Down Griffon

[donnybrook]

http://www.airforce.forces.ca/index_e.htm

There's a photo at this link. The military has had to figure out a way to force the politbureau to by new helicopters. I hope it's not by writing them all off.

 

[CTD]

Good point Vortex Ring. As I said, the blade in question had soot, grease, and soap in it, so it's not like the crack developed on that flight.

The picture in donnybrook's link shows a dirty Griffon with a happy face drawn in the soot. Since these things rarely fly, and the wx in Goose isn't that cold yet, I would think someone would have the time to give these things a bath? Maybe they haven't learned the lesson after all.

 

[firehawk]

Seems to be that the last year there have sure been fare number of mechanical mailfunctions in aircraft or is it just me? Scares the hell out of a guy to here
that a helicopter just fell from the sky and the cause is unknown, As pilots we always want to know right now what happened so it doesnt happen to us or at least try to prevent it.
I was out at the Bonaparte fire when the 204 went down. Its one thing when guys are being cowboys and crashing. (Not that that is acceptable). But it just seems we are having a run of mechanical defaults.

 

[cyclic monkey]

Vortex, I'm not surprised that you are "amazed" that it takes "eleven techs" that "work their buns off" and yet "dirty blades thus preventing proper visual inspection" are the fatal result.

I wouldn't be amazed, I'd be scared. There is something wrong with the system.

Yet, as CTD notes, the tail boom in the recent incident hasn't been washed in a long time, and with the black painted tail-blades it's hard to see how long it has been since they were washed either.
Why are they painted black?? So the taxpayers don't notice the dirt ??
Surely this black paint doesn't help with a "proper visual inspection" either.

From a fellow pilot.......please watch your "ponderous rear".

 

[Over-Talk]

Good point about the 'mechanical' incidents lately Firehawk.
It does appear that way sometimes. We seem to keep losing very good people in this cruel business.
As we slowly drag ourselves away from "bush" flying methods and get a bit more "professional" by saying 'NO' when we should, there will hopefully be less pilot-induced incidents.
Therefore, that means the percentage of mechanical-caused incidents will increase, in relation to the total. (Hopefully the manufacturers and component overhaul shops can keep ahead of this. Thanks to them, our aircraft are a lot more reliable than they were 20 or 40 years ago).
CTD, or anyone, do you have the statistics on this apparent percentage increase in mechanical incidents, or are we just feeling it as we lose more friends??

Aside from the tragic losses of Ben at Bonaparte and the two Airspray tanker pilots in Cranbrook, the big B.C. fire-flap seemed to have relatively few incidents. This 'appears' to prove your point Firehawk, and makes their deaths even sadder. Who knows what the statistics will say.
What is known is that some families lost some Dads, and we lost some buddies, let's never forget them.

 

[Over-Talk]

Donnybrook, you asked the politbureau to "buy new helicopters" ????????????????????

The Griffon in this incident and photo is only a few years old. It just looks ancient.

If it didn't have the poor maintenance system (mentioned above), or was maintained as well as an old civilian ship (mentioned above), or was maintained by a private contractor to the DND (mentioned above), it wouldn't look so old.

I agree the Navy needs Seaking replacements, but one of the reasons to spend billions on new helicopters should not be because the others are dirty.

 

[donnybrook]

Woah, let's not jump to conclusions here fellas. The military techs take very good care of the machines. Seeing a dirty tailboom isn't a sure fire link to a shoddy maintenance program. I've seen lots of dirty booms flying the civilian skies. We must consider the duration and frequency of this aircraft's tasking before the incident (ie. was it on a SAR mission all day before this flight), how much of the discoloration is actually stain (not soot, the smiley face isn't very bright) and what type of fuel they were burning. Also, this situation was supposedly caused by a power loss, so if it was engine related we might be looking at civilian overhaul facilities. I'm just playing "devil's advocate" as I have no real idea what lead to the crash. I just wanted put forth a different mindset.


Cheers.

 

[CTD]

Donny, your point is valid, but I don't see many dirty civvy tailbooms on aircraft that are hangared every night and fly a few hundred hours a year.

The stats I've seen recently don't show an increase in mechanicals. They do tend to lag behind real life though, because of the time it take to determine cause in many cases. Might be an interesting article at some point soon.

 

[MagSeal]

in my opinion, if you can't see what you're inspecting, you're just standing there looking busy.
We get components here that sometimes are so dirty you need to wash your hands after unpacking them. I can't see how any DOM or Chief Eng. could allow a very important inspection tool (your eyes) to be used ineffectively. As drivers, ask yourselves and ask your engineers then ask your Chief Engineers, what am I not seeing today? A bucket of water, a scrub brush and some soap should be your answer. Every time you open a cowling, every dirty component might just be hiding something from you. Give it a quick wipe if need be.
And on a money stand point, dirt holds water, water causes corrosion and it's usually the most expensive parts that corrode, eroding away at your profit margin in a damn hurry.
I'm going to drink some anti freeze and see if I can get sloshed enough to come up with a "get clean" slogan.

Imagine...."Clean! Clean! Clean to be seen, and....."

I better work on it some more.....another round barkeep!!!!

 

[frenchwrench]

the 412's are being maintained as per the Type certificate. I haven't heard of any scrimping, rather, they were too stringent, not a light out etc, even if VFR. I saw no complancecy ever.

 

[graunch1]

😱 Maybe the under-worked squadron pilots could spend part of their day away from perusing the job boards to wash their own helicopters???
I know in many companies this is jst not done at the drivers are too important. I worked for one very large corporate operation and the pilots would never lower themselves to touching a cleaning tool - one who did was severly ostracized by the others <_<
However in many small and very good operations, the AME takes care of the fixin' and the pilto takes care of the groomin'

What's the take out there on who cleans the machine?

 

[firehawk]

The cleaning of the aircraft should go hand and hand for both the pilot and engineer
It should'nt be shoved off on one or the other.

 

[Vortex Ring]

The Griffons are maintaining a Canadian C of A as well as all military mods. This is a new thing and as far as I know only the Griffon does this although the Cormorant may also do this. True military types like the CF18 only maintain military mods and updates. Since the process of maintaining a CofA is recent. This came about because of the debacle of trying to sell our used B206 and B212 and that we simply could not sell them because no ADs had ever been carried out except the necessary ones for safety of flight.

As for the black paint, it is because the tails get very dirty and yes, we do wash the aircraft however the military fuel we use tends to make aircraft much dirtier than the jet fuel used by commercial operators. When our Sea Kings are deployed we wash the entire airframe every 25 hours but this is due to operating at sea in a salt water environment.

Having said that the machines (Griffons) should be washed more often if dirt was a contributing factor to not noticing damage which led to a failure. I am not sure what the schedule is like for those machines.

I don't want to give the wrong impression about our technicians, they are very good and work damn hard. The problem we are having is similar to commercial ops in that our techs lack enough experience, we cannot "make" a qualified tech fast enough that we loose people as they get out. Havins said that the two systems are totally different and as a pilot I must admit that I just don't understand. To this day it perplexes me completely how about a dozen guys can maintain the Slingsby and Jet Ranger at the NFTC run school in Portage La Prairie where DND used to have three times that amount in two shifts????? I just don't know what DND does so different and only someone who had worked on both sides of the fence could possibly explain it.

 

[Rosco]

Hey Vortex Ring,

Thanks. That answer is what I thought but I wasnt too sure if things changed with outsourcing. Maybe I didnt ask the question correctly as no one else replied or asked me to elaborate.

Cheers

R

 

[MagSeal]

the pilot should wash the aircraft to show his pride in flying, the engineer should wash the aircraft to show his pride in maintenance.
In a perfect world, one would wield the hose, the other would wield the brush.