Look, I wasn't referring to anything of mine that he has dismissed. I have just noticed a little negativity coming from your end. Maybe antagonistic was too far. I also realise that his last post was a while ago, but it is still relevant. If you would like me to prove it to you in a personal message, I will, although you needn't look far back in this specific forum to see some examples.

I won't be spending anymore time getting off topic.

See now you're just confusing everyone. Who are you talking to?

"anything of mine that he has dismissed"

"negativity from my end?"

If you're going to rant, get it right.

But yes, feel free to PM me, I could use a laugh.

I don't recall seeing the Dreamworld chopper crash mentioned, or the Seaworld chopper hi-jacking either.

I was actually on the hydro-coaster stairs when the helicopter crashed in the car park.

Would have been June 2009 just before our son was born.

The pilot did very well to put it down where he did and avoid the cars etc around.

It's a shame it (I think) was human error in the end, but a good landing in the circumstances

Don't quote me but I have a feeling the next day they said it ran out of fuel.

That's what I remember it being too. That comes down to human error. The chopper doesn't go fuel itself up. It's amazing in this day and age that we still rely on people to calculate the fuel load themselves on aircraft. (Unless that's been changed since last time I watched air crash investigation.....which happened to be on a flight to the USA in 2011 lol)

Yeah you would reckon it would be something you'd make sure of.

Imagine that feeling when you are watching the fuel gauge of the car thinking am I going to make it or not, except you're 15,000 feet up!

I hope the guy that under-fuelled it got his ass handed to him.

I wouldn't be surprised if it came back to being a cost-cutting measure though. Keeping in mind airlines are notorious for only just putting enough fuel in to get to their destination +~30mins hold time to save money.

There's a report on the CASA website, while it was a long time ago when I read it, I'm pretty sure the upshot was basically that they took off with too little fuel onboard, due in part to human error, and in part to a faulty gauge.

Contributing safety factors

• The operator did not have a procedure in place

to ensure independent crosschecking of the

helicopter’s fuel quantity. [Minor safety issue]

• At takeoff, there was insufficient fuel on board

the helicopter to ensure the safe completion of

the flight.

• The pilot did not associate the illumination of

the FUEL PUMP warning light with a possible

low fuel state because of his previous

experience where such illuminations were a

consequence of electrical system faults.

• The combination of low altitude, airspeed and

main rotor RPM meant that there was

insufficient energy in the main rotor for the

pilot to arrest the descent rate prior to landing.

Other safety factors

• The helicopter’s fuel gauge may have been

over reading.

• The pilot deactivated the caution lights on the

annunciator panel, which also deactivated the

low rotor RPM warning horn.

• The low fuel quantity approaching the helipad

increased the risk that any unusual attitudes

or out-of-balance flight may uncover the fuel

boost pump(s).

I guess this is a good thing....

Action taken by the helicopter operator

The operator no longer operates any aircraft in

Australia.

Full report - It's an interesting read..... http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/2492711/ao2009026.pdf

Edited July 23, 201412 yr by reanimated35

S

As far as Aussie park accidents go, we've spoken on Dreamworld and Luna Park. What else have we got?

I don't recall seeing the Dreamworld chopper crash mentioned, or the Seaworld chopper hi-jacking either.

Well I mentioned Wonderland... although only a no-fault drowning and a bathroom stabbing. As for ride accidents, I think between Daniel, Bussy, Wazza and several other Wonderland members, the park's accidents have been well documented - highlights include the demon cable snap, the probe cable snap, the skyrider cable snap... i'm seeing a theme here.

I wouldn't really class the DW or SW chopper incidents as ride accidents... but they are both interesting incidents to say the least. Somehow I don't think the bloke at SW was going to make it to his intended destination - the chopper didn't have the range for that...

As for calculating fuel loads, choppers can't just "fill the tank" so to speak. The pilot (or other authorised person) has to calculate that the fuel weight, passenger and cargo load etc are all within the aircraft's acceptable takeoff limits. This is supposed to be done before every flight - which is a lot of work for joyrider trips.

These kinds of flights would probably work with a full tank at the start of the day, but they have to work out approximately how much fuel is used on each flight so as to stay within weight limits for each trip (this is why the joyflights have prescribed routes and durations, as the fuel use is pre-calculated for each of those routes). It sounds onerous, but this all has to be documented prior to each take off, as the paperwork can be examined by CASA after the fact to determine whether the pilot has done his job properly in the case of an incident.

It's not just a money saving exercise to 'only fill what you need plus 30 minutes'... the weight of a plane at takeoff is important too. The heavier the plane is, the longer the runway needed to get off the ground (which may be limited). The pilots also need to know how much weight is on board in order to calculate "V1" - which is the point at which it is no longer safe to abort the take-off and they must attempt to lift off.

In adverse conditions such as icy or wet runways, pilots want to keep their plane as light as they can, so that they can take off in the shortest possible distance leaving them as much room for error as they can possibly get. Sure - the airline doesn't want to waste money, but in a jetliner that flies pretty well non stop from 6am to 10pm every day, a little extra fuel on landing isn't a problem (a lot is - it's harder on the wheels and brakes), but it's not like the airline is losing money - the fuel will be used eventually... they just need less fuel in the plane to fill up next time.

I wouldn't really class the DW or SW chopper incidents as ride accidents... but they are both interesting incidents to say the least. Somehow I don't think the bloke at SW was going to make it to his intended destination - the chopper didn't have the range for that...

Aside from the hijacking in the 80s, there was another incident in 1991 where all seven on board died: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1991/aair/aair199102520.aspx

Yeh I was at dreamworld the day the chopper came down we were just walking over the crossover from the giant drop to gold rush country and seen the chopper started smoking up, then start spinning around and then hanged a left then the back end dropped, and then landed or should I say crash in to the car park. Was defenly somthing will probs never see again, and somthing I will never forget. Very sad day for dreamworld that was

There were numerous non-fatal accidents at Wonderland.

The teenage boy who nearly de-gloved his fingers on The Beastie (brushes were installed just before the platform of both Beastie and Bush Beast as a result).

A teenage girl with a suspected spinal injury (thankfully she was OK) after stepping out of the speed slide trough and slipping and hitting her neck on the edge of the slide.

Heaps of other injuries, nearly all as a result of guest error/stupidity.

The funniest, although he had no physical injuries, his ego would've been severely damaged, was when a male guest of a rather large build sat down in a dodgem car and promptly put the seatbelt on. How he managed to get it on around his chest is beyond me, but he was stuck for a little while before it was cut off.

"The Bus is now leaving for Accident Inlet, Queensland"

Aside from the hijacking in the 80s, there was another incident in 1991 where all seven on board died: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1991/aair/aair199102520.aspx

I'd never heard of this one before... To save everyone the trouble, the 7 deaths were ruled a result of a temporary heart dysfunction - Myocarditis. Nothing was wrong with the chopper, and the pilot did nothing wrong.

Nothing was wrong with the chopper, and the pilot did nothing wrong.

Yes he did. He became the immediate past president of the being alive club.

But I read the report and doesn't it say that was the most likely reason, but they were not able to confirm it with certainty? (Admittedly I did read it late at night though so I might be wrong)

Yeah, the only thing confirmed was that there was nothing wrong with the chopper. It did raise questions about the skills of the pilot, if he was 'showing off' or not, and how exactly it was that he was able to become a pilot for the company in the first place. The report is very ambiguous in its findings; either the pilot was at fault, and flying recklessly or he had an undiagnosed heart condition. Given the report mentions he had friends on board, I'm betting the former, but at the end of the day it's pure speculation and that's all it can be.

The investigation found no evidence of the pilot having attempted such a manoeuvre previously and considering his rather conservative character, it is considered unlikely that he would have attempted a torque turn with a fully loaded helicopter. It is also considered unlikely that he was 'showing off for his passengers.

The pilot was suffering from an undiagnosed, temporary heart dysfunction known as myocarditis

It is possible that the vertical manoeuvre was initiated by the pilot losing control due to an incapacitating event. The lack of change in the helicopter's attitude during its final moments is

also consistent with pilot incapacity.

I don't believe the report is ambiguous. It presents all of the facts. It suggests showing off as a possibility, however the experts make a finding that he would not have attempted a risky maneuver. It also makes a finding that 'showing off' was unlikely. Further, it makes a finding that the pilot was suffering from a heart condition, and that the 'torque turn' was possibly a result of the pilot becoming incapacitated, but all subsequent events were consistent with that.

The thing about air crash investigations is that if they cannot be satisfied that their findings are the most likely possibility, they will rule as undetermined. This wasn't ruled undetermined, so my impression of this report is that the investigators were comfortable and confident that the maneuver wasn't intentional, was a result of a medical condition, and the accident was nothing more than a terrible tragedy.

The fact that they present 'showing off' as a possibility isn't meant to lead you to draw your own conclusions - it's presented to show you they considered it, and subsequently discounted it.

I have been told many times by friends that people have died on the wipeout. As far as I know, this is not the case. Could someone clarify for me whether anyone has died on this ride and why people think that this has happened

Probably someone just trying to scare you

From what I know, the only deaths we've had in our theme parks have been In pools and not on rides. I do remember a while ago (a long while ago) that one of the cable catches came loose on giant drop during high winds and nearly struck a rider, hence the overhead steel mesh you see today. Outside of that and what you see elsewhere on the forums, the parks do have some epic safety standards. There's always things that go on inside parks that doesn't make media or these forums but that's to be expected too.

does anyone remember when the two trains at dreamworld hit eachother head on i think ? but do remember it happening its was sometime in the mid 90's 1994-1995 ? i carnt remember if anyone was killed

How would that even happen on a one way track?

as i said i dont remember if it was head on or not but i am sure that the two trains did hit eachother sometime in the mid 1990's

There used to be another train track that went around Village Green. This is clearly viewable on the 1994 park map on the Dreamworld Dreamsite.

http://www.scottware.com.au/theme/dream/

Have a read around the other topics guys, I posted about this recently. You're right, mid 90'S it happened around the rocky hollow bridge where the track switch is located