New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

General stuff that gets thrown about when Helicopter Pilots shoot the Breeze.
arrrj
2nd Dan
2nd Dan
Posts: 345
Joined: Jul 2012

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby arrrj » Thu Aug 9 2018, 05:41

FF,

100% correct.

I have learned far more from fellow pilots than I ever have from CASA notices.

Including, as you point out, first hand stories from guys that have had bad experiences. And I have shared a few too. And I share them not to make me look stupid, but to help others understand something new from my experiences.

It is quite simple really. Most in the industry I have met are more than happy to help.

Cheers,
Arrrj
Gonsky
1st Dan
1st Dan
Posts: 252
Joined: May 2016

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Gonsky » Thu Aug 9 2018, 06:28

FF, don't use batteries you should really keep up. Do you actually know the difference between a UAS and a drone?

We also have a amazing system called telemetry that relays all info back to an operator either by a encrypted data link or a similar 5G signal that now gives us unlimited range.

What is even more amazing is we get fuel status as one of those feeds and therefore have procedures in place so we don't endanger the airframe or anyone on the ground.

After so long you still don't get that we are involved with airframes all over 250kg and currently working on larger ones for the fire side.

I am not the one bi$$hing about CASA on a daily basis, yet you guys all seem to have ongoing issues with them and still haven't figured out that CASA and your direct employers can read this forum just like the rest.

Do you really want your employer to know you guys are flying around on fumes?

Additionally your insurance insurance underwriters would null and void any claims as well.

Regards,
'Mankind has a perfect record in aviation - we have never left one up there!'
User avatar
Evil Twin
3rd Dan
3rd Dan
Posts: 579
Joined: Mar 2007

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Evil Twin » Thu Aug 9 2018, 07:16

Before this all gets too nasty, can we remember that Eric's quoted event occurred in 1976. Times have changed dramatically since then but, there is information in there that we all can learn from. It's unlikely that anyone would do the same in similar circumstance. I'd bloody hope that they weren't put in that situation now given the quality of situational awareness/navigation equipment that we all carry in our aircraft and pockets.
User avatar
Eric Hunt
3rd Dan
3rd Dan
Posts: 788
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Eric Hunt » Thu Aug 9 2018, 07:46

All too true, Evil. A moving map was a million-dollar option for an F-111 at the time. A humble Huey had a single NDB. Our government in its brilliance bought the Hueys with a TACAN set (a VOR/DME that worked on UHF, not VHF) but actually PAID to take it out because they thought it was unnecessary, but then put a LEAD WEIGHT in the nose to fix the balance. How can you compete with that logic.

However, comma, TACAN was somewhat out of range from Amberley at zot feet over Charleville in the pi$$ing rain.

"Learn from the mistakes of others, because you will not live long enough to make them all yourself" (old jungle saying)
godfather007
Gold Wings
Gold Wings
Posts: 178
Joined: Apr 2008

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby godfather007 » Thu Aug 9 2018, 11:19

MR Gonsky.
R u implying the sky is gone!
I’m pretty sure you said you were not coming back.. History has been written.
But you have slipped back in..
And just like a rat desperate for water, you keep returning.
I assumed your airframe, UAV, drone, remote control world would have keep you way to preoccupied to spare time to return and attempt to stir up baby poo in our industry again.
Maybe you have failed in your attempt to replace us pilots.
You are not a pilot, yes??
If you have any real experience with what is being discussed here I will be amazed.
Feel free to post on drone slapped and maybe refresh your drawing board.
You will be retired or dead by the time CA$A let you go BLOS.
Keep throwing your investors cash around. Seen it all b4.
I will be retired and floating on my super before that sad wet dream of yours checks in.
Leave the gents to discuss the variables for all to learn and F()ck off.
Send as many PMs as you like. They will all be trashed as done so in the past.
Drift off.
User avatar
Evil Twin
3rd Dan
3rd Dan
Posts: 579
Joined: Mar 2007

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Evil Twin » Thu Aug 9 2018, 11:38

and Flyhuey is off his meds again too.......... :roll:
Gonsky
1st Dan
1st Dan
Posts: 252
Joined: May 2016

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Gonsky » Thu Aug 9 2018, 21:02

Morning all, nice rank.

Sorry but I don't use OPM, "other people's money" and also i don't take liberties with other people's aircraft.

Good luck with your super and retirement, wish you all the best.

Regards,
'Mankind has a perfect record in aviation - we have never left one up there!'
User avatar
hand in pants
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby hand in pants » Thu Aug 9 2018, 22:28

Godfather, very harsh. Poor old wentsky just wants to be involved.

Agree completely with your well chosen words. Poor sad little man has been trying to wind us real pilots up since he first appeared.
I'm sure he will eventually get the hint.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
godfather007
Gold Wings
Gold Wings
Posts: 178
Joined: Apr 2008

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby godfather007 » Fri Aug 10 2018, 03:43

Hi Gregory/ Gonsky.

A bit harsh as HIP noted. (Thanks HIP, always enjoy your input!)

Can’t say I’m sorry for my post.

You have proven to be a serial pest.
Time to move on or join the club by gaining anther credential. PPL(H) even.

My judgement of you in your opinion may not be all that accurate ATM, so I apologise for that. I specialise in many areas inc. Cleaning/ removal of all matters and info gathering beyond steering egg beaters.
Some on point and some not so.
But I know people who you know and know what you do.
Be careful, spend wisely and I wish you luck for your future projects.
Just don’t share your crap here.
Wash your laundry in Drone Slapper.

Regards,

GF

Over and out.
flyhuey
Silver Wings
Silver Wings
Posts: 67
Joined: Mar 2014

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby flyhuey » Fri Aug 10 2018, 10:32

Yeah, FlyHuey the "irrelevant old man" is off his meds. Though I never needed any. I hate to take even an aspirin.

I spent 36 years doing whatever I had to do to protect my Pilot Licence(s). It is a privilege, not a right.

Regarding Fuel Remaining and 2 pages of this reading nonsense . . .

Proper Fuel Planning is very basic Airmanship, just as reading an Aircraft Operator's (Flight) Manual from cover-to-cover and complying with all Cautions and Warnings, for the basic aircraft and optional systems or appliances installed. Aviation Accident Investigators and Aviation Regulaors, worldwide, take a very dim view of Pilots ignorant of, oblivious to, or otherwise not complying with Cautions and Warnings notes . . . And, they could easily make a case for Pilot Error for not following Aircraft Manufacturer's Recommendations.

One well respected Pilot, here, wrote about flying in flood conditions . . . About to embark upon flying across any vast body of water, one should make that critical Go/No-Go decision, especially regarding carrying sufficient Fuel + Reserves. It is as simple as asking yourself, "to rescue one person, is it worth destroying an aircraft and killing myself"? And, the second question you should be asking, does it comply with the Regulations, Company S.O.P., Aircraft Manufacturers, Limitations/Cautions/Warnings? If the answer is, "No", then fukc it, let someone else play hero.

I personally know a Captain of a Boeing 747 who did not carry sufficient fuel, had to divert, cost the company a lot of time and extra money, and he was reduced to serving the remainder of his time with that airline as a First Officer (Co-pilot). He got off easy.

If any of you understand ETOPS or and all the fuel planning considerations and systems redundancies involved with flying a two engine jet across a vast expanse of water, you would begin to appreciate "leave yourself a way out", "give yourself some options", or make the decision to divert early. That very basic thought process or logic would have prevented the ditching of the Westwind 1124A off Norfolk Island, at Night, November 2009. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2009/aair/ao-2009-072/

What does flying jets and ETOPS have to do with flying helicopters?

One might ask that same question what does it have to do with flying a twin engine turboprop at night, during the Winter, across the Bass Strait, with two stops, one in Launceston, where the fog is unpredictable, and often raced me to the airport, though Temp/Dew Point spread indicated a clear night in the forecast, and my second stop at Hobart, could easily be below minimums, or have crosswinds strong enough to exceed the aircraft limit . . . So, what does a prudent Pilot-in-Command/Captain do? Once the decision has been made to takeoff from MEL?

1) Ignore the Owner-Chief Pilot's "commercial realities" and profit margin for the flight.
2) Make your own decision how much fuel you will need to fly to Launceston, plan for one Approach and a Missed Approach to fly to Hobart, plan for one Approach and a Missed Approach to fly to Devonport, where the worst of the weather is crosswind on landing. Or, you could carry sufficient Fuel -by Regulation for INTER or TEMPO, Hold for the 30 or 60 minutes and IF the weather does not improve, then where do you go min fuel?
3) Get a Weather Update, just before reaching midpoint of Bass Strait . . . Make your decision to continue to Launceston or return to Melbourne.

I am just saying there should be a thought process, a plan, some consideration for what if? Or, fly based upon blind luck.

My career in Aviation is behind me. I never violated any Aviation Regulations, in any country I flew in. I never scratched paint or dented metal. I am proud to have maintained a perfect Aviation Safety Record for 36 years. I worked hard at it. Does that mean I never took any risks or cheated death?

If you try really hard, put the childish name calling and nasty unwarranted replies, aside, you might actually learn something from me and realise I am not so irrelevant nor so old.

What IF, just one thing I wrote and you read saved your life, prevented an accident?

Or, ignore me. It is your life and your career and your choice.
User avatar
Eric Hunt
3rd Dan
3rd Dan
Posts: 788
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Eric Hunt » Fri Aug 10 2018, 10:49

J.F Krist, do you lot think I PLANNED to run out of gas? Do you think that any amount of planning would help when you get directed all over the place by somebody who is supposed to know where he is, or that there was any way out of a closed-over valley other than flying along it until there was a way out? Because there was not a place to put down - floodwaters tend to cover up the nice flat bits first, and then move along at a nice rate of knots.

Circumstances build up, the holes in the swiss cheese start to line up, and I was fortunate enough that the last hole wasn't there.

It all happened before most of you were born. You have been brought up by crusty old prix like me who learnt in a hard way and have drilled it into their students that there is a better way to do things than the way it used to be. You now have a far better navigation tool in your pocket than the million-dollar map in the F-111. It is almost impossible now for anybody not to know where they are in 3 dimensions. You have accurate distance-to-run and groundspeed readouts - there was no groundspeed calculation possible when you are over featureless flooded land, no pinpoints possible, no way of knowing when that little town is going to appear. Just keep going because putting it down in the water isn't an option.

30-minute reserves are there for such emergencies. Any idiot who says that the law should descend on somebody who enters that reserve is the one who needs a kick from their chief pilot, along with the poor bunny who actually did it. Wake up and smell the coffee in Brazil.

"We had it tough. The young kids these days wouldn't understand, mumble mumble, rhubarb...."
User avatar
Twistgrip
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Twistgrip » Fri Aug 10 2018, 13:35

If any of you understand ETOPS or and all the fuel planning considerations and systems redundancies involved with flying a two engine jet across a vast expanse of water, you would begin to appreciate "leave yourself a way out", "give yourself some options", or make the decision to divert early.


It may actually surprise you that there would be a lot of bladeslappers here that do this on a daily basis in not a “jet” but a helicopter, a two engined one, a long way over water. The principles the same right?.

Fly Huey from your accounts you do appear to have sound advice but with all due respect it would be far better received by all on here, young and old In the industry if your delivery had a hint of humility attached to your experiences, we all like to be respected,maybe food for thought.

Unfortunately this industry attracts “Pissing Contests” lets all try and learn from some of the dribble.
"You can watch things happen, you can make things happen or you can wonder what happened"
Heliduck
1st Dan
1st Dan
Posts: 287
Joined: Jan 2008

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby Heliduck » Fri Aug 10 2018, 19:19

Twistgrip wrote:
it would be far better received by all on here, young and old In the industry if your delivery had a hint of humility attached to your experiences, we all like to be respected,maybe food for thought.


Very true Twistgrip, people don’t always remember what you say but they always remember how you make them feel.
"Plan twice...Fly once"
User avatar
hand in pants
4th Dan
4th Dan
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sep 2006

Re: New B206B3 'low fuel quantity' requirements.

Postby hand in pants » Sat Aug 11 2018, 21:17

Well said Eric. Love your work. I've learnt more from listening to those who've done than I have from those who claim to have done.

Sitting around and relaxing with a few beers telling and listening to war stories can be a better learning environment than in a classroom.

You do over the years learn to detect knobs. Wentsky and flewhuey come to mind very quickly.
Just a gentle word of advice from a novice, there are ways to impart knowledge, and you two don't know what they are. Take a deep, deep breathe in and don't exhale.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!

Return to “On the Job”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests