Engine Chips warning
 

This is the scenario. A brand new No 1 engine has just been fitted and after the flight test the aircraft departed on a revenue flight to a barge offshore 100 miles away. At about 40 nm outbound the No 1 Eng Chip light came on. When the power was reduced, the light goes off. Check list and flight manual says continue flight but mornitor engine parameters. Flight manual says after landing check the magnetic plugs for confirmation. What would you have done.. a)continue offshore to the barge, land and then come home hoping for the best. b) continue to the barge, land and shut down for inspection or c) turn around and head back to helibase.
I chose option (C) because we are relatively close to base (40 miles) AND the fact that it was a BRAND NEW engine that hadjust been installed.
Now, I would like to have some feed backs and discussions

Mmmm ...

Option "C" ... correct ..... 'cos you never know what you might find when you have a closer look !!!!


:eek:

Yep, better safe than sorry, so option "C" works for me. Now, it is actually quite normal for some types of engines to generate a "small" bit of metal after the are overhauled, but you want to find this out back at base, not on a barge somewhere. The engineering staff don't like to change engines on barges!

On an aircraft such as a King Air 200 under same parallel circumstances, option C is also good. I would also have prepared for a possible engine shutdown on the return leg.

Or you could take the approach I saw on a TNI-AU helicopter at Sentani Airport years ago, they had disconnected all the chip detectors! :eek:

What the eye don't see the heart don't grieve over!!! :sad:

I'd go with option C as well.

Reminds me of a flight on the backseat of an EC120 in Asia a few moons ago.

Me to driver: "Uhh, did you notice your chip light just came on?".
Driver: "Don't worry, happens all the time."
Driver: "It will go away in a few minutes."
Driver: "It's just a small metal..."
(continues to tell me how a chip light works)

Turns out they were flying that lovely EC120 with chip light all the time and couldn't find what the culprit was (my suspicion: the maintenance center was very far away).

All this chat about chip lights has reminded me of the only time in five years of flying helos that I had one come on was when I was carrying a Directorate of Airforce Safety (DAFS) team doing an investigation into a Mirage fighter ejection.

We had been having a regular problem with this chip light due to water in the cannon plug and as soon as the light came I knew what the problem was but with the DAFS team on board I really had no choice but to land and sort it out. Fortunately we called up the reserve chopper and the DAFS team were on their way quickly while we WD40'd the plug and were soon on our way.

I'm also with option 'C' by the way, better to go U/S back at base rather than out to sea on a barge.

Regards,
BH.

'C' without a doubt.

The chippies
 

would go for option C...However, if there would be a deck or landing site closer than 40nm I would have put it down right there.:ok:

Option C without a doubt, If you landed offshore and shut down only to find that it was a major problem, the logistics of getting another heli to rescue you and engineer etc would be a tricky one. You are closer to base than the rig.... no brainer really.
T4

Phew..I am glad that so far ALL of you have responded with option C which is what I did. I put this up for discussion because it was worded as " Continue Flight " in the flight manual (OK it is the 332L2 that I am flying) if other parameters are normal. Next paragraph says "On landing check magnetic plugs for confirmation of chips". The doubt here is, is it on final landing back at base to check the plugs OR on landing at the first destination (that would be my understanding) which is the first rig. Sometimes these sort of statements creates a lot of ambiguities and it depends on which hat one is wearing to come up with the "correct answers". Seat warmers and bean counters always have it their own way every where and it may not be the most healthy option!

Well as an Engineer I would look at it as, well it's all well and good continuing on to the barge, but what happens if you get all the way out there and for some reason you cannot land on, you're then faced with a heck of a long trip back with it still on. so C without a doubt.

Definately option D.

Enter autorotation and the saltwater will put the chip light out, then RTB and report to engineering :eek:

Some have been known to get out pen knife and blow the floats to save on insurance hassle :E

This is a rumour network no?

My sentiments exactly, you cost the company and client more sitting U/S offshore. And thats before you consider the passenger safety side, with recent events people up here (Aberdeen) are watching what we do very closely. A good decision and hopefully one backed up by both your company and your client.

Si

Chip light
 

Am I missing something but why should pulling back an engine put out a chip detector light. It works by a ferrous chip completing a circuit.

Chip lights after newly installed engines and gearboxes are not unusual. However, you don't know if it's fine grey sludge or a substantial chip that's set off the warning let alone whats caused the chip to be produced. You don't say what type of twin you were flying but my guess would be that the follow up actions are "Land as soon as Practical". Therefore Option C gets my vote. You were closer to your point of departure than your destination.
Your passenger(s) are looking to you to display captaincy and make the right choice regardless of how inconvenient your decision might be.

bursting the floats
 

ref Grifffothefog

In 1979, at Aceh, there was a tail rotor in the stage of failing on the way out to one of the exploration rigs offshore. Helicopter was a Puma. I was not the engineer but worked with the man (initial JB) involved. The problem was realized when the mech, sitting in the middle seat saw the (large size) passengers very agitated. One was attempting to jettison the sliding door. The mech made his way rapidly to the cloth cover over the tail boom, kicking the panicking pax hard to stop him releasing the door. Probably without regard to C of G going rearwards he got his head well into the tail boom, and heard very loud, and unusual banging/clatter. He made his way back to the pilot, I don't know if he kicked the passenger on the way back as well. Reporting all was most definitely not well to the pilot. The pilot, a westerner, continued to the rig, but for some reason besides going at a much lower level also decide to reduce speed considerably. (This will load the tail rotor and drive more). The pilot called forward to the rig, who informed him that if he attempted to shut his helicopter down there he would be pushed off the helipad straight away. They would however, send a standby ship and inform others that he was putting down near the rig in the water. The water landing was uneventful, floats and life rafts worked. JB was interested enough in the way the helicopter floated stable with the water, as it should, entering the pax area to several inches deep. He swum around and under the Puma. When the powers that be (western) spoke to him later about this they asked why he had not punctured the floats and saved a costly repair to the aircraft.

Clearly this is a position of damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Engine Chips warning
 

Come on - be a Captain (Commander, PIC or whatever you want to call yourself) If you have a technical problem less than 20 minutes away from homebase, there is not much doubt in my mind. Go home, and have it fixed. Management or your customers can say whatever they want, it is still your call.
If it happened 5 minutes away from the destination, you still go home unless you have additional indications of something going really bad.
The Makilas in the L2 are extremely reliable engines, but if you landed, you don't take off with a chip light glaring at you.:)

The light goes out!
 

I think the fact that the light went out is important. Aren't a lot of these systems designed to see if the chip light remains on and then act accordingly?

In the case discussed here the fact that the FM stated pull the chips at the next landing; option C becomes the best answer.

In an S76 though, for example, the checklist states that if the light goes out then continue flight and advise maintenance. If this were the case wouldn't option A be the accepted and preferred course of action (ignoring the tongue in cheek "hope for the best comment")?

I fully agree with the above post that you can't take off with the light on but in this example the light went out. Most manuals state that this is a continue flight and report afterwards situation. I understand that some companies are ammending the checklist procedures for some emergencies such as this for more cautious actions such as making precautionary landings but in the absence of these it is ok to continue is it not?