North Sea Helicopter Crash 16th July - findings

[Chris771]

The following was posted on an oil industry site:-

A defective rotor blade was the cause of the fatal helicopter accident in the North Sea on July 16th. Eleven persons were killed in the accident.

Evidence of wear has led the investigation committee to conclude that damage in the rotor blade was the cause of the tragic accident, says a report from the Ministry of Transport. A stroke of lightning three years ago may have caused the damage on the rotor blade. Ten of the passengers have been found. The search for the eleventh has stopped. ...........................




No doubt, whilst the oil company concerned will pay lip service to the tragedy and doing everything in their power to promote safety as their prime objective, will they reflect that if they were perhaps willing to pay the helicopter operators rates which allowed for a reasonable profit margin, then said operators would be able to replace compromised components before they fail?

Whilst CAA regulations have strict controls on damaged/suspect components, there are always slightly suspect items such this rotor blade which suffered a minor lightning strike. Not enough obvious damage to condemn it, however, if economic constraints had not intruded, it would potentially have been replaced before failing and killing 11 personnel.

Somehow I doubt it. Any comment to add Colin?


Chris

www.impact-computers.net/boat/cruiser.htm

 

[trev]

If the lightening strike was three years ago, and the chopper had operated safely since that date, it seems a rather vague finding. North Sea safety parameters are very strict.
I work in the Saudi oilfields and fly about four times a week - all our helicopters are inspected daily and any faults immediately corrected. Most of our pilots are American and they will not fly under any sort of duress. We have had one fatal crash in the thirteen years I've been here (eleven lives lost) - that was pilot error (local pilot - very few of these!!)
The safety record of oilfield choppers is generally very good, but accidents are an unfortunate fact of life - as any 'Safety Expert' will tell you.

Trev

 

[ChrisP]

I think that before you go running off at the mouth about the companies reactions to the crash you should at least find out what their reaction was. We lost 3 people in the crash. The companies first thoughts and actions were directed towards the relatives and friends of the victims. A trust fund was set up within 24 hours for the benefit of the families and has grown consierably to date. Nobody can eradicate the hurt and loss but at least they can take some monor comfort from the fact that we alll share in their loss.

As for offshore safety, Anybody who works in the industry knows that safety concerns are of the highest priority both onshore and offshore. Yes, comercial restraints do apply but then I have no doubt that you would be one of the first to moan as soon as the producers put a penny on the price of fuel. Helicopters are one of the most dangerous ways of flying and their operation in the comercial sector will always be considered a second choice. However while you are unwilling to meet the shortfall in the countries revenue that closure of the north sea would cause. We have to accept that the helicopter is part of the operation and that we owe a debt of gratitude to the men who travel in and operate them.

When you're willing to pay the extra for fuel and all the plasitcs that are the products of the North sea you can start questioning the economics of the operation. But until then I would suggest that you quit the post accident pontifications and pseudo political jibes at the industry and start remembering the the conditions that these people have to work under to continue your creature comforts.

May the victims of this disaster rest in peace and the families take comfort in the knowledge that we are still working to try and ensure that this kind of accident is engineered out of the operation. Our thoughts are with them.

What do you mean the sea gull in front's walking !!!

 

[ccscott49]

Accountants rule OK!!! The oil companies, even making vast obscene profits are always looking to cut costs, they will cut the service companies to the quick, they then scream and loudly, when equipment fails or you use cheaper inexperienced labour! Then cancel your contract and put a few hundred people and their families out of work, but does the government say anything, no chance, they get too much tax from them and they are in the oil giants pockets. Look at the HSE, they only have about ten inspectors for the whole of the oil industry! Bloody useless! If I could do something else and earn decent money, I would, but it's too late for me n ow, don't let your sons/daughters work in the oil industry, better ofor them to be a piano player in a whorehouse! You get more respect and the job lasts longer!!

 

[Chris771]

ChrisP,

I'm afraid that I must largely echo Colin's views on this. Having worked offshore for 20 years I am well acquainted with the financial constraints placed on companies.

I was making this post with the knowledge that the "Spare" Helicopter which used to be maintained at Sumburgh was withdrawn about 4 years ago because the operators were no longer making enough to be able to maintain it. Very often these days there is not even a spare in Aberdeen.

I am flying back to Malabo today and will be riding in a 412 out to the rig tomorrow, so my comments are not purely speculative. I am acutely aware of the conditions we endure to earn a reasonable living.

As Colin said, it is also too late for me to contemplate a career change now. When I think back to a Field Support vessel of 12 years ago, the catering Budget perman/per day then was £12, in the North Sea recently it was £6.50. 12 years ago the food was fantastic, now it can be described as about adequate.

The accountants are forever chipping every penny off everything they can whilst the oil companies are forever making greater profits. The cutbacks that personnel endure in everyday life have a significant effect upon them, whilst, individually these cutbacks have a near negligable effect on overall profits.

The oil companies always make a big song and dance about safety, which is fine as long as it does not cost them anything. Once it starts costing it soon gets sidelined.

Chris

www.impact-computers.net/boat/cruiser.htm

 

[alpha]

Being involved in safety in the airline industry, I had occasion to visit AAIB at Farnborough recently. I saw the remains of the S-76, though not the fractured blade which seems to have caused the crash, which was not with the main body of wreckage.

I don't want to ad to the speculation by giving details. A good friend lost close colleagues in the crash.

Whilst some may wish to suggest that corners are cut on safety in air transport, these days the chances of an engineering error being covered up are so slight (largely as a result of the work of AAIB and their equivalents) that manufacturers and operators will not fly questionable components.

However, we are still learning about components which have composite elements to them. Please, let's wait for the final report to see what happened. Speculation seldom serves safety.

(More horrifying was the SD-360 which ditched off Edinburgh. The crew survived the ditching, but drowned trapped in their seats).

 

[ccscott49]

More horrifying???? I suggest dying is horrifying enough! and I have a helicopter flight off this rig on friday or saturday, shuttup please!!