Keep Your Eyes on the Hook! Underslung External Load Safety
Keep Your Eyes on the Hook! Underslung External Load (HESLO) Safety This video was commissioned by Transport Canada and highlights key lessons for working safely around helicopters and longline loads. Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eESeTQVjOTY Canadian Coast Guard Ground Crewman Michel Raymond’s story of an incident he was involved in is particular worth hearing. UPDATE 7 September 2016: A worker got caught in Australia during a helirig operation for a mining company (ATSB database entry and WA Department of Mines and Petroleum report). As the helicopter lifted the rig, [a worker’s] leg became entangled in a tag line. He was lifted some distance before the helicopter pilot became aware of the situation. The worker fell 5 to 10 metres to the ground, injuring his back. UPDATE 25 November 2016: The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) have issued their report: On 23 May 2016 at about 0700 Western Standard Time, a team of ground and flight crew commenced sling operations to move a drill rig and associated platform and equipment by helicopter to a new location on a salt lake at Lake Disappointment, Western Australia. The ground team for the removal of the equipment consisted of a load master and a driller’s offsider. The driller’s offsider involved in the operation was new to the role. For the operation, the offisider’s role included ground support and to sling equipment under the guidance of the load master. The load master was to guide the helicopter using hand signals and a two way radio to communicate with the helicopter pilot. The pilot of an Aerospatiale Industries [sic] AS350 helicopter, registered VH-BII, worked with the ground crew to move three mats and a power pack to a new site, before returning to move the rig. The load master and offsider attached the rig to the hook under the helicopter and attached two tag lines – 6 m loop slings, to the load on separate corners. At about 1040, in readiness to lift the rig, the load master advised the pilot using hand signals that the load was attached and that they were clear and ready for the lift. The helicopter climbed and the rig lifted a few centimetres above the ground. The load swivelled as it lifted off the ground, and pushed against a PVC pipe protruding from a bore hole. The load master and offsider stepped in closer to manoeuvre the rig clear of the pipe. The pilot observed the ground crew then step away from the rig. As they stepped back, the offsider had inadvertently stepped into the loop of the tag line. As the helicopter lifted the rig, the tag line went taught, and the offsider’s leg was ensnared in the loop. The offsider was lifted off the ground by the leg and the helicopter began lifting the load. The load master radioed the pilot, and advised that the offsider was hanging in the loop. The helicopter was then about 50–60 ft above the salt lake. The pilot turned the helicopter around to return to the pad and descended to about 15–20 ft above the ground. The pilot also slowed the helicopter as much as possible given the load and the tailwind, to a groundspeed of about 25 kt. The offsider then freed their leg and was about to jump off, but the helicopter then started to climb and accelerate....
read moreNTSB Recommendations on Offshore Methane Gas Venting
NTSB Recommendations on Offshore Methane Gas Venting The US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) have issued a series of recommendations following two accidents were single engined offshore helicopters ditched after the suspected ingestion of vented methane gas caused a full or partial engine power loss near an offshore platform. Vented combustible gas can cause surging, a compressor stall, or flameout of a helicopter engine. The NTSB quote the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), who state in Chapter 2.3.5 of CAP437 that concentrations above 10% lower flammable limit (LFL) pose a risk. LFL is the lower end of the concentration range over which a flammable mixture of gas or vapour in air can ignite at a given temperature and pressure. While some safety alerts had been issued in 2011, the NTSB is acting because the second accident occurred after these measures. The NTSB: …believes this occurrence highlights the need for the identification and development of comprehensive systems and procedures for oil platform operators to mitigate the risk of vented gas ingestion. The majority of offshore installations in the Gulf of Mexico tend to be small and serviced by small single engined helicopters that are particularly vulnerable to a power loss on take off. Accidents 24 March 2011 Bell 206-L3 N32041, operated by PHI (ASN Database Entry / NTSB Database Entry) 13 August 2013 Bell 407 helicopter N53LP, operated by Panther Helicopters (ASN Database Entry / NTSB Database Entry) Both types are powered by a Rolls-Royce 250 turboshaft engine. The six people on the two helicopters all received minor injuries. Recommendations To the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE): In collaboration with the US Coast Guard, identify and develop comprehensive systems and procedures to mitigate the risk of ingestion of raw gas discharges, such as methane, by helicopters operating in the vicinity of offshore oil platforms. (A-14-67) After appropriate mitigations are developed as recommended in Safety Recommendation A-14-67, require fixed offshore oil platform operators to implement these systems and procedures. (A-14-68) To the US Coast Guard (USCG): Work with the US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement to identify and develop comprehensive systems and procedures to mitigate the risk of ingestion of raw gas discharges, such as methane, by helicopters operating in the vicinity of offshore oil platforms. (A-14-69) After appropriate mitigations are developed as recommended in Safety Recommendation A-14-69, require mobile offshore oil platform operators to implement these systems and procedures. (A-14-70) To the American Petroleum Institute (API): Finalize revisions to API Recommended Practice 2L, Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Heliports for Fixed Offshore Platforms, to address the venting of raw gases, such as methane, as a risk to turbine-powered helicopters operating in the vicinity of fixed offshore oil platforms. (A-14-71) Interestingly, no recommendations are directed at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) issued Safety Alert No. 311 in 1 April 2014. UPDATE 24 September 2014: The BSEE issued an Advance Notice Of Proposed Rulemaking on Helideck and Aviation Fuel Safety for Fixed Offshore Facilities. BSEE cite studies by both the Helicopter Safety Advisory Conference (HSAC) who publish Gulf of Mexico (GOM) focused helicopter safety data annually on their website, and a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study in 2013. Aerossurance expand on this and another helideck accident here. UPDATE 8 September 2015:...
read moreUK Airborne Anti-Pollution Assets
UK Airborne Anti-Pollution Assets The UK Maritime and Coastguard Agency issued this video in 2011 on their anti-pollution airborne dispersant spraying and surveillance assets. The video describes their two sesnor equipped surveillance aircraft. It goes onto show their airborne dispersant spray capability being demonstrated in Lyme Bay, using both a small Cessna Caravan II and a Lockheed Electra, doing runs at 300ft and then 50ft. The MCA’s fixed wing contract is held by RVL Group. The elderly Electras were withdrawn in 2013. UK company Oil Spill Response Limited (OSRL) provide a global aviation aerial dispersant service. UPDATE 26 April 2016: OSRL has commissioned its first UK based 727 dispersant aircraft with a TERSUS dispersant system. UPDATE 12 July 2016: OSRL’s first 727, G-OSRA, operated by 2Excel, was displayed at Farnborough International Airshow in July 2016. It has since been joined by G-OSRB. UPDATE 14 September 2016: Both OSRL 727s were in action for an exercise off the Isle of Wight today. 2Excel explain: In 2014, EASA ruled that for an aircraft spraying system, oil spill dispersant liquids are to be classified as ‘flammable fluids’. The FAA soon aligned with EASA, and as a result any system entering service now has to meet the stringent regulation set out by these agencies. TERSUS, the system on the B727, was designed and built from scratch by 2Excel’s EASA Part21J & G design and production organization Leading Edge. Awarded an EASA STC in 2016, TERSUS is the only aerial dispersant system in the world that complies with the new EASA and FAA regulations. Spraying is done at 150ft. UPDATE 17 August 2020: OSRL and 2Excel sign a contract with the MCA. UPDATE 18 August 2020: 2Excel have modified the 727s to enable flight in known icing conditions with spray booms fitted. For expert advice you can trust on contracting for, design & conversion of and operation of special mission aircraft, contact us at enquiries@aerossurance.com Follow us on LinkedIn and on Twitter @Aerossurance for our latest updates. ...
read moreBristow Invests £3.2mn in Tool Control
Bristow Invests £3.2mn in Tool Control Energy Voice reports that Bristow Group has introduced the latest Snap-on Industrial Automated Tool Control (ATC) system to its maintenance operations as part of the company’s commitment to safety by reducing the risk of Foreign Object Debris (FOD) being introduced during maintenance. Jeremy Cresswell reports: The ATC Box is fitted with hi-tech camera technology which captures images of its contents, allowing the system to identify whether tools are present or not. This information is then displayed on a screen on top of the tool kit so that a maintenance engineer is constantly aware of the location of each tool. Tools are automatically issued and returned without user input and the activity from each toolbox is streamed across the company network giving administrators real time visibility of all tooling activity. At a cost of £3.2million Bristow has introduced the technology to the company’s bases in Europe and the US Gulf of Mexico and is in the process of rolling it out across all of its bases across the globe. This builds on an initiative pioneered at their Aberdeen base in 2009. All three Aberdeen based helicopter operators have introduced ‘company tools’ and some form of enhanced tool control. However in the UK it is still common for aircraft maintenance personnel to supply their own tool kits and to rely only on company issued specialist tools. This makes it far harder to identify when tools are lost. In one famous example, during a hangar tour a senior manager at an airline picked a tool box at random and asked to see the owner to verify that all the tools were accounted for. To everyone’s general embarrassment it was found the engineer who owned the tool box had passed away several years earlier… UPDATE 28 May 2016: From Australia Rotor Blade Tool Control FOD Incident UPDATE 12 February 2017: Flying Control FOD: Screwdriver Found in C208 Controls Aerossurance has extensive air safety, airworthiness, maintenance human factors and safety analysis experience. For practical aviation advice you can trust, contact us at: enquiries@aerossurance.com Follow us on LinkedIn and on Twitter @Aerossurance for our latest updates. ...
read moreLeonardo Helicopter Obstacle Proximity LIDAR System (OPLS)
AgustaWestland Helicopter Obstacle Proximity LIDAR System (OPLS) Earlier in 2014 AgustaWestland (now Leonardo Helicopters) gained EASA certification of a new laser based obstacle warning safety system to help protect helicopters from main and tail rotor strikes when operating in confined areas and close to obstacles (e.g. around a helideck). Initially available as an option for the AW139, it will be made available for AW169, AW189 and AW101. Such a warning system was one of the proposals in a 2003 UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) research paper on managing the risk of tail rotor failures. The Obstacle Proximity LIDAR System (OPLS) uses three independent fixed Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) sensors, a central computer (a GE MAGIC 1) and a dedicated control panel. It can present a 360º representation of adjacent obstacles (closer than 25m) on the aircraft’s existing Multi-Functional Displays with a two level aural tone as the clearance distance reduces. A detailed presentation given to the Helicopter Safety Research Management Committee (HSRMC) can be found here. UPDATE: the link has been amended after changes to the CAA website. The OPLS system is expected to be of particular value for military, offshore, Search and Rescue (SAR) and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) helicopters. UPDATE 1 June 2016: The AW101s being purchased as part of the NAWSARH SAR project by Norway will be equipped with OPLS. Aerossurance has extensive helicopter safety, design, airworthiness, operations and special mission aircraft experience. For aviation advice you can trust, contact us at: enquiries@aerossurance.com Follow us on LinkedIn and on Twitter @Aerossurance for our latest...
read moreHouse of Lords Inquiry into Civil RPAS
RPAS (or Unmanned Air Vehicle / Systems [UAV/UAS]) are a hot topic internationally at the moment. The House of Lords, the upper house of the British Parliament, is to hold an inquiry into the civil use of remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) in the European Union. Written evidence is sought by Friday 19 September 2014. Public evidence sessions will be held in October and November 2014. The hearings will be held by the un-snazzily titled “Internal Market, Infrastructure and Employment Sub-Committee of the House of Lords European Union Committee”, which for once makes the unmanned community’s acronyms look simplistic. They explain: The European Commission has been discussing since 2012 how to regulate the operations of RPAS in the EU. It published a Communication on 8 April 2014 setting out its ideas on how European industry can become a global leader in the market for this emerging technology. At the same time, it acknowledged that the integration of RPAS into the EU’s airspace must be accompanied by adequate public debate on societal concerns… The Committee will consider whether the Commission has identified the key issues in this debate, and how the EU’s actions can benefit the RPAS industry in Europe in a way that is acceptable to all stakeholders. In its deliberation the Committee will look at wider questions such as the advantages and disadvantages of regulating RPAS at national, EU or international level and the new and innovative ways in which RPAS are likely to be used in the future. Currently, regulation of UAS in the UK is described in the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) CAP722 document. Aerossurance is also aware of progress of work by the UK Military Aviation Authority (MAA), announced last year, to overhaul the regulatory framework military UAS/RPAS, with an Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) to the MAA Regulatory Publications (MRPs) likely by year end. Aerossurance has experience in UAS/RPAS going back to the mid 1990s. If you want to discuss their safety, technical, operational and regulatory issues, contact Aerossurance at: enquiries@aerossurance.com Follow us on LinkedIn for our latest updates....
read moreWrong Deck Landings
Wrong Deck Landings Occasionally, offshore helicopters do land on the wrong offshore installation. On 26 August 2014 the media picked up an such an event that occurred a few days earlier involving a Sikorsky S-92A. So is it a big deal? Well, yes and no! There are good reasons to avoid landing on a deck that is not standing by for an arriving aircraft. These range from the lack of fire cover, the unknown pitch, roll and heave on vessels, cranes may be operating adding to the collision risk, radio silence procedures may be on force on the installation (e.g. when explosives charges are being prepared) and so on. Of course if the deck is open and expecting an aircraft, then there is the risk of a second helicopter, which is actually heading for the right deck! While landing on the wrong deck does increase risk, in practice, with many similar installations in close proximity and various human factor challenges, misidentifications do occur a few times every year in the UK sector alone. Each needs an appropriate investigation to identify any systemic improvements, but few in reality actually deserve press headlines. We are not in the position offer further informed comment on last week’s occurrence. We can however share the story of an investigation we conducted overseas after a wrong deck landing: Our oil and gas customer had two mobile jack-up drilling rigs on contract from the same drilling company, at different sites in the same field. Although a few miles apart, they were just a few degrees different in heading from the airport onshore. The rigs were of the same type. They were both painted in the drilling company’s standard colour scheme and had similar multi word names. The equally similar rig callsigns were listed one after the other in the database of the aircraft’s navigation system. Due to the wind direction that day, the approach was also in a direction that meant visibility of the rig and deck markings was dramatically reduced and the helideck crew would have had a limited view of the approach too. Consequently all the ingredients were in place for a simple programming error and confirmation bias… Our customer requested we review the air operator’s investigation when it was complete to ensure there was systemic, preventative learning. They were concerned because the ‘next deck’ was over the median line in a less than friendly neighbouring country, where a wrong deck landing would have been a major diplomatic incident! Perhaps an unintended consequence of this (large) customer taking an interest in the (small) helicopter operator, was that the operator’s investigation was swift and had emphasised ‘who’ made the errors not ‘why’. Consequently, the actions taken consisted of ‘warning letters’ being put in personnel files. Rather than review the operator’s investigation, we therefore had to start from scratch and persuade the operator to focus on WHY (not WHO) and therefore the systemic issues (internal to them and, with our help, externally). To their credit they did and reversed their earlier action, removing the warning letters. For more background, the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) published a research report in 2000. A valuable resource on investigating human error is The Field Guide to Understanding Human Error Paperback by Prof Sidney Dekker, which we highly recommend. UPDATE 27 May 2015: Controls against wrong deck landings (‘Threat 12’) are included in the new Flight...
read moreTaranis
Taranis The UK designed and built Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) demonstrator, the BAE Systems Taranis, first flew on 10 August 2013. Named after the Celtic god of thunder, this £185 million programme, involving BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce, GE Aviation Systems (formerly Smiths), QinetiQ and the Ministry of Defence (MOD). Powered by a modified Rolls-Royce Adour Mk951 turbofan, this Low Observable (LO) platform is the successor to studies that started as part of the Future Offensive Air System (FOAS) study in the mid-late 1990s. BAE Systems have released this interesting promotional video: The first flight was only publically announced six months after it occurred and even then the test site, widely believed to be Woomera, South Australia, was not revealed (UPDATE 11 Nov 2014: until an Australian statement). Woomera was the test site for BAE System’s earlier Mantis UAV demonstrator, which first flew at the Australian desert test range 21 October 2009. Further testing has taken place to demonstrate typical operational scenarios, with the flight test air data boom replaced by stealthy conformal air-data system. UPDATE: More details on the aerodynamic design challenges of Taranis were revealed in August 2014 issue of The Aeronautical Journal, the technical and research journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS). More details were briefed at a 2016 RAeS lecture. Aerossurance has experience of UAS/UAV/RPAS design, test, certification and regulatory issues. For aviation advice you can trust, contact us at enquiries@aerossurance.com Follow us on LinkedIn and on Twitter @Aerossurance for our latest updates....
read moreVolcanic Ash…Déjà Vu All Over Again??
On 18 August 2014 the Icelandic Met Office (IMO) upgraded the aviation colour code for the Baroarbunga volcano to ‘Orange’ which means that, ‘The volcano shows heightened or escalating unrest with increased potential of eruption’. UPDATE: On 23 August 2014, the morning after this article was published, it was raised to ‘Red’ (‘Eruption is forecast to be imminent with significant emission of ash into the atmosphere likely’), initially stating that there were signs of a sub-glacial eruption but now stating this is on the basis they cannot rule out an eruption. There remain different views on the current situation but seismic events continue (see live updates). While local earthquakes continue the IMO state there are no signs of ongoing volcanic activity, but many will remember the Eyjafjallajökull (E15) volcano disruption of 2010. The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has issued a Safety Information Bulletin. The UK Military Aviation Authority (MAA) has issued a Regulatory Notice. The Icelandic Coast Guard has brought their Bombardier Dash 8 Q300 maritime surveillance aircraft (delivered by Field in 2009) back from an EU deployment in the Mediterranean to provide airborne monitoring. The UK Met Office now have an asset they didn’t have in 2010, the Met Office Civil Contingency Aircraft (MOCCA). A pressurised, piston engined Cessna 421C, MOCCA can fly safely into worse ash conditions than a turbine powered aircraft to better map dispersion of ash or smoke from environmental disasters such as the 2005 Buncefield oil depot fire. The necessary modifications were designed by Cranfield Aerospace, and the aircraft operated by special mission specialists DO Systems. Meanwhile, easyJet has been trialling the Norwegian AVOID sensors system for use on their Airbus aircraft (which included generating their own asj cloud), however this equipment is not likely to be in-service until 2015. See David Learmouth’s comments in his Flight International blog here. UPDATE: In this article he also expands on the roles of the European Aviation Crisis Co-ordination Cell (EACCC) was set up following the 2010 event. As Aerossurance has reported previously, the oil and gas industry has also been working on its resilience planning to cope with aviation disruptions for any reason. Europe is now better prepared and will have better data to make sound judgements compared to 2010. For more background see this Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) paper and this Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS) paper. Rolls-Royce and Airbus, among others, presented to the British Air Transport Association (BATA) at a seminar in October 2013: Rolls-Royce presentation – note page 7, an assessment of volcanic risk worldwide Airbus presentation If you don’t have a pet volcanologist on tap(!) and want to explore the issues raised, contact us at enquiries@aerossurance.com Follow us on LinkedIn for our latest...
read moreCommanders: Flying or Monitoring?
Commanders: Flying or Monitoring? At a recent Royal Aeronautical Society Conference, one of the speakers, Colin Milne of BALPA, highlighted that in a number of past UK large helicopter accidents involving Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) or Loss of Control (LOC) the Commander was the Pilot Flying rather than the Pilot Monitoring. While there are circumstances where this is appropriate, for example when the wind direction suits a helideck approach flown from the Commander’s position, as the conference summary points out: …this was contrary to the practice in the airlines where the more experienced pilot assumed the monitoring role – ready to advise corrections or, in extremis, to take control. This also eliminates any reticence a monitoring pilot may have due to the authority gradient in the cockpit. The five accidents quoted were: G-BEON Sikorsky S-61N, British Airways Helicopters, in the sea near St Mary’s Aerodrome, Isles of Scilly on 16 July 1983, 20 fatalities (AAIB Report) – a routine passenger flight from Penzance to the Isles of Scilly – the only non-oil & gas accident cited G-TIGH Aerospatiale AS332L, Bristow Helicopters, the Shell Cormorant Alpha platform, East Shetland Basin on 14 March 1992, 11 fatalities (AAIB Report) G-BLUN Aerospatiale SA365N, CHC, near the Centrica North Morecambe gas platform, Morecambe Bay on 27 December 2006, 7 fatalities (AAIB Report) – strictly in this accident control was transferred to the Commander moments before the accident G-REDU Eurocopter EC225, Bond Offshore Helicopters, near the BP Eastern Trough Area Project (ETAP) Central Production Facility Platform in the North Sea on 18 February 2009, no fatalities (AAIB Report) G-WNSB Eurocopter AS332L2, CHC, 1.5 nm west of Sumburgh Airport, Shetland Islands on 23 August 2013, 4 fatalities (AAIB Special Bulletins) The first anniversary of the G-WNSB accident is on Saturday 23 August 2014. To mark the anniversary, the UK Oil and Gas Chaplaincy and Step Change in Safety have created a memorial film which includes a short Act of Remembrance. Step Change in Safety’s Les Linklater reflects on that accident here. Milne also discussed the need for: common operating procedures understanding the Type Certificate Holder’s design philosophy sharing lead customer experiences agreeing common procedures incorporating those procedures for all training providers mandating those procedures. These are matters currently being examined as part of the Joint Operators Review (JOR), which was discussed at Oil & Gas UK’s recent Aviation Seminar. Monitoring Background In 2013 the RAeS ran a specific conference on monitoring. One account of that is here and another here. UK CAA have also set up a microsite ‘Making Monitoring Matter’. Airbus presented their thoughts on monitoring to the European Society of Air Safety Investigators (ESASI) in April 2014. UPDATE 13 November 2014: The Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) issued a study A Practical Guide for Improving Flight Path Monitoring, the final report of the Active Pilot Monitoring Working Group. The working group was created to address the issue of aviation incidents with ineffective monitoring as a factor. Meanwhile the CAA have issued a series of Crew Resource Management (CRM) videos. These include one that features a reconstruction of a helicopter incident where a malfunction forced the crew to divert to an unfamiliar airfield. Autopilot mode confusion during the glideslope capture results in loss of control a breakdown in collective situation awareness. UPDATE 18 September 2016: AAIB: Human Factors and the Identification of Flight Control Malfunctions Aerossurance is an Aberdeen based aviation consultancy. For...
read more
Recent Comments