***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 3 *****
Further debate in here...
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 15 Feb 14 at 21:00
|
|
My grandson has just told me that his school pals sister has a flat near the crash site (she is at uni). She did not see the crash but heard it and thought it was fireworks, which would tie in with witness reports that mentioned "backfiring".
|
I've been reading up on this too because I am interested. I'm not pretending expertise, but the height/velocity thing is interesting.
Helicopterists are very aware of the height/velocity curve -
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height%E2%80%93velocity_diagram
I'm sure the subtleties have escaped me, and the example is for a single engined aircraft, but it's pretty clear that low hovers are less safe than high ones, and the more forward speed the helicopter has, the lower it can go while retaining the capability for an engine-out landing.
Police helicopters do a lot of hovering, and it's easy to see why the pilots prefer to do it at some height, and not just for noise/stealth reasons.
There is also a trade-off in design between low inertia main rotors and high inertia ones. The rotor inertia is the reserve lift for an emergency landing, so presumably from that point of view more is better, on the other hand a low inertia main rotor will be more capable of generating lift quickly (under engine power) and saves overall weight. The EC135 is AFA I can glean a low inertia design.
E&OE.
Reading the reports and comments from professionals, it's still a mystery. The explanation is IMO of more than professional interest, even if we are are not capable of understanding it fully.
I don't think it's a matter for joking, but I'm not po faced. I don't award anonymous scowlies.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 2 Dec 13 at 20:20
|
|
A very erudite explanation of the background; I think helicopter would award a good grade for it!
|
>> helicopter would award a good grade for it!
He may have written some of it, since it's mainly from Wiki. But that Wiki piece itself still doesn't explain (to me) what feathering the pilot needs to do to achieve auto-rotation in a dive from 800 feet plus, the minimum comfortable altitude for a sudden power loss. The stuff about heavy and light rotors is interesting though.
It looked to me at first, and still does, as if there was a transmission problem in this case. The more convincing eyewitness accounts suggest something of the sort. I await further information with great interest.
|
Well it isn't exactly feathering, as such. It is changing the pitch of the main rotor blades to vary the amount of lift they produce. In the event of an engine failure at a decent height (300 ft +)
the pitch is reduced to allow the machine to descend, increase airspeed and thus increase or maintain a suitable rotor rpm; when one needs to reduce the rate of descent and make a gentle landing the pitch is increased, the rate of descent is reduced and, if one has practiced enough, the rate of descent becomes zero as the height becomes zero..
Engine failures at low level or in the hover either can't be recovered or need a skilled and rapid reaction. (E&OE)
|
>> isn't exactly feathering, as such. It is changing the pitch of the main rotor blades
Yes Mellers, you're right... I thought people would get the simple rowing image of feathering, but altering the pitch is technically correct.
Of course helicopters get directional drive by altering the pitch in the appropriate quarter too. Like gondolas, being sculled along from one side only with a complex twisting movement...
They are complex machines though and extreme stresses are concentrated in one place really, at the hub of the main rotor.
There's a rollicking but informative account of flying Hueys in the Vietnam war, 'Chickenhawk', that told me a lot about how helicopters work. But one's tendency is to think of them as much the same in all cases, when of course they aren't: they vary in size from gnat to behemoth just for a start. It is reported indeed that the pilot in this case did a lot of hours in Chinooks. But the Russians have I think an even bigger single-rotor thing.
I like aircraft as a general idea but don't like flying in them, and both those things apply in spades to helicopters (I've never had to go in one).
|
>> It looked to me at first, and still does, as if there was a transmission
>> problem in this case. The more convincing eyewitness accounts suggest something of the sort. I
>> await further information with great interest.
>>
I agree, there are some credible accounts of events in todays Scotsman. I also read somewhere (pprune?) that the gearbox suddenly slowing down (seizing) could cause the engine compressors to stall and cause the "backfiring" noise that several witnesses heard. I do not have enough knowledge of jet engines to know if this is true or not.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 2 Dec 13 at 21:05
|
>> gearbox suddenly slowing down (seizing) could cause the engine compressors to stall and cause the "backfiring" noise that several witnesses heard.
Could be that, or could be mechanical graunching and clanking heard from 500 feet. It was all pretty quick, and once or twice it seemed to me that some of the people in or near the pub got events in the wrong order, or compressed/extended time. Quite common in traumatic experiences even with experienced or trained observers.
|
that the gearbox suddenly slowing down (seizing) could cause the engine compressors to
>> stall and cause the "backfiring" noise that several witnesses heard. I do not have enough
>> knowledge of jet engines to know if this is true or not.
>>
No it wouldn't, the aircraft gearbox and the engine gearbox are connected via a pto shaft. On one end will be a shearneck to stop the aircraft gearbox from dragging down the engine. On everyone I've seen anyone, not touched an EC though.
|
>> No it wouldn't, the aircraft gearbox and the engine gearbox are connected via a pto
>> shaft. On one end will be a shearneck to stop the aircraft gearbox from dragging
>> down the engine. On everyone I've seen anyone, not touched an EC though.
>>
I got the impression reading the professionals' explanation that the gearbox has its own turbine, fed by the engines, which aren't shafted together or mechanically linked in any way. Perhaps when the output shaft stops the back pressure is the problem for the engines.
(Drivel alert - I don't know of course. I also regurgitated something earlier about the second engine quitting 10 minutes after the first in the event of running out of fuel - apparently that is nearer two minutes).
|
>> >>
>>
>> I got the impression reading the professionals' explanation that the gearbox has its own turbine,
>> fed by the engines, which aren't shafted together or mechanically linked in any way.
It could well work like that. Usually done in SPS type application. First time I've seen it replace a PTO shaft.
|
don't think it's a matter for joking, but I'm not po faced. I don't award anonymous scowlies.
What he says.
|
There are sensors throughout the mechanicals which should give warnings of excess temps or vibrations caused by a failing component.
The aircraft was returning to the pad I would hope that it was within its safe margins for low fuel. Just a thought.
|
Running out of fuel sounds unlikely. Those who know say the first engine would quit, by design, 10 minutes before the second in that circumstance, during which time the pilot would be sure to land.
But then everything sounds unlikely at this stage.
|
Scuse me for asking what may appear (to you) as a stoopid question but,
Why is it that if the copter was removed largely intact, and there wasn't any fire, why didn't any crew survive the impact?
|
|
Helicopter is a very lightweight structure and I don't think it crashed onto its landing skids, which might have been survivable, but toppled and the cabin area hit first. Opinion only!
|
>> Scuse me for asking what may appear (to you) as a stoopid question but,
>>
>> Why is it that if the copter was removed largely intact, and there wasn't any
>> fire, why didn't any crew survive the impact?
Wasn't largely intact, it was broken into chunks and dented. Like the occupants.
There was a good thing shown on one of the driving programs with a smart, driving it into something at very large and solid at some large speed, and it survived pretty well, with not much intrusion into the passenger cell. Alas newtons laws of motion dictate that while you didn't get crushed, your internal organs turned to mush with such high internal g forces.
|
>> There was a good thing shown on one of the driving programs with a smart,
>> driving it into something at very large and solid at some large speed, and it
>> survived pretty well, with not much intrusion into the passenger cell.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s
|
Interesting, I would have put money (Lud's) on the Corsa coming orf a lot worse than it did.
But even with seatbelts and airbags a'plenty, the occ's would still not have survived.
70 MPH into concrete blocks is going some though!
|
>> Scuse me for asking what may appear (to you) as a stoopid question but,
>>
>> Why is it that if the copter was removed largely intact, and there wasn't any
>> fire, why didn't any crew survive the impact?
>>
Also additional 'crumple zone' was provided by a deformable roof structure thus reducing the g forces applied to the occupants. It was suggested on Pprune that they may have been unrestrained, (nobelts) in preparation for an immediate exit.
|
>> Scuse me for asking what may appear (to you) as a stoopid question but,
>>
>> Why is it that if the copter was removed largely intact, and there wasn't any
>> fire, why didn't any crew survive the impact?
Probably because the impact was to severe to be survivable. By all accounts the chopper dropped like a stone.
Some of the broadcast references to intact refer to fact that the whole aircraft landed in one place. That would probably not be case if either rotor or any other major component separating had precipitated the crash.
|
|
From looking at the TV pictures of the wreckage you can see that the bottom and front of the cabin are crushed and the landing skids are bent halfway up the side of the cabin. As the main rotor blades are removed the edges and tips seem undamaged although the blades are broken (or have been cut off, the breaks I saw looked straight and neat), the tail boom is still straight and not bent as if the helicopter was spinning on contact. To me it looks like it went straight in at about a 45 degree nose down angle with the main rotor not doing a great deal of work.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 3 Dec 13 at 08:44
|
>>your internal organs turned to mush with such high internal g forces.
Yes, I was thinking along those lines too. Thanks all.
|
Thinking about this on the way to work today - 2 hour trundle through rural Wales....
I was wondering whether there was a posibility it was downed delibrately by an external force.......?
|
>>was wondering whether there was a posibility it was downed delibrately by an external force
This type of external force (could only happen in Wales!)
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/man-calls-fire-brigade-after-getting-toilet-roll-holder-stuck-up-bottom-8978258.html?origin=internalSearch
|
Like someone blinding the pilot with a laser? Like this incident:
www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/03/london-man-shining-laser-pen-helicopter
Or could it be the pilot suddenly became ill/poorly.
|
|
As it is a criminal offence I am surprised it only resulted in a caution. I hope the police don't get sued for violating his human rights by confiscating his laser.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 3 Dec 13 at 11:44
|
Ask me whose 15 year old son thought it would be fun , whilst staying on a boat at the Gare Loch. to shine his green laser pen up into the hills to see how far it could be seen.
Yes, the boat he was on, my friends boat, was tied up approx. 500 yards from Faslane.
Those police launches can fair shift..
Not his best move.......
|
I see another bugbear of mine has started - the "raising funds for the victims".
I fully appreciate the emotion, the closeness that all Glaswegians feel with this but we now have official fund
www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/u/the-clutha-tragedy-fm-pledges-scottish-government-cash-to-crash-victims-fund.1386084334
and as well as that there are various fundraising ventures being organised.
But what does this money do? Who takes control of it, who makes the decisions?
And, without being inhumane, what is the difference between someone who dies in the helicopter accident and something like this
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-25192145
or
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-25206018
I fully understand that the families must be going through absolute hell, unimaginable hell, but is it any worse than the relatives of someone killed in a car crash, or knocked down or other sudden death?
By all means if celebs, friends or whatever want to hold fundraising nights etc then that is great, but when the council, the Scottish govt, and I believe Nick Clegg has also promised govt funds, then that is a total different scenario?
Is this not setting a precedent?
Without knowing the details I assume the estate of a serving police officer killed on duty will receive a substantial payout - so does his family receive the same amount as perhaps someone who didn't have the same life cover?
I seem to remember many years ago, was it the Welsh school disaster, that 25 years later there were still arguments and legal battles over monies raised? I know there were issues with the monies raised at Dunblane as well.
Maybe I just look too deeply into these things but over the years I have been aware of several fundraising initiatives which have ended up causing lots of hassles, legal issues and fallouts.
|
Without knowing the details I assume the estate of a serving police officer killed on duty will receive a substantial payout - so does his family receive the same amount as perhaps someone who didn't have the same life cover?
You're right.
|
|
I agree Bobby. A one off payment from a group or kindly person to help fund a funeral is one thing but a fund with no specific purpose spread over so many folk's families is very hard to administer fairly.
|
>> Without knowing the details I assume the estate of a serving police officer killed on
>> duty will receive a substantial payout - so does his family receive the same amount
>> as perhaps someone who didn't have the same life cover?
>>
>>
>> You're right.
You're right to which bit? Before the hyphen or after the hyphen?
|
thats very hyphen-esque of you
|
|
I wonder how many other people were killed and injured in accidents last Friday - and what help they and their families will receive?
|
The paper you all know & hate has at least four stories in the on-line edition about a person called Paul Walker who was killed in a car accident in America.
Meanwhile in the UK, people continue to leave flowers and Teddy bears where people they have never known have met sticky ends.
Crocodile tears, or has this generation had its brains turned to mush by reality TV & computer games?
Where is the stiff upper lip of yesterday?
|
>>has this generation had its brains turned to mush by reality TV & computer games?
Yes, going by the figures published by the OECD.
>>Where is the stiff upper lip of yesterday?
Atrophied through lack of use.
|
Did it start with Diana? With these public tragedies I think it's the shared wailing and gnashing of teeth that's the accelerant. I imagine many of the teddy bear leavers making less fuss about more private bereavements. It's a luxury they can afford when it doesn't really affect them at all, a sort of first world problem.
I learned yesterday that a good friend had died in October, although distance has prevented us meeting for maybe 10 years. I rang his wife. We chatted for a hour or so, and I told her that he was a good man who had been kind to me. She sobbed a bit as we remembered but she's getting on with it. You have to when it affects you personally.
|
>> Did it start with Diana? With these public tragedies I think it's the shared wailing
>> and gnashing of teeth that's the accelerant. I imagine many of the teddy bear leavers
>> making less fuss about more private bereavements. It's a luxury they can afford when it
>> doesn't really affect them at all, a sort of first world problem.
>>
>>
The stiff upper lip gradually disappeared the further we got from the war. When I were a lad most of the adults I knew had lived through times when every family had lost members as a matter of course and many had woken up in the morning to find a whole block full of neighbours had bought it in an air raid during the night. We live in the safest period in history now and those who have known nothing else have come to regard all premature death as a preventable tragedy.
|
"Where is the stiff upper lip of yesterday?"
Gone I'm afraid along with homophobia, casual racism, women knowing their place at home and doing the dishes, world wars and rampant xenophobia. The UK society of today is not perfect but a tendency to mawkish sentimentality is a fairly small defect in a much improved world.
|
>> Wow. Well said, CGN.
See? Look? bows down and takes it. Pull yourself to gather man < slap >
|
>> See? Look? bows down and takes it. Pull yourself to gather man < slap >
??
|
|
Never mind. instantaneous humour that has a short sell by date and does not stand up to investigation.
|
>> "Where is the stiff upper lip of yesterday?"
>>
>> Gone I'm afraid along with homophobia, casual racism, women knowing their place at home and
>> doing the dishes, world wars and rampant xenophobia. The UK society of today is not
>> perfect but a tendency to mawkish sentimentality is a fairly small defect in a much
>> improved world.
I agree the world is much improved for most people - perhaps that explains their inability to accept that bad things happen to good people, hence the emotional incontinence and compensation culture.
In general that is. Not aimed at anybody's response to what happened in Glasgow.
Last edited by: Manatee on Wed 4 Dec 13 at 14:47
|
>>I agree the world is much improved for most people
In my experience it is quite surprising how the level of whinging about life is inversely proportional to the number and severity of problems actually faced.
|
>> Gone I'm afraid along with homophobia, etc. etc.
Chapeau CGN... Herself usually takes a dim view of this site but I made her listen to that and she giggled approvingly. Well done indeed (needless to say I can't prevent contrary views from surging up, but that's another matter).
:O}
|
|
And then I heard in the news today a local solicitor touting for business, I mean stating that the accident investigation needs to come up with answers quickly so they know who to blame, I mean so they can fully understand what happened.
|
>> And then I heard in the news today a local solicitor touting for business, I
>> mean stating that the accident investigation needs to come up with answers quickly so they
>> know who to blame, I mean so they can fully understand what happened.
The accident investigation will not be quick and it's not about blame. The AAIB website is very clear about this. If it's investigations were to be used to allocate blame or criminal liability then participants would hide behind their lawyers and the whole exercise would lose its value.
AAIB will probably publish a special bulletin in next week or two outlining the facts so far established. There may be further bulletins as the investigation progresses.
Depending on what is found and extent to which components need to be forensically examined, their history established and manufacturers involved it may take a year to get to final draft stage. That will then need to be circulated to all interested parties for comment etc.
That last stage will take more time but is vital if the final report is to be credible and not contentious.
|
I loathe ambulance chasing lawyers - particularly those who have a stand in our local shopping precinct and those who advertise on TV.
I blame the blame culture!
Last edited by: Roger on Wed 4 Dec 13 at 15:29
|
|
And who's to blame for the blame culture ?
|
|
I dunno, but I reckon people are too quick to blame those that blame the blame culture for everything.
|
This is C4P
Dave gets the blame.
|
>> Dave gets the blame.
As always.
|
>> I dunno, but I reckon people are too quick to blame those that blame the
>> blame culture for everything.
What we have here, is a total lack of responsibility...
|
I see we're back joking about again. I'm not complaining - if that's what the Brit's do. I know when my mother's partner died in July there were some laughs/jokes when we reminisced about past events. That's life.
Back to this terrible event in Glasgow, I hope the actual investigation is not seen as blaming someone. Whether it turns out to be design fault, mechanical failure (so possibly maintenance fault), pilot error, pilot health,..... etc. What is important is to LEARN from this and not apportion blame. But we now live in a compensation culture, inherited/imported from the US.
Any one of us could be in a similar situation and I'm thankful it was not me or anyone I care about or know. But accidents happen.
Nowhere near the same loss of life, but that helicopter flying in fog earlier this year in London hit a crane... plummeted to the ground and burst into flames. Killing the pilot and someone walking to work. Rare but it happens. Or the crane collapse in Brasil at the football stadium.
Life's too short to dwell on things. Which is why I plan to live life as much as I can before I am old. I'd say I walked away from this damaged car but I didn't... I was carried unconscious to an ambulance but apart from a cut to my head from the roof collapsing I think I'm still okay 7 years later :-)
tinypic.com/r/2e4ae09/5
|
|
Now that the wreckage has gone and emotions have slowed down a bit I have to say that, while understanding the deep concern of people over the death or missing status of their friends and loved ones, they seemed to be a bit too worried about getting the deceased out of the pub when really the helicopter wreckage had to be examined in situ and then removed without destroying possible evidence of the cause(s) of the accident. There are almost 1000 of these machines in service and a cause must be established. A difficult balance between necessity and humanity to be fair.
|
>> about getting the deceased out of the pub when really the helicopter wreckage had to
>> be examined in situ and then removed without destroying possible evidence of the cause(s) of
>> the accident.
Human factors come first, and accident investigation will always come second. The public would not accept anything else.
>> There are almost 1000 of these machines in service and a cause must
>> be established. A difficult balance between necessity and humanity to be fair.
The fact that 1000's of these things are flying around the world and they are not falling out of the sky and no-one has reported similar pre existing issues found in servicing indicates there is nothing endemic so speed of cause of failure is not a requirement.
If anything urgent is discovered the AAIB will liase with the CAA and the CAA will issue a bulletin.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 4 Dec 13 at 20:16
|
Some people don't seem to have realised the consequences of their online actions.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-25290793
|
|
Racist or sectarian I can understand, but why should it be a crime to be offensive?
|
|
I agree. Surely, freedom of speech is freedom of speech, not just freedom of speech that people like.
|
That's going to be a tough one to implement. Taking emotion out of it, what is the difference between joking about these victims and, say, Maggie Thatcher?
However from what I have seen myself, the issues seem to be (as usual in Glasgow) sectarian and bigoted.
|
|
Suspect the issue is racist/sectarian content which breaches (IMHO reasonable) statutory restrictions. Sick jokes about choppers are unlikely to cross the threshold.
|
That story is astonishingly uncommunicative. Doesn't say a thing.
Who sees these 'hate comments' anyway? Only other twitterers or facebookers who are used to that sort of thing even if they disagree with it. Storm in a teacup.
Not that I mind mouthy unpleasant people getting a swipe across the head.
|
|
looks like its going to be pilot error of some sort.
|
>> looks like its going to be pilot error of some sort.
>>
You know this as a fact?
In that case what caused the "Loud misfiring car" sound mentioned in the report, and heard by several people.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 9 Dec 13 at 16:37
|
>> looks like its going to be pilot error of some sort.
Not sure there's enough to go on to draw that conclusion. Impact damage is making it difficult to be sure both engines were capable of turning the rotors.
My only thought is that 95litres of fuel drained after recovery is very little but of course there may well have been leakage/loss as result of impact.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 9 Dec 13 at 16:59
|
>>
>> My only thought is that 95litres of fuel drained after recovery is very little but
>> of course there may well have been leakage/loss as result of impact.
>>
Enough for fifteen minutes flying, according to a report on R4.
|
>> looks like its going to be pilot error of some sort.
Well as the rotor was not turning the pilot must have stuck his head up through the cockpit and stopped them
|
>> >> looks like its going to be pilot error of some sort.
>>
>> Well as the rotor was not turning the pilot must have stuck his head up
>> through the cockpit and stopped them
>>
There is a disc brake on the main rotor shaft operated by a lever in the control panel above the pilot. I believe it is not capable of overcoming engine power and is used to stop the rotor after shut down on the ground.
|
>> Correct ON
>>
I have been a passenger in this type of helicopter dozens of times, usually with a good view of the pilot, the controls, and instruments. I also had many discussions with the pilots who were always happy to answer any questions. My interests include anything mechanical and I am always interested in how they work.
|
>> Official report - to date
>>
>> www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/S9-2013%20G-SPAO.pdf
Requested file does not exist. It says.
|
>> Looks as though they've reposted - typo or something?
>>
>> www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources/S9-2013%20G-SPAO%20v2.pdf
>>
something to do with inaccurate recording of the weather conditions
'Initial examination was carried out at the site, before the
helicopter was transported to the AAIB’s headquarters.
Examination continued on its arrival at Farnborough,
Hampshire, where it was confirmed that all significant
components were present at the time of impact. Initial
assessment provided no evidence of major mechanical
disruption of either engine and indicated that the main
rotor gearbox was capable of providing drive from the
No 2 engine power turbine to the main rotor and to the
fenestron drive shaft. Clear impact distortion of the
structure had caused a splined shaft on the drive train
from the No 1 engine to disengage, preventing a similar
continuity check.'
so right now, all we know is the engines hadn't failed and were capable of providing drive, but if I read it correctly, the rotors weren't rotating at the time of impact
|
I wonder if it's possible for, say, the engines to be switched off accidentally, and for the pilot then to have a forgetful moment and operate the starter while everything is still turning, which in a car for example usually results in a horrid noise and minor damage but can cause a seizure of everything and major damage? Seems unlikely, pilots being methodical and careful by training, but might explain the mechanical clanking or coughing heard and the non-turning rotor.
I do know when I am just speculating. I don't know enough about helicopters to know if something like that is possible.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Mon 9 Dec 13 at 18:14
|
Almost certainly not - engine master switches are guarded in one way or another. You either have to lift a cover, or pull the switch out before turning it. And there's two of them, so even if you knocked one by mistake the other engine would be fine.
IMHO you'd snap the switch off (in the on position) before you shut an engine down accidentally.
|
Disc brake inadvertently permanently applied leading to eventual overheating?
Starter in a helicopter seems a big thing that can spin up the rotors as well as the engines. No doubt it can't be operated when that would be a bad idea?
The only other obvious-seeming thing to an interested ignoramus might be dirt or water in the fuel.
|
|
Daily fuel checks for water/dirt. Sample taken and stored. AAIB will have had those samples pronto.
|
|
The AAIB report is an initial bulletin, and meant to infer nothing. No conclusions can be drawn from a report that says "we have no idea at the moment"
|
|
Yes, it hasn't hinted at any sort of cause. We wait. None of our business anyway.
|
Seems to be a lot more "knowledgeable" debate on the cause on that pprune link that was provided earlier.
The hot topic seems to be the fact that no mention has been made in this report of the positions of the various cockpit controls / switches / levers
|
Bond Services have grounded all their EC 135 helicopters... something wrong with the NW Air Ambulance one so they grounded them all. Weren't these grounded last year as well?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-25353001
|
>>Weren't these grounded last year as well?
From the Beeb report....
In May last year, Bond Air Services temporarily grounded EC 135 models operated by the Scottish Ambulance Service, Strathclyde Police and the Northern Lighthouse Board, following safety concerns.
It took the decision following receipt of a Safety Information Notice from Eurocopter over reports identifying cracks on the lower hub shaft flange on the EC 135.
|
|
It has been reported elsewhere that this time it is an "Indication" fault. (fuel gauge, Sky News)
|
>> (fuel gauge, Sky News)
Yes, apparently one helicopter had a fuel gauge that sometimes said full when it wasn't, or was it empty? Anyway I would expect helicopter pilots to know how much fuel they had before taking off and have a pretty good idea of how long it would last. But perhaps I'm idealising the pre-flight checks palaver.
I can't help wondering if the fuel gauge is the only thing being checked. Just can't help it.
|
aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=163238
Another EC135 crashes. Although a power line collision this time.
Last edited by: R.P. on Tue 14 Jan 14 at 19:45
|
Helicopter crash - Old Navy
