AS332L2 Ditching off Shetland: 23rd August 2013
FAI
There is always major confusion about FAI. This is partly because there are only 5 million of us, and of course mainly because most people learn most of what little they know about law from watching second rate TV.
FAI are held for specific reasons. In many cases of sudden death, if the Procurator Fiscal can readily establish why the deceased person died then there will often be no reason for an FAI. For instance, that is why FAI are rarely held for mountain accidents.
Principally, they are held if someone dies at work or in custody. Also, if the death is suspicious or unexplained. There may be public interest reasons.
In the case of a North Sea helicopter accident, UKCS Scotland, if anyone dies as a result, we can expect an FAI because all POB are there in the course of their work.
Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976,
Section 6, (1), specifies the form of the resulting determination.
(a) where and when the death and any accident resulting in the death took place;
(b) the cause or causes of such death and any accident resulting in the death;
(c) the reasonable precautions, if any, whereby the death and any accident resulting in the death might have been avoided;
(d) the defects, if any, in any system of working which contributed to the death or any accident resulting in the death; and
(e) any other facts which are relevant to the circumstances of the death.
It's a presentation and examination of a detailed investigation by a PF so that the state can establish important facts about a death. It's not a race to a finish line and it's not going to be hijacked.
Although often interesting in the way that every nuance of the situation is laid out for examination, in the end they result in a set of dry and often unremarkable facts.
FAI are held for specific reasons. In many cases of sudden death, if the Procurator Fiscal can readily establish why the deceased person died then there will often be no reason for an FAI. For instance, that is why FAI are rarely held for mountain accidents.
Principally, they are held if someone dies at work or in custody. Also, if the death is suspicious or unexplained. There may be public interest reasons.
In the case of a North Sea helicopter accident, UKCS Scotland, if anyone dies as a result, we can expect an FAI because all POB are there in the course of their work.
Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976,
Section 6, (1), specifies the form of the resulting determination.
(a) where and when the death and any accident resulting in the death took place;
(b) the cause or causes of such death and any accident resulting in the death;
(c) the reasonable precautions, if any, whereby the death and any accident resulting in the death might have been avoided;
(d) the defects, if any, in any system of working which contributed to the death or any accident resulting in the death; and
(e) any other facts which are relevant to the circumstances of the death.
It's a presentation and examination of a detailed investigation by a PF so that the state can establish important facts about a death. It's not a race to a finish line and it's not going to be hijacked.
Although often interesting in the way that every nuance of the situation is laid out for examination, in the end they result in a set of dry and often unremarkable facts.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Les Linklater from the HSSG:
Audioboo / Les Linklater from the Helicopter Safety Steering Group on Superpumas return to flight.
Audioboo / Les Linklater from the Helicopter Safety Steering Group on Superpumas return to flight.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listen to the offshore worker who refuses to go on a SP presently - used to only having 13 / 14 on board but now chokkablok with 19 and he fears for an easy egress. L2 windows and seating arrangement ....... just an observation.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question
Just a question....hypothetical and all that
If it turns out to be CFIT, no petrol, pilot error etc (rather than technical) , where does it leave Bob Crowe and his union? Would his union file suit against the pilots who might belong to another union (BALPA for example).
Or would he still deem it the fault of 'The Management'....?
If it turns out to be CFIT, no petrol, pilot error etc (rather than technical) , where does it leave Bob Crowe and his union? Would his union file suit against the pilots who might belong to another union (BALPA for example).
Or would he still deem it the fault of 'The Management'....?
Listening to the audio....I understand all is safe now as the Oil Company, the Helicopter Operators, and the Authority have all reviewed their processes and procedures and have concluded the folks offshore working over due to the Super Puma groundings....need to get home.
There...done...finished....and whenever the AAIB gets around to it...all will deal with that report as all the earlier reports have been dealt with.
So ya'll just get back to work....put your irrational fears and concerns behind you and move along....there is nothing to see here.
Did I summarize that correctly?
There...done...finished....and whenever the AAIB gets around to it...all will deal with that report as all the earlier reports have been dealt with.
So ya'll just get back to work....put your irrational fears and concerns behind you and move along....there is nothing to see here.
Did I summarize that correctly?
.
No you didn't.
The two last sentences of the HSSG :
"However it suggests that given the sensitivities around the accident, the L2 fleet should only initially return to non-revenue operations.
Additionally it mandates an independent review into offshore helicopter transportation."
Safety group lifts Super Puma flight ban
.
No you didn't.
The two last sentences of the HSSG :
"However it suggests that given the sensitivities around the accident, the L2 fleet should only initially return to non-revenue operations.
Additionally it mandates an independent review into offshore helicopter transportation."
Safety group lifts Super Puma flight ban
.
It also notes no reaction from either EASA or the UK Civil Aviation Authority "which positively affirms that there are no safety reasons that support a suspension of flying".
Knowing how quickly the UK CAA is to arrive at a decision...and its reluctance to assume responsibility however indirectly on issues that could come back to bite its corporate butt....the lack of a response by the CAA comes at no great surprise does it?
Assuming the lack of response is a response seems a bit dodgy in my mind.
However it suggests that given the sensitivities around the accident, the L2 fleet should only initially return to non-revenue operations.
So they are saying no Revenue flying for the SP series?
How does that get the Work Overs home in a timely manner?
Last edited by SASless; 29th Aug 2013 at 21:08.
I stand corrected.....perhaps my Cold Medicine is stronger than advertised. It warned against operating machinery and driving automobiles. but not a word on thinking ability.
But the good news is that they are mandating an independant review of offshore helicopter transportation.
Mind you, it doesn't say what sort of review, maybe a review of why the oil companies have to pay so much for those darn helis, and how to do it cheaper?
Mind you, it doesn't say what sort of review, maybe a review of why the oil companies have to pay so much for those darn helis, and how to do it cheaper?
A number I have heard thrown around about the Oil Companies is their total Transportation budget....Tankers, Trucks, Gulfstream jets, Helicopters, limo's....is 2% of their total operating costs. If we consider the helicopter costs out of that 2% budget....knowing how small that amount is compared to all the other Transportation modes....we are not really talking about a huge amount of budget. Assume just a 10% increase in "helicopter" costs....that remains a small up tick in the total transportation cost.
Rex Tillerson, Head Wallah at EXXON, last year pulled down a cool 35 Million Dollars in Compensation......so that should put things into perspective a bit.
The EXXON Annual Report for 2012 reported an After Tax Earnings of 44.88 Billion Dollars.
I suggest there is some room for spending a bit more on helicopter safety if they really cared to do so.
That is just one Oil Company mind you.
2013 may not be as good as 2012.....
Rex Tillerson, Head Wallah at EXXON, last year pulled down a cool 35 Million Dollars in Compensation......so that should put things into perspective a bit.
The EXXON Annual Report for 2012 reported an After Tax Earnings of 44.88 Billion Dollars.
I suggest there is some room for spending a bit more on helicopter safety if they really cared to do so.
That is just one Oil Company mind you.
2013 may not be as good as 2012.....
Last edited by SASless; 29th Aug 2013 at 22:37.
HC
Do you think my point about overuse of the autopilot functions, in benign conditions, versus making sure that stick skills are maintained may have perhaps been reaffirmed by this latest accident? (assuming a/c was f/s as it entered water)
HF
Do you think my point about overuse of the autopilot functions, in benign conditions, versus making sure that stick skills are maintained may have perhaps been reaffirmed by this latest accident? (assuming a/c was f/s as it entered water)
HF
No, not at all (although of course we don't know the circumstances yet). We don't know if the approach was being flown manually, coupled, partially coupled, and why the pilots may not have noticed the loss of speed and descent. Lets have the discussion once we know more.
But basically, I suspect that the primary missing skill was a failure to monitor. Are you suggesting that they saw the sea coming up but were too de-skilled to know they should pull up the collective and restore some speed?
But basically, I suspect that the primary missing skill was a failure to monitor. Are you suggesting that they saw the sea coming up but were too de-skilled to know they should pull up the collective and restore some speed?
Last edited by HeliComparator; 29th Aug 2013 at 22:45.
HC
I agree let's wait til we know the full details - however I believe that monitoring/flying are the same thing if you can't interpret what the instruments are telling you because you believe the autopilot is doing the right thing then you can reach a state where the a/c momentum can't be overcome in the height available.
HF
I agree let's wait til we know the full details - however I believe that monitoring/flying are the same thing if you can't interpret what the instruments are telling you because you believe the autopilot is doing the right thing then you can reach a state where the a/c momentum can't be overcome in the height available.
HF
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Thompson Airline research
Thompsons experienced a couple of serious incidents during 'go arounds' and decided to investigate further. They found that by using 'eye-tracking' technology during their sim training and testing over a period of months they were able to understand that many of their pilots had little or no structure or discipline to their instrument scan.
I see on a regular basis the impact that the change from dials to flat screen PFD/MFD has on pilot performance. In some cases, especially at the beginning the pilots literally cannot see (find) the data they are looking for and they are swamped by a plethora of information to the extent that it's no wonder that they have not developed a disciplined scan - unless they are taught to do so and shown how during their training. Were you taught what to look at when when you did your last training course ? or were you left to teach yourself?
The L2 may not have flat screens but the Thompson experience may be pointing a finger at a deficiency that is widespread amongst all pilots whether they be fixed or rotary wing.
G.
I see on a regular basis the impact that the change from dials to flat screen PFD/MFD has on pilot performance. In some cases, especially at the beginning the pilots literally cannot see (find) the data they are looking for and they are swamped by a plethora of information to the extent that it's no wonder that they have not developed a disciplined scan - unless they are taught to do so and shown how during their training. Were you taught what to look at when when you did your last training course ? or were you left to teach yourself?
The L2 may not have flat screens but the Thompson experience may be pointing a finger at a deficiency that is widespread amongst all pilots whether they be fixed or rotary wing.
G.
Geoffers,
I know my first good look at an all digital flat screen Cockpit made me understand what a Dog watching Television feels like.
I know my first good look at an all digital flat screen Cockpit made me understand what a Dog watching Television feels like.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ganddal, Norway
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The experience of changing from good ol`steam gauges to smaller crt`s and onwards to large flatscreens can be difficult for anyone. My local flying club has seen issues/incidents with the G1000 C172 repeated over and over by pilots coming from the classic version, escpesially hard landings (by experienced pilots as well as rookies!).
Even in the train operator world has this been an issue, where lcd screens are taking over a majority of the information being displayed (like the new Stadler Flirt), scanning them correctly requires more training then the steam gauge Bm69.
The human brain can go quite numb if presented with too much info at once without knowing how to prioritize.
For the pilots sake, I hope they did everything correctly.
Even in the train operator world has this been an issue, where lcd screens are taking over a majority of the information being displayed (like the new Stadler Flirt), scanning them correctly requires more training then the steam gauge Bm69.
The human brain can go quite numb if presented with too much info at once without knowing how to prioritize.
For the pilots sake, I hope they did everything correctly.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England... what's left of it...
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The unfavourable comments about glass cockpits in general are very valid. What a retrograde step. Mostly mixed, random, messy and counterintuitive, totally at odds with how a human seeks and isolates information. If users need training in how to glean/extract vital information from a "Display" (further to regular IFR scanning), then what does that say?