Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

AS332L2 Ditching off Shetland: 23rd August 2013

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

AS332L2 Ditching off Shetland: 23rd August 2013

Old 16th Sep 2013, 19:47
  #1761 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 155
Recent......extract from Skybary:

"The term monitoring actually comes from the Latin root ‘Monere’ to warn and in the context of flight operations it is defined as:
The observation and interpretation of the flight path data, configuration status, automation modes and on-board systems appropriate to the phase of flight. It involves a cognitive comparison against the expected values, modes and procedures. It also includes observation of the other crew member and timely intervention in the event of deviation."


No hard and fast rules for when to intervene - common sense I guess - and please don't mention that there was a CCG in these modern times of self-awareness?

There go by the grace of God go I (?)
JulieAndrews is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2013, 21:14
  #1762 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 63
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by keithl View Post
As you know, CDFA provides for "nominal vertical guidance", which can be no more than the standard ALT vs DME table - and therefore wouldn't have provided any extra protection to the accident we're discussing.
Probably true since the heli ran out of steam whilst still descending on the approach. But with dive and drive, the heli will have to level out at MDA, thus if coupled in 3 axis on VS and then ALT, a collective increase must be made on level off to prevent speed decay, whereas with CDFA there is no level sector.

Of course, not being coupled in 3 axes and especially not with VS / ALT is a good way to stay safe, but CDFA seems to be another string to that bow.

One has to wonder if, flying a pretty straightforward NPA is beyond some pilots's capabilities (thinking of the accident stats posted earlier, not this specific one), then how would they cope with the harder bit - getting in to the runway when suddenly becoming visual near the MAPt of, say, a VOR half way up the runway whilst still at the MDA and doing say 100kts.

I don't really see the argument against CDFA?
HeliComparator is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2013, 21:30
  #1763 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Age: 73
Posts: 495
I'm not totally against CDFA, HC, I believe it is one of those things that does no harm, but I think doesn't necessarily do any good. Particularly for helicopters as opposed to FW.

I'm off now, but if people are still interested in 2 weeks, I will elaborate then.

The argument was 30 - 40% of CFIT accidents were from NPAs. This is true for FW but, while I'm away, let everyone find a helicopter CFIT from NPA to discuss. This one, yes, but that's not 30%. Be careful not to include visual manoeuvring following an NPA.

Last edited by keithl; 16th Sep 2013 at 21:37.
keithl is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2013, 22:14
  #1764 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,537
One has to wonder if, flying a pretty straightforward NPA is beyond some pilots's capabilities (thinking of the accident stats posted earlier, not this specific one), then how would they cope with the harder bit - getting in to the runway when suddenly becoming visual near the MAPt of, say, a VOR half way up the runway whilst still at the MDA and doing say 100kts.

Why not use Vy or the minimum IMC airspeed for an approach and slow down well out on the final approach segment?

You are flying a helicopter remember.
SASless is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2013, 22:35
  #1765 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 63
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
Why not use Vy or the minimum IMC airspeed for an approach and slow down well out on the final approach segment?

You are flying a helicopter remember.
Slowing below Vy seems a bad idea to me - on the back of the drag curve its very easy to lose too much speed. Then the regulatos will want to know what you will do if an engine fails in IMC below Vy, etc etc.

Personally I think even slowing to Vy can be too much if there is a significant crosswind, since the drift angle can become significant, resulting in pilots looking in the wrong place for the lights and possibly rendering one pilot unsighted at the moment its decided to go visual.

Yes, a helicopter can do both these things but the primary aim should be a safe landing somewhere, not a landing at the nominated destination but with reduced safety margin.

Aggressive visual manoeuvring at low speed in marginal weather (big flare to slow down) just seems a recipe for disaster, and for what benefit?
HeliComparator is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 06:19
  #1766 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 57
Posts: 1,213
212 - that PFD screen is the worst ergonomic display I have ever seen. What aircraft is it from??? Or it is from a computer game.

It took me a full half hour to figure out where the everything was and still not clear where the RADALT and bug settings are on the display???

Why is the VSI not in the PFD scan area or can it be moved??

Last edited by DOUBLE BOGEY; 17th Sep 2013 at 06:22.
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 07:06
  #1767 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Norwich
Posts: 237
Is a Night Approach considered a NPA?? Certainly, when you look at CFIT in the offshore world, Night Approach, ARA and now an onshore Non Precision Approach are all incidents with similar hallmarks.
Special 25 is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 08:57
  #1768 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Nigeria
Age: 53
Posts: 4,599
212 - that PFD screen is the worst ergonomic display I have ever seen. What aircraft is it from??? Or it is from a computer game.
I assume you are joking when expressing your apparent ignorance about the type?

Regardless, I cannot but agree with you about the ergonomics and I have had many heated discussions with the OEM about them, that go back 7 years!
212man is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 09:02
  #1769 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 57
Posts: 1,213
212 Man no honestly I have no idea, is it the S92??

Apologies if I sound a bit I'm but I do not gt out much!!
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 09:24
  #1770 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Nigeria
Age: 53
Posts: 4,599
DB - yes, it is.
212man is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 09:29
  #1771 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 57
Posts: 1,213
Holy Molly I have heard some negatives about it before but never realised how bad it was. Looks like a Kid has gone nuts with a box of crayons!!

One technical Q though. The P. R. C. Indication on the AFCS annunciation strip, is shoung "Collective" in the RH AFCS Annunciator?? Which seems illogical.


DB

Last edited by DOUBLE BOGEY; 17th Sep 2013 at 09:31.
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 09:41
  #1772 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Nigeria
Age: 53
Posts: 4,599
The P. R. C. Indication on the AFCS annunciation strip, is shoung "Collective" in the RH AFCS Annunciator?? Which seems illogical.
Depends what logic process you apply, I guess. EC seem to use the logic that the collective is physically on the left, but on the PFD you could equally argue that the functions to which it pertains - ALT, V/S and G/S - are all on the right.

the AFCS annunciation strip
One thing I introduced a while back, and tried to get the OEM to adopt too, is the use of the expression FMA - Flight Mode Annunciator. It is absolutely the standard expression used accross all the FW manufacturers, operators and other bodies (just look at the guidance on level busts, or NPAs). Every RW manufacturer has a different term for it (SAC call it the PFD header strip!) and consequently operators have no standard term too.
212man is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 09:55
  #1773 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 57
Posts: 1,213
212 yes I agree. The FMA is a better term. Airbus usethis too. Try saying "AFCS Annuciation Strip" intheheat of battle or 100 times a day.

I am intrigued though about the Collective Mode logics.

In EC the logic. C. YR. P. are the VERTICAL. LATERAL. LONGITUDINAL. axis and the MODES are assigned to the relevant axis making it clear which flight control is doing what.

However, during AFCS systems based training, quality time spent demonstrating these logics and display presentations I think lies at the heart of understanding fully the operation of the AFCS.

I have an open mind but when the "C" is on the right my small swede is confused.

DB
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 10:35
  #1774 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 4,683
then how would they cope with the harder bit - getting in to the runway when suddenly becoming visual near the MAPt of, say, a VOR half way up the runway whilst still at the MDA and doing say 100kts.
Thousands of fixed wing pilots seem to manage this without coming to the hover, You may well be flying a helicopter but the approach is designed and certified for a fixed wing aircraft. Why make things difficult at Vy when there are thousands of metres of concrete at the end to stop it in.

Last edited by Fareastdriver; 17th Sep 2013 at 12:37.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 14:43
  #1775 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a figment of my imagination
Posts: 116
FW drivers add 400m to the RVR/CMV when using the 'dive and drive' method. Except for circling approaches.
Kakpipe Cosmonaut is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 17:01
  #1776 (permalink)  
GJM
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Space
Posts: 22
'What we do know is that a helicopter ended up in the drink with both engines operative'

Does that categorically mean the Heli still had enough fuel?

I mean you can run off the road on a car with fuel in the lines still pulling you until impact but that doesn't mean it can take you another 10 miles.

How accurate are the gauges, does inaccurate weights have much of an impact.

From my time offshore in the past, the truth is figures passed on weights are rarely accurate
GJM is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 17:17
  #1777 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,753
Originally Posted by GJM View Post
Does that categorically mean the Heli still had enough fuel?
If there had been an issue with fuel quantities, there would have been a PAN and then a MAYDAY declared (depending on planned and actual fuel loads).

It has already been reported (on day one), that there was not even a MAYDAY call.
Bravo73 is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 17:26
  #1778 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 63
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by Fareastdriver View Post
when there are thousands of metres of concrete at the end to stop it in.
If only there were!
HeliComparator is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 17:29
  #1779 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 63
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by GJM View Post
'What we do know is that a helicopter ended up in the drink with both engines operative'

Does that categorically mean the Heli still had enough fuel?

I mean you can run off the road on a car with fuel in the lines still pulling you until impact but that doesn't mean it can take you another 10 miles.

How accurate are the gauges, does inaccurate weights have much of an impact.

From my time offshore in the past, the truth is figures passed on weights are rarely accurate
Have you actually read the interim AAIB report? Clearly it hadn't run out of fuel. Anyway, we know that Sumburgh was the destination and they were carrying fuel for an alternate.
HeliComparator is offline  
Old 17th Sep 2013, 17:37
  #1780 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Age: 59
Posts: 19
GJM ,Shut up.
JA. last line is so true.
Etap was not CFIT(W) not with the high ROD and high Q.
Fly into a hill when you think you are somewhere else is CFIT.
Did the crew start to recover too late! Level in pitch right wing low. Nose down dump the pole.
Lets not forget it's a crash not a ditching ( not CFIT(w) ) A Crash!
How do we move on and try to reduce the risk?
OMONEZ is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.