G-REDL 10 year anniversary.
Thread Starter
G-REDL 10 year anniversary.
Today is the 10 year anniversary of the G-REDL crash.
I for one shall raise a glass to all onboard this evening.
May we never forget them.
I for one shall raise a glass to all onboard this evening.
May we never forget them.
Agreed, a terrible tragedy followed by another one 6 years later with the same cause. 29 lives lost, a massively life changing event for the families and a still recalcitrant OEM.
2009 was a horrible year for the industry, starting on the 4th Jan with the PHI S76, Cougar 491 on the 12th March and then G-REDL, plus the G-REDU CFIW event that had no injuries.
Even the report on 9M-SSC (the SA330J that had the MGB failure) had an addendum from them saying they disagreed with the findings and suggested it may have been caused by the pilot's door opening and his brief case hitting the TR!
(Strangely enough, in looking to see what there is online about the accident I see that the registration has been reallocated (to MASWings on a Twin Otter). I'm surprised.
(Strangely enough, in looking to see what there is online about the accident I see that the registration has been reallocated (to MASWings on a Twin Otter). I'm surprised.
Is it "bashing" or recounting the truth?
I’d go for “truth”
Airbus admit they don’t know why it happened, but assure us they have fixed it.
Personaly, I think the industry has fixed it, by keeping the fleet hours so low the next rotor separation might not occur for a significant time.
Airbus admit they don’t know why it happened, but assure us they have fixed it.
Personaly, I think the industry has fixed it, by keeping the fleet hours so low the next rotor separation might not occur for a significant time.
212Man.....do you recall anything remotely official that would suggest the initial failure could have begun with the tail rotor?
We are talking about the aircraft that was on takeoff and was video'd right up through the loss of the Main Rotor Blades before crashing behind a building out of view of the camera?
The one that had just completed some sort of engineering maintenance work just a few flight hours before the crash?
We are talking about the aircraft that was on takeoff and was video'd right up through the loss of the Main Rotor Blades before crashing behind a building out of view of the camera?
The one that had just completed some sort of engineering maintenance work just a few flight hours before the crash?
We are talking about the aircraft that was on takeoff and was video'd right up through the loss of the Main Rotor Blades before crashing behind a building out of view of the camera?
Thank You!
When the two most recent fatal crashes occurred that ended the 225's service in the offshore industry.....it was said that it and the first of the two crashes.....did not involve the same transmission design as in the 330/Puma.
Am I right to assume the crash being discussed has been the only such crash resulted from a MGB failure or have there been others that remained under the radar?
One such failure in all the millions of hours the Puma Fleet has flown is not a bad record I am thinking although any such failure and subsequent fatal crash is a real tragedy.
The two fatal crashes from similar causes without a proper determination of cause and a refusal to admit that is very worrisome.
Am I right to assume the crash being discussed has been the only such crash resulted from a MGB failure or have there been others that remained under the radar?
One such failure in all the millions of hours the Puma Fleet has flown is not a bad record I am thinking although any such failure and subsequent fatal crash is a real tragedy.
The two fatal crashes from similar causes without a proper determination of cause and a refusal to admit that is very worrisome.
The fundamental difference with the SA330 was that there was an abundance of evidence of the deterioration - in fact it was amazing it lasted as long as it did given the amount of metal it was making. The issue was that the Chief Engineer did not know the difference between 7square millimeters, and 7 millimeters squared and was sticking the debris on his graph paper waiting for it to get to 49 square millimeters.........
In fairness (for want of a better term) the AAIB did a poll of the UK CAA surveyors and found about a 50/50 split.
In fairness (for want of a better term) the AAIB did a poll of the UK CAA surveyors and found about a 50/50 split.
I am that typical Yank that can barely convert Miles to Miles.....Statute/Nautical....but even I can grasp that difference even when given in Metric.
Time for a big dollop of Bailey's in my second cup of coffee to celebrate being able to do so.
50/50.....makes you wonder what all else got lost in the translation over the years!
Time for a big dollop of Bailey's in my second cup of coffee to celebrate being able to do so.
50/50.....makes you wonder what all else got lost in the translation over the years!
The two fatal crashes from similar causes without a proper determination of cause and a refusal to admit that is very worrisome.
Sometimes you need to read between the lines.
Why the gear failed has not been determined.
This is what I read in the reports.
Ah ok - it was about 10 years ago that I read the report (original hard copy). I recall that actually the MGB was flushed at one point and the counting restarted from zero, so the actual accumulation was even greater than the error, so possibly that's where my own error stems.
When the Puma first entered military service the main gearbox was lifed for 800 hrs. between overhauls. In the early 70s Aerospatial decided to launch it into the civilian market but 800 hrs. was far too short to be accepted by civilian operators.
There then came a project known as the CAAP (Components Advanced Ageing Programme).
Five aircraft were involved. Three from the French Army and two from the Royal Air Force; one from each squadron, ours was XW203.
The plan was simple. Fly each one for 100 hrs./month, an horrendous number for a military aircraft were the rate was more like thirty. When a component came up for overhaul remove, inspect and replace in the aircraft. In this way the components could be proved to be able to have their lives extended.
This would lead to endless hours hovering in thick fog or, more satisfactory, using the aircraft for jollies to burn off the hours. Macrahanish for kippers, Gutersloh to stock up on German wine for functions, some even used it to travel for job interviews.
XW203 came to a sudden end in 1974 when an autopilot malfunction put it into an uncommanded barrel roll after take off of which it only managed 70% before coming back to earth. Both crew exited through the front of the aircraft with only minor burns.
However the project had been declared successful by then so the civil gearbox attained an 1,800hrs. overhaul life.
There then came a project known as the CAAP (Components Advanced Ageing Programme).
Five aircraft were involved. Three from the French Army and two from the Royal Air Force; one from each squadron, ours was XW203.
The plan was simple. Fly each one for 100 hrs./month, an horrendous number for a military aircraft were the rate was more like thirty. When a component came up for overhaul remove, inspect and replace in the aircraft. In this way the components could be proved to be able to have their lives extended.
This would lead to endless hours hovering in thick fog or, more satisfactory, using the aircraft for jollies to burn off the hours. Macrahanish for kippers, Gutersloh to stock up on German wine for functions, some even used it to travel for job interviews.
XW203 came to a sudden end in 1974 when an autopilot malfunction put it into an uncommanded barrel roll after take off of which it only managed 70% before coming back to earth. Both crew exited through the front of the aircraft with only minor burns.
However the project had been declared successful by then so the civil gearbox attained an 1,800hrs. overhaul life.
