Sky Shuttle AW139 ditches in HK Harbour
Black Dragon,
If you step back and look at say.. what's new in west Africa (Nigeria) thread, I think you will find Shell Management is a sort of Borat rip off merchant....
Very knowledgeable in helicopter ops but a complete piss taker....
Probably spent tooo much time hopping local honeys in the street bars in Nigeria..
Relax dude, everybody got out......
If you step back and look at say.. what's new in west Africa (Nigeria) thread, I think you will find Shell Management is a sort of Borat rip off merchant....
Very knowledgeable in helicopter ops but a complete piss taker....
Probably spent tooo much time hopping local honeys in the street bars in Nigeria..
Relax dude, everybody got out......
Last edited by griffothefog; 13th Jul 2010 at 16:17.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
I think it's vital not to lose sight of the main issues.
The evidence proves that the company actually made a very good risk assessment. The crew selection and training were obviously well up to the job, the captain made an excellent response to the emergency situation.
The on-board safety equipment also did its job. The post accident issues were those of surviving the immediate water landing until rescued. No lives were lost here. Liferafts were proven to be unneccesary. In a colder climate, with a longer likely rescue period, they would be.
Seems to me that the main discussion should revolve around aircraft design and maintenance issues. But only when the evidence has been gathered and assessed by experts.
These incidents / accidents posted here always seem to rapidly draw "holier than thou" armchair experts out of the woodwork. Truly professional people, in my experience, keep criticism to themselves at least until after the accident report, rather than trying in advance to stir up trouble.
The evidence proves that the company actually made a very good risk assessment. The crew selection and training were obviously well up to the job, the captain made an excellent response to the emergency situation.
The on-board safety equipment also did its job. The post accident issues were those of surviving the immediate water landing until rescued. No lives were lost here. Liferafts were proven to be unneccesary. In a colder climate, with a longer likely rescue period, they would be.
Seems to me that the main discussion should revolve around aircraft design and maintenance issues. But only when the evidence has been gathered and assessed by experts.
These incidents / accidents posted here always seem to rapidly draw "holier than thou" armchair experts out of the woodwork. Truly professional people, in my experience, keep criticism to themselves at least until after the accident report, rather than trying in advance to stir up trouble.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Facts Found:
1. Tail Rotor Gear Box departed in flight. All survived.
2. er...
3. ummm...
4. ?????
And some of the latest speculation from Shell M.!
1. "I make no judgement on the operators SMS, but I will observe they have no oil and gas customers so are probably not very adavanced."
Good grief! Can you explain that? (Oughta' be good.) Then you go an list a very commendable and thorough list of 'risk reduction initiatives'. Well done. So what? Are you selling something?
griffothefog, 'Borat rip off merchant' wasn't the first word which sprung to mind, I must admit. I think BD makes a very pertinent point. Shell M. clearly has no clue in context, does he? Great in the West Africa thread...maybe even funny! His list is meaningless in this discussion unless he relates it to the operation we are talking about. He's yet to do that. Choose who you defend matey, because you'll look stupid if he does.
ShyTorque +1
(hehe! This is fun.)
1. Tail Rotor Gear Box departed in flight. All survived.
2. er...
3. ummm...
4. ?????
And some of the latest speculation from Shell M.!
1. "I make no judgement on the operators SMS, but I will observe they have no oil and gas customers so are probably not very adavanced."
Good grief! Can you explain that? (Oughta' be good.) Then you go an list a very commendable and thorough list of 'risk reduction initiatives'. Well done. So what? Are you selling something?
griffothefog, 'Borat rip off merchant' wasn't the first word which sprung to mind, I must admit. I think BD makes a very pertinent point. Shell M. clearly has no clue in context, does he? Great in the West Africa thread...maybe even funny! His list is meaningless in this discussion unless he relates it to the operation we are talking about. He's yet to do that. Choose who you defend matey, because you'll look stupid if he does.
ShyTorque +1
(hehe! This is fun.)
...The evidence proves that the company actually made a very good risk assessment..
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
So what? It didn't happen that way and if it did, would a liferaft have made a difference?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: In England
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ST - I do take issue with you in some respects with your comment above about "truely professional people etc etc".
While you and I would fully agree that inapproriate and ill-informed comments and debate are not the sign of "truely professional people", I see no problem with profesional and informed debate on such matters on such a forum as this. People should not rush to judge of course, particulary if tragic circumstances are involved, but to suggest that suppression of knowledgeable and sensible debate is the best way forward until a (often lengthy) period of Inquiry has ensued, is not the way in our democratic society - thinking before speaking (writing!) is perhaps better advice, with no false judgements in the absence of specific evidence.
Cheers
While you and I would fully agree that inapproriate and ill-informed comments and debate are not the sign of "truely professional people", I see no problem with profesional and informed debate on such matters on such a forum as this. People should not rush to judge of course, particulary if tragic circumstances are involved, but to suggest that suppression of knowledgeable and sensible debate is the best way forward until a (often lengthy) period of Inquiry has ensued, is not the way in our democratic society - thinking before speaking (writing!) is perhaps better advice, with no false judgements in the absence of specific evidence.
Cheers
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South East Asia
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shell Management: Wow, a little touchy aren't we, 'Saint Kack' and 'irrational hatred', I've certainly learned how to push your button haven't I.
Now, take a look at the subsequent postings and take note of the remarks made regarding yourself and your postings.
After doing this, go to the 'Whats New in West Africa' thread, Post #3997 and you'll read "...Frankly I don't why anyone is giving SM (Shell Management) airtime - surely no one believes his comments to be genuine?..."
My suggestion to you now is to start your own thread, entitled something like 'Ask the Expert' where we mortals can ask you a whole range of questions regarding commercial and non-commercial helicopter activities and be assured of a authoritative answer. I'll start the ball rolling with this; 'Are the objectives of Shell Management/Shell Aircraft and the IHST compatible and what are the implications to commercial and non-commercial operators." Looking forward to your reply, but please, don't answer on this thread we'll be rightly accused of thread drift.
Now, take a look at the subsequent postings and take note of the remarks made regarding yourself and your postings.
After doing this, go to the 'Whats New in West Africa' thread, Post #3997 and you'll read "...Frankly I don't why anyone is giving SM (Shell Management) airtime - surely no one believes his comments to be genuine?..."
My suggestion to you now is to start your own thread, entitled something like 'Ask the Expert' where we mortals can ask you a whole range of questions regarding commercial and non-commercial helicopter activities and be assured of a authoritative answer. I'll start the ball rolling with this; 'Are the objectives of Shell Management/Shell Aircraft and the IHST compatible and what are the implications to commercial and non-commercial operators." Looking forward to your reply, but please, don't answer on this thread we'll be rightly accused of thread drift.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
ST - I do take issue with you in some respects with your comment above about "truely professional people etc etc"
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Asia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Life rafts a must on Macau run
Jul 09, 2010
I wish to praise the act of heroism of the two pilots who saved the lives of 11 passengers when their helicopter was forced to land in the harbour on July 3.
It was fortunate that no one was hurt in this incident and that everyone was rescued by passing boats within minutes.
Imagine if this incident had happened not in the harbour but in the open sea between Hong Kong and Macau and passengers only had life jackets to put on.
I was chief executive of helicopter companies in Hong Kong and Macau until 2006. During my time, the business was under the Heli Express brand and we operated Sikorsky S-76C+ helicopters.
Safety was our primary objective and we had an untarnished record.
I recall it was once suggested by the helicopter inspector of the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department that life rafts should be fitted on to the helicopters travelling between Hong Kong and Macau as an additional safety device. This is because the entire journey is over water.
Following the accident on Saturday, I urge the Hong Kong CAD and the civil aviation authorities in Macau (AACM) to consider this matter and make it a requirement that life rafts should be installed in the AgustaWestland AW139 helicopters as an added life-saving device.
Andrew Tse, managing director, X Air Ltd
Jul 09, 2010
I wish to praise the act of heroism of the two pilots who saved the lives of 11 passengers when their helicopter was forced to land in the harbour on July 3.
It was fortunate that no one was hurt in this incident and that everyone was rescued by passing boats within minutes.
Imagine if this incident had happened not in the harbour but in the open sea between Hong Kong and Macau and passengers only had life jackets to put on.
I was chief executive of helicopter companies in Hong Kong and Macau until 2006. During my time, the business was under the Heli Express brand and we operated Sikorsky S-76C+ helicopters.
Safety was our primary objective and we had an untarnished record.
I recall it was once suggested by the helicopter inspector of the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department that life rafts should be fitted on to the helicopters travelling between Hong Kong and Macau as an additional safety device. This is because the entire journey is over water.
Following the accident on Saturday, I urge the Hong Kong CAD and the civil aviation authorities in Macau (AACM) to consider this matter and make it a requirement that life rafts should be installed in the AgustaWestland AW139 helicopters as an added life-saving device.
Andrew Tse, managing director, X Air Ltd
I happen to agree with him by the way, because the same thing happening at night out on the southern route (Charly) between HK and Macau would not have been too pretty. Pax would not have been picked up for hours. 13 people floating around separately in the dark??? (Some couldn't even find their lifejackets during daylight). Fatalities would be highly probable.
Said it for years...liferafts on this operation - "a no brainer".
Last edited by Iron Will; 15th Jul 2010 at 08:22.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Asia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Shell Management
The liferafts for the AW139 can be deployed from the cockpit or with an EXTERNAL handle on top of the float pack. Fears that passengers could deploy a raft in flight are simply irrational.
When the company had S76, there were several occasions where pax have unlocked doors in flight, ignored ground crew and disembarked out the wrong side, and one passenger even tried the emergency door release in flight just for kicks.
Let me clarify that the ground ops in this operation is very vigilant and assertive in making sure procedures are followed, but these pax have a mind of their own and refuse to pay attention for safety demonstrations or instructions.
Liferafts are a must because of the route environment, particularly at night, but need to be pilot controlled and deployed.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'rational' trajectory
In 1975 we went to work in the North Sea in a wooly-pully and airline pilots trousers......... then came a spate of ditchings so we gained the infamous 'UVIC' survival jacket. Meanwhile the pax were toying with survival suits. We all tied our 'once-only' lifejackets around our waists - at least they would be there if you hopped out in a hurry. Next came pucka goonsuits for the pax whilst lifejackets remained in their pouches tied round the waist........... more ditchings..... so we - the crew that is - finally got a goonsuit and a Mk44 military lifejacket. Pax started to get proper constant-wear lifejackets too. Now we would never think of going offshore without the right kit.
Someone applied what must have seemed at the outset to be a sensible 'rationale' to the Macau flights:- benign environment for most operations, no open water and lots of potential rescue boats. Nothing quite like a 'nasty' to make you revisit your 'sensible rationale' however, and I don't think anyone will be surprised if the regulators and the operators now agree that probably liferafts are a good idea and maybe a different approach to lifejackets. No loss of face, just learning lessons that to some old North Sea hands may have seemed inevitable. There you go, history repeats itself and as George Bernard Shaw said 'the one thing we learn from history is that we never learn from history'.
Sometimes I do wonder about our industry............. still to cheer me up I hear that the HAI safety initiative has moved to create a Code of Practice for all (including offshore!!!) corporate operations. As the team leader is an ex-Shelly this is guaranteed to make some Gomers take a deep breath and will no doubt bring on a few tears ...... and I will be surprised if they are tears of joy.
Back to Macau and couldn't miss the opportunity to congratulate the pilot on a job well done. Text book stuff.
G.
Someone applied what must have seemed at the outset to be a sensible 'rationale' to the Macau flights:- benign environment for most operations, no open water and lots of potential rescue boats. Nothing quite like a 'nasty' to make you revisit your 'sensible rationale' however, and I don't think anyone will be surprised if the regulators and the operators now agree that probably liferafts are a good idea and maybe a different approach to lifejackets. No loss of face, just learning lessons that to some old North Sea hands may have seemed inevitable. There you go, history repeats itself and as George Bernard Shaw said 'the one thing we learn from history is that we never learn from history'.
Sometimes I do wonder about our industry............. still to cheer me up I hear that the HAI safety initiative has moved to create a Code of Practice for all (including offshore!!!) corporate operations. As the team leader is an ex-Shelly this is guaranteed to make some Gomers take a deep breath and will no doubt bring on a few tears ...... and I will be surprised if they are tears of joy.
Back to Macau and couldn't miss the opportunity to congratulate the pilot on a job well done. Text book stuff.
G.
Geoffers, inside guy at Agusta....
Any more info on what caused the T/R gearbox to depart? Agusta's bulletin says consistent with FOD, but they could as easily have added that it was also consistent with a migrating undiscovered fatigue crack, or consistent with poor maintenance and someone forgetting to lock or safety wire something.
Outstanding airmanship by the pilot. I wonder if he had Rotorsim training and the training syllabus includes the tailrotor gearbox departing emergency, or whether he'd learned all his fine art at CHC.
Any more info on what caused the T/R gearbox to depart? Agusta's bulletin says consistent with FOD, but they could as easily have added that it was also consistent with a migrating undiscovered fatigue crack, or consistent with poor maintenance and someone forgetting to lock or safety wire something.
Outstanding airmanship by the pilot. I wonder if he had Rotorsim training and the training syllabus includes the tailrotor gearbox departing emergency, or whether he'd learned all his fine art at CHC.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Here
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but they could as easily have added that it was also consistent with a migrating undiscovered fatigue crack, or consistent with poor maintenance and someone forgetting to lock or safety wire something.
-------------------------------------------
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure that it would be possible to tell the difference between say a worsening crack which would show up on HUMS at least a 'split second' before failure, and a sudden catastrophic event in which every parameter was 'in the green' and stable right up until an event which ended every reading instantly.
But I really don't know.
-------------------------------------------
Why so eager and quick to cry 'foul'? What is this morbid fascination people have which leads them to 'leap' to the conclusion that someone ballsed up, that there is a cover up...and all before understanding the truth.
FFS, give the guys in Macau credit. They are pilots like you....if there was any kind of foul play or negliagence, I'm sure PPrune will be the first to know.
In the meantime, hold back on making fcukwit kind of comments like yours above.