Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WTF_was_that

Rcmp River Rescue

Recommended Posts

Ok hover exit, do it all the time.

 

The hover exit ops spec only applies to CAR 702 operations.

 

But in this case it isn't applicable because the flight was conducted under Part VI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Comparison with duty to rescue

Good Samaritan laws may be confused with the duty to rescue, as described above. U.S. and Canadian approaches to this issue differ. Under the common law, good Samaritan laws provide a defence against torts arising from the attempted rescue. Such laws do not constitute a duty to rescue, such as exists in some civil law countries,[25] and in the common law under certain circumstances. However, the duty to rescue where it exists may itself imply a shield from liability; for example, under the German law of "Unterlassene Hilfeleistung" (an offense according to provide first aid when necessary), a citizen is obliged to provide first aid when necessary and is immune from prosecution if assistance given in good faith turns out to be harmful. In Canada, all provinces with the exception of Quebec operate on the basis of English Common Law. Quebec operates a civil law system, based in part on the Napoleonic Code, and the principle of duty to rescue does apply.[26]

 

To illustrate a variation in the concept of duty to rescue, in the Canadian province of Ontario, the Occupational Health and Safety Act provides all workers with the right to refuse to perform unsafe work. There are, however, specific exceptions to this right. When the "life, health or safety of another person is at risk," then specific groups, including "police officers, firefighters, or employees of a hospital, clinic or other type of medical worker (including EMS)" are specifically excluded from the right to refuse unsafe work.[27]"

 

I got this from Wikipedia under the Good Samaritan Law, if you read the second paragraph starting at , it reads to me that an RCMP pilot and crew have no choice but to act. To do nothing would then be negilgence on their part.

Also, if you read up under this definition, anyone, could have come to the rescue without the fear of reprisal is something went wrong:

 

Protection from liability 2. (1) Despite the rules of common law, a person described in subsection (2) who voluntarily and without reasonable expectation of compensation or reward provides the services described in that subsection is not liable for damages that result from the person's negligence in acting or failing to act while providing the services, unless it is established that the damages were caused by the gross negligence of the person. 2001, c. 2, s. 2 (1).[23]

Also Good Samaritan Act

[RSBC 1996] CHAPTER 172

 

I did not see the video, so I am only going on what has been written in this thread.

Good job on the part of the aircrew, the person is alive and with their family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who have not been able to view the video, I'll do my best to describe it without editorializing.

 

EC120 comes in. Girl is already strapped to a stretcher (not a litter). They open the left hand doors and slide her in sideways, perpendicular to the axis of the aircraft. They put her in feet first, so her head is sticking out past the skin of the aircraft (which I do not understand).

 

They secure the stretcher with seat belts (and whatever else they can find) and close the doors against the protruding stretcher and call it good.

 

So they took off with the doors open and about a foot of the stretcher protruding out of the aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for clarifying Mmike, I see where the MASH referance cam from.

I will now retire to the sidelines to watch what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a big deal is being made over nothing really. If I were in the same situation and someone needed life saving I would do the same as the RCMP pilot did (I agree he did a good job BTW). Vertical into the gravel bar, lightly rest the skids on those big rocks and have the victim placed in the floor of the helicopter stretcher or not.

 

Lots of armchair pilots and regulation crunchers with no concept of the real world still on this forum, thats why I stopped posting a long time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lots of armchair pilots and regulation crunchers with no concept of the real world still on this forum

 

More than suspected after watching this thread!!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so the big deal is they tossed the victim in the back without a proper securing method? As a the Medic, I've tossed a guy across the backseat of an astar on a spine board, secured with the seatbelts, knelt on the floor, and we few to the hospital. his feet were sticking out, but whoopy do. you do what you have to.

 

I really need to find an internet connection fast enough to watch the video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't secure ####!!! They put her on the back floor and the guy that jumped in the front seat had to reach around and hold the stretcher. We're not in northern Manitoba here hours away from the nearest nursing station, this the lower mainland!!! It would've been a huge step to have at least seen a somekind of tiedown on her but there wasn't.

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...