Comments on: Due diligence

By: Peter

Peter — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 04:31:28 +0000

As a non-helicopter pilot (fixed wing commercial/multiengine/instrument), but a paramedic and emergency physician, I wonder if there would be a better way to integrate the scene personnel with the weather equation.

Obviously, the EMS personnel who called the helicopter are seeing the weather on the ground at the landing zone. Presently, none of them have any weather training, but does anyone think they could be efficiently trained to provide reliable (if not very technical) landing zone weather reports. I realize this won’t help for the en route phase, but might still be very useful for the go/no go decision.

In my EMS experience, if the call is “cool” (as most helicopter response scenes are) there are typically lots of people around looking for things to do. Could this be one of them?

By: Mike

Mike — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 03:27:52 +0000

I’ve been around long enough to know when ever the Government gets involved it will suggest unrealistic solutions. IFR for EMS helicopters? There has never been any IFR approaches to any of the scene’s that I’ve flown into. Mandatory requirement of two Pilots? Most pilots try to keep weight down for performance reasons. Usually we are doing maximum preformance take offs with obstacles. Mandatory Auto pilots and NVG’s great idea. NVG’s? The Feds will not authorize a pilot to descend below 500 feet unless all crew members are using NVG’s. Under 500 feet is where you need them the most. The safety will only increase when the pilots follow the GOM and OPSPECS. If the weather is at or below minimums you don’t go. No one is doing the patient any favors if you have to divert or cancel enroute. When you cancel enroute you increased the response time for patient care. We self anounce on the helicopter frequency when going into and out of scenes and hospital pads. Most helicopter pilots are not even aware of the frequency 123.05 for helicopters let alone monitor it. It is my humble opinion that safety will only increase when Twas, NVG’s and Auto pilots are used by responsible pilots who have courage to say no.

By: Jon S

Jon S — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 23:01:42 +0000

FIrst of all, thanks for your response Tim. I still agree with you that climbing is the best/safest option in such circumstances, and if the pilot has satisfied the due diligence standard, they should be much more open to that option. In an ideal world, it would be easy for a HEMS pilot (or any of us) to switch from VFR to IFR–get our clearance quickly, receive an efficient routing that won’t strain our fuel, and be able to make our destination–but we all know that it’s far from being like that. I think Steve raises an important point: that aviation resources are really focused on airplanes, with helicopters just awkwardly trying to fit in to that mold (btw, thanks, Tim, for representing–finally we have a voice in AOPA!). Maybe NextGen, including ADS-B, will help helicopters fit into the airplane-centric NAS better, since we’ll be able to enjoy the equivalent of radar coverage even at the low altitudes we fly. How we can get better weather reporting is another problem. We should have better access to the thousands of “unofficial” weather reporting station in between airports, not for official use, of course, but for situational awareness and decision making in the planning stages. Especially since “in between airports” is where we fly.

Well, I’m rambling. I’m going to be quiet now, but I’ve really enjoyed this discussion. Lots of food for thought. Thanks once again, Tim, for what you do. Also, thanks to Retsae for your inside perspective on HEMS.

By: Steve

Steve — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:13:40 +0000

Wow Retsae Miller, you make very valid points. Without repeating you; I to think are weather service is less that perfect. I also see the weather services simular to the FAR’s in that helicopter operations are just kind of thrown in with that which were specific to fixed-wing only operations.
I have a big problem with the way our IFR training and procedures are addressed in the helicopter industry. IFR & helicopter operations should not be in the same sentence. We’re not fixed-wing aircraft; we fly unstable aircraft compared to fixed-wing and we should not pretend to be able to use a system designed for them.
Even the helicopters that have autopilot in an IFR flight are different than the airplane and most helicopter pilots that do try and fly in TRUE IMC conditions and use there autopilot are not familuar with it’s limitations because of the lack of use. IMC/IFR & HELICOPTERS JUST DON”T MIX. IFR in an airplane is very comfortable, but is very uncomfortable in the helicopter to me. Helicopters are flown by feel and visual reference plain and simple. So there’s my soap box.

We do need a separte system specific to helicopters to deal with inadvertant IMC but continued focus specifically on getting out of it and landing, not continuing. NVG, FLIR, TAWS are fantastic tools, but wont help you in IMC, it’s for night flights to off airport operations.

By: Bill

Bill — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:02:36 +0000

Retsae, regarding WX. i totally agree. let me suggest that you do not want to give the FEDs anymore authority. remember you are the PIC, you have final authority whether or not to operate. Let’s not give the FEDs to much power delegate and regulate how you interpet the WX and the forecasts.. not being in that branch of the industry, let me ask, on site coordinators, (whatever they are called) do they have the ability to give you all wind, speed, temp, dew point and pressure? if so why cant you interpolate what the weather will probably do? what is the avg stage length in time of an EMS flight? , if they dont have the ability to provide real wx like that why not? there are several hand held tools available. they cant provide cigs and vis but they can
give you the indicators of what may happen…oh, and btw, dont make the offical WX Observers.. that muddies the water regarding real time, on site local conditions WX. (example, is the guy/gal qualified? is the instrument certified and calibrated.) just use it as a tool for additional info.

By: LTE

LTE — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:00:12 +0000

I couldn’t agree more with R. Miller. I have flown in the Northern Rockies for a long time and the weather reporting system very unreliable. Our weather changes instantly up here and it is up to the PIC to determine when to turn around or land, that comes with situational aware. You are right where is our Stimulus Package?

By: Retsae Miller

Retsae Miller — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:27:18 +0000

I disagree with the 1 in 10 scene flights. That may be true in your area but that is too broad a statement for the whole industry. In my area quite the opposite is true. The ground guys want revenue so they don’t want to call air. Many times first reponders call for air only to get cancelled once ground EMS arrives. Instead they haul the patient to the nearest facility who then calls for air to transport the patient to higher care. Now time is waisted and the patient gets extra uneccesary bills. I don’t mind being launched then cancelled if it winds up being a code green or yellow. Getting us up and running is a good thing just in case. I do agree however that many transfers between hospitals by air are unwarranted. I don’t know if that number would impact accident rates though.

By: Paramedic Pete

Paramedic Pete — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:04:56 +0000

The sad part about air-ems is only about 1 in 10 scene flight really need to be flown. Ems dumps on the flight services so they don’t have to drive long distance transfers. If less BS is flown, less chance of accident . Now areomeds have quick turnaround time because of demand.

By: Retsae Miller

Retsae Miller — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 14:04:16 +0000

I am an EMS helicopter pilot and have been flying for over 26 years. I will say for the most part the pilots in this industry are pretty experienced. Also I would say that 99% of the decisions on whether to launch or not is based soley on WX, not revenue or life saving. The other 1% is fuel. I say 1% because most flight requests for a base are in a particular region and that area is usually small enough to accomadate most fuel issues. When unforecasted weather is encountered during a flight it is usually aborted. The problem arises when a patient is onboard. Not only do you have to abort but you have to make arrangements with a ground ambulance service to meet you somewhere and continue the transport. I have done this many times. One issue that is always overlooked is our weather forecasting industry. I have seen it decline in the past 20 years to the point that I DO NOT TRUST IT.
In my area the accuracy rate is less than 50%. It seems when the human element was taken out i.e. local observers and forecasters and centralized, then later computerized, accuracy when down the “tubes”. The industry lost the local guys area knowledge based on his experience with local phenomenom.TRAGIC. This was all done to save money. So lets quit putting all the blame on the pilots. NTSB and the FAA need to shoulder some of this. We launch with the conditions we are given and then encounter something totally different while we are in motion with a patient onboard trying to figure out whether or not the weather is going to get worse from where we just departed from while we are turning around heading back. If the FEDs supported an intentional IMC recovery procedure vs inadvertant, then there would be no violations and the guys and gals would not be so hesitant to go up. But the FEDs are not willing to take on any responsibilty on any issue. They only point fingures. As for NVG’s. They are great IF you completely understand there limitations and deceptions. Thay can be a double edged sword and get you in as trouble as getting you out. Speaking from over 1500 hours NG time. So what are the solutions? NVG’s, TAWS, IIMC training, FED approval, fix the WX forecasting. All take money. How about some of the stimulus?

By: Ehud Gavron

Ehud Gavron — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:06:15 +0000

I appreciate other people’s opinions.

I think it’s great you want to fly. I too want to fly and I’m not an EMS pilot. (I’m not yet IFR rated either).

However, we can take those First Responders who save lives and protect theirs and we can do so by eliminating noncompliant traffic that won’t announce on CTAF, won’t listen on CTAF, and won’t get out of the way.

You have an issue with it. Fine. Don’t make it personal. I’m suggesting what I think would keep the EMS guys alive… while inconveniencing me (and you) only in a true first-responder emergency.

If something I said offends you, please don’t take it personally. If you have to take personally, remember you’re on Tim’s forum, and be polite. Sign your name.

I’m not trying to solve all or any of the world’s problems… except I think these ideas will make EMS helis safer.

Respectfully,

Ehud