Two helicopters collide - Gold Coast, Queensland - Sea World 2/1/2023
I built and fly an RV-9, and to that end wear one of those 'police-style' tactical vests when I fly. It's got a bunch of goodies in various pockets, from my 406 PLB, first aid kit, laser pointer to a small survival kit, etc. It's not about "looking cool", but recognising the fact I do have a somewhat dangerous passion and I want to do all I can to tip the odds in my favour. It does generate an occasional question at the bowser, but so far as I'm concerned, we had 'em in Army Aviation where we had factory-built birds and professional maintainers - not just a plane some bloke put together in his back shed - and If I could get a helmet to fit under the canopy, I'd have no hesitation in wearing one of those too to better my chances of surviving a prang.
Statistically, the take-off and landing are more dangerous than cruise, and Sea World has their frequent operations down to a fine art - and I speak as a passenger on one of their longer joyflights a couple years back. But one must ask when does PPE (a helmet) become unpalatable in an OH&S context just because it's 'a passenger operation' - given there's documented history of birds coming through helicopter canopies including on the Gold Coast and helmets are proven to minimise injuries in even relatively minor accidents.
Given the choice of two identical operators, one with a pilot in a Nomex flying suit, work boots & helmet, the other in shirt sleeves, Rayban's and deck shoes, I'd pick the former every time, for the simple reason they're demonstrating not just saying they take safety seriously and 'at any cost' and go that little bit extra to try to make sure they go home to the wife & kids at the end of the day. But then again, the KRviatrix does frequently tell me I'm not right in the head so YMMV....
Statistically, the take-off and landing are more dangerous than cruise, and Sea World has their frequent operations down to a fine art - and I speak as a passenger on one of their longer joyflights a couple years back. But one must ask when does PPE (a helmet) become unpalatable in an OH&S context just because it's 'a passenger operation' - given there's documented history of birds coming through helicopter canopies including on the Gold Coast and helmets are proven to minimise injuries in even relatively minor accidents.
Given the choice of two identical operators, one with a pilot in a Nomex flying suit, work boots & helmet, the other in shirt sleeves, Rayban's and deck shoes, I'd pick the former every time, for the simple reason they're demonstrating not just saying they take safety seriously and 'at any cost' and go that little bit extra to try to make sure they go home to the wife & kids at the end of the day. But then again, the KRviatrix does frequently tell me I'm not right in the head so YMMV....
Normal passenger would have 2 immediate question:
1. Where is my helmet?
2. Why do I need a helmet?
Those will be closely followed by next 2:
3. Wait a minute, why do a pilot need a helmet?
4. Maybe I should bail out of this?
Last edited by admikar; 6th Jan 2023 at 14:37.
Why not? I was involved with an operator where a Jet Ranger`s front was chewed by a Piper Arrow propeller all the way thru instrument panel. (Jet Ranger parked on apron, Piper pilot picking up a dropped ball pen from the floor while taxiing.) This Jet Ranger is still flying happily more than 25 years after the accident.
The following 6 users liked this post by Hughes500:
I had read they were at 1500ft but the same principle applies. Unless they were taking off and landing from the same spot in reciprocal directions (no one ever does that - do they?) then how could there possibly not be a couple of hundred metres between them? At 150ft one is 200m from the pad decelerating and the other is 200m away, same direction, accelerating. Seperation should have been increasing!
it honestly should be a hard requirement from the authorities. Flying passengers, single pilot, low level in an aircraft without bird strike resistant windscreens and no AFCS should simply mandate a helmet. Just like riding a motorcycle on the street does.
The following users liked this post:
In the meantime, Aviation Safety Digest 131 page 20 has the article "Nut Case" with photos of a mustering Bell 47G where rotors struck a tree before smashing through the top of the bubble and left a scrape on the pilots helmet. Article indicates he may well have been severely injured or dead without the helmet:
https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/defaul...131_sum_86.pdf
Also ASD 132 Page 21 carried the article "I wouldn't be seen dead without my bone dome" which is also worth a read and is as relevant to some helicopter pilots as the ag aircraft pilot examples in the article:
https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/defaul...132_aut_87.pdf
The ASD "Special Issue - Visual Flight" has an article "En route mid-air collisions how to avoid them" from page 22 to 25 with plenty of informative advice on scanning for other traffic and how eyes work:
https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/defaul...cial_vf_86.pdf
ASD 148 article "Let's look at 'See and Avoid..." from page 4 to 6 also has plenty of sensible advice:
https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/defaul...148_aut_91.pdf
And if that isn't enough, ASD 129 article "looking after your passengers" from page 13 to 15 includes the advice under the sub title "When on board" of: "Make sure your passengers:...Can used the intercom, if fitted, and know how to communicate if there is no intercom":
https://www.atsb.gov.au/sites/defaul...129_win_86.pdf
The positioning of the shoulder harness of the front mid passenger in the screenshot shared by mickjoebill was also an eye-opener. It isn't obvious there is any ability to lower the connection point at the top of the seat for people who are not as tall as, say, the pilot. Plenty for ATSB to consider in investigation and subsequent recommendations to improve safety.
who was doing your 412 maintenance if this was a genuine concern in house to wear a helmet for?
Not my outfit, the event occurred in Alaska and was written up in the aviation media, vibration caused by something breaking in the swashplate as I recall. We started wearing helmets in offshore, a 76 with plastic windscreens in the USA took a bird into the cockpit and all died. One of our 76 took a bird on the glass windscreen (an option) which threw it up into the rotor which then slammed the carcass down through the roof onto the passengers laps. Lunch is served. Glass windscreens weigh more, but provide a measure of protection. 206 pilot flying over Chicago at night took a bird through the windscreen which knocked him out, subsequently woke up, fortunate that his 206 was fitted with an autopilot system which kept the greasy side pointing down. If you can make a safety case for a helicopter pilot not to wear a helmet I'd love to hear it. A local neuro surgeon stated he wished helmets were mandatory for those in cars, for that's where he got all his business.
Blancolirio has put up a vid on this incident.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2FBWa_yTtw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2FBWa_yTtw
There is a good internal EC-130B4 360* image available on PHS's website here, go to the EC130 in the main photo and click the 'Eye' symbol under it.
The following users liked this post:
In the nit picking category, I wonder if the use of wrap around sunglasses has less effect on interfering with peripheral vision than a regular frame?
Some research into the subject is linked here in relation to distortion of peripheral vision due to *prescription* eyeglasses. I'm referring to the vertical rim of sunglasses which, in this case, may have blocked a few degrees of vision in the critical direction?
Do the military give specific advice on the subject?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6497825/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/b...ipheral-vision
Mjb
Some research into the subject is linked here in relation to distortion of peripheral vision due to *prescription* eyeglasses. I'm referring to the vertical rim of sunglasses which, in this case, may have blocked a few degrees of vision in the critical direction?
Do the military give specific advice on the subject?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6497825/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/b...ipheral-vision
Mjb
It's a shame that Blancolirio references a photo of an AS350 instead of the EC130 B4 in that video.
There is a good internal EC-130B4 360* image available on PHS's website here, go to the EC130 in the main photo and click the 'Eye' symbol under it.
There is a good internal EC-130B4 360* image available on PHS's website here, go to the EC130 in the main photo and click the 'Eye' symbol under it.
He pontificates as if he is an expert but made the same basic mistake twice - talking about 130 blindspots while referring to a picture of a 350!
The following 2 users liked this post by [email protected]:
Another commenter on YouTube, 'Speed Bird', also mentions the current four southern pads vs only the single one Blancolirio was aware of. But 'Speed Bird' has dug a fair bit deeper, so I will copy his message here:
"Great breakdown of events. The Google map of that area [used by Blancolirio] is from 2017, if you use Google earth and timeline it to the most recent there are 4 concrete helipads south of where the 'island' pads are located. The southern island pad is closed, but the northern one is operational, so you are spot on with the departure point of the ascending heli. However looking back through the timeline on Nearmaps (low altitude photo images) it shows both those island pads closed at the beginning of 2019. By November 2021 they are still closed and remained closed on each snapshot between those dates. The northern pad shows open again on the next snapshot on Jun 7 2022. so there was a lengthy period where those island pads were not in use and the pilots were accustomed to only looking for traffic from the 4 pads (all adjacent) that the descending heli was landing on. Also check 'QLD Globe' for time lines when the pads were closed."
Last edited by helispotter; 7th Jan 2023 at 12:03. Reason: Sort out second quote