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.