Example of S92 MFD NAV screen.
Radar 10NM range, GMAP2, manual gain, slightly tilted down, a/c height 500 feet, oil rig target at just under 2NM, about 15 degrees offset, active waypoint symbol overlapping the radar return.

https://preview.ibb.co/dyh4MQ/IMG_4907.jpg

Was always a two pilot affair as far as I'm aware. SOP when you were in that neck of the woods was copilot flew from RHS as PF, PIC in the left as PM conducting the orchestra. Single pilot capable though I think.

Geoffers

No I haven't! Don't get me wrong, I fully recognise the importance of SOPs, but I'm just trying to think of some reason as to why the flight crew opted for a much hazardous approach than necessary. It is obvious the risk of obstacles - and uncharted ones - is always going to be greater the lower you are, and the longer you're there. It's clear you've loads of experience - any ideas on why they did?

A good example of correctly tuned radar. The point I was making earlier about interpretation of the radar information is clearly shown, with sea clutter appearing behind the target in-front of you. If the oil rig was instead a 500' cliff there would be a very deep arc absent of sea clutter behind the target, which should flag a big warning in the pilot SA loop.

The radar on the accident aircraft, if correctly operated and interpreted, should have provided a warning sign of what was ahead even if the active waypoint marker sat directly on top of the Blackrock radar return. If they send an S92 out to re-fly the accident mission profile I'd like to see what the radar image looks like.

What rate does it turn you at, 6 degrees/sec?

They were flying too low.

"As long as HDG is coupled to the flight director, heading may be altered by rotating a knob on the RIC - a small panel on the pedestal, and by pressing either cyclic coolie hat. At low speeds in SAR mode, heading is altered by pressing a switch on either collective."

Of course, the pilot could also simply move the controls in the traditional manner in order to override the autopilot - which, if the PF had fully appreciated the proximity of the rock and the tech crewman's urgency, would probably have been a more appropriate course of action.

The picture of the MFD NAV screen does seem to point at why they didn't notice the rock - it's all very well to say they should have noticed the absence of returns beyond the rock but you are asking them to notice something is missing from a display which is far easier said than done.

The 3rd generation helicopter seems to have a problem of too much information and perhaps the SOP should be to have the simple radar picture on the MFD without the FMS overlay.

HDG change
 

Re HDG change

See page 13 paragraph 4 of AAIU report

Thanks Pltnorway for that informative illustration. It shows my initial concern that priority given to the symbol, along with the outline needed to distinguish it, hides the return at that display range.

It is important to understand such limitations when setting the MFD for a particular task.

No, it's easy to do, and it's essential knowledge which must be applied for proper use of the radar. I never paid any attention to this aspect of using the radar until I watched the Honeywell weather radar training video, which was a great resource for understanding what the radar was telling you.

It probably is easy when it is the only thing you have to do. When you are multi-tasking then you will tend to react to the information that is presented to you rather than try to interpret what isn't being shown to you.

Can anyone post a link to this Honeywell weather radar training video? Apologies if done already.

I'm guessing by your logic Crab that all multi-crew aircraft should still have dedicated flight engineers and navigators?

Hardly, I'm just suggesting that vital information (which that radar picture is in those circumstances) should be absolutely clear rather than having extra information overlaid on top of it.

I don't have a problem with new technology (not that those MFDs are) but there is a temptation to put lots of information on the screen just because you can rather than because it is needed.

When not in critical stages of flight then have as much junk as you want on the screen but at 200' in the dark have a clear and well presented radar picture since it is the only thing that can stop you bumping in to things.

Fair comment. Any system is only as good as the operator; and the operator is only as good as his/her training and currency allow them to be.

Can you please elaborate on the quote Crab.

I think the temptation is to put too much on one display, rather than have to change between different formats.

There are lots of weather radar training videos on YouTube, for example:

https://youtu.be/xmRYNIghm9M

dclbydalpha - I just meant that MFDs are not new technology and I agree that it is too easy to have too much information on one scree.

It would be interesting to see what the display looks like on. 2.5nm setting. Maybe the Black Rock return would have been be bigger than the BLKMO overlay and more visible to the crew?