SAR S-92 Missing Ireland
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What soogyboxers said.
Last edited by oleary; 24th Mar 2017 at 02:28.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
BER NOOLY you are getting a bit of a kicking because your posts, although childlike to us in the know, are good questions that are at the heart of this accident.
EGPWS is not the panacea you would imagine it to be and can never be trusted as a primary navigation aid. The Regulator makes that clear as does the manufacturer.
The WX Radar, If used reasonably competently should show a clear coastline. Islands, ships and boats. It's hard to accept that this crew, doing such a procedure, at such heights AMSL, would not have the Radar trimmed for optimum performance. At the heights implied large ships become a hazard. This was their bread and butter day job after all.
It's as hard to accept they navigated to the wrong waypoint.
While there is always potential for human error, In this case there were multiple layers of "humans" experienced and authorotive enough to reduce the chances of an error exponentially.
It is for these reasons that Soggy Boxers is getting irritated because in the end, the only real answers may come from the wreckage, FDR and CVR data. Without this information, nothing of this incident makes any sense when the experience and skills of that crew are considered.
BER nooly. Hope that explains Soggies frustration.
EGPWS is not the panacea you would imagine it to be and can never be trusted as a primary navigation aid. The Regulator makes that clear as does the manufacturer.
The WX Radar, If used reasonably competently should show a clear coastline. Islands, ships and boats. It's hard to accept that this crew, doing such a procedure, at such heights AMSL, would not have the Radar trimmed for optimum performance. At the heights implied large ships become a hazard. This was their bread and butter day job after all.
It's as hard to accept they navigated to the wrong waypoint.
While there is always potential for human error, In this case there were multiple layers of "humans" experienced and authorotive enough to reduce the chances of an error exponentially.
It is for these reasons that Soggy Boxers is getting irritated because in the end, the only real answers may come from the wreckage, FDR and CVR data. Without this information, nothing of this incident makes any sense when the experience and skills of that crew are considered.
BER nooly. Hope that explains Soggies frustration.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belfast
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't the RTE report assume all the Coastguard S92's have the same spec'
Is it strange that Sligo-based R118 helicopter had been tasked at 9.40pm on Monday night to go 241km west and
R116 left Dublin at 11.02pm.
Wouldn't that mean R116 was then about two hours twenty behind R118, if you assume about an hour to get to the west coast doing about 100kts.
Is it strange that Sligo-based R118 helicopter had been tasked at 9.40pm on Monday night to go 241km west and
R116 left Dublin at 11.02pm.
Wouldn't that mean R116 was then about two hours twenty behind R118, if you assume about an hour to get to the west coast doing about 100kts.
Rescue 118 was tasked at that time but went from Sligo direct to Blacksod to refuel before heading to the ship, I would have thought that top cover should have the two S92s travelling together and not to be so far behind.
For what it's worth I posted this a week ago.
Again I am not familiar with the this helicopters radar kit but that happened once. Not on the database they could have thought it was a ship.
I am reminded by a CFIT in China in the late 90s. This was flying towards the coast, VFR, in a low cloudbase and flew into the steeply rising coastline. The radar was on and from the CVR the crew, being aware of the coastline, had commenced to backtrack towards the sea. From the wreckage the radar was assessed as being on and the tilt was selected at least 5 degrees up.
Flying with the radar tilted is common to avoid ground returns that interfere with returns from cloud formations especially over land. The upwards tilt will mask obstacles directly in front at and below the same height. For example, using the 1/60 rule 1 degree tilt up will hide a 1 foot obstacle 60ft in front; a 100ft obstacle 6,000ft in front. 5 degrees nose up will mask the same obstacle at 1,200ft or under a 1/4 mile. Most radars, when selected to 5 miles or greater, will not define at a 1/4 mile as it will be lost in scanner base scatter. It means that you can fly at a 300ft cliff at 200ft and not be aware of it.
Flying with the radar tilted is common to avoid ground returns that interfere with returns from cloud formations especially over land. The upwards tilt will mask obstacles directly in front at and below the same height. For example, using the 1/60 rule 1 degree tilt up will hide a 1 foot obstacle 60ft in front; a 100ft obstacle 6,000ft in front. 5 degrees nose up will mask the same obstacle at 1,200ft or under a 1/4 mile. Most radars, when selected to 5 miles or greater, will not define at a 1/4 mile as it will be lost in scanner base scatter. It means that you can fly at a 300ft cliff at 200ft and not be aware of it.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A ship would look different than a land mass, and would you pass over a ship at 220ft? Still doesn't add up.
Guest
Posts: n/a
BER NOOLY you are getting a bit of a kicking because your posts, although childlike to us in the know, are good questions that are at the heart of this accident.
EGPWS is not the panacea you would imagine it to be and can never be trusted as a primary navigation aid. The Regulator makes that clear as does the manufacturer.
The WX Radar, If used reasonably competently should show a clear coastline. Islands, ships and boats. It's hard to accept that this crew, doing such a procedure, at such heights AMSL, would not have the Radar trimmed for optimum performance. At the heights implied large ships become a hazard. This was their bread and butter day job after all.
It's as hard to accept they navigated to the wrong waypoint.
While there is always potential for human error, In this case there were multiple layers of "humans" experienced and authorotive enough to reduce the chances of an error exponentially.
It is for these reasons that Soggy Boxers is getting irritated because in the end, the only real answers may come from the wreckage, FDR and CVR data. Without this information, nothing of this incident makes any sense when the experience and skills of that crew are considered.
BER nooly. Hope that explains Soggies frustration.
EGPWS is not the panacea you would imagine it to be and can never be trusted as a primary navigation aid. The Regulator makes that clear as does the manufacturer.
The WX Radar, If used reasonably competently should show a clear coastline. Islands, ships and boats. It's hard to accept that this crew, doing such a procedure, at such heights AMSL, would not have the Radar trimmed for optimum performance. At the heights implied large ships become a hazard. This was their bread and butter day job after all.
It's as hard to accept they navigated to the wrong waypoint.
While there is always potential for human error, In this case there were multiple layers of "humans" experienced and authorotive enough to reduce the chances of an error exponentially.
It is for these reasons that Soggy Boxers is getting irritated because in the end, the only real answers may come from the wreckage, FDR and CVR data. Without this information, nothing of this incident makes any sense when the experience and skills of that crew are considered.
BER nooly. Hope that explains Soggies frustration.
I never said EGPWS was a panacea or their primary means of navigation, quite the opposite in fact.
There is a way to answer questions, which the vast majority of people have done in a civil way. There is just one senior member that seems to have a chip on his shoulder, as also evidenced in some of his replies on other threads too.
Childlike but also a good question? Which is it? So a downward radar tilt while flying at 220 ft would have no problem detecting something say 2 km ahead?
I never said EGPWS was a panacea or their primary means of navigation, quite the opposite in fact.
There is a way to answer questions, which the vast majority of people have done in a civil way. There is just one senior member that seems to have a chip on his shoulder, as also evidenced in some of his replies on other threads too.
I never said EGPWS was a panacea or their primary means of navigation, quite the opposite in fact.
There is a way to answer questions, which the vast majority of people have done in a civil way. There is just one senior member that seems to have a chip on his shoulder, as also evidenced in some of his replies on other threads too.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Midnight
Visibility 2.5 km, Ceiling 400 ft
11 pm
Visibility 3.9 km, Ceiling 600 ft
10 pm
Visibility 6 km, Ceiling 500 ft
Guest
Posts: n/a
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
BER NOOLY, sadly your question is "childlike" in that if you had experience of the weather radar you would know the answer to your question is impossible given the variables in play. I am not being rude just explaining why people get frustrated with some posters.
The EGPWS is the virtual world.
The RADAR is the real world,
but as you quite correctly state there are errors that can be made in setting it up to give accurate information that you may need at that particular time. Crews such as SAR are well practiced in such techniques and scenarios. There is nothing to suggest this crew did anything wrong with the radar, but it is possible to set it up so badly that the picture it provides does not give the information you may need. It is also possible, with severe sea conditions, that sea clutter can obscure the targets in play ahead of you. Again this crew would certainly know that.
Many of us understand these issues very well and thus can see no merit in trying to decode what and what did not take place in that cockpit.
Don't take your bat home but just recognise that some issues seem black and white but in reality they are much more complex.
We have to wait for the real situation that will hopefully be presented by the recorded data on the FDR/CVR. In the meantime the desktop assessments count for f***k all.
The EGPWS is the virtual world.
The RADAR is the real world,
but as you quite correctly state there are errors that can be made in setting it up to give accurate information that you may need at that particular time. Crews such as SAR are well practiced in such techniques and scenarios. There is nothing to suggest this crew did anything wrong with the radar, but it is possible to set it up so badly that the picture it provides does not give the information you may need. It is also possible, with severe sea conditions, that sea clutter can obscure the targets in play ahead of you. Again this crew would certainly know that.
Many of us understand these issues very well and thus can see no merit in trying to decode what and what did not take place in that cockpit.
Don't take your bat home but just recognise that some issues seem black and white but in reality they are much more complex.
We have to wait for the real situation that will hopefully be presented by the recorded data on the FDR/CVR. In the meantime the desktop assessments count for f***k all.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sea Area Forecast until 0600 Saturday 25 March 2017
Forecast for Irish coastal waters from Valentia to Erris Head to Howth Head:
Wind: Northeasterly or variable force 3 or less.
Weather: Fair.
Visibility: Good.
Outlook for a further 24 hours until 0600, Sunday, 26 March 2017: Light easterly winds in the northwest and north, elsewhere moderate northeasterly winds occasionally fresh in the southeast. Fair weather.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Belfast
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weather at the site today is reported as excellent, diving to commence at 10am, Navy divers will go down two at a time and can only spend ten minutes at the site before coming back, two more will then go down ,this is so they don't need to decompress after a dive, they are all currently at the site so hopefully things will go ok for them.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Divers expected to go down around now.
From RTE:
"Naval Service divers are due to commence their investigations at the wreckage of Coast Guard Rescue Helicopter 116 shortly.
Sea conditions are favourable and fair weather expected for the area around the search site.
Teams of specialist Naval Service divers will embark in pairs and will stay underwater for ten-minute periods.
The operation is being coordinated by the LÉ Samuel Beckett, which is located close to the wreckage at Blackrock Island.
It is hoped that the three missing crew members - Captain Mark Duffy, Winch Operator Paul Ormsby and Winchman Ciarán Smith may still be in the wreckage.
Detailed mapping of the undersea conditions has been carried out in recent days and images gathered by specialist cameras have been reviewed by the multiple agencies involved in the operation.
The wreckage is located in waters 60m off the western face of Blackrock, at a depth of around 40m.
Wind conditions in the area have eased considerably and the forecast is for fair or fine weather with good visibility.
Specialist equipment was loaded onto boats at Blacksod pier yesterday evening in anticipation of those favourable sea conditions.
All the agencies involved are stressing that safety concerns will take precedence throughout the operation.
At a briefing at Blacksod Lighthouse last night, Superintendent Tony Healy said the hope was that the three crew were in or near the wreckage.
He said the conditions for underwater exploration of the helicopter were the best that search teams had experienced so far.
Chief Investigator with the Air Accident Investigation Unit Jurgen Whyte said a lot of information had been gathered and that everything possible was being done to assist the dive process.
He said he was confident that dive conditions would be good for a number of days.
Mr Whyte said the priority was to recover the three crew members before efforts were made to access the flight recorder."
From RTE:
"Naval Service divers are due to commence their investigations at the wreckage of Coast Guard Rescue Helicopter 116 shortly.
Sea conditions are favourable and fair weather expected for the area around the search site.
Teams of specialist Naval Service divers will embark in pairs and will stay underwater for ten-minute periods.
The operation is being coordinated by the LÉ Samuel Beckett, which is located close to the wreckage at Blackrock Island.
It is hoped that the three missing crew members - Captain Mark Duffy, Winch Operator Paul Ormsby and Winchman Ciarán Smith may still be in the wreckage.
Detailed mapping of the undersea conditions has been carried out in recent days and images gathered by specialist cameras have been reviewed by the multiple agencies involved in the operation.
The wreckage is located in waters 60m off the western face of Blackrock, at a depth of around 40m.
Wind conditions in the area have eased considerably and the forecast is for fair or fine weather with good visibility.
Specialist equipment was loaded onto boats at Blacksod pier yesterday evening in anticipation of those favourable sea conditions.
All the agencies involved are stressing that safety concerns will take precedence throughout the operation.
At a briefing at Blacksod Lighthouse last night, Superintendent Tony Healy said the hope was that the three crew were in or near the wreckage.
He said the conditions for underwater exploration of the helicopter were the best that search teams had experienced so far.
Chief Investigator with the Air Accident Investigation Unit Jurgen Whyte said a lot of information had been gathered and that everything possible was being done to assist the dive process.
He said he was confident that dive conditions would be good for a number of days.
Mr Whyte said the priority was to recover the three crew members before efforts were made to access the flight recorder."
Guest
Posts: n/a
Weather at the site today is reported as excellent, diving to commence at 10am, Navy divers will go down two at a time and can only spend ten minutes at the site before coming back, two more will then go down ,this is so they don't need to decompress after a dive, they are all currently at the site so hopefully things will go ok for them.
AAXX 24101 03976 45/71 /1602 10087 20028 30318 40330 52010==
Visibility 21 km, Wind 160 ° (SE) 2 m/s (3 knots)
Ber Nooly
I don't think I would ever use a down tilt at 220', it would be at least level tilt if not one division up, depending on clutter. I always wanted to see as much as possible what was in front.
So a downward radar tilt while flying at 220 ft would have no problem detecting something say 2 km ahead?
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: South Coast, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts