AW109 down Poros, Greece
Apparently it had just left the mainland SW of Poros for Athens airport
There is some information here: https://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/20...r-video-crash/
And a video here which I assume to be the incident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=mBHlvVRvyW0
And another here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09s8Lbgw8ss
It's a popular spot with yachts, one might speculate that the passengers had just left a yacht.
There is some information here: https://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/20...r-video-crash/
And a video here which I assume to be the incident: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=mBHlvVRvyW0
And another here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09s8Lbgw8ss
It's a popular spot with yachts, one might speculate that the passengers had just left a yacht.
Shy.....why don't you educate us on why CAT A was mandated for this takeoff and how that car park qualified as an approved takeoff site for a CAT A takeoff!
You hold yourself out to be the one with the expert knowledge.....so enlighten us will you!
It sure appeared to me the wire strike occurred long after any takeoff as the aircraft was in level flight.
Or are you just going to ignore the question and offer a smart assed reply?
You hold yourself out to be the one with the expert knowledge.....so enlighten us will you!
It sure appeared to me the wire strike occurred long after any takeoff as the aircraft was in level flight.
Or are you just going to ignore the question and offer a smart assed reply?
Given this was single pilot, I wonder how often such 'high-end' operations are performed with 2 pilots? Or at least have the the pilot supported by a 'spotter' It must be a handful flying a complex a/c like this in such a messy environment and easy to loose awareness of hazards. I know that SAR operations that have to routinely get in and out of tight spots have multiple spotters with precisely defined roles. I doubt the wealthy customers would balk at the extra cost.
I presume the requirement for Cat A departure would depend on whether this was classed as a CAT or a private flight.
The problems is those wires and, since he hit them, the obstacle environment didn't allow for a CAT A profile - if that is what he flew and if he did so correctly.
The problems is those wires and, since he hit them, the obstacle environment didn't allow for a CAT A profile - if that is what he flew and if he did so correctly.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I presume the requirement for Cat A departure would depend on whether this was classed as a CAT or a private flight.
The problems is those wires and, since he hit them, the obstacle environment didn't allow for a CAT A profile - if that is what he flew and if he did so correctly.
The problems is those wires and, since he hit them, the obstacle environment didn't allow for a CAT A profile - if that is what he flew and if he did so correctly.
SAS, we all know that you are the only one allowed smart-assed answers here under your rules and that you never provide an answer but only ask leading questions.
However, are you saying that if a CAT A departure wasn't required by law then in your day you wouldn't have bothered doing one? I would hope not.
I suspect, looking at the aircraft type in the photos (an early model), it wasn't actually capable of a CAT A departure and could only fly a shallow climb profile. All the more reason why the pilot should have been very much aware of the wires and either used a different departure path or a different site altogether.
As is often so, this was a case of the holes in the Swiss cheese eventually lining up.
I presume the requirement for Cat A departure would depend on whether this was classed as a CAT or a private flight.
The problems is those wires and, since he hit them, the obstacle environment didn't allow for a CAT A profile - if that is what he flew and if he did so correctly.
The problems is those wires and, since he hit them, the obstacle environment didn't allow for a CAT A profile - if that is what he flew and if he did so correctly.
From google street view:
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4945...7i13312!8i6656
Wires seen from the road next to the pad which is closed off from the carpark and road, so this sure looks like a pad used for helicopters and not some random car park that has been suggested.
A measurement in google maps places the wires about 1000ft from the pad, and I'd guess the low point of them being 100-150 ft over the water from the pictures.
https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4945...7i13312!8i6656
Wires seen from the road next to the pad which is closed off from the carpark and road, so this sure looks like a pad used for helicopters and not some random car park that has been suggested.
A measurement in google maps places the wires about 1000ft from the pad, and I'd guess the low point of them being 100-150 ft over the water from the pictures.
Marine charts show a clearance of 48m under the wires. That will refer to the lowest point in the middle and allowing for sag on a hot day, so represents an absolute minimum possible height above sea level. In practice you will always find wire a good few metres higher than that.
Last edited by double_barrel; 22nd Aug 2019 at 09:13.
Didn't the FAA conduct a study about wire strike accidents and found out that an astonishingly high number of them included wires that the pilots knew about and their locations?
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by keeptalkinggreece.com
The deputy mayor of Poros, Giorgos Koutouzis told state broadcaster ERT TV that he helipad of Galatas is illegal as it has not been licensed. “Private companies allow their helicopters take off and land at their own responsibility,” he said.
Don't you need approval for off-field landings in greece?
Folegandros official helipad
I think what was lost in translation was that it is not an approved, official helilpad but an off airport landing site that companies use regularly.
Reference: Regulation (EC) No 216/2008, Regulation (EU) No 965/2012
The term 'commercial operation' is now defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as follows (previously in Reg. (EC) No 216/2008):
“'Commercial operation' means any operation of an aircraft, in return for remuneration or other valuable consideration, which is available to the public or, when not made available to the public, which is performed under a contract between an operator and a customer, where the latter has no control over the operator.”
The term 'commercial air transport (CAT) operation' is defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 as follows:
“'Commercial air transport' means an aircraft operation to transport passengers, cargo or mail for remuneration or other valuable consideration.”
The two definitions make it clear that 'commercial operations' include 'CAT operations'. Specialised operations (SPO) are another type of commercial operations. They are also defined in Article 2 of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012.
The term 'commercial operation' is now defined in Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 as follows (previously in Reg. (EC) No 216/2008):
“'Commercial operation' means any operation of an aircraft, in return for remuneration or other valuable consideration, which is available to the public or, when not made available to the public, which is performed under a contract between an operator and a customer, where the latter has no control over the operator.”
The term 'commercial air transport (CAT) operation' is defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 as follows:
“'Commercial air transport' means an aircraft operation to transport passengers, cargo or mail for remuneration or other valuable consideration.”
The two definitions make it clear that 'commercial operations' include 'CAT operations'. Specialised operations (SPO) are another type of commercial operations. They are also defined in Article 2 of Reg. (EU) No 965/2012.
Are we talking CAT A or PC1? Why would either be required in this case, private or public transport?
Originally Posted by [email protected]
If it is a commercial flight it should be operated to PC1 in an aircraft certfied to Cat A
And by implication...
The second video in double_barrels post show the 109 seemingly flying level just prior to the impact so I don’t think it would make any difference with regards to the performance class. It could have been a 44, a AS350, or a Super Puma flying into these wires as long as the helicopter was flown that way and the pilot didn’t see them.
Single engine commercial flight? CAT B, PC3...
“If it is a commercial flight it should be operated to PC1 in an aircraft certfied to Cat A“
Are you suggesting this as best practice or regulation Crab? PC1 is not required for an aircraft in that weight category unless operating out of a congested and hostile site.
Cheers
TeeS
Are you suggesting this as best practice or regulation Crab? PC1 is not required for an aircraft in that weight category unless operating out of a congested and hostile site.
Cheers
TeeS
I thought the PC 1 profile ensured adequate clearance from obstacles up to 1000' asl and therefore the wires should have been included in the calculations to see if the site was suitable for that profile on that departure heading.
Shy, it appears this Cat A business is not as clear cut as you might have thought is it?
The reason I ask leading questions is to evoke a discussion....perhaps you might have figured that out over the years especially after being told that directly in the past.
A previous thread about this Cat A/ PC 1 business which references a second thread on the topic.
https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-170213.html
Are we sure the takeoff began at the helipad and not the car park?
Comparing the Google Sat View and the video of the aircraft hovering with close proximity of vehicles, trees, and a building seems to favor the car park.
If that is the case....then that would add another issue re what rules and regulations pertain to the event.
The reason I ask leading questions is to evoke a discussion....perhaps you might have figured that out over the years especially after being told that directly in the past.
A previous thread about this Cat A/ PC 1 business which references a second thread on the topic.
https://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-170213.html
Are we sure the takeoff began at the helipad and not the car park?
Comparing the Google Sat View and the video of the aircraft hovering with close proximity of vehicles, trees, and a building seems to favor the car park.
If that is the case....then that would add another issue re what rules and regulations pertain to the event.
Last edited by SASless; 22nd Aug 2019 at 14:43.
If it is a commercial flight it should be operated to PC1 in an aircraft certified to Cat A
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
That is exactly the 1 Mio. USD question everyone here keeps asking. In my company we were briefed about this location, including saving the location of the wires as waypoints into our ipads that we use. I don't know about the other companies and their SOPs. That area is regularly used as a landing area so the wires are a known factor. What pisses me of is that the electric company refueses to put markings on them.
Didn't the FAA conduct a study about wire strike accidents and found out that an astonishingly high number of them included wires that the pilots knew about and their locations?
Didn't the FAA conduct a study about wire strike accidents and found out that an astonishingly high number of them included wires that the pilots knew about and their locations?
Sorry, I don't work under FAA rules and administration, so I can't answer the question in your last paragraph. Perhaps the pilot hadn't been properly briefed on the wires and not familiar with the landing site?
