Landing in public areas - no marshalling?
I can't say I've seen the SOPs for every single operator but the ones that I have seen all include crowd control and oversight of the machine, when rotors running, by a member of the medical crew or other emergency service personnel at any time when there is a risk of public access.
This really is not a big deal.
Thread Starter
Ah, OK, so a crew member/paramedic will get out as soon as possible after touching down, and keep public back while the heli runs the engine cool-down?
Situation de-mystified !
Situation de-mystified !
And a lot of the modern aircraft need no engine cool down period, it is not unknown to see approximately 40 seconds from wheels (or skids) on to rotor stopped.
QUOTE=OvertHawk;11051005]And a situation which UK HEMS and Ambulance crews have been thinking about and managing for over three decades and hundreds of thousands of off-site landings.
I can't say I've seen the SOPs for every single operator but the ones that I have seen all include crowd control and oversight of the machine, when rotors running, by a member of the medical crew or other emergency service personnel at any time when there is a risk of public access.
This really is not a big deal.[/QUOTE]
Agree completely with this statement, what you see as a big deal with unmitigated risk control is just a normal day for any HEMS or SAR crew. It is highly likely there was a good reason to land there that was not apparent. A good example is their services are no longer required for the tasking due to death or the patient not been urgent enough for the helicopter. There could be any other reason that is just as reasonable. I would be surprised if the crew just landed because they could!
The crew have enough to deal with in their day to day work so probably best not to second guess them especially as stated where you were too far away to see everything anyway.
It would be a sad day indeed if helicopters required a marshaller for a simple landing.
I can't say I've seen the SOPs for every single operator but the ones that I have seen all include crowd control and oversight of the machine, when rotors running, by a member of the medical crew or other emergency service personnel at any time when there is a risk of public access.
This really is not a big deal.[/QUOTE]
Agree completely with this statement, what you see as a big deal with unmitigated risk control is just a normal day for any HEMS or SAR crew. It is highly likely there was a good reason to land there that was not apparent. A good example is their services are no longer required for the tasking due to death or the patient not been urgent enough for the helicopter. There could be any other reason that is just as reasonable. I would be surprised if the crew just landed because they could!
The crew have enough to deal with in their day to day work so probably best not to second guess them especially as stated where you were too far away to see everything anyway.
It would be a sad day indeed if helicopters required a marshaller for a simple landing.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For SAR training the crews are still allowed to land at their discretion. The landing site is always dynamically assessed by the crew and full briefing is conducted before carrying out the landing.
LZ
LZ
Thread Starter
QUOTE=OvertHawk;11051005]
The crew have enough to deal with in their day to day work so probably best not to second guess them especially as stated where you were too far away to see everything anyway.
It would be a sad day indeed if helicopters required a marshaller for a simple landing.
The crew have enough to deal with in their day to day work so probably best not to second guess them especially as stated where you were too far away to see everything anyway.
It would be a sad day indeed if helicopters required a marshaller for a simple landing.
As I say, I am not having a go - I am just trying to understand the risk assessment. I have good eyesight and look down on that carpark from a hill. I could see very clearly the heli, the public, their dogs etc. standing nearby. I could not see any heli markings such as the words 'Air Ambulance' because it was exactly tail-on to me and remained so.
I appreciate that any heli crew will obviously be very safety minded and will make an operational assessment of any landing site. It just the difference in what is allowed that intrigues me: Pilots of A320's etc at airports are not allowed to walk across a taxiway to the aircraft 'next door', even though we have a Hi Viz vest, we are trained pilots so we know and understand the movements of other aircraft and baggage trucks etc. We also have annual eyesight tests, hearing tests and medicals, On an airport ramp, there are no random, untrained loose public, dogs, cyclists or private cars moving about. When the passengers walk out to an aircraft, they are usually marshalled, to prevent them straying under the wing or away from the aircraft.
In an open public carpark, where nobody in the carpark is even expecting a helicopter to land, there are no such restrictions.
Last edited by Uplinker; 29th May 2021 at 09:10.
As a matter of interest my daughter did the Emergency Driving Course when she became an ambulance driver. Part of the course involved driving an ambulance up to 105 m.p.h. with the blues and twos down the M78 motorway.
As I say, I am not having a go - I am just trying to understand the risk assessment. I have good eyesight and look down on that carpark from a hill. I could see very clearly the heli, the public, their dogs etc. standing nearby. I could not see any heli markings such as the words 'Air Ambulance' because it was exactly tail-on to me and remained so.
I appreciate that any heli crew will obviously be very safety minded and will make an operational assessment of any landing site. It just the difference in what is allowed that intrigues me: Pilots of A320's etc at airports are not allowed to walk across a taxiway to the aircraft 'next door', even though we have a Hi Viz vest, we are trained pilots so we know and understand the movements of other aircraft and baggage trucks etc. We also have annual eyesight tests, hearing tests and medicals, On an airport ramp, there are no random, untrained loose public, dogs, cyclists or private cars moving about. When the passengers walk out to an aircraft, they are usually marshalled, to prevent them straying under the wing or away from the aircraft.
In an open public carpark, where nobody in the carpark is even expecting a helicopter to land, there are no such restrictions.
I appreciate that any heli crew will obviously be very safety minded and will make an operational assessment of any landing site. It just the difference in what is allowed that intrigues me: Pilots of A320's etc at airports are not allowed to walk across a taxiway to the aircraft 'next door', even though we have a Hi Viz vest, we are trained pilots so we know and understand the movements of other aircraft and baggage trucks etc. We also have annual eyesight tests, hearing tests and medicals, On an airport ramp, there are no random, untrained loose public, dogs, cyclists or private cars moving about. When the passengers walk out to an aircraft, they are usually marshalled, to prevent them straying under the wing or away from the aircraft.
In an open public carpark, where nobody in the carpark is even expecting a helicopter to land, there are no such restrictions.
Uplinker I would suggest that an airport apron due to having multiple movements requires a greater duty of care as the use is not one time or limited. Also rather than having one hazard there are many at a busy airport some of which you may be unaware of because of noise and distraction. Having extra people on the apron even if qualified just gives more to manage for the ground crew. Regular operations to certified helipads require the same safety standards as an RPT apron
In an open car park a landing helicopter very quickly has everyone’s attention. The majority of people remain at a safe distance. If they are not you just stand off until they get the right idea often encouraged by hand gestures from the crew. Occasionally the plan has to change due to the “moron factor” but you just adjust if needed. As soon as you land the crew are in a position to intercept any wayward bystander. As others have mentioned it’s a dynamic assessment and one which is taken seriously. If something does go wrong it is pretty clear where the liability lays and most crews are very good at managing the risks appropriately.
One of the great things about being a Helicopter Pilot vs fixed is depending on your operation there is much more freedom to how you operate. This is a good example of where the pilot can use his grey matter to good effect.
