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

ted1

kippy wrote: »

And resources.
A lot of the current coastline in the search area is very difficult to access - you won't find regular folks accessing it. Specialist resources are required but I take you points on the remainder of you post.

Drones are great , and have probably broking out of the specialist resource category

Gadgetman496

As pointed out way back in this thread, Boards IE & The Journal IE or both owned by the same group Distilled Media.

[Deleted User]

TomOnBoard wrote: »

You're using a no- named source in an Internet - based red-top as evidence? Noooo thank you.

No official source, and no mention of the medical assessment fearing septicaemia.

Boards and The Journal are viewed by most as one and the same.

TomOnBoard

fiachr_a wrote: »

Personnel involved in the medical evacuation said that miscommunication concerning the nature of the man’s injuries was responsible for the Coast Guard helicopters being dispatched last Monday. http://www.thejournal.ie/coastguard-injury-miscommunication-dara-fitzpatrick-3296348-Mar2017/

You're using a no- named source in an Internet - based red-top as evidence? Noooo thank you.

No official source, and no mention of the medical assessment fearing septicaemia.

TomOnBoard

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

That's a good point. There may be onboard video footage that would help in the investigation.

While I agree that any/all potential evidence could be of use to the investigation, enabling a more complete picture of the accident to be painted, I see the successful download of voice and data from the black box as providing most of the relevant information already.

fiachr_a

elastico wrote: »

His point is totally irrelevant.

Personnel involved in the medical evacuation said that miscommunication concerning the nature of the man’s injuries was responsible for the Coast Guard helicopters being dispatched last Monday. http://www.thejournal.ie/coastguard-injury-miscommunication-dara-fitzpatrick-3296348-Mar2017/

Cianmcliam

ED E wrote: »

[Not an expert]

Never heard of an FDR/CVR that records video. Normally when an incident is caught on video its 3rd party (CCTV for Hudson River Landing, Dashcam for the Bagram Airbase crash etc).

Yes, even for audio the high quality track is fairly limited in duration due to storage requirements, they use solid state memory. Video of reasonable quality would use too much of the limited storage.

Gaoth Laidir

allthedoyles wrote: »

Was there any dashcam footage or cctv in the fuselage area recording to black box in R116 ?

That's a good point. There may be onboard video footage that would help in the investigation.

ED E

allthedoyles wrote: »

Was there any dashcam footage or cctv in the fuselage area recording to black box in R116 ?

[Not an expert]

Never heard of an FDR/CVR that records video. Normally when an incident is caught on video its 3rd party (CCTV for Hudson River Landing, Dashcam for the Bagram Airbase crash etc).

allthedoyles

Was there any dashcam footage or cctv in the fuselage area recording to black box in R116 ?

TomOnBoard

elastico wrote: »

We could make up endless what if scenarios...

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle and all that.

Actually, if your Auntie had balls, she'd most likely be your transgender Auntie, not your uncle.

elastico

TomOnBoard wrote: »

What's the evidence for that statement?

His point is totally irrelevant. As was the line about how the Aer Corps hadn't enough staff, as if to imply it all could have been different.

We could make up endless what if scenarios...

If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle and all that.

TomOnBoard

fiachr_a wrote: »

They thought he was missing a hand when it was only a finger. Someone is responsible for the confusion.

What's the evidence for that statement?

uck51js9zml2yt

Rte news at 6 reporting that a grid search is to be conducted up the coast and if they get big enough fishing vessels to extend that to 35 miles out.

Water John

Big grid search from 35 miles out to be conducted, on Friday I think. From RTE News.

Turtwig

There are also potential legal implications. Just like a newspaper could be used as a source or claim so too can this website. Even though material posted here is usually the opinion of an anonymous user the issue arises when the site publishes that opinion i.e the post is visible to the viewing public. the site is left bearing responsibility for the material posted.

[Deleted User]

Reati wrote: »

I struggle with why this is a problem, afterall this is meant to be a discussion board.
It's not an official channel for the investigation.

It's not an official channel for the families to get information.

It's not an official information channel for the media

It's a public discussion board. People should be free to discuss "what if's" and other theories around the crash without the fear of either getting a ban or a telling off.

Nothing discussed here will impact why the crash happened or the report that will come out in due time.

I fixed your post for you, it's not a "public" discussion board it's a discussion board owned and operated by Boards.ie Limited who set the rules, the rules by which you agreed to when you signed up and indeed the local rules of A&A in the Forum charter. Whether you like it or not when you are in someone else's house you play by their rules not your own.

Boards.ie is a discussion forum, and Ireland's largest online community.

http://www.boards.ie/content/about-us

No freedom of speech.

This is a private website. There is no "right" to freedom of speech here. We, the Admins and moderators DO want to promote discussion but FREE un-moderated discussion online turns into a screaming match between children. We believe that rules of etiquette should be applied (see below). Shouting about how we have infringed your "freedom of speech" on a privately owned website is silly. You can use blogger.com to say what YOU like, what you aren’t entitled to is access to the community we have built here without abiding by the community's rules, as decided and enforced by us.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/faq.php?faq=bie_faq

Reati

Tenger wrote: »

This post sums up the problem of this thread and others elsewhere. Discussion and speculation is happening based upon incomplete data and several "what if....?" and "I heard this...."

I struggle with why this is a problem, afterall this is meant to be a discussion board.

It's not an official channel for the investigation.
It's not an official channel for the families to get information.
It's not an official information channel for the media

It's a public discussion board. People should be free to discuss "what if's" and other theories around the crash without the fear of either getting a ban or a telling off.

Nothing discussed here will impact why the crash happened or the report that will come out in due time.

kippy

elastico wrote: »

The shoreline is only a tiny part of the possible search area. The entire north atlantic will be the potential search zone shortly.

The shoreline is the only part of the search area that is feasible to search...and that cannot be done without resources.

elastico

kippy wrote: »

And resources.
A lot of the current coastline in the search area is very difficult to access - you won't find regular folks accessing it. Specialist resources are required but I take you points on the remainder of you post.

The shoreline is only a tiny part of the possible search area. The entire north atlantic will be the potential search zone shortly.

fiachr_a

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I think that, in due course, the protocols in place for calling out Coastguard assistance will need to be reviewed and any lessons that might be learned from the R116 tragedy taken on board. I'm not saying in any way that the R116/R118 callout was not justified- how would I know-.

They thought he was missing a hand when it was only a finger. Someone is responsible for the confusion.

kippy

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I don't believe successful recovery has much to do with the level of resources any longer, as the missing crewman have now been taken by the sea and their retrieval depends entirely on them being washed up somewhere. Once washed up, they will be spotted by any number of possible shoreline users, rather than by dedicated search personnel. The length of possible shoreline is so vast that no amount of resources being thrown at a search could yield any more results than would be possible as a result of shoreline user keeping an eye out. I'm trying to nail this one because otherwise, the issue of 'not spending enough on the effort' will take root.

Furthermore, there comes a time in any search, when initial frenetic efforts need to be stood down and a different pace of effort comes into play, as the search area simply become too large. In this regard, a point will come when the other SAR helicopters will have to coddled as recent Air Worthiness bulletins in respect of the Sikorsky S-92 tail rotor assembly appears to require a 16- man hour maintenance effort to conduct borescope examination after every 10 (or was it 6) hours of flight.

So of your three dependencies, I believe that any recovery is now almost entirely down to luck.

And resources.
A lot of the current coastline in the search area is very difficult to access - you won't find regular folks accessing it. Specialist resources are required but I take you points on the remainder of you post.

Storm 10

Granuaile looks to be departing Blacksod and showing Galway as its destination ETA 2am tomorrow morning

[Deleted User]

@Tabnabs sorry don't get me wrong she has often crossed the border and is on regular record having done so, quite a regular visitor to daisyhill in Newry I meant more that far north operationally.

Worthy of note is my words "that far north" from my previous post.

Tenger

TomOnBoard wrote: »

No doubt the FDR will have exact and reliable flight data, and that is well known to the investigators by now..

The 90 vs 9 or something else is only of relevance in places like this, where each figure has been used as a definitive basis for one theory or another, when in fact both theories have been based on jumping to conclusions. Such theories may well turn out to be correct when the fact are fully known. However at the time they are presented here, they are basically built on pure speculation dressed up as fact- based conclusions.

This post sums up the problem of this thread and others elsewhere. Discussion and speculation is happening based upon incomplete data and several "what if....?" and "I heard this...."

The current review of the GermanWings crash should be a wake-up call to the potential dangers of making assumptions too early in an investigation.

In my almost 2 decades of working in the commercial aviation sector the patience required to await full reports is tedious but mostly worth it to get fully researched reports at the end. The push to get an answer as quickly as possible is mostly from non-aviation people. (once inherent airframe issues can be ruled out of course, which appear to cleared up by that last AAIU statement re "no mechanical anolmalies)

The recovery operation was focused on the missing crew as a priority. Once the combi FDR was retrieved in good shape the AAIU were mostly assured of getting the data they needed.Talking to CHC about operational procedures would add to that raw data.

I wonder does my time in the industry qualify me as "an aviation professional" for some of the elitist posters here?

TomOnBoard

kippy wrote: »

Sorry, but this just has to be responded to.
There are very few parallels between both incidents. That much should be very obvious and not even need to be stated.

As for the chances of finding the other two crewmen - that depends entirely on:
The resources thrown at it.
The weather.
Luck.

I would hope that there is a chance within the next two/three weeks but the longer that time period goes out the less likely a successful recovery.

I don't believe successful recovery has much to do with the level of resources any longer, as the missing crewman have now been taken by the sea and their retrieval depends entirely on them being washed up somewhere. Once washed up, they will be spotted by any number of possible shoreline users, rather than by dedicated search personnel. The length of possible shoreline is so vast that no amount of resources being thrown at a search could yield any more results than would be possible as a result of shoreline user keeping an eye out. I'm trying to nail this one because otherwise, the issue of 'not spending enough on the effort' will take root.

Furthermore, there comes a time in any search, when initial frenetic efforts need to be stood down and a different pace of effort comes into play, as the search area simply become too large. In this regard, a point will come when the other SAR helicopters will have to coddled as recent Air Worthiness bulletins in respect of the Sikorsky S-92 tail rotor assembly appears to require a 16- man hour maintenance effort to conduct borescope examination after every 10 (or was it 6) hours of flight.

So of your three dependencies, I believe that any recovery is now almost entirely down to luck.

Tabnabs

Deleted User wrote: »

Bit of both, most photos of helis on their facebook page seem to be of HM Coastguard 92's only one of MES 61. I don't remember 116 deploying that far north recently. They've been over to IOM twice in the last 3-4 months for familiarisation.

Not trying to prove a point, but she was regularly north of the border.

The aircraft, which regularly takes part in training exercises involving the RNLI, Newcastle and Kilkeel Coastguard teams and mountain rescue unit

http://www.thedownrecorder.co.uk/pages/index.asp?title=Rescue_116_carried_out_dozens_of_rescues_in_Mournes

Joining the five RNLI lifeboats in the major search were the Irish Coast Guard Helicopter Rescue 116 along with a rescue helicopter from Prestwick and local coastguard teams.

http://www.irishlifeboats.com/apps/blog../show/44026407-five-rnli-lifeboats-involved-in-search-for-missing-microlight-aircraft

the major multiagency search was coordinated by the coastguard and included Bangor RNLI, the Irish Coast Guard helicopter Rescue 116, four shipping vessels, two boats from Whitehead Yacht club and Larne, Portmuck and Bangor coastguard teams.

http://www.irishlifeboats.com/apps/blog../show/44024863-larne-rnli-rescue-three-missing-divers-north-of-the-gobbins

etc. etc.

elastico

kippy wrote: »

Sorry, but this just has to be responded to.
There are very few parallels between both incidents. That much should be very obvious and not even need to be stated.

As for the chances of finding the other two crewmen - that depends entirely on:
The resources thrown at it.
The weather.
Luck.

I would hope that there is a chance within the next two/three weeks but the longer that time period goes out the less likely a successful recovery.

The only comparison I am making is that ocean currents make search areas vast rather quick. They were searching off Donegal last week afaik. At this stage the search zone could be well north of Scotland.

I agree with you that luck will play a part, hopefully wash up on a beach somewhere.

kippy

elastico wrote: »

When you look at the search for the Malaysia airlines plane the search area becomes vast rather quickly with ocean currents.

Sorry, but this just has to be responded to.
There are very few parallels between both incidents. That much should be very obvious and not even need to be stated.

As for the chances of finding the other two crewmen - that depends entirely on:
The resources thrown at it.
The weather.
Luck.

I would hope that there is a chance within the next two/three weeks but the longer that time period goes out the less likely a successful recovery.

[Deleted User]

Tabnabs wrote: »

Scottish CG helicopter used in hoax search in NI over the weekend. Often the job of Rescue 116 to assist in these waters too.

https://www.facebook.com/BangorRNLI/?hc_ref=PAGES_TIMELINE&fref=nf

Bit of both, most photos of helis on their facebook page seem to be of HM Coastguard 92's only one of MES 61. I don't remember 116 deploying that far north recently. They've been over to IOM twice in the last 3-4 months for familiarisation.