Passenger now confirmed as Lord Ballyedmond.

After the 2004 crash of an A109 at Bournemouth in 2004, the CAA produced the following recommendations.

We still have too many Night VFR VIP helicopter accidents operating out of private sites at night????

Mathew Harding
Philip Carter
Lord Balleymond

Often single pilot, poor weather, too high a workload.

Not to mention Haughey Air's S76 accident in Ireland, which was different but shows how quickly things can go tragically wrong.


FOLLOW UP ACTION
The one Safety Recommendation, made by the AAIB following their investigation, is reproduced below, together with the CAA’s response.
Recommendation 2005-55

The Civil Aviation Authority should review the Rules of the Air and relevant regulations in their applicability to helicopters and should consider imposing minimum visibility requirements for day and night. These minima should afford an effective safety margin to prevent inadvertent flight in instrument meteorological condition or loss of adequate external visual references. The requirement for a clearly defined horizon, particularly over water or featureless terrain should also be considered.

CAA Response

The CAA accepts this Recommendation.
The CAA has prepared a draft Regulatory Impact Assessment and consultation commenced in February 2005, with a view to setting minimum visibility requirements for all flights conducted by visual reference, whether by day under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) or under the provisions for visual reference flight contained in the Instrument Flight Rules (IFR).

Norwich airport to the north started to fog out according to the tag at about that time. Indeed it had been dipping in for the last hour.
Thoughts with the families

Firstly, my sincere condolences to everyone directly affected. The aircraft was operated two crew, btw. I knew both and was talking to the pilots only a few days ago.

I must say that in the circumstances I think some comments made here are particularly insensitive and thoughtless.

Special25;


Don't forget that the pilot in the Bournemouth crash was flying a night approach in poor weather to a well equipped airport and didn't have an IR.
Mathew Harding was a departure from an airfield at night/marginal conditions in an unstabilised 355 (no autopilot, floppy stick) And Phillip Carter departed from an airport to a very well equipped HLS and something went wrong, and we still await the outcome of Peter Barnes crash.


There is nothing intrinsically unsafe about operating to private sites at night, so long as they are well equipped (decent lighting etc), the pilots are familiar and you can safely make a visual approach/departure (weather etc). Skip one out of that list and it all becomes a rather different matter.


I'd have to check my log book for exact numbers, but this winter I've probably done it 20 times, and the final say is very much with the pilot, one shred of doubt and we're off to the nearest airport.


SND

Special 25

I fully endorse SND's post. It is important not to get carried away with sweeping generalised statements regarding night private ops. An awful lot goes on, perfectly safely and indeed it is imperative to the maximising of helicopter potential. Of course hazards are higher than daylight ops but then many forms of helicopter use have their win higher risk areas, be they North Sea, police and HEMS and these risks need to be managed and minimised. Clearly we need to wait for the accident report to see exactly why this crashed and what if any subsequent action is necessary.

Only one of your examples is relevant. As SND says, the Bournemouth 109 accident was into an airport with an ILS. The Harding accident had nothing to do with landing/taking off at night - it was a LOC in IMC in the cruise 20 miles or so from the departure point. The Carter accident probably was caused by losing visual reference on a foggy night approach.

And of course the Pete Barnes accident was daytime.

A very tragic accident though. My deepest sympathies to the families of those involved.

At least there should be a full FDR/CVR to assist in the investigation.

Very interesting reading indeed.

Sad news. AW139 is a very capable aircraft even in the most adverse conditions when used to its full potential. The UK SAR crews have to routinely explore poor weather conditions with low level IMC ops day & night.
Senseless loss.

Pittsextra,

Can you please stop trying to stir things? Four people have died. Have some respect.

Dangers of these threads and personal information security.
 

Before 'her' posts were made it was fairly easy to get some quite in depth information about this incident and those possibly involved based on this thread alone, let alone the updating media reports.

Posts on this thread
22:05 Augusta Westland
22:19 Norbrook 139
22:29 Based on the location and proximity of a private landing site, the identity of one male passenger is now being speculated
22:52 Haughy Air AW139 seems to be the way it's possibly heading
22:54 Haughy, Lord Ballyedmond, certainly owns Gillingham Hall
23:00 Sky reporting a Northern Ireland link
23:06 Lady Boss - Can some one please help me my husband was flying Norfolk to newly tonight?
23:32 Anyone know if XX was flying if it was indeed the Haughey 139?
23:59 Lady Boss - My husband flies G-LBAL any help please


'She' may well be genuine, however wouldn't it be better to call someone you know in the industry, or in the company, friends etc etc rather than post those sort of questions on here? As for 'her' reference to the registration number, surely something like "he flies for the company" would be more natural.

I would wonder how many press 'Aviation Experts' might have PPRuNe sleeper accounts?


By the way everyone, time to check your social media sites access settings.
It's amazing how open people seem to be! To check yours, get someone that shouldn't be able to see your social media info to have a look. They shouldn't be able to see anything, unless you want everyone to, or you are inadvertently in public mode :eek:

SS - perhaps the lady had other things on her mind at that moment. Personally, I find her posts absolutely understandable (having been in those circumstances) and I see nothing to 'complain' about.

My condolences to all affected.

John R81;
Ok, you're more trusting than I am.
However, point taken :ouch:

My condolences to everyone involved.

Seems to be confirmed as G-LBAL

13-Mar-14 G-LBAL AgustaWestland AW139 Beccles, UK (4F) | Helihub - the Helicopter Industry Data Source

I'm sure, thanks to your sage input, she will have learned her lesson. :rolleyes:

If you understood how these private operators don't have the "ops" infrastucture that you have been, and are privileged to enjoy, you might understand that it is entirely plausible that the post was a genuine request. My wife would have been in a similar dilemma. Terribly worried but no-one available to ask at the time.

In my simple opinion
In the dubt genuine or not just show respect considering true everithing.

The EDP have published a photo of the aircraft:

http://www.edp24.co.uk/polopoly_fs/n.../266956263.jpg

Update: Police say roads around Norfolk helicopter crash site will remain closed for some time as investigations continue into tragedy in which four men, including Lord Ballyedmond, were killed - News - Eastern Daily Press

Special 25: GLBAL was often based at the airfield where I work until recently and I've never known it operate single pilot, even for VFR positioning flights.

Pitts.....is that all you have to fret about?:=

If you have some concerns about posts being deleted....send a PM to Senior Pilot which would be far more an appropriate venue than a thread about a Crash that killed four people.

Or.....perhaps you might just take a hint when you see your posts disappearing.:ugh:

Pitts, It would appear to be censorship on behalf of a very wealthy,influential individual.If the post had been retrospective to the crash I could see why it might be considered worthy of this treatment.However it was a link to something several years ago which was nevertheless very relevant to the current situation.

I sometimes wonder why some of the regulars log on here given it is a rumour site about aviation.

Trying to silence the story emerging and blocking media reports will never work.

The Daily Mail is running the following which details the background and probable cause of the accident.

Safety fears over £500m Tory peer's doomed helicopter | Mail Online

Yes times 3.

But the fact is (how insensitive the timing is for making any conclusions), SAR and military crews are trained for it, and train for it in their flying program.

The crew flying the VIP 139 is not (up to it), no matter their former experience.

And you brake the rules if you take off VFR in fog (or into fog patches).

All my sympathy goes so far to the crew and pax.

I'm not really fretting. Just asking the question.

Seriously you can't see any interest at all when a AW139 shunts in poor weather near a private site and those prior threads?

and yeah I asked Senior Pilot... waiting the reply

Tango123;


I refer you to posts 45 and 46, a lot of highly experienced civvie crews train for it, and use that training regularly.


SND

Perhaps it's time to utilise such things as 'Find my iPhone'.

Video now posted:


Helicopter Crash scene, Gillingham, Norfolk. ©Archant 2014 - YouTube

I live just a few miles from the crash site.Between Beccles and the coast,the crash site being about one mile west of the town.I was working in the garden all afternoon and only went in when it got dusk about 6pm.The three quarters full moon was clearly visible at 730 when I went back out to check on the bonfire that I had lit.

Gillingham though is beside the River Waveney and the fog forms there much more densely and often in patches.My guess is that they decided to fly and were in one of the less dense parts but quickly ran into a patch.My wife came in about seven and said she ran into some thick stuff that was clear after a couple of hundred metres.

Seems that Pitt has a point.
After all, the media are picking up on the request for a refund due to the aircrafts problems, so why not have a look at the company culture mentioned in all those previous threads. A culture that is possibly involved here.

BBC news just carried an aerial shot of the crash site. There does not appear to me to be significant forward speed evident in the debris layout, and it is close to trees just over-flown.

PPL holder interviewed suggests dense fog at the time of take-off.

Thank you for your contribution over an issue that has been running for quite a while before this incident. :rolleyes:

I seem to recall we have been here before and not that long ago.
Private operations and fog.

In fact, it OFTEN used to fly single pilot.


RIP Mate!!

An observation on the posted video.

Main rotor totally destroyed, tail rotor virtually intact.

Not being either an helicopter pilot or an engineer having any significant knowledge of such machines, I would not presume to infer too much but would anyone more knowledgeable care to comment?

You do wonder when...
 

I found the old PPRuNe threads as one of them was the No.4 most popular on a simple google search when looking for Haughey Air, it doesn't make flattering reading. Its not the only thread with similar wording, and that's just on this site.

Add this:-

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/fil...ral/4719-0.PDF

and one wonders why the anger is directed to someone just reflecting the obvious. (obvious by which I mean there seems to be background issues)

I wonder if the pressures of corporate flying have come to bear here. :=
Just a thought as I have been there many times and have been lucky.

RIP to all those who perished......

Corporate is strange world,they spent 15 milion euros for aw139 and save 2500 month for a copilot onboard

Genuine question.

This is being described as a VFR operation. But it's clearly an immensely capable IFR aircraft.

Are we saying the pilot didn't hold a valid Instrument Rating, or that the AOC was for VFR ops only?

Or simply that this was a VFR manoeuvre whilst not in VMC?

Or have I completely misunderstood

Cheers.

If they were going to fly IFR they would need to take off from a site that had an approved departure procedure that would mean they did not hit anything as they took off.
I very much doubt that anyone has invested in having had this done for a private site.
It's not just about the airframe or the pilot's qualifications it is also about the infrastructure surrounding them such as departure procedures and approache plates etc.

FSX, On the subject you raise,BBC Look East this lunchtime showed footage of the aircraft taking off from Gillingham Hall.It struck me that it looked potentially quite tricky.They were using the lawn of the house and the whole site was surrounded by mature tall trees.I would imagine that in poor visibility it would be very easy to clip a branch on your way out.

I accept all your comments.

Good to hear that this was a two crew operation in an excellent aircraft. The Bournemouth accident was really being used as the source of the CAA review material. The Carter accident does have many parallels however. But that is just one and I don't really havea figure of how common this type of flying is these days.

I am sure that in these areas of dense fog patches, moon possibly shining through on occasions, a sound flying decision can quickly become a bad one.

I too saw the BBC footage of the aircraft taking off from the property, and didn't fancy it much. Also, flying for Haughey Air, with Mr Haughey in the back must be an enormous pressure - I have no reason to doubt that the crew would have had no issues with standing down, if they genuinely had concerns about the flight.