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

Emergency landing on rooftop

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

Emergency landing on rooftop

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27th Nov 2011, 08:27
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sweden
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not judging anyone’s opinion here, I know the business and the kind of pressures that might force a pilot to get the job done. However, say that you’re operating with a solid fuel-low warning and a stopwatch that’s showing your estimated seconds to starvation, what if someone other than you screws up? Off course, it might be a simple A-to-B lift with no screw-up factors involved (and that’s fine), but some jobs are more than a one-man show. Are those few extra kilos/pounds really worth endangering the safety of the guys on the ground for?

Just for an example.. What if you’re mounting something... say a heavy mast section (with your seconds ticking), and suddenly one of the legs wont fit into its dedicated attachment? One of the guys in the mast has already attached his bolts on his leg, and you are stuck. “Stupid anxious guy!” It is going to take a few minutes to sort the situation out. With the seconds ticking, you have nowhere to go but to sit tight. If you drop it the mast might fall and the guys will be hurt/killed, if you haste it the guys in the mast might be hurt/killed by the section, and if you wait for your fuel to cut the engine the mast might fall and the guys will be hurt/killed.

Just saying... operating on the very limit to starvation might be forced upon from time to time, but you better think the whole scenario through a few times before you choose to accept the challenge. You might be confident to get the job done safely, but what if something unexpected happens?

I trust it that you guys that are doing this exception from time to time really knows what you are doing, and this is nothing new for you. But I just want to highlight the subject that sling loading (especially mounting operations) are a teamwork with more than the pilot’s skills and safety to take into consideration.
Torque and temp is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2011, 08:50
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Beside the seaside
Posts: 670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Excellent post T and T.
Epiphany is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2011, 15:08
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: An Irish dude in Houston, TX. I miss home!!!
Age: 43
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gordy,

Not quite... I the US, the FAR's state you may not BEGIN a flight unless you have enough fuel to fly to your first point of intended landed plus 20 minutes... FAR 91.151 .
I'm sure the FAA would totally agree with you on that, especially during an interview with them after spreading some skids with a dry tank.

Oh and I'm an offshore guy, haven't flight instructed in quite some time. I do renew my instructor certificate every 2 years. Maybe that's what you're referring to with your condescending tone.
darrenphughes is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2011, 15:52
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
Posts: 1,959
Received 50 Likes on 15 Posts
Hey Darren,

I'm sure the FAA would totally agree with you on that, especially during an interview with them after spreading some skids with a dry tank.
They would agree...Like I said, I would not recommend it, but technically legal.

Oh and I'm an offshore guy, haven't flight instructed in quite some time.
Good for you. I remember a few years ago when you were a student still. Glad you made it and did not get stuck in the hole like many others around your time.

condescending tone
Was not meant to be condescending.... We need a "sarcastic" font. But still, in the utility world, it is somewhat normal to run the aircraft on "less than perfect world" fuel amounts occasionally to complete a task.
Gordy is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2011, 16:08
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,290
Received 516 Likes on 215 Posts
You can legally LAND with zero fuel... Not that I recommend it....
I can assure you that when the fuel available becomes "ZERO"....you are going to land.....legal or illegally....the rules of Thermodynamics and Gravity are just that...Laws!

Gordy is quite correct (as usual)....the law does not address amount of fuel upon landing....just what the minimum, takeoff fuel is....and that is quite flexible by shear definition. The word "Intended" is the key. For day time VFR in excellent weather....Twenty minutes seems a lot....but can be very much not enough with just a few shifts in the weather or availability of landing spots.

Gordy's record of being correct risks termination early Spring 2012 from what I hear.
SASless is online now  
Old 27th Nov 2011, 16:10
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: An Irish dude in Houston, TX. I miss home!!!
Age: 43
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good for you. I remember a few years ago when you were a student still. Glad you made it and did not get stuck in the hole like many others around your time.
Yeah, got into tours & charter for 2-3 years after instructing, and then made the move to offshore. Better money & schedule.

So the FAA wouldn't violate you for running out of fuel then?
darrenphughes is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2011, 17:12
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,290
Received 516 Likes on 215 Posts
Running out of fuel....is a Mortal Sin!

Fuel Exhaustion warrants a violation.

Fuel Starvation due mechanical reasons is forgiveable.
SASless is online now  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 02:23
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
Posts: 1,959
Received 50 Likes on 15 Posts
So the FAA wouldn't violate you for running out of fuel then?
They may violate you under 91.13, but cannot violate you for "running out of fuel" nope.... I had this verified by an FAA inspector a few years back---now bear in mind the different FSDO's may interpret it differently....but I would have no problem fighting it in court.

Gordy's record of being correct risks termination early Spring 2012 from what I hear.
I even have the "proverbial" encyclopedia set for sale too...
Gordy is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 10:22
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,290
Received 516 Likes on 215 Posts
Gordy,

Despite your vast collection of Books of Knowledge, years of life experience, and extraordinary commonsense...upon uttering those infamous words..."I Do!".....all that is trumped by the results of that act. Your usual retorts, responses, and utterances shall all be narrowed down to a humble "Yes Dear!"

The one Law of Life that shall prevail is the one that states "If Mom ain't happy....ain't nobody happy!"

Beware the Ides of March!
SASless is online now  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 10:36
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...

Very good post T & T
170' is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 11:49
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Very good post, SASless.

(Don't ask, personal experience!!!!)
John R81 is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 13:57
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Obviously the pilot -with his experience- thought it was ok and he was proven wrong.

Luckily nobody got seriously hurt.

Now, would the same have happened to a pilot with less experience or simply not being the owner of the aircraft? Who knows...

I have the feeling, he will not continue again with a FUEL warning showing for 15 minutes...
Ready2Fly is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 13:57
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 616
Received 61 Likes on 35 Posts
ICAO Law
FAA Regs
JAR-OPS ---> EASA
National Law...

The 20 minute VFR or 30 minute IFR reserve is common to most regs/air law. Contingency fuel is usually calculated on top of that and may be an operational or regulatory requirement. Discretionary fuel is just that.

If you're out of planned fuel; and you've used up your discretionary fuel (assuming you had any); and you've used up your contingency fuel (assuming you needed to carry any); then what's left is final reserve fuel. It isn't intended for operational use.

Depending on the aircraft type and the individual setting, some fuel lights come on with 20 mins fuel left, some with 12, some with about 8, some with less than that.

Of course, most of us know all of that and [almost] nobody here is saying flying with a low fuel light is operationally appropriate. But without debating the finer points of regs, surely flying routinely into the 20/30 minute reserve and not regarding this as at least a critical situation, if not legally an emergency, is cavalier.

Quite a few pilots run it real close at times and consider themselves good "commercial/real-world pilots". And some of them crash.

TT
Torquetalk is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 14:14
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 900
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
Although not applicable in this case (non-CAT), JAR-OPS has additional protection built in for this very eventuality:

JAR-OPS 3.375 In-flight fuel management
(See Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.375)

(a) An operator shall establish a procedure to ensure that in-flight fuel checks and fuel management are carried out.

(b) A commander shall ensure that the amount of usable fuel remaining in flight is not less than the fuel required to proceed to a heliport where a safe landing can be made, with final reserve fuel remaining.

(c) The commander shall declare an emergency when the actual usable fuel on board is less than final reserve fuel.
Even when the calculation of fuel is simplified, for example for small types and non-complex operations, the amount of the final reserve fuel has to be established in the OM to permit this in-flight procedure to be applied.

Landing with reserve fuel intact, or the declaration of an emergency, appears to indicate the gravity of this provision.

Jim
JimL is offline  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 15:18
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,290
Received 516 Likes on 215 Posts
(b) A commander shall ensure that the amount of usable fuel remaining in flight is not less than the fuel required to proceed to a heliport where a safe landing can be made, with final reserve fuel remaining.

Oh gosh.....does this mean a permanent "heliport" or just a temporary helipad, cow pasture, or pub parking lot?

Common sense would suggest some place where fuel can be obtained...but as in Ag Operations...that might be atop a Batch Truck in a cotton patch.




Would there be a problem caused by mere "definition" as written there JimL?

Such as mentioned here?

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP168.PDF
SASless is online now  
Old 28th Nov 2011, 15:26
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 900
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
No, it means exactly what you'd like it to - i.e. for operations within a local area, the amount of reserve fuel can be reduced:

..."when operating within an area providing continuous and suitable precautionary landing sites."
Jim
JimL 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.