ICAO Annex 14 Volume 2 – Heliport Design Working Group (HDWG) update Introduction
At the last ASTG meeting on 31st January 2006, under item 4 “Future Technical Issues”, Captain Brian Hodge (CAA – Retired) updated members on the current ICAO Annex 14 work group activities and gave an undertaking, if required, to provide a full list of the latest changes and work group time lines to ASTG members. This short paper is prented to provide a summary of the more significant changes propod for offshore helideck and shipboard heliport standards and recommended practices (SARPS) in the revision of Annex 14 Volume 2. The ‘revisions’ are on the table for discussion at HDWG/3, convening between 5th and 9th June 2006 in Montreal. I will be attending the meeting as a UK ‘expert’ reprentative and would be interested to hear the views of the UK offshore industry on the draft proposals. If you have any comments on the propod changes, summarid below, I would be grateful if you could make the to me by 31st May 2006. My email address is: kevin.payne@uk.
When propod changes to offshore SARPS have been agreed in principle by the HDWG, a paper will be drafted and forwarded to the Aerodrome Panel (AP) for consideration at AP1 in Montreal between 11th and 15th December 2006.
Kevin Payne
April 2006
Summary of significant changes propod for discussion at HDWG/3
Propod changes (or new text) to existing ICAO Annex 14 Volume 2 standards and recommended practices are shown in italics. Numerical references relevant to propod revision of the Annex.
Chapter 3 – Physical Characteristics
NB: Current Annex acknowledges that for a helideck it may be presumed that the touchdown and lift-off area (TLOF) and the final-approach and take-off area (FATO) will be coincidental. The term FATO has been ud throughout the document to describe the available landing area on a helideck or shipboard heliport.
3.3.2: ‘Standard’ to be split for helicopters with a maximum approved take-off mass (MATOM) of >3175 kg (3.3.2i) and tho with a MATOM of 3175 kg or less (3.3.2ii). For the former a 1D minimum size FATO is retained. In the latter ca the FATO may be reduced below 1D to 0.83D minimum size.
3.3.3: Recommendation for helicopters with a MATOM of 3175 kg or less to contain a FATO of sufficient size to accommodate a 1D circle.
3.3.6: Objects who function require them to be located on the edge of the FATO shall not exceed a height of 25 cm except, where the FATO is less than 1D, such objects shall not exceed a height of 5cm. Objects who function requires them to be located within the FATO (e.g. aiming circle lighting), shall not exceed a height of 2.5cm.
3.3.7: Safety nets/ shelves shall be located around the edge of the helideck but shall not exceed the helideck height.
3.4: (Title change) Purpo built and non-purpo built Shipboard heliports.
(NB: Under revid text for 3.4.1, the scope has been expanded to include purpo built helidecks in the bow or stern of a ship).
3.3.3: For purpo built shipboard heliports provided in a location other than the bow or stern the FATO shall be a minimum of 1D.
3.3.4: For purpo built heliports provided in the bow or stern of a ship the minimum FATO size shall be 1D, except for operations with limited landing directions which shall contain an area within which can be accommodated two opposing arcs of a circle with a diameter of not less than 1D over the ang
ular distance subtended by the permitted landing headings plus 15 degrees at both ends of the arc. The minimum width shall be 0.83D (e attached figure YYY).
3.3.5: For non-purpo built shipboard heliports the FATO shall be not less than 1D. Chapter 4 – Obstacle restriction and removal
4.1.23: Helideck obstacle free ctor shall compri of two components, one above and one below helideck level. (a) Above helideck level, a horizontal plane level with the elevation of the helideck that subtends an arc of at-least 210 degrees extending outwards to a distance that will allow for an unobstructed departure path appropriate to the helicopter the helideck is intended to rve, until the helicopter reaches climb away speed. (b) Below helideck level, within the 210-degree arc, the surface shall extend downwards below the elevation of the helideck to water level for an arc of not less than 180 degrees that pass through the centre of the FATO and outwards to a distance that will allow for safe clearance from obstacles below the helideck in the event of an engine failure for the type of helicopter the helideck is intended to rve.
Note: For PC1 and PC2 helicopters the horizontal extent of the distances from the helideck will be compatible with the one-engine inoperative capability of the helicopter type to be ud.
4.1.28 (Characteristics of the limited obstacle ctor – LOS): Unchanged (including Figures 4-3 to 4-5) for 1D helidecks. In the ca of a FATO less than 1D, the limited obstacle surfaces shall nonetheless reflect the same dimensions and requirements as if the FATO was of diameter 1D.
4.2.14: Recommendation (applicable for helidecks excluding heliports on ships), if a permitted obstacle is located within the inner portion of the LOS at a height >5cm but less than 0.05D, a prohibited landing ctor (PLS) should be established to provide the helicopter with further protection from obstacles not readily visible to flight crew becau the obstacles are positioned behind a landing helicopter.
4.2.15: Falling 5:1 gradient may be reduced to a ratio of one unit horizontally to three units vertically within the 180 degree ctor for multi-engine helicopters.
Shipboard heliports: Obstacle restriction criteria for an amidships location differentiated between landings facing athwart ships and landings facing fore and/or aft. Obstacle criteria from 4.2.24 to 4.2.27 are applicable to a non-purpo built ships side location.
4.2.21: Amidships location with landing facing athwart ships. No objects permitted above helideck level except tho esntial for the safe operation of the helicopter and then only up to a maximum h
eight of 5 cm. No raid fittings permitted on the deck that might induce dynamic rollover.
4.2.23: Amidships location with landings facing fore and/or aft. Obstacles located in the 150- degree ctor to the rear of a landing helicopter, shall not exceed a height of 5 cm for a distance from the edge of the FATO of 0.5D. See Figure 4-11.
4.2.25-4.2.26: Ships side location: Obstacle criteria in accordance with revid Figure 4-12 (shown below).
4.2.27: Ships side location, to provide further protection from obstacles not readily visible to the flight crew obstacles within the 1.5D circle (out-with the 1D portion designated as the FATO) located to the rear of a landing helicopter shall not exceed 5cm for a distance from the edge of the FATO of 0.5D. See Figure 4-12.
Chapter 5 – Visual Aids
5.2.9.3 Location of the touchdown marking (aiming circle): Note “It is not considered appropriate to offt a touchdown marking on a helideck located on the bow of a vesl or for any helideck where the certificated D value is 1
6.0m or less.”
5.2.9.6 Characteristics of the touchdown marking: Recommendation: “Where a touchdown marking is intended to rve helicopters of significantly different sizes, an additional concentric touchdown marking should also be displayed.”
5.2.12 Helideck Surface Marking: New standards introduced requiring the FATO to be painted dark green or dark grey using a high friction paint coating. On unpainted (light grey) aluminium decks, markings shall be enhanced by a black outline or black background.
5.2.13 Helideck Prohibited Landing Sector Marking: New Recommendations introduced to provide PLSM on the touchdown marking to the edge of the FATO where it is necessary to prevent the helicopter from landing within specified arcs. PLSM ‘Characteristics’ are the same as CAP 437, chapter 4, Figure
6.
Arc of minimum value 1D FIGURE YYY
(b) landing fore or aft
Max height of obstacle
within (a) landing athwartships
FIGURE 4-11
