Eurocopter crash Grand Canyon Feb 2018
Thread Starter
Yes that is true, I am just a PPL /ATCO so I do not have any significant experience of helicopter operations but what I actually said was "a heavy landing which ruptures the fuel tank" In the information that I have found this situation has a high risk of engulfing fire.
Oh right, so you did....sorry about that. Yes true, if the fuel tank is compromised you're at the mercy of the fuel coming into contact with an ignition source. Fuel tanks shouldn't be compromised in mishaps that aren't even heavy enough to compromise the people on board. Warning signs are unlikely to have any affect on the outcome however, or defer liability away from anywhere where liability might be due.
The twin start had the bladder tanks but wasn't really popular back then to the point where EC did not see a business case going forward with the singles.
And yes, a tank that actually demonstrated crashworthy instead of "crash resistant" actually cost that much. If you want to be safe, pay the price.
And yes, a tank that actually demonstrated crashworthy instead of "crash resistant" actually cost that much. If you want to be safe, pay the price.
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Manchester
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Somerset
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until it is mandatory for crash resistant fuel tanks to be installed on all aircraft, operators and manufacturers will choose the cheaper option.
My personal view is that if they can’t afford to do it safely, they can’t afford to do it at all.
My personal view is that if they can’t afford to do it safely, they can’t afford to do it at all.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: hayling island
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one wants to see anyone hurt, ideally we would have no accidents.
But unfortunately we try to reduce accidents in aviation, each helicopter goes through certification process to try an iron out as many problems as they can, but some choices are always a compromise.
Plus owners when purchasing helicopters are given so many options, basically unless it is forced on operators/owners some things just don't happen until there is an incident/accident.
It's the same in all businesses.
Merry Christmas to all and fly safe.
But unfortunately we try to reduce accidents in aviation, each helicopter goes through certification process to try an iron out as many problems as they can, but some choices are always a compromise.
Plus owners when purchasing helicopters are given so many options, basically unless it is forced on operators/owners some things just don't happen until there is an incident/accident.
It's the same in all businesses.
Merry Christmas to all and fly safe.
Some poor journalism there, I think. Having crashworthy fuel tanks would not have prevented the accident. It may have made it survivable, but it wouldn't have prevented it.
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Somerset
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All ‘accidents’ are preventable.
Having been involved in helicopter aviation for 27 years of my working life I have never read a report of an accident that could not have been avoided.
Having been involved in helicopter aviation for 27 years of my working life I have never read a report of an accident that could not have been avoided.
Thread Starter
I see that the inquest has opened into the accident at the Grand Canyon and has thrown up many issues, some of which are reported in the Times today. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/p...9115050ec9daab
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canadadadadada
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So: imagine you are on vacay at the Grand Canyon, you want to go for a Helicopter ride. Option a) you don't go because you have heard of the fuel cell issue.
b) heard of the fuel cell issue, have the option to go with operator xyz who has fuel cell installed and is $100 bucks more a ride than Operator abc who hasn't. go with cheaper? if you can go in a BH407, would you know there is a soft fuel cell in it? (can still rupture!!!)
c) you have heard that 100 people go on that ride every day, no problem, just go.
The fuel cell would only be installed if the Insurance will give a significant reduction on the install., I think.
b) heard of the fuel cell issue, have the option to go with operator xyz who has fuel cell installed and is $100 bucks more a ride than Operator abc who hasn't. go with cheaper? if you can go in a BH407, would you know there is a soft fuel cell in it? (can still rupture!!!)
c) you have heard that 100 people go on that ride every day, no problem, just go.
The fuel cell would only be installed if the Insurance will give a significant reduction on the install., I think.
I see that the inquest has opened into the accident at the Grand Canyon and has thrown up many issues, some of which are reported in the Times today. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/p...9115050ec9daab
Everything of relevance to this incident has been discussed in detail in this PPRUNE thread over 163 posts:
EC 130 down at the Grand Canyon
The Coroner has issued a prevention of future deaths report addressed to the CAA:
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/..._Published.pdf
I'm sure it's well meant and perhaps provides some comfort for the relatives of the deceased but it's a matter of international regulation; I cannot see how the CAA can meaningfully respond.
As a follower of the aviation scene for forty years but with professional roots elsewhere I don't feel qualified to express an opinion of crash resistant fuel systems but surely mandating them going forward is going to be a battle. Is retro fitting to existing aircraft even technically feasible?
It's also odd that he published version of the report has had the aircraft type excised. Why? I mean it's reported by the press, in the NTSB report etc etc. It's limited to a choice of two from an non - excised comment later in the report.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/..._Published.pdf
I'm sure it's well meant and perhaps provides some comfort for the relatives of the deceased but it's a matter of international regulation; I cannot see how the CAA can meaningfully respond.
As a follower of the aviation scene for forty years but with professional roots elsewhere I don't feel qualified to express an opinion of crash resistant fuel systems but surely mandating them going forward is going to be a battle. Is retro fitting to existing aircraft even technically feasible?
It's also odd that he published version of the report has had the aircraft type excised. Why? I mean it's reported by the press, in the NTSB report etc etc. It's limited to a choice of two from an non - excised comment later in the report.
Yes, you can buy the kit and retrofit the aircraft. The operator in this accident has already updated their whole fleet. The USFS has just mandated that for all future contracts utilizing the AS350 series helicopters that crash resistant fuel tanks be required.
So: imagine you are on vacay at the Grand Canyon, you want to go for a Helicopter ride. Option a) you don't go because you have heard of the fuel cell issue.
b) heard of the fuel cell issue, have the option to go with operator xyz who has fuel cell installed and is $100 bucks more a ride than Operator abc who hasn't. go with cheaper? if you can go in a BH407, would you know there is a soft fuel cell in it? (can still rupture!!!)
c) you have heard that 100 people go on that ride every day, no problem, just go.
The fuel cell would only be installed if the Insurance will give a significant reduction on the install., I think.
b) heard of the fuel cell issue, have the option to go with operator xyz who has fuel cell installed and is $100 bucks more a ride than Operator abc who hasn't. go with cheaper? if you can go in a BH407, would you know there is a soft fuel cell in it? (can still rupture!!!)
c) you have heard that 100 people go on that ride every day, no problem, just go.
The fuel cell would only be installed if the Insurance will give a significant reduction on the install., I think.
most people never even check
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Age: 59
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2016
Location: USA
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA SAIB for crashworthy fuel tanks
The FAA has published an SAIB with a link to a list of approved crashworthy fuel system designs.
https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSAIB.nsf/0/8997c0a7f5f7a5a6862584c70076cefa/$FILE/SW-17-31R2.pdf
https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSAIB.nsf/0/8997c0a7f5f7a5a6862584c70076cefa/$FILE/SW-17-31R2.pdf