tecpilot, not sure what you mean by "Heedm is part time right." If you mean we're part time on rescues and other time on something else, then no...our only task is rescue.

I don't know any pilot that can always prevent a load from swinging in the turbulent conditions we often see in the mountains. Any load swinging with a live load could be disastrous. With a winch, the load can still swing, but since you don't move the helicopter excessively, returning the load to the ground quickly is an option.

heedm,
i've meant you have partial right with the fixed line disadvantages.
"The patient is exposed to the environment beneath the helicopter far too long. Hypothermia, shock, fear, treatment delays are just some of the patient concerns. Danger for those on the line and for those in the helicopter is increased (not as likely to pickle a live load). Since the load must be relocated by moving the helicopter, a guide line is not possible thereby increasing danger of swing, spin, instability, etc. "

On a bigger helicopter like a seaking the patient could be initially transported inside the helo. Absolute clear this means some advantages. Your are also on the right side with load swinging.
It's easier to prevent on hoist ops. On fixed line you have to move the whole helo+fixed line+rescuer system. Need's much more skills. That's what i wanted to discuss, no questions, hoist ops if possible is the better way. But for operators using smaller helicopters on a multirole fixed line ops could be an interesting variant. On a car crash site in urban area or a home visit after a heart attack the BK's or BO's or ... are the winners compared to the "bigs".
We use BK 117 B2 and hoping on a PA max. 4000 ft, 3-4 man crew + patient, in case of an engine failure the OEI limits should be great enough to save the inside and outside crew. The BO counts for a single engine helo. Mostly used for training purposes. In europe we have some operators using the fixed line on smaller helos like A 109 K2, EC 135, AS 350/355, BO's and BK's. Especially in Austria, Switzerland and Germany. They all together have made thousands of fixed line rescues.

TecP,

I think the only advantage of the smaller helos is that they can land in smaller sites than something like a Sea King. Other than that, if you can get a static line to a casualty then you can winch to a casualty and as you have already agreed, hoist ops are safer. The main reason I can see for using fixed line on a smaller helo instead of a winch on a bigger one is cost - not exactly putting the safety of the crew and casualty first is it?
If your man on the end of the wire is having trouble facing forward then he might need to look at a different harness - our winchmen wear a bosun's chair arrangement that allows them to kick freely and thus keep themselves facing forwards (most of the time).
I wouldn't do a fixed line rescue if I could possibly help it as it increases exposure to danger time for all on the wire as discussed on other posts.
A question - do you do fixed line ops at night? The best mirrors in the world won't replace a good winch ops hover patter, especially if your hover references are poor.
Winch out, rescue casualty, winch in then start treating the casualty on the way to hospital - I would not like to be recovered from an RTA just to freeze to death on the end of a 100' bit of rope!

Used fixed length lines in SE Asia. 140' lines with up to four people usually. Maguire rigs as I recall. The folks locked arms or held onto a leg to get stabilized.

We were required to ride them before we were allowed to carry folks on them. Still one of the "E" coupon rides of my life.

A problem I experienced on one occasion is that, if you have a problem and can't get the people inside, they arrive at the emergency landing site first. Not a good thing normally.

We have operated small single engine aircraft in support of Parks Canada's Mountain Rescue program for 20+ years with no problems.
We use various lengths of fixed lines, attached to the aircraft with dual hooks. Vertical reference is used by the pilots to place rescuers on location. Slinging distance and time with live loads is kept to a minimum.
Altitudes in the Rockies reach 13,000', but typical rescues are preformed between 8,000 and 12,000'.
It would be great to have the twin engines and hoisting capability, but economics preclude this type of operation.

Well, I have to say that working with a hoist and a nice team is for me the only option there should be. I understand that "expensive" should not be a consideration to take into account, once someone decides to place a helicopter to do the job, it should be assumed that it's expensive, so let's get the minimum equipment to do what it's supposed to do i.e. a HOIST. I think nobody should do sea rescue without floats .... for the same reason...
Of course you guys that do long line have my respect for you are doing the job without the best tool.
Anyway I believe the main thing is to have full confidence in every member of the team: hoist man, rescuers, pilot...
We do only the rescue job, once the person is out of the accident scenary we fly a short distance to a near by spot where we have already waiting an EMS helicopter to take him/her to hospital:) WHAT A LUXURY!!!!:eek:
All that we do with an AS355N and a hoist for 204 kgs. capacity.
Buen vuelo.

I think I gave the impression that we should not be using a fixed line. In fact, I think the adaptability of the helicopter is one of its best attributes. Flying tours around mountains, someone is hurt, helicopter is the only way in and you have the only helicopter. If you can long line and that's the only option for the patient then I say go for it.

If you regularly do rescues with a fixed line then you should definitely rethink buying a hoist.

_____________

407 driver, maybe mention to Parks Canada what kind of lawsuit could result if someone was injured on a longline when they (Parks) could have paid more for the service to allow you to buy a hoist. Who knows, might work.

I might be stopping in Golden when the labs leave Comox this summer. Will you be around?

Some pros and cons from Mexico. We have been doing 4-5 long line rescues per month for several years now in some of the roughest mountains on the planet so we have some experience.

Long line pros

Expense and don't tell me price is not a consideration. If that were the case we would all be using Boeing 234's or Mil 26's complete with doctors, nurses and an ER on board for rescue work.

Long line is a simpler system. No electrics, gears, brakes, cutters, guides, operator etc. The cargo hook electrics are disabled during these operations.

The ability to put multiple rescuers and/or victims on the line at the same time. The usual is 3 medics and one litter victim at a time. We have only put a single rescuer out once. We feel that a single rescuer is a marginal situation for the evaluation, preparation and loading of the victim. The victims are fully enclosed in a cover to isolate them from the environment.


We have a basket that will handle up to 15 people at a time that we are experimenting with but have not used yet.

We have never had a victim/rescuer spin as I have seen during hoist rescues. The video of the LA county paramedic and victim is sobering.

The pilot has an unobstructed view and complete control of the load, no need for third party instructions and confusion. Presision placement of the rescue personnel without the need for "Tag Lines" or any other assistance from the ground.

In the time it takes to winch a victim 100 ft and load we can usually have the victim to a suitable landing area where he is loaded internally.

In the US, hoist operations are a Part 133 Class "D" operations while long line operations are Class "B". There is only one approved EMS Class "D" that I am aware of. That approval is hard to get to say the least.

Cons

If you have an engine or tail rotor failure during external load operations it really doesn't make any difference if it is a hoist or long line. You either have fly-away power and/or control or you don't. But then how many of us are flying transport category helicopters with true single engine performance at normal operating weights and altitudes? The ending is going to be very similar.

The requirements on the pilot are much greater. But to a good logging/seismic pilot/long line pilot it's "just another load" and a light one at that.

Fire away.

With a hoist you can put multiple rescuers in but you don't have to put them all on at once. If you have an engine failure and you hoist from a sensible height, then at most you injure/kill only those that are on the hook at the time (normally one per load for us, but sometimes we 'double up' rescuers or rescuer and patient.

The guide line or "tag" line is not a necessesity, it is an enhanced capability. When conditions are so turbulent that load swing is unavoidable a succesful rescue can occur by using the line. Normally we use it for ship hoists in storms.

Precision placement is the norm without vertical reference using the hoist and hoist operator. If you want to use vertical reference and a hoist operator, fill your boots.

Respect to LamaBear, an absolutely clean description of the situation.
Have also flown bigger helos during my military time including hoist ops on SAR missions. But the backbone of the EMS are the smaller helicopters around the world. Mountain rescue (or rooftop) with hoist or fixed line is an additionally very small part of the alldays business. Shure depends on location. It's not the question fixed line or not, the answer was given years ago. Military is not interested in rescueing a climber or collapsed tourist with their big machines. Due to their smaller funds civ ops will be shorted. And any other organization, operator or police stands in fight with the deskjockeys and insurances, cutting down the operation costs.
We have to find the best, cheapest, but safest way! An additionally hoist operator standing by each day for our 3-5 fixed line missions per month isn't to pay.
Heedm,
two or more guys on the line, at least one fixed line or hoist experienced seems to me much better than single uplifts, because i've seen more people getting nuts on the line and trying to kill theirselfs, than engine failures. Also an unharmed Patient should be fully enclosed in a rescue bag, that's the best way.

To the problem of facing rearwards: due to the harness-rope clipping in chest level it's not to avoid. Could be only avoided with a persons CG exactly under or within the airforces pressure point. Under hoist ops the problem is not so important because there's not so much airspeed and airforces.

[email protected],
i don't know that "bosun chair arrangement". Is it usable in mountains, gives the rescuer fully movement and for selfprotection it's to sling into a mountain hook? Sometimes it isn't possible to lift the rescuers direct to the patient and they have to climb or descend on the rock.

Matator,
sounds good, but we are the EMS helicopter, there is no other helicopter to assist us. Guess our authorities don't like the idea to pay for a helicopter to catch the patient and the next for medical treatment.

Well, I have no long line experience and it seems to me very difficult a job to go flying around with people hanging from the hook. When we do rescues sometimes we have our rotor blades very near stones, ridges.... and most times in bad wind conditions. I just cannot imagine myself taking care of that and looking out the door to see way downthere where I have to put a person in places where most times there is hardly enough room to stand. For all that I said before: All my respect to you guys doing that job all by yuorselves but when you do that type of job 4 or 5 times a month you must be trained so I understand you spend a few flying hours doing it, hope your boss don't think that is expensive too... Of course EXPENSIVE is a consideration if we talk about using a CHINOOK for the job.... but that is not the point, I'm talking about a HOIST that is much cheaper:)
Anyway the more I think about it the more I realize that the job can be done in many different ways as long as it works for the team that is doing it.
As we say here: Everywhere you go, do what you see being done.:rolleyes:
Buen vuelo

Well, it seems that I have one supporter in Lama Bear. Lama, it appears you conduct ops in a similar way to us.
The Parks Canada system is completely TC approved and legal Heedm, We'd like to call on you and your twin engined aircraft with hoist and all of your expericence, but for a simple sprained ankle above Lk Louise at 830 PM, You're no help....you're just too far away from us. We can do the job quickly, and at a fraction of the cost. Cost, unfortunately, is an issue in this day and age.
Local knowlege of these mountains is also a factor, I personally have over 21 years in this area. We do what we have to do help people, and in the almost 30 years that Parks have been at this game, there have been no incidents. Our pilots are very experienced it mountain ops, and are extremely good at vertical reference. The volume of rescues do not pay for a dedicated aircraft, the aircraft in the Parks system do all jobs, but are immediately available to break-away from charter ops to conduct a rescue.
I'm not saying our system is the answer, I'm saying it is a system that does work, under the circumstances.
I will be here in YGE Heedm, drop by for a coffee or soda when you ferry through, we're in the big brown hangar at the south end of the ramp...Alpine!

A few other comments...Lama Bear, we have gone to a 2 hook system on our aircraft to comply with Transport Canada's latest requirements for live sling loads. We use the ship's standard electrical/mechanical cargo hook, plus a second hydraulicaly releasable unit attached to the airframe for the rescue. The fixed line is Y'd to attached to each unit.
As you mentioned, the sling distance is kept to a minimum, then the patient is loaded INTO the aircraft for the flight to the hospital. unfortunately, no second aircraft is available for the transportation.

As you mentioned, the Vertical Reference aspect of the job is second nature to us, as well as yourself. We are operating on a 150' line almost every day here, and the commercial loads are generally 5 times what our 2 rescuers weigh.

407 driver,

I wasn't meaning to imply anything illegal was going on. I just thought that if the only argument was cost then perhaps a bit of leverage on the customer could get the bucks coughed up.


Totally agree about needing local area knowledge. For us, we can't get too detailed because we're not kept around long enough and the area is big. Many times where six years flying around BC has given me enough area knowledge to make a big difference on a mission. Can't imagine how useful I'd be with 21years here. Sure like to find out, though.

So let me get this right, it's a daytime mountain rescue, its blowing 30-40 kts and it's snowing - your casualty is stuck on a near vertical face and you want to fly the aircraft close to the rockface to get to the overhead AND look down 100' to make sure you don't smear the 3 man rescue team on the fixed line into the mountainside. Are you using the force Luke?
I must be a complete poof but I would opt for a winch operators patter while I try to stop the whirling bits hitting the hard bits every time.
I didn't get a response to my question about night ops - do you carry out fixed line rescues with mirrors in the dark or do the casualties have to wait until daylight.

TecP, the bosuns chair is a material seat harness with webbing support and a quick release box on the front. The box accepts a short lead that attaches to the winch hook. The winchman can also attach either rescue strops or a stretcher to the winch hook so that a stretcher casualty comes up at about waist height with the winchman.

[email protected],
have never made a fixed line lift in the dark and never heard about. Have made hoist ops at night in flat area. Low altitude ops in mountains at night is very dangerous and need a lot experience under such circumstances. Maybe due to the use of NVG or FLIR it becomes better possible in the future. At the moment fixed line at night it's not imaginable for me. To operate a hoist at night in confined area, facing some rocks around you and lifting up guys from a spot you couldn't land, is also a thing only for a specialiced, experienced and fearless or crazy crew.
Somedays it's not possible to get help from a helicopter. If the weather conditions, daytime and equipment doesn't allow a rescue mission its quite fate. We try to give our best but have our limits like the ground units. But we try to improve...

I mentioned earlier in this thread about shock loading of the hoist cable, and also mentioned an Israeli accident. I have not been able to find any data on that incident, however, I did read an article today in April's Helicopter World which spoke of this shock loading, if you can get a hold of a copy you may find it interesting.

Have a good one,

A couple of comments from an old winch operator guys. The incident in Israel was caused by the 2 guys falling out of the ac with 18 inches of slack cable, the shock loading snapped the cable. A longer length of cable has the ablility to absorb the shock, the end of a 300 ft wire is remarkably smooth ride. Breeze have produced a clutch to minimise the risks.
In the days of 100 ft hoists, we used climbing ropes then purpose made 60 ft and 120 extensions to extend the hoist. The extra time taken to deploy the kit with sometimes a very long carry was not beneficial to the casualty. Thank God for the 300 ft hoist
In my opinion, if you are going to do the job, you have to bite the bullet and provide a hoist equiped aircraft with the extra expense that entails. Yes you have to pay for hoist operator, and some of them are not very good. REMEMBER pay peanuts, you get monkeys. No offense to any winch operators out there.

I think that one of the big differences here is the concept of vertical reference operations - essentially alien outside North America - providing rescue services where none exists; and the application of specifically configured rescue aircraft operated or funded by Government agencies (or $). Vertical reference operations require precision longline external load skills, capabilities, and equipment that are not the realm of general helicopter operations.

There are many areas (and occasions) where no specific helicopter rescue capability exists. It is on these occasions that agencies look to local operators to provide that service. The cost and lack of utilisation of a winch may well preclude the viability of procuring such a system, let alone the cost of maintaining proficiency and having the capability (personnel and aircraft performance) available when required - we would actually have to pay for it ourselves and it is beyond the budget of most commercial operators I know. Many of the aircraft are extremely mobile and are often equipped with what they can pack. In many cases, this includes, specifically, a long-line.

I have been involved in at least 20 long-line rescues. I can think of at least five times that number that I know of. All were provided in instances where no other capability existed, and provided the only practical, expedient, means of retrieving injured personnel. It is not something we undertake lightly. We maintain all the equipment essential to safely sling injured humans as a legal requirement for the type of operation we do. If we do not have the means of flying someone out, we cannot operate. Our own self-rescue capability, is however secondary to any other capability that might be available (Coastguard, etc.).

There are certain hazards related to long-lining people, they have to be recognised and managed. Long-lining is however a safe and viable means of rescue where appropriate. Our flight time with someone on the hook is kept to a minimum, only long enough to remove the party from the scene, to the closest point where they can either be positioned inside the aircraft, or to some other means of transportation.

The Denali Lama programme, is a specifically configured programme utilising Long-lines and "screamer suits"! It has operated succesfully for around 10 years now and offered a capability that nothing else could, until very recently. Denali Lama On the one occasion that the Lama got stuck on the mountain, there were no alternatives, no rescue for the rescuer! Fortunately Jim got her going and came back down safely! :eek:

I think the big issue, is the ability to provide safe expeditious rescue capabilities with helicopters, wherever and whenever we can, utilising the skills and equipment at hand. We are not in competition with one another, simply enhancing the overall capability and likelihood of a succesful outcome. We all know that either would certainly come to the rescue of the other in the event it were ever required!

In all the lifts we have ever performed, we have never had a single complaint!:p

Heedm,

The letter that I referred to was from TRW, written by their engineer following an investigation of a damaged winch cable operated by an Australasian company who used the hook as an anchor point for rapelling practice. Friends in Queensland with a better filing system than mine provided me with another copy of the letter, but I am waiting on the author's permission before posting it verbatim.

However, since it was distributed publicly to most Australian operators, the gist of the letter was that the shock load on the hook has an adverse effect on the short length of cable to the drum, which is unable to absorb the strain, thus "unwrapping" the helix of the cable. The main strain acts on the inner core of the cable, where it can't be seen, and further shock loads can then result in a broken cable. If you suspect that your cable has been used for rapelling/fast roping, a check with a micrometer to ascertain cable thickness is strongly recommended.

If you want the letter, let me know and I can e mail it.

Denali Lama in action.
 

McKinley sees first rescue

INJURED: Two Spanish men fall while descending from Denali Pass.

By Anne Marie Tavella
Anchorage Daily News

(Published: May 17, 2002)
Two Spanish mountain climbers were seriously hurt after falling on their way down from Denali Pass on Mount McKinley late Wednesday night.

Francisco Rodriguez Martin, 35, suffered broken ribs and severe frostbite and Miguel Angel Romero Ruiz, 33, suffered a fractured ankle, a head injury and possibly a broken neck. Both men were being treated at Providence Alaska Medical Center on Thursday.

The climbers, members of the five-person Gamba De Palamos expedition, were traveling unroped from the 18,200-foot level to the 17,200-foot high camp on the West Buttress route when they fell.

According to the National Park Service, another member of their team had descended the pass a few hours before Martin and Ruiz earlier in the evening. As that climber neared the high camp he fell into a small crevasse but was able to free himself and walk to the nearby ranger station.

After checking in, he scouted the area for his teammates and spotted them in the snow at the bottom of the pass, said Maureen McLaughlin, a spokesperson with Denali National Park.

The sky was reported clear at the time with 25 mph winds and the temperature at about minus 20 degrees.

Apparently no one saw the fall. The Park Service is still trying to piece together what happened, McLaughlin said. It's not known what triggered the fall or how far the men fell, she said.

A park ranger and volunteers at the 17,200-foot high camp reached the men at about 10 p.m. and gave them medical attention until the men could be flown by high-altitude rescue helicopter to the 7,200-foot base camp Thursday morning. The climbers were put on a medical helicopter at about 11:30 a.m. and flown to Anchorage.

It was the first rescue of this year's McKinley climbing season, which runs from late April to mid-July. According to the Talkeetna Ranger Station, 322 climbers have been issued permits to climb McKinley as of Thursday. Another 32 have climbed and returned, of which three reached the 20,320-foot summit.

To date, 1,163 climbers have registered to make the trek this season. Last year a record 1,305 climbers attempted the climb. That season marked the third year there were no deaths on the mountain.

I have received the OK from Mr Bill Teel, of TRW, to quote his memo:

"Thank you for your input and concern. TRW does not advocate the use of fast roping from the hoist hook for two reasons. The first is that fast roping can produce large shock loads depending on how quickly a person stops. The hoist was designed to minimize these loads by providing "soft" acceleration and deceleration rates when starting and stopping. This reduces transient loads from being imparted to the hoist cable and structure.

When using the fast rope method, the hook is horned and the load is reacted by a short (less than 18 inch) section of cable between the hook and the drum. If a transient load occurs, the short cable length is stiffer and tends to lengthen the cable when reacting the instantaneous load. This action tends to "unwrap" the cable helix. This is much more damaging to a cable than if the same shock load were applied when 10 or 20 feet of cable were extended. Consequently, the cable is more susceptible to damage and unwrapping with a short cable length, just as you have observed.

Worst yet, shock loads tend to break the inner wires first, even though the outer wires may still visually appear acceptable. This is due to the relative motion that occurs between the inner strands/wires. As time and use progresses, the cable will begin to permanently stretch or neck down in a localised area. By the time this occurs, the cable has lost much of its strength. This is why TRW strongly advocates inspecting the cable frequently including measuring the cable with a micrometer.

The second reason TRW does not advocate fast roping from the hoist hook is that this produces a possible single point of failure. When the fast rope is attached to the hook, the hook is only reacted by the steel hoist cable. If the cable were previously damaged (again note that the damage could be undetected, internal damage), then a large shock load could cause the hoist cable to fail and there would be nothing to react the person attached to the fast rope.

For these reasons TRW does not recommend fast roping from the hoist hook. TRW recommends fast roping from a structural feature only."



Please feel free to distribute this memo as widely as possible.....as it pertains to all company's hoists with a 3/16 diameter cable.

Sincerely yours,

WIlliam Teel
Senior Design Engineer"

Fixed Lines
 

Hi all,

I'm a 60 PC inthe Texas Guard and we use a fixed line for two types of rescue.

One uses a conical type basket (Billy Pugh) similiar to that used to hoist crews from boats to oil rigs in the GOM, this basket is used for pulling folks out of rivers and such.

The second is a metal contraption about 12 foot by five with a gate at one end and is intended for high rise fire etc. I flew the thing when we first got it and at any thing over 20 knots it really begins to trail back and by 80 it was close enough to the tail that we recommend no more than 70 as a max IAS. I imagine it would be rather unpleasant to ride in at anything quicker than a hover as the side rails are only about three feet high and there is no roof.

Both of the rigs hook to the cargo hook and have a secondary cargostrap that wraps through the cabin. In the center of the strap is a wooden block placed so the strap keeps it in place against the floor. So if I really need to punch off the load I first pop the hook and then the crew chief is supposed to take an axe and hack through the strap. The board is to keep him from damaging the floor or worse the axe.

Friggin goofy arrangement at best......only in the Army.

Best regards,

Brian

Billy Deacon SAR Trophy Goes to S-61 Winchman
 

Every now and then we get reminded how we are surrounded by extraordinary individuals. Thanks, Shiner Wright!


From the Sikorsky.com web site:

Billy Deacon SAR Trophy Goes to S-61 Winchman

A rescue crewman aboard a Sikorsky S-61 helicopter serving Her Majesty's Coastguard in Great Britain has won the inaugural Billy Deacon SAR Memorial Trophy.

Stephen (Shiner) Wright, employed by Bristow Helicopters at the Coastguard Search and Rescue base at Stornoway, Isle of Lewis, received the 2002 trophy this spring in London. Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, presented the award for the first time on April 30, 2002.

The award honors S-61 winchman Billy Deacon, who died heroically during a 1997 rescue aboard a foundering ship after ensuring its crew was hoisted to safety.

Wright was the winchman lowered from the Coastguard helicopter "Mike Uniform" on March 31, 2001 when it was called to recover an injured seaman from the fishing vessel Amadeus in 50-knot winds and a violent sea state.

A description of his actions shows that being a winchman, the SAR crewman who is lowered from the aircraft, is not a calling for the faint-hearted.

"In the process of being lowered to the deck, the vessel lurched suddenly throwing Shiner down a well deck. Before he had time to disconnect from the winch hook, the vessel fell away causing Shiner to be dragged upwards, impacting the sides of the well deck and thus sustaining injuries to his leg, chest and head. As the ship rose upwards again, he was unceremoniously deposited onto the upper deck of the fishing vessel and rendered semi-conscious.

"Though badly injured and in extreme pain, he managed to disconnect from the winch hook and recover sufficiently to move up to the bridge to tend to the casualty. In severe pain from a broken foot and bruised ribs and suffering from concussion, he administered first aid to the seaman, who had an injury to his shoulder.

"After placing the casualty in a lifting harness, Shiner returned to the winching area and, along with the casualty, was recovered to the helicopter. On return to Stornoway, Shiner was detained in hospital for a short period. He returned to work after a six-week period of recovery. Throughout the rescue, his primary concern was for the casualty and he displayed a high degree of determination, dedication and professionalism."

The trophy is awarded to winch operators and winchmen from the British Coastguard, Royal Air Force and Royal Navy for meritorious service during SAR helicopter operations from U.K. bases. The award committee, independently chaired by the Operations Director from the Royal National Lifeboat Institute, sits annually to consider nominations.

Bristow Helicopters and Breitling UK sponsor the award. Shiner will hold the Trophy for one year or until the award is reallocated.



http://www.sikorsky.com/details/0,30...TI1251,00.html

Impressive stuff! Truly a hero.

I'm always lost in admiration for those brave people who risk serious injury and even their own lives to save others.

And well done to Sikorsky for creating the Award.

Shiner is one of those very brave men who puts his neck on the line "routinely" when there is a job to be done.

He has been doing it for quite a few years now I recall he had to jump into the sea with another SAR crewman past the still turning screws of a ship that was on its final plunge AFTER they had rescued all on board , that was about 12yrs ago when he was on Culdose SAR duty with the RN.

I am very pleased to see that now and again these individuals get the recognition they deserve, they can never be paid enough for what they do!

Good on yer Shiner!:)

Wunper::cool:

http://www.sikorsky.com/Images/SAC_S...r_and_Duke.jpg
http://www.sikorsky.com/Images/SAC_S...and_Trophy.jpg

Hate to admit it, but airline flying is a bit tame compared to SAR. :o

Portland SAR helicopter down
 

Just saw on the news that the Portland Coastguard helicopter has crash landed at the Royal Marines base in Poole Harbour. The news said both engines caught fire whilst the helicopter was looking for someone in the water. Apparently all crew are OK but aircraft doesn't look like its going to be flying again.

Glad everyone appears to be OK...
 

A very sorry day, I'm glad preliminary reports suggest that everyone is OK, lets hope this is the case.
If anyone can confirnm all are well & give an idea of what happened would be very interested........Thanks:(

According to our local news, all four crew members escaped unhurt. Apparently, one engine caught fire so they elected to make an emergency landing at the Marines Base at Poole. Just before they landed (300') the second engine exploded, according to the report. The aircraft is totally destroyed by fire.

My No 2 Micropulse was swimming nearby and saw it descending with smoke from one engine. He also heard the explosion and saw a lot of smoke.

CG are threatening to move this aircraft from Portland to Leigh on Solent so this might accelerate this move, which will upset a lot of locals.

Agree with everything said. The BBC website has a report saying everybody got away unharmed however the aircraft is probably going to be scrapped. Is there a spare at Portland? Nearest SAR would be Southampton otherwise.

There is another S61 at Portland callsign " Whiskey Bravo", which has undergone maintenence,but will be made available in the morning. Portland is a meca for divers since the navy left, and the loss of the Coast Guard helo to Solent would not be too good for the poor divers suffering from the bends, which happens very frequently!
Big campagn on to stop the move from Portland to Solent for just this reason, 300 divers plus at the weekend!!

Very sad to see this happen. Glad to see that all crewmembers safely evacuated from the wreck.

Some video here. Not much recognisable in it though.

From my understanding (although I haven't seen pictures yet) the aircraft is a total loss with only one of the sponsons and a wheel left intact !

Bristow do have 2 spare SAR S-61's that are available for use so there will be no loss in cover and I guess another aircraft will have to be fitted out to replace the one they have lost. Thankfully no injuries at all which is remarkable as I have heard that aside from the fire, the aircraft lost all hydraulic assistance during the final stages of landing as presumably the fire engulfed everything in the gearbox area.

Well done boys !

there is a picture and article at http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/...00/2131775.stm
not a lot left by the looks of things

My local rag has had an interview with the co-pilot and it is scarry reading!!

Crew on board were .. Mike Roughton, Simon Hoare, Peter Mansell and Adrian " Buck " Rogers.

Co - pilot Mike Roughton described it as a " catastrophic failure":eek:

He said " We train for emergencies but usually would expect to be dealing with only one thing". " We suddenly had four or five things happen one after another in the space of a minute!"
"It started with the failure of number 2 engine,then the pressure from the main rotor gear box disapeared. Then the hydraulics started to fail and as we were trying to get in to land ,there was an indication that the other engine had failed."
"There was some sort of catastrophic failure and the speed of events was very alarming".
" It was very scary and we were lucky that we were close to land otherwise we would have ditched."
" We managed to get it down but there were flames coming from around the rotor,it was like a chimney!"

lady luck and first class training me thinks.:eek:

(Please excuse any errors of etiquette in first time post here)

On of my colleagues was one the last customers. Winched off a rib on the preceeding Sunday afternoon after the Coastguard didn't like the sound of his symptoms.

They have some pictures here:

http://www.sasac.co.uk/News/Poole_Rescue/index.htm

If anybody wants a copy of the original tape (digital) or pictures I can put you in touch. The local BBC News do have a copy.

Does anyone know the registration?

The S61N is a great machine to fly. Very stable, just a little short on power. In my distant past I aquired nearly 3000 hours on it and never had an engine problem, except for one occasion when an inlet guide vane problem reduced power on one engine.

Of course the problem with any helicopter is that everything is concentrated up around the rotorhead. If you have a serious fire up there it is going to eventualy effect the oil supply to the gearbox, the engines and the hydraulics. Therefore multiple failures would be expected in this case, given sufficient time for the fire to take hold.