If anyone's interested, the 1991 'Brent spa' accident report is here

http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/cms_resou...1%20G-BEWL.pdf

I don't fly offshore, but found it quite interesting reading.

Why are people comparing Brent Spa to Leman 27AD?
There is no comparison!

Sorry 212! Spoils your article in the Daily Bollox!!!!!!!!!

Nice to see things degenerating in the usual manner!

I think one or two of us here were trying to politely point out that sticking your tail into a crane whilst landing, is not something to be taken lightly. It is only the fact that people are so adament that it's a non-event that has prolonged the thread. Reference to the Spar was to try and educate those who were ignorant of the event, or remind those with short memories, of what the true potential of this incident was. Looking at the witness marks in the fenestron shroud just highlights how close to a different outcome this latest incident was.

Let's wait and see if the AAIB feel there are parallels to be drawn.

Due to the fact that this thread has considerably diverged, I do believe that a chicken sandwich should now be discussed. :D

OK....time for a question for the odd few that see this as no big deal.

Having looked at the score marks made by the fenstron blades....what would it take for you to accept the proposition that this is in fact a very big deal although with a favorable outcome?

Can anyone fail to see just how close this came to being a situation very likely to have resulted in serious injuries and/death?

The thought of suddenly losing torque control at a time one is pulling a lot of power in the final stage of landing....scares me. If you have ever ridden out one of those events one remains converted to avoiding that however possible.

If I had been the handling pilot when this had happened....I would consider myself one very lucky guy to have it turn out the way it did.

212man sees it right.

Davy07, me boy. Don't you know that in the internet world anything done cannot be undone? Here's your pictures back.

In what twisted world does a pilot fear getting sacked from posting pictures, but doing millions of dollars damage and putting his crew and passenger lives at risk has no consequence at all?

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o...y07-photo2.jpg

http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o...y07-photo1.jpg

As I said before......
 

Words Fail Me.......

Thanks for the pics Malabo. It certainly shows just what a non-event it was!!
As 212 and various others have said, particularly JimL, to pass this one over as a narrow escape etc, is wasting very good learning points that should fall out of the incident investigation. No apportionment of blame, just simple facts and how to avoid getting into the situation in the future.

OK, so words didn't fail me, but the sentiment still goes........

Malabo..

The engineer who took the photos i had posted asked me to kindly remove them which i done for him.. The two shots you have showing are different from the ones i linked from another forum!

Dave

In Nov 1980 a newly transferred pilot from 76s managed to cut half way through the hand rail on the Sedco 707's drill tower with a 61 tail rotor; classically he had forgotten he was flying a larger aircraft and used the 76 landing circle. The only indication of damage was a high frequency buzz through the yaw pedals.

I went out the next day and managed to put a 61 on the extended keyhole deck of the rig, rather than winch the engineers and replacement crew down. The damage to the hand rail was amazing, the tail rotor blades had lost a few inches.

Above the noise of the aircraft I had a fascinating 'discussion' with the pilot concerned explaining how he was returning in the cabin with me and not, definitely not, returning in the aircraft he had just maimed.

Apologies
 

I am the guywho posted the pictures in the HC forum, & I have posted to offer my profuse apologies for doing so.

I had thought that as the accident had already been in the public domain (news and press), that it was ok..very wrong. However, by the time I had removed the photos from the other thread, they had already been posted here.

I had also posted what I had thought to be some light hearted comments which, on re reading my thread, in the cold light of day were not so.
I had allowed my own frustrations to cloud my judgment in doing so, & I profusely apologise to all those I have offended..not least the two crew involved, and SM for using his photos without thinking to ask.

VCO,

Welcome to the forum. With you post count at exactly "1", tis easy to see you are new here.

The photo's and discussion they provoked have served a good purpose and perhaps that will help to soothe the wounds.

The very best thing that can result from an event such as what provoked the discussion is just that....healthy discussion about what happened and how best to ensure, if possible, that it not happen to those of us who learn from other's mistakes.

I also hope you understand that you are not the only one that has ever put in print what in retrospect might have been said most any other way than as submitted. We seem to take turns at that so please don't feel unique.

Looking at the photos..brown pants and very very lucky..:eek: A bit more than just a scrape...

Steve mc stated, “there was a scrape of a tail fairing, 2 feet clear of the enclosed fenestron. Absolutely no danger to anyone on board. Also, it happened, at the maximum, 3 seconds prior to an uneventful landing!”

also

Helimutt says, “the photos are "boring".

I have now seen the photographs and have to make the following observation. With the amount of denting and distortion of this area of the tail section, it would have to have been a very significant ‘knock’.

I state this, because if anyone is fully aware as to the internal method of construction of this area of the tail section, with the numerous ribs, strings, formers and doubler plates within this complex shaped structure, it would have had to have been a substantial clout.

I sincerely hope that neither of the above posters were either directly or for that matter indirectly associated with this incidence, because their comments would indicate that they do not appreciate the significance of the damage and their ‘lightening’ of this matter is grossly worrying.

I witnessed a similar previous incident on a SA365N (before they changed the designation to AS365N) with if anything less visual damage. This had been caused by a ground handling incident. After a full rigging check indicated more distortion than at first appeared, the manufacturer then became involved. Their on-site investigation determined significant internal damage and required the whole tail boom assembly to be removed and returned to the factory for further testing and repair. The investigation also showed creasing towards the main body of the fuselage, where the tail boom assembly is attached. This area also required some significant repairing.

If one considers the length of the tail boom and the physical strength of the tip of this structure, any damage as shown by the photograph, shows that a tremendous lateral load must have been placed on the whole tail boom assembly.

As decufault posted above,
“Looking at the photos..brown pants and very very lucky.. A bit more than just a scrape...”

VB

Was the damage repaired in-situ, or did the aircraft get back to the beach on a barge/ship?

Was transported back to shore by boat!

x-ray delta...
 

When I was young and foolish and carried my balls around in a wheel barrow,(circa 1986) I had several goes at trying to write old XD off..:eek:
God she's one tough old bird.......... but nice try fellas:D

As stevemc stated here, “it is only a little scrape of paint on a fairing”, and Helimutt says “the photos are "boring"…..

I have to therefore assume that the helicopter must by now be back flying ……

Is this the case? Or how long will it be before it is?

VB

Heard it was a complete tail boom change.

helimutt

Your original posting stated
“the photos are "boring””

You are now posting
“OK, so the photos were nothing like seeing the a/c up close and personal.”

If the photographs were boring . . . . and nothing like seeing the a/c up close and personal . . . . having seen the photographs as posted, I tread to imagine how much worse the actual helicopter is!
When is it going to be back flying?
VB

The rumor say 6 months.

Well the fan was disaligned at the impact, so all of the blades will have to be replaced, the whole fenestron gearbox checked, repaired, or replaced, the duct will have to be replaced, so is the whole skin. Than the drive train, whole tail section checked for cracks, bends, material strains. Don't know where the tail fan drive train goes in the EC155, so that parts will have to be checked also.

Too cut it short - the while tail will have to striped down, checked and every component repaired/replaced. The whole thing is very serious - many fast-spinning, precise-machined, very important parts out there ;)

The fan blades ... not the main rotor blades :hmm:

Rumour at the coal face has it XD is going to be retired since it's financially not viable to repair. Also the Irish 365 is going to be retired before it's G-Check. After all the rules change from 2010 where you need to have cat "A" capability if I remember correctly. Though the problem is that there are no replacements in the pipeline.:ugh:

Time will tell what the truth will be.

Kind Regards to the pilot though. Top bloke :D.

After this and the AB139 introduction fiasco I hear Perenco are considering jumping ship.

Well us guys on Anglia are glad we saw the pics...we were just initially told something had happened on the lem with the as65...and that was it....so to see the pics ... thanks...and we will have a wee whip round on the sector to try to buy some reverse parking sensors should she fly again!!!

Firstly a disclaimer: I know NOTHING about offshore oil/gas support!!

However, I have been interested in this incident as it is not an event that is simply confined to the oil/gas support industry, and I would even go so far as to say that it is not "unique", "isolated", nor "minor". But I do think it is testament to the shrouded tail rotor systems available. I have read the Brent Spar accident and I can draw the connection between the two in contributing factors. The very different outcomes are no reason to avoid comparison - I think they are the very reason FOR comparison.

I think it is well accepted safety practice to react to identified hazards in a stepped approach that begins with "engineer the problem out" and ends with "train to cope" (warnings and SOPS somewhere in the middle). Engineering this problem out is almost impossible short of having the helidecks always above all other obstacles - but this is not practical for most rigs/boats and is impractical for nearly all unprepared land based HLS. So the next avenue is the helicopter design and therefore trade off (there are no free lunches).

The fenestron and NOTAR are attempts to engineer this issue out - or at least minimise the likely consequences of an eventual probable strike by the aircraft type, but they come with power/weight/cost/maintenance penalties (see Nick Lappos for a great dissertation on this!). Incidents like these graphically explain the benefit side of the cost/benefit analysis of that design choice, and we pilots often need a graphic demonstration to prove such points. Our clients need it even more!

Therefore, whilst this incident had "minor" consequences for the human lives, it has so much potential to teach us something about our profession that it is a free lesson (in terms of lives, not aircraft lost). It is an absolute credit to an organisation that posts such pictures that we may all learn. :D
Perhaps we can appreciate that this type of incident is possible by almost any pilot almost anywhere in the world in almost any role.

Please overlook those who would gloat. It won't ever happen to them.....
Rather, post for those of us who want to learn.

The fenestron and gearbox was damaged. could have been very nasty.

Helmet Fire,

As I read it....this was not an official company report or in any way supported or promoted by the operator. My impression is it was business as usual....hold the cards close to the vest standard mode.

It were individuals that got this into the public eye. For that....they should be admired by the rest of us as they probably have paid a price for having done so.

You are too right when you say how valuable this is for the advancement of safety awareness by the industry. It is a shame we cannot get the operators to invest in a common forum that would benefit all of them.

I firmly believe photographs of wreckage and it's contents, aired in a professional venue, combined with a documentation of the causes as is possible, would reinforce the importance of proper procedures both in engineering and in piloting. It would take the abstract out of reality.

Safety training programs would be a very good venue for that.....how can you talk about safety...crashes...accidents...injuries...and deathes....and not be confronted by the stark reality and tragedy of aircraft losses.

Sasless I know for a fact there is a forum for these kind matters but you can only access it if you work for the company but this forum is shared amongst all the airlines and offshore operators. This will allow you to look up incidents on a 747 or Puma.

Enlighten us then?
FSF
UKFSC
IATA STEADES
What are you talking about??

It's been three years so all I remember is that it began with a W.

Accident information
 

Brilliant Stuff - Are you perhaps referring to BASIS - originally developed by British Airways and used by commercial airlines to share accident and incident information - then taken up by helicopter operators for the same purpose. It doesn't begin with a Dubya though!!

isnt it WINBASIS ?

HELICOPTER OPERATORS

Bond Offshore Helicopters
Bristow Helicopters Ltd
Gulf Helicopter
Norsk Helikopter AS
Wiking Helicopter Service


Customer list from the WINBASIS web site......now located in Dubai.

OK - so WINBASIS does begin with a Dubya!! That's the more up-to-date iteration of BASIS.

CHC use something called SQID - not compatible with WINBASIS.

So.....does CHC swap safety data information with BHL as they use different and incompatible reporting systems?:uhoh:

The three FSO's in Aberdeen all freely exchange safety information. Bristow and Bond Offshore actually now use Sentinel which is the updated version of Winbasis. The incident would also be entered into the MOR system run by the CAA and no doubt the AAIB will be looking into it, so all the details will come out in the fullness of time.

Yupp it was Winbasis.

CHC have been seeking a Flight Safety Officer in Aberdeen ... again, though this time its a full-time job.

Is XD back flying yet? What is the latest information?
VB