Helicopter down in East River, NYC
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is precisely why open door flights should be banned for the general public unless seatbelts are worn all the time OR the FAA needs a new regulation that states that open door flights in helicopters OR airplanes may only be conducted when FAA approved harnesses are in use.
What FLYNYON was selling wasn't the ability to take photos of the skyline from a helicopter. They were selling thrills, the "foot selfie" thing. There is even (or was) a photo on their web site where customers could sit in a helicopter mockup, with their feet dangling over a model of the ground, so they could practice their foot selfie camera shots before the flight.
I don't believe there is a harness made, that would be safer for a tourist to use in the event of submersion than a seatbelt. Releasing a seatbelt is an instinctive act. We do it every day when driving a car. Fooling with any special harness release -- especially one designed to handle a tension load (i.e. falling out of the aircraft) -- is going to take more time than releasing a seatbelt. The solution seems obvious. There can still be a tourist industry with open door flights, and people buckled into their seats.
You mean the way it’s successful been done for years, save the odd dumbass dropping something out the side by accident which also happen with profession SAR crews from time to time.
It's just not needed to take photos with the doors off.
Gray - Totally agree but when he makes a statement along the lines of
then it needs to be pointed out that he is incorrect when it comes to segments of commercial aerial photography.
If he is one who just sits there and takes photos of stuff on the ground like houses etc then yeah fine but dont encompass all of us who do what we do into that same statement. Thats all
I've done hundreds of hours of open door commercial aerial photography, and only a very small amount of that was in a harness. It's just not needed to take photos with the doors off.
If he is one who just sits there and takes photos of stuff on the ground like houses etc then yeah fine but dont encompass all of us who do what we do into that same statement. Thats all
To Doors Off or Not Off
Briefings, checks, cross checks, gear secured or? Done hundreds of film/photo shoots & never lost a thing out the cockpit (no doors) 
well maybe some spit, sweat, snot & vomit 
Cockpit has gotta be prepped & managed right....plain & simple. This crash was not an Aerial-work shoot. it was a play on marketing versus rules & they lost...Lives lost, machine lost, AOC (probably) lost, credibility lost...etc
Very sad outcome for the hapless victims & their surviving Families
well maybe some spit, sweat, snot & vomit Cockpit has gotta be prepped & managed right....plain & simple. This crash was not an Aerial-work shoot. it was a play on marketing versus rules & they lost...Lives lost, machine lost, AOC (probably) lost, credibility lost...etc
Very sad outcome for the hapless victims & their surviving Families
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We're not talking about segments of commercial aerial photography here, and I wasn't either. These are tourist flights. They need to be managed differently.
So true. This isn't helicopter centric but some of the more memorable vacation moments I never anticipated were when someone handed me a camera to take a photo of a group or couple and a conversation ensued. Some were pretty darn funny. I don't suppose your feet have much to say during one of those photo shoots. How do we even know they are your feet.....
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas, like a whole other country
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Thanks for posting that, H&H. It's a nicely done video that shows how enjoyable one of those flights can be if everything goes right, though I'm not condoning the open-door shoe selfie thing. Obviously, there are some differences from what occurred on 350LH - first, this guy was on a twin, not a single (not to reignite that argument, but as has been noted before, the fuel switch for the twin is on the ceiling, so the presumed cause of the East River incident would not be likely).
Second difference, and probably not that significant, is that the pax headsets seem to include microphones, whereas the crash ship did not.
I wonder if this was a "special" flight since the company knew they were being videoblogged. (I will say the pilot is rather fetching with those blue eyes and all...)
Second difference, and probably not that significant, is that the pax headsets seem to include microphones, whereas the crash ship did not.
I wonder if this was a "special" flight since the company knew they were being videoblogged. (I will say the pilot is rather fetching with those blue eyes and all...)
I think Patrick Day - CEO of NYONAIR is kidding himself of the consequences of his decisions and the resulting accident by posting this on LinkedIn;
Many media have misreported facts associated with the tragic accident that occurred on March 11, 2018. To help correct these misstatements and provide the FACTS to all audiences we’ve addressed them head on below. Safety has always been FlyNYON’s top priority and we will always put that first.
Perception
The harnesses used on the FlyNYON’s flights are illegal.
Fact
Before the accident, there were no rules prohibiting the harnesses previously used on flyNYON flights. However, the FAA has since prohibited the use of harnesses so moving forward, all our passengers will wear FAA-approved three-point seatbelts installed by the manufacturer. at all times.
Perception
A helicopter owned by flyNYON was involved in the accident.
Fact
The helicopter involved in the accident was owned and operated by Liberty Helicopters, not FlyNYON.
Perception
The FAA banned doors-off flights.
Fact
The FAA never banned all doors-off flights. It is completely legal to fly doors off with passengers wearing seatbelts and entirely consistent with all applicable FAA regulations.
Perception
FlyNYON isn’t offering refunds.
Fact
FlyNYON issued refunds to customers who had reservations for flights that we were unable to service following the accident while we awaited guidance from the FAA.
As we have resumed operation of doors-off flights, we are not offering refunds on existing reservations, but rather offering customers the option to take a doors-on flight or extend the redemption period of flight credits.
Perception
Doors-off flights aren’t safe.
Fact
The FAA has determined that doors-off flights using approved seatbelts are safe and operators throughout the country have safely flown doors-off with seatbelts for decades.
Many media have misreported facts associated with the tragic accident that occurred on March 11, 2018. To help correct these misstatements and provide the FACTS to all audiences we’ve addressed them head on below. Safety has always been FlyNYON’s top priority and we will always put that first.
Perception
The harnesses used on the FlyNYON’s flights are illegal.
Fact
Before the accident, there were no rules prohibiting the harnesses previously used on flyNYON flights. However, the FAA has since prohibited the use of harnesses so moving forward, all our passengers will wear FAA-approved three-point seatbelts installed by the manufacturer. at all times.
Perception
A helicopter owned by flyNYON was involved in the accident.
Fact
The helicopter involved in the accident was owned and operated by Liberty Helicopters, not FlyNYON.
Perception
The FAA banned doors-off flights.
Fact
The FAA never banned all doors-off flights. It is completely legal to fly doors off with passengers wearing seatbelts and entirely consistent with all applicable FAA regulations.
Perception
FlyNYON isn’t offering refunds.
Fact
FlyNYON issued refunds to customers who had reservations for flights that we were unable to service following the accident while we awaited guidance from the FAA.
As we have resumed operation of doors-off flights, we are not offering refunds on existing reservations, but rather offering customers the option to take a doors-on flight or extend the redemption period of flight credits.
Perception
Doors-off flights aren’t safe.
Fact
The FAA has determined that doors-off flights using approved seatbelts are safe and operators throughout the country have safely flown doors-off with seatbelts for decades.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Zealand
Age: 52
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i wonder if Bose and foreflight want to have their advertising removed from the Fly NYON promo video, or if they stick with the old saying, "any advertising is good advertising".
Is there such a thing as "sub judice" in the US?
Both the pilot and the CEO have now commented on this incident on social media?
Are they being advised by lawyers or not?
I notice the ceo accepts that doors open flying is permitted if the pax is wearing a seat belt. How then does he justify the use of a harness as well?
(Allegedly - the harness being the item that killed all the pax)
Finally - in the UK the claimants would sue the pilot first. If there was not enough money in the pilots insurance policy AND their private estate, they would then sue for the rest of the money from the owner/operator.
Was the pilot suitably insured i ask?
Both the pilot and the CEO have now commented on this incident on social media?
Are they being advised by lawyers or not?
I notice the ceo accepts that doors open flying is permitted if the pax is wearing a seat belt. How then does he justify the use of a harness as well?
(Allegedly - the harness being the item that killed all the pax)
Finally - in the UK the claimants would sue the pilot first. If there was not enough money in the pilots insurance policy AND their private estate, they would then sue for the rest of the money from the owner/operator.
Was the pilot suitably insured i ask?
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not an attorney, but that's not the way it works in the US. From my observation it seems that lawsuits are filed naming all defendants at once. The plaintiffs are typically a lot more interested in naming the defendants with the ability to pay a lot of money (deep pockets) than the defendants at fault. Many states have "Joint and severable liability" which means that a defendant may be sued and assessed far in excess of their actual contribution to the damages. ie: you may have one party which is 90% at fault, but has no assets, and another party who is 10% at fault but with large assets. The second may wind up paying the majority of the damages. Maybe a US attorney can explain this better than I have.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I understand the concept correctly, no, there is not. I recall from another thread (the jet crash at the airshow) that several posters were making a lot of noise about how posters might get in legal trouble for discussing the matter, now that it had become a criminal investigation. There is nothing of the sort in the US, if there is a criminal case in the courts, I am perfectly free to comment however publicly and accusatorily I wish.
"Perception
The harnesses used on the FlyNYON’s flights are illegal.
Fact
Before the accident, there were no rules prohibiting the harnesses previously used on flyNYON flights. However, the FAA has since prohibited the use of harnesses so moving forward, all our passengers will wear FAA-approved three-point seatbelts installed by the manufacturer. at all times."
My Perception is that just because there is no prohibition at the time, doesn't negate the fact they didn't do their homework and determine the safety of the harness' they were using. This means they are negligent. They made a decision that killed people.
might as well have put a loaded gun in that pouch with the instructions to use it should the aircraft ditch in the water.
The harnesses used on the FlyNYON’s flights are illegal.
Fact
Before the accident, there were no rules prohibiting the harnesses previously used on flyNYON flights. However, the FAA has since prohibited the use of harnesses so moving forward, all our passengers will wear FAA-approved three-point seatbelts installed by the manufacturer. at all times."
My Perception is that just because there is no prohibition at the time, doesn't negate the fact they didn't do their homework and determine the safety of the harness' they were using. This means they are negligent. They made a decision that killed people.
might as well have put a loaded gun in that pouch with the instructions to use it should the aircraft ditch in the water.
Mike’s flight was door off.
Mjb
"Perception
The harnesses used on the FlyNYON’s flights are illegal.
Fact
Before the accident, there were no rules prohibiting the harnesses previously used on flyNYON flights. However, the FAA has since prohibited the use of harnesses so moving forward, all our passengers will wear FAA-approved three-point seatbelts installed by the manufacturer. at all times."
My Perception is that just because there is no prohibition at the time, doesn't negate the fact they didn't do their homework and determine the safety of the harness' they were using. This means they are negligent. They made a decision that killed people.
might as well have put a loaded gun in that pouch with the instructions to use it should the aircraft ditch in the water.
The harnesses used on the FlyNYON’s flights are illegal.
Fact
Before the accident, there were no rules prohibiting the harnesses previously used on flyNYON flights. However, the FAA has since prohibited the use of harnesses so moving forward, all our passengers will wear FAA-approved three-point seatbelts installed by the manufacturer. at all times."
My Perception is that just because there is no prohibition at the time, doesn't negate the fact they didn't do their homework and determine the safety of the harness' they were using. This means they are negligent. They made a decision that killed people.
might as well have put a loaded gun in that pouch with the instructions to use it should the aircraft ditch in the water.