Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

North Sea Mechanical Rescue Devices

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

North Sea Mechanical Rescue Devices

Old 21st Jan 2008, 14:19
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
North Sea Mechanical Rescue Devices



I believe BALPA put out guidance to their North Sea pilots not to fly if sea conditions were such that the rig stand-by vessels could not launch their FRCs, the inference being that mechanical rescue devices such as Dacon scoops did not offer a realistic chance of rescue.

Does any body know what caused, or what the basis was, for such a stance to be take?
Ship Manager is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2008, 15:20
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oop North
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not denigrating what the standby boats do but the thought of being in a 4.5m+ swell at night with my only chance of pick up being a scoop doesn't fill me with joy!

I think BALPA has the right idea - after all SAFETY is always preached as the only thing that counts.

At least BP has brought in SAR helicopters which have a far better chance of a. spotting you on a dark and stormy night (300ft and .75nm) than a boat has, and b. being able to pick you up.

332M
332mistress is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2008, 15:23
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You believe wrong. It is under discussion but there is no edict from BALPA saying that thou shall not fly if only Dacon scoop is available.
Droopystop is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2008, 17:41
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
332M, where do you get your 300/0.75 from? Do you mean normal ARA decision range or spotting a body in the water?
Droopy is online now  
Old 21st Jan 2008, 18:12
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
On the West coast it was usually the customer who would stop us flying well before we would worry about the dacon. Then again they are closer to shore compared to the Northsea.
Brilliant Stuff is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2008, 19:06
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oop North
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Droopy

Yes I used the example of our minimum night wx limits for an approach followed by a ditching.

332M
332mistress is offline  
Old 21st Jan 2008, 19:44
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Frozen North
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There was a meeting last year of interested parties: Pilots, Helicopter operators, Boat skippers etc. to look at Dacon scoops etc. The findings of this meeting have now been reviewed by BALPA big boys and a policy adopted that they don't think them a good idea. (Something along the lines of - rescue may be assured, but the number of limbs attached afterwards may not be). It is, however, a policy, not an instruction to their members not to fly.

OA
Overt Auk is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2008, 14:20
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the top of the flag pole
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Safety Offshore

In the not so distant past one OIM complained that a Co-pilot used a stairway on his installation without using the handrail to create a three point contact throughout. The pilot concerned was disciplined and a Flight Staff Instruction was issued to prevent this happening again. Slightly heavy handed, maybe, but putting safety first - generally a good thing.

Now we have an OIM going ballistic because crews are unhappy to risk shuttling in seas in excess of 5m swell, with only mechanical recovery (not rescue) available, following a ditching.

We are lead to believe that mechanical recovery devices can not be used in close proximity of a platform, due to the lack of SBV manuverability in high seas.

We are lead to believe that the best practice in recovering survivors from the water/life raft is via a Daughter craft/FRC which is in turn recovered to the SBV. As I understand it, it is the recovery of the Daughter craft/FRC that poses the greatest risk in high seas.

Only when this best practice is unavailable (I guess because the Master of the SBV is not prepared to expose his crew to that risk) is "mechanical recovery only" offered.

So why if the Master of the SBV is not willing to expose his crew to that risk, should I expose my crew and passengers to a greater risk if we do end up in the water?

Maybe just so that the Oil/Gas Company can keep the profits flowing? Lets put profit before safety hey!

Thank goodness there are some very sensible Oil/Gas companies who stop flying ops in these conditions.

And I'm always aware of the bravory and skill of the crews of the SBV's. I would hate to put them in greater perril. I know 'on the day of the races' most would endevour to launch their FRC in what ever weather they faced. So maybe I have a responsibility to them too.

I'd like to know from an OIM, if handrails are so important, why keep flying in 'Dacon Scoop only' conditions?

Fly safe
Red
RedWhite&Blue is offline  
Old 22nd Jan 2008, 16:32
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just to clarify something. As I believe, the company did try to discipline a pilot over the handrail incident but had to back down. None of us flying from that base had/have copies of the safety orders for all the rigs we fly to, so how can we be expected to obey them. Secondly, there would have been quite a backlash from the pilots had he been disciplined. The most sensible thing to do was done, and an instruction was issued requiring us to use the 'Three Point Contact Method' when using the stairs on any installation.

As for the Dracon, all I've heard of is a Balpa note to say that the CC chairs should rise this issue with their respective companies and that there should be no change to normal working practices in the interim. If anyone knows more...

Brom.
Brom is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2008, 10:35
  #10 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you for your replies. There is going to be a further meeting in the very near future between BALPA, UK Oil & Gas, ERRVA (who represent the Stand-by boat operators) and other interested parties regarding mechanical recovery devices. If I get any feed back I will let you know.

RW&B. Just to clarify I’m not an OIM nor and oil company employee, and I’m not quite sure how you arrived at the conclusion I was going ballistic !
Recovery by FRC/DC is the preferred method but I would not say it is best practice. It is best practice in given weather conditions, and the Dacon Scoop is better practice in adverse conditions.
The Masters decision not to use boats is indeed based on risk to his crew during launching, operations, and the ability to recover FRC/ crew / casualties to the mother ship. However suggesting the Master is not willing to expose his crew to recovery by Scoop is a red herring / illogical. Who is going to launch a boat knowing they will probably have to rescue their own crew and at the same time have starved themselves of the very people who are going to operate the equipment !

332M BP may have introduced helicopters – but they had to keep the ships as well due to a few short comings of your wonderful machines. The best of both worlds, now there’s a thing!
Alas the preaching of “unqualified safety” is used too often by too many people to either justify or counter an argument. The concept of a practical pragmatic safety culture seems to get lost in polarised views that get put forward under the safety banner. Hopefully in this instance there will be healthy debate based on fact (not perception) and a correct conclusion arrived at.

Keep your feet dry,

SM
Ship Manager is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2008, 11:54
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the top of the flag pole
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ship Manager - I in no way implied that you were an OIM or that you went ballistic. However I can assure you that certain OIMs are really not happy when the A/c Commander refuses to fly due to sea state with the prospect of only a Dacon Scoop type recovery.

I would ask you the question: Why do some oil companies stop flying ops in these conditions? Remember we are talking about short sector shuttling here.

I am also not suggesting that the SBV crew be exposed to rescue via the scoop initially. My point is that the Ships Master would probably not want to expose his DC/FRC crew to the risk of trying to recover the DC/FRC in such conditions.

I am not aware of the number of hands onboard the average SBV, however if DC/FRC recovery did go wrong, then I guess the DC/FRC crew might need to be 'scooped'. If these are the same guys who operate the Scoop, as you rightly point out, they would not then be well placed to reach the crane controls! Indeed they could not rescue themselves let alone anyone else.

Has the scoop ever been used/demonstrated in such conditions? How many people have been rescued (with or without further injury) by it? Surely this is type of rescue is WELL tried and tested in 5m+ seas. I'm sure we wouldn't risk using it in conditions in which it hasn't been comprehensively proven. Would we?

What do people really think of the Dacon Scoop?

By the way my research lead me to believe that the SBV and its DC/FRC act best in unison, and that best practise is to transfer people from water/lifeboat via DC/FRC to SBV. Maybe you could put me right if I'm wrong

Fly safe

Red
RedWhite&Blue is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2008, 19:59
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Do the safety boats do a practice recovery at night or do they do them daytime only??
micraman is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2008, 05:13
  #13 (permalink)  
nbl
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I always found it amusing how some oil companies would cancel / hold pax flights due to sea swell over 'x' metres.
Then phone up and ask for a freight flight - this they would accept????
Ho hum!
nbl is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2008, 10:35
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
nbl

Remember, as crew we don't matter!

bondu
bondu is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2008, 14:27
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The text below was copied from an Official report a number of years ago. My quotes

It is likely that these methods will only be deployed when weather conditions are so severe as to preclude the launching and retrieval of FRC. Generally speaking, this situation coincides with the marked reduction in performance of such systems and practical limitations on the use of the scoop in extremely adverse sea conditions have been experienced on occasions. In some respects
it remains the case that vessels that are fitted with scoop or basket equipment may have an operating limit only marginally better than that for FRC/DC
check is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2008, 20:31
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can someone explain to me why some pilots are happy to fly over miles of water not covered by standby boats, operate to construction vessels with no standby boat cover and yet when the standby boat in field cannot launch the FRC, they stop flying? The standby boats are not primarily there for helo ops, they are for evacuating rigs in case of tragic accident and most importantly for picking up MOB's. Is flying offshore really that dangerous? Moreover, looking at the pilot doors on many helicopters, you're not going to get out of the damn thing anyway.

Don't get me wrong, if there is a real risk, then this issue must be addressed, but is it the issue at the top of the list? What about helmets, stass, hearing protection etc etc.
Droopystop is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2008, 16:14
  #17 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RW&B, I can’t shed light on the wonders of the decision making processes within oil companies – oh that I could !
Why are you considering short sea shuttling only, are those flying further not worthy of mechanical recovery as well ?
Regarding shorter hops ie the southern North Sea and the Irish Sea then 5m seas are not really the problem. Shallow water, wind, and tide make for steep waves at very short periods. By the time you get to about 3 – 3.5m you don’t want to be putting your boats down. Operation of the Dacon Scoop is quite tenable in those conditions though.
Yes, Dacons have been tested in 5m seas – there are some good videos – nothing on youtube though ! Crews exercise regularly with them and have to complete an independently adjudicated validation trial on an annual basis.
I don’t know how many people have been saved, or injured, by scoops but they do “secure a good prospect of recovery and rescue” (PFEER Regs) beyond the point that FRCs can operate.

Micraman, yes, night time exercises are undertaken.

nbl – I worked on a ferry where we cancelled the freight and only took the passengers!

Check - Agree the window for use for scoops between cessation of FRC ops and just holding on for dear life is not great.

Droopystop – I suppose there is a subtle difference in that if you are on a platform and have to abandon you have no option, however if flying you do not have to put yourself in to a potential situation.

What do I think of scoops - They work and if you have them you may as well use them.

SM
Ship Manager is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2008, 22:41
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the top of the flag pole
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ship Manager, most of the crews who are uncomfortable with the Dacon Scoop operate in the Southern North Sea. They understand the risks involved in flying. They are aware that something could go wrong at any time which could scupper their day.

Knowing those risks they fly offshore every day of their working life. Accepting that there are risks involved with the Dacon Scoop most will accept the task of flying to a single platform/rig in the type of conditions we are discussing here. They just ‘bite the bullet’ so to speak.

What they are more concerned with are the increased risks involved with flying multiple sectors within field i.e. Short Sector Shuttling. It’s not the distance offshore that is the issue. Every soul on board any flight is worthy of a rescue if needed. I would hope they are worthy of a rescue with a realistic outcome too.

What makes shuttling different is the number of take offs and landings and the environment, often in the pitch dark.

A minute of taking off or landing is accepted to be as safe (or risky) as forty minutes in the cruise, so I'm told. So a take off and landing is forty times riskier that the equivalent time in the cruise. If you do say fifteen sectors in one flight (as we do regularly), the take off and landings would offer the equivalent exposure to ten hours in the cruise.

Add to that, at low level you have less time to react to problems and you may well have less options open to you.

Some of the SNS decks are very low indeed and not all aircraft are capable of a guaranteed single engine fly away, when heavy, should problems occur close to landing or just after take off. Ones only option being to ditch. (I do accept that in windy conditions the outcome of an engine failure should be more favourable than in still air, due to better performance.)

Furthermore, we are lead to believe that engine failures cause, in round terms, about 50% of ditchings. So, even very powerful machines like the AB139, with good single engine performance, are not exempt from problems in this situation.

Of course the very nature of the environment means there are more places that the SBV can’t get to, to use the scoop. The more platforms the more areas of ‘no use’ so to speak, not being able to manoeuvre close in to the legs.

All that having been said the most compelling detraction to the Scoop is the fact that we see the SBV pitching and rolling in heavy seas throughout our working lives.

Most flight crews simply don’t believe that any human or team of humans can control, with the degree of accuracy required, a vessel (so large in comparison to a survivor) in such conditions, as not to put the survivors in grave danger.

Being run down in heavy seas by a trawling SBV is not my idea of a good night out. How on earth can the crew keep constant visual contact with the survivors to ensure they aren’t injured?

Please remember that the helicopter crews hold the SBV crews in the very highest esteem and this is no reflection on their experience or skills.

However in those conditions I would fancy my chances a whole lot more with a SAR helicopter hovering over me.

The truth is this may be a misnomer. The Dacon Scoop may be the best thing since sliced bread, but there are many who doubt it. Until those doubters are convinced why risk it? Someone needs to do some serious persuading. Maybe we should be shown the video.

As I pointed out some oil companies cease flying ops in these condition. Sounds like a good policy to me.

You say 5m seas are not really the problem in the SNS. I disagree. This is exactly the time the crews worry about putting guys out on the NUIs. You say that the scoop is quite tenable in 3 – 3.5m seas. What about 5m short period steep waves? Just like last week. Do the crews train such seas? I doubt it somehow (and hope, for their sakes, not!).

Can you define for me, maybe in percentage terms, “secure a good prospect of recovery”? I would not get in a helicopter if it only offered me a good prospect of flying!

Just to put the record straight, BALPA did not “put out guidance to their North Sea pilots not to fly if sea conditions were such that the rig stand-by vessels could not launch their FRCs, the inference being that mechanical rescue devices such as Dacon scoops did not offer a realistic chance of rescue.”

However, they do have a policy on the subject which they hope will one day be adopted by all those involved.

I’m confident BALPA would support any crew who made such a decision on the grounds of safety.

I guess someone got their knickers in a muddle over this one by inferring that BALPA was encouraging some kind of wild cat industrial action – this was not the case. By that I don’t mean you Ship Manager, unless of course you don’t manage ships that float but fly.

Safe watch.

Red

Last edited by RedWhite&Blue; 30th Jan 2008 at 08:28. Reason: Spotted the first spelling mistake... I guess there are more.
RedWhite&Blue is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2008, 23:35
  #19 (permalink)  
Chief Bottle Washer
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: PPRuNe
Posts: 5,097
Received 172 Likes on 101 Posts
Question

Gents,

For the sake of some of us out of offshore, could a quick run down of the acronyms being used here be made?

SBV, OIM, FRC: most of us understand BALPA, the rest we need help
Senior Pilot is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2008, 00:29
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Nowhere Special
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SBV - Standby Vessel

OIM - Offshore Installation Manager

FRC - Fast Rescue Craft

ARRC - Autonomous Rescue Relief Craft

DC - Deck Crew? (Guessing)

SNS - Southern North Sea

ARA - Airborn Radar Approach
Night Watchman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.