Helicopter Crash Kills 3, Puts Transplant on Hold
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too many people are being knee-jerk defensive here. A surgeon and a technician have been killed, along with the pilot. Gordy you might have a go at SM for not offering his condolences, but I can bet you the relatives of the dead pax will be far more concerned about why the accident happened and what could/should have been done to prevent it. And I suspect it will turn out that an IFR twin would have avoided the fatality. You quite reasonably say it's about training and the ability to say "no". So why in this instance might have "no" been appropriate, if it wasn't for the fact it was a VFR 206? And what training might have been lacking? Would seem the pilot was pretty experienced.
Before Landing Checklist; you ask what part of the 206 was not suitable. Well how about its one engine. This 206 came down over dense forest. What would you do if the donk stopped then? Ok, I suppose you'll say you'd be avoiding all the areas where you couldn't autorotate to a safe landing, using the landing light. Yeah, yeah. I do agree though with those that consider single pilot at night is quite acceptable.
And JonWilson and MamaPut, what training are you advocating that might have enabled this old 206 to complete the flight safely? Apart perhaps from the sense to say I won't do this in a single engine VFR helo.
I guess the physical size of the US might mean the benefits of helicopter medevac are greater that in much of Europe. There can surely be no doubt that use if IFR SP twins would be safer at night. Admittedly though the cost would be substantially higher. Does anyone actually know of any research or statistics that back up the use of single engined helos at night? For example, what is the fatal accident rate of twins over singles? What is reckoned to be the value of a life? Or is the resistance to IFR twins here simply one of protecting an existing scale of business?
Before Landing Checklist; you ask what part of the 206 was not suitable. Well how about its one engine. This 206 came down over dense forest. What would you do if the donk stopped then? Ok, I suppose you'll say you'd be avoiding all the areas where you couldn't autorotate to a safe landing, using the landing light. Yeah, yeah. I do agree though with those that consider single pilot at night is quite acceptable.
And JonWilson and MamaPut, what training are you advocating that might have enabled this old 206 to complete the flight safely? Apart perhaps from the sense to say I won't do this in a single engine VFR helo.
I guess the physical size of the US might mean the benefits of helicopter medevac are greater that in much of Europe. There can surely be no doubt that use if IFR SP twins would be safer at night. Admittedly though the cost would be substantially higher. Does anyone actually know of any research or statistics that back up the use of single engined helos at night? For example, what is the fatal accident rate of twins over singles? What is reckoned to be the value of a life? Or is the resistance to IFR twins here simply one of protecting an existing scale of business?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Use of a single pilot rotorcraft.
at night.
at night.
1. Twice as much to go wrong.
2. Gets you to the scene of the crash quicker.
Why people continue to persist with the "I would have used a twin for that" bull**** is beyond me, a single is just as good, if not better. There is nothing wrong with a 206 BIII at night, albeit a 1970's...or a 2011 machine.
Remember SM, engine failures are rare - a blade could have gone walkies for all we know, would a twin really make a difference....I think not!!
Anyway, condolences to all involved - its an awful thing to happen especially at this time of year.
It's all about complacency I am afraid. I have witnessed 15,000 hour captains taking risks in fully IFR equipped twins that a 100 hour private would consider to be beyond the realms of common sense. SM, you are not an idiot, but you sure need to adopt some compassion within posts like these. Many ppruners are likely to have known and respected the crew. RIP.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Devon
Age: 49
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two crew IFR
Rotorspeed,
Yes no doubt a twin IFR two crew helo would be safer, of course it would but that's not how it's done in the U.S. How far do we delve into the safety culture box to provide a sensible but acceptable level?
I don't recall the UK operating their police helicopters two crew and IFR.
As far as providing good training from the start this is only a suggestion. Would it be an idea to ensure all pilots go through a learning debate or even assessment about factors involved in accidents. Maybe, maybe not but it's just an idea.
Before anyone says it I will add that this is not a suggestion born from this accident. It may well be that this pilot was highly experienced and until we know exactly what happened it would be wrong to jump to conclusions.
Yes no doubt a twin IFR two crew helo would be safer, of course it would but that's not how it's done in the U.S. How far do we delve into the safety culture box to provide a sensible but acceptable level?
I don't recall the UK operating their police helicopters two crew and IFR.
As far as providing good training from the start this is only a suggestion. Would it be an idea to ensure all pilots go through a learning debate or even assessment about factors involved in accidents. Maybe, maybe not but it's just an idea.
Before anyone says it I will add that this is not a suggestion born from this accident. It may well be that this pilot was highly experienced and until we know exactly what happened it would be wrong to jump to conclusions.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the fundamentals of a Safety Management System is to risk assess literally every single aspect of every operation. Reducing accidents begins with the removal of every 'high risk aspect of an activity. Where removal is impractical then some form of mitigation must be employed.
I used to spend my winters flying single pilot day and night doing offshore shuttling 185 miles from terra firma in my trustee Bo 105. We don't do that any more. Why? Flying single pilot could be removed from our service inventory and the risks reduced. The cost-benefit was judged to be worth the candle.
We are humans, we learn from our mistakes and if we possibly can we don't stub our toes on the same rock twice. We dig up the rock or change the route. You can - and I know because I and many other pilots out there flew successfully at night in both singles and twins - on our own. It's not rocket science but it is high risk.
Literally, you pays your money and you takes your choice. It is not about well trained or not well trained ( I have lost some very competent chums at night, in a Sea King, in a Wasp and in an S76). It is simply harder to do the job safely at night and mistakes can have more serious consequences.
You are not 'wrong' if you operate single pilot/single engine at night. You are simply taking a bigger risk. If the cost-benefit equation is in favour of that modus operandi then fine but lets be honest. Does the customer get the benefit of a full explanation of the risks associated with 'economy' as compared with 'de-lux'. You should be able to guess the answer because there are not many single engine single pilot airliners out there.
Why not? When we make decisions on behalf of others we tend to err on the low risk side of the equation but when we judge risk for our own group or ourselves it is easier to feel close to the impact of price and therefore we can minimise the impact of risk and focus on other elements of the equation such as cost, enjoyment, time saving and excitement. Thus regulators say two engines at least and two pilots at least when you take the family to the Costa Brava yet, for some of us at least, given the opportunity to do the same trip in a 206 we would jump at it, even if it involved a bit of night flying and our night-rating was barely in-date. But would you send your wife and children in the same helicopter if you weren't driving and you had no idea about the person that was?
G.
I used to spend my winters flying single pilot day and night doing offshore shuttling 185 miles from terra firma in my trustee Bo 105. We don't do that any more. Why? Flying single pilot could be removed from our service inventory and the risks reduced. The cost-benefit was judged to be worth the candle.
We are humans, we learn from our mistakes and if we possibly can we don't stub our toes on the same rock twice. We dig up the rock or change the route. You can - and I know because I and many other pilots out there flew successfully at night in both singles and twins - on our own. It's not rocket science but it is high risk.
Literally, you pays your money and you takes your choice. It is not about well trained or not well trained ( I have lost some very competent chums at night, in a Sea King, in a Wasp and in an S76). It is simply harder to do the job safely at night and mistakes can have more serious consequences.
You are not 'wrong' if you operate single pilot/single engine at night. You are simply taking a bigger risk. If the cost-benefit equation is in favour of that modus operandi then fine but lets be honest. Does the customer get the benefit of a full explanation of the risks associated with 'economy' as compared with 'de-lux'. You should be able to guess the answer because there are not many single engine single pilot airliners out there.
Why not? When we make decisions on behalf of others we tend to err on the low risk side of the equation but when we judge risk for our own group or ourselves it is easier to feel close to the impact of price and therefore we can minimise the impact of risk and focus on other elements of the equation such as cost, enjoyment, time saving and excitement. Thus regulators say two engines at least and two pilots at least when you take the family to the Costa Brava yet, for some of us at least, given the opportunity to do the same trip in a 206 we would jump at it, even if it involved a bit of night flying and our night-rating was barely in-date. But would you send your wife and children in the same helicopter if you weren't driving and you had no idea about the person that was?
G.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Presumably how SM ended up as a 'safety expert' and gave up being an aviator "cluck, cluck, cluck"
I suspect it will turn out that an IFR twin would have avoided the fatality.
Care to enlightened us on why you suspect this to be the case?
Just what do you base your suspicions upon?
Twas there not an old...old 206 operated by Bristow for decades purely for IFR training....G-AVII as I recall...that just recently got flogged off for parts or scrap finally?
Does that not suggest both single engine IFR and IFR in a Jet Ranger works?
The US Army is doing it all day long at Fort Rucker in their Jet Rangers.
I can recall Bell TH-13T's doing it too.....although not cleared for IMC.
Rough Flight at Best
First, I would like to express my deepest condolences to those that lost loved ones in this tragic mishap and the heart recipient that will have to suffer with the anxiety of not knowing when another organ may come available. I have flown in that area of Florida both day and night. To say the least it is very dark along that route of flight. Add patches of ground fog to the equation and you have a recipe for disaster. There were very well equipped air medical aircraft with highly trained crews including NVG and IFR capabilities at both the points of departure and destination for this flight. One has to ask why they were not utilized.
See and avoid
Thread Starter
I'm almost sorry I started this thread if I knew it would turn into a flame war about what type of aircraft is the correct one for the purpose.
1) There is a "sell by date" on fresh, viable, capable organs that match the size, blood type, histocompatibility group (look it up) of the intended transplant recipient who is nearest the top of the "I need a transplant or otherwise I die" list.
2) This may lead to bad decisions on the part of pilots. It goes way beyond "get-home-itis."
3) Losing a cardiac surgeon and technician probably represents a greater loss in terms of man-hours of training and potential lives lost than what it takes to be a good helicopter pilot. I'm sure this comment will offend most of you, as I know helicopter pilots save many, many lives, but once a heart surgeon cracks a chest, there's no flinching and no going back.
4) If you read the full story of the link I posted, the original heart that could have a life probably wound up in a standard biohazard incenrator, rather than saving another's life, as presumably the donor (dead person) or their family, and the recipient wished with, shall I say, with all their heart.
5) You never know where or why or when viable organs will become available or where they'll be needed.
6) You tell me, do all transplant hospitals (AND THEIR DONORS) have 24/7 access to full scale airports?
7) May seem grim, but some transplant surgeons refer to motorcycles as "donor cycles", as the riders tend to be very healthy young men with everything but their brain or neck intact. Helmets are good.
1) There is a "sell by date" on fresh, viable, capable organs that match the size, blood type, histocompatibility group (look it up) of the intended transplant recipient who is nearest the top of the "I need a transplant or otherwise I die" list.
2) This may lead to bad decisions on the part of pilots. It goes way beyond "get-home-itis."
3) Losing a cardiac surgeon and technician probably represents a greater loss in terms of man-hours of training and potential lives lost than what it takes to be a good helicopter pilot. I'm sure this comment will offend most of you, as I know helicopter pilots save many, many lives, but once a heart surgeon cracks a chest, there's no flinching and no going back.
4) If you read the full story of the link I posted, the original heart that could have a life probably wound up in a standard biohazard incenrator, rather than saving another's life, as presumably the donor (dead person) or their family, and the recipient wished with, shall I say, with all their heart.
5) You never know where or why or when viable organs will become available or where they'll be needed.
6) You tell me, do all transplant hospitals (AND THEIR DONORS) have 24/7 access to full scale airports?
7) May seem grim, but some transplant surgeons refer to motorcycles as "donor cycles", as the riders tend to be very healthy young men with everything but their brain or neck intact. Helmets are good.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
At the risk of adding raw fuel to the fire - in my opinion, there is no such thing as night VFR, except over a built-up area.
The logic goes like this - in order to fly by visual means, you need to be able to orient the aircraft attitude, position and height by reference to the ground (or water). At night, over an unlit area, there are no references...
And we need to know whether this machine was fitted with a serviceable attitude indicator and if the pilot had any IFR training at all.
The logic goes like this - in order to fly by visual means, you need to be able to orient the aircraft attitude, position and height by reference to the ground (or water). At night, over an unlit area, there are no references...
And we need to know whether this machine was fitted with a serviceable attitude indicator and if the pilot had any IFR training at all.
Geoffers ... Good post and I agree with everything you say . We have done many hours ferrying people around the UK at night in singles . We have never had a problem but there are without doubt more "no go" times than in daylight .
I have spent 30 years on and off defending singles in the twin v single debate ...mainly because I have always flown them and that's what I had to do the job .
Now I am flying a twin ( A109 ) I have to admit that it is v v nice having a spare engine especially when over water / built up area or forestry and even an old Mk11 can take you a long way on one engine and give you valuable time to find a spot / get lights on and put a call out in the event of an engine failure . These are admittedly rare and I still am happy to do it but let's not kid ourselves that an ifr twin would not be safer .......it's just more expensive !!!!!!
I have spent 30 years on and off defending singles in the twin v single debate ...mainly because I have always flown them and that's what I had to do the job .
Now I am flying a twin ( A109 ) I have to admit that it is v v nice having a spare engine especially when over water / built up area or forestry and even an old Mk11 can take you a long way on one engine and give you valuable time to find a spot / get lights on and put a call out in the event of an engine failure . These are admittedly rare and I still am happy to do it but let's not kid ourselves that an ifr twin would not be safer .......it's just more expensive !!!!!!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless
"Suspect" means I have a hunch. Not know. And I stand by that. I'll be surprised if this accident is caused by a reason that would have affected an IFR twin. Probably LOC in IMC, possibly engine failure. Probably not some catastrophic failure with, eg, the airframe or rotor system - ie something that could have as likely happened to a twin. And I base my judgement on the fact that the acft crashed at night, into a forest, with some light fog around. Now can you confirm you disagree with my suspicion? What's your hunch? Be interesting to see when the report comes out - and even if I'm proven wrong, I mainatain the added risk factors existed.
Thank you for raising B206 G-AVII. This was indeed approved for IFR training. But only in daylight, with a minimum cloudbase of 1000ft. Don't think that helps your argument.
Jonwilson - read my previous post again. I did not maintain two pilot ops were necessary.
Agree with much of what Geoffers says. Especially question as to whether you would put your wife and kids in that heli for that trip? Surely the acid test. Would you? Not me. Do however think airliner two crew point not entirely appropriate - a small twin FW carrying 4 pax is, and that may well have one crew. Not convinced night workload that much more either apart from landing and that is largely down to pilot in control.
Sir Korsky - you chide SM for not showing compassion to the crew, as many ppruners would have known the pilot. But no mention from you of compassion for the heart surgeon and technician pax, who placed their trust in the pilot's judgement. It is indeed tragic for the pilot and his family, but at least he was in a position to make a judgement about about the risks involved and make a launch decision. I suspect the pax weren't. I hasten to add though this may be irrelevant should the cause turn out to be out of the pilot's control.
Interesting post from Jack Carson....
"Suspect" means I have a hunch. Not know. And I stand by that. I'll be surprised if this accident is caused by a reason that would have affected an IFR twin. Probably LOC in IMC, possibly engine failure. Probably not some catastrophic failure with, eg, the airframe or rotor system - ie something that could have as likely happened to a twin. And I base my judgement on the fact that the acft crashed at night, into a forest, with some light fog around. Now can you confirm you disagree with my suspicion? What's your hunch? Be interesting to see when the report comes out - and even if I'm proven wrong, I mainatain the added risk factors existed.
Thank you for raising B206 G-AVII. This was indeed approved for IFR training. But only in daylight, with a minimum cloudbase of 1000ft. Don't think that helps your argument.
Jonwilson - read my previous post again. I did not maintain two pilot ops were necessary.
Agree with much of what Geoffers says. Especially question as to whether you would put your wife and kids in that heli for that trip? Surely the acid test. Would you? Not me. Do however think airliner two crew point not entirely appropriate - a small twin FW carrying 4 pax is, and that may well have one crew. Not convinced night workload that much more either apart from landing and that is largely down to pilot in control.
Sir Korsky - you chide SM for not showing compassion to the crew, as many ppruners would have known the pilot. But no mention from you of compassion for the heart surgeon and technician pax, who placed their trust in the pilot's judgement. It is indeed tragic for the pilot and his family, but at least he was in a position to make a judgement about about the risks involved and make a launch decision. I suspect the pax weren't. I hasten to add though this may be irrelevant should the cause turn out to be out of the pilot's control.
Interesting post from Jack Carson....
Without the intent of getting into a pissing contest rotor, Crew was maybe slightly misleading. With any mission critical medical professionals onboard, I consider a generic word for crew acceptable. My deepest sympathy to all affected.
I'd include a look at the logistics/admin aspect of this in the investigation. Lowest bidder etc. Chances are that the surgeon & medi tech wouldn't know one helo from another.
Sad thing is that the transfer could probably have been done by road...
Feel sad for those who've lost folks.
Sad thing is that the transfer could probably have been done by road...
Feel sad for those who've lost folks.
Night VFR?
Shawn, I am sitting on both sides of the night VFR fence. I believe that it can be done safely in many conditions. That being said the METAR for Craig Field (CRG) in Jacksonville at the time of the flight was: METAR KCRG 261053Z AUTO 01006KT 10SM OVC007 14/13 A3022 RMK AO2 CIG 006V010 SLP234 T01440128.
700 OVR with a dew point spread of 1ºC is pretty sketchy for a VFR flight in a VFR aircraft.
700 OVR with a dew point spread of 1ºC is pretty sketchy for a VFR flight in a VFR aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lowest bidder etc. Chances are that the surgeon & medi tech wouldn't know one helo from another.
Last edited by EN48; 28th Dec 2011 at 01:48.
if the pilot had any IFR training at all.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
should give a basic ability to keep things the right way up over a dark area
but should give a basic ability to keep things the right way up over a dark area
SM - empathy just isn't your strong point is it?
Last edited by Torquetalk; 28th Dec 2011 at 04:02.