Heli crash NYC

A little off-topic. Over heard on KATL twr freq on a real dog S*** day mid 1990's. Wx: zero obsc, vis: nil point zilch. Nobody moving, just bitching. Then a call: " Helicopter N****, 20 west over I-20, landing Atlanta." Tower immediately says " Cleared to land." Everybody chimes in: How did he get cleared to land 20 miles out? How does he rate? What about me? Tower simply says, "he's a helicopter." Up until about 2000,FAR 91.155 said RW minimums were clear of clouds... no vis stated. Now its Vis one half mile.
 
Palmpilot said:
Anybody know what frequency he was using? Maybe there's a LiveATC recording.
Click to expand...
No, I'd have expected him to be on the LGA tower frequency but there was nothing there. Tried a couple of the approach sectors (EMPYR, etc...) and didn't hear anything either.
 
Here's a map from the PPRUNE thread:

jlprjvwzly_1d2d51aa3e3d8a286b0381b5392e6ad80758e099.png
 
flyingron said:
Here's a map from the PPRUNE thread:

jlprjvwzly_1d2d51aa3e3d8a286b0381b5392e6ad80758e099.png
Click to expand...
This map is about 20 blocks short of where the crash occurred. The crash occurred on 7th avenue between 51 and 52nd street. This map ends at 32nd and Park Ave.
 
Bob Vila said:
I'm from NYC. What you are calling a ferry dock is actually is the Skyport Marina. Where you can dock your multimillion dollar yacht while you're have a hot dog!. It is also the NY Skyports Seaplane Base 6N7. (the floating support)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification.

benyflyguy said:
Nice depiction. See if you can add the crash site to it.
Click to expand...

I've moved a couple markers to line up with the flight path on the rotorheads discussion (possibly from ADS-B/MLAT data?). They were moved so as to keep the background approximately correct as shown in the video. Also added the point where the rotorheads flight track stops, and the crash site. A straight line is drawn between points for clarity...but that's not actual flight path and sounds like nobody knows how he got from the last known ADS-B point to the crash site.

To better fit on landscape screens, the image is rotated so that North-South is roughly right-left. Maximize browser window to see the most detail. I also have the KML file I could post but cannot figure out how to either post that here or put it on a Wordpress site and then link to it from a post here. Any ideas?

flight-path-v2-copy.jpg
 
He was most likely talking to the heliport. I believe it's Atlantic Aviation. Doubt it's recorded
 
Yep, and despite the press histrionics, he wasn't attempting to land on the building, just Cory Lidled it into the side.
 
Maxnr said:
The NTSB preliminary is out at this time. How did that sad sack get a seat in such a pricey, capable air craft?
Click to expand...

I don’t know, 2,800 hrs ain’t bad for a VFR twin gig. Most SPIFR twin engine EMS jobs only require 2,000 hrs TT. 2,000 + hr helo jobs are everywhere right now. Companies can fill seats fast enough.
 
The "Additional Information" section of the NTSB final report notes the dead pilot didn't want to fly that day, but the owner of the helicopter (also a pilot, and the passenger of the inbound flight) insisted he fly.

"[the pilot-rated passenger] is making me fly."

Probably more along the lines of...if you don't fly, you can find another job. Further, if the pilot had not flown, fees of $200/hr would have been incurred until the weather cleared and I suspect the owner may have threatened the pilot about not departing quickly as well.

Yeah, it is ultimately the pilot's fault, but...I hope (a) the dead pilot's family is suing the owner to the tune of 8 figures, and (b) the FAA has had some seriously threatening conversations with the owner.
 
Turbo-Arrow-Driver said:
I hope (a) the dead pilot's family is suing the owner to the tune of 8 figures, and (b) the FAA has had some seriously threatening conversations with the owner.
Click to expand...
While unfortunate, doubtful on both accounts.
 
I still don't get how rotor pilots fly these types of jobs for thousands of hours without an instrument rating.
 
mryan75 said:
I still don't get how rotor pilots fly these types of jobs for thousands of hours without an instrument rating.
Click to expand...
In general, less than 10% of the helicopters used in this type of work (corporate, charter, etc.) are certified for IFR flight or certified for single pilot IFR ops. Single engine versions are at less than 1% of the fleet have IFR certifications. Some pilots have IR tickets but never fly aircraft that are capable.
 
Bell206 said:
In general, less than 10% of the helicopters used in this type of work (corporate, charter, etc.) are certified for IFR flight or certified for single pilot IFR ops. Single engine versions are at less than 1% of the fleet have IFR certifications. Some pilots have IR tickets but never fly aircraft that are capable.
Click to expand...
It’s really interesting to me. I wonder if it occurred to the owner that this could have happened with him in the chopper. It’s like with Kobe or Chris what’s his name, the oil billionaire. You know better than I obviously, but I just wonder why that extra step is t taken by a lot of these wealthier folks or required of 135 ops. But I gather it’s just a different ballgame than fixed wing.
 
mryan75 said:
It’s really interesting to me. I wonder if it occurred to the owner that this could have happened with him in the chopper. It’s like with Kobe or Chris what’s his name, the oil billionaire. You know better than I obviously, but I just wonder why that extra step is t taken by a lot of these wealthier folks or required of 135 ops. But I gather it’s just a different ballgame than fixed wing.
Click to expand...

Supply and demand. Used to be quite rare for a helo pilot to have their instrument ticket. Just wasn’t needed for the type of work they were doing. Hard to find schools that had an IFR program and the ones that did, it’s incredibly expensive. So you get guys that go VFR COM, rack up hours as a CFI or get their first gig flying tours, racking up even more VFR hours. Then they find their way into a corporate gig through networking and they put getting their IFR on the back burner.

Even the ones who get their IFR through the civilian route, most cases it’s useless. The majority of your SE helos aren’t IFR certified because of more stringent equipment requirements than fixed wing. So, they get their rating entirely by simulated time. I’ve said it before, it’s too easy to cheat with a vision restricting device. Also, doing a quick pop up for an IAP on foggles can’t compare to filing and flying IMC in the NAS. Kobe Bryant’s pilot had an IFR ticket and 8,000 hrs but based on his background, most likely didn’t have a lick of actual weather time.

It’s gotten better in some 135 helo ops. EMS ops required an instrument rating about 6 years ago. I’d say most companies required it before the FAA mandate anyway.
 
mryan75 said:
I just wonder why that extra step is t taken by a lot of these wealthier folks
Click to expand...
Mainly because its different in every case. In this 109 accident, the owner-pax was a rated pilot and owned the entire charter business and not just the aircraft. So he, the owner, knew what the situation was that day. But still tld the guy to fly back. In Kobe's case, he had flown with the 76 pilot for 10 years with no issues... until that day. In the Chris Cline AW139 accident, that aircraft is basically a state-of-the-art IFR platform and capable of most advanced flight modes, yet the pilot flying deactivated most modes during the take-off. The ironic thing was the SIC commented during that erratic climb-out that this is the exact reason that 139 crashed in the UK (killing another billionaire). Then boom. So trying to figure out which "extra step" is needed is very subjective to the operation. There are fixed wing accidents with the same issues its just that most don't fly rich or famous people around like helicopters.
mryan75 said:
or required of 135 ops
Click to expand...
To add to the above post, keep in mind helicopters can perform a lot of 135 flights in VFR or SVFR that fixed wing can only do IFR. However, I think that is going to start changing after the last Navy trainer bid/contract that required IFR capability for a single engine, off-the-shelf helicopter trainer. There are now several new STCs available that are/will work their way into civilian ops. Useful load is still a big issue with these new SE IFR upgrades but from what I've seen it might be close enough to see more IFR capable helicopters with current IR pilots flying them. Maybe. Its still hard to make a buck flying 3 people in a 6 place helicopter with an extra fuel stop.
mryan75 said:
But I gather it’s just a different ballgame than fixed wing.
Click to expand...
Definitely different and more expensive (relatively speaking) on all levels. From market to aircraft to equipment to ratings to whatever when you compare it to comparable fixed wing ops. Fortunately there are many charter helicopter flights, to include IFR/2 pilot ops, that happen daily carrying the same level cliental with zero issues. Then one day Stevie Ray Vaughan gets splattered on a hillside in a SE VFR helicopter flown by a pilot who was only IR rated in airplanes.
 
Last edited:
Bell206 said:
Mainly because its different in every case. In this 109 accident, the owner-pax was a rated pilot and owned the entire charter business and not just the aircraft. So he, the owner, knew what the situation was that day. But still tld the guy to fly back. In Kobe's case, he had flown with the 76 pilot for 10 years with no issues... until that day. In the Chris Cline AW139 accident, that aircraft is basically a state-of-the-art IFR platform and capable of most advanced flight modes, yet the pilot flying deactivated most modes during the take-off. The ironic thing was the SIC commented during that erratic climb-out that this is the exact reason that 139 crashed in the UK (killing another billionaire). Then boom. So trying to figure out which "extra step" is needed is very subjective to the operation. There are fixed wing accidents with the same issues its just that most don't fly rich or famous people around like helicopters.

To add to the above post, keep in mind helicopters can perform a lot of 135 flights in VFR or SVFR that fixed wing can only do IFR. However, I think that is going to start changing after the last Navy trainer bid/contract that required IFR capability for a single engine, off-the-shelf helicopter trainer. There are now several new STCs available that are/will work their way into civilian ops. Useful load is still a big issue with these new SE IFR upgrades but from what I've seen it might be close enough to see more IFR capable helicopters with current IR pilots flying them. Maybe. Its still hard to make a buck flying 3 people in a 6 place helicopter with an extra fuel stop.

Definitely different and more expensive (relatively speaking) on all levels. From market to aircraft to equipment to ratings to whatever when you compare it to comparable fixed wing ops. Fortunately there are many charter helicopter flights, to include IFR/2 pilot ops, that happen daily carrying the same level cliental with zero issues. Then one day Stevie Ray Vaughan gets splattered on a hillside in a SE VFR helicopter flown by a pilot who was only IR rated in airplanes.
Click to expand...
Thanks to you and @Velocity173 for the insights.i read a lot about the Cline accident, though I didn’t have the knowledge to understand exactly what happened. I read about the comment the one pilot made. Why on earth did they do what they did?

And SRV is my favorite guitarist of all-time. I still remember the pilot’s name.
 
mryan75 said:
Why on earth did they do what they did?
Click to expand...
My SWAG: the boss calls at 11pm his daughter and friends are in a bad way. They launch in the 139. They land at an non-approved site and everyone jumps in rotor turning and hightail it out before they're caught on this irregular/illegal flight into Bahamian airspace. So how would you go in and out? Like John Wayne or Sullenburger?
 
Bell206 said:
My SWAG: the boss calls at 11pm his daughter and friends are in a bad way. They launch in the 139. They land at an non-approved site and everyone jumps in rotor turning and hightail it out before they're caught on this irregular/illegal flight into Bahamian airspace. So how would you go in and out? Like John Wayne or Sullenburger?
Click to expand...
Yeah, the whole op was illegal. Still just amazes me they managed to fly a perfectly good helicopter straight into the drink while talking about another chap who did the same thing. “Hey, which one of us was supposed to be monitoring our altitude…?”
 
Bell206 said:
My SWAG: the boss calls at 11pm his daughter and friends are in a bad way. They launch in the 139. They land at an non-approved site and everyone jumps in rotor turning and hightail it out before they're caught on this irregular/illegal flight into Bahamian airspace. So how would you go in and out? Like John Wayne or Sullenburger?
Click to expand...
PS. What systems did they have available on that helo that they turned off? Like GPWS-type stuff?
 
mryan75 said:
Thanks to you and @Velocity173 for the insights.i read a lot about the Cline accident, though I didn’t have the knowledge to understand exactly what happened. I read about the comment the one pilot made. Why on earth did they do what they did?

And SRV is my favorite guitarist of all-time. I still remember the pilot’s name.
Click to expand...

Never read the report on the Chris Cline crash but it sounds like they were hand flying it. Obviously departing into the black abyss like that is challenging but with the capabilities of that aircraft, all you got to do is set an attitude and let the stability augmentation hold it. They probably didn’t treat the departure like an instrument take off and were inside outside back and forth and got disoriented. Sounded like they were unfamiliar with the systems as well.

Just tonight was actually my annual unaided training and I got a bit disoriented coming off the pad. We’re in the middle of the mountains so not much to reference with outside lighting. I wasn’t getting any airspeed because the nose was a couple degrees up (like the accident). The light from the houses on the hills (altered plans of reference) was making me feel like I was banking. Finally I said screw it, went completely inside, leveled the wings and set the nose level, let SAS hold it there and did a slow acceleration. No need to hand fly if you don’t have to.
 
Velocity173 said:
Never read the report on the Chris Cline crash but it sounds like they were hand flying it. Obviously departing into the black abyss like that is challenging but with the capabilities of that aircraft, all you got to do is set an attitude and let the stability augmentation hold it. They probably didn’t treat the departure like an instrument take off and were inside outside back and forth and got disoriented. Sounded like they were unfamiliar with the systems as well.

Just tonight was actually my annual unaided training and I got a bit disoriented coming off the pad. We’re in the middle of the mountains so not much to reference with outside lighting. I wasn’t getting any airspeed because the nose was a couple degrees up (like the accident). The light from the houses on the hills (altered plans of reference) was making me feel like I was banking. Finally I said screw it, went completely inside, leveled the wings and set the nose level, let SAS hold it there and did a slow acceleration. No need to hand fly if you don’t have to.
Click to expand...
I read a ton of the docket just because it was so bizarre. There was a CVR and the two pilots were just yammering the entire time, didn’t seem like anybody was paying any attention at all to what they were doing. Really appreciate the insight, it’s just such a bizarre accident.
 
When I saw SRV and 'Cline', I really thought someone meant Patsy Cline. Another great talent lost to VFR-IFR. That was a long time ago, but could have just as easily happened yesterday.
 
mryan75 said:
PS. What systems did they have available on that helo that they turned off? Like GPWS-type stuff?
Click to expand...
As I recall, the PIC kept disengaging the force trim on the cyclic during takeoff which put some of the autopilot modes into standby like altitude hold, etc. Some AP/SAS modes remained engaged which added to the mess. Basically if he would have let the aircraft fly itself he would have made it. However this is a very general statement. The website (aerossurance) V173 used above for the 109 report has one of the better laymans explanations of the events using the NTSB docket. If you cant find it I 'll post a link to it later today.
Velocity173 said:
but it sounds like they were hand flying it.
Click to expand...
Partially hand flying. Look for the report I mentioned above and read it. You'll understand it better than me and give a better explanation.
 
Bell206 said:
As I recall, the PIC kept disengaging the force trim on the cyclic during takeoff which put some of the autopilot modes into standby like altitude hold, etc. Some AP/SAS modes remained engaged which added to the mess. Basically if he would have let the aircraft fly itself he would have made it. However this is a very general statement. The website (aerossurance) V173 used above for the 109 report has one of the better laymans explanations of the events using the NTSB docket. If you cant find it I 'll post a link to it later today.

Partially hand flying. Look for the report I mentioned above and read it. You'll understand it better than me and give a better explanation.
Click to expand...
Will do! Thanks again to you both, I’ve always been interested in understanding what happened there.
 
Velocity173 said:
…. No need to hand fly if you don’t have to.
Click to expand...
I’m not an RW guy, but this seems a fundamentally different mindset from FW. I’m curious if don’t hand fly if you don’t have to is a common mindset in the RW space or is it something that has to be ingrained.
 
TCABM said:
I’m not an RW guy, but this seems a fundamentally different mindset from FW. I’m curious if don’t hand fly if you don’t have to is a common mindset in the RW space or is it something that has to be ingrained.
Click to expand...

All depends on the situation. Last night if I had NVGs I’d probably override the SAS and hand fly til I got a few hundred feet then let SAS do it’s thing. Flying unaided into areas of marginal ground reference, or no reference like the accident, it’s a lot safer to let SAS maintain the attitude. Kinda like an F-18 launching off a carrier at night where they grab the “towel racks” and let the computer fly it for the first few seconds.

Based on the description of the accident, that operation would be illegal for part 135 helos. We have to have ground references or at night, a visual light reference in order to control the aircraft. That’s why pretty much all EMS operators require NVGs. There are a few areas where you just wouldn’t be able to meet that requirement without them. Even in my area, there’s a stretch of wilderness area that I wouldn’t be able to see the ground. Just black at night. Therefore, if I don’t have NVGs I’m required to follow populated areas (roads mostly) to get back to base.

Edit: to further understand the different mindset in letting a computer fly vs hand is the instability of helos. I remember doing simulated (foggles) in the B407 during new hire training 10 years ago. I was working my *** off trying to keep that thing within PTS standards. I was exhausted just from 20 minutes of simulated. Also, most helos just aren’t unstable, they’re incredibly light on the controls. You can be in an unusual attitude in the blink of an eye. Flying instruments in my plane is a walk in the park compared to a helicopter with no SAS / AFCS / AP.
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
All depends on the situation. Last night if I had NVGs I’d probably override the SAS and hand fly til I got a few hundred feet then let SAS do it’s thing. Flying unaided into areas of marginal ground reference, or no reference like the accident, it’s a lot safer to let SAS maintain the attitude. Kinda like an F-18 launching off a carrier at night where they grab the “towel racks” and let the computer fly it for the first few seconds.
Click to expand...

I don't quite remember how SAS works on the 407, but it doesn't work how you are alluding to on advanced IFR helicopters like the 135/145 or the accident helicopter 139. You don't disengage or override SAS with the FTR. You disengage attitude hold (and force trim) with the FTR, but the SAS is still working. Maybe it's just a terminology thing, but these pilots always had SAS on and working. By engaging the FTR, they took the helicopter out of attitude hold and were controlling the pitch and roll by hand. Attitude hold is not an autopilot upper mode, it is the default mode if no autopilot modes are engaged. I think this is where these IFR aircraft differ from the 407.
 
The level of proficiency needed to fly the ADS-B IFR system in the GOMEX requires fully coupled autopilot use immediately after takeoff as well as radar for avoiding obstacles during offshore approaches to very low altitudes. Weather conditions simply do not allow VFR flight with any chance of success. That is one of the rare exceptions when the FAA will approve the use of IFR part 135 ops, but the certificate holder has to diligently prove it can be done safely. Equipping the multi-engine helicopters and training the pilots to this standard is expensive and beyond the resources of a small commercial operators.

That said, the ability to go VFR into marginal weather can only be done safely in helicopters operated under a certificate acceptable to the Administrator and that means specific weather minimums for whatever conditions exist, such as mountainous or urban areas. Limitations for rain, snow and brownout also confound the ability to go from A to B.

It's a tough business and requires a significant commitment (meaning money) by the operators.
 
IK04 said:
The level of proficiency needed to fly the ADS-B IFR system in the GOMEX requires fully coupled autopilot use immediately after takeoff as well as radar for avoiding obstacles during offshore approaches to very low altitudes. Weather conditions simply do not allow VFR flight with any chance of success.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand any of this. Can you explain what ADS-B has to do with anything? Are you saying onboard radar is used to avoid obstacles in IMC? What do you mean weather in the Gulf doesn't allow for VFR? The vast majority of helicopters in the Gulf are VFR singles.
 
There is a matrix of "airways" in the gulf formed by gps fixes. They are there to substitute for VOR airways or fixes, due to being out of range. ADS-B is used for position fixing due to the lack of ATC radar. IFR clearances end at one of those gps fixes and a self-contained IFR approach is made from there after descending from the enroute altitude, usually 5- or 6,000 feet.

When the destination is a platform 100+ miles offshore and they are reporting ceilings at 100 feet, you can bet a VFR single engine helicopter cannot carry twelve dudes and their gear, nor does it have the fuel range for such a flight.

Part of the crew training for this kind of IFR operation is using the radar to positively fix and avoid the large steel obstacles that are usually higher than your flight path. Depending on the wind, the final approach segment may thread the needle between these obstacles and they must be visible on the radar, or the approach minimums will be 200 feet or higher.
Radar altimeters are required for the MDA also.

If the weather is clear, the approach can be made in VFR conditions after canceling IFR and continuing visually.

The VFR only aircraft usually stay close to shore and fly between platforms, so they rarely fly higher than 100-200 feet. If the weather is lower than the IFR minimums, the VFR aircraft can still operate because of their see and avoid rules.
 
Direct C51 said:
I don't quite remember how SAS works on the 407, but it doesn't work how you are alluding to on advanced IFR helicopters like the 135/145 or the accident helicopter 139. You don't disengage or override SAS with the FTR. You disengage attitude hold (and force trim) with the FTR, but the SAS is still working. Maybe it's just a terminology thing, but these pilots always had SAS on and working. By engaging the FTR, they took the helicopter out of attitude hold and were controlling the pitch and roll by hand. Attitude hold is not an autopilot upper mode, it is the default mode if no autopilot modes are engaged. I think this is where these IFR aircraft differ from the 407.

Yeah SAS on the 407 is nothing more that an attitude hold where as some aircraft it’s always functioning to provide dynamic stability regardless of FTR on or not. Two different types of systems but both provide stability. Sounds like attitude hold on the 139 is strictly an AP function. If they didn’t have that engaged, well the results are predictable .
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top