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

HAA fatal 4-2-23 Alabama EC-130

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

HAA fatal 4-2-23 Alabama EC-130

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 7th Apr 2023, 15:44
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
Posts: 1,960
Received 50 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by wrench1
Yes as noted above. However, there have been some recent changes where Part 135 operators can implement a max 70 age limit if they so choose provided they meet certain criteria.
Which regulation is this? I cannot find it.
Gordy is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2023, 16:46
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 753
Received 24 Likes on 19 Posts
Originally Posted by Gordy
Which regulation is this? I cannot find it.
Not a regulation but law. H. R. 2617 passed this year. Page 799, Section 107 gets you the text.
Its actually a second attempt with a few articles out there that give the history. Here's one: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...ge-91k-135-ops

EDIT: got my skis crossed. When looking for other references was informed the final bill specified "turbojet" ops vs simply "operations" from the original bill several years ago. Doubtful this bill will have any effect on your ops or other "turboshaft" operations. My bad.

Last edited by wrench1; 7th Apr 2023 at 17:14. Reason: Clarify understanding
wrench1 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 7th Apr 2023, 20:59
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
Posts: 1,960
Received 50 Likes on 15 Posts
Originally Posted by wrench1
Doubtful this bill will have any effect on your ops or other "turboshaft" operations. My bad.
All good, I have to say I kind of agree with the limit for certain operations. I know a few 70 = year old helicopter pilots who should prolly hang up their helmet but refuse.
Gordy is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 9th Apr 2023, 11:48
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: VA
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by verticalspin
A closer look at the ADS-B exchange data does in fact look more like a regular high and low recon. One of the pictures of the aircraft on the ground does show power lines crossing the road in the background.
Looks like a bit more than a "regular" high/low recon. 20 minutes time elapsed from the first time they crossed Hwy 43 until the last data point. Even if you take out that first large sweeping LH turn, there is still 15 minutes of circling up and down the road.
dragon6172 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2023, 12:30
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,332
Received 623 Likes on 271 Posts
Originally Posted by dragon6172
Looks like a bit more than a "regular" high/low recon. 20 minutes time elapsed from the first time they crossed Hwy 43 until the last data point. Even if you take out that first large sweeping LH turn, there is still 15 minutes of circling up and down the road.
They could have had trouble locating the casualty and perhaps waiting for the road to be closed.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2023, 12:54
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: VA
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
They could have had trouble locating the casualty and perhaps waiting for the road to be closed.
That's my point. Wouldn't be a "regular" high/low recon then.
dragon6172 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2023, 17:37
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,332
Received 623 Likes on 271 Posts
Still seems like a normal event though, I've lost count of the times the casualty wasn't where we were told or there was more than one person on the ground matching the description.

The fact they went round a few times doesn't give cause for concern, maybe they were just being extra cautious due to the LS.

If they had any technical problems, it seems unlikely they would continue to try and land.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2023, 20:41
  #28 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 515
Received 38 Likes on 16 Posts
Stand-off protocol?

Some programs have an airborne standoff protocol in which they do not want the helicopter circling overhead as a “rush or distraction “ for the ground resources. Distance is determined by the local/situation but usually comms with the ground has been established.

Not saying that is the case in this incident, don’t know their SOP.
havoc is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2023, 14:43
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 753
Received 24 Likes on 19 Posts
Prelim released. Interesting chain of events...

A witness and his wife were driving down a road when they saw a helicopter off to the side of the road about 100 ft away and 3 to 4 ft above the ground. The helicopter was hovering, facing south, and parallel to the road. The helicopter then rapidly ascended and turned towards the road where they were traveling on. The helicopter moved above the car for several seconds and turned 180° back toward a field, and immediately the helicopter pitched nose down and impacted the road behind them.
EC130 Alabama EMS Prelim
wrench1 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2023, 14:57
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,332
Received 623 Likes on 271 Posts
Bizarre chain of events - hopefully the Vision 1000 will show what actually caused the accident.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.