Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bell214

Rocky Mountain Helicopters

Recommended Posts

Here are some stats when it comes to 214's and logging

 

There have been a total 18 crashes of machines actually engaged in logging at the time resulting in 11 machines being wrote-off. 4 were fatal resulting in 7 fatalaties. 9 of the crashes were Rocky Mountain Helicopters. Of the 4 fatal crashes 2 were maintenance errors, 1 was pilot error, and only 1 was mechanical failure. The mechanical failure happened in 1977 when the vertical fin seperated from ship #004 (214B's were first certified in 1976). This resulted in an AD that mandated the replacement of one of the original aluminum fin spars to a steel one.

 

Since 1977 there has not been a fatal 214 logging crash as a result of mechanical failure. This cannot be said for most all other logging machines out there.

 

Here is how the causes break down for the logging crashes:

 

Engine failure - 6 (Improvements made to failure prone parts)

Maintenance error - 4

Cluth failure - 3 (Bell introduced a better clutch in 1980, no failures since)

Pilot error - 2

Tailboom failure - 2 (See above for the 1 failure)

Tranny spindle failure - 1 (Now time-lifed)

 

Through improvements and experiance the 214 is one of the best suited and safest helicopters in the logging enviroment.

 

 

I would like to know where your "stats" have come from ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wrecks that I remember (in Canada) go something like...

1)Alpine - skis through t/r

2)original Transwest - can't remember...snagged bucket in trees?

3)Can-Arc - engine failure

4)Black Tusk - collective bounce

5)East West - fuel starvation

6)Transwest - spindle failure

7)East West - fuel starvation

8)Transwest - engine failure

9)Transwest - engine failure

10)Black Tusk - tailboom failure

 

Thats from memory so some of the details may have got wiped out by the rye. Feel free to correct me if the list doesn't seem right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The wrecks that I remember (in Canada) go something like...

1)Alpine - skis through t/r

2)original Transwest - can't remember...snagged bucket in trees?

3)Can-Arc - engine failure

4)Black Tusk - collective bounce

5)East West - fuel starvation

6)Transwest - spindle failure

7)East West - fuel starvation

8)Transwest - engine failure

9)Transwest - engine failure

10)Black Tusk - tailboom failure

 

Thats from memory so some of the details may have got wiped out by the rye. Feel free to correct me if the list doesn't seem right.

 

The "stats" posted are just the actual numbers of aircraft that crashed.....I have no problem with that.

 

You posted that 2 were pilot error.....that is what I am questioning?

How did you come up with that number????

Perhaps some of the "maintenance" issues were "human factors"?

Have those ever been verified ?????

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
H56, the "stats" were posted by 33inchChord, the wrecks I posted were just from memory.

 

vortex

 

Thanks V.....thats why I quoted his post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear I was talking about 214's actually engaged in logging at the time of the accident. There has been other accidents by companies that use 214's for logging but were not logging at the time.

 

Helilog, the stats come from accident reports published by the respective government agencies.

Most, but not all are available on the internet. I consider them a valuable training tool.

 

I know pilot errors and maintenance errors are a broad categories and both usually involve multiple human factors. For the purpose of the discussion I was separating the mechanical failures of the machine from the human errors (both pilots and engineers).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to be clear I was talking about 214's actually engaged in logging at the time of the accident. There has been other accidents by companies that use 214's for logging but were not logging at the time.

 

Helilog, the stats come from accident reports published by the respective government agencies.

Most, but not all are available on the internet. I consider them a valuable training tool.

 

I know pilot errors and maintenance errors are a broad categories and both usually involve multiple human factors. For the purpose of the discussion I was separating the mechanical failures of the machine from the human errors (both pilots and engineers).

 

Thanks...... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to engine failures..for you 2 engine dude's...keep in mind...that most of , if not all the engine failures in the 214 are from fuel starvation, which in no way should be confused with mechanical error, comes under human factors..pilot error...one or 2 engines doesnt matter still needs fuel...and as for any other "mechanical error" 2 engines wont make a dam bit of difference if the spar or a clutch fails....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to engine failures..for you 2 engine dude's...keep in mind...that most of , if not all the engine failures in the 214 are from fuel starvation, which in no way should be confused with mechanical error, comes under human factors..pilot error...one or 2 engines doesnt matter still needs fuel...and as for any other "mechanical error" 2 engines wont make a dam bit of difference if the spar or a clutch fails....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...