AW139 Crash in Bahamas - 7 Killed
Wait...what? The t/r gearbox separated from the fin? And one of the four t/r blades has not been found? Hmm. I know that a lot of you had leapt to the conclusion that two inept pilots screwed up. And I know it's tempting to use our vast knowledge of helicopters to pontificate on meaningless internet forums so we can prove to others how smart we are... But maybe we shouldn't be so quick to judge? My personal jury is still out on this one.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by [email protected]
The aircraft is certified SP IFR so is it just FAA regs that don't allow SPIFR on all aircraft or just the 139?
A local Search effort but the aircraft was not reported missing until the afternoon?
One would have thought that having filed a F-P ,that it would/should have been followed up earlier...likewise friends/relatives at the base it left in Florida,the hospital it was going to,and the owners secretary/wife,etc....
Might be a repeat of `Leicester`....
or,if one blade did leave early,the others and gearbox were probably close behind....
Might be a repeat of `Leicester`....
or,if one blade did leave early,the others and gearbox were probably close behind....
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: N/A
Age: 56
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then taking-off at night from a coastal helipad of a small island, is no more VMC few seconds after TDP. Regulations are far behind real life.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: N/A
Age: 56
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vaibronco,
Of course we refer to instruments to make sure we are on the profile for Cat A takeoffs. But I disagree that external cues are not utilised, and if anyone is teaching this, they should not be.
It is in fact essential that the pilot flying is looking outside during the takeoff, because the chances of a successful reject are severely diminished if he is not looking out. It is also during the initial stages of the departure that collision avoidance by means of lookout is most critical. There are more foreign objects, birds, wires, tv masts etc below 200 ft than there are above.
If there are 2 crew, then the pilot monitoring should be assisting by looking inside and ensuring that the departure is according to the profile.
Of course we refer to instruments to make sure we are on the profile for Cat A takeoffs. But I disagree that external cues are not utilised, and if anyone is teaching this, they should not be.
It is in fact essential that the pilot flying is looking outside during the takeoff, because the chances of a successful reject are severely diminished if he is not looking out. It is also during the initial stages of the departure that collision avoidance by means of lookout is most critical. There are more foreign objects, birds, wires, tv masts etc below 200 ft than there are above.
If there are 2 crew, then the pilot monitoring should be assisting by looking inside and ensuring that the departure is according to the profile.
I'm sure nobody is teaching CAT A takeoffs ignoring external cues.
External cues, are actually utilized before TDP in a confined (more than a cue, you keep the helipad in the chin) or vertical. After TDP, during day take-offs life is easier: natural horizon, obstacles and so on. After TDP at night, the day experience helps you to get comfortable with that IAS taking ages to get alive and you know on the 139 it will move suddenly from zero to 50KIAS while your GS gradually increases. When you leave the helipads lights behind, if you have total trust in the procedure, you keep your pitch where it should be. A smart PM knows that after rotation, even if collective force-trims are released, the PI will decrease few points and that is the time, if the helipad has a small height above water surface, time to restore those few points lost. The PM eyes controlling actively PI, and monitoring attitude, pitch timing, radalt, GS and only some seconds later air speed. Not written in the RFM, rarely taught by instructors. Let's call it experience. This happens if everything goes right. If something goes wrong it gets harder and dependent on how you performed the previous "all working ok" phase.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anyone here pinpoint where this private island is, where the helicopter departed near Grand Cay Bahamas?
I've been looking at Google Earth sat photos, and "Grand Cay" looks too built-up to be where this originated. Walker Cay to the NW with a runway is a customs entry point, I think. I'm not seeing any small private islands near Grand Cay that might fit the profile, unless it's one of the ones very close to the north/northeast. This might be relevant to shallow water levels, tidal movement of recovered debris, etc.
Where were they taking off from?
I've been looking at Google Earth sat photos, and "Grand Cay" looks too built-up to be where this originated. Walker Cay to the NW with a runway is a customs entry point, I think. I'm not seeing any small private islands near Grand Cay that might fit the profile, unless it's one of the ones very close to the north/northeast. This might be relevant to shallow water levels, tidal movement of recovered debris, etc.
Where were they taking off from?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Florida/Sandbox/UK
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wait...what? The t/r gearbox separated from the fin? And one of the four t/r blades has not been found? Hmm. I know that a lot of you had leapt to the conclusion that two inept pilots screwed up. And I know it's tempting to use our vast knowledge of helicopters to pontificate on meaningless internet forums so we can prove to others how smart we are... But maybe we shouldn't be so quick to judge? My personal jury is still out on this one.
Not that it would have made any difference on this occasion, however, I am surprised to see the length of time between the accident and the overdue alert notice. We have basic technology nowadays that could cut that down to a few minutes. I can't remember my FAA flight plan data/process, but if their flight plan wasn't closed within say, an hour of the scheduled landing time, wouldn't that have been sufficient to raise an alert?
“Two inept pilots screwed up”
FH1100 I suggest that you read through what people have written. No one suggested that the pilots were inept or that they ‘screwed up’. You are showing the ignorance that typifies those who do not understand this type of departure.
Highly skilled, qualified and competent pilots can easily lose situational awareness performing this type of IMC take-off.
FH1100 I suggest that you read through what people have written. No one suggested that the pilots were inept or that they ‘screwed up’. You are showing the ignorance that typifies those who do not understand this type of departure.
Highly skilled, qualified and competent pilots can easily lose situational awareness performing this type of IMC take-off.
Hi Sycamore. Outside the US going south the ATC situation can be very spotty. Taking a UH-60 to Brazil on a demo, we left Trinidad southbound to Manaus ( had the ESSS with 2-230 gallon tanks ) with a VFR forecast and a VFR flight plan. Wx turned very different and finally just south of the Orinoco River, down to 300 ft in rain where we could see down but not forward, we made a decision, climbed thru it ( well off airways ) and from on top at 12k we tried calling all the appropriate frequencies to file IFR. Not one response on all the VHF and UHF ATC freq’s. Finally a United Airlines guy heard us and thru him we got filed to Manaus. After landing ( Wx cleared down there and was clear and 50 ), went into the ATC folks to ensure we were cancelled and they had no flight plan for us. And there was no fuss about our arrival etc.( AOE).
Last edited by JohnDixson; 26th Jul 2019 at 21:33.
“Two inept pilots screwed up”
FH1100 I suggest that you read through what people have written. No one suggested that the pilots were inept or that they ‘screwed up’. You are showing the ignorance that typifies those who do not understand this type of departure.
Highly skilled, qualified and competent pilots can easily lose situational awareness performing this type of IMC take-off.
FH1100 I suggest that you read through what people have written. No one suggested that the pilots were inept or that they ‘screwed up’. You are showing the ignorance that typifies those who do not understand this type of departure.
Highly skilled, qualified and competent pilots can easily lose situational awareness performing this type of IMC take-off.
Hmm. I know that a lot of you had leapt to the conclusion that two inept pilots screwed up. And I know it's tempting to use our vast knowledge of helicopters to pontificate on meaningless internet forums so we can prove to others how smart we are... But maybe we shouldn't be so quick to judge? My personal jury is still out on this one.
Seems an apology is in order.
FH can make some interesting posts....but in this particular instance he was clearly misquoted/misunderstood.
FH can make some interesting posts....but in this particular instance he was clearly misquoted/misunderstood.
Thank you for inserting bold type John - very kind of you to point out my dopey error.
I read it again and as far as I can see FH is asserting that there are people here insinuating that the accident was caused by inept pilots screwing up. I am one who suggested that a possible cause of the accident due to the circumstances is one of loss of control due to loss of situational awareness and that can happen to anyone. The only person who has used those terms in FH himself.
Paco - note above.
I read it again and as far as I can see FH is asserting that there are people here insinuating that the accident was caused by inept pilots screwing up. I am one who suggested that a possible cause of the accident due to the circumstances is one of loss of control due to loss of situational awareness and that can happen to anyone. The only person who has used those terms in FH himself.
Paco - note above.
Re the preliminary report:
One obvious hypothesis arises from the report along these lines; loss of one tail rotor blade, a huge resultant one per tail vibration which in turn results in the tail rotor, tail rotor head and associated structure separating from the aircraft. CG shifts forward, perhaps beyond the capability of the available cyclic range to correct etc etc. One side possibility here would be the pilot instinctively applying full aft stick rapidly, perhaps slicing into and separating the tail cone ( this is suggested by the report statement about separate tail cone pieces ). Something like this would preclude any radio calls. The weakness of this hypothesis is that I have no info or feel for the CG range, control rigging, control moment capability and the like for the subject aircraft. My guess is that by now the NTSB will have looked at this possibility, and probably others, and may have a good idea of what happened.
One obvious hypothesis arises from the report along these lines; loss of one tail rotor blade, a huge resultant one per tail vibration which in turn results in the tail rotor, tail rotor head and associated structure separating from the aircraft. CG shifts forward, perhaps beyond the capability of the available cyclic range to correct etc etc. One side possibility here would be the pilot instinctively applying full aft stick rapidly, perhaps slicing into and separating the tail cone ( this is suggested by the report statement about separate tail cone pieces ). Something like this would preclude any radio calls. The weakness of this hypothesis is that I have no info or feel for the CG range, control rigging, control moment capability and the like for the subject aircraft. My guess is that by now the NTSB will have looked at this possibility, and probably others, and may have a good idea of what happened.
Last edited by JohnDixson; 28th Jul 2019 at 14:30. Reason: corrrected grammar
When the Sky Shuttle AW139 lost a TR blade shortly after take-off the TRGB immediately departed the scene with it. They almost had a full load of passengers so that would have put the CG way forward with the TRGB missing. The aircraft was controllable and a successful auto rotation was made onto the water.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Sycamore. Outside the US going south the ATC situation can be very spotty. Taking a UH-60 to Brazil on a demo, we left Trinidad southbound to Manaus ( had the ESSS with 2-230 gallon tanks ) with a VFR forecast and a VFR flight plan. Wx turned very different and finally just south of the Orinoco River, down to 300 ft in rain where we could see down but not forward, we made a decision, climbed thru it ( well off airways ) and from on top at 12k we tried calling all the appropriate frequencies to file IFR. Not one response on all the VHF and UHF ATC freq’s. Finally a United Airlines guy heard us and thru him we got filed to Manaus. After landing ( Wx cleared down there and was clear and 50 ), went into the ATC folks to ensure we were cancelled and they had no flight plan for us. And there was no fuss about our arrival etc.( AOE).
Our (OKie's) aircraft was loaned to Bell because they smashed up their demonstrator.
It was somewhere east of Campo Grande - Bell pilot's leg.
Americans certainly do this stuff differently than Canadians.
This was after I filed IFR from Trujillo to Lima - at night.
I thought the Texas Bell pilots where gonna have a heart attack just before we broke out at 300 and a mile.
Personally, and I flew in South America for many years, I have never had a problem with their ATC.