Synthetic Vision for HEMS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something to be "proud of"? "Brag" about? No. Just providing background information so that if a conversation ensues, others in the conversation understand my experiences and can feel free to question or provide direction to the conversation. Many don't survive what I experienced. I'd like to help change that. To that end, I welcome all commments.
For those of you defending TC, please re-read his condescending entry.
Adroight, if your CAA doesn't allow night single pilot HEMS, that's fine. In fact that may be where the U.S. winds up. I was just pointing out that if you don't fly at night, where most Inadvertant IMC occurs, it may be more appropriate to join the conversation than criticise from the safety of day VFR only squadroom. "A bit of a giggle"? Maybe, but that was from actual experience and did bring on a chuckle when safely on the ground.
Re: synthetic vision being a distraction to a VFR pilot who should be looking outside, I point out that, like an auto pilot is being considered for emergency inadvertent incounters with IMC. CCCC doesn't mean climb to your service ceiling. It means Climb (to clear obstructions), Communicate (with ATC), Confess (as to your emergency situation) and Comply (with ATC instructions).
SASless, "... are you in the Life Saving business or are you just providing a safe, efficient medical transportation service?" Define a traumatic amputation at an auto accident scene or a twelve year old's 40% burns going to a burn center. Not just interfacility transport, if that's what you are asking.
Spinwing, "the US EMS accident record speaks for itself". Yes. That's why I'm here.
Crab, "there is no real excuse for crashing so many of those." So true. Can you help figure out how we can avoid doing that?
I'm up for answering personal criticsm, but I ask that we avoid criticizing a whole 'nother's country's way of flying. Unless it's constructive criticism.
For those of you defending TC, please re-read his condescending entry.
Adroight, if your CAA doesn't allow night single pilot HEMS, that's fine. In fact that may be where the U.S. winds up. I was just pointing out that if you don't fly at night, where most Inadvertant IMC occurs, it may be more appropriate to join the conversation than criticise from the safety of day VFR only squadroom. "A bit of a giggle"? Maybe, but that was from actual experience and did bring on a chuckle when safely on the ground.
Re: synthetic vision being a distraction to a VFR pilot who should be looking outside, I point out that, like an auto pilot is being considered for emergency inadvertent incounters with IMC. CCCC doesn't mean climb to your service ceiling. It means Climb (to clear obstructions), Communicate (with ATC), Confess (as to your emergency situation) and Comply (with ATC instructions).
SASless, "... are you in the Life Saving business or are you just providing a safe, efficient medical transportation service?" Define a traumatic amputation at an auto accident scene or a twelve year old's 40% burns going to a burn center. Not just interfacility transport, if that's what you are asking.
Spinwing, "the US EMS accident record speaks for itself". Yes. That's why I'm here.
Crab, "there is no real excuse for crashing so many of those." So true. Can you help figure out how we can avoid doing that?
I'm up for answering personal criticsm, but I ask that we avoid criticizing a whole 'nother's country's way of flying. Unless it's constructive criticism.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: IOW
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe you should be asking yourself why you have been inadvertent IMC on 3 separate occasions at night rather than trying to blame the aircraft, your company or the FAA. The buck stops with you and your decision making.
Fly911, I do agree that honestly reporting concerns and incidents is the way forward to understanding how they happen and preventing them from recurring in the future.
However, unless some of those root causes are actually acknowledged and dealt with, the incidents will keep on happening.
Although HEMS threads usually degenerate into a US vs UK battle of who does it best and how - the facts remain that HEMS accidents (especially fatal ones) are pretty much unknown in UK whereas they are common place in the US.
You can cite the disparity of hours flown (the US clearly has far more HEMS aircraft and therefore flying hours) when defending the stats but unless the 'lifesaving' attitude takes second place to the 'safe aviation' attitude, nothing will improve.
If you get a 12 year old with 40% burns or a traumatic amputee into your aircraft and then kill them (and the crew and medics) on the way to hospital, you have achieved nothing.
However, unless some of those root causes are actually acknowledged and dealt with, the incidents will keep on happening.
Although HEMS threads usually degenerate into a US vs UK battle of who does it best and how - the facts remain that HEMS accidents (especially fatal ones) are pretty much unknown in UK whereas they are common place in the US.
You can cite the disparity of hours flown (the US clearly has far more HEMS aircraft and therefore flying hours) when defending the stats but unless the 'lifesaving' attitude takes second place to the 'safe aviation' attitude, nothing will improve.
If you get a 12 year old with 40% burns or a traumatic amputee into your aircraft and then kill them (and the crew and medics) on the way to hospital, you have achieved nothing.
Guest
Posts: n/a
First of all, we should not point fingers here-if someone comes up with something that has happenend to him, we should discuss that topic-not accusing that it has happenend in the first place.
One big difference between the US and the European HEMS service are the pilots AND their attitude.
Many HEMS pilots in Europe are experienced Ex-military pilots..so they are experienced enough to cancel a mission before something goes wrong.
I have met many pilots (from different countries) who were talking about how they were flying with VIS less than 400 m to an accident side, then did a landing, and despite clipping a wire on the way back delivered the patient to the hospital..
THAT is the real problem here: Attitude.
Usually, the policy of the operator (in Europe) is to provide Minimum Meteorological Conditions that need to be forecasted before a flight is allowed to take place.
These conditions are usually so high that-even if the weather deteriorates-the VIS and ceiling will stay high enough for the flight to be continued without any danger...
The question is:
What is your company policy on this?
One big difference between the US and the European HEMS service are the pilots AND their attitude.
Many HEMS pilots in Europe are experienced Ex-military pilots..so they are experienced enough to cancel a mission before something goes wrong.
I have met many pilots (from different countries) who were talking about how they were flying with VIS less than 400 m to an accident side, then did a landing, and despite clipping a wire on the way back delivered the patient to the hospital..
THAT is the real problem here: Attitude.
Usually, the policy of the operator (in Europe) is to provide Minimum Meteorological Conditions that need to be forecasted before a flight is allowed to take place.
These conditions are usually so high that-even if the weather deteriorates-the VIS and ceiling will stay high enough for the flight to be continued without any danger...
The question is:
What is your company policy on this?
Something to be "proud of"? "Brag" about? No. Just providing background information so that if a conversation ensues, others in the conversation understand my experiences and can feel free to question or provide direction to the conversation. Many don't survive what I experienced. I'd like to help change that. To that end, I welcome all commments.
Yet you refuse to discuss the three IIMC events you have had, what happened to get you into those situations, and what you have done to avoid them since.
Your silly response about amputations and burns tells me that you embrace the "Life Saving" mindset.....which we all know KILLS Crews and Patients.
Your Mission Statement issued by your employer probably reads...."to provide a safe and efficient medical transportation service..." and then mentions something about the quality of care, the service level, training and certification of the Medical crew.
So thus far, my perception of you is not very favorable. You admit to repeated events of IIMC, you talk of saving lives as your mission, and you point the finger at everyone but yourself.
It is good you seek to improve the situation as any professional should. However, so far you have provoked a USA/UK conversation, refused to discuss what happened in your three IIMC's that you report, and offer no information about the "Lessons Learned" you took away from them.
You want to start over and present a professional review of your experiences with IIMC, Lessons Learned, and suggestions for how to improve the Industry's record for CFIT, IIMC fatal crashes? If so we are all prepared to listen....otherwise you will see a very cold reception here. This isn't Just Helicopters where you must hang out when not here.
Crab,
You offer a false argument. There is very little night HEMES in the UK and there have been Fatal Crash(s) by units that perform them. You do recall a Police helicopter that crashed after aborting a night flight in inclement weather when it attempted to land back at its base which had poor lighting and obstructions.
Remember there are over 800 EMS helicopters in the USA....all of which fly at night. There is a huge difference in scale of operations that must be taken into account.
We have all been around the houses on the USA/UK thing.....so could we all please skip that here this time and stick to the generic IIMC and related issues please.
Yet you refuse to discuss the three IIMC events you have had, what happened to get you into those situations, and what you have done to avoid them since.
Your silly response about amputations and burns tells me that you embrace the "Life Saving" mindset.....which we all know KILLS Crews and Patients.
Your Mission Statement issued by your employer probably reads...."to provide a safe and efficient medical transportation service..." and then mentions something about the quality of care, the service level, training and certification of the Medical crew.
So thus far, my perception of you is not very favorable. You admit to repeated events of IIMC, you talk of saving lives as your mission, and you point the finger at everyone but yourself.
It is good you seek to improve the situation as any professional should. However, so far you have provoked a USA/UK conversation, refused to discuss what happened in your three IIMC's that you report, and offer no information about the "Lessons Learned" you took away from them.
You want to start over and present a professional review of your experiences with IIMC, Lessons Learned, and suggestions for how to improve the Industry's record for CFIT, IIMC fatal crashes? If so we are all prepared to listen....otherwise you will see a very cold reception here. This isn't Just Helicopters where you must hang out when not here.
Crab,
You offer a false argument. There is very little night HEMES in the UK and there have been Fatal Crash(s) by units that perform them. You do recall a Police helicopter that crashed after aborting a night flight in inclement weather when it attempted to land back at its base which had poor lighting and obstructions.
Remember there are over 800 EMS helicopters in the USA....all of which fly at night. There is a huge difference in scale of operations that must be taken into account.
We have all been around the houses on the USA/UK thing.....so could we all please skip that here this time and stick to the generic IIMC and related issues please.
Last edited by SASless; 4th Mar 2013 at 12:42.
fly911 there is no room for complacency in aviation. everyone is entitled to 1 IIMC in their career. There is absolutely no excuse to go IIMC twice and third time -I'd have sacked you from my unit without notice
Don't look for rules or devices to mask or support your inadequacy. God help the unit you work for. you are an accident waiting to happen.
Don't look for rules or devices to mask or support your inadequacy. God help the unit you work for. you are an accident waiting to happen.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hueyracer "These conditions are usually so high that-even if the weather deteriorates-the VIS and ceiling will stay high enough for the flight to be continued without any danger..." That is an excellent policy and would probably save lives in the U.S. if instituted. Usually here as long as the FAA minimums are observed, the rest is up to the pilot, depending on his/her comfort level.
SASless, ok. one incident involved night flying from one city to another about 100 miles apart without much in between. Both cities were reporting 3000 feet cloud base. About midway we went IIMC crusing at 2000 feet. I began my scan maintaining straight and level since I was relatively familiar with the route of flight. The medcrew notified me that they observed flickering automobile lights below and frequently reminded me to check altitude. We broke out within about a minute as I was about to contact ATC. I thought a lot about how I could have avoided that encounter. Any suggestions?
SASless, ok. one incident involved night flying from one city to another about 100 miles apart without much in between. Both cities were reporting 3000 feet cloud base. About midway we went IIMC crusing at 2000 feet. I began my scan maintaining straight and level since I was relatively familiar with the route of flight. The medcrew notified me that they observed flickering automobile lights below and frequently reminded me to check altitude. We broke out within about a minute as I was about to contact ATC. I thought a lot about how I could have avoided that encounter. Any suggestions?
Last edited by fly911; 4th Mar 2013 at 18:07.
Sas, that is 1 accident total and I think that aircraft was on police not HEMS duties at the time.
There will be more night HEMS in the UK so we will see what happens but the BIG difference is that the operators are not looking to make a profit - they are funded by charities and will have fully instrumented aircraft, autopilots, 2 engines etc etc - in short, all the things that are not mandated in the US.
I know it is an unfair comparison but the USA is the country with an apparently unsolvable problem with HEMS crashes.
There will be more night HEMS in the UK so we will see what happens but the BIG difference is that the operators are not looking to make a profit - they are funded by charities and will have fully instrumented aircraft, autopilots, 2 engines etc etc - in short, all the things that are not mandated in the US.
I know it is an unfair comparison but the USA is the country with an apparently unsolvable problem with HEMS crashes.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomas Coupling, your juvenile approach of setting the parameters for everyone else's operation and childish comments about what you would do if I worked for you belies your lack of ability to participate in any intelligent discourse. I'm not sure that you possess the intelligence to supervise other pilots beyond yourself. Please don't expect me to respond to your future postings if they contain more of your psychobabble.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,609
Received 467 Likes
on
247 Posts
fly911,
If that was the most memorable and worrying of your IIMC encounters, it immediately highlights the problem. What you describe is a total non-event in a properly equipped IFR aircraft flown by an appropriately IR trained, rated, experienced and current pilot.
From all the arguments I've seen on this forum, and elsewhere, the USA is years behind Europe in this respect (and how they hate anyone pointing it out, which is unavoidable in these discussions). If you try to do a job where IMC is likely, with a VMC budget, sooner or later you'll have IMC related accidents, especially if it's a competitive market. It doesn't matter where you're going, who you're carrying or what you're trying to achieve.
SASless, ok. one incident involved night flying from one city to another about 100 miles apart without much in between. Both cities were reporting 3000 feet cloud base. About midway we went IIMC crusing at 2000 feet. I began my scan maintaining straight and level since I was relatively familiar with the route of flight. The medcrew notified me that they observed flickering automobile lights below and frequently reminded me to check altitude. We broke out within about a minute as I was about to contact ATC. I thought a lot about how I could have avoided that encounter. Any suggestions?
From all the arguments I've seen on this forum, and elsewhere, the USA is years behind Europe in this respect (and how they hate anyone pointing it out, which is unavoidable in these discussions). If you try to do a job where IMC is likely, with a VMC budget, sooner or later you'll have IMC related accidents, especially if it's a competitive market. It doesn't matter where you're going, who you're carrying or what you're trying to achieve.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Just to add fuel to the fire -
Unless you're over a built-up area with lots of lighting, there is no such things as VFR at night. You should treat it as IMC (or IFR, if you want to be picky).
The logic is that you need to be able to orient the aircraft's attitude and height with respect to the ground (or water), and at night, you just can't do that.
Plus, you can't see the bad weather coming until it's too late....
Unless you're over a built-up area with lots of lighting, there is no such things as VFR at night. You should treat it as IMC (or IFR, if you want to be picky).
The logic is that you need to be able to orient the aircraft's attitude and height with respect to the ground (or water), and at night, you just can't do that.
Plus, you can't see the bad weather coming until it's too late....
"Just a pilot"
Thomas Coupling said:
"fly911 there is no room for complacency in aviation. everyone is entitled to 1 IIMC in their career. There is absolutely no excuse to go IIMC twice and third time -I'd have sacked you from my unit without notice
Don't look for rules or devices to mask or support your inadequacy. God help the unit you work for. you are an accident waiting to happen."
The statement of "1 IIMC per career, etc." can't pass unremarked. It is false, arrogance or ignorance, but in any way, it is wrong.
"fly911 there is no room for complacency in aviation. everyone is entitled to 1 IIMC in their career. There is absolutely no excuse to go IIMC twice and third time -I'd have sacked you from my unit without notice
Don't look for rules or devices to mask or support your inadequacy. God help the unit you work for. you are an accident waiting to happen."
The statement of "1 IIMC per career, etc." can't pass unremarked. It is false, arrogance or ignorance, but in any way, it is wrong.
"Just a pilot"
One can indeed fly VFR at night completely without cultural lighting. There is no challenge for a sound pilot to do so with adequate visibility and celestial lighting. Period.
One should be properly trained to do this, it is not the same physiologically as day VFR flight. One should also carefully factor in meteorological considerations, weather processes manifest differently at night. But, if there is no weather to "see", it can not be a factor.
One should be properly trained to do this, it is not the same physiologically as day VFR flight. One should also carefully factor in meteorological considerations, weather processes manifest differently at night. But, if there is no weather to "see", it can not be a factor.
Read your Part 135 lately?
Better check your OpSpecs as well.
I do believe you find surface lighting to be a requirement.
That is different from Part 91....and way too many EMS Pilots violate that Regulation. In many parts of the Country...it rules out Night VFR as there are no surface lights.
Do you comply with that Regulation?
When using NVG's....is there a Waiver so Surface Lights are not required?
Better check your OpSpecs as well.
I do believe you find surface lighting to be a requirement.
§ 135.207 VFR: Helicopter surface reference requirements.
No person may operate a helicopter under VFR unless that person has visual surface reference or, at night, visual surface light reference, sufficient to safely control the helicopter.
No person may operate a helicopter under VFR unless that person has visual surface reference or, at night, visual surface light reference, sufficient to safely control the helicopter.
Do you comply with that Regulation?
When using NVG's....is there a Waiver so Surface Lights are not required?
Last edited by SASless; 5th Mar 2013 at 00:51.
The conundrum of legality and safety. Some think they go together. 
Your NAA covers legality - safety is your problem.
Your NAA covers legality - safety is your problem.
Last edited by RVDT; 5th Mar 2013 at 03:45.
I would be quite comfortable with the surface illuminated by moonlight: wouldn't you? Clear skies, bright stars, no cloud all contribute along with a clearly defined horizon and a positive visual navigation fix to confirm your position en route.
Or is that too simple?
It does seem a poorly worded regulation - perhaps it is flaunted because it is open to interpretation.
As John says, the surface (land) reflecting bright moonlight is more than sufficient to maintain attitude and orientation whereas the same lighting over a flat calm sea might not.
A single point light source on the land (especially on a dark night) is not enough to maintain attitude and orientation (autokinesis) but it would seem to meet the stipulated criteria.
A combination of a visual horizon and sufficient visible features on the ground is what is really required for safe night VFR flight - so why doesn't the rule say so?
As John says, the surface (land) reflecting bright moonlight is more than sufficient to maintain attitude and orientation whereas the same lighting over a flat calm sea might not.
A single point light source on the land (especially on a dark night) is not enough to maintain attitude and orientation (autokinesis) but it would seem to meet the stipulated criteria.
A combination of a visual horizon and sufficient visible features on the ground is what is really required for safe night VFR flight - so why doesn't the rule say so?
devil49: I meant it in a philosophical way. I meant that IF one accidentally experienced IIMC then this should be used as a basis for building safeguards against a repeat performance.
SAS has it right again - re read the rules, you cannot fly without visual reference to a light source sufficient to keep you safe. I think the missing words here are: COMMON SENSE.
How can anyone transit at night between cities/towns where there is no ambient light and do it under VFR/VMC?
SAS has it right again - re read the rules, you cannot fly without visual reference to a light source sufficient to keep you safe. I think the missing words here are: COMMON SENSE.
How can anyone transit at night between cities/towns where there is no ambient light and do it under VFR/VMC?
Moonlight is ambient light: I have no problem flying between our widely spaced towns by the "ambient light" of the moon, often for long distances. 50-100nm would not be unusual, with a good moon and a visible horizon, once outside the built up areas of Australia.
Sea pilot transfers here have been carried out NVFR in SE helicopters for many years: that is an area where they do not always conform to a good visual horizon since the pilot transfer requirement is day in/day out, with no regard for the state of the moon and thus the "ambient light". Akin to the issues that the USA has with their HEMS operations, maybe?