The Aviation Thread

General Chatter
User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 4440
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by Kismet »

old salt wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2020 7:15 pm
njbill wrote: Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:13 pm A few (dumb) questions from someone who knows essentially nothing about flying helicopters. Do you guys think the pilot was trying to land? Is that something a pilot would try to do as a last resort if he found himself in an entirely untenable situation?
Still don't know bill -- the GPS track looks like a buttonhook course reversal at the very end, but it also shows a rapid ascent 2300 ft, which would have allowed him to clear the terrain if he was still in controlled flight. He may have departed controlled flight at some point. I not sure of the accuracy of GPS track & altitude being reported.

He may have seen the onrushing terrain, did a panic climb, lost control, departed controlled flight & possibly overstressed the tail boom or dynamic components.

The NTSB will piece together the debris, evaluate the ATC tape & radar data, the GPS track, the GPS app on his I-phone, & anything else they can pull together.

The pilot should have been very familiar with that terrain. He worked at a flight school at Van Nuys airport for 9 years, got his flight training there & instructed there. He was very much at ease coordinating with Burbank & Van Nuys towers & transiting their airspace.
He got back on course & tracked overhead Hwy 101 for a good stretch, He made it through some of the mountain pass.

He was not trying to land at that site. The debris pattern indicates high speed impact with terrain.

The great thing about helos. You can land them anywhere.
In one 3 year tour of duty in a squadron, I did 3 off airport landings in farmers fields.
2 for maint emergs, 1 for weather (icing & unforecast snow squall).
Flew 'em all out the next day, after enjoying local hospitality.
Which makes we wonder why he didn't land at Van Nuys when he passed close aboard the airport.
He had the airport in sight & was talking to the tower.

These videos are helpful. The pilot speak can be difficult to understand, but it's revealing.
Linked rather than embedded them, so you can go full screen to interpret.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSHpbGhy3Ko
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... =emb_title

Had he popped up sooner & not lost control, SoCal approach could have picked him up.
They apparently got a "hand off" from Van Nuys tower & were expecting him.
Excellent links and perspective - thx OS
Which makes we wonder why he didn't land at Van Nuys when he passed close aboard the airport.
He had the airport in sight & was talking to the tower.
It could be that neither the pilot nor Van Nuys was aware of the milk bowl fog at the other end of the San Fernando Valley at that time.

NTSB lead investigator said he missed not hitting the terrain by 20-30 feet. In those conditions, little to no margin for error - 20-30 feet isn't much but it made all the difference in the resultant CFIT although I think you are correct that nobody knows for sure at this point whether last moments were controlled or uncontrolled. NTSB press conference yesterday - long but substantive.

"The day before the crash, Zobayan (the pilot) had made the same trip from John Wayne Airport in Orange County, where Bryant lived, to Camarillo, near the Mamba Sports Academy in Thousand Oaks, where the basketball tournament was being held. Homendy said Zobayan had used a more direct route for the roughly 90-mile trip northwest, and that the skies were clear."

ardilla secreta
Posts: 2095
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:32 am
Location: Niagara Frontier

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by ardilla secreta »

Does the S-76B have an open cockpit or is there a bulkhead separating the pilot? If I could have overheard the pilot communications I would have been quite concerned. Just having to hover over Glendale for 12 minutes would have made me demand to land in Burbank or Van Nuys. Trying to fly from the SF Valley through those mountains in that fog would have freaked me out cold. Get me down!

Death by affluence. I wonder how common helicopter commuting is for individuals. Just two weeks ago a prominent local developer here in Buffalo who was responsible for many projects rejuvenating the city went down piloting his own helicopter from Wash DC to home.
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17511
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by old salt »

It could be that neither the pilot nor Van Nuys was aware of the milk bowl fog at the other end of the San Fernando Valley at that time.

NTSB lead investigator said he missed not hitting the terrain by 20-30 feet. In those conditions, little to no margin for error - 20-30 feet isn't much but it made all the difference in the resultant CFIT although I think you are correct that nobody knows for sure at this point whether last moments were controlled or uncontrolled. NTSB press conference yesterday - long but substantive.

"The day before the crash, Zobayan (the pilot) had made the same trip from John Wayne Airport in Orange County, where Bryant lived, to Camarillo, near the Mamba Sports Academy in Thousand Oaks, where the basketball tournament was being held. Homendy said Zobayan had used a more direct route for the roughly 90-mile trip northwest, and that the skies were clear."
That makes sense. Listening to the ATC tapes, there was no tension in the radio comms with Burbank & Van Nuys towers. Sounded like they were used to talking to each other & the pilot was very familiar with the area.

One of the flight tracker sites showed recent previous flight tracks by that acft. There were multiple tracks between John Wayne & Camarillo airports, but they all transitioned from the I-5 directly to Hwy-101 routes on the S side of Burbank/Van Nuys airports. Because of IFR arrival/departures, the tower controllers had to SVFR transition him on the N sides of the airports. Nonetheless, he appeared to circumnavigate without difficulty & rejoin the Hwy 101 route well before the mountain pass & milkbowl. The difference in passing S rather than N of Burbank/Van Nuys airports, probably accounts for the slightly more direct route the NTSB investigator referenced.

He was flying specific FAA published helo routes, based on the underlying highways, which are used routinely by local helo operators & are well coordinated with ATC. I saw an interview with another LA comml helo pilot who said helo ops in the LA basin would nor be practical without those routes & that SFVR clearance is frequently necessary to access & transit the Class C/D airspace which overlays the multiple airports in the LA terminal area. He said they couldn't operate regularly enough to survive without routine use of SVFR clearances.

As an alternative, there are also published VFR routes that pass N <-> S over LAX for general aviation aircraft (helo & fixed wing). An expansion of the old VFR corridor that took you right over LAX. If he could have departed John Wayne under SVFR, then found a hole to climb through the low lying marine layer of fog, to attain "VFR on top" conditions, he possibly could have continued "VFR on top ", on one of the VFR routes overhead LAX, to the area near Ventura VOR, then tried to get into Camarillo SVFR. On the prior day, under solid VMC, he may have used one of those higher alititude, more direct, published VFR routes.

He was probably quite accustomed to scud running the I-5 <--> Hwy 101 routes, using SVFR as necessary. Not likely the first time he encountered marine layer fog approaching the coast. He might have planned to pop up as necessary & reverse course. If the max transient GPS altitude of 2300 ft. just prior to the rapid descent to impact, is accurate, he was high enough to clear the terrain in the immediate area, had he been able to maintain controlled flight. He probably had a Plan B, which we'll learn from speculation by other LA comml helo pilots who regularly fly those same routes.
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17511
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by old salt »

ardilla secreta wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 9:51 am Does the S-76B have an open cockpit or is there a bulkhead separating the pilot? If I could have overheard the pilot communications I would have been quite concerned. Just having to hover over Glendale for 12 minutes would have made me demand to land in Burbank or Van Nuys. Trying to fly from the SF Valley through those mountains in that fog would have freaked me out cold. Get me down!

Death by affluence. I wonder how common helicopter commuting is for individuals. Just two weeks ago a prominent local developer here in Buffalo who was responsible for many projects rejuvenating the city went down piloting his own helicopter from Wash DC to home.
Depends on specific acft configuration. Could be open cabin or bulkhead (with or without pass through).

With 9 souls on board, the copilot cockpit seat was likely occupied by a passenger, maybe Kobe.

Based on the casual, relaxed tone of the pilot's radio comms with ATC, I get the feeling he was used to these conditions & probably not the first time he & Kobe had been in similar circumstances along that route, or elsewhere in the LA basin.

Helo travel was prestigious & convenient for Kobe's lifestyle commuting to Staples Center & now the Mamba facility, but for a fraction of the cost, I could have safely transported him in one of my former companies Piper Navajo Chieftans of Beech Super King Airs light twin engine airplanes, safely & legally, as a FAR 135 carrier certified for IFR operations (even single piloted, with our coupled 3 axis autopilots), with little or no additional delay over scud running with the inherent delays involved in getting SVFR clearance to transition through Class C/D airspace along the helo routes.

More costly is not always safer or more reliable. Professionally piloted helo ops (licensed commercial pilots, corporate under FAR 91 or charter ops under FAR 135) have a very good safety record. Charter companies like Petroleum Helicopters shuttle large numbers of workers to/from oil rigs with airline comparable safety stats. The high % of helo accidents are privately owned, operated by pilots with just a private pilot rating.
Air ambulance & external lift operators have a higher accident rate due to more hazardous missions & operating environments.

The old saying -- what's the most dangerous aircraft in the sky ? A Beech Bonanza flown by the (private pilot) Doctor who owns it.
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17511
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by old salt »

NTSB Inspector :
Homendy said the helicopter was flying at an altitude of 2,300 feet when it lost contact with air traffic controllers and then plunged into a hillside at a rate of more than 2,000 feet a minute.
In a helo, when you do an abrupt pull up & gain that much altitude, you bleed off your airspeed rapidly. You don't slow below stall speed (like you would in an airplane) but it's a similar situation when you slow so much that you lose ETL (effective translational lift). Recovery is similar to stall recovery in an airplane -- abrupt nose down attitude & max power to recover flying speed. It's an abrupt, challenging maneuver to do in good visibility because you need all your visual cues & senses. It's hard to do when flying soley by reference to instruments, particularly when you're not expecting it. You have to concentrate on keeping wings level & you pull + g forces in the recovery. It's a radical maneuver.
For that reason, I suspect he became disoriented when he popped up, overcorrected when he dumped the nose to regain airspeed &/or departed controlled flight. Airplanes are inherently stable. Helicopters are inherently unstable. They don't stay "trimmed up" like airplanes. Flight by reference to instruments in a helo is much more demanding, requires constant vigilance & a more rapid, continuous scanning of the flight instruments.

Interesting write up from a fellow helo pilot on inadvertent flight into IMC :
Here's what happens when a pilot goes IIMC....

First, it's unplanned. As a general rule, its human nature to not want to commit to going into the clouds. You're flying VMC (visually), so going IMC and transitioning to the instruments is very dangerous and not planned. You end up in controlled airspace, on your instruments, re-calibrating your brain to fly on the instruments, changing who you're talking to, no longer in control of your flight route, etc. So there's a natural resistance to doing it. Plus, any helicopter pilot with more than a handful of hours has encountered some weather and made adjustments to stay out of it. It's not like every time there's a cloud you punch in.

So, instead of committing to it, you slow back and decrease your altitude. Flying at 1000' AGL and 100 KIAS? Time to drop to 500' and 80. Then 300' and 70. Then 200' and 60. Etc. This is the right move until it isn't. If you're not really decisive and psychologically ready to commit to punching in, it's easy to find yourself too low and too slow. Now you punch in anyway and you're in a way, way, way, way worse situation. Because now you're closer to the ground and too slow.

'But why not climb straight up?' asks the non-helicopter pilot. 'That's easy, right? just get away from the stuff that can kill you.... *smug face*'

Because when you're slow in a helicopter and yank an armful of collective, you have a lot more to deal with than a normal transition into IMC, which is still a heck ton.

Even in forward flight you have to ensure your scan is perfect to manage your heading, pitch, attitude, altitude, vertical speed and torque, all of which are intertwined and must be adjusted to while taking into account the impact it'll have on the others. And the radio is going crazy. Or its not because you're not on the right channel yet. And your navigation cues aren't ready (probably) for an instrument route. And even though the rule is: aviate then navigate then communicate, it's hard to just ignore the other two. Since your slow you also have to take into account that the aircraft is going to rotate more in opposition to the increased torque because you're not in forward flight. And it all very, very, very disorienting.

So this is how it plays out, tragically.... (I'm not saying this is what happened here exactly, just that it's what can happen in a similar situation)....

----

You get slow and low. You're looking for a way out. There's rising terrain in front of you, but you can only see some of it because of the clouds and fog. So you get close to ETL...maybe you can go to the left. Let's start that turn. And *poof*, you're in the cloud. heck, this is scary. Can I see outside? Yea, kind of. There's a tree, some grass, a road. Ok, I'm still kind of good....nope, now it's all gone. OK, heck! I need to be on instruments. Initiate a climb. Vertical speed is good. AGL altitude is low, but climbing. Crap, we're turning to the left at 60 degrees a second. Apply pedal to counter that. Forward cyclic to stabilize and get some forward airspeed. Ok, pitch is better...I'm not spinning...turd, my torque is too high...take a little power out...I wonder who I need to talk to now...no, don't worry about that yet. Get back to your scan...heading is good, nose attitude is good, power is good, turd, we're descend at 3000'/min. We're too low. Yank an armful of collective. Fixate on vertical speed and AGL altitude. Pitch is heck, HSD is spinning, torque is through the roof, nose goes from way down, to way up, collective still in your armpit....the end.

---

I get anxious just typing that. IIMC is scary. Anyone who says it isn't has either not experienced it, or has more experience that I can even fathom, and I've got quite a bit.

My heart goes out to everyone involved here, the pilot and his family included. He screwed up, but flying is dangerous and weather is scary and unpredictable. Rest in Peace. And fly safe out there. Take offs are optional.

-----EDIT: Some acronym explanations added----------

AGL (Above Ground Level....how many feet am I above what's under me right now)

KIAS (Knots Indicated Airspeed....how fast am I moving relative to the air around me....not quite the same as ground speed, but close)

Collective (power. Pull it up, things on the ground get smaller. Push it down, things on the ground get bigger.)

ETL (Effective Translational Lift....the forward speed you need to have to fly in clean air...it's when the helicopter becomes a lot more power efficient and easier to fly)

HSD (Horizontal Situation Display....basically the compass to show what direction you're going)
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17511
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by old salt »

If COVID19 slows air travel significantly, it will reduce the MAX delay impact on Boeing & the airlines counting on it.
Will airlines adjust scheds to use more widebody models used on long intl flights on domestic routes ?
Update on Boeing 737 MAX pilot training :
Boeings Plans for 737 MAX Simulator Face Unusual Challenge
8:14 AM ET 2/28/20 | Dow Jones
By Andy Pasztor and Alison Sider

Plans to mandate simulator training for pilots before Boeing Co.'s 737 MAX can return to service -- already a time-consuming and costly undertaking -- could face a further complication: personal friction between the plane maker's staff and U.S. government officials.

Internal Boeing messages recently made public amid House and Senate investigations showed company pilots ridiculing their counterparts at the Federal Aviation Administration.

Now several of those agency experts are responsible for helping approve a version of Boeing's updated training programs, according to industry and government officials familiar with the details.

How the two sides get along could partly determine how long it takes to get the MAX flying again, nearly a year after it was grounded world-wide following two fatal crashes that claimed 346 lives.

Some of the FAA employees are still fuming over what they contend were earlier efforts by a pair of senior Boeing pilots to mislead them about the need for any simulator training when the MAX was first certified to carry passengers, the officials familiar with the details said.

In one internal message from 2015, a Boeing employee compared the knowledge levels of FAA regulators to those of household pets. Describing the regulators' response to a company presentation aimed at minimizing training requirements for 737 MAX pilots, the Boeing employee said: "It was like dogs watching TV."

Boeing has repudiated that and other messages made public over the past few months, saying a cavalier attitude toward safety doesn't represent company values. FAA officials have played down any tensions with Boeing, saying the company has a new chief technical pilot responsible for MAX training. Nonetheless, the industry and government officials said, lingering hard feelings could complicate an already convoluted process.

A spokesman for Boeing said its training proposals, expected to be approved by regulators in coming months, aim to improve aviators' knowledge of the MAX's flight-control systems and related flight-deck commands, as well as restore confidence in the jet.

Boeing and the FAA, however, first need to resolve differing approaches on the content of training. The company initially proposed that pilots practice, one by one, a handful of selected maneuvers. The FAA, by contrast, favors more expansive training that highlights longer scenarios featuring the interplay of different emergencies, according to the officials.

Some international regulators have vowed to craft their own training programs, which could add months to the vetting process.

Meanwhile, airlines generally are reluctant to commit to any training curriculum before software fixes to the MAX are formally blessed by regulators. Last-minute tweaks to the planes could require carriers to repeat training.

"We're very encouraged to see Boeing signal the importance of simulator training," Nicholas Robinson, director general of civil aviation at industry regulator Transport Canada, said in an interview. But he added, "It's still premature to identify if what Boeing has proposed is the full extent of what we will end up approving and recommending."

Simplicity was part of the sales pitch to airlines when Boeing was developing the MAX. Carriers wanted a plane that would fit seamlessly into their existing fleets of 737 jets, and they were eager to avoid having to put pilots through costly simulator sessions. Boeing had promised to refund Southwest Airlines Co. $1 million for every MAX that required additional simulator training, according to a company sales brochure released by House investigators.

But Boeing reversed course earlier this year when it said it would recommend simulator training.

The change of heart came as FAA leaders communicated to Boeing that they saw simulator sessions as essential safety improvements. Boeing's move came two days before it released a trove of internal messages revealing that a faction of its employees viewed avoiding simulator requirements as a priority that trumped nearly all other considerations during the years the MAX was under development.

The manufacturer's change in thinking surprised FAA leaders and some carriers. It also didn't immediately propose any specifics, according to government and industry officials briefed on the matter.

Even when Boeing, airlines and aviation regulators do agree on the content of training sessions, securing simulator time could be challenging.

There are only about three dozen MAX flight simulators around the globe, and airlines are clamoring for their pilots to get access. The FAA is also working to approve more simulators in the U.S.

Boeing owns eight of the machines, made by third-party manufacturers, at its training sites in Miami, London, Shanghai, Singapore and Istanbul. The company is acquiring two more, and a spokesman said it was doing everything it can to accommodate customers' requests to use the devices.

Some carriers are taking measures into their own hands. Southwest said in January that it struck a deal with manufacturer CAE Inc. to buy three more flight simulators that it hopes to have ready to use by summer, on top of the three it has and three others on order. The carrier said the training will delay the plane's returns by a couple of months beyond what the airline had planned.

CAE said that six of the seven simulator orders it has received this year are for units that replicate the MAX. Textron Inc., another manufacturer, has also said it would start making more of the devices.

Even airlines that are confident they will get access to simulators are having to make adjustments. American Airlines Group Inc. is now planning to train its pilots on a rolling basis, rather than having them all ready to immediately fly the MAX once it returns to service.

All three of the U.S. carriers that previously operated the plane have taken it out of their schedules until August or September.

--Kim Mackrael contributed to this article.
Write to Andy Pasztor at [email protected] and Alison Sider at [email protected]
> Dow Jones Newswires
February 28, 2020 08:14 ET (13:14 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
User avatar
holmes435
Posts: 2357
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:57 am

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by holmes435 »

Coronavirus pandemic will bankrupt nearly ALL of the world's airlines in a matter of WEEKS, Australian aviation experts say

Tough to discuss without the political aspect, but this and a number of other industries are going to be hit hard by the virus. Not sure how sensational the title is (the Daily Mail is shady), but there is plenty to be concerned about financially, especially with drastically lower stock prices after all the buybacks and such during the previous run of good years.
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17511
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by old salt »

User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 4440
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by Kismet »

United Boeing 777 loses an engine shortly after takeoff from Denver International enroute to Honolulu. Returns to the airport safely after raining debris on neighborhoods in Denver



Talk about calm as a cucumber while calling for a MAYDAY - need a turn





shredded engine live video including successful landing back at DEN
Amazing listen to ATC audio - controller is more exercised than the captain. Note how calmly he reports MAYDAY....MAYDAY
User avatar
old salt
Posts: 17511
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:44 am

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by old salt »

I saw random episodes of Ice Pilots on TWC but never got into the full story line.
Then I saw it on the Imdb app & watched all 6 seasons, start to finish.
Don't know if it's on Netflix, but it's free on Roku, Tubi & Imdb apps.
Fascinating story of a remarkable operation. Authentic flying. Compelling characters.
Remarkable & unique family business model, in a challenging environment.
Accurately portrays the challenges of sustaining a flight operation at a lower level of the aviation food chain.
I really enjoyed it.
It prompted me to research what has happened to Buffalo Airways since the series concluded in 2014.
They're still flying, doing cargo & passenger charters & firefighting. They never resumed scheduled passenger service.
User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 4440
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 6:42 pm

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by Kismet »

Any thought of some of the aviation folks here on the 737 crash in China?

Highly unusual that a modern jet airplane falls out of the sky cruising at 29,000 feet prior to starting initial descent? Drops to 8,000 feet, levels off momentarily and then straight down nose first into the ground per video from a distance. No smoke or fire.

Expect that an impact like that might damage black box and cockpit recorder.
User avatar
Brooklyn
Posts: 9621
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2018 12:16 am
Location: St Paul, Minnesota

Re: The Aviation Thread

Post by Brooklyn »

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/46NfO75p ... ture=share


never seen anything like this before
It has been proven a hundred times that the surest way to the heart of any man, black or white, honest or dishonest, is through justice and fairness.

Charles Francis "Socker" Coe, Esq
Post Reply

Return to “GENERAL CHATTER”