Hey Gomer Pylot, I'm surprised to hear you don't have any EMS Helicopters in the US! is that just in your State or the whole of the US? Where I'm based in Europe we have a first response unit on board and the first priority is to be on scene asap, often before ground units. Transfer to the hospital is of secondary importance (generally) as we are fully equipped to stabilize the patient (in most cases) unless surgery is urgently required. As there is no VFR night flying where I am it is not unknown to drop the medic team at the accident and return the Helicopter to Base empty before sunset, again, the emphasis is to put the team on the ground as first priority and they take ground transport to a Hospital. The reason for my initial question is that we have recently received comments from the client that we were not complying with the original contract of being airborne within six minutes for Primary calls, I think its the time of year for contract renewal and probably our competitors are offering to guarantee shorter launch times. I suppose it depends very much on the Heli type as regards to what is a safe launch time, in one regards I am lucky (pampered?) that we have a licensed (generally) engineer to see me safely off, but on the other hand to start up and lift a medium Bell within six minutes leaves no time for by the book system checks and god help me if I'm sitting on the can when they call..

Cheers

Laws and philosophies are different in Europe and the US. There are very few EMS helicopter operations run by any government entities. Almost all are private companies, run for profit. Local governments operate ground EMS agencies, and not much more. Many ground ambulances are also privately owned and operated, some by hospitals, some by separate ambulance companies. Ambulances operated by private companies can't just go to a scene uninvited, whether they're ground or air ambulances. The EMS agency which controls the area has to call for them.

Whether this is right or wrong, I won't even try to say. It's just the way it evolved.

Cloud hangs over helicopter service - CHC Australia Shortage
 

Cloud hangs over helicopter service - Local News - News - General - Central Western Daily

But there are problems in other parts of the world adter acciddents

There are more accidents in the US at least in part because there are more helicopters. There are hundreds, if not a thousand, EMS helicopters flying regularly in the US. With that much area, and that many helicopters, there will be accidents, even if the rate is equal to or less than that elsewhere. I have no data on the accident rates around the world, but jumping to conclusions based solely on numbers of accidents is flawed. The only way to prevent all accidents is to prevent all flying. Yes, we need to reduce the numbers, but through an informed debate, not through knee-jerk reaction.

80000 HEMS missions for patients in Germany (1999 - 2004)

24 helicopter crashes (22 during the day, 2 at night)

3 crashes - fatal
2 crashes - nonfatal injuries
7 persons killed
4 injured severely
4 injured slightly

54% of all crashes were reported during approach and landing
17% of the crashes ocurred during ground run
29% during the remaining flight phases.

I have no data regarding HEMS in my country, but in 11 years, regarding 2 helicopters in 24h operation, there has never been any crash.

What I would really like to know is if other countries have a contract requirement to be airborne in a certain time. If we are not airborne within six minutes we have to write a report to justify the reason, and every month the client (local government in this case) calculates a percentage of launch times and compares them to other bases. Just to clarify, we get 0 pressure from the medics, we are on the same team and they receive the same pressure from the client as do the flight crew

Stillnoeydear, is that 20 minutes for Primary flights? seems a very long time... or do you not have the team on site like some operations where I am?

Here in germany the guideline for HEMS primary missions are 2 min from call to T/O. But no consequences if circumstances ( p. e. weather ) resulting in longer times.

http://www.inm-online.de/pdf/forschu...oegerungen.pdf

(only summary in english )

skadi

Skadi, you're kidding right? you would have to be strapped in the seat for the whole shift with your finger on the start button to be airborne in two minutes?

Portuguese HEMS has 15' from call to T/O .

TS, im not kidding. In the mentioned report ( About a HEMS base in Munich with a BK 117 ), the average time was about 3 minutes. 95% below 5 minutes. Since most HEMS Bases in Germany now uses EC 135, the average time all over the country will be shorter then.

skadi

I can only confirm what Skadi is saying, becouse I have seen it with my own eyes. (Ok, 3 min is maybe more realistic than 2, but now we are into details a bit too much, I suppose...)
Again, it works only with specific organisation, equipment, and under certain conditions. You cannot reach those times with helicopter, powered by one or even two Allisons 250 C20..... Modern helicopters have FADEC controlled engines, and quick start is allowed ( EC-135, A-109 Power) where you can flip BOTH engine switches to FLIGHT SIMULTANEOUSLY and FADEC will take care of starting sequence (and count appropriate penalty on engine cycles for abusive starting)
I believe that putting required take off time in HEMS contract or even offer it to gain contract over competitors is a dangerous way to go - but this is reality, if contractor (mostly governmental departments here in Europe) allows ruthless competition among HEMS providers. Unfortunatelly, those who are writing tender specifications, are often not enlightened enough aviationvise to understand, what they are doing with such requirements.

Stay safe!

Thanks for all the great reply's. I have to admit that I have to crank up two PT6's and have never experienced a FADEC start up so can understand the differences in time to takeoff. The problem where I am is that we are the only none FADEC ship in our area of control so probably a little unfair comparison, but at the end of the day that is a problem for my company bosses, not the pilots.
Cheers

And what's to prevent you calling 'airborne' to dispatch at the 5 minute mark, even if you're not quite there?

The same thing that prevents me from flying in weather below minimums, fudging on my logbook, and other miscellaneous dodgy stuff - my personal pride and integrity.

No Hero
 

Hello

I see many times we are activated 30 to 45 minutes after accident happens, taking off in 3 minutes is possible but useless, we have a 10 minute regulation and you have time to do every check.
They way to save time is on the 112 coordination center side who usually have no idea about helicopter operations.

Ya know, this whole bit about launch times is a bit dodgy! As soon as there is an accident attributed to rushing our company comes out and tells everyone Safety First, launch times later. Then a bit later comes a review of launch times and they teeter the other way, and on and on it goes.

The thing I REALLY don't like about all this rush rush launch launch like a fire engine bolting from the stable is when a competitor decides they're going to misrepresent their launch time history, and that of their competitors, to the point where they actually publish these pseudo claims in newspapers to serve their end of gaining first due status from townships. Or, by also going to town hell, ooops, hall, meetings to make their case, unopposed by those they accuse of slow times, etc., etc., etc. That is about as low as it goes in my book and one way we work against one another. The ramifications of such behavior can get really awkward, and can take awhile to sort out.

Just making a point about some things that go on behind the scenes in case a few never thought such things happen.

Tuna, back when I was flying EMS in the 412 our lift-off times were better than with the following FADEC equipped 430.

That was for a standard VFR departure, with IFR clearances involved it became a washout.

An interesting discussion!

We fly SPIFR on SAR / EMS tasks. Our management discourages trying to meet real or percieved response targets, certainly at the expense of thorough pre-planning. In fact, at night we are not to get airborne in less than 20 min' following a wake-up call due to the effects of "sleep inertia".

This is one of the advantages of being a Government operated entity as we don't have the "provider / client" relationship that NGO's are faced with.

Cat

When I flew in Czech we usually were airbourne within 4-5 minutes of recieving a call (first responese EMS though)
As said by others, helicopter a few steps from crew room, aircraft checked and configured for start, starting off GPU (no delay on second engine start - B427) etc.
No one running, just practiced and efficient.

Night was a different story, inter-hospitals only, so about 15 mins to be ready, check weather, phone towers on the route for real time weather, then confirming the flight can go ahead.

Scattercat,

I heard that the 20 minute rule by night has nothing to do with "sleep inertia" more so that's the extra time for you to get up, take the call, then put some clothes on so the rest of your crew don't have to see you butt naked:ok:

Hmmm .... & I thought what happens on shift, stays on shift!:confused:

Whatever gave you that idea? What happens on shift gets spread far and wide. At least that's my experience.

Uh Oh....sounds like this thread is drifting around to a discussion on Flight Nurses!:E

That's a relief - I thought for a mo' they were talking about the after-effects of this pilot's attempts at cooking.

It matters not at all whether it's about nurses, cooking, or anything else, nor whether it happens in EMS or offshore. If it happens, everyone with a telephone knows all about it within about 3 minutes. Everyone else finds out as soon as they're seen face to face. There are no secrets, and that's no secret. :}

So the average rumour response time would be around 3 minutes then... ;)

Give or take a few seconds... :rolleyes:

From the "NTSB Hearing on Most Wanted: Improve the Safety of EMS Flights" thread

:)

Any chance this way of thinking will make it over the pond?

Tuna:
Over the pond? It will never see the light of day on this side of the pond!!.Reason?the guys who sign the checks get to make the rules. As of now, the guys in US HEMS signing the checks are fresh from running ground ambulance services, fire stations and the like.
Alt3.

Hi Alt3, don't the FAA make the rules? or would it be too difficult for them to impose such a rule on an operation?
TS

TS -

As UK HEMS is charity run (= not paid on results), not included in ORCON time statistics and will (theoretically) always be sent as a back-up to ground forces, response time isn't the be-all and end-all.

In my pond we go when we are all ready, and not before. At least then we don't arrive in the wrong place with half the kit missing and with my shirttails hanging out of my pants.

FF

It would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce such a rule. There are 'official' rules, and 'unofficial' rules, and they aren't necessarily the same. Companies may follow the official rules officially, but in reality follow different ones. I haven't personally seen any hard liftoff times, but there are 'target' times. I lift off when I'm ready to lift off, and the company can accept it or not. I've had lift times of less than a minute, and I've had lift times of 10 minutes. It depends on the situation. To get a minute lift time, you have to be listening to the scanner and anticipate the call. A call for a long-distance transfer in the middle of the night with marginal weather will take much, much longer than one in the daytime with completely clear weather when I've been listening to the local EMS service and know that a serious wreck has occurred and we're likely to be called.