There was a time when Helijet operated S76's IFR on sked runs Vancouver to Victoria.
...and so why are the old helicopters operating where the biggest challenges are? Politics?
Have they quit doing that because the machines are to old?
Moderators: North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister
There was a time when Helijet operated S76's IFR on sked runs Vancouver to Victoria.
...and so why are the old helicopters operating where the biggest challenges are? Politics?
Not at all. Perfectly valid point. Just wondering why the ORNGE keeps all the Agusta 139's down south when the "biggest challenge" for the rotor pilots is in the northern part of the province. I'm not an expert by any means, just seems backwards doesn't it?There was a time when Helijet operated S76's IFR on sked runs Vancouver to Victoria.
Have they quit doing that because the machines are to old?
Cat Driver wrote:An instrument rating does not give you the skills to prevent CFIT, you need further training?
Or is Ornge dispatching pilots into conditions that require an instrument rating and they do not have valid IFR ratings?
Well, it would see that's what they did this time by having them ground themselves or be suspended over training standards ..... that's the usual least paperwork solution offered until the septic tank can be pumped out enough for the toilets to flush once again.Special K wrote:Management not understanding the operational side of its operation? That can't happen! That's what TC is fo.......
![]()
....disregard.
K
The problem is, TC no longer practices real oversight, and therefore SMS remains a red herring as there is nobody holding operators accountable. It all looks good on paper, but in practise there are some abhorrent operations out there with perfectly acceptable SMS programs in place. I have no idea about the SMS culture at Ornge, but being quite familiar with many such programs with other operations or their customers, it's apparent we are no closer to operating "safely" now than we were five years ago. In some respects we may be a good bit further away from that goal.DonutHole wrote:TCs belief that SMS absolves them of oversight... to the contrary I believe that it simply re-arranges where their oversight takes place, it doesn't replace it.
Not to take sides here but this Oh Canadian Helicopters praise fails to mention the 2008 black hole crash I mentioned earlier... It as a Canadian Helicopters S76 and it did crash at night during a black hole approach. http://www.bst-tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-r ... 8o0029.aspIt was under Mazza’s tenure as chief executive officer that ORNGE decided to cut short its contract with Canadian Helicopters Ltd., which through a series of competitive bids, had operated Ontario’s rotor-wing air ambulances since 1977 without a fatal accident.
...
“It’s a very, very complex operation. Putting it simply, there’s no learner’s permit for this. It’s very, very difficult to do. We’re very good at it,” Rob Blakely, a vice-president with Canadian Helicopters, told the public accounts committee probing the ORNGE controversy last year.
...
It was no idle boast. Canadian Helicopters had been recognized by Sikorsky for its safety record flying the S76.
...
“ORNGE did not have the core competencies to become an aviation company. That was better left to the third-party aviators who do this for a living day in and day out,” Blum said.
...
It was the kind of darkness that has a name — the “black hole” effect where the lack of visual references creates risks for pilots.
The condition is a bigger concern on landings, when such darkness makes depth perception difficult. But it can also play havoc on takeoff when pilots must cope not only with the lack of visual references but also the sensory illusions caused by the acceleration of the aircraft as it takes to the air.
It could be so disorienting that Canadian Helicopters gave its air ambulance crews repeated practice in “black hole” arrivals and departures to drive home the risks and the skills needed to safely in such conditions.
....
Canadian Helicopters had managers in charge of individual air bases across the province. Such a manager would never have paired Filliter and Dupuy together for a challenging night flight, one source said. But when ORNGE took over, they got rid of the base managers and moved to centralized scheduling run from its Mississauga headquarters.
I'm not convinced this is true. A properly set up SMS might have caught this, but I don't think you can say with certainty that it would have.DonutHole wrote:A properly set up SMS would have caught the lack of training and records ...
I would submit that the SMS would not have detected the underlying problem of record keeping and/or training program delivery. I put that position forward because SMS is there to rectify issues which have been found through an audit or direct experience process and reported to the SMS Committee for resolution. After being dealt with, the information is then logged and analyzed for trends.Sidebar wrote:I'm not convinced this is true. A properly set up SMS might have caught this, but I don't think you can say with certainty that it would have.DonutHole wrote:A properly set up SMS would have caught the lack of training and records ...
Problems with training and records are symptoms of deeper organizational issues.
Going to have to disagree. Part of SMS is internal audits. These audits are intended to find deficiencies in areas such as training/record keeping. That in fact, is the entire point of SMS. To catch yourself making mistakes before they turn into incidents. If the system is properly set up, these record keeping/training deficiencies would be GLARING errors impossible to miss.single_swine_herder wrote: I would submit that the SMS would not have detected the underlying problem of record keeping and/or training program delivery. I put that position forward because SMS is there to rectify issues which have been found through an audit process and reported to the SMS Committee for resolution.
single_swine_herder wrote: Moderator STL has warned that this thread should not be allowed to explore SMS because his personal experience with it appears to have been negative and have no redeeming value. So lets' keep it on track with respect to operational oversight, training quality, performance monitoring, and competence which is not just measured by the term "experienced pilot." Lots of us have experience, but perhaps not the highest level of training along the way in dealing with a threat filled environment, and recognizing that IFR skills are very perishable.
Of that there can be little doubt.The core issue here is lack of competence in aviation matters by those whose responsibility is quite simple overall .... to read the regulations, develop a training plan, and ensure it is delivered and documented as having been completed.
You seem quite certain about this. One could also expect that descent shortly after takeoff would also be impossible to miss, yet it happened to this helo crew.DonutHole wrote:If the system is properly set up, these record keeping/training deficiencies would be GLARING errors impossible to miss.
A cyclic argument.Sidebar wrote:You seem quite certain about this. One could also expect that descent shortly after takeoff would also be impossible to miss, yet it happened to this helo crew.DonutHole wrote:If the system is properly set up, these record keeping/training deficiencies would be GLARING errors impossible to miss.
I suggest that, unless training records are specifically targeted for an internal audit, AND the auditors have sufficient training and experience, the SMS is unlikely to detect this. If SMS does detect such an issue, it will likely have been present for some time before detection.