime in a 30 knot crosswind while eating a sandwich, doesn't mean we should have to do that.
Old guys like me are retiring and heading for the golf course, being replaced by low-time pilots. Nothing wrong with that. We were all in that position at one time. There needs to be an industry cultural change in how helicopters operate in the GOM, or we will continue to maintain our high level of accidents. The air operators have made a lot of improvements over the last 15 years, but those companies not in the top three in the Gulf operate on a shoe-string in order to compete for the smaller oil company business. A much more difficult exercise in cultural change.
The culture of reducing operational risks is an ongoing process in every facet of any industry, especially aviation. There is a two tier system of safety in the GOM, or two levels of safety practices. HSAC has identified the problems, root causes, and mitigating processes to increase the opportunity for you and the rest to go home alive after a work hitch. But, HSAc can only recommend. API refuses to spend money to improve helidck requirements, and the FAA washes their hands of it all.
These types of accients will continue unless a drastic change in the safety culture of GOM aviation takes place. We've had all the lip service over these many years. It is time to raise the standards to catch up with Europe, Australia, and the former Soviet Union to name a few.