Jump to content


VOLO_VRGeneral468TigerTugsVRForumGen468Helicopter AcademyFrasca VRForum468
Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Don't strap people in a helicopter

crash

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#21 Nearly Retired

Nearly Retired

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 569 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pensacola, FL
  • Interests:Well, obviously flying and anything aviation...but motorcycling as well. And drinking (when I'm not riding of course!). Oh, and Facebook. Always on Facebook (Bob Barbanes).
  • Company working for:Golden Wings Aviation, Brewster, WA (part-time)

Posted 14 March 2018 - 08:16

Well to be fair it wasn't an actual article but only a Letter To The Editor calling for the use of twins in sightseeing ops.  The idea may have some merit.  Twins (like the 355 for example) usually have the engine controls up top.

 

Having said that, if Aerospatiale had originally put the engine controls on the overhead when they designed the 350, instead of down on the floor between the seats we wouldn't be having this discussion right now.  But no...the designers wanted those critical controls (FCL and fuel shut-off) near where the pilot could reach them easily.  

 

If, if, if...

 

IF...  they just wouldn't allow front-seat pax to have items with straps.  Have we learned NOTHING from the Era Alaska crash, which was TEN YEARS ago?

 

IF...  the passengers' harness had some sort of emergency quick-release that could be activated by the pilot...

 

IF...  the Apical floats had been quicker and more completely to inflate...

 

Talk about the holes in the Swiss cheese lining up!


  • Wally likes this

#22 chris pochari

chris pochari

    VR Veteran Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco CA
  • Interests:Helicopters, business, geopolitics, rotorcraft technology, investing, real estate, business opportunities
  • Company working for:RSI

Posted 14 March 2018 - 08:37

Well to be fair it wasn't an actual article but only a Letter To The Editor calling for the use of twins in sightseeing ops.  The idea may have some merit.  Twins (like the 355 for example) usually have the engine controls up top.

 

Having said that, if Aerospatiale had originally put the engine controls on the overhead when they designed the 350, instead of down on the floor between the seats we wouldn't be having this discussion right now.  But no...the designers wanted those critical controls (FCL and fuel shut-off) near where the pilot could reach them easily.  

 

If, if, if...

 

IF...  they just wouldn't allow front-seat pax to have items with straps.  Have we learned NOTHING from the Era Alaska crash, which was TEN YEARS ago?

 

IF...  the passengers' harness had some sort of emergency quick-release that could be activated by the pilot...

 

IF...  the Apical floats had been quicker and more completely to inflate...

 

Talk about the holes in the Swiss cheese lining up!

 

Do you know of previous AS350 fuel cut off accidents? I tried searching the NTSB but didn't find anything



#23 helonorth

helonorth

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,028 posts

Posted 14 March 2018 - 11:45

Not an article. Just a letter to the editor. Do we know that's what happened with the fuel control? Those weren't Apical floats.

Edited by helonorth, 14 March 2018 - 11:47.


#24 Wally

Wally

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,617 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Jefferson, GA
  • Interests:Reading's high on the list.
  • Company working for:none

Posted 14 March 2018 - 13:15

Think about this event for a second: 

  • engine failure, for whatever reason
  • doors off
  • survivable auto to the water. 

 

You'd think that at least one of the pax would get out by dumb luck.

Nope, the restraints had to be cut away to recover all the passengers' bodies.

The RESTRAINTS kept all the victims in the aircraft and drowned them.

 

Oh, and "The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft".  That pilot will carry this for the rest of his/her life.


Edited by Wally, 14 March 2018 - 13:23.

  • chris pochari likes this

Just a pilot (retired, so I have a LOT of time)...


#25 Azhigher

Azhigher

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 514 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 March 2018 - 16:37

That pilot will carry this for the rest of his/her life.

 

True, but at least his life goes on. Plenty of time to figure out all the other pieces.



#26 helonorth

helonorth

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,028 posts

Posted 14 March 2018 - 21:37

Not an article. Just a letter to the editor. Do we know that's what happened with the fuel control? Those weren't Apical floats.

 

I have to correct myself. When I flew offshore, " Apical floats" were the ones with the rafts. Dart acquired them in 2007 so there are no more "Apical" floats, they are just floats and the raft is optional.

 

I don't know what happened but IMO, flying passengers over water that are restrained in such a way that it would be very difficult to free themselves in an emergency, is criminally negligent.


  • chris pochari likes this

#27 DizzyD

DizzyD

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 89 posts

Posted 15 March 2018 - 02:48

FFCL placement previously identified as a design hazard...

 

https://www.ntsb.gov...rs/A-10-131.pdf

 

"As a result of its findings from this investigation, other similar accidents, and reported incidents, the NTSB is concerned that inadvertent movement of the FFCL on certain Eurocopter AS350-series helicopters and other helicopters with similarly designed FFCLs and detent tracks could lead to an engine overspeed event or loss of engine power, which could cause a serious or catastrophic accident if the FFCL movement occurs during a critical point in flight or on the ground."



#28 Spike

Spike

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,623 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 March 2018 - 02:56

If the reports are accurate, especially with the AS350, maybe simply restrict what passengers are allowed to bring into the cockpit environment would prevent such incidents…. If so, discussing the related issues with HUET, harnesses and floats essentially become moot ….

 

The initial “links of the chain” of an accident are usually apparent and thus should be easily mitigated. Failing to recognize this, for whatever reason, can contribute to further “links” contributing to an unfortunate end result.

 

With more than a few hours in an AS350, if you fly one, guard the center floor controls like your life depends on it -because it does. If flying tours, in cruise, cover the center controls with your left hand and arm at all times. Simply hook a finger into the left seat bucket edge and rest your arm across the center control area. This will afford you a level of protection and, be instantly readily available to lower the collective in case of engine failure.  In short, every machine has one or more “Achilles Heel”. Understanding what they are may save your life and the passengers lives you’re responsible for…..


Edited by Spike, 15 March 2018 - 02:59.

  • Wally, Mikemv, Hand_Grenade_Pilot and 1 other like this

#29 hotstart

hotstart

    Student Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts

Posted 15 March 2018 - 19:20

500 hours in B2's flying in the ditch last year. Many times one of the front passengers would be taking a picture with a camera or cell phone then drop it. Countless times the phone/camera ended up directly under my FFCL or fuel shut off after they attempt to catch it. The majority of the time the passenger instinctively goes to grab for it immediately. If you happen to be talking about something outside of the aircraft or momentarily distracted something else they can beat you down there before you're able to smack their hand away or grab it for them. Honestly couldn't believe someone at one point thought that design would be a good choice. Specifically for loss of tail rotor at a hover as well as the possibility for accidental shut off. I feel like the majority of FFCL or shut off valve incidents would be prevented by a left drive helicopter in the tour sector.

 

Just my $0.02

 

 

Oh, also maybe don't restrain people into a helicopter with zero ways of quick disconnecting in an emergency. But I think we beat that horse.


  • Wally and Hand_Grenade_Pilot like this

#30 chris pochari

chris pochari

    VR Veteran Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco CA
  • Interests:Helicopters, business, geopolitics, rotorcraft technology, investing, real estate, business opportunities
  • Company working for:RSI

Posted 17 March 2018 - 02:57

Anyway, it's not up for debate anymore.

WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration temporarily banned open-door helicopter tours Friday because of concerns that extra restraints could hinder emergency evacuation, after the deaths of five people in a New York City crash Sunday.

The FAA said operators, pilots and consumers should be aware of the hazard created with extra restraints that hold passengers inside helicopters, but could hinder an emergency evacuation. Leaving doors open is popular for photography. “The FAA will order operators and pilots to take immediate actions to control or mitigate this risk,” the agency said in a statement. “Until then, the FAA will order no more “doors off” operations that involve restraints that cannot be released quickly in an emergency.”



#31 iChris

iChris

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 937 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 21 March 2018 - 12:00

Anyway, it's not up for debate anymore.

WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration temporarily banned open-door helicopter tours Friday because of concerns that extra restraints could hinder emergency evacuation, after the deaths of five people in 

 

Hold the phone... The FAA has not issued any official banned on open-door helicopter tours. The FAA has a rulemaking process. To date, no regulatory actions has been taken, in writing. All we have is an NTSB recommendation. It may happen, and there may be some upcoming emergency action, but it hasn’t happened yet.

 

We have not seen the official order.


Edited by iChris, 21 March 2018 - 12:14.

  • Hand_Grenade_Pilot and chris pochari like this
Regards,

Chris

#32 Nearly Retired

Nearly Retired

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 569 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pensacola, FL
  • Interests:Well, obviously flying and anything aviation...but motorcycling as well. And drinking (when I'm not riding of course!). Oh, and Facebook. Always on Facebook (Bob Barbanes).
  • Company working for:Golden Wings Aviation, Brewster, WA (part-time)

Posted 21 March 2018 - 20:02

No operator in their right mind will ever tether pax to a helicopter again with a harness that is not quick-release, FAA rule or not.  

 

Not to make light of this accident, but I envision a WKRP moment at Liberty Helicopters.  I'm sure that whoever is in charge must've walked in the door like a modern-day Mr. Carlson and said, "As God is my witness, I never figured on this happening."  And honestly, they probably did not.  In retrospect, *we* can see how fraught with danger these harnesses are...now.  But the incredible series of events...the holes in the Swiss cheese lining up like that...boy, who could've (or should have) seen that coming?

 

Well, the courts will decide that. 

 

But like I said, even without a new FAR on the subject, I can almost guarantee you that it will never happen again.


  • chris pochari likes this

#33 r22butters

r22butters

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pluto,...at least until the next election :) ,...damn the wifi here is unbelievable!
  • Interests:Admiring the city lights and coastal sunsets from a thousand feet,...when I have the dough. :)

    ,...oh' yeah, and boobs!
    😕+🍟+🚁+🌃=☺
    .
  • Company working for:Just a happy casual renter! :)

Posted 21 March 2018 - 21:08

Hold the phone... The FAA has not issued any official banned on open-door helicopter tours. The FAA has a rulemaking process. To date, no regulatory actions has been taken, in writing. All we have is an NTSB recommendation. It may happen, and there may be some upcoming emergency action, but it hasn’t happened yet.
 
We have not seen the official order.


I thought it was a photo flight not a "tour"?
The only dream I have left is to live long enough to see the pilot shortage. Its been about fifteen years since they first told me it was coming, so,...

Aaaaaaaany day now! :D

#34 hotstart

hotstart

    Student Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts

Posted 21 March 2018 - 21:29

I thought it was a photo flight not a "tour"?

 

zzzing!



#35 iChris

iChris

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 937 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 21 March 2018 - 22:27

I thought it was a photo flight not a "tour"?

 

Urgent Recommendation

 

To the Federal Aviation Administration:

Prohibit all open-door commercial passenger-carrying aircraft flights that use passenger harness systems, unless the harness system allows passengers to rapidly release the harness with minimal difficulty and without having to cut or forcefully remove the harness. (A-18-12)

 

BY THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

ROBERT L. SUMWALT, III

Chairman

Adopted: March 19, 2018 

 

Harness system was not installed by the helicopter manufacturer; it was comprised of off-the-shelf components (a nylon fall-protection harness tethered via a lanyard to the helicopter) that were provided to the passengers by FlyNYON, the company that sold the experience to the passengers. Under normal circumstances, at the conclusion of each flight, FlyNYON personnel would unscrew a locking carabiner located on the back of the passengers’ harnesses so that the passengers could egress. 

FlyNYON - The Ultimate Helicopter Photo Experience

 

NTSB Urgent Safety Recommendation (Full Text)


Edited by iChris, 21 March 2018 - 22:36.

  • Wally and chris pochari like this
Regards,

Chris

#36 chris pochari

chris pochari

    VR Veteran Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco CA
  • Interests:Helicopters, business, geopolitics, rotorcraft technology, investing, real estate, business opportunities
  • Company working for:RSI

Posted 23 March 2018 - 21:43

https://www.ainonlin...esses-doors-ops



#37 iChris

iChris

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 937 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 24 March 2018 - 13:19

 It may happen, and there may be some upcoming emergency action, but it hasn’t happened yet.

 

We have not seen the official order.

 

The official emergency order...

 

``Doors-off'' and ``Open-door'' Flight Prohibition: Emergency Restriction/Prohibition Order

 

or

 

PDF


Edited by iChris, 24 March 2018 - 13:26.

  • hotstart likes this
Regards,

Chris

#38 r22butters

r22butters

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pluto,...at least until the next election :) ,...damn the wifi here is unbelievable!
  • Interests:Admiring the city lights and coastal sunsets from a thousand feet,...when I have the dough. :)

    ,...oh' yeah, and boobs!
    😕+🍟+🚁+🌃=☺
    .
  • Company working for:Just a happy casual renter! :)

Posted 24 March 2018 - 13:30

The official emergency [/size]order...
 
``Doors-off'' and ``Open-door'' Flight Prohibition: Emergency Restriction/Prohibition Order
 
or
 
PDF


So, just how many operators are actually affected by this? I mean, was it that common to lets passengers dangle out the open door strapped in by a harness that could only be cut off in the event of an emergency?!
  • chris pochari likes this
The only dream I have left is to live long enough to see the pilot shortage. Its been about fifteen years since they first told me it was coming, so,...

Aaaaaaaany day now! :D

#39 iChris

iChris

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 937 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

Posted 24 March 2018 - 17:27

So, just how many operators are actually affected by this? I mean, was it that common to lets passengers dangle out the open door strapped in by a harness that could only be cut off in the event of an emergency?!

 

From the FAA’s viewpoint it’s not so much how many people have been affected, it’s how many could be affected and lose their lives in the future. That seems to be the basis for their decision evidenced from the background and basis of the order section in the original text. Also read the “Scope and Effect of This Order” section. Order Link..

 

Background/Basis for Order

 

While the fatalities on March 11, 2018, involved an aircraft impacting the water, passengers could face a similar hazard in other emergency situations, such as an aircraft fire on the ground.

 

Under 49 U.S.C. 46105( c ) the Acting Administrator has determined that an emergency exists related to safety in air commerce. This determination is based on the threat to passenger safety presented by the use of supplemental passenger restraint systems not approved by the FAA, which may prevent a passenger from exiting the aircraft quickly in an emergency. Accordingly, this Order is effective immediately.

 

This order is issued to all operators and pilots of flights for compensation or hire with the doors open or removed (hereinafter, “doors off flights” or “doors off flight operations”) in the United States or using aircraft registered in the United States for doors off flights.

 

This Order also prohibits passenger-carrying doors off flight operations unless the passengers are at all times properly secured using FAA-approved restraints.


Edited by iChris, 24 March 2018 - 17:47.

Regards,

Chris

#40 Fred0311

Fred0311

    VR Veteran Poster

  • VR Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 395 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:?

Posted 25 March 2018 - 16:30

I could see this being a problem for utility. Power line inspections and aerial ignition both involve people hanging out of doors in harnesses. Or am I missing the wording that targets those photo/tour flights? I've never done net gunning but that would probably be hit too. Anyone else see some unintended consequences that I'm missing? I know it says quick release or mitigation but they did have strap cuttersnfrom what I read so that must not qualify as mitigation.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: crash

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



HeliHelmetsBE_VRGen200AMTC - GeneralPrecisionVRForumGeneral200NFCVRGeneral200Genesys VRForum200_GeneralSpectrum_VRGeneral468MaunaLoaSoftwareVRGeneral200