Helicopter - v - crane LONDON
My friend I don't want to get into a personal bun fight but seriously these are shocking events, if you don't come to that on your own having read the interim report I'm not going to convince you.
To suggest pilots shouldn't be free to talk about events they themselves find crazy then that is just wrong. If you suggest pilots are put into a position to fly with a gun to the head in this kind of weather then I want the media to be all over it and get it stopped. Either way the operation stinks, if you want to defend this amateur hour carry on.
To suggest pilots shouldn't be free to talk about events they themselves find crazy then that is just wrong. If you suggest pilots are put into a position to fly with a gun to the head in this kind of weather then I want the media to be all over it and get it stopped. Either way the operation stinks, if you want to defend this amateur hour carry on.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AAIB site broken for me currently. Just looking at the track it makes you wonder he was momentarily confused about position on river and trying an approach to the heliport on the wrong section. It doesn't seem likely, but that's what it looks like.
On my walk to work this morning i saw a driver tapping away at his smartphone whilst stationary and then still looking at it as he turned at a junction and drove off. Many distractions in the modern world...
On my walk to work this morning i saw a driver tapping away at his smartphone whilst stationary and then still looking at it as he turned at a junction and drove off. Many distractions in the modern world...
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My friend I don't want to get into a personal bun fight but seriously these are shocking events, if you don't come to that on your own having read the interim report I'm not going to convince you.
To suggest pilots shouldn't be free to talk about events they themselves find crazy then that is just wrong.
Personally I believe that anyone who is a working professional or is an advocate of helicopters and our industry should realise that there is a limit to what one should post publicly. If not to limit what tripe is reported in the press, then at least to maintain one's humility!
Either way the operation stinks, if you want to defend this amateur hour carry on.
Why'd you have to go say that??
No Heliport, I am not an AAIB inspector, but I am someone who in a previous life conducted many charters like this in an S-76 flown single pilot IFR over London and the home counties....before texting phones and even before GPS.
I encountered weather conditions like this many times. It is sunny one minute and foggy the next and very unpredictable. Once VFR on top (IFR to me) I would have asked for a climb, declared IFR and diverted somewhere with an ILS if necessary, that is if I had taken off in the first place from Redhill into conditions conducive to fog and freezing fog formation.
I would not have been grubbing around at low level over London looking to divert to a postage stamp size VFR heliport which I needed good VMC to get to without knowing the weather at Battersea or between where I was and there. If I need to divert, I will make very sure it is to somewhere I know I can get in. ILS to Gatwick with a visual break to Redhill, or a landing at Gatwick, or Luton / Stanstead, all better than the outcome achieved here.
I encountered weather conditions like this many times. It is sunny one minute and foggy the next and very unpredictable. Once VFR on top (IFR to me) I would have asked for a climb, declared IFR and diverted somewhere with an ILS if necessary, that is if I had taken off in the first place from Redhill into conditions conducive to fog and freezing fog formation.
I would not have been grubbing around at low level over London looking to divert to a postage stamp size VFR heliport which I needed good VMC to get to without knowing the weather at Battersea or between where I was and there. If I need to divert, I will make very sure it is to somewhere I know I can get in. ILS to Gatwick with a visual break to Redhill, or a landing at Gatwick, or Luton / Stanstead, all better than the outcome achieved here.
Lewy, as noted above, there are a variety of apps that turn voice into text and text into voice. If one is using such, you end up with basically another radio. Pilots have been operating with multiple radios from before I ever flew.
As to "texting while flying" I'd have to say that depending on what your flying condition is and what your task load is, your
Aviate
Navigate
Communicate
Priorities remain unchanged, and you fit in various "communicate" tasks as the situation allows.
Do you fly, sir?
As to "texting while flying" I'd have to say that depending on what your flying condition is and what your task load is, your
Aviate
Navigate
Communicate
Priorities remain unchanged, and you fit in various "communicate" tasks as the situation allows.
Do you fly, sir?
Risk Management....CRM....commonsense all play a role in how we manage our Cockpit duties....and when Single Pilot we have to admit that our workload at the best of times is significant.
Part of CRM and just plain commonsense is that we allocate our time to absolutely neccessary actions and even then put a priority on each of them.
Thus....as Texting is an issue here....where would you rank that task in the order of priorities given the situation under discussion?
We do not know the workload the Pilot was under....if the Auto Pilot was doing the driving....or anything else that would play a factor in that ranking.
I am not passing judgement on Barnes....but sincerely feel the questions need asking as if such a tragedy can happen to him.....it can happen to any of us.
As any tragedy like this....we must learn from what happened and see if we can find a way to ensure it does not happen again for the same reasons....whatever they may turn out to be.
One Man's Opinion....Texting is a NO NO. Using a Cell Phone is a NO NO. I took a stand on that once before. I said with no uncertain terms...when I was a Pilot....I was a Pilot....and running a business from the seat of helicopter in flight just plain was not going to happen.
The difference between a Cell Phone conversation and a radio exchange is the Radio Exchange is short, brief, and concise and all about an essential bit of business...that being flying the machine and coordinating that with ATC.
Cell Phone conversations are a distraction...can be extended (as compared to talking with ATC), and generally can wait until after the aircraft is shut down.
We have to make our own decisions about that as long the activity is not illegal. Just as in every part of this flight....just because something is "legal" does not make it something that should be done or can be done without additional risk.
That the holes in the Swiss Cheese lined up on this one....cannot be denied.
Let's find out what the holes were....and plug them however we can.
Part of CRM and just plain commonsense is that we allocate our time to absolutely neccessary actions and even then put a priority on each of them.
Thus....as Texting is an issue here....where would you rank that task in the order of priorities given the situation under discussion?
We do not know the workload the Pilot was under....if the Auto Pilot was doing the driving....or anything else that would play a factor in that ranking.
I am not passing judgement on Barnes....but sincerely feel the questions need asking as if such a tragedy can happen to him.....it can happen to any of us.
As any tragedy like this....we must learn from what happened and see if we can find a way to ensure it does not happen again for the same reasons....whatever they may turn out to be.
One Man's Opinion....Texting is a NO NO. Using a Cell Phone is a NO NO. I took a stand on that once before. I said with no uncertain terms...when I was a Pilot....I was a Pilot....and running a business from the seat of helicopter in flight just plain was not going to happen.
The difference between a Cell Phone conversation and a radio exchange is the Radio Exchange is short, brief, and concise and all about an essential bit of business...that being flying the machine and coordinating that with ATC.
Cell Phone conversations are a distraction...can be extended (as compared to talking with ATC), and generally can wait until after the aircraft is shut down.
We have to make our own decisions about that as long the activity is not illegal. Just as in every part of this flight....just because something is "legal" does not make it something that should be done or can be done without additional risk.
That the holes in the Swiss Cheese lined up on this one....cannot be denied.
Let's find out what the holes were....and plug them however we can.
Last edited by SASless; 23rd Jan 2013 at 14:10.
Wolf
Clues:
1) poor with freezing fog and low cloud
2) very high with course and destination changes, radio and frequency changes and commercial plan changes.
I would be communicating using old fashioned radio to an ATC unit who could give me vectors and weather information not a mobile phone, until I was on the ground and safe.
.As to "texting while flying" I'd have to say that depending on what your flying condition is and what your task load is, your
1) poor with freezing fog and low cloud
2) very high with course and destination changes, radio and frequency changes and commercial plan changes.
I would be communicating using old fashioned radio to an ATC unit who could give me vectors and weather information not a mobile phone, until I was on the ground and safe.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay Pitts
Man to man. Human to Human.
Can you not see my point re generally spouting off when it comes to the press?
Surely as a registered member of this forum you have an interest in aviation/ helicopters? Someone says something like "Its rank amateur", the newspapers get on it and the general public get riled up and then everything looks bad and the industry suffers.
A lot of people here have lost a great friend and colleague in Peter and making such accusations and statements is going to be offensive and upset a lot of people, not to mention the families reading this. This is where humility comes into the equation.
If there is something to be had with safety here it will be done correctly through the correct channels. Not on an anonymous public forum. Pilots slagging off other pilots and operations just makes us ALL look like a bunch of *****!
As for people asking stupid questions like "is it alright to use my mobile when I'm flying?", well they are here to generate even more negative publicity. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying that if you need to ask, you'll never know!
Man to man. Human to Human.
Can you not see my point re generally spouting off when it comes to the press?
Surely as a registered member of this forum you have an interest in aviation/ helicopters? Someone says something like "Its rank amateur", the newspapers get on it and the general public get riled up and then everything looks bad and the industry suffers.
A lot of people here have lost a great friend and colleague in Peter and making such accusations and statements is going to be offensive and upset a lot of people, not to mention the families reading this. This is where humility comes into the equation.
If there is something to be had with safety here it will be done correctly through the correct channels. Not on an anonymous public forum. Pilots slagging off other pilots and operations just makes us ALL look like a bunch of *****!
As for people asking stupid questions like "is it alright to use my mobile when I'm flying?", well they are here to generate even more negative publicity. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying that if you need to ask, you'll never know!
Last edited by Old Age Pilot; 23rd Jan 2013 at 14:20.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just throwing this out there....
Now we all know someone with a newly printed cpl, they most proberly would give their right arm for a chance to fly with an experianced pilot on these charter flights. Most are proberly trained at the company doing the flights anyway. wouldnt it make it a win win for all if an sic was in there helping the work load........
It might help avoid this type of accident in the future.
Now we all know someone with a newly printed cpl, they most proberly would give their right arm for a chance to fly with an experianced pilot on these charter flights. Most are proberly trained at the company doing the flights anyway. wouldnt it make it a win win for all if an sic was in there helping the work load........
It might help avoid this type of accident in the future.
Last edited by malc4d; 23rd Jan 2013 at 14:43.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but typical and true to form, people on this forum will just berate you if they don't agree with your comments rather than have a civilised discussion.
This is a high profile job and can be sensationalised (either positively or negatively) in a heartbeat.
I think we are entitled to feel protective of our jobs and industry. Don't you?
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cornwall UK
Age: 79
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the interim report the Notam for the crane gives an obstacle height of 800feet....what minimum height should be flown on route H4 in the stretch of the river by Vauxhall bridge during the Notam period?
Guest
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the shadow of R101
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at the track of the last bit of the flight before the collision, the turn over the Thames from westerly to easterly heading was made to the right, presumably because the pilot is in the right hand seat and it feels more natural to turn that way (??). The second turn back onto a westerly heading was also to the right, and the natural place to look is into the turn, so the building and crane would have passed across the pilot's line of sight quite rapidly. What was the back-drop behind the crane from that point of view? London is a bowl, so there is rising ground to the south of the river.
There were 7 seconds elapsed and about 125m travelled between the Battersea frequency change being acknowleged and the collision with the crane. Given that the frequency was not one anticipated, perhaps this required it to be set on one radio rather than a simple selection of a pre-tuned radio.
A very short time, an obstruction subtending a narrow angle with potentially an urban back-drop, an in-cockpit task...
There were 7 seconds elapsed and about 125m travelled between the Battersea frequency change being acknowleged and the collision with the crane. Given that the frequency was not one anticipated, perhaps this required it to be set on one radio rather than a simple selection of a pre-tuned radio.
A very short time, an obstruction subtending a narrow angle with potentially an urban back-drop, an in-cockpit task...
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hassocks, Mid-Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A lot of seemingly unnecessary arguments taking-place between PPRuNe members since some of the facts have come to light - but never mind.
Good idea.
Figure 3. of the report (see map on previous page) recorded his final altitude as 770ft (I don't know where this puts his height in relation to the top of the crane but the crane was advertised in the NOTAM as being at a similar HEIGHT).
This means:
a) He was moving in and out of cloud and simply flew into it because he didn't see it, or
b) He was visual with the Tower but was distracted (either changing frequency or something else) and again didn't see it and flew into it, or
c) The same as (b) above but saw the obstruction at the last second when it was too late to make enough deviation to avoid contact with the crane
Originally Posted by malc4D
Just throwing this out there....
Now we all know someone with a newly printed cpl, they most proberly would give their right arm for a chance to fly with an experianced pilot on these charter flights. Most are proberly trained at the company doing the flights anyway. wouldnt it make it a win win for all if an sic was in there helping the work load........
It might help avoid this type of accident in the future.
Just throwing this out there....
Now we all know someone with a newly printed cpl, they most proberly would give their right arm for a chance to fly with an experianced pilot on these charter flights. Most are proberly trained at the company doing the flights anyway. wouldnt it make it a win win for all if an sic was in there helping the work load........
It might help avoid this type of accident in the future.
Originally Posted by Dg800
Yes we do. He turned right into the obstacle, either because he couldn't see it or because, if it was indeed visible to him at the time, he just didn't look. I'm not sure anybody will be able to say for sure which of the two is true, seeing as nobody who was there survived, sadly.
Yes we do. He turned right into the obstacle, either because he couldn't see it or because, if it was indeed visible to him at the time, he just didn't look. I'm not sure anybody will be able to say for sure which of the two is true, seeing as nobody who was there survived, sadly.
This means:
a) He was moving in and out of cloud and simply flew into it because he didn't see it, or
b) He was visual with the Tower but was distracted (either changing frequency or something else) and again didn't see it and flew into it, or
c) The same as (b) above but saw the obstruction at the last second when it was too late to make enough deviation to avoid contact with the crane
Last edited by Grenville Fortescue; 23rd Jan 2013 at 14:58.
If the AAIB read this, I just would like to state that I am so glad to be able to fly in the UK.
Any government organisation that can deliver such a detailed report within one week of an accident is, indeed, remarkable. (And, yes, I realise that the immense political, media and public pressure meant it had to be done - making the work even more praiseworthy.)
The complexities of this particular flight no doubt made the report even more difficult to compile.
For those who haven't read the full report, please do so.
Any government organisation that can deliver such a detailed report within one week of an accident is, indeed, remarkable. (And, yes, I realise that the immense political, media and public pressure meant it had to be done - making the work even more praiseworthy.)
The complexities of this particular flight no doubt made the report even more difficult to compile.
For those who haven't read the full report, please do so.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I second JB's comment. The AAIB have done a huge amount of work in such a short time to publish this interim bulletin. It helps those of us who want to understand this event, to have a much better appreciation of what happened as soon as possible.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hassocks, Mid-Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Passenger urged helicopter crash pilot not to fly - Daily Telegraph
Passenger urged helicopter crash pilot not to fly - Telegraph
Helicopter crash pilot ‘ignored weather warnings’ http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/u...cle3666073.ece
Passenger suggested pilot should put off trip London helicopter crash: passenger suggested pilot should put off trip | UK news | guardian.co.uk
Helicopter hit crane while pilot was turning to head for heliport
Pete Barnes, the pilot of the helicopter which crashed in London last week killing two people, was urged to abandon the trip by the passenger he was due to collect, air accident investigators have found.
Less than half an hour before the Agusta 109 hit a crane in Vauxhall, Richard Caring, the owner of the Ivy, advised Mr Barnes not to take off.
“The pilot replied that he was already starting the engines. The client stated he repeated his suggestion that the pilot should not take off.”
Less than half an hour before the Agusta 109 hit a crane in Vauxhall, Richard Caring, the owner of the Ivy, advised Mr Barnes not to take off.
“The pilot replied that he was already starting the engines. The client stated he repeated his suggestion that the pilot should not take off.”
Helicopter crash pilot ‘ignored weather warnings’ http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/u...cle3666073.ece
Passenger suggested pilot should put off trip London helicopter crash: passenger suggested pilot should put off trip | UK news | guardian.co.uk
Helicopter hit crane while pilot was turning to head for heliport
Last edited by Grenville Fortescue; 23rd Jan 2013 at 15:18.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JimBall - I agree; hopefully a lot of pointless speculation (including on this website) can be addressed but I fear the texting issue will only generate more waffle from m'learned friends - and others.
3 comments: I have flown the 206 into Battersea and seem to remember the visual circuit being at 1000'
Secondly, speed at impact does not seem to have been mentioned. If flying at normal A109 cruise speed then the trajectory of the falling machine would surely have carried it further from the crash site?
Finally, I have witnessed an S61N rotor strike and there were bits of blade everywhere (OK more blades) but in the Vauxhall instance no mention of high-speed blade debris causing damage has been stated.
3 comments: I have flown the 206 into Battersea and seem to remember the visual circuit being at 1000'
Secondly, speed at impact does not seem to have been mentioned. If flying at normal A109 cruise speed then the trajectory of the falling machine would surely have carried it further from the crash site?
Finally, I have witnessed an S61N rotor strike and there were bits of blade everywhere (OK more blades) but in the Vauxhall instance no mention of high-speed blade debris causing damage has been stated.
Guest
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: In the shadow of R101
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Report says 7 seconds to travel ~125m, and that blade and other debris damaged buildings close to the collision site, breaking glass panes etc.
Distance/time suggests speed was below 40kts, I suspect that actually the path was longer and curved so actually likely to be higher but not by a large factor.
Distance/time suggests speed was below 40kts, I suspect that actually the path was longer and curved so actually likely to be higher but not by a large factor.