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

Kalyke · 16-03-2017 09:50PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Yourself and Irish Steve seem to believe the fallacy that highly trained aviation professionals can't make mistakes.
For those of us working in the industry, we know that that is a very dangerous viewpoint to take.

No, I think what they are saying is, now is not the time for speculation. Now is the time for respect!

eatmyshorts · 16-03-2017 09:55PM

sdanseo wrote: »

Just because it's logical doesn't mean it happened and this shouldn't be a working theory by any stretch until there's evidence to support it.

Respectfully, I disagree.
Every possibility should be a working theory until discounted. To do otherwise would only handicap an investigation.

Cianmcliam · 16-03-2017 09:57PM

sdanseo wrote: »

Just because it's logical doesn't mean it happened and this shouldn't be a working theory by any stretch until there's evidence to support it.

The only reason I can see that a helicopter would want to land on that rock, other than to maintain the light, is a dire emergency caused by a major failure on the aircraft or if they mistook it for Blacksod - which seems unfathomable. If the cloudbase was 300ft and they were using instruments, then if anything that's more reason why they couldn't have mixed up the two, and therefore wouldn't have been anywhere near low enough at a range of six miles from landing.

I don't know, I am pretty sure it was 116 that flew over the Applegreen on the M1 past Swords one night last week and it couldn't have been more than 400ft up, that is 12km from the airport, as the crow flies.

sdanseo · 16-03-2017 09:58PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Respectfully, I disagree.
Every possibility should be a working theory until discounted. To do otherwise would only handicap an investigation.

That's a good point. Perhaps working theory for the AAIU, but not something for which speculation should be fuelled because it could damage reuptations unfairly.

rushfan · 16-03-2017 10:01PM

Means Of Escape wrote:

Magnificent and apt idea Followed by a hovering rescue chopper above

Would be amazing, but there wouldn't be a dry eye in the place, me included.

Calina · 16-03-2017 10:02PM

flazio wrote: »

I know it's a remote island i just thought they might have some sort of surveillance in case of a light fail or damage or someone getting marooned. I did say "long shot".

Back to a bird strike possibility, looking at pictures of the helicopter, i do see a sort of cone device fitted to the air intake on top of the helicopter (where the harp logo is) but I don't think it's completely bird proof.

Just for info, the lighthouse is monitored remotely from the HQ of the Commissioners for Irish Lights. Light fails would be picked up and anyway the tower is visible from the shoreline so the locals would notice too.

I do note that it seems they are careful to rule out hitting the lighthouse.

Odelay · 16-03-2017 10:08PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Respectfully, I disagree.
Every possibility should be a working theory until discounted. To do otherwise would only handicap an investigation.

And the professionals that are dealing with this year in year out will investigate all possibilities. They will know of possibilities that you or I could never imagine.
They will not offer a speculation on a public disucssion site, and that is what is going on here.

sdanseo · 16-03-2017 10:12PM

Storm 10 wrote: »

Folks I just sent an email to the IRFU to see if they will honor the four heroes with a minutes silence on Saturday. Will you guys do the same and email info@irishrugby.ie it would be a fitting tribute to them their colleagues and families

Brilliant idea, also done.

Oscar Bravo · 16-03-2017 10:12PM

Pat mcgrath on rte news just now, parts of the helicopter found very near the lighthouse.

Storm 10 · 16-03-2017 10:13PM

RTE news now parts of the helicopter found at the Lighthouse on Blacktock

eatmyshorts · 16-03-2017 10:15PM

Odelay wrote: »

And the professionals that are dealing with this year in year out will investigate all possibilities. They will know of possibilities that you or I could never imagine.
They will not offer a speculation on a public disucssion site, and that is what is going on here.

I agree, 100%

The point I'm just trying to make, and it comes from 20 years of experience in aviation, is that no theoretical possibility, no matter how unpalatable to popular opinion, can be arbitrarily discounted.
To do so shows blinkered thinking.

ThaiTanic · 16-03-2017 10:15PM

Sounds like it clipped off the lighthouse according to RTE news there

Gaoth Laidir · 16-03-2017 10:19PM

Just again to reiterate the motto in aviation: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. In that order. So if you have a problem, sending out a Mayday is not the first thing on the list. Fly the aircraft and navigate, then communicate, if there's time.

duskyjoe · 16-03-2017 10:26PM

A lot of emotion in thread and rightly so. The sooner Jurgen Whyte and his team get their hands on the FDR the better. Priority no.1 is to retrieve the remaining crew. I'd like to wade in too re my thoughts but enough has been said.

Means Of Escape · 16-03-2017 10:28PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Yourself and Irish Steve seem to believe the fallacy that highly trained aviation professionals can't make mistakes.
For those of us working in the industry, we know that that is a very dangerous viewpoint to take.

Art Scholl a perfect example

Stovepipe · 16-03-2017 10:28PM

two pilots on board; if one is flying (PF), then the other as PNF can use the radios, which would already have 121.5 on Guard anyway, and in the case of the S92, the winch op has a comms console all of his own....you're talking about a catastrophic incident that precluded any kind of comms, let alone a Mayday so it's either a total mechanical failure, such as a main rotor blade coming off or a main gearbox seizing and they are designed to run oil free for about 20 minutes. A tail rotor loss of control would still allow time to talk and still allow limited control, especially at high speed. After that, you're left with CFIT, which is unfortunately all too common in Ireland.

cosanostra · 16-03-2017 10:38PM

Irish times posted this photo of the lighthouse not sure if it's from today or an old photo but it gives a good view of the LH and island. If 116 hit that lighthouse I very much doubt that it would be still functioning http://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.3013842.1489698125!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_620_330/image.jpg

Storm 10 · 16-03-2017 10:41PM

It's going to be on Prime time on RTE shortly

jetfiremuck · 16-03-2017 10:42PM

Stovepipe wrote: »

two pilots on board; if one is flying (PF), then the other as PNF can use the radios, which would already have 121.5 on Guard anyway, and in the case of the S92, the winch op has a comms console all of his own....you're talking about a catastrophic incident that precluded any kind of comms, let alone a Mayday so it's either a total mechanical failure, such as a main rotor blade coming off or a main gearbox seizing and they are designed to run oil free for about 20 minutes. A tail rotor loss of control would still allow time to talk and still allow limited control, especially at high speed. After that, you're left with CFIT, which is unfortunately all too common in Ireland.

If you are flying ahead at180kts you wouldn't have time . That helicopter has auto hover,Flight director and autopilot. Were they flying under imc is another question. Spatical disorientation or spatical orientation is also possible.

Gaoth Laidir · 16-03-2017 10:46PM

jetfiremuck wrote: »

If you are flying ahead at180kts you wouldn't have time . That helicopter has auto hover,Flight director and autopilot. Were they flying under imc is another question. Spatical disorientation or spatical orientation is also possible.

It was flying at around 90 knots, not 180.

Calina · 16-03-2017 10:46PM

Sun is shining in that photo so almost certainly not today.

I have doubts it hit the lighthouse. There would be a load of wreckage around it if it had. But sadly, I do not exclude contact with the island itself.

spaceHopper · 16-03-2017 10:51PM

None of this matters there are any number of possible causes it could be mechanical electrical or human or any combination of them. A dedicated crew who we should all be proud of are gone. We have no business judging them for any possible mistakes they may have made

murphaph · 16-03-2017 10:54PM

spaceHopper wrote: »

None of this matters there are any number of possible causes it could be mechanical electrical or human or any combination of them. A dedicated crew who we should all be proud of are gone. We have no business judging them for any possible mistakes they may have made

Of course the cause matters. Aviation actually learns from its mistakes through recognising them. Nobody is trying to lay the blame at anyone's feet however.

Bazzy · 16-03-2017 10:54PM

The barstool theories here need to stop

There's people standing on a pier on the west coast of Ireland missing their , Husband, father , Brother , Son god knows what

A lady is about to be waked and buried

Can we not just keep the what happened until the Black Box has been recovered and we know facts.

I know this is a hot topic but the tabloids wanted to focus on the Air Corps and people seem to want to find blame rather than an answer.

Lets wait for the news ask factual questions about aviation and helicopter flying in general and wait for more news.

Whats happened has happened and lets get the facts and go from there

Buffman · 16-03-2017 10:56PM

cosanostra wrote: »

Irish times posted this photo of the lighthouse not sure if it's from today or an old photo but it gives a good view of the LH and island. If 116 hit that lighthouse I very much doubt that it would be still functioning http://www.irishtimes.com/polopoly_fs/1.3013842.1489698125!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/box_620_330/image.jpg

That's a very old photo, it's since been renovated (1999) and is now habitable as per Tabnabs post.

Tabnabs wrote: »

irishgeo · 16-03-2017 10:57PM

Equipment failure could have led to it clipping the lighthouse on the way down.

Cianmcliam · 16-03-2017 10:59PM

spaceHopper wrote: »

None of this matters there are any number of possible causes it could be mechanical electrical or human or any combination of them. A dedicated crew who we should all be proud of are gone. We have no business judging them for any possible mistakes they may have made

I don't see any judgement to be fair, no one is in any way questioning their competence. That would be completely absurd for such an experienced and distinguished crew. Competence and excellence don't replace checklists and redundant systems though in recognition that we are all human, not machines.

Reati · 16-03-2017 11:07PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Yourself and Irish Steve seem to believe the fallacy that highly trained aviation professionals can't make mistakes.
For those of us working in the industry, we know that that is a very dangerous viewpoint to take.

Oh sorry, didn't release I'm not part of the industry club. Must send my license back to the IAA so. All that money on training and testing for nothing :rolleyes:

Anyway, back down here off the high horse. I never said they couldn't make a mistake. I said it's highly unlikely and it's more likely the craft failed. Is it possible there was a pilot error due to a system failure? Of course. Is it possible they crashed due to pilot error? Of course but it's still unlikely.

Just in case you didn't know, I'm not on the AAIU so I am free to have a public opinion based on track record of the pilots experience and safety record with regard pilot error. The AAIU will be the ones who will figure it out, follow all possible leads, use the FDR and will publish a, no doubt, detailed report. My view nor the views of anyone on a forum isn't going to make a shred of difference to the AAIU investigation. I doubt they are loading up boards.ie and going, Aha! Reati says they couldn't have made a mistake, better rule that out so.

Anyway, If the crew fly into Blackrock by mistake, I'd be surprised. it would be an opportunity to learn why and how to prevent it in future.

I certainly won't find the joy some in here seem to have for the pilot error theory...

Oscar Bravo · 16-03-2017 11:09PM

rte news update, basically saying what Jurgen Whyte said on prime time. he also said the area is treacherous and there is an area of interest they couldnt get to this evening.

"A section of the missing Coast Guard helicopter R116 has been found by Air Accident Investigation Unit inspectors on Blackrock, some 10 kilometres off the Mayo coast.

The discovery was made close to Blackrock lighthouse this evening, when personnel from the AAIU were brought to the site by an Air Corps helicopter.

The finding confirms that the helicopter encountered difficulties around the area where the last communication with it was registered.

Investigators spent around 90 minutes on the small island, which houses the most westerly lighthouse off Co Mayo"

Irish Steve · 16-03-2017 11:10PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

Yourself and Irish Steve seem to believe the fallacy that highly trained aviation professionals can't make mistakes.
For those of us working in the industry, we know that that is a very dangerous viewpoint to take.

And having spent over 30 years involved with or working in the aviation industry, I am not a believer in the fallacy that you imply, I am very much aware that mistakes can be made, the most glaring example in recent times being the Air France A330 loss, which was completely preventable, and should not have happened, and on occasions, (not here on boards) I have been very vocal in specific circles about the problems that have been introduced into commercial flying over the last 30 years.

R116 crew could indeed have made a mistake that ended with the event that is now being discussed, but I will be very surprised if that eventually turns out to be the case, simply because SAR crews are operating in a different environment than the normal commercial environment, and their entire ethos, training, and experience is unique to the aviation industry, and the reason they survive and there are so few accidents is because they operate with the ethos of "expect the unexpected".

I will put it like this. Someone made the comment (in this thread) a while ago that even Formula 1 drivers make mistakes, also true, but to put it in context, when was the last time anyone can remember a Formula 1 driver crashing during the in lap after they set their qualifying time? That is the context of Monday's accident with R116.

SAR pilots are NOT the same as any other commercial pilot, because of the unique nature of the task they perform. Every flight is different, it is either a rescue mission, or a training mission, so a lot of the time, they cannot plan or prepare in the same way as commercial aviation pilots do, in that if a rescue is called, they don't have the time to spare to produce detailed plans of where they will go, and how they will do it, they have to be sufficiently skilled that they can (in the right sense) make it up as they go along, and that is a very different skill set when compared to normal commercial flying, and it means that their situational awareness has to be operating at a much higher level throughout the flight.

Most commercial pilots will spend a training day every 6 months being reviewed in a simulator, and that is deemed acceptable by "the system". SAR pilots carry out a training mission as part of their handover every time they come on shift, and also fly other training missions on a regular and repetitive basis, and their awareness of the issues that can cause problems is massively enhanced in comparison to "routine" pilots, mostly because they have probably encountered such issues on a regular basis during their operations, which are too often in weather conditions or locations that most people would run a mile from if they could.

Anyone I have talked to that is involved in any aspect of flying is having a hard time coming to terms with this accident, because they (like me) are very much aware of the implications of an accident like this.

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

Comments