Well I didn’t intend to contribute again as the verbal bashing(not to mention the outlandish insults) has left me somewhat confused..
However

Whirlybird….I wasn’t there so I don’t know the layout of the land. Landing and deploying a throw rope may have been an option.

Zardoz…. Tenure went out the window a long time ago…and rightly so

Unwell _Raptor The mail, and every other British newspaper, are sensationalists who exist for profit and profit alone. Those of us who read them ( and I do because they are free) do so knowing they are written by brain dead twerps who usually thrive on the misfortune of others…usually they are 100% inaccurate and are therefore discounted as irrelevant.

Windle Poons The first honest and informed post on this thread. Spoken from reasoning rather than comparisons to a previous career. I don’t agree with everything you say..but …in this democratic society I respect your right to say it. Well thought out words are considerably better than off the cuff insults.


Hillico… I now have an open mind


Flying Lawyer…This is the UK ,,,of course he is innocent of all charges unless the CPS have a realistic chance of 80% success

Amen

HnH

Fire crews were trying to reach the man, but couldn't.

There's no 80% test. Otherwise, what you say about the CPS is correct.

The Mail praised the crew's actions. Rare treat for the industry - make the most of it.

FL

These situations are a pilots nightmare (because it is the pilot who makes the final decision), the paramedics will be swayed by his considerations.
Basing my comments on the information given (firemen having trouble getting a rope across? SAR cab too far away); I would approach the situation, thus:

Offer to fly the rope across the river for the firecrew. If successful, our job would be complete. Firecrew could carry out rescue from then on.
If this can't be done:
Accept the job (due to time constraints) after checking ALL the crew wish to participate.
LAND on at a nearby safe sight.
Thoroughly brief participating crew on safety issues including ditching in the river.
COMPULSORY DONNING OF LIFE JACKETS.
Fly over car, skids onto or close to car roof. Lower mae west to driver.
Indicate to driver to don jacket, then clamber out of window and cling to skids.
Fly driver to river bank.

IF driver couldn't / wouldn't comply:
Deplane paramedic onto roof (firmly tied to rear of cabin), help driver out, either help him into back of cab or grab hold of him and fly them both to river bank.

In summary:
It was a solid piece of flying skill.
The paramedic was 'brave' - mind you I have never met a paramedic who wasn't!.

BUT, perhaps some more thought could have been put to :
Everyone wearing maewests.
Driver given maewest without paramedic climbing out.
Driver wading ashore using rope from chopper etc etc.

It is so easy to get stuck in when situations like this present themselves. I'm not saying the crew didn't think outside the box (I wasn't there), but I do know what goes thru ones mind when it happens. AND YOU MUST TRY TO CLOSE DOWN AS MANY OF THE RISKS AS POSSIBLE.
That is all that could be expected of anyone IF something went wrong.

I say to myself, when we do jobs similar to these:
Was I acting (as commander of the a/c) in the best interests of ALL THOSE CONCERNED.

There will never be a precedent for scenarios like these - impossible.

I've said it before:
if you get away with it, you're all heroes. If you don't, you find you have no friends anymore!!!!

These jobs have a nasty little habit of boiling down to risk assessment. Everybody so far on this thread appears to have the opinion that the appropriate assessment was made and therefore no real problem.
Any SAR or EMS job must surely assess the "what if" when one of the two motors fails, assuming we are under JAR and you have two in the first place. The reason S61's winch from boats running in to wind as much as possible is to give crews a chance of escaping despite the lack of SE performance at low speed of said type. If the 105 can hover over a river on one engine at this a/c's weight fine. But if not.........
We forever talk of "sods law", we accept an element of danger in flying, it will happen in the worst place at the worst time etc. Was the risk absolutely minimised given the apparent situation unfolding.
Can a Bo105 type rated pilot please respond and tell of this types ability for SE hovering within a foot/two of a car.
Was the victim actually in such immediate danger as would prevent a cessation of flying to don Mae Wests etc. as TC's plan suggests? This appears to be an extremely tight space, plenty to go wrong........
Being Devil's advocate merely because several SAR pilots remind me regularly of the day they have to sit above a boat with critically ill person on board and say no because its too much of a risk to winch them aboard. No point losing more lives in trying to save the victim as he can't be saved by a now incapacitated crew.
This mans apparent loonacy has brought two other lives into danger. Do we turn around and say well he's in danger so we must save him at all cost. A successful outcome does not mean it couldn't so easily have become a tragedy should something have gone wrong. It is not indicated in any report I've read that all other means to rescue him were exhausted.
This may however be the case and the photos may confuse the appearance of the scene ie. clear area etc.
I have to ask are we thinking along the lines of American EMS and Police operators where accidents are occuring at an alarming rate, wire strikes, night time incidents etc. The victim is being saved, most of the time but at possible fatal risk to the crew, more than normal flying risks. Five years ago an SAR crew were killed in an incident where they flew in conditions apparently beyond their capabilities and those of the a/c. A timely reminder of what can happen. We strive to do our best, but sometimes we should say no. An unfortunate fact of the job, nature of he beast. Something for a few of the previous posters to think about.
This may not have been one of those times, it may. See what other SAR/EMS crews say, maybe Pete would join the conversation and enlighten us with more detail. I'm keeping an open mind, but hoping to learn from Pete's experience either way.
Regardless well done Pete and Kevin, a pint shall be drunk in honour.....or ten! :ok:

A BO105 won't single engine hover.

As a paramedic and a helo pilot and currently rather the worse for wear due to a rather affulent alcoholic friend! :) ...

Who has posted above wouldn't do the same in the same situation?
Who won't risk their life to say others? I ve done it several times (on and off duty) and would do it again... difficult call but don't know anyone in any of the emergency services who would quit and let someone die.
I ve posted before on a similar subject and would happily lose my licence to save a life... can always 'go public' via the press afterwards... you re unlikey to come off worse than the CAA...

Watch someone die or risk your licence ? YOUR choice...

PW

Sorry boys i worded my bit a little to strong then. what i intended to say then is that, you know your crew and know what dicisions to make knowing your crew, and there views feelings etc etc.

then you make the final dicision from there, H/P no not worked as EMS HEMS ETC speaking from a firemans prospective in this instant only. and yes CRM is a must and if any member of my team decided at any time he wanted out or not to do it then dicisions would assessed based on that and changed if necessary

I would hope in a situation like this though that what the pilot thought and his crew where the same thing, that is to save this guys life and quick.

if your crew has quistions about situations like this, at what point would that crew member voice his view to stop. this is where i was coming from.

Team work is what all games are about but if there is a quistion of dought about any player it makes the ultimate dicision more difficult. and poss adds a risk to the task.

But this is only an ex firemans point of view.

PS im with pilot wolf on this one.

Sincerely
Bravo 99

Although you hastily retreated from this initial post I would worry if I was a member of YOUR crew. I have flown with pilots who go down atunnel of "I am right..don't question me" and its not an experience I will allow to happen again!

Has it increased even further then?

I agree with TC about planning such a task, it is important to plan plan and discuss so every one is happy with their role and whats to be done. I appluad the actions of the crew who did this rescue. I am sure also that HH does not deserve the flak some of you are giving out. He was not intending to cause disconcern but was just pointing out the what ifs....
With the experience he obviously has 1200 hours he knows his stuff.
HH would no doubt have done the same thing but like TC, would have made sure it was planned and all eventualities were worked out

Volrider,

Thank you for your views.

Thomas coupling Thanks for yours.

Its interesting that the abusers havent submitted you to the same torrent of words that I was subjected to.

Abuse is easy... constructive thought requires more intelligence:D

At the end of the day each individual has his/her own opinion
the crew made the right choice,someones life was saved so well done to then.

Just as a final note Isurvived 23 years in the front line of fire Service, only to have my career finished by someone who at the time did not carryout an instruction given to him. becouse he thought better.

but that is a different story.

Signing off on this one

Bravo 99
AJB

Deepest thanks from all the crew involved for the kind support.

Great thought was applied to the situation which included

a. ANO Rule 5 b,c,e
b. JAR Ops 3.005
c. Risk v need.
d. SAR 25min ETA approx
e. No plan immediately available to the Fire brigade.
f. Ditto for Police.
g. Equipment levels and inadequacy
h. and don't forget the main reason.......a man trapped in a car, up to his middle in freezing water for 30 mins already, no means of immediate escape, rising flash flood level, car unstable with the fear of being swept further down river to the deeper area and car doors and windows (electric) unable to be opened against the flow.

All this considered within a very short space of time.

"Instinctive"

Everyday possibility for HEMS, all be it not too often.

pp Kev, Collin and Peter.
:ok: :ok:

Well done guys
 

It's great to hear from you and, as we all knew anyway, you made a decision based on the situation at the time; something which none of us can comment on really without being there.

Cheers

Whirlygig

Yes Biffa good to hear from you and the crew an excellent job that we all hope we could emulate but also hope we never have to:ok: :ok:

OK to throw a different angle on it.... suppose the life saved wasn't human?

Is it still worth the risk? Would you still risk an accident or your licence?

Top story here, (SoCal), is currently about the fire department rescuing a dog stranded in the flood waters of the LA river..

OK so they re trained for winch rescue and not sure what aircraft was used. But following a recent FD incident - mechanical failures occur....

Any thoughts?

PW

No, but isn't your first duty to protect life?

In similar circumstances, after weighing up all of the pros and cons, I hope I'd be brave enough to take the right decision; whatever that may be.

Well done to the crew.

PS From what I remember of WYPA the biggest threat to H&S is rattling your fillings loose once you get back on board.

Isn't PPRuNe great !
 

Pose a simple thought-provoking question, without passing any criticism ( or praise ) and get shot at :eek: !

A hearty slap on the back for the crew from me too for a job well done. Without knowing all the details of their decision making, they must surely have considered the options before reaching their joint decision - I doubt if they would be in the job for long if they didn't do this on EVERY mission !

A big thumbs up aswell for "HuntingHound" for raising these issues so everyone can comment on them - and for daring to ask the question " What if ... "
Loads of CRM considerations have been posted as a result which can only be good for everyone concerned.

Here's another " What if " question ...

... " What if " a Private helo pilot or someone without the expertise, knowledge and training of the Air Ambo / Police / SAR crews were to happen upon an incident like this TOMORROW ( I've just checked the weather forecast - and this might not be as unlikely as you think ! ) - WHAT WOULD THEY DO ????

Maybe they'd have a go at a rescue without considering all the options and potential consequences, Maybe they will have read this thread and will have learnt a few things - consider some options they might not have thought of before, Maybe they won't.

The only answer is to get Capt. Biffer to fly more missions - I've heard he really can walk on water !


:ok:

Nice one, Mr Barnes!

Coconutty

Without passing any criticizm??

Kinda strange for hunterhound to start his thread about a succesful rescue mission with this icon next to it

http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/...cons/icon9.gif = unhappy

if you aint meaning to criticize.

They didn't look like innocent 'neutral' questions to me. He was trying to make some points and for some reason best known to himself he decided the pilot and paramedic hadn't thought of all them questions for themselves before doing the rescue. :rolleyes:

My hat's off to the crew. :ok:

I have read some crap at times but coconutty you take the biscuit, I can only think you are sleeping with huntnhound, or maybe you are a fully law abiding by the book policeman, who we all love to meet when caught doing 5 mph over the limit and have to endure the lecture!!
What a plonker to sumise any PPL would now consider a rescue after reading this thread - you have got to be on another planet, I may watch casualty but I don't try open heart surgery in my spare time. Try firing from the head for a change rather than the hip, you may score a hit. Have you ever thought a PPL may read this and think well done - then work harder to succeed and progress to his CPL etc in the hope of emulating a job well done.

Back to the books...........