Police helicopter crashes onto Glasgow pub
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Auckland
Age: 81
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Winch-control. In NZ it's sometimes years before the TAIC or CAA release a final report. If you were a pilot or knew anything you'd know that.
I don't think your stating the obvious is helping very much.
I don't think your stating the obvious is helping very much.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Problem is, some of us have in front of us the cards, the books and at times the aircraft, trying to work out what might have happened, for our own peace of mind. After all, it is us that know the finer details of operating the aircraft.
If we then throw an idea out there, however cryptic, we are leapt upon by those that either don't fly, don't fly rotary, don't fly at at night, don't fly twins, don't fly turbines, don't fly in controlled airspace, don't fly the 135, don't fly in the role, don't complete challenge/response pre to/landing checks etc etc.
While I'm painting I think these things over, while the coat dries I can look things up. When I'm forced to sit in front of jungle or dance programs, the same applies, it's as simple as that.
At the beginning of this thread I suggested that people needed to download things, ie the 135 flight manual.
When I highlighted that when the twist grips are wound off, the N2 stabilises at 60%; As the Nr decays, on reaching 60% the gearbox will once again then be driven by the engines, yet the replies went;
"As you must know, I do not fly the EC135 and so have no reason to download the RFM. But every helicopter I have flown (and that's quite a few types, single and twins, including flying in the same police role), requires the engines to be secured in an emergency autorotative landing such as this appears to have been.
If the engines were running or not (I can only assume you mean that in this type they are selected to "Idle", rather than "Off" for an emergency autorotative landing), the Nr would still decay during the landing because they wouldn't respond to collective input, would they?"
As a consequence, I deleted my what I thought of as informative posts in a huff (2 Dec 10:04) in a case of 'what's the point' because the missile, shooting, laser, church etc theories were accepted as possibilities, as for using the utilisation of the nitesun or skyshout, nice thought with good intent, however..!
Am I losing it?
Well I guess if you were to see me sat in the seat with books on my lap going through various possibilities, twisting throttles, touch drilling and walking around our aircraft asking the airframe what could have happened, well maybe I am.
If we then throw an idea out there, however cryptic, we are leapt upon by those that either don't fly, don't fly rotary, don't fly at at night, don't fly twins, don't fly turbines, don't fly in controlled airspace, don't fly the 135, don't fly in the role, don't complete challenge/response pre to/landing checks etc etc.
While I'm painting I think these things over, while the coat dries I can look things up. When I'm forced to sit in front of jungle or dance programs, the same applies, it's as simple as that.
At the beginning of this thread I suggested that people needed to download things, ie the 135 flight manual.
When I highlighted that when the twist grips are wound off, the N2 stabilises at 60%; As the Nr decays, on reaching 60% the gearbox will once again then be driven by the engines, yet the replies went;
"As you must know, I do not fly the EC135 and so have no reason to download the RFM. But every helicopter I have flown (and that's quite a few types, single and twins, including flying in the same police role), requires the engines to be secured in an emergency autorotative landing such as this appears to have been.
If the engines were running or not (I can only assume you mean that in this type they are selected to "Idle", rather than "Off" for an emergency autorotative landing), the Nr would still decay during the landing because they wouldn't respond to collective input, would they?"
As a consequence, I deleted my what I thought of as informative posts in a huff (2 Dec 10:04) in a case of 'what's the point' because the missile, shooting, laser, church etc theories were accepted as possibilities, as for using the utilisation of the nitesun or skyshout, nice thought with good intent, however..!
Am I losing it?
Well I guess if you were to see me sat in the seat with books on my lap going through various possibilities, twisting throttles, touch drilling and walking around our aircraft asking the airframe what could have happened, well maybe I am.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Winch-control
You seem to have a personal agenda against the AAIB, given, as far as I'm concerned, your unfair and probably ignorant criticism of them in both your post 746 and above. I'm sure like any other organisation there is room for improvement, but I for one feel they do an excellent job with very thorough reports.
My own view is that if there had been any obvious mechanical problem, eg a failed TRGB, it would have been found within 2 or 3 days and information of some sort provided to the 135 fleet operators already. If the AAIB has not found obvious mechanical failing then they will feel less pressure to rush to conclusions and will methodically go through what is likely to be a very complex investigation, possibly with sensitive human factors involved.
The AAIB clearly have a huge responsibility to get their report right as it is likely to have ramifications for those with some responsibility - and don't forget that in the same way that we pilots don't want to fail and be criticised nor does anyone else, be it aircraft manufacturer, operator, ATC or anyone else involved. These reports have huge significance so we must be patient.
You seem to have a personal agenda against the AAIB, given, as far as I'm concerned, your unfair and probably ignorant criticism of them in both your post 746 and above. I'm sure like any other organisation there is room for improvement, but I for one feel they do an excellent job with very thorough reports.
My own view is that if there had been any obvious mechanical problem, eg a failed TRGB, it would have been found within 2 or 3 days and information of some sort provided to the 135 fleet operators already. If the AAIB has not found obvious mechanical failing then they will feel less pressure to rush to conclusions and will methodically go through what is likely to be a very complex investigation, possibly with sensitive human factors involved.
The AAIB clearly have a huge responsibility to get their report right as it is likely to have ramifications for those with some responsibility - and don't forget that in the same way that we pilots don't want to fail and be criticised nor does anyone else, be it aircraft manufacturer, operator, ATC or anyone else involved. These reports have huge significance so we must be patient.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
Sid. I understand how you are feeling. It's close to home for you. I have spent a fair amount of time on shift at the ASU and it can get claustrophobic when there is only one pilot. On the NS there are lots of us to water down the intensity of situations and it is easier to get on with it.
I think it is clear we will not really know what happened until the first report is released. No one seems to really know anything.
In the meantime it's best we just concentrate on our own jobs in hand. Be a little more diligent, and rest assured that what has happened is not the first time, and sadly it will not be the last...no matter how hard we all try.
Take some time out Sid and stay safe!!
Best Regards DB
I think it is clear we will not really know what happened until the first report is released. No one seems to really know anything.
In the meantime it's best we just concentrate on our own jobs in hand. Be a little more diligent, and rest assured that what has happened is not the first time, and sadly it will not be the last...no matter how hard we all try.
Take some time out Sid and stay safe!!
Best Regards DB
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Oh, and can we get away from the 'lack of distress call' red herring (imho), as I think in the very short period of time available, I'd rather be 'Warning crew and passengers', flying the aircraft and trying to work out what's happened ... than be talking on the radio.
Just my thoughts.
Just my thoughts.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: East Ecosse
Age: 71
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick question for someone here who will know - was it usual for this sortie to go as far east as Dalkeith? I have lived in Central Scotland all my life and was not aware the the (Strathclyde Police Force) aircraft operated beyond the (old) boundaries. The force has recently been amalgamated into 'Police Scotland'.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: bora scirocco
Age: 50
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you know of a different situation other than a tail rotor problem where you close down both engines in flight, I'd like to know!
Yes, I agree with you...when you train autorotations on EC135 in Eurocopter factory, they tell you that you do that for, more or less, only one case - fenestron failure! In that case, you must put both eng to IDLE, and finish the flight with auto. If you enter last 100 ft with less than 60 KIAS, more or less, you will crash!
JR
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Auckland
Age: 81
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@SilsoeSid. While the answer might be simple -- even obvious -- when you know what it is the fact is you almost certainly don't have all the bits of the jigsaw to put together. Since the police are still appealing for witnesses who saw the helicopter maybe nobody does.
I can see you view solving this as a challenge but there are possibly aspects of this accident you will never know about.
deleted: SP
As you already know, often several things go wrong at once. Best wishes and take care.
I can see you view solving this as a challenge but there are possibly aspects of this accident you will never know about.
deleted: SP
As you already know, often several things go wrong at once. Best wishes and take care.
Last edited by Senior Pilot; 8th Dec 2013 at 09:53. Reason: As you say, you're not a helicopter pilot
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Police helicopter crashes onto Glasgow pub
Must post.
Strathclyde police vanished when all the Scottish forces were amalgamated into Police Scotland. So yes, quite common for the HU to cover a very wide area.
Strathclyde police vanished when all the Scottish forces were amalgamated into Police Scotland. So yes, quite common for the HU to cover a very wide area.
Whitehead06
Errr, it may have escaped your notice, but you're on Pprune...
We still have no definative answer to the question as to cause of this accident, so should not speculate.
Given the failings of the AAIB, it will be a long time before Number 2. is proven
May I politely request that you stop slagging off the AAIB, for two reasons:
1. You are not contributing anything useful to this thread (admittedly you're not alone in this).
2. Unless you can prove that the AAIB have actually failed in their duty, your vitriol against them is completely unjustified as well as unpleasant. Can you provide facts showing the time limit for the AAIB to release a conclusive report into a crash? Because if not, they haven't failed - they simply haven't met your own personal, subjective, unrealistic expectations.
We all (including the AAIB) want to know what happened in this and every accident, but this tragic event isn't a simple one to figure out and at least the AAIB are maintaining a dignified silence while they pore over the available evidence. You are not poring over anything (apart from your own reflection perhaps) and you are not maintaining a dignified silence. Perhaps you could learn from them. The ball's in your court.
TOTD
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midlands
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whitehead06 - From the perspective of the guys on the ground. Absolutely Yes!
When they were drawing up and selecting NPAS base locations they decided through consultation with Police forces that the helicopters should be no more than a 20 minute response time away from any area in their primary deployment zone in order to both get the resource to scene within and appropriate time frame and provide sufficient 'on task' time.
From the Police perspective the 20 minute response time starts from the moment that the officer on the ground says "we need air support please!"
However NPAS said "whats the top speed of the helicopter?"
"So how far can it cover at top speed in 20 minutes?"
Then drew a big circle with that distance as its radius around the potential bases to determine where to place the helicopters.
However, their method assumed that the helicopter was already hovering over the base and able to accerate to top speed instantly and also go in a straight line without slowing down or diverting course for anything (like Class A airspace for exampe). They were forgetting, of course, the time for the message to get to the crew, the crew to work out location/routing to the task, head out to the heli, startup, run checklists, hovertaxi as required, lift and transition into forwards flight and accelerate to maximum permissible speed for that routing.
Thus the areas of responsibility are stupidly big in some cases.
Thankfully for my force the basing calculations worked out that we kept our helicopter at the same site and our neighbouring force kept theirs at the same location too because of the call volumes that each handle (ours was already providing air support for 3 forces and the other fr 2 forces) so our primary and backup air support is still coming from the same locations but many others (particularly in more remote areas) are suffering from lack of air support due to the distancea that each now has to cover.
When they were drawing up and selecting NPAS base locations they decided through consultation with Police forces that the helicopters should be no more than a 20 minute response time away from any area in their primary deployment zone in order to both get the resource to scene within and appropriate time frame and provide sufficient 'on task' time.
From the Police perspective the 20 minute response time starts from the moment that the officer on the ground says "we need air support please!"
However NPAS said "whats the top speed of the helicopter?"
"So how far can it cover at top speed in 20 minutes?"
Then drew a big circle with that distance as its radius around the potential bases to determine where to place the helicopters.
However, their method assumed that the helicopter was already hovering over the base and able to accerate to top speed instantly and also go in a straight line without slowing down or diverting course for anything (like Class A airspace for exampe). They were forgetting, of course, the time for the message to get to the crew, the crew to work out location/routing to the task, head out to the heli, startup, run checklists, hovertaxi as required, lift and transition into forwards flight and accelerate to maximum permissible speed for that routing.
Thus the areas of responsibility are stupidly big in some cases.
Thankfully for my force the basing calculations worked out that we kept our helicopter at the same site and our neighbouring force kept theirs at the same location too because of the call volumes that each handle (ours was already providing air support for 3 forces and the other fr 2 forces) so our primary and backup air support is still coming from the same locations but many others (particularly in more remote areas) are suffering from lack of air support due to the distancea that each now has to cover.
Last edited by Burnie5204; 8th Dec 2013 at 12:45.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly but nowadays not the only investigation that has to take place.
Glasgow helicopter crash: Clutha hate comments investigated by police
Glasgow helicopter crash: Clutha hate comments investigated by police
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
DAPT
Please allow me to throw that one 'back at ya'!.
What does the 'S' in SOP stand for?
What does SOP call for?
What does the 'S' in SOP stand for?
Fuel contamination
Can anyone explain to me why fuel contamination cant be an issue here? There appears to be agreement that after a sortie of this length, the aircraft would be operating from the lower reaches of the tanks. If there was sufficient liquid in the tanks, there would be normal readings and no warnings activated. If the liquid wasnt fuel.....
With the onset of contaminated fuel being ingested, would the pilot not be quite confused by the symptoms (no criticism implied) and from what has been written, have about a minute before the other engine was similarly afflicted?
Could explain the popping etc sounds reported by witnesses, the stopped engines at impact, and the lack of fire. Could it not also have contributed to a loss of height before the decision to auto rotate was taken? Given that height for a successful autorotation was likely at a premium even in the cruise.....
The blades may have been turning very slowly at impact as a result of a desperate attempt to arrest the rate of descent, realising a successful landing was not possible. The final irony being that the pub roof by virtue of its unusual construction provided a degree of cushioning of the impact, but sadly not enough
With the onset of contaminated fuel being ingested, would the pilot not be quite confused by the symptoms (no criticism implied) and from what has been written, have about a minute before the other engine was similarly afflicted?
Could explain the popping etc sounds reported by witnesses, the stopped engines at impact, and the lack of fire. Could it not also have contributed to a loss of height before the decision to auto rotate was taken? Given that height for a successful autorotation was likely at a premium even in the cruise.....
The blades may have been turning very slowly at impact as a result of a desperate attempt to arrest the rate of descent, realising a successful landing was not possible. The final irony being that the pub roof by virtue of its unusual construction provided a degree of cushioning of the impact, but sadly not enough
Fuel contamination
With all professional outfits these days surely they have strict controls/procedures to avoid any form of fuel contamination? Maybe a fuel supplier might like to make comment?
DAPT,
Standard Operating Procedures are for "Standard" situations.
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate - in that order.
Falcon900, I'm not aware that any suggestion has been made that fuel contamination is not a possibility. However, it is a requirement that both the aircraft and bowser/fuel Installation daily samples are retained so the AAIB will have something to work from. You may have noticed that when the aircraft was lifted from the building, one of the first things done before it went on the lorry was a fuel sample.
Standard Operating Procedures are for "Standard" situations.
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate - in that order.
Falcon900, I'm not aware that any suggestion has been made that fuel contamination is not a possibility. However, it is a requirement that both the aircraft and bowser/fuel Installation daily samples are retained so the AAIB will have something to work from. You may have noticed that when the aircraft was lifted from the building, one of the first things done before it went on the lorry was a fuel sample.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
For starters, the check A involves fuel checks from 4 drains. 2 from the main tank and one each for the supply tanks. Also throw in the daily fuel checks at the bowser installation, the checks on the delivery vehicle etc etc. Throw in a few filters along the way and imho it's highly unlikely. Put it this way, it's not the same as a 45 gallon drum and a zenith pump operation.
Popping sounds; flame out with auto relight, are you thinking along those lines?
Thomson 757 Bird Strike - YouTube
One point this Thomson incident brings out about radio calls, it is 11 seconds from the first flame that pops out of the engine to when the Mayday was broadcast. 'Nuff said
As for the lack of fire, again, watch the Auckland incident.
Popping sounds; flame out with auto relight, are you thinking along those lines?
Thomson 757 Bird Strike - YouTube
One point this Thomson incident brings out about radio calls, it is 11 seconds from the first flame that pops out of the engine to when the Mayday was broadcast. 'Nuff said
As for the lack of fire, again, watch the Auckland incident.