PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rotorheads (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads-23/)
-   -   August 2019 AAIB Bulletin (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/624402-august-2019-aaib-bulletin.html)

212man 8th Aug 2019 13:42

August 2019 AAIB Bulletin
 
https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib...cureuil-g-plmh

https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib...-as-350-vp-cih

https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib...y-s-92a-g-ckxl


industry insider 8th Aug 2019 13:58

On the WDL, 7.6nm EBRA to BRAB vs 13.5nm EBRA to BRAA, didn’t the sector time seem a little short?

212man 8th Aug 2019 14:28


Originally Posted by industry insider (Post 10540126)
On the WDL, 7.6nm EBRA to BRAB vs 13.5nm EBRA to BRAA, didn’t the sector time seem a little short?

My thoughts too!

finalchecksplease 8th Aug 2019 22:08

Bet he / she was busier than the proverbial one-armed paper hanger doing this shuttle as a LTC with a newbie, also having had the intervention on the previous deck his / her mind might have been focused on the approach and lost sight of big picture.

industry insider 8th Aug 2019 23:53


Bet he / she was busier than the proverbial one-armed paper hanger doing this shuttle as a LTC with a newbie, also having had the intervention on the previous deck his / her mind might have been focused on the approach and lost sight of big picture.
3 stops is not really a shuttle. Hard not to recognise the BRAA, always stands out with the 2 derricks. Don’t they carry EFBs with plates?

HeliComparator 9th Aug 2019 08:02

I think it is ridiculous to tie up the AAIB resources on such a trivial thing. Landing somewhere isn’t an accident, and only an incident if you are the oil company lobby looking to moan about something. It is a shame the AAIB didn’t consider what the actual risk of a WDL was. There have been loads, and never has there been an actual safety issue. So it is all just a bit too hysterical.

OvertHawk 9th Aug 2019 08:41


Originally Posted by HeliComparator (Post 10540652)
I think it is ridiculous to tie up the AAIB resources on such a trivial thing. Landing somewhere isn’t an accident, and only an incident if you are the oil company lobby looking to moan about something. It is a shame the AAIB didn’t consider what the actual risk of a WDL was. There have been loads, and never has there been an actual safety issue. So it is all just a bit too hysterical.

Please don't confuse "never has there been an actual safety issue" with "never has there been an accident".

Landing on the wrong deck is a huge safety issue for a lot of reasons. That it has not yet led to a FOD event, Crane strike, Mid-air or any one of the other possible hazards is nothing more than good fortune.

"there have been loads" - Oh - that's all right then - must be fine if it happens all the time!

HeliComparator 9th Aug 2019 11:41


Originally Posted by OvertHawk (Post 10540682)
Please don't confuse "never has there been an actual safety issue" with "never has there been an accident".

Landing on the wrong deck is a huge safety issue for a lot of reasons. That it has not yet led to a FOD event, Crane strike, Mid-air or any one of the other possible hazards is nothing more than good fortune.

"there have been loads" - Oh - that's all right then - must be fine if it happens all the time!

But you don’t have any supporting evidence for your scaremongering. Where is the risk analysis? If WDLs were a significant safety issue then oil companies would have taken proactive steps such as installing red and green “traffic lights” on helidecks, making their names easier to read and less cryptic. But they didn’t bother because actually, it isn’t a big deal. Human pilots will always make mistakes given enough exposure. Giving them a hard time and using the taxpayer funded and overstretched resources of the AAIB to pressure them doesn’t help to reduce the probability of a recurrence because no-one does it deliberately. WDL have always happened and will continue to happen so long as all blame and responsibility is dumped on the pilots. Fact of life, get over it.

roundwego 9th Aug 2019 15:54

Well said HC.

ShyTorque 9th Aug 2019 16:11

I once landed in the correct place, but a month early. Not my fault, someone in the tasking cell thought that the seventh month was June, rather than July. No-one died.

OvertHawk 9th Aug 2019 21:36


Originally Posted by HeliComparator (Post 10540834)


But you don’t have any supporting evidence for your scaremongering. Where is the risk analysis? If WDLs were a significant safety issue then oil companies would have taken proactive steps such as installing red and green “traffic lights” on helidecks, making their names easier to read and less cryptic. But they didn’t bother because actually, it isn’t a big deal. Human pilots will always make mistakes given enough exposure. Giving them a hard time and using the taxpayer funded and overstretched resources of the AAIB to pressure them doesn’t help to reduce the probability of a recurrence because no-one does it deliberately. WDL have always happened and will continue to happen so long as all blame and responsibility is dumped on the pilots. Fact of life, get over it.

Fair enough then.

My mistake

Carry on!

industry insider 10th Aug 2019 00:04

Nice to see you back HC.

Of course, this can easily be explained. It’s actually the oil company’s fault for using the old fashioned S-92 without the built in WDL warning.

Had the oil company selected 225 for this contract with its superior built in WDL envelope protection, this kind of thing wouldn’t happen and the pilots could be absolved of any need to identify the destination.


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:12.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.