Police helicopter crashes onto Glasgow pub
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Winch-control
"I would suggest 7 days, 10 at the most is adequate. If the AIB need 12 months plus to resolve the reasons for any accident/incident I would suggest they are sadly very lacking, and not fit for service."
Having served my time in the incident investigation sector, I would ask you to think again. In root cause analysis (the way of stopping similar things happening again, rather than just pointing the finger at someoner) we always start with the incident statement. What happened? What are we investigating?
That can be hard enough to decide. In this case you'd think it was obvious: helo crashed, people died. I'd suggest it's not so obvious, and a good investigation would start with: helo fell through building roof; people died.
Then you draw up a list of everything that needs to be looked at. Then a provisional timeline. Then a list of all the factors that could be involved (you'll probably want to use the TOP-SET method at this point). Then another list of all the things you need to examine, all the things you need to simulate, all the people you need to talk to... oops; your 7 days is up.
Ah well; Pilot Error it is, then...
Isn't that exactly what we DON'T want? A quick headline, and probably blame pinned on the last bod to touch the controls?
In other words, it's a long, meticulous business. And it has to be, if investigation's ever to be of any use. Your or my desire for a quick answer isn't worth squat compared with the need for the truth of what happened. (And sometimes, as every investigator knows, you have to accept the fact that you'll never find the whole answer.)
Nobody's dragging their feet. But a team of investigators shouting "Coo gosh wow chaps let's go with MY hunch!" is about as much use as a chocolate teapot.
"I would suggest 7 days, 10 at the most is adequate. If the AIB need 12 months plus to resolve the reasons for any accident/incident I would suggest they are sadly very lacking, and not fit for service."
Having served my time in the incident investigation sector, I would ask you to think again. In root cause analysis (the way of stopping similar things happening again, rather than just pointing the finger at someoner) we always start with the incident statement. What happened? What are we investigating?
That can be hard enough to decide. In this case you'd think it was obvious: helo crashed, people died. I'd suggest it's not so obvious, and a good investigation would start with: helo fell through building roof; people died.
Then you draw up a list of everything that needs to be looked at. Then a provisional timeline. Then a list of all the factors that could be involved (you'll probably want to use the TOP-SET method at this point). Then another list of all the things you need to examine, all the things you need to simulate, all the people you need to talk to... oops; your 7 days is up.
Ah well; Pilot Error it is, then...
Isn't that exactly what we DON'T want? A quick headline, and probably blame pinned on the last bod to touch the controls?
In other words, it's a long, meticulous business. And it has to be, if investigation's ever to be of any use. Your or my desire for a quick answer isn't worth squat compared with the need for the truth of what happened. (And sometimes, as every investigator knows, you have to accept the fact that you'll never find the whole answer.)
Nobody's dragging their feet. But a team of investigators shouting "Coo gosh wow chaps let's go with MY hunch!" is about as much use as a chocolate teapot.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Question then: IF the rotor brake was applied in flight (either inadvertently or on purpose) would it be man enough to initiate the following scenario (or would it be too small a system to slow the rotors in flight such that it was merely a severe embarrassment):
Rotor brake pressure applied - Nr begins to decay slightly, Drags Nf down causing the engine(s) to stall/surge. [Eye witnesses report popping and spitting] Pilot sees and hears this but (obviously) doesn't connect it with a rotor brake problem - he sees it as an engine(s) problem. So he tries to identify the source but the noise(s) and (slight) drop in Nr troubles him to the extent that his best course of action is to remove the stalling engines. So he sets himself up for an auto and chops the throttles (all of this has taken seconds to decide and all the time the engines are popping and surging). He chops the throttles but the rotor head now much more easily slows down as the rotor brake has no engine resistance fighting against it. Engines are off, Rotors are stopping??????
Rotor brake pressure applied - Nr begins to decay slightly, Drags Nf down causing the engine(s) to stall/surge. [Eye witnesses report popping and spitting] Pilot sees and hears this but (obviously) doesn't connect it with a rotor brake problem - he sees it as an engine(s) problem. So he tries to identify the source but the noise(s) and (slight) drop in Nr troubles him to the extent that his best course of action is to remove the stalling engines. So he sets himself up for an auto and chops the throttles (all of this has taken seconds to decide and all the time the engines are popping and surging). He chops the throttles but the rotor head now much more easily slows down as the rotor brake has no engine resistance fighting against it. Engines are off, Rotors are stopping??????
Even in the most unlikely event that the pilot missed it, I'm sure at least one of the TFO's wouldn't!
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
I'm quite amazed, well not really, in the number of posters with a lack of post tally. I stopped counting after 12 in the first 5 pages of the number of posters with less than 10 posts. I'm sure the 5 most recent pages would show a similar figure, with different usernames than those in the first.
Seems this thread has brought out more, "I'm a long time observer of this site and never felt like commenting before, however ..... " types.
Seems this thread has brought out more, "I'm a long time observer of this site and never felt like commenting before, however ..... " types.
Helpful advice for the AAIB...
Quotes from Winch-control:
"Given we are in the 21st century, is it not to be considered unacceptable, that the authorities, given to them power to investigate, cannot with all the evidence laid in front of them come up with an answer as to the cause?
"I would suggest 7 days, 10 at the most is adequate. If the AIB need 12 months plus to resolve the reasons for any accident/incident I would suggest they are sadly very lacking, and not fit for service."
So it's "unacceptable".
I'm sure the guys and gals at Farnborough will be mortified to be censured by someone who understands these matters so much better than they. S'pose they might plead in mitigation that the mechanics of an aircraft accident have changed little since the dawn of flight, not to mention Newton's laws.
"Possibly they are financially capped, short of personnel, these issues must be resolved."
Thanks for the antipodal tip! No doubt doubling the number of investigators on this case would halve the time to produce the answers... Or could it be that the person who normally types-up the bulletins is on leave this week? BTW, everything is "financially-capped" over here these days.
"There is no apparent mechanical problem with this incident. If there was the a/c would be grounded."
Quite: you've answered your own question. So, given that we are in the 21st Century, could it simply be instant gratificaion that you are demanding?
Perhaps your ire would be better directed at the manufacturers, certificators, and operators. Given that we are in the 21st century, in which the acquisition and storage of data is so much more practicable than before, why are 3-tonne vehicles flying 500 feet above us with no recorders?
"Given we are in the 21st century, is it not to be considered unacceptable, that the authorities, given to them power to investigate, cannot with all the evidence laid in front of them come up with an answer as to the cause?
"I would suggest 7 days, 10 at the most is adequate. If the AIB need 12 months plus to resolve the reasons for any accident/incident I would suggest they are sadly very lacking, and not fit for service."
So it's "unacceptable".
I'm sure the guys and gals at Farnborough will be mortified to be censured by someone who understands these matters so much better than they. S'pose they might plead in mitigation that the mechanics of an aircraft accident have changed little since the dawn of flight, not to mention Newton's laws."Possibly they are financially capped, short of personnel, these issues must be resolved."
Thanks for the antipodal tip! No doubt doubling the number of investigators on this case would halve the time to produce the answers... Or could it be that the person who normally types-up the bulletins is on leave this week? BTW, everything is "financially-capped" over here these days.
"There is no apparent mechanical problem with this incident. If there was the a/c would be grounded."
Quite: you've answered your own question. So, given that we are in the 21st Century, could it simply be instant gratificaion that you are demanding?
Perhaps your ire would be better directed at the manufacturers, certificators, and operators. Given that we are in the 21st century, in which the acquisition and storage of data is so much more practicable than before, why are 3-tonne vehicles flying 500 feet above us with no recorders?
Haven't there been problems with the EC135 suffering from fuel gauge issues recently? I understood there to have been a number of complaints to EC about this. I appreciate tech logs should show correct uplift/consumption, but it wouldn't be the first time a helicopter had less fuel in it than the PIC thought and if the gauge wasn't reading correctly, it would hide the issue until too late. I believe both engines flamed out when they ran out of fuel before the Low Fuel warning lamp came on.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
.... which doesn't mean to say that those with a high list count aren't!
toptobottom
nice try ttb
toptobottom
Haven't there been problems with the EC135 suffering from fuel gauge issues recently? I understood there to have been a number of complaints to EC about this. I appreciate tech logs should show correct uplift/consumption, but it wouldn't be the first time a helicopter had less fuel in it than the PIC thought and if the gauge wasn't reading correctly, it would hide the issue until too late. I believe both engines flamed out when they ran out of fuel before the Low Fuel warning lamp came on.
nice try ttb
TTB
Fuel Quantity transmitters (probably float switches) and Fuel Quantity warning lights activated by low level switches are separate.
Your scenario would require 2 separate quantity systems to be malfunctioning at the same time. Never heard of that in my 30+ years in the industry.
Fuel Quantity transmitters (probably float switches) and Fuel Quantity warning lights activated by low level switches are separate.
Your scenario would require 2 separate quantity systems to be malfunctioning at the same time. Never heard of that in my 30+ years in the industry.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
.... not to mention a miraculous change in the shape of the fuels tanks!
And I've never heard of that in my time in the industry either.
And I've never heard of that in my time in the industry either.
SS - I wouldn't be quite so quick to jump down people's throats if I were you; it makes you sound like a nob.
Industry Insider - thanks for the explanation. I don't know the 135's innards well enough to be specific, but I'm old and ugly enough not have posted this speculatively... Have you (or anyone) heard about misreading fuel gauges? Has Bond grounded its other wet lease 135s?
Industry Insider - thanks for the explanation. I don't know the 135's innards well enough to be specific, but I'm old and ugly enough not have posted this speculatively... Have you (or anyone) heard about misreading fuel gauges? Has Bond grounded its other wet lease 135s?
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
industry insider
Fuel Quantity transmitters (probably float switches) and Fuel Quantity warning lights activated by low level switches are separate.
Your scenario would require 2 separate quantity systems to be malfunctioning at the same time. Never heard of that in my 30+ years in the industry.
Fuel Quantity transmitters (probably float switches) and Fuel Quantity warning lights activated by low level switches are separate.
Your scenario would require 2 separate quantity systems to be malfunctioning at the same time. Never heard of that in my 30+ years in the industry.
.... not to mention a miraculous change in the shape of the fuels tanks!
And I've never heard of that in my time in the industry either.
SS - I wouldn't be quite so quick to jump down people's throats if I were you; it makes you sound like a nob.
Here's one I took earlier
135 fuel
Last edited by Senior Pilot; 7th Dec 2013 at 17:38. Reason: Photo too large
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 55 degrees north ish.
Age: 53
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel quantiy probes are capacitive.
Low fuel sensor is a temperature operated switch. I.e. It gets hot when there's no fuel on it and brings on a caption. Separate circuits.
Supply tanks are different capacities, meaning #2 would flame out 90 to 180 seconds before #1.
Low fuel sensor is a temperature operated switch. I.e. It gets hot when there's no fuel on it and brings on a caption. Separate circuits.
Supply tanks are different capacities, meaning #2 would flame out 90 to 180 seconds before #1.
temperature operated switch
It took a while but I finally found a reference to such a device.
Specialty Level Switches
Specialty Level Switches
Thermal level switches sense ... the increase in thermal conductivity as a probe becomes submerged in the process liquid.
To those unhappy with the AAIB progress to date, this from Rev 2 of the Eurocopter SIN:
"Please find the following information update:
• AAIB deputy chief inspector David Miller said in an interview “I can confirm that nothing detached from the helicopter in flight before the accident”.
• The wreckage has been transported to the headquarters of the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) in Farnborough.
• The complete investigation team led by the AAIB and including EC experts plans to start with the in depth examination of the wreckage on Monday, December 9th".
"Please find the following information update:
• AAIB deputy chief inspector David Miller said in an interview “I can confirm that nothing detached from the helicopter in flight before the accident”.
• The wreckage has been transported to the headquarters of the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) in Farnborough.
• The complete investigation team led by the AAIB and including EC experts plans to start with the in depth examination of the wreckage on Monday, December 9th".
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Not sure of the setup at the Scottish Air Ops, but who do they speak to apart from Police, Prestwick or Scot Info? Is the office manned when the ac is out? Who would/could they make a distress call to?
Anyway, thinking on a new one, TRGB CHIP ...
Anyway, thinking on a new one, TRGB CHIP ...
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thanks cyclic, do you know if there is then a requirement for the pilot to call 'approaching the base'?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TC
If the NR was decaying for what ever reason, why would any one want to reduce the throttles?
Surely if you decide to auto rotate (and you still have tail rotor) you would want to have engines assisting? even if they were stalled, they would most likely recover whilst descending?
So he tries to identify the source but the noise(s) and (slight) drop in Nr troubles him to the extent that his best course of action is to remove the stalling engines. So he sets himself up for an auto and chops the throttles (all of this has taken seconds to decide and all the time the engines are popping and surging). He chops the throttles
Surely if you decide to auto rotate (and you still have tail rotor) you would want to have engines assisting? even if they were stalled, they would most likely recover whilst descending?
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Thanks again cyclic, appreciate there's a call to Glasgow informing of the rtb, but is there then a call or 'blind call' to the base?