Skidz Posted July 26, 2013 Report Share Posted July 26, 2013 LOSS OF CONTROL AND COLLISION WITH TERRAINKANANASKIS MOUNTAIN HELICOPTERS LTD.BELL 206B JETRANGER (HELICOPTER) C-GLQILODER PEAK, ALBERTA 0.4 NM NW30 MARCH 2012 http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2012/a12w0031/a12w0031.asp 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twin Helix Posted July 26, 2013 Report Share Posted July 26, 2013 Of note, the pilot overstated his total time, PIC time and Time on type. TSB found it in his logbooks, why didn't the company? Why didn't the insurer (why didn't they know about the previous rollover accident?)? In this case, the hours weren't massively overstated (100 hours claiming 500, for example) but still an example of something which likely occurs with too much frequency among low-time pilots who are desparate to get on the controls in a meaningful way. Also "the company had not confirmed the pilot’s previous mountain-flying training or experience. But in view of the pilot’s reported flying experience and time, the company did not require formal mountain training." So basically, a guy lied about his total time, they believed him and so they waived a mountain course, there was a mountain accident involving the same pilot. How hard is it to check references, confirm logbooks and call guys/girls out if they don't seem credible? A little due diligence saves lives, machines and money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
407driver Posted July 26, 2013 Report Share Posted July 26, 2013 Not good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Parker Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 It's a shame there are not more opportunities for low timers on the flats... P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helilog56 Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 It is the sole responsibility of the employer to ensure that the pilots resume as presented is accurate...and it really is not hard to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freefall Posted July 27, 2013 Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 He still had far more experience than some of the guys flying tours in those mountains. I do not condone putting false hours in the logbook but was it really a factor in this accident? He flew 2.5 hours of training and had a .5 hour pcc. It was during those 3 hours that the company should have determined if he was fit to fly their helicopter for their type of work. He passed a pilot competence check that is the bottom line. A .5 hour pcc is pretty bloody short imo. Maybe its so short because its the only part of the training the owner had to pay for himself? or maybe the pilot even had to pay for that too. When you are forcing a (low) time pilot to pay for his own training within your company obviously people are going to cut corners as much as possible because it is not something most people in that situation can afford. I'm sure the pilot would have loved to do more mountain training. I can't imagine what it must be like to be one of 12 pilots fighting for scraps working in that place...I consider myself very fortunate not to have experienced it. I feel terrible for the friends and family who will read that report. I don't believe it points to the real root cause of that accident. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skidz Posted July 27, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2013 He still had far more experience than some of the guys flying tours in those mountains. I do not condone putting false hours in the logbook but was it really a factor in this accident? He flew 2.5 hours of training and had a .5 hour pcc. It was during those 3 hours that the company should have determined if he was fit to fly their helicopter for their type of work. He passed a pilot competence check that is the bottom line. A .5 hour pcc is pretty bloody short imo. Maybe its so short because its the only part of the training the owner had to pay for himself? or maybe the pilot even had to pay for that too. When you are forcing a (low) time pilot to pay for his own training within your company obviously people are going to cut corners as much as possible because it is not something most people in that situation can afford. I'm sure the pilot would have loved to do more mountain training. I can't imagine what it must be like to be one of 12 pilots fighting for scraps working in that place...I consider myself very fortunate not to have experienced it. I feel terrible for the friends and family who will read that report. I don't believe it points to the real root cause of that accident. I think the fact that TC revoked their PCC status and PPC'd all of their pilots speaks volumes in itself... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizzo Posted July 28, 2013 Report Share Posted July 28, 2013 "The Transport Canada (TC) post-accident process inspection (PI) of the company in May 2012 revealed deficiencies in pilot training, which existed at the time of the last program validation inspection (PVI) and were active on the day of the accident. This finding resulted in TC inspectors revoking PCC authority and conducting pilot proficiency checks (PPCs) on all company pilots. If adequate surveillance is not maintained by TC , there is an increased risk for operator safety deficiencies to go unidentified." What SMS didn't catch that? It's a shame that TC has been reduced to such an ineffective organization, only getting involved once things have taken place. Would this accident have happened if someone other than the company involved taken an interest in ensuring a "standard"? Guess we'll never know. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bell-powered Posted July 29, 2013 Report Share Posted July 29, 2013 Of note, the pilot overstated his total time, PIC time and Time on type. TSB found it in his logbooks, why didn't the company? Why didn't the insurer (why didn't they know about the previous rollover accident?)? In this case, the hours weren't massively overstated (100 hours claiming 500, for example) but still an example of something which likely occurs with too much frequency among low-time pilots who are desparate to get on the controls in a meaningful way. Also "the company had not confirmed the pilot’s previous mountain-flying training or experience. But in view of the pilot’s reported flying experience and time, the company did not require formal mountain training." So basically, a guy lied about his total time, they believed him and so they waived a mountain course, there was a mountain accident involving the same pilot. How hard is it to check references, confirm logbooks and call guys/girls out if they don't seem credible? A little due diligence saves lives, machines and money. Totally agree, I once heard of a pilot from lets say outside Canada, who had an accident and after the company in question was asked if they checked his hours with previous employers, and the company responded "But he is from XX" ... like an international call is so hard these days.. So sad to see this happen, but quite surprising it doesn't happen more often. These guys makes it way harder for the people that actually are honest low timers.. Its a mentality that should be dealt with way better in this industry, rather than focusing on some things that they are now... BP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minab Posted July 29, 2013 Report Share Posted July 29, 2013 This other one was not that long ago Power LossKananaskis Mountain Helicopters Ltd.Bell 206B Helicopter C-GFQZCline River Heliport (CCR5), Alberta12 August 2007 http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/aviation/2007/a07w0150/a07w0150.asp both of them showing company dysfunctions ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.