Hong Kong GFS Superpuma ditches in Reservoir after engine failure
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Second star on the left
Posts: 124
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Reverse and Rockape,
What a bitter and warped load of drivel that you spout on this forum. I grant you that GFS is not perfect, occasionally guys do make mistakes but then so do we all. The advantage that GFS has is that they never claim to be perfect; I have not heard any of them slagging off Heliservices for wrapping a load and sling around a pylon and power cables a few weeks ago, Skyshuttle cannot claim to be perfect either.
It is about time that people realise that GFS do not fly from A to B, they do the full gambit of task including SF, but all within the rules albeit with exemptions for some tasks; sometimes things go wrong and as they are flying close to the limit, the outcome can be bad, they learn from their mistakes, do you?
I suggest that you wait for the outcome of the Investigation before you vent your bitterness against GFS. With comments such as you have both made, I can understand why you failed the selection.
Head down, look out for the flack
What a bitter and warped load of drivel that you spout on this forum. I grant you that GFS is not perfect, occasionally guys do make mistakes but then so do we all. The advantage that GFS has is that they never claim to be perfect; I have not heard any of them slagging off Heliservices for wrapping a load and sling around a pylon and power cables a few weeks ago, Skyshuttle cannot claim to be perfect either.
It is about time that people realise that GFS do not fly from A to B, they do the full gambit of task including SF, but all within the rules albeit with exemptions for some tasks; sometimes things go wrong and as they are flying close to the limit, the outcome can be bad, they learn from their mistakes, do you?
I suggest that you wait for the outcome of the Investigation before you vent your bitterness against GFS. With comments such as you have both made, I can understand why you failed the selection.
Head down, look out for the flack
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Earth
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As one of the ex-military SAR personnel who was responsible on occasion for conducting independent audits of GFS I always found them to be totally professional. Some of the previous comments about GFS seem to be completely misinformed, even libelous (if the individuals repeated them without the protection of anonymity). Can't comment on this incident as who would believe anything that's been reported to date?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: airport
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HK probes helicopter mishap (from RTHK)
A GFS helicopter comes down in the Shing Mun Reservoir. Photo: Simon Lee
The Hong Kong Government Flying Service has grounded all three of its Super Puma Mark Two helicopters after engine trouble forced one to make an emergency landing in the Shing Mun reservoir.
The three crew members escaped unharmed. An investigation is underway into the incident.
The helicopter involved in Monday's incident was taking part in a hill-fire operation and flying low, lifting buckets of water from the Shing Mun Reservoir, when an engine problem prevented it from climbing. The pilot then made an emergency landing into the reservoir, several hundred metres from the shore.
An inflatable device kept the helicopter afloat while the three crew members climbed into the water and swam to safety. They were taken to Yan Chai hospital for examination and released.
Director-General of Civil Aviation Norman Lo said an investigation will look at all factors, including any mechanical problems affecting the Super Puma Mark 2 helicopter. Mr Lo said the craft had gone through regular maintenance and was up to service standards.
Engineers from the French maker of the Supa Puma helicopter will carry out checks on the government's three aircraft. The helicopter involved in Monday's incident has been in service since 2001 and has accumulated more than 5,000 flying hours.
Michael Chan, Controller of the Government Flying Service, said the chopper's age was not thought to be a factor in the accident. He praised the pilot for making the right call by performing an emergency landing. He said the move ensured the crew's safety.
The helicopter will be partially disassembled, then airlifted from the site. The recovery operation is expected to take days.
Engineers from the Water Services Department took samples of the reservoir water for tests, but there was no immediate sign of contamination to the supply.
Floats were used to cordon off the chopper to guard against any oil spill.
A GFS helicopter comes down in the Shing Mun Reservoir. Photo: Simon Lee
The Hong Kong Government Flying Service has grounded all three of its Super Puma Mark Two helicopters after engine trouble forced one to make an emergency landing in the Shing Mun reservoir.
The three crew members escaped unharmed. An investigation is underway into the incident.
The helicopter involved in Monday's incident was taking part in a hill-fire operation and flying low, lifting buckets of water from the Shing Mun Reservoir, when an engine problem prevented it from climbing. The pilot then made an emergency landing into the reservoir, several hundred metres from the shore.
An inflatable device kept the helicopter afloat while the three crew members climbed into the water and swam to safety. They were taken to Yan Chai hospital for examination and released.
Director-General of Civil Aviation Norman Lo said an investigation will look at all factors, including any mechanical problems affecting the Super Puma Mark 2 helicopter. Mr Lo said the craft had gone through regular maintenance and was up to service standards.
Engineers from the French maker of the Supa Puma helicopter will carry out checks on the government's three aircraft. The helicopter involved in Monday's incident has been in service since 2001 and has accumulated more than 5,000 flying hours.
Michael Chan, Controller of the Government Flying Service, said the chopper's age was not thought to be a factor in the accident. He praised the pilot for making the right call by performing an emergency landing. He said the move ensured the crew's safety.
The helicopter will be partially disassembled, then airlifted from the site. The recovery operation is expected to take days.
Engineers from the Water Services Department took samples of the reservoir water for tests, but there was no immediate sign of contamination to the supply.
Floats were used to cordon off the chopper to guard against any oil spill.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stairways to heaven
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GFS has its foundations in the British Military crewfolk who were there at its inception
What does listing 300 year old battles have to do with this thread, or with the beginnings of the GFS with help from the RAF?
Senior Pilot
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stairways to heaven
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's precisely my point inception is one thing and current is another.
And because the british military helps someone out doesn't necessarily mean it's a great advantage, hence pointing to history.
It seems I offended you Mr. Senior Pilot and apologize for it.
Long live the Queen
And because the british military helps someone out doesn't necessarily mean it's a great advantage, hence pointing to history.
It seems I offended you Mr. Senior Pilot and apologize for it.
Long live the Queen
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Performance Class 3?
I didn’t expect to read some of the comments made on this thread on this forum. I kind of hoped we were better than that...but then mankind never fails to disappoint me. I would like to think that they wouldn’t have been said if HKG was still a British Crown Colony (STIC!).
I thought TREX450 got close to asking an interesting question; with the external load bucket jettisoned surely the aircraft could have flown away on one engine. I am not inferring an error on the crew's part, perhaps there were additional problems that we are not aware of that made a ditching the best course of action.
A one-engine-inoperative recovery to the GFS base would have saved the GFS a massive recovery and repair expense and not necessarily have increased the risk, as a ditching and evacuation has its own set of risks.
I thought TREX450 got close to asking an interesting question; with the external load bucket jettisoned surely the aircraft could have flown away on one engine. I am not inferring an error on the crew's part, perhaps there were additional problems that we are not aware of that made a ditching the best course of action.
A one-engine-inoperative recovery to the GFS base would have saved the GFS a massive recovery and repair expense and not necessarily have increased the risk, as a ditching and evacuation has its own set of risks.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: All The Places I Shouldnt Be
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Few questions for those in the know.
Q - Are the GFS Super Pumas fitted out with a lot of kit, hence making OEI a moot issue.
Q - Was it a really hot day when they were fighting the fire and was it up high.
Q - If they lost an engine wouldnt there have been enough power to at least get to the edge of the dam they were working out of.
Maybe someone with knowledge of the Super Puma MKII could answer some of these. And no they arent for any specific purpose, just curious whether there were other issues besides the engine failure.
Cheers.
Ned
Q - Are the GFS Super Pumas fitted out with a lot of kit, hence making OEI a moot issue.
Q - Was it a really hot day when they were fighting the fire and was it up high.
Q - If they lost an engine wouldnt there have been enough power to at least get to the edge of the dam they were working out of.
Maybe someone with knowledge of the Super Puma MKII could answer some of these. And no they arent for any specific purpose, just curious whether there were other issues besides the engine failure.
Cheers.
Ned
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this was a GFS operational flight then I doubt that operating at OEI weights was much of a consideration. Training yes - operations no. Even with only 3 crew onboard if it was full of fuel and hot and high in a low hover picking up a heavy load of water then ditching would have been the only option for the Super Puma.
Same for SAR. This is not CAT A passenger carrying flying. You fill up to get the job done - not to plan for an OEI fly away.
The crew would have briefed the OEI scenario after observing the hover TQ at the start of the lift and would have ben expecting to ditch in the event of OEI. Which seems to be exactly what they did.
.
Short shaft - you would probably be asking why they didn't ditch if they had attempted to fly away on one engine and crashed.
Same for SAR. This is not CAT A passenger carrying flying. You fill up to get the job done - not to plan for an OEI fly away.
The crew would have briefed the OEI scenario after observing the hover TQ at the start of the lift and would have ben expecting to ditch in the event of OEI. Which seems to be exactly what they did.
surely the aircraft could have flown away on one engine
Short shaft - you would probably be asking why they didn't ditch if they had attempted to fly away on one engine and crashed.
Last edited by Epiphany; 29th Dec 2010 at 09:08.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 415 Likes
on
218 Posts
with the external load bucket jettisoned surely the aircraft could have flown away on one engine.
Shame the "old" (not very) S-70s had to go, though ....
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not as good as we are led to believe?
Oh dear ShyTorque, you have done it again...more disappointment!
Whilst I understand that there are very few twin engine helicopters that are capable of an OEI flyaway from the hover I was led to believe by my friendly Eurocopter Salesman that the Super Puma Mk II was perhaps one of them.
With only 3 crew and a ‘reasonable’ amount of fuel, an OAT of less than ISA+5, and only a few hundred feet altitude, I queried whether the aircraft could have flown away. Maybe a Super Puma expert who sleeps with a RFM under his pillow could advise on that point.
If I am supposed to think that I should ditch a multi-engine helicopter just because an engine has malfunctioned then we are using Royal Navy thinking and perhaps we should consider going back to single engine helicopters.
Whilst I understand that there are very few twin engine helicopters that are capable of an OEI flyaway from the hover I was led to believe by my friendly Eurocopter Salesman that the Super Puma Mk II was perhaps one of them.
With only 3 crew and a ‘reasonable’ amount of fuel, an OAT of less than ISA+5, and only a few hundred feet altitude, I queried whether the aircraft could have flown away. Maybe a Super Puma expert who sleeps with a RFM under his pillow could advise on that point.
If I am supposed to think that I should ditch a multi-engine helicopter just because an engine has malfunctioned then we are using Royal Navy thinking and perhaps we should consider going back to single engine helicopters.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 415 Likes
on
218 Posts
Whilst I understand that there are very few twin engine helicopters that are capable of an OEI flyaway from the hover I was led to believe by my friendly Eurocopter Salesman that the Super Puma Mk II was perhaps one of them.
But then you would perhaps need a twin rating. Judging by your profile, you perhaps don't have one.
Perhaps best to wait for the results of the inquiry, eh?
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I am supposed to think that I should ditch a multi-engine helicopter just because an engine has malfunctioned then we are using Royal Navy thinking and perhaps we should consider going back to single engine helicopters.
If you believe everything that a helicopter salesman tell you then you are also demonstrating an extraordinary level of naivety.
Last edited by Epiphany; 29th Dec 2010 at 16:25.
Having carrid out an uncountable number of winching operations in the South China Sea can I put my oar in.
Some twin-engined helicopters will fly away from a OEI situation if it is cold and windy enough. Unfortunately for most twin engined helicopters those situations are too rare. The 332L1 to the best of my memory will hover OEI OGE at about 12,500 lbs with Zero wind in the Hong Kong area, which equates to just the crew and no fuel. Things get a lot better when there is some wind.
That was me winching inside the OEI curve with 7 knots plus 5 knots from the tanker with 2,000 lbs of fuel on board at about 28.C. Add 800 lbs for mooring crew and it come to about 15,300 lbs. It could have been a lot more, the 2,000lbs just happened to be hanging about. Twenty knots or so and you were above Max weight.
THE OEI HOVER OGE IN MY CASE WAS A PUBLIC TRANSPORT REQUIREMENT.
These same wind conditions would give you flyaway whilst on SAR duties if the weights were the same. Normally when offshore there is a fair amount of wind which keeps the OEI curve well up the weight scale. When the wind drops the picture changes; judging by the weather history and the video in this case they had less than five knots.
There is a not a lot of differences in hover performance betweeen an L1 and an L2. With any sort of fuel load plus what an SAR helicopters carries they were not going to fly away. Pickling the water tank might have slowed the rate of descent but when the floats went off they will have been dragged into the water.
I would not have thought that the GFS would have worried too much about OEI flyaway. Their previous chariot, the Sikorsky S76C resembled a brick if an engine stopped in the hover so that was what they were used to.
Personally, all things being taken into consideration, they did as well as anybody could be expected to do in the circumstances.
Some twin-engined helicopters will fly away from a OEI situation if it is cold and windy enough. Unfortunately for most twin engined helicopters those situations are too rare. The 332L1 to the best of my memory will hover OEI OGE at about 12,500 lbs with Zero wind in the Hong Kong area, which equates to just the crew and no fuel. Things get a lot better when there is some wind.
That was me winching inside the OEI curve with 7 knots plus 5 knots from the tanker with 2,000 lbs of fuel on board at about 28.C. Add 800 lbs for mooring crew and it come to about 15,300 lbs. It could have been a lot more, the 2,000lbs just happened to be hanging about. Twenty knots or so and you were above Max weight.
THE OEI HOVER OGE IN MY CASE WAS A PUBLIC TRANSPORT REQUIREMENT.
These same wind conditions would give you flyaway whilst on SAR duties if the weights were the same. Normally when offshore there is a fair amount of wind which keeps the OEI curve well up the weight scale. When the wind drops the picture changes; judging by the weather history and the video in this case they had less than five knots.
There is a not a lot of differences in hover performance betweeen an L1 and an L2. With any sort of fuel load plus what an SAR helicopters carries they were not going to fly away. Pickling the water tank might have slowed the rate of descent but when the floats went off they will have been dragged into the water.
I would not have thought that the GFS would have worried too much about OEI flyaway. Their previous chariot, the Sikorsky S76C resembled a brick if an engine stopped in the hover so that was what they were used to.
Personally, all things being taken into consideration, they did as well as anybody could be expected to do in the circumstances.
Last edited by Fareastdriver; 29th Dec 2010 at 19:15.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 415 Likes
on
218 Posts
Personally, all things being taken into consideration, they did as well as anybody could be expected to do in the circumstances.
I agree about the S-76C previously used by GFS (albeit not for the SAR role, they were the A++ version). Torque readings of 90/90 didn't do much for the confidence when hovering, especially over a ship.
Moderator
It's sad to see those rather negatives posted here by a few. I think there is an "axe grinding" thread elsewhere....
Though I have zero knowledge of the events of this accident, my time working with the people of GFS (two occasions, totalling three weeks) left me very impresed with the way things are done there.
My experience with GFS, included an afternoon of fixed wing flying, and another afternoon aboard a helicopter training flight. The crews were methodical, prepared, and relaxed. The flying in both cases demonstrated everything I would be looking to see in an operation, whose demands are so varied.
Similarly, the maintenance at GFS gets my highest regards.
No matter how well you maintain, and how well you fly, stuff occasionally happens. It sounds like they made the best of a not good situation, and damage was well mitigated. Let's extend to our aviation colleagues the benefit of our courtesy in respect of their operations. I doubt I could do better than they do, so I don't feel a need to criticise...
Though I have zero knowledge of the events of this accident, my time working with the people of GFS (two occasions, totalling three weeks) left me very impresed with the way things are done there.
My experience with GFS, included an afternoon of fixed wing flying, and another afternoon aboard a helicopter training flight. The crews were methodical, prepared, and relaxed. The flying in both cases demonstrated everything I would be looking to see in an operation, whose demands are so varied.
Similarly, the maintenance at GFS gets my highest regards.
No matter how well you maintain, and how well you fly, stuff occasionally happens. It sounds like they made the best of a not good situation, and damage was well mitigated. Let's extend to our aviation colleagues the benefit of our courtesy in respect of their operations. I doubt I could do better than they do, so I don't feel a need to criticise...
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: earth
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are "pilots" posting stuff like this really being serious?
