Emergency landing on rooftop
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 40
From: On the big blue planet
Emergency landing on rooftop
Yesterday a AS350 made an emergency landing on the roof of the VW factory in Hannover/Germany. They had engine problems during ext-load operations.
Hubschrauber in Hannover abgestürzt Fotostrecken Hannover Hannover / HAZ - Hannoversche Allgemeine
skadi
Hubschrauber in Hannover abgestürzt Fotostrecken Hannover Hannover / HAZ - Hannoversche Allgemeine
skadi
Last edited by Senior Pilot; 11th September 2011 at 09:17. Reason: Add a couple of photos
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 675
Likes: 0
From: Desert Rat
I must say that I have to pay respect to the pilot who had the imagination to park the aircraft the way he did. And he walked away from it. What more does one want? That is one unusual parking space.
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 541
From: Lost again...
Very lucky that it did not go through the roof - it does not look like it's very strong. I think this shows that the pilot must have done a very good job of arresting the rate of descent for the landing.
It's interesting to note that the rotor RPM must have been very low (as you would expect) when the blades contacted the building - there is comparatively little damage to them.
I hope the pilot bought a lotto ticket that night!
OH
It's interesting to note that the rotor RPM must have been very low (as you would expect) when the blades contacted the building - there is comparatively little damage to them.
I hope the pilot bought a lotto ticket that night!
OH
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,067
Likes: 40
From: On the big blue planet
It's interesting to note that the rotor RPM must have been very low (as you would expect) when the blades contacted the building - there is comparatively little damage to them.
skadi
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 541
From: Lost again...
I'm utterly amazed that they did not go through that roof! 
A good friend of mine had an engine failure at low level/airspeed in a 350 many years ago whilst load lifting. He too, did not get the load off before impact and it had the reverse role to what you suggest happened on this occasion (although i'm not saying you are incorrect) - the load hit the ground and acted like an anchor stopping all the horizontal movement and catapulting the helicopter vertically into the ground very hard.
Were they quite close to the roof when it happened do you know?
incredible escape!
A good friend of mine had an engine failure at low level/airspeed in a 350 many years ago whilst load lifting. He too, did not get the load off before impact and it had the reverse role to what you suggest happened on this occasion (although i'm not saying you are incorrect) - the load hit the ground and acted like an anchor stopping all the horizontal movement and catapulting the helicopter vertically into the ground very hard.
Were they quite close to the roof when it happened do you know?
incredible escape!
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 541
From: Lost again...
Skadi
Just read your post again properly - sorry.
You were asserting that the horizontal motion was stopped by the load - i think you are quite correct that this could have happened.
apologies
OH
Just read your post again properly - sorry.
You were asserting that the horizontal motion was stopped by the load - i think you are quite correct that this could have happened.
apologies
OH
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
From: Bury St. Edmunds
Kudos to the pilot for a good outcome from a very nasty "event".
The only question I have is, surely this ought not to have been a task for a single-engined helo? Anyone tasking this must, when doing even a rudimentary risk assessment, have realised that a twin engined aircraft would have been the sensible option given the terrain and obsticales.....
MB
The only question I have is, surely this ought not to have been a task for a single-engined helo? Anyone tasking this must, when doing even a rudimentary risk assessment, have realised that a twin engined aircraft would have been the sensible option given the terrain and obsticales.....
MB
Joined: Aug 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 83
From: Gold Coast, Australia
Kudos to the pilot for a good outcome from a very nasty "event".
The only question I have is, surely this ought not to have been a task for a single-engined helo? Anyone tasking this must, when doing even a rudimentary risk assessment, have realised that a twin engined aircraft would have been the sensible option given the terrain and obsticales.....
MB
The only question I have is, surely this ought not to have been a task for a single-engined helo? Anyone tasking this must, when doing even a rudimentary risk assessment, have realised that a twin engined aircraft would have been the sensible option given the terrain and obsticales.....
MB
Being JAA land the issue of twin accountability seems to be a bit fuzzy, and we have a similar issue at times here in Oz. I won quite a few lifting jobs because I had a BK117: not due to CASA Regs but the good old Elfin Safety in the form of our WorkSafe Victoria and their oversight of JSA (Job Safety Analysis). Based on the premise that we would jettison the load over a safe area thus giving SE flyaway capability, I guess the rooftop in this example would have required a split second timing to dump the load!
Then again, with one engine still operating a twin should have hover capability once the load hits the roof? At which stage, if not done already, the load can be pickled off and a SE recovery made? Just thinking out loud, but something which is worth considering.
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
From: UK
Concur with John E - whilst there might be twice the chance of engine failure, there's a significantly higher chance of flyaway following a SINGLE engine failure, which is what we're really talking about. I can't remember ever reading or hearing about a double concurrent turbine engine failure - & before someone finds one, I mean not caused by severe icing or fuel starvation, neither of which would likely happen with this sort of operation, I'd suggest.
All in all, hats off to the pilot, for a skillful &/or lucky outcome. It's always heartening to see a positive outcome to what could, so easily, have been otherwise.
All in all, hats off to the pilot, for a skillful &/or lucky outcome. It's always heartening to see a positive outcome to what could, so easily, have been otherwise.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
From: airport
According to various German news web sites, rumor #1 is engine failure while they wanted to set down the load on the roof (load consists of new fume outlets). According to the firefighters on site, rumor #2 is that the engine failure happened because they were low on fuel. Apparently the fire fighters wanted to pump the remaining fuel to avoid a fire, but there was no more fuel left in the tank.
Maybe they stuck the hose in the wrong hole, or maybe there was a fuel leak due to the post-"landing" damage, or maybe they are just all full of !!!!!.
Maybe they stuck the hose in the wrong hole, or maybe there was a fuel leak due to the post-"landing" damage, or maybe they are just all full of !!!!!.