AW139 accident India
 

Informations about?

An Agusta Westland AW 139 (VT-GVI) helicopter with four occupants crashed in the Paud area of Pune, due to strong winds and bad weather.

The helicopter was going from Mumbai to Hyderabad.

The captain suffered injuries and was hospitalized.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0b34646fc.jpeg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0626ad901.jpeg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....ef081f9de.jpeg

Well, whatever else was causal, I’m pretty sure it wasn’t the wind!

Video in the X-link…

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/413696

Video here:

so it wasn’t the wind…..

Quote
“Global Vectra AW-139 makes an emergency landing due to technical defect near Pune. Excellent work by the pilots and all on board safe.”

Is that an emergency landing or a crash?

Either way good news there were no fatalities.

is that a rhetorical question?

Weather looks fine. Looks like an autorotation into trees, low rpm. Unlikely fuel starvation so soon after takeoff. Tail rotor? Would explain going into trees instead of maneuvering for a clearing. Pilot played the hand he was dealt.

Curious what "technical defect" they've identified so soon, even faster than the usual Pprune gunslingers.

They won't fix that one. Claim the insurance and buy a new one.

From video on X, seemed like fuz / rotor disk was pitched up to around 60-70 degrees just before impact. Would a pilot intentionally do that to (say) wash off forward speed if this was indeed an autorotation?? That leaves little to arest the descent.

the ground usually does that quite effectively........

Perhaps running out of room with trees ahead prompted the harsh flare.

Has there ever been a dual engine failure in a 139? I couldn’t find anything stating one even went OEI.

I would bet money that the engines were running normally in this accident.

What the photos show, again, is how crashworthy the 139 fuselage is.

I'm with you there 212! Solid engines and I'm also impressed the airframe is still very intact. Will be an interesting read when we start to learn more.

If you're going down through trees, tail first is a good option. I'm surprised the helicopter still had so much forward speed at the end of the big flare. Does the 139 have completely independent fuel system for each engine like the S76?

The landing gear was up when it hit the ground. Does the landing gear absorb much of the impact forces in a crash?

It does if it's down! :E​​​​​​​

It's a requirement for all FAR 29 helos gulli

§ 29.953 Fuel system independence.

(a) For category A rotorcraft—

(1) The fuel system must meet the requirements of § 29.903(b); and

(2) Unless other provisions are made to meet paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the fuel system must allow fuel to be supplied to each engine through a system independent of those parts of each system supplying fuel to other engines.

(b) Each fuel system for a multiengine category B rotorcraft must meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this section. However, separate fuel tanks need not be provided for each engine.

§ 29.903 Engines

(b) Category A; engine isolation. For each category A rotorcraft, the powerplants must be arranged and isolated from each other to allow operation, in at least one configuration, so that the failure or malfunction of any engine, or the failure of any system that can affect any engine, will not—

(1) Prevent the continued safe operation of the remaining engines

The Babcock Spain autorotation a few years back initially was thought to be a double flame out due to turbulence, subsequently shown to have been a double lowside due to excessive Nf high (127%) situation, possibly induced by pilot over controlling in reaction to turbulence. You have to read the final report kinda carefully to understand that there was technically nothing wrong with the aircraft and it behaved as designed, however it would be easy to interpret a double engine failure, especially single pilot.

There have been many issues with pilots over reacting on the flight controls due to a surprise or perceived upset (floats inflated in flight, resulting in full pedal and a 90 degree roll induced by the pilot, recent 9 minute UA, other inadvertent AP release incidents etc) where the behaviour of the Nf could trigger the overspeed protection and subsequent reversion to manual control. Inadvertently hitting the Tq limiter (if selected on) during a recovery from turbulence could also decay the Nr, leading to a perception of a failure.

Be careful with your collective rates of movement, unexpected stuff can happen as a result!

Having said that, I wasn't in the cockpit and I have no idea why they ended up like this. Wishing them all a speedy recovery.

Anything to do with the LPC/OPC being essentially a box ticking exercise with little unusual to actually challenge the pilots?