Helicopter - v - crane LONDON
Originally Posted by Rotors
but in the Vauxhall instance no mention of high-speed blade debris causing damage has been stated.
Originally Posted by AAIB
A residential building below
the crane suffered minor structural damage, including
broken glass panels, from impact by released sections of
the helicopter’s main rotor blades.
the crane suffered minor structural damage, including
broken glass panels, from impact by released sections of
the helicopter’s main rotor blades.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Royal Leamington Spa
Age: 78
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
posted by industry insider -
VFR on top (IFR to me)
Me too.
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.
Agree wholeheartedly.
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 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.
Me too.
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.
Agree wholeheartedly.
As I sadly reveiw the couple of hundred posts above, half of which are utter BS, I'm prompted to say that most professional pilots have probably been in similar situations. Knowing that things could turn out badly, but through skill and luck, the flight is completed without further event. I,m sorry to see the lastest torrent of "I told him not to go" newspaper articles but that's par for the course. So rest in peace Pete, this flight is over and a new flight has begun.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
I find it strange that the report quotes Thames Radar as offering him "VFR if you can or Special VFR" for a transit through the London CTR. VFR is not possible in the London CTR. It's Class A airspace.
NS
NS
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Shepperton
Age: 51
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one so far seems to have picked up on the timing of events around 07.55
5 mins prior to 07.55 Mr Barnes' client phoned Battersea Heliport to see if it was open and was told it was.
at 07.55 Mr Barnes received a text message from his client saying that Battersea was open. It looks like he then radiod to see if Battersea was open (edited - the radio call was 1 minute after 7.55 as pointed out by Ambient sheep in the post #411).
If he chose to divert to Battersea at the specific suggestion of his client then the premise that his diversion was due to weather is incorrect. In fact the report shows he was "safe" VMC on top with a clear stated intention to return to base before 7.55's text and could have accepted an IFR transit offered if this wasn't the case. We also know the pilot couldn't see Battersea when overhead just 10-15 minutes earlier.
The 07.53 text "least we tried" indicated the pilots state of mind to try and do what he could to please the client.
The radio message "IF I COULD HEAD TO BATTERSEA THAT WOULD BE VERY USEFUL" is also interesting. Would "useful" be a word you would use for a weather diversion?
In which case commercial pressures look likely to be the specific reason he was anyway near the impact site in weather that was not VFR (or SVFR) legal.
5 mins prior to 07.55 Mr Barnes' client phoned Battersea Heliport to see if it was open and was told it was.
at 07.55 Mr Barnes received a text message from his client saying that Battersea was open. It looks like he then radiod to see if Battersea was open (edited - the radio call was 1 minute after 7.55 as pointed out by Ambient sheep in the post #411).
If he chose to divert to Battersea at the specific suggestion of his client then the premise that his diversion was due to weather is incorrect. In fact the report shows he was "safe" VMC on top with a clear stated intention to return to base before 7.55's text and could have accepted an IFR transit offered if this wasn't the case. We also know the pilot couldn't see Battersea when overhead just 10-15 minutes earlier.
The 07.53 text "least we tried" indicated the pilots state of mind to try and do what he could to please the client.
The radio message "IF I COULD HEAD TO BATTERSEA THAT WOULD BE VERY USEFUL" is also interesting. Would "useful" be a word you would use for a weather diversion?
In which case commercial pressures look likely to be the specific reason he was anyway near the impact site in weather that was not VFR (or SVFR) legal.
Last edited by readgeoff; 23rd Jan 2013 at 17:33.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Forest of Caledon
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“ROCKET 2 APPROVED VIA THE LONDON EYE NOT
ABOVE ALTITUDE 1,500 FEET VFR IF YOU CAN OR
SPECIAL VFR, QNH 1012”.
The pilot replied:
“YEAH, WE CAN, 1012 AND NOT ABOVE 1500, VFR
OR SPECIAL VFR ROCKET 2”.
At 0753 hrs,
the controller asked:
“ROCKET 2 DO YOU HAVE VMC OR WOULD YOU
LIKE AN IFR TRANSIT?”
The pilot replied:
“I HAVE GOOD VMC ON TOP HERE, THAT’S FINE,
ROCKET 2”.
ABOVE ALTITUDE 1,500 FEET VFR IF YOU CAN OR
SPECIAL VFR, QNH 1012”.
The pilot replied:
“YEAH, WE CAN, 1012 AND NOT ABOVE 1500, VFR
OR SPECIAL VFR ROCKET 2”.
At 0753 hrs,
the controller asked:
“ROCKET 2 DO YOU HAVE VMC OR WOULD YOU
LIKE AN IFR TRANSIT?”
The pilot replied:
“I HAVE GOOD VMC ON TOP HERE, THAT’S FINE,
ROCKET 2”.
ATC was aware of the wx - temp/dew -5/-5; fog/mist/low stratus etc.
The pilot had clearly stated that he was not in VMC. The oxymoron of "Victor Mike on top" is fully understood.
Why was a VFR or SVFR clearance issued (and accepted) in what was so clearly not VMC?
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hassocks, Mid-Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why was a VFR or SVFR clearance issued (and accepted) in what was so clearly not VMC?
readgeoff - yes we see it and you're suggesting that the client was the one who proposed Battersea. Yes, seems like it. But, Barnes would still have to concur (which evidently he did).
As I said (in a much slagged-off) earlier post - pressure to perform?
Last edited by Grenville Fortescue; 23rd Jan 2013 at 16:52.
Originally Posted by readgeoff
No one so far seems to have picked up on the timing of events at 07.55
Mr Barnes received a text message from his client saying that Battersea was open. It looks like he then radiod to see if Battersea was open (the radio call was also at 7.55 so its hard to see if this sequence is correct or not).
Mr Barnes received a text message from his client saying that Battersea was open. It looks like he then radiod to see if Battersea was open (the radio call was also at 7.55 so its hard to see if this sequence is correct or not).
Originally Posted by AAIB report
At 0755 hrs, G-CRST was put under radar control as it entered the London CTR. One minute later, the pilot asked:
“ROCKET 2, IS BATTERSEA OPEN DO YOU KNOW?”
“ROCKET 2, IS BATTERSEA OPEN DO YOU KNOW?”
...so it would seem that was indeed the sequence of events after all.
I thought the existing weather at the airfield controlled the status of the airspace and ATC tells the Pilot what that status is by means of the ATC Clearance issued to the Pilot. When does a Pilot get the choice from ATC?
One question. What is the operators involvement or expected involvment in this?
I see a text at 0640hrs from the pilot to the Operator that says:-
Freezing fog all london airports ok up north have text [client] clearing between 8 - 10
but I don't see anything back.
I see a text at 0640hrs from the pilot to the Operator that says:-
Freezing fog all london airports ok up north have text [client] clearing between 8 - 10
but I don't see anything back.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
Why was a VFR or SVFR clearance issued (and accepted) in what was so clearly not VMC?
I think we can expect some clarification of what SVFR means in the AAIB report's recommendations, as well as such things as whether VMC on top is an acceptable way to transit the London CTR, what clearances ATC can offer into the London CTR, and who decides what the weather conditions are in the London CTR for the purposes of authorising transit clearances (in Class D zones, the ATC unit responsible for the airspace decides what the visibility is. There's no equivalent for the London CTR).
NS
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
SASless:
Only in Class D so not applicable here.
NS
I thought the existing weather at the airfield controlled the status of the airspace and ATC tells the Pilot what that status is by means of the ATC Clearance issued to the Pilot. When does a Pilot get the choice from ATC?
NS
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
readgeoff - yes we see it and you're suggesting that the client was the one who proposed Battersea. Yes, seems like it. But, Barnes would still have to concur (which evidently he did).
As I said (in a much slagged-off) earlier post - pressure to perform?
As I said (in a much slagged-off) earlier post - pressure to perform?
NS
NS.....who determines if an Airspace is IFR or VFR....each pilot or ATC?
If it is "Controlled Airspace"....some ATC unit has "control" of that airspace.
If no ATC unit has "control" then how does one do SVFR or IFR without an ATC Clearance?
Are we seeing a huge hole in the ATC System around London here?
I only flew over London once....and that was by mistake....amply pointed out to me and my Mate by serious powers that were at Redhill's upper floors. We did not know it was London....but we did know exactly what time it was when we determined where we were....and where we were not.
If it is "Controlled Airspace"....some ATC unit has "control" of that airspace.
If no ATC unit has "control" then how does one do SVFR or IFR without an ATC Clearance?
Are we seeing a huge hole in the ATC System around London here?
I only flew over London once....and that was by mistake....amply pointed out to me and my Mate by serious powers that were at Redhill's upper floors. We did not know it was London....but we did know exactly what time it was when we determined where we were....and where we were not.
Last edited by SASless; 23rd Jan 2013 at 17:49.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Read it whatever way you like but for me the accident commenced when the client takes a chill-pill and suggests that PB waits a while. Flip, how many of us have really pushed things because the client is barking at us like a rabid dog? (That Scouse chap who sang a few song in the sixties comes to mind as an example of an excellent pilot succumbing to unnecessary pressure). PB is on the ground at Redhill when This client quite clearly indicates that the weather ain't good and he isn't in a rush. From a charter perspective, things doesn't get any better than that. So why did PB push on and launch despite there being no need?