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 19th Sep 2013, 19:22
  #1821 (permalink)  

That's Life!!
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Out of the sand pit, carving a path through our jungle.
Age: 67
Posts: 396
I can recall a 234 driver coming back to Aberdeen when the weather was a tad 'iffy'. As most of Scotland was the same, he declared his diversion was Paris!
Sailor Vee is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2013, 19:38
  #1822 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 63
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
HC,

If one sets the RadAlt but to 150/100/50 feet....pick your choice....does the helicopter know the difference between CAT 1, 2, 3 etc?

I should think that fancy 225 Autopilot you slavishly praise to us constantly would quite happily drive the machine to whatever height you selected.....would it not?

Would it not hold the Airspeed you select as well?

We know it would magically track the localizer to a gnats reared as well.
The 225 ILS system is quite capable of delivering the heli to 80' at 30 kts IAS, from which it can be beeped down to 30'. However the rules don't allow it to be used below the system minimum of 200'. To get down to 150' would be CAT 2, requires an operational approval from CAA and recurrent training every 6 months. And not even sure that Aberdeen is approved for CAT 2? Certainly other minor airports aren't.

So (and this directed to HF as well) it is not just about what tricks the heli can perform, it is what is allowed under the operational regulations and what has been certified. To certify such a system would have to take account of failure modes - ie if the heli was entering an auto-hover over the runway in IMC what would the pilots do if it stopped working - how would they even know if it stopped working until there was a crunch. So in all probability it is less about the money for certification, and more about whether such use is certifiable at all.

When flying an ILS in the 225, for Bristow it is SOP to leave the ILS coupled at DA if visual. The ILS system then takes the heli down to level flight at 80' on the localiser and the pilot beeps the speed well down. The aircraft handles this perfectly every time, and it eases workload in the sometimes tricky transition to visual flight with substantial speed reduction. BUT this can only be done if the pilots have the required visual references at and below DA. Thus they can monitor against visual references and take manual control if necessary (though it never is!).
HeliComparator is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2013, 20:00
  #1823 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,537
HC.....so we in the helicopter industry are still playing by Rules put in place for Fixed Wing Aircraft are we not?

When I suggested a "Shields Down" review of how we have gotten to where we are.....a process of evolution in reality.....the amazing capability of modern technology is still limited by 1950's regulations.

Should the Authorities take a fresh view of the Rules and Regulations that pertain to Helicopters that evolved from those created for fixed wing aircraft?

How about Point in Space IFR Approaches.....could there not be a place for them and even Helicopter Only Low Level IFR airway routes?

A dear friend and colleague of yours has been advocating that for many years and laid out such a system to the FAA which like most authorities gave the concept scant attention.

Helicopters are very different in their handling abilities than are Airplanes. Why should there not be a separate set of Regulations and Infrastructure for us rather than trying to replicate fixed wing concepts?
SASless is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2013, 20:17
  #1824 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 4,683
Ideally we would have separate routes and separate approach patterns for helicopters. They then could use their attributes and their unique equipment. However at the moment we use fixed wing certified approach aids and runways and we have to share them with our fixed wing brethren.

You cannot come down an approach at Vy and come to the hover at the threshold with a radar controller feeding fixed wing into the approach at two minute intervals behind you. You have to go with the flow. That's why we did 140 knot approaches at Hong Kong. (In a S76)
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2013, 20:30
  #1825 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,537
AT West Palm Beach one evening....Approach asked a 727 to increase speed on final as he had a Helicopter overtaking him.

The Airline Pilot said he would add ten knots......two minutes later he was asked if he could speed up a bit more.....and when the Controller again said it was because a Helicopter was overtaking him......he asked "What the hell kind of a helicopter is it?"

I chimed in and said ....." A very fast one!"

We were smoking down the chute at Vne.

Flying brand new 76's at the factory had its perks!
SASless is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2013, 21:09
  #1826 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Aberdeenshire
Age: 72
Posts: 66
Originally Posted by obnoxio f*ckwit View Post
Aberdeen-Magnus-Aberdeen direct both ways loses its appeal very quickly!
Used to do Aberdeen-Bruce and Bruce-Aberdeen regularly, so I can tell you that being stuck in the back of a SP for nearly 2 hours dressed up like the Michelin man is not much fun either. I would hate to do the round trip in one go, so you have my sympathies.

We sometimes used to call in at Longside on the way out for a top up of fuel, but that seemed to have stopped before I left. Is Longside still used as a fuel top-up or diversion airfield?

On the visibility issue, I worked in the North Sea for about 30 years, and it was a rare occasion that we were delayed due to weather.
OffshoreSLF is offline  
Old 19th Sep 2013, 21:34
  #1827 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 71
Aberdeen-Magnus-Aberdeen direct both ways loses its appeal very quickly!
You're not wrong there! So does Aberdeen-Brent-Aberdeen followed by Aberdeen-Fulmar-Aberdeen. Used to do them in the BV234LR, not much fun at all.

And yes it was possible to use Paris as an alt from the basin, with full fuel, few or no pax, a strong following wind and flying at altitude nose bleed to keep the fuel flow down.

Anyway,enough reminiscing, back on topic you lot this is a very good informative thread with some excellent input.
Brom is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2013, 06:40
  #1828 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 7,639
Interesting that you need extra training to reduce the DH from 200ft to 150ft. If my brain is working today the RAF Seaking had a DH of 150ft for an ILS and PAR - this was due to the calculation of DH for various a/c which included an Aircraft Approach limitation (AAL) which was used in conjunction with the Obstacle clearance limit (OCL). This produced a DH for the Seaking of 150ft - we had no extra training for this - you just flew to that limit.

Crab may be able to confirm if this is still the case - the ILS was also manually flown as we had no coupler for approaches to airfields.
HF, as HC mentions above, we are limited to 200' on an ILS due to the system limitations not the helis. We can still subtract 50' from a FW precision approach minima but not below 200' for ILS and 150' for PAR.

Unfortunately, after many many, years of safe operation of the SK, someone allowed a piece of work by a Navy TP to surface and we now have a variable HTA between 30' and 50' to add on Oh and the same genius imposed a 100 kt GS limit on ILS as well - not very helpful when you have poorly people in the back and you are in a hurry!

I believe that the S61s in Ireland (which had the SN 500 series autopilot like the SK 3A) were allowed, in extremis, to use the trans down SAR modes to runway which would get you to 40' fully coupled.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2013, 11:11
  #1829 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 18
We flew the army gazelle down to 150 feet single pilot and no stick feel or autopilot just hands on.must admit when I started flying civvy flying I did question why with all the help and full autopilot and 2 crew we could only go down to 200 feet ?
micraman is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2013, 11:57
  #1830 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West coast Australia :)
Posts: 234
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I believe that the S61s in Ireland (which had the SN 500 series autopilot like the SK 3A) were allowed, in extremis, to use the trans down SAR modes to runway which would get you to 40' fully coupled.
We used the LN450 to transition down running into Sumburgh @ 40ft when the 40 Mile an hour fog was about, using the localiser as a backup indication of the correct track to runway 27/09. It was a well established procedure by the time I arrived in 2004.

Si
bigglesbutler is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2013, 19:10
  #1831 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 4,683
We flew the army gazelle down to 150 feet single pilot
We did the same with Pumas, everywhere, anytime.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 06:11
  #1832 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 687
Fareastdriver

We flew the army gazelle down to 150 feet single pilot

We did the same with Pumas, everywhere, anytime.
We flew the Wessex at 50ft agl on low level transits on Ex in Germany - there again the Pumas always were big P====ys

Just before my time on the Seaking somebody tried to demonstrate a trans down at RAF Chetwynd ( a grass airfield) - unfortunately I believe the rad alt unlocked over the waving long grass so the system thought it was higher than 50ft and planted the Seaking firmly!! onto the ground.

HF

Sorry about slight thread drift!!
Hummingfrog is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 09:38
  #1833 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Northern Lights
Posts: 48
Gossip I heard this week was that the PM -- who was the co-pilot-- said "airspeed" more than once. Please note that this is second or third hand gossip, but, if true, will put us in a run of incidents/accidents where quite inexperienced co-pilots are sitting watching experienced pilots crash aircraft.
I've got my doubts about the veracity of this as I would expect the commander to be PM given the poor weather there was at the time. Is this standard practice across all the companies?
Ray Joe Czech is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 10:05
  #1834 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 777
I've got my doubts about the veracity of this as I would expect the commander to be PM given the poor weather there was at the time. Is this standard practice across all the companies?
Don't doubt yourself Ray.
industry insider is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 10:05
  #1835 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 4,683
We flew the Wessex at 50ft agl on low level transits on Ex in Germany
I know; we used to undertake you.

Last edited by Fareastdriver; 21st Sep 2013 at 10:06.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 12:23
  #1836 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 63
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by Fareastdriver View Post
I know; we used to undertake you.
Wow, you should be careful. With such enormous balls dangling, they might hit the ground and that WOULD be painful.
HeliComparator is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 12:46
  #1837 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 63
Posts: 2,021
Originally Posted by Ray Joe Czech View Post
... I would expect the commander to be PM given the poor weather there was at the time. Is this standard practice across all the companies?
It is in Bristow, but not set in stone. If the copilot never plays the PM role in such circumstances, how can he prepare for command? But if he was pretty new, putting him as PF would seem the sensible thing to do.
HeliComparator is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 14:23
  #1838 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,537
Is it company policy where you work for the Captains to mentor Co-Pilots and give them as much hands on experience as possible....or are Line Captains seen to be the Hands on guy and the Co-Pilot there to assist the Captain by doing all the grunt work?

I always saw it to be my responsibility to teach and mentor as well as be the PIC of the Helicopter.

By doing that.....do you not work to break down the psychological barrier between the two pilots so that in times of stress the subordinate is willing to speak up and communicate and for the Captain to "Listen" to the Co-Pilot?


HC....we know you would never have that problem of banging yer balls....but if you did it would be a very small problem.

Last edited by SASless; 21st Sep 2013 at 14:25.
SASless is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 15:22
  #1839 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Northern Lights
Posts: 48
Is it company policy where you work for the Captains to mentor Co-Pilots and give them as much hands on experience as possible....or are Line Captains seen to be the Hands on guy and the Co-Pilot there to assist the Captain by doing all the grunt work?
I think you are reading waaaay too much into my comment about the PIC taking control for the DA decision in marginal weather, but here goes anyway...
In my company generally one pilot flies out and the other flies back. I may offer the other pilot the other sector as well from time to time if they are relatively new on line so they can get the take-off and landing practice: regrettably, I won't improve, maybe they will.
As to mentoring, no, I don't think there is any policy about that although I fail to see how you can sit there and not learn anything from watching the other guy regardless of the experience you have.

I always saw it to be my responsibility to teach and mentor as well as be the PIC of the Helicopter.
By doing that.....do you not work to break down the psychological barrier between the two pilots so that in times of stress the subordinate is willing to speak up and communicate and for the Captain to "Listen" to the Co-Pilot?
No, you don't. I think you set yourself up as 'teacher' if you do that and force them into the roll of 'student' and probably considerably steepen any cockpit gradient. Probably better to treat them as as much of an equal as you can and ask as many open questions as you can about the decisions you need to make. Unfortunately, I probably trample all over this ideal the moment I say, 'Well, I'd rather get back to base with more/less fuel than that because of the weather/exposure coming off the deck.'
It probably also helps to tell them before you go flying, that if they see anything they don't like or understand to spit it out sooner rather than later.

Last edited by Ray Joe Czech; 21st Sep 2013 at 15:35.
Ray Joe Czech is offline  
Old 21st Sep 2013, 16:14
  #1840 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 71
Posts: 16,537
RJC,

Seems you confuse "Mentoring" with "Instruction"....and I take it from your comments you think a new copilot should silently admire your Monkey Skills and somehow soak up that ability vicariously.

Monkey skills come from hands on flying....or doing.....the other important part of the learning process is as you say....including the lesser experienced pilot in all phases of the business at hand.....in other words....being a Mentor.

Is not the old Master/Apprentice relationship what we are talking about here?

The skilled craftsman passing that skill down to a younger person?

How that gets done is the question.

I maintain Captains have an inherent responsibility to do so.......do you disagree?

Do you know Gann......I begin to think not?


Great Aviation Quotes: Piloting

Last edited by SASless; 21st Sep 2013 at 16:18.
SASless 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.