Gittijan THANKS

This event bring some things into sharp focus. We make a Big Deal about Category A performance and how important we deem it to be. But in reality, there is still only one tail rotor and (in the case of Cougar in the North Atlantic) one main transmission. The failure of either one of those items (even though we assume the possibility to be extremely remote) can still put you in the water.

ERA machine......

I would prefer to wear a helmet too but it would be politically quite difficult to justify to corporate pax why the crew do but they don't....

The Macau route is well populated by surface vessels and the sea temperatures high compared to UK. A life-raft isn't seen as such a high priority as it would be in colder climates.

Horses for courses. The nature of the operation in Hong Kong/Macau is quite different to offshore.

Huh? Only a fool would make such a statement without knowing intimately the nature of the operation in Hong Kong/Macau, the normal weather patterns, sea temperatures, air temperatures, sea states, average currents, distances from land, local laws and requirements of the authorities, politics, SAR coverage in the area, ATC and radio coverage, SARSAT efficicency and capabilities, marine traffic density along the route, exposure related illnesses etc..etc..not to mention an understanding of the company and why this is even an issue now...

Really? I'm ashamed.

FH, that is true, but what do you propose to do. What's your point?

Shouldn't we take care to mitigate the risks we have control over as best we can, rather than worrying about things we can't control? I don't think we can create a profile which would allow safe 'tail-rotor gearboxless' flight in all phases and call it Category X! Unless you're suggesting two main rotors and a backup tailrotor, or parachutes for all on board....

Salvage? I presume they are using sonar. But seriously mud bottom with a lot of current and traffic, including trawling. Vis down to 3-5m. Magnetometer might help too therefore rather than a sonar (depending on the size and composition of the target). Interested to know which salvage company they are using. A CCTV would really help to pinpoint the trajectory of the parts and at least point to the correct part of the haystack!

Hi Rotorheads, I was interested in seeing how CAD has responded to this incident given the advisory after the Qatar incident, and note that the posting c/w photo for that has been deleted. I am interested as a transport consultant.

Nothing has been deleted. The thread is still here, and the photos are in this post :hmm:

gulliBell, Post #195: "...The nature of the operation in Hong Kong/Macau is quite different to offshore." Actually I would have thought that the SkyShuttle flights, except perhaps on the Shenzhen route, have some common factors with an offshore/OGP operation, i.e. the flights are entirely over water, Cat A performance is utilized, pre-flight safety brifings are very similar and the helicopter onboard equipment comes close to OGP requirements. I have noticed that the SkyShuttle helicopters appear to have ADELT's installed, is this a CAD/AACM requirement?

However, having said that I agree with other comments that liferafts will be of limited use. The main difference here is that offshore passengers are more disciplined and have undergone HUET training whereas the SkyShuttle passengers are members of the general public without this awareness.

The thought of installing external liferafts onto these helicopters where the passengers have access to a jettison handle, as mentioned in a earlier posting, is quite freightening and it would only be a matter of time before the inevitable happened...

Shell Management: Your comments in the "What's New In West Africa" thread are humerous to most but helpful to only a small few, please desist from this thread.

Thank you Senior Pilot! I'd forgotten it was on a link. Now where did I put my glasses???

St Jack: Couldn’t agree more with your last paragraph…..

It’s a trifle sad that these H&S focused people thrive on criticism. A TR failure at 300’ during a climb out over water (without too much airspeed on the clock) ain’t a picnic and the crew did well. Therefore presumably their Company’s selection, training and operating procedures aren’t too bad and the question of life-rafts and helmets rationalised and sensibly addressed.

St Jack - a balanced approach in a formal Hazard and Effects Management Process is essential to achieve a risk that is ALARP. A monocontrol logic results is rarely effective.

Shell Management: Do you have first-hand knowledge of the EAA/HeliExpress/SkyShuttle/AirTech SMS? You appear to be jumping to the conclusion that they do not have "....a balanced approach in a formal Hazard and Effects Management Process is essential to achieve a risk that is ALARP..." but rather they have "....A monocontrol logic results is rarely effective..." Which is it?

Prawn2king4 gets it essentially correct with his statement "...A TR failure at 300’ during a climb out over water (without too much airspeed on the clock) ain’t a picnic and the crew did well. Therefore presumably their Company’s selection, training and operating procedures aren’t too bad and the question of life-rafts and helmets rationalised and sensibly addressed..."

With respect to the company's internal decision making and risk assessment process, let's all wait and see what the official preliminary and final reports say before castigating this company.

It will be hard to give a preliminary report,,, if the dont try harder to find the missing bits in Victoria Harbour :ugh::ugh:

Is it confirmed that they are not looking for the bits or is that speculation?

Ive been told they ARE looking for it. The question is HOW HARD

Its not rocket science, its a narrow Harbour, not to deep, and not too long.
The HK Gov found the missing GFS, EC135 sliding door after 3 weeks, and that had almost no metal in it.

In fact I have a lot of experience working with operators in the region and some of the cultural issues.;)

If you have some specifics on this operator feel free to share.

In Helicopter ?? call me if your in town for a coffee !!

Yes, helicopters extensively for many, many years.

I think FH100 and CSGS both make valid, thoughtful points. First, it's disturbing when a helicopter model that is widely acknowledged to have the best OEI performance in its class ends up in the water due to failure of another critical component. Second, it's certainly prudent to develop PC1/PC2e takeoff and landing procedures to mitigate the risk associated with engine failure during takeoff or landing. Historically, the number of engine failures greatly exceeds the number of main rotor component, tail rotor component, or gearbox failures.