Issue 4
Transcription
Issue 4
T h e R A F F l i g h t S af e t y M a g a z i n e airCLUES NovemBER 2010 issue 4 airCLUES contents 10 features Foreword 4 Spry’s View 5 The Icing on the Wing 6 I learnt about the weather from that x 4 10 I learnt about arctic flying from that 14 Flight safety in the arctic circle 16 I learnt about pushing the limits 18 Children, elves and fairy tales 22 The views expressed within Air Clues are those of the authors concerned, and do not necessarily reflect those of the Royal Air Force, or MoD. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form without prior permission in writing from the editor. Unless by prior arrangement, articles and photographs will not normally be returned. 2 24 30 There’s no landings like snow landings 24 Winter Operations 26 Relections on a harsh winter 28 Dealing with the known unknown 30 Operating in Extreme Weather 34 Flight Safety Awards 40 FOD Matters 45 Chinese Lanterns 46 airCLUES I learnt about cockpit gradients from that 33 3 airCLUES foreword by Air Chief Marshal Bryant CBE ADC MA BA CDir RAF, Commander in Chief, HQ Air Command At the time of writing, we are about to enter a period of extreme turbulence that will follow decisions made during the SDSR, which, added to the already high tariff of support to current operations, can only increase the challenge to operating safely. However, I am determined that, despite these potential distractions, safety will remain at the heart of all that we do. During this period, more than ever, we must continue to invest in our safety culture; this speaks to both resources and, perhaps more importantly, through the unambiguous support of all within the chain of command. Air Safety critically underpins effective air power and you should be in no doubt that compromises in safety will inevitably and very directly lead to both reduced operational capability and unacceptable risk to our people. However, I do not wish to dwell solely on the challenges ahead, I also wish to highlight some of our recent achievements. Foremost amongst these is the progress made in implementing the recommendations arising from the HaddonCave Report into the loss of Nimrod XV230. Following on from the formation and expansion of the Military Aviation Authority (MAA), we now have a formalised clear structure of aviation safety accountability. This is helping to ensure that Duty Holders are provided with the requisite airworthiness and operational advice needed to make informed decisions about the levels of risk to their platforms and aircrew. Meanwhile, the Air Command Safety Management Plan (ASMP), which provides the higher level governance processes for aviation safety across the RAF, is being reviewed and rewritten to provide robust, clear direction as to how we identify, manage and, where possible, control risk. At the Command level, I have already noticed a better understanding of the management of risk, however, for this to reap real dividends and to be valid and authoritative it must also be supported by an effective system of error reporting at all levels of the organisation. We are en-route to achieving this with the roll out of the Error Management System (EMS), which is already proving an invaluable tool for the reporting of error in the workplace and is increasingly providing the data we need to identify developing error trends and to understand the reasons that underline them. Ultimately, this will allow us to predict and prevent reoccurrence of the errors which hitherto have led to aviation accidents. With initial success within the A4 environment already assured, EMS is now being trialled across all aviation-related areas as part of the wider Aviation EMS project, which will include Air Traffic operations. In sum, I believe that the RAF has made significant progress in achieving a “just” culture in the Air Safety domain over the last year. However, there is much more to be done. We are starting to inculcate a cultural shift but this will require constant attention and appropriate resourcing to ensure this change becomes embedded. I will be endeavouring to provide both and I ask that you do the same. 4 Spry’s View Mil: 95 221 6666 BT: 01494 496666 Email: Air-FltSafetyWgCdrSpry@mod.uk Welcome to the fourth issue of Air Clues and a hearty greetings of the season to you all. As I write my Foreword in the tail end of our rather dismal attempt at a Summer, I can’t help but feel a trifle odd discussing the approaching bleak midwinter, but as we are oft reminded, “fail to plan; plan to fail”. So as the frost makes its first appearances on the old E-Type, even Spry’s dusty old cranium is reminded of the upstart of a winter season we had this year; which had the temerity to disrupt the smooth running of the roads, runways and infrastructure of this fine country. With this memory foremost in my mind I have pulled together a veritable cornucopia of winter articles in this issue that should give you a little seasonal hindsight to mull over during the long winter evenings. Take this gift, read it, inwardly digest and make sure that you learn from the lessons of others and are fully prepared for the meteorological machinations of the British winter to come. As ever, I hope you have a first-rate Christmas and New Year and I will see you all safely back in 2011. Yours aye, Spry Dear Wg Cdr Spry After all these years I’ve finally dusted off the old quill pen, found myself a pot of the old blue/black Quink and penned a missive in your direction (metaphorically)! What, you might ask, can possibly have stirred these old bones into action? Well in fact it was an article in the June 2010 issue of your splendid periodical. It was entitled, if my memory serves me correctly, ‘I learned about TCAS from that ……’ and was presumably penned by some young sprog from Cranwell. The gist of the article seemed to me to be that the rest of the world was out of step with 45 Sqn’s TCAS SOPs and thus that a Captain in an E-3D (splendid old aircraft, what…!!) found himself ‘generally not knowing what the *&^$ was going on (sic) !!! I was most gratified to read on further and to find that 45 Sqn’s SOPs have now been changed to tie in with the way the rest of us do things ! I’m sure that the aforementioned young sprog was attempting to be humorous when he wrote the article – and assuming that this is the case, I’m not totally convinced that he should give up his day job. However, presuming that he will continue with his day job, he might wish to note that following a Resolution Advisory should never result in the overstress of an ac (clever little devil, this TCAS thingy !!), E-3Ds crews tend to prefer Horlicks to tea/coffee (that caffeine stuff stops you having a nice snooze in the old cockpit) and surprisingly we do generally tend to have a very good idea of what the *&^$ (sic) is going on. We have taken to heart lessons learnt from incidents such as the collision between the Bashkirian TU-154M and the DHL 757 in July 2002 and, more specifically, the old military maxim that it’s the one you don’t see that gets you ! We follow the guidance given by the TCAS system since we can’t guarantee that a Resolution Advisory has come from ‘the aircraft that we’ve visually identified’ and since, assuming that the other aircraft also has TCAS (or ACAS), his/her reaction will be based upon the ‘handshake’ between our respective TCAS systems. Spry Says: Thank you for your letter, but I feel that not unlike an inverted fast jet jockey, you may have got the wrong end of the stick. The original article’s author clearly had a case of the ‘mea culpas’ and appeared more than happy to admit that the actions of the King Air may have appeared both confusing and illogical to other parties and that assumption in these situations had the potential to be maternal to all cock-ups. However, from a purely HF perspective, this does reiterate how communications in whatever form are inevitably open to differing interpretations. As such, we should strive to make our human interactions, be they handovers, briefings, as accurate and unambiguous as possible, backed up by a thorough check of understanding. airCLUES Sqn Ldr Gunning 8 Sqn QFI airCLUES the icing on the wing It’s official; summer must be coming to an end because I have been asked to write an article for Air Clues on ‘Winter Ops’ from a flying perspective. As an inexperienced writer I began sketching out the myriad of issues relating to aviating during the cold winter months. I could have covered Black Top states, precipitation or how to operate out of those many countries infinitely adept at dealing with severe winter weather, such as Norway and Canada. Instead I decided to write about an area I have definitely experienced - aircraft icing In basic terms, in-flight icing is the accretion of ice on the airframe during contact with super-cooled liquid droplets. This can come in the form of cloud droplets, snow, hail or freezing rain/drizzle. In rare cases it can also be formed when a cold soaked aircraft enters a moist warm air mass. Icing really concerns us because it can adversely affect the flight characteristics of an aircraft. It can increase drag, decrease lift, and cause control problems. Added weight from ice accretion can also be a factor in light aircraft. It is, however, widely agreed that severity is dependent upon moisture content, temperature and, most importantly, water droplet size. Flt Lt Chrispin Chapple, Captain, 32(TR)Sqn explains the dangers of ice in aviation; Icing is currently classified into four severity categories: • TRACE. Ice becomes perceptible. Rate of accumulation is slightly greater than the rate of sublimation. It is not hazardous even though de-icing/anti-icing equipment is not generally used, unless encountered for an extended period of time. • LIGHT. The rate of accumulation may create a problem if flight is prolonged in this environment. Occasional use of de-icing/anti-icing equipment removes accumulation. • MODERATE. The rate of accumulation is such that even short encounters become potentially hazardous and the use of de-icing/anti-icing equipment or diversion/re-routing is necessary. • SEVERE. The rate of accumulation is such that de-icing/anti-icing equipment fails to reduce or control the hazard. Immediate diversion/ re-routing is necessary. reminding us all that it is only really safe for ice and aircrew to come together in a Gin & Tonic. Note that these definitions are based on the pilot’s perception of the aircraft’s ability to deal with the ice accretion. They are not based on meteorology. OUTSIDE AIR O C to -1OOC to -15OC to O 6 TEMPERATURE RANGE -1O C -15OC -2OOC O ICING TYPE CLEAR MIXED CLEAR AND RIME RIME Types of icing encountered that affect us are: • RIME. Rough, milky, opaque ice formed by instantaneous freezing of small super-cooled water droplets. • Rime ice occurs when tiny, super-cooled liquid water droplets freeze on contact with a surface whose temperature is below freezing. Because the droplets are small, the amount of water remaining after the initial freezing is insufficient to coalesce into a continuous sheet before freezing. The result is a mixture of tiny ice particles and trapped air, giving a rough, opaque, crystalline deposit that is fairly brittle. Rime ice often forms on leading edges and can affect the aerodynamic qualities of an aerofoil or the airflow into the engine intake. Due to entrapped air, and slow accumulation rate, Rime ice usually does not cause a significant increase in weight. • CLEAR. A glossy, clear or translucent ice formed by the relatively slow freezing of large super-cooled water droplets. • Clear ice is most likely to form in freezing rain, a phenomena comprising raindrops that spread out and freeze on contact with the cold airframe. This situation can occur below a warm front. Super-cooled drops are unstable, and will freeze on contact with a surface that is below zero degrees — the skin of an aircraft, or the propeller blades, for example. Freezing of each drop will be relatively gradual, due to the latent heat released in the freezing process, allowing part of the water drop to flow rearwards before it solidifies. The slower the freezing process, the greater the flow-back of the water before it freezes. The flow-back is greatest at temperatures around 0° C. The result is a sheet of solid, clear, glazed ice with very little air enclosed, usually with undulations and lumps. Clear ice can alter the aerodynamic shape of the aerofoils quite dramatically and reduce or destroy their effectiveness. It is tenacious and, if it does break off, large chunks may damage the airframe. Freezing rain may exist at higher altitudes in the presence of ice pellets, formed by rain falling from warmer air and freezing during descent through colder air. The presence of ice pellets therefore usually indicates cold air below freezing with a layer of warmer air above. • MIXED. A mixture of Rime and Clear ice. ICE TYPES CLEAR ICING Note the freezing that occurs down-flow of the point of initial airframe contact. RIME ICING Note the freezing that occurs down-flow of the point of initial airframe contact. MIXED ICING Note the freezing that occurs down-flow of the point of initial airframe contact. In 1942, Jerome F. Lederer, the founder of the New Zealand Flight Safety Foundation (FSF), stated in a lecture on aviation safety; “Strange as it may seem, a very light coating of snow or ice, light enough to be hardly visible, will have a tremendous effect on reducing the performance of a modern aeroplane”. How true these words still are today; and despite new technology, training and procedures developed since then to address the problem, accidents related to icing conditions continue to occur. How quickly a surface collects ice depends in part on its shape. Thin, modern wings will be more critical with ice on them than thick, older wing sections. The tail surfaces of an aeroplane will normally ice up much faster than the wing. If the tail stalls due to ice and the airflow disruption it causes, recovery is unlikely at low altitudes. Tail stall is less familiar to many pilots, however, in aircraft with high tails, Based on depiction found in Fig. 9-5 of Air Command Weather Manual 7 airCLUES such as the VC10 or smaller aircraft like the HS125, it can be lethal. A wing stall is the much more common threat, and it is very important to correctly distinguish between the two, since the required actions are roughly opposite. WINGS The wing will ordinarily stall at a lower angle of attack, and thus a higher airspeed, when contaminated with ice. Even small amounts of ice, especially if the ice is rough, can have an appreciable affect. Thus an increase in approach speed is advisable if ice remains on the wings. How much of an increase depends on both the aircraft type and amount of ice, and the Aircrew Manual particular to the type must be the reference. Normally, washout helps to ensure that a symmetric stall starts inboard, and spreads progressively. However, the stall characteristics of an aircraft with ice-contaminated wings can be seriously degraded. The tips are usually thinner than the rest of the wing, so they are the part of the wing that most efficiently collects ice. This can lead to a partial stall of the wing at the tip, which may lead to an asymmetric stall between the two wings. One of the hazards of this type of structural icing is the possible uncommanded and uncontrolled roll phenomenon referred to as roll upset. If ice accumulates in a ridge aft of the de-ice boots but forward of the ailerons, this can affect the airflow and interfere with the proper functioning of the ailerons. This type of situation is often associated with severe in-flight icing. Roll upset may be caused by airflow separation inducing self-deflection of the ailerons and loss of, or degraded, roll-handling characteristics. It can occur without the usual symptoms of ice or perceived aerodynamic stall. It is a little known and infrequently occurring flight hazard that can affect aircraft of all sizes. In 1994, an ATR 72 crashed in Roselawn, Indiana, during a rapid descent after an uncommanded roll excursion while on autopilot. The airplane was in a holding pattern in freezing drizzle and was descending to a newly assigned altitude. The NTSB determined that one of the probable causes of this accident was “loss of control, attributed to a sudden and unexpected aileron hinge moment reversal that occurred after a ridge of ice accreted beyond the de-ice boots... Had ice accumulated on the wing leading edges so as to burden the ice protection system, or if the crew had been able to observe the ridge of ice building behind the de-ice boots... it is probable that the crew would have exited the conditions.” A contributing factor was the lack of information in the flight manual about autopilot operation during such conditions. 8 TAIL The horizontal stabilizer balances the tendency of the nose to pitch down by generating downward lift on the tail of the aircraft. When the tail stalls, this downward force is lessened or removed, and the nose of the aeroplane can severely pitch down. Perhaps the most important characteristic of a tail-plane stall is the relatively high airspeed at the onset and, if it occurs, the suddenness and magnitude of this nose down pitch. Because the tail has a smaller leading edge radius and chord length than the wings, it can collect proportionately two to three times more ice than the wings and, often, the pilot cannot see the accumulation. This is particularly relevant during the approach phase of flight. Application of flaps can aggravate or initiate the stall, and the pilot must use caution when applying flaps during an approach if there is the possibility of icing on the tail-plane. A stall is much more likely to occur when the flaps are approaching the fully extended position. In this configuration, the wing centre of lift moves aft, downwash is increased and the horizontal tail, as a result, must provide greater downward lift. In some aircraft, depending on the forward C of G, the tail may be near its maximum lift coefficient and just a small amount of contamination could cause it to stall. This type of issue was thrust into the spotlight in the early 1990s after a number of accidents involving US regional air carrier turboprop aircraft. These aircraft all shared the following characteristics: • Non-powered flying control surfaces, relying on aerodynamic balance to keep stick forces low. • High efficiency flaps producing relatively high downwash, which results in high angle of attack on the tail-plane. • Non-trimmable stabilisers. • Efficient stabilisers with short chord length and small leading edge radii. • Inflatable boots for ice protection. This immediately led to a joint NASA/FAA International Tail-plane Icing Workshop to address the problem, and one of the findings was the recognition of the need for more education and training for pilots. It suggested that some of the training at the time, specifically to increase airspeed, might have actually exacerbated the already adverse situation at the horizontal tail-plane. In this case as power is added to compensate for the additional drag and the nose is lifted to maintain altitude, the angle of attack increases, allowing the underside of the tail to accumulate additional ice. • Elevator control pulsing, oscillation or vibrations. • Abnormal nose-down trim change. • Reduction or loss of elevator effectiveness • Sudden change in elevator force. • Sudden uncommanded nose down pitch. This does refer to aircraft with tail-plane pitch control only. As a pilot if you encounter bad weather during the approach phase and final flap is taken, would you immediately notice any of the above symptoms given the prevailing conditions and react appropriately? It is vital to understand the dynamics of your aircraft for exactly this reason. Of course, with all forms of airframe icing it does not always have to happen in the cruise or approach; if conditions are poor enough, or correct procedures are not carried out on the ground, these symptoms may appear as early as initial climb. North American and North European countries are continuing to invest in research to increase the safety of aircraft with respect to icing, with the shared common purpose of improving air transportation safety. In the United States and in Canada a number of Federal agencies as well as universities have active programs in icing research. The Aircraft Icing Research Alliance (AIRA), created by Canadian and US partners, has a mission to “coordinate among parties, the conduct of collaborative aircraft icing research activities that improve the safety of aircraft operations in icing conditions”. You only need to look at the statistics to see how much of an effect icing has on aircraft accidents; more than 1 in 10 over the period 19902000 were directly attributable to icing. In conclusion, as pilots we are required to know and recognise times and areas where the aircraft is in danger of experiencing icing conditions, and knowing how to deal with them. Being familiar with the aircraft’s performance and flight characteristics will also help in recognising the possibility of ice. Ice build-up will require more power to maintain safe cruise airspeed. Ice on the tail-plane can cause diminished nose up pitch control and heavy elevator forces, and the aircraft may buffet if flaps are extended. Ice on the rudder or ailerons can cause control oscillations or vibrations. Ice on the leading edges can lead to wing stall and undemanded roll. Make sure that your met briefing is as up-to-date as it can be if you think that icing may be an issue on your flight. Know the characteristics that are unique to your aircraft, and how best to manoeuver should symptoms become apparent. If you find yourself inadvertently in icing conditions, quickly consider how best to get out of them. Don’t become a statistic, and be aware of aircraft icing. Spry Says: “I’ve never seen icing conditions. I’ve never deiced. I’ve never seen any—I’ve never experienced any of that. I don’t want to have to experience that and make those kinds of calls. You know I’d’ve freaked out. I’d’ve have like seen this much ice and thought oh my gosh we were going to crash.” First Officer Rebecca Shaw, less than five minutes before forty-nine people in the aircraft and one person on the ground died. Colgan Air, Flight 3407 Buffalo, NY. One of the key factors which links the accidents to Colgan Air Flight 3407 and the infamous Air Florida Flight 90, which crashed into the Potomac Bridge in Washington seconds after take off, is that the flight deck crews of both aircraft underestimated the effects of ice accretion at critical junctures in flight and failed to take the right corrective action to remedy the situation. Icing in aviation is one of the most dangerous and insidious of killers, mainly because of the initial difficulties in recognising that it is affecting aircraft performance and, more importantly, because of the instantaneous and significant effect it has on handling. With our focus on hot and dry operations, our corporate experience of icing is diminishing and so the need to train and inform our people in dealing with the exigencies of cold weather operations becomes ever more important. The demands on maintaining currency and competency across the broad gamut of operations and operating environments remains difficult, however, it is vital that we never take our eye of the ball when it comes to developing core airmanship skills, of which the ability to recognise and deal effectively with icing must surely be fundamental. airCLUES Tail-plane stall symptoms include: airCLUES I learnt about the weather from that x4! I have enjoyed a long and safe career in the RAF with no ejections, the same number of take-offs and landings, and I have only ever had to shut down an engine in anger once (I now fly multi-engine aircraft!). All the other incidents that have occurred have, in my opinion, all been relatively minor in nature, including a few aborted take-offs and the occasional precautionary engine shut down. However, during my flying time I have slowly learnt to treat the weather gods with more and more respect and to become more of a weather pessimist at least as far as flying is concerned. I can highlight 4 separate incidents where I have learnt from the weather. Incident 1. As a young co-pilot on a delta wing bomber, I was probably more thumb in bum, mind in neutral at both most aspects of aviation apart from the pure flying and the planning and preparation required to do so. One beautiful winter’s day following overnight light snow, there was a forecast of isolated snow showers accompanied by increased wind strengths and a weather symbol in the TAF titled BLSN about which I was blissfully ignorant. We duly launched and flew a successful low level sortie before returning to base. It was my turn to fly a few circuits at the end of the sortie and I was looking forward to a bit of ‘hands on pole time’. Closer to base, we were warned of a snow shower in the vicinity of the airfield and my older, wiser captain elected to make a single approach to land and to bin the circuits, much to my evident disgust. I flew the practice instrument approach to my freshly minted green rating, looked up at DH and prepared to land. At this point, the beautiful winter’s day suddenly changed and it started to snow. Again, much to my chagrin, my captain elected to land the aircraft himself and, following 10 a successful touchdown, we suddenly lost sight of the runway as the wind picked up and snow started blowing across the airfield. In utter silence my captain brought the aircraft successfully to a halt. There we were in our little cockpit bubble some 15 ft above the ground, clearly able to see the ATC Control Tower but nothing else on the ground at all. We remained in this ethereal atmosphere for some 10 minutes waiting for the snow shower to pass while the crew reminded (taught!) me that BLSN stood for blowing snow. Eventually the snow stopped and it transpired that we had nearly stopped on the RW Centreline and a much chastened co-pilot requested that we be allowed to taxi to our dispersal. Incident 2. A few years later and I was now a fully fledged bomber captain passing on all my knowledge to my own co-pilot. On this occasion, we had briefed for a low level sortie which involved flying the old ‘Stornoway Link Route’ with a simulated bomb run on Stornoway airfield itself. The weather on this summer’s day was as near perfect as possible with excellent visibility, some fluffy Cu and a little bit of low level turbulence. The sortie proceeded in a completely normal fashion until shortly before the start of the ‘bomb run’ when there a noise that I can only say sounded like an explosion, followed by some strange electrical indications and unintelligible but loud mutterings (expletives) from the AEO. I immediately commenced a low level abort, but with the throttles untouched and started looking about for engine problems. My co-pilot looked at me for words of comfort and explanation; he was out of luck as I had no idea what had happened and my scrambled brain was fully employed flying the aircraft. I did manage to order a ‘Pan’ call and turned the aircraft Incident 3. Yet a few more years later, I was now an A2 QFI and Flt Cdr at BFTS. It was the night flying phase of the course and it was a beautiful night so I attended Met brief in body if not in mind while considering a few issues with the flying programme etc (distractions?!), and missed the bit about the possibility of low lying fog patches later in the night. I took my student off for his night navex and relaxed while he went about his task. Somewhere to the South of York, with visibility only limited by the curvature of the earth, the DI ordered a recall because of the possibility of fog!!. In true QFI fashion (especially as an A2!) I regaled my student about the stupidity of this decision (blah, blah, blah) all the way back to base. True enough, the weather at base appeared to be magnificent and as the last aircraft to return we did a visual join and the subsequent circuit proceeded uneventfully, until just as the student prepared to flare, and without warning, the ground disappeared in shallow fog. I took control and did nothing as the aircraft settled heavier than usual onto the ground. In total silence (again) we travelled down the runway until, a few seconds later, we came out of the fog remarkably somewhere near the centerline and taxied back to dispersal. It was only later when I re-checked the forecast that I remembered all those Met gems about high pressure in late Autumn, cooling below Dew Point temperatures, the possibility of thick shallow fog forming when there was little or no wind, especially in low lying ground near a source of water; RW 22 at Linton-on-Ouse ticked all those boxes on that night. Incident 4. Still more years later, and I was now a C130 Flt Cdr and Training Captain but on this occasion I was let loose in the USA as part of a 5 man crew on a Routine Logistics Flight ( I’d love to tell you more but I would have to shoot you afterwards!). We were planned for an overnight flight from our USAF base with a dawn landing back at base and, according to the weather forecast there was absolutely nothing to worry about. This was quite important because we had a Weapons airCLUES towards Prestwick. There followed an agonising wait of only a few seconds during which my life seemed to flash in front of me, before the AEO stated, in a remarkably calm and reassuring voice, ‘OK we’ve had a Lightning Strike’ followed by a statement about loss of electrical bits and pieces which had no effect on me whatsoever since I could now tell that all the engines were still operating normally and that we were going to survive this little escapade more or less unscathed. The co-pilot pointed out that there were a number of ’interesting’ little holes and marks on the refueling probe as we proceeded with a plethora of FRC actions to cover the electrical problems that we had. On the advice of the AEO and despite being well over normal maximum landing weight, I elected not to burn off fuel and not to stream the tail chute on landing in case it brought on additional electrical problems. Following a textbook approach and landing (well, modesty has never been a strong suit), we climbed out of the aircraft to discover approximately 20 individual lightning strikes all entering in the vicinity of the probe and all with bigger exit ‘wounds’ along the trailing edges of the wings. Oh and when I returned eventually to base feeling like a bit of a hero, I had an interview with a Flt Cdr to explain my departures from the SOP in not burning off fuel and not streaming the chute. 11 airCLUES Safety Officer (WSO) on board who had spent the previous few days stressing the importance of avoiding weather, especially lightning strikes because of the possible effect on our highly sensitive load. Shortly after take off we were passed on to New York Centre and cleared to climb to our cruising altitude of FL220. Halfway up the climb it became apparent that all was not well with the weather as all the civil traffic were requesting deviations from track because of a line of completely unforecast thunder storms stretching about 400 nm North and South of our intended track and from approx FL160 – FL250. With an IFR flight plan we were required to climb above FL180 and with the help of my highly experienced Navigator we were cleared deviation from track as required to avoid weather and then to proceed direct to our Oceanic Entry Point. Following a stressful meander through cloud following the CCWR and with frequent operation of the aircraft de-icing and constant 12 operation of anti-icing, we eventually re-discovered the stars above and the lights of the Atlantic seaboard below. I heaved a big sigh of relief until the Nav then informed me that we would reach our Oceanic Entry Point approximately 2000lbs (those were the days before metric weights) below Red Fuel (the absolute minimum) to cross the pond. Unfortunately, due to the nature of the load, the only diversion airfield was our USAF base of departure so we reversed track to return there. Meanwhile we were informed by ATC that the thunderstorms tops had climbed to FL280. After some thought we elected to dump fuel and requested the ‘wrong’ altitude of FL280 since we were unable to climb to FL290 and retain sufficient fuel plus reserves. Another extremely tense period followed as we tip toed through the clouds until, yet again, the stars came back into view. Unfortunately, at this point, there was a noise like a gun going off as the pilot’s windscreen effectively delaminated. The WSO had an unfortunate accident since he was convinced that we had now been struck by lightning and we were all about to die. I was able to reassure the crew and we descended carrying out FRC drills as we did before a relatively uneventful landing. I can say that this was one of the most stressful flights I have ever been on; 3hrs 30 mins in the logbook and not a single cup of coffee. I can also testify to the absolute brilliance on US ATC when there is weather about and I walked off the aircraft with a beer in one hand and a cigarette in the other despite having given up smoking some years before. I remember little about the rest of the night since the WSO insisted on plying us with copious amounts of beer for ‘saving his life’ and I didn’t have the heart to tell him that it was down to a lot of luck as well as good crew co-operation. As a result of the above incidents and a lot of other experiences along the way, I have learnt to give the weather total respect and I am much more careful now than I was in my younger years. Which brings me to those well worn Flight Safety idioms which hold as true today as they always have and they are Never Assume, Check and Always expect the Unexpected. airCLUES Spry Says: I too am of the old and bold school of aviators, but this has largely been down to having Lady Luck on my side for the large part of my frivolous youth. You see, it is only the gift of hindsight and the increased awareness of risk that comes with advancing toward my dotage, that has highlighted how much of my early aviation career I ‘winged’. One of the things I oft paid lip service to were those clever johnnies in the Met Office. Cu this; Cb that; advection fog, katabatic drainage; it was all a bit to technical and irrelevant to the young Spry. However, as this article rightly highlights it is not until the proverbial hits the fan, that you realise the full potential of the weather to ruin your day. It would be trite of me to say, “pay attention to the met brief”, or, “make sure you understand the effects of extreme weather” for we are all professional aviators and this is our bread and butter. What I would say is never, like myself of old, let Lady Luck be your mistress and where possible plan for the unexpected; as the one predictable thing about the weather is its unpredictability. 13 airCLUES I learnt about arctic flying from that… ‘It’ll be fine… that’s how we always did it years ago…’ February 2010… It’s the Puma Force’s first deployment to Norway for winter training in 3 years. During the European transit en-route to Bardufoss, Norway, for Exercise CLOCKWORK 10, our 3-ship Puma helicopter formation had planned a 3-day route stopping in Aalborg, Denmark and Trondheim, Norway before reaching our destination on the third day. However, in true Support Helicopter fashion, we were constantly hampered by bad weather… pretty much the norm for Europe in February! Due to the bad weather, the formation never actually stayed or refuelled anywhere that was originally planned, instead over-nighting at Groningen, Holland… Odense, Denmark and then Molde, Norway. Having lost a day-anda-half in Denmark, there was also the perception within the crews that we had to try our utmost to get to Norway in order to commence training, as the Puma Force had very limited time to get many of its personnel qualified in arctic techniques, and a limited number of days on the Exercise. This was pretty much a self-induced pressure as the detachment commander and the training officer were both part of the transit party. In hindsight, a call to the Duty Flight Commander (DFC) at Benson or indeed the Squadron Boss would have been the better option as they would definitely have given us advice and reassured us that these ‘pressures’ were not there! Having previously refuelled with F34 fuel (with icing inhibitor) and F35 fuel (without icing inhibitor) through the low-countries we had yet to experience sub-zero temperatures on our transit. However on a clear-weather day in Norway, the decision was made for a straight-line transit between Kristiansund and Floro rather than a lower-level coastal route, as it saved approx 2-3 hrs and another refuel stop. This route would have kept us within the Outside Air Temperature (OAT) limits laid down in the Puma Release to Service which states that flight without icing inhibitor in the fuel is not permitted below 0°C. We refuelled the aircraft with F35 (this was our first mistake) and planned our sortie. Terrain meant that a high-level (above Flight Level 70, OAT -15 deg C) transit was needed and all 3 crews (consisting of 2 pilot instructors, 3 training captains, one pilot standards officer (STANO), one crewman instructor, one crewman trainer and one crewman STANO) agreed it as the best course of action. This was our second and potentially most critical mistake. By choosing this course we were disregarding the Release-to-Service (RTS) limits with respect to the use of F35 (ie fuel without icing inhibitor (FSII)), which is not to be used below 0˚C OAT). Everyone was working on the ‘old wives tail’ that as long as there was some FSII in the tanks from the previous fill, then everything would be fine. We further compounded our earlier errors when we were ordered, 14 under Radar Control, by ATC to climb further still into even colder air at FL100 which we complied with, without question, and continued to fly there for 15 minutes with an OAT of approx -21˚ C. The formation then began a descent for the approach to Floro and during this descent the lead aircraft experienced a momentary drop of engine performance (Ng) on the No 1 engine. The drop lasted less than one second and fortunately for us, recovered to normal readings with no further fluctuations. All the aircraft then landed at Floro approx 20 mins later without further incident, where the crew concerned heaved a sigh of relief and then refuelled with standard F34 fuel with FSII. Although there is no way of knowing what actually happened to the engine that day, we came to the conclusion that the event may have been caused by the early signs of fuel icing. The possibility is that the lack of FSII in the tanks caused residual water within the fuel to freeze and under the pressure change in the descent the ice formed was dislodged, travelled through the system and thus caused the engine speed to drop. The Release to Service limits are based on the temperature exposure the fuel has prior to entering the engine and in a Puma the fuel pipe routing unintentionally ensures that the fuel is cooled to the ambient OAT, in this case well below the 0 ˚C specified. We disregarded clearly specified limits in our haste to arrive in good time and in so doing we could have seriously damaged our chances of arriving at all. OC CLOCKWORK’s Comments The crews involved in this non-incident were all well practiced, current and qualified, had flown for several hours and indeed days prior to what at first sight seems a very minor event; a momentary drop in engine performance. Where the crews have been entirely proactive, is in their recognition of the potential seriousness of their lapse of judgement taking unprotected fuel and their post-flight analysis of the events. It is seemingly minor events that can trigger a sequence which can lead to a serious incident. In this case the minor event has lead to a learning exercise for current arctic operators and a dispelling of certain ‘myths and legends’ about the way we used to do business. A DFSOR was raised to ensure that the lessons that this deploying crew learned will not be lost and I’m really pleased that Air Clues is back to ensure that there is a vehicle to pass this information on to a wider audience. A double engine flame-out over mountains, in the winter, in Norway, at -15 deg C, is not the place to remember the reason for using fuel with FSII; these crews were probably lucky (although we will never really know), but most importantly are to be commended for their honesty. Spry Says: I fully concur with OC CLOCKWORK’s comments, the crew of this aircraft are to be fully commended for their professional and honest analysis and subsequent reporting of what appears to be a ‘non-event’. The inculcation of a questioning culture, where we review our actions and errors is fundamental to ensuring that we not only report errors in the first place, but also that we are able to learn valuable lessons about preventing their reoccurrence as well. The key to understanding error is not to glibly construct an obvious error chain, that is forged in the fires of hindsight, rather we need to put ourselves in the position of this crew as they made each decision and think, “why did they take this particular course of action?” As an example, when the crews decided to make a high level transit without FSII in the tanks, we can all look back and say that was a risky decision, but why did they take it? The fact that so many were involved in the decision making process and approved the final decision, points toward a high degree of ‘risky shift’; where the degree of risk that the group is willing to take is significantly higher than individual members would take on their own. So what? What factors actually convinced that group that this was a good call, despite their years of aviation experience? Pressure, over-confidence, unrealistic risk reduction? Ultimately, I leave the analysis to you, for it is fundamental that you question the decisions and glean the ‘whys and wherefores’ of error. From there you can consider how often you have been in a similar situation and how you would deal with it in the future without inducing unnecessary risk. 15 airCLUES engineering flight safety in the arctic circle by Flt Lt Dave Mirfin, JEngO 28 Sqn B Flt The Me Fce detachment to Ex CLOCKWORK was conducted at RNoAF Bardufoss over a 5 week period in Feb/Mar 10. I was fortunate to be the EngO for the Me detachment and my team of engineers remained for the whole period in support of 2 Mk 3A ac and an initial deployment of 28 Sqn aircrew, followed by 78 Sqn aircrew roulement at the mid point of the detachment. The engineers worked a two-shift system to provide a 24/7 commitment to operating the 2 ac. The principles of engineering and Flight Safety apply irrespective of the environment, but the challenges presented by operating inside the Arctic Circle, where -25 deg C temperatures and high winds were routine, dictates more stringent attention to personal preparation and maintenance procedures. Even though all the engineers had completed a Cold Weather Survival Course to prepare for the conditions, which primarily concentrates on operating in the field, it was imperative that the affects of the cold and the necessity to wear protective equipment when maintaining ac were fully understood by everyone. In particular, simple measures such as monitoring the time exposed to the elements and wearing gloves proved to be essential because two of the major risks were that personnel would stay outside too long to get the job done and freezing metallic surfaces are a serious hazard to unprotected skin. 16 Consequently, additional time had to be factored in to the maintenance estimates to the aircrew in order to allow for the impacts of shorter working periods and more cumbersome PPE, irrespective of conducting rectification maintenance or routine tasks such as Flight Servicing. Similarly, whilst it was a personal responsibility to monitor your own reaction to the cold, these testing conditions naturally placed heightened responsibility on the command chain to assure the safety and welfare of everyone. Alongside personal preparation, there is also an additional commitment to prepare the ac for operating in such an environment. The Extreme Cold Weather Environment Procedures are laid down in the Technical Publications and detail additional maintenance to be carried out on the ac. Before the ac can commence flying, it is imperative that these extra procedures are fully captured in the Aircraft Document Set and understood by all personnel so that the ac are maintained correctly for the operating conditions. Not only does this confirm that the ac is serviceable for the demands of Arctic flying, this preparation is undoubtedly a major contributor to flight safety. Whilst it is normal practice to protect the ac overnight using the blanks and designated covers for the nose, windscreen, main rotor blades and tail rotor blades, preparation, understanding the environment and adhering to procedures materialised in response to an incident experienced with one of the ac. On returning from a sortie, a whining noise was heard on the ac and reported by one of the engineers stood close by. The aircrew were unable to hear the noise, so the alertness of the engineer was the starting point in the successful recovery of this ac. Following investigation, it was established that ‘Engine 2’ was the source of the noise and the resulting course of action was to change the engine. With limited options for towing the ac inside a hangar, the engineers erected a temporary shelter over the ac and commenced the engine change outside. Employing a vehicle-mounted crane to remove the old engine and install the new one, the engine change was completed in a matter of hours in conditions that worsened as the day progressed. Notably, following a successful air test the following morning, the ac was quickly returned to the flying programme. This ac recovery was impressive to witness and the whole chain of events is testimony to the vigilance, initiative, determination and ‘can-do safely’ attitude of those involved in their contribution to Flight Safety. Overall, Ex CLOCKWORK was a success for the Me Fce and it can be considered a true reflection of the engineers’ professionalism and total regard for Flight Safety that contributed to this success. airCLUES additional operating procedures were instigated to ensure that the blanks and covers would be fitted during any extended periods of non-flying throughout the day. By protecting the ac this way, especially during periods of heavy snow, we were not only reducing the risk of snow and ice build up, but were enabling the ac to be made flight ready in a relatively short time when required. It is worth commenting at this point that proactive aircrew assistance in this labour intensive task certainly resulted in the process becoming very slick. On occasions, the colder overnight temperatures had frozen certain actuator-driven components on the engines. The recovery procedure in this instance was to apply warm air through the engine intake using a dieselpowered GSE heater and hoses to eventually thaw the frozen component. Another locally instigated procedure for preparing the ac first thing in the morning was to affix a series of the heater hoses in to the engine intakes and in to the cabin area. Besides removing any ice build-up in the engine compartments, this procedure also slightly warmed inside the ac without incurring any problems with condensation. These preventative measures not only reduced the chance of experiencing a fault on start and delaying the sortie, but further minimised the risk to Flight Safety from environmental factors. The culmination of all the aforementioned personal 17 airCLUES I learnt about pushing the limits ...from that “Go down, slow down, turn round, land on” is the standard Support Helicopter (SH) poor weather brief. In terms of the Puma, this comes partly from reluctance, in the winter months, to carry out a low level abort into cloud due to a lack of icing clearance, and not normally having sufficient fuel for an instrument recovery. The SH force has a reputation for a ‘can-do’ spirit and, given the flexibility of helicopter operations, we very often find ourselves grovelling around at low level in poor weather in order to reach troops (that sadly do not operate exclusively at airfields). The result of this is that we can become desensitised to how bad the picture outside the cockpit actually is; thinking, “I’ve seen this before, it’ll be fine once we get round the next corner”. I recently discovered what happens after you go down, slow down, loose the turn round option and become forced to land on in a remote location without communications with home base. I was part of a small detachment of Puma aircrew taking part in an exercise involving both fixed wing and rotary aircraft and troops. We had spent a few days at a Main Operating Base (MOB) in Yorkshire not greatly involved in the Exercise tasking, instead trying to achieve our own training. We then deployed with 2 Pumas to set up a Forward Operating Base (FOB) at RAF Kinloss with enough troops to form a reaction force and wait for 18 further tasking. No tasking came and we were unable to carry out any of our own training for the first few days due to poor weather. To add to this 2 pilots and the Mobile Meteorological Unit (MMU) Officer were struck down by diarrhoea and vomiting. On 25 March 2010 the weather was below night flying limits and the exercise scenario called for 2 pilots to be put ‘on the run’ with some of the troops to simulate a downed aircraft, enabling the Exercise Headquarters to practise a personnel recovery situation. Just prior to this the Squadron Survive, Evade, Resist, Extract Instructor had given a brief that covered the aspects of survival in the Scottish Highlands, using “Protection, Location, Water, Food” as a framework. After helping the chosen pilots gather their kit and having a bit of a laugh at their faces as the minibus door closed and the rain started to be blown sideways, we watched a film and then returned to the accommodation. We went to bed just after midnight to maintain the expected night tasking routine. I travelled into the FOB shortly after lunch and it was decided that we would carry out our own training that afternoon and fly a low-level tactical formation sortie. We received a weather brief via telephone from the Kinloss Met Office as the MMU Officer was sick in quarters. The forecast indicated potentially poor weather conditions in the area of operation with cloudbases as low as 700’-800’ in parts with showers reducing visibility. The sortie was therefore planned utilising the low valleys to Autlbea Helicopter Landing Site (HLS) on the west coast of Scotland where we had forward deployed a Tactical Supply Wing (TSW) team to set up a Forward Arming and Refuelling Point (FARP). The planned route would take us from Kinloss to 2 HLSs in Inverness, southwest through the Great Glen before heading west towards the coast northeast of Skye to Applecross HLS and then on to Aultbea HLS for a refuel. We would then return to Kinloss by either reversing the route or, if weather permitted, following an easterly route via Cromarty. The sortie was briefed and we walked for the aircraft slightly later than the original plan, but not rushed as the sortie was not time critical. We decided to take the reaction force troops as passengers so that if exercise tasking emerged they would be with us and the helicopter experience would benefit them and provide us with practise of flying a heavier aircraft. THE SORTIE along the valley in an attempt to reach a point where the bowser could drive to us however the visibility reduced to 100m and we were forced to land with approx 60kg of fuel per group - still above min landing allowance. The aircraft was shut down, rotors were socked and locked and the aircraft was picketed to the ground to prevent damage from strong and increasing wind. POST LANDING We then found ourselves in a survival situation and as a crew used the Protection, Location, Water, Food survival principles. All crew and pax remained inside the aircraft for shelter from the heavy drizzle and rain and winds in excess of 25kts that peaked at approx 35-40kts. One SARBE was activated from a crew LCJ and the aircraft radio used to transmit on 243.0 and 121.5 and various airways frequencies in the area overhead with no response. In addition, an extra radio, fitted only for the exercise, was used to try transmitting on 406Mhz, again with no response. The passengers sent messages on their survival radios again with no response. One of these radios was set to 121.5 to allow for a listening watch without using aircraft battery power. There was no mobile phone coverage. Approximately 45 minutes before darkness airCLUES I was the handling pilot and captain of the Lead aircraft. The aircraft suffered 2 failed engine start attempts due to low battery voltage but successfully started after a helistart kit was connected. Shortly after we started, the No2 aircraft shutdown and informed us they had a failed alternator; we therefore continued as a singleton as per the loser plan. Up until the point we lifted from Applecross HLS, the sortie had run as planned with better than expected weather, in fact the poor weather that had been forecast was not observed. We had an extra 20 mins of fuel over and above the minimum required to complete the planned route to the FARP at Aultbea (a rare occurrence in the Puma). The weather being 10K+ visibility, 2000’+ cloudbase, the Non-Handling Pilot (NHP) suggested we deviate from our planned track to identify a WWII crash site, near Torridon, that had been discussed in previous planning back at Kinloss. This would add approx 10nm requiring 5 mins extra fuel – in reality it would have required approx 9 mins extra fuel but still within the extra fuel we had. I initially thought perhaps we should continue with the plan but taking into consideration the extra fuel and the weather, which was suitable, I changed my mind and agreed to the diversion as it would be both good training value and interesting to see. The transit was uneventful until we reached the area of interest and found the peak to be in cloud. We did not attempt to ID the site and continued to regain track at the refuel site at Aultbea HLS. Due to an avoid around Eilean Subhainn we routed around another, northwesterly, valley that would steer us direct toward Aultbea. We have since identified a lower ground route around the avoid however, without site of the map and given the high level of service throughout the sortie, I accepted the route given by the NHP. At this point the weather was 5K+ visibility, 2000’ cloudbase. However, very soon after we entered the valley the weather deteriorated very quickly. Within a couple of minutes the weather had closed in both front and back and we were reduced to a hover taxy. During the weather deterioration we reached a point where, due to increased fuel burn caused by reduced speed, the fuel required to retrace our steps out of the valley was not sufficient to reach Aultbea and we were committed to the chosen route. Given the very low speed and high fuel burn, we were soon unable to reach Aultbea. We elected to continue 19 airCLUES 2 of the passengers took a mobile phone and a survival radio as far up the hillside as could be seen through the weather but were unable to establish communication with any agency. With light fading we elected to stay with the aircraft for the night and cosider a move towards the nearest habitation at first light. Between the crew and passengers we had survival equipment including cold weather gear, sleeping bags, rations and water for 24 hours. Shortly before darkness we heard a Coastguard helicopter transmitting on 121.5 and established weak communication. They were unable to get to our location due to the weather, however established that we were safe and had sufficient equipment and rations for the night and informed us that they would try again in the morning. Relieved that we had been located, the crew and pax ate some rations and bedded down inside the aircraft cabin for the night. At approx 0230 I was awake checking for signs of frost or ice outside to gauge the outside air temperature, when I saw some searchlights and a paralume in the valley. I woke everyone up and took the day/night flare and miniflares that had been prepared outside to use as signals if required. My head torch was enough for the 3 members of the RAF Leuchars MRT to find our location. They gave us more rations, blizzard tubes and set up camp next to the aircraft. In addition, they used a satellite phone to inform the Aeronautical Rescue Co-ordination Centre (ARCC) that we were safe and well and updated the Detachment Commander on the condition of the aircraft with respect to socks/locks, picketing, fuel state and whether the engines had flamed out or not. We were told that a Chinook was tasked to bring a replacement crew and fuel the following day so returned to the aircraft to sleep. RECOVERY In the morning we woke up, packed up all kit, replaced the seats in the aircraft cabin, ate some breakfast rations and serviced the aircraft in preparation for the recovery crew. We all walked with the MRT 200m to where the terrain descended rapidly towards the coast and the FARP at Aultbea HLS – the area we had been unable to see the previous day. Around lunchtime a Chinook arrived with replacement crew and engineers to refuel and recover the aircraft. We helped the crew to set up the refuel equipment and the aircraft was refuelled from the Chinook. My crew, plus the pax, were recovered to Kinloss by Chinook and the aircraft followed shortly after. HINDSIGHT With hindsight the decision to deviate from track was illconceived. Although the weather and fuel allowed this 20 detour, the lack of flight following and SAR cover as detailed below makes subsequent searches difficult. At the point where we found the area of interest to be in cloud we should have retraced our steps back to the coastal route. The route chosen on the 1:250,000 scale map did not fully represent the terrain we were attempting to route through and the river valley that appeared to plateau before rapidly descending toward the coast did in fact continue to increase in altitude before the descent we were eventually unable to reach. All of this, our lack of experience in this location and a rapid reduction in the weather conditions caught us out, resulting in an unplanned landing in a mountainous environment off planned track. HOW WILL THEY FIND ME? SARSAT no longer monitors the SARBE transmissions and 406Mhz capable replacements are still long overdue, in addition the recent removal of fixed wing SAR aircraft on standby capable of searching at height made locating our off-track position difficult. If you have no radio contact with an ATC agency before you are forced to land and no mobile phone coverage after you land then locating your position will rely heavily on a search of your planned route. Clearly, if you were not on the planned route, either by choice or forced by weather, the search will be more difficult. If operating within a formation you have a greater freedom of routing as flight following is provided by the other aircraft. ‘Spot-nav’ is a recognised method of training but hindsight has reminded me that deviating from planned track as a singleton in a mountainous environment without the location aids discussed above should be carefully considered, if not avoided all together. If you wish to test the ‘spot-nav’ of a crew member then simply leave your intentions on a separate map with the authoriser. SURVIVAL KIT The crew had survival go-bags with warm kit for a night but with experience of the blizzard tubes provided by the MRT and how little space they require for storage, I now carry one in my ‘go-bag’. I have also suggested that consideration should be given to the Puma Fce adding these to the role fit of the aircraft. In addition, 24 hour ration packs and cyalumes could be carried in a ‘go-bag’ and/or stored in the aircraft with little weight and space penalty and neither expire in short timescales. We were confident that we could walk to habitation in daylight and therefore were confident we would be located within 24 hours. I know from experience of survival exercises that we can generally survive 24 hours without food fairly easily but the rations, especially hot drinks, kept our spirits up. The picketing kit is not always carried in the aircraft but was invaluable in preventing damage to the aircraft. The Puma has a high centre of gravity and a narrow undercarriage meaning that high winds present a risk of the aircraft being blown over. This risk is increased at low fuel states. I will certainly consider taking a picketing kit on tasks into more remote areas in the future. embarrassing, account of their incident. So the crew (and I) stand to be judged and acknowledge that things would certainly be different next time – our embarrassment is worth it if you are reading this article and thinking how you would not make the same mistake. In this case, the crew sought to make things more demanding for their training benefit, but without thinking through the consequences all the way to the finish. With no IFR options, the withdrawal of Nimrod SAR cover, the lack of 406 beacons and operating in an unfamiliar area with changeable weather, this was an unnecessary increase in risk. However, mistakes and set-backs will always occur in some form – the challenge for supervisors is how we react to them. Here, from the point of landing the actions of the crew were excellent and probably saved a notoriously ‘top heavy’ Puma from being blown over that night; nothing was hurt beyond personal pride. I commend the captain for his approach to the aftermath of this incident, including the time taken to write this article; it is more valuable to my flight safety effort that any stand-up interview, or written warning could ever be. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Unfortunately, as the word suggests, lessons identified tend to come after the event and are very often glaringly obvious. This incident has highlighted mistakes and consequences that were not fully considered before actions were carried out. Had we asked the “What if?” question with respect to the points raised above we would probably have made different choices. When I say ‘we’, ultimately I mean ‘I’, as the captain. My decision not only lead to a full scale search and rescue operation, but caused great distress to my colleagues and chain of command who spent 2 long hours believing the search was for wreckage. My only saving grace is that after finding myself in that final scenario I stuck to the last part of the “Go down, slow down, turn round, land on” motto. It would have been very easy to press on in desperation below fuel minima, causing the engines to flame-out, potentially crashing and killing 8 people. Luckily I can finish with the following: Did anyone get hurt? No. Was the aircraft damaged? No. Did we “learn about flying from that”? Yes. SQUADRON COMMANDER’S COMMENTS In Edition 1 of the re-launched Airclues, a Puma pilot described the ‘Airclues Test’ – the concept that you may be asked to write to Airclues describing your actions one day and, if this would be an embarrassment, then it is probably not worth doing. I applied the Airclues Test to this particular crew and the result is an open and honest, if slightly airCLUES ASK THE “WHAT IF?” 21 airCLUES children, elves and fairy tales Flt Lt Jon Dunn, SFSO, RAF Linton-on-Ouse takes a alternative look at risk assessment in military aviation. Mentioning risk assessment in the title would lose me 90% of the potential readership so bear with me; this story has drama and excitement and might save somebody’s life and prevent you going to jail. The problem with mentioning risk assessment is that it conjures up sentiments like, “this is ‘elf and safety gone mad” and the gem, “we’ve been doin’ it like this for years without any accidents”. More importantly the fact is that you’ve been doing risk assessments for years and you don’t even notice that you are doing them. Every time you cross the road you are, without thinking, carrying out a risk assessment. How busy is the road? Do I really need to cross the road? Is there a pedestrian crossing/traffic lights/footbridge? Can I remember the Green Cross Code etc? The fact that in most cases the risk associated with crossing the road can be effectively mitigated by these sorts of defences doesn’t make crossing the road an inherently safe activity - just ask the 3000, or so people who get run over every year! Neither does it make it a sensible option to extrapolate our assessment of risk to playing volleyball in the middle of the M25 at rush hour; although given the average traffic speed on the M25 it probably wouldn’t be a high risk venture. By the jolly clever process of “natural selection” the gene pool is relatively free from individuals who are incapable of making appropriate risk assessments. Sadly in aviation terms we have not evolved a robust method of assessing aviation risks. Birds, on the other hand, probably have and yet you still see them making errors and having accidents when confronted by something relatively new like windows, power lines and aircraft. Bear in mind that a bird strike for us is usually a relatively minor incident. From the bird’s perspective it’s a fairly major accident! Birds have also failed to organize themselves into Air Forces and convene Coroner’s Courts - but more on those later. Children play. Fact. Children sometimes get injured playing. Fact. Children very occasionally die playing. Sadly, this is also a fact. Do we stop children from playing? 22 No, of course we don’t. To do so would be absurd, or in RAF speak, “risk averse”. Do we attempt to mitigate the risks? Yes. We supervise them. We set limits and boundaries. We ensure that their activities are appropriate for their level of development. We teach them to make appropriate choices and decisions for themselves. So when last weekend my three children were playing in the park within 20 meters of my wife and I, things were going well. When my eldest son, Freddie, 7, offered to give my daughter, Olympia, 2, a piggy back I was unconcerned as he had done it before. I had explained the dangers of dropping her and he was a strong and sensible boy. I therefore assessed the residual risk to be minimal. Sadly for the Dunn family Freddie had not been taught about or thought through the potential pitfalls of his sister sliding down his back and more importantly the risk associated with his recovery action. So when she did slide down he bent forward and lifted her up his back. The result was that she flew over his head and landed forehead first on the grass flipping over and flexing her neck backwards to a frankly alarming degree. Screaming would have been preferable to what actually happened. My wife and I were quickly confronted with an unconscious two year old who was now suffering a seizure. Needless to say an ambulance was called and shortly thereafter our nice day out terminated in A&E. So was our risk assessment appropriate? With 20:20 hindsight, probably not! This is the point! Your activity will be assessed with the benefit of hindsight. The Coroner will have the benefit of looking back on the planning for your flying activity knowing that it ends in a fatal accident. If you approach your risk assessment from the point of view that your proposed activity is inherently safe then you will inevitably reach the conclusion that the risk assessment process is pointless, a waste of time and only likely to be filed in the bin anyway. In most cases I’m glad to say you’ll be right, but at least you have gone to the effort of thinking through what the potential risks are. Here lies another little pitfall. By the nature of the people who are attracted services industry and the result was the Recession. I’m not saying that I am in no way affected by all of the preconceptions that I have discussed thus far. I vividly remember climbing up the ladder to my Tornado F3 in a HAS at RAF Leeming and being roundly chastised by WO Eng on XI(F) Sqn for not wearing my flying helmet whilst doing so. “’elf and safety gone mad” surely? “I’m about to strap myself heroically to a piece of exploding furniture and swoop majestically down valleys at 600 mph; don’t bother me with your petty, earth bound inconveniences, I am a military aviator and above all of this” I thought. What I had failed to realise was that the two are entirely separate activities only linked in my mind by the fact that it was me carrying them out. To put it another way; the fact that the activity you are about to carry out might carry an incredibly high risk, which might be outside your control, should not prevent you from attempting to mitigate those risks which are within your control. Or more simply your task of flying £50,000,000 worth of state of the art military hard wear will not protect you from being hit by the fuel tanker during your short walk to crew in to it. On an organisational level the fact that we are at war in Afghanistan should not make us think that it’s OK to risk lives in the UK. I hope this article has put risk assessment into some sort of context for you. If you are tasked with carrying out a risk assessment then how to go about it is all there for you in JSP 551 Vol 3; another worthy candidate for the Man Booker Prize. Oh, my daughter, Olympia….. she’s fine. Her neck wasn’t broken. She hadn’t fractured her skull. She didn’t have a brain haemorrhage and no lasting damage thank goodness. Freddie has learnt about piggy backs (which are now prohibited in the Dunn household). I’ve learnt about risk assessment and the Child Protection authorities haven’t come round to discuss our risk mitigation measures. The elf? Never seen ‘im. airCLUES to military aviation we are more often than not life’s risk takers. People don’t sign up to potentially going to war in a fast jet thinking that they aren’t going to survive. We enhance this by training them to believe that they are the best trained, best equipped and pound for pound, person for person the most capable Air Force in the world. I would not wish to undermine all this great esprit de corps building stuff, but it doesn’t set us up well for realistically assessing the risk inherent in our activities. The average mid twenties military pilot firmly believes that he/she is immortal; they won’t admit it, mostly because they are intelligent enough to objectively analyse when asked but the majority of them are firmly in denial. The motor insurance industry knows how skewed the perception of risk held by a mid twenties male is and sets premiums appropriately. Fortunately the vast majority of these young aviators don’t die due to their skewed perception of risk. More disappointingly, this lack of threat in their experience often leaves them with the enhanced perception that it will always happen to the “other guy”. Cue the banter of, “elf and safety gone mad!” and “We’ve done it like this for years and never had an accident”. I have to fight the urge to add “Yet” for them. I agree that if you start from the mind set of “our activity is inherently safe” then risk assessments are garbage and a waste of time. However, if you have gone through the motions of a risk assessment and completed it from this point of view then remember that the Coroner will assess you from the view point of knowing the outcome. He or she is unlikely to be swayed by your argument that “it was very unlikely that one of our aircraft would crash and kill the two crew and three civilians” if that is what actually happened. If you have carried out a risk assessment and filed it and that assessment was reasonably thorough and if a similarly experienced and competent person would come to similar conclusions based on the evidence that was available to you at the time then the coroner is very likely to agree with you and you will be part of a learning process. If that is not the case then you may quickly find yourself on the wrong end of a gross negligence or manslaughter charge. So yes, to a certain extent a risk assessment is a rearcovering exercise. This flawed methodology was brought to light by Charles Haddon-Cave QC in “The Nimrod Review”, but at 500+ pages I suspect that the majority of the potential readership was whittled down to all but the most determined, or the insomniacs. Suggesting that we aren’t very good at assessing risk would mark you out as somebody who was “risk averse”, a cardinal sin. However, by being “risk aware” from the viewpoint that our business is inherently safe; is not risk management, it’s gambling. The last group of “professional” risk managers who went about their activity in this manner worked in the financial 23 airCLUES There’s no Landings like Snow Landings… Lessons learned from the Merlin Force’s recent experience of landing in arctic conditions in the midst of an Oxfordshire winter. Landing a helicopter is like parking your car. The more practice you get the better you are at it. Ultimately though, when you have found a space, in order to know what steering, brake and accelerator inputs to make, you need to reference your car’s position to the open space or the cars between which you intend to park. References are also the secret to hovering and landing a helicopter. In normal UK conditions this is relatively easy, but when these references become obscured by the environment, landing without specific training becomes a serious flight safety concern. The weather last winter was changeable, giving sudden, often heavy snow showers. With it came poor visibility due to low cloud bases caused by the cooler snowy surfaces, similar conditions to those found in the Arctic. Being able to delineate between white cloud and snowcovered surfaces becomes more difficult, especially as the visibility deteriorates. The disorientation caused by this phenomenon 24 manifested itself as a serious flight safety concern at RAF Benson. For several years, the Puma, Merlin, Chinook and Commando Helicopter Forces have sent detachments to RNAF Bardufoss, Norway inside the Arctic circle to train in just these conditions, and just as well; landing an aircraft in snow is one of the most testing techniques which Support Helicopter (SH) aircrew are taught, and here’s why. As the helicopter gets near the ground and slows, its downwash (a 70kt wind, keeping the aircraft airborne) hits the surface, and creates an enormous blowing cloud of snow. “White-out” ensues, creating a very disorientating experience and without reference to anything on the ground, landing is extremely hazardous. A similar situation results when operating in the desert, and it’s often referred to as a limited visibility landing. So the art is to win the battle, helicopter vs. snow. By picking a marker on the ground (something sticking out of the snow), the aircraft is manoeuvred from transit to the ground reducing speed and height to zero, at the same time, before the snow cloud has an opportunity to obscure the reference. Easy, provided that you bear a few things in mind. Firstly, size loses its context in the snow. Picking a marker in snow conditions is a challenge itself. It needs to be something chunky enough to stand out but small enough to get under the rotor disc, bearing in mind, the blade tips are spinning at nearly 400mph! The other major considerations are the thickness of the snow and what is under it. Often in deep snow the aircraft wheels will never actually reach the ground and it will sit on the snow after landing on its belly. But you just don’t know. In the battle, helicopter vs. snow, the speed and height must be zero at touchdown, or a sub-snow level boulder that you had not seen might damage the aircraft undercarriage or belly skin. There are many different considerations that go into perfecting this technique and with practice it becomes an essential skill for SH squadrons to maintain. This decision wasn’t taken lightly but was one that would be repeated on flight safety grounds if, and when, these conditions return again this year. Spry Says: Whilst on the subject of low visibility landings I thought it may be of interest to provide you all with an update on the latest technological solutions to the problem. As such I have consulted the boffins at Dstl to see what they are working on; so here comes the science bit ….. “Accidents due to brown/white-out can be broadly divided in to two causal areas; loss of situational awareness and unseen landing site (LS) obstacles. With dust-penetrating sensors, which can identify LS hazards, still some way off, Dstl have been working on the situational awareness problem. Dstl scientists and engineers initially carried out a rapid technology assessment of several proposed solutions, which resulted in a Ferranti Technologies Limited conformal symbology solution being taken forward to simulator and flying trials. The system utilises an Advanced Signal Display Computer, with feeds from a high grade EGI, millimetric wave RADALT and aircraft RADALT to generate symbology. The symbology is presented on a helmet mounted display, and provides the crew with a virtual 3D representation of the LS that stays fixed to the earth as the pilot flies his approach. The LS symbology provides the pilot with enough cues to fly visually, even when the outside world is completely obscured by dust or snow. The system can be used with helmet mounted day HUD for daytime operation, with the symbology fed through current night vision goggles to provide a night time capability. Currently LVL is undergoing de-risking activities prior to hopefully achieving UOR status in early ’11.” airCLUES Some may argue that this type of approach in these times of desert warfare is the mainstay of helicopter aircrew skill sets, with limited visibility landings being flown daily in Afghanistan, and other environmental training deployments. The techniques are similar, but not the same. The smooth monochromatic nature of snow cannot be understated, and consequently the importance of a predetermined, crew-agreed marker is paramount before the start of an approach. With dust, however, the undulations and texture of the ground allow the crew to modify their marker late in the manoeuvre, making it a more flexible approach profile, even when in the heaviest “brown-out” conditions. So landing a helicopter in Arctic conditions is much more involved than a normal hover landing, which is practiced and taught daily, and subtly different to landing in the dust. To be competent to deal with Arctic conditions and safely land a helicopter in the snow, involves a specific qualification and training of its own as a result. The decision was made at RAF Benson, during the heavy snow conditions earlier this year, that only Arctic qualified aircrew would cascade training to those without snow experience rather than falling back on the fleets’ unquestionably vast “limited visibility” operational experience. The Merlin Force had suffered a period of serviceability issues around this time with many crews were on the edge of currency. There was therefore a risk balance to be contested, between the continuation of routine currency training and the difficult decision to qualify crews in the difficult conditions. With the exception of operations and their kinetic threat, approaches into limited visibility landings, especially snow are dangerous, especially without training and practice. Advantage was taken to train more crews and share this Arctic experience, although it was a hindrance to normal training and tasking. 25 airCLUES WINTEROPERATIONS By Flight Sergeant Paul Buttolph, ATC, RAF Benson - an ATC perspective Well, the summer is drawing to a close and it’s time to think about Op Blacktop again. As a rotary unit we don’t need to clear the runway which is a bit of a bonus as we come under the classification of a “Training Unit” and, therefore, don’t have the budget, or equipment for runway clearance. Our Blacktop ops therefore revolve around the dispersal and hangars. We have a 3 Priority system: Priority 1 clears the areas required for the Thames Valley Air Ambulance, the Chiltern Air Support Unit (Thames Valley Police helicopter) and an emergency response route for the Fire Section to reach the technical and domestic sites. These are areas that must be kept clear at all times to ensure emergency services can respond. Priority 2 clears a limited numbers of spots for both the Puma and Merlin Forces and a route from the hangar to the spot. The Duty Controller liaises with Sqns to plan which end of each hangar is to be cleared. This allows for very limited flying capability, ensuring that high priority sorties can take place. Priority 3 covers the rest of the dispersal, taxiways and engineering areas. When the snow hit us last year we were already well into the Blacktop season and were coping well with keeping Priority 1 and 2 clear of frost and ice. Our only concerns at the time were that Clearway isn’t a great deicer and only works effectively for a short period; and we had a limited supply of it. This meant that when a severe frost was forecast the MT Blacktop team would have to monitor the surfaces throughout the night and judge the right moment to begin laying. Unfortunately you can’t stop snow falling in the same way that you can prevent ice forming, you have to wait for it to become deep enough to plough and hope that it stops snowing long enough to clear. This was the major problem when the snow did come; it didn’t stop. We didn’t have the manpower, equipment, or budget to clear snow over the 26 area required on a continuous basis. Despite their best efforts MT were hard pressed to keep Priority 1 clear. By the time the snow stopped and the skies cleared we were running short of Clearway and other units were “borrowing” from us. MT did a sterling job on the dispersal, keeping Priority 1 and 2 clear. The sqns were obviously itching to fly and there seemed to be a continuous stream of requests for snowploughs to clear various parts of the dispersal and hangar ends, most of which were politely refused and the callers referred to the Blacktop Op Order. As soon as possible more of the dispersal was cleared, enabling flying to increase. Some of the brave aircrew used the opportunity to practice their snow landings, which led to its own problems – what do you use as a landing reference when the whole area is covered in snow? How about the PAPIs? Just remember that if your downwash causes them to become mis-aligned, they won’t be available when you need them to check your approach to the runway. It also led to some amusement when 2 aircraft recovered to the airfield and had to hold for 10 minutes over the grass while the engineers towed aircraft back into the hangar, because they had filled all of the available spots. So, what did we learn from last year? We have a Priority system which aims to keep the most important areas clear. We have very limited resources for snow clearing. This means that our ability to maintain clear dispersals and launch aircraft is limited. If you feel that your needs are not met by this system, you need to highlight this at the end of season wash-up. Clearway works well in preventing ice from forming for short periods, but it must be laid at just the right time – too early and it dissipates before the frost, too late and the ice has already formed. It must also be re-laid at regular intervals to continue to be effective. To close I leave you with this thought: One of the most pleasing sights of the snow season last year was 3 days into the snowfall when a group of personnel trooped out of a hangar armed with shovels and brooms and proceeded to clear parking spots for their aircraft. This contrasted with the scene at the other end of the dispersal where airCLUES an aircrew vs engineer snowball fight had just finished. So, if you’ve got people sitting in the crew room moaning about a lack of flying, they might be better employed with a shovel or broom. 27 airCLUES reflections on a Harsh Winter RAF Lyneham describes how learning lessons, teamwork and forward planning enabled them to cope with the last Wiltshire winter. In January and February of 2010 the heavy onslaught of snow and subsequent icing across southern England affected most of the RAF airfields and major civilian airports in southern UK, often rendering them unable to accept, or release, traffic. At RAF Lyneham in Wiltshire, we happened to have experienced similar issues the previous year, which were still fresh enough in the memory of some, to ensure that some of those lessons were lessons learned, not just lessons identified. Therefore, this reflection visits our key experiences and lessons in brief as everyone enters ‘short finals’ for the next winter blues. As airports and units closed under the winter onslaught the concern for Lyneham was our remit as the UK Military Emergency Diversion Airfield (MEDA), the need to continue supporting Ops and those now too frequent repatriation ceremonies of our fallen, which alas would not decrease any more than the blizzards. The snow fell as quickly as it was being cleared, and that which was left, 28 froze with an impenetrable grip under clear nights. In sum, our limited resources meant that the airfield simply could not be cleared as a whole. Every person and section on Stn was affected and the MT and Logistics Sqns were inundated with Stnwide requests for snow clearance, or gritting. Stepping back further and further to maintain priority and then just catering for those most critical areas became the new modus operandi; this became somewhat taxing as those priorities regularly changed and the subsequent actions were sometimes unpopular. Operation BLACKTOP is our process of using key personnel, mainly Ops, ATC, Movements and Airfield MT to maintain a clear runway. These adverse conditions and the fear of closure left us temporarily widening the array of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to include the Met Office, Logistics, MT, flying sqns, BSW, and various others, to form thrice daily BLACKTOP Action Group meetings. For efficiency and effectiveness, Stn Ops provided a new single point of contact for all, or any, Stn snow & ice clearance decisions and so the wider Action Gp membership SMEs became crucial. We needed to know the consequences of all sections and sqns in order to maintain the aim. Despite the huge input which regularly tested patience, this literally allowed us to effectively leave large areas of the Stn alone and saved massive waste by further pooling limited resources. Experience taught us Clearway anti-icing is nowhere near as good as a de-icing agent, so keeping the runways open relied upon prevention rather than cure. That bold ethos was averaging 9000ltrs a day on a 5-day 40000ltr stock! This critical, tactical point led to early strategic communication through HQ 2 Group and Air Command to rethink the unsustainable usage. The follow on process encouragingly realised a particularly strong team ethos across the rest of the RAF too: Waddington, Cranwell, Leeming, Marham and Brize Norton all provided extra chemical agent to assist in keeping Lyneham open for ops, an excellent result given that the supply routes were also suffering from that same snow and ice! The combination of our recent experience and increased communications was the key in Lyneham staying open whilst other airfields were closing. If it’s winter, then it’s too late to start thinking of BLACKTOP Ops. Irrespective of available stocks, Lyneham will definitely return to a wider BLACKTOP pool of advice and an ultra-centralisation of control and assets for more effective and efficient results this winter. We believe that whilst none of this is new, some of the most obvious lessons can easily be forgotten until it’s too late. The trite mantra of ‘team effort’ is all well and good, but the art of convincing someone to close their section, give their assets to someone else for the bigger picture lies in the cross pollination of knowledge rather than reliance on the Stn command chain. As always, the devil is in the detail. airCLUES The immediate forecast and priorities were identified in the morning Action Gp meetings with the workload coordinated and a daily stock-check of CLEARWAY antiicing chemical and other key assets. The wider Action Gp could then inform the remainder of the Stn on why things were being done or left alone, accordingly. The midday and evening meetings revisited priorities, provided Sitreps, cross pollination of advice, checked contingency plans and organised preparation for the following day; pooling the aircraft and equipment required for the following days work into one single area eased the morning burden. However, the process had to be 24/7 and those wider elements not usually so involved with BLACKTOP proved invaluable; simple examples of extra personnel relieving critical engineers and snowplough drivers from other commitments like Stn guard duty, all helped. The dangerous ice on the dispersals left several looking skyward at short notice and manoeuvring C130s across ice was not a widely practised skill. Encouragingly, such risk in prepositioning aircraft was also reduced by utilising aircrew that had the right snow and ice experience; this was no time for vanity, or pride. Additionally, the cross pollination of advice found that some engineers were unfamiliar with the aircrew orders and aircraft manual as much as some aircrew were unfamiliar with engineering orders. The technical advice for snow and ice measures seemed slightly scattered which became an issued addressed by Ops Sqn’s Flight Safety office. 29 airCLUES dealing with the Known Unknown – maintaining operations in snowy Scotland Flt Lt Dave King, Pilot, 201 Sqn, RAF Kinloss writes about the specific difficulties of managing operational commitments when the ‘unthinkable’ happens and the weather turns bad in Scotland. With the winter of 2009/10 being particularly harsh throughout the UK, RAF Kinloss received more than its fair share of bad weather. Snow and ice persisted throughout the North of Scotland for nearly 3 months; it was the best Scottish skiing conditions on record with skiing on Cairngorm still possible on Midsummer Day. As the Nimrod Duty Pilot (NDP) over the Christmas period I found myself thrown in at the deep end. Part of my remit was to provide aircrew specific advice to ATC and Operations staff. With the inclement weather, a variety of issues presented themselves most noticeably with the snow and ice. At Kinloss, virtually permanent MT snow clearing activity on the runway was required to keep the airfield open to maintain the Nimrod MR2’s SAR and 30 operational commitments. Numerous runway inspections were carried out throughout the day by the ATC supervisor and myself with the runway being maintained clear for the most part. However, Kinloss is presented with a few unique issues by virtue of its locality. Being situated right next to Findhorn Bay (a local nature reserve), strict procedures are in place to ensure minimal environmental impact from operations at Kinloss. As a result, the strength and type of Clearway used at Kinloss is significantly weaker than other local airfields such as Prestwick. The use of Clearway generally kept the runway clear of significant deposits of snow and ice; however, the greatest problem was with slush deposits and some local ice patches. This was further compounded by two airCLUES different types of black top on the runway (1500ft of one end of the runway had been resurfaced the preceding year and this patch took significantly longer to clear than the rest of the blacktop). Because of this only 6000ft of runway was available, and at reduced widths, as the significant snow fall experienced had lead to snow banks along the sides of the runway; Kinloss issued SNOWTAMS for the first time in years. This resulted in the MR2 being prepared with a reduced fuel load, impacting on range and endurance, to be able to operate safely from the shortened runway requiring the 2nd aircraft to be held at reduced notice. Clearing the taxiways and aircraft manoeuvring areas was no less challenging a problem, especially when it took all our snow clearing capability to maintain even the reduced runway strip. Other issues included the selection of the Station Diversion. With marginal conditions at base, the choice of a ‘solid’ diversion was imperative. With snow, ice and fog widespread throughout the UK and Northern Europe, airfields meeting our requirements were few and far between. This was further exacerbated on Christmas Day with airfields closing for the holiday. This resulted in the NDP having to negotiate with the Airport Manager at London Gatwick for permission to use their airfield, in particular an exemption for noise limits; the Nimrod MR2 certainly isn’t quiet! With the constantly changing weather it was routine to have 3, or sometimes more, diversion changes throughout the day. On one occasion Lyon in France was booked as it was the nearest airfield that met the diversion requirements, over 2hrs flying time from Kinloss. This constant juggling act and the tenacity of the Duty Ops Staff ensured there was always a diversion available. 31 airCLUES As 24/7 snow and ice clearing operations were underway, the stock of Clearway was rapidly depleting. All efforts were made to replenish the supplies, but as the only 2 major roads to the Morayshire coast were closed by snowfalls for significant periods, replenishment was difficult. No break was expected with the poor weather in the Kinloss area and the decision was made to try and deploy one ac and ground crew away from Kinloss to cover SAR/Ops on 27 Dec 09. The search for a suitable airfield was complicated due to other RAF airfields also being either shut, or severely affected by weather. Although affected by snow, Prestwick airport managed to maintain its operational capability and was also deemed a good choice to allow crews to rotate after a bus journey from Kinloss. Departing from Kinloss became a race against time as the last application of Clearway for the runway and taxiway had been used with no more available for at least 24hrs. On request from the captain of the departing aircraft, the NDP assisted with the planning and preparation for operating in less than ideal conditions at Kinloss. After an excellent team effort from MT, Nimrod Line Sqn, ATC and Ops, the airfield was cleared to sufficient standard to allow for the safe departure. Whilst the NDP’s principal focus was directed at the safe aircraft operation other issues presented themselves, in particular around the aircraft. Such simple things as loading the aircraft became treacherous, with untreated areas having approximately an inch of solid sheet ice (very akin to the local ice rink). Great care was required to ensure no injuries to personnel or damage to vehicles or aircraft occurred. Now at Prestwick, on the 28 Dec 09, the Nimrod MR2 was scrambled for a SAR tasking involving a 406 MHz locator beacon 200nm west of Ireland. As the aircraft had been parked at the civilian terminal the only way to the aircraft was via standard airport departures and security. The crew were impressed by the security staff who cleared the busy security area of holiday makers and allowed the crew a quick transition through the scanners to the wonder of the many onlookers. Take off was achieved only 90 minutes after receiving the initial call. This was no 32 mean feat with the crew accommodated 20 minutes from the airport, having to go through security and de-ice the aircraft prior to departure. Once on task, communications were established with the vessel and it was discovered that the beacon had been accidentally activated. However, the weather was very bad and the yacht’s crew were concerned about the weather conditions ahead. Weather information was past and photo runs were conducted prior to returning to Prestwick where the aircraft remained for over a week on standby. With all the efforts over the period, culminating in this SAR tasking (on this occasion a false alarm but the outcome of which could have been significantly different) proved that all the hard work from the Duty Staff at Kinloss was completely justified. This was a busy final Christmas and New Year for the RAF’s long-serving MR2 in some of its most trying (and unusual) conditions; many lessons were learned throughout the period and much experience was gained. Further Comment by OC Ops Wg One of the more challenging aspects of last year’s winter was our crews’ ability and experience of operating on snow and ice. In the preceding years there had been a significant outflow of experienced pilots from the Nimrod Force and following many years of desert operations, and a reduction in the number of traditional maritime operating bases, the newer generation of Nimrod pilots had rarely experienced taxiing on snow and ice. In the 1970s and 1980s this used to be relatively common, with winter operations from Icelandic and Norwegian airfields being a regular occurrence. Unfortunately, despite the weather presenting an unusual and perfect opportunity to practice this skill at Kinloss, Nimrod MR2 aircraft availability over this period was poor and we were not afforded the spare aircraft to allow crews to taxi aircraft in these conditions. Despite our ground crew working desperately hard to keep the SAR Ops aircraft available for the standby commitment, it proved impossible to generate additional aircraft to take advantage of practising on these extreme conditions. I learnt about cockpit gradients ...from that As the junior crew member on a multi engine type a number of years ago I was on the way back from a 5 day trip around America. This had been my first States trip and was very enjoyable, very enjoyable that is apart from the crew dynamic which had built throughout the trip. My Captain for the trip was a very senior Captain who was also an OCU instructor, and knew his way around America and American ATC with his eyes shut, he was also of the opinion that the only point of view worth airing was his, and if he wanted someone else’s then he would ask for it – which he didn’t! So, there we were winding our way back up the coast about an hours flying offshore from the Eastern Seaboard, heading for a flag stop before going oceanic, when I heard a SAR homer breaking through faintly. Now the aircraft type I was on was fairly well equipped for homing to a beacon and after a few minutes of looking at the kit it was quite clear that we had tracked towards this beacon, then passed it, probably on our starboard side, and were then tracking away from it. During this time I had announced to the crew that I was picking up a beacon, this had been greeted with silence. Throughout the route it had become clear that the best way to avoid the Captain’s scorn was to say as little as was necessary and not voice an opinion on anything that was not directly in your job spec! I commented again on the beacon, this time giving my thoughts as to its relative position, and suggested that at the least we ought to mention it to ATC who could then choose whether to take further action. I was then informed that when I had, ‘got some time in’ I would know that this area was fairly prone to beacons going off and that it would be down in one of the many marinas along this stretch of coast. Having been told in no uncertain terms that if and when my opinion was required it would be asked for, we continued on our way. I quickly forgot the issue with the beacon and by the time we had flag stopped and headed across the pond it was well and truly in the past. The remainder of the trip was uneventful and I eventually got into bed some 16 hours after crewing in that morning. It was only on turning on the television the following morning that I was very quickly taken back to the previous day as I was faced with footage of the US coastguard winching over 30 people off a burning ship near the US coast. Further digging showed that the ship was in pretty much the same location as we had heard the beacon, and that the alarm had been raised when an aircraft had radioed in about the beacon. It later transpired that the aircraft was further company traffic from one of our other squadrons tracking up the coast about 30 mins after we had done so. Thankfully they had raised the alarm, where we hadn’t. I am sure that many people will remember crew dynamics such as this and think that they don’t exist anymore, well maybe they don’t in such blatant form, mainly through the effective application of CRM training. However, what does still exist is the situation where the inexperienced crew member feels reluctant to speak up or, having voiced their opinion once, reluctant to press it home because the other crew member, or members, all have so much more experience they couldn’t possibly be wrong – could they? Spry Says: The history of aviation is replete with examples of the fatal consequences of steep cockpit gradients, most notably the Tenerife Air disaster in 1977 which cost the lives of 583 people. In my experience the RAF has made very significant progress, as identified by the author of this tale, in changing the ethos and culture of multi-aircrew aircraft such that the attitudes and behaviours described above are very much in the minority. Of course, I stand ready to be corrected! However, I think the real key point that this article brings out is the importance of the art of assertiveness. Assertiveness is a fundamental part of the followership role and fostering it in a team should be a major part of how we lead. As such, assertiveness is inextricably linked to the mission outcome and the leader’s ultimate success, or otherwise. Thankfully, I see much evidence of such healthy team dynamics across the RAF, however, there is always room for improvement and I would ask that in whatever environment you work, that you take a fresh look at how you lead and follow. Breaking the accident chain relies on all personnel in the RAF contributing assertively to flight safety through the proactive identification of risk. However, achieving this safety culture also requires the support of leaders at all levels to ensure that contributions are respected and received without fear of undue castigation. airCLUES Operating in Extreme Weather - Advice from those in the know! Wg Cdr Sophy Gardner, OC Ops Wg and contributors from across RAF Valley describe some of the engineering, infrastructure and operating difficulties of maintaining aviation output in the ‘4-seasons-in-a-day’ environment of RAF Valley. 34 Ask those who know Valley from a brief spell of training here, or who have only heard anecdotes from mates, and you’ll probably immediately associate our location with ‘weather’ – of all descriptions. High winds, hail, gales, heavy rain, bright sunshine; we can have all of these in the space of a day, and sometimes twenty minutes. Less well known, and a well kept secret in many ways, that becomes apparent to those of us who are based here for a couple of years, is that the overall weather factor here is extremely good and very much bound up with the reason why the base was established here in the first instance. For 80% of the time, we have a WHT/BLU colour state, which makes us an attractive diversion and indicates the relatively high levels of sunshine we enjoy, throughout the year. Our Station motto is: ‘In Adversis Perfugium’ translates as ‘Refuge in Adversity’ and originates from the years of the Second World War when the Station was obvious location to develop as a Second World War diversion airfield for aircraft transiting the Atlantic since we would generally be available if the rest of the country wasn’t. And our coastal location on the Irish Sea protects us from the worst of snow and ice on the base, albeit we can normally see it from our airfield on the top of Snowdon for around half the year. But there can be no denying that when we have ‘weather’ it is more likely than in most UK cases to be extreme, and for that reason, our operators and engineers have rifled through their experiences to provide some advice gleaned from plenty of lessons learned over the years. As for the weather, some statistics first on wind, which, of course, our cheerful WHT/BLU statistics don’t fully expose (with thanks to our Senior Met Officer, Graeme Jackson): The windiest month at Valley was February 2002 when we recorded an average wind speed over the entire month of 19.9 kts (the 10-year average for February is currently 13.3 kts). This included 9 separate “days with gales” within the month when we averaged a mean speed of at least 34 kts during one routine hourly observation. The maximum individual gust within the month was 61 kts. The period between November 2006 and January 2007 gave rise to the windiest three-monthly period in Valley’s recent history, with mean wind speeds for November, December and January of 17.1 kts, 17.4 kts and 19.4 kts respectively. During this period, we saw 28 “days with gales” in this 92 day block (12 days in December alone). The highest gusts we’ve had over the last decade also occurred within this period. 67 kts were recorded on both 3rd December 2006 and 18th January 2007. The highest mean maximum gust (each day’s maximum gust summed and divided by the number of days within the month) for any individual month in the last decade occurred just last year in November 2009. This averaged to 40.3 kts. 9 “days with gales” occurred and a maximum gust of 58 kts was recorded. With a mean wind speed of 19.0 kts, it was also the 4th windiest November since records began (in 1941). The windiest day ever recorded at Valley occurred on the 19th November 2009. On that day, the mean wind speed was 37.1 kts, with a maximum gust of 56 kts. set in a harsh marine environment’. This neatly captures the challenges offered by the local conditions, in that winds frequently reach gale force, the salt and sand content of the air is high, and thus corrosive to materials, and the likelihood of rain delays is significant. The following is a sample of some of the challenges that are faced through the build phase and beyond through the life of our infrastructure: So most of us currently stationed at Valley have very recent experience of some pretty extreme (for the UK) sustained high wind conditions. Competition for operating surfaces, airspace, circuit access, instrument patterns, local operating areas and even parking and hangarage is now at a premium; any loss of flying due to bad weather just compounds the pressures; the more we can do to mitigate against this happening has got to be good news. Thus challenging weather just adds to the fun for engineers, aircrew and operations staff and so we offer some thoughts from our various bazaars. - Permanent Fencing. Equally, permanent fencing must be able to withstand strong winds over a sustained period. Unsurprisingly, RAF Valley is used to test specialised fencing for the whole of the MOD! A View from Support Wing: Construction and Maintenance Sqn Ldr Steve Fulcher, SETL, shares his experiences of how extreme weather impacts on Infrastructure. For any new project at Valley, the first line of the requirement document should read that ‘RAF Valley is - Temporary Fencing. Fencing must be robust and tied or weighted down; contractors have returned to their site next morning to find poorly erected fencing elsewhere on the base; most recently in 208 Sqn’s car park following a windy night in 2009. New standards of FOD fencing have been developed which are able to sustain the punishment even last November’s winds meted out. - Materials. Weather-resistant and high quality materials are essential in order to preserve their life. Powder coated paints, commonly used elsewhere, quickly fail and flake; galvanised steel and GRP extend the use of assets. - Project Timescales. Tight timescales are rarely met as most projects are affected by high winds (roofing) or rain (exposed interiors). Planners will try to build some flex into programmes but at a cost to the project. Managing the expectations of the operators and engineers, desperate for restoration of their facilities, be it ASPs or hangars, can be challenging… 35 airCLUES - FOD. Contractors must be thoroughly briefed on FOD and must adopt systems to secure all materials, even within their compound. A contractor will frequently consider the site to be his own but he must be made aware of the impact of material blowing across the airfield. Piles of loose material, including light material in skips, cannot be left exposed as a change in wind direction can quickly fill hangars – and aircraft – with debris. - Maintenance at Height. The wind can have a significant effect on tall structures e.g. lighting stanchions. Such assets must be regularly inspected to minimise the risk of falling debris, which threatens both personnel and our valuable aircraft. Engineering Operations - Strong Winds and Horizontal Rain By David Broatch, Babcock As has already been mentioned, RAF Valley is located in an exposed position on the Irish Sea coast of Anglesey and is susceptible to strong winds and constantly changing weather. Winters tend to be wet and windy and summers can be hot with variable wind conditions. RAF Valley operates line-ops for Hawk TMk1 and Hawk TMk2, requiring engineering tasks and ac servicing to be carried out in adverse weather conditions. Hawk aircraft also need to be carefully parked to ensure the wind does not blow directly down the jet pipe and the canopy damage is not sustained. Typically, the side opening Hawk canopy requires two ground crew to open/close the canopy in medium to strong winds to prevent canopy damage and to ensure the H&S of the ground crew. 36 Hawk ac are always hangored overnight to minimise exposure to the elements. RAF Valley has four Hawk hangars, 3 traditional Bellman type hangars and a Rubb hangar.All hangar doors have differing operating parameters relating to the maximum permissible wind speed limits for doors operation. If a strong winds increase to a gale, all Hawk aircraft remaining outside are required to be secured with piquets. Unfortunately, RAF Valley is not provisioned with piquet points, which means that the local weather condition and wind speed have to be carefully monitored and continually anticipated to ensure all ac are housed in the safety of the hangars before the wind reaches critical speeds. The close proximity of RAF Valley to the Irish Sea can mean that the air can become laden with salt and fine sand. This type of atmosphere can exacerbate corrosion and sand induced erosion of the paint and other systems. The local atmosphere regularly leads to additional cleaning of windscreens, canopies and washing of the whole ac to ensure flight safety is not compromised. Extremes of weather can also adversely affect Human Factors, specifically, the general welfare of engineers working the ac lines. Strong winds, combined with ‘horizontal rail’, hot and cold weather, all have to be anticipated and appropriate control measures and monitoring need to be in place to avoid hypothermia in the winter and heat stroke and sand inhalation in the summer months. As a result of strong winds at Valley during the last 12 month period incidents have occurred, including an engine intake blank being blow from the ground stowage container. Storm damage to buildings is common and roof tiles have been blown from buildings causing minor damage to an MT vehicle. During a particularly strong gust a ‘near miss’ occurred when a very heavy fabricated steel hangar door was partially blown closed during an ac towing operation. 37 airCLUES airCLUES A View from C Flt, 22 Sqn: Well, I Didn’t See That Coming! By Flt Lt Iain Smith One cold and snowy winter afternoon, Rescue 122 was called into action to evacuate a housebound casualty in Shropshire to the local hospital; his predicament had been caused by several inches of fresh snow blocking access for an NHS ambulance. Our problems started with 10 miles to go when all 3 of our Attitude Indicators (AI) began to indicate slightly differing information; notwithstanding this, we managed to complete the rescue and recovered the casualty to Shrewsbury Hospital. It was now dark and following a crew discussion on how to get home if the AI were still malfunctioning, we realised that we 38 couldn’t due to worsening weather over Wales and the lack of reliable attitude instrumentation. We decided to get ourselves to RAF Shawbury - a mere 5 minutes away - but as we transited fuel began to leak into the aircraft cabin. Fortunately, we were able to land safely at Shawbury and shutdown without further incident. Overnight, the temperature was forecast to reach minus 15 degrees, but the aircraft would have to spend the night outside. The next morning our engineers arrived and carried out rectification on the ‘snags’ - the main rotor head and tail rotors were re-greased as the cold soaking had frozen it off, but other than that the aircraft was serviceable. We said our goodbyes to Shawbury and started the journey home. A phrase you will sometimes hear in a Sea King is: “This cab feels a bit rough”, an inherent characteristic of flying an aircraft in which all the moving parts are headed in different directions. Not overly alarmed we continued for home. The vibration very quickly became uncharacteristically severe just as I began to feel a rattling through the yaw pedals. A ‘PAN’ was transmitted and we landed in a field 1½ mile from the North Wales Police HLS. On the ground, still with rotors running, everything seemed normal but any application of power produced marked vibrations so for the second time we shut down somewhere unexpected. On a beautiful crisp winter’s day in a field in Conwy you wouldn’t expect to be faced by a survival situation, but that is what it quickly turned into. The aircraft temperature gauge read minus 6. Stood in flying suits and thermals that you had been sweating in 5 minutes before, we quickly become chilled. Fortunately we all had hats, gloves and extra layers to put on, but even this wasn’t enough and the cold quickly penetrated the soles of our flying boots. My co-pilot (ex-SERE School instructor) became concerned about frost-nip on exposed extremities and so we were soon wrapping ourselves up with anything we could find. Not long after, we were sat on our ‘go-bags’ having a good old sing-song in the emergency survival shelter. One foray into the aircraft to get a Mars bar revealed that the drugs had frozen in the first response bag! Worse still, so had the Mars bar. It is not often that a set of circumstances will conspire so effectively against you to culminate in the strangest of survival situations, but in a field in Conwy that is exactly what happened to us. The phrase “dress to survive” is glibly overlooked by some in our world – and probably in yours. It certainly had been by me, but when packing for winter think about what you’d do and how well protected you are outside of your aircraft; if you’re cold and shivering walking across dispersal I’d suggest it’s not a good start! Spry Says: When we consider the risks to aviation that extremes of weather bring we often focus on the more obvious conditions like driving snow or thick ice. However, what these articles have so ably demonstrated is that ‘simple’ high winds, cold or heavy rain can all have second order effects on flight safety. In the examples above, cold and rain can drive personnel deep into the Error Zone, increasing fatigue, reducing physical and mental abilities and ultimately, affecting their judgment and decision making skills. For flying and engineering, there is little margin for this type of error to creep in and it is worth all of us being aware of the effects even more benign conditions can cause during prolonged exposure. In addition, it is very easy for personnel not directly working on the airfield to forget how easily loose items, temporary structures and rubbish around station can rapidly become a significant hazard when the wind picks up. Objects like these have the tenacity of a pit bull when it comes to finding innovative ways to end up on the airfield on a windy day. So as the nights draw in please remember that even autumn and spring weather bring with them their own particular flight safety hazards; and it takes all personnel on station to make sure they don’t contribute to the next accident. 39 airCLUES Flight Sa f e t y Aw a rd s Cpl McGUIRE, Manchester On the 28 Apr 09 Monarch Airlines Aircraft G-MAJS arrived from Manchester at 08:41L as part of the on-going De-compression flights. Upon arrival the aircraft was diagnosed with an engine fault which required rectification by a civilian engineer, due to the work carried out the aircraft required a subsequent flight test. At 22:00L Cpl McGuire was in attendance at the above aircraft as NCO i/c the start team for the see-off for the required flight test, as part of his duties he and his team carried out a pre-start FOD check of the surrounding area in preparation for the imminent engine start. At approximately 22:10L the aircraft captain was given clearance form the VAHS ground-crew to start engine No. 2. During the engine start cycle Cpl McGuire witnessed a foreign article exit the exhaust of the No. 2 engine, he immediately signalled via the safety man for the captain to shut down the No. 2 engine. With the engine safely shut down Cpl McGuire carried out a sweep of the area behind the No. 2 engine to find a 16oz hammer approximately 20 feet behind the exhaust. After a thorough check of the area he informed the crew of his findings and raised his concerns over other possible articles or additional damage caused by the hammer on its egress, the engineer refused to carry out a further check and the captain decided to proceed against Cpl McGuire’s advice. The aircraft was then started and carried out the flight test without further incident. Cpl Miller, RAF Akrotiri On the 31Oct 09 a Globespan B767 Flt No. GSM7419/20 arrived at 0630L from Minhad as part of the on-going Decompression flights through RAF Akrotiri. The aircraft was scheduled for a 0800L departure that day to return Decompressed troops to RAF Brize Norton. Upon arrival the aircraft was diagnosed with an instrument problem, which caused a slight delay to the aircrafts allotted departure time. At 0810L on the 31 Oct 09 Cpl Miller and his see-off team proceeded to the aircraft upon notification that the passengers were boarding. On arrival at the aircraft Cpl Miller proceeded to carry out a final FOD check around the vicinity of the aircraft. In carrying out his FOD sweep Cpl Miller observed what appeared to be evidence of a potential birdstrike on the No.1 engine and upon further investigation, evidence of blood and feathers could be seen on the 1st stage compressor rotor blades. Cpl Miller immediately found the aircraft captain and made him aware of his findings. The captain did not appear to be overly concerned with the situation so Cpl Miller located the aircraft ground engineer to further convey the gravity of his findings. Cpl Miller’s well founded concerns were mirrored by the ground engineer who immediately declared the aircraft unserviceable. Subsequently a specialist team was flown out from the UK to carry out further investigation into the extent of any damage caused by the birdstrike. After extensive checks the aircraft was deemed serviceable by the specialist team and departed at 0210L on 01 Nov 09 with no further complications. 40 SAC Morris, Kandahar On 16 Sep 09, SAC Morris was conducting a ‘Man B’ After-Flight Servicing on a Chinook helicopter at Kandahar Airfield. During his inspection of the airframe, he noticed a crack in a section of critical load bearing frame. Subsequent investigation and NDT analysis of the crack identified it to be 30mm in length, running between two Hi-Lock Fasteners. This observation was due to Morris being particularly diligent in his duties, as the area is not easy to inspect and in excess of the requirements of the servicing. At the time Morris was in the eleventh hour of a twelve hour shift, working in low-light levels, with the aircraft having landed at 0510L. SAC DINNING, 216 Sqn AAR Det SAC Dinning was part of an aircraft servicing team working as part of the 216 Sqn AAR Det operating with 902 EAW in Seeb, Oman. During an After Flight servicing, Dinning noticed that the Number 2 engine fuel feed pipe, in the Hydraulic Servicing Centre, was chafing on adjacent hydraulic and fuel vent pipes; the damage was not immediately obvious as the damage was hidden by the two other pipes. Once Dinning realised what he had seen, he immediately identified the possible risks and highlighted the damage and possible consequences to his detachment engineering management. During further more in-depth inspection, it was found that the chafing fuel pipe had been incorrectly routed between a hydraulic pipe and a fuel vent pipe, rather than underneath the vent pipe as per the design authority drawings. During his inspection Dinning recalls thinking that ‘something just didn’t look right’, driving him to carry out a further, deeper inspection. During his inspection, not only was the area dark and the error difficult to see, but Dinning was not mandated to check these pipes during the flight servicing; identifying an installation error such as this highlights Dinning’s diligence and professionalism. Luckily, on this occasion, the fault was identified before it became a problem and the pipe was correctly routed before any further damage was caused. The Number 2 Engine fuel feed pipe is the main fuel feed for the engine, and the consequences of failure are very severe: the engine would have been starved of fuel, more than likely causing it to be shut down, and a very serious potential fire risk in the belly of the aircraft would have been created. As a result of Dinning’s professionalism, it was deemed necessary to check the rest of the RAF Tristar fleet, which fortunately were all found to have the engine fuel feed pipes correctly routed. MR WATSON, RAF Northolt On the afternoon of Friday 2nd September 2009, Mr Watson, an Aircraft Handler employed by Serco Defence, Science and Technology in the Visiting Aircraft Support Section at RAF Northolt, was detailed to “see in” a visiting civilian Gulfstream 550 twin engined aircraft ( reg no CS-DKF, call sign NJE-393D). As the aircraft came to a stop, Mr Watson noticed what he thought was a fine mist around the starboard mainwheel assembly. After placing the chocks on the nosewheel he investigated the area and found a large pool of hydraulic fluid around the brake assembly. Mr Watson contacted the pilot who, on inspecting the leak, found that the parking brake pressure had dissapated: the pilot then placed the aircraft unservicable. The fault was later confirmned by a company aircraft technician as a ruptured brake seal. The fact that Mr Watson does not possess an aviation background prior to working on VASS makes the discovery, and his response after noticing the ‘fine mist’, all the more commendable. The mist was very easy to miss in the windy and dull weather conditions prevaling at the time. Vigilance and intelligent application of his training prevented a serious flight safety problem to the aircraft. 41 airCLUES Green Endorsements & Flight Safety Awards On the afternoon of Fri 16 Oct 09, RESCUE 128, a RAF Sea King from Leconfield, was scrambled to 2 people stuck at the base of a high cliff, cut off by the tide, near Whitby. As had been briefed at the start of this crew’s shift, the operational aircraft captain, Flt Lt Cunliffe, was in the left hand seat fulfilling the co-pilot duties whilst Lt Bullock RN flew as ‘acting captain’ and handling pilot in the right hand seat to gain the maximum training benefit from the sortie with a view to his forthcoming operational captaincy check. The geography and wind conditions at the scene meant that Flt Lt Cunliffe had the best visual references and thus ended up actually flying the aircraft for the rescue. The radar/winch operator, MALM Bragg and the winchman, FS Brompton were fulfilling their standard primary duties. After arriving at the scene and assessing the situation, the crew put their plan into action. The winchman, FS Brompton, was lowered to a safe height of 10’ with the aircraft at 50’ over the sea and the aircraft was then manoeuvred towards the cliff whilst climbing to 200’ to place the aircraft over the cliff with the winchman next to the casualties. The winchman assessed the casualties, placed the person considered to be in the worst condition into a rescue strop and secured himself and the casualty back to the winch hook ready for recovery. The aircraft then flew back out to sea at a fast walking pace descending progressively to 50’ where winchman and casualty could be safely winched up to the aircraft. Having manoeuvred the winchman into position for a second time and secured the second casualty, the aircraft started to move away from the cliff and down over the water to the safe height of 50ft to recover the winchman and casualty to the aircraft. As the aircraft descended through approximately 175’ one phase of the aircraft AC essential busbar failed, causing loss of all AC essential equipment. All the attitude indicators (AI) failed, including the standby AI, so the pilot had no internal attitude references. In addition, the automatic flying control system (AFCS) that normally helps keep the aircraft stable in flight and smooths out flying inputs now made random changes in pitch, roll and yaw. This was felt through the airframe as serious vibration and gave the handling pilot significant difficulties keeping the aircraft in a stable attitude. Moreover, the aircraft radar started to thrash around making sounds remarkably similar to the Sea King simulator’s audio warning of a tail rotor drive shaft failing – every helicopter’s operator’s worst nightmare. Various lights and captions flashed on and off as systems intermittently lost all, or part of their power supply further adding to the melee of sensory inputs and general confusion about what exactly was happening. As handling pilot, Flt Lt Cunliffe, was presented with a vast array of symptoms including the possibility of an imminent tail rotor failure and was coping with multiple undemanded control movements in all aircraft axes. He accelerated forward, increasing the airflow over the airframe to help stabilise the aircraft. Lt Bullock immediately started to record the indications and offered to make a mayday call. MALM Bragg started to winch-in rather than cutting the winch cable and FS Brompton (who could hear by his remote radio what was going on) and the casualty started to climb rapidly towards a bouncing aircraft at some 175ft. FS Brompton was now also consoling a screaming male casualty at the same time as getting into position to manoeuvre them both into an aircraft against the force of a significantly higher airflow (40-50 kts) than normal (5-10kts). With no worsening of symptoms and assessing the aircraft to be ‘manageable’, Flt Lt Cunliffe elected to land on the clifftop. As he flew towards the chosen landing area, Lt Bullock continued to calmly fault diagnose and the crew worked together to ensure that the winchman and casualty were brought safely on board at the same time as expediting getting on the ground. Complete failure of the AC essential busbar in this manner is so unusual that it has no associated FRC drill, although the crew were the first to determine with hindsight that some other drills might have been appropriate to use, the indications seen and symptoms felt did not clearly lead to any particular drills. The information 42 gathered by Lt Bullock greatly aided the subsequent diagnosis / rectification work, however, this still took 2 days of engineers’ head-scratching to locate the cause of the problem. Flt Lt Cunliffe, as handling pilot and aircraft captain, kept a cool head and maintained a safe flight configuration whilst keeping the crew working together to recover both aircraft and all occupants to a safe location. MALM Bragg made an excellent snap cut/don’t cut decision on behalf of his winchman and casualty and also worked well with the captain to ensure their safety on their subsequent roller coaster entry into the aircraft. Despite the traumatic ride, FS Brompton showed great calmness and professionalism to ensure that his casualty was secure as the aircraft landed. Flt Lt Stuart Cunliffe is awarded a green endorsement in recognition of his exceptionally cool and calm handling of aircraft and crew in the face of extremely difficult circumstances. In addition, MALM Richard Bragg is awarded a green endorsement for exceptional judgement in the face of extremely testing conditions. Lt James Bullock and FS Russell Brompton are both awarded flight safety awards in recognition of their outstanding judgment and the excellent support they provided during a complicated aircraft emergency. Lt James Bullock Flt Lt Stuart Cunliffe, MALM Richard Bragg & FS Russell Brompton SAC WILSON, RAF Marham SAC Wilson is an Aircraft Maintenance Mechanic employed on IX(B) Sqn at RAF Marham. The following took place at Kandahar Airfield whilst the Sqn was deployed in support of OP HERRICK. On 1 April 2010, SAC Wilson was part of a see-off team for a Tornado GR4 which had been tasked with a Close Air Support mission. On marshalling the aircraft out of its shelter SAC Wilson alerted the trade ‘hit team’ to the fact that she had seen an unsecured panel on the spine of the aircraft. The ‘hit team’ brought the aircraft to a halt before it had left the dispersal and a technician climbed onto the aircraft where he found that a quick release catch was indeed unsecured. The technician secured the catch and the aircraft then continued without further incident. SAC Wilson was carrying out a task she had done many times before and the Sqn was close to the end of its deployment. Due to the routine nature of the task it would have been very easy at that point to let complacency creep in. However, not only was the unsecured catch in an extremely difficult place to see from SAC Wilson’s position but due to the aircraft’s taxi pattern she was the last person who could possibly have spotted it before the aircraft left the dispersal. SAC Wilson’s diligence and attention to detail, however, ensured that not only was a potentially serious flight safety incident avoided but that the aircraft was able to carry out an important operational mission. 43 airCLUES MASTER AIRCREW CRIPPS Master Aircrew Cripps was a Qualified Rearcrew Instructor on board a 54(R) Sqn Sentinel OCU training sortie. During the taxi, whilst the Flight Deck were busy completing Taxi Checks, Master Aircrew Cripps was manning the beam window as lookout and noticed that the arrestor cables were in the ‘up’ position. He immediately notified the flight deck as this cable position would not have been discernable to the flight deck once the aircraft had lined up on the runway. The standard configuration for a Sentinel departure is for the cables to be de-rigged as the platform is not authorized to trample cables at greater than 20 knots. The Flight Deck queried ATC who then de-rigged the cable. Had the take-off role commenced without de-rigging, considerable damage could have been done to both the aerials under the Dual Mode Radar (DMR) Fairing and to the DMR fairing itself. Master Aircrew Cripps’ diligence and quick thinking prevented what could have been a damaging, dangerous and expensive incident. bomadier penney, 16 air Assault Brigade On 20 Feb 2010 personnel from14 Sqn and associates from 16 Air Assault Brigade (AAB) were airborne in VC10 XV104 of 101 Sqn, en-route to Davis Montham AFB, via a refuelling stop at Ottawa, to run Exercise Torpedo Focus. Whilst over the North Atlantic and some 2 hours from Ottawa, Bombardier Penney of 16 AAB observed a ‘blister’ lifting from the upper surface of one of the flaps on the left hand wing. Penney alerted a 14 Sqn member who sought the views of a Sqn airframe trade SNCO. Sgt Scott the VC10 Ground Engineer, was also alerted to the condition of the flap, the gradual deterioration of which, was monitored until the safe landing at Ottawa. On the ground the LH No4 flap was inspected and declared unserviceable with surface de-lamination measuring approximately 4’ x 2’ and the aircraft was grounded. A repair team was requested from RAF Brize Norton. If XV104 had departed Ottawa for DMAFB without the fault being discovered the result might have been a structural failure of the flap in flight, the ingestion of debris into engines 1 and 2, and consequently an aircraft emergency. Bombadier Penney is not an aircraft engineer but his alertness and moral courage in reporting his observation lead to the early detection of a serious defect which may have endangered the aircraft. Penney is to be highly commended for his Flight Safety awareness and his acceptance of responsibility. 44 FOD MATTERS ONE OF THE BIGGEST SOURCES OF FOD ON RAF STATIONS ARE SKIPS AND WHEELIE BINS LEFT OPEN. JUST BECAUSE THE SKIP IS BEHIND SHQ, THE MESS, OR A BARRACK BLOCK DOES NOT MEAN IT DOESN’T COUNT – IT IS STILL ON AN ACTIVE AIRFIELD Close the lid! A very recent picture from a Stn FODPO NEWS It was reported that a member of the public, local to an RAF flying station, having become disgruntled with aircraft noise, threatened to release 120 Chinese lanterns near to the approach path. The member of the public was visited by the local civilian police and the threat was never carried out. However, threatening such an action could be classed as intent to endanger the safety of an aircraft and as such is an offence under the Civil Aviation Act 1982. The GR4 community – IPT, 1Gp and Stns - is launching a new FOD initiative this autumn, with full financial support from Rolls-Royce, entitled Project FACT – FOD Awareness Campaign Tornado. More information on this in the next edition of Air Clues. At a flying station in the south of England recently, the Bird Control Unit, while on a routine FOD inspection of the runway found a screwdriver. The screwdriver bore no markings, making tracing the owner difficult. The station in question is currently undergoing an extensive programme of works, so one possible source of the rogue screwdriver could have been from a civilian contractor. airCLUES FOD damage can result in anything from minor repairs to catastrophic events (think Concorde accident). Experts estimate that the cost of FOD to the global aerospace industry runs at around $4 billion annually. Individual engine costs for the RAF are equally eyewatering; a Tornado engine rejection based on FOD damage is currently running at around £300k per engine. This is money from Defence which could be better spent elsewhere. FOD prevention in the RAF forms part of an MOD-wide FOD prevention strategy. The newly-formed MAA has overall responsibility for pan-Defence policy and ensuring that the individual air arms comply with this policy. Responsible for the RAF single service policy is the Inspector of RAF Flight Safety; which then flows down through the Groups and onto the FOD Prevention Officers at stations. FODPOs are either full or part-time, and are answerable to the Stn Cdr through the Stn Flt Safety Officer, for FOD prevention at their Unit. FODPOs have a wide range of methods at their disposal to assist them with FOD prevention such as: publicity and awareness briefings, sweeping of operating surfaces, analysis of found FOD (including trending of areas of FOD ‘finds’), and investigations. We are currently in the middle of an upgrade programme for runway sweepers; whereby the old (and now frequently unreliable) Johnson sweepers are being replaced by the latest state-of-the-art Schmidt AS990s. Priority for roll-out is for Stns holding QRA, but eventually all units will receive the new sweepers. However, the station also plays host to a large number of visiting civilian aircraft and it is just possible that the screwdriver fell from one of those. As a result, a long list of actions was implemented in an attempt to prevent a recurrence. 45 airCLUES chinese lantern coming to a airfield near you Very pretty – but don’t mix with aeroplanes! See accompanying Chinese Lantern Article Other units should note the requirement for fully briefing contractors on the importance of tool control and prevention of loose articles and should consider formalising these requirements in Station Standing Orders. Additionally, if civilian aircraft are operating from our airfields, you are entitled to challenge them over the fidelity of their tool control – they may work to CAA rules, but they are on MOD property. The RAF will also be launching a fresh new FOD awareness campaign this autumn, and is looking for examples of best practice from across units. FOD occurrences are still all too common. It is everyone’s responsibility to play a role in FOD Prevention. The Air Command FOD Prevention Officer is Flt Lt Rick Lipscomb, who can be contacted at RAF Flt Safety, Air Command, RAF High Wycombe ext 6666. The author is grateful to any agencies who feel they have something to contribute on FOD issues and would wish to share with a wider audience in future editions of Air Clues. 46 The releasing of Chinese Lanterns (sometimes known as Sky Lanterns) is becoming evermore popular on occasions such as fetes, weddings, parties and outdoor events. These lanterns make for very attractive displays, and are readily available from dealers on the Internet. They do, however, pose a Flight Safety hazard – something which has been recognised by the CAA and prompted them into commissioning a safety assessment. The hazard is twofold: firstly the remnants of lanterns littering airfields and posing an engine ingestion problem; and secondly the less likely, but potentially more serious distraction (and potential subsequent evasive action) issue. Anecdotally, pilots have reported that in poor light conditions lanterns can be mistaken for conflicting air traffic. Several RAF airfields have reported picking up old lanterns scattered across their ‘live’ areas. Those units close to population centres seem to suffer the most, with Northolt having a particular problem. Lanterns are constructed of rice paper, with a combustible fuel cell and then usually some rigid material to keep the shape – often in the form of a metal framework. They ‘fly’ for anything from 5 to 20 minutes and can reach heights of 1500 ft. While no hard evidence exists as yet with regard to the effect on a jet engine of ingesting a lantern, clearly it is a situation which should be best avoided. The metal frame would certainly cause damage in some way, although the severity is as yet unquantified. The consequences of a multiple strike could be much more serious – similar to a flock of birds, as opposed to a single specimen. The CAA has no specific policy regarding lanterns as yet – but they have become sufficiently concerned to commission their own safety assessment. The closest thing to a ‘policy’ for now is CAP 736 (available on the CAA website – www.caa.co.uk ), which mandates regulation for helium-filled balloons, lasers, searchlights and fireworks. In 2009 the CAA considered almost 90 requests for lantern releases – approving 76, but rejecting the remainder on the basis of the proximity of the launch site to an airfield. In addition, they issued 43 NOTAMs as a result of the approvals. ns an u? There is however no legislation that requires people to inform the CAA. New policy and guidance is being planned for the next reissue of CAP 736 in early 2011. This will include a piece on Sky lanterns specifically, and should cover some of the following recommendations: • Local ATC should be contacted if people intend to release lanterns within 8 miles of that airfield. • If the release site is outside of 8 miles, then depending on numbers, the CAA is to be contacted. Ten lanterns or fewer is being suggested as the threshold level. All this is well and good as far as ‘officially’ organised events are concerned; what will be much harder to regulate are releases by private individuals. In the meantime, all operators of RAF airfields should remain particularly vigilant to the possibility of ‘spent’ lanterns being encountered anywhere on manoeuvring areas. FODPOs are encouraged to run awareness campaigns at their Units, and in particular to ensure that occurrences are notified using the DFSOR template on ASIMS. Early approaches to government regarding banning of the sale of lanterns have failed due to lack of recordable evidence, so it is imperative that the RAF informs the discussion by recording our occurrences. A total ban is perhaps unlikely anyway; the farming community have lobbied hard for such a ban – lanterns have caused deaths in cattle from eating the metal parts and also started crop fires – but as yet this lobbying has met with no success. However, restrictions in manufacturing materials and greater awareness of the dangers to aviation being made at point-of-sale areas where regulations could be tightened. IF YOU EXPERIENCE CHINESE LANTERNS AT YOUR UNIT, THEN RAF FLIGHT SAFETY WOULD LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT IT. airCLUES 47 Produced by Air Media Centre, HQ Air Command 0248_10CW © Crown/MOD 2009