AS332L2 Ditching off Shetland: 23rd August 2013

[Harry O]

CHC change their mind

If it hasn't been posted. Some CHC news.
Some CHC Helicopters Back in Air Following ?Super Puma? Crash Off Shetland| Offshore Energy Today

"After CHC on Saturday announced it would ground all of its helicopters within the UK, as a response to the AS332-L2 Super Puma helicopter crash which occurred Friday, off Shetland, the company last night revealed that some of its helicopters might start flying Monday after all.

“We believe that engineering and operating differences associated with AS332L/L1 and EC225 aircraft warrant continuing flights with those aircraft. Nonetheless, we canceled all of our Sunday (Aug. 25) flights on those aircraft types (except for those involved in life-saving search-and-rescue and medevac missions) in order to give us time to take stock of any implications associated with Friday’s accident, which involved an AS332L2 aircraft,” said CHC last night in a press release.
The company’s AS332L/L1 and EC225 helicopters are expected to start flying today.
“We will continue to hold all flights worldwide involving AS332L2 aircraft, except for those involved in life-saving SAR and medevac missions. In the U.K., consistent with a request by the Helicopter Safety Steering Group and until further notice, we will not fly AS332Ls/L1s/L2s and EC225s, except for life-saving SAR and medevac missions,” the company concluded.

[Hummingfrog]

The floats are remarkabley robust. I had a set blow (365N2) on rotation from the Piper B. There was a "bang" and there they were. I flew to the Tharos our base alongside and landed on for advice from the company! I kept running as the nose bag kept the nosewheel clear of the deck and I didn't want to risk ground resonance on the helideck. It was decided to fly back to Aberdeen below 90kts which was our max arm float speed. All went well - if noisy! Arrived back in Aberdeen to Be met by most of the hangar watching and being cleared to taxi in by ATC. That would have ruined the floats. On carefully shutting down it was found that the floats were as hard as ever!

HF

[excrement]

nonsense

This is my first contribution this site, but having read all of the postings, some of which are well informed and make valid observations backed up with facts, otherssadly are ill informed and ridiculous.

Pilots and engineers are the same on BOTH sides of the North Sea and if comparisons are to be made to determine “WHO IS THE SAFEST” then the following should be taken into account.

Regarding the recent CRASHES/DITCHINGS/INCIDENTS, not including the most recent as cause has still to be released;

The initial EC225 incident was due to pilot error and possibly conditions but NOT THEOPERATOR or sector of operation.

The L2 crash was attributed to debris in the main xmsn. The operator and its procedures were closely scrutinised by the relevant bodies and determined not to be negligent.

The EC225 DITCHINGS were performed by their Pilots who each made a decision based on their ability, experience and the situation they encountered including passenger safety.

None of the above can be attributed to area of operation, and the fact that these events did not occur in the Norwegian sector was purely by chance.

PLEASE no more talk of EXPLODING ROTOR BLADES, PARACHUTES, ILL-INFORMED IMPROVEMENTS TO IHUMS OR MARMS and MOUNTING THE FLOATS above the windows.


As for survival training, when the DUNKING is carried out in the pool Divers are always at hand and should someone panic and fail to evacuate the operation is repeated. Unfortunately in a real event there are no second chances.



I have worked with all variants of Super Puma as well as other types for 30 years and can assure any apprehensive passenger I do not take their safety lightly. I am also saddened by nonsense media reporting and subsequent rhetoric.
If a Kneejerk reaction to these events results in the removal of the Super Puma then should it’s alternative (S92) have a problem – WHAT THEN !

[HeliComparator]

O F yes, I think that is fair comment in some respects, but I didn't say whose fault it was that HUMS tool was not used optimally. Two things I am aware of:

Our engineers told me they would have done things differently and looked at the shaft, since its relatively easy to do that. You could say "they would say that, with 20:20 hindsight" and maybe that is true, we can't know.

There is however I suspect a cultural difference in that Bristow is a developer of HUMS, whereas Bond is a user of it.

Secondly the amount of effort that has gone into refining the HUMS thresholds over the last 25 years or so of its existence is pretty minimal, ditto for improving reliability. That is not the operator's fault, not the manufacturers fault (well maybe) it is a cultural fault of our "system" resting on the laurels of HUMS developed in the 1980s. My point is that HUMS was quite capable of detecting the fault, and in fact did, but the warning was treated as "cry wolf" because the reliability rate of the sensors is not very good, and because the possible failure modes (of the transmission) had not been fully examined.

I did have it in mind that Bond had not downloaded the HUMS data after each flight, but if I am wrong in that respect then I apologise.

[jayteeto]

One of my north sea mates has just posted that article from the Scotsman on facebook. The S92s amazing ability to run for 30 minutes after it has run out of fuel is Herculean!

[Tractor_Driver]

Mitchaa:

"For CHC to release such a statement so soon where they believe it is not related to the other aircraft types tells you what you need to know about the incident."

or about CHC?

[airwave45]

Missing the point gents.
Pax think the aircraft is junk.
Pontificating on irrelevant technical details is not changing the minds of the pax.
If they don't fly, you don't get paid. (However smart you are)

As sassles said, sheilds down and look at the issues.

Of which there are 2.

Slf confidendce gone (and going further)

Aircraft capability, sort of ok, but not trusted by pax.
(Sort of ok meaning worse then GoM averages, which are not "good" )

You are heads up against pax who would gleefully burn these aircraft, whilst you are arguing that "it's what we have, what more do you want?"

What the SLF want is to get to work and get home with the same risk profile they have with flying to Londinium in a plank.

If you can't deliver what they want, they'll find a new company who can.

Poo poo what is going on now at your peril.

[nomorehelosforme]

HF

I did ask early in this thread, how many North Sea flights are there, daily/ weekly merely asking, you seem like someone in the know?

[obnoxio f*ckwit]

If you can't deliver what they want, they'll find a new company who can.

Unfortunately for them, what they want doesn't exist.

I am unaware of fleets of underused S-92s sitting in hangars around the world, ready to decamp to the NS.

If they really are going to refuse to fly on any Superpuma, of whatever variant, then I hope they like sailing and cranes.

[HeliStudent]

I did ask early in this thread, how many North Sea flights are there, daily/ weekly merely asking, you seem like someone in the know?

And since I saw your question I've been trying to find out.

What I've been able to see is that Aberdeen has about 100 helicopter movements per day (some sources say 200), Norwich has 40 departures per day (not sure how many movements that equates to, maybe double if they come back) and I've read there's a similar amount (around 50 movements or more from Holland).

Haven't been able to find Dansish helicopter movements and I think Norwegian movements are at least 150 or 200 per day and I can't find what the movements are for Sumburgh.

But, a very rough estimate would put it at somewhere between 300 and 500 movements per day throughout the North Sea (I think)?

It would be nice if someone could help please.

[HeliComparator]

aiwave, I think you have been reading the press and watching too much TV. Yes there certainly is a loud and ill informed movement to "destroy the Super Puma's" (sic) but that is just hysterical froth whipped up by fools. Of the few SLFs that I know personally, all take the pragmatic view that there is nothing particularly wrong with the SP family, after all they have spent many years flying in them - although of course they would prefer not to have to fly in a rather cramped and uncomfortable helicopter at all!

If the ignorant masses get to decide by mob rule what helicopters are operated, we are all doomed (well, they are doomed anyway) but, depending on the cause of this latest accident, hopefully that won't happen.

[nomorehelosforme]

North Sea daily movements?

Percentage wish, if 200 - 400 movements per day in the North Sea is correct, how does the accident percentage, per day, compare to all UK helicopter flights, commercial and private? At a guess North Sea movements would win hands down on safety per movement?

[airwave45]

Obnoxio f*kwit (great name btw :-) )
The slf are genuinely beyond a short game here and _will_ put up with boats.
Boats don't kill them.
Unpleasant nast and smelly as they are. They don't suffer "falling into the sea"

You, have to get your house in order.
Currently you are tit for tat with single engined single pilot ops.
Which, is not good.
Given you run twin engine twin pilot ops.

Now, aside from telling me you are my only option.
What are you actually doing to make me belive you are getting better at what you do for a day job ?

As sadly, you as an NS pilot, I think you should be doing much better.

[fenland787]

"destroy the Super Puma's" (sic) but that is just hysterical froth whipped up by fools.

The Beeb are gleefully reporting how many 'likes' the Facebook page has got (whatever a 'like' is) over 34,000 it would seem. I have to say I may have to revise my opinion of Facebook as a means of running everything - I had assumed it was some sort of flash mob social chit-chat thing, I had no idea they had anything like that many experts in aviation and the safety aspects of operating aircraft in the North Sea on their books! Still, we live and learn....don't we...?

[Lorimer]

bring back the BV 234

It was in the late 80s I flew the Chinook helicopter out to the rigs for Shell & British Airways Helicopters - there was a fleet of 6 of them.
It was really handy having an endurance of 4 hours, 140kt cruise carrying 45 pax with refreshments,
cabin crew and a loo!
I still have my certificate from Boeing
for 1000 hours on the aircraft.
It sounds as if the Chinook is required once again.

[airwave45]

HC, read your point.
I'm not a fan of the press, too much power, too little responsibility.

Just a bear.

Have a bit of p1 time, but way more slf time, so have a wee bit of insight to both sides (currently non grafting)
No p1 on anything H (or p2 on anything H)

But what I'm trying to get across to the boys n girls up front is that the pax are genuinely, seriously, scared to get into any of the 330 variants.

If you don't seriously address those concerns, an alternate will be found.
I refer you back to sassles, proper ground up introspection is required.

Not on here (too public)
But really, when your frequency of unplanned arrivals on heavy / medium twins is equal to the GoM with singles/single pilot ops....(i've done the research, it is)
You really, really should be looking closely at what you do.

[SASless]

They Chinooks are not available.....all of them are out Logging and doing Fire Fighting in the USA and other parts of the World and making far more money than they would flying offshore probably. I would come out of retirement if they were to be re-introduced....well one can dream anyway.

Now if a Safety Auditor Gig would be offered.....I would put on my Tweed Jacket, Cords, and Brogans and jump on the next US Air flight to LWR (so long as it was a Boeing and not an Airbus).

This video showed up a little while ago.....not very dramatic but gives a good view of a successful water landing in benign seas.

Sorry HC....but you would get soaked no matter how you were dressed on this occasion. Lacking Rain falling....it appears SP Pilots need to imitate Alaska Bush Pilots and wear Knee Waders if they are to keep their feet dry.

Puma ditching Nigeria - YouTube

[HeliComparator]

Mitchaa, regarding your comments on the REDL HUMS shenanigans, there was fault on the Bond side according to the report -they did not use the correct EDR forms that should make for clear and recorded dialogue with EC. The primary communication was by telephone calls - there were emails as well, but the emails did not fully back up the phone conversations and consequently, some discrepancies arose. They misidentified the "chip" material as being silver or cadmium, when in fact it was steel. Silver and cadmium are non-ferrous and therefore non-magnetic, so it would seem, even to a simple pilot like me, unlikely to be found on a magnetic detector.

Most importantly, they didn't remove the epicyclic as was required by the AMM. Although we don't know what they would have found, there is a fair chance that there would have been a good few more metallic particles.

Therefore I think its unfair of you to blame the inappropriate maintenance actions on EC.

[Pittsextra]

Question. At what point is a Super Puma seen as a family of helicopters or individual models??

Recent events seem to blur things where I think it would be fair to say many seem to like to quote X number of flight hours of the Super Puma fleet as a whole when looking for statistics to promote a positive view on the model (s) and then instantly wish to differentiate individual models when one or another goes in. Just an observation.

There has also been comments around if the UK side of the North Sea is as safe or are individual operators / industry as a whole doing all it can safety wise. Given the community isn't that big in the grand scheme what are the pilots that complain doing about it? Maybe they are putting their hands up for huge change and its being ignored? (although that doesn't seem to be reflected here).

HC suggests that poor exploitation of HUMS is to blame for the crash of G-REDL and the two recent 225's that ditched, yet in order for the 225 to fly in the interim we have further reliance on HUMS...even more incredible is that there has been a complete change of view from Eurocopter regarding onboard HUMS data from the AAIB recommendations from the G-REDL crash to recent events with the 225.

The point is its all very well moaning about a faceless "industry" but thats just made up of individuals whom for the most part seemed to just rely on the fact that Eurocopter has a bunch of clever people and the rest should but out.

[airwave45]

Lorrimer,
I sailed on the Bar Protecter when we went to find the 3rd of the ditched chinooks.
I saw the rov footage.
You have 1000 hours on those indescribably awful aircraft.
Good effort.
They averaged a little over 9000 hours between ditchings ( in the n sea )
You are a lucky man.

This is 2013,
That level of attrition is just not acceptable now.

I am lost, as a group you want the bears to accept that the current level of attrition is ok.
As a bear, i'm letting you know, we disagree.