Honestly, I think that if people are completely aware of the danger involved, they should be able to decide for themselves whether or not to fly in a helicopter with no doors. It's a simple question of liberty, which is a dimming concept in New York City these days. City government seems to think that it should control everything from the food you eat to the activities in your spare time. Whether it's the City trying to decrease the amount of sugary drinks you consume to where you can drive your car, it's all about the rights of the many outweighing the rights of the individual.
Well, while I like my rugged individualism as much as the next gal, I don't agree with your analysis. In the case of the helicopter crash, we had city workers deep-diving in frigid water to cut the individuals out of their known traps. So 'my right' to do something with known dangers ends with public servants risking their own well-being to perform some kind of rescue and recovery.
Where you can "drive your car"? Really? Maybe we should consider my right to zip down a one-way street the wrong way on an illegal electric bike. What's with those pesky street signs anyway?
12
Great to see some common sense, now enforce the height limits over Waikiki and extend out from shore enough to keep choppers from buzzing the lineups from dawn to dusk. Stop noise pollution.
6
What caused the accident in the first place?
3
Depends on which version you get.
Watch the video and you see it quickly descend slam belly first into the river.
Indicative of a loss of power thrust or lift as the rotors progressively slow and fail to hover air beneath the vessel keeping it airborne.
Hard to say from the brief video but it looks like the pilot failed to keep rotor RPM high until close enough to the water to cushion it on.
Take off our shoes to board an airplane, check.
Don’t stuff pets into the overhead bin, check.
Wear a seatbelt while driving, check.
Don’t text and drive, check.
Don’t permit open door helicopter flights, check.
Use guns and rifles to slaughter numerous classrooms full of our children, concert goers, church folk, moviegoers, clubgoers? Nope, no way to stop that.
Pathetic.
24
When I was a actively skydiver the door stayed shut until we were ready to get out. Everyone aboard wore a parachute weather they were jumping or not. A requirement. That they allow aviation novices to ride in a sircraft sans doors is nuts. A quick release mechanism will likely end up with some passenger inadvertantly falling out in flight.
Instead of removing the doors for obstruction free photography why not cut a hole in the window large enough for a lens to fit through. That would negate the all important selfies though.
5
5 die in copter, boom there’s a new policy. 17 die in a school, hmmm let’s see how we can ponder the problem longer, but maybe try & sell more guns to schools cuz well you know, ...gunmakers’ bottom line & re-election....
19
As a former military helicopter pilot, my view is that no one has any business riding doors off if they can't be trusted to not undo their seatbelt. We regularly flew with doors open with Soldiers who had no particular training other than the passenger safety brief. It's not that different than a chairlift -- just windier and higher and above 50ft or so, it really doesn't matter how far you fall. Keep your seatbelt on until a crew member tells you take it off.
If you can't trust passengers not to undo their seatbelt, don't fly them at all (the doors are easy to open anyways). Flying overwater with with untrained passengers who are belted and tethered at their backs with a non-quick release tether is criminal. It is tragic and mostly preventable that these folks drowned feet from the surface.
9
Brutal to imagine their last moments, assuming they were still conscious, struggling to get out of those seats with daylight visible through the murky water above them.
4
One crash and immediate action is taken. More children killed by gun violence since Sandy Hook than American troops in combat since 9/11, and the GOP members of Congress can't bring themselves to oppose the NRA -- far from it, they want MORE guns.
14
Truly a demented sign of our times in America - tourist helicopter flights with "doors-off"! Anything - including accidental death - just to get an Instagram or Pinterest pic? Anything - including purposeful death in America - i.e. guns in every American home! God save the United States of America, please.
7
Wow something dangerous to public safety can be halted, just like that? How about we do this with assault rifles!
15
What about the fuel switch problem?
pilot should be supervising the loading and storage of anything going on his aircraft
Only if Assault Rifles has such doors attached to them...
9
One freak helicopter accident yields immediate safety measures from the government.
Hundreds of mass shootings a year and ....
8
As a retired FAA supervisory safety inspector, this sad tail just validated one of the most common truisms in a federal regulatory agency: regulations are often written in blood.
If the prohibition had happened without the benefit of hindsight, it probably would not have been written in today’s hyper-partisan environment. And which two other regulations would have been cancelled?
It is sad and inexcusable that the public demands perfection from the regulators, but only after a tragedy.
4
This is such a devastating tragedy because it really should have been foreseen and prevented. While water landings are very uncommon (although, we've had 2 in NYC in the past 10 years), fires occur with much more predictable frequency in motor vehicles (planes, helicopters, cars, buses, etc.)
The fact that the passengers were constrained with no opportunity to rehearse emergency procedures (actually find a razor and cut a strap which is tethered to their backs) prior to a true emergency is reckless. That 0 out of 5 passengers were able to escape proves how reckless this was. RIP my friends.
5
Good to hear your thoughts, what about the alleged power loss cause of crash? If that was an autorotate landing, would rotors spin strongly once down?
I'm with Gina - ban all Helicopters in Manhattan
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/nyregion/will-a-deadly-crash-in-the-e...
6
A better first measure by the FAA would be to require formal disclosure of the risks of such a flight (if somehow the risk can't be mitigated by a safer restraint design, which as a non-aviator I guess am failing to understand). As mentioned in another comment, people are de facto trapped in the airliners we use for transportation and the risks are known and/or disclosed very explicitly (thanks to the FAA). People are always going to want thrills like riding in a helicopter with no doors and why would you ban it? There are many other risky things that are relatively unregulated, like renting an ATV and bombing through the woods with the risk of imminent death. Caveat emptor, with guidance.
1
The article talks about "doors-off" flights of helicopters. What it doesn't say is "trapped passenger" flights. Because of "safety" concerns, they basically lock the passengers into their harnesses so they won't fall out of the helicopter. However, if the plane lands in the water or catches on fire, it is a death trap. The pilot is fine as he can release himself but leave the passengers to their drowning death.
3
I beieve what the FAA has banned is doors off flights with the type of harness used on that copter. I don't think they are banning doors off fights with "quick release" harnesses.
3
I was a helicopter pilot in the Army. Army helicopters have skids or wheels, but not pontoons. Our standing instructions were not to fly over water farther than we could reach land in the event of engine failure. Further, Army helicopters did not have a rotor brake to stop the rotor from turning once on water or a ship.
Navy and Coast Guard helicopters either have built in pontoons or large pontoons that can either be used to land on water or ground. In addition over water military helicopters have a rotor brake to stop the rotor when landing in water.
I viewed the video of the subject helicopter coming down into the water. The touchdown appeared to touch down level with no forward movement. That was a good water landing. The rotor continued to turn until the helicopter tilted over and the rotor contacted the water. At that point, to use the jargon of helicopter pilots, the helicopter "tore itself up". The helicopter then became inverted in the water and only the pilot survived. Pictures of the helicopter taken after it was removed from the water showed what appeared to be "Happy Birthday" balloons attached to the skids.
I suggest that overwater flights not be permitted unless 1) the helicopter has permanent pontoons capable of keeping the helicopter upright, even in rough water, and 2) the helicopter has a rotor brake system.
38
He’s absolutely correct. As soon as the propeller hit water, it capsized the helicopter.
Yes,, especially the rotor brake system and floats. Sure it would make the operation more expensive, but so what? These are recreational flights burning someone's disposable income.
No picture or video is worth risking one's life for. This was a bold and prudent move on the part of the F.A.A. At least the deaths of these 5 individuals will not have been in vain and will possibly help prevent future tragedies such as this one, although these after-the-fact actions by the F.A.A. probably come as cold comfort to the loved ones of the deceased.
18
Helicopters in cities are a dangerous nuisance, period. Why are city-dwellers expected to put with immature tourists seeking their next thrill? One helicopter operator in my city offers a wedding package, another a helicopter ride to the soccer game.
Grow up people.
30
Any time there's a mass death, we immediately ban the behavior that caused it. We do it with the United Airlines dog, we do it with the helicopter, we do it with mass shootings in public places...
Oh, wait....and wait.
87
The pilot managed to save his own behind while leaving his passengers in the water to die. He was likely the only person on that copter who knew how to release their harnesses. People in the Hamptons have been fighting this particular helicopter business for years, due to the tremendous noise, danger and pollution it causes with its flights. But five people had to die for the FAA to notice. If an organization as obsessed with protecting the aviation industry's interests as the FAA can take swift action like this, what is the NRA waiting for?
36
How are they going to define & regulate what constitutes a harness that is “easily removed”? My husband and I just took a doors-off helicopter flight for the first time in Hawaii less than two weeks ago and while we felt safely buckled in and not in fear of falling out, I don’t feel the harness/buckle system was at all complicated. I didn’t give it much thought at the time but we were able to easily fasten ourselves in and out, although it was double-checked by the staff before take-off. Who will be checking different operators and determining whether their system is “easy to remove” — or not?
9
I took one of those open door helicopter rides in Hawaii, too. But we were harnessed inside, with an X-type belt that buckled in the center of our chests - in other words, easily reachable and detached by each passenger. We didn't have the range of movement to allow us to hang out of the open doors for dare-devil pictures. My guess is, the buckled harnesses on this NYC flight, which fastened behind the passengers, weren't reachable by the passengers themselves. This is why the pilot (who knew where his buckled was) survived, while the passengers could only fight for the chance to free themselves before they drowned.
5
Wow, as a professional photographer with an emergency response agency who has flown and worked "doors off" on many occasions (with training, safety protocols, a clear photography objective/need and someone, literally, on my back as a spotter with safety oversight) this is a swift and correct response from the FAA. It was absolutely insane to take tourists with no professional photography or helicopter work training, no advance safety training, and no one watching their backs/no active egress method on "exciting" photo ops flights over water tethered in with the doors off.
Now, with no apologies to those who bemoan and sputter over government regulations and interference, why can't be get this kind of firm and direct action on the opioid crisis, automatic weapons, distracted/irresponsible/no license drivers and other clear and present dangers that take the lives of way more than five people on a daily basis?
138
To HK: because gun regulations run up against the Second Amendment; because driving is regulated by the states; because opioids used properly are legitimate drugs serving a medical need, which massively complicates any effort to try to control their use. Whereas the FAA is a federal agency with oversight of all civil aviation. Not to mention, this action is temporary.
7
No thanks, sorry, but last time I checked the Second Amendment used the term "well-regulated" and didn't mention anything about there being a problem with strictly controlling military grade automatic weapons capable of mowing down dozens of innocents, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration describes its mission as "saving lives, preventing injuries and reducing vehicle-related crashes" and the FDA says that 11.5 million people abuse or misuse opioids with 40 of those dying every day. Get on board and be a supporter of solving problems that kill thousands of Americans every year instead of saying "No we can't."
66
You're talking about what you wish would happen. I was answering your question, taken literally: the FAA can snap their fingers and temporarily ban these types of helicopter rides - why can't we simply snap our fingers and do all these other complex things? That's the question I was answering.
4
I wish the FAA would have also made it a requirement to have supplemental removable oxygen bottles available for each passenger for flights over water. Too many tourists have given their lives because they survived the water 'landing' but ended up drowning in the cabin when the helicopter capsizes. This recent accident shows that the inflatable pontoons don't work with keeping the helicopter upright. When the helicopter contacts the water with any bit of roll so the center of gravity is no longer over the body of the helicopter, it is going to capsize and the pontoons will keep it floating upside down. Don't you think supplemental oxygen for the passengers would help? Better yet, it is time to end the helicopter flights over and around such a populated area. They are a killing, noise-making nuisance.
29
I think it might be as difficult to reach supplemental oxygen as it is to get out of any harness or regular safety belt on a helicopter that is upside down in cold murky water. Of all the E river copter crashes that I have been aware of over the past 30 years the only people who survived were those who got out quickly on their own. People who, for whatever reason, couldn't get out, had to be taken out by divers and by then were either dead or in cardiac arrest and died later.
I think the best thing you could do for people who insist on these fights is to give them more rigorous training in how to get out of sinking upside down helicopters, and there are places that do that.
7
compressed air tanks represent their own set of risks, starting with heavy cylinders in a crash situation. Breathing them underwater is scuba diving - there are health hazards here as well - done wrong it can lead to air embolisms that can be fatal faster than drowning.
Figure out how the pontoons failed before adding more complexity to the system.
5
I believe one of the issues the safety board will look into is whether the absence of doors caused the copter to take on water so rapidly the pontoons were of no use (or something to that effect).
1
Assault rifles still untroubled. Whew.
106
There are an average of 28 helicopter fatalities each year in the USA.
There are 85 gun fatalities EACH DAY (i.e. 31,000 each year) in the USA.
We must stop this senseless helicopter slaughter !!
http://www.ihst.org/portals/54/symposium/2016/Presentation%20IHST-CIS_20...
114
And the FAA has what kind of jurisdiction over guns?
1
Amateurs with improperly secured photography equipment, flying over urban areas in helicopters without doors? Safety restraints that cannot be quickly removed in an emergency? The only suitable outcome for this company is to be forced into liquidating it's fleet and paying every dime left to the victims families. Let all future air tourism business flow only to companies that operate with all available safety precautions in place. Flight is a high risk business when greed and machismo preside over common sense. This truism repeats itself constantly, in unnecessary disaster after disaster. Passengers signing waivers are not the only ones affected. People and buildings below are also placed at risk. All commercial aviation services that refuse to make every effort to operate safely, should not be operating at all.
48
The FAA needs to take a long look at the medical and tourist helicopter industries. Way too many crashes.
But the FAA won't and we all know that.
7
It's not all-doors-off flights as headlined. It's those devoid of quick-release occupant restraints.
11
Add another to the list of items more heavily regulated in the wake of tragedy than guns.
100
Is the no helicopter lobby ? “NHA”
18