Another MedEvac Helicopter Down

[MikeD]

Also, back in my comfort zone re: FW. No, it's certainly not anything like doing scene flights in a helo, or even doing rotor-wing transfers. But "just like any other air taxi"? Eh, I mean maybe there's some passenger air taxi operator somewhere that does 80% of their flying in to short, rural strips, with no TAF, at short notice, at all hours, down in the weather, but I haven't seen them yet. It's a LOT more similar to flying freight than to flying people from Teterboro to Boca in a JEEEETTTTTT, IMHO.

I think "just another air taxi" is meant in terms of the airborne flying portion, as well as flights having more time for general planning, versus the 911 of heading out of the station like a fire truck, and heading to some road, or middle of nowhere with no lights, etc.

 

[Boris Badenov]

as well as flights having more time for general planning,

There I'll quibble with you. The amount of time it takes me to file, read the NOTAMS, do the W&B, "assess the risk", get out to the aircraft, and get it ready to go leaves me about the same amount of time to plan as the rotorwing guys. Which is, of course, "however much is needed". But ultimately, there is time pressure for everyone involved.

Back to the subject at hand, though, my thesis is that the amount of money spent on finding administrative reasons not to fly would be better spent on giving these guys the tools they need TO fly. Honestly, what do you reckon it costs to "achieve Level IV certification" with the FAA's latest buereaucratic non-solution vs. what it costs to let these guys fly around in a cloud every once in a while?

 

[MikeD]

There I'll quibble with you. The amount of time it takes me to file, read the NOTAMS, do the W&B, "assess the risk", get out to the aircraft, and get it ready to go leaves me about the same amount of time to plan as the rotorwing guys. Which is, of course, "however much is needed". But ultimately, there is time pressure for everyone involved.

Back to the subject at hand, though, my thesis is that the amount of money spent on finding administrative reasons not to fly would be better spent on giving these guys the tools they need TO fly. Honestly, what do you reckon it costs to "achieve Level IV certification" with the FAA's latest buereaucratic non-solution vs. what it costs to let these guys fly around in a cloud every once in a while?

I agree with you on the need, no argument there. My comments are simply on the reality of something like that coming about, and the likely management argument for why they wouldn't want to spend the money on it. It's funny, I get quizzed on checkrides on all the IFR stuff (being RW instrument rated of course) regarding takeoff minimums, approach/alternate minimums, etc. And in reality, flying an AStar, my answer for everything the checkpilot asks me should be "I'd stay on the ground, therefore instrument approach mins, alternate mins, visibility mins, etc for IFR, don't apply here because the AStar isn't certified for it." End of instrument portion of checkride.

 

[Boris Badenov]

The ones that really get me are the middle of the night requests for an airport with no TAF within 50 miles. Rotor turns it down for temp/dewpoint (as they should, being VFR for the entire trip). Area Forecast looks fine, but nobody wants to hear "well, I'd say there's a 95% chance we can get in and out with no problem, but...". Obviously, it's another case of $$$$, but you could probably put an ASOS on every rural field in MO/IL for what it costs in lost revenue and lost hours of productivity for the hospital to drive out there (let alone the possibility of a bad outcome due to the time of transport). I guess maybe I should write my Congressman...

 

[MikeD]

The ones that really get me are the middle of the night requests for an airport with no TAF within 50 miles. Rotor turns it down for temp/dewpoint (as they should, being VFR for the entire trip). Area Forecast looks fine, but nobody wants to hear "well, I'd say there's a 95% chance we can get in and out with no problem, but...". Obviously, it's another case of $$$$, but you could probably put an ASOS on every rural field in MO/IL for what it costs in lost revenue and lost hours of productivity for the hospital to drive out there (let alone the possibility of a bad outcome due to the time of transport). I guess maybe I should write my Congressman...

Agree. I wouldn't think a basic ASOS or AWOS-3 should cost that much to install, generally speaking. And you mention IFR in a helo which brings up another point that I think Ive mentioned before: going to an alternate. In a helo, any alternate that you'd likely have fuel or distance for at 2 miles/minute or less, isn't that far away and likely has the same WX as your destination you're diverting from. Another reason why IFR/IMC just isn't great in a helo, apart from equipment/crew needs, etc. It's not like a PC-12 or other FW where you can hit a reasonable alternate some distance away with the fuel you have, and have a reasonable expectation of actually better WX.

 

[Boris Badenov]

Yeah it seems like IFR HEMS is a pretty limited market. But, at least around here, I think the benefits outweigh the costs. Our rotors turn down flights fairly regularly that would be legal and sane under IFR and wouldn't require an alternate for weather between the hospitals. I would imagine that there's a lot less of that in the Southwest, and of course you're quite right that an IFR helo is never going to have the capabilites of an airplane with something like 4 hours of endurance on half tanks. At least I'd better hope not...

 

[z987k]

The ones that really get me are the middle of the night requests for an airport with no TAF within 50 miles. Rotor turns it down for temp/dewpoint (as they should, being VFR for the entire trip). Area Forecast looks fine, but nobody wants to hear "well, I'd say there's a 95% chance we can get in and out with no problem, but...". Obviously, it's another case of $$$$, but you could probably put an ASOS on every rural field in MO/IL for what it costs in lost revenue and lost hours of productivity for the hospital to drive out there (let alone the possibility of a bad outcome due to the time of transport). I guess maybe I should write my Congressman...

Better than the no TAF for 250 miles that we deal with. No ASOS for probably 50 miles and unknown runway conditions, but they usually have a windsock! Thing is, we are still very much like the air taxi next door that does the same flight but in a navajo.
I've stopped with the 95% crap long ago. If I'm 51% we go, and if I can't get in that's their problem for being so simplistic with a yes/no only. So we go fly an hour take a look and go home if it's not working.

 

[I_Money]

It seems to me there are things on both sides - the last EagleMed flight hit a pole, another EagleMed the pilot was showing off, running out of fuel and there was a guy chasing a moose recently. Those all seem like poor judgement calls that additional oversight could have prevented. I do think some IMC time, autos to the ground would be beneficial too.

 

[deadstick]

The ones that really get me are the middle of the night requests for an airport with no TAF within 50 miles. Rotor turns it down for temp/dewpoint (as they should, being VFR for the entire trip). Area Forecast looks fine, but nobody wants to hear "well, I'd say there's a 95% chance we can get in and out with no problem, but...". Obviously, it's another case of $$$$, but you could probably put an ASOS on every rural field in MO/IL for what it costs in lost revenue and lost hours of productivity for the hospital to drive out there (let alone the possibility of a bad outcome due to the time of transport). I guess maybe I should write my Congressman...

BB, down in the SEMO, you know there will be fog this time of year. To heck with the area forecast. It'll roll in just before sunrise and stick until 9 or 10. I had proposed Super AWOS at a couple of places before it was decertified, but there is the issue of it being seen as a "kick-back." Talking about lift times, is your med crew at the airport or the hospital? BIG difference between wheels up in 15-ish and doing everything, watching the end of a movie, sending email, and strolling out to the aircraft.

 

[deadstick]

do think some IMC time, autos to the ground would be beneficial too.

Agreed. Heck I know IFR programs that don't do enough to stay proficient. Although they do checks every 6 mo, there are times when they probably wouldn't go at the 5 mo point. Also, I bet I've done more full down autos in the last year than some of the HEMS pilots I've worked with.

"The impact signatures to the components of the airframe structure were consistent with the initial impact occurring in a 40° nose-low and slight left-bank attitude, on a heading of about 030° (nearly opposite to the direction of travel)."

 

[dustoff17]

Looks like EagleMed got a new helo and are up and running again at this base...

http://m.kansas.com/wichita/db_106588/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=qswDbS0R&full=true#display

 

[Pilot Fighter]

You might want to see what you can do out of ground effect before reaching that obstacle.