So how many single-pilot HEMS flights have crashed because of pilot incapacitation and how many single-pilot HEMS crashes have been averted in single-pilot flights with dual controls?
That's the name of the game, isn't it?
No action would've ment three fatalities.
I'd rather not, but they are successful operators with a very good safety record.
At least one.
Harder to find numbers on that, since such events probably end up not reported, or reported but without too much fanfare.
Can’t confirm that Vandy has a pilot incapacitation training program but I’ve heard rumors they do. Whether or not this paramedic went through that is unknown. It’s become pretty common training in the industry now. All started maybe 10 years ago when Airevac had a pilot in a B206 become partially incapacitated. Med crewmember crawled up on the litter and assisted the pilot for landing. After that, they developed a training program. We do it with the medcrew on initial hire and then annually. Without an AP it would be useless but all our aircraft have them now so at least it gives them a fighting chance. After the Vandy crash, a lot of them are coming up to me and are like “can we go over setting up the autopilot again?”
OGTG was awesome.
Oh they’re taught how to take over as well. Our AP bumps offline at 44 KIAS so they’re gonna have to land it on their own at some point. SAS still stays engaged but it’ll be both cyclic and collective inputs from the medcrew to pull off a safe landing. Problem is, there’s no actuator to the pedals (same as Vandy) so once they get below ETL it’s gonna spin like a top and burn in. I always tell them “speed is life.” You get slow and you’re done.
You don't make policy for black swan events. Is it more likely that a second set of controls will be necessary and used to save everyone or that it will get in the way. It seems the ratio is heavily tilted to the latter.
Stop jumping to conclusions so hard, you'll injure yourself. I just don't want to name them.
www.ecfr.gov
As Velocity173 already explained, most autopilots will drop around 40-50kts.
Right.
What would make it reportable per the rules if the landing is successful?Federal Register :: Request Access
The problem with that is how to do you stay within CG when the medic gets in the back with the added patient?
You'll find its a statistical anomaly on those numbers when compared to flight hours flown. The offshore industry did several studies on this in the 80s to see if there were viable mitigative steps using non-crew members to assist. The end result the oil companies opted to address the problem on the human side and required more medical requirements, age limits in the cockpit, etc. to reduce any potential pilot incapacitation issues. Regardless, all those types of events must be reported by rule so very doubtful they were not reported.
I think this question is covered on most FAA written tests I've taken. I know for sure that it was on my latest commercial and CFI tests.
For those patients, the choice is often get on the helicopter or die.
Sure. How much of that is public records?
Plenty of helicopters don't have autopilots. Your previous statement was not aligned with knowledge of a typical heli AFCS.
I know nothin'!
See above.
Thanks - you made me re-read the reg and saw it.
FIFY
Yes, many of the patients are so critical they don't make it off. I actually met a Vanderbilt flight crew a few years ago that had transported a six-month old baby from a regional hospital to Vanderbilt. It was around her third birthday. The nurse recounted taking the girl from her mom for the flight, and how moving the goodbye was. She said they always let parents take their time in such situations because it's often the last time they'll see their child alive. What these people do is amazing.
Which is why having a single point of failure around the most critical component for flight deserves consideration.
Look at the context of the conversation, and what nauga asked. The general public can look at the NTSB database, not at what the 135 reports to the FAA. I (incorrectly) read the rule as not requiring reporting to the NTSB. Thus drew the conclusion that there might not be a good enough amount of data there to conclude the pros/cons.
No, that was your assumption. Yes, my statement left room for interpretation, but you chose to go there.
You alluded to the training being just autopilot operation training, when the AP will go offline at 40-50 kts. The only AP mode the passenger needs to know is SAS or ATT (if available) and how the trim system works.
None whatsoever.
Can’t be having that stuff man. Next step will be taking me out of the loop. I’m not ready to retire yet!
Unfortunately, the current slew of helicopters operating in EMS would not be capable of using such technology on several levels. Even with the addition of 2-axis autopilots and SAS systems on the legacy <6000lb fleet, there would still need to be a technology leap to get those in the autoland loop. As to the 2 crew option, the EMS side has generally moved away from that configuration for quite some time just has the move has been away from twin-engine to single engine ops.
When responding to a question, is it necessary to be a jerk?
I’d definitely retire if we went to two pilots. No way I could stand sitting around for 12 hrs a day, 7 days in a row with the same pilot. We’d drive each other crazy. That and the fact the pilot not on the controls would be bored out of their minds. The flights are really low workload. Even the IFR guys, the AP is easy to setup for single pilot.
You already do that with your favorite PIC.
Actually, with a number of helicopter models dual controls are an option. So percentage-wise most light helicopters have no dual controls or even the provisions for them. Where they become standard equipment, in general, are in models that require 2 pilots if it has IFR capability. So no real comparison to airplanes.
Maybe you should cross train on the medical side so you’re not the only single-task guy in the crew after the rest of them finish learning to fly it.
Care to provide a link? Nothing with your description came up in CAROL.
You're not saving anyone by "dropping" it at 50kts, plus whatever vertical velocity you achieve with the drop. An impact at 30kts has one third of the energy compared to the 50kt one.
Depends on the helicopter.
Digging into the ground with 50kts of forward velocity won't keep you upright, either.
