Police Helicopter crash

[EGDR]

This is pointless, if we are going to play Rule 8 every single time something vaguely civvy crops up on this forum would be a very boring place. I, and I expect the majority of users of FC, regard Police helicopters as government owned and government operated (which they are) and are therefore appropriate on this forum, and even if they didn't fall under the bounds of Rule 8 then I am sure given the context of this thread, it would still be allowed, as is the small amount of discussion of civilian operations I have noted here in the past which have been injected into some logs to provide some extra detail, which seems fair enough to me.

[ARFA2]

And this is a matter of concern for all of us-the crews that fly these essential machines and those of us underneath----

[paddyboy]

Very well composed and said Kyle

You are obviously a man beyond your young years

Best regards as always, and my thoughts are still with the crew and the civilians who suffered

Paddyboy

[2e1var]

Don't feed the trolls please

[Pen Pusher]

last feed

I best stop posting war bird piccies here as they are all civilian registered.

Brian

[PeteHemsley]

This is not the other terrible forum. This is FC. We are a friendly bunch of fools. This topic is something close to our hearts, regardless if it's civi or not. Keep the arguing and terrible banter away and keep the topic on track.

[britaylor]

Well put as this subject is almost 3 pages full why start this crap banter now and how about also the RAF grob civil markings

[C24]

From a friendly old fool (as the saying goes, "There is no fool like an old fool").

All systems are designed to cover +/- 95% of all eventualities. The remainder should be covered by a second system and so on until the last set of problems can be solved by an old man,a dog and paper & pencil.

What I cannot understand, is why the pilot didn't autorotate. Like most of these incidents, more questions are posed than answers found.
Forwhatit is worth please include threads about police a/c; coastguard (now civilian?) so that we FCers can show our appreciation of their work.

Sermon over.

[POL]

Can you auto rotate from a hover? I though you needed forward airspeed?

[C24]

Can you auto rotate from a hover? I though you needed forward airspeed?

Yes, it is called a 0-0 autorotation. I was not aware that it was hovering but whatever. As I understand, the disk would be rotating and have energy. (Stating the obvious). So you dump the collective lever and drop the nose to gain airspeed converting height into energy in the disk. Just before hitting the ground you flare, pulling up the collective, using the energy in the disk to create lift as the disk slows down, reducing the vertical speed, hopefully to zero and a soft landing.
Of course, if the hover height is only a few feet,the effect is minimal but the principle is sound and still taught.

[POL]

Yes, it is called a 0-0 autorotation. I was not aware that it was hovering but whatever.

Wasn't sure if it was or not, just wondering if it was a possible reason. Thanks for the explanation

[Tooks]

Regrettably, this accident was NOT dual engine failure as the papers have reported, but, having read the AAIB report, it sadly looks like fuel mismanagement by the crew. Low fuel lights on, fuel transfer switches off..........

Agreed, the newspapers appear to have interpreted a 'double engine flame out' as 'double engine failure' which of course it wasn't.

I'm holding fire on apportioning blame to the pilot (the crew are passengers in a Police helicopter, and play no part in flight controls/systems other than standard CRM procedures) until the AAIB report back on the failed display system and whether the pilot got all the warnings he was supposed to regarding fuel states.

There are still questions around why no Mayday (although I suspect no time) and why the aircraft failed to enter autorotation.

[C24]

With respect Tooks, it is not known whether or not the pilot commenced an autorotation. Even if he did, there are many reasons/factors that would still result in the end result. Flaring too high, easily done in the circumstances, would mean a drop of say twenty feet or less. The impact would kill you unless fortune was on your side.
The pilot did his best, believe me. All sorts of factors were against him.

[Tooks]

With respect Tooks, it is not known whether or not the pilot commenced an autorotation. Even if he did, there are many reasons/factors that would still result in the end result. Flaring too high, easily done in the circumstances, would mean a drop of say twenty feet or less. The impact would kill you unless fortune was on your side.
The pilot did his best, believe me. All sorts of factors were against him.

Indeed, I meant no disrespect to the pilot either, I was just responding to the supposition that crew (ie the pilot) fuel mismanagement was to blame.

I know there are many factors that could prevent entry, there is a very small window to do so in most scenarios (seconds) and it is at the end of the day an emergency procedure and not guaranteed to work.

As I think I've said before, I don't believe the aircraft entered any kind of auto, and it would have been very unfortunate for all the crew to perish from a drop of twenty feet or so, given the inherent strength of the fuse and the g protection offered by the seats (debris penetration aside). I think the first AAIB interim report indicated a drop from much higher than that anyway.

I apologise if any of that teaches you to suck eggs by the way!

[ArabJazzie]

Regrettably, this accident was NOT dual engine failure as the papers have reported, but, having read the AAIB report, it sadly looks like fuel mismanagement by the crew. Low fuel lights on, fuel transfer switches off..........

It can only be attributed to being the fault of the crew, if they were receiving all the information they required to manage the fuel. I have a feeling that the fuel gauge/sender issue in the EC.135s just after this accident will have a bearing on this one!
Arabest,
Geoff.

[C24]

Hello Tooks & jem60,
I have not read any of the reports so my comments were/are just general from the info gathered from the media.
No Mayday/Pan call? Guessing that the radio button was under a cyclic hand finger, perhaps he changed hands to press/flick buttons or switches.
If they were in a low hover an autorotation would be possible but only if that was on the list of solutions in the pilot's mind.
All this is pure speculation based on both our lack of info of what occurred to create the incident & what could be done in the time available maybe it should allowed to take it's course.
Why I fail to understand, why no advance warning before the fuel flow stopped? As in my car. Or was it missed?

I am beginning to realise that I should shut up before I start talking through the back of my neck. Forgive me if I offend anyone but it was a "Holy shi!," moment for sure.

Tooks, no sweat, egg & chips for lunch, honestly.

[Tooks]

C24. There were all the warnings you could wish for. Even the fact that one engine stopped sometime before the 2nd. one!. I can't remember the time interval between them flaming out, but one preceded the other.Obviously the time interval was short. Low fuel lights flickering amber, then remaining on, then a red light, then bells and whistles, then an engine stops whilst one keeps going. They didn't just stop with no warning!. It really is necessary to read the interim report to have a clearer understanding of this accident.

We don't know for sure that there were all the warnings that could have been wished for yet, until the investigation into the panel displays and fuel probes is complete.

It's not unusual for the main fuel tank transfer pumps to be in the off position once the main tank is dry, although that would leave the aircraft below the minimum allowable fuel level allowable for landing as set by the operator of the aircraft.

What I can't get my head round is that the pilot (and TFO's) would have had to ignore all the fuel level warnings (Amber and red) and I just don't know why you would do that, unless you weren't getting the warnings.

But that raises the question of the transfer pumps should have been set to on then.

It's possible that they were switched to off in an attempt to prevent a post crash fire, but then if they'd been on, the supply tanks wouldn't have run dry and the engines wouldn't have stopped.

It's perplexing....

I hope the AAIB get to the root cause of it all.

[C24]

This might be of use;

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... G-SPAO.pdf.

Having read it several times, I would be happy to discuss my findings at RAF Scampton, tomorrow.

Message ends

[Tooks]

This might be of use;

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... G-SPAO.pdf.

Having read it several times, I would be happy to discuss my findings at RAF Scampton, tomorrow.

Message ends

Yes, I've read that, a couple of times, and my questions still remain.

There is nothing in the report that states the root cause yet, just a number of known facts.

I say this as somebody who works in UK Police aotary aviation, and so I'm not coming at this from an ignorant position (and not stating that anybody else is, in case anybody wants to take offence!).

I can see what conclusions might be drawn from the interim report, but I don't think we should try to apportion blame until the AAIB final report is released, and that may be many months away yet.

Anyway, what's happening at Scampton today then?!

[flarkey]

"Anyway, what's happening at Scampton today then?!"

The Red's new paint job.