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

212 accident offshore Dubai

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

212 accident offshore Dubai

Old 2nd Sep 2010, 23:33
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Out There, Man
Posts: 24
Accident report ?

Today is the second anniversary of this crash.

Has an accident report ever been published ?
Was an investigation carried out ?
technoprat is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2010, 06:05
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 9
Incident / Accident Investigation Report
MS29513-017 is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2010, 07:02
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 26
Final Report

An O ring beat me to it but here it is again.......

http://www.gcaa.ae/en/ePublication/a...-%20A6-ALV.pdf
Helicopter doctor is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2010, 08:04
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: au
Posts: 6
I don't believe for a minute that Chris B. would have allowed the a/c to move that far aft, the crane they hit was 50m behind them!

RIP Chris, it was a pleasure working with you.
chopper reid is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2010, 10:40
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,380
Mmmmm ....


And I ... would have to agree with the above post .... the Chris Brown I knew would NEVER have let it go 5' backwards let alone 50m.


spinwing is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2010, 12:03
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pizza hut
Posts: 630
How convenient......... pilot error (no national in the front on this one)

From what I know of these parts....
griffothefog is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2010, 13:17
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Lebanon
Age: 29
Posts: 2
May they Rest In Peace.. Pilot mistakes are always possible no matter how good a pilot is..
LebanesePilot is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 04:26
  #68 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 68
Posts: 3,811
"Pilot mistakes are always possible no matter how good a pilot is.. "

True, but highly unlikely in this case, and let's not forget Luis, who, apart from being a nice guy was also a Mr Safety. If it was anything like that, it would rather be "the Human Factor" than "Pilot Error".

Uncommanded cyclic movements due to failed tarsyns are not impossible, neither are failed artificial horizons, and this is no reflection on the maintenance dept at Aerogulf, who are second to none, IMHO. They do an outstanding job.

Phil
paco is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 10:08
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 273
Surely old 212s offshore at night is not smart.
sox6 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 10:15
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pizza hut
Posts: 630
Sox,

You said it brother....

A very nearby operator used to send un-stabilised 212's offshore at night

FcUking bean counters
griffothefog is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 10:29
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 75
Posts: 767
But Aerogulf are a Shell approved operator with the necessary Safety Case and SMS!
Shell Management is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 10:31
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,380
Mmmm ......



....A very nearby operator used to send un-stabilised 212's offshore at night ...


Any one I would know ??
spinwing is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 10:52
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Nigeria
Age: 53
Posts: 4,638
I'm guessing SASless would know........

Surely old 212s offshore at night is not smart
How does this relate to the accident in question? During the hover and take-off phase the 212 is as stable as most types out there, I'd say. Or, are you suggesting the risk of a pitch trim actuator runaway is greater on am old type?
212man is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 11:08
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 273
212man:- It certainly is an aging airframe which must make the chance of a system failure greater. I take it Aerogulf would not be doing routine night flights with passengers in 212s.

Smell Management:- I very much doubt Shell would use Aerogulf or that they had the sort of safety management of a 'major' helicopter operator. From what I recall at the time even life insurance wasn't apparently in place.
sox6 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 11:50
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,380
Mmmm ....

Actually .... that is exactly what Griffo and myself were alluding too .... that in fact UAE operators WERE sending 212s regularly offshore at night! (and some were unstabilised VFR machines AND in the UAE there is NO such thing as NGT VFR ... sort off!).

Happily Aerogulf are now about to put AW139s into service and the other operator has seen the light and no longer uses the 212 offshore (much!).


spinwing is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 15:59
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: texas
Posts: 117
Ah! Night flights in an unstabalized 212. Single pilot with an engineer along for the ride. Taking off and landing in the Zakum field with the engineer holding the log book to shield your eyes from the flares. Ah - the good old days.
js0987 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2010, 16:25
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pizza hut
Posts: 630
js0,

That would be the good old day's when there was never a recorded over torque on winch moves, single pilot...

Funny, when we went 2 crew, there were many...
griffothefog is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2010, 23:39
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Out There, Man
Posts: 24
Thanks for posting the report.
The fact that they did one at all is a positive step.
technoprat is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2010, 01:24
  #79 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 68
Posts: 3,811
"Surely old 212s offshore at night is not smart"

I've flown a lot worse at night, landing on crossed headlights and all.... I don't see much wrong with using the 212 for that, if the rest of the system is OK - at least the tail doesn't fall off. And, of course, if there is no evidence of equipment failure, it can't be included in the report.

Just to set the record straight, Aerogulf tried to get the customer concerned to use the 412 in 1993, and Bell even loaned them the machine for the demo, but the customer simply didn't want to pay for it. Now, of course, they're very happy to upgrade. Funny that. And to put things in perspective, I believe that was their only loss in over 30 years of operation - better than an airline, I think.

Phil
paco is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2010, 02:47
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Nigeria
Age: 53
Posts: 4,638
Yes, I agree with Phil - there is nothing intrinsically bad about flying a 212 at night. Other concerns that may exist are equally valid in daytime too. The 212 is a damn sight easier to fly offshore landings and takeoffs than the 76, for example!

Off topic, but they use a strange set of ATA numbers when referring to the deferred defects - anyone know why? AFCS should be ATA-22 and GPS should be ATA-34, surely?
212man is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.