N.L. crash families question certification

The families of victims of a deadly 2009 helicopter accident off the coast of Newfoundland are asking the federal transport minister to investigate the certification of the type of chopper involved.

Seventeen people died when the Sikorsky S–92a crashed southeast of St. John's on March 12, 2009, while taking offshore oil workers to a rig.

The families of those who died and the sole survivor, Robert Decker, want Chuck Strahl to investigate certification of that model of helicopter by the Federal Aviation Administration in the U.S.

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) released its final report on the crash on Feb. 9.

'Passengers ... remain at risk.' —Families' letter

Relatives of the passengers killed and Decker have had time to review the report and believe fundamental issues related to the S–92a's certification have not been addressed.

"Did Transport Canada succumb to pressure from the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or Sikorsky, or did they simply fail to recognize a serious safety/certification issue?" said the letter to Strahl.

Cougar flight 491 crashed 11 minutes after its pilots saw an indicator suggesting the helicopter's main gearbox was losing oil pressure.

The letter said it should have been "obvious" to Sikorsky and the FAA in 2002 that the S–92a did not have the 30-minute run-dry time it was advertised as having.

"On Aug. 6, 2002, Sikorsky carried out its initial certification test to demonstrate to the FAA that the MGB could run dry.... The MGB suffered a catastrophic failure approximately 11 minutes into test," the letter said. 

"At that point, it was obvious to Sikorsky and the FAA that the helicopter was incapable of meeting the run dry requirements for certification."

Minister supports recommendations

"We support the intent of the TSB recommendations to improve helicopter safety," Strahl said in a response emailed to the CBC.

"We intend to respond within the required 90 days. However, I have instructed my department to respond to the recommendations as soon as possible so that appropriate action can be taken to improve the safety and security of Canadian aviation."

The Minister also said he has directed his department to work with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration "to ensure we have a closely aligned and appropriate system in place for assessing the airworthiness of aircrafts and parts."

He also vowed to "work cooperatively with the Canada Newfoundland Off shore Petroleum Board to do all we can to maintain and enhance the safety of Canadian aviation."

Company message changed: TSB

The TSB’s Feb. 9 report on the crash outlines how the S–92a was marketed by its maker.

"Sikorsky published a technical brochure for the new helicopter in April 1998 to highlight its features and performance to buyers. The brochure identified one of the S–92a’s safety features as a ’30-minute run-dry drive system,'" wrote the TSB.

The TSB said the company’s message changed after certification testing.

"In February 2003, following certification testing in 2002, Sikorsky published a new technical information brochure which was changed to state the S–92a main gearbox was capable of ’30 minutes safe operation following an oil leak.’ Sikorsky never publicly announced that its original marketing information about the MGB’s run dry performance was inaccurate," said the TSB report

The letter from the victims' families and Decker said continued use of the S-92A to transport offshore oil workers is not safe.

"To this date, the S–92a helicopter lacks 30-minute run dry capability, a capability enjoyed by the vast majority if not all of the helicopters that compete with the S–92a. Passengers and crew flying on this aircraft offshore remain at risk in the event of another loss of MGB oil," it said.

Lori Chynn — whose husband, John Pelley, died in the crash — wants to know why the certification was approved.

"It's proven that the S92 is incapable of staying in the air for 30 minutes. And we're talking about the North Atlantic. And that's a worry. Knowing what I know now, if my husband was still working offshore, I'd be very, very concerned."