# Survival Flight Ohio Fatal HEMS crash



## CANMAN (Jan 29, 2019)

Survival Flight out of Mount Carmel Hospital in Columbus Ohio crashed this morning enroute to pickup a patient. I believe they're in a 407. Limited details at this time but 3 fatalities have been confirmed  RIP crew. 

https://www.10tv.com/article/3-dead-after-medical-helicopter-crashes-southeast-ohio


----------



## GMCmedic (Jan 29, 2019)

From what I can tell I believe you are correct on the 407. 

Sad news.


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 30, 2019)

News article claims MedFlight, a competing program, turned the flight down due to weather.


----------



## CANMAN (Jan 30, 2019)

NomadicMedic said:


> News article claims MedFlight, a competing program, turned the flight down due to weather.



So sad that with the amount of crashes that continue in the industry there are programs and flight crew who will continue to take flights that put their lives at risk and no one speaks up. I hear that not only was the flight turned down by two programs, one right in the town the hospital was at, but also this program has been known for launching on flights other programs turned down. 

Also crews currently searching for a Guardian Flight King Air 200 out of Alaska that has been missing since this morning. No updates on that yet....


----------



## NomadicMedic (Jan 30, 2019)

Such a needless waste.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 30, 2019)

I just looked, and can confirm that there were a multitude of weather turndowns in Ohio yesterday.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Jan 30, 2019)

CANMAN said:


> So sad that with the amount of crashes that continue in the industry there are programs and flight crew who will continue to take flights that put their lives at risk and no one speaks up. I hear that not only was the flight turned down by two programs, one right in the town the hospital was at, but also this program has been known for launching on flights other programs turned down.
> 
> Also crews currently searching for a Guardian Flight King Air 200 out of Alaska that has been missing since this morning. No updates on that yet....


New updates are saying they are finding debris in the last known area of the plane. Sounds like they found part of a wing.


----------



## MonkeyArrow (Jan 30, 2019)

CANMAN said:


> So sad that with the amount of crashes that continue in the industry there are programs and flight crew who will continue to take flights that put their lives at risk and no one speaks up. I hear that not only was the flight turned down by two programs, one right in the town the hospital was at, but also this program has been known for launching on flights other programs turned down.
> 
> Also crews currently searching for a Guardian Flight King Air 200 out of Alaska that has been missing since this morning. No updates on that yet....


I'm certainly not an expert on how calls for service get routed in the HEMS world, but why does more than one program even get an opportunity to take the call for an emergent flight? Certainly if you [as a hospital/scene provider/whatever] get turned down once due to weather, you wouldn't continue trying to shop around until someone bites and flies in what you know now is poor weather...


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Jan 30, 2019)

MonkeyArrow said:


> I'm certainly not an expert on how calls for service get routed in the HEMS world, but why does more than one program even get an opportunity to take the call for an emergent flight? Certainly if you [as a hospital/scene provider/whatever] get turned down once due to weather, you wouldn't continue trying to shop around until someone bites and flies in what you know now is poor weather...


But that is exactly what happens at least here in CA. If company A turns down the fight then company B will be called then company C and so on. Generally speaking the hospitals main goal is to get the patient out. 

Even within companies they will get the call and then see if base A will take it. If not then they will call base B and so on. We had one the other day that 4 bases within our own company refused due to weather so we also refused it.


----------



## VentMonkey (Jan 30, 2019)

DesertMedic66 said:


> But that is exactly what happens at least here in CA.


Clearly, it isn’t just a California thing.

Without knowing too much about the Ohio incident, it does happen quite frequently. The combing through different bases is something a hospital could care less about, when as @DesertMedic66 pointed out, they’re just trying to get a patient out.

My base has no issues saying no, even if it means I will ultimately end up on the ground transfer for it. So is life. 

But as an example of things, I’ve turned calls to the base @DesertMedic66 is now at simply because we may not be able to get to said hospital from The Valley Floor but they might be able to from The Desert Floor, and vice versa.

I’ve also been taught to advise their base when I’m able to on the turn down and why it was turned by our base. And if they call (which they have) and inquire why, I have no problems disclosing what we see on our end vs. what they may/ may not on theirs.

At the end of the day, competitor or not, no one wants that on their shoulders.

TLDR~ logistics do sometimes play a factor; no clue if they did or didn’t in this particular case.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Jan 30, 2019)

VentMonkey said:


> Clearly, it isn’t just a California thing.
> 
> Without knowing too much about the Ohio incident, it does happen quite frequently. The combing through different bases is something a hospital could care less about, when as @DesertMedic66 pointed out, they’re just trying to get a patient out.
> 
> ...


Our company is also very good on advising us “hey guys, we have a flight request from X to X. The flight was already turned down by company X and by our own base (Y and Z). Just wanted you guys to take a look and see if you are able to do it.” We will call around and see why it was turned down if everything looks ok on our side. 

We have also started to do ground transports when we aren’t able to fly.


----------



## VentMonkey (Jan 30, 2019)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Our company is also very good on advising us “hey guys, we have a flight request from X to X. The flight was already turned down by company X and by our own base (Y and Z). Just wanted you guys to take a look and see if you are able to do it.” We will call around and see why it was turned down if everything looks ok on our side.
> 
> We have also started to do ground transports when we aren’t able to fly.


Every now and again OCC calls us with similar info. I find them to be quite helpful.


----------



## PotatoMedic (Jan 31, 2019)

So as a HEMS dispatched I have I have a bit of a perspective on how this goes down.  First off hospitals don't care about weather/pilot duty time/ crew fatigue, they just want the person gone and they get mad when we tell them no for any of those reasons.  As mentioned before those sometimes turn into ground trips for our crews.  

Second ANY time we decline a trip that is FW or RW we put it into a system called weather turndown.  That way people can log in and see if there were flights turned down and for what reason and it gives a contact number if pilots want to chat.

Third if the RW can't make it we might see if the FW can do it (FW for our service is IFR where our RW is only VFR).  Rarely we will ask our other bird to see if they can do it (Usually because the base not the destination is the issue weather wise).

Fourth places shop and if weather is bad I will ask if anyone has already declined it (sometimes they are truthful and sometimes they lie, that is why I will call around and ask the other flight services if they have turned it down already).


So yeah... that is my perspective.  My service even allows us in the comms center to decline a flight if we don't think it is safe.  Sadly some places will try anything to get a flight.

I will say it is fun to listen when our medical director argues with the hospital doctor about why we are not flying even though you have a sick patient.


----------



## Scott33 (Jan 31, 2019)

# 5. 




I can’t comment as to the validity of this picture. However, on the off chance that it is legitimate, their whole operation needs to be shut down.


----------



## VFlutter (Jan 31, 2019)

To play devil's advocate, we frequently take flights that other bases turn down for weather.  We rarely have ever aborted a flight due to weather, rarely have to go by ground, never go IIMC, etc. Just like most things in life everyone has a different perspective, interpretation, and comfort level. Just because a base takes a flight that another base or company turned down does not necessarily mean they did something wrong, wreckless or inherently risky. Weather can be location dependent. There are also pilots that will automatically turn down a flight request without even checking weather if it was turned down by someone else when in all reality it was flyable. 

We unfortunately have a competitor that is notorious for reporting turning down for "weather" for all reasons such as out of service, maintenance, weight. 

Obviously no one should push weather and when multiple other bases or companies have declined a flight then you should be vigilant and consider unforecasted weather. Everyone wants to make it home. But you can take safety to both ends of the spectrum, the safest flight is never getting off the ground.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jan 31, 2019)

The first question our dispatch asks is if any other services have turned it down. Most of the time we turn it down also, as the only IFR service in the area, sometimes we take them (right now that it rare cause of the temperature).  

The major reason for shopping for aircraft, as pointed out, the hospital doesn't care. Another reason is an aircraft to the west may have weather below minimums, but an aircraft to the east may have blue skies.


----------



## GMCmedic (Jan 31, 2019)

GMCmedic said:


> The first question our dispatch asks is if any other services have turned it down. Most of the time we turn it down also, as the only IFR service in the area, sometimes we take them (right now that it rare cause of the temperature).
> 
> The major reason for shopping for aircraft, as pointed out, the hospital doesn't care. Another reason is an aircraft to the west may have weather below minimums, but an aircraft to the east may have blue skies.


To late to edit: If another aircraft turns down a flight, we have to clear it it with OCC before we accept it.


----------



## Ensihoitaja (Jan 31, 2019)

What's OCC?


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Jan 31, 2019)

Ensihoitaja said:


> What's OCC?


Operational Control Center. Pretty much the big boss people


----------



## DrParasite (Feb 1, 2019)

We used to dispatch HEMS; if the nearest helicopter turned it down for weather, we would go to the second nearest, advising that the first turned it down for weather.  if they turned it down, I think it went to the 3rd, but I am not sure.  But after that, the job is turned down due to weather, and no one else was asked (a benefit of a single HEMS dispatch point state wide).

The reason why is quite simple: there might be a huge storm between helicopter A and the scene, preventing them from taking the job.  But helicopter B, which is 100 miles on the other side of the state, might have a clear path in and out, so why shouldn't they take the job?   If there is poor weather over the destination, it was usually a denial all around.

It was typically the pilots who make the call on whether they take the job, based solely on the weather to the pickup location, but I believe any crew member was able to deny the flight.

As for the company pictured, I'm curious why their crew find it acceptable to fly is weather that is less safe than industry standard minimums....


----------



## Ensihoitaja (Feb 1, 2019)

DesertMedic66 said:


> Operational Control Center. Pretty much the big boss people


Thanks!


----------



## Carlos Danger (Feb 1, 2019)

Scott33 said:


> # 5.
> 
> I can’t comment as to the validity of this picture. However, *on the off chance that it is legitimate, their whole operation needs to be shut down.*



Not necessarily.



DrParasite said:


> As for the company pictured, I'm curious why their crew find it acceptable to fly is weather that is less safe than industry standard minimums....



I don't know anything about the programs in question, but a reasonable assumption about what point #5 means is that the program represented in the picture adheres to FAA minimums, where other programs in the area have higher minimums, as a matter of internal policy.

So hypothetically, Program A could turn down a flight because the weather is below _their_ minimums, while Program B accepts the same flight with the same weather, because they adhere to the FAA minimums, which are lower than Program A's minimums. And that may or may not be the right call, as far as safety is concerned.

The FAA minimums for Part 135 cross-country flight (especially at night) are definitely marginal, but not necessarily unsafe……which is why the FAA


----------



## PotatoMedic (Feb 1, 2019)

FAA minimums are 800 foot ceiling and 2miles visibility at night and 3 miles visibility at day.  Just an FYI.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Feb 1, 2019)

Remi said:


> Not necessarily.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The issue with that is that the CAMTS standard for weather is to be equal to or exceed FAA 135.609 standards. Since it is a CAMTS and FAA requirement for weather minimums there should be no agencies who are operating outside of that (military and possibly law enforcement excluded). Air Methods was one of the bases who turned it down for weather being below weather minimums and they use the 135.609 standards. 

There are possibilities that still could have occurred such as when the first several companies were requested the weather was below minimums but when this specific company was requested the weather was above minimums or marginal. With multiple closer bases turning the flight down several red flags should have hopefully been tossed up but they may not have even known about the other companies turning it down. They may not have asked or even worse the hospital could have lied about other bases refusing the flight which has been known to happen.


----------



## VFlutter (Feb 2, 2019)

Just because an AirMethods base declined it for minimums does not mean that it was below FAA minimums. We fly at 800/2 quite often being that we are an urban base with multiple hospitals and airports within our service area. Other bases will decline at 1000/3 or even 1200-1500/3+ 

It is all speculation at this point. Even if they were the first call, and other bases hadn't turned it down, it may have been the same result. Even if the forecast was clear and they encounterd unpredictable IIMC conditions it may have happened the same way.


----------



## DesertMedic66 (Feb 2, 2019)

VFlutter said:


> Just because an AirMethods base declined it for minimums does not mean that it was below FAA minimums. We fly at 800/2 quite often being that we are an urban base with multiple hospitals and airports within our service area. Other bases will decline at 1000/3 or even 1200-1500/3+
> 
> It is all speculation at this point. Even if they were the first call, and other bases hadn't turned it down, it may have been the same result. Even if the forecast was clear and they encounterd unpredictable IIMC conditions it may have happened the same way.


It is all speculation at this point as it could be anything from IIMC, CFIT, engine failure/failure to autorotate, etc but weather was a huge factor in it so of course that is a major part to consider. Add a company that openly advertises their weather minimums are different than other bases (even though those other bases use FAA standards) with 2 other companies who turned down the flight for weather minimums, with reports of snow storms in the area, with extremely low temperatures and conditions that could produce icing are all huge concerns and are all very likely to have caused or at least be a major factor.


----------



## Carlos Danger (Feb 2, 2019)

DesertMedic66 said:


> The issue with that is that the CAMTS standard for weather is to be equal to or exceed FAA 135.609 standards.



Right. But if Program A's minimums EXCEED the FAA's minimums, and Program B's minimums ARE the FAA's minimum's, then program B can correctly say "we have different weather minimums", and possibly legally take flights that program A turns down for weather.

Of course I don't know that this is the case here, and this may have had nothing at all to the with the crash. I'm just just pointing out to the earlier posters (that I quoted in my original comment) that it is possible for a HEMS program to truthfully claim to adhere to different weather standards than their competition, and it can be perfectly legal, as well.


----------



## GMCmedic (Feb 2, 2019)

#5 is poor wording IMO, but that's pretty much what we tell customers. The difference being were IFR.


----------



## CANMAN (Feb 3, 2019)

GMCmedic said:


> #5 is poor wording IMO, but that's pretty much what we tell customers. The difference being were IFR.



Agree, #5 will come back to haunt them I believe in future court proceedings. There is also word that this program had a motto of "we fly what other's can't". From speaking with some people I know in the industry in that area it sounds like frozen precipitation was present, so I'm going to guess OAT and conditions for icing should have been concerns despite ceiling/vis. 

IFR certainly can give you a leg up, but not in those conditions if that was indeed the type of weather that was moving through. I agree that there are times where program A might turn it down and it's not a safe mission, but program B might be coming from another direction and able to safely accomplish the mission. I have done this more times then I can count in my career. That being said, if you have two programs in the local area decline and you're coming from a considerable distance away weather becomes even more of a consideration to look at. Although 800/2 are mins, depending on the terrain and conditions I don't care to be out in those ceilings/vis routinely because in our area it doesn't give you the FAA mandated cloud clearance, we have a ton of 1000 foot plus tower's, and it also really limits the amount of time you have to make some smart decisions prior to popping in IIMC unless you're buzzing along at 800/2 and only 80-90knots. Lower = slower.

End of the day what I don't understand in almost all of these crashes is we are flying in a HELICOPTER with the ability to land almost anywhere. If weather is taking a **** abort the flight and turn around and go back to where weather was good/home. If it's really hitting the fan then declare and emergency and LAND THE AIRCRAFT! The emergency is over at that point. Sure they're might be some explaining to do and some additional paperwork, but at least you and the crew are alive to deal with the fallout. Too many people are just climbing into A/C as self loading cargo and going along for the ride, whatever the conditions may be without stopping and asking the tough questions.

Although personally I would never fly in a single, I do believe there should be a study performed about for profit vs. non-for profit programs and crashes. I believe there is pressure/more pressure to fly in alot of for profit programs, and I would be curious to see some data against non-for profit programs.


----------

