Super Puma down central North Sea Feb 2009
That's Life!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Out of the sand pit, carving a path through our jungle.
Age: 72
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T4 Risen Sorry if I didn't fully explain that, the gate was a 'fix' for me on visual approaches, obviously one had to amend that if 'forced' into carrying out an ARA due to the prevailing Wx conditions.
BTW please note my input was 60 KIAS, almost irrespective of ground speed!
BTW please note my input was 60 KIAS, almost irrespective of ground speed!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: all over?
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generally I agree with what you say, for the 225 the best way to operate at night is to keep the automatics engaged, slow right down if not much wind (min coupled IAS 30kts) until you have the site picture (your rugby ball), only then disengage and fly the last bit manually - by then you are close to the destination so the visual references are better. That's what I teach.
But I wouldn't go so far as to say "no turning" - there is nothing wrong with turning either in heading hold, or with manual cyclic input, provided you are coupled in ALT and IAS.
But I wouldn't go so far as to say "no turning" - there is nothing wrong with turning either in heading hold, or with manual cyclic input, provided you are coupled in ALT and IAS.
Bond do indeed dual rate on the 332L2 and EC225 and not aware of any previous problem with that
Although I don't know if 225's etc have a rad hold
80 kts groundspeed for the gate? - much too fast, = big flare, dumping collective, destabilisation and nose up in the air where the visual reference just was!
HC
DB,
What a load of tosh you speak!! Have you never worked anywhere other than Aberdeen? Come down to the South side and try your suggestion, a twenty stop night shuttle would take all night. Maybe night recency ought to be looked at. I could even make a radical suggestion and say that maybe Aberdeen pilots ought to spend at least one winter shuttling down south before going up North to practice what they have learnt, lets face it, the guys flying in the SNS probably do more night landings in one night than those in Aberdeen do in a year! However, if you work for the same company as me, all the OPS manuals are based around flying a Puma out of Aberdeen, yet they still think they can tell us how we should be aproaching decks at night without any consultation with the guys and gals who do it all the time. We have been advised that we should be doing stabilised straight in approaches, whereby judging closing speed is almost impossible. It is far easier and safer to approach to base leg with a certain amount of visual manoeuvring at the bottom to establish on finals once you are happy with references.
By this I am not saying we know it all and are closed to new suggestions and techniques. Mistakes and disorientations do happen when you are making approaches to very small decks in the black with just a circle of green lights as your only outside reference.
I think the comment on the use of automatics is a valid one and needs to be looked at more closely. We have been flying 4 axis aoutopilot aircraft for long enough now to have had SOPs written regarding which modes should be used during the different phases of flight, but our manuals do not include them.
As to coupling everything, maybe you should be aware that the S76A+ aircraft down South have nothing more than a rudamentry AFCS system with no AP functions at all, so we have to hand fly all the time!!!
What a load of tosh you speak!! Have you never worked anywhere other than Aberdeen? Come down to the South side and try your suggestion, a twenty stop night shuttle would take all night. Maybe night recency ought to be looked at. I could even make a radical suggestion and say that maybe Aberdeen pilots ought to spend at least one winter shuttling down south before going up North to practice what they have learnt, lets face it, the guys flying in the SNS probably do more night landings in one night than those in Aberdeen do in a year! However, if you work for the same company as me, all the OPS manuals are based around flying a Puma out of Aberdeen, yet they still think they can tell us how we should be aproaching decks at night without any consultation with the guys and gals who do it all the time. We have been advised that we should be doing stabilised straight in approaches, whereby judging closing speed is almost impossible. It is far easier and safer to approach to base leg with a certain amount of visual manoeuvring at the bottom to establish on finals once you are happy with references.
By this I am not saying we know it all and are closed to new suggestions and techniques. Mistakes and disorientations do happen when you are making approaches to very small decks in the black with just a circle of green lights as your only outside reference.
I think the comment on the use of automatics is a valid one and needs to be looked at more closely. We have been flying 4 axis aoutopilot aircraft for long enough now to have had SOPs written regarding which modes should be used during the different phases of flight, but our manuals do not include them.
As to coupling everything, maybe you should be aware that the S76A+ aircraft down South have nothing more than a rudamentry AFCS system with no AP functions at all, so we have to hand fly all the time!!!
Last edited by pitchlink; 27th Feb 2009 at 19:22.
Brassed
Its a difficult point, but at some stage the old skills become obsolete and are replaced by new skills. When I first learnt to fly a helicopter, probably 90% of my concentration was used to adjust the throttle to maintain the rotor rpm. Now 25 years later, that skill is completely redundant - I fly a helicopter that doesn't even have throttles.
So is it a necessary skill to be able to fly a highly automated aircraft manually under difficult conditions? Of course automation can go wrong but with the high levels of redundancy built into modern aircraft, and if the policy is to RTB if its not working, I suggest its not.
If we are going to have to maintain all manual flying skills, things will never move on and what's the point in investing millions in new technology?
If I were a passenger in your care, I would much prefer to be on one of the flights where the automation was flying the aircraft, rather than ones where you were flying manually at night in poor weather.
DB - I guess pitchlink is one of the dinosaurs you were afraid of. Maybe he hasn't read the Morecambe Bay accident report.
HC
Its a difficult point, but at some stage the old skills become obsolete and are replaced by new skills. When I first learnt to fly a helicopter, probably 90% of my concentration was used to adjust the throttle to maintain the rotor rpm. Now 25 years later, that skill is completely redundant - I fly a helicopter that doesn't even have throttles.
So is it a necessary skill to be able to fly a highly automated aircraft manually under difficult conditions? Of course automation can go wrong but with the high levels of redundancy built into modern aircraft, and if the policy is to RTB if its not working, I suggest its not.
If we are going to have to maintain all manual flying skills, things will never move on and what's the point in investing millions in new technology?
If I were a passenger in your care, I would much prefer to be on one of the flights where the automation was flying the aircraft, rather than ones where you were flying manually at night in poor weather.
DB - I guess pitchlink is one of the dinosaurs you were afraid of. Maybe he hasn't read the Morecambe Bay accident report.
HC
Yes I have read the Morcombe Bay report at length. As I said we are all open to suggesions on how things could be done better and more safely. If I am a dinosaur then I bow to you, I ought to be extinct, you are obviously a higher level life form and therefore know better! After all, yours is bigger than mine and therefore its operator must be superior!!
P1V1T1, Appologies for any stereotyping in this post, I just couldn't resist. I just think that there is a massive offshore night flying skill base which is not being used or consulted about procedures purely because they do not operate out of Aberdeen. Anyway, I drift off the subject, back to the 225 incident.
P1V1T1, Appologies for any stereotyping in this post, I just couldn't resist. I just think that there is a massive offshore night flying skill base which is not being used or consulted about procedures purely because they do not operate out of Aberdeen. Anyway, I drift off the subject, back to the 225 incident.
Last edited by pitchlink; 27th Feb 2009 at 19:56.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The toughest task
I have said before that this type of work is about as tough as it gets and we all know that, whether we are current night ops or not, the 'skill-meter' is sat at max throughout. I am not surprised - if you go to edge too frequently then one day you will fall over. Where's our margin for error I ask myself.
I agree entirely with the classification 'A Human Factors Accident'. Make the job easier or suffer the consequences. Better automatics, night vision, more sim training or kick such ops into touch. Take your pick and don't be too judgemental lest one day you are bitten in the arse by such an event.
G
I agree entirely with the classification 'A Human Factors Accident'. Make the job easier or suffer the consequences. Better automatics, night vision, more sim training or kick such ops into touch. Take your pick and don't be too judgemental lest one day you are bitten in the arse by such an event.
G
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Trolls
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now now boys this is not a pi**ing contest
The primary aim of SOP's and so much automation is safety and minimising risk and we are now more systems opperators, than pilots.
As a 'Proby' to the NS I have to agree with Horror Box's comments earlier
This is no longer a job where you can get yourself out of trouble with skill
alone, especially in marginal conditions
Pv
The primary aim of SOP's and so much automation is safety and minimising risk and we are now more systems opperators, than pilots.
As a 'Proby' to the NS I have to agree with Horror Box's comments earlier
This is no longer a job where you can get yourself out of trouble with skill
alone, especially in marginal conditions
Pv
Certain fundamentals carry over even to the most complex machine flown currently. At some point the Mark I eyeball and human brain has to look at the deck and select a safe angle and flight path to arrive safely.
SAS/Autopilots might ease the handling but it still takes the human interface to achieve the safe landing (at this point anyway).
As long as all the techology is working we can get by with fewer fundamental skills I guess but at some point when things go "bang"....and things revert to basic helicopter flight then having some grasp of the fundamentals does come in handy.
The trick is to figure out what needs to be retained and what can be let go.
The safety record of the antique S-76's compared to the ultra hi-tech EC products is not all that much different as relates to CFIT it seems. We might try to figure out what is going on to cause that to be.
SAS/Autopilots might ease the handling but it still takes the human interface to achieve the safe landing (at this point anyway).
As long as all the techology is working we can get by with fewer fundamental skills I guess but at some point when things go "bang"....and things revert to basic helicopter flight then having some grasp of the fundamentals does come in handy.
The trick is to figure out what needs to be retained and what can be let go.
The safety record of the antique S-76's compared to the ultra hi-tech EC products is not all that much different as relates to CFIT it seems. We might try to figure out what is going on to cause that to be.
A couple of `Q`s,what is an ARA, and what autopilot functions do you have on the 225/332/Pumas, simplex/duplex,and what rad. alts do you have,1,or 2?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the top of the flag pole
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Geoffers!
One point about the idea of making every approach at night an ARA without the option of visual flying.
In the SNS Gas fields there is too much steel work around to offer a clean approach to many platforms whatever wind direction prevails. I remember doing my SNS line training, having flown up north on the 332. The first time I looked at the number of returns on the radar I nearly S$$t myself. I'd never seen anything like it!
As often as not you will have to approach the first return and the continue using intermediate platforms/objects to reach your destination. In this case you must fly visually. Of course you may still be fully coupled.
Automatics are key, but sensible SOPs with consistent technique and application with good crew concept is vital.
I would also echo the point that is is important to be able to seamlessly transfer from fully coupled "automatic" flying to manual, day or night. It would be easy to over look the importance of such a perishable skill. I had reason to do just that recently. Being current on a fully mandraulic 76 certainly helped when the shiny new Hi-tech cab threw a total wobbler. On this occasion we were IMC by day at MSA and not 300ft above the briney in the dark - I'm glad to say
One point about the idea of making every approach at night an ARA without the option of visual flying.
In the SNS Gas fields there is too much steel work around to offer a clean approach to many platforms whatever wind direction prevails. I remember doing my SNS line training, having flown up north on the 332. The first time I looked at the number of returns on the radar I nearly S$$t myself. I'd never seen anything like it!
As often as not you will have to approach the first return and the continue using intermediate platforms/objects to reach your destination. In this case you must fly visually. Of course you may still be fully coupled.
Automatics are key, but sensible SOPs with consistent technique and application with good crew concept is vital.
I would also echo the point that is is important to be able to seamlessly transfer from fully coupled "automatic" flying to manual, day or night. It would be easy to over look the importance of such a perishable skill. I had reason to do just that recently. Being current on a fully mandraulic 76 certainly helped when the shiny new Hi-tech cab threw a total wobbler. On this occasion we were IMC by day at MSA and not 300ft above the briney in the dark - I'm glad to say
Last edited by RedWhite&Blue; 27th Feb 2009 at 21:14.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: scotland
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brassed Off I totally agree with your comments 50/50 and also a recency requirement. Helicomparator I almost always agree your comments on pprune however this time I wonder if it is because you have the 'old skills' that you now think they are redundant. I feel both old fashioned handling practice and relying more on the new technology are both equally relevant - this coupled with appropriate recency would in my opinion improve standards, confidence and therefore safety.
When I flew offshore down south we flew lots of ARAs for practice - having come back to offshore flying in Aberdeen the culture seems to be do an ARA when you need too. I try to practice ARAs and even get a little reluctance sometimes from my crew, however, something constructive almost always seems to come from a practice approach. I also think night recency is required even if it means the odd late training flight - the oil companies can afford it and if all operators agree to the same requirements I can't see it hurting anyone commercially.
Finally my thoughts go out to the crew it could happen to any of us and I think they did a great job getting everyone into the rafts- I know I have scared myself at night before now.
When I flew offshore down south we flew lots of ARAs for practice - having come back to offshore flying in Aberdeen the culture seems to be do an ARA when you need too. I try to practice ARAs and even get a little reluctance sometimes from my crew, however, something constructive almost always seems to come from a practice approach. I also think night recency is required even if it means the odd late training flight - the oil companies can afford it and if all operators agree to the same requirements I can't see it hurting anyone commercially.
Finally my thoughts go out to the crew it could happen to any of us and I think they did a great job getting everyone into the rafts- I know I have scared myself at night before now.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
PITCHLINK
You have made some very valid points, there is a massive difference between the ABZ op and the SNS, and in terms of deck landings I think the void in both frequnecy and Experience is great.
My time on this forum up to now has been one of trying to stimulate the call for information. The time now is to get some real procedure mandated to ensure that the potential for this kind of incident is almost erradicated.
PITCHLINK I do not have all the answers and I do see a problem for you guys in SNS, many many freq approaches and lack of automation.
I note in your text although you say I speak a lot of "Tosh" you then go on and recognise that some of the suggestions are valid - good some common ground. For that reason I do NOT put you in the category of dinosaur, but rather a bloke trying to do a difficult job, in difficult conditions with kit that needs to be better.
My suggestions are not easily going to intergrate with the dynamics of the SNS.
Morcambe Bay was actually the other end of the profile - ie go-around. Whilst I do not want to upset anyone, IMO the more approaches and landings you do, the better you get at it, and the less likely you are to have to go-around. until the day..........
There is no doubt in my mind that one size may not necessarily it all/. But we must recognise that our current mandates are not protecting us, our passengers or our families.
There is a better way, I have some very firm ideas for my "Fleet" only to be honest. The needs and reqs of other fleets need to be ground down and assimilated by the experts who fly those types, on those types of operation.
PITCHLINK your comments about OMs is also very valid. They are **** because some shiny arsed butt kissing committee in Europe has written them for us.
I really hope the CAA tear into the culture that currently exists, in spite of operational crew, on the NS.
Get back to basics, then , get with modern times.
You have made some very valid points, there is a massive difference between the ABZ op and the SNS, and in terms of deck landings I think the void in both frequnecy and Experience is great.
My time on this forum up to now has been one of trying to stimulate the call for information. The time now is to get some real procedure mandated to ensure that the potential for this kind of incident is almost erradicated.
PITCHLINK I do not have all the answers and I do see a problem for you guys in SNS, many many freq approaches and lack of automation.
I note in your text although you say I speak a lot of "Tosh" you then go on and recognise that some of the suggestions are valid - good some common ground. For that reason I do NOT put you in the category of dinosaur, but rather a bloke trying to do a difficult job, in difficult conditions with kit that needs to be better.
My suggestions are not easily going to intergrate with the dynamics of the SNS.
Morcambe Bay was actually the other end of the profile - ie go-around. Whilst I do not want to upset anyone, IMO the more approaches and landings you do, the better you get at it, and the less likely you are to have to go-around. until the day..........
There is no doubt in my mind that one size may not necessarily it all/. But we must recognise that our current mandates are not protecting us, our passengers or our families.
There is a better way, I have some very firm ideas for my "Fleet" only to be honest. The needs and reqs of other fleets need to be ground down and assimilated by the experts who fly those types, on those types of operation.
PITCHLINK your comments about OMs is also very valid. They are **** because some shiny arsed butt kissing committee in Europe has written them for us.
I really hope the CAA tear into the culture that currently exists, in spite of operational crew, on the NS.
Get back to basics, then , get with modern times.
smudge
I did say it was a difficult point. Clearly its a good idea to retain (or learn) manual flying skills, the problem is that if we are pushing the automated way of flying as being the safer option, its then difficult to justify why we would require half the night approaches to be flown manually - ie we would have a policy where we intentionally do things in a less safe way half the time. Like I said, passengers on the manual flights might feel hard done by, especially if they end up in the water and can point to the Ops Manual taking risks with their safety in order to carry out training on routine line flights.
Regarding the point about night recency/training, I guess you are not a training captain. If you were, you would know just how hard it is to find a helideck prepared to accept you for non-rev training. Yes the big oil companies bang on about safety, but only when it doesn't cost them anything and only when it doesn't interrupt the work schedule offshore. When you ask them how you are supposed to train new pilots if they won't let you use their decks, the answer is "that's your problem, not ours".
HC
I did say it was a difficult point. Clearly its a good idea to retain (or learn) manual flying skills, the problem is that if we are pushing the automated way of flying as being the safer option, its then difficult to justify why we would require half the night approaches to be flown manually - ie we would have a policy where we intentionally do things in a less safe way half the time. Like I said, passengers on the manual flights might feel hard done by, especially if they end up in the water and can point to the Ops Manual taking risks with their safety in order to carry out training on routine line flights.
Regarding the point about night recency/training, I guess you are not a training captain. If you were, you would know just how hard it is to find a helideck prepared to accept you for non-rev training. Yes the big oil companies bang on about safety, but only when it doesn't cost them anything and only when it doesn't interrupt the work schedule offshore. When you ask them how you are supposed to train new pilots if they won't let you use their decks, the answer is "that's your problem, not ours".
HC
With regards to using automation and keeping your hand skills current.
I'm currently flying the 76C++ in an offshore role for one of the worlds largest oil companies. On our contract the oil company employees are not permitted to be carried at night except for life or limb threatening medevacs. This is great for us avoiding night flights but it also has the effect of reducing what were once very finely tuned skill sets.
We still have a minimum of 3 night deck landings and take-offs while at the controls to complete on a 90 day rotation.
I choose to do the first one or two using automation to it's fullest/safest amount then if no weaknesses were exposed I'll perform the last one or two using no automation to keep that set of my skill set functional as well.
My hand skills are certainly not what they once were when I flew non automated aircraft in challenging night and instrument conditions but by doing night training in this fashion and by hand flying once in awhile I haven't completely lost my touch.
I believe every aircraft in the night/imc offshore role should have automation and that all pilots should be extremely proficient with the automation. All pilots should endeavour to keep current in hand flying aircraft as well.
bb
I'm currently flying the 76C++ in an offshore role for one of the worlds largest oil companies. On our contract the oil company employees are not permitted to be carried at night except for life or limb threatening medevacs. This is great for us avoiding night flights but it also has the effect of reducing what were once very finely tuned skill sets.
We still have a minimum of 3 night deck landings and take-offs while at the controls to complete on a 90 day rotation.
I choose to do the first one or two using automation to it's fullest/safest amount then if no weaknesses were exposed I'll perform the last one or two using no automation to keep that set of my skill set functional as well.
My hand skills are certainly not what they once were when I flew non automated aircraft in challenging night and instrument conditions but by doing night training in this fashion and by hand flying once in awhile I haven't completely lost my touch.
I believe every aircraft in the night/imc offshore role should have automation and that all pilots should be extremely proficient with the automation. All pilots should endeavour to keep current in hand flying aircraft as well.
bb
The points about currency are so true. Anyone who shuttled in the Brent field or flies in the Southern North Sea will be current and well tuned in night landings offshore. I believe the oil companies did once ask for 3 night decks every 90 days for all operations, but it became clear that this just wasn't possible in Aberdeen or Shetland for 6 or 7 months of the year.
Out of Aberdeen, night flying accounts for 7% of my total flying and I would guess only about 5% of my annual landings offshore. Even here in the midst of winter, I still think I am only at the controls for about 12 night landings during the winter season. That just isn't enough to be current and competent.
Also, when it comes to training, I know a couple of guys that were taken out for their first night decks recently and just had perfect conditions. Nice moonlit night, wind in the right direction, no precipitation. The Training Captain was signing them off because they had achieved the standard but he was so aware that the next time they are offshore at night with passengers in the back, they could be trying to land in a situation they are completely unprepared for. All nights are different and it is difficult, even as an experienced pilot to be prepared for everything.
Out of Aberdeen, night flying accounts for 7% of my total flying and I would guess only about 5% of my annual landings offshore. Even here in the midst of winter, I still think I am only at the controls for about 12 night landings during the winter season. That just isn't enough to be current and competent.
Also, when it comes to training, I know a couple of guys that were taken out for their first night decks recently and just had perfect conditions. Nice moonlit night, wind in the right direction, no precipitation. The Training Captain was signing them off because they had achieved the standard but he was so aware that the next time they are offshore at night with passengers in the back, they could be trying to land in a situation they are completely unprepared for. All nights are different and it is difficult, even as an experienced pilot to be prepared for everything.
Last edited by Special 25; 28th Feb 2009 at 06:25.