Jump to content

Medevac Flight Research for a Novel


Tropic

Recommended Posts

Thanks in advance for information on this topic. I'm writing a medevac scene with a medevac crew on the way. This takes place in the Midwest (plains - no mountains) about 20 years ago. A blizzard is on the way, but it is not snowing. There is no ice. There is a storm front. It is night time and winds are gusting up to 45 mph. Helicopter is flying 800 to 2000 feet. Is problematic turbulence much of a possibility in this type of weather scenario or not very likely? I would like to write a realistic scene. I wanted to depict the crew as having to deal with severe turbulence. The helicopter needs to complete the mission, so I wouldn't want a situation that would disable it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 48 years, never in 'severe turbulence' by official definition. I have been bumped around pretty good, and once with patient and new medical crew aboard. Scared the F outta them. It happens.

Can't add anything to your oncoming blizzard scenario, I'm in the Deep South. Fronts can move pretty quickly.

Edited by Wally
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies and some clarification. I should have realized there are definitions for levels of turbulence in the aviation world. I meant "scary" unexpected turbulence from the pilot's and passenger's viewpoint. I see the technical definition of turbulence in an article by John Brandon at this link:
Wind Shear and Turbulence
www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/safety/wind_shear.html#definition

So, I'd like to clarify that it would be more in the moderate turbulence range or yes a pilot with good judgment would decline the flight.

Regarding realistic - is it realistic that a pilot could experience that level of moderate turbulence with a storm front/impending blizzard flying over a flat rural area at 800 - 2000 feet? Is a front like that likely to cause problems with winds already gusty 30 to 45 mph (or please provide a wind gust range that would not deter a pilot with good judgment). I realize aircraft are built to certain specifications regarding durability for certain weather conditions...

 




  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We just had a warm front pass and we had 50kt winds to the surface paired with heavy rain that could have easily been snow if the temp had been only a few degrees lower. Even a massive helicopter would struggle in anything above 30kts so I think the weather system and aircraft are realistic.

As for setting it 20 years ago, I haven't been in the industry long enough to give you a good idea about what the norm was back then. I would recommend reading some of the books by Randy Mains (http://www.randymains.com/enter/) who wrote several books about the early EMS days. Journey to the Golden Hour would be my personal recommendation about the GO attitude and the FAA trouble it caused. He's also very active on some of the Facebook helicopter pilot groups, so you can track him down and message him there.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, zippiesdrainage! I'll check out your leads.

When you experienced the warm front were you in the Midwest?

The helicopter would be very similar to the H135 - a member of Airbus Helicopters' light-medium EC135 family of helicopters. Available starting in 1994. I probably won't identify a specific helicopter type/company though. Needs to be a twin engine workhorse though typically used for civilian medevac.

 

Any guidance re: what that helicopter could withstand in terms of weather conditions? Turbulence should be "scary" and challenging, perhaps testing the limits of the aircraft, but the pilot never loses control of the aircraft. Wind in knots or mph bad, but not so terrible flight would be declined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't specify if this is a professional air ambulance operation? I can see getting caught out in this scenario in HEMS, some patients take hours to get aboard. But, if this situation was forecast to occur during a reasonable time period of patient transport, I would likely refuse the request- I ain't no hero and won't risk killing 4 to try to save 1.

 

Wind in and of itself is not an issue in flight other than the affects on your speed over the ground. Example: If you are making 130 knots airspeed and flying in the same direction as a 50 knot wind, you're making 180 knots over the ground. Reverse is also inescapably true, 130 knots into the wind is 80 knots over the ground. The effect decreases as you go across the wind except that you have to point into the wind to make your course good. At some adjustment to heading vs course, you will be back to your indicate airspeed versus ground speed. Flown many hours in 50, 60 knot winds at cruise altitudes, no problems.

Wind at engine/rotor start, takoff and landing/shutdown is a whole different thing with various helicopters and locations having their particular issues.

The amount of light, as in 'night', is not a particular issue except that the almighty surface reference has to be available if you're flying visual reference. Until the issues in the next paragraph...

"Gusts to 45 mph" is the real challenge in your scenario. How big is the gust spread? Why is it gusty? If the basis wind is 30 or better, lots of general operations manuals will allow you to fly. That's a max gust of 15. The landings and takeoffs in wider gust spreads get real sporty and the en route leg will be bumpy.

If the front is approaching and convective activity is increasing, the turbulence at cruise also becomes more marked and can be a surprise. This makes the med crew's work very challenging.

I think of blizzards as a cold front phenomenon and cold fronts can move very quickly and generate significant winds before and after. Dealing with an approaching front at night is a challenge.

 

The biggest difference in 20 years ago and now:

In-cockpit data availability, weather depictions on moving maps, digital 'smart' gauging, data relays to company flight control

Night vision goggles were much less common, a pilot would probably be flying unaided. How dark is it? Parts of the plains have little artificial lighting on the ground, so under a cloud deck that blocks moon/star lighting, it can be very very dark for visual flight. As In you can't see ANYTHING dark.

I am a light discipline bear flying unaided, I require the medical crew minimize light usage without notification and I will change my route and altitude if they need it. The crew would be working in the dark, which is a stresser.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be a professional Helicopter EMS service with a highly skilled, ex-combat pilot who has good judgment about whether or not to fly.

This is makes great sense for the scene I'm writing:

"Gusts to 45 mph" is the real challenge in your scenario. How big is the gust spread? Why is it gusty? If the basis wind is 30 or better, lots of general operations manuals will allow you to fly. That's a max gust of 15. The landings and takeoffs in wider gust spreads get real sporty and the en route leg will be bumpy.

If the front is approaching and convective activity is increasing, the turbulence at cruise also becomes more marked and can be a surprise. This makes the med crew's work very challenging.

I think of blizzards as a cold front phenomenon and cold fronts can move very quickly and generate significant winds before and after. Dealing with an approaching front at night is a challenge.

In a helicopter like the H135 would that flight be a reasonable go? Or should I lower the gusts from 45 - change the weather info somewhat? It's a 40 mile trip toward the incoming blizzard front so I suppose the weather could be quite different en route.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not familiar with the acronyms, ElJay :)

iimc?

crm?

what would happen in that scenario?

 

 

IMC: instrument meteorological conditions (instrument conditions, requiring flight by reference to instruments, or conditions less than the minimum for visual reference flight).

 

CRM: crew resource management, also called cockpit resource management. It's about using all the resources available in the cockpit, coordinating with other crew members, whether pilots, medics, etc, as well as air traffic control. It's also about managing cockpit resources such as navigational aids, and so forth. It's closely tied to ADM, which is aeronautical decision making.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 years ago, a probable aircraft would be the BK117. This can fly in very rough weather, due to its rigid rotor system - I have been in turbulence that tipped me over to 120 degrees bank. It will cruise fairly happily around 125kt.

 

Downside is that it needs CSAS, the stability augmentation system, and even then the cabin ride can be rugged, as the fuselage is rigidly attached to the rotor system, and whatever it does gets passed on to the pax. Many EMS machines were not IFR, just Night VFR, so no autopilot - too expensive, added weight and complexity. Few glass screens, mostly steam gauges and clockwork.

 

CRM in those days was known as Airmanship, or just CDF. Common Dog F###.

 

GPS moving maps were becoming more common, Garmin made a nice colour map, but it was usually a free-standing unit, not built-in. NVG was almost unknown in the civil world.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be a professional Helicopter EMS service with a highly skilled, ex-combat pilot who has good judgment about whether or not to fly.

 

Regardless of the time period, it would be difficult for an “unskilled” pilot to be hired as an EMS pilot. Moreover, I’m not sure of the significance of the “ex-combat” characterization or the emphasis on “good judgement”. If this is an attempt to describe the pilot as a true professional EMS pilot, with the conditions you’ve painted, he’s not going to pull-pitch in the first place and jeopardize the machine and crew. That is, in order for this flight to take place, the pilot is going to have a flaw…..

Edited by Spike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is, in order for this flight to take place, the pilot is going to have a flaw..

Just make him an ex-Robby Ranger, HEMS guys love hearing about them scewing up!,...well at least over at the fun forum. :D

 

Do people still read books?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Spike, then what I'm asking is - under what conditions - weather data info - would it appear reasonable to take off with the type of weather info available 20 years ago, and yet the pilot encounters unexpected, moderate turbulence heading into the front?

Helicopter is not damaged and pilot remains in control of it.

Eric Hunt's answer seems like a good one, but I'm not a pilot.

 

During my research for this on other forums, reading books, etc. I've read several accounts of experienced pilots encountering unexpected weather conditions. I'm looking at accounts about 20 years ago when systems for providing weather forecasts aren't as sophisticated as they are now.

 


  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Even with all the technology and oversight that available, we still haven't figured out how to avoid flying into bad weather and having poor results. Often times, in these situations, the only difference between making it back and not is luck.

 

That luck could be in the form of time (5 minutes either way can make a huge difference), maybe seeing a hole just at the right time to regain control, maybe just having returned from IFR recurrent training (what you brushed up on might have had an entirely different outcome the hitch before), etc...

 

If you want a realistic account of what kinds of weather people would leave in, or what can change that makes things a little scary, I'd suggest looking through some NTSB accident/incident reports.

 

http://www.aviationdb.com/Aviation/AccidentQuery.shtm

 

A simple search by typing in the box "Aircraft Make" you could type "Bell" for example and on the very bottom "Narrative" box type "IMC" and it will bring all sorts of results, and some even in your desired time period. It will take a little digging, but there are many examples that list the weather, what happened, etc.

 

I found a few, but don't have a way to cut and paste here.

 

If you find some reports that you see as valid, note the tail number and look it up. You should be able to find the full ntsb report that gives you more detail.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not Spike, but some thoughts:

 

What's not appreciated/anticipated by many is the amount of time involved in any HEMS flight. Programs proclaim standards such as 10 minutes at a scene and 20 minutes at a hospital. Often these are met but it's not unusual to be much longer at the patient pickup. The pilot is typically given only patient location and receiving facility for a hospital to hospital flight, period, and has no idea if it's remote patient from the LZ or a nest of tubes serving a barely stable, complicated patient in a hospital.

The idea is to give the pilot enough information to make a purely aviation decision. It's not unusual to spend hours at a scene or a hospital gaining access to the patient, stabilizing and packaging. One of our crews hiked miles into a mountain wilderness and carried the patient out with the responding agency people,,, hours spent waiting and monitoring weather with secondary methods, especially 20 years ago.

 

The next challenge is to get the patient to appropriate care and protect the aircraft afterwards. Yes, I could see being in the described scenario, I have done it (except for the blizzard). One carefully and conservatively evaluates conditions, avoids the poorer conditions, makes an alternate plan within reasonable limits and proceeds. I am a big one for taking circuitous routes around hazards and to have more immediate landing areas closer. There's nothing worse than getting deep into an uncomfortable situation and having to reverse course and fly back out.

 

A close weather decision can become a real problem in the hours waiting. The flying can be challenging but the waiting and the decision processes are the killers.

 

It can get pretty bumpy and be acceptable from an aircraft and pilot point of view. The med crew has different challenges, sudden aircraft attitude changes can be a real problem when you're accessing a vein or whatever they are doing back there. A good EMS pilot solicits input in the decision process, listens to the crew treating the patient and watches them. I am always thinking about nearest hospitals and airports, especially if they are really busy.

 

MBB Bo105s were still in wide use 20 years. I'm not a Bolkow driver and pilot opinions are all over, but it rides like a buckboard and is cramped on the inside.

 

"Combat experience" is a two-edged sword. It stresses some and lends detachment to others. The best pilot I ever saw was just over 5 foot tall, blonde and a woman, 100% civilian.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...