nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

sparrowcar

Contact lost just before 0100 off the west coast of Achill island on a rescue mission.
Search in progress including all available ships and Rescue 115.

Hopefully a positive outcome to this.

Please keep replies civil, and respectful of the crew and their families.

Please do not speculate as to any cause unless you have a factual basis to do so (and can back it up with information released to the public).

There will be zero tolerance for troublemakers or those that choose to ignore these guidelines.

There are other moderator messages in the thread, as a result of issues that have arisen, and we will be less forgiving going forward, due to the ongoing sensitivity of this incident

As per normal boards guidance, any comments on moderation are off topic and should be addressed directly to mods or cmods by PM. Any part of posts which are off topic in such a manner may be edited or removed, with possible sanction. Non news posts will be moved to the parallel R116 Non news and discussion thread

Should any new reports, updates or news stories come out, posts which can be boiled down to "I Told You So" or other triumphalism about previous commentary will result in significant punishment.

Any threadbans will carry over to any replacement thread should this approach 10,000 posts

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

TomOnBoard

cram1971 wrote: »

I see dives have been suspended for the day on the RTE website.

I also just got an RTE Alert on my phone to say "An initial investigation of The Rescue 116 black box shows no mechanical anomalies, according to to AAIU.

Sad to see the ships going back in and not being able to do the business today. Unfortunately, met.ie is not showing a huge improvement for tomorrow, with two particularly noteworthy forecasts issued at 12:00 today-

"Forecast for Irish coastal waters from Roches Pt to Slyne Head to Malin Head
Wind: Northwest force 4 or 5 and reaching force 6 for a time between Roches Pt and Valentia, decreasing force 3 or 4 this evening, backing westerly force 2 or 3 tonight, backing southerly overnight and increasing forec 4 to 6 by noon tomorrow."

and

@Outlook for a further 24 hours until 1200, Monday, 3 April 2017: Mostly moderate to fresh southerly winds, increasing strong to gale force on western coasts

:mad: "Man plans, God laughs :mad:

Irish Steve

cram1971 wrote: »

i was thinking that but aircraft on approach or departure are never just a couple of hundred feet above sea level.

Flights arriving at Dublin over Howth will be descending from 3000 Ft to 2500 Ft, there is a specific Final Approach Fix (MAXEV) close to Howth which requires them to be at that height, it's used to confirm that they are on the correct profile for the ILS, so in order to prevent TCAS alerts, which will cause all manner of anxious moments for the flight crew of the passenger aircraft, and a mandatory resolution message that overrides ATC instructions, the SAR aircraft will operate in order to be more than 1000 Ft below the commercial traffic which is a legal requirement for IFR traffic separation, from other IFR or VFR traffic.

It used to be the case that they flew to the outer marker at Portmarnock for descent from 1500 Ft, I don't know when that was changed, so at one time, the SAR flights would have had to be at 500 Ft to remain legal.

12gauge dave

Would pilots have been familiar with the area and blacksod?

zuutroy

Dublin tower typically specify that if you're transiting north-south under the 28 approach you do it on a line joining Baily Lighthouse to Lambay at not above 500ft.

Gaoth Laidir

zuutroy wrote: »

Dublin tower typically specify that if you're transiting north-south under the 28 approach you do it on a line joining Baily Lighthouse to Lambay at not above 500ft.

Yes, the Lambay Transit Route, as detailed here...

http://iaip.iaa.ie/iaip/Published%20Files/AIP%20Files/AD/Chart%20Files/EIDW/EI_AD_2_EIDW_24-28_en.pdf

arubex

12gauge dave wrote: »

When people say blackrock helipad is too small for an s92 to land are we talking marginally too small or way too small as in impossible to land a copter of that size.

Black Rock pad has a diameter of 10 metres. It was designed for a BO-105, rotor diameter just under 9.9 metres and overall length 12 metres.

It can just accommodate the PDG EC-135s that now operate for Irish Lights ( based on the 105 airframe with fenestron and other changes ), rotor 10.2 metres length 12.2 metres. Both types have skid undercarriage and are the only types approved for the pad; even then the pad isn't considered ideal, but is all that can be achieved given the geography.

An S-92 has a rotor diameter of over 17 metres and a wheelbase alone of 8.9 metres. On paper one could theoretically put the wheels on the pad and have the nose and tail, nevermind the rotors, overhang assuming they didn't strike the rough ground around three-quarters of the pad's diameter; the fourth quarter is over a sheer drop. I don't think that would be considered feasible except in utter emergency.

For comparison, Blacksod pad is a concrete square 20 metres on each side and the closest obstruction is another 20 metres away.

arubex

Follow-on from the latter; Sikorsky's recommended pad sizes for the S-92 are:

1. Square with sides 75 feet long ( just under 23 metres ) or
2. Circular of diameter 100ft ( 31 metres ).

IE 222

elastico wrote: »

It depends though if the 90kN was the actual speed at the point of impact or the average speed over a period of time prior to that.

What would there final approach speed be for landing.

elastico

IE 222 wrote: »

What would there final approach speed be for landing.

I am no expert but any time I see a helicopter land they more or less hover down from above with little forward speed.

Whether that 90knots shown was the actual speed it collided with the island or not is the question.

As I said already it may have been the average speed over the previous number of minutes etc.

January

Didn't R118 land on blackrock?

Cianmcliam

January wrote: »

Didn't R118 land on blackrock?

No, it was the Air Corps.

homerjay2005

January wrote: »

Didn't R118 land on blackrock?

yes it did.

elastico

January wrote: »

Didn't R118 land on blackrock?

Don't think so. It was mentioned here but I have only seen the Aer Corps one confirmed as having landed there.

I doubt its rotors would clear that rocky outcrop anyway.

Irish Steve

There's a lot of interest in the detailed spec of the SAR92, the brochure I mentioned earlier is primarily sales oriented, but there is a great deal of information about the aircraft in it. It's a PDF file, accessible at http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/ms2/photo/Sikorsky/S-92/Sikorsky-S92-search-rescue-helicopter-brochure.pdf

Psychlops

12gauge dave wrote: »

When people say blackrock helipad is too small for an s92 to land are we talking marginally too small or way too small as in impossible to land a copter of that size.

It looks like the pad was built to accommodate nothing bigger than an Alouette.

vicwatson

Irish Steve wrote: »

There's a lot of interest in the detailed spec of the SAR92, the brochure I mentioned earlier is primarily sales oriented, but there is a great deal of information about the aircraft in it. It's a PDF file, accessible at http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/ms2/photo/Sikorsky/S-92/Sikorsky-S92-search-rescue-helicopter-brochure.pdf

Jesus it's depressing looking at and reading that. So much information. So sad. Thanks for posting it. Looking at it just makes me think of those final moments. Terrible really.

bennyob

Initial review of blackbox data are showing no sign of mechanical failure. Report on rte website.

Psychlops

elastico wrote: »

Picture shows the sheer size of a helipad for an S92 compared to the fart of a helipad in the foreground that accommodates a regular helicopter.

The original pad looks like it was built to accommodate the Dauphins/Alouettes from the Air Corps & the BO's.

Turtwig

RTE's headline's makes it sound like Mechanical Failure was definitively ruled out for good: It wasn't. Their article even says so.

Billy Reid

Is the news report implying something more tragic happened on board?

bennyob

Turtwig wrote: »

RTE's headline's makes it sound like Mechanical Failure was definitively ruled out for good: It wasn't. Their article even says so.

It's a bit tabloid alright.

TomOnBoard

Turtwig wrote: »

RTE's headline's makes it sound like Mechanical Failure was definitively ruled out for good: It wasn't. Their article even says so.

There's a fundamental tenet in a multi-threaded logical analysis, ie if one thread shows an absence of evidence that something exists, it cannot be presented as evidence that it does not exist. When all threads have been considered, and there is still an absence of evidence that the something exists, then a reasonable inference that it does not exist can be made.

(Jaysus my head hurts after that!!)

At this early stage of the investigation, Absence of evidence (of mech. failure) is not Evidence that such failure did not occur.

[Deleted User]

TomOnBoard wrote: »

At this early stage of the investigation, Absence of evidence (of mech. failure) is not Evidence that such failure did not occur.

RTE:

"An initial analysis has been conducted of the data retrieved from the helicopter’s Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) and the Multi-Purpose Flight Recorder (MPFR). No mechanical anomalies have been identified during this initial analysis," said the statement.

"Data" in this case probably also includes the voice recording, as this is a modern digital solid state digital system.

Means Of Escape

IE 222 wrote: »

Everyone is capable of making a mistake or been distracted by other events.

Eastern Airlines Flight 401

Irish Steve

The AAIU were very specific that they wanted to clarify that there do not appear to be issues that could affect other operators of the S92, so they have stated "No mechanical anomalies have been identified during this initial analysis". There has been no mention of any investigation of the voice recorder aspect of the systems, and that will require a lot more detailed analysis, their urgent focus was to ensure that a fundamental mechanical issue was not responsible for bringing R116 down, as a major mechanical failure could have required that all S92 aircraft were grounded, and there are many other users of the S92 who will have been monitoring any information from the AAIU. There will be a large number of people who are less worried this evening as a result of the release of this finding, but they will still be concerned that this accident remains unexplained.

We can only hope that the recovery teams at Blackrock have more success over the next few days so that the families can get closure and an end to the mind numbing pain that they are having to cope with every day.

qhe0i9zvfgdou8

Irish Steve wrote:

We can only hope that the recovery teams at Blackrock have more success over the next few days so that the families can get closure and an end to the mind numbing pain that they are having to cope with every day.

Amen to that , what those poor families must be going through doesn't bear thinking about.

spaceHopper

Irish Steve wrote: »

We can only hope that the recovery teams at Blackrock have more success over the next few days so that the families can get closure and an end to the mind numbing pain that they are having to cope with every day.

Unfortunately the swell forecast for next week is mostly big, there is a small window Sunday morning but I dough it will be big enough to let them do much.
Lets hope they get a luck break

de biz

From the AAIU WEBSITE

Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU) Statement in relation to R116 Investigation

The Chief Inspector of Air Accidents, Mr. Jurgen Whyte, in conjunction with the appointed Investigator-in-Charge, Mr. Paul Farrell, wish to make the following statement.

The AAIU is keenly aware of the loss and grief of the families, friends and colleagues of the crew of R116 and extends its condolences to all concerned. The AAIU continues to work with other agencies to locate and recover the two missing crew members.

The AAIU is mindful that Sikorsky S-92A helicopters are in operation around the world in a variety of roles, including Search and Rescue. Following an event such as this, many operators and agencies are anxious to learn if any matters are identified during the ongoing investigation that may require immediate safety actions.

The Investigation is still at a preliminary stage. However, an initial analysis has been conducted of the data retrieved from the helicopter’s Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) and the Multi-Purpose Flight Recorder (MPFR). No mechanical anomalies have been identified during this initial analysis.

The AAIU Investigation is ongoing and a Preliminary Report will be issued in the near future.

Ends

tricky D

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

Yes, the Lambay Transit Route, as detailed here...
http://iaip.iaa.ie/iaip/Published%20Files/AIP%20Files/AD/Chart%20Files/EIDW/EI_AD_2_EIDW_24-28_en.pdf

zuutroy wrote: »

Dublin tower typically specify that if you're transiting north-south under the 28 approach you do it on a line joining Baily Lighthouse to Lambay at not above 500ft.

It mostly operates at around 500ft with wheels down (sop) in that area. However normally it doesn't quite take the Lambay Transit Route but the principles I reckon would be similar. Its main sea approach is something like ~270deg over Malahide and Swords and then turning to approach. On some occasions when it's not busy airspace, it does do a 'normal' 28 ILS path approach though appears to enter the 'chute' below fixed wing approach.

EchoIndia

Normally the SAR helicopters set up for an approach to runway 16, which is most convenient to their ramp and hangar area.