# Sea King helicopter lands near grocery store



## Eye In The Sky

Article Link

Sea King helicopter lands near grocery store

Crew detected a hydraulic problem 
CBC News 


A Sea King helicopter from CFB Shearwater made a controlled landing next to a Sobeys parking lot in Bedford, N.S around 2 p.m. Thursday.

Lt.–Col. Jeff Fletcher, the commanding officer of 423 Squadron, said they were returning from a routine training mission to Greenwood when the indicator light showed a problem with the helicopter's hydraulics.

"When that occurs, what we need to do at that point, we need to make an emergency landing," he said.

There were five people on board. Fletcher said they looked for the nearest safe location to land. They found an empty field, right next to a busy shopping area in Bedford.

"When we were at 3,000 feet, a mile and a half away, your heart's kind of racing a little bit," he said. "To think that you're going to be putting it in a parking lot or into an area like this, it's not something you necessarily want to do."

Fletcher said they practice for a situation like this several times a month.

"When it happens, your training just kicks in. You still get a heightened level of awareness, but that in itself, we're ready for when it happens."

'When we were at 3,000 feet, a mile and a half away, your heart's kind of racing a little bit'—Lt.-Col. Jeff Fletcher

Emergency vehicles rushed to the scene as the helicopter neared the parking area.

"It sure attracted a bit of a crowd. I don't remember when I last landed a helicopter and I had a couple of fire trucks, and the police response that we had. That's certainly not in the ordinary."

No one was injured in the incident.

CFB Shearwater spokesperson Lt. Navy Len Hickey said there will now be an investigation to determine exactly what caused the problem.

The helicopter is still sitting in the parking lot. Hickey said they haven't decided how it will be removed from the scene.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay also spoke about the unexpected landing.

"The imporant thing is everyone is fine, everybody has walked away from it," he said. "It's an unfortunate incident but it does happen with machinery."

This isn't the first time a Sea King has landed in the area. In 2010, a helicopter made a precautionary landing in Lower Sackville because of a hydraulic problem.


----------



## Scott

Good on one of Army.ca's own.

Great job.


----------



## TN2IC

Not even bothering posting anymore.


----------



## Civvymedic

Was there a medical team on board or do you mean a scary moment for the responding Ambulance crew to the scene? Glad everybody is ok. I used to work for EHS in Nova Scotia. Love it there   :yellow:


----------



## Journeyman

Macey said:
			
		

> It was a scary moment for all the medical Amb team yesterday.


I didn't see any mention, in any of the articles, about an embarked medical team. Were you a member of the immediate response team, and were you scared?

Or are you, *once again*, telling tales outside your lane?

   op:


Yes, the site can be unfriendly.....to those who insist upon making it so for themselves.


----------



## Nfld Sapper

I thought that they just saw a good deal and needed to pick up the groceries......


 ;D


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Macey said:
			
		

> It was a scary moment for all the medical Amb team yesterday. Lucky everyone walk away safe.



 ???

I'll suggest it was a tad more "scary" for the crew.  Not taking away form 'luck', but I think I'll give credit to the Aircraft Captain and crew for landing her safely.


----------



## Eye In The Sky

Civvymedic said:
			
		

> Was there a medical team on board or do you mean a scary moment for the responding Ambulance crew to the scene? Glad everybody is ok. I used to work for EHS in Nova Scotia. Love it there   :yellow:



I'll say no.  Normal crew compliment is 4 (2 Pilots, 1 ACSO, 1 AES Op).  CO (who was onboard) of 423 MH Sqn said in his interview it was a routine training flight, with a crew of 5, so likely the 5th person was an instructor/Standards pers (despite the obvious comments on CBC about the MND being flown around for his groceries, etc).


----------



## Ciskman

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> (despite the obvious comments on CBC about the MND being flown around for his groceries, etc).



Big suprise there. :


----------



## dapaterson

Eye In The Sky said:
			
		

> (despite the obvious comments on CBC about the MND being flown around for his groceries, etc).



Well, his wife _is_ pregnant.  That's probably why we're getting the Chinooks - so he can go to Costco for Pampers.


----------



## kratz

I walk past that area daily. 

We heard the emergency response sirens and thought it was another accident on the highway.

Late yesterday afternoon, we watched a Sea King fly low level down Larry Uteck, hang a right and still flying low level the flew along the rim of Bedford basin to the container terminal before rising to a standard altitude. So we thought it was all over with.

When we headed out at 1845, and drove past the LZ, the Sea King was still on site. On our return trip at 2045, the entire site was empty. 

Good job on the crew, support team and system in keeping this as safe as it turned out.


----------



## Popurhedoff

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


----------



## Journeyman

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Were you a member of the immediate response team....


Based upon PM from Macey, I sincerely apologize for this post, which erroneously presumed he was posting outside his lane.

Sorry.


----------



## Scott

Yesterday's Herald had a satire cartoon depicting the Sea Kings as lemons. Must have been a late night at the drawing board to get that out for pressing :


----------



## kratz

link to drawing


----------



## Good2Golf

BZ to the crew for a solid response to what, for larger helicopters, can be a highly undesirable ending.  Loss of both hydraulics can lead to loss of aircraft control.  Don't know about the specific force required in a Sea King, but with a dual hydraulic failure on a CH-47 Chinook, it takes over 6,000 lbs of force to move the controls (i.e. impossible).

Skipper did a good job securing the aircraft and ensuring everyone's safety, spectators included.

Regards
G2G


----------



## SeaKingTacco

G2G-

There is effectively no way to control a Sea King without Pri and Aux hydraulics.

While loss of either system is a serious thing and must be dealt with, it I not like being on fire or losing the tail rotor- that will kill you. The crew did a good job of not taking something serious and making it worse by trying to force a landing in a worse spot than what they did choose.

And loss of hydraulics has nothing really to do with the age of the aircraft.  It can happen on a brand new airplane, too.


----------



## Strike

kratz said:
			
		

> link to drawing



Gotta love the media.

I would argue that a helicopter that is still flying strong almost 50 years after its purchase is anything BUT a lemon.


----------



## Good2Golf

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> ...And loss of hydraulics has nothing really to do with the age of the aircraft.  It can happen on a brand new airplane, too.



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


----------



## observor 69

kratz said:
			
		

> I walk past that area daily.
> 
> We heard the emergency response sirens and thought it was another accident on the highway.
> 
> Late yesterday afternoon, we watched a Sea King fly low level down Larry Uteck, hang a right and still flying low level the flew along the rim of Bedford basin to the container terminal before rising to a standard altitude. So we thought it was all over with.
> 
> When we headed out at 1845, and drove past the LZ, the Sea King was still on site. On our return trip at 2045, the entire site was empty.
> 
> Good job on the crew, support team and system in keeping this as safe as it turned out.



Now that has to p*** the media off. 
BZ to the ground crew.


----------



## SeaKingTacco

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> 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

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> 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

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> 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

Loachman said:
			
		

> 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

Popurhedoff said:
			
		

> 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.


----------

