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

Negative_G

EchoIndia wrote: »

It's easy to be cynical and go for the "conspiracy" theory. Where is the evidence that the AAIU does or would operate in the manner suggested?

Given the information that's been made available to date, both officially and through Prime Time etc, it is glaringly obvious that there will be singificant legal implications for one or several parties.

It was an observation, I couldn't care less how long it takes them to publish but it is entirely reasonable to deduct that the legal implications will impact every aspect of it.

In other news, have CHC solved the FTL issues that attracted the attention of the IAA?

TomOnBoard

Hard to believe it's a year!

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-it-s-been-a-tough-year-very-tough-1.3420207

Oscar Bravo

Interim statement published

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/files/report-attachments/Interim%20Statement_2.pdf

TomOnBoard

A quick summary here:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/rescue-116-aaiu-seeks-review-of-search-and-rescue-operations-1.3429563?mode=amp

Means Of Escape

Landing gear was down 9 miles out .

prunudo

Means Of Escape wrote: »

Landing gear was down 9 miles out .

Nothing unusual about that. Always see them flying with gear down around here in Wicklow. It would be more unusual to see them with gear up. Not sure why as they aren't coming into land, must be operational reason or to do with lower speed flight.

jetfiremuck

jvan wrote: »

Means Of Escape wrote: »

Landing gear was down 9 miles out .

Nothing unusual about that. Always see them flying with gear down around here in Wicklow. It would be more unusual to see them with gear up. Not sure why as they aren't coming into land, must be operational reason or to do with lower speed flight.

Or they weren't where they thought they were. There are let down procedure checklists re landing gear, lights,fuel pumps etc that are part of the aircraft operating system that must be adhered to.

faoiarvok

jvan wrote: »

Nothing unusual about that. Always see them flying with gear down around here in Wicklow. It would be more unusual to see them with gear up. Not sure why as they aren't coming into land, must be operational reason or to do with lower speed flight.

I remember seeing a question about it on a photo one of the crews posted on Facebook, they answered that they always have them down below (I think) 1000ft, as the aircraft gives a constant warning if they aren’t.

Carawaystick

Does "Oversight of National SAR aviation operations in Ireland" mean looking into why the Aer Corps fixed wing top cover wasn't used?

Negative_G

Carawaystick wrote: »

Does "Oversight of National SAR aviation operations in Ireland" mean looking into why the Aer Corps fixed wing top cover wasn't used?

The HR issues within the Air Corps regarding pilots and ATC were well documented at the time and it doesnt appear to be getting better.

The SLA regarding SAR top cover states the Air Corps provider top cover on an "as available" basis. Hence the reason there was no top cover immediately available on that night.

CHC, it would appear, were happy to use a rotary aircraft for top cover. Not ideal if you are 150 miles off shore. Perhaps CHC might propose a seperate fixed wing asset when the tender opens again.

roadmaster

if i remember correctly there was an article in the Irish times from last September ish that the air corps where able again to provide 24hr cover for both top cover and inter hospital transfers but in saying that the British times had an article the other day saying the air corps are in serious trouble as a senior pilots have given in there notice including casa training pilots so they are down again

smurfjed

The Irish Times summary was quite interesting, but I am still wondering if a lot of these items are within the scope of a ICAO Annex 14 report.

ED E

Negative_G wrote: »

Perhaps CHC might propose a seperate fixed wing asset when the tender opens again.

Isn't CHCs business entirely rotary at the minute (UK/EU included)?

TomOnBoard

Carawaystick wrote: »

Does "Oversight of National SAR aviation operations in Ireland" mean looking into why the Aer Corps fixed wing top cover wasn't used?

Previous reports clearly stated that Aer Corps fixed wing top cover wasn't used because it wasn't available. The fact that it was not available and the reasons why have been exhaustively chronicled and debated. The circumstances around the non- availability have previously suggested that a) night cover was not available (for whatever reason but possibly due to non- availability of qualified crews) and b) only one Casa was available on the night of the crash as the maintenance schedule had taken the other one out of service. In addition, although not connected, the one that was available was due to go out of service some days later, meaning that within days of the R116 tragedy, there were NO CASA resources available to the Aer Corps for some weeks into months.

When "Oversight of National SAR aviation operations in Ireland" is reviewed in due course, I would expect that ALL aspects will be considered, including the current and future role of the Aer Corps (and its assets) within a service that has been basically contracted out from the Aer Corps to a non- National, Privately operated entity as a result of Government policy.

Within any such review, I would hope that a zero- based review will take place into what SAR service is likely to be required for the next quarter century or so (and perhaps longer). This should identify:

• WHAT will be needed, followed by

• HOW the need should be serviced (including consideration of National Security/Asset considerations vs RaW Econonomic ones).

In conjuction with the HOW would be consideration of the question of WHO should provide the service, INCLUDING whether the WHO should be a single entity or a partnership between a number of entities, each with clearly delineated roles, responsibilities and funding commitments.

Consideration of the HOW will need to address your question by dealing with the basic fact that, if Aer Corps assets are required to be part of the service then adequate investment will need to be made to ensure that such assets are available when required. If such investment has already been/is being made then it is perfectly valid to question why the fixed wing top cover was not used in the sortie that ended in the tragic loss of R116. If such investment has not been /is not being made, then equally there should be no future expectation that the Aer Corps will be able to provide a service if the current funding levels continue. (Clearly the reality of being able to retain Aer Corps crews within a Public Service pay structure that may not compete with the Private Sector will be a factor in any review.)

Equally however, a review ought to consider the current implied reliance on a rotary wing SAR service that has no fixed wing capability to provide safe Top Cover from within its own resources, while operating on the edge of one of the wildest seas on Earth. As Climate Change continues to increase the severity of storms etc. in our region, this matter will become ever more relevant and more troubling to address. A key additional consideration here will be the extent to which pre- existing sharing of responsibilities have been operating on a 'gentleman's agreement' between Ireland and the U.K. and the very real possibility that such agreements that have existed for decades into centuries will be eroded and/or nullified by fallout from the UK's withdrawal from the EU Resulting from Brexit! This latter consideration is currently un-quantifiable, but should not be minimised in our thinking.

Too often we fail to fund a service and then go ballistic when that service cannot/doesn't provide when the siht hits the fan. Hopefully this 'Irishism' will be dealt with (as well as countless others) in the proposed review.

EchoIndia

It's "Air Corps", by the way.

Gadgetman496

Inquests into Rescue 116 crew deaths opens:

https://www.rte.ie/news/connacht/2018/0412/953999-rescue-116-inquest/

J Mysterio

Gadgetman496 wrote: »

Inquests into Rescue 116 crew deaths opens:

https://www.rte.ie/news/connacht/2018/0412/953999-rescue-116-inquest/

Inquest adjourned according to that link, so will be some time yet.

Means Of Escape

Given that the helicopter was perfect as established within a month of the crash and the weather conditions not unduly poor it can only unfortunately point to pilot error .
The AAIU and Mr Whyte can take 30 years and inquests can pussy foot around the elephant in the room but the "armchair investigators " (who dared point this out early on)they were called on this forum were probably correct but until the final report emerges we won't know .
Added other factors i.e. maps made it more difficult to make a safe passage .
It is not about blame it's about learning from an accident and putting protocols in place to improve safety

J Mysterio

I think it will be a little more nuanced than that. I think they might mention gaps in their charts, which did not identify significant land masses. They may also look at how the crew followed some other 'normal protocols' or routines - such as the low flightpath - that when combined with organisational failures such as gaps in charts, ultimately proved fatal. There seemed to be poor communication between the responding teams too. Where R116 the best option for an incident on the West Coast?

I'm not saying there wasnt pilot error involved, but it seems that the systems the crew relied on may not have been sound in the first instance, which is obviously highly problematic.

Means Of Escape

J Mysterio wrote: »

I think it will be a little more nuanced than that. I think they might mention gaps in their charts, which did not identify significant land masses. They may also look at how the crew followed some other 'normal protocols' or routines - such as the low flightpath - that when combined with organisational failures such as gaps in charts, ultimately proved fatal. There seemed to be poor communication between the responding teams too. Where R116 the best option for an incident on the West Coast?

I'm not saying there wasnt pilot error involved, but it seems that the systems the crew relied on may not have been sound in the first instance, which is obviously highly problematic.

Agreed and I would expect that a minimum approach altitude for night flights will be recommended and made compulsory shortly afterwards

Means Of Escape

Tenger wrote: »

The post by Irish Steve was aimed towards the speculative posts of "maybe they got mixed up and thought they were going to Blacksod at sea level rather than Blackrock at 300ft , hence why they flew into the island" type posts.

Of course in any investigation by the relevant authorites all possible causes will be explored. However the keyboard investigators making light of the high levels of professionalism are not showing respect to the memory of the R116 and their SAR colleagues who continue to do their work off our coasts. The need to get answers is apparent but as with any aviation incident there is a period of waiting that can be quite long.

Suffocation of logical and intelligent debate by posters present on this post from the offset last year .
The accuracies and suggested possibilities scoffed at and ridiculed by those who felt they knew better .

Clearly now that is not the case .

L1011

Means Of Escape wrote: »

Suffocation of logical and intelligent debate by posters present on this post from the offset last year .
The accuracies and suggested possibilities scoffed at and ridiculed by those who felt they knew better .

Clearly now that is not the case .

No, speculation of all kinds was stopped due to the sensitivities of the case.

Crowing I-told-you-so style posts are clearly pointless considering the discussion wasn't allowed to begin with. So don't make anymore should you wish to be able to post here at all.

Steve

Means Of Escape wrote: »

it can only unfortunately point to pilot error .

As in any most accident final reports, the cause will be an unfortunate accumulation of many factors.

I think it's unfair to single out pilot error as a sole cause, personally I believe it was a combination of many factors (yes, including pilot error) that led to this incident but I trust the AAIB will publish all of this in the final report.

Means Of Escape

L1011 wrote: »

No, speculation of all kinds was stopped due to the sensitivities of the case.

Crowing I-told-you-so style posts are clearly pointless considering the discussion wasn't allowed to begin with. So don't make anymore should you wish to be able to post here at all.

Again you confuse speculation with intelligent and informed opinion based on the facts presented at the time .
Furthermore we have another example of a threat by a moderator to gag debate to facilitate the "order" in the forum . .
Circle the wagons .

I stand by my own "speculation"
No "crowing " as you put it just a timely reminder not to be so quick to dismiss or scoff at other people's opinions.

L1011

No, it's a moderator enforcing the rules imposed on this thread since day one. That was your final warning of many and you've blasted right past it

Do not post in this thread again.

Gadgetman496

Life jacket and helmet from crew member of Rescue 116 found off Achill Island


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/life-jacket-and-helmet-from-crew-member-of-rescue-116-found-off-achill-island-37124715.html

Steve

Just read the same on the Journal.

http://www.thejournal.ie/rescue-116-items-found-4130241-Jul2018/

sparrowcar

I can't imagine what news like this is like for the families. I'm sure they want to know but probably opens the wounds again.

Irish Steve

I have just removed a number of insensitive / inappropriate posts that added nothing new to the discussion and had the potential to be distressing to the families and friends of the crew of R116. I trust I will not have to remove any more

RTE have seen an unpublished review of overall SAR aviation ops, its is seperate and is not part of actual crash investigation.


"A review of Search and Rescue aviation operations in Ireland has identified several sources of confusion among the agencies overseeing the system.

This unpublished review seen by RTÉ News was commissioned by Minister for Transport Shane Ross on the recommendation of the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit."

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0824/987246-rescue-116/

TomOnBoard

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

RTE have seen an unpublished review of overall SAR aviation ops, its is seperate and is not part of actual crash investigation.


"A review of Search and Rescue aviation operations in Ireland has identified several sources of confusion among the agencies overseeing the system.

This unpublished review seen by RTÉ News was commissioned by Minister for Transport Shane Ross on the recommendation of the Irish Air Accident Investigation Unit."

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0824/987246-rescue-116/

Interesting excerpt:

Those findings include what it says were "several sources of confusion and potential conflicts of interest that have resulted in a lack of shared understanding of roles and responsibilities" among the agencies overseeing rescue operations.
"

While the findings are claimed not to be related to the loss of R116, the many comments/ questions on here as to who is really responsible for oversight and overall management of SAR in Ireland would seems to have been on the ball.

Negative_G

Is anyone really surprised?


I feel there will be more to be revealed when the final report is published.

irishgeo

any word on the final report?

TomOnBoard

irishgeo wrote: »

any word on the final report?

Spooky that.... I was watching the report of the sad likely demise of Emiliano Sala and his pilot off the Channel Islands just yesterday and asked myself- I wonder when R116 will publish...

I don't anticipate it being imminent or anything, based on the noises we last heard from officialdom, due to there being an ongoing investigation preceding/ beyond the night of...

irishgeo

TomOnBoard wrote: »

irishgeo wrote: »

any word on the final report?

Spooky that.... I was watching the report of the sad likely demise of Emiliano Sala and his pilot off the Channel Islands just yesterday and asked myself- I wonder when R116 will publish...

I don't anticipate it being imminent or anything, based on the noises we last heard from officialdom, due to there being an ongoing investigation preceding/ beyond the night of...

Wasn't aware of that.

Steve

irishgeo wrote: »

any word on the final report?

You can sub on AAIU website and get notified when new reports are published

http://www.aaiu.ie/reports/aaiu-investigation-reports

Roger_007

There does seem to be an inordinate delay in publishing the final report. The AAIU have been in possession of most of the relevant information about the incident from a very early stage. Their initial report confirmed this.
The AAIU's remit is to establish the immediate cause of the incident and the relevant factors which led up to it. They do not apportion blame or liability to any person or persons involved. However, they know that their report, whatever it says, will be interpreted by others as pointing the finger at somebody or other and will lead to public comment and possibly political controversy.
Because of the tragic fatalities that occurred I would guess that the only reason that the final report has not issued yet is due to the sensitivity around those fatalities. They do not want to intrude into the grief of the families involved until a good deal of time has passed. For this reason they will delay their final report as long as possible. It could be another couple of years yet.

Stovepipe

They are not deliberately delaying it. Fatalities always adds an extra dimension to any accident investigation and it adds to the amount of agencies and private and public organisations involved; Gardai, Air Corps, Dept of Transport, IAA, Dept of Defence, HSE, Coast Guard, CHC, HSA and the families of the deceased, so there are a huge number of people in the reporting chain. Like the crash of the Pilatus, 265, and the crash of the Metroliner, it has implications for operators and agencies and will probably have repercussions that will affect some parts of aviation in Ireland, so the AAIU have to do their level best to get it as right as possible before it gets published.

faoiarvok

Stovepipe wrote: »

They are not deliberately delaying it. Fatalities always adds an extra dimension to any accident investigation and it adds to the amount of agencies and private and public organisations involved; Gardai, Air Corps, Dept of Transport, IAA, Dept of Defence, HSE, Coast Guard, CHC, HSA and the families of the deceased, so there are a huge number of people in the reporting chain. Like the crash of the Pilatus, 265, and the crash of the Metroliner, it has implications for operators and agencies and will probably have repercussions that will affect some parts of aviation in Ireland, so the AAIU have to do their level best to get it as right as possible before it gets published.

Am I right in thinking they also need to give interested parties time to consider and provide comment before publication?

MadYaker

Id read some media outlets summary of it, it'll probably be long

Gadgetman496

MadYaker wrote: »

Id read some media outlets summary of it, it'll probably be long

We all pretty much know what happened and why it happened, no?

Recommendations on what to do so it never happens again will be the only worthwhile content of the final report.

Alkers

Nothing to do with the families, I'd say more likely not wanting to jeopardize any criminal or otherwise investigations that may be ongoing

mr.anonymous

Simona1986 wrote: »

Nothing to do with the families, I'd say more likely not wanting to jeopardize any criminal or otherwise investigations that may be ongoing

Those come after the final report is published.

And yes there is a consultation period for people to comment on the draft of the final report before publication.

Has it been rumoured that its release is soon, or is it just an expectation because of the approaching anniversary?

Brennus335

faoiarvok wrote: »

Am I right in thinking they also need to give interested parties time to consider and provide comment before publication?

Yes, that's correct. Standard procedure.

Stovepipe

faoiarvok wrote: »

Am I right in thinking they also need to give interested parties time to consider and provide comment before publication?

Yes. Every interested party that is entitled to get a draft report will get one and be invited to comment, even to the point of rejecting all or part of it. That's what ties up a lot of the time, dealing with comments, replies, answers and rejections afterwards, because every reply has to be dealt with.

Roger_007

Roger_007 wrote: »

There does seem to be an inordinate delay in publishing the final report. The AAIU have been in possession of most of the relevant information about the incident from a very early stage. Their initial report confirmed this.
The AAIU's remit is to establish the immediate cause of the incident and the relevant factors which led up to it. They do not apportion blame or liability to any person or persons involved. However, they know that their report, whatever it says, will be interpreted by others as pointing the finger at somebody or other and will lead to public comment and possibly political controversy.
Because of the tragic fatalities that occurred I would guess that the only reason that the final report has not issued yet is due to the sensitivity around those fatalities. They do not want to intrude into the grief of the families involved until a good deal of time has passed. For this reason they will delay their final report as long as possible. It could be another couple of years yet.

I would reckon the report is delayed because it isso very complex, probably tbe mother of all AAIU reports as it will undoubtedly by default involve an analysis of the whole oversight of SARS operations, the production of navigation charts etc etc. we pretty much know the tragic and totally unecessary accident was a result of the crew’s lack of awareness of the topography along their particular low level flight path, and that this was as a result of lack of such information on their nav system which seems to have been unsuitable for low level flight as typically conducted by SAR helicopters which are often tasked to go into less familiar terrain. Final Reports often come with complex recommendations, and these will require a huge amount of consideration in the light of the prevailing SAR operations. Indeed Final Reports are studied by the worldwide aviation community and very often tbe recommendations are adopted by agencies all over the planet, so this report will no doubt set an aviation safety milestone punting threat to much safer protocols in the future.

Stovepipe

Don't forget that, while this was Ireland's second only SAR heli crash, other nations have had to deal with decades of SAR / Offshore oil industry / mountain rescue crashes. As a nation, we are relatively new to this scale and tempo of these types of operation and the resultant casualties, so it is to be expected that we are still feeling our way along. Similarly, despite the scale of our airline industry and associated traffic, we have had very few hull losses and a very low death rate, so we still have a bit of a way to go to match our neighbours in the investigatory business. we have the smallest AAIU, for a country with such a huge involvement in aviation.

Carawaystick

MadYaker wrote: »

Id read some media outlets summary of it, it'll probably be long

Id read the report itself.
They are usually in reasonably plain language and not as slanted as a few-paragraph-media-report
MCIB reports are interesting too, a bit less rigid, but in the same
"how to find out what happened and not let it happen again" vein, rather than fingerpointing

wotswattage

Another Interim report from the AAIU, more of a statement than a report not giving much away other than they are making progress and there won't be an annual interim report. Mentions sending the draft report out to the interested parties when its ready. I'd expect the final report is a long way off yet. No problem with that.

http://www.aaiu.ie/sites/default/files/report-attachments/R116%20Interim%20Statement%202_1.pdf

Interim Statement --- 1 March 2019
Investigation into Accident involving S92A helicopter EI-ICR (R116)
Black Rock, Co. Mayo on 14 March 2017

As per International Convention, EU Regulation and domestic Law relating to accident investigation, it is required that, if the final report into an air accident investigation cannot be made public within 12 months, the Air Accident Investigation Unit shall release an Interim Statement at least at each anniversary of the accident or serious incident, detailing the progress of the investigation and any safety issued raised. Work on the preparation of a Draft Report is at an advanced stage. Rather than preparing another detailed Interim Statement, which would detract from the ongoing work of preparing the Draft Report, the Investigation is focussing its efforts on finalising the Draft Report. Once finalised, the Draft Report will be circulated, in confidence, to interested parties as soon as possible. Accordingly, a detailed Interim Statement is not being issued on the occasion of the second anniversary of this accident.

-END-

NH2013

Two years on today, anyone with any info on the timeline of the reports publication, other than the above memo stating it’s being worked on?