London helicopter crash: Two Dead.
 

The helicopter hit a crane, and according to the news..In misty conditions..

This is sad, with 2 dead and 9 injured..This will be bound to add fuel to the debate over the 3rd runway at Heathrow..

This helicopter was capable of carrying 5 or 5 passengers, depending on the configuration..One or two pilots.

Terrorism is all but ruled out.

BBC News - London helicopter crash: Two die in Vauxhall crane accident

From another forum:

NATS STATEMENT

Just before 8am today a helicopter crashed in central London close to Vauxhall Bridge.

Earlier in the helicopter’s journey the pilot had been receiving an air traffic control service from NATS, although was not receiving a service at the time of the crash.

The incident will be subject to an investigation by the Air Accident Investigation Branch and NATS will assist any inquiry. Any further information should be from the AAIB or the emergency services.

Jason Hawkes posted an image on Twitter of the area shot in good visibility, shows the crane and the building:

https://twitter.com/jasonhawkesphot/...610817/photo/1

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BAuR08pCUAArGSj.jpg

My last question for now because I know I am intruding on the hallowed ground of professionals but roughly how much would a radar cost the heliport and could it help pilots in the future like coming into the heliport at night or in bad weather?

I was told that some oil rigs are sometimes fitted with radar?

All you need to know about helicopter procedures for Battersea, including weather minima, is here:

http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/eadba...2013-01-10.pdf

From involved people I understand that the machine had already tried to get to Elstree from Redhill, had turned back due to bad weather and was reduced in height while returning to base for ATC reasons (we all know what that's like - aircraft on approach etc). There may not even have been any communication with Battersea.

More if I hear it.

Battersea as far as I'm aware does not have a radar, and whilst they are very professional I do not think they are trained to the highest standard of say an airport radar controller.

And do you know how many obstructions there are in London TMA, NOTAM'd or otherwise?

All this aside this is all conjecture until the facts are known, we don't know where he was going what he was doing or the state of the aircraft before it hit anything.

So whilst all the arm-chair budding AIB investigators dig out weather reports etc, just calm down take your hands of the mouse button and wait till Jeremy Vine and his cronies sort the facts out but most of all have some respect!

HeliStudent

You'd have to ask an ATC what they can see on radar but in my experience within the zone you'd normally be talking to Heathrow zone (and receiving a ATC SVFR radar service) the ATC require/ask opposing aircraft to be visual and/or talk to Battersea to co-ordinate with inbound/outbound Battersea aircraft.

Apparently it's now being reported that NATS say the aircraft was eastbound and had been receiving a NATS service but wasn't at the time of the incident.

Again in my humble experience - on that route heading for Isle of Dogs - I would expect to remain in contact with Heathrow zone and receive a basic service. I would also expect advice about other traffic in the vicinity BUT I have never received NOTAM data whilst flying over London from ATC.

As the end of the zone is very very close to the site of the incident (from what I know based on reports where the building is - it's just inside the zone) it seems also somewhat academic - although technically correct - IF the aircraft was coming into Battersea and again I dont want to speculate and pre-empt AAIB, but having heard that the aircraft had requested a divert to Battersea it's normal that NATS would have handed the aircraft to Battersea - therefore the aircraft should have been in receipt of an ATC/AG service albeit possibly not from NATS - some might say that statement was a bit incomplete!

What is clear is that the sensationalism of the media is what fuels irrational and knee-jerk reactions and speculation prior to an AAIB report is always premature !

Following Basher's advice:

By the look of the photo from Max Shutterspeed one might suppose that the aircraft was below the height of the top of the crane in order for the rotor to make contact.

So one assumes that the cloud base was about that height?

Eyewitness report: "The helicopter sliced through the crane as if it was made out of paper".

London Ambulance confirm 1 POB - Pilot deceased. The other deceased was "in the vicinity of the aircraft".

Reported as a "Scheduled flight" from Redhill to Elstree, diverted. Reporters asked if it was trying to land at Battersea, but not confirmed at this time by Police.

Then cut to Jim Ferguson "aviation expert" who did not know whether these aircraft have a black box. He also thought that the river was the appropriate route, and thought it raised a question of whether we allow helicopters over London. He finished off by noting that the safety record for helicotpers into / out of London was very good.

Battersea owners later confirmed that a request to divert to them due to weather had been received. Helicopter was inbound at the time of crash

Ken Livingstone now calling for private heli's to be banned given the good transport links in London. Bandwagon here we go.

Heli Student

One of our semi submersible offshore facilities (soon to be installed) will have radar but it is weather radar combined with doppler to show approaching storms which can be very bad in the tropics.

Helicopter crews will be able to interrogate it before they depart for offshore, but it is not designed to "paint" a helicopter neither is there anyone qualified to provide any kind of air traffic advice. Pilots are responsible for their own obstacle clearance when in the vicinity of the field.

The boom arm of a tower crane is usually left to weather vane when not manned.

Pitty Ken Livingstone doesn't think about how many people have been saved by air Ambulance!

From this image it appears as if the boom which normally sticks up at a tangent (see bottom photo) has been severed near the jib end and the supporting stay/cabling holding the boom horizontal has failed or been cut. With the stay gone, this has resulted in the boom swinging down, it being retained at the cab end.

http://www.independent.co.uk/incomin...rane-crash.jpg

"IF" the point of contact is where the jib is severed in the photo above this would mean that the helicopter "PROBABLY" stuck the crane somewhere in the region contained within the black box in the photo below.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-s...fbd6ee65_k.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8055/8...fbd6ee65_k.jpg


Indications that the pilot's name may be released soon.


.

This from Bloomberg:-

Jan. 16 (Bloomberg) -- The helicopter that crashed in
central London this morning is understood to have diverted from
its flight path due to poor weather, according to controllers at
Redhill Aerodrome, from where the flight departed.
The aircraft involved was an AW109 built by the
AgustaWestland unit of Italy’s Finmeccanica SpA, Phil Wright,
senior air traffic controller at Redhill, south of London, said
in a telephone interview.
Redhill is a base for AW109 operator Rotormotion, which is
preparing a joint comment with the aerodrome, Wright said.
Today’s flight was due to have operated to Elstree, west of
London.

Grenville,

I don't think so. The helicopter would most likely have cut the support cables holding the derrick(boom) up, and the remains of it has then swung down to the positon it has now, on your picture.

"The boom arm of a tower crane is usually left to weather vane when not manned"

Quite true. But the Metar was only giving wind as VRB002kt ish.

But can I ask you, if you were a control tower officer on duty with light traffic and you had a helicopter coming into your heliport in bad weather and if you didn't have much else to do because of low traffic levels, would you remind the pilot of the obstruction?


Yes if possible. However, the information would be in the form of 'caution crane 2 miles north west of airfield operating to a height of 400ft' or similar phrase to that. Whilst that is good generic data theres no gaurantee that the information would be sufficient for a pilot to readily see the obstruction, particularly in poor visibilty or at night. As it was a 'see through' crane jib that would have made the pilots job even harder.

Not only are my thoughts with the relatives and friends of the deceased and injured, but with ATC at EGLW, it'll be a tough time for them too.

Speaking as someone who flies this route quite regularly, the Battersea area has cranes all around and ATC there are good at warning pilots about new ones.

However, these days there are many tall cranes all over London. To try to warn pilots about all of them over the radio is impractical. The position of this one is outside the Battersea ATZ.