Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

S92 OEI into Sumburgh

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

S92 OEI into Sumburgh

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 26th Nov 2016, 05:17
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
S92 OEI into Sumburgh

North Sea helicopter in emergency landing at Sumburgh - BBC News

Usual BBC over dramatic headline of 'emergency landing"

FR24 shows 2 x S92 dispatched for down-manning the platform. Wing man overhauls the OEI aircraft and leaves him to his night overwater OEI transit and approach.

So to turn a non story into a meaningful discussion: would you shepherd the OEI aircraft on his diversion to nearest suitable or would you press on with your pax to original destination?

Last edited by Max Contingency; 26th Nov 2016 at 06:05.
Max Contingency is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 06:35
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: After all, what’s more important than proving to someone on the internet that they’re wrong? - Manson
Posts: 1,846
Received 51 Likes on 36 Posts
over dramatic headline of 'emergency landing"
If an engine failure is in the EP's of the RFM they are probably correct?

So to turn a non story into a meaningful discussion: would you shepherd the OEI aircraft on his diversion to nearest suitable or would you press on with your pax to original destination?
Without knowledge of the exact circumstance - difficult to answer that one.

In the first instance as we now have a single engine helicopter out in the North Sea in the dark if you had the option you would possibly stay with them as a first priority. If they did end up in the Ogen you could at least tell somebody where they were and probably not much else?
RVDT is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 06:39
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: On land
Posts: 245
Received 29 Likes on 13 Posts
If an engine failure is in the EP's of the RFM they are probably correct?
I have "Aux Batt Off" in my EOP, but it doesn't make it an emergency landing.
Nescafe is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 07:00
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Nescafe

I guess our are flying an AW139. If not ignore my comments.

The RFM for the 139 is a technical document written exclusively for the certification process, hence now the clamour from all corners of industry for a Flight Crew Operations Manual. These are currently available for the EC 225 (RIP) and the S92 and will soon be available for the 139.

The RFM currently advises the reader to 'continue flight' in the event of a 'Main Battery Hot' event, likewise for the 'Alt Batt Hot'. Perhaps most astonishingly it says the same if both events occur simultaneously.

This goes to show that the the context of a malfunction/emergency is very important. With any of those Batt Hot events I would indeed continue fight but only if I was downwind in the circuit which is probably where the Flight Test Engineer who wrote the procedure was when he came up with the drill.

If there is a tendency in our industry I would like to change it is the apparent desire NOT to tell the world you have a problem. Even worse even when it is acknowledged by the crew that they have an issue and tell ATC they use mealy-mouthed words like:

"We are returning with a technical issue"

When challenged by the controller - "are you declaring an emergency" they still refuse to use the magic words PAN PAN.... PAN PAN... PAN PAN.

Why not??

G.
Geoffersincornwall is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 09:02
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK - The SD
Posts: 460
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Max Contingency
North Sea helicopter in emergency landing at Sumburgh - BBC News

Usual BBC over dramatic headline of 'emergency landing"

FR24 shows 2 x S92 dispatched for down-manning the platform. Wing man overhauls the OEI aircraft and leaves him to his night overwater OEI transit and approach.

So to turn a non story into a meaningful discussion: would you shepherd the OEI aircraft on his diversion to nearest suitable or would you press on with your pax to original destination?
Maybe they were concerned about the runway possibly being fouled by the OEI aircraft.
serf is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 11:07
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Aer
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not really a big deal. In the airline world, there is usually 1x IFSD or engine problem / rejected takeoff about every 1.5 days somewhere.
terminus mos is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 11:19
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Location, location - is very important when buying a house.
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agree, but the airline world is a MUCH bigger world.

Alas, the North Sea has had more than it's fair share of tradegy in recent years so any helicopter 'emergency' will make the news whatever the peers think.
Frying Pan is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 12:31
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: UK
Age: 80
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by terminus mos
Not really a big deal..........
Hmm.....well, having had an engine shut down on me for no apparent reason on a dark, snowy, North Sea winter's night some 70 minutes from the nearest land I can assure you for me it was certainly a big deal....... but then I always was a 'what's going to happen next' kind of guy not a bold pilot who isn't phased by these happenings.
Democritus is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 17:04
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: east ESSEX
Posts: 4,660
Received 68 Likes on 43 Posts
Well,if I was the local CP,I`d invite the `other crew` for an early morning `coffee and biccies`,but no coffee or biccies, to explain their reasoning for not assisting the aircraft in` distress`....If that is what happened....even if the aircraft with the problem does`nt want assistance/declare an emergency ,etc,common sense and professional etiquette as a Captain should come first...
sycamore is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 19:36
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Another snippet...


Double North Sea Drama As Helicopter Down-Manning Workers Makes Emergency Landing - Oil and Gas News
Concentric is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 20:03
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Out West
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Flying a helicopter with one engine? Phew! Whatever next?
Same again is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 21:02
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 3,837
Received 74 Likes on 29 Posts
Maybe they were concerned about the runway possibly being fouled by the OEI aircraft.
Yes, I guess the second S92 would have a problem if it couldn't land on the runway.

I would have stayed with the OEI.
MightyGem is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 21:36
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Runway Blocked

It always amazes me (an overused word) but why would a HELICOPTER worry about a blocked runway on a huge airfield? It could land on the hardstanding outside the terminal building, bearing in mind how they land offshore. In fact, back in the day, helicopters did just that.

The second aircraft should have accompanied, given the conditions.

Can we please get a grip.

Sq
ScotiaQ is offline  
Old 26th Nov 2016, 22:37
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 956
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
Would the OEI helicopter have been tracked by either radar or satellite? If so I'm wondering what value the second helicopter would have added?
krypton_john is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2016, 01:48
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by krypton_john
Would the OEI helicopter have been tracked by either radar or satellite? If so I'm wondering what value the second helicopter would have added?
Surprisingly, some very modern aircraft have their sat tracking system wired to the non essential bus bar that is shed in the event of OEI
Max Contingency is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2016, 03:43
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 714
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts
Wasn't OEI, chip indication without secondary so just a roll back to idle. Can be rolled back up if required. Everything offshore these days is satellite tracked, with 30 sec frequency if you flip the "concerned" switch. Good call by the crew of the other aircraft, if they had loitered around in the dark trying to stay visual with the slower aircraft to only provide a location that is already well known, then they'd be in my office the next day.

Different strokes... this is a profession, not a support group.
malabo is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2016, 07:11
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Australia sometimes
Posts: 103
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I sometimes wish we had a "like" button on this forum. The last 6 posts deserve a "like". Common sense seems to be getting quite rare.
Scattercat is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2016, 08:43
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wanaka, NZ
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
The non-essential bus gets shed OEI, really?
gulliBell is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2016, 10:15
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,251
Received 331 Likes on 184 Posts
Originally Posted by gulliBell
The non-essential bus gets shed OEI, really?
The S92 does not have a non-essential bus and, regardless, does not shed any buses after an engine shutdown. It uses MGB driven generators - not engine starter/generators.

That said, you do come across some odd wiring examples on different types, as Max Con says. The one that really struck me was reading the Air Transat A330 report, where they dumped all their fuel out of a leaking pipe over the Atlantic, at night, and then dead-sticked into the Azores. The CVFDR was shed after the second flame out, so the investigators lost the last 30 min of the flight! Turns out that that's a standard practice, but now being addressed.
212man is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2016, 10:34
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Very true, the S92 does not shed any busses OEI but will shed certain services upon a generator failure - AVC, No.1 Eng Anti-Ice etc.
Industry is slowly catching up with CVFDR problems in that most new CVFDR installations have an independent (battery) power supply to power them on the event of loss of main power.
ukv1145 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.