That sounds like the sensible SAR plan for SPIFR that I remember and it worked very well. But if the operation was VFR and the plan involved flying long distances over water at night then possibly not. NVG is a great aid for getting you to the deck but not for the winching itself. Auto-hover is a great aid during winching but it is normally over-ridden and flown manually. Add a second pilot, IFR, NVG, auto-hover and LOTS of training and you are getting close.

It seems it came as a surprise to them when they hit the water. Fortunately it floated for a period which assisted their extraction from the cabin. So that probably discounts a mechanical problem with the helicopter.

Does the BK have immersion switches for automatically popping the floats on water contact?

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12224813

The Pilot is still in hospital but due out soon once his 2 black eyes have opened. The rear crew are fine...ish:ouch:

On a side note, this is a team effort so monitoring the pilot at the critical approach phase is paramount

I should think so, but I don't know so. I don't think the rules allow operation of a M/E helicopter over water more than 100nm from shore, right?

You seem to be stirring the pot.

You know the answers to all your questions I suspect....

As usual the industry is quick to stick the knife in.

Glad they are all safe at home to tell the story. They are still building Helicopters!

I wasn't being critical of the crew who were no doubt trying to do their very best for the injured fisherman and I am very glad to hear that they are all safe and well. It is easy to pick a plan and actions to bits from the comfort of an armchair. But having experience of both single pilot SAR ops in a BK and multi-crew ops in something larger and better equipped I know which is preferable. You have to have been over the back of a pitching deck on a dark and stormy night to understand - or even making an approch to land over water. At least lessons have been learned and all survived.

Budget the Little Helicopter - a story
 

Fishing Vessel "Southern Ocean Rape" - "Hi helicopter company we have a minor injury to a crewman, can you come and get them so that we can carry on clearing the ocean of these troublesome fush - we don't want to call the Rescue Coordination Centre because of the paperwork and Worksafe investigation"
Helicopter company - "no problem - but we are all flying BKs in NZ now because of the new ambulance contract so you will have to pay double for that - but don't worry its a BK so we don't need top cover so it will work out about the same cost as two Squirrels"
Fishing vessel - "sweet as"
Pilot - "hey we have a new BK - according to the flight manual fuel consumption figures we should be just OK to get there - but lets sling a few jerrys in the back in case we have to land short"
Crewman - "sweet as"
A few hours later..........
Pilot - bit more of a "headwind than I thought"
Paramedic - "its gone awfully quiet in the back"
Splash
All - "good job aircraft with empty fuel tanks float for a bit"

Your astute observations lead me to suspect you might be barbados sky in disguise as somebody else.

wot? 2 engines and no fuel? really?
see Cultha thread and Category A Takeoff thread

I would find that difficult to believe. Twin engine helicopters don't usually do fuel exhaustion simultaneously on both engines. Normally one engine will run out of fuel a few minutes before the other one. In which case, when the first engine went quiet a radio call would go out pronto. Not-withstanding a radio call should have already gone out when it was realized the required fuel to destination was more than the actual fuel on-board. There was no such radio call in this instance, as far as we know.

And if you really screw up your fuel planning and don't have enough fuel to get to your destination, and you're over hostile terrain, I should think the M/E pilot would choose to shut down one engine and leave all the fuel for the other engine to maximize range and get you as close as possible to a suitable landing site.

Are you going to bring this cr8p to every thread?

Anfi has a valid point. If there was a single engined variant of a BK117 then presumably it would likely have better endurance...

AnFI,

Running out of fuel can happen to singles as well. Probably 1000's of forced landings/crashes over the years due to it, but maybe not as spectacular as In 2003 there was a very similar thing happening in the south Atlantic. That involved a single engine that also almost made it to destination, even flown by an gods-gift-to-aviation superduper-pilot, that since have had another very interesting thread on this forum also involving a single engine in the water. Although I know what brought down the last one, lets not cloud the story with facts.... just to follow your way of discussing.

Why don't you just create your own single vs twin thread or better yet, reply to one of the still current threads that is open on the topic?!

https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/26...ht=single+twin

https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/43...gle-isn-t.html


Chop,

You'd be delighted to know, that your wish for a single engine version of the BK117 is slowly but surely on the way, but with a different name and made in Switzerland... Was supposed to kill off the AS350/H125, highly unlikely to happen anytime soon unless Jesus himself intervenes and does some magic to the b.e.w. But it will sure as hell have longer legs than the BK without aux-tanks, but then again, the R44 on the way to the Antarctic was claimed to have had an engine FAILURE and not run out of gas (although there was no record of a proper aux-tank fitted for the flight and the distance is quite much more than the 44's range), so then the extra fuel is just extra weight and will make the rests burn a little bit longer unless you ditch...

Chopjockwould it have the same MAUM, payload and speed or are you forgetting those bits?

Ah, some editing to preserve anonymity after a complaint I presume:)

Gulli.....please to recall the Wessex (two engined version) routinely cruised on one engine with other one shutdown....as a normal procedure.

That completely corrupts AnFi's thesis about un-needed weight and complexity.

When done that way it was a Twin Engined helicopter flown as a single......or perhaps a Single engine helicopter flown as a Twin depending upon how you wish to look at it.

The entire EMS industry may not be keen to see you ask that question, rottenjohn. (Granted, there are a few parts of the world where heliborne EMS is a godsend ... got a friend in Washington State whose second career was in that line of work)
Glad they all walked away from this one. (Or swam away?)

Yeah, it would be interesting to know the reason for accepting such risk!