Rescue 116 Crash at Blackrock, Co Mayo(Mod note in post 1)

Damien360

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

'Circling the Wagons' is not something that pilots do when it comes to accident investigation. Cop on.

The early stages of this thread with pilots commenting and the statement from the pilots association come across exactly as that. Who would have thought an organisation would be against transparency in ireland. Not a new concept to most Irish people.

Reati

Once again the Unions can't spot their head from their arse. What they should be condemning is the media who focused on and sensationalized the last words of the pilot. I doubt without the level of reporting this condemnation likely wouldn't have occurred by the pilots union.

This is one of these emotive things in life no matter what happens, someone is going to find something to be offended or disappointed or unhappy about. They is many side to this coin and in fairness most of them are right in a way.

Were the last moments of the recording incredibly hard to read as a person. Absolutely. But should it be redacted? Not in my opinion. The report is there to report the facts and evidence. The CVR is evidence and should be reported. It clearly displayed the facts around the situation crew were in. Where the last words nessesary? No, but if they were excluded then we'd have a media scrum about how the AAIU is trying to hide something or other such rubbish and no doubt someone else would have released a presser condemning the lack of transparency.

It's a super hard one.

PukkaStukka

Reati wrote: »

Once again the Unions can't spot their head from their arse. What they should be condemning is the media who focused on and sensationalized the last words of the pilot. I doubt without the level of reporting this condemnation likely wouldn't have occurred by the pilots union.

This is one of these emotive things in life no matter what happens, someone is going to find something to be offended or disappointed or unhappy about. They is many side to this coin and in fairness most of them are right in a way.

Were the last moments of the recording incredibly hard to read as a person. Absolutely. But should it be redacted? Not in my opinion. The report is there to report the facts and evidence. The CVR is evidence and should be reported. It clearly displayed the facts around the situation crew were in. Where the last words nessesary? No, but if they were excluded then we'd have a media scrum about how the AAIU is trying to hide something or other such rubbish and no doubt someone else would have released a presser condemning the lack of transparency.

It's a super hard one.

It is a unions job to represent and protect their members interests, and in this case TWO bodies have come forward and complained that there has been a breach of agreed defined principles of accident investigation and confidentiality.

This isn't spotting head from arses stuff. This is a very serious claim and is being maintained by a international and European representative bodies, and they are very clear in terms of what ICAO rules / regulations / procedures / principles have been crossed.

It will be interesting to see what the AAIU's take on this is and what falls out of it.

ProfessorPlum

Damien360 wrote: »

The early stages of this thread with pilots commenting and the statement from the pilots association come across exactly as that. Who would have thought an organisation would be against transparency in ireland. Not a new concept to most Irish people.

Can you give examples of the issues you're referring to 'in the early stages of this thread' and how it came across as circling the wagons?
Did anyone even read the statement from IALPA?
If you think circling the wagons is on the agenda, you clearly have no idea about the role of the association or accident investigation. The point IALPA make is that transcribing the last 2 minutes in the interim report contravened the agreed principals of confidentiality, added a burden to the victims damiles and was of no benefit to the investigation. It also highlighted the 'breach of trust to all those involved in commercial aviation'. This is an important point. Incident reporting by and large depends on trust between pilots, crews and others involved, and thd operators and regulators. CVRs exist because of agreement between pilots and regulators - and were introduced on agreement that the recordings would be confidential, and only the parts pertinent to the accident would be disclosed, and then only in the final report.
IALPA, IFALPA the ECA or any other pilot body has no interest in being anything but transparent in this or any other accident investigation.

Edit to add:I have a huge amount of respect for the work the AAIU do. It is world class. The report into the Manx2 accident is a case in point. I do think IALPA makes a point for discussion. My reason for commenting was to counter the 'circling the wagons' claim. As far as I am aware, no other profession is as open, honest and transparent when it comes to self reporting their mistakes.

Cloudio9

PukkaStukka wrote: »

It will be interesting to see what the AAIU's take on this is and what falls out of it.

From rte:

The AAIU has responded saying it is satisfied the best international practice has been followed.

"The section of transcript released in the Preliminary Report was deemed very relevant to the AAIU in giving the families, aviation regulators, operators and the many operational S-92 pilots around the world a better understanding of the sequence of events that occurred on the day of this tragic accident," the AAIU said in a statement.

It added: "The AAIU will continue in its work to bring this particular investigation to its final conclusion. AAIU investigations are held in private and are confidential."

Coil Kilcrea

rustynutz wrote: »

Serious skills needed there. I'm assuming in most medevac cases at sea the casualty would be winched up rather than the heli attempting to land, is that the case?

Yes, that's a military application anti-sub helicopter. Great skills.

ForestFire

Are they not contradicting themselves, or am I reading this wrong?

"They also said the release was a breach of regulations, whereby "the State conducting the investigation of an accident shall not make CVR recordings and any transcripts from such recordings available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation"

Was it not released as part of an accident or incident investigation?

selectamatic

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Can you give examples of the issues you're referring to 'in the early stages of this thread' and how it came across as circling the wagons?

Quite a few prominent posters basically stating that this accident wouldn't be classed as CFIT and then proceeding to condemn anyone who had the gaul to disagree with them.

ProfessorPlum

selectamatic wrote: »

Quite a few prominent posters basically stating that this accident wouldn't be classed as CFIT and then proceeding to condemn anyone who had the gaul to disagree with them.

Any of them pilots? Because the guys I recognise as being airline pilots here were the ones saying it may we'll be CFIT. Some of them got banned for it. The 'no wsy CFIT brigade were non airline pilots.

Cloudio9

Hard to know what to make of the union criticism. It's not clear if they reflect the views of the families.

I'm sure plenty here are following the accident thread on pprune and not one helicopter pilot has criticised the interim report but several have commented on how well written it is.

ProfessorPlum

ForestFire wrote: »

Are they not contradicting themselves, or am I reading this wrong?

"They also said the release was a breach of regulations, whereby "the State conducting the investigation of an accident shall not make CVR recordings and any transcripts from such recordings available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation"

Was it not released as part of an accident or incident investigation?

Keep reading. ICAO stipulates that the relevant parts of the recording may be published in the final report.

selectamatic

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Any of them pilots? Because the guys I recognise as being airline pilots here were the ones saying it may we'll be CFIT. Some of them got banned for it. The 'no wsy CFIT brigade were non airline pilots.

Couldn't tell ya some certainly gave the impression they are indeed pilots or heavily involved in aviation.

Coil Kilcrea

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Any of them pilots? Because the guys I recognise as being airline pilots here were the ones saying it may we'll be CFIT. Some of them got banned for it. The 'no wsy CFIT brigade were non airline pilots.

Absolutely spot on!

That said, and having read the AAIU preliminary report in full, I commend their transparency in every respect. The press sensationalised the harrowing last words, not the investigators.

Coil Kilcrea

Cloudio9 wrote: »

Hard to know what to make of the union criticism. It's not clear if they reflect the views of the families.

I'm sure plenty here are following the accident thread on pprune and not one helicopter pilot has criticised the interim report but several have commented on how well written it is.

I'm reasonably sure that the families were briefed before the release of the AAIU report.

Reati

Coil Kilcrea wrote: »

Absolutely spot on!

That said, and having read the AAIU preliminary report in full, I commend their transparency in every respect. The press sensationalised the harrowing last words, not the investigators.

Exactly. So where is the union condemnation of that?

ProfessorPlum

Coil Kilcrea wrote: »

Absolutely spot on!

That said, and having read the AAIU preliminary report in full, I commend their transparency in every respect. The press sensationalised the harrowing last words, not the investigators.

Very true - and infact that was the very first point made in the IALPA statement. I saw it printed as a half page pictorial on the front page of the Irish times and to be honest I thought it was sickening.

Coil Kilcrea

Reati wrote: »

Exactly. So where is the union condemnation of that?

You hit the nail on the head. A poor communication aimed at the wrong target the intent of which could be widely misunderstood.

ProfessorPlum

Reati wrote: »

Exactly. So where is the union condemnation of that?

In the first paragraph of the statement! Did you read it?

Cloudio9

Coil Kilcrea wrote: »

I'm reasonably sure that the families were briefed before the release of the AAIU report.

Of course they were briefed. What I was wondering is if the union criticism reflects their views.

Coil Kilcrea

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Very true - and infact that was the very first point made in the IALPA statement. I saw it printed as a half page pictorial on the front page of the Irish times and to be honest I thought it was sickening.

Absolutely, I was very upset at that headline and I would much prefer if IALPA would focus on that issue. Sadly, their communication is badly aimed and ambiguous. And that's a great pity.

Coil Kilcrea

Cloudio9 wrote: »

Of course they were briefed. What I was wondering is if the union criticism reflects their views.

Well I can't answer that but I think it unlikely as it targets the AAIU and not the sensationalist press who made selective headlines which were distressing to family members and the many more who have been touched by this tragedy.

The excerpts from the CVR give much needed context, the speed of events, the flow of information, the final moments and reinforce the awfulness of apparently flying into something they didn't realise was there. And that's critically important information.

ProfessorPlum

Coil Kilcrea wrote: »

Absolutely, I was very upset at that headline and I would much prefer if IALPA would focus on that issue. Sadly, their communication is badly aimed and ambiguous. And that's a great pity.

https://ialpa.net/ifalpa-press-release-on-chc-sikorsky-s-92-rescue-116-accident-investigation/


Link to the IFALPA release. I think it's very unambiguous in its condemnation of the release of the CVR recordings on the grounds that it feeds sensationalism and is of no benefit to the investigation.



“Rescue 116†CVR transcript publication is unnecessary and harmful, says pilot community
Montreal – Brussels, 18 April 2017

Last Friday, the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU) published the last two minutes of the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) transcript of a fatal helicopter accident (CHC Sikorsky S-92 “Rescue 116â€), which occurred at Black Rock, on the west coast of Ireland, on the 14th of March 2017. That same day, this transcript filled newspapers and websites, including the front page of the Irish Times.

The International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) and the European Cockpit Association (ECA) strongly condemn this publication as unwarranted, unacceptable, counterproductive to flight safety, and a breach of both ICAO Annex 13 Standards and EU Regulation 996/2010.

Not only does the publication contravene the internationally agreed principles of accident investigation confidentiality, set out in ICAO Annex 13 and EU Accident Investigation Regulation 996/2010, but it unnecessarily adds to the burden of the victims’ families, and is also a breach of trust to all those involved in commercial aviation.

Evan Cullen, President of the Irish Air Line Pilots’ Association (IALPA) said, “There is absolutely no justification for – or benefit from – publishing specifically the last two minutes of this flight, other than feeding a thirst for sensationalism.â€

According to ICAO Annex 13 paragraph 5.12 and the EU Regulation 996/2010 Article 14 (paragraph 1) the State conducting the investigation of an accident shall not make CVR recordings and any transcripts from such recordings available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation. Such recordings shall be included in the Final Report or its appendices only when pertinent to the analysis of the accident. Annex 13 goes on to state that “parts of the records not relevant to the analysis shall not be disclosed.†No benefit has been noted in the report to justify the Irish investigation body’s decision to disclose CVR data.

In this early stage of the technical investigation, many critical questions remain to be answered. IFALPA and ECA call for adherence to the proper accident investigation process and expect a comprehensive and accurate analysis of events based on the highest professional standards. IFALPA and ECA remain fully committed to enhancing aviation safety and our organisations’ resources are at the disposal of the Accident Investigation Agencies to achieve this aim.



Captain Evan Culllen
President Irish Air Line Pilots’Association,
IALPA Headquarters,
Corballis Park,
Dublin Airport.

Coil Kilcrea

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

https://ialpa.net/ifalpa-press-release-on-chc-sikorsky-s-92-rescue-116-accident-investigation/


Link to the IFALPA release. I think it's very unambiguous in its condemnation of the release of the CVR recordings on the grounds that it feeds sensationalism and is of no benefit to the investigation.



“Rescue 116†CVR transcript publication is unnecessary and harmful, says pilot community
Montreal – Brussels, 18 April 2017

Last Friday, the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU) published the last two minutes of the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) transcript of a fatal helicopter accident (CHC Sikorsky S-92 “Rescue 116â€), which occurred at Black Rock, on the west coast of Ireland, on the 14th of March 2017. That same day, this transcript filled newspapers and websites, including the front page of the Irish Times.

The International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA) and the European Cockpit Association (ECA) strongly condemn this publication as unwarranted, unacceptable, counterproductive to flight safety, and a breach of both ICAO Annex 13 Standards and EU Regulation 996/2010.

Not only does the publication contravene the internationally agreed principles of accident investigation confidentiality, set out in ICAO Annex 13 and EU Accident Investigation Regulation 996/2010, but it unnecessarily adds to the burden of the victims’ families, and is also a breach of trust to all those involved in commercial aviation.

Evan Cullen, President of the Irish Air Line Pilots’ Association (IALPA) said, “There is absolutely no justification for – or benefit from – publishing specifically the last two minutes of this flight, other than feeding a thirst for sensationalism.â€

According to ICAO Annex 13 paragraph 5.12 and the EU Regulation 996/2010 Article 14 (paragraph 1) the State conducting the investigation of an accident shall not make CVR recordings and any transcripts from such recordings available for purposes other than accident or incident investigation. Such recordings shall be included in the Final Report or its appendices only when pertinent to the analysis of the accident. Annex 13 goes on to state that “parts of the records not relevant to the analysis shall not be disclosed.†No benefit has been noted in the report to justify the Irish investigation body’s decision to disclose CVR data.

In this early stage of the technical investigation, many critical questions remain to be answered. IFALPA and ECA call for adherence to the proper accident investigation process and expect a comprehensive and accurate analysis of events based on the highest professional standards. IFALPA and ECA remain fully committed to enhancing aviation safety and our organisations’ resources are at the disposal of the Accident Investigation Agencies to achieve this aim.



Captain Evan Culllen
President Irish Air Line Pilots’Association,
IALPA Headquarters,
Corballis Park,
Dublin Airport.

I disagree with his conclusions. It feels like it's calling the AAIU report into disrepute. It suggests that the report fueled the sensational headlines and that somehow priniting the last few moments was unnecessary. It states numerous breaches of agreed processes and demands a proper investigative process.

To my mind, it smacks of 'our way is the only way' and finally to my mind, undermines the work of the AAIU.

And if they are representing the families then they should say so.

ProfessorPlum

Coil Kilcrea wrote: »

I disagree with his conclusions. It feels like it's calling the AAIU report into disrepute. It suggests that the report fueled the sensational headlines and that somehow priniting the last few moments was unnecessary. It states numerous breaches of agreed processes and demands a proper investigative process.

To my mind, it smacks of 'our way is the only way' and finally to my mind, undermines the work of the AAIU.

And if they are representing the families then they should say so.

Honestly, I don't see how it criticises the overall (interim) report or calls the unit into disrepute.
The report did fuel the sensationalist headlines - it enabled the printing of the transcripts on front pages, and I'm waiting for someone to point out how printing them achieved anything that could not have been achieved without printing them.
Looking at the provisions of ICAO Annex 13, it would seem that there were breaches. That's a statement of fact, as IALPA/IFALPA/ECA interpret it.
The only issue with the report or the investigation that the associations gave issue with is the publishing of the last 2 minutes of the CVR recording. That is all.

Dara and Mark were members of IALPA, so they do represent their interests.

Dial Hard

ProfessorPlum wrote:

Honestly, I don't see how it criticises the overall (interim) report or calls the unit into disrepute.

It calls the release of the transcript "counterproductive to safety".

Do you not think that's critical of the report or questioning the reputation of the IAAIU?

I'd also love to know their logic behind the "counterproductive to safety" line.

Gaoth Laidir

Absolute gob****es. Their claim is full of contradictions. The final two minutes are THE most crucial pieces of the puzzle so far and without them things would be open to more speculation. Do they honestly mean that they would be happier to not know the final moments? Wouldn't not knowing be counterproductive to safety?

ProfessorPlum

Dial Hard wrote: »

It calls the release of the transcript "counterproductive to safety".

Do you not think that's critical of the report or questioning the reputation of the IAAIU?

I'd also love to know their logic behind the "counterproductive to safety" line.

It is critical of the decision to release the transcript, not the report. It is critical of that decision only and no, it doesn't call into question the reputation of the unit. IALPA maintain that they made an error in deciding to publish the CVR, and just like pilots make errors, it does not automatically imply that their reputation is tarnished.
If you read on, they talk about the 'breach of trust' that is the publishing of the CVR. Reporting culture is the backbone of aviation safety and it is largely trust based - that trust has to be maintained. Any erosion of trust has the potential to erode flight safety. I guess where that comment comes from.

Cianmcliam

Dial Hard wrote: »

It calls the release of the transcript "counterproductive to safety".

Do you not think that's critical of the report or questioning the reputation of the IAAIU?

I'd also love to know their logic behind the "counterproductive to safety" line.

Are they perhaps thinking pilots and crew will be more tight lipped in the cockpit when faced with adverse conditions, given that their every word could end up on page 1? Maybe they could keep doubts or inconsistent observations to themselves when journalists might say 'person x clearly knew something was going wrong but failed to express it sooner/clearer/correctly?'. I suppose keeping it for the final report a year from now would only push it from page 1 to page 4 or 5.

ProfessorPlum

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Absolute gob****es. Their claim is full of contradictions. The final two minutes are THE most crucial pieces of the puzzle so far and without them things would be open to more speculation. Do they honestly mean that they would be happier to not know the final moments? Wouldn't not knowing be counterproductive to safety?

The puzzle is in the early days of being solved. Not publishing the transcripts does not somehow magically make that information disappear from the investigation - but it does mean that it's not plastered all over the front page of the paper. If, after a full investigation, it it deemed appropriate to publish the transcripts or part of as part of the final report, then that is accepted. Seriously. They're not asking not to use the CVR in the investigation. They're asking not to publish it prematurely and as part of a very preliminary and incomplete report.

Gaoth Laidir

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

The puzzle is in the early days of being solved. Not publishing the transcripts does not somehow magically make that information disappear from the investigation - but it does mean that it's not plastered all over the front page of the paper. If, after a full investigation, it it deemed appropriate to publish the transcripts or part of as part of the final report, then that is accepted. Seriously. They're not asking not to use the CVR in the investigation. They're asking not to publish it prematurely and as part of a very preliminary and incomplete report.

So in the meantime other S92 pilots carry on in the dark (so to speak) regarding the details of the crash. The report is fully factual so calling any part of it premature is wrong imo. It has not stated any cause as yet, just laying out the facts so far. If the conversation in the cockpit sheds light on the events and could go towards improving safety in the near future before the final report then what is the problem? As stated before, there are a lot more pro helicopter pilots over on pprune who find no problem with the report. I would be listening to them first and foremost.