Sea King helicopter lands near grocery store

[SeaKingTacco]

Indeed SKT.  I had loss of a primary control hydraulic on only a 15-year old helicopter -- spicier yet was being at 10,000' ASL at the time. 

Agree Strike, that any aircraft that is half a century old that can still be put safely on the ground is doing all right.

Regards
G2G

10,000 feet in a helicopter?  Wow- that is a long way up. I think I have been that high in a Sea King once.  In case you care, a sonobuoy dropped from that altitude takes a long time hit the water.  Still functioned!

 

[Journeyman]

In case you care, a sonobuoy dropped from that altitude takes a long time hit the water.  Still functioned!

That's about 48 seconds of freefall......assuming you open your 'chute around 2,000 feet.....otherwise you won't still function

/tangent  ;D

 

[The Bread Guy]

An update:

A new report says a leaking O-ring is the reason the pilots of a Sea King helicopter were forced to make a controlled emergency landing last year.

The helicopter landed near a parking lot at a Sobeys in Bedford on Nov. 22, 2012.

Military safety officers say the faulty, dime-sized seal was leaking hydraulic fluid.

Their report says it was the fifth time since 2000 that an O-ring or the packing material beneath it has broken down and started to leak ....

 

[PAdm]

An update:

It always amazes me how such a small, cheap part can cause such an accident. This one was a good news story, but it could have been a tragedy. 

 

[Loachman]

Larger and more expensive parts can fail too, but that doesn't make anybody feel better.

And, by definition, tat was not an accident. It was an emergency, yes, but no damage resulted.

 

[cupper]

For want of a nail.

 

[Good2Golf]

Fortunately, aviation technicians are less worried about the actual size of a critical component than they are of ensuring that all critical parts, be they large or small, are properly maintained and serviced.  In a helicopter, there are over 10,000 'nails' for which one could be left wanting.

BZ to the crew for responding to the emergency properly am not letting potential perceptions get in the way of sound decision making.

Regards
G2G

 

[PAdm]

And, by definition, tat was not an accident. It was an emergency, yes, but no damage resulted.

Accident vs emergency - I suspect the difference is the condition of your shorts once it is all over. 

 

[Loachman]

If a part fails, but no significant damage occurs as a result, it is simply a part failure and not an accident.

If the machine had hit hard, rolled over, and beaten itself to death due to an over-reaction or other error on behalf of the crew, it would have qualified as an accident.

If your tire bursts while driving down the highway and you pull over onto the shoulder of the road, that is simply a burst tire and not an accident.

If the burst tire causes you to veer into the ditch and destroy your car, that would be an accident.

 

[PAdm]

Cheers Loachman for the info. But I do believe DFS should look into the poop factor. Could be a 3rd dimension in the risk matrix. I can see next year's flight safety briefing - "while the risk was deemed low, Bloggins crapped himself".  :nod:

 

[AirDet]

CH124 412  aka "Hormuz Harry" from the first Gulf War.  She was a good flyer during that time.  I spent a lot of hours with her and the others.  I still love the SeaKing and what the crews do with them.

Sounds like one of the primary flight hydraulic systems failed (Pri or Aux), when one shuts down for any reason it automatically turns the other on if selected off and gives warnings.  A pretty good system, and I am glad all are ok.

Cheers
Pop

I can't think of a more reliable helo than the old girl. Igor got the hyd system right. Having a pri failure and still having the confidence to land near people is only something the Seaking could deliver.

Pop,
Good to see you're still going strong.