AW139 G-LBAL helicopter crash in Gillingham, Norfolk
Why the rule or limitation of 50 Knots was placed upon the Crew is something else that needs to be re-thought.
How many millions of takeoffs have been done using the "Military" method by Pilots all around the Globe for at least the past Fifty Years that I know of....and that method is verboten by the CAA for some unfathomable reason plain escapes me.
Now if we could do that safely...routinely....repeatedly in helicopters with no Gucci Kit....why in the world could that "Tool" not be allowed in a Crew's Tool Box for the odd unusual instances such as befell the 139 Crew?
That assumes training, currency, and PROFICIENCY in the technique.
How many millions of takeoffs have been done using the "Military" method by Pilots all around the Globe for at least the past Fifty Years that I know of....and that method is verboten by the CAA for some unfathomable reason plain escapes me.
Now if we could do that safely...routinely....repeatedly in helicopters with no Gucci Kit....why in the world could that "Tool" not be allowed in a Crew's Tool Box for the odd unusual instances such as befell the 139 Crew?
That assumes training, currency, and PROFICIENCY in the technique.
I trained many military students in the simulated art of zero/zero take offs from the ground. I could never really see the point unless you were being shot at or had some other kind of extreme emergency. The risk simply outweighed the reward, especially if you were unfamiliar with the climb out path. Very few students showed much inability to complete the maneuver though - but I don't think this is a path that civilian operators should be encouraged to pursue or we may be educating our 'masters' into a new realm of confidence and expectancy. The old world methods of aviating, utilizing true refined ability with fine finesse have been overtaken by touch screens and button pushing.
That technique came in very handy in dusty areas....especially working sling loads with a Chinook. When you do twenty or thirty of them a day....you develop a certain amount of competence in a hurry.
Add in snowy conditions on an open flat surface....or off a Rig or Platform at night on misty, drizzly, overcast nights....and again that is not an uncommon event.
As to pushing the envelope further for the Bosses....actually I see it as a self defense measure against the Bosses. We are not talking about reducing the Take Off Minimums....we are talking about safer ways of coping with departing from "confined areas and under conditions" that do not allow for "approved" profiles.
The right answer is of course....if the weather is below approved minimums....the weather is below Take Off Minimums....tell the Boss, Arrange for Ground Transport and Accommodation for him, tied the blades down, insert the Blanks and head for the Pub.
Add in snowy conditions on an open flat surface....or off a Rig or Platform at night on misty, drizzly, overcast nights....and again that is not an uncommon event.
As to pushing the envelope further for the Bosses....actually I see it as a self defense measure against the Bosses. We are not talking about reducing the Take Off Minimums....we are talking about safer ways of coping with departing from "confined areas and under conditions" that do not allow for "approved" profiles.
The right answer is of course....if the weather is below approved minimums....the weather is below Take Off Minimums....tell the Boss, Arrange for Ground Transport and Accommodation for him, tied the blades down, insert the Blanks and head for the Pub.
The level of concentration required to undertake a zero/zero departure up to the IFR environment with no SAS or FD is at the top end of any pilot ability. We didn't make it easy for them in the SIM. I'm not talking poking your head out over a dust cloud, but a long period of intense instrument scanning. Back to the same scenario in your 139, you add the boss man banging on the glass and tapping his watch, you need all your experience and everything else you got in that bag to make it through. I do agree though, that the procedure may be a useful addition to any pilot's tool bag, but it must be reviewed regularly in SIM or training sessions in the civilian world.
I don't think anyone is talking about doing a zero/zero IF take off without SAS or AP - again, not impossible but does need to be practised.
This crash was in a fully-IFR capable twin with more bells and whistles in the AP than you can shake a stick at. The simple application of a basic technique would have saved their lives - or they could have just said No.
This crash was in a fully-IFR capable twin with more bells and whistles in the AP than you can shake a stick at. The simple application of a basic technique would have saved their lives - or they could have just said No.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
- or they could have just said No.
For me that has to be the biggest learning point for any pilot; ATPL, CPL and PPL alike. No matter
- how frightened you are of the big, scary businessman
- what your employer wants
- what you promised your friends for this weekend
- how important it is to get to where you hoped you were going
If you can't do that - for whatever reason - then the odds are high that one day you will figure badly in an accident report, and we will be here talking about how we can't understand why you did what you did.
Once upon a time a major British operator removed the Helipad Takeoff from the VMC Basecheck to save money. I could well see them omitting the Vertical IFR Departure for the same reason.
The day came when a crew had to medevac a patient from offshore to Aberdeen Hospital. To depart required a Helipad Takeoff which were not checked out to do so the company had to send a training captain out from Dyce to fly it back.
Allofasudden Helipad Takeoffs were back.
The day came when a crew had to medevac a patient from offshore to Aberdeen Hospital. To depart required a Helipad Takeoff which were not checked out to do so the company had to send a training captain out from Dyce to fly it back.
Allofasudden Helipad Takeoffs were back.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Its not a question that the vertical IFR departure is "verboten by the CAA", or that it is not approved by an operator.
If the rotorcraft flight manual says you can't fly less than 50 kts IMC, then you can't do it under anybody's rulebook, until the RFM is amended.
If the rotorcraft flight manual says you can't fly less than 50 kts IMC, then you can't do it under anybody's rulebook, until the RFM is amended.
So then we come back to Geoffers point about rig departures. We all know it happens and can be done quite safely but because of the way the RFM is written it is technically verboten.
No one is suggesting extended flight below Vmini but to prevent the transition from hover to forward flight on instruments is to deny one of the great abilities of the helicopter.
No one is suggesting extended flight below Vmini but to prevent the transition from hover to forward flight on instruments is to deny one of the great abilities of the helicopter.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
The stated minimum visibility from private sites is 800 metres. Technically speaking, this does allow departures in fog.
If the rotorcraft flight manual says you can't fly less than 50 kts IMC, then you can't do it under anybody's rulebook, until the RFM is amended.
Mind you we have had this argument over and over.
Challenging the Lawyers who write RFM's might be in order in certain cases....don't you think?
After all....in far too many instances...the RFM is written to be a one size fits all recipe that has a sole function of protecting the Factory's legal interests only.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
I hope that those who have previously argued that in the UK, IFR departures from "non-IFR sites" are illegal, will note that the CAA don't agree with them.
The stated minimum visibility from private sites is 800 metres. Technically speaking, this does allow departures in fog.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS
... until the day comes when they beat you over the head with it because something went wrong during the period 0 kts - Vmini and you crashed. The management are very good at turning a blind eye when it suits them but soon disappear from the scene when the lawyers come running. The industry has collectively cast a blind eye over this whole subject because the situation is TOO DIFFICULT to resolve without hampering the offshore support industry.
G.
After all....in far too many instances...the RFM is written to be a one size fits all recipe that has a sole function of protecting the Factory's legal interests only.
... until the day comes when they beat you over the head with it because something went wrong during the period 0 kts - Vmini and you crashed. The management are very good at turning a blind eye when it suits them but soon disappear from the scene when the lawyers come running. The industry has collectively cast a blind eye over this whole subject because the situation is TOO DIFFICULT to resolve without hampering the offshore support industry.
G.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Metric, or Imperial (0.43 nm)? It could only ever be an estimate, in practical terms, unless it's a regularly used site. Or you could calibrate your legs and pace it out.
You wouldn't want to violate the Rule and sneak out with only 790 Feet Visibility would you?
It's very common in the US to pick up a IFR flight plan beginning at a point in space, if departing from a LZ without a instrument approach. Call the TRACON, get your clearance. They may ask you if you can maintain VFR to the first waypoint if the VFR transition is in controlled airspace and you may need to request special VFR. Picking up a pre-filed IFR flight plan in flight is also common, depending on how busy the sector controller is. I've always found ATC to be be extremely helpful and accommodating. How does this compare in the the UK?
As a Civvy - never done a towering IF departure in a relatively 'modern' aircraft with an excellent ap.
As a Mil pilot, did quite a few in a dinosaur aircraft with non-existent auto-pilot.
We all know that the accepted/approved/trained procedure for PC2DLE is 250m RVR, clear of obstructions etc etc, no reject option as you ain't landing back on the deck.
Done many VMC departures using the IF/Visual scan in pitch black with no discernible horizon.............but the fudge is definitely 250m RVR.
Which is laughable - on one departure I swear it was more like 240m but we vowed not to tell anyone.
I remember one shag suggesting they ask the rescue vessel to station at 250m until someone highlighted the 'obstruction-like' qualities of such a vessel, right where you would not want him.
This is old hat - fudge will continue until Mr Tesla and Mr Solar Panel save the world from our addiction to carbon fuels or the OEMs provide a suitable aircraft which the energy companies are mandated to use.
As a Mil pilot, did quite a few in a dinosaur aircraft with non-existent auto-pilot.
We all know that the accepted/approved/trained procedure for PC2DLE is 250m RVR, clear of obstructions etc etc, no reject option as you ain't landing back on the deck.
Done many VMC departures using the IF/Visual scan in pitch black with no discernible horizon.............but the fudge is definitely 250m RVR.
Which is laughable - on one departure I swear it was more like 240m but we vowed not to tell anyone.
I remember one shag suggesting they ask the rescue vessel to station at 250m until someone highlighted the 'obstruction-like' qualities of such a vessel, right where you would not want him.
This is old hat - fudge will continue until Mr Tesla and Mr Solar Panel save the world from our addiction to carbon fuels or the OEMs provide a suitable aircraft which the energy companies are mandated to use.
As a Civvy - never done a towering IF departure in a relatively 'modern' aircraft with an excellent ap.
As a Mil pilot, did quite a few in a dinosaur aircraft with non-existent auto-pilot.
We all know that the accepted/approved/trained procedure for PC2DLE is 250m RVR, clear of obstructions etc etc, no reject option as you ain't landing back on the deck.
Done many VMC departures using the IF/Visual scan in pitch black with no discernible horizon.............but the fudge is definitely 250m RVR.
Which is laughable - on one departure I swear it was more like 240m but we vowed not to tell anyone.
I remember one shag suggesting they ask the rescue vessel to station at 250m until someone highlighted the 'obstruction-like' qualities of such a vessel, right where you would not want him.
This is old hat - fudge will continue until Mr Tesla and Mr Solar Panel save the world from our addiction to carbon fuels or the OEMs provide a suitable aircraft which the energy companies are mandated to use.
As a Mil pilot, did quite a few in a dinosaur aircraft with non-existent auto-pilot.
We all know that the accepted/approved/trained procedure for PC2DLE is 250m RVR, clear of obstructions etc etc, no reject option as you ain't landing back on the deck.
Done many VMC departures using the IF/Visual scan in pitch black with no discernible horizon.............but the fudge is definitely 250m RVR.
Which is laughable - on one departure I swear it was more like 240m but we vowed not to tell anyone.
I remember one shag suggesting they ask the rescue vessel to station at 250m until someone highlighted the 'obstruction-like' qualities of such a vessel, right where you would not want him.
This is old hat - fudge will continue until Mr Tesla and Mr Solar Panel save the world from our addiction to carbon fuels or the OEMs provide a suitable aircraft which the energy companies are mandated to use.
What language did you google translate that from?
Ah, that is ex-mil Anglais, I don't think google translate can turn that into spam