Wollongong fatal crash March 2013
Thread Starter
What happened
At about 1207 local time on 21 March 2013, a Robinson Helicopter Company R44 helicopter (R44), registered VH-HWQ, was manoeuvring at a grassed area at Bulli Tops, New South Wales. Shortly after landing, the helicopter lifted off and turned to the right. The main rotor struck branches of a nearby tree, and the helicopter descended and then rolled over onto its right side. A fire started on the grass under the rotor mast and the cabin. The pilot and the three passengers were fatally injured.
At about 1207 local time on 21 March 2013, a Robinson Helicopter Company R44 helicopter (R44), registered VH-HWQ, was manoeuvring at a grassed area at Bulli Tops, New South Wales. Shortly after landing, the helicopter lifted off and turned to the right. The main rotor struck branches of a nearby tree, and the helicopter descended and then rolled over onto its right side. A fire started on the grass under the rotor mast and the cabin. The pilot and the three passengers were fatally injured.
) or orographic lifting. Yes, I have operated there and from a landing to the hover should not be influenced by any local conditions.
via as350nut:
...The interesting thing will be the next accident where the tank is ruptured and the fuel bladder is intact and no fire, that will be the proof needed.
...The interesting thing will be the next accident where the tank is ruptured and the fuel bladder is intact and no fire, that will be the proof needed.
http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/3899970...-016_final.pdf
Last edited by Flying Binghi; 6th Apr 2013 at 04:42. Reason: correct link
Flying Binghi
Its with interest and sadness that I note the date of the report showing that in fact fuel bladders do work is 30/4/12. Sad because its only now; 3/4/2013, that a Airworthiness Bulletin ( still not an AD) is released stating in effect that the Service Bulletin and the date for tanks to be fitted with bladders is to be adhered to and in effect its not legal to fly after 30 April 2013. I know that reminders have been sent out but there are a lot of commercial operators and others who resist or lag behind on SB and only act on AD's. I've been offered for sale and in fact bought machines that haven't had all SB's up to date. Great to see though that fuel bladders seem to work. Service Bulletin below refers:
http://casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/airworth/awb/02/044.pdf
http://casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/airworth/awb/02/044.pdf
Thread Starter
Its with interest and sadness that I note the date of the report showing that in fact fuel bladders do work is 30/4/12. Sad because its only now; 3/4/2013, that a Airworthiness Bulletin ( still not an AD) is released stating in effect that the Service Bulletin and the date for tanks to be fitted with bladders is to be adhered to and in effect its not legal to fly after 30 April 2013. I know that reminders have been sent out but there are a lot of commercial operators and others who resist or lag behind on SB and only act on AD's.
On 26 June 2012, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) issued Airworthiness Bulletin (AWB) AWB 28-012 titled Robinson R44 Fuel Tanks. That AWB highlights the improvement in the 'post-crash survivability' of R44 helicopters that had been fitted with bladder-type fuel tanks. The AWB refers to a Robinson Helicopter Company Service Bulletin SB-78 that, depending on the Maintenance schedule affecting the individual helicopter, required the fitment of a bladder-type tank to all R44 and R44 II helicopters.
In October 2012, Robinson Helicopter Company brought forward the compliance date for SB-78B for affected R44 and R44 II helicopters to 30 April 2013. Given the reduced compliance time, on 5 February 2013 CASA sent a letter to all R44 operators recommending the installation of the bladder tanks and highlighting their responsibilities under regulation 42A(4) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (the CAR).
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day John,
In no particular defence of Robinson, they did issue a SB on the 20th December 2010, and did offer many owners, including me, a cost reduction (USD1,000 I think ?) for actioning the SB.
http://www.robinsonheli.com/srvclib/r44sb78.pdf
There has been plenty of time for users to act on this, it is after all April 2013.
That said, and I have said this prior, whilst there have been now 3 horrendous accidents involving fires with crashed R44's (in Aus), there were also 2 others, the AS350 B3 at Bankstown and the Twin Squirrel at Lake Eyre...even with "safe" fuel storage systems, both of these aircraft burned to the ground.
Arrrj
In no particular defence of Robinson, they did issue a SB on the 20th December 2010, and did offer many owners, including me, a cost reduction (USD1,000 I think ?) for actioning the SB.
http://www.robinsonheli.com/srvclib/r44sb78.pdf
There has been plenty of time for users to act on this, it is after all April 2013.
That said, and I have said this prior, whilst there have been now 3 horrendous accidents involving fires with crashed R44's (in Aus), there were also 2 others, the AS350 B3 at Bankstown and the Twin Squirrel at Lake Eyre...even with "safe" fuel storage systems, both of these aircraft burned to the ground.
Arrrj
John Eacott
Fair enough John, maybe I don't understand how the Sb/AD system works but in my mind "proactive" would mean CASA mandating the tanks well before this. But I am happy to be corrected and bow to your superior knowledge.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think John SB's should be regarded as one would a very stern long haired friend, disregard at your peril.
I think Robinson could have been more proactive and advised each countries regulatory bodies; a) how many R44's there are, and b) when the parts will all be avbl.
Just procedural for CASA I think, unless they were proactive and hounded the factory and or FAA, nothing stopping them doing that I guess and maybe they did.
I don't have any problems with the grounding order, plenty other aircraft types been grounded for various reasons over the years.
Convincing photos Binjhi.
I think Robinson could have been more proactive and advised each countries regulatory bodies; a) how many R44's there are, and b) when the parts will all be avbl.
Just procedural for CASA I think, unless they were proactive and hounded the factory and or FAA, nothing stopping them doing that I guess and maybe they did.
I don't have any problems with the grounding order, plenty other aircraft types been grounded for various reasons over the years.
Convincing photos Binjhi.
I am interested if the pilot who chartered the R44 new of the potential problem.
I don't fly R44s but new of the risk as I had followed news reports of the other accidents.
If I was going to charter such a helicopter model I would ask if the mod had been done and then make my decision based on the level of risk I was prepared to accept. It's called being responsible for ones own actions.
As to the passengers- there was a CASA safety brochure which explained clearly how passengers flying with private pilots should make their safety decisions .
If CASA has to make all safety decisions on behalf of individuals there would probably be a lot less flying taking place.
I don't fly R44s but new of the risk as I had followed news reports of the other accidents.
If I was going to charter such a helicopter model I would ask if the mod had been done and then make my decision based on the level of risk I was prepared to accept. It's called being responsible for ones own actions.
As to the passengers- there was a CASA safety brochure which explained clearly how passengers flying with private pilots should make their safety decisions .
If CASA has to make all safety decisions on behalf of individuals there would probably be a lot less flying taking place.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was going to charter such a helicopter model I would ask if the mod had been done and then make my decision based on the level of risk I was prepared to accept. It's called being responsible for ones own actions.
As to the passengers- there was a CASA safety brochure which explained clearly how passengers flying with private pilots should make their safety decisions .
Cheers tet.
Hey Ag-Rotor with these Flimsy types, it's a given that more will continue to fall-apart in-flight
Mickjoebill
Last edited by mickjoebill; 7th Apr 2013 at 23:13.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we can only continue to grumble that the comparably poor crash worthiness of light helicopter airframes is unacceptable
I hope you do not include the H500 type in that statement.
mickjoebill
Last edited by mickjoebill; 13th Apr 2013 at 05:40.
