AS332L2 Ditching off Shetland: 23rd August 2013
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: North
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe, but in the past 10 years or so I've been flying IFR offshore I've never had an autopilot to rely on so automation systems induced degradation of situational awareness has never been an issue. Neither have I ever sat in a sim let alone done any training in one. The oil company loves it, no sim training to pay for, and a very cheap basic IFR helicopter that virtually always gets through whatever the weather.
What I have found is if the weather is really bad I go VFR, because sticking to the rules under the IFR just doesn't get you where you need to go. I'm just astounded that a modern 2-crew helicopter can come to grief in a way where "technical aspects" don't seem to be involved. Maybe there's an argument to made to go back to basic stick-and-rudder flying and common sense airmanship from time-to-time, as part of a wider structured training regime, and just forget about all the complex automation stuff that time and time again we see giving rise to holes in the Swiss cheese.
What I have found is if the weather is really bad I go VFR, because sticking to the rules under the IFR just doesn't get you where you need to go. I'm just astounded that a modern 2-crew helicopter can come to grief in a way where "technical aspects" don't seem to be involved. Maybe there's an argument to made to go back to basic stick-and-rudder flying and common sense airmanship from time-to-time, as part of a wider structured training regime, and just forget about all the complex automation stuff that time and time again we see giving rise to holes in the Swiss cheese.
Satsuma
I wrote a post about simulators, you asked if I was being ironic but you seem to be talking about windows. Forgive me but I think that we speak of different things.
SAS yes, you are grouchy and quite rude. We are trying to do the right thing by our company, passengers and pilots.
Our Simulator testing and training is done by our contracted operator (HC would know them well) and pilots get 8 hours per "session" not 1 1/2 hours of OPC. If they need more for any reason, we will work with the operator on additional costs where justified....so stick that up the tail pipe of your noisy antique Harley willy extension.
I wrote a post about simulators, you asked if I was being ironic but you seem to be talking about windows. Forgive me but I think that we speak of different things.
SAS yes, you are grouchy and quite rude. We are trying to do the right thing by our company, passengers and pilots.
Our Simulator testing and training is done by our contracted operator (HC would know them well) and pilots get 8 hours per "session" not 1 1/2 hours of OPC. If they need more for any reason, we will work with the operator on additional costs where justified....so stick that up the tail pipe of your noisy antique Harley willy extension.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of giving the bean counters some ammunition, a quote from the great Bell X-15 test pilot Scott Crossfield -
Man is the most efficient and flexible control device you can install in an aircraft. Furthermore he can be produced cheaply by unskilled labour.
Produced cheaply, but expensively trained!
bondu
Man is the most efficient and flexible control device you can install in an aircraft. Furthermore he can be produced cheaply by unskilled labour.
Produced cheaply, but expensively trained!
bondu
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AW139 is the same. (And it's not possible to jettison the main doors).
The EC175, on the other hand...
Last edited by Um... lifting...; 12th Sep 2013 at 15:12.
This is why the only approved emergency exits in an AW139 are the windows, both up front and down the back.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's also a matter of stability in the water. In the Sky Shuttle incident, the passengers made no attempt to disembark once the aircraft was in the water, so the crew opened the doors from outside, which sped up the taking on of water, as you might imagine.
Training on opening the windows from outside the airframe probably wouldn't go amiss, but I think you'd need a real training device, so people would have a sense for how much force needs to be applied, and where.
Training on opening the windows from outside the airframe probably wouldn't go amiss, but I think you'd need a real training device, so people would have a sense for how much force needs to be applied, and where.
However, does the existing sim training cover only the legally-required minimum for proficiency checks? Or is it possible to have additional time, if sim slots are available?
I recently tried to start monthly groundschool sessions, just to answer the sort of technical questions which are always cropping up. The pilots were very enthusiastic about the idea - but couldn't be released from the flying programme, there were no "spares".
Training doesn't earn revenue. It is therefore seen as a drain. Operators do what they have to, and if I get to do pure training sim sessions it's because of some fancy footwork by CTCs.
CAA requires OPCs. I'd like to see the outcome of this incident being a requirement, so many hours a year, for pure training.
Last edited by keithl; 12th Sep 2013 at 17:56.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: In Situ
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I'd like to see the outcome of this incident being a requirement, so many hours a year, for pure training."
Couldn't agree more, Keithl.
"receptive frame of mind", also crucial.
Couldn't agree more, Keithl.
"receptive frame of mind", also crucial.
Rosters
Keithl - one thing I suspect is that the equal time rosters make this sort of training much harder. With a 4:2 type roster, pilots were at work for more days (about 27 more IIRC) and so could fly less each day to stay within their annual totals and/or had more days on standby or when they could be spared for training.
Now, with the equal time roster, every day "on" is precious to the company and so the current situation is not surprising. Perhaps it is time for the Union to put flight safety ahead of lifestyle and agree that a few of those many days off per year can be assigned to recurrent training?
Now, with the equal time roster, every day "on" is precious to the company and so the current situation is not surprising. Perhaps it is time for the Union to put flight safety ahead of lifestyle and agree that a few of those many days off per year can be assigned to recurrent training?
II,
I question the concept of recurrent training consisting of a Check Ride. Does that mean if the pilot passes the check ride...in reality there is no prescribed minimum standard for training that must be done to satisfy Recurrent Training Standards?
Do you in the UK have Minimum Training Standards and Courses of Training for Re-Current courses? Does the CAA have to approve your training courses, materials, videos, or do you just decide on your own what is sufficient?
If you do not have a formal Recurrent Course....one that is approved by the CAA....to what standard do you train?
Is there a Common Standard that all UK Operators must adhere to.....re Ground Training, Flight Training and Simulator Training? Must the Sim's be approved by the CAA.....does the CAA do any sort of Inspection procedure to certify the Operator is actually compiling with the Approved Standard?
I question the concept of recurrent training consisting of a Check Ride. Does that mean if the pilot passes the check ride...in reality there is no prescribed minimum standard for training that must be done to satisfy Recurrent Training Standards?
Do you in the UK have Minimum Training Standards and Courses of Training for Re-Current courses? Does the CAA have to approve your training courses, materials, videos, or do you just decide on your own what is sufficient?
If you do not have a formal Recurrent Course....one that is approved by the CAA....to what standard do you train?
Is there a Common Standard that all UK Operators must adhere to.....re Ground Training, Flight Training and Simulator Training? Must the Sim's be approved by the CAA.....does the CAA do any sort of Inspection procedure to certify the Operator is actually compiling with the Approved Standard?
HC - I do SO agree.
I can't quote the numbers, but I have seen the comparison between training days and revenue days and the balance is surprising. Your last sentence is my opinion, in a nutshell!
I can't quote the numbers, but I have seen the comparison between training days and revenue days and the balance is surprising. Your last sentence is my opinion, in a nutshell!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Equal time rosters and training days
HC and Keithl,
When the equal time roster was constructed in BHL, six training days were 'built in' - the same number of training days as in the previous roster. This was agreed on by both the management and BALPA. The ET roster also gave BHL management the increase in productivity they demanded before they would even consider its introduction - on average, well over 50 hours per pilot per year. If you are now saying that more training days are required, then there should be no problem in scheduling those days within the 182/183 days on, still leaving an increased productivity over the old roster.
However, I seem to remember that the running of the roster deteriorated badly after the first couple of years, with many of the advantages of ET being eroded. And of course, management also took the increase in pilots' hours as 'the norm' and wanted more.
As someone has already posted, the CAP371 limits have become targets, rather than a fatigue safety issue. Perhaps this is another subject that should be included in the independent 'full and wide ranging review' of North Sea helicopter operations, alongside:
Helicopter design and certification;
Operational limits;
Management culture in oil companies and helicopter operators;
Role of the regulators - CAA, EASA, HSE;
Pilot training;
Passenger survival training;
Role of all media in reporting incidents/accidents;
Role of all unions in North Sea operations.
There are probably more aspects that need to be included and I'm sure other Rotorheads will suggest them. So rather than waste posts slagging each other off, why not use this fantastic thread to look at what we need to do to advance safety in our operations.
bondu
When the equal time roster was constructed in BHL, six training days were 'built in' - the same number of training days as in the previous roster. This was agreed on by both the management and BALPA. The ET roster also gave BHL management the increase in productivity they demanded before they would even consider its introduction - on average, well over 50 hours per pilot per year. If you are now saying that more training days are required, then there should be no problem in scheduling those days within the 182/183 days on, still leaving an increased productivity over the old roster.
However, I seem to remember that the running of the roster deteriorated badly after the first couple of years, with many of the advantages of ET being eroded. And of course, management also took the increase in pilots' hours as 'the norm' and wanted more.
As someone has already posted, the CAP371 limits have become targets, rather than a fatigue safety issue. Perhaps this is another subject that should be included in the independent 'full and wide ranging review' of North Sea helicopter operations, alongside:
Helicopter design and certification;
Operational limits;
Management culture in oil companies and helicopter operators;
Role of the regulators - CAA, EASA, HSE;
Pilot training;
Passenger survival training;
Role of all media in reporting incidents/accidents;
Role of all unions in North Sea operations.
There are probably more aspects that need to be included and I'm sure other Rotorheads will suggest them. So rather than waste posts slagging each other off, why not use this fantastic thread to look at what we need to do to advance safety in our operations.
bondu
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HC,
Does that mean that you expect your people to complete Type Rating training on a particular Type, including such emergency procedures as can only (sensibly) be carried out on the Sim, then 6/12/18...months later, to perform to the required standard without any opportunity to refresh/practice/re-train on those procedures in the interim?
And if they don't achieve the required standard under those circumstances, they are incompetent?
Did I misunderstand...?
22
Does that mean that you expect your people to complete Type Rating training on a particular Type, including such emergency procedures as can only (sensibly) be carried out on the Sim, then 6/12/18...months later, to perform to the required standard without any opportunity to refresh/practice/re-train on those procedures in the interim?
And if they don't achieve the required standard under those circumstances, they are incompetent?
Did I misunderstand...?
22
HC and Keithl,
When the equal time roster was constructed in BHL, six training days were 'built in' - the same number of training days as in the previous roster. This was agreed on by both the management and BALPA. The ET roster also gave BHL management the increase in productivity they demanded before they would even consider its introduction - on average, well over 50 hours per pilot per year. If you are now saying that more training days are required, then there should be no problem in scheduling those days within the 182/183 days on, still leaving an increased productivity over the old roster.....snip....
So rather than waste posts slagging each other off, why not use this fantastic thread to look at what we need to do to advance safety in our operations.
bondu
When the equal time roster was constructed in BHL, six training days were 'built in' - the same number of training days as in the previous roster. This was agreed on by both the management and BALPA. The ET roster also gave BHL management the increase in productivity they demanded before they would even consider its introduction - on average, well over 50 hours per pilot per year. If you are now saying that more training days are required, then there should be no problem in scheduling those days within the 182/183 days on, still leaving an increased productivity over the old roster.....snip....
So rather than waste posts slagging each other off, why not use this fantastic thread to look at what we need to do to advance safety in our operations.
bondu
Yes there are 6 training days included in the 182/3 days worked. However in the past when there were more days worked, it was easier to allocate more training days on an ad-hoc basis in particular for copilot development, since each worked day "costed less" and there was more flex in the roster.
Yes, the union could maintain a policy of intransigence here, but with its alleged commitment to flight safety, I think it will be "seen through" in due course, to its overall detriment. Food for thought perhaps?
HC,
Does that mean that you expect your people to complete Type Rating training on a particular Type, including such emergency procedures as can only (sensibly) be carried out on the Sim, then 6/12/18...months later, to perform to the required standard without any opportunity to refresh/practice/re-train on those procedures in the interim?
And if they don't achieve the required standard under those circumstances, they are incompetent?
Did I misunderstand...?
22
Does that mean that you expect your people to complete Type Rating training on a particular Type, including such emergency procedures as can only (sensibly) be carried out on the Sim, then 6/12/18...months later, to perform to the required standard without any opportunity to refresh/practice/re-train on those procedures in the interim?
And if they don't achieve the required standard under those circumstances, they are incompetent?
Did I misunderstand...?
22
Are you saying that a newly qualified pilot is entitled to forget what they have been taught within 6 months and not be expected to be able to cope should an emergency happen after 5.9 months?
Last edited by HeliComparator; 12th Sep 2013 at 20:01.
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Aberdeenshire
Age: 76
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bondu
Can I add - Review of current survival suit/lifejacket/rebreather and their help/hindrance in the evacuation. I would suggest that the survivors from this incident's views would be invaluable to this aspect.
When I went offshore first, we went in jeans and tee shirt, with a lifejacket in a little pouch tied round our waist. Before I left, I was feeling like the Michelin man with all the clobber we had on. I just wonder if we perhaps have gone too far down the"survival" route to the detriment of "escape" or perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
O-SLF
Can I add - Review of current survival suit/lifejacket/rebreather and their help/hindrance in the evacuation. I would suggest that the survivors from this incident's views would be invaluable to this aspect.
When I went offshore first, we went in jeans and tee shirt, with a lifejacket in a little pouch tied round our waist. Before I left, I was feeling like the Michelin man with all the clobber we had on. I just wonder if we perhaps have gone too far down the"survival" route to the detriment of "escape" or perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
O-SLF
Last edited by OffshoreSLF; 12th Sep 2013 at 20:07.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hm...
I'm sure people don't willingly forget anything but I had the idea that all aspects of flying skills are perishable in the absence of practice, not just hand-flying on instruments, as has been much discussed here. If there is no opportunity to refresh, other than the next check, when does training take place?
Or is it that way simply because the training budget in the contract doesn't allow enough hours in the Sim?
I'm sure people don't willingly forget anything but I had the idea that all aspects of flying skills are perishable in the absence of practice, not just hand-flying on instruments, as has been much discussed here. If there is no opportunity to refresh, other than the next check, when does training take place?
Or is it that way simply because the training budget in the contract doesn't allow enough hours in the Sim?
Hm...
I'm sure people don't willingly forget anything but I had the idea that all aspects of flying skills are perishable in the absence of practice, not just hand-flying on instruments, as has been much discussed here. If there is no opportunity to refresh, other than the next check, when does training take place?
Or is it that way simply because the training budget in the contract doesn't allow enough hours in the Sim?
I'm sure people don't willingly forget anything but I had the idea that all aspects of flying skills are perishable in the absence of practice, not just hand-flying on instruments, as has been much discussed here. If there is no opportunity to refresh, other than the next check, when does training take place?
Or is it that way simply because the training budget in the contract doesn't allow enough hours in the Sim?
After that its 3 days training every 6 months, although of course a good bit of the 1st 6 months is spent with line training. Just how much more training do you think should be provided? You can never have too much training, but then some revenue work also has to be done from time to time!
Last edited by HeliComparator; 12th Sep 2013 at 20:39.