AS332L2 Ditching off Shetland: 23rd August 2013
Ball in your Court HC....how does SteinarN's observations compare to your knowledge of the UK System and Operator's procedures?
Perhaps JimL might be able to clarify the differences between Norway and the UK approach to TBO's, Maintenance Schedules and the like,re Regulatory Policies and Practices.
Perhaps JimL might be able to clarify the differences between Norway and the UK approach to TBO's, Maintenance Schedules and the like,re Regulatory Policies and Practices.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These are very, very brave men who are only volunteers, having seen that footage I shall make a donation to the charity today. It's sad that such tragic circumstances alert us to the courageous work they do, sincere condolences to all families who have lost loved ones in this terrible accident.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Norway
Age: 57
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding my previous post, I found some more information.
In the years 1999 to 2009 there was twelve helicopter accidents in the North Sea. Of those twelve, eleven was on the Uk side and one on the Norwegian side. None fatalities in the Norwegian accident, the number of fatalities on the UK side was 34 fatalities in three of the eleven accidents. Total hours flown in the same period was 7,8 million on the Norwegian side and 6,1 million on the UK side.
Correction;
Total man hours flown was 7,8 million on the Norwegian side and 6,1 million on the UK side.
In the years 1999 to 2009 there was twelve helicopter accidents in the North Sea. Of those twelve, eleven was on the Uk side and one on the Norwegian side. None fatalities in the Norwegian accident, the number of fatalities on the UK side was 34 fatalities in three of the eleven accidents. Total hours flown in the same period was 7,8 million on the Norwegian side and 6,1 million on the UK side.
Correction;
Total man hours flown was 7,8 million on the Norwegian side and 6,1 million on the UK side.
Last edited by SteinarN; 24th Aug 2013 at 17:48. Reason: Correcting hours flown versus man hours flown
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question that I keep asking.....why are these event happening on the UK side of the North Sea and not on the other side? Is it just my memory fails me or are we really not seeing any on the other side? I am not suggesting anything....so don't get your feathers ruffled.....honest question here.
If we are not having crashes and ditching on the east side....then what are the factors that might be in play that keeps them from having the same problem?
If we are not having crashes and ditching on the east side....then what are the factors that might be in play that keeps them from having the same problem?
Perhaps its the current obsession with paper safety - both from the operations and the engineering side? Maybe its time to have less reliance on paper, and more reliance on safety derived from individuals carrying out their jobs in a professional manner. In this respect, IMO it is the regulatory authorities that are driving the paper-safety gold rush and showing little interest in the real safety "on the shop floor".
SAS, well obviously I can't compare the Norwegian side practices, because I don't have sufficient knowledge, however it must be borne in mind that Norwegians are much better at doing everything.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: A nice place
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HC It’s interesting to note that some Norwegian companies won’t even carry out training at EC facility’s due to lack of Health and Safety requirements. That’s not to say EC are slack, the Norwegians are particularly sensitive to these issues.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hassocks, Mid-Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the Norwegian sides all companies follow stricter rules laid out in three safety reports from Sintef in Trondheim.
One other difference is that on the Norwegian side the power out take from the engines is limited to 80 percent under normal operations in order to reduce the load on key transmission components.
One other difference is that on the Norwegian side the power out take from the engines is limited to 80 percent under normal operations in order to reduce the load on key transmission components.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can i assume (im a ppl so please don't get technical) that the ac was intercepting the localiser for 09 as the vis/ weather was bad...... do they use 09 as the approach is over the sea not high land.... i ask as having looked at google earth and having read the metar that an approach to 15 would have brought them direct into wind (140 deg at 20kts)... even in a super puma that's a brisk old wind.
Does 15 not have a localiser/ils and or is the approach unsuitable in bad weather. Assuming they approach to the numbers can i assume that the puma would nose into wind once the runway was in siight??
Does 15 not have a localiser/ils and or is the approach unsuitable in bad weather. Assuming they approach to the numbers can i assume that the puma would nose into wind once the runway was in siight??
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't know the aircraft lost power, we do know the aircraft descended rapidly at a late stage with limited/no control.
Reports of power loss only come from survivors, this could easily be confused with entry to auto for some reason.
Also in the northern North Sea, most companies comply with the tighter OGP requirements for crew and aircraft.
Reports of power loss only come from survivors, this could easily be confused with entry to auto for some reason.
Also in the northern North Sea, most companies comply with the tighter OGP requirements for crew and aircraft.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Up here, but not for long
Posts: 315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just received the Eurocopter Safety Information Notice.
One quote
"It is confirmed that this 332 L2 aircraft was equipped with a Main Gear Box with a carburized vertical shaft, this shaft is not the nitrided shaft involved in the two EC225 ditching"
One quote
"It is confirmed that this 332 L2 aircraft was equipped with a Main Gear Box with a carburized vertical shaft, this shaft is not the nitrided shaft involved in the two EC225 ditching"
Paper Safety
Sadly in this day and age every industry has this thrown at us, in reality it is merely self preservation for CEO's, Chairman etc who, understandable so, who would wish to be indicted in a cooperate manslaughter charge. I accept and agree with H&S procedures been put in place but do get frustrated when senior management choose, self preservation which overrides practically and common sense!
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Norway
Age: 57
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.helikoptersikkerhet.no/?d...vedrapport.pdf
172drver,
Just a few comments here does not provide sufficient data to decide what the "answer" is.....as the actual answer is far more complex and difficult to ascertain.
I will say the Stats provided thus far very much beg the question....why the UK side of the Sea has such a poor record compared to the Norwegian side.
Much as HC hates the evidence.....it does appear the Norwegians are doing something right and the UK Teams are not.
I don't think Old Man Luck is rooting for the Norwegians in this.
In Nigeria I saw a similar contradiction....Bristow had lost more Wessex helicopters alone....than Schreiner ever had crashes of all kinds. That ignores all the other types that Bristow destroyed all the while bragging about their wonderful safety record and scoffing at the Cloggies down the road.
Just a few comments here does not provide sufficient data to decide what the "answer" is.....as the actual answer is far more complex and difficult to ascertain.
I will say the Stats provided thus far very much beg the question....why the UK side of the Sea has such a poor record compared to the Norwegian side.
Much as HC hates the evidence.....it does appear the Norwegians are doing something right and the UK Teams are not.
I don't think Old Man Luck is rooting for the Norwegians in this.
In Nigeria I saw a similar contradiction....Bristow had lost more Wessex helicopters alone....than Schreiner ever had crashes of all kinds. That ignores all the other types that Bristow destroyed all the while bragging about their wonderful safety record and scoffing at the Cloggies down the road.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: At the back of the bus
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a lot of the individuals directly employed by CHC, Bond and Bristow who post on here seriously underestimate the depth of anti-Super Puma feeling amongst the offshore workforce. Hatred would not be an exaggeration.
Last edited by MoodyMan; 24th Aug 2013 at 18:39.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: On an island
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No mayday call and no time for brace suggests only a few seconds. If the aircraft had descended rapidly and hit the water, I doubt anyone would have walked away.
How long before we see the first 189 in the North Sea.
Never with any luck!
Last edited by SASless; 24th Aug 2013 at 18:53.
Mitchaa, sorry but it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the nature of a brand new type, to be looking forward to it (assuming you are a passenger).
Moodyman, well you and your mates are entitled to your opinion of course, even if its not a very scientific one.
Moodyman, well you and your mates are entitled to your opinion of course, even if its not a very scientific one.