Accordingly, it is inappropriate that AAIU Reports should be used to assign fault or blame or determine liability, since neither the safety investigation nor the reporting process has been undertaken for that purpose.
homerjay2005 wrote: » is there any indication why they were so low?
In response to a query, "come right just confirm"? from the Commander, the crew member said degrees right yeah, and a heading change was initiated using heading mode. The rear crew member then interjected, with increasing urgency, "Come right now come right COME RIGHT".
Steve wrote: » SOP for 'an approach like this' was descend to 200ft RA, it's in the report.
Steve wrote: » One thing that is niggling at me is the exact location of BLKMO, I can't find any reference on AIP so was this a company waypoint?
BLKMO is a geographic point on the Operator’s Route Guide at which the arrival into Blacksod was to commence; it is close to Black Rock
superg wrote: » It's bloody grim reading the ends of four peoples lives laid out in black and white like that.
TomOnBoard wrote: » Error by crew is NOT what the Times report is saying... That report says: " The report details how aircraft relies on an Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS) to detect obstacles, providing a visual and audio alert to the pilot. “The EGPWS provides the flight crew (subject to the display selections made) with a display of the helicopter position relative to the databases of surrounding terrain and obstacles. If the EGPWS detects that the helicopter is, or will come into, conflict with database terrain or obstacle(s), it will provide a combination of annunciator lights, colour display(s) and aural alerts to the pilot.†The report continues: “In relation to Black Rock and its Lighthouse the EGPWS manufacturer informed the Investigation that ‘The lighthouse obstacle is not in the obstacle database and the terrain of the island is not in our terrain database’.†That suggests to me that the crew relied on EGPWS and it was devoid of info on Blackrock.?
Skuxx wrote: » Who says they should have been flying at 3000ft?
P.lane78 wrote: » I agree ...Awful
The helicopter was equipped with a EuroAvionics EuroNav 5 moving map display which had a number of maps/charts available for selection. The exact information in relation to Black Rock and Lighthouse varied from none, to detailed, depending on the selected map/chart.
irishgeo wrote: » I have a few questions. Why is the RA different to the actual flying altitude?
Were flying a preprogrammed route flown loads of times before? Is the BLKMO the small island they flew over but before Blackrock itself?
Could a person not just pull a stick for a turn rather than typing it into the computer?
P.lane78 wrote: » Is 200 feet the company approach
Reati wrote: » These reports are very factual to the events as prescribed by evidence found. It's very direct in language so we can be clear and learn from it with little left to ambiguity.[/quote Better than the journal and the increasingly tabloidly Indo ...Pulling the last cockpit voice interactions at such an early stage is click bait at its finest
Steve wrote: » OK, thread re-opened. Please comment on what is in the report only. It was emotional to read however the relevant facts are that the crew were flying a company approach, details of which are not fully outlined, and Black rock island terrain was not in the terrain / navigation database they had. They did not know it was there until it was too late.
Gaoth Laidir wrote: » Wtf is BLKMO doing so close to an island that's not represented on the EGPWS database and may or may not have been on their moving map, depending on which chart was selected? See page 17 for the Operators Route Guide map.
gctest50 wrote: » blm. - the island itself
cabledude wrote: » But the lighthouse was operational? Did they mistake Blackrock for Blacksod?