Helicopter Crash Central London

[ORAC]

Sky reporting that it was a weather diversion requested through Heathrow who asked Battersea on pilot's behalf. Service terminated by Heathrow but no radio contact made with Battersea before the crash.

[RomeoTangoFoxtrotMike]

Helicopter crash in pictures: aircraft hits crane in Vauxhall, south London - Telegraph

Originally Posted by 757hopeful

Pictures 14 & 16 show the visibility quite clearly to be low

Indeed. From my vantage point just east of Tower Bridge, about half-an-hour after the accident, I would estimate that the visibility on the surface (say up to the top of Tower Bridge) was reasonable, about 2km, but rapidly deteriorated above that -- certainly most of the Shard was completely invisible due fog, and I've no reason to suppose the tower wasn't, either. Very sad

I see that Kate Hoey, the local MP, is already starting to have a go at helicopters being able to fly around central London -- how about stopping developers from building ego-boosting tall buildings instead...

[FlyGooseFly!]

Originally Posted by bluecode

He was probably perfectly aware of the building in his path and the crane. But perhaps the jib wasn't visible until it was too late and he just clipped it.

Whereas I know very little of helos beyond training in R22 - I do know quite a bit about mast head cranes and big buildings - the witness damage to the jib broken in two about half way long its length tells me that it suffered one hell of a knock - this together with the luffing supports sheared off allowing the rest of the jib to hang vertically down confirms this. I reckon the machine hit just about as square on as could be possible at a fair rate of knots.

A very sad business together - there by the grace.

[eman_resu]

Lemain,

Good points..

Before I migrated I flew the London heli lanes on a number of occasions and I'd hate to see that opportunity removed due to a single, very unfortunate accident.

Some of the comments I am reading, to the media and lay person, and politicians (re RTFM comments re Kate Hoey) would purport banning all rotor craft over london (except Police helicopters of course, ala radio 5 expert they are apparently invincible)

757H

Although I'd say pic 14 wouldn't have been too long afterward it clearly shows the jib has been hit

Yes, apologies, missed the bleeding obvious when I first looked at the photo.

[Lemain]

RTFM --

I see that Kate Hoey, the local MP, is already starting to have a go at helicopters being able to fly around central London -- how about stopping developers from building ego-boosting tall buildings instead...

Idiots like that are just making noise for the publicity. If you restrict GA both fixed and rotary you'll degrade London as a hub for the sake of a bit of green-eye. This accident will have a cause, and it will be a series of events not just one 'failure' - 99% of accidents are. Unless this is a type issue (seems unlikely) then it isn't going to happen again other than by bizarre fluke (which sadly does happen) until the AAIB comes out.

Pure speculation on my part and no evidence related to this tragedy, I fear over-reliance on GPS particularly running on evolving platforms with evolving software. But I don't know it that's a factor here.

[LondonPax]

This from the BBC website re Kate Hoey comments:

1154: Kate Hoey, MP for Vauxhall, tells the BBC there should be an "inquiry into the increasing numbers of helicopters flying around London" among so many new high-rise buildings.
She says: "The river is a kind of motorway for helicopters, but the noise of course is horrendous sometimes, when we get a lot of helicopters hovering. Maybe we've come to take it almost for granted that people have the right to take their helicopter over London at any time and I think we may have to look at that."

I'm no expert but I think the only helicopters that hover over central London are police and air ambulance.

[green granite]

Question, with the 500' rule in mind and the need to fly along the edge of a linear feature to avoid hitting something doing the same in the opposite direction, does that not mean that the minimum height for that part of the river is the 600' of the building + 500' which = 1100'. If that is true how did he hit the crane, or have I got the interpretation of the rules wrong?

[riverrock83]

Report from fire brigade says tail landed on roof of St George's Wharf Tower.

Question marks from lots of people about the lights on the crane - can't find any pics online showing lights on it. Sunrise was officially 07.57 with the incident reported at 08.00.

I believe Vauxhall Bridge is a mandatory reporting point on that Heli route.

Report that 'copter was on a weather divert into Battersea heliport, after trying to go from Redhill in Surrey to Elstree in Hertfordshire. It had just left a radio service (doesn't say what kind) from Heathrow, but hadn't yet contacted Battersea.

[fireflybob]

Question, with the 500' rule in mind and the need to fly along the edge of a linear feature to avoid hitting something doing the same in the opposite direction, does that not mean that the minimum height for that part of the river is the 600' of the building + 500' which = 1100'. If that is true how did he hit the crane, or have I got the interpretation of the rules wrong?

I believe the legislation says "within 500 ft of" so (legally subject to the rule to alight clear in event of engine failure) so long as you are not within 500 ft of the obstruction you are in compliance.

[mixture]

I believe the legislation says "within 500 ft of" so (legally subject to the rule to alight clear in event of engine failure)

The 500 feet rule
Except with the written permission of the CAA, an aircraft shall not be flown closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure.

[captainkt]

500ft except when landing or taking off. Landing at Battersea and twin engine so height not an issue more of no assistance from Heathrow about crane. Maybe pilots might get more assistance in future.

[fireflybob]

The 500 feet rule
Except with the written permission of the CAA, an aircraft shall not be flown closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle or structure.

mixture, thanks for the clarification - so you could actually be flying below 500 ft and be in compliance (although I doubt this applies in this case)

[captainkt]

Yes as Battersea only short distance away

[mixture]

fireflybob,

Well, you have to land sometime....

Don't think I'm suitably qualified to comment in this context because the London Heli route is a little bit special in some respects, and there are things you can / cannot do there that can / cannot be done elsewhere.

Also, if we're talking 500ft altitude then there are additional rules that apply over built up areas (1,000 feet above the highest fixed obstacle within a horizontal radius of 600 metres of the aircraft) ... but again, London Heli may change things.

Someone will doubtless be along shortly to fill in the gaps I've left !

[ORAC]

Tail reported to be on the roof of the tower; the transmission landed outside a loading bay in New Covent Garden Flower Market and the engines with the rest in Wandsworth Road.

So the impact seems to have been severe enough to break up the entire airframe rather than just a blade strike.

[EdVFX]

'Question marks from lots of people about the lights on the crane'

I commute past the site daily, and am pretty certain the crane jib was lit, as is the tower.

I was on a train stopped at signals on the bridge over Wandsworth Road adjacent to the crash site , half an hour after the incident, and visibility was very poor, the top of what remains of the crane almost enveloped in cloud.

Smouldering helicopter wreckage was a sobering sight. My sympathies are with the families of those who died, and those injured.

[Kitbag]

Isn't it possible the crane/jib got lost in glare from the rising sun? or have I lost the orientation of the incident?

[Groundloop]

Isn't it possible the crane/jib got lost in glare from the rising sun? or have I lost the orientation of the incident?

There was no "rising sun" this morning. I passed the site on the train about ten minutes afterwards and there was VERY low cloud cover. Many taller building tops were obscured.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<more of no assistance from Heathrow about crane.>>

"Heathrow" (actually at Swanwick) almost certainly knew nothing about the crane. In the 31 years I worked in Heathrow ATC I do not recall ever seeing a NOTAM referring to obstructions away from Heathrow.

[Pace]

Going off the press reports the crane Jib came out at an angle and was obscured by the building.

Again the press reports indicate that the crane was only lighted when out of use at night but not in the day.

The pilot was diverting due to the weather and more than likely in very poor viz had his full attention on the building.

Again it has been reported on the BBC that concerns were made about the Crane lighting a few months ago.
A building is a solid visible structure a Crane is not!!!

As in most incidents its easy to blame the pilot but maybe such high Cranes also take the blame and regulations regarding lighting such temporary high and invisible structures should be re looked at with far better and more visible lighting attached to them???