Helicopter Crash in Austria
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SP
Thanks
But if you don't remove the pro twin nonsense and you do remove the anti twin 'nonsense' then it looks like you are biased.
I would be pleasantly impressed if you actually had the same number of hours twin and single as I have. It is just possible but extremely unlikely.
Yes: rechecking your hours I was referencing an older article, and you will obviously have a few thousand up in the intervening years!
Splot
Anyhow it is unsurprising that (as you say) the majority of posters are against my posts since this forum is dominated by pro-twin (superstitious) types.
The logic and maths used to justify the twin has been discredited, will you justify it? (1x10^-5)^2 ? It is not evidentially nor theoretically supported.
It is evident that the twin does not have the safety yeild it is supposed to have.
If this accident, at night in the mountains, has ANYTHING to do with engine failure then i'll eat your hat ! (pretty safe bet)
If it is'nt engine failure what humble pie will you eat?
Thanks
But if you don't remove the pro twin nonsense and you do remove the anti twin 'nonsense' then it looks like you are biased.
I would be pleasantly impressed if you actually had the same number of hours twin and single as I have. It is just possible but extremely unlikely.
Yes: rechecking your hours I was referencing an older article, and you will obviously have a few thousand up in the intervening years!
Splot
Anyhow it is unsurprising that (as you say) the majority of posters are against my posts since this forum is dominated by pro-twin (superstitious) types.
The logic and maths used to justify the twin has been discredited, will you justify it? (1x10^-5)^2 ? It is not evidentially nor theoretically supported.
It is evident that the twin does not have the safety yeild it is supposed to have.
If this accident, at night in the mountains, has ANYTHING to do with engine failure then i'll eat your hat ! (pretty safe bet)
If it is'nt engine failure what humble pie will you eat?
Chief Bottle Washer
No-one (apart from you) has raised this as an engine failure issue. Flyting merely opined that
I definately wouldn't want to fly away from there at that time of the night in a single.
Back to the thread subject, please: any more on this will be moderated out as OT.
Mountain cabins don't usually come with ILS, so not sure what (other, if any) IFR equipment you could ask about?
R66 has option for stabilization system and radar alt. I don't know if the mishap a/c was equipped with either.
Guest
Posts: n/a
We all don´t know what he was doing....but lets face it:
Flying in the mountains at night (without night aid) is a big no-no......unless you´re flying a well known (and documented) route, or a known GPS-track...
It is pretty dark up there (depending upon the weather and the moon), and i can´t see why it was necessary to resupply a chalet at night anyway...
So this accident leaves a lot of ????......and people in general, but pilots especially like to come up with ideas based upon their own experience..
I doubt there are many pilots here who have high altitude/mountain experience in a helicopter.....
The accident investigation will show more....
Maybe he hit a cable?
Maybe he just had a CFIT?
Maybe another technical problem?
Maybe he had a vertigo?
Who knows.....
None of those will answer the question about risk assessment for this flight....
Flying in the mountains at night (without night aid) is a big no-no......unless you´re flying a well known (and documented) route, or a known GPS-track...
It is pretty dark up there (depending upon the weather and the moon), and i can´t see why it was necessary to resupply a chalet at night anyway...
So this accident leaves a lot of ????......and people in general, but pilots especially like to come up with ideas based upon their own experience..
I doubt there are many pilots here who have high altitude/mountain experience in a helicopter.....
The accident investigation will show more....
Maybe he hit a cable?
Maybe he just had a CFIT?
Maybe another technical problem?
Maybe he had a vertigo?
Who knows.....
None of those will answer the question about risk assessment for this flight....
Censoring
Now even if this was true, this I feel should be the last reason to censor a contribution. I am certainly not accessing an internet forum to read the majority view. I am actually more interested in the outsider view of somebody who challenges our mainstream thinking.
Beside the tragic end of this flight, there are many questions which are in general not very good for aviators.
- Was this a commercial flight? I cant find any information that htis helicopter was registed in an AOC ?
- Was there a valid outside landing permission? The landing area ist within a restricted area.
- Night VFR in the dark - human factors the eyes need at least half an hour to get used to the darkness.
- Flight planing does the aircraft have enough reserves for this altitude?
- Was this a commercial flight? I cant find any information that htis helicopter was registed in an AOC ?
- Was there a valid outside landing permission? The landing area ist within a restricted area.
- Night VFR in the dark - human factors the eyes need at least half an hour to get used to the darkness.
- Flight planing does the aircraft have enough reserves for this altitude?
Last edited by MichiScholz; 12th Sep 2016 at 08:06.
What are the regs in that part of the world wrt night ops?
Do the take off and landing sites need to be approved for night ops else it would need to be operated under IFR?
On the human factors affecting this incident, you have to wonder if being a redbull sky god alters ones perception of risk and affects how you view your own abilities.
Do the take off and landing sites need to be approved for night ops else it would need to be operated under IFR?
On the human factors affecting this incident, you have to wonder if being a redbull sky god alters ones perception of risk and affects how you view your own abilities.
According to the surviver it looks like Hannes tried to fly away from the hut - down the valley and impacted into terrain... all happening very quickly.
CFIT
Reminds me of this accident/discussion...
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/446...iscussion.html
CFIT
wonder if being a redbull sky god alters ones perception of risk and affects how you view your own abilities
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/446...iscussion.html
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Here and There
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good question Bell_ringer, I don't want to speculate on the how and why but an important question needs to be asked. What the heck is an enthusiastic but when it comes to commercial helicopter ops fairly mediocre pilot doing up there at night.
Replenishment and support flights to cabins and huts in the alps are the bread and butter of commercial operators in this part of the world. However, conducted by highly experienced pilots with thousands of hours and more importantly years of flying experience and local knowledge.
Besides the legality of all this, these folks would laugh you off when asked to conduct such an operation in a Robinson helicopter at night. What made Mr. Arch think he can pull it off?......we'll never know.
This is a tragedy, but hopefully it can serve as a warning to other retired Red Bull sponsored adrenaline junkies that think they are god's gift to helicopter aviation. This is a very unforgiving line of work, if you contiguously keep stretching the boundaries it will bite you!
Replenishment and support flights to cabins and huts in the alps are the bread and butter of commercial operators in this part of the world. However, conducted by highly experienced pilots with thousands of hours and more importantly years of flying experience and local knowledge.
Besides the legality of all this, these folks would laugh you off when asked to conduct such an operation in a Robinson helicopter at night. What made Mr. Arch think he can pull it off?......we'll never know.
This is a tragedy, but hopefully it can serve as a warning to other retired Red Bull sponsored adrenaline junkies that think they are god's gift to helicopter aviation. This is a very unforgiving line of work, if you contiguously keep stretching the boundaries it will bite you!
Last edited by imuney; 12th Sep 2016 at 11:55.
Besides the legality of all this, these folks would laugh you off when asked to conduct such an operation in a Robinson helicopter at night.
Night ops in South Africa
If the landing site (whether approved or not) is not equipped with adequate night flying facilities and/or where objects and terrain in the vicinity could endanger the operator, then no night flying to or taking off from such landing site is allowed (CAR 139.01.5), even if the flight itself was operated under IFR.
As flyting has pointed out already, the actual commercial cargo operations was likely to be concluded during daylight conditions. Only the return leg was done after dark. However, one can argue that this empty return leg was done under Part 91 (i.e., General Aviation).
With regards to the night flight, the passenger and the pilot could have agreed that the lift that the pax got on the way down (no pun intended) was a non-revenue flight. So again the operations and flight rules for night ops under Part 91 would be applicable.
If the night VFR flight however is a commercial operation, then in your country further conditions and restrictions with regards to Second-in-Charge, pilot experience, recurrent training, approved and documented operating procedures, and additional instrumentation apply (CAR 127.07.11 and 127.07.20).
Hot&Hi, I would argue that when someone starts to argue how something "could" be interpreted instead of how it "should" be interpreted they are are already on the wrong side of the line.
Clever use of semantics is unlikely to affect the outcome of a poor decision.
Clever use of semantics is unlikely to affect the outcome of a poor decision.
https://kurier.at/chronik/oesterreic...rz/220.844.874
Rough translation:
- the surviving passenger Reinhard B. (who runs the chalet) "couldn't provide much insight into the cause of the accident"
- Hannes told him he had "night flying equipment" and he accepted that explanation
- when he was in the helicopter and only the beam of the landing lights was illuminating the ground, he couldn't see any contours [of the landscape]
- "he then felt his way through the landscape, using only the landing light", [Reinhard] told the German "Bild" paper.
- a rock wall appeared in the beam of the landing light. He attempted to pull up, but was unsuccessful. "Hannes made a death-cry that I will never forget"
- So far, no clues have been found that would indicate there was a technical problem.
Der mit Arch verunglückte Hüttenwart Reinhard B. konnte jedenfalls bisher wenig zur Ursache des Unfalls beitragen. „Hannes meinte, er habe eine Nachtflug-Ausrüstung. Ich habe das akzeptiert. Als ich dann drin saß und nur der Lichtstrahl des Start- und Landescheinwerfers zu sehen war, sah ich keine Konturen mehr. Dann hat er sich durch das Gelände getastet, nur mithilfe der Scheinwerfer“, sagte er gegenüber der deutschen Bild. Im Lichtkegel tauchte demnach eine Felswand auf. Arch versuchte noch hochzuziehen – vergeblich. „Hannes stieß einen Todesschrei aus, den vergesse ich nie.“ Hinweis auf ein technisches Gebrechen gibt es bisher jedenfalls nicht.
- the surviving passenger Reinhard B. (who runs the chalet) "couldn't provide much insight into the cause of the accident"
- Hannes told him he had "night flying equipment" and he accepted that explanation
- when he was in the helicopter and only the beam of the landing lights was illuminating the ground, he couldn't see any contours [of the landscape]
- "he then felt his way through the landscape, using only the landing light", [Reinhard] told the German "Bild" paper.
- a rock wall appeared in the beam of the landing light. He attempted to pull up, but was unsuccessful. "Hannes made a death-cry that I will never forget"
- So far, no clues have been found that would indicate there was a technical problem.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
imuney
Slight correction - Hannes was still very much a current Red Bull 'athlete' - certainly not retired.
Not sure where it has been said or by whom (apart from you) that he thought he was god's gift to helicopter flying either....
Slight correction - Hannes was still very much a current Red Bull 'athlete' - certainly not retired.
Not sure where it has been said or by whom (apart from you) that he thought he was god's gift to helicopter flying either....
Bell Ringer, I tend to agree with your remark concerning the outcome of poor decisions.
I was responding to your notion that one may still operate at night from an unsuitable (or unapproved) landing site, provided one files for IFR. I would think this is incorrect. A flight under IFR cannot land at an aerodrome which is in IMC at the time, unless - as a minimum - that aerodrome is equipped with instrument landing facilities.
Originally Posted by Bell_ringer
Do the take off and landing sites need to be approved for night ops else it would need to be operated under IFR?
Bell Ringer, I tend to agree with your remark concerning the outcome of poor decisions.
I was responding to your notion that one may still operate at night from an unsuitable (or unapproved) landing site, provided one files for IFR. I would think this is incorrect. A flight under IFR cannot land at an aerodrome which is in IMC at the time, unless - as a minimum - that aerodrome is equipped with instrument landing facilities.
I was responding to your notion that one may still operate at night from an unsuitable (or unapproved) landing site, provided one files for IFR. I would think this is incorrect. A flight under IFR cannot land at an aerodrome which is in IMC at the time, unless - as a minimum - that aerodrome is equipped with instrument landing facilities.
For night ops there are minimas required for facilities, currency and visibility. From the various translations of reports it would appear that this flight did not meet the all the requirements and should not have been conducted.
Naturally ops under IFR have different requirements.
In this neck of the woods it's easy to try find a way to make regulations work for your benefit especially if you find a need to justify your actions to a man with a clipboard in a high viz jacket.
I doubt that would work in Austria though. At least I hope not.
Another article from the Kurier
https://kurier.at/chronik/oesterreic...ch/220.807.911
Google translation:
Google translation:
It is also unclear whether Arch would ever be allowed to start. Pilots point out that helicopter flights are allowed actually at night only from airfield to airfield, also had regular contact with the air traffic control exist.
[...]
The owner of the mountain hut stated that the 48-year-old Arch (free of charge) provided him with potatoes, because its previous supplier was apparently too expensive.
Since April Arch had permits for landings to supply the cabin. How did he get those permits however, is unclear. Normally in the National Park Hohe Tauern strict flight rules apply. Since Arch, reportedly, had no license for supply flights, he must have done this as a favour as a private person.
[...]
The owner of the mountain hut stated that the 48-year-old Arch (free of charge) provided him with potatoes, because its previous supplier was apparently too expensive.
Since April Arch had permits for landings to supply the cabin. How did he get those permits however, is unclear. Normally in the National Park Hohe Tauern strict flight rules apply. Since Arch, reportedly, had no license for supply flights, he must have done this as a favour as a private person.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: airport
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can help but wonder why Archs Plan (relayed by the surviving passenger) to "climb 1000m and fly directly to Salzburg, as there would be no obstacles in that altitude" didn't work out.
Even if the Garmin had issues (passenger claimed to have seen "no signal" on the portable navigation device) the compass outght to show north quite reliably. Acceleration should not affect the compass when flying north or south, right?
Even if the Garmin had issues (passenger claimed to have seen "no signal" on the portable navigation device) the compass outght to show north quite reliably. Acceleration should not affect the compass when flying north or south, right?
I doubt there are many pilots here who have high altitude/mountain experience in a helicopter....
Night mountains is not for the unprepared - even with NVG - for unaided flying it is a place for twin-engine, twin pilot, IFR capable aircraft with a lot of careful planning and currency/recency on type and in the location.
Another example of self-belief in ones abilities not matching the reality of a hostile environment??? Very sad waste of life.
