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

[212man]

Originally Posted by Traffic_Is_Er_Was

I'm not debating the impact. I've seen all that before. I'm debating the suggestion that something identified in the video filmed from inside one of the helos prior to impact is the other helo. Nothing in that linked clip informs me otherwise.

I have to say, I’m struggling a bit and not convinced too.

[KiwiNedNZ]

When was the decision made to operate from that helipad?

- About 40 years ago when it was built. They have been operating from that pad for decades - you trying to read stuff into it that isnt there is ridiculous.

​​​​​​​

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

The best thing to come out of this whole very sad situation is that first and most importantly, most involved survived. This gives investigators the opportunity to examine with the people in the incident what they saw and when and where they saw it.

[Lookleft]

About 40 years ago when it was built. They have been operating from that pad for decades - you trying to read stuff into it that isnt there is ridiculous.

I'm referring to the day of the accident but I think you know that. As far as reading stuff into it, two helicopters collided because one departed a helipad at 90 degrees to one landing on another helipad! Clearly there was a fatal flaw in operating that way so the ridiculous idea is that it had nothing to do with the outcome.

[KiwiNedNZ]

two helicopters collided because one departed a helipad at 90 degrees to one landing on another helipad!

Better contact ATSB and tell them to stop their investigation as you seem to have worked out what caused it.

[zzodr]

two helicopters collided because one departed a helipad at 90 degrees to one landing on another helipad!

With visual contact, radio calls and vertical spacing, this has been done many times the world over with no incident.

[KiwiNedNZ]

I'm referring to the day of the accident but I think you know that

Actually your post says nothing of the sort. You think they just decided on the day hey lets operate from this pad that we have never done so from before ??. They operate from the ticket booth pad every day - its NOTHING NEW.

[Dick Smith]

There was 180 degrees of azimuth available over water for the arriving and departing helicopters to be separated.

Yet they were in exactly the same airspace.

I wonder if that's what the local procedures called for.

If so it was a potential accident waiting to happen.

[Ascend Charlie]

The takeoff would always be at 90 degrees to the land, which is full of obstacles and people. The departing machine didn't really have a choice.

While climbing out, the landing aircraft was in a blind vision spot above the roof and centre window divider, and the landing aircraft had the departing acft in his blind spot behind the A pillar. Only radio calls would have alerted them, or the efforts by the concerned pax. If he had tapped the left shoulder, a different result may have ensued, but he couldn't reach that far. And it may have been too late.

There is always a lot of cockpit distraction with joyride pax, squealing, pointing, waving cameras, and asking the pilot questions if they are on intercom. Easy to blot out a radio call.

[Lookleft]

Actually your post says nothing of the sort. You think they just decided on the day hey lets operate from this pad that we have never done so from before ??. They operate from the ticket booth pad every day - its NOTHING NEW.

Well if thats the case then this was an accident that was always going to happen. To have one helicopter depart at 90 degress to an arriving helicopter's flight path is just negligent or did they normally only operate from the so called ticket booth pad everyday? My interpretation of the video is that the arriving pilot was not expecting there to be any traffic coming from the "ticket booth pad". If it was in daily use then you would think he would be scanning in that direction as he is making his approach.

Better contact ATSB and tell them to stop their investigation as you seem to have worked out what caused it.

Do tell your version of events then.

​​​​​​​There was 180 degrees of azimuth available over water for the arriving and departing helicopters to be separated.

Yet they were in exactly the same airspace.

I wonder if that's what the local procedures called for.

If so it was a potential accident waiting to happen.

For some though Dick it was just another day at Sea World where the only problem was the operating crew and their inability to give way at a helicopter T-intersection.

[Dick Smith]

Ascend - What would stop a takeoff to the SW and a landing from the NW?

[Lookleft]

The takeoff would always be at 90 degrees to the land, which is full of obstacles and people. The departing machine didn't really have a choice.

The take-off is parallel to the buildings. If it was 90degrees to the land its flight path would have been over the water. Is there any reason that the departing helicopter could not have rotated 90 degrees on the pad and departed over the water?

[KiwiNedNZ]

What would stop a takeoff to the SW and a landing from the NW?

Dick that would work if only the main section of helipads was being used however that ceases to work when they also use the helipad by the ticket booth which is the one where the ill fated EC130 took off from as no matter what you would have outbound and inbound aircraft having to cross flight paths.

To be honest having seen them conduct faultless flight ops using both pads and in some cases all three pads for many years I am at a loss to understand how it all turned to custard this time. These are not amateurs and Jenko oversaw a good bunch of people. Unfortunately all the holes in the swiss cheese lined up that day.

[helispotter]

Originally Posted by KiwiNedNZ

...To be honest having seen them conduct faultless flight ops using both pads and in some cases all three pads for many years I am at a loss to understand how it all turned to custard this time...

Having read the differing views regarding use of the several helipads, thought I might provide some approximate relative distances between current pads:

From northern pad (used by XKQ) to nearest of the four newer Sea World pads: ~178m
Distance between centres of the extreme two of the four newer Sea World pads: ~67m
Distance between the southern most Sea World pad and northern most Gold Coast Helitours pads: ~885m

So any range of distances between pads considered to be a higher risk than others?

Following 'satellite view' is from Courier Mail extracts shared by John Eacott and shows current Sea World pad configuration:


Older Google Earth view down to the three Gold Coast Helitours pads, showing approximate distances:


On a tangent, remember the unfortunate 1985 HeliJet reef pontoon accident in which rotors of a pair of helicopters (VH-HIL, a Bell 206L and VH-HIA, a Bell 222) tangled resulting in loss of life of one passenger and serious injury for two others: https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications.../aair198503546

[[email protected]]

Without knowing the actual local procedures used by the company we can only surmise that having a departure and climbout path that has to cross an arrivals and approach path is not the greatest idea unless you have planned vertical separation as well.

Ie, arriving aircraft stays at 300' until he has positively identified departure aircraft and departing aircraft climbs to 200' until positively clear of the arrival path.

Having no crossing would be ideal but sometimes the wind conditions probably won't allow for that.

[KiwiNedNZ]

Crab - unfortunately for Seaworld ops there is no way to avoid crossing paths when using both sets of pads. They arent allowed to fly over the park itself so very much limits the ins and outs.

[[email protected]]

Originally Posted by KiwiNedNZ

Crab - unfortunately for Seaworld ops there is no way to avoid crossing paths when using both sets of pads. They arent allowed to fly over the park itself so very much limits the ins and outs.

That would leave vertical and/or time separation which I'm pretty sure any competent operator would have had in place anyway along with RT calls - It will be interesting to see if the crash investigation finds why two serviceable aircraft with pilots familiar with both the area and the operation and operating to the same Ops manual managed to hit each other.

[SIUYA]

Cooperplace says at #306...

Interesting that the ATSB say it will take 18 months for a report

According to a report this morning Calls for joy flight review after deadly Gold Coast Sea World helicopter crash - ABC News

​​​​​​​The Australian Transport Safety Bureau investigation into the cause of the tragedy is expected to take several years to conclude.

Why does it take the ATSB so long to finalise investigations? I remember the old BASI/early ATSB finished investigations in much shorter timeframes than presently happens, so what's changed to make the ATSB now need so much more time to do its job?

[MagsOffTap]

Originally Posted by SIUYA

Cooperplace says at #306...



According to a report this morning Calls for joy flight review after deadly Gold Coast Sea World helicopter crash - ABC News



Why does it take the ATSB so long to finalise investigations? I remember the old BASI/early ATSB finished investigations in much shorter timeframes than presently happens, so what's changed to make the ATSB now need so much more time to do its job?

fair question I think.

[Traffic_Is_Er_Was]

Originally Posted by [email protected]

Without knowing the actual local procedures used by the company we can only surmise that having a departure and climbout path that has to cross an arrivals and approach path is not the greatest idea unless you have planned vertical separation as well.

Ie, arriving aircraft stays at 300' until he has positively identified departure aircraft and departing aircraft climbs to 200' until positively clear of the arrival path.

Having no crossing would be ideal but sometimes the wind conditions probably won't allow for that.

I was thinking much the same thing. I had a look at the various "tours" they operate and I'd say that the most popular ie the cheapest ones, all tend to depart and track south, then reverse back north along the coast before tracking back down to the pads via the Broadwater. I'm assuming it is the way it is is because finishing via the Broadwater gives them a better approach to the pads. I wondered if reversing the "circuit" might provide some relief, but it just reverses the problem. The southern pad departures would cross the northern ones approach. Arrivals and departures from the pads to and from the west so that some form of pre-arranged vertical/horizontal separation would probably waste too much time when you are trying to sell and achieve as many 5 minute flights as possible. I would imagine the only way to eliminate crossing paths is to not use two different pads.