PHI Nearly Loses Another S-76
 

Things kinda quiet in the GOM about the near loss of a PHI S-76 with ten people aboard.

Landed short on a Deck, folded the starboard main gear and ended with the port side main gear on the wire netting.

The photos are startling!

Aircraft tail number was N729P.....and no FAA Preliminary Report seen at the FAA web site.

Anyone got more information on this one?

The accident happened on the Apache ST-308 on the 24th of this month.

Any chance of seeing some pics, then?

yes, you can't say something like that to us 76 drivers and not post pics.


:uhoh:

I saw the pics, sitting on the belly, probably quite flyable again.

pics at:

2 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

1 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

ooops! :uhoh:

...no need to post pics of the seat-cushions this time! :ooh:

Deck Aiming Circles
 

Well JimL, here's another cove who hasn't read the ICAO guide to the proper use of deck aiming circles.

G :}

Aiming Circles? We don't need no stinking Aiming Circles!:rolleyes:

Mind you there was no mention of an engine failure or anything....perhaps a bit of near sightedness?

Wow!

That scares the hell out of me just looking at it never mind being strapped inside it.

I wonder who got out first and how that conversation went?

NO ****!!! Somebody just had incredible luck...:ouch:

Talk of turbulence and junior crew making a low approach...

I take it no NTSB involvement.

The pilot was Maxwell Smart (Secret Agent 86), explained shortly after by a shoe 'phone call to the Chief of Control: "Sorry about that Chief, missed it by THAT much". :O

Seriously, anyone know if the blades made contact with the deck under power? If so I then the repair bill would be a lifetime of pilot pay checks.

How could that happen? Easy enough, if you're used to flying 407s and you land it where you would land a 407. The S76 is just a little larger than a 407, and the main gear is just a little further aft than the rear of a 407's skid...
:}

As for aiming circles, Apache wastes no money on unnecessary paint, or on anything else.

N729P is a Beech 36, and the pix doesn't look like one of those ;)

Is this a substitute for the CAP 437 perimiter safety net DROP TEST!:8

A good reason for putting the heavier passengers towards the front!

Hi!
I think thi type of the aircraft have problem with the power. I am flying on the EC-155B with that problem also. the power some time not strong enought! so wen the aircraft on profile to land, it request very strickly to use the power. specially in the hot temperature erea.

Lucky? This guy should buy a lottery ticket !!
 

Who knows what happened here but either way judging from the safety of the armchair next to the hindsight couch, the aircraft is about 2-3 feet from toppling over backwards. Glad to hear no one got seriously hurt this time. :)

The Movie Game
 

Looks like a dry run for a US version of The Italian Job..............

voice of Michael Caine - Don't worry boys..... I've got a great idea...

;)

What is this "Flat Approach" profile used by PHI I am hearing about?

Why would one want to do a "Flat" approach?

Is not a steep approach with a slow forward airspeed with power carried throughout the approach better than a run in at speed and trying to time a flare type landing?

Where do we draw the line between a "Flat Approach" and "Hot Dogging" ?

I think 792P would be the correct N number. SASless may be slightly dyslexic. ;)

Some people like flatter approaches, some like steeper. Having seen the results of flat approaches over the years, I prefer steeper. I wasn't present on this approach, so I have no idea what the approach angle was. I do know that this isn't the first time a PHI S76 has put the main gear in the fence, though. Power was not likely the problem in this case. The S76A++ has the engines of a C, but the max gross weight of an A, and thus lots of power available. It may have the best power/weight ratio of any S76 variant, and I've never come close to running out of power in one, even in the summer.

hahahahahaha :}

You've obviously never flown the C+ or the B then.

Hey.....I got some the numbers right!

At least I recognized it as being a PHI aircraft....thought it might have been an RAF SAR Sea King for a few minutes till I remembered they don't fly yellow helicopters in the GOM.

I don't reckon Sikorsky put out Performance Charts for all the various types thus it being easy to "run out of power"?

Probably some of that ol' Boudreaux mindset of fill'er up, climb in, "We're outta here!" thinking common to the GOM.

looking at the pictures it looks like that 76 still has the acrylic windshields?? I know at Bristow (Airdog)... who have the stretched acrylic not cast acrylic windshields.. the have imposed a 110kt vne until they can be replaced with glass. Does this mean PHI are still using acrylic windshields?

Besides that it looks as if they tried park on the very corner of the helideck... and if they did not plan on landing there it must have been one hell of a flat approach... where was the two brains thinking on this one...

Approach profiles...
 

If you fly consistent "rugby ball" approaches at night, you should get it just about right. (Sorry DOUBLE BOGEY I cannot say CTB). So why wouldn't you fly the same or similar approach during the day?
The only guy's that I have seen flying flat, fast and non standard approaches have invariably been guy's that have been flying single pilot for years in the Gulf of Mexico or the Arabian gulf and have recently gone 2 crew and refuse to change their attitude (excuse the pun) until on a line check with someone who may point out the error of their ways!!:=

There may be an argument for non standard approaches to certain decks being out of wind or with flare booms etc, but other wise why change a safe and proven profile. (And by the way, there was also never or few recorded over torques before 2 crew ops in the last offshore company I worked for). Saw plenty when we went two's up :E

My thoughts on standard offshore procedures as I was taught and in no way a reflection on what may or may not have occured in this unfortunate incident. Best wishes to the crew involved :ok:

SAS, who are your friends at PHI? Where do you get these nuggets?!?

There is no such thing as a 'flat approach' profile being used/taught/authorized/condoned by PHI in the S76. It's all strictly standard offshore approach type stuff, this incident or the non-SOP techniques of individual pilots notwithstanding.

You know, some of us actually work at this company while you, on the other hand, float around in a boat.

I think the stupidity of doing a flat fast approach (cos there ain't enough power to do a stable decelerative sight picture approach) beggars belief.

JAR-OPS requires the helicopter to be operated at an AEO HOGE mass to prevent this kind of "Cowboy" flying having to be done.

SAS - Do U/S regulations demand a similar thrust margin for Offshore exposed approaches??

Not saying that in this case thats what the crew did, there may be a good reason they have ended in a drop-short. Just a general comment.

DB

Rev,

I lived to retire and float around in a boat...and never had a chargeable incident or accident. That considering how long I flew helicopters and the places I flew them speaks for my basis for making some of the observations I do.

The PHI and the GOM mentality in general is quite different than the entire rest of the world which also speaks for itself.

Things are changing in the GOM but only long after the rest of the world moved on.

I hate to burst yer bubble but PHI does not have the monopoly on how to fly helicopters......not by a long shot.

There are some very qualified and experienced pilots working for PHI but unless you have a change of scenery now and then you cannot appreciate the difference.

As I heard told in an Arabian Gulf company.....a pilot was asked by the Chief Pilot at the dinner table one time...."You ever work for PHI?"

The response was "Not until I came here!"

Perhaps you might take a visit to Aberdeen and see for yourself what I mean about there being at least one other way of flying helicopters.

You would get your eyes opened and be the better for it!

Perhaps you can get someone to invite you over and show you around.

Better yet....approach PHI and see if they will organize an exchange program with a view towards researching "Industry Best Practices" and incorporating them into the GOM operations.

Fast and Flat?
 

You mean like this?



(I'm amazed the cameraman hadn't run for cover!)
:}

Actually, more like this I would suggest!

S-76 Approaches
 

It never made it to You Tube, but somewhere there is a video of what looks to be the quintessential, perfect, by-the-book approach to a rooftop helipad in an executive S-76. A sunny day with a slight breeze.The heading doesn't twitch a hair, the pitch attitude and roll attitudes are rock solid. The slow-down flare is gentle as one should expect in such an environment. All looks in order.

And it was until the pilot hit the edge of the roof with his tail boom. It was the UTC Building and the UTC S-76. I never did hear even a "creative" account of how it happened.

It did have a bit of a special meaning for Nick Lappos and I because we had campaigned rather hard for an improvement to forward visibility during the initial stages of the flight test program in 1977. We had been unsuccessful and Nick's eloquence and my single-mindedness had nothing to show for it. (The original front end lower glass looked very different than it does today).

Then we heard that the SA President, Gerry Tobias, was coming down to West Palm and wanted to fly in 'his" helicopter. I write "his" because Gerry had gone to bat for that machine and it bore a lot of his input.

What to do? Well, I had a typical GOM helipad painted on the runway using a healthy quantity of very white paint. Then, at the end of Gerry's familiarization flight ( and I had put him in the right seat by the way ), which up to that point had gone perfectly for him, I shot a few approaches to that helipad, and asked him in advance to tell me one thing and to call it out: when did he lose sight of the helipad?

You can guess what happened: by the time we had shot four approaches he was all charged up. I hadn't had to say anything; Gerry had figured it all out. So he got out and all of the ranking VP's were there asking about the ship and he waxed effusively about it for sometime, until he changed the subject to visibility. One of the VP's said that the subject was under review and that he would be advising him shortly on what they would be doing.

Gerry looked around and asked for a felt tip pen, turned to the VP with that pen in hand and said, " I'll show you what we're going to do", and drew the present lower plexiglass lines on that prototype. "Thats what we're going to do", he said, "and I'd like to see the design next week". I recall with clarity that two of the VP's turned their heads toward me and Nick, and their looks displayed more than passing displeasure.

But you still have to pay attention when you are landing.

John Dixson

Long ago, or rather, 8+ years ago when I was on the North Sea, I favoured a steepish power-on low ROD approach. I figured that if I were to lose an engine, at least I'd make it onto the deck.

I think landing on the fwd edge of the deck at high speed and then taxiing backwards on the rear wheels shows the passengers how brave and highly skilled the pilot must be. The most important thing here is looking good.

No, seriously, steep and steady all the way hey hey to the front of the circle for me.

Though I was once asked by a Capt if I had seen how they did low approach runs into a hot LZ in 'Nam. As I was 3 when it all ended in 'Nam I said not but I would love to see. The Cap then showed me how it's done. 10ft radalt at full tilt to the last second then aft cyclic and straight up 100ft and onto the deck, finally a big heave ho to level the aircraft dead centre on the circle. Certainly suprised the HLO on the deck edge.

SAS old boy godspeed and fair winds and all that on your well-deserved retirement gig navigating a boat around exotic, palm-lined islands; I'm more than a little envious. Your experience and knowledge are beyond reproach and have served you well during a long, accident free career -as you pointed out. Your expertise on everything from Altimeters to Zulu Time is much valued by all here on Pprune. You are truly one of the Wise Old Men of this board.

But when it comes to the inner workings of PHI your firsthand experience is nada, zilch, zero.

When people are shooting real bullets at you, you tend to do things a little differently than you would when there are paying customers involved but no bullets. When you're doing the non-standard maneuvers, you either learn to control the aircraft precisely, or you don't.

I hope they find the 76 had a mechanical problem otherwise I feel sorry for the pilot when he tries to explain what happened.:{

Did you train him Old Fella....?

Rumour has it that a either a bit of turbulence or a sudden massive increase in the surface magnetism of the rig got him!

Now I heard it was a glinch in the Earth's ugliness repelling strength.

Quote "helicopters don't fly , they are just so ugly the Earth repels them"

Chester:ok:

Red Wine

If I had, it wouldn't have happened!:ok:

P.S. Wish I could work out who you are!!:confused:

The Governor taught me well when it came to deck landings in a '76, but, it's nice I can now repay that and teach him how to win at poker. :E