Super Puma down central North Sea Feb 2009
That being the case then, if as it turns out the PIC happens to be the one to remain on instruments until the 2IC lands visually, how many PIC's out there are entirely comfortable not looking outside, at least to some extent, to see what's going on whilst the 2IC is landing the aircraft in poor viz? Or in practice is there a scan of some sort going on here where the PIC is looking outside to monitor the approach, and cross referencing to the instruments?
Surely with the proximity of obstacles at the platform, and the risk of departure from optimal approach profile due to poor seeing conditions (depth perception and illusions), wouldn't it be more prudent for both pilots to be looking outside? As a NFP PIC in these circumstances I'd be very uncomfortable arriving at the platform without actually observing what's going on outside.
Surely with the proximity of obstacles at the platform, and the risk of departure from optimal approach profile due to poor seeing conditions (depth perception and illusions), wouldn't it be more prudent for both pilots to be looking outside? As a NFP PIC in these circumstances I'd be very uncomfortable arriving at the platform without actually observing what's going on outside.
Guillibell
I would point out that the North Sea at night in limited viz is a very difficult environment to operate in. As PIC, I am quite happy 'looking in' until the very last minute. Trying to take over visually too early with inadequate or limited visual references is a very testing experience. At those times, it is the crew member on instruments that will be the one to ensure the aircraft isn't sinking towards the water or losing airspeed. You certainly won't pick up those cues looking outside.
I would point out that the North Sea at night in limited viz is a very difficult environment to operate in. As PIC, I am quite happy 'looking in' until the very last minute. Trying to take over visually too early with inadequate or limited visual references is a very testing experience. At those times, it is the crew member on instruments that will be the one to ensure the aircraft isn't sinking towards the water or losing airspeed. You certainly won't pick up those cues looking outside.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: all over?
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would point out that the North Sea at night in limited viz is a very difficult environment to operate in. As PIC, I am quite happy 'looking in' until the very last minute. Trying to take over visually too early with inadequate or limited visual references is a very testing experience. At those times, it is the crew member on instruments that will be the one to ensure the aircraft isn't sinking towards the water or losing airspeed. You certainly won't pick up those cues looking outside.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West coast Australia :)
Posts: 238
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One point to add for those outside the north sea, is that the pilot flynig isn't always the Captain (PIC). If the rig (dependant on wind and other obstacles) is on the left then the Co-Pilot will do the talk down then actual landing with the captain flying the approach. This can be changed dependant on the experience of the crew, but would mean a more complicated hand over at the "bottom" (decision point).
I will echo HB about the fact we don't take chances or risks as we are taking people to work, not saving lives (i.e. SAR).
I will echo HB about the fact we don't take chances or risks as we are taking people to work, not saving lives (i.e. SAR).
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: N/A
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew the Super Puma when it first came on the North Sea in the early 80's.
Designed for 145kt cruising speed.....it took a long time for everyone concerned to realise that this helicopter, it's gearbox and transmission train was being overly stressed....many gearbox changes later they reduced its speed.
I remember many incidents and accidents then with this type and unfortunately the incidents and accidents continue.
Flying the AS332L was not always an enjoyable experience for me as we lost one quite early due to the inclined hinge pin coming loose and the inclined driveshaft cover opening up into the tail rotor, amazingly no-one was killed (G-TIGD).
In my view the Super Puma on the North Sea has had a great deal of luck.
I would not say that this helicopter has had a sound history of safety, look back and see for yourself how many serious incidents and accidents it has had.
Continued good luck for those who have to fly in it!
Designed for 145kt cruising speed.....it took a long time for everyone concerned to realise that this helicopter, it's gearbox and transmission train was being overly stressed....many gearbox changes later they reduced its speed.
I remember many incidents and accidents then with this type and unfortunately the incidents and accidents continue.
Flying the AS332L was not always an enjoyable experience for me as we lost one quite early due to the inclined hinge pin coming loose and the inclined driveshaft cover opening up into the tail rotor, amazingly no-one was killed (G-TIGD).
In my view the Super Puma on the North Sea has had a great deal of luck.
I would not say that this helicopter has had a sound history of safety, look back and see for yourself how many serious incidents and accidents it has had.
Continued good luck for those who have to fly in it!
Mark One Eyeball
I think that's slightly harsh. I accept you have your doubts and have seen the history of the Super Puma on the North Sea, but as an aircraft type, it really has an exceptionally good track record. I don't think I know of a single type that has entered service without some inherent faults that have been solved with engineering fixes over the following years.
Thats why I think the EC225 was always a good choice for the North Sea, being a further development of an existing proven design, with a solid design pedigree you can trace back to the original Puma in the 70's. The pilots certainly seem to love it and you don't hear many complaints especially when it comes to night flying or landing at Aberdeen in the fog !!
I think that's slightly harsh. I accept you have your doubts and have seen the history of the Super Puma on the North Sea, but as an aircraft type, it really has an exceptionally good track record. I don't think I know of a single type that has entered service without some inherent faults that have been solved with engineering fixes over the following years.
Thats why I think the EC225 was always a good choice for the North Sea, being a further development of an existing proven design, with a solid design pedigree you can trace back to the original Puma in the 70's. The pilots certainly seem to love it and you don't hear many complaints especially when it comes to night flying or landing at Aberdeen in the fog !!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,580
Received 438 Likes
on
231 Posts
I understand the 332 on its introduction, used the same main rotor gearbox as the RAF's HC1 model. The HC1s were not fitted with a torquemeter and limited to 15.5 degrees Collective Pitch for takeoff and hover in temperate climates, with further restrictions in other phases of flight. We seldom had MRG problems (or engine problems with the old Turmo IIIC4, for that matter).
I was informed that the 332s were flying using the equivalent of 16 and 16.5 degrees CP. On hearing this I assumed that the gearboxes were modified to take extra power. We later heard that they weren't.... if that's true perhaps it's not surprising that there were some reliability issues.
I was informed that the 332s were flying using the equivalent of 16 and 16.5 degrees CP. On hearing this I assumed that the gearboxes were modified to take extra power. We later heard that they weren't.... if that's true perhaps it's not surprising that there were some reliability issues.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeenshire
Age: 49
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also agree with HB about the added problems of flying ARA's at night in poor vis. The only part i do not agree with is the commercial pressure. I have never felt any commercial pressure to operate a flight. If i do not want to go then I dont go...that is my decision as a captain, and that is the decision they pay me to make. Yes i will explore ever avenue before deciding to delay/cancel a flight but will not be pushed to make a decision based on a commercial issue.
and with regard to the safety of the super puma.......yes it has had its fair share of incidents/accidents over the years and teething troubles at the begining are the same for every new aircraft entering a role. Look at the number of flights/hours flown since they first came into service on the north sea compared to the number of accidents incidents and i think you will find it a very safe machine..........if it wasnt i would not be too keen on strapping one to my butt each day and flogging around the north sea in all types of weather day or night!!!
and with regard to the safety of the super puma.......yes it has had its fair share of incidents/accidents over the years and teething troubles at the begining are the same for every new aircraft entering a role. Look at the number of flights/hours flown since they first came into service on the north sea compared to the number of accidents incidents and i think you will find it a very safe machine..........if it wasnt i would not be too keen on strapping one to my butt each day and flogging around the north sea in all types of weather day or night!!!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: all over?
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T4 - just to add to and clarify my point earlier about commercial pressure. I am certainly pleased that you do not feel the commercial pressure, but some do, and I must point out that I did not mean specifically the crew. Commercial pressure is probably felt more in the hangar and in the ops rooms than us stick monkeys. Fortunately I think these days the companies do a good job of protecting the flying crews, but I have seen many cases of commercial pressure manifesting itself in ops, even recently, especially now in financially difficult times. Incorrect lighting on decks or incorrect deck design as an example. We may be used to it, but we all know it is wrong, and commercial pressure is for management to get the job done anyway without making too much of a fuss. It doesn't normally present itself as a big issue, as we know/hope the oil company will sort it eventually, but as I said everything is a very long chain.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for a timely reminder here but some people are suggesting SAR crews will risk all beyond that of a transport pilot because lives are at risk. Returning home to our families is as important as anybody else.
While we will push further then CAT allows we will not risk our lives needlessly. If we can help we will push ourselves to the limit to do so. Beyond that your on your own. I personnaly have a wife and 2 kids to think about!
Well done to the crew and passengers of the 225. Regardless of reason for being there you made the job of the SAR crews on scene 100% easier.
While we will push further then CAT allows we will not risk our lives needlessly. If we can help we will push ourselves to the limit to do so. Beyond that your on your own. I personnaly have a wife and 2 kids to think about!
Well done to the crew and passengers of the 225. Regardless of reason for being there you made the job of the SAR crews on scene 100% easier.