Heli ditch North Sea G-REDL: NOT condolences

[victor papa]

I was at EC Marignane on course when the 225 accident occured. No internet or anything, bit I knew immediately something was on when the EC personnel started sending us on smoke breaks and gathering together. At first, they would not answer the "what is going on" question. Very late in the afternoon once it was in the press we were told the 225 went down and it is under investigation.

A human error was very much on the cards, even on this thread, right from the beginning, yet the EC guys did not speculate until it was confirmed and even afterwards their discussions never included the operator or crew but only the aircraft.

I understand those flying the type needs answers asap, but what do you want EC, Bond and the authorities to say if nobody knows? I can just imagine the reaction at Marignane (after seeing the response to the 225) to this accident. Safety first, but if EC ground the 332L2 fleet after all the hours accumulated up to now, the offshore transport is very much at a standstill especially in certain areas where only L2's are operated as the mainstay aircraft with an impeccable safety record.

Having worked with the L2 I have my theories, but all require more than one failure and or mistake to result in such a tragic accident. We had a seemingly human factors 225 accident, a MGB failure on the 92 and who knows what happened here? I hope the boxes can tell the story and honestly do not believe any helicopter flying out there today is designed/flown/maintained/operated with the intention to fail.

[The Governor]

I've been reading this thread occasionally, however, not anymore.

It has descended into a petty, tit for tat, "I said, he said" squabble that would make my 3 year old look mature and erudite.

I know it's supposed to be all about the rumours but the puffed out chests and "I know more than you" attitude grinds me down. We're supposed to be professionals aren't we?

Thank you to the chaps posting their support for flying in the L2. Absolutely the best thing I have read on this thread.

Yours disappointedly,

Gov

[victor papa]

As things stand now, I would probably get into that l2 wondering, but knowing what she has achieved and her ability what is my alternative? Look at the hours and she survived the "newer" type on the block speciman relatively easily. Maintenance error and/or pilot(not an issue in my opinion here) is difficult to control and pin point at the earlystages in a investigation.

I remember a recent presentation by non EC personnel pointing out that engine failures occured on the 350 fleet over the last 4 million flight hours-the only casualties caused by incorrect follow of procedures(hyd come to mind). Presentation actrually by AW to justify single engine but they did not have sufficient hours on the 119.

I had a L2 LH ancil(-2 so well pre manufacturer recommendations) failure entereing final approach. There was a bang and slight yaw but after a second all the non LH mGB driven electric and hydraulic system took over and except for the fright from the bang and yaw-no loss of any hydraulics/MGB etc due to the redundance system.

This lies close to my heart as I swear by the L1/L2/225 and will still get in their first. Just want to know the true facts of what went wrong. As said before, I can guarantee you eC has got every possible component of a nother in the so called "torture chamber" trying to put the puzzle together!

Good luck to all the researchers, operators,aircrews and the pax!

[maxwelg2]

maxwelg, there are no L2's in Canada -unless you have real interesting rumor information you can share. Of course, everything else you could fly instead of an L2 has also crashed at least once, so I hope you didn't have your heart set on a flying a helicopter type that has never crashed

Malabo, helo I'm referring to is operated by CHC from Halifax, haven't flew with them yet so I'll assume that it's a AS332L1. Cougar flew this variant from St. John's before the S-92a unit came on the scene, never had any additional concerns back then.

I'm a realist, don't expect there will ever to be a crash-free helo and I accept the calculated risk same as we all do. Just like to know my odds are favourable before I put that survival suit on...but IMO playing a word game with FAR29 wrt. the S-92a certification is not my idea of the right way forward.

[Aser]

NorthSeaTiger News reporting a Chc machine involved in an incident at the moment , any info ?

NST

The latest incident involved a Eurocopter EC225 with a fuel leak.
North Sea Helicopter Forced To Land After Fuel Leak (from The Herald )

Regards
Aser

[5711N0205W]

From the article linked in the post above;

But BP has now said it will continue to use helicopters from other operators despite Bond restarting operations. A spokesman for Bond said: "Super Pumas are still licensed and certified by the authorities to fly."

That's quite a step to take if that is BP's ongoing position!

[leading edge]

5711N0205W

I thought that too. I may have read it wrong but it seems that BP won't use Bond....how long for I don't know.

The website shows almost no scheduled flights for the next few days.

Do we all think that this is a temporary "respect" issue or is Bond in real trouble with BP?

[NorthSeaTiger]

I was going to post "Looks like a full programme for Monday the 13th for BP"

but when I checked back on their flight programme it now has no scheduled flights. Are any of their other customers still flying with them ? How long will this last ?

I think what the oil companys need to do is start flying with Bond again to show confidence with them and try and get things back to some sort of normality (obviously things will never be the same again)

NST

[T4 Risen]

Am i correct in believing that BP actually Own some of the aircraft and assets that Bond Use?...when Bond came back onto the North sea a Few years ago it was with BP as there sole customer.......almost as if Bond was a sort of Air BP??? How does this sit if BP want to Pull the contract? would they also take the aircraft if i am correct about them owning them?
T4

[ScotiaQ]

Are aircraft owned by BP

A quick trawl on G-INFO will show aircraft are owned by International Aircraft Leasing or, in the case of G-REDU on lease from ERA.

IAL is a sister compnay to BOH

[crud12001]

BP Super Puma / Bond

how about the jigsaw(Super Puma) A/C? why do they still use the Bond A/c?

A bit cynical i know but............

[victor papa]

OK! So what is the question here? Is bOND the problem accordingly to BP or the 332L2? Sorry, just seem everybody talks around the core and it seems funny that BP crews are being flown in L2's in different colours as long as it is not BOND colours. Politics? Maintenance? Badluck? I will aWAIT ec AND AUTHORITY REPORT.

[FrustratedFormerFlie]

I'm with you Victor Papa. Now is the vacuum the speculators and journalists will want to fill - at the expense of the dignity of the families and the sound management of safe British rotary aviation.

Lets keep our heads down and our ideas for private conversations when we know exactly who we are speaking to. With full recovery of wreckage and, thankfully, victims, we can hopefully look forward to decisive findings in reasonably early course.

[dipperm0]

What is the problem ? The accident occurs 8 days ago. The officials got the wreck 3 days ago, and nothing....

Obviously, it is not a human error, thus are still in the pot either a major and sudden technical failure, either due to a maintenance problem or a manufacturer flaw, or something external to the aircraft.

I favor the last option. Hope the AAIB will not be muted.

D0

[outhouse]

Really sorry but, having experience in the accident investigation procedures though a number of years ago. Once you have the wreckage and the recorded data the cause is soon either obvious or not. This information is available to a limited audience. The UK system generally will not release any findings immediately unless an airworthiness issue is found. An interim report may be issued however when?
O

[victor papa]

As said before I just want the facts asap on this specific issue as the L2 despite a few quirks(not including South American which was solved not by changing the aircraft) has prooven itself over and over. My problem is that I was at a briefing today where a different manufacturer(not Sikorsky or obv EC) made clear statements as to the build in errors and unreliability of the 332 and 225 range based on this accident. The 92 was forgotten. I know the investigation need time, but certain manufacturers climb onto these unfortunate accidents promising customers it has never and will never happen to them so bye1 now and get 1 for free. The fact that the cabin does not allow CPR/the aircraft does not have range/etc all of a sudden disappear as the mentality becomes as long as it is not an EC that falls out of the sky weekly. Mission readiness-what is that-scheduled downtime-what is that, at least we do not crash!

In my opinion the saddest and hightest invitation to murphy! It almost makes me feel that we will unfortunately be here again soon just wih a nes manufacturer name and yet more than that geniune unique sould lost.

Should there not be a monatorium on manufacturers using accidents like the last 3 until results are published before we just sell those not proven yet and 5 years down the line have to read the weekly update as to how many was lost in this 5 years ago it would not have happened aircraft.

Again, my full support to EC and the 332 and hope we can solve this to stop the misinformation and lying!!!!!!!!

[HeliComparator]

dipperm0

Obviously, it is not a human error

So no humans involved in maintaining the aircraft, designing it, building it, defining the certification standards, defining the operations standards, defining the maintenance standards then?

I suggest that almost all accidents are human error, though the relevant humans are often not the flight crew.

HC

[Horror box]

I suggest that almost all accidents are human error, though the relevant humans are often not the flight crew.

Exactly. Pilot error vs Human error. A subtle, but very often overlooked difference.
I would suggest also that human error or human factors is a factor in nearly every case. Pilot error is used when there is a lack of evidence to prove anything else.

[dipperm0]

My applogize. You are all right. Instead of human error I should have wriiten Pilot error.

D0

[malabo]

cut-cut-cut