Austria - alpine rescuer dead after release of HEC
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Austria
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Austria - alpine rescuer dead after release of HEC
Today morning an alpine rescuer was killed after beeing released from 10 meters above ground as HEC at the Grossvenediger. Stormy conditions, fog,...
Alpinpolizist stirbt bei Bergungsaktion in Osttirol - Osttirol - Chronik - Tirol - Nachrichten | TT Online
Alpinpolizist stirbt bei Bergungsaktion in Osttirol - Osttirol - Chronik - Tirol - Nachrichten | TT Online
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An desk officer from the austrian aviation authority as part time pilot in the private air rescue business pressed the button and dropped the most experienced high mountain rescuer in that part of the Alps to dead. 
Wonder why it's allways the same helicopter operator in the headlines of Austria.
Wonder why it's allways the same helicopter operator in the headlines of Austria.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Donīt know the circumstances.......but an old saying was popping through my mind, when i read that...
"If you pay peanuts........"
Was thinking exactly the same-an "experienced pilot with 2000h" as a "part time pilot" in mountain rescue AND in bad weather?
Sorry.....there have been a few things gone wrong BEFORE the trigger has been pressed...
"If you pay peanuts........"
Was thinking exactly the same-an "experienced pilot with 2000h" as a "part time pilot" in mountain rescue AND in bad weather?
Sorry.....there have been a few things gone wrong BEFORE the trigger has been pressed...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Donīt know the weather minimas for the company-but in this part of the mountains, weather tends to change REALLY fast (like almost anywhere in the mountains)....
Not an excuse.......curious to find out more about this one..
It looks like we are slowly getting the output of all the "very experienced" low-timer guys, that the old chaps were complaining about a few years ago..
Not an excuse.......curious to find out more about this one..
It looks like we are slowly getting the output of all the "very experienced" low-timer guys, that the old chaps were complaining about a few years ago..
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and this... not about the cable car accident btw but another lost load...
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/188...ml#post4909251
dp
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/188...ml#post4909251
dp
Just how does one "punch off" a Short Haul load?
That in itself tells it all.....when one strings human beings from the helicopter....you should remove the ability to release the load by any other means than say manually operated bolt cutters or a big sharp knife or axe! The system should incorporate two anchor points and can have an Emergency Release system but it should require TWO independent actions to function. If the Rope or Wire gets snagged the aircraft does need a way to release the device to free the aircraft.
A Rescue Hoist does have a "Cable Cutter" with a back up of a pair of Bolt Cutters....but that is a different kettle of fish which is used in the event of the cable fouling on something.
Bottom line....anything that goes on a Cargo Hook is expendable...and that does not include People!
Every Short Haul should be flown with the 'safe" landing of the people on the line being the only priority....and anything else is secondary.
http://amd.nbc.gov/library/handbooks/shorthaul_hb.pdf
That in itself tells it all.....when one strings human beings from the helicopter....you should remove the ability to release the load by any other means than say manually operated bolt cutters or a big sharp knife or axe! The system should incorporate two anchor points and can have an Emergency Release system but it should require TWO independent actions to function. If the Rope or Wire gets snagged the aircraft does need a way to release the device to free the aircraft.
A Rescue Hoist does have a "Cable Cutter" with a back up of a pair of Bolt Cutters....but that is a different kettle of fish which is used in the event of the cable fouling on something.
Bottom line....anything that goes on a Cargo Hook is expendable...and that does not include People!
Every Short Haul should be flown with the 'safe" landing of the people on the line being the only priority....and anything else is secondary.
http://amd.nbc.gov/library/handbooks/shorthaul_hb.pdf
AC 29-2c contains provision for HEC Class D (which includes 'short haul'); here are a couple of examples:
...and
Short haul does not just consist of hauling humans on a rope; it is subject to similar stringent regulations as hoisting. There have been many attempt in recent years to divorce 'alpine rescue' from the airworthiness requirements. This is why it should not be allowed.
The guidance for HEC - contained in AC 29-2c - are equally applicable to EASA States.
Single Point Suspension External Airborne Personnel Load
Is defined by § 1.1, as a load combination in which the external load is other than Class A, B, or C and has been specifically approved by the Administrator for that operation. This load combination includes human cargo. For human cargo operations, the payload which typically consists of personnel and their containment device is suspended from a hook or a similar device during all or part of a flight. The hook may be rigidly attached to the rotorcraft or may be attached to a movable hoist cable and the hoist itself rigidly attached to the rotorcraft. Typical use is for transfer of personnel to a ship. Carrying devices may transport one or more persons. Typical carrying devices are vest and straps, baskets, life preservers with straps and attachment
Is defined by § 1.1, as a load combination in which the external load is other than Class A, B, or C and has been specifically approved by the Administrator for that operation. This load combination includes human cargo. For human cargo operations, the payload which typically consists of personnel and their containment device is suspended from a hook or a similar device during all or part of a flight. The hook may be rigidly attached to the rotorcraft or may be attached to a movable hoist cable and the hoist itself rigidly attached to the rotorcraft. Typical use is for transfer of personnel to a ship. Carrying devices may transport one or more persons. Typical carrying devices are vest and straps, baskets, life preservers with straps and attachment
Section § 29.865(b) does not currently contain quick release requirements for Class D rotorcraft - load combinations, but § 133.45(e)(4) requires that a primary emergency release system control device (requiring two distinct actions) be installed on a primary control or be installed near a designated crew members station. Also, a manual quick-release system backup actuation device must be available and readily accessible.
The guidance for HEC - contained in AC 29-2c - are equally applicable to EASA States.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting article for the german speakers.
Basically says that flight inspectors of the Austro Control are not allowed to fly for private companies due to conflict of interests... was reported in 2010.
dp
Basically says that flight inspectors of the Austro Control are not allowed to fly for private companies due to conflict of interests... was reported in 2010.
dp
JimL.....out of that you said....answer a question please.
Are you and/or the EASA rules saying one can attach a Short Haul Load (human beings) to a standard helicopter cargo hook?
Are you and/or the EASA rules saying one can attach a Short Haul Load (human beings) to a standard helicopter cargo hook?
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Over the hills and far away
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tecpilot: An desk officer from the austrian aviation authority as part time pilot in the private air rescue business pressed the button and dropped the most experienced high mountain rescuer in that part of the Alps to dead. Wonder why it's allways the same helicopter operator in the headlines of Austria.
What's your point here? Or should I ask which company you work for, Wucher or ÖAMTC? Blaming the pilot and the company a few hours after the accident is nothing short of being biased and unprofessional! You do work in the same field of occupation, doing high mountain rescues, do you?
Then please explain why this so highly experienced individual that tragically lost his life didn't call the rescue off. According to the Austrian press he had never worked with that operator or that particular pilot before. He must have seen the deteriorating weather conditions and the high winds too? They all knew that at that point they were only recovering a dead body from the crevasse anyways. Was there no briefing about wind, weather, the situation in general and the "get there" options between the three guys on the line and the pilot before they decided to use the most risky insertion method? Was there no other landing option available? A safer landing site or a toe-in maybe? These rescues are team efforts and every person involved has the right and obligation to analyse the risk and speak up or call the rescue off if they have doubts. That is not only the pilots responsibility! They had many things against them and yet they decided to proceed with probably the most risky method.Why did nobody disagree and why did they not explore other ways?
And just to be clear here ... I do not know the pilot nor do I have any sympathy for a civil aviation inspector who tries to prove himself as a part time mountain rescue pilot. But, I presume he met all the requirements to do such a job, including CRM and human external load training. So what else could have been done by the helicopter operator to avoid this particular tragedy unless it was a technical malfunction that caused the accident?
Sitting at a desk, bashing at the pilot and the operator not even a day after a fatal accident is very sad indeed! But everybody who knows the helicopter business in Austria a little bit, also knows that that is common policy there and nothing else is to be expected. I don't know of any other country where operators report their competitors to the authorities like that and many pilots are led by resentment and jealousy in a way they are in the Austrian helicopter business. I'm almost surprised that you haven't started shooting each other down yet! Everywhere else in the world you might not like your competitors, but you do respect them and their pilots and you help each other out in difficult times. Maybe that's worth a thought for you!
What's your point here? Or should I ask which company you work for, Wucher or ÖAMTC? Blaming the pilot and the company a few hours after the accident is nothing short of being biased and unprofessional! You do work in the same field of occupation, doing high mountain rescues, do you?
Then please explain why this so highly experienced individual that tragically lost his life didn't call the rescue off. According to the Austrian press he had never worked with that operator or that particular pilot before. He must have seen the deteriorating weather conditions and the high winds too? They all knew that at that point they were only recovering a dead body from the crevasse anyways. Was there no briefing about wind, weather, the situation in general and the "get there" options between the three guys on the line and the pilot before they decided to use the most risky insertion method? Was there no other landing option available? A safer landing site or a toe-in maybe? These rescues are team efforts and every person involved has the right and obligation to analyse the risk and speak up or call the rescue off if they have doubts. That is not only the pilots responsibility! They had many things against them and yet they decided to proceed with probably the most risky method.Why did nobody disagree and why did they not explore other ways?
And just to be clear here ... I do not know the pilot nor do I have any sympathy for a civil aviation inspector who tries to prove himself as a part time mountain rescue pilot. But, I presume he met all the requirements to do such a job, including CRM and human external load training. So what else could have been done by the helicopter operator to avoid this particular tragedy unless it was a technical malfunction that caused the accident?
Sitting at a desk, bashing at the pilot and the operator not even a day after a fatal accident is very sad indeed! But everybody who knows the helicopter business in Austria a little bit, also knows that that is common policy there and nothing else is to be expected. I don't know of any other country where operators report their competitors to the authorities like that and many pilots are led by resentment and jealousy in a way they are in the Austrian helicopter business. I'm almost surprised that you haven't started shooting each other down yet! Everywhere else in the world you might not like your competitors, but you do respect them and their pilots and you help each other out in difficult times. Maybe that's worth a thought for you!
Last edited by Kowalskii; 1st May 2012 at 00:36.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Desert Rat
Age: 53
Posts: 675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahm...let me refine your post. If certain Austrian operators would have the ability to use guns, and shoot the competitor then they would do it. They (competition) has been gunning at Roy Knaus since years. And a certain other operator still thinks that it has a monopoly status disregarding the competitive market, etc... So having that said; yet another unfortunate incident whereby only the pilot, and other parties involved can contribute to the account of what happened. Anything else is sheer speculation and bashing.
UVS: Heli Tirol bekommt Recht - Osttirol - Chronik - Tirol - Nachrichten | TT Online
The article just shows how certain "others" see and exercise competition...
UVS: Heli Tirol bekommt Recht - Osttirol - Chronik - Tirol - Nachrichten | TT Online
The article just shows how certain "others" see and exercise competition...
Last edited by alouette; 1st May 2012 at 02:10.
@Kowalskii
Roy Knaus, CEO and head of operation stated to the media yesterday, the decision to shuttle the rescuer by HEC under storm and fog was after all questionable. Especially for a body recovering.
Not sure what kind of briefing they have done. Knaus told the media the fatally injured was not part of his own rescue crew and he can't at the moment explain why he was allowed to fly the mission instead of the helicopter crew rescuer.
Knaus suspected it was a misunderstanding because the first name of the victim was the same as the first name from his own crew rescuer. Allegedly the pilot was not aware his own crew rescuer stayed on ground while an other was on the string.
Meantime the prosecutor opened a file. During a check up of the helicopter by the accident board no mechanical fault was found. The ship is released to operation again.
And last, i don't work for a competitor of Knaus. But after 6000h in mountain rescue i know HEC and rescue business first hand. It's is not a play ground for authority pilots trying to get some bucks and a few flight hours additionally to desk riding. But also in other austrian companies authority officers are flying part time. It's just good to have an authority pilot in the staff
In 2010 Austro Control banned the private part time flying of his officers with operators after a lot of trouble ... Interesting to see it was open again. Bet the next trouble is now on the way.
Roy Knaus, CEO and head of operation stated to the media yesterday, the decision to shuttle the rescuer by HEC under storm and fog was after all questionable. Especially for a body recovering.
Not sure what kind of briefing they have done. Knaus told the media the fatally injured was not part of his own rescue crew and he can't at the moment explain why he was allowed to fly the mission instead of the helicopter crew rescuer.
Knaus suspected it was a misunderstanding because the first name of the victim was the same as the first name from his own crew rescuer. Allegedly the pilot was not aware his own crew rescuer stayed on ground while an other was on the string.
Meantime the prosecutor opened a file. During a check up of the helicopter by the accident board no mechanical fault was found. The ship is released to operation again.
And last, i don't work for a competitor of Knaus. But after 6000h in mountain rescue i know HEC and rescue business first hand. It's is not a play ground for authority pilots trying to get some bucks and a few flight hours additionally to desk riding. But also in other austrian companies authority officers are flying part time. It's just good to have an authority pilot in the staff
In 2010 Austro Control banned the private part time flying of his officers with operators after a lot of trouble ... Interesting to see it was open again. Bet the next trouble is now on the way.
Last edited by tecpilot; 1st May 2012 at 07:58.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...
Very early for any speculation?
Reminiscent of the straight forward ground resonance event not too long ago that had 'theorists' working overtime...But it's a rumor network so why cloud the issue with objective analysis.
Condolences to the families...
170'
Reminiscent of the straight forward ground resonance event not too long ago that had 'theorists' working overtime...But it's a rumor network so why cloud the issue with objective analysis.
Condolences to the families...
170'
Last edited by 170'; 1st May 2012 at 07:46.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Firstly I'd like to preface this by saying that I don't fly for any operator in Austria...
@Allouette
You are making Roy Knaus out to be hard done to but I am sure that he uses the same tactics as all his competitors in Austria. As evidence I present the FACT that he has at least one flight inspector from Austro Control working for him...
dp
@Allouette
You are making Roy Knaus out to be hard done to but I am sure that he uses the same tactics as all his competitors in Austria. As evidence I present the FACT that he has at least one flight inspector from Austro Control working for him...
dp
Guest
Posts: n/a
There is an article on the net, stating that the rescuers themself asked the pilot to cut the line...
Donīt find the link now....but they were showing pictures of the area, too..
Even if the statement above would be true-yes, i am still blaming the pilot-as there has been no technical defect found on the helicopter or the equipment; so it must have been a "human error".
An experienced pilot would have called this operation off BEFORE everything went wrong...
Thatīs the difference between the "old" and the "bold" pilots....
Sorry, guys.......thatīs how it looks like at the moment...
Someone had to die because another guy could not do the job he was paid for-but thought he could....
Donīt find the link now....but they were showing pictures of the area, too..
Even if the statement above would be true-yes, i am still blaming the pilot-as there has been no technical defect found on the helicopter or the equipment; so it must have been a "human error".
An experienced pilot would have called this operation off BEFORE everything went wrong...
Thatīs the difference between the "old" and the "bold" pilots....
Sorry, guys.......thatīs how it looks like at the moment...
Someone had to die because another guy could not do the job he was paid for-but thought he could....
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Essex
Age: 53
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hueyracer, Here is one "article" about the incident.
Freak accident kills mountain rescue expert after he attempts to save climber who'd plunged 150ft | Mail Online
Freak accident kills mountain rescue expert after he attempts to save climber who'd plunged 150ft | Mail Online
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes, thatīs the article i was talking about...
I donīt know how the pilots was operating-with mirrors, VR or "only" with radio communication to the rescuers?
Either way-the investigation will (hopefully) show, what really happened...
And (hopefully) the company is going to recheck their procedures...and kick some a**s if necessary..
But when freak high winds set in, Mr Franzekson asked the pilot, who has not been named, to release them instantly onto the craggy rock-face below, apparently not realising how high they were
Either way-the investigation will (hopefully) show, what really happened...
And (hopefully) the company is going to recheck their procedures...and kick some a**s if necessary..