Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Two helicopters collide - Gold Coast, Queensland - Sea World 2/1/2023

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Two helicopters collide - Gold Coast, Queensland - Sea World 2/1/2023

Old 8th Jan 2023, 10:30
  #301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,092
Received 419 Likes on 192 Posts
Originally Posted by John Eacott
CASR 91.330 and 91.340 .

91.330 items 2 and 3 deal with define circumstances for giving way when approaching or landing.

item 6 is the basic give way to the right rule.
Those are rights of way and nowhere do they define when an aircraft is landing.

There is no definition of landing in the document you refer to either https://www.legislation.gov.au/Detai.../Html/Volume_5

We all know what we mean by landing but that is not the same as approaching to land and is very different for helicopters when compared to fixed wing.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 10:47
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Africa
Posts: 522
Received 8 Likes on 5 Posts
While it is understandable that some victim initially didn't want to release her cell phone video out of consideration for people affected by this accident (everything is understandable when it comes to human emotions, including crimes of passion), there clearly is a strong public interest (I mean this in the legal sense of the term) to get access to each and every passengers' snaps and video recordings. (I bet all eleven of them like it is common practise today were recording during this pleasure flight.) It would be wrong for the investigators to suppress this information.

In particular I would be interested to to see the video that this surviving passenger took on his tablet computer....

Rear LH pax taking a video with his tablet.
Hot and Hi is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 8th Jan 2023, 11:12
  #303 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 178
Received 22 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by havick
Couple of questions for those that have operated at Sea World before;

- Why was the departing aircraft taking off from the single pad as opposed to the four pads together?...
I see KRviator has responded from recent experience, but see also post #80 by Avv and post #280 where I copied some material shared by 'Speed Bird' on YouTube regarding the apparent usage over recent years of the various Sea World helipads. The discussions here so far have tended to focus on the Sea World facilities, but it is worth realising that Gold Coast Helitours has three helipads (and small hangar) at the end of a jetty off Marina Mirage not that far south of Sea World. Years back, there was also an operation called Happy Wave (based on logos on side of their Squirrel) that operated off a floating helipad on the Broadwater in generally the same area. I also remember a Hughes 500 was operating joy flights out of a paddock either to the north or south of Sea World back then, so the area has been busy with various joy flight operators from various locations all in reasonably close proximity for many years now. As far as I know, all those operations had remained accident free except for the loss of Long Ranger VH-TCH and all its occupants, which had been a single aircraft accident rather than a collision.
helispotter is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 11:27
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 37 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by helispotter
I see KRviator has responded from recent experience, but see also post #80 by Avv and post #280 where I copied some material shared by 'Speed Bird' on YouTube regarding the apparent usage over recent years of the various Sea World helipads. The discussions here so far have tended to focus on the Sea World facilities, but it is worth realising that Gold Coast Helitours has three helipads (and small hangar) at the end of a jetty off Marina Mirage not that far south of Sea World. Years back, there was also an operation called Happy Wave (based on logos on side of their Squirrel) that operated off a floating helipad on the Broadwater in generally the same area. I also remember a Hughes 500 was operating joy flights out of a paddock either to the north or south of Sea World back then, so the area has been busy with various joy flight operators from various locations all in reasonably close proximity for many years now. As far as I know, all those operations had remained accident free except for the loss of Long Ranger VH-TCH and all its occupants, which had been a single aircraft accident rather than a collision.
Thanks, yep Iím aware of all the other operators in the vicinity.

Iím simply curious to know what was different in this incident (procedurally) that both pilots werenít expecting to see another aircraft?

- What radio calls are generally made when lifting from the pad or inbound to the pad? Even if itís localismís
havick is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 11:45
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Africa
Posts: 522
Received 8 Likes on 5 Posts
The question who had right of way it irrelevant in this case. By definition, those rules only applies to two aircraft that are aware of each other. The Rules of the Air then prescribe what evasive manoeuvre each aircraft has to make to deconflict. (Like it would be stupid if two aircraft on a collision course would both pull-up, and then still collide despite both pilots having taken evasive action.)

The principle of VFR is "look & avoid", not "look & be righteous". If I was the only aircraft that sees the other (and the other aircraft seems blissfully unaware), my only duty is to avoid. If both aircraft were unaware of each other, it is irrelevant who would have had right of way.
Hot and Hi is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by Hot and Hi:
Old 8th Jan 2023, 11:51
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: down under
Posts: 448
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Interesting that the ATSB say it will take 18 months for a report but it seems they were pretty quick to hand footage to the media, footage they weren't authorised to pass on. It seems disappointing, correct me if I'm wrong.
cooperplace is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 11:57
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 178
Received 22 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by Traffic_Is_Er_Was
I'm not convinced that that is the climbing helicopter that's circled. If you watch the video on Youtube at 25% speed, the white structure looks to be in front of the rear of whatever that dark object is, (truncating the tail boom to look more like a Jetranger than an EC130). The EC has substantial rear skid struts that aren't obvious in the video. I think it is some feature on the ground. The rotor effect is the Channel 7 text scrolling across that feature.
I can relate to what you say, and am likewise still unsure if that is -XKQ, though it appears about where you might expect to see it directly in line with but above the helipad from which it had departed.

Images below are the departure helipad seen either from video footage taken from a Sea World joy flight some time back (posted on YouTube) or from the '3D' view on the Apple map app (from roughly the same perspective as it was seen from -XH9). The latter is also based on material from several years back. There is no obvious larger white structure near the helipad, though I guess it could easily be a white marquee set up at any time.







helispotter is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 11:57
  #308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: down under
Posts: 448
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Hot and Hi
The question who had right of way it irrelevant in this case. By definition, those rules only applies to two aircraft that are aware of each other. The Rules of the Air then prescribe what evasive manoeuvre each aircraft has to make to deconflict. (Like it would be stupid if two aircraft on a collision course would both pull-up, and then still collide despite both pilots having taken evasive action.)

.
H&H, surely the rules around approaching landing areas apply whether aircraft have seen each other or not.

As a fixed-wing pilot I know zip about choppers, but the same principles apply?
cooperplace is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 12:11
  #309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: switzerland
Posts: 21
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
Enhanced Video Still Images 2

Further to my post #283 above I have done a bit more work.

1) I have posted my enhanced video here:

https://imgur.com/KgPtBIN
https://imgur.com/KgPtBIN

I hope that anyone interested can see it. It is at zoom 2X, and Speed 25%, with contrast and saturation increased in a Box around the apparent 2nd Helicopter. In real time, if this video starts at time 0sec, then the rear passenger's shoulder tap would be at 12secs, and the impact would be at 13.5 secs.

2} If anyone has a source for the full "Inside The Helicopter" video without the Channel7 News logo on it, please let us know! The Logo is a major factor in making the video difficult to see in the area of the 2nd helicopter.

3) I withdraw my suggestion that you may be able to see the 2nd helicopter blades flickering slightly. It is probably just the News Logo!

4) But I maintain that it is clear that "Mystery Object" is above and in front of the ground, and is moving left-to-right, which is correct for this to be the 2nd helicopter, to my understanding. It may even be judged to be climbing. And it is generally in the correct position for where the rear seat passenger excitedly points later on.

5) you see the "2nd Helicopter" approaching a building with dark grey walls and a white roof. This building is clearly seen, in the correct relative position, in this Photo of Take-off Helipads cropped from Helispotter Post #58.



6) I also post this drawing of the EC130 helicopter, for comparison.



I hope some of you find this input informative,

IB

Last edited by Ivor_Bigunn; 8th Jan 2023 at 12:17. Reason: correct link
Ivor_Bigunn is offline  
The following 3 users liked this post by Ivor_Bigunn:
Old 8th Jan 2023, 12:21
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I had another go at cleaning up the video. This still shows the helicopter just above its helipad. The gif hopefully shows the rotors.





DroneDog is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 8th Jan 2023, 12:53
  #311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 178
Received 22 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by cooperplace
Interesting that the ATSB say it will take 18 months for a report but it seems they were pretty quick to hand footage to the media, footage they weren't authorised to pass on. It seems disappointing, correct me if I'm wrong.
Don't be so sure that is what happened. In the commentary with the footage at the following link, the 7 News presenter says: "..been obtained exclusively by 7 News... the vision obviously will be passed on to the experts investigating this tragedy". So sounds to me like 7 managed to get hold of the material first, then planned to pass to ATSB. I can well imagine media people managed to make it over to the crash site long before any ATSB personnel, or perhaps even police, arrived on the scene. Passenger may have handed over material under a false impression they were giving it to an official investigator. You can bet this will be investigated as well now.

https://7news.com.au/sunrise/sea-wor...rred-c-9361711
helispotter is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 13:01
  #312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,092
Received 419 Likes on 192 Posts
Originally Posted by Hot and Hi
The question who had right of way it irrelevant in this case. By definition, those rules only applies to two aircraft that are aware of each other. The Rules of the Air then prescribe what evasive manoeuvre each aircraft has to make to deconflict. (Like it would be stupid if two aircraft on a collision course would both pull-up, and then still collide despite both pilots having taken evasive action.)

The principle of VFR is "look & avoid", not "look & be righteous". If I was the only aircraft that sees the other (and the other aircraft seems blissfully unaware), my only duty is to avoid. If both aircraft were unaware of each other, it is irrelevant who would have had right of way.
Hot and Hi - you are right that when neither aircraft sees the other then rights of way become irrelevant but when operating in VFR you are obligated to 'see and avoid' which neither of them did.

I only pointed out the right of way issue because someone somewhere will want to blame someone for the accident and the surviving pilot did technically have right of way.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 14:07
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 178
Received 22 Likes on 19 Posts
This post is mainly intended for Ivor_Bigunn (#309) and DroneDog (#310). Good work on your continued effort to enhance what is seen in the video. Using a still from clip prepared by Ivor_Bigunn, I have marked up an attempt to reconcile what we see against an approximate outline of the orientation that -XKQ may have had relative to -XH9. What seems especially hard to reconcile is the distinct white mark(s) on what should be the helicopter fuselage. As far as I can tell, -XKQ was mostly dark grey just as -XH9 is but would also have had light coloured 'Sea World' logos on the engine cowling. Any better interpretation?



Update:

The 'unexplained white' might be reflection of the starboard side pop-out float cover off the gloss fuselage paint (see my post #321). The light coloured float covers might also explain why the starboard side skid isn't more obvious and shows up as a blurred light grey immediately above the walkway to the helipad.

In any case Channel 9 has now also made that on-board footage available without the watermarks all over it, and -XKQ can be seen much more clearly, including rotor turning:


Also in this clip, it confirms there is a white structure now located immediately behind the departure helipad, see screen shots below:





Update 2: For a quite different but more credible interpretation of view of -XKQ from -XH9, see subsequent post #373 by Traffic_Is_Er_Was. But I have otherwise left my post here as it originally was.

Last edited by helispotter; 12th Jan 2023 at 12:12. Reason: 2nd update with link to later more credible interpretation.
helispotter is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 8th Jan 2023, 16:30
  #314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The white stripe down the side threw me, i found this on Google, It is described as a picture of one of their machines.





DroneDog is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 16:48
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,059
Received 328 Likes on 127 Posts
I only pointed out the right of way issue because someone somewhere will want to blame someone for the accident and the surviving pilot did technically have right of way.
Re-stated what Crab said (and not trying to speak for Crab) is....."One Pilot is alive to speak to what he knows of the series of events that led to the collision.".

Sadly, the other Pilot shall not have that opportunity.

Hopefully there shall be enough evidence gathered from Audio Tape Recordings, Individual testimony, witness accounts, video, and forensic examination of the two aircraft to determine what happened with some reliability.

The Investigation shall piece together an account using all of hat information and then consider how it all came to happen then make some suggestions on how to prevent another similar tragedy at Sea World and other similar operations.

Hopefully, that is the case as there should be some good come out of this sad event.
SASless is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 20:37
  #316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: House
Posts: 85
Received 4 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by cooperplace
Interesting that the ATSB say it will take 18 months for a report but it seems they were pretty quick to hand footage to the media, footage they weren't authorised to pass on. It seems disappointing, correct me if I'm wrong.
If this is true, or if the media obtained the obtained the video under any nefarious circumstance, I trust they will be hung out to dry.
sagan is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 21:30
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,134
Received 104 Likes on 46 Posts
Don't be so sure that is what happened. In the commentary with the footage at the following link, the 7 News presenter says: "..been obtained exclusively by 7 News... the vision obviously will be passed on to the experts investigating this tragedy". So sounds to me like 7 managed to get hold of the material first, then planned to pass to ATSB. I can well imagine media people managed to make it over to the crash site long before any ATSB personnel, or perhaps even police, arrived on the scene. Passenger may have handed over material under a false impression they were giving it to an official investigator. You can bet this will be investigated as well now.
That is the more likely scenario. Any material that has been formally obtained by the ATSB cannot be released to the public. This footage may not even be required by the ATSB as they may have more than enough. Have you noticed that there is no footage from the other helicopter? I would imagine that is of more interest to the investigators. Even the surviving pilot is not prevented by the ATSB from telling the media his story. The only thing he can't do is provide the media with a transcript or an audio copy of his discussion with the ATSB. If someone was trying to impersonate an official investigator the ATSB would have to refer any investigation into that matter to the AFP. The investigation would only proceed if the AFP thought that by impersonating a Commonwealth Officer (thats what investigators are) that person was able to obtain some form of financial reward from the Commonwealth or hindered the investigation. Anyone can conduct their own investigation of this event, as evidenced by this thread. The difference with the ATSB is that they have the legal backing to obtain whatever they need to conduct the investigation and that evidence is not available for public scrutiny even for FOI requests.

Realistically the ATSB already know what happened. Two modern helicopters collided on a clear day conducting joyflights. Its the why that will be the focus of the investigation particularly why a helipad with a white cross on it was being used. The fact that the CP was flying from that helipad would be significant as he would be the only pilot within the organisation that could authorise its use. The focus will be on the whole organisation ,including Sea World management, and its contribution to the accident. The surviving pilot was unfortunately the last line of defense but if he wasn't told that the old helipad was being used then why would he look in that direction.

​​​​​​​To all those who shout " He should have had a better scan" or " He was looking in the wrong spot" consider this. How many of you look behind when proceeding at a stop or give way sign?
Lookleft is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by Lookleft:
Old 8th Jan 2023, 21:33
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,092
Received 419 Likes on 192 Posts
Hopefully, that is the case as there should be some good come out of this sad event.
Agreed, even if it is only for the bereaved to take some measure of comfort from.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 21:45
  #319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: At the moment, here.
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Ennio is offline  
Old 8th Jan 2023, 22:32
  #320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 57
Posts: 178
Received 22 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by DroneDog
The white stripe down the side threw me, i found this on Google, It is described as a picture of one of their machines...
DroneDog: Yes, I also came across that image (at YouTube link below with ATC recording apparently post the accident) while searching the net for the scheme of -VH-XKQ (aside from what is seen on news). But I am reasonably sure that isn't a photo of -XKQ, at least not in its current scheme. The image of that helicopter has been pasted onto a backdrop of the Gold Coast. The rotors are not turning else they wouldn't be drooping like that.


AustAirData explains that VH-XKQ (c/n: 4639) was previously registered PK-URR. At following link, there are several photos that are probably of it from February 2019 heading north along Queensland coast, possibly on its way to Indonesia?:

http://cqplanespotting.********.com/...egistered.html

While there is another photo of PK-URR on the Twitter page of Said Oemar, which does have light bands on its fuselage, that may well be another helicopter (c/n: 4060):

https://twitter.com/oemar_thok/photo
helispotter is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.