Both Winnerhofer and Jim59 raised use of Fenestron or tail rotor guards. Those thoughts also came to mind when I read about this sad incident. Various helicopter manufacturers have certainly been conscious of the risks related to injury from the tail rotor, and it didn't take any regulations for them to factor this into their designs. Given the Gazelle was the first helicopter to feature the Fenestron, I read on Wikipedia what it said about this feature: "The fenestron, while requiring a small increase in power at slow speeds, has advantages such as being considerably less vulnerable to damage, safer for people working around the helicopter and with low power requirements at cruising speeds, and has been described as "far more suitable for high-speed flight"...". Of course mounting the tail rotor high on a vertical stabilizer such as on the MBB Bo 105 and BK 117 are other options that have been adopted, especially considering their rear loading clamshell doors. NOTAR had also already been mentioned as another way of preventing injury. Again, Wikipedia entry for NOTAR mentions benefits of "increased safety (the tail rotor being vulnerable), and greatly reduced external noise". Then there are also coaxial and tandem rotor helicopters which also dispense with the need for a tail rotor. I wonder whether there would be any rational way of comparing ground accident/injury statistics for helicopters were there is no tail rotor within reach against types where there is such a risk?

Maybe the awful truth is.....unless the PAX is a trained member of the crew (Pilot, Engineer or TCM), passengers should only ever be loaded and unloaded with the rotors stationary. Why do we insist on taking this risk. Surely it cannot be the start cycles argument!!

I exclude the HOFO Operation where the helicopters are bigger and the pax are trained, briefed and still escorted by the Deck Crew.

Something else that comes to mind is a bright short duration strobe (flash), the frequency of the flash is governed so the rotor blades are visible to the naked eye. Stroboscopic lights are used in industry to capture fast movements of machinery.
This is similar to the familiar effect of a high shutter speed and a motion picture frame rate of 25, 30, 50 or 60 frames per second which freezes the motion of each rotor, so it can appear stationary or rotating slowly. The same visual effect is observed by the naked eye when a short duration flash illuminates a spinning disc.
https://youtu.be/AYQAKwCxScc

The tech to do this is not extraordinary for night operations. Daylight operations would require quite a high output flash. A compact flash as used in still photography can't dissipate heat and will melt.
Another option would be a laser hitting a mirror like surface or finish on the blade.
https://youtu.be/83XPg9K8FI8

Mjb

At least that isn't a dynamic component. Might be a good way to raise awareness/alertness.
As an aside, are you aware that strobe lights and other flashing can trigger epileptic seizures? Wait for the first law suit. :p
I remember getting tested for a thing they called "flicker vertigo" when I was going through flight training.

I'm assuming you've never operated on a helipad at night and/or bad weather Mjb. Any flashing light is quite extraordinarily disorientating, and as for making the tail rotor appear to be stationary .......

Seriously, the only people who should be unsupervised anywhere near a live helicopter are:

1. trained aircrew/groundcrew/ops personnel who know what areas are safe, and what areas are dangerous. These personnel know exactly where the hazards are, and don't go anywhere near them.
2. trained passengers (eg airborne troops) who know that the entire helicopter is dangerous, except for the safe route they have been taught to/from the entry door.

Everyone else; supervision.

I’m not sure how making the tail rotor appear to be stationary, or slow moving, will help things!

The Chinook would do that for you....especially in the late afternoon with the Sun shining down through the forward rotor blades and being reflected off of the glass of the Attitude Indicator which acted like a mirror.

If I have. my math right....230 RPM, three blades, yields an 11.5 Hz frequency of flashes.....which is about the middle of the frequency range of 1-20 Hz.

I never got a full case of Vertigo...but it did produce an uncomfortable sensation.

Making a Tail Rotor to appear stationary would only make the situation worse....much worse.

Glad it wasn’t just me!

I'm intrigued that in an industry so focused upon safety, with so many people blaming the victim, nobody has mentioned the familiar hierarchy of controls.
Paraphrasing, these amount to:
Remove the hazard entirely (eg: use a hot air balloon!)
Substitute a lesser habit (eg: a fenestron)
Isolate the hazard from the people (eg: build a fence)
Train the people to avoid the hazard (brief the passengers!)
Provide PPE (Personal Protective Equipment; give the passengers tail rotor proof hard hats)

He's only a "victim" of his own actions.

Why the accident happened is beyond our ken at the moment, accidents happen and in a just culture you don't "blame" the individuals involved, but seek to ascertain the cause and put defenses in place. Then again, folk need to comply with procedures. The wealthy can be an issue, they get rich because they are risk takers, often have a sense of entitlement, and adverse to taking instruction. A young pilot can be overly deferential as well to his customers and not exercise adequate "command", that also applies to ground staff. It's a bugger being human.

OH&S is for wimps eh?

There is only so far you can go, at some point an individual has to take some responsibility for their own actions.
The desire for the herd to thin the pack is a bit too strong even for OH&S to save the day with absolute certainty.

Out of all fatalities, how many are related to rotor strikes? Let's not lose all sense of perspective.
The helicopter is not about to be redesigned, nor should it, for a statistical corner case, where most of the time existing common-sense procedures tend to save the day.
There are areas of far greater importance to safety.
Every activity has risk, and compared to a tail strike, crossing the road is by far more dangerous and demanding for any individual.

Unless you were there, you don't know that. Give it a rest.

Did anyone see the father of the victims friend on GMTV this morning? He was on to dispel on behalf of the family what appeared to be falsely negative stories circulated (and subsequently retracted) by the Greek authorities/journalists. The initial reports that the lad was taking selfies and had returned from the lounge to do so appear to be false. Any claim that he was doing anything irresponsible at all is contradictory to what the chap on TV was saying. From the first hand account of his son, who followed the victim out of the aircraft, he simply went the wrong direction and into the rotor.

It happens despite briefings, training and best intentions.

https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/Accide...eyword_list=on

As far as I can make out the aircraft was parked on the pad immediately above the word "Superior" and facing the lounge, why would he walk to the tail is the question?


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....420262a9c5.png

So then, he's still a "victim" of HIS own actions. **** happens, that's why they call them "accidents".

People who are not aircrew, (or any other profession where detailed instructions are given and need to be understood), do not necessarily listen properly or understand clearly to what is being said. Witness any safety briefing on any passenger aircraft in the World !!

Also, if a pilot says walk forwards, left, right, towards that door, or whatever, people still do not necessarily understand what they are being told to do, and their understanding of a given direction might be incorrect.

Even then, when taking off the headset and exiting a helicopter whose engines are still running or winding down, there is such a huge onslaught of very loud noise to the senses, that one can easily become disorientated, and/or just want to run away from the noise.

I remember a passenger, wearing a headset in a Coastguard helicopter, (that was being used for a television thing), being briefed by the winch-man over the intercom as the helicopter was en route. After a few moments, the passenger said "sorry, who is talking to me?" when the winch-man was standing directly in front of the passenger. Because of the noise of the open helicopter door, the winch-man's microphone was very overloaded and distorted.

When I lived in Escondido, I would often see women with small children (and even babies in strollers) crossing in the middle of the very wide (and very busy street) instead of using the crosswalk at the light less than fifty yards away.

People are gonna do what they're gonna do.