The aircraft was G-BBHM

Ah HM. l last flew her in the Falklands in February 1985. Also got many hours on her out of Aberdeen before that. Those were the days! Glad she let everyone get out before her demise.

worth repairing?
 

Fortunately I could smile in the circumstances, when one of the news reports talked about engineers visiting the crash site to see if the helicopter could be repaired!

AAIB Special Bulletin now available here.

Well done to the crew - special mention for the efficient way they all worked together to a successful outcome.

Amen to that!!:D

Excessive Downdraft during SAR Ops
 

Before I get flamed mightily.....

I have a massive amount of respect for the work done by the heli crews and the time from callout to attendance was less than 10 minutes in both cases which is outstanding service.

On two occasions in the last week I witnessed inconvenience caused by the downdraft from an RAF or Navy Seaking during relatively non-urgent SAR/coastguard operations.

The first situation was an unconsious man in an RIB following a colission between the RIB and a small boat in a river marina. The boat was already under tow and the man being looked after and the Air Ambulance already on scene. The Seaking hovered low over the marina causing two or three smallish RIBs (empty) to be flipped over by the downdraft meaning two of them lost their outboard engines to the bottom of the river.

The second was in a cliff rescue (person stuck 5m up a cliff over a sandy beach) With the situation under control and the cliff rescue team 3 minutes away a Seaking decided to hover low over the beach, in the process scattering a party of holidaymakers (with very young children) and there picnic to all the points of the compass.

My questions as an interested non-pilot are..

..how much are heli pilots aware of the major inconvenience that can be caused by the downdraft?

..Does it influence how they fly the chopper in an SAR situation?

..Do the services pick up the tab for any damage caused during ops by heli downdraft?

Deliberately been a bit vague about the location and situation to avoid making it a personal criticism of the pilot.

Many thanks

DeepC

It is pointless attempting to save/assist one person if you are going to cause damage or injury to others. From the information you have given it sounds as though these are cases of poor airmanship. The pilots and crewman of these aircraft should have a good picture of what is going on around them. if there was a need to recover the survivor from the boat , then it would be prudent to direct the vessel to a location that is clear of other vessels etc. As for causing damage on the beach, again there is no emergency that requires you to place the public at risk by flying in this fashion.:(

Your in trouble..no matter what you do.
 

I don't want to comment on the both tasks.....

Therefore in general terms, one of the hardest and most challenging tasks of a "Highly" trained EMS or SAR crew, is when to say NO.

Generally EMS folk have pressures [real or implied] upon them, as they know that simply because they are called it means that someone believes an incident is severe enough to use this method of transport.......... the team is relying on them!!........it takes a strong and professional pilot to stay in bed.....!!!

SAR guys/gals are generally the same as EMS folk, but due to the low real work load, there can be a larger belief that ..."We are here to save you"....regardless if you really need saving....!!!

A helicopter can be prefectly suited for some rescue situations that clearly no other method is appropriate........however the helicopter winch, should be thought of as the last resort, rather than the first.

SARITIS.......is something that is real.

Too true ....

Would seem on surface both cases presented were not planned
as they should have been.

SAR OPS have to take everything into account when positioning the aircraft for the rescue, doesn't look like good headwork was available for these.

I'm going to have to get on my horse(high) for this one:

As a SAR Operator I cannot comment fully on the above events as I did not witness them nor did I participate in either of them, however:

SAR Crews are only too aware of the effects of their downwash. The Pilots would have been getting a full picture of what was going on from the RearCrews but sometimes things can't be helped.

The people who were being treated may still have required an urgent evacuation to a medical facility. Being treated by a Medic/Paramedic at the scene does not compare to the definitive care provided at a Hospital(Gloden Hour and Scoop And Run and other great phrases). Also, did the SAR Crew know that the Cliff Rescue Team were 3 minutes away? How long would it take the Cliff Rescue Team to set up the rescue? A fall from 5m can kill someone, it doesn't have to be thousands of feet. SAR Crews have picked up a person who fell over 2000 feet and got away with it. She was then put into a hospital to a person who fell off a ladder and was now a quadraplegic.

Sometimes the public will just not get out of the way. I have personnally been involved in SAROps where no matter what we did the public would not move, then we had to balance the life of the casualty to the risk to the public. It is a difficult choice and you do the best you can.

Basically it boils down to the fact that you are not fully aware of the full situation and perhaps you should find out before slinging around accusations of unprofessionalism.

SAR/EMS crews have a very difficult job to do, which is generally done with little support from either the public or the Government. How about letting us get on with it.

Rant Over!

Deep C

My advice, although only being a private helo pilot, if you are seriously after the 'right' answer, would be to contact a SAR unit ( such as RAF Wattisham) and ask one of the crews.
It appears you're more likely on here to get mistakenly fragged for making accusations when you are in fact just asking a question.
I'm sure a decent search engine could give you a URL or two to try. You might try looking up RNAS Culdrose or RAF Wattisham as they are slightly better known.

What a strange reaction handyandyuk. :confused:
DeepC asked a question and has been given balanced and informed replies. Oops 78 may have been slightly blunt in the way he put it, but surely it's a fair point that a casual observer looking on disapprovingly may not know all the facts of the situation? And Oops took the trouble to give a full and informed explanation.

I'm surprised you think DeepC should contact a SAR unit if he wants the 'right' answer rather than ask on Rotorheads. A total stranger telephoning or e-mailing any 'official' body is likely to get the formal 'official' answer, but he's much more likely to get the 'right' (= true) answer by asking here where off-duty professionals can respond informally and more freely because of the anonymous nature of the forum.

Heliport,
in defense of Handyandyuk, I think his comment "It appears you're more likely on here to get mistakenly fragged for making accusations when you are in fact just asking a question." although not perhaps worded as well as it could have been, fairly accurately describes OOPS 78's response to DeepC's posting. I don't consider OOPS 78's comment about "slinging around accusations of unprofessionalism." to be a fair or accurate response to DeepC's post where he made it quite clear the high esteem in which he holds SAR crews (and rightly so!). DeepC did afterall witness the two events and although not in posession of all the information, is perfectly entitled to attempt a reasoned evaluation of the situation. And he tried to further that evaluation by seeking feedback from the forum. Human beings rarely have the luxury of knowing all the facts but that doesn't stop us trying to evaluate situations, and if we didn't, well everyday living would soon grind to a halt. It is however up to each individual to be as responsible as possible in their evaluations.


Irlandés

OOPS 78, keep up the good work!!

On a lighter note, DeepC, you'll probably find that rotor downwash is never excessive, it just is. It's where you point it that matters! :D

Irlandes
If you become a professional pilot and get to fly SAR, EMS or Police in the UK, you'll find out why the guys get kinda sensitive on this subject. Or you could try reading Oops78 post again and think about it this time.

Thanks very much everybody for the replies.

Oops78: I tried very hard not to be too critical but presented the situations as I witnessed them first hand. Sorry if I hit a raw nerve because that was not intended. More a 'heads up' from someone on the ground who saw a situation develop that could have been avoided. My post did not 'sling around accusations of unproffesionalism'.

I think it could safely be assumed that there was a breakdown in communication on the days in question and a sledgehammer/nut situation developed. I would have thought that the crew could have held off at a suitable distance (higher or over the sea) until the situation panned out into something that required their services.

That said, it is amazing that in the part of the UK that this happened you can have a cliff rescue team and one or two helicopters on seen within 10 minutes. Truly outstanding service and as I said if the situation had panned out into a situation where the direct input of the Helicopter was needed then the damage and inconvenience would have very soon been forgotten.

Once again thanks for your input.

DeepC

Bronx,
I do understand why they can be sensitive on the issue. It doesn't take much understanding. As for your second comment, if you want a reasoned reply (and it's possible that you don't), I'm afraid you'll have to expand a little bit.

Thanks,
Irlandés

Iralndes
I wasn't looking for a reasoned reply to anything, I was trying to help you understand somehting and suggested two ways that might help you. Sometimes it's difficult for recreational pilots to understand the problems professionals face. It's good you've thought more about it since your earlier post and worked things out for yourself.
Good luck with the training.

Oooops 78
 

All good points.........

Just updating your comment:

B]Being treated by a Medic/Paramedic at the scene does not compare to the definitive care provided at a Hospital(Gloden Hour and Scoop And Run and other great phrases).[/B]

Close. but not quite correct....the idea started years ago [1960's] in Ireland, then Australia and then followed by the US and very slowly by mainland UK..........of taking the commencement of "Definitive" medical care to the location rather than the patient to "Definitive" care........this care starts when our Doc/Paramedic starts work at the scene, and hopefully continues until they walk out of hospital.

All

Some good points on a clearly emotive issue (questioning pilots airmanship is bound to be).

I think the EMS/SAR/Police do a very difficult and important job but there is bound to be good and bad airmanship displayed in all levels of license.

I don't think that the police or whatever pilots can be exempt from critiscism or questioning just because of their job.
I have seen a police pilot and crew land at an airfield (there was a heli school open day with several R22s doing trila lessons etc) and the interested public got to clamber all over the EC135. Top PR work for them and they were brilliant at chatting to everyone. When they lifted into a high hover and then slowly transitioned forward, the next door fixed wing flying schools plant pots and other decorative garden furniture was then sent flying over the car park and across the grass. This was met by the CFI of the school saying "F%^$*g helicopters.

A little thought of his downdraught would have stopped the animosity then projected at us "egg whisk" pilots that were left helping him to chase after his plant pots!!!

It was impressive performance though for a biased R22 heli pilot to watch;)

That CFI was probably just jealous..:cool:
But giving downwash some thought is a good idea. But sometimes the public are plain stupid anyway, there's nothing we can do about that.

Red Wine,

I do partially agree with you about definitive care at the roadside, however, there is a change in some ambulance services which is going back to stabilise and mobilise. Definitive Care will always be in the hospital for major cases. The ambulance deals with the situation and then gets the cas to hospital in the most expeditious and safe manner. This is why we have air ambulances/SAR etc.

As for me being blunt - point taken and apologies alround.

Sar Pilot Aptitude Test
 

Ladies and Gentlemen

Tio all aspiring SAR pilots, may I present the ultimate aptitude test. It is Community Race Relations friendly, and perhaps the standard we should all aspire to

http://www.emergency.qld.gov.au/aviation/kids/[URL=http://]

County, based in the Midlands, operates according to Pre-Hospital Trauma Life Support (PHTLS), which a Royal College of Surgeons (England) course.

Basically, emphasis is on "platinum 10 minutes" on scene in a "time critical" patient (ie. one with serious injuries) - only actions on scene being securing of the airway (if necessary) and spinal immobilisation. Then continue rest of treatment en route to hospital - drips, intravenous fluids, analgesia, immobilising factures, etc.

Based on evidence from Sheffield University showing a higher risk of dying the longer that is spent on-scene.

Anton
:cool:

Conservative logic.......
 

Sorry, but there will always be horses for courses....!!

As I first stated, the main land UK was the slowest to adopt the concept of Paramedic and acute Pre-hospital care by specially trained personnel....and is still the most conservative in this discipline.

With the danger of ruffling a few feathers, the UK also has the most conservativelly trained pre-hostipal professionals in the Western World.....just conservative.

As far as horses for courses are concerned......remember you can fit the UK into Australia about 32 times [what a awful thought.:rolleyes: ]......my point???......I would be only half way to my first refuelling point when you are back in bed......so hence we must train harder and higher, and do things a little different, or our injured will suffer.

We are all on the same side.........:)

Completely agree about conservative nature of pre-hospital care in the UK. Our paramedisc still do not perform Rapid Sequence Induction, put in chest drains, naso-gastric tubes, urinary catheters, cardiovert (small shocks for treatment of a rapid pulse), etc., etc.

Some is due to the short distances, but mostly due to the forces of conservatism to which you refer!!

Some of the best jobs I have done have taken the best part of a day worth of travelling, etc., in Africa.

Our long-distance stuff is over half an hour here!!

Cheers
Anton :cool:

After reading through this thread and also a few years 'in the seat' I would also like to add a few points that seemed to have slipped throught the net.

The public tend to see a helicopter in a low hover and for whatever reason think they need to stand under it:rolleyes:

The aircraft is normally tasked and in constant radion contact with the Rescue Co-ordination center. Through this contact the crew will be informed of the stability of the patient and also the need to remain on scene should the stability situation change.

The crew will also be in contact with the rescue services 'on the ground', normally through harbour radio IMM16. The rescue services will generally be more concerned with a rapid pickup in the case of an injured person suddendly becoming worse than the loss of a pair of dinghys. In general damage caused as a direct result of SAR helo ops can be claimed for through the MOD.

Downwash is of great concern to SAR crews, especially when operating over cliffs or mountains. Remeber the crews do this job, 10ft away from the hard stuff day and night, VMC or IMC. Judge for yourself the training level. :eek:

DeepC, without doubt every SAR pilot in the UK is painfully aware of the destructive capability of the Sea King downwash and will usually go to great lengths to avoid putting it in the wrong place. However comma an unconscious man in a RIB has presumably suffered a head injury and having the Air ambulance on scene does not mean a paramedic is with the casualty - therefore the priority must be to extract the casualty quickly or at least place the winchman (paramedic trained) with the casualty so he can assess the level of injury. Frankly this comes first and foremost and the fact that a couple of yotties will have to claim on their insurance for a new outboard comes a very poor second to saving someones life (casualties with head injuries can deteriorate very quickly). As for the other situation which you imply was well under control - a cliff sticker/faller can be just about to fall the 5m that might kill him and a cliff rescue team takes a while to rope up and deploy once they have arrived on scene. Therefore as captain of the aircraft do you take immediate action to prevent loss of life and rescue the cliff sticker/faller or do you watch him drop off the cliff and break himself. Again the scattering of a few peoples picnics is not much of a price to pay. Coastguard units often have big problems with clearing the public away from SARops as everyone wants to rubberneck and none of them can anticipate the effects of the downwash.

Crab,

Thanks for the reply. A few thoughts from where I stood. Regarding the couple of yotties needing to fork out for a new motor comment. I would agree that in the situation I saw the downwash casualties were limited to a couple of capsizing empty RIBs and the subsequent loss of their motors and therefore it was a small price to pay. The fact was that not ten minutes before, there were two young lads (around 10 years old) paddling around in a couple of small inflatable dinghies. Shouldn't think they weighed much more than an RIB with an outboard attached. Saying that, I could be selling the pilots short and they had checked the contents of all inflatable boats in the area.

Regarding the beach incident. I was wondering at the time why he did not hover over the sea or over nearby farmland from where the response time would have been just as quick.

I should not really criticise you so please take this as questions rather than criticism.

Thanks

DeepC

DeppC, without actually being in the aircraft at the time it is impossible to know exactly what the crew were doing or what other inputs and information they had regarding the situation - if you know where the cab came from then give them a ring and ask.
The point of my post was to highlight the priorities for the captain - ie safety of the aircraft and crew first, then the saving of life/prevention of loss of life. Sitting around having a chat and waiting for someone else to come and do the job really isn't an option, I suspect you would be less than happy if an ambulance crew drove without the blues and twos and then had a tea break when they arrived at your house after you had called 999 because one of your family was sick/ill/dying.
I don't really understand your comments about the beach job, if you need to get the winchman to the casualty you either land on close by and let him walk in or winch him straight to the casualty - hovering over the sea or nearby farmland wouldn't have achieved much. The crew must have decided that the casualty was in danger and that their priority was the prevention of the loss of life or injury that could have occurred if the cliff sticker had fallen/jumped.

Engine failure during rescue work
 

I do not have the excact details but this week an Austrian helicopter had to drop a member of a mountain rescue team hanging underslung into a nearby lake after experiencing engine governing problems.

The helicopter made a successful emergency landing on a nearby airfield but the man is still missing presumed drowned after falling into the lake carrying all his mountain rescue gear.

I do not know the type of helicopter they where using and what the problem was excactly but I would be interested to hear what procedures pilots use to safely land with someone hanging underneath them if they experience an engine failure.

All Austrian mountain rescue helicopters now use a underslung technique and not a winch to rescue people of mountains to give them extra space (they don't need a dedicated winchman) in the helicopter (EC135).

Any comments???

Sounds like they are just getting set up for the start of next years Fire Diving season!;)

The subject is a thorny one, and one that bedevils certification and operating authorities the world over.
You can make a case for allowing someone to be firmly attached to a helicopter (not on a hoist/ winch) for the purposes of saving lives - the risk to the person underneath the helicopter of an engine failure having bad consequences is outweighed by the benefit to the person being rescued. But there is always a risk that things will go wrong, and when they do, there are folks who will say "I told you so".
This could generate a lot of discussion - my sympathies to the family of the missing man, and to the pilot of the helicopter who had to make that decision.
Shawn

Accident occured at 12:00 on monday. A mountain rescuer was hanging on a fixed line underneath a A 119 for a rescue practice. It seems that during the practice the helicopter got a FADEC failure with a very strong governor overspeed. The RPM was only at climbing power to control. The (very experienced) pilot climbed up from approx. 3000 to 9000 ft with the rescuer on the fixed line. During that time all possible decisions was discussed by radio between ground crew, rescuer and pilot. At the end the decision was made to fly from the mountains to the great lake "Bodensee" between switzerland, germany and austria. After the flight to the lake all possible forces were on scene including some vessels and an other rescue helicopter "Christopherus 8" circled over the dropping area. The A 119 pilot cuted the engine to idle and autorotated from 9000 ft to the lake. In the last moment flat over the lake the pilot flared the helicopter, increased the engine power (to the old failure with overspeed) and dropped the rescuer in to the lake. The other rescue helicopter and some vessels were within some seconds at the dropping zone but - the man was gone and is still missed. The A 119 made an emergency touchdown at hohenems without greater damage. That's the known facts at the moment. I don't know the A119 and her engine control and i'm glad not to be the pilot.

Fixed line is a difficult business and i remember my thread "Technique and experience for mountain rescue". We discussed the fixed line and hoist operations.

My sincere condolences to the family of the rescuer and the pilot affected by this tragic accident.

Awesome, one of the worst scenarios I have ever read about. Sincere condolences to all involved including that very sad pilot.

In this case, assuming the rope was attached to the side of the helicopter and not right underneath the belly, the rescuer could have climbed up the rope if he had had a pair of jumar clips. Cavers use what they call single rope technique to climb up hundreds of feet of freely hanging rope.

Obviously, this would be no use in a sudden engine failure, but might it have been a solution here?

Awful.

QDM

After 13 years in Navy SAR, this is why we receive extra Hazardous duty pay.

I agree with Shawn, one has to weigh the benefits of making the rescue vs. someone on the line when things go south in the bird.

I can say that everyone who does that type of work knows, and (I hope) accepts those risks involved.

If I were taking my personal experiences into account for your question woolf, I would say that I am expendable out there, the pilot is going to land or make the maneuvers necessary to get the heli down safely, if that includes time to take me into account and maneuver, then (I believe) he/she will, but again, hoists have a cable cut as well. From tecpilot, it sounds like the guy had a good pilot who responded the best he could, placing him into the lake would have been preferable to land.

(Don't let my tone lead you elsewhere, I'm sorry to see that happen to anyone, condolances all around.)

From the sounds of things, this was one of those days. It looks like the pilot did everything in his power to save the situation.
The analysis of the engine problem is going to be pretty interesting as well - was this failure a known type of failure?
The pilot must be congratulated in some way for his attempt - any suggestions with regards to awards?
Shawn

rescue
 

SASless-Bad taste!

This sad accident reminds me of a time and a place in the Far East ,in the mid-60`s when we were required to pick-up some of the Men-in-black from Hereford,if they found themselves on the hot-foot from the enemy and no LZfor p/up.We carried several sets of abseil-tapes(before ropes were used) and a couple of rescue strops,attached to one end of the tapes,plus sand-bag as ballast;the other ends were attached to the winch cable,or the para-rail.Said troops would then attach themselves and be hauled skywards to a safe location,2at a time,repeat op/a/r until all are safe. At the time we were also experiencingengie computer problems which if you were unlucky could give a runaway up/down/freeze,but you could use manual throttle,assuming you didn`t surge as well.A couple of SOP`S were tucked away (as this was not approved by any higher authority),that in the event of engine problems,anyone on the tapes would be cut-away over a river,or along a beach,or in the worst case into the trees,or if stuck at high power,then if possible,be dropped-off on a fly-through on a ridge at about 5000ft where on would be short of OGE hover power,and then sort the a/c out from there.Fortunately ,we never had to try the SOP`S in anger,but they may give a little food for thought.
A couple of further thoughts come to mind,sitting in a comfortable chair; Could rescuers on a long-line also wear an emergency -type `chute,or have one attached by static -line to the a/c,at the a/c end of the long-line?What about a mini life-jacket as well? I know there are mobility problems for the rescuer,but I`m sure that there must be kit that is available that you Ppruners know about/use/seen and can share the information around,so we hopefully won`t see a similar tragedy again.
My sincere condolences to all the families and compatriots.

SASless, you are so funny... :mad: :mad: :mad:

be shure unfortunately we don't understand your kind of humour.

I would like to give you a free ride fixed on a 150 ft rope underslung a single engine helicopter through the alps on Oktober at zero temperatures. May be your wet pants could be frozen. And i'm shure you could also get the ride from all mountain pilots who made such rescue flights and have lost a brave man, compeer and friend.

Your ignorance is really greater than your mind.

Presumably this is the 'Koala' helo?
Anyone qualified on this, out there.
If so: should a FADEC failure leading to a runaway up, occur, can't it be controlled by selecting manual?

Again out of curiosity, if the pilot could enter and recover from auto, resulting in a diversion to land, why didn't he simply land in the first instance?

Not trying to point the finger...genuinely curious in the mechanics of the failure???