-Multi-Engine Helicopters: First, I have no time in twin helicopters. That being said, my understanding is that most HEMS accidents are due to helicopters running into things: from towers/obstacles, to LZ mishaps, to other helicopters. How does a twin helicopter help? Or are the twins meant to address a power problem for ingress/egress?

-IFR: I do hold IFR and CFII ratings in helis and airplanes. I definitely do understand the benefit of being able to fly IFR, if only to react to inadvertent IMC. Moreover, I recently heard Matt Zucarro explain that one of HAIs top lobbying issues is to establish a low-altitude airspace system. How would this IFR capability and airspace structure aid in off-site operations? I would think the most dangerous situation would be descending IFR into an area you hope is VMC, with no approach or wx observations.

-Training: In the article above, Mr. McAdams mentioned increased training. Specifically in what area? As I mentioned, how do you increase training for CFIT/O? (I have dubbed CFIO as Controlled Flight into Obstacles) I imagine that it is largely due to low weather, visibility, and single pilot workload which causes the pilot to “miss” what is going on outside. Short of two-pilot crews (which I support) how can this be mitigated by training?

I am hear to learn, any insight is greatly appreciated.

I concur that rules will have an immediate effect on reducing the amount of “bad behavior” both on the management side and the flight crew side, and I too have been around long enough to not be “Pollyanna” about the immediacy and totality of effect that certification programs and even new FAA RULES would have on the overall accident rate, but as you know changing mindset is neither simple nor quick, especially in the aviation community.

Even if rule changes WERE implemented, continually operating safely requires a continuous safety mindset, something that really can’t be legislated. Sure… management knows they are putting pressure on pilots, but to your point, if they are aren’t forced to constantly think about, or live with the consequences of that pressure (even outside of criminal negligence, which by the way, such charges can always be brought by prosecutors NOW, if they felt there was criminal intent, and they had PROOF of such action), then it is easier for them to maintain the status-quo. Will forcing them through safety awareness training once a quarter make a difference? If the course has strong content and good presentation, and generates organization-wide awareness, my bet is it will reach some of them, which is better than none of them. Hopefully over time, that number would grow.

Again, it would be the “completeness” of the program that would work to simultaneously improve pilot tools, skills and proficiency in the specific areas of operation, imbue the WHOLE operation with a safety mindset, and educate the consumers of EMS services that they have a CHOICE in selecting operators who work to a higher standard of performance. That covers all the “risk-generation” elements, but again, in the end its the judgment and value system of the people involved that will make or break it.

Like I said before, until the FAA gets serious about wanting to fix the problem and not just putting out useless Op Specs to please some people that don’t really do anything to help, we’ll all continue to be in danger of becoming statistics too.

PS : I just thought about something. As soon as Congress or whoever can do it makes it criminally negligent for managers to put pressure on pilots and we see a few of these yahoos go to jail then we’ll start seeing some changes. Every company says safety is their #1 concern, until you remind them of the money issue, then safety goes to #2 (pun intended).