A Good Call Guys!

[sirlandsalot]

Yes, I agree with Auto Relight on that one. If it wasn't the main blades it would have been the tail rotor next. Bush rule number 1 in a confined, never turn around the mast, always turn around the mast. That was pounded into me by a person with a career-and-a-half of working in the bush. Tail should be locked in a zone that is known as a clear zone. It would seem that there must be 2 pilots in there, and they both elected to turn the tail towards the wires????

 

However could happen to any of us, and hyndsight is so very good. I mean nothing towards the pilots.

[gwk]

For me, it,s not so much what happened, the video pretty much says it all, the PIC rotated around the MR in a confined area, and suffered the consequence, as the previous poster noted.

 

What I am more interested in is the follow up, does the PIC get canned, is the Fire Captain, who planned the LZ, going to be held accountable in any way, is this video going to be used by the company and BC ambulance service for training. Is BCAS going to insist that this PIC be taken off contract, to never fly for them again, like some Forestry Ministries probably would.

 

I know that I,ll never get those answers, but I would prefer to see the discussion head in that direction, instead of slagging the PIC for what some, in hind site feel is poor airmanship.

[twinstar_ca]

i personally don't think anyone is slagging the pilots... it happened and as so many have said, could happen to any of us..

 

i do hope it gets used as a training aid for flight crews AND ground crews...

[Wiggins]

I've never seen a 76 started without the rotor brake engaged. I thought SOP was to start the first engine and stabalize at idle with the brake on. Releasing the brake then brings the rotor RPM up quickly to reduce hazards to ground personel. I guess maybe the brake was broke.

[coolhand110]

Worked at Helijet for many years (6 of those flying the ambulance) and other than extremely windy days, the rotor brake was never used on start up. SOP's are company specific, not type specific. Unfortunate incident, however everyone is fine. As for learning from ORNGE, Helijet has been doing this long enough and very well. They are different operations operating under completely different environments. I do not think anyone should be calling for a pilot to be fired or not being able to fly for BCAS again. You are constantly being tasked to go to scene calls, both during the day and night, and not every spot is a great place to land.

 

Try to ease up a bit and learn from what has happened.

 

Curtis

[SuddenStop]

You are constantly being tasked to go to scene calls, both during the day and night, and not every spot is a great place to land.

 

Try to ease up a bit and learn from what has happened.

 

Curtis

 

yes, some learning to do. I know you'll disagree Curtis, but HJ is the one i'm thinking has the most to learn.

 

regardless of "operating under completely different environments" thats hogwash. the goal is to get the patient safely to the hospital, not endanger them further. That should be the same page as any medevac operator, full time/part time, period.

 

I don't believe the pilot or anyone else should be reprimanded over this incident. I only feel that they should change their operating proceedure to reflect safety as a whole. Make sure it never happens again. The ones directly involved just got a huge Safety 101 course insitu, thats plenty of incentive to change right there.

 

Imagine if it was the T/R that hit those wires, some major sh*t hitting the fan now, and you've got how many people in close range at risk in this particualr scenario as seen in the video, and you still have patient #1 to worry about. So why ever assume that risk, simply pick a landing zone big enough and far enough away to ensure 100% that you have removed the risk. If the ambulance has to drive a mile to meet you so be it, the patient is in their care.

[Iceman]

The PIC ultimately has the last word and his decision is always final no matter what the outcome. He'll take his lumps like we all do and life will go on.

[coolhand110]

You are right suddenstop, I disagree. Helijet has some extremely talented pilots and a great record. There is nothing wrong with the way they do things. At the end of the day, the PIC is the one making the final call. So why not leave the company aspect out of it. While there is always room to learn, your assumption that Helijet has the most to learn is complete crap. Both operations run differently for sure, and yes, at the end of the day, the job is to get the passengers there safely, This is just one of those things that happen, move on. The only thing that is left to say is, learn from it, and try to avoid something like this in the future. In hindsight, I am sure that the crew would have done things differently. Time to move on and get over it.

[Gary Watson]

I've never seen a 76 started without the rotor brake engaged. I thought SOP was to start the first engine and stabalize at idle with the brake on. Releasing the brake then brings the rotor RPM up quickly to reduce hazards to ground personel. I guess maybe the brake was broke.

 

I don't know HJ's SOP for rotor brake operation and the last time I saw one starting and stopping was in Courtenay last summer and I didn't watch what they did with regard to rotor brake operation.

After working on 76s a few years back I know the rotor brake puts a lot of strain on the dynamic components when being engaged. This is all well and swell on a offshore platform to ensure pax safety and speed up a crew change. However if you don't need to have the brake grinding way all the time why use it if you don't have to? The same on startup but maybe not as much stress. HJ probably has decided that the their procedure is the best for their operation.

Assuming of course that the crew was following SOPs

[happydays]

I don't know HJ's SOP for rotor brake operation and the last time I saw one starting and stopping was in Courtenay last summer and I didn't watch what they did with regard to rotor brake operation.

After working on 76s a few years back I know the rotor brake puts a lot of strain on the dynamic components when being engaged. This is all well and swell on a offshore platform to ensure pax safety and speed up a crew change. However if you don't need to have the brake grinding way all the time why use it if you don't have to? The same on startup but maybe not as much stress. HJ probably has decided that the their procedure is the best for their operation.

Assuming of course that the crew was following SOPs

 

 

We use the rotor brake on every 76 shutdown. It's there to be used and when used correctly won't put an unnecessary strain on the head. The general idea being why have the blades turning longer than is necessary with people around, particularly in strong winds when bladesailing is a factor. The 76 has the mainrotor tilted 5 degrees forwards so the blades at the nose are around head height at the best of times. In strong winds they typically sail around waist height! On start the brake can be used for the same reasons, typically for starts in winds above 15 or 20 knots.

 

I'm not sure what you mean with regards to offshore ops Gary? All our pax are loaded/unloaded rotors running, typically at 100%Nr or higher as the case may be with the C++(107%). This is for a number of reasons not least of which l mentioned earlier, bladesailing! The only time we would shutdown on deck is if the client needed an extended time on deck or we had some kind of problem requiring a shutdown.

 

As for the HJ incident, well if it were a 2 crew operation then they have some serious CRM issues. If the handling pilots take-off brief (assuming they do them?) mentioned pulling into a hover followed by a left pedal turn then some pretty serious alarm bells would be ringing. Were it a single pilot op then you would have to question the pilots experience in confined areas. Yes, #### happens however some fundamental mistakes were made there that simply shouldn't have. For a medivac machine, scary stuff!