7 die as medical helicopters collide over Arizona
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: US
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps the bottom line is criteria by which helicopters can be utilized must be tightened up to slow the competitive expansion and inject some sanity. It would be interesting to know just why the recent helicopters involved in crashes were being utilized.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The way the US EMS business seems to be think I'd rather walk to the hospital. I like our local set up. Job goes out to tender to supply IFR capable twin for X years. Competition for the tender, not for the day to day tasking.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That setup would be fine, if someone were willing to pay for the twin on the contract. The government won't do it here, and there aren't that many hospitals which will, and those are used mostly for transfers, not scene flights. The question that always has to be answered is "Who is going to pay for it?". Bigger, more capable, and more expensive aircraft are nice, but who's going to pay for them? In the US, the answer is generally "Nobody". The current system here has evolved over the years, with little regulation until recently. Changing entrenched bureaucracy isn't easy. Another factor in the US is the idea, also firmly entrenched, that any company has the right to enter the marketplace and compete. The FAA is required by law to consider the economic impact of any regulations.
I'm not defending any of the above, just saying that's the way it is. Those in other countries are always free to do things the way they want, as the US will undoubtedly continue to do.
I'm not defending any of the above, just saying that's the way it is. Those in other countries are always free to do things the way they want, as the US will undoubtedly continue to do.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: foot of a mountain
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agent 99, I suggest you have a good look at the types and causes of ALL 8 accidents in the uS this year. You will be shocked that the problem is not solved by merely a twin, IFR, TCAS twin.
OOPS!!!!!! So what next? If that is our ownly solution based on our analysis, do we know ban them too and go for medium to heavy twins manufactured after 2000 ownly?
My feeling is even that might not solve it as the type off machine is one halve of the problem if that much. Read all the other forums currently on going and you will see where the BIG problems lie in hEMS(not just in America by a long shot!!)
OOPS!!!!!! So what next? If that is our ownly solution based on our analysis, do we know ban them too and go for medium to heavy twins manufactured after 2000 ownly?
My feeling is even that might not solve it as the type off machine is one halve of the problem if that much. Read all the other forums currently on going and you will see where the BIG problems lie in hEMS(not just in America by a long shot!!)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was being sarcastic!
Sorry it was lost on you.
I agree that the problem isn't the machinery.
Makes me worried that alot of people see a single engine helicopter crash and straight away think that it wouldn't have happened if it was a twin, with all the bells and whistles.
If its bigger it has to be better obviously.
Sorry it was lost on you.I agree that the problem isn't the machinery.
Makes me worried that alot of people see a single engine helicopter crash and straight away think that it wouldn't have happened if it was a twin, with all the bells and whistles.
If its bigger it has to be better obviously.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One piece of equipment that might have helped is a simple TAS in both cockpits. With those, I've seen traffic I never knew was there, and while it doesn't give resolution advisories, it is relatively cheap and light. They're used in many aircraft in the GOM, and IMO are worth more than they cost, especially near cities where traffic can easily get lost in the buildings and automobile traffic. There hasn't been a midair in the GOM since they started being used, although that could be simple coincidence. It's a mistake to rely on them exclusively, since they can only report traffic from active transponders, but they're far better than nothing.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seventh Victim Of Copter Crash Dies - Phoenix News Story - KPHO Phoenix
The lone survivor of Sunday's mid-air crash of two medical helicopters has died at a Flagstaff hospital here, authorities said.
James Taylor was a registered nurse and was flying on one helicopter that was ferrying a patient from the south rim of the Grand Canyon to a Flagstaff hospital.
Earlier in the week, investigators picked through the wreckage. They found that the tail of one helicopter showed signs that it had been hit by a rotor blade.
The Federal Aviation Administration said the Flagstaff collision was only the second mid-air crash involving a medical helicopter in the past 25 years, and the first that involved two medical aircraft.
A memorial service for the six (now 7) people who died in the collision was set for 10 a.m. Tuesday at the Pine Mountain Amphitheater in Flagstaff. It will be open to the public and the media.
The lone survivor of Sunday's mid-air crash of two medical helicopters has died at a Flagstaff hospital here, authorities said.
James Taylor was a registered nurse and was flying on one helicopter that was ferrying a patient from the south rim of the Grand Canyon to a Flagstaff hospital.
Earlier in the week, investigators picked through the wreckage. They found that the tail of one helicopter showed signs that it had been hit by a rotor blade.
The Federal Aviation Administration said the Flagstaff collision was only the second mid-air crash involving a medical helicopter in the past 25 years, and the first that involved two medical aircraft.
A memorial service for the six (now 7) people who died in the collision was set for 10 a.m. Tuesday at the Pine Mountain Amphitheater in Flagstaff. It will be open to the public and the media.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest (R&W daily news):
July 11, 2008
Sat-Tracking Systems May Aid Midair Probe
Satellite-based tracking systems from each aircraft may aid the investigation into the June 29 midair collision of two EMS helicopters in Flagstaff, Ariz. The seventh victim of that crash, Flight Nurse James Taylor from the Classic Helicopters Bell Helicopter 407, died July 4 of injuries from the crash. That aircraft was equipped with a satellite tracking system that provided updates on the flight to Flagstaff Medical Center every 4 min. But the Air Methods 407 that collided with it about a quarter mile from the center had an Outerlink system that updated reports every 30 sec. Teams of investigators led by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board also are culling other data sources. A security camera on the medical center's parking garage recorded the collision; its images likely can't be enhanced much, but may help verify the airspeed and flight angle of each aircraft. Later this month, an NTSB investigator will travel to Hartford, Conn. to supervise analysis of engine control units from each of the 407s at the units' manufacturer, Goodrich. Investigators hope non-volatile memory in the units' computer chips may provide details on collective and throttle position, altitude and performance parameters. Investigators also have information from the crews' communications with their respective operations centers and the medical center, as well as a handheld GPS unit from one of the aircraft. Both aircraft were heavily damaged post-collision, but the Classic 407 shows signs of main rotor blade strikes on the underside of its tail boom.
July 11, 2008
Sat-Tracking Systems May Aid Midair Probe
Satellite-based tracking systems from each aircraft may aid the investigation into the June 29 midair collision of two EMS helicopters in Flagstaff, Ariz. The seventh victim of that crash, Flight Nurse James Taylor from the Classic Helicopters Bell Helicopter 407, died July 4 of injuries from the crash. That aircraft was equipped with a satellite tracking system that provided updates on the flight to Flagstaff Medical Center every 4 min. But the Air Methods 407 that collided with it about a quarter mile from the center had an Outerlink system that updated reports every 30 sec. Teams of investigators led by the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board also are culling other data sources. A security camera on the medical center's parking garage recorded the collision; its images likely can't be enhanced much, but may help verify the airspeed and flight angle of each aircraft. Later this month, an NTSB investigator will travel to Hartford, Conn. to supervise analysis of engine control units from each of the 407s at the units' manufacturer, Goodrich. Investigators hope non-volatile memory in the units' computer chips may provide details on collective and throttle position, altitude and performance parameters. Investigators also have information from the crews' communications with their respective operations centers and the medical center, as well as a handheld GPS unit from one of the aircraft. Both aircraft were heavily damaged post-collision, but the Classic 407 shows signs of main rotor blade strikes on the underside of its tail boom.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: US
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come to think of it, other than prisoners being flown against their will, crash victims being flown from a scene are pretty much the only human beings who have no say in how they are transported to hospital. Given a choice, perhaps even after becoming a crash victim, I wonder how many would opt for the helicopter.
Given the involuntary nature of this public transport endeavor it kinda makes me think the equipment, training, compensation and operating standards in this business should be next to none in the world, surpassing top airline and corporate operations.
Sounds good anyway!
Given the involuntary nature of this public transport endeavor it kinda makes me think the equipment, training, compensation and operating standards in this business should be next to none in the world, surpassing top airline and corporate operations.
Sounds good anyway!
"Just a pilot"
"Screwed" Said:
"It's always intrigued me about the U.S. EMS scene.
Taking off in snow storms. Taking off in fog. Flying S.E. machines at night.
WHY?"
"Taking off in snow storms." Huh? What? My RFM will allow flight into 'x' visibility, far less than any visibility minimum permitted and far less than a "snow storm", even here in Dixie. My program's air boss has flat forbidden any operation in falling snow, period. I suspect my Yankee friends have similar minimums, equates to 2nd to lightest green on radar. Again, hardly a snow storm.
"Taking off in fog." Well, okay, I guess anytime the METARs reports "BR", we're flying in fog. Minimums vary from 2-5 miles, depending. You're right, that's outrageous. Again, my guess is that our minimums are fairly typical.
"Flying S.E. machines at night." Guilty. How many accidents, much less fatalities gave engine failures caused here in the profit- crazed U.S. EMS industry? Very few.
Next, ALL the stats I've seen indicate a bare arguable advantage for light twins, if any exists at all. Look'em up, there is very little safety advantage in a light twin- unless you count pilot induced engine/system problems, positively exacerbated by twins.
I advise that you not take the media's reportage as reliable.
"Ned-Air2Air" said:
"Quote:
'The air medical community, the FAA, and NTSB have been working intensively and collaboratively for the past several years on improving air medical safety.'
Like that has made a difference."
Actually it has made a difference. It's just a glacial, if not geologic time frame for the process. As fast as the company can get'em, they're deploying new aircraft. Our newest fleet standard for VFR singles is- Dual Garmins, 500/400 combo with a MFD and something called a VEMD, never seen it, so I'm not certain what all it does; Terrain/obstacle warning of some sort (I'll know tomorrow or the next day. I'm being trained on the new suite in advance of our receiving it.); Data uplink for WX/traffic; NVG and compatible a/c lighting; The usual VHF stone age VHF nav radios (NO ADF!!!); Crash attenuating seats all-around; and, well you get the idea, lots of good stuff- better than the IFR twin I was in 10 years ago, less the autopilot.
We've been helmets and nomex for a while. Goggles are being and have been deployed as fast as we can get them, likewise the compatible airframes. It takes time to come up with or overhaul 300+ airframes to fit the standards set, plus the competition is snarfing the stuff up, too.
We have "big brother" staffed with aviators overseeing and waiting to advise us on issues enroute.
Pretty much everything the NTSB recommended in 2004 is happening.
My opinion is that this all helps, but isn't the silver bullet solution. Somehow, we have to tighten up the "loose nut behind the wheel". My pet peeve is scheduling for dummies- Dummies make the schedule, and the schedule makes more dummies, switching casually day to night. We need more peer review, we operate in isolation. Knowing that another pilot will see the sloppy approach, etc., and critique you mercilessly encourages good practice.
Rant mode off, time to review the literature on this new-fangled VEMD thing-a-muh-jig.
"It's always intrigued me about the U.S. EMS scene.
Taking off in snow storms. Taking off in fog. Flying S.E. machines at night.
WHY?"
"Taking off in snow storms." Huh? What? My RFM will allow flight into 'x' visibility, far less than any visibility minimum permitted and far less than a "snow storm", even here in Dixie. My program's air boss has flat forbidden any operation in falling snow, period. I suspect my Yankee friends have similar minimums, equates to 2nd to lightest green on radar. Again, hardly a snow storm.
"Taking off in fog." Well, okay, I guess anytime the METARs reports "BR", we're flying in fog. Minimums vary from 2-5 miles, depending. You're right, that's outrageous. Again, my guess is that our minimums are fairly typical.
"Flying S.E. machines at night." Guilty. How many accidents, much less fatalities gave engine failures caused here in the profit- crazed U.S. EMS industry? Very few.
Next, ALL the stats I've seen indicate a bare arguable advantage for light twins, if any exists at all. Look'em up, there is very little safety advantage in a light twin- unless you count pilot induced engine/system problems, positively exacerbated by twins.
I advise that you not take the media's reportage as reliable.
"Ned-Air2Air" said:
"Quote:
'The air medical community, the FAA, and NTSB have been working intensively and collaboratively for the past several years on improving air medical safety.'
Like that has made a difference."
Actually it has made a difference. It's just a glacial, if not geologic time frame for the process. As fast as the company can get'em, they're deploying new aircraft. Our newest fleet standard for VFR singles is- Dual Garmins, 500/400 combo with a MFD and something called a VEMD, never seen it, so I'm not certain what all it does; Terrain/obstacle warning of some sort (I'll know tomorrow or the next day. I'm being trained on the new suite in advance of our receiving it.); Data uplink for WX/traffic; NVG and compatible a/c lighting; The usual VHF stone age VHF nav radios (NO ADF!!!); Crash attenuating seats all-around; and, well you get the idea, lots of good stuff- better than the IFR twin I was in 10 years ago, less the autopilot.
We've been helmets and nomex for a while. Goggles are being and have been deployed as fast as we can get them, likewise the compatible airframes. It takes time to come up with or overhaul 300+ airframes to fit the standards set, plus the competition is snarfing the stuff up, too.
We have "big brother" staffed with aviators overseeing and waiting to advise us on issues enroute.
Pretty much everything the NTSB recommended in 2004 is happening.
My opinion is that this all helps, but isn't the silver bullet solution. Somehow, we have to tighten up the "loose nut behind the wheel". My pet peeve is scheduling for dummies- Dummies make the schedule, and the schedule makes more dummies, switching casually day to night. We need more peer review, we operate in isolation. Knowing that another pilot will see the sloppy approach, etc., and critique you mercilessly encourages good practice.
Rant mode off, time to review the literature on this new-fangled VEMD thing-a-muh-jig.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: US
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gomer Pylot states:
""Should be, yes. Will be, ...nah. Not as long as money is the driving force.""
Agreed. Having some experience inside the Washington DC beltway I guarantee the only way to break this money driving industrial log jam ref: the way HEMS is utilized is to get Congress involved from the pilot level.
Seems a very good subject for a couple Unions!
WIII
""Should be, yes. Will be, ...nah. Not as long as money is the driving force.""
Agreed. Having some experience inside the Washington DC beltway I guarantee the only way to break this money driving industrial log jam ref: the way HEMS is utilized is to get Congress involved from the pilot level.
Seems a very good subject for a couple Unions!
WIII
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just went through all these posts and it seems nothing changes but the time of day. Some here have no clue, others think they have a clue and the rest want to reinvent the wheel or create a paperwork nightmare in hopes that will solve the problem........which is (See and Avoid). Two VFR Pilots had an accident as they either didnt see each other and/or were not talking on air to air. All these links to the accident are free and available, use them and things go well.
The area is such that TCAS is not needed, A Controller at the hospital is not needed and we certainly dont need more government intervention. As it is we have two or three "overseers" who do nothing but make more rules and charge for membership so they can claim things are safer if done their way.
As to the Hero syndrome. Its sad they are gone but they were employees doing a job for pay to make a profit for a company who will pay the rest of the employees. It was not a combat mission and more than likely all would be alive today if handled by ground ambulance.
EMS in the states is not a group of people in a ready room waiting to go out and save the world. For the most part they are trained to transfer Patients from Point A to Point B faster than by ground. Companies charge a ton of money for this service and the competitive atmosphere is enough to make one sick. You can see the infighting of the inbreds on JustHelos daily. Our company is better than yours etc. So much so, that many do not even talk to each other on air to air even when safety is paramount.. probably can be attributed in this case also..
Yes EMS does do scene calls and yes they do save lives, but as mentioned above, the bulk of the work/money comes from transfers.
EMS is expanding at a pretty fast pace, but certainly not at the publics benefit. Its a huge money maker. Its America and thats what drives this country. Certainly not out of the goodness of anyones heart.
The area is such that TCAS is not needed, A Controller at the hospital is not needed and we certainly dont need more government intervention. As it is we have two or three "overseers" who do nothing but make more rules and charge for membership so they can claim things are safer if done their way.
As to the Hero syndrome. Its sad they are gone but they were employees doing a job for pay to make a profit for a company who will pay the rest of the employees. It was not a combat mission and more than likely all would be alive today if handled by ground ambulance.
EMS in the states is not a group of people in a ready room waiting to go out and save the world. For the most part they are trained to transfer Patients from Point A to Point B faster than by ground. Companies charge a ton of money for this service and the competitive atmosphere is enough to make one sick. You can see the infighting of the inbreds on JustHelos daily. Our company is better than yours etc. So much so, that many do not even talk to each other on air to air even when safety is paramount.. probably can be attributed in this case also..
Yes EMS does do scene calls and yes they do save lives, but as mentioned above, the bulk of the work/money comes from transfers.
EMS is expanding at a pretty fast pace, but certainly not at the publics benefit. Its a huge money maker. Its America and thats what drives this country. Certainly not out of the goodness of anyones heart.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 424 Likes
on
224 Posts
B Sousa,
I agree with your post in the main but can't understand your comment about TCAS not being needed. As a user of TCAS/TAS for nearly ten years, I'd be grateful to know why you say this. Thanks.
I agree with your post in the main but can't understand your comment about TCAS not being needed. As a user of TCAS/TAS for nearly ten years, I'd be grateful to know why you say this. Thanks.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
two pilots
Do any of the US EMS heli's use two pilots ? I understand weight issues but surely a B407 with role equipment can handle and extra front seat pilot. A post mentioned too much going on when approaching a site for single pilot to cope with - so put two pilots up front. Cost !!! I'm pretty sure the cost of insurance claims / loss of a/c so far this year is far greater than the cost of a second pilot. Hey it could even be a lower hour pilot that deals with radio coms, nav, etc as well as lookout and gets good experience along the way!
The UK corporate market seems to be going this way more & more. Is it really needed - maybe not - does it increase safety - definatley. Even when using TCAS/TAS trying to spot the actual a/c that causes a woman to shout "traffic traffic" can be diffucult - 2 sets of eyes increases awareness.
The UK corporate market seems to be going this way more & more. Is it really needed - maybe not - does it increase safety - definatley. Even when using TCAS/TAS trying to spot the actual a/c that causes a woman to shout "traffic traffic" can be diffucult - 2 sets of eyes increases awareness.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: US
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TCAS? Used it 14 years - great stuff. 2 pilots? Just as good as TCAS as long as both have their act together.
More of the same knee-jerk reaction here in the US? Of course. We all know what the problems are but companies just do not respond until there are deaths and it looks like government is going to get involved, which everyone knows is like a bunch of weenies trying to play hard ball but it does get industries' attention. Ya want change? Go to the top - don't muck around in the weeds!
More of the same knee-jerk reaction here in the US? Of course. We all know what the problems are but companies just do not respond until there are deaths and it looks like government is going to get involved, which everyone knows is like a bunch of weenies trying to play hard ball but it does get industries' attention. Ya want change? Go to the top - don't muck around in the weeds!