Another Helicopter ditches into the north sea....

[Rich H]

Report said mrotor head detached and struck the tail.

[kerryxeg]

Apparently the Mk1 has a gearbox chip warning alarm/ indicator, but the mk2 does not, the info is fed into the HUM's system (whatever that is). This one was a mk2 which also has a bit more power.

There is a mixture of mk 1 and mk2 models in use in the North Sea.

Kerry

[2F45T4U]

nearly everything is speculation until the full AAIB report is released. Theres so many people offshore getting themselves upset and worried about things they dont even understand. Considering the vast number of moving parts on a chopper, im surprised there arent more incidents, so i have every confidence that the MK2 and Mk1 will be safe enough for me and il be coming home on one come Wednesday.

If the pilots refused to fly them then ok, yes i might have reason to be concerned. but as it stands. im sure the last thing Eurocopter, the helicopter operators and oil companies want is another failure so the gearboxes will now probably be even more scrutinised than they were before.

[~ ~ Cal ~ ~]

I can understand all of the uncertainty and sad loss of lives of late but I think people who work offshore can often forget that it's more dangerous driving up the A90 to Aberdeen to get to the heliport as it is to fly out....we're so accustomed to everyday risk that we take it for granted that driving is safe. Does not detract from the current issues though

I chucked the offshore coveralls in the bin 7 years ago but before that I was moving & postioning semi-subs & jack-up's & was flying almost every week. Having been in that position, all the news of late really strikes a chord so I hope there is a solution found the to the AAIB conclusions.

I wonder if they'd ever consider cutting the milk-round choppers which carry more risk due to more unecessary landings

Was always happy to fly out of Blackpool to Morecambe Bay where the chopper ride was circa 15 mins. I HATED the fixed wing flights to Scatsa although it saved 2.5 hours in a Chopper going to the Penguins field @ 62 deg N.

You've also got to wonder about the re-breather pockets being more of a hinderance than an aid ( assuming you land & capsize with sufficient time to get out) - they seem perfect for catching a window will or snaggin' elsewhere

[Victor Meldrew]

I can understand all of the uncertainty and sad loss of lives of late but I think people who work offshore can often forget that it's more dangerous driving up the A90 to Aberdeen to get to the heliport as it is to fly out....we're so accustomed to everyday risk that we take it for granted that driving is safe. Does not detract from the current issues though

I chucked the offshore coveralls in the bin 7 years ago but before that I was moving & postioning semi-subs & jack-up's & was flying almost every week. Having been in that position, all the news of late really strikes a chord so I hope there is a solution found the to the AAIB conclusions.

I wonder if they'd ever consider cutting the milk-round choppers which carry more risk due to more unecessary landings

Was always happy to fly out of Blackpool to Morecambe Bay where the chopper ride was circa 15 mins. I HATED the fixed wing flights to Scatsa although it saved 2.5 hours in a Chopper going to the Penguins field @ 62 deg N.

You've also got to wonder about the re-breather pockets being more of a hinderance than an aid ( assuming you land & capsize with sufficient time to get out) - they seem perfect for catching a window will or snaggin' elsewhere

I think the "milk round" helicopters are no different than any normal helicopter. If you need to get someone from A to B the a helicopter has to do it, whether its the same one or four different helicopters it the same number of landings and take off. So I don't buy it, its no less safe than any other option, its just the bears moaning about being stuck on a helicopter.....

The re-breather is only a hindrance if your a big fat fecker. Which to be fair, a lot of the offshore population are. How often have we sat at the heliport and said to one of our mates "how the hell did that fat fecker get through his medical, hope I'm not sitting next to him"...

[~ ~ Cal ~ ~]

Fair point re: milk-round.........what I meant was exposing the bears to 4/5 landings ( in some cases) plus more "air-time"when strictly speaking it's increasing their exposure to risk. I get your point though and from a cost perspective it makes little sense

But w.r.t to windows one. Unless you're built like the side of a fiver then ANYONE would have some difficulty getting out of the rear windows at the very rear of the aircraft. Agree, though there's waaay too many tubbies offshore on extremely dubious medicals



I always seemed to have a stray shoe lace just before boarding the aircraft so that I could get the safest seats with the biggest windows at the front for this very reason.

We would sometimes fly out with 25kg transit cases inside the cockpit with us too. Was never keen on that either regardless of the fact that they were strapped & tensioned.

[Mikie711]

I've been working offshore for 20+ years. Been in a couple of choppers that had unexpected events occur that resulted in diversion or quick landings. But TBH it's all just part of the job. Yes, I was deeply saddened when I heard about the crash and it does make you pause for thought. And it does affect you, your family and friends etc because it's so close to home as it were.

As for the training we endure every 4 years, if you really think that is going to save your ass in an event similar to what has just happened or indeed any uncontrolled water landing then your in the wrong job. A flat calm day in the North Sea still has an average 3m swell. If there is any wind, and there's usually plenty, then there's sea height to consider. It's all very well practicing in a warm (ish) pool but the real deal would be something else entirely. They used to have an end of course exercise in an environmental pool with wave generator and wind machines. They did it with the lights off and instructors hosing you down from the side. You had to jump off a 10-15ft platform, swim out and right a life raft and then help pull everybody else into it, the water was 6-8deg same as the NS. But, it got stopped on, would you believe, health and safety grounds . Now all we get is the Heli evac and some fire fighting. 1/2 a day every 4 years!!.

I remember a guy who had been in a couple of ditchings telling me one time when they hit the water every bodies "training" kicked in and they punched out the windows, evacuated to sea, inflated there jackets and swam away from the chopper. The flight crew, however, climbed through to the passenger compartment, opened the air stay door, deployed the life raft, stepped into it form the still upright chopper and set about recovering all the passengers that had disregarded there instructions because of there training!!!. I not saying that training is bad but if it's anything more than a semi controlled landing on water you ain't "walking away". It's the oil industries and probably any industry now, typical reaction to any incident, more training, more regulation.
I get on a chopper every 3 weeks and don't ever stop to think what might happen. I don't consider it anything more or less than getting on a bus and going/to coming home from work, it's a means to an end. If I did dwell on the ifs and buts then I would probably go and get a job with McDonald's or burger king.

The single most annoying thing about this whole sad incident is the amount of time given in the press and on the TV to that man Malloy. Him and his soap box want to give it a rest, why couldn't he just give his condolences to the families and keep his safety this, investigation that bollocks to himself. Typical union bloke, all bark and no bight. But that's a separate issue.

Anyway the point I trying to make is that based on the number of passengers that fly to and from the rigs every year and the amount of flights there are the risk is still minimal that you will ever be involved in a serious incident. As mentioned before I am more at risk driving my own car than I ever will be traveling to work.........statistically.

Rant mode........Off

[tut]

When metal turns, even with the best servicing in the world, failures happen.

In between life goes on as normal.

tut

[scottishselise]

Anyway the point I trying to make is that based on the number of passengers that fly to and from the rigs every year and the amount of flights there are the risk is still minimal that you will ever be involved in a serious incident. As mentioned before I am more at risk driving my own car than I ever will be traveling to work.........statistically.

Rant mode........Off

That's exactly what I would have said. I actually enjoy going offshore, I enjoy the banter (usually) and usually enjoy moaning about the rooms and usually enjoy doing a job properly and for the client to be happy. I also enjoy the perks (time off and £££).

Thus I will quit when I am unable to go offshore physically or oil runs out. I am currently on a BP installation and since the crash a fairly senior person from BP gives people a briefing before the flight and also an additional briefing by Scotia staff was also given. On the rig, we recieve upto date and exact findings and recommendations as well as a counselling services for personell/fmailies of victims too. I am not sure if I should be going into detail regarding the exact findings right now, as I am not sure it is public information. More than likely there are >10 folks here who know anyway. PM me if you REALLY want to know.

Tut: If you don't mind me asking: which company did you fly for?

S.

[tut]

Seventeen years with Bristow, '77 to '94.

First four years on the Bell 212 based offshore on shuttles and safety chopper in the Brent then down on Claymore, Piper and Tharos, then the rest on the S76 based from Aberdeen.

tut

ps could you pm me what you have heard to compare with my own.

[DavieK]

I ahve to agree that the training given will do nothing for you onther than during a controled ditching in next to flat calm conditions. As for the size of some of the blokes offshore I know theres a doctor in Glasgow that people travel miles to see because if you can stand on your own two feet and talk (not always at the same time mind you) he passes you, although I'm not sure if he is still on the go.

Training for offshore (safety or work related) is generally easy to pass no matter how bad some people are they still get through which on the whole makes a mockery of it all. Also a lot of it is just a way for companies that are involved in the training to make cash.

I was on the BP Clair when it happened and to be honest I'd rather still have flown back with Bond rather than Scotia (sorry if anybody works for them)

With all the delving into emrgency landings etc. I'm surprised theres been no mention of the scotia 225 that we saw on the way to the Clair that was escorted to Sumburgh by the coastguard chopper at the end of last month then tailed by 2 fire engines untill it was shut down and the lads were out.

[hendeg]

[quote="scottishselise]I am not sure if I should be going into detail regarding the exact findings right now, as I am not sure it is public information. More than likely there are >10 folks here who know anyway. PM me if you REALLY want to know.[/quote]

I've heard a few of these what REALLY happended rumours and been told that you can't say anything. Rumours are what they are unless someone is prepared to come out and say it in the public domain. Probably best to either come out and say it or say nothing at all.

[tut]

They do not really need rumours, I am 99% sure that it was a transmission gearbox/shaft failure that prevented the main rotors from going into autorotation, so they stopped pretty quickly and would have dipped and gone out of balance accounting for the tail boom strike. That would have sheared the tail rotor drive which is why it was virtually undamaged, ie it was not turning when it hit the water.

The reason that the pilot only got out three seconds of radio transmission was the time it took the rotors to decay from 100% to no lift, lord knows what flight configuration the aircraft was then in, but it would have fallen like a brick.

tut

[Gareth]

Tut,
Is it possible that once gearbox transmission failed that these guys could of been virtually shook to death with the vibration? If not, I guess it would of been instant death hitting the water from 2k feet...would just be like hitting concrete.

Anyway, big memorial thing in Abz today with road closures in Abz and a big screen to watch it.
BBC are streaming it too.

[scottishselise]

They do not really need rumours, I am 99% sure that it was a transmission gearbox/shaft failure that prevented the main rotors from going into autorotation, so they stopped pretty quickly and would have dipped and gone out of balance accounting for the tail boom strike. That would have sheared the tail rotor drive which is why it was virtually undamaged, ie it was not turning when it hit the water.

The reason that the pilot only got out three seconds of radio transmission was the time it took the rotors to decay from 100% to no lift, lord knows what flight configuration the aircraft was then in, but it would have fallen like a brick.

tut

Did you recieve my pm?