135 originally certified at 2720kg thus exempt from FDR despite mtow increasing with newer variants. Same for the A109.

Bondu,
Google Official Record Series 4 on the CAA Website and check out numbers 988 & 989.

Those truly in the know....................know.

Forty odd,

Just done as you suggested.
I defer to your superior knowledge! As an AS332L/EC225 driver, I've had a FDR/CVR for many years. I haven't flown the 135, so my apologies.
However, a question then. Should helicopters operating for police and EMS agencies have FDRs/CVRs?

In my opinion all service aircraft should have FDRs fitted as they work in built up and city enviroments usually at low altitude.

It is absolutely right that the AAIB will carry out a full investigation into this terrible event, and it is further likely that such an investigation will take some considerable time. Only then we will know exactly what happened. Five minute speculators on this forum are only as useless as those in the media that "report".
I would like to extend my sympathies to my former colleagues.

Wiki page now up and running.

2013 Glasgow helicopter crash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bondu,

Bell built in a data recorder into each of the displays on the 429. As long as all displays do not burn (unlikely on a Bell) the data is recoverable. The data mapped is equivalent to ED-112 type recorders used on the big boys, except at a slower rate of one sample every 1/2 second. The 429 also has a fully compliant ED-112 data bus with data up to 8 times a second which feeds an optional modern CV/FDR.

Why do you think we have to put "dignity and respect" to one side if we speculate ? It's possible to do so in a perfectly dignified manner. There has already been some illuminating comments from informed folks (e.g. skadi, Fortyodd2 and others) which has contributed to shared knowledge.

If you don't want to benefit from this enlightenment, or think that you might see something you don't like, then feel free to *not* browse to this page. However, telling the rest of us, who do wish to benefit from informed speculation, that we're not allowed to because *you* don't want to read it, isn't really on... :hmm:

8 dead, 14 serious :(

BBC have just confirmed 3 bodies found within the helicopter... :-(

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25165894

"Be careful not to criticise anyone for speculating, as the moderator seems to be handy at snipping out folk who suggest its not good practice....


Speculation is clearly the way forward, after all Im told its a rumour network, so dignity and respect can be put to one side in the name of speculation.


Wonder how long this post lasts then ?"

You seem to have a vast depth of knowledge about the practices an this forum for someone with 6 posts :rolleyes:

Sultan,

Thanks for info on The 429.

I understand that some 135s do have FDRs fitted - the newer model P2+ has the AR Combi 204C fitted and some T2s have something called a CPDS fitted, which collect some data streams and has a recording facility.

It looks as though last nights machine may not have either system fitted, but we should wait for the AAIB to confirm that.

Bondu,
CPDS = Central Panel Display System - comprising a VEMD, (Vehicle Engine Monitoring Display), and a CAD, (Caution Advisory Display).

Can I also thank John Gleeson for injecting some much needed first hand knowledge into Sky News instead of the their usual armchair expert guesswork.

Very sad day for all affected.

Have other 135s been grounded?

Not speculating, just asking.

Do Police helicopters downlink video/sound at all times to their control room or do they only do that when on a tasking? Just thinking there could possibly be a lot of useful information to the AAIB there.

My dad was a Deputy Chief Fire Officer; I remember him reviewing footage of a school fire from Cheshire's Islander (G-PASV) and remarking how it would have made it possible to save the building - The police got an amazing amount of funding compared with the Fire Service; I can't imagine them not downlinking information almost 20 years later.

If I recall correctly, the MD900 and 902 had a port on the engine/transmission displays form which it was possible to recover an amazing amount of information?! Not an FDR per-se but a very very useful tool. It's been so long I can't remember what it's called but I miss that aircraft daily!!

from witness reports inside the pub, it seems to have been a 2 stage event, with the heli ending up the roof with more control than just gravity, followed shortly after by the wooden roof collapsing under the weight. So providing these witness reports are factual, some level of auto-rotation control was still possible. Pure gravity would have smashed right through the ceiling.

Patronising, sarcastic, condescending & downright rude
 

staplefordheli,:rolleyes: Rolling eyes at an eye-witness report. Were you there?
All: This is a public forum and non-flyers are just as entitled to comment as much as some of the "expert-never put a foot wrong- know-it-all" pilots on here. There are some extremely well written comments on this site that are a pleasure to read & then there are the patronising, sarcastic, condescending & downright rude smart-a55es who, quite frankly, just show themselves up.

Condolences & discussion
 

As someone who's expecting to fly one of these, in this role, tomorrow, I remain confident that this airframe is one of the best for this task, if flown & maintained properly, unless your luck really has run out . . . which has happened in the past. Valid speculation can be valuable for those who may feel nervous about getting back in the saddle, and there are a number of pointers from eye-witnesses, and the photos, which should help to reassure others - the following are nothing else but observations, with a little speculation at the end:

1. Photos show the better part of two whole MR blades, and a smaller end of one other, intact over some length. The two protruding blades appear close to, but less than, 90deg apart. Having seen photos of a 135 that rolled over under power some years ago, the carbon fibre blade spars shred themselves completely.

2. The fenestron appears mostly intact, if twisted, and in conjunction with MRBs would seem to show a roll to the left to inverted after/during landing - certainly IF the reports of a landing, followed by a roof collapse, are accurate,

3. One might expect an aircraft with a complete power loss and "stopped" rotors (as some have reported) to hit the roof so hard as to go straight through, but might also expect the impact to create a lot more distortion of the lighter parts, & tail boom specifically.

4. If reports of stopped rotors were accurate, it could be argued that the deadweight of the airframe, and the C of G with heavy transmission on top might have started to turn the aircraft inverted before impact?

5. A number of consecutive TR blades appear to be in place - the photo isn't taken at an angle to allow a view of the rest.

6. Whilst UK Police 135's are not required to be, & aren't, fitted with a CVR, some historical data is downloadable from the FADECs, so AAIB may at least be able to find out what the engines were doing in the later moments of flight.

Personal opinion only, is that it might appear there was some control which reduced the rate of descent before impact, hence the relatively minor distortion of the rear empenage, and the reports of an impact, with time for people in the pub to comment about the band, followed by the roof caving in. Of course there is no indication, apart from the tragic result recently announced, of the state of the main body of the aircraft, which has had a good track-record in other, fairly high impact, EC135 accidents. The lack of any reported emergency by the pilot might speak more volumes than anything else, certainly so close to base. That worst case scenario of something sudden, as intimated by David Learmount, may have to be considered.

It a very sad day when an event such as this occurs, tragic for those who fly these machines (who are aware of the risks but train hard to mitigate them) and doubly so for the innocent Friday night public who we spend our time assisting & protecting. All sympathies & prayers are with those affected.

At the end of the day, however, the AAIB are world-respected experts in their field and will get to the bottom of what happened, with the willing assistance of the manufacturers. The reason aviation, in almost every area, is as safe as it is today is because we listen, read & learn about these terrible events which understandably, but sadly, make more headlines than the road fatalities that spoil so many more lives. Any failing of the aircraft will surely be addressed as quickly as possible, as has happened in the past, and we'll learn and adjust the way we operate. The 135 remains a state of the art machine IMHO, which has looked after me and my team very satisfactorily for many years. As I don't like complacency, however, I always keep a useful phrase in the back of my mind, from my early training:

"Aviation itself is not inherently dangerous but, to an even greater capacity than the sea, is very unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

The :mad: at the BBC News are at it again.

They have shown a picture of the helicopter involved today, "AO" and said "a helicopter similar to this one".

Do these people not do their research or have brains before opening their mouths?

At least one eyewitness reported the aircraft tumbling end over end as it fell from altitude.

Not a pilot here but a builder so I'm limiting my comments to that. It is not uncommon for a structure to fail in stages, especially when the initial stress has caused large-scale structural damage to adjacent stressed members. In this case just the reverberation from the band's amplified sound or from dancers in rhythm could have caused just enough vibratrion to make the rest of the structure fail as shear forces were aggravated or displaced parts shifted. And if wood was involved, it often delaminates relatively slowly as opposed to snapping in two, even without additional stress loading being applied. It could have been failing slowly even without any other aggravating input after the initial settling under the strain. Of course the structure was never designed to accept this load so it seems to have done very well and performed admirably and normally. Having nothing else to add that's it for me in this thread.

A local SBS user reported that his last contact was 22:21:49 at 725ft.

Not sure why you have singled out my post in particular which was one of the first on this thread as the event unfolded.

The emocon was more to do with the fact the media were using the witness reports of backfiring noise as being a misfiring and failing engine as the cause akin to a R44 or R22 with Lycoming Piston engine . Not a twin engine turboshaft. Flameouts can pop and bang but not like that unless the core of the turbine was breaking up. but that would still have left an active engine to run on save for damage to control components and hydraulics probably leading to a fire

It was more likely the noise described to have been a mechanical noise associated with parts of the main transmission breaking apart so It wasn't aimed at the ley witnesses in any way who wouldn't know if it was powered by turbine piston or even electric rare earth motors

As for some of the other comments on this thread, each to their own
There is place on here for everyone however outlandish their views after an accident such as this and you cannot stop some folks who may not agree with your views posting. However I dont agree with some being shot down by others for having those views

For now with the 3 crew confirmed dead along with members of the public I am just leaving it up to the AAIB who I have every confidence will expediently publish what they find

low rotor rpm
 

the result seems to be similar to the 2008 crash of an ec135 of the Hungarian Air Ambulance - low rotor rpm in autorotation. The cause at that time could not be found out clearly - might have been a mismatch during emergency procedure after FADEC-induced engine out of one of the engines in low altitude.

In my experience as a PC dealing with the helicopter, the downlink is only used when selected, it doesn't operate at all times. There is an aerial that deploys below the aircraft (at least the MD902 my force had when I was in). This was left down upon landing several times causing damage and downtime for the downlink. FCR would normally request it's usage, it wasn't automatic.

That would be the editor from the Sun on a nearby multi-storey car park?
Possibly in a flat spin?

I am not a professional pilot by any stretch, but a long time lurker - over the years I've learned a lot of interesting stuff!

But I am a Glaswegian. The junction that the Clutha sits on is larger by some measure than the Clutha's roof, is relatively quiet at that time of night due to the bus lane and being relatively far away from the real nightlife.

A view of it is here. Would a pilot really choose to land on this roof if they had a choice in the matter? Moreover, the buildings in that block aren't exactly known for their structural integrity, which any local can vouch for.

But regardless I'm sure the AAIB will get to the bottom of it. This is a really sad event for the crew and the casualties on the ground - no one should have to go to work (or for a night out, for the matter) and not come back.

Don't forget that the turbine engines of a very rapidly yawing aircraft can suffer a compressor surge or stall, due to airflow disturbances across the intake. A symptom of which is a popping noise.

Obviously, part of the AAIB investigation will look at the whole picture and part of that will be to check the fenestron tail rotor drive.

But the engine intakes on the 135 are way inside the airframe, so that I think a yaw movement would have nearly no influence.

In a force control room (FCR) close to me, the down link is only requested when on a task. The crew sometimes leave it on when transiting but not normally. The down link images are not recorded in the FCR either, recordings are stored on a hard drive in the aircraft itself. The microwave antenna is is hinged down below the skids when needed and needs to be raised for landing.

zorab64

Thank you for your post.

Have a good day tomorrow

This is a thought only, and has to do solely with reports of little damage to the main rotor blades in this accident:

If one pulls "early' on an autorotation, and ends up -- lo and behold -- above desired spot with a bit of extra altitude, would not the blades be mostly out of inertia as one makes contact with whatever is below one at the bottom?

That is one way to explain general lack of damage to main rotor blades, I think.

Please correct me if I am making a meal of that thought.

EDIT:

Question for clarification: is EC135 high inertia rotor system or low inertia?

Surely the idea that a chopper pilot would choose to land on the roof of a building when he could land on the ground, even a busy junction, is somewhat strange? Cars and pedestrians would be likely to have at least some chance of getting out of the way, whereas those in a building would not, not to mention the added danger to the crew if the roof gave way.

Also surely the C of G of this craft would mean it stays upright when the blades are seized?

Network shows last contact 75 feet 2224

Tragedy & Emoticons
 

Thank you staplefordheli for taking the time to reply to my frustrated rant.
Your post on this thread about a dreadful accident, to be honest, really wound me up. To me it came across as "non-pilots, what do they know" & is an attitude that exists on & spoils this forum. Yours was simply the straw that broke the camel's back & I would have used any other had I come across them today. You seem to have a good knowledge of helicopter workings & your explanation of the bangs was very informative - much more useful than rolling eyes!

zorab64 Fenestron....
 

zorab64, just curious as to your understanding of the fenestron being intact... There is a decent angle of the tail boom with horizontal stabilisers sticking up in the air, you can also see the fenestron hub with a few blades attached, no shroud or other blades remaining. My understanding would be it's not quite intact...

Judging from the google earth picture of the pub above, if he had to do an emergency landing at night while having a large work load the roof top might not be to dissimilar looking from the road or a small parking lot.
It's a flat felt roof, with no lights and it's low level right beside the junction.

Further to Lurkers contribution, the Clutha building was originally a multi-storey that was partially demolished. This is seen in many places across the city where clearance has taken place leaving the ground-floor pub as the only remnant of a block of tenaments. Hence the walls are pretty substantial but the roof is much newer and flimsier than the apparent age of the building would suggest. No surprise that it couldn't hold a 3ton chopper even if an attempted autorotation had removed most of the energy.
Given the variety of more benign landing spots available - King St car park, the Briggait Broomielaw Stockwell St intersection, Clydeside Walkway and the Clyde itself, I'd go along with the supposition that the pilot flared out of the autorotation too early and landed on the pub, not the intersection.

Doesn't explain eyewitness statements about tumbling end over end though.