Helikopter - Ambulanseflyging

Historien er lang. I Norge kom saken vedr. besetningens sammensetning opp for mange år siden. Da var Bo105 maskinen som ble brukt, og den har marginal ytelse, spesielt med en motor ute av drift. Terje Aanestad, på vegne av Stiftelsen Norsk Luftambulanse, hevdet med styrke at en kunne utdanne en medarbeider i funksjonen som assisterende flyger i tillegg til å ta vare på nødstedte på skadestedet. Saken kom bredt opp etter Føredesfjordulykken i 1996 hvor en ambulansemaskin gikk i et spenn og alle ombord omkom. Anestesilegeforeningen tok flysikkerheten opp, men ikke noe kom ut av arbeidet til Rikstrygdeverket. To flygere kom ikke på tale selv om Airlift praktiserte det. Norsk Flygerforbund ved undertegnede, hevdet at IFALPA Policy vedr. bruk av to flygere var sunn, og at helikoptrene i bransjen måtte ha ytelse nok til å ta en ekstra flyger. Statistikken på verdensbasis viser at det var korrekt. ulykkene i HEMS er alt for mange.

French Hems Debate Heats Up Around Second Crewmember
France’s civil aviation authority, the DGAC, has approved the idea of training medical personnel as helicopter emergency medical service (Hems) “technical crewmembers,” beginning October 8. This change should meet the EASA IR-OPS requirement, which France opted out of for two years. Most helicopter EMS flights in the country today are conducted by a single pilot. The idea comes from an association of French doctors who believe the additional cost and weight of a second pilot would be excessive. In March, a DGAC official greenlighted the proposal but made it clear the authority must approve a training program. Under the new rules, the technical crewmember is needed when flying to an unprepared site to embark a patient. Helicopter operator Inaer France is already devising a course that includes the required tasks listed in an EASA document. The main items are “see-and-avoid” other traffic, landing site selection, assistance in navigation and enforcing safety measures during ground operations with rotors turning. However, the SNPNAC pilot union has rejected the idea of having a part-time aviation person in the copilot seat. It has argued that courts would take an unfavorable view of an operator in the event of an accident. Most operators do not oppose the move but are concerned about liability. For example, an operator will not have any oversight on the second crewmember’s rest periods.