Another nutter...
 

check out this link
http://www.independent.ie/national-n...d-1371901.html

Car park landing puts pilot on shaky ground
 

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...d-1371901.html
http://www.independent.ie/multimedia...lo_181512t.jpg
By Grainne Cunningham
Saturday May 10 2008
Grainne Cunningham

IT WOULD never happen in the movies... just as the helicopter pilot attempts to bring his craft into land, out rushes a car park attendant, frantically trying to wave him away.

But that's what happened in the central shopping area of Athlone Town when a gung-ho pilot decided to take an unorthodox route to collect his newly cut keys and landed on the roof of an adjacent multi-storey car park on July 8, 2007.

The 48-year-old pilot has been criticised for "poor airmanship" and for having broken Irish air law.

The attendant injured his hand when the downwash from the helicopter's main rotor caused a door to slam against it and the single-engine craft should not have been put down in a congested area because of the danger of engine failure, the pilot was told.

Review

The Irish Aviation Authority said last night that it was reviewing the incident and the pilot may face sanction in the future. However, he has not faced any repercussions for his actions to date.

"In landing at such a site the pilot displayed poor airmanship," concluded air accident investigator Paddy Judge in his report. Despite repeated requests, both by phone and letter, the pilot did not complete and return an air accident report on the incident.

The Air Accident Investigation Report says the pilot, who was accompanied by his brother in the single-engine Hughes 369HS helicopter, was getting some keys cut for the door of his aircraft at the Texas Department Store.

"He landed on the roof of the adjacent multi-storey car park. It is unclear to the investigation where the helicopter could have been safely force-landed in the event of an engine failure during landing or take-off.

"It is also probable that the approach was made over the unstressed roof of the shopping centre due to the location of the church to the north of the landing site," the report said.

"The shopping centre was open for business at the time, and for obvious safety reasons, the area should have been completely avoided."

Mr Judge described the landing site as being in a congested area and "furthermore, and importantly, it is an elevated site where Rescue and Fire Fighting Services are mandatory. Neither was available".

The report says the pilot's US licence was issued in March 2007, just four months before the incident.

"The pilot stated that he has about 150 hours helicopter flying experience, but was unable to supply a logbook, which he stated was lost in a subsequent accident."

In evidence, the car park attendant said that as the helicopter approached for landing he attempted to wave it away.

"The helicopter pilot ignored him and he had to duck into the doorway... as space on the roof is restricted. The downwash from the main rotor caused the door to slam back against him hitting his hand."

Words were exchanged between the attendant and the pilot after the landing.

The gardai were called, but by the time they arrived the helicopter had left.

The attendant said the helicopter had landed on the roof some months previously and his supervisor told him afterwards that this was not allowed

The pilot said he had landed there before accompanied by the owner of the shopping centre who had given him permission to land on the car park roof.

That day, he rang the duty manager of the shopping centre before taking off to confirm that he had permission to land. He was unaware that the duty manager no longer had authority to grant him permission to land.

The pilot said the car park attendant was not on the roof while he was landing and only approached the helicopter on engine shutdown.

He said that the attendant could not have given signals, as he was not present until after landing.

- Grainne Cunningham

Another nutter...
 

http://www.aaiu.ie/AAIUviewitem.asp?...g=ENG&loc=1652

I note he hasn't responded to requests to complete the paperwork & "lost" his logbook?.

These cowboys get the regulars a bad name. :sad:

Agreed.

Flagrant, irresponsible behaviour. As a reprimand the best that the IAA could throw at the individual was ' poor airmanship' !!
Surely gross misconduct & reckless behaviour deserve a stiffer sentence.
Time to weed out the chaff.

"Paddy Judge", sounds fishy to me....

Absolutely hilarious, love it. I especially like the bit of the report that states the pilot was breaking irish air law followed by no recommendation...excellent. If it wasn't for bandits flying around the place there would be no craic anymore.:E

"he then took refuge behind a door where he was injured by the helicopters main rotor downwash."

Poor guy, pounded mercilessly by the wind.....

I hope he bought a parking ticket.

"!!!!!" it's just like the wild west out there.

SB

wiki wiki wild wild west
 

wish I could've banged around in a 500 with 150 hours not worrying if roofs could support me!

Heard the week before he got caught on the roof of a statoil getting the jumbo breakfast roll in! ('ah 2 egg 2 sausage 2 rasher 2 bacon 2 puddin 1 black 1 whiiiite....'!) :}

Must be kind of risky parking your car on that untested roof too I guess!!

A Dublin cabbie once told me in Ireland if you fail your driving test you get a 'Certificate of Incompetance' but you can still continue, unsupervised, to teach yourself to drive!

Brilliant. Good job the pilot wasn't flying a twin onto the carpark - the downwash may have caused further distress to the attendant.

Since when did the number of engines influence the downwash?

Since when did f***ing up the people and property on the landing site become a source of amusement? Or is that amusement only for the pilot/owners? :ugh:

What can the IAA do against an FAA pilot?
 

What exactly are the powers of the Irish Aviation Authority to take action against an F.A.A. licensed pilot, private or commercial? Their response may seem farcical but perhaps their hands are tied by a lack of proper legislation. I am a PPL with IAA and FAA licences so I'm not pushing the anti-pilot or anti-flying agenda here. But reckless stuff like this and the AS350 Nutter need to be properly dealt with. These two appear to be lacking a little in the common-sense department and for their own good, and those in their immediate vicinity, perhaps they would be better off not holding licences. They make the heli industry look like a bunch of cowboys when the opposite is the case for the vast majority of pilots here in Ireland and elsewhere. If any of us endangered life by driving a car recklessly, we could expect a call from the police. Should the same not be the case for ropey flying as well?

500 Fan.

Ahhh, the chorus of the self-righteous...

All regulations aside, if this pilot was my student I would say job well done. He picked a flat, unobstructed surface, no significant obstacles, no loose debris, elevated so therefore good approaches. No persons or cars on the large open car park area, so no risk or hazard to the public. He is flying a light 2500lb helicopter on skids so lots of HOGE performance margin. For that weight a car park is more than structurally sound - you guys should try a log-truss pad in PNG, or 6 feet of fresh show, with maybe an ice crust layer two feet down.

He'd landed at that location before, and this time again contacted the authority he thought was required and that had previously given approval. Hardly irresponsible.

The authority in Ireland did right to scratch their heads and come up blank for a regulatory infraction. If it had gone to tribunal the pilot could have made them all look foolish.

I've heard of helicopter pilots that have only ever landed on airport runways or large designated helipads. I guess this forum is full of them.

Absolutely amazing. A lot of negative comments from a lot of people who should perhaps hand their licences back and get fixed-wing ones instead. This kind of thing is what helicopters are designed for. I hope more people follow suit. Too bad the pillock let himself down with the 'lost' logbook.

Just curious, according to the media report, why the AAIU Investigator is apportioning blame to the pilot for this incident. Is that not the remit of the other agency known as the IAA???
The AAIU website states catagorically that it's job is to find the facts and circumstances, but not apportion blame for the incident/accident!!! Seems like the spokesperson of the AAIU is unsure if he is discussing apples or oranges......:ugh: Not defending the actions of the pilot, rather, lets get our own guns loaded before sending rounds down range at the target!!!!:cool:

Mister Bonkers......A London Cabbie once told me that the reason there were so many Irish in the UK was to put the 'Great' back into Britain!!! You shouldn't believe everything you're told! Particularly about downwash from multi engined heli's..........:cool: You have an aptly named callsign!!!!:D

Er, yes, like me. It kind of seems sensible given my limited experience and I guess the same applies to the many others like me on the forum who come here to learn, not to be heroes. Pardon us for being inexperienced :rolleyes:

This whole thread seems a little silly - someone landed a helicopter, by the looks of it quite safely - and someone hurt his hand because he couldn't operate a door in windy conditions and had to have his mummy kiss it better... It seems to me that there are two types of rotorhead - the pilot type who thinks that this type of thing is perfectly normal and dare I say it a bit cool (and bugger what the neighbours think about the noise) - and theres the spotter type who like to talk about G-FART and which company which airframe worked for and when - and how we neeed to do something about these cowboys who fly at 490' and give us all a bad name.

But perhaps thats just me exhibiting a hazardous macho attitude?

Rudestuff,
I think you are off the mark, granted there are a few who do not see the seriousness of this report or may not view the reason for such a report. Helipolarbear made a very important point:

The IAA can not come out with a statement on one person flying antics, but in my opinion are using the AAIU as a tool to issue a public report into the incident as some one suffered an injury, be it very small, it is still an injury, caused by the operation of an aircraft.

Lipgo:
We have to assume the IAA and AAIU work in conjunction, and are trying to find ways around there legal bindings. The IAA recently published adverts in national news papers telling the public why it is illegal to fly in an aircraft with out an AOC. Might there be a clamp-down on illegal AOC operations?

Now, lets just think out of the box for a minute, might it be that the IAA intend to take people to court? Might it be that they are looking for a very public case to bring to the attention of other pilots, that are not acting within Irish Air Law, that they will be prosecuted?

This incident has good evidence, a photo of the helicopter on a roof top car park. Very difficult to argue against that point......
Do we all have our AOC stickers?? Do we all have our Aerial works Permits and manuals? If you don't, the next report may be about you.....

On a side note, where do the insurance companies stand on not complying with airspace law?

I come late to this argument.

It sounds like a case of mis-communication more than anything else.

The real question you lot should be discussing is why fire and rescue services have to be provided for landing a helicopter.

If one were to take off from an airport that was closed after normal business hours.....would you argue the operation was unsafe because there were no fire/rescue services available?

A second question would be why there are not more roof top heliports available for use in urban areas.

Why is it places like Los Angeles can have hundreds of roof top heliports and the UK/Ireland have none?

The third question that begs discussing is why anyone would call this a "nutter", describe him as having performed "poor airmanship" and immediately hang him from the town gate.

What is it that this fellow did that is so out of the norm that he belongs in the "near lunatic category"?

The concept single engine helicopters cannot operate safely over "congested" areas and only multi-engine aircraft can is yet another question to be argued.

Perhaps we should have Nick remind us of the engine failure rates for singles and explain the inherent risks to operating a "Twin" outside full CAT A performance standards?

The final question that needs to answered, as one of my friends suggested over a lovely curry in Horley, is why Brits seem to pounce on others and tear at them like dogs at a rag, when things like this occur? He wondered whether it was unique to the British as he had not seen such events amongst the Americans, Canadians, or the Australians.

As mentioned previously, the main risk to this landing is engine failure. If the engine keeps going, and you don't catch a skid on that railing, then the landing and take-off presents 'little' risk to the aircraft or people on the ground. If the engine decides to quit at the wrong time then things are going to turn nasty. Its a question of whether you simply want to take the (relatively small) risk. It would be interesting to know what the statistics say in relation to engine failure in the 250-C20 series engine per 100,000 flight hours. Other than that, it can be argued that the landing was a well-executed one.

Perhaps the comparison between this 500 pilot and AS350 Nutter is a little harsh.

As I read the following, this does not make any remark to 'one off' landings but only to permanent heliports. I do recall that the Radison in Galway was classed as an elevated heliport durring the races, but the Abbeyglen is not, nore would the top tee box in the Glenlo Abbey? Are these are elevated and congested? :confused:

Extracts from OAM 08/00
2. DEFINITIONS

These definitions are taken from ICAO (Annex 14 Volume 2, Chapter 6) and refer
to ‘helicopter overall length’ being the helicopter length, including the tail boom and
the rotors. At surface level heliport sites, the corresponding levels of RFFS should
be used for the H2 RFFS STANDARDS (see Section 3 below) or H1 RFFS
STANDARD (see Section 4 below) as appropriate and these correspond to the
standards which meet the Authority’s requirements for the levels of RFFS at
permanent and temporary licensed surface level heliports. An operator is
encouraged to adopt these H1 or H2 standard levels whenever a safety case cannot
be made for employing the lower levels described in Sections 5 and 6 below. At
elevated heliports the level of extinguishing agents described in Section 7 are to be
regarded as the absolute minimum.

a) Helicopter Category H1: A helicopter with an overall length up to but not including 15
metres.
b) Helicopter Category H2: A helicopter with an overall length of 15 metres up to but not
including 24 metres.
c) There are currently no Category H3 helicopters on the Irish register.
d) Elevated Heliport: A heliport located on a raised structure on land.

2. International Standards and Recommended Practices

2.1. The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is the organisation
responsible, inter alia, for compiling and disseminating information concerning
internationally agreed helicopter Operating Standards and Recommended Practices
(SARPS). ICAO Contracting States are required to notify ICAO of any differences
between their national regulations and practices and ICAO SARPS. ICAO has been
notified that there are no differences in Irish regulations, relating to for ground level
or elevated heliports, from the SARPS in ICAO Annex 14, Volume 2 (Heliports) and
its associated Heliport Manual (Doc 9261- AN/903).
4. Elevated Heliports

4.1. By virtue of the siting of the vast majority of elevated heliports within congested
areas with the associated perceived risk to the heliport building, third parties and to
nearby structures, only helicopters with Performance Class 1 capability are
permitted to land at or take-off from elevated heliports. The helicopter type,
intended to be used, must possess a Flight Manual performance profile
demonstrating that, in the event of engine failure occurring at any time during the
take-off or landing manoeuvres, the helicopter can safely land back on to the
elevated heliport or safely fly away, avoiding all obstacles by a vertical margin of at
least 35 feet (see Aeronautical Notice 0.2).

4.2. The minimum acceptable dimensions of an elevated heliport must also be described
in the Flight Manual, the Flight Manual Supplement and/or in the Operations Manual
for the helicopter type under consideration. Elevated heliports which do not
conform to the required dimensions should not be considered for use.

Any proposed development for an elevated heliport for day or night use,
will always attract the need for IAA operational approval and licensing.
Factors considered will include, intended operations, heliport dimensions, obstacle
environment, lighting, approach path indicators; and visual cues and flight visibility
from the type of helicopter to be used; and pilot qualifications and training.
Thus, a heliport ‘proving’ flight test programme, undertaken by a helicopter operator
in conjunction with the IAA, will normally be required, and successful completion of
a special pilot training and checking programme to ensure pilot competency will also
be necessary before an IAA approval of helicopter operations to an elevated heliport
will be considered.

4.3. The provision of Rescue and Fire Fighting Services (RFFS) at elevated heliports is
mandatory and must be provided to the scales laid down in Chapter 6 of ICAO
Annex 14, Volume 2, (Heliports). Close liaison with the local Fire Brigade during the
heliport planning and construction stages must be established and maintained
thereafter to ensure a viable emergency plan is agreed, maintained and monitored.

4.4. In all cases, it is necessary that an elevated heliport developer consult in advance,
with the IAA and with the local planning authority before final development
committal is made to the project. Recent experience has shown that, where a
planning application is made, environmental considerations, such as possible noise
disturbance, fuel contamination, public access, etc., weigh heavily in the decision
making process.

4.5. When seeking guidance from the IAA, an architect's/engineer’s drawing/plan
together with a helicopter operational report from an appropriately qualified
consultant, including aerial photographs of the proposed heliport site taking in
nearby structures and obstacles should be forwarded to Authority for preliminary
evaluation. Site visits during the heliport development phase and thereafter by IAA
Inspectors will be required. Fees will be payable in respect of site visits and
licensing, as appropriate.

Now I'm not going to say that what this guy did was the smartest thing in the world, especially landing a very expensive piece of equipment for a couple dollars worth of keys...I fly commercially and have a natural tendency to think that way. BUT what was so reckless about it. Did he break the rules or no? He obtained permission, albeit from the wrong authority, and given that ignorance is no excuse his "pp" should be slapped a little. It's single engine but so what...cars have 4 tires and just one blowout can cause alot of problems. Does he need the city's approval? If he does then fine his ass. All in all I don't think he did anything too seriously wrong or dangerous. Hell, given where I land on a daily basis that looks like an airport to me.

As for the wind thing, well, I've done the Scotish/Irish thing and you can bet your royal behind that the winds off the coast of either country will definately put pale to anything a 500 can produce.:p And by the way, is it Irish Law to be carrying your personal logbook, or were they talking about the A/C Journy Log Book

I have to fly commercially to tickle my flying fetish, but I would give my left nut to be able to go to the store like this bloke in my own personal helicopter. If the Prince can land a Chinook in his girlfriends backyard (of which I have read and don't have any problems with either as a guy does have to fly to stay current, and at least he didn't land that beast in my backyard LOL.:}) and Tornadoes can continue to scare the !!!!e out of no brainer tourists trying to drive on the "right" side of the road, (yes that was me! LOL:8) I think what this guy did deserves a little less attention than what some of you think it deserves.

BWB

2. International Standards and Recommended Practices

"Recommended" is not an imperative where I come from.



ICAO Contracting States are required to notify ICAO of any differences
between their national regulations and practices and ICAO SARPS.

ICAO plainly expects some variations from their rules.



4.1. By virtue of the siting of the vast majority of elevated heliports within congested
areas with the associated perceived risk to the heliport building, third parties and to
nearby structures, only helicopters with Performance Class 1 capability are
permitted to land at or take-off from elevated heliports.

Isn't there a difference between known, provable risks and their "perceived risk" concept?

4.2. The minimum acceptable dimensions of an elevated heliport must also be described
in the Flight Manual, the Flight Manual Supplement and/or in the Operations Manual
for the helicopter type under consideration. Elevated heliports which do not
conform to the required dimensions should not be considered for use.

How many RFM's set forth Helipad dimensions? Does a Privately owned and operated helicopter have an OPS Manual?

a heliport ‘proving’ flight test programme, undertaken by a helicopter operator
in conjunction with the IAA, will normally be required, and successful completion of
a special pilot training and checking programme to ensure pilot competency will also
be necessary before an IAA approval of helicopter operations to an elevated heliport
will be considered.

Why pray tell does every helicopter pilot have to receive training on each helipad they are going to operate from? Does each pilot have to be "checked" by the IAA? If so that is simply ridiculous!

4.4. In all cases, it is necessary that an elevated heliport developer consult in advance,
with the IAA and with the local planning authority before final development
committal is made to the project. Recent experience has shown that, where a
planning application is made, environmental considerations, such as possible noise
disturbance, fuel contamination, public access, etc., weigh heavily in the decision
making process.

No problem with that.

4.5. When seeking guidance from the IAA, an architect's/engineer’s drawing/plan
together with a helicopter operational report from an appropriately qualified
consultant, including aerial photographs of the proposed heliport site taking in
nearby structures and obstacles should be forwarded to Authority for preliminary
evaluation. Site visits during the heliport development phase and thereafter by IAA
Inspectors will be required. Fees will be payable in respect of site visits and
licensing, as appropriate.

Who determines qualifications for a consultant? Why is a "consultant" required? Could not a layman interpret the rules and regs and related information and plan his own helipad without the need for a "consultant"? Sounds like a "make work" situation similar to private owners having to employ an engineering agent to oversee maintenance on a private aircraft.

I.A.A. stands for........
 

SASless,

I.A.A. (Irish Aviation Authority) - occasionally refered to as the "Institute Against Aviation"!;)

As pointed out, this, in some jurisdictions wouldn't raise an eyebrow! However, in his local situation, this was probably just a bit "in your face", as it were, with regard to the local populace who do seem to have a small tendency towards begrudgery!! Perhaps a little more circumspection would have been a better idea!

Other than that, perhaps this thought applies here:-

"Old men love to give good advice when no longer able to give bad example!"

The IAA wants the OAM 08/00 being seen as rules. However the document state say they are only guidelines!

If you land in a confined area, something helicopters are made for, you might get a letter inviting you to talk about it. The IAA wants you to have at least 143 meters free take-off distance, behind that only minor obstacles for the remaining 350 meters (R44). For an AS350 even 200 meters.

Now as I understand from some JAA instructors here, they don't even train pilots for confined areas, because training has to be done at a licensed airfield, so they only train 'simulated' confined area's!!!! This guy was properly trained in the States so he had plenty of confined area training.

Ireland is very strict with the regulations and guidelines, and way more so then the UK or any other country in Europe (I flew in most of them).

SASless.

You 'come late to the argument', but with good questions in both your posts. :ok:


Agree, it was a lovely curry - and good to put the world to rights at the end of a great day. :)

Holy !!!!! What a nutter...... If this qualifies for being a "nutter", then I am probably in the insane-category as I have landed on quite a number of places a LOT worse and a goood number being single engine..


By the way, has any of the twinONLY-boys ever reflected over the fact that in a twin you have twice the chance of an engine-failure:E

Nubian....nice thought.......but it also means in a multi-engine, if you have an engine failure and have planned right, you get to fly away and land somewhere safe most of the time (99.99999%?)......, better odds than single operations anyway you factor it!:ok:

Car park landing
 

"He landed on the roof of the adjacent multi-storey car park. It is unclear to the investigation where the helicopter could have been safely force-landed in the event of an engine failure during landing or take-off."

Well he could always use the roof of the multi-storey car park !!!

Doh !

Helipolarbear,
I think you should check your % figure of enginefailure in twins, as I don't think it is as high as 99,999999%
I will agree, that you'll have more power to control an emergency landing but it is a bit more complex than "engine failure!.....doesn't matter as we have another one....."

If you refer to new performance Class 1 helicopters, I agree, but if you say twin in general......then you must include all those 105's, 355F's, 109A, 222A, 76A and so on.
These helicopters my friend DON't have the neccesary performance when operated at GW in normal conditions (not to mention hot/high) to have a failure a the most critical point AND fly away and land somewhere nice as you say...

Until just some years ago, the only TRUE twin flying was the Bell 214ST which could loose one engine at GW, OGE, hot and still continue the take-off. All others have to in BEST case reduce GW and in most cases land back on before DP or Vtoss OR get the speed

Now, when you also include to engine failures the lack of fuel (flameouts of various fuel related nature), you can rest assured that twins will stop when they are not properly fed as well ;)

I am not trying to say that twins are not safe or for that matter dosen't make a diffrence. Just saying that, just cause you have two engines on your back it is important NOT to become complaceant and think you'll never need to think about shooting an auto again in your life.


Well, I guess this was abit off topic of the thread, but initially the remark was ment as a joke:ok:

Regards

95 % of stats are made up on the spot or something like that including that one :)

the single twin rules are something for the CAA/IAA's to come up with and those of us doing public transport simply have to follow them wether we think they are right or not. This guy was clearly flying private in his heli so if he wants to put the heli into a tight spot thats up to him, I fly MD500's and they are great and built tough the only thing that I think might need's looking at is wether or not he put the people on the ground at any risk?

I think landing in a carpark on a roof is fab it's what your ment to do with a helicopter along with all the other things you can't with a plane, but as the pilot or crew you know the risk's the poor sods on the ground don't but if their sorted then crack on :)

CBS

I suppose this is going to cause a few coronaries! :E

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l7...g/AUT_6019.jpg

looks familar....... think I've seen those roofs before......:E

whats such a nice heli doing in a place like that ?

Looks like downtown Ikeaja, Lagos....then it could be Conakry, Nouakashott, Dakar, et.al.........

Nubian, regarding those 'other; non Cat A twins.....then the assumption must include that the engine failure occurs inside the cruise envelope which would make up most of the time of operational exposure.....but I do see your point............!:ok: