Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Helicopter Down in Mesa AZ (6/21/11)

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Helicopter Down in Mesa AZ (6/21/11)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21st Jun 2011, 14:50
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Helicopter Down in Mesa AZ (6/21/11)

Helicopter crashes, bursts into flames | azfamily.com Phoenix

This is all I have. Happened not too long ago, not far from my home this morning. I can't read the tail number. Maybe someone knows a bit more than I. I hope everyone is alright.

EDIT: it appears the three people on board are alright, the helicopter was registered to the Boeing Aircract company and left as support for the an Apache from the Mesa AZ. From what I'm hearing it was a precotionary rescue helicopter that leaves with any Apache for support if something arises on a test flight.
OEI-Dave is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2011, 15:42
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK/OZ
Posts: 1,888
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
I'm wondering why the two Apachies nor the news helicopter appear not to have immediatly landed and rendered assistance.
The original video (now updated) showed a recording of the live to air report from the chopper. It showed three persons 100 meters from the burning chopper but no sign of any first responders.
Oddly, this newsworthy footage was not included in the subsequent edited report.

If there was a reasonable explaination as to why the news helicopter did not render assistance as first responders, it would have been prudent for the pilot/reporter to relay this to his viewers.

That the subsequent report edited out the aerial footage of the survivors, who were seen apparently fending for themselves whilst the news chopper was overhead, could be a sign that the broadcaster has realised their chopper crew made an error of judgement, or perhaps the broadcaster responded to a request for anonimity from the survivors?

Would be benificial if some light was shed on the matter.

Mickjoebill

Last edited by mickjoebill; 22nd Jun 2011 at 09:14. Reason: Revised when video was edited
mickjoebill is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2011, 23:20
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: In the desert southwest
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
some good reasons

1. The three people from the crashed aircraft are safely away from the aircraft. They are initially all seen kneeling down. One lays down and it looks like one of the others is prepping a bandage for his leg. The other guy is seen walking around and looking shaken but otherwise fine. I am not sure what you would expect the people from a news chopper to do in the form of rendering assistance. They are certainly not "first responders" as that title is saved for trained professional people who respond to accidents/ incidents.

2. The area where the aircraft crashed appears to be unsuitable for landing. Slope limitations, rough terrain etc.

3. The aircraft went down near a military base and a city so real first responders likely showed up very soon after the video ends.

4. I make the same comments with regards to the Apache helicopters in the area: sloped, rocky terrain, no training to supply any meaningful assistance and they are certainly friends and co-workers of the downed crew and are most likely doing a bang up job of coordinating the rescue effort from the air.

If you want to see a typical media botch job, watch the attached video. This was not an EMS helicopter but it is labeled as such twice in the report.

Helicopter crashes near Mesa; two taken to hospitals

Cheers
grumpytroll is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2011, 04:31
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Desert Rat
Age: 53
Posts: 675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lovely reporting job...must have been the ambient heat.
alouette is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2011, 18:54
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: At home
Posts: 503
Received 11 Likes on 9 Posts
2. The area where the aircraft crashed appears to be unsuitable for landing. Slope limitations, rough terrain etc.
You must be kidding me! How flat do you need it to be for setting down letting one of the pax out to "verbally" confirm that all is well with the unlucky guys of the crashed helicopter???
I know pilots who would land their airplanes next to the 212, and I wonder how we move loggers and drillers around in bush all the time.

It's not really too much of a hassle stopping by to see IF you can at least lend them your First Aid Kit.

Well, but maybe it's better to let people die while they're waiting for the
"first responders"
to arrive?
Nubian is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2011, 22:53
  #6 (permalink)  
Chief Bottle Washer
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: PPRuNe
Posts: 5,150
Received 183 Likes on 111 Posts
Why is there an apparent assumption that the News helicopter was 'first on scene'? Inaccurate as the news items can be, Boeing are quoted:

Boeing confirmed they owned the Bell 212 support aircraft. A flight of three aircraft lifted off from Falcon Field and the downed helicopter was one of two support aircraft for an Apache Longbow helicopter on a routine mission.
Is it inconceivable that the other support helicopter was in attendance, negating any requirement for the News machine to land? Could it also be possible that the local HEMS machine was arriving at the same time as the News helicopter?

There are occasions when there are an awful lot of assumptions made here, which then get rapidly converted to facts
Senior Pilot is offline  
Old 25th Jun 2011, 05:19
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK/OZ
Posts: 1,888
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Is it inconceivable that the other support helicopter was in attendance, negating any requirement for the News machine to land? Could it also be possible that the local HEMS machine was arriving at the same time as the News helicopter?

There are occasions when there are an awful lot of assumptions made here, which then get rapidly converted to facts
To be clear, my questions were raised by the contents of the original unedited vision apparently broadcast live from the chopper and which as usual left much to be assumed by the viewer, including why the news chopper didn't render assistance.

The live report lasted around four minutes, with no sign of any other aircraft or first responders either in vision or being reported in the area by the news chopper.
The area appears suitable for landing, someone is injured with no emergency crews present but the news crew did not explain to its live audience why they were not helping.

Thats my point.
Maybe they landed after they finished their report.

In respect to the separate issue of who is able or qualified to give meaningful help consider that the severity of burns is greatly reduced if given prompt 1st aid.

Having assisted paramedics who exhausted their first aid supplies on a serious burn victim and then used saline bags to cool the victim, one should not suppose that one isn't qualified or have the tools to help especially for the treatment of burns in remote areas where the simple application of water can create a far better outcome for the victim.

As is common with aircraft crashes one of the victims of this crash suffered serious burns.



Mickjoebill
mickjoebill is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.