Helios Crash
 

Hello everyone...I'm new here so be gentle, i'm a lady! :p

I am not a pilot and I need help from some of you guys.

Basically, I am working on a docunmentary about the Helios plane crash that took place last year in Greece. Most of you might be aware of the accident and the surrounding facts/questions/accusations...

In a nutshell, this documentary tells the story of that tragic day and looks at all the facts in an investigative way. We don't think the pilots are to blame at all and we are trying to understand what could have happened on that plane and what are the main factors we should look at.

I would like to get in touch with THE British pilot who used to work for Helios and who flew the doomed plane on the day before the crash OR for any witnesses who could confirm to me that on the previous day there were some problems with the aircraft as reported by the crew.

If anyone can help or give me information on this I would be very greatful!:ok:

If:-

Then why have you decided:-

BEFORE you:-

As for:-I think you'll find that gutter-living journos here to do stich-ups without knowing what the hell they are talking about are about as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit!!!


Oh... Welcome to PPRUNE!!

I'll be gentle because you are a lady and I'm a nice guy!

I'm sure I speak for many people when I say that this really is an inappropriate use of this web site/BB and I would be very surprised to see any professional pilot contact you following your posting.

May I gently suggest that you use your other journalistic resources to try and get your information.

Anybody with a story to sell is not going to get any cooperation from a knowledgeable source. However if you have developed/discovered new facts not previously considered by the investigating parties, then I'm willing to listen and suggest other avenues to follow.

I am a former professional test pilot who has no connection with the Helios accident.

I am posting just to say that the kindest possible reading of your post is that you are inexperienced (as opposed to trying it on).

If you really are inexperienced then I would counsel that you do a good search of accident related posts on PPRuNe as this will enable you to realise how the aviation community has been very badly served in the past by inaccurate, unbalanced and sensationalist reporting.

So much damage has been done over the last decade in this respect that it is hard to see how somebody – even if they genuinely want to do a decent balanced programme – will be able to win back the confidence of those who could help.

While a face to face meeting might - just might - persuade an insider that your intentions are honourable a BB approach will only be seen as reason to suspect the worst.

There is plenty of discussion of the incident in these two threads:

Cypriot plane crashes in Greece

Cypriot airliner crash to re-enacted

When you've trawled through those you may not even want to come back here to make your request but if you do, then you may get a bit more co-operation... depending on how you take the comments above and below.

Investigations are done by a transportation safety board, or air accident investigation team. Journalist (generally) try and come up with a sensational story that will sell. Technical stuff (the truth) doesn't sell so is not printed. In other words, as far as I am concerned, miss, please stop posting on a PROFESSIONAL PILOT´S network, you are not welcome, full stop!:*

"Hello everyone...I'm new here so be gentle, i'm (sic) a lady!".

What a bl**dy joke; haven't you folks in the media ever heard of sexual equality? Why should you be treated any differently?

I wish you luck in your attempt at intelligence gathering dear but I don't exactly think you are off to a racing start.

I would suggest searching for the Toronto Star's reportage on Air France 358, including their "investigation", and then doing the opposite. There is probably a link buried somewhere in the threads here on pprune, but is probably behind a paywall by now so you'll have to reach for the company credit card.

As has been pointed out above, don't use the word investigation as this will in the mind of the public put you on the same level as the relevant investigative authorities with uncensored access to FDR/CVR etc. etc. etc. when you will not have much more than whatever leaks and chinese whispers are floating around the Aegean.

I don't normally post on this forum but today must to support the previous 8 posters.

Although I am not a Professional Pilot, I am a Professional Aircraft Engineering Technician, but I do not like either Aircrew or groundcrew being dragged through the scrubber via ill researched information. Sensationalist witnesses unfotunately drub our brethren with no substantive knowledge of aviation, aircraft, the people involved and belittle our community by misleading people such as yourself.

Flying Bird, If you must investigate, You must ask the relevant authorities and not these forums.

Sorry, Take care.

Talk Wrench

Miss Flying Bird.

If you really are genuine about wanting to make an objective report based on fact about the crash, then i will suggest that you make a documentary about yourself. You will be the first reporter that is not fussed about selling, but who just "want the truth".

Sorry, but i think you will find that professional pilots only will talk to professional investigation boards if they have vital information about an incident or accident. History has proven that it is best that way :(

Good luck :E

Dear Miss Bird

I have to agree with my more experienced ppruners, experience shows us that journalists are very rarely interested in reporting facts objectivley, there is more money to be made by sensationalising things and pointing fingers at those ill equipped to defend themselves.

The majority of states comply with the requirements of ICAO Annex 13 and have an AIB set up with sufficient experience and expertise to make sense of the tangled web of facts that leads to the loss of an aircraft. Their reports are factual, don't (usually) apportion blame, and make recommendations to prevent it happening again, which surely is the whole point. If you want a balanced, factual viewpoint try talking to the Greek AAIB, instead of courting comment from this forum.

I have yet to see any piece of journalism or tv documentary which has made any contribution to air safety.

Miss Flying Bird,
The three previous posts will indicate why you have come to the wriong place. Talk Wrench hit the nail on the head just before that. For every opinion there will be a counter-opinion, you'll not be able to filter the wright from the rong (sic). That'll provide you with the (professional-pilot-guided) leeway for your story to follow any eye-catching and most newsworthy path, if you hadn't realised already......
Someone will now disagree with what I have said perhaps; lets see.

Oh come on. No journalist worth any salt is going to be satisfied with "ask your government what happened." And besides, it's not that hard to spot a wannabe talking crap, is it?
All you need is some basic training in how to do your research. Since this is technically an anonymous forum, you'd be a moron, the Cyprus Daily Mail, or any number of other journals to cite this forum, wash your hands, and declare the day is over.
Oh wait.
Here's a hint to the journalists: I'm not a pilot, nor do I work in the industry; the only time I've ever been accused of something like that was when I used the phonetic alphabet on L1 pax support.
Do I think there's an engaging story to be told about the Helios incident? Well, contrary to the professionals here, I do. And I think it has nothing to do with that old hackneyed play to the audience's fears, "there's nobody beyond that locked door watching out for us." (By the way, if you must take that angle, please make it metaphorical and political, with plenty of cross cuts to foreign and domestic policy missteps)
The real Helios story is how very few in positions in power, particularly in the Mediterranean world, can face a chaotic world, where simple human oversights, technical niceties, and dumb luck occasionally combine to produce disaster. As Aristotle said, there can be no science of the accidental; the post-Byzantine world's response is to claim that the accidental does not exist. Thus a simple tragedy becomes a political football in Greece and Cyprus: the opposition party blames the current government; the current government blames the opposition party, back when they were in power. Meanwhile, the conspiracy nuts, who cannot stand the idea that anything happens without meaning, weigh in with even worse conspiracies.
The crash is less than a year old, and it's second only to Itavia in terms of conspiracy theories and sheer crap that's been generated. There have been so many press opinions, official leaks, non-official non-leaks, parliamentary investigations, and who knows what else, that, to be honest, there is no chance in my mind that any worthwhile technical observations will come out of this. For that matter, odds are we will probably never know the "truth" of the incident. Tsolakis may surprise us on this one, though.
There's no point in trolling here. Besides, proper journalism involves contacting people personally, not generally. A general post like that will only get you the most extreme nutcases of the previous discussions: go ahead and read them -- there are some scary types around here.
Oh yeah, right. The truth doesn't sell; fear does.[/rant]

Top one Dinger

I will say it for you.

RANT ON.

RANT OFF.

TW:ok:

If you want to start understanding the most basic issue, find a decompression facility that is prepared to take your money and go experience hypoxia in all its insidiousness.

I agree with all the posts so far - anyone thinks I am encouraging too much say so and I will delete.

Sven

There are a few governments that none of will accept as honest brokers in accident investigation.

If flying-bird really wants something close to the truth, she might take a look at the professional aviation press. They aren't perfect, they may have axes to grind, they've certainly got rags to sell, but they are the closest thing we have to a complete story.

Most of these folks at least have professional licenses and writing skills, and may take the time to explain the not-so-obvious; if you don't understand the jargon, you are sure to jump to the wrong "answer".

I suspect that by the time you finish your research and make the program the official report will be released. Best wait for that.

Frankly I'm almost lost for words to express my disgust at some of the moronic and childish tantrums which have been thrown here.

What happened to basic courtesy? You know nothing about this woman's integrity or background - yet you presume to know it all. Heaven forbid that you should let facts get in the way of your judgement.

You b!tch about journalists being hysterical, sensationalist, biased, ignorant, inaccurate, rude and ill-informed, and yet virtually all the responses to this lady's polite question so far have demonstrated that the posters have all those qualities, in spades.

Danny appears to be the only person who's actually been prepared to make the effort to stand up for the word 'professional' on this forum.

As for those of you who've behaved with the manners I'd expect from a gang of howler monkeys, I think you're a disgrace. You make the teenage taunting and bickering on !!!!!!!!!!!!!! seem like civilised debate.

If the lady in question is genuine (and I've no evidence to the contrary) then I hope she treats you with the utter contempt you deserve and obtains the help she's seeking from more reliable, more professional, more mature sources elsewhere. :*

KC
How do you knw that "Flying Bird" is a woman? Please tell me the secret.
watp,iktch

I DON'T know.

But it won't hurt to take the first post at face value until proven otherwise. :E

First off, playing the "female card" is not only crass and dated, but it shows your colours, ma'am. "Bat the eyelids and the pilots will tell all". Why don't you post a picture of you lifting your skirt above your knee!! Maybe I'm wrong about you but that is the way you introduced yourself, so be prepared for the retoric.

It must be clear to you by now most pilots are of the opinion that a "professional" person in the media has the objective to make a program that the maximum amount of people will watch thereby selling the maximum amount of advertising space for the maximum amount of money. I'm sure you are very "professional"!!!

In comparison, a pilot wants to find out why an accident or incident occured so as to train other pilots not to repeat the incident or else change procedures so that it cannot occur again (I know it's a simplistic explanation). As you can see we have very different objectives when it comes to analysing accidents or incidents.

Now for my less sarcastic comment: Inevitably the cause of accidents are so complex that they are very difficult to comprehend by non-industry personnel. As such, this makes presentation on a TV progamme an extremly difficult task and, furthermore, comprehension by the average viewer can be an even more difficult pusuit. As a result of this, it has become common for TV documentaries to focus on a single event or circumstance which appears to be "scandalous" as the cause. This satisfies the "60 minute" hit that the viewer requires but very often distorts the truth beyond recognition.

Back to sarcasm: I am confident that in order to be as "professional" as possible you will replace words such as "descended" with words such as "plummeted". This may be a simple journalistic embellishment but it is a twisting of the facts to a pilot. Unless you tells us the vertical speed and the attitude of the aircaft then use of the word plummet just means gutter press to us.

I hope this goes some way towards explaining why pilots are anti press. You have to understand it took many years of bad press to develop this distrust. I don't think you will repair it all with a "bat of the ould eyelids", ma'am.

Dear Miss Flying Bird.

I have been on the front page of the Telegraph in a fanciful report of a non-event that became "Jet Crash survivors Given Valium Jabs" after a mere engine failure and text-book landing. 17 short paragraphs, if I remember correctly, but you needed to get to the 9th before you had a paragraph without an incorrect fact in it.
Is your name Je**** Ja****?



As I see it.....

Pilot makes mistake - people die - journalist prints error ridden story and makes money

Journalist makes mistake - pilot gets defamed - journalist MIGHT have to print retraction on page 99 in tiny print.

Not a level playing field and there are insufficient checks on the skill and honour of journalists, unlike pilots.

Reading the previous posts, I had an idea (not too experienced in journalism etc) but wouldn't it be interesting to make a story out of the difference in the journo reports that come from accidents and the actual events?

Because, Chiglet my friend, I do my homework and research before sticking my foot in my mouth - isn't that the thing which Proon keeps accusing journalists of doing?

It wasn't difficult to find out who she is and what she's working on. I'm sure with a bit of effort anyone else here could have the same information. Not such a big secret, is it?

Me again
 

Hi everyone,

Thanks for replying to me.

Well, what can I say? I don't feel very welcome here but, fair enough, I understand...Now, let me post that last message because I feel the need to answer these 'attacks'. Then, I should leave this space and let you discuss in peace! :{

So, point taken: Pilots do not like journos and you feel we will produce a sensational film with no serious content. If that is what you believe, I cannot prove you wrong until the doc is release (and unfortunately you will have to wait for that). In my defense, having talked to key people of the aviation industry and to relatives, I can only say I really feel responsible for produciong an honest and balance account of the story and avoid hollywood style as much as possible. I believe this is going to be a different film than the usual 'disaster stories' and that it will provide viewers with the appropriate information in an objective way.

We've done our homework, we've done the background research, the appropriate tests and we've talked to the right people in the right places.

Perhaps it was my mistake to use this thread for such purposes and I apologise if I offended some of you. Ho, and for the record, yes i'm a lady and no I wasn't planning on lifting my skirt (sorry Bomber Harris)...

Now, if anyone can help or wishes to talk seriously about this, then I will be happy to give more details about what we are doing...

Gentlemen, it's been a pleasure....thanks for taking the time to reply to me.

All the best.

Although i agree with MOST of your comments about the subject. . in trawling through the 2 pages of post's...i was bored !!!!less in reading the same thing. . yet i have been sucked into posting a reply..(like most).."flying bird" probably read the first post and never came back. . yet your all still carying on about her, i agree with MOST of you, about the media's ways of portraying aviation accidents. but we all seem to have far to much time on our hands to write 2 pages of the same crap.
:confused:

of course i leave my self open to education of "flying Bird" and if anyone has actually met her/him/the to make a valid regarding the real person and not a generalisation.

Correct me if i'm wrong but news stories aren't Documentary's. . shows such as Air crash investigations are Documentary's and are not a sensational story but the sensational and tragic truth, it is classed as ilegal to put misleading information in a documentary, as Doc's are classed as fact, not fiction nor speculation. (open for correction)
JF

Flying-bird,
Allow me to extend a courtious and professional welcome to you here on this forum. I am not one of the moderators, nor am I involved in the management or running of this forum. I, like yourself, am merely a contributer.

I am sure you will have realised by now that there is a general negative feeling towards representatives of the press and media here. This is not strictly a view directed at you personally. However, the phrase 'tarred with the same brush' is relevant.

This view is widely held within the proffesional aviation community, and it is based purely on experience, as you will have read above.

Within my own lifetime, I have had the misfortune to have lost a number of friends in aviation. They were all professionals and acted accordingly. This never prevented the media from presenting, at best distorted, at worst completely fabricated, reports of events and background leading up to events.

However, let this not disuade you from your path. Should you consider yourself to be a professional within your chosen field, may I suggest you link or post here some of your previous, published work regarding aviation and allow those professionals here to review. Should you have a proven track record of published, unbiased, impartial, truthful and, most importantly, accurate works, then, and only then, would you potentially be taken seriously here.

I anticipate your positive response with interest.

camlobe

OK..so SHE came back.,.. i was wrong there. . and trawled through the 2 pages. .and made a valid valid point. .

Camlobe is spot on.... a professional valid post you would expect from aviation professionals.

If the journos are part of the incident, they can't possibly misreport it
 

From yesterday's Irish Independent

dear flying bird.

If indeed you have done your homework, back ground research and the appropriate test. Perhaps you can let us all in on what really happened on that fateful day, perhaps you could send you research in to HELIO"S and, or the appropriate authority and let them Know what happened as well. I am sure they would love to here from you, they are all trying to find away to blame someone else you views would be as good as any body's. Then of course the question beckons, why do you need help from a pilot, surely you must have meet plenty during your research, or did they all tell you to ....... off. Perhaps as you stated yourself, you should wait till the real report is released then release you show.. Oh but i guess that would be no good would it as you might tell a different story to your truth and all your RESEARCH would have been for nothing..

:=

I must say that some of you do us all a disservice with some of your replies. It is one thing to make criticisms of published or broadcast stories or documentaries but to lash out at a polite request for help before knowing the credentials of the poster is akin to exactly the same actions by some of the gutter media many of you so love to hate.

To accuse the poster of not researching something that is very technical and at the same time fail to notice that she states that she is making a documentary and not publishing a newspaper article is blatant hypocracy. A few of you have made polite and sensible replies but I sense a mass hysteria by some who only exhibit their 'bravery' when posting on here whilst cowering behind their protctive cloaks of anonimity.

Can we please have a bit of decorum on here? If you are rabidly anti-press then by all means make your views known but at least try and make sure you are not being hypocritical whilst doing so.

You're a wise man Danny, and some people on here do not deserve the right to use this vehicle you so graciously provide to lash out at people they don't even know. Sadly, I feel your sage words will be lost on them.

http://www.smileypad.com/v202/Cache/Misc/Surrender.gif

Jeff

The press cost lives....Thats all we need to know really.
I have witnessed a family deprived of their father because of journo`s.....Don`t forget, they are also making a living, this means they are getting paid for potentially killing others.
A report will never be neutral or good, neutral and good do not sell.

att -The press cost lives....Thats all we need to know really.
I have witnessed a family deprived of their father because of journo`s.....Don`t forget, they are also making a living, this means they are getting paid for potentially killing others.
A report will never be neutral or good, neutral and good do not sell.

Although you have witnessed a family deprived of their father, i have witnesses my best mate portrayed in many ways. BUT THIS DOES NOT MEAN PRESS COST LIVES!!!! they had noting to do with his accident!!!.. and of course some read into the accident to much...but many came to us looking for a realistic approach!!!!
Neutral & good do not sell. . bull !!!!. . aviation accidents sell full stop!!! and reports are neutral or good. . car crashes not matter how horrific wont make world news, murders etc. but avaition accidents make news global... go figure!!! no need to spruce it up. . they are spectacular for some, horrific for some and a great loss for others. . these need no neutral or good!!!. I feel you should strongly revise your comments. As if you are going to make generalisations i would be right to state all Pomms are winging Bast*rds, or durg addicts, or tossers. . just because i may have met a few like this doesn't mean your all like this ? does it? :confused:
JF

How much would it actually cost to commission a 30 minute TV programme? Would it not be beneficial to all sides to have a TV "insider" show highlighting the view of avaition from OUR side?
Answering such questions as "Why can't I board after the gate has close", "What really happens if the engine stops in a Cessna 150" and "What is wrong with stubbing out a cigarette in the waste paper bin"?

I've watched the "Airport" series in the UK where Easyjet check-in staff tell pax that they are too late to board and the pax start ranting yet the show never BOTHERED to explain why the late pax cannot get on (Loading of bags, C of G calcs, Mandatory safety brief, steps/loaders have gone etc etc)

I would have thought this sort of informative programming would knock spots off of a vague and speculative documentary. (No offence, but 30 mins won't do it for the Helios story)

I might be prepared to put my money where my mouth is since I can imagine this idea making a profit, especially if we all pushed it!

blue up...your onto a good idea here... and it can be easy done..with the right marketing..i'm sure we could find investors to do a 30 min or 60min FAQ program...inside aviation...explaining to the public..the rules regsand all the questions you stated...i think we should push for it.... i'd be happy to help out.

JF

FlyingBird? Since you ought to have the credentials and contacts, can you tell me how we might develop this idea?

Imagine how good a prog might be if WE were keen to make it work!!! "Black Box" got a lot of airing in the UK and I doubt that there were many people on the inside keen to help the producers. "Airline" was a documentary centred on "people" rather than the technical side and the end result was not far different from Eastenders-in-an-airport.

Dear Danny,

Now you might suggest that the replies are being rude to miss journalist and that we are wrong. But I have seen my collegue pilot smashed rudely in the press once to often to remain quiet about it. Sure I won't start a new post attacking the press, but if this woman invites me, I will tell here how I feel about it, which is not good.

If you take ten aviation reports in the papers, how many of those are good journalism and how many are absolute crap? I think at the moment all ten. Now maybe this good woman is of a different kind, but I just don't think that the aviation community is served well by reporters and it is my good right as a pilot to be suspicisious to the lot of them.

Just a small note. I am a member of a pilot's union. They give you this card to keep in your wallet, just in case something bad happens. For you need reference at such a time. It is quite a long list but the first three points are:

1) Safe-guard the well being of your passengers
2) DO NOT talk to members of the press
3) call your union representative

Are these guys paranoid then as well? I think they learned from experience!

Well, if good journalism means selling the most dead trees (or the most video airtime) then these two are probably synonymous. :uhoh:

Unstable approach:

I consult for a major news network in the USA. You mentioned you had never seen a story improving air safety. We did quite a bit on the "crushable concrete" ( emas) over-runs right after the Southwest Airlines over-run at Chicago Midway airport. I think this story at least sets the agenda to discuss installation of this system. (sadly, I had spoken to a US Congressman,like the house of commons I guess, over 10 years prior to the midway accident and encouraged installation at all airports especially midway, washington national, new york laguardia and San Francisco among others.)

I think as professional pilots we SHOULD speak out and use the media to advance safety concerns.

To the "lady" asking the questions about HELIOS, I have no clue on how to get hold of the "british" pilot on the previous flight.

There certainly is enough information out there about:

1.Easily confusing the warning horn for configuration and high cabin altitude. (remember, by the time it goes off you may already be slightly hypoxic)

Remember that in the simulator, where the pilots are trained to deal with this warning the pressure is sea level or ground level of simulator and the LACK OF OXYGEN at altitude is NOT simulated.

2.Incorrectly configuring the pressurization panel.


I do wish that Boeing and the others would change the high cabin altitude warning to a voice that screams: "OXYGEN.GET ON OXYGEN NOW"


regards

jon