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

billie1b · 23-03-2017 08:50PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Hot refuel and go

No fuel uplift, picked up equipment and left straight away.

23-03-2017 08:53PM

Water John wrote: »

We know the purpose of the post. Don't take the bait.

It was a simple question as it happens, I wanted to know was he referring to what 116 did last week or what 118 did today. I wasn't fully sure, however nice try at inferring something in my post that wasn't actually there.

23-03-2017 08:54PM

billie1b wrote: »

No fuel uplift, picked up equipment and left straight away.

Thanks I was told they were waiting on fuelers.

Gaoth Laidir · 23-03-2017 08:55PM

Both Belmullet and Mace Head were reporting zero cloud cover and just 5-knot winds at 7 pm. Perfect.

elastico · 23-03-2017 08:57PM

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Both Belmullet and Mace Head were reporting zero cloud cover and just 5-knot winds at 7 pm. Perfect.

Planning for a very early dive by the looks of things. And no update from what the ROV saw today either.

billie1b · 23-03-2017 09:00PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Thanks I was told they were waiting on fuelers.

I was busy for the first 10 minutes that it got in. Landed on stand about 17:30, Only got down to it about 17:40 and I watched it right up until it departed, never seen it refuel, maybe it did in the first few minutes, I could be mistaken.

23-03-2017 09:04PM

billie1b wrote: »

I was busy for the first 10 minutes that it got in. Landed on stand about 17:30, Only got down to it about 17:40 and I watched it right up until it departed, never seen it refuel, maybe it did in the first few minutes, I could be mistaken.

No mustn't have, I was told they were waiting on refuelers. So if you didn't see them they didn't do it.

Gaoth Laidir · 23-03-2017 09:38PM

Visibility at Belmullet at 8 pm is down to 7 km in mist (it was 19 km at 7 pm) while it's 45 km at Mace Head and 65 km at Knock.

ted1 · 23-03-2017 09:48PM

Will the footage from the submersible be clear enough to see the damage to the body and if so would they have a better idea of what happened? I.e landing gear up or down , front smashed or near perfect .

elastico · 23-03-2017 09:53PM

ted1 wrote: »

Will the footage from the submersible be clear enough to see the damage to the body and if so would they have a better idea of what happened? I.e landing gear up or down , front smashed or near perfect .

I would assume the investigators have a very strong idea of what happened at this stage. They have access to a lot more information than what has become public knowledge.

Cianmcliam · 23-03-2017 10:02PM

Prime Time preview just mentioned they have new information on the collision avoidance system on 116, after 9 O'Clock News.

coillsaille · 23-03-2017 10:02PM

Just caught an ad for Primetime there and think she said they have new info on the aircraft warning system??

Psychlops · 23-03-2017 10:08PM

Shamrock841 wrote: »

Just on your last point there, I was under the assumption that the MEDEVAC callsign was the aer corps AW139 and not associated with the CG S92. I am of course completely open to correction

IRCG C/Sign used is predominantly "RESCUE" & the numbers eg RESCUE115, I have heard the C/Sign "MEDEVAC115" being used also by all four bases.

When the Irish Air Corps & HSE Established the Emergency Aeromedical Service (EAS) in Athlone they started by using the C/Sign "MEDEVAC112" but some time last year they changed the C/Sign to "AIRCORPS112".

Interestingly AIRCORPS112 is visible daily on FR24 as they go about their lifesaving work.

Donal55 · 23-03-2017 10:30PM

Psychlops wrote: »

IRCG C/Sign used is predominantly "RESCUE" & the numbers eg RESCUE115, I have heard the C/Sign "MEDEVAC115" being used also by all four bases.

When the Irish Air Corps & HSE Established the Emergency Aeromedical Service (EAS) in Athlone they started by using the C/Sign "MEDEVAC112" but some time last year they changed the C/Sign to "AIRCORPS112".

Interestingly AIRCORPS112 is visible daily on FR24 as they go about their lifesaving work.

Any truth in the rumour that the Aer Corp EAS system has been curtailed lately to daytime flights only?
Thanks

Psychlops · 23-03-2017 10:59PM

Donal55 wrote: »

Any truth in the rumour that the Aer Corp EAS system has been curtailed lately to daytime flights only?
Thanks

The EAS since day one has always been a daylight service only. And its Air Corps, not Aer Corp. :-)

Gaoth Laidir · 23-03-2017 11:07PM

Primetime right now..

Stheno · 23-03-2017 11:14PM

Primetime claiming that the close terrain warning software did not include Blackrock Island

P.lane78 · 23-03-2017 11:15PM

Chilling stuff

selectamatic · 23-03-2017 11:16PM

Stheno wrote: »

Primetime claiming that the close terrain warning software did not include Blackrock Island

A poster here was basically laughed at by some for proposing a similar theory about a week ago.

Gaoth Laidir · 23-03-2017 11:17PM

"Final reported altitude 220 ft".

"EGPWS database did not contain Blackrock".

So, just like SkyDdemon doesn't have Blackrock, neither does the EGPWS database. Therefore the EGPWS could not warn them about Blackrock.

All the above is subject to confirmation in the official investigation. Jurgen Whyte did not want to comment on it.

Blingy · 23-03-2017 11:17PM

selectamatic wrote: »

A poster here was basically laughed at by some for proposing a similar theory about a week ago.

Yep I remember it being mentioned here.

Esel · 23-03-2017 11:19PM

How is it possible that the EGPWS did not have Blackrock in its database?

CardinalJ · 23-03-2017 11:19PM

It seems genuinely incredible that a large rock in the middle of the sea, relatively close to a designated landing area, wouldnt be on their maps or programmed into their equipment.

Were not allowed to speculate, but wow.

HighLine · 23-03-2017 11:22PM

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

"Final reported altitude 220 ft".

"EGPWS database did not contain Blackrock".

So, just like SkyDdemon doesn't have Blackrock, neither does the EGPWS database. Therefore the EGPWS could not warn them about Blackrock.

All the above is subject to confirmation in the official investigation. Jurgen Whyte did not want to comment on it.

Actually shocking to red that. And Blackrock is circa 260ft at highest point.

scuby · 23-03-2017 11:22PM

If true that blackrock is not in the nav system, that's utterly heart breaking.... surely though the AIS beacon and lighthouse light would have been an alert to them?

Cianmcliam · 23-03-2017 11:23PM

Esel wrote: »

How is it possible that the EGPWS did not have Blackrock in its database?

The picture they are using of the cockpit is the same one as the flying in Ireland article, the moving map looks to me like it is provided by OSI. It was supposed to be Euronav according to some posts on here. I still think the missing data for the island on the 1:50000 OSI maps could be important. It could be the basis of the elevation data in the EGPWS?

Atlantic Dawn · 23-03-2017 11:23PM

Irish Lights did say previously that the lighthouse was functioning and was still functioning after the crash, would it not have been visible?

cabledude · 23-03-2017 11:24PM

CardinalJ wrote: »

It seems genuinely incredible that a large rock in the middle of the sea, relatively close to a designated landing area, wouldnt be on their maps or programmed into their equipment.

Were not allowed to speculate, but wow.

This is hard to comprehend....

naughto · 23-03-2017 11:24PM

scuby wrote: »

If true that blackrock is not in the nav system, that's utterly heart breaking.... surely though the AIS beacon and lighthouse light would have been an alert to them?

Spelling

Was it foggy weather that night

Gaoth Laidir · 23-03-2017 11:24PM

selectamatic wrote: »

A poster here was basically laughed at by some for proposing a similar theory about a week ago.

Blingy wrote: »

Yep I remember it being mentioned here.

I had mentioned it about my Skydemon app. Still, I would expect that this crew's systems would have all pertinent information available.

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

Comments