Helicopter emergency medical services NPRM critique

    Dec. 16, 2010
    WASHINGTON, 16 Dec. 2010. The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) announcement that it may require data recording or monitoring, or both, for helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) operators was not embraced by all concerned. The notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) introduced, but did not clearly define, the FAA's new term, lightweight aircraft recording system (LARS). It simply threw out a few markers and asked for comments.
    By Charlotte AdamsWASHINGTON, 16 Dec. 2010. The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) announcement that it may require data recording or monitoring, or both, for helicopter emergency medical services (HEMS) operators was not embraced by all concerned. The notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) introduced, but did not clearly define, the FAA's new term, lightweight aircraft recording system (LARS). It simply threw out a few markers and asked for comments.The NPRM, however, is somewhat contradictory, according to Pascal Gosselin, president of Wi-Flight, a Canadian company that is preparing to introduce an ultra-low-cost HFDM (helicopter flight data monitoring) product next year. The FAA calls for a price point of $6,450 and emphasizes the importance of FDM, but cites requirements that could imply a more complex and expensive box along the lines of a traditional flight data recorder (FDR). The agency mentions parameters, such as aircraft flight control position inputs, Gosselin says, which might suggest the need for FDR transducers. According to Gosselin, the goal of a LARS should not be strictly for accident investigation. Rather, a LARS should be the central part of a Flight Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA) or FDM program. These programs, he points out, focus on pilot behavior before everything else. That means recording what the helicopter is doing -- its movements -- and doing post-flight analysis in an automated fashion. Gosselin also takes issue with the FAA's concern for the LAR's weight, as apparent in the acronym. Simplicity is a more important issue, he says. "FDRs need to tie into all sorts of control inputs, for example, and that makes them complicated and expensive to install, requiring customized STCs [supplemental type certificates] for each model of helicopter." He goes on to suggest that a LARS should be "simple enough to be installed under an AML STC [approved model list STC] for all helicopters ... something that the FAA currently doesn't allow."

    Voice your opinion!

    To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of Military Aerospace, create an account today!

    View All Companies >