Jump to content

Finnair

Member
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Finnair last won the day on March 12 2012

Finnair had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About Finnair

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Helicopter manufacturers have GARA (General Aviation Revitalization Act) – Signed into law in the US in 1994, GARA dictates that no civil action for damages for death or injury may be brought against a manufacturer of an aircraft – or for any component, system, subassembly, or any other part of an aircraft – in the US 18 years after the initial date of delivery of the aircraft to its first purchaser, lessee, lessor or seller of that particular aircraft. GARA was initially designed to protect general aircraft manufacturers from seemingly endless liability suits. In other words, in the US, ther
  2. Wow! Death threats, blacklists, fear, intimidation, cash, helicopters........ I don’t think anyone has an issue with remaining anonymous, especially after reading some of the previous posts. Only downside is you shouldn’t expect to be taken seriously. It can be a tough business – most everyone knew that coming in. I sincerely hope some of your real lives are not as bad as portrayed here. Wayne
  3. The forums here on Vertical are pretty entertaining.....for the most part. I believe that the intent of the Vertical Forum is and should be entertaining, but more importantly, it should be a way and means to openly discuss issues that reflect concerns/current issues that are important to anyone associated with this industry. Despite our differences of opinions, everyone in this industry plays a part, some big, some small, in shaping how we conduct our day to day activities. This forum is a mixture of everyone. It truly is a representation of the Canadian helicopter industry, an
  4. Actually, almost 60% of twin engine failures begin with total loss of power to both engines. (NASA) My point was not that there are any more or less engine failures in a twin, but the fact that the possibility of a structural or component failure in a twin is almost identical to the possibility of an engine failure in a single. So in regards to long lining in a twin or a single, are you better prepared for a structural/component failure or an engine failure? For a line patrol or heli-skiing, the same stats apply. Training, experience, good engineering, SMS – all are key to safe op
  5. Once again, the stats are not mine, but belong to NASA and Bell. If you base your safety only on an engine failure, you are missing the other 85% of the equation. Safety decisions on any one aspect of helicopters should not be made without considering all the other safety aspects, as well as the human causes. Fly safe in your "clapped out old twin". Wayne
  6. The above numbers in post #42 were based on Bell Helicopters Fleet. Twin Engine machines are 212, 222, 230, 214ST, 412, 430. Single Engine are 206, 206L/L3/L4, 204, 205, 407, 214. I would expect that the higher percentage of injuries could be attributed partially to a slightly higher seat capacity in the Bell twin engine machines, although I have no numbers to confirm this. NASA on the other hand, does identify a “disturbing trend” which identifies a higher fatality rate with larger helicopters which are capable of carrying more passengers. NASA puts the fatality rate of single
  7. ”Engine Material Failure (MF) initiated the crashes that caused 14.8 percent of the serious injuries to occupants of single-turbine helicopters, as compared to only 3.4 percent for the serious injuries to the occupants of twin-turbine helicopter accidents. If only this one piece of information is considered, the obvious conclusion is that two engines are better than one. However, next consider only the cause factor of material failures other than engine (non-engine MF). In this case, only 11.0 percent of the seriously injured occupants were involved in single-turbine helicopter crashes
  8. Hey Jerry Hope you are doing well in retirement. I don't regularly read Disraeli, but if you can provide some facts, and some links to such, I'm all ears. Wayne
  9. Jullian Good question.... The stats provided were not mine, but belong to a US organization called NASA. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) performed a study of US Civil Rotorcraft Accidents over a 34 year period. http://www3.verticalgateway.com/portals/54/industry_reports/NASA%20TP%20209597.pdf The link above will provide you with the entire 300+ page report. The previous post was to show that twin turbine helicopters may reduce the frequency of engine failures, but the increase in airframe/component failures offset any advantage to twin turbine. Single turbin
  10. In addition to the previous post, according to the NTSB, nearly 45% of all first event loss of power accidents, twin or single turbine, can be directly traced to human error. (Fuel/Air mixture, fuel starvation, fuel exhaustion, fuel contamination) 20 minute reserves? Wayne
  11. For your consideration; Loss of engine power accounted for 31% of the single turbine first event category accidents. Loss of engine power accounted for 13% of the twin turbine first event category accidents. Airframe/component failure accounted for 30% of the twin turbine first event category accidents. Airframe/component failure accounted for 12% of the single turbine first event category accidents. First event is the physical event that adversly affected the rotorcraft or unusual occurance that the aircrew became aware of. We train for engine failures throughout our careers
×
×
  • Create New...