Helo crash east of Phoenix 02JAN

A

azmedic

Well-Known Member
Haven’t seen anything posted on this yet. Initial reports are they crashed into a slackline. 4 fatal.
www.azfamily.com

4 dead after helicopter crashes in remote mountains near Superior

Four people are dead after a helicopter crashed east of the Valley late Friday morning.
www.azfamily.com www.azfamily.com

IMG_1241.png
 
Blanco did one on this, I think. Apparently was the guy's wedding day and he was taking his three nieces for a sightseeing flight. The gist from Juan's presentation was that the slackline may not have been properly marked, and that, even if it was, it was extremely hard to see and the Notam for its presence was not easily found.

I don't know enough about helos to comment intelligently on the rest, but the Notam system is hopelessly stupid and ass-coveringly broken everywhere else, so I suspect he is right about that much.
 
The NOTAM was under Superior airport, E81, since it was only a few miles south.

Two tenants of helo flying when low level, is 1. Don’t hit the ground, and 2. Don’t hit anything attached to the ground. Just because you can fly low (considered under 1000 AGL), the risk of hitting something attached to the ground increases to a large degree, as most things attached to the ground that you can’t see, are generally less than 1000 AGL. Most things above that, such as towers, are things you can see. So unless there’s an operational need, flying lower than that even in a familiar area, but definitely in an unfamiliar area or area you haven’t been in some time, is increased risk for no reason. In addition to this, if necessary to be that low, don’t do so at high speeds. Give some time to be able to see and avoid potential obstacles.

The other reason flying lower when not needed, is the amount of time available in a single engine helicopter, to react to an engine failure or power loss, and get yourself into a good stable autorotation, before hiring the ground. Lower altitudes = less time to react,

Of course, if there’s an operational need to be low level, then the risk is accepted and mitigated to the best of one’s ability. But aside from that, stay a little higher. Because things can come out and bite you, with terminal consequences.

No, I didn’t waste my time watching Cornholio do another idiotic video where a fatty jet clown tries to analyze helo stuff like some kind of expert. :)
 
One other thing coming out, are people claiming that when you search for NOTAMs from his departure field of Pegasus airport, that the NOTAM for that particular obstruction didn’t show up. And that since he wasn’t going to land at Superior / E81, that he wouldn’t have checked the NOTAMs for that airport, where that NOTAM did show up.

Remote NOTAMs like these, are tied to a geographical area, which is most every case, is the nearest airport to the NOTAM.

If you check the NOTAMs for your home field, a NOTAM for something 30 or so miles away isn’t going to show up, like in this case. It’s obviously reasonable and prudent to check the NOTAMs at an airport(s) nearest to the location you are going to, as that’s the only way these local NOTAMs will be seen, since that’s the nearest airport they are tied to, regardless of whether you are going to land at the airport or not. That’s merely a good flight planning tenant, if nothing else.
 
Yet another really important NOTAM written in the usual utter TRASH format of meaningless numbers that don’t mean jack squat to pilots the way it’s presented.

I honestly thought after AC at SFO and Member Sumwalt’s comment about how NOTAMs are just a bunch of garbage, would have changed something about the format and presentation.
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Yet another really important NOTAM written in the usual utter TRASH format of meaningless numbers that don’t mean jack squat to pilots the way it’s presented.

I honestly thought after AC at SFO and Member Sumwalt’s comment about how NOTAMs are just a bunch of garbage, would have changed something about the format and presentation.
Click to expand...

I mean. I saw this very NOTAM as written, and knew exactly what it meant and where it was, as I was headed last week from Roosevelt Lake south to E77 airport. I saw it because I checked the airports along the general route I was going to look for any oddball NOTAMd obstructions near them. And this was one of them. It was tied to the appropriate nearest airport, and was simple to read and understand.

Are there some junk NOTAMs out there? Sure. But the general problems with the NOTAM system that could use some revamping, wasn’t a factor here in this accident. The pilot either didn’t know the obstruction was here due to not checking the NOTAMs for E81 that he would be flying near, or knew it was here and flew in the area anyway below the altitude it was published to be at. And this pilot wasn’t an inexperienced pilot at all.
 
MikeD said:
I mean. I saw this very NOTAM as written, and knew exactly what it meant and where it was, as I was headed last week from Roosevelt Lake south to E77 airport. I saw it because I checked the airports along the general route I was going to look for any oddball NOTAMd obstructions near them. And this was one of them. It was tied to the appropriate nearest airport, and was simple to read and understand.

Are there some junk NOTAMs out there? Sure. But the general problems with the NOTAM system that could use some revamping, wasn’t a factor here in this accident. The pilot either didn’t know the obstruction was here due to not checking the NOTAMs for E81 that he would be flying near, or knew it was here and flew in the area anyway below the altitude it was published to be at. And this pilot wasn’t an inexperienced pilot at all.
Click to expand...

You have vast experience in that area. I’d have no clue what E82 was and what that useless lot long implies in a simple GA aircraft. Unless a GA aircraft had GPS, it’s fairly useless.

These need to be in simple English.

“DANGER - Big ass wire between (nearest airport) to (nearest airport) at an altitude of (feet).”
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
You have vast experience in that area. I’d have no clue what E82 was and what that useless lot long implies in a simple GA aircraft. Unless a GA aircraft had GPS, it’s fairly useless.

These need to be in simple English.

“DANGER - Big ass wire between (nearest airport) to (nearest airport) at an altitude of (feet).”
Click to expand...

To get the specific area, one does have to put the lat/long into the GPS, but the first NOTAM above even says “2.8 NM SE E81”,’or 2.8 miles southeast of Superior airport, in terms of the general area to be aware. And this pilot was supposedly familiar with the area, with his departure airport being a winter-home Airpark about 30 or so miles to the southwest of there.

Sometimes a NOTAM requires a bit of interpretation to get the specifics of it, especially for a remote-located NOTAM like this that isn’t on an airport (such as a taxiway or runway closure would be). And for the guys who always complain about all the BS NOTAMs like towers and powerlines, those NOTAMs exist because they are important to someone’s operation, if not necessarily important to our own. Same as a NOTAM for a change to a STAR, for example, is important to one operation, but not necessarily to another.
 
I don't see the confusion,
Enable NOTAM layer in Foreflight, a bazzilion new perimeters pop-up (a remarkable number about drones at 200(?) feet)

little tiny circle over that canyon, it said something like "Tight Rope/Tether/cable" there was something about lights, and maybe flag/?
No route airports needed, no interpreter needed, I don't care what the LAT/LON numbers are, or any of the "code"

No cumbersome pre planning.
Grey circle that says tight rope/tether/cable, by where my little aircraft symbol is, pay attention or avoid.

Do most people have that layer turned on, or use Foreflight, or is it a layer in all versions? I dunno.
I usually have that layer off, it can be annoying clutter, But sight seeing low level?
It would be on and looked at
 
Last edited:
The other investigative item I would be looking as is where the helicopter hit the wire, and was it or wasn’t it in the area of the WSPS, or Wire Strike Protection Systen shears, which N3502P was equipped with. And if the impact was in the WSPS coverage area, did it or did it not shear the cable. This bird was a beautiful 2024 model 530F, and apart from the tragedy of the loss of life here, was the loss of a very nice and nicely equipped aircraft.
 
The format is useless. Every time at LAX and EWR there are dozens of “Obstacle Crane” type NOTAMS with DMEs in the decimals, and lat longs. Utterly useless.


They need to be simple English. And warning/danger on those that really matter. Like a wire running across a canyon or an tethered balloon.


Flying once in a charter flight from BRO to LAX, I saw a an ungodly altitude red color obstacle on my ND. It was a tethered balloon, and I went back to the NOTAMS and couldn’t find it in my packet. That is the kinda thing that would be nice to know. If I can hit something outta Texas that’s over 5,000 ft tall, put it in a big ass DANGER - NOTAM in simple English.
 
There is no order of importance of NOTAMS either. At XOJET I had to review every NOTAM in a 30 page packet. On page 17 of 30 I found a NOTAM for a closed runway at the airport we were heading to. I didn't have a dispatcher to help either. I can't really fathom where anyone who flies a multi engine turbine jet would need to know about an unlit tower at LAT/LOG at 175'. At such a low altitude it's not planned to be anywhere near this tower.

But the closed runway at ones destination? Probably good to know about.
 
Local news interviewed the landowner and he claimed he didn't know the slackline had been installed, despite there being NOTAMs and the cable being flagged and lighted. Coincidentally, he knew the pilot well, though.

Wonder if he's preemptively angling against any sort of litigation.
 
BEEF SUPREME said:
There is no order of importance of NOTAMS either. At XOJET I had to review every NOTAM in a 30 page packet. On page 17 of 30 I found a NOTAM for a closed runway at the airport we were heading to. I didn't have a dispatcher to help either. I can't really fathom where anyone who flies a multi engine turbine jet would need to know about an unlit tower at LAT/LOG at 175'. At such a low altitude it's not planned to be anywhere near this tower.

But the closed runway at ones destination? Probably good to know about.
Click to expand...

Hurt to like a Beefy post, but yes all this.


This stuff was quoted by the NTSB for AC at SFO. That literally involved a closed runway NOTAM, buried deep in the NOTAM package. Yes there other things involved like confirmation bias and fatigue, but still. Important, relevant NOTAMS need to be first page.
 
BEEF SUPREME said:
There is no order of importance of NOTAMS either. At XOJET I had to review every NOTAM in a 30 page packet. On page 17 of 30 I found a NOTAM for a closed runway at the airport we were heading to. I didn't have a dispatcher to help either. I can't really fathom where anyone who flies a multi engine turbine jet would need to know about an unlit tower at LAT/LOG at 175'. At such a low altitude it's not planned to be anywhere near this tower.

But the closed runway at ones destination? Probably good to know about.
Click to expand...

Apparently, for liability purposes, dispatch cannot parse NOTAMs for applicability, though our dispatch in the 121 gig does highlight applicable NOTAMs. But you still have to double check that, as they’ve been known to miss important ones. All NOTAMs are important, they're just important to different segments of aviation.
 
MikeD said:
The NOTAM was under Superior airport, E81, since it was only a few miles south.

Two tenants of helo flying when low level, is 1. Don’t hit the ground, and 2. Don’t hit anything attached to the ground. Just because you can fly low (considered under 1000 AGL), the risk of hitting something attached to the ground increases to a large degree, as most things attached to the ground that you can’t see, are generally less than 1000 AGL.
Click to expand...

So, many years ago, when I started flying the Pawnee, I got some advice from an old cropduster guy. He always kept the trim ever so slightly nose up. The reasoning being, when you get distracted someday, it is better to realize that you are too high, than to realize that you just hit the ground.

Anything similar to that in helos?
 
MikeD said:
Apparently, for liability purposes, dispatch cannot parse NOTAMs for applicability, though our dispatch in the 121 gig does highlight applicable NOTAMs. But you still have to double check that, as they’ve been known to miss important ones. All NOTAMs are important, they're just important to different segments of aviation.
Click to expand...
Our system is a hot mess domestically.

Internationally, there’s like two for PVG, one for ICN and maybe two for HND. I really haven’t flown anywhere else in the last couple months. If there are less than 30 for DTW, I’d be shocked.

Years ago, I sent in an FCR for thirty different NOTAMS about perimeter fences at SLC’s cipher-lock codes changing and showed an example of a 45 NOTAM packet with two actual relevant NOTAMS. It’s one thing when you have a single leg and your software will let you flag things as “read” but our flight planning software would reset all the flags as ‘unread’ AAAAAAAAND you’re flying five legs that day, fully responsible for reading all NOTAMS.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
So, many years ago, when I started flying the Pawnee, I got some advice from an old cropduster guy. He always kept the trim ever so slightly nose up. The reasoning being, when you get distracted someday, it is better to realize that you are too high, than to realize that you just hit the ground.

Anything similar to that in helos?
Click to expand...

If SAS equipped, yes, via force trim, press the force trim and set the cyclic, then release. If one of the light helos that doesn't have it, then no….its all on you. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top