Comments on: Too close to the rotor

By: Obelix

Obelix — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 06:34:00 +0000

Mr Jim Borger, I would love to hear why you believe that the Chief Pilot had NO CHOICE but to enforce this rule? It seems to me, while I understand that the ops spec is a legal document that the operator is required to abide by, that there is always discretion and judgement to be used in every situation. It is what Tim used when he decided not to land in the middle of the pad and it is what the Chief Pilot should have used when deciding how to handle the matter. Many people misunderstand this about positions of authority.. it is a part of one’s responsibility in that position to use discretion when enforcing rules. One should enforce the SPIRIT of the rule not aimlessly follow the rule to the letter. Pointlessly following rules to the letter is in fact only a display of one’s incompetence and lack of confidence in one’s own ability to judge and use discretion correctly.

By: helios

helios — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 16:49:46 +0000

Unfortunately being a chief pilot in the EMS or Gov’t world doen’t always mean your smarter than the next guy. It just means that he’s been there longer and wanted you to know that he is the BOSS. He probably agrees with your explaination but will never admit it.

By: Jerry Faust

Jerry Faust — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:34:38 +0000

Tell the chief pilot you will accept his butt-chewing but only after he has first chewed the butts of everyone before you who has flown the subject helicopter type for the company, given that they all violated the 12 foot rule every time they landed.

By: HeloMike

HeloMike — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 23:43:37 +0000

You did land ON THE HELIPAD….
Good job!

By: Jim Borger

Jim Borger — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 15:11:23 +0000

The chief pilot can change the ops manual but he must enforce it until he does change it, which he can do verbally over the phone. If you think something in the manual is wrong put it in writing and send it up the line but until it is changed live with it. If you choose to do something outside the manual have a good reason and be prepared to suffer the consequences, good or bad. I am not advocating blindly doing everything by the book. As I stated, nobody can write a set of rules that cover every situation. Use your best judgement but be aware that just maybe the boss, or FAA, will not see things your way.

45 years of flying helicopters, over 40 in 135 ops. Whoopee.

By: Rob

Rob — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 03:53:40 +0000

“The chief pilot has no choice but to enforce the ops manual, no matter what his personal opinion is” 20 years in the helicopter industry and I say this comment is totally wrong! The chief pilot has the responsibility to make sure the ops manual is resonable and that his pilots are allowed to make decisions in the best interest of safety. If he does what you say and doesn’t apply his opinion he is a waste of a position. I can find someone off the street and pay them minimum wage to just “enforce the ops manual, no matter their opinion” A chief pilot is supposed to be qualified enough to give an opion that is useful and matters to those in management, and back the pilots when they do something smart.

“You either knew the rules and broke them, or didn’t know the rules, either way your wrong” Or, you knew the rules, understood the intent, and made the best decision to best protect the assets (crew and aircraft) that the rules are there to protect in the first place. That’s why PIC stands for pilot in command, not pilot in compliance.

Next thing you know we are going to have people that think the ops manual should of had a paragraph in it to tell the pilot what to do in case the helipad is being covered by water from broken pipes that froze.

If I couldn’t have the rotor over a 4′ obstacle our utility flight department would be shut down. Cleary what you did was in the best interest of the crew. Like you said, have silly CP put it in writing how he interprets the regs and when 50% of your flights get turned down, the management will fire him long before they let go of a pilot that can actually use judgement when necessary.

By: Jim Borger

Jim Borger — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 23:53:37 +0000

The chief pilot has no choice but to enforce the ops manual, no matter what his personal opinion is. If he was a line pilot he might very well have done the same thing but he can’t say that. Nobody can write a set of rules that covers every situation you might encounter while performing your duties so you, as PIC, must decide the best course of action to take in a particular situation. If the chief pilot disagrees with your decision then you know not to do it again. Say you’re sorry, even if you aren’t, and ask him for guidance as to what the proper course of action should be if this situation should arise again.

By: Cary

Cary — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 23:07:29 +0000

My .9 hours of rotorcraft time hardly qualifies me to comment, but as an experienced pilot and a lawyer, I have some thoughts here. I question that the author of the ops reg had any reason–I’ve seen too many rules, regs, ordinances, statutes, and court opinions that have obviously been drafted by someone with zilch knowledge of the subject–they were just given the drafting task. One of the critical criteria for a good reg, however, is that it is unambiguous–this one apparently is ambiguous and needs to be changed.

Just yesterday, reading about Dave Hirschman’s unanticipated landing of the SBD, I was reminded of how regs et al often make little sense. The operating manual for the SBD told Hirschman that he should land gear up in an emergency, but he chose to land the SBD gear down on a grass strip. That’s similar to the ops manuals of most Navy airplanes for years. When I was learning to fly back in the early 70s at a USAF aero club, I often read the Navy’s aviation safety newsletter. In it, there was an article about a Navy flight student who landed gear up in a T-28 after an engine failure–on a 10,000′ runway–because the T-28′s manual said that emergency landings must be made gear up. It took thousands of bucks to repair the airplane, over and above replacing the engine.

The PIC has final word on what is or is not safe. Whether landing on an icy helipad is unsafe, I can’t say for lack of experience, but if the PIC considered it to be unsafe, then his alternatives were to land where it wasn’t icy or go elsewhere, either being OK in spite of regs to the contrary, because of his emergency authority.

Cary

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 20:59:03 +0000

Cap’n 777,
I wonder how you can be certain that the writer of the Ops manual determined the 12-ft margin so scientifically? “Why 12′ and not 10′, or 15′? I don’t know…and I bet neither does the pilot, OR the chief pilot. However the person who wrote the manual sure did…and unless they were flying that day…no one should assume to know better.” I have been involved in more than one occasion of developing operation procedures for an outfit, and as often as not, would set limits that seemed, to my informed opinion, reasonable at the time. Twelve feet sounds reasonable; if the writer neglected to include “lateral distance” or some other clarifying wording, it is the failing of the writer – - not the pilot in the actual situation.
I do concur that Mr. McAdams would have been most prudent to send the Chief a CYA letter before leaving the facility that day; it might have turned out to be a career-saver. Turns out he didn’t need one, but there was no way to know that in advance. Cite ‘emergency authorization’ or declare that the copter had slid to the corner after landing – whatever, but CYA. Then get that Ops Manual revised to make sense.

By: R. Fetterman

R. Fetterman — Sat, 08 Jan 2011 19:12:24 +0000

Quite simply, the pilot in command has the final say and can bend or ignore any rule necessary if in his/her assessment it is prudent to do so for the safety of he crew or public. Just make sure you don’t enter a TFR in the process.