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

TomOnBoard wrote: »

3. Neither of the winching crew have been found so we don't know whether life jackets were an issue or not. What we do know is that if either or both of them floated the lack of beacon signals is an issue. If they did not float, then beacons would not have helped but clearly flotation devices would be an issue. Until one or both men are recovered, we can not answer these questions.

Anytime I have seen these professionals post a picture of a mission they have done when they post on their Facebook accounts you will notice they always wear lifejackets/orange immersion suits, I can only imagine this is enforced through out the SAR world, especially on long range taskings out to sea or to the Islands as the majority of their work takes place over open ocean.

The ADELT is ICAO defined as:

ICAO Annex 10 wrote:

Automatic deployable ELT (ELT(AD)): An ELT which is rigidly attached to an aircraft and which is automatically deployed and activated by impact, and, in some cases, also by hydrostatic sensors. Manual deployment capability is also provided.

Which confirms that it should have activated by nature of impact forces or immersion in water.

With regards to testing and maintenance, there is also a more relaxed policy in place on live testing of ADELTs, due to the critical function they perform. Whereas PLBs may only be live tested in extreme circumstances and only with prior notification and authorisation, ELTs may be tested in the first 5 minutes of the hour having sought prior authorisation.

As far as PLB's go, the only reference I can think of off the top of my head are the DTTAS regulations for fishing vessels which state that:

DTTAS COP for Fishing Vessels >15 meters wrote:

An approved Personal Locator Beacon (PLB) capable of transmitting a distress alert on
the 406 MHz band shall be provided for each person on-board and shall be carried by
each person on deckat all times. Each PLB should be ready to be manually activated.

No mention of automatic activation, only that they must be able to be readily activated manually.

I think it's also important that PLB's were primarily designed for marine situations such as MOB or a sinking vessel, where the wearer has likely not been the subject of the forces involved in an aircraft crash.

Also, given the impracticalities of using immersion sensing on marine PLBs, I would believe that other mainstream PLBs for use in aviation or recreation refrain from employing immersion sensing due to the real possibility of false alarms, which would place administrative pressure on MRCCs to confirm each and every alarm received and possibly delay giving attention to an alert which may be genuine.

Rescue 116: Coast Guard extends search area for two missing crew.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-coast-guard-extends-search-area-for-two-missing-crew-1.3036814

Interestingly and somewhat sadly ironic, the latest published report by the AAIU concerns an incident with SAR 117.

I'm posting this to try and give people an understanding of the level of detail and analysis that AAIU put in to their investigations. This report took 15 months to complete.

SAR 116 will be infinitely more complex and I would expect it to take a lot longer before all aspects have been fully investigated. As happened with the Manx 2 crash in Cork, there will probably be a preliminary report issued but that may take 6 months to a year.

I would urge people to read it as it may provide a balance to the fact vs speculation debate and also to my previous point that even if they are now focusing on human factors, they most certainly have not exhausted other aspects including mechanical issues.

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/files/report-attachments/REPORT%202017-005_0.pdf

Surely the captain and Co pilot's Police would be auto trigger as they do not risk close proximity to water, the fact that a state of the art SAR chopper that collided with a rock and sank didn't release an emergency beacon of any sort is an anomaly.

Steve wrote: »

Interestingly and somewhat sadly ironic, the latest published report by the AAIU concerns an incident with SAR 117.

I'm posting this to try and give people an understanding of the level of detail and analysis that AAIU put in to their investigations. This report took 15 months to complete.

SAR 116 will be infinitely more complex and I would expect it to take a lot longer before all aspects have been fully investigated. As happened with the Manx 2 crash in Cork, there will probably be a preliminary report issued but that may take 6 months to a year.

I would urge people to read it as it may provide a balance to the fact vs speculation debate and also to my previous point that even if they are now focusing on human factors, they most certainly have not exhausted other aspects including mechanical issues.

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/files/report-attachments/REPORT%202017-005_0.pdf

Interesting that in this instance the winchman was wearing a SABRE which activated on contact with water. So you would have to assume it was also standard kit for the winchman on R116

Re manual or automatic inflation of lifejackets - there's good reason for them to be manual, as it would be nigh on impossible to escape from an upturned helicopter while wearing a fully inflated jacket ( this exercise forms part of standard offshore survival courses).

Automatic inflation is more appropriate for yachtsmen or deck workers on fishing or other vessels where they are more likely to fall into open water, possibly as the result of a concussive blow.

knucklehead6 wrote: »

I'd doubt it... Sure why would they POSSIBLY want to search the actual crash location??? :rolleyes:

Already well searched

nuac wrote: »

Already well searched

Have they searched the whole coastline of Blackrock? All of it? I was under the impression that most of the dives concentrated at the wreckage location 60 m east of the shoreline. I have seen or heard no news that they have done an exhaustive search for the bodies of all of the shoreline inside that. Maybe I missed something.

deaddonkey15 wrote: »

If that's true then it's more understandable. I still think it's a bit disrespectful to not have Mark Duffy's name mentioned.

Is it at all possible that this event was conceived and the posters ordered before the body of Capt Mark Duffy was located?

***Edit*** Just seen that this possibility was already mentioned and responded to

smurfjed wrote: »

It should be issued within 30 days.

Sorry I got the dates wrong when looking at a few similar accident reports.

That report won't give you anymore information than what is available right now, it won't reveal a cause.

There are a lot of people following this thread who may not be aware of the detail in an AAIU report, I was suggesting they read the one I linked to as an example to see the lengths they go into, not the prelim for 116 - I agree with you on that.

In any case, it's been 30 days so we can expect that soon.

Jakey Rolling wrote: »

Re manual or automatic inflation of lifejackets - there's good reason for them to be manual, as it would be nigh on impossible to escape from an upturned helicopter while wearing a fully inflated jacket ( this exercise forms part of standard offshore survival courses).

Automatic inflation is more appropriate for yachtsmen or deck workers on fishing or other vessels where they are more likely to fall into open water, possibly as the result of a concussive blow.

This point highlights the extent to which the SAR crew(s) safety/ recoverability cannot rely on many of the safety devices/fallbacks that are taken for granted in boating/sailing etc. So much of the strategies and technologies relied on elsewhere is simply of limited utility in such a hostile environment as the wild North Atlantic Ocean, such as:

radio beacons are of no use underwater, and can be seriously compromised on the surface due to monstrous wave heights;
water temperatures are so low that hypothermia will occur quickly although mitigated by immersion suiting; ;
life jackets are of limited use to a less than fully aware survivor due to the impracticality of using automatic inflation technologies;
search areas are vast out there and terrain and conditions hazardous to surface rescue craft.

This link was posted in the pprune thread today. Interesting technical details on the Irish S92s.

http://www.dttas.ie/maritime/english/s-92a-technical-details

Steve wrote: »

Interestingly and somewhat sadly ironic, the latest published report by the AAIU concerns an incident with SAR 117.

I'm posting this to try and give people an understanding of the level of detail and analysis that AAIU put in to their investigations. This report took 15 months to complete.

SAR 116 will be infinitely more complex and I would expect it to take a lot longer before all aspects have been fully investigated. As happened with the Manx 2 crash in Cork, there will probably be a preliminary report issued but that may take 6 months to a year.

I would urge people to read it as it may provide a balance to the fact vs speculation debate and also to my previous point that even if they are now focusing on human factors, they most certainly have not exhausted other aspects including mechanical issues.

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/files/report-attachments/REPORT%202017-005_0.pdf

Massively impressed that a member of the public can make a 999 call at 14.04 and 10 minutes later at 14.14, the winch man was being lowered in to the sea to pick up the casualties.