Pasadena Police - two OH-58s make contact
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: earth
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the most common example that is the closest comparison, is i went shopping today. It a place i go every day, been doing it for 30 years, for 15 years before that i went with my mum. Drove in the carpark, went to park in our normal spot but i had an accident, i smashed into another car that was half parked across my carpark.
It wasn't my fault, cos it was raining and the windscreen wipers were out of washer, and the car window was a bit dirty and it was a bit cloudy. I couldn't really see where i was going, but since i always park there i just drove in following the lines.....
well I'm sorry but you are a flaming idiot for writing off you car!!!
It wasn't my fault, cos it was raining and the windscreen wipers were out of washer, and the car window was a bit dirty and it was a bit cloudy. I couldn't really see where i was going, but since i always park there i just drove in following the lines.....
well I'm sorry but you are a flaming idiot for writing off you car!!!
That's the closest comparison you could find!
Given the water drenched nature of the pad, I wonder if the lady could actually see that the other was not parked on its pad.
There is a saying, "You should never assume. You know what happens when you assume. You make an ass out of you and me because that's how it's spelled." Judging distance by eye is fraught with danger, this is not the first, and nor will it be the last where helo drivers have run into obstructions, that's the main reason company's buy yellow paint and splash it about the concrete. In this case it's just a pity someone didn't make use of what the yellow paint was saying. Wonder what their SOP's were regarding positioning, if there were no SOP it leaves the door wide open and you have to ask why they wasted money on buying yellow paint. Looking back on past satellite photos the pads have changed position numerous times.
Cockpit conversation prior to the following.
‘Just check we are clear’ - PIC.
'Yes' - copilot.
‘Sure?’ - PIC;
‘yes’ - copilot.
‘Still clear?’ - PIC
‘yes’ - copilot.
BANG
Lack of SA.............................bites another pilot again!
Cockpit conversation prior to the following.
‘Just check we are clear’ - PIC.
'Yes' - copilot.
‘Sure?’ - PIC;
‘yes’ - copilot.
‘Still clear?’ - PIC
‘yes’ - copilot.
BANG
Last edited by megan; 15th Mar 2018 at 05:44.
Megan,
You have to remember that according to Crab, TC and the other skygods, the importance is that someone f..ked up (which their immune to), and the underlying cause behind it is not important. It is just to state what kind of idiots they were, pull their license and problem solved.
Simples, as they say...
You have to remember that according to Crab, TC and the other skygods, the importance is that someone f..ked up (which their immune to), and the underlying cause behind it is not important. It is just to state what kind of idiots they were, pull their license and problem solved.
Simples, as they say...
Nubian - you do seem to have a problem, just because I criticised your analysis of the accident.
None of us, especially me, are immune from f**kups but when you do mess it up there comes a point where all the excuses in the world can't hide the fact that you did, indeed, f**kup. You have to put your hand up to it and move on, hopefully having learned not to make the same mistakes again.
I didn't suggest pulling her licence - I said it was an option for the regulator.
None of us, especially me, are immune from f**kups but when you do mess it up there comes a point where all the excuses in the world can't hide the fact that you did, indeed, f**kup. You have to put your hand up to it and move on, hopefully having learned not to make the same mistakes again.
I didn't suggest pulling her licence - I said it was an option for the regulator.
Grow up Nubian and if you have to quote ....quote correctly.
I did not say pull her license, I said rebrief her and then get on with life.
You're not a Generation Snowflake are you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Snowflake
Megan.
I didn't assume the pilot lost SA. I stated it!
Pilot taxi's into normal hover position over 'normal' ground markers
and doesn't "queue" the fact that the sister ship alongside........is not where it should be.
Call it what you like:
Complacency.
Unconscious bias.
Peripheral vision deficit.
I call it Lack of Spacial Awareness:
I did not say pull her license, I said rebrief her and then get on with life.
You're not a Generation Snowflake are you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Snowflake
Megan.
I didn't assume the pilot lost SA. I stated it!
Pilot taxi's into normal hover position over 'normal' ground markers
and doesn't "queue" the fact that the sister ship alongside........is not where it should be.
Call it what you like:
Complacency.
Unconscious bias.
Peripheral vision deficit.
I call it Lack of Spacial Awareness:
Spatial awareness is the ability to be aware of oneself in space. It is an organised knowledge of objects in relation to oneself in that given space. Spatial awareness also involves understanding the relationship of these objects when there is a change of position.
I think this is one of the better discussions on this board. Good points being made on both sides.
crab, I can certainly see where you are generally coming from in this discussion. But I must say the following two paragraphs are completely contradictory:
The whole point of these markings is that you know the helo will fit in there. You are pointing out that someone didn't use the markings correctly to guarantee safe separation. I agree. But how is this supposed to be the landing pilot as opposed to the one on the ground? 
crab, I can certainly see where you are generally coming from in this discussion. But I must say the following two paragraphs are completely contradictory:
Originally Posted by [email protected]
helipad markings are excellent and, if used correctly, guarantee safe separation from other aircraft so going hard over to remove them would be a retrograde step.
The main issue with this accident was the pilot not recognising that the other aircraft wasn't positioned on the normal spot and adjusting her landing position to cater for it.
The main issue with this accident was the pilot not recognising that the other aircraft wasn't positioned on the normal spot and adjusting her landing position to cater for it.
Because, regardless of what is painted on the ground, you have to recognise when the pads are being used correctly and when they are not.
If you assume they are being used correctly but don't bother to check and then exercise poor airmanship by not thinking about where your rotor is in relation to the aircraft on the ground then you have compounded the mistake made by the crew that didn't position the parked aircraft.
Just because it was parked in the wrong place doesn't absolve you as the pilot of the landing aircraft from the responsibility of keeping clear.
As you come into dispersal and see (positively) the other aircraft on its prescribed square then you know landing on the other square will keep you clear.
If you see the other aircraft isn't on its prescribed square then you must take extra care and modify your landing spot to ensure adequate clearance.
It is absolute basic airmanship.
If you assume they are being used correctly but don't bother to check and then exercise poor airmanship by not thinking about where your rotor is in relation to the aircraft on the ground then you have compounded the mistake made by the crew that didn't position the parked aircraft.
Just because it was parked in the wrong place doesn't absolve you as the pilot of the landing aircraft from the responsibility of keeping clear.
As you come into dispersal and see (positively) the other aircraft on its prescribed square then you know landing on the other square will keep you clear.
If you see the other aircraft isn't on its prescribed square then you must take extra care and modify your landing spot to ensure adequate clearance.
It is absolute basic airmanship.
Whilst training on big fixed wing I'd see people getting very sloppy about staying on the yellow line - to get a point across I had a little saying:
"If you hit anything when you're OFF the yellow line, you're **c ked. If you hit anything when your ON the yellow line you're **u ked !
"If you hit anything when you're OFF the yellow line, you're **c ked. If you hit anything when your ON the yellow line you're **u ked !
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Nubian - you do seem to have a problem.
I didn't suggest pulling her licence - I said it was an option for the regulator.
I didn't suggest pulling her licence - I said it was an option for the regulator.
Yeah Crab, it's definitely me...
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Nubian yes, it is because they can do something to remove some of the layers of cheese, but other than taking away the licence of the pilot, they can't remove the root cause.
I have not said that the pilot was blameless or that she did nothing wrong. I was highlighting the single cause that would prevent this from ever happening! If you read the whole report and look at the changes made, not only to the helipad layout, you might understand how this is measures that would prevent it from happening rather than what you suggest.
You can argue all you want that this would still very much be something that could happen, but then you can't have seen the way these, now 4 parking-pads+landingzone are spaced.(I am talking about THIS case, not in general) If now a pilot would fly into another one, that would be someone with either loss of aircraft control or someone that would do this deliberately. Then, you have a different root cause. Different story.
TC, you must know yourself good enough to know that your way of discussing is not really of diplomatic grade! Not that I need that (as I am not much diplomat either), just letting you know that if you come across arrogant and condescending, you'll be answered accordingly.
Btw, thanks for letting me learn a new term today. Never heard about Generation Snowflake.
My only point in all this and other cases is the why behind, not the key of what happened, which in this case is pretty obvious, so I can learn from other peoples f..kups before I do them myself, and I want to keep it that way!
So how should I interpret your statement then?
She made a mistake and the cost was only (fortunately) embarrassment and two trashed aircraft - I don't know if she got to keep her job but I am pretty sure she will be super-careful in future.
None of the measures recommended or actioned will prevent another pilot from making a mistake - they will help but they can't cater for an error in judgement.
Hence my assertion that the prime cause of this accident was pilot error which could have been avoided with a little extra care.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Just because it was parked in the wrong place doesn't absolve you as the pilot of the landing aircraft from the responsibility of keeping clear.
But it seems like in your eyes the landing pilot is the only one to blame here.
I'm saying "operational urgency" should never be used as an excuse for conciously neglecting the most obvious and basic safety measures.
That really is one of the worst excuses they could have come up with.
"he knew they would be off the ground in a couple of minutes or he would be up on radios" is not much better either.
"The pilot stated that it was not uncommon to place the helicopter outside of the box" is the only one that might remotely qualify. But then again, the other pilot basically stated the opposite.
This guy was obviously well aware that what he did played an essential role in letting this accident happen.
Yes obviously, but nobody here said anything like that.
It was clearly a strong contributory factor - it shouldn't have been parked there unless there was good reason - the close proximity of the fuel pumps (24') might have been a reason that some pilots preferred the aircraft 'off' the spot - there is a clear discrepancy between what the 2 pilots said about that process.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
None of the measures recommended or actioned will prevent another pilot from making a mistake
Have I said that these measures would prevent anyone making a mistake?? Nope!
But, with the layout as it is now, and I specify in THIS case (after all it is a specific case this thread is about, no?), the room for pilot error without the same result is greatly increased, so that this will happen again, well I will not hold my breath....
I asked you a question which you haven't bothered about although I repeated it and gave another poster a chance to answer which failed as well.
If the base had been like it is now, do you think we would have this discussion?
Judging by the available photos and video. I bet this base was originally intended for the use of 1 helicopter and dimensioned for that, then later on expanded to multiple helicopters without making the base appropriately bigger, only a set of new markings and maybe an SOP which is easy to not follow for various reasons. Now, if this is the case you have set a trap and it is only an unknown time to wait before the rest of the holes in the cheese line up and the ''dumb ass pilot'' conclude the story.
Don't get me wrong, lots of ''dense dumb ass pilots'' do unforgivable mistakes that cause accidents fatal or not, some should probably never have a license in the first place, but it is alway a more complex case than the pilot just being a dick and crash his machine. Very few crash intentionally!
youtube is full of these 15 second ''celebrities'' but you never know the story behind. Very easy to sit and watch idiots after each other do the silliest things like just having lost SA. etc. and conclude how stupid the pilot is.
But none of you have come up with any of the why's behind. Now, if you're going to prevent things from happening, you need to know why before you can change anything!
As for the 24 ft to the fuel-pump, the disc diameter of the OH58 is 35 feet, meaning the blade is 17,5 which gives you 6,5 feet lateral separation, so I think pilots that accept 2 feet rotor tip clearance don't have much problem with 6,5 + vertical component in addition.
Never argue with a Woman
She'll win every-time 
I bet this base was originally intended for the use of 1 helicopter and dimensioned for that, then later on expanded to multiple helicopters without making the base appropriately bigger, only a set of new markings and maybe an SOP which is easy to not follow for various reasons. Now, if this is the case you have set a trap and it is only an unknown time to wait before the rest of the holes in the cheese line up and the ''dumb ass pilot'' conclude the story.
What most seem to be missing here is Mr. Reason and his Swiss cheese model. It's far from good enough to say the Lady is the one on whom all the blame falls, she was merely the one who pulled the trigger on a gun loaded by others. No one has an accident by choice, the pity is everyone is making assumptions as to why the accident occurred, as in lack of SA. If indeed it was lack of SA there can be explanations for that as well, divorce, death of child, duty hours etc. Nothing in the report gives a clear cut explanation, there are many other questions I would have wanted answered. We're all human - I think, and hope.
This is similar to a rear-end car crash. The driver who smashes into the rear-end of a preceding car is almost always to blame - regardless of whether that preceding car was within the lane markings or even braked too hard. YOU as the following vehicle are required to allow ample spacing to avoid a crash.
In this incident, it might also be helpful to take the scenario a bit further...let's say the already-parked helicopter was much further out of the box...is it his/her fault still...or the landing pilot? What is the parked helicopter was half-way over the other parking spot...is it the fault of the landing pilot yet?
You don't land an aircraft unless you've ensured it is safe to do so. You can blame the umpire all you like, but the fault (and root cause) lies with you. Own your mistakes. I own a lovely acreage of mistakes, which I carefully tend to and nurture, so I NEVER forget them.
In this incident, it might also be helpful to take the scenario a bit further...let's say the already-parked helicopter was much further out of the box...is it his/her fault still...or the landing pilot? What is the parked helicopter was half-way over the other parking spot...is it the fault of the landing pilot yet?
You don't land an aircraft unless you've ensured it is safe to do so. You can blame the umpire all you like, but the fault (and root cause) lies with you. Own your mistakes. I own a lovely acreage of mistakes, which I carefully tend to and nurture, so I NEVER forget them.
Who done it? The PIC, no if's, buts, or excuses
At one stage there was only one pad, positioned in the centre of square of tarmac adjacent to the fuelling point.
What most seem to be missing here is Mr. Reason and his Swiss cheese model. It's far from good enough to say the Lady is the one on whom all the blame falls, she was merely the one who pulled the trigger on a gun loaded by others. No one has an accident by choice, the pity is everyone is making assumptions as to why the accident occurred, as in lack of SA. If indeed it was lack of SA there can be explanations for that as well, divorce, death of child, duty hours etc. Nothing in the report gives a clear cut explanation, there are many other questions I would have wanted answered. We're all human - I think, and hope.
What most seem to be missing here is Mr. Reason and his Swiss cheese model. It's far from good enough to say the Lady is the one on whom all the blame falls, she was merely the one who pulled the trigger on a gun loaded by others. No one has an accident by choice, the pity is everyone is making assumptions as to why the accident occurred, as in lack of SA. If indeed it was lack of SA there can be explanations for that as well, divorce, death of child, duty hours etc. Nothing in the report gives a clear cut explanation, there are many other questions I would have wanted answered. We're all human - I think, and hope.
but wait someone is outside the designated parking spot, I'll show 'em...BOOM 
This is similar to a rear-end car crash. The driver who smashes into the rear-end of a preceding car is almost always to blame - regardless of whether that preceding car was within the lane markings or even braked too hard. YOU as the following vehicle are required to allow ample spacing to avoid a crash.
In this incident, it might also be helpful to take the scenario a bit further...let's say the already-parked helicopter was much further out of the box...is it his/her fault still...or the landing pilot? What is the parked helicopter was half-way over the other parking spot...is it the fault of the landing pilot yet?
You don't land an aircraft unless you've ensured it is safe to do so. You can blame the umpire all you like, but the fault (and root cause) lies with you. Own your mistakes. I own a lovely acreage of mistakes, which I carefully tend to and nurture, so I NEVER forget them.
In this incident, it might also be helpful to take the scenario a bit further...let's say the already-parked helicopter was much further out of the box...is it his/her fault still...or the landing pilot? What is the parked helicopter was half-way over the other parking spot...is it the fault of the landing pilot yet?
You don't land an aircraft unless you've ensured it is safe to do so. You can blame the umpire all you like, but the fault (and root cause) lies with you. Own your mistakes. I own a lovely acreage of mistakes, which I carefully tend to and nurture, so I NEVER forget them.
I asked you a question which you haven't bothered about although I repeated it and gave another poster a chance to answer which failed as well.
If the base had been like it is now, do you think we would have this discussion?
If the base had been like it is now, do you think we would have this discussion?
I think the points that I and others have made about it being the landing pilot's responsibility not to land on another aircraft - REGARDLESS of where that aircraft is parked - is paramount.
With the new HLS layout, it is less likely to happen again - that's why the NTSB recommended the changes but its also even less likely to happen again because it has happened once and plenty of lessons were learned from it.
If you want to hypothesise about whether the accident would have happened with a new layout then carry on because it is a pointless quest - it did happen with the layout that was there - the layout was a contributory factor and it has been changed but the landing pilot was soley to blame for where and how she landed her helicopter.
If you think I am going to say that the HLS marking was the prime cause of the accident then you will be waiting a long time.......
BTW - which pilots are happy with a 2 ft tip clearance?
Originally Posted by [email protected]
If you think I am going to say that the HLS marking was the prime cause of the accident then you will be waiting a long time.......
Something I came across.
The most complex piece of equipment in a machine is the operator, trouble shooting why someone did what they did is not obvious to casual observers such as we, see the UH-60 thread where the tailwheel was put over the side.
Crab, you think there may be a memo iterating a necessity to be positioned on the pad?
Nowadays, pilots are encouraged to be open and honest about their mistakes. The industry has powerful, independent bodies designed to investigate crashes. Failure is not regarded as an indictment of the specific pilot who messes up, but as a precious learning opportunity for all pilots, all airlines and all regulators.
Of course, it’s entirely normal to have difficulty in accepting our own failures, be it in a presentation or on the golf course. But it turns out, failure to learn from mistakes has been one of the greatest obstacles to progress. Unfortunately, many companies have not yet established an open system in which these attitudes or patterns can be easily discussed and further consequences prevented. In most cases, they will be noticed by colleagues and whispered about or mentioned behind closed doors. Conventionally, errors are still stigmatised as deficits and associated with embarrassment, shame and fear.
Modern error management is different, and requires a different perspective. It accepts errors — and the reasons for them — as an unavoidable part of human behavior. Sure, those who make mistakes may still become annoyed at themselves, but they need not fear ridicule or sanctions from others. Instead, they should try to analyze what led to the mistake and attempt to eliminate this to prevent future problems.
We should consider redefining our relationship with failure, as individuals, as organizations, and as societies. Instead of denying failure, or spinning it, aviation teaches us to learn from it.
Of course, it’s entirely normal to have difficulty in accepting our own failures, be it in a presentation or on the golf course. But it turns out, failure to learn from mistakes has been one of the greatest obstacles to progress. Unfortunately, many companies have not yet established an open system in which these attitudes or patterns can be easily discussed and further consequences prevented. In most cases, they will be noticed by colleagues and whispered about or mentioned behind closed doors. Conventionally, errors are still stigmatised as deficits and associated with embarrassment, shame and fear.
Modern error management is different, and requires a different perspective. It accepts errors — and the reasons for them — as an unavoidable part of human behavior. Sure, those who make mistakes may still become annoyed at themselves, but they need not fear ridicule or sanctions from others. Instead, they should try to analyze what led to the mistake and attempt to eliminate this to prevent future problems.
We should consider redefining our relationship with failure, as individuals, as organizations, and as societies. Instead of denying failure, or spinning it, aviation teaches us to learn from it.
If you think I am going to say that the HLS marking was the prime cause of the accident then you will be waiting a long time...
