Experts: Impossible To Determine If Aberdeen Super Puma Accident Was Preventable | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-05.12.25

Airborne-NextGen-05.13.25

AirborneUnlimited-05.14.25

Airborne-FlightTraining-05.15.25

AirborneUnlimited-05.16.25

Fri, Jan 31, 2014

Experts: Impossible To Determine If Aberdeen Super Puma Accident Was Preventable

Gearbox Pieces Critical To Investigation Never Recovered From The Ocean Floor

It may be impossible to determine if an accident in 2009 that resulted in 16 fatalities in the North Sea was preventable, according to an inquiry being conducted in Aberdeen, Scotland.

The accident occurred when the main rotor gearbox on a Super Puma aircraft reportedly failed during flight and the aircraft went down in the water. But divers were unable to recover a critical piece, a gear that may have failed, from the ocean floor.

The Evening Express newspaper reports that the accident inquiry board was told that without that critical part, it is likely impossible to know if the accident was preventable. AAIB inspector Mark Jarvis said that because "we fully don't understand the failure mode," he could not say with certainty that the accident was avoidable.

But after inspecting what was recovered from the seabed, Jarvis said “What we do know is that if the gearbox had been removed from service and sent to the manufacturer then during their overhaul procedure this gearbox would have been rejected.”

He said there was evidence of spalling, or metal-on-metal contact, in the recovered gearbox, but there was not the usual amount of debris that would normally be found in such a situation.

An attorney for Airbus Helicopters (formerly Eurocopter) which made the Super Puma said that it was unlikely that the gear failed, because if it had been defective, that would have shown up in previous inspections. But Jarvis said that, as unlikely as that may be, "the possibility remains it … may have contributed to this accident.”

FMI: www.aaib.gov.uk

Advertisement

More News

NTSB Prelim: Hy-Tek Hurricane HP

About 100 Ft Above Ground Level, The Engine Lost Total Power On April 14, 2025, about 1003 Pacific daylight time, an experimental amateur-built Hy-Tek Hurricane HP, N9088G, was sub>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.14.25): Flight Check

Flight Check A call-sign prefix used by FAA aircraft engaged in flight inspection/certification of navigational aids and flight procedures. The word “recorded” may be a>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (05.14.25)

“While our traditional mechanical magnetos will be around for a long time, Hartzell Engine Tech acquired E-MAG to expand its PowerUP Ignition System product portfolio into bo>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.15.25): Primary Radar

Primary Radar A radar system in which a minute portion of a radio pulse transmitted from a site is reflected by an object and then received back at that site for processing and dis>[...]

Airborne 05.12.25: $1M Flying Car, Marion Airport Saved, AirVenture Cup

Also: ‘Sonoran Beauty’ Jump-Qualified, IAG Orders, FAA Shuts Down ATC Oversight, EAA Joins Modern Skies Slovakia-based developer Klein Vision recently unveiled the prod>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC