Heli Deck

OFFSHORE HELIDECK DESIGN
GUIDELINES
Prepared by
John Burt Associates Limited / BOMEL Limited
for the Health and Safety Executive
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
ii
PREFACE
These offshore helideck design guidelines have been developed in response to an

increasing awareness within the industry that offshore helideck operations can encounter
problems that potentially affect flight safety. These problems may be caused by helideck
layout and equipment deficiencies, structure-induced turbulence, hot gas plumes generated
by turbines and flares or the effects of wind/wave-induced motions on helidecks on floating
structures and vessels. Often the problems result in operating limits being imposed by the
helicopter operators.
Recommendation 10.3 (i) in CAA Paper 99004, a joint HSE / CAA sponsored report into
offshore helideck environmental issues, was the main starting point for these guidelines
along with an increasing number of non-conformities found during helideck inspections.
HSE, with the support of the CAA and endorsement by the Offshore Industry Advisory
Committee’s Helicopter Liaison Group (representing industry associations, trades unions
and regulators), have commissioned the development of these guidelines. The objective is
to provide designers and helicopter operators with the means to identify and understand the
key issues that need to be addressed during design, fabrication and commissioning of
helidecks. Good helideck design and operability also requires the designer and helicopter
operator to have a clear understanding of regulatory requirements and the management
and operational aspects of offshore helicopter logistics. These guidelines should therefore
be read in conjunction with the latest editions of CAP 437 - Offshore Helicopter landing
Areas - Guidance on Standards [Ref: 40] and the UK Offshore Operators Association
Guidelines for the Management of Offshore Helideck Operations [Ref: 49]. They should
be regarded as companion documents.
The environmental research work, which is the foundation for Section 10 of these
guidelines, was performed by BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited in conjunction with other
specialists (e.g. DERA and JBAL). In addition, technical contributions from several
experienced industry professionals and the findings from several other research projects
form the substance of these guidelines.
It is HSE's intention that these guidelines be periodically updated to reflect the outcome of
ongoing industry research and advances in design and operating knowledge. Readers are
therefore requested to send in their suggestions and comments for consideration to the
HSE Hazardous Installation Directorate Offshore Division (Marine & Aviation Operations) at
Rose Court, 2 Southwark Bridge, London, SE1 9HS and / or BOMEL Limited at Ledger
House, Forest green Road, Fifield, Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 2NR.
iii
DISCLAIMER
Whilst every effort has been made to ensure the data given in this document are both
correct and up to date at the time of publication, the Health and Safety Executive and
authors will not accept any liability for any erroneous, incorrect or incomplete information
published in this document.
iv
ORGANISATIONS CONSULTED
Association of British Certification Bodies (ABCB)

British Helicopter Advisory Board (BHAB)
British Rig Owners Association (BROA)
Civil Aviation Authority (CAA)
Cogent / Offshore Petroleum Industry Training Organisation (OPITO)
International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC)
International Association of Geophysical Contractors (IAGC)
International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (OGP)
International Marine Contractors Association (IMCA)
Inter Union Offshore Operations Committee (IUOOC)
Maritime & Coastguard Agency (MCA)
Offshore Contractors Association (OCA)
United Kingdom Offshore Operators Association (UKOOA)
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
BOMEL Limited
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST & EDITOR
John Burt Associates Limited
v
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
vi
CONTENTS
PREFACE III
DISCLAIMER IV
CONTENTS VII
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Purpose 2
1.2 Scope 2
2.0 THE OFFSHORE HELICOPTER OPERATING ENVIRONMENT 5

2.1 Introduction 5
2.2 The Offshore Platform Operator / Vessel Owners Perspective 5
2.3 The Offshore Helicopter Pilot’s Operating Environment 6
2.4 Helideck Problems Encountered on the UKCS 7
3.0 THE OFFSHORE HELIDECK DESIGN PROCESS 11

3.1 Introduction 11
3.2 Design 11
4.0 REGULATIONS, DESIGN CODES & VERIFICATION 17

4.1 Introduction 17
4.2 Regulations 18
4.2.1 Aeronautical Legislation and Enforcement 18
4.2.2 Offshore Helidecks Legislation & Enforcement 19
4.3 Selecting Appropriate Design Codes 21
4.3.1 Fixed Installations 21
4.3.2 Mobile Installations and Vessels 21
4.4 Verification 22
4.4.1 Introduction 22
4.4.2 Safety-Critical Elements 22
4.4.3 Performance Standards 23
4.4.4 The Process 23
4.4.5 Helideck Design Appraisal 24
4.4.6 Providing Information for Operating and Flight Crew Operations Manuals 25
4.4.7 Limited Helideck Operations 26
5.0 DESIGN SAFETY CASES 27

5.1 Introduction 27
5.2 Risk and Operability Assessments 28
5.3 Helideck Assessment Strategy 29
vii
5.4 Performance Assessment And Review 30
5.5 Template for a Design and Operability Report 30
6.0 HELIDECK AND FACILITIES LAYOUT 37

6.1 Introduction 37
6.2 Developing a Helideck Design Specification 37
6.2.1 General 37
6.2.2 Reference Publications and Guidance 37
6.3 Installation / Vessel Layout Considerations 38
6.3.1 Main References 38
6.3.2 General 38
6.3.3 Helideck Physical Characteristics 40
6.3.4 Helideck Orientation 41
6.3.5 Assessing Suitability of the Proposed Helideck Arrangement 42
6.4 The Safe Landing Area 48
6.4.2 General 48
6.5 Helicopter Parking Facilities 50
6.5.3 Design Considerations 51
6.5.4 Hangars 53
6.6 Obstacle Free Environment 54
6.6.2 Obstruction Clearances 54
6.6.3 Limited Obstacle Sector 54
6.6.4 Falling Gradient 55
6.7 Control, Access And Escape 55
6.7.2 Helideck Control Room 55
6.7.3 Access and Escape Routes 56
7.0 FLOATING STRUCTURES AND VESSELS 57

7.1 Introduction 57
7.2 Mobile Drilling Rigs 58
7.2.3 Specific Features to Consider in MODU Helideck Design 58
7.3 Floating Production Systems 67
7.3.3 Specific Features to Consider in FPSO Helideck Design 68
7.3.4 Marine Operating Environment 69
viii
7.3.5 Vessel / Helideck Classification / Verification Process 70
7.3.6 Optimising Helideck Location and Layout 71
7.3.7 Shuttle Tanker Operations 71
7.4 Specialist Vessels 72
7.4.3 Specific Features to Consider in Vessel Helideck Design 73
7.5 Motion Considerations And Operating Limits 76
8.0 OTHER INSTALLATION ARRANGEMENTS 77

8.1 Combined Operations 77
8.1.4 Safety Cases 81
8.1.5 Management of Combined Operations Helidecks 82
8.2 Normally Unattended Installations 83
8.2.3 Definitions 84
8.2.4 Seeking the Safest and Most Efficient Helideck Design Options for
Operations to NUIs 85
8.2.5 Equipment Design Considerations 85
9.0 HELIDECK STRUCTURES 91

9.1 Introduction 91
9.2 Main References 92
9.3 Landing Surface 93
9.3.1 Wood 93
9.3.2 Steel 93
9.3.3 Aluminium 93
9.4 Support Structure 95
9.4.2 Materials 95
9.4.3 Design 96
9.4.4 Interconnected Modules 96
9.4.5 Maintenance 97
9.5 Appurtenances 97
9.6 Load Combinations and Load Factors 97
9.6.2 Emergency landing 98
9.6.3 Normal Operations and Helicopters at Rest 99
9.6.4 Design Loadings 99
ix
9.7 Helideck Friction Surface and Landing Nets 101
9.7.1 Friction Surface 101
9.7.4 Helideck Landing Nets 102
9.7.5 Helideck Net Fixings 103
9.7.6 Helideck Landing Net Removal 106
9.8 Access and Escape 107
9.8.3 Access – General Considerations 108
9.8.4 Escape - General Considerations 109
9.8.5 Platforms 109
9.8.6 Walkways 111
9.8.7 Stairways and Ladders 111
9.8.8 Control of Personnel Access to Helideck 112
9.9 Drainage 112
9.9.3 Environmental Considerations 113
9.9.4 Operational Considerations 113
9.10 Perimeter Safety Net 115
9.10.4 Areas to be protected by Perimeter Safety Net 116
9.10.5 Combined Handrail and Safety Nets for Vessels 116
9.10.6 Construction and Inspection Considerations 117
9.10.7 Perimeter Safety Net Load Testing 121
9.11 Tiedown Arrangements 121
9.12 Helideck Surface Trip Hazards 124
9.13 Helideck Structural Maintenance 124
10.0 HELIDECK ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 127

10.1 Introduction 127
10.2 Main References 127
10.3 Background 127
x
10.4 Design Issues 129
10.4.2 Aerodynamic Issues and Criteria 130
10.4.3 Plan Location of the Helideck 131
10.4.4 Helideck Height and Air Gap under the Helideck 132
10.4.5 Proximity to Tall Structures 134
10.4.6 Temperature Rise due to Hot Exhausts 136
10.4.7 Cold Flaring and Rapid Blow-down Systems 139
10.5 Special Considerations for Floating Systems and Vessels 140
10.5.1 General 140
10.5.2 Wave Motion Characteristics and Criteria 141
10.5.3 Sea State Characterisation 142
10.5.4 Vessel Motions and Helideck Downtime 142
10.5.5 Helideck Location Dependence 142
10.6 Special Considerations for FPSOs and Dynamically Positioned Vessels 145
10.7 Combined Operations 146
10.7.1 Permanent Arrangements 146
10.7.2 Temporary Arrangements 147
10.8 Examples of Good and Bad Practice in Platform Helideck Location 148
10.8.1 Fixed Installations 149
10.8.2 Semi-submersible and jack-up drilling units 150
10.8.3 Tension Leg Platforms 152
10.8.4 FPSOs 153
10.9 Methods of Design Assessment 155
10.9.2 Wind Flow Assessment 155
10.9.3 Wind Climate 161
10.9.4 Prevailing Wind Direction 163
10.9.5 Upwind Helideck Location 164
10.9.6 Estimating Helideck Downtime Due to Wind 167
10.10 Presentation of Wind Flow Assessment Results 169
10.10.1 General 169
10.10.2 Presentation of Flow Assessment Results for Design 169
10.10.3 Presentation of Flow Assessment Results for Operations 176
10.11 Wave Motion Assessment 179
10.11.1 Wave Induced Motion Estimates 179
10.12 Wave Climate 180
10.12.1 Limiting Motion Criteria 180
10.13 Estimating Helideck Downtime Due to Waves 182
11. HELIDECK SYSTEMS 183

11.1 Introduction 183
11.1.1 Hazardous Area Classification and Equipment Selection 183
xi
11.2 Visual Aids - Markings 184
11.2.3 Helideck Markings 184
11.2.4 Installation / Helideck Identification 185
11.2.5 Obstruction Markings 187
11.3 Visual Aids - Lighting Systems 188
11.3.2 Considering the Offshore Lighting Environment 189
11.3.3 Specific Requirements for NUIs 191
11.3.4 Perimeter Lighting 192
11.3.5 Floodlighting 195
11.3.6 General Lighting 198
11.3.7 Obstruction Lighting 199
11.3.8 Windsock Lighting 202
11.3.9 Status Lights 204
11.4 Electrical Power Supplies 207
11.4.1 General Philosophy 207
11.5 Fire Protection Systems 208
11.5.1 General 208
11.5.3 Firefighting Safety Goals and Objectives 209
11.5.4 Requirements of a Foam System 211
11.5.5 Design Criteria for Foam Systems 211
11.5.6 Design Considerations for Monitor Systems 212
11.5.7 Water / Foam Systems 217
11.5.8 Hydrant Systems and Equipment 218
11.5.9 Complementary Media 221
11.5.10 Helideck Fire Detection 223
11.6 Rescue Equipment Provisions 224
11.6.2 Rescue Equipment Cabinets 224
11.6.3 Rescue Equipment Inventory 227
11.7 Helicopter Refuelling 228
11.7.3 Operational Considerations 228
11.7.4 General Design Considerations 229
11.8 Communications Equipment 235
xii
11.8.3. Location of Equipment and Aerials 236
11.8.4 Aeronautical VHF Radio 237
11.8.5 Marine VHF Radio 238
11.8.6 Helideck Crew Portable VHF Sets 238
11.8.7 NDB Equipment 238
11.8.8 Public Address and Alarm Systems 239
11.8.9 Video Briefing System 240
11.9 Meteorological Equipment 240
11.9.3 Equipment Requirements 241
11.9.4 Wind Velocity and Direction Measuring Equipment 242
11.9.5 Air Temperature Measuring Equipment 245
11.9.6 Barometric Pressure Measuring Equipment 246
11.9.7 Visibility Measuring Equipment 247
11.9.8 Cloudbase Measuring Equipment 248
11.9.9 Vessel Motion Measuring Equipment 248
11.9.10 Automatic Meteorological Instrument Station 249
11.10 Miscellaneous Helideck Equipment 250
11.10.1 General 250
11.10.2 Helicopter and Helideck Washdown and Cleaning Equipment 251
11.11 Bird Control Devices 251
11.12 Safety Signs and Posters 254
11.12.3 Specifying Safety Signs 254
11.12.4 General Helideck Signs 255
11.12.5 Heli-Admin Signs and Posters 256
APPENDIX 1 - CONTRIBUTORS 260
APPENDIX 2 - REFERENCES 262
APPENDIX 3 - LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 269
APPENDIX 4 – BELL 214ST - DESIGN INFORMATION 273
APPENDIX 5 – EH INDUSTRIES EH101 - DESIGN INFORMATION 275
APPENDIX 6 – EUROCOPTER EC155 - DESIGN INFORMATION 277
APPENDIX 7 – EC225 - DESIGN INFORMATION 279
APPENDIX 8 – EUROCOPTER AS332L1 - DESIGN INFORMATION 281
xiii
APPENDIX 9 – EUROCOPTER AS332L2 - DESIGN INFORMATION 283
APPENDIX 10 – EUROCOPTER AS365N2 - DESIGN INFORMATION 285
APPENDIX 11 – SIKORSKY S61N - DESIGN INFORMATION 287
APPENDIX 12 – SIKORSKY S76 - DESIGN INFORMATION 289
APPENDIX 13 – SIKORSKY S92 - DESIGN INFORMATION 291
xiv
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
xv
1.0 INTRODUCTION
These guidelines have been developed and published under the sponsorship of
the Health & Safety Executive supported by the Civil Aviation Authority and
endorsed by the Offshore Industry Advisory Committee – Helicopter Liaison Group
(OIAC-HLG) to provide technical information about the design and operation of
helidecks and their facilities and to indicate current good practice. The OIAC-HLG
membership is comprised of HSE, CAA, BHAB, UKOOA, BROA, IADC, IMCA and
the trades unions TGWU and AMICUS (MSF).
Since oil and gas exploration activities began on the United Kingdom Continental
Shelf (UKCS), the Offshore Industry has been dependent on the efficient and safe
use of helicopters for logistics and emergency support. The primary role is moving
people to and from their workplaces on the offshore facilities. Other roles include
freight movement, emergency evacuation and search and rescue.
Over the thirty years or so since oil and gas activities commenced on the UKCS,
helicopter travel has become the norm for the workforce. A measure of the scale
of this vital activity since the early sixties is that there have been in the order of 6
million flights and 45 million passenger movements within the UKCS (1968 –2002).
The introduction of helicopters in the early sixties as a routine offshore ‘workhorse’

has increasingly brought the associated operational support activities into sharper
focus. The harsh operating environment, some serious and fatal accidents and the
emergence of goal setting regulations offshore have all contributed to a greater
awareness of the problems associated with operating helicopters in a marine
environment.
However, this greater awareness of operating problems has not always been
matched by a full and clear understanding of requirements at the interfaces
between aviation, oil and gas production and processing and marine operations.
Helideck surveys carried out between 1992 and 1995 by the Civil Aviation
Authority (CAA), on behalf of the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) [Ref: 34]
revealed deficiencies concerning the physical layout of helidecks, helideck
operations, maintenance, standards of equipment and the competence and
training of helideck crews that were subsequently corrected.
It is vital that the technical requirements for helicopter operations are properly
identified during the conceptual design of an installation and given full
consideration at all subsequent stages from detailed design through to fabrication,
1
construction, installation and commissioning, operations and any subsequent
modification.
Technologically, helicopters have improved significantly during the period they

have operated on the UKCS. Aircraft designers, maintenance engineers, flight
crews, Helicopter Operators and the Regulators continue to seek improvements to
helicopter safety and reliability.
Offshore Installation Owners and Operators, and vessel owners should similarly
recognise the need to continuously improve the standards of helideck hardware
and their operating management of helicopter facilities.
1.1 PURPOSE
These guidelines are intended to:
• Assist those involved with the conceptual and detailed design of helideck
systems to specify the equipment on offshore installations, MODUs and
vessels, in order to provide suitable helideck arrangements that will
ensure good availability under both normal and emergency operating
conditions
• Assist onshore and offshore personnel responsible for the management of

offshore helicopter and helideck operations to provide safe and efficient
offshore helicopter services
• Provide Independent Competent Persons (ICPs) who are undertaking

verification of offshore helideck and facilities design and operations
inspections and audits with examples of good industry practice.
1.2 SCOPE
The guidelines are intended to comprehensively address the routine and key
technical issues that are known to arise in the design and construction of offshore
helidecks and the execution of UKCS offshore and helideck operations.
In so doing, the guidelines should provide industry with advice and technical
information on good helideck design and construction practices and the acceptable
operating standards that duty holders and vessel owners are reasonably expected
2
to adopt. Duty Holders should be careful to use up to date editions of the
reference documents mentioned herein.
It is acknowledged that advances in technologies used in helideck design will

continue as a result of ongoing research and development projects and will have
occurred during the preparation of these guidelines. Therefore, under the
sponsorship of OIAC-HLG, the content of this document will be reviewed and
periodically updated to embody the latest information.
3
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
4
2.0 THE OFFSHORE HELICOPTER OPERATING ENVIRONMENT
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The offshore helicopter operating environment is viewed quite differently by the

various organisations and people that are involved in the wide range of activities,
from helideck design through to actual offshore helideck operations. The various
parties include:
• Installation Operators / Vessel Owners Management (Duty Holders)

• Helicopter Operators (AOC Holder), Flight Crews and Maintenance
organisations
• Helicopter Landing Officers (HLOs), Deck Crews and Service Providers
• Helideck Designers, Fabricators and Technical Support Specialists
(Consultants)
• Installation / Vessel Project Engineering & Construction Management
• Regulators.
Several individuals and organisations will be involved in the ‘lifetime’ management

of a helideck design and its routine operation. It is the different perspectives held
by these individuals and organisations that can, and often does, lead to inadequate
helideck facilities and support arrangements being provided, particularly when they
act or operate in isolation from one another.
The following sections serve to offer an insight into the end users’ perspectives
and thus provide a better understanding of the overriding operational requirements
and outcomes that should be given priority consideration.
2.2 THE OFFSHORE PLATFORM OPERATOR / VESSEL

OWNERS PERSPECTIVE
The helicopter crew, HLO and deck crews are the end users. They have to endure
the day-to-day problems in operations caused by any errors and omissions during
initial helideck specification, design and construction.
The installation operator, MODU or vessel owner makes the capital expenditure
(CAPEX) for the design and construction of a helideck. They also pay the
operating expense (OPEX) during life of field helicopter operations.
5
Reductions in capital expenditure by economising on helideck design and
construction costs may well prove very expensive in operating costs.
Therefore, their primary objective should be to ensure that for a given CAPEX, the
helideck and its systems give value for money over the life of the facility. This
means ensuring that the helideck and systems design will provide for safe and
efficient flight operations. Design deficiencies that increase OPEX should be
avoided.
The helideck and facilities designers (usually several discipline engineers) are
tasked with developing the helideck structure and systems design for fabrication
and construction.
Simply following oil field tradition and practice during the design phase will
invariably embody all the errors and omissions that have accumulated in helideck
designs over the years.
An integrated and well-informed approach by operations and project management

and the discipline engineers is more likely to produce a good operational helideck
and support systems.
2.3 THE OFFSHORE HELICOPTER PILOT’S OPERATING

ENVIRONMENT
Offshore flight operations are a highly complex and specialised process. It

requires high levels of training, competence and skill to plan a flight, land and take-
off from an offshore installation and to consistently execute the task safely and
efficiently under ‘normal’, good weather flying conditions.
When a task is carried out in adverse weather (e.g. poor visibility), during night
flying and when other predictable and / or unpredictable factors routinely found in
and around the environs of an offshore installation or vessel are encountered, the
skills of flight crews can be stretched.
Unlike pilots operating from onshore airfields, offshore helicopter crews have
relatively little ground-based technology and fairly limited information to assist
them as they commence their final approach for a landing on an offshore helideck.
It is much the same when taking-off.
Despite the many advances in aircraft technology, navigation, landing and

communications aids in recent years, there are currently no reliable and effective
6
electronic landing aids available for use on offshore installations / vessels.
Therefore, offshore helicopter crews have to rely heavily on their acquired skills
and experience when approaching, landing and taking-off from offshore
installations / vessels.
It is not necessary or appropriate to review the whole scope of helicopter flying in

these guidelines. However, it is to essential to consider two important topics
concerning flight crew activities that are performed within the offshore flight
operations process. These are:
1. pilot information, and
2. approach, landing and take off manoeuvres.
Helideck Designers are recommended to acquaint themselves with these topics.

They are covered in detail in the UKOOA Guidelines for the Management of
Offshore Helideck Operations [Ref: 49].
2.4 HELIDECK PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED ON THE UKCS
In recent years, HSE and CAA have jointly funded a number of studies and
research projects that have included analysis of incidents and other statistical data
relating to offshore helicopter safety.
CAA Paper 99004 [Ref: 41] provides two good measures of the extent of problems
encountered by offshore helicopters due to adverse helideck environmental
conditions. In 1997, a count of the BHAB Helidecks Installation / Vessel
Limitations List (IVLL) – now renamed the Helideck Limitations List (HLL) –
showed the following:
UNRESTRICTED HELIDECKS RESTRICTED HELIDECKS
96 (25.6%) 279 (74.4%)
Restrictions referred to in the IVLL included notified non-compliances (e.g. physical

obstructions in 210° sector and 5:1 infringements) and limitations / comments
arising from flight experience (e.g. turbulent sectors and turbine exhaust effects).
It is important to note that the restricted helidecks are not confined only to older
Installations, MODUs and vessels (e.g. those built over 20 years ago or more).
Restrictions continue to be established and imposed by the Helicopter Operators
7
Helideck Technical Committee for basic deficiencies on helidecks that have been
more recently installed.
In the same CAA Paper, an analysis of 18 accident reports (see following table)
taken from the CAA SI&DD, Mandatory Occurrence Reporting (MOR) database
shows that defects in Installation design can be cited as the cause for two thirds of
the occurrences. This situation clearly suggests that helideck operability was not
properly addressed during the initial design phase of the Installations concerned.
Such design deficiencies can seriously undermine operational efficiency and
compromise safety
FLIGHT PHASE AT OFFSHORE INSTALLATION
APPROACH LANDING TAKE-OFF HOVER CLIMB
5 (27.8%) 9 (50.0%) 2 (11.1%) 2 (11.1%) 0 (0%)
PRIMARY CAUSE
FLARE / BURNERS TURBULENCE EXHAUST PLUMES PILOT ERROR
4 (22.2%) 7 (38.9%) 3 (16.7%) 4 (22.2%)
SECONDARY CAUSE
FLARE / TURBULENCE EXHAUST PILOT ERROR OTHER

BURNERS PLUMES
0 (0%) 9 (50%) 2 (11.1%) 3 (33.3%) 4 (22.2%)
FAILURE CATEGORY
INSTALLATION DESIGN AIRCRAFT OPERATION
12 (66.7%) 6 (33.3%)
Further evidence to demonstrate the need for ensuring that design and operation
of helidecks on the UKCS are properly managed, is illustrated in the following
table.
The table takes data from the CAA SI&DD, Mandatory Occurrence Reporting
(MOR) database over the period 1975 to 2001 and provides a breakdown of non-
fatal reportable accident causes.
8
In recent years, as a result of several flight safety initiatives, a significant reduction
in the number of non-fatal reportable accidents on the helicopter side of the
equation is noted. The number of non-fatal reportable accidents caused by
installation / vessel deficiencies remain fairly constant, in line with flight activity
levels.
NUMBER OF OCCURRENCES
CAUSE 1975-1983 1984-1992 1993-2001
Aircraft Related Incidents
15 19 5
(e.g. Flight Crew, Operations, Weather,
Manufacture, Maintenance, etc.)
Installation / Vessel Related Incidents
(e.g. Helideck Operations, Adverse 2 6 2

Helideck Environment, Vessel Motions,
etc.)
In addition to fatal and non-fatal reportable accidents the MOR Database also
records other occurrences.
These relatively minor occurrences take place in greater numbers but are equally
as important from an offshore flight safety viewpoint. They require appropriate
actions to be taken to prevent recurrence.
From an aviation perspective the occurrences are typified by events such as

engine and other component failures and operational shortcomings. Their effects
are generally contained within the design and operating capability of helicopters.
Other occurrences are helideck environmental issues, offshore helideck

management and operational procedure violations. Avoiding these violations is
part of the substance for these guidelines.
9
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
10
3.0 THE OFFSHORE HELIDECK DESIGN PROCESS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this part of the guidance document is to identify the topics and
expand the requirements that need to be properly considered in the design and
fabrication of new helidecks and the modification of existing helidecks, regardless
of the type of facility to which they are fitted.
3.2 DESIGN
Offshore helideck and facilities design can be broken down into a sequence of
events within an overall project process. The process is illustrated in the following
figures:
Figure 3.1 – Defining the Basic Requirements for a Helideck

Figure 3.2 – Verification / Classification Process and Selecting Design Codes
Figure 3.3 – Facility and Helideck Layout Considerations
Figure 3.4 – Specifying the Helideck and Support Systems.
11
Figure 3.1 - Defining
What type the Basic installation
of offshore Requirements for a Helideck
/ vessel / helicopter operations
are envisioned?
Fixed ?
Fixed? Mobile ? What is the
(e.g.Manned
(e.g. manne ord NUI)
or (e.g. FPSO, Project Logistics
un - manned) MODU, Vessel) intent ?
Is a helicopter
landing area
required? If yes,
Under what W hat is the Is a parking /

jurisdiction is the Project Design laydown area
facility to operate ? Helicopter ? required ?
What is the predicted What is the predicted Is helicopter

meteorological operating marine operating refuelling
environment ? environment ? required ?
Decide verification / If yes, determine

classification process the operational
and establish project fuel usage and fuel
design codes storage capacity
required, including
reserves
See
See See See
See See
F
Fig.
igure
3.2
1.2 Fig. 3.31.3
Figure Fig. 3.4
Figure 1.4
Figure 3.1 - Defining the Basic Requirements for a Helideck
12
Fixed Mobile Specialist
Installations Installations Vessels
(incl. FPSOs) (incl. MODUs) (DSVs, etc.)
Figure 3.2 - Verification / Classification Process and Selecting Design Codes

Figure 3.2 - Verification
(Also / Classification
(Alsoififdesignated
designatedan
an Process and Selecting Design Codes
offshore Installation)
Offshore installation)
Offshore Aviation Flag State (Marine)

Health & Safety Regulatory Regulatory
Regulatory Requirements Requirements Requirements
All applicable regulations

identified, advised to project
and complied with
Classification Society /
Verification Authorities
identified and appointed,
where appropriate
Authority Jurisdictions
for the operating
location correctly
identified and advised
to project?
All applicable project helideck ICAO Annex 14 Vol 2

design codes (structures & CAP 437
systems) and operating IMO MODU code
procedures identified and SOLAS (Ships)
advised to project Flag State Rules
Ships Rules (Class)
Industry Guidelines
Figure 3.2 - Verification / Classification Process and Selecting Design Codes
13
Project design
helicopter
established
Figure 3.3 - Facility and Helideck Layout Considerations
Determine maximum Determine maximum Determine available Assess all potential

safe landing area required helideck helideck locations adverse helicopter
required size and shape on the installation environmental effects
Can the dead and imposed loads Can the full obstruction free Can adverse environmental
of the helideck and support environment be obtained without factors be minimised and
structure be accommodated? incurring operating limitations? helideck operability assured?
Have all the appropriate

regulatory and code
requirements been
complied with?
Has the extent and operating impact

of any potential flight limitations been
properly considered and passed as
acceptable by the helicopter operator
or by an aviation specialist?
NO YES
YES
Reappraise design FIX

layout and find helideck design
solutions layout
Figure 3.3 - Facility and Helideck Layout Considerations
14
Safe Landing Area
(SLA) and overall
helideck location, size
and shape determined
(Sections 6 & 10)
Helideck design, Communications and

material, surface, Refuelling system Fire Protection All visual aids (markings meteorological
access & escape required? systems requirements and lighting) properly equipment requirements
selected (Section 11.7) identified and identified and set out identified and properly
(Sections 6 & 9) capacities calculated (Sections 11.2 & 11.3) specified
(Section 11.5) (Sections 11.8 & 11.9)
Aviation Fuel
Structural support storage and Helideck, identification,
design / material supply systems installation side signage
Fire protection & rescue
/construction identified, located and obstruction markings Alarm & public
equipment properly
requirements identified and sized properly specified address systems
specified
and satisfied (Section 11.7) (Sections 11.2) identified & specified
(Sections 11.5 & 11.6)
(See Section 9) (Section 11.8)
Lighting systems
Aviation fuel requirements specified &
All miscellaneous helideck system and Protective clothing adequate electrical Helideck motion
equipment, safety equipment requirements identified power (main & UPS) recording system and
equipment and signs, etc. properly specified and specified available equipment identified &
properly identified and (Section 11.7) (Section11.6.4) (Sections 11.3) specified (FPSOs,
specified MODUs & Vessels)
(Sections 11.10 & 11.12) (Section 11.9)
Figure 3.4 - Specifying the Helideck and Support Systems

(Section Numbers refer to these guidelines)
15
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
16
4.0 REGULATIONS, DESIGN CODES & VERIFICATION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
There are a significant number of regulations governing the use of helicopters and
the provision of facilities for their operation on the UKCS. These Guidelines
identify the regulations in force at the time of publication, but users of this
document should always ensure that they refer to the latest issue of any
regulation; particularly new or revised HSE Publications and HSE and CAA
research and development papers (See Appendix 2).
Over the years several documents have been published in the form of legal
requirements, official notices, guidance and good industry practice for offshore
helicopter operations. The essential elements of these documents will be found
referenced in the text and appendices of these Offshore Helideck Design
Guidelines.
This section deals with the legislation and enforcement with respect to helideck
design, construction and verification as two distinct subjects:
• aeronautical operations, and
• offshore helideck operations.
The offshore regulations do not apply to vessels that are not designated as
Offshore Installations, UK or Flag State Marine Law applies to these vessels.
Aeronautical operations regulations and guidelines make no such distinction on the
UKCS: Aviation Rules always apply.
It is, however, recommended that owners and builders of vessels with helidecks
that will operate on the UKCS, in support of oil and gas operations, seriously
consider the advantages of complying fully with the UK offshore and aviation
regulatory requirements. There is considerable operational and commercial
benefit to be obtained by employing the most rigorous design standards. This
design guide is written with these standards in mind.
17
4.2 REGULATIONS
4.2.1 Aeronautical Legislation and Enforcement
As these Guidelines deal only with offshore helideck operations, it is not intended
to detail the legislation and enforcement regime as it applies directly to the
maintenance and operation of helicopters.
Helicopter Operators are obliged to comply with relevant Aviation Law. The onus
is on the Helicopter Operators, as holders of Air Operators Certificates (AOC) to
ensure that any landing site meets minimum requirements. If a helicopter operator
finds serious failings and deficiencies in the facilities, he may decide not to
authorise the helideck for use.
The primary instrument of civil aviation legislation in the UK is the Civil Aviation Act
1982 [Ref: 2].
Under the 1982 Act, CAA is responsible for operation of the Air Navigation Order
(ANO). The legislation is supported by Civil Aviation Publications (CAPs). CAP
437 [Ref: 40] is the primary UK aviation standard for the design of offshore
helidecks. This standard contains the criteria that an AOC Holder will use in order
to authorise the helideck for use by Flight Crews.
Offshore helidecks fall within the definition of ‘unlicensed aerodromes’ and are
outside the CAA licensing remit. However, the CAA will provide advice on any
items of non-compliance with the helideck physical characteristics and emergency
equipment requirements according to the guidance provided in CAP 437.
Acting on behalf of the offshore helicopter operators, BHAB Helidecks assess and
inspect helideck designs and apply appropriate operational restrictions where there
are non-compliances. The CAA monitors the operational restrictions that are
imposed by BHAB Helidecks through its regulation of the helicopter operators. It is
therefore important to realise that non-compliance with design criteria of CAP 437
may result in significant loss of helicopter operational flexibility (e.g. reduction in
available payloads or even a landing ban in certain weather conditions).
Frequently found non-conformities during BHAB Helideck inspections are

highlighted in the appropriate sections of these guidelines.
18
4.2.2 Offshore Helidecks Legislation & Enforcement
This section addresses the regulatory requirements and enforcement affecting

Offshore Installation operators, mobile offshore drilling unit (MODU) owners and,
where appropriate, vessel owners.
The responsibility for regulating and enforcing the health, safety and welfare of
employees offshore rests with the HSE – Offshore Division (OSD).
4.2.2.1 Health and Safety at Work Act
The Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974 (HASAWA) [Ref: 1] is the principal
legislation safeguarding the health, safety and welfare of workers in the UK
offshore oil and gas industry.
The Act applies to places and activities specified in the Health and Safety at Work
etc. Act 1974 (Application Outside Great Britain) Order 1995 (SI 1995/263) [Ref:
4]. This includes helideck activities on offshore installations, but not helicopters
while in flight.
Flag State laws and ICAO and IMO conventions may also apply to shipping
activities (e.g. specialist vessels).
MODUs may be both Installations and ships and, therefore, have to comply with
both regimes.
The Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction, etc.) Regulations
1996 (SI 1996/913) – (DCR) [Ref: 8] place responsibility for ensuring the safe
design and construction of offshore installation landing areas on the installation
duty holder. This generally means the operators of fixed installations and owners
of mobile installations, floating production units and some vessels.
4.2.2.2 Offshore Legislation
The Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 1992 (Sl 1992/2885) – (SCR)
[Ref: 5] require Operators and Owners to submit a Safety Case (See Appendix 2)
which demonstrates that they have an adequate safety management system, have
identified major accident hazards, assessed the risks from those hazards, and
taken the measures necessary to reduce the risks to persons to as low as
reasonably practicable (ALARP).
19
In addition, the following regulations have relevance to offshore helicopter
operations:
• The Offshore Installations and Pipeline Works (Management and

Administration) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/738) – (MAR) [Ref: 6]
• The Offshore Installations (Prevention of Fire and Explosion, and

Emergency Response) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/743) – (PFEER)
[Ref: 7]
• The Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction, etc.)

Regulations 1996 (SI 1996/913) – (DCR) [Ref: 8].
Designers should be aware that the above regulations may subsequently be

modified by other enabling legislation which introduces new or amended
requirements that may have an affect on the intent of the original regulations.
Approved Codes of Practice (ACOP) that provide interpretation of these

Regulations, along with other non-mandatory guidance are listed in Appendix 2.
Duty holders who comply with ACOP’s are deemed to comply with the pertinent
regulations.
The supporting guidance to DCR, Regulation 11 (‘Helicopter Landing Area’) refers

to the relevant CAA published guidance, CAP 437 [Ref: 40].
Duty Holders of Offshore Installations and owners of vessels having a helideck

should always ensure that compliance with CAP 437 is established initially (subject
to any declared non-compliance), and subsequently maintained.
The CAA is in a position to enforce certain standards on helicopter operators.

Essentially, this means that a helideck shall meet the minimum standards set out
in CAP 437. Where these standards cannot be achieved in full, BHAB Helidecks
apply relevant restrictions. The HSE regards CAP 437 as appropriate guidance
regarding helideck standards.
In extreme cases where CAP 437 criteria cannot be fully met, this could entail a
landing ban on the installation, MODU or vessel in certain weather conditions and /
or on night operations.
20
4.3 SELECTING APPROPRIATE DESIGN CODES
The selection of appropriate design codes at the commencement of design is

essential to ensure that the helideck structure and support systems are fit for
purpose and meet UK regulatory and operational requirements.
4.3.1 Fixed Installations
Generally, selection of appropriate regulations, guidance and design codes for

design and construction of a fixed installation to be placed on the UKCS is a
straightforward matter. These guidelines address many of the current
requirements throughout the text and should therefore provide designers with a
good appreciation of the standards to be adopted.
4.3.2 Mobile Installations and Vessels
The selection of appropriate regulations, guidance and design codes for MODU
and vessel helidecks is a different and often more complex matter.
Essentially, the starting point is the Owners specification for the MODU or vessel
and this will dictate such things as the Country / Port of Registration, vessel class,
operating regions, Classification Society, etc.
If the MODU or vessel helideck is to be used operationally on the UKCS there are
potentially a number of conflicts likely to arise between UK and International
requirements and Classification Society Rules, particularly where the MODU or
vessel is designed and constructed outside the UK. It is therefore the
responsibility of the MODU or vessel owner to address and resolve all possible
regulatory and code conflicts when writing the initial vessel specification if the
helideck is intended to operate in UK waters without having severe operating
restrictions imposed by BHAB Helidecks.
Design areas where conflicts in the requirements generally occur are:
• Helideck structural codes and passive fire protection (particularly if

aluminium helideck structures are specified)
• Helideck size, allowable mass and obstruction criteria
• Helideck and installation / vessel markings
• Lighting systems
21
• Firefighting system selection, capacities and coverage
• Rescue equipment scales.
The above areas where potential MODU and vessel design and construction
requirements may conflict are covered in more detail in Section 7.
4.4 VERIFICATION
4.4.1 Introduction
The Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction, etc.) Regulations
1996 (SI 1996/913) – (DCR) have amended the Offshore Installations (Safety
Case) Regulations 1992 (SI 1992/2885) – (SCR) to replace the Certification
regime established by the, now revoked, Offshore Installations (Construction and
Survey) Regulations 1974.
The Safety Case centred Regulations dispensed with the concept of a Certifying
Authority and place sole responsibility for the development and ongoing
maintenance of a safe Installation onto the Operator or Owner (Duty Holder).
It is recommended that vessel owners operating in UK waters adopt a similar

approach to that described below where they have an operational helideck
installed. There is close correlation between the fundamental requirements of
classification and that of verification. There is also the basic requirement to
comply with CAP 437. For legal and practical reasons, therefore, it makes good
sense to apply this design guidance to all helidecks.
4.4.2 Safety-Critical Elements
Operators / Owners are required to list the Safety-Critical Elements (SCEs), have
them subject to independent review and develop a scheme for verification of their
performance throughout the life cycle of the installation.
UKOOA Guidelines for the Management of Safety-Critical Elements [Ref: 51]

provide further detailed information.
An Offshore Installation helideck is a collection of systems, some of which are

safety-critical or have safety-critical sub-systems or components. This means that
a failure in any part of its operation could cause, or substantially contribute to, a
major accident at the installation with potentially serious consequences for
installation, helicopters and workforce.
22
Sub-systems contributing to safety-criticality may include:
Helideck Power
Helicopter firefighting Drainage
Escapeways Emergency Lighting
This list of items arises from the helideck function as a means for evacuating the
installation / vessel in an emergency (where possible under certain defined
scenarios). Also, failure of helideck safety systems (e.g. firefighting system) may
prevent the on-board capability from limiting the effects of a helicopter accident on
the helideck.
4.4.3 Performance Standards
Performance standards should be set by the Installation Operator, MODU or

vessel owner to measure or assess the suitability and effectiveness of the helideck
and to assure and verify that the helideck structure, systems and equipment are fit
for purpose. Meeting the installation integrity requirements of DCR and PFEER
performance standards also contribute to assuring the SCEs for the helideck.
In setting the performance standards to comply with offshore legislation, it should

also be recognised that the requirements of CAP 437 must be met in order to
obtain BHAB Helidecks clearance for routine flight operations. Therefore, CAP
437 should be used as the basis for setting the relevant SCE performance
standards.
SCE performance standards do not cover the auditing of helideck operational

aspects. These should be covered in the installation Safety Management System
(SMS). However, they are equally important.
4.4.4 The Process
Having set the performance standards, independent and competent persons

should be selected by the operator / owner to prepare, or be consulted on the
verification scheme and to implement it. It is for the operator / owner to decide
how this is to be achieved. The prime requirement of the verifying body is an
adequate capability to assess the importance of defects.
‘Independent’ in this context may include employees of the installation operator,

MODU or vessel owner, provided they have not been involved technically in the
design and planning of the relevant parts of the installation and that their
management lines should be separate from those whose work they are checking.
23
It is also important to ensure that the objectivity of those undertaking verification
works is not compromised.
The scope and level of the verification scheme should define what parameters will
be measured; equipment tested or designs reviewed. It should also define how
these measurements will be undertaken.
When, where and how often the performance standards will be measured or
assessed during the life cycle should be specified.
There should also be a system for verifying that the performance standards have
been achieved. The personnel carrying out routine inspection and testing and the
personnel who will independently verify this work may cover this.
4.4.5 Helideck Design Appraisal
During development of a new helideck or the modification of an existing helideck,

independent and competent person(s) should conduct a design appraisal and
fabrication survey to verify that the helideck and its systems meet the specified
performance standards (see CAP 437) and is ‘fit for purpose’ in respect of the
following items, as a minimum:
• size and structural adequacy for selected helicopter

• orientation to prevailing winds
• gas / exhaust emissions and turbulence environment
• effects of vessel motions (if applicable)
• suitable helideck height
• clear landing approach and take-off paths
• obstructions within permitted limits
• falling gradient (i.e. 5:1)
• access and escape routes
• parking arrangements, if provided
• lighting
• markings
• friction surface
• tiedowns
• helideck net and perimeter safety net
• refuelling facilities
• firefighting equipment – hardware aspects
• helideck details in the Operations Manual.
24
During the helideck design verification process, the appropriate design documents
including drawings, wind tunnel test reports, etc. should be reviewed and verified
by an independent competent person (ICP).
BHAB Helidecks should also be notified at the commencement of ‘new’ helideck

designs or modifications to existing helidecks and, when appropriate, consulted on
issues concerning potential non-compliances with CAP 437 requirements. At the
conclusion of the helideck design and fabrication, a set of ‘up to date’ design
documents including drawings, wind tunnel test reports, etc. should be passed to
BHAB Helidecks for their review, comment and retention. It should be clearly
understood that modifications on installations, MODUs and vessels in areas off the
actual helideck and some distance away can adversely affect helideck operations
(e.g. the addition of new modules, repositioning of gas turbine exhausts and vent
systems, etc.).
Upon satisfactory completion of the helideck Hook Up and Commissioning, BHAB

Helidecks should be notified in order for them to undertake an initial inspection of
the helideck and its systems prior to the commencement of flight operations. The
inspection will follow the approved Offshore Helideck Inspection Report (OHIR)
format.
This initial inspection, along with an appraisal of the relevant design documents,
will highlight non-compliances and thus assist BHAB Helidecks with determining
whether operational limitations should be applied.
4.4.6 Providing Information for Operating and Flight Crew Operations

Manuals
One of the imperatives at the conclusion of helideck design and construction is to

provide relevant and complete technical information for future use by the helideck
and flight crews.
As part of the inspection / acceptance process BHAB Helidecks require a full set of
plans and documentation as listed on the Offshore Helideck Inspection Report
(OHIR).
Information to be gathered for inclusion in the installation or vessel operations

manuals should be largely the same as that required to develop the Design and
Operability Report (template provided in Section 5.5). In particular, it is essential
to include any information to be provided in written instructions to flight crews,
OIMs and helideck crews.
25
Vendor information, data sheets, operating instructions and maintenance and test
manuals should also be obtained for each piece of procured equipment and
provided for use on the facility.
4.4.7 Limited Helideck Operations
In the event that helideck operations are likely to be restricted as a result of design
or construction deficiencies, the problems likely to be encountered and the likely
costs incurred by the duty holder during operations should be clearly understood
and justified to the helideck owner by the designers.
Installation operators, MODU and vessel owners should instruct Topsides and
Helideck Design Contractors to advise them formally of any helideck or associated
system deficiencies arising from the overall installation, MODU or vessel helideck
designs that may give rise to helicopter or helideck operational restrictions and / or
additional operating expense.
26
5.0 DESIGN SAFETY CASES
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 1992 (SCR) (SI 1992/2885),
among other things require installation owners and duty holders to identify all
hazards which could cause a major accident, including helicopter accidents, and to
take measures to reduce the risks to as low as is reasonably practicable
(Regulation 8).
The approach taken when making these Regulations was to set objectives. The
objectives were then expanded further in guidance on the regulations.
However, it is noted that, with respect to helicopter operations, the guidance on

Safety Case Regulations is focused mainly on the hazards and risks to an
installation and its personnel from impacts by aircraft. It does not specifically
encompass the hazards and risks to a helicopter and its passengers from the
installation and its processes.
Duty Holders, including Designers, should adequately address the potential effects
on helicopter flight operations caused by adverse operating environments created
on and around offshore installations. These adverse effects may result from
production and power generation processes and structures on the installation or
from adjacent installations and vessels. When combined with local weather
conditions the resultant effects can place helicopters in jeopardy, particularly
during critical flight phases. Duty Holders including Designers should, in particular,
assess any hazards due to hydrocarbon gas release, exhaust emissions, physical
turbulence generation and lit flares. Failure modes of installation, MODU or vessel
systems that have the potential to affect the safety of helicopters should also be
assessed (e.g. loss of heading control on a vessel whilst a helicopter is located on
the helideck). References to these studies should be made in the Design and
Operations Safety Cases.
HSE has recognised the need to consider the hazards to helicopters created by an
installation, MODU or vessel. The joint HSE / CAA research project resulting in
CAA Paper 99004 [Ref: 41] concluded (Conclusion No: 29) that guidance in the
past has been solely and erroneously concentrated on the risk to the installation
and has not explicitly encompassed the hazards the installation may pose to the
helicopter. HSE Safety Notice 4/99 [Ref: 23] draws duty holders’ attention to the
need to consider installation or vessel induced hazards for helicopters.
27
5.2 RISK AND OPERABILITY ASSESSMENTS
There are a number of situations where the actions of the duty holder could be
prejudicial to the safety of helicopter operations.
These include:
1. Poorly controlled activities which could adversely affect the wind flow over
the helideck, such as design modifications to the topside layout or
blocking air gaps under the helideck (where these are provided) thereby
reducing the effectiveness of the design air gap.
2. Combined operations (e.g. involving closely positioned workover rigs or

flotels) where the effects of windflow, exhausts and proximity on helicopter
operations have not been considered. There may be conflict between
flights to adjacent installations, however, bridge linked units can make a
choice of helideck available.
3. Lack of awareness on the part of the OIM of the impact of routine platform
activities on helicopter operations can also be important. Gas turbine
exhaust plumes are largely invisible to a helicopter pilot but can be
detrimental to helicopter handling and performance. Information on the
operational status of such equipment should be made available to pilots.
4. Releases of hydrocarbon gas, whether due to an unforeseen accident, or

as part of a controlled blowdown of process equipment, also represent a
hazard to helicopters. Where a condition can exist which may be
hazardous to the helicopter or the occupants, duty holders should install
helideck status lights.
5. Diesel exhaust emissions can also cause serious degradation to the

quality of the flying environment. This is particularly so in respect of the
fumes and airborne particulates associated with diesel exhausts. The
thermal effects from diesel exhaust emissions on helicopter rotor, engine
control and performance are generally less than from gas turbine
exhausts operating at higher temperatures.
The sample strategy, outlined in Section 5.3, is provided to maximise coverage of

the helideck assessment.
28
5.3 HELIDECK ASSESSMENT STRATEGY
When preparing risk and operability assessments the duty holder should
particularly address the following issues by preparing a schedule of key factors
likely to have an impact on the safety of helicopter operations. The schedule
should include, but is not necessarily limited to:
• The maintenance of unobstructed air flow over and under the helideck
• Consideration of the likely impact on the airflow situation due to changes

in the topside layout that could range for example from temporary storage
under the helideck to more permanent changes such as the addition of
cladding to the drilling derrick
• The operation of gas turbine units in situations where hot exhaust gasses
may be emitted into the path of a helicopter
• Flaring and blowdown of flammable gas which may be prejudicial to

helicopter operations
• The location, operation and maintenance of wind recording equipment
• Combined operations involving another installation or vessel in the vicinity

of the installation with potential to disturb the airflow significantly or to emit
hot exhaust into the flight path of a helicopter
• The Safety Management System for an installation should set the

standards and monitor compliance against a set of established
operational requirements designed to minimise environmental hazards to
helicopter operations
• Standards to be attained and procedures to be used for monitoring the

control of installation activities to ensure an acceptable level of safety for
helicopter operations is maintained
• Ensuring procedures are in place for communicating relevant information

to helicopter operators in a timely manner, including any departure from
agreed operational practice, which may have an adverse effect on
helicopter safety.
Offshore safety requires co-operation between everyone who has a contribution to

make to ensure health and safety on an offshore installation or the activities
29
involving the installation. The scope of Regulation 8 of MAR is, therefore, very
wide and includes operators, owners, concession owners, employers, employees,
managers and people in charge of visiting vessels or aircraft.
5.4 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW
When reviewing the assessments, helideck design and operability and the
intended arrangements for helicopter operations should be assessed against
current guidelines and good industry practice.
The overall scope of individual duty holder submissions will vary considerably, and
the guidance given in this document may assist with assessing the completeness
of the case for safety.
It is also important for the duty holder to have a good measure of the operability of
a helideck and facilities design in terms of the proposed operating arrangements
and the predicted operational performance (e.g. availability).
A performance assessment can be made using the template set out in Section 5.5.
5.5 TEMPLATE FOR A DESIGN AND OPERABILITY REPORT
5.5.1 Report Objectives
The objectives of a Design and Operability Report are:
1. To present an overview of the facilities design and the provisions being

made for supporting helicopter operations to and from an installation or
vessel.
2. To provide relevant information about the helideck and support systems

design and operability, to enable the verification process to be completed.
3. To achieve acceptance for flight operations by the helicopter operators

(BHAB Helidecks) with minimum operating limitations.
4. To provide a document that interfaces with the Safety Case and provides
relevant operating information for helicopter crews and helideck teams.
30
5.5.2 Suggested Report Structure
Section 1 – Introduction
Preferably limited to general statements about the facility and to report objectives.
Section 2 – Management Summary
To include statements on the completion of design and operability assessment

activities, completion of helideck hook-up and commissioning activities and overall
conclusions on the helideck operational status and acceptability.
Section 3 – Documentation
Provide listings of key helideck project and vendor design drawings, design
specifications, data sheets and reports (e.g. helideck wind tunnel testing). The
information that is provided for each document should include the Document
number, Originator, Title, Revision and Approval status and date.
Section 4 – Logistics & Operations Philosophy
Following a brief introduction, the contents of this section should address the
installation, MODU or vessel operator's preferred or specific aircraft selection,
routings and payload expectations. Diversion and adverse weather polices should
be included along with relevant information on intended search & rescue
provisions / coverage and a statement on adverse weather policy. The field
operator’s requirements (taken from initial design specification) for the helideck
and facilities should be noted along with any variations requested as design
proceeds. Additionally, the installation / vessel operator’s requirements for
helicopter refuelling, passenger and freight handling should be noted. Finally, a
brief statement covering the installation / vessel operator’s existing facilities and
operating experience should be included.
Section 5 – Regulatory Requirements and Verification Process
This section should briefly set out the regulations, rules, codes and standards that
are applicable to the helideck design, fabrication, construction and verification
processes. It is also prudent to identify each of the ‘official’ bodies concerned with
the verification of the helideck, its support facilities and their areas of involvement.
This process is usually simple for UK fixed installations but, in the case of FPSOs,
MODUs and vessels, which may retain class for world-wide operations, it can be
more complicated. It is therefore essential to identify the classification aspects,
31
which introduce the need to observe international conventions that may conflict
with established UK offshore requirements.
Verification meetings and the initial BHAB Helidecks review and inspection should
be noted. Reference to the outcomes and outstanding work lists should be
included.
Section 6 – Design and Operability Review
This section should address the whole range of topics relevant to the helideck
design and its future safe operation. Sub-sections should cover the following:
1. Production and Operating Environments
Includes field / operating location(s), environmental conditions, the facility layout

and leading particulars, production processes and helideck / helicopter
transportation risk assessments.
2. Aircraft Operating and Performance Considerations
Data relevant to helicopter types that may use the helideck, For example, motion
limits imposed on FPSOs, MODUs and vessels.
3. Helicopter Landing Area Operational Standards
Information provided should include the landing area height (vessels should
include variations to draught conditions AMSL), wind direction, frequency and
velocity distribution, vessel motions affecting helicopter operations including a
motion analysis (when applicable).
4. Helicopter Landing Area Physical Characteristics
This section should address the following list of topics and should clearly
demonstrate that each element has been properly considered during the design
phase. It is essential that any reduction or infringement of the dimensional or
obstruction clearance requirements set out in CAP 437 is highlighted and full
justification given for the anticipated operating limitations. Similarly where the
requirements are exceeded these should also be stated.
• Helicopter Safe Landing Area size

• Overall helideck size (if larger than the basic safe landing area)
• 210° Obstacle Free Sector
32
• 0.12 ‘D’ Limited Obstacle Sector (0.62 'D' from centre of D circle)
• 0.21 ‘D’ Limited Obstacle Sector (0.83 'D' from centre of D circle)
• 5:1 Falling Gradient
• The adverse effects of combined operations on clearances (if applicable)
• Helideck and landing area design, materials, airgap, etc.
• Helideck friction surface / helideck net
• Helicopter tiedown points arrangement, fittings, etc.
• Perimeter Safety Net
• Access and Escape arrangements
• Routine or emergency parking and laydown arrangements (drawings to be
provided showing locations and revised obstruction clearances)
• Helideck drainage.
5. Aerodynamic and Process Thermal Effects on the Helideck and

Helicopters
This is a key section that deals with providing good information for flight crews on
the likely adverse flying effects (aircraft handling difficulties and pilot workload)
they may encounter from turbulence over the helideck and around the installation /
vessel environs during approach, landing and take-off. Potential turbulence (from
structures, etc.) and thermal sources (from gas turbines, diesel exhausts, process
vents and flares, etc) that are identified during model testing (using physical or
CFD methods) should be quantified and fully explained. Estimates of helideck
operability should be provided and conclusions drawn in respect of flight safety
and the potential for additional operating costs if accepting helideck operational
impairment and landing limitations [Ref: 68].
6. Visual Aids
It should be demonstrated that helideck and obstruction markings fully meet CAP
437 requirements. Any deviation must be justified and accepted by a competent
agency.
This section should also address helideck and other associated lighting systems,
their power sources and control.
The lighting systems will include perimeter and surface lights, floodlights, general
helideck and installation / vessel lighting, status lights, etc. Information should be
provided on system design, equipment selection and lighting performance.
Finally, statements should be made to demonstrate that the design and location of
installation / vessel identification markings / signs have been properly addressed in
33
order to eliminate the potential for wrong deck landings. Reference should be
made to CAP 437 (side signage) and HSE Operations Notices 14 and 39 [Refs: 24
& 26].
7. Firefighting and Rescue Facilities
This section should summarise the detection, protection and firefighting philosophy
adopted for the helideck landing area (e.g. the identification and control of helideck
emergencies) and its support systems (e.g. helifuel storage and supply). As a
minimum, it should be clearly demonstrated that the systems design, equipment
selection, operation and maintainability meet relevant offshore regulations and the
requirements of CAP 437.
Details of rescue equipment, helideck crew protective equipment and breathing

apparatus should be included.
8. Helicopter Fuelling Facilities
Where helicopter fuelling facilities are provided, the following topics should be
addressed:
• basic system requirements

• storage requirements
• bulk capacity and location
• fuel supply and dispenser systems design and locations.
9. Helicopter Operations Support Equipment
This section should summarise the many items of helicopter operations support
equipment. Items will include, but not necessarily be limited to:
• Meteorological equipment
• Communications equipment
• Helicopter starting unit
• Safety and information signs and posters
• Aircraft tiedown equipment
• Aircraft chocks
• Windsocks
• Passengers, baggage & freight weighing equipment
• Helideck de-icing equipment
• Safety briefing system.
34
Section 7 – Matters to be Provided for in Written Instructions
This section should include references and information specific to the helideck and
its systems that should be embodied in the installation, MODU or vessel
Operations Manual and Emergency Procedures. Also, where there is a need for
notifications to helicopter operators, specific operating procedures or maintenance
instructions to be written, these should be included. Details should also be
included about Flight Information Reporting including meteorological reporting and
vessel movement.
A ‘HORG’ or Route Guide plate will be generated for the installation, MODU or
vessel based on information provided to BHAB Helidecks. This document is a
summary of the key points about an installation landing site and is made available
to flight crews. Ideally, a ‘draft’ Plate should be prepared (with appropriate
graphics and text) to include all the information that will be required in the formally
published document. Ideally, the information should be accompanied by a three-
dimensional digital image.
Examples of route guides are given in UKOOA Guidelines for the Management of
Offshore Helidecks [Ref: 49].
APPENDICES
Appendices should be used where considered appropriate to assist document

readability.
As a minimum, an A3 sized general arrangement drawing should be included

clearly illustrating the installation / vessel plan and an elevation (showing the
helideck arrangements), details of the helideck and its helicopter operating criteria
and equipment layout.
35
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
36
6.0 HELIDECK AND FACILITIES LAYOUT
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this section is to identify the topics that should be considered in the
design and fabrication of new helidecks and in the modification of existing
helidecks.
It also identifies experience-based practical requirements for the operation and

maintenance of a helideck, regardless of the type of facility to which it is fitted.
6.2 DEVELOPING A HELIDECK DESIGN SPECIFICATION
6.2.1 General
At the conceptual stage of an installation, MODU or vessel design, a firm

commitment is required from the owner or operator to ensure that a good operating
environment is obtained for safe and efficient helicopter operations. A positive
management commitment at this stage should ensure that, at each stage in the
design process, proper consideration is made for the future helicopter operations,
alongside other competing priorities.
The ideal helideck design can rarely be achieved due to an offshore installation,
MODU or vessel's other activities and priorities (e.g. process, drilling, power
generation, and diving operations), the working environment including vessel
motions in the case of floating installations and vessels. Inevitably, the outcome
will always be a compromise with the other activities. However, the designer
should make every effort to ensure that the helideck is truly ‘Fit for Purpose’.
6.2.2 Reference Publications and Guidance
It should be noted there are only a few authoritative publications that provide
general guidance for helideck designs e.g. the International Civil Aviation
Organisation (ICAO) codes, CAA Standards, Mobile Offshore Drilling Units
(MODU) codes, etc. These codes have been identified in Section 4.3 and in
Appendix 2. It is therefore important to give careful consideration to the topics in
the following sections. They are not in order of priority, nor exhaustive.
37
6.3 INSTALLATION / VESSEL LAYOUT CONSIDERATIONS
6.3.1 Main References
CAP 437, Chapter 2 is the starting point for helideck and facilities design in the
UKCS.
6.3.2 General
The helideck is a vital support system for all offshore operations. Failure during
design to maximise helideck operability may have far reaching implications during
operations. These implications are typified by flight restrictions (sometimes
severe), and have the potential for increased operating expense that may later
lead to costly modifications.
It s important that the design of the helideck is regarded as a key component of the
structure, allowing for the safe transportation of personnel and equipment, as well
as a primary escape route in an emergency. The design therefore needs to be
integrated and not regarded as an appendage to the main structure.
On fixed installations and some floating structures, helidecks are generally placed
on top of an accommodation module. Vessels tend to vary quite a lot with bow
helidecks either mounted above bridge level or above the foredeck, positioned aft
and elevated above the main deck or accommodation block level and, in some
cases, offset outboard.
Layouts are invariably established following the basic published ‘landing area’
dimensional minima (i.e. CAP 437). It is recommended the designer also give
careful thought and attention to ‘operational’ criteria.
It is therefore essential whilst developing a specification and obtaining approval for

construction to:
1. Clearly define the purpose and characteristics of the installation, MODU or

vessel on which the helideck will be installed.
2. Identify the operating intentions of the installation operator, MODU or

vessel owner. Maintain flexibility of design as far as practicable, to cater
for future changes of use. Identify all key features of the installation,
MODU or vessel that may significantly affect helideck design.
38
For example a consensus decision is made to operate helicopters only by
daylight (e.g. on a NUI) and therefore a decision is made not to install any
helideck lighting. The CAA might point out that, since this is a design
decision, they will not permit any emergency evacuation flights at night
and the HSE will therefore need to see a Safety Case which does not
involve helicopters for night use of any kind, routine or emergency.
3. Identify and eliminate, or reduce as far as possible, the hazards

associated with helideck operations. These hazards may include, but are
not necessarily limited to, the following:
• Excessive windflow turbulence due to adjacent structures or

process thermal effects (e.g. turbine exhausts, normal and
emergency hydrocarbon cold venting systems), which may cause
helicopter handling problems
• Obstructions in the approach or departure sectors
• Emergencies such as helicopter crashes, fires or fuel spills requiring

a rapid response and therefore unimpeded helideck access
• The potential for personnel contact with main or tail rotors whilst on
deck
• The potential for loose items of equipment being sucked into rotors
or air intakes by structure induced turbulent airflow or rotor
downwash
• Consider provision of protected stations for helideck crews to avoid

danger from possible crash debris or rotor plane movement after
landing.
4. Consult competent aviation specialists, the aviation or logistics staff of the

Owner or Operator, the CAA, BHAB Helidecks and helicopter operators
as necessary.
39
6.3.3 Helideck Physical Characteristics
The helideck structure should be designed to accommodate a safe landing area

(‘D’ circle) suitable for the largest and heaviest helicopter that it is anticipated will
use the helideck. The operator or owners’ project and logistics staff should provide
this information.
This information is fundamental in any helideck design and will enable designers to
determine the minimum overall size of the helideck and safe landing area and the
required load bearing strength of the structure. The Safe Landing Area (SLA) is
the actual area on a helideck enclosed and delineated by the Perimeter Line
marking. ‘D’ is the imaginary circle described on drawings to establish the SLA
dimensions and clearances for a selected helicopter (See CAP 437).
The operational needs of the installation, MODU or vessel and the helicopter
crews, helideck crews and passengers should also be taken fully into account. To
do this, it is prudent for the designer to explore potential opportunities for enlarging
the shape of the helideck beyond the minimum safe landing area requirement.
This obviously needs to be done whilst keeping in mind the ultimate weight, size,
structural loadings and economics of the final structure.
When selecting and fixing the final helideck size, shape and configuration, the
following factors should be properly considered and mitigated:
• The safe landing area (SLA) should be positioned for optimum operational
efficiency and clearance from obstructions (See Section 6.4). Also, the
SLA should be positioned toward an appropriate outboard edge of the
main structure so that overflying installation structures is avoided, and
there are adequate clear landing and take-off sectors available
• Safe passenger access to and egress from a helicopter in both normal

and emergency situations in all weather conditions
• Safely performing routine helideck crew activities such as refuelling,

freight and baggage handling, fire fighting and rescue, and maintenance
requirements
• The need to provide a parking area for an unserviceable helicopter to

make the landing area available for a ‘recovery’ aircraft should be
seriously considered. This facility may be operationally desirable where
alternate landing sites / arrangements cannot be easily obtained.
40
Doing this exercise properly will help to determine the overall helideck dimensions
that are required, over and above the safe landing area.
Simple examples for developing helideck configurations are given in Section 6.6
and a selection of actual helideck arrangements is illustrated in the following
plates.
The actual helideck arrangements shown are not necessarily optimum helideck
designs without any operating restrictions.
Figure 6.4 – Fixed platform (NUI) with cantilevered helideck

Figure 6.5 – Accommodation vessel with helideck above buoyancy legs and
anchor winches (also note the provision of 2 helidecks)
Figure 6.6 – FPSO with aft mounted helideck
Figure 6.7 – Drilling / Production ship with bow mounted Helideck (above bridge)
Figure 6.8 – Seismic vessel with foredeck mounted helideck
Figure 6.9 – Seismic vessel with aft mounted helideck
Figure 6.10 – Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) with helideck Inboard of the
buoyancy legs and anchor winches
Figure 6.11 – Jack-up drilling rig with cantilevered helideck.
6.3.4 Helideck Orientation
6.3.4.1 Fixed Installations
The jacket, topsides, and riser strength and fatigue considerations for the chosen
location of the facility will primarily dictate the orientation of fixed installations.
Potential hydrodynamic and wind loadings on the structure have to be taken into
account during design for the predicted oceanographic and environmental
conditions likely to be encountered offshore.
Reference should be made to Section 10 where this topic is discussed in detail

with respect to helideck environmental effects.
6.3.4.2 FPSOs and Vessels
Ship-shaped FPSOs and Vessels generally have the ability to move their heading
into the weather and, as a result, they have greater operational flexibility when
optimising helideck orientation and movement for the prevailing winds. This
feature is addressed in more detail in Section 7.
41
6.3.4.3 MODUs, Jack-Ups and other Semi-Submersibles
MODUs and Jack-ups, when operating alone, are effectively the same as fixed
installations when determining the helideck orientation.
For example, in the Northern North Sea, the preferred orientation for a MODU is
about 300° True because this is where the most severe weather comes from (e.g.
winds and waves).
When MODUs, Jack-ups and other Semi-Submersibles (e.g. Floatels) are

positioned for combined operations there is a need to integrate several key marine
(e.g. anchoring) and operating (bridging, etc.) requirements. The marine, drilling
and other operational positioning considerations will take priority.
This tends to cause some loss of flexibility for orienting the helideck to optimise
wind flows. However, in this mode of operation there will usually be a choice of
operational helideck. This situation is addressed in more detail in Section 7.
6.3.5 Assessing Suitability of the Proposed Helideck Arrangement
6.3.5.1 Introduction
Having decided upon the initial layout and before proceeding further with detailed
design, the designer should examine operational effectiveness of the proposed
arrangements with respect to both physical (space and other material aspects) and
with respect to potential environmental effects.
6.3.5.2 New Designs and Modifications to Existing Installations
The following sections of these design guidelines address in detail operational

considerations, helideck systems and support equipment. The designer may draw
on this information for new installations in order to achieve a detailed design that
follows good industry practice based on practical considerations that are supported
by field experience.
For existing installations that are being modified, a review may be necessary to
assess the effects of any new plant and equipment on the operability of the
helideck. Examples of modifications that could affect operability include the
construction of an additional accommodation or other module and provision of
satellite dish nearby.
42
6.3.5.3 Helideck Environmental Considerations
Section 10 of these design guidelines deals with assessing the potential effects on
helicopters from aerodynamic and thermal environments and wave motions that
may be encountered around offshore helidecks.
43
(Photograph courtesy of John Burt Associates Limited)
Figure 6.1 – Fixed platform (NUI) with cantilevered helideck
(Photograph courtesy of Shell Exploration & Production)
Figure 6.2 – Accommodation vessel with helideck above buoyancy legs and anchor winches
(note the provision of two helidecks and large hangar facility between)
44
(Photograph courtesy of Conoco UK Ltd)
Figure 6.3 – FPSO with aft mounted helideck
(Photograph courtesy of Amerada Hess Limited)
Figure 6.4 – Well test / production vessel with bow mounted

helideck (above bridge)
45
(Photograph courtesy of Western Geco)
Figure 6.5 – Seismic vessel with foredeck mounted helideck
(Photograph courtesy of Western Geco)
Figure 6.6 – Seismic vessel with aft mounted helideck (note: the streamers are deployed and
the helideck perimeter safety net is raised to act as handrailing – with the handrailing in
raised position the helideck is inoperative)
46
(Photograph courtesy of Dolphin A/S)
Figure 6.7 – Mobile offshore drilling unit (MODU) with helideck inboard of the buoyancy legs
and anchor winches (Note: this is a poor arrangement due to the significant 5:1 infringement,
which will incur operating restrictions).
(Photograph courtesy of Maersk)
Figure 6.8 – Jack-up drilling rig with cantilevered helideck
47
6.4 THE SAFE LANDING AREA
CAP 437, Chapter 2.
6.4.2 General
The safe landing area (SLA) must be big enough to accommodate the largest
helicopter that the landing area is intended to serve. The SLA is the area of a
helideck that is contained within the WHITE Perimeter Line. This does not
necessarily mean that the SLA will be the largest possible ‘D’ circle that can be
accommodated within the overall structural dimensions of a helideck. Examples of
helidecks with various Safe Landing Area arrangements are shown in the following
figures 6.10 to 6.12 (see also previous sections that address the need to optimise
helideck layout). The SLA should be given full and proper consideration from an
operational perspective whilst laying out the helideck arrangement during the
conceptual design phase of an installation or vessel.
‘D’ is the largest dimension of the helicopter when the rotors are turning and in a
conventional helicopter with an exposed tail rotor; it is the distance from the front of
the main rotor tip path to the rear of the tail rotor tip path. The parameter ‘D’
(overall length) for the chosen helicopter is found in CAP 437 – ‘D’ Value and
Helicopter Type Criteria along with the aircraft weight data.
Importantly, the SLA should be carefully positioned on the helideck to give an

obstruction free environment (see Section 4.7 for details), which will provide
adequate landing, overshoot and take-off paths, ample clearance from structures,
etc. during helicopter manoeuvres and sufficient space for the helideck crew to
operate and passengers to embark and disembark safely.
Where the overall size of the helideck structure can be made larger than the SLA
the designer is strongly recommended to take full advantage of any extra space
that is available to maximise separation of the SLA from any adjacent structures
and possibly to create a ‘run-off’ (parking) area.
Helideck enlargement is particularly important on vessels with forward mounted

helidecks where any additional space gained to create more forward visual cues
for landing is a highly desirable feature.
Where helideck space is limited and the windflow is over the bow, the helicopter
will land on the helideck with its tail rotor towards the Limited Obstacle Sector (e.g.
48
vessel superstructure) and the flight crew will be unable to see the helideck
surface in front of the nose of the helicopter.
Therefore, with more space behind the helicopter and thus, the provision of greater
separation, there is less likelihood for an inadvertent tail rotor strike. This topic is
covered in more detail in Section 7.
NOT TO SCALE Boundary of Helideck

Structure (excluding
Perimeter Safety Net)
Chevron located
H at this point
Limited
Obstacle
Sector
‘D’ Circle (= SLA)
Figure 6.9 – Example of a coincident safe landing area and ‘D’ circle extending to the
boundary of the helideck structure. Note: 'H' offset 0.1’D’ towards outboard edge.
NOT TO SCALE Boundary of

Helideck Structure
(excluding Perimeter
SLA = Safety Net)
Whole
H
Helideck
Chevron located
at this point
Limited
Obstacle
‘D’ Circle Sector
Figure 6.10 – Example of a safe landing area extending to the boundary of the whole helideck
structure. Note ‘D’ circle only covers part of the helideck and 'H' offset 0.1’D’ towards
outboard edge.
49
NOT TO SCALE Chevron located
Boundary of
at this point Helideck
Structure
SLA is the
(excluding
area within
Perimeter
white
Safety Net /
H
Perimeter
Handrailing)
Line
Limited
Obstacle
Sector
‘D’ Circle
Figure 6.11 – Example of a helideck where the structure is larger than the safe landing area
thus providing additional clearance from obstructions and greater scope for personnel
movement, etc. outside the rotor disc area. Note: 'H' offset 0.1’D’ towards outboard edge.
6.5 HELICOPTER PARKING FACILITIES
6.5.1 Introduction
In certain instances, helicopters visiting offshore installations may become

unserviceable and have to shutdown. A helicopter transiting the general area
offshore may have an in-flight emergency and be seeking an offshore diversion.
Therefore, there may be good operational reasons for wanting to park a helicopter
on a helideck but still be able to allow other helicopters to use the safe landing
area (SLA).
The ability to park a helicopter on an offshore installation and still be able to use
the helideck for other helicopter movements gives much greater operational
flexibility. For this reason a parking or ‘run-off’ area should be seriously
considered at the outset of conceptual installation / helideck design.
Factors that may assist with decision-making on the benefit of providing a parking
area are:
• The type of facility being designed (i.e. a small vessel or NUI may not be
able to accommodate a parking area)
50
• There may only be limited structural capacity and space options with the
intended installation design and layout
• Capital cost implications may outweigh the potential operational

advantages of having a parking area
• Provision of one helideck with a parking area when operating several

helidecks within an oil / gas field.
CAP 437, Chapter 3.
6.5.3 Design Considerations
A parking area should be regarded as an integral part of the helideck layout

regardless of whether it is adjacent to the SLA or located some distance away with
ready made access to and from the SLA.
The parking area size, dimensions and layout will be entirely dependent upon the
space that can be made available. Also, there is a need to ensure that:
1. A parked helicopter does not infringe the obstacle protected surfaces for
the helicopter landing area (e.g. create an unacceptable obstacle
environment for the helideck).
2. The parking area can be clearly distinguished from the SLA. This is best
achieved by painting the parking area in a contrasting ‘light’ colour. In
addition, the perimeter line marking and perimeter lights should clearly
delineate the SLA boundary from the parking area. For night operations,
perimeter lighting may be installed around the parking area outboard
boundary but it should be a different colour (e.g. blue) to the SLA
perimeter lighting. Similarly, the parking area should ideally be floodlit.
However, it is important to note that all parking area floodlighting should

be adequately shielded to avoid ‘overspill’ onto the SLA with the potential
to affect pilot's night vision. See also Section 11.3
51
NOT TO SCALE Perimeter Safety Net
Omitted for Clarity
H PARKING
AREA
Safe Landing Area

Limited Obstacle
(SLA) inside White
Sector
Perimeter Line
Figure 6.12 – Example of helideck layout with adjacent parking area
NOT TO SCALE Perimeter Safety Net

Omitted for Clarity
H
PARKING
AREA
Limited Obstacle
Safe Landing Area (SLA) inside Sector
White Perimeter Line
Figure 6.13 – Example of helideck with remote parking area
3. The positioning of a parked helicopter does not create ‘visual cueing’

problems for incoming flight crews (e.g. mask flood lighting and status
lights).
52
4. The positioning of a parked helicopter does not impair access and escape
routes, operation of firefighting equipment, etc
5. The helicopter can be readily manoeuvred into the parking position.
6. Parked helicopter clearances (for each type likely to use the helideck) can
be properly demonstrated and verified.
7. There are adequate tiedown points provided to ensure the parked

helicopter can be properly secured.
8. Structurally, the parking area is of adequate construction to support the

imposed loads (static).
6.5.4 Hangars
On occasion there may be a requirement to install a hangar offshore to

accommodate permanently offshore-based helicopters (e.g. in-field shuttle
helicopters and offshore-based rescue and recovery [OBRR] helicopters).
Hangar structures will normally be associated with either a second helideck or an

adjacent parking area. They should therefore be considered a functional part of an
integrated helideck design. Consideration should also be given to providing two
helidecks when hangar operations are planned so that one helideck can always be
used in any weather scenario (See Figure 6.3).
In addition to the general considerations to be taken into account when designing

helidecks and hangars (see also Figure 6.3), it is essential to consider the potential
for these combined structures to create adverse aerodynamic effects over the
designated SLA. There is likely to be increased turbulent windflows in some
sectors and these may seriously affect the overall aerodynamic performance of the
helideck. Potential turbulence should be modelled and quantified to establish the
full extent and effects of any adverse windflows from the structure. Flight
restrictions may have to be applied.
53
6.6 OBSTACLE FREE ENVIRONMENT
CAP 437, Chapter 3.
6.6.2 Obstruction Clearances
Viewed in plan and all elevations, the helideck location and orientation in relation
to the topsides configuration including modules and structures / appendages such
as cranes, flare booms, turbine exhausts, radio antenna, lifeboats, etc. should
maximise the obstruction free sectors available.
A minimum 210° obstacle free sector is required. Its Point of Origin (PO) on the
inboard side of the deck is the apex of the chevron (see CAP 437 – Visual Aids).
On an existing helideck that, by unusual exception, does not meet the normal
obstacle free sector of 210°, the accepted angle (less than 210°) should be clearly
shown. In this case, operability may be compromised. Where the minimum 210°
obstacle free sector can be exceeded (e.g. on a NUI), the increased angle may be
declared. In this case operability may be improved.
By extending a line out from each leg of the chevron, a check is required to ensure
freedom from obstructions within the 210° sector by identifying items that are
above deck level. Such items may not exceed 250 mm in height, and even then
must be restricted to specified essentials such as lighting fittings, safety net rails,
etc. as specified in CAP 437. Generally, no obstructions of greater height are
permitted within 1000 metres of the PO. However, in some operational
circumstances it may be acceptable to permit obstacles within 250 metres of the
PO, subject to CAA / BHAB Helidecks assessment and approval.
Achieving the obstruction clearances can be a problem, particularly with floating

installations (e.g. floatels), vessels operating adjacent to fixed platforms and during
shuttle tanker operations to FPSOs. Where uninfringed obstacle protection cannot
be achieved this is likely to restrict or preclude operations to that helideck. See
also Section 8.1 - Combined Operations.
6.6.3 Limited Obstacle Sector
Permitted obstruction heights should be calculated for the largest helicopter that
the helideck is designed to accommodate.
54
The obstacle height restrictions applied to helidecks are provided in order to
maintain safe helicopter rotor clearances. The dimensions will vary according to
'D' size and helicopter type (e.g. single main rotor or tandem rotor). Refer to CAP
437 for specific details.
6.6.4 Falling Gradient
Strict control is required over the size of obstructions projecting from the side
profile of the installation / vessel below the helideck. These obstructions are
typified by lifeboat arrangements, communications antenna, laydown platforms,
exhaust systems, buoyancy tanks and windlasses and anchor systems (on
MODUs).
Within an outboard arc of minimum 180° (preferably 210°) centred on the centre
of the landing area, and lying centrally within the 210° unobstructed arc, such
obstructions must not penetrate an imaginary surface which extends downwards
and outwards from the edge of the helideck at a gradient of 1 unit outwards for
every 5 units of vertical fall. This is shown in CAP 437 – Size and Obstacle Free
Environment.
This unobstructed space permits the helicopter to descend safely after take off in
the event of engine failure, so as to pick up climbing speed.
The 5 to 1 gradient is measured from the outer edge of the 1.5 metre helideck
perimeter safety net.
6.7 CONTROL, ACCESS AND ESCAPE
CAP 437, Chapter 3.
6.7.2 Helideck Control Room
If project space / weight / cost controls permit, it is advantageous to provide a

helideck control room adjacent to the helideck. Providing a helideck control room
should:
• Assist with the efficient supervision of helideck operations
• Provide a good location for aeronautical telecommunications equipment
55
• Provide a storage area to ensure crash / rescue equipment is readily
available
• Provide a good location for meteorological and navigation instruments
• Provide storage for helideck crew personal protective clothing.
To be effective, the control room should have good all round visibility of the
helideck and potential helicopter landing and take-off flight paths. The control
room construction should take full account of potential exposure of the occupants
(e.g. Helicopter Landing Officer) in the event of a serious helicopter incident on the
helideck.
Care is required when designing the control room to ensure that it does not
encroach into the obstruction free sectors and that the height is within the height
limitations in the limited obstacle sectors.
6.7.3 Access and Escape Routes
When deciding the normal access and emergency escape routes to and from the
helideck, a safe and efficient route should be provided for passengers between the
helideck and arrival / departure areas.
The escape evacuation and rescue analysis for the Offshore Installation should be
taken fully into account (see SCR and PFEER requirements).
The potential orientations of a helicopter positioned on the helideck should also be

considered especially with respect to prevailing winds, but also in consideration of
all possible landing directions (See CAP 437).
Access and Escape route design is addressed in greater detail in Section 9.0,
Helideck Structures.
56
7.0 FLOATING STRUCTURES AND VESSELS
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Floating Structures and Vessels account for a large proportion of the day to day
offshore activities in UK waters.
Floating structures comprise of the following:
• Floating Production and Storage Systems

• Mobile Offshore Drilling Units
• Accommodation Vessels (Floatels)
• Jack-ups on-the move and
• Specialist Vessels.
Specialist Vessels may include:
• Shuttle Tankers
• Diving Support Vessels
• Well Intervention Vessels
• Seismic Vessels
• Pipelay Barges / Vessels
• Crane Barges and others.
Many of these units will have helidecks where the design and construction of such
helidecks (particularly on some vessels) tend to be less prescriptive than for fixed
installations; the ship’s main functional purpose will sometimes inhibit helideck
design. However, they are required to meet the standards set out in the relevant
regulations, codes and guidance in order to undertake helicopter operations
routinely in UK waters. Failure to meet the required UK standards will either
exclude helicopter operations, or incur severe limitations requiring expensive
rework to comply fully.
Many MODUs and specialist vessels are foreign flagged and are certificated to
operate on a worldwide basis. When they enter UK waters on contract they should
meet the UK standards required for helidecks and helicopter operations otherwise
they are likely to be severely restricted, until such time as they do. They will
require inspection by the BHAB Helidecks before helicopter operations can
commence on the UKCS.
57
Often there is a failure to comply fully with UK standards. This has the effect of
reducing commercial value in the worldwide marketplace because many other
countries are also applying the same or very similar standards.
The following sections deal with the variations to helideck layout and systems that
will be encountered when specifying the design requirements for floating
structures, MODUs and vessels. These requirements (over and above those
generally applied to a fixed installation) should be fully taken into account when the
floating structure, MODU or specialist vessel is intended to operate in UK waters.
7.2 MOBILE DRILLING RIGS
7.2.1 Introduction
Invariably a MODU (a semi-submersible, jack-up on the move, or drill ship) will

initially be specified using the IMO MODU Code [Ref: 70] as the basis for design.
It should be noted that helidecks are covered in Chapter 13 of that code, and the
basic deck specified is smaller than that required by ICAO Annex 14 Volume 2 and
CAP 437 standards. However, ‘where adverse climatic conditions are prevalent,
as in the North Sea, the Coastal State may…[specify a larger helideck]’ (MODU
Code 13.2.3). The MODU Code specifications are still very brief and relying
exclusively on Chapter 13 of the IMO MODU Code, could easily mislead a
designer into producing an inadequate helideck facility for UK operations.
Therefore, it is imperative that UK national codes and guidance for helidecks and
helicopter operations are referenced alongside the IMO MODU Code.
CAP 437, Chapter 6.

IMO MODU Code.
7.2.3 Specific Features to Consider in MODU Helideck Design
The following sections cover specific topics that are relevant to MODU structures
(but differ significantly from fixed installations) and require specific consideration
during the design of such MODU structures. They are not in order of importance.
58
7.2.3.1 Operating Environments
Semi-submersibles
The marine operating environment for a semi-submersible is similar to a fixed
installation insofar as the helideck heading is generally fixed as a result of the
anchoring arrangement or, if fitted, a dynamic positioning (DP) system.
However, it differs from a fixed installation in that the helideck has a dynamic
movement in roll and pitch axes, heave, surge and sway due to the vessels
dynamic characteristics.
In addition to wind speed and direction, helideck movement (velocity and

accelerations as well as heave amplitude) induced by the floating structure should
be fully taken into account during helideck and system design and helicopter
operations. See Section 10.
Jack-ups
The marine operating environment for a jack-up on station is the same as a fixed
installation. However when under tow, the helideck conditions are similar to a
vessel under way.
Vessels
The marine operating environment for a drilling vessel ‘on station’ is similar to a
semi-submersible insofar as the helideck heading is generally fixed as a result of
the anchoring arrangement or, if fitted, the dynamic positioning (DP) system.
Similarly, the helideck has a dynamic movement in roll and pitch axes, heave,
surge and sway due to the vessels dynamic characteristics.
7.2.3.2 Anchoring
Anchoring arrangements should be taken into account when locating a helideck.

The locations of windlasses and anchor chains (above sea surface) should be
checked to ensure they do not encroach into the obstruction free sectors and 5:1
falling gradient.
7.2.3.3 Dynamic positioning
Care should be taken to ensure correct positioning of the DP system heading

control sensors, etc. that may be adversely affected by disturbances from
helicopter rotor downwash during landing and take-off. In particular, anemometers
can be greatly affected by spurious windflows.
59
Apart from spurious DP changes potentially causing severe problems for the
vessel whilst performing its primary operating task, even small changes to vessel
heading, etc. can induce increased helideck motions. These increased helideck
motions may suddenly put the helideck out-of-limits for a safe helicopter landing
and / or create serious stability problems for a helicopter parked on the helideck.
7.2.3.4 Drainage
Semi-Submersibles
Despite the best efforts of the builders, steel plated helidecks rarely remain flat
enough to be reliably drained by rig motion alone. Normal practice on such
helidecks is to camber the deck about a centreline knuckle. Camber is generally
between 1:100 and 1:50 (0.57° and 1.15°).
Vessels
As a result of vessel trim and motions the helideck should drain naturally toward
the drain holes and scuppers.
Therefore the helideck does not need a built-in ‘fall’, as is the case with fixed
installations.
If a ‘fall’ is built into a vessel helideck this effectively introduces a pre-fixed ‘list’
onto the helideck relative to the vessel datum. This ‘list’ has the effect of reducing
motion tolerance at the helideck for helicopter landings and the degree of ‘list’ must
therefore be added to the recorded motion measurement in the relevant axis (e.g.
roll or pitch).
7.2.3.5 Helideck Location, Size and Obstacle Environment
Helideck location on MODUs will largely depend upon the type of hull structure
employed (e.g. Semi-submersible, Jack-up or Ship). Size is not normally a
problem other than the structural and weight considerations associated for
example with very large, elevated helidecks that may have an adverse effect on
vessel stability.
Fundamental to any helideck design on a floating structure is the achievement of

an optimum safety performance for a moving helideck.
A moving helideck requires the designer and the operator to take full account of a
number of key issues that require proper resolution during design if the helideck is
to offer good operability and safety. Depending on the helideck location, these
issues involve providing:
60
• Good tail rotor clearances from obstructions (e.g. vessel superstructure)
for the helicopter to make a safe landing and take-off
• Increased space around the landing area to allow safe passenger and
helideck crew movements
• Proper provisions for safe personnel access and egress from the helideck
irrespective of the rate of helideck movement
• An accurate means of recording and reporting the actual and predicted

movements of the helideck during helideck operations.
Semi-Submersibles
The helideck is typically located at one corner of the main deck (forward or aft)
directly above one of the buoyancy columns and adjacent to the bridge /
accommodation. In this location, the windlasses and winches for controlling the
anchoring system will be directly below the helideck.
It is therefore important to ensure there is sufficient cantilever of the helideck

structure over the column and windlasses to avoid infringing the 5:1 falling gradient
below the helideck surface. It is also essential to provide sufficient air gap below
the helideck structure and above the winches and housings to avoid unfavourable
aerodynamic effects over the helideck.
NOT TO SCALE
Helideck
Overall Size ‘D’ Circle
H
White
Additional
Perimeter Line 1500mm
(= SLA) working space
all round
Figure 7.1 – Recommended dimensions for increasing helideck size to provide additional
space for helicopter manoeuvring and personnel movement on moving helidecks.
61
Normally, the position of the helideck relative to the topside structure, potential
obstructions and potential flight paths will provide adequate visual cues for flight
crews and sufficient clearances for landing and take-off.
Additional space around the helicopter landing area for safe passenger and
helideck crew movements and during manoeuvring a helicopter for landing onto
the moving helideck, is a prime consideration.
As a guide, irrespective of the helicopter type for which the helideck is designed, it
is recommended, where practicable, that the overall helideck size be increased by
at least 1500mm around the perimeter of the ‘D’ circle in order to provide additional
working space (see Figure 7.1).
In the case of small helidecks with a 'D' circle of 16 metres or less, the provision of
increased working space around the perimeter becomes a necessity. This is
because small helicopters (e.g. Sikorsky S76) generally have low rotor disc heights
and in some wind conditions blade sailing below the height of an average person
can easily occur. The provision of this extra perimeter space and with markings
based on deck centre along with a minimum of three escape points from the
helideck surface will facilitate safer personnel movements.
Jack-Ups
Helidecks on jack-ups, when on location, do not need special consideration for
vessel movements because they are in effect fixed structures. However, when
under tow they are effectively a vessel, and helicopters landing on the helideck
(routinely or in an emergency) will require the same design considerations and
operational aids as a mobile unit.
In particular when under tow, the legs will be elevated to their maximum height
and, as a result, they will be the dominant obstructions. This should be taken fully
into account during helideck design.
Vessels
Similar to semi-submersibles, vessels require their helideck designs to take fully
into account the additional measures needed to accommodate vessel movements,
as noted previously. Much will depend on the location of the helideck on the
vessel and the ability of the vessel to manoeuvre in order to gain favourable wind
flows over the helideck during helicopter operations.
A Drill Ship featuring a vessel type hull may be typically moored using a
conventional widely spread anchor system. Alternatively, it may be dynamically
positioned (DP).
62
Conventional anchoring means there is little, if any, scope for changing the
helideck position relative to favourable windflows once the anchor pattern is set.
DP may allow the vessel some heading adjustment into the prevailing wind, wave
and current conditions, dependent entirely on drilling and marine safety priorities.
A forward mounted helideck, either mounted on the foredeck or elevated above the
bridge, presents the biggest problems for a helicopter pilot. This is because there
are very few, if any, visual cues available to assist the pilot in making a safe
approach and landing. Taking-off is less of a problem.
The lack of visual cues means that manoeuvring space provided for the helicopter
has to take greater account of the proximity of all likely obstructions. To do this,
and in order to prevent inadvertent tail rotor strikes, the helideck and safe landing
area layout should be very carefully designed to obtain maximum operating
clearances – see Figure 7.2. (See also CAP 437).
NOT TO SCALE
Helideck
Overall Size
Additional
H
obstruction
clearance
= 0.5 ‘D’
Additional
1500mm
working space
‘D’ Circle
all round Limited Obstruction Sector
Figure 7.2 – Recommended dimensions for increasing overall helideck size on a vessel with
forward mounted helideck to provide additional space for safe helicopter manoeuvring and
personnel movement.
Important naval architecture considerations to be made when designing a forward

mounted helideck are:
63
• A large and therefore heavy helideck structure elevated above the bridge
may adversely affect vessel stability
• A large foredeck mounted helideck (below bridge level) that overhangs

the vessel bow will obscure the vessel forward section from the bridge,
thus severely reducing visual references for manoeuvring the vessel when
coming alongside
• A helideck integral with the Foredeck may have the advantage of two
access and escape routes toward the rear of the helideck past the natural
protection afforded by the bridge structure. However, providing a third
means of escape forward will invariably require a forward hatch to below
deck. This hatch may constitute a structural ‘soft spot’ and should be
regarded as a restricted approach and landing sector which will then
require suitable markings to inform the helicopter pilot.
7.2.3.6 Materials of Construction
It should be noted that where aluminium is chosen for the helideck construction,
and the vessel is to be constructed to comply with SOLAS, then reference should
be made to SOLAS Chapter II -2 Regulation 18.8 [Ref: 71].
Regulation 18.8 requires specific design considerations to be taken into account

where the helideck surface is located above the bridge or accommodation areas.
Generally, there will be a requirement for installing either passive fire protection
measures beneath the helideck surface and on the support structure and / or
installing fire shutters / doors to protect the bridge windows and any access points
below helideck level.
7.2.3.7 Firefighting
When establishing a helideck firefighting philosophy and designing the fire

systems, full account should be taken of the anticipated helideck manning and fire
team composition / emergency response during helideck operations. This topic
should be discussed at an early stage in the project with the MODU or vessel
owner in order to obtain a clear understanding of the operating intent. Guidance
on helideck manning issues is also provided in the UKOOA Guidelines for the
Management of Offshore Helidecks [Ref: 49].
64
Where crew numbers may be at a minimum, yet consistent with safe helideck
operations, having fire systems available that can be simply operated will be an
overriding requirement.
For example, when designing a foam system it should be ensured that the system
can be operated from a single control point without having to set or actuate a lot of
valves.
MODUs and specialist vessels will, at times, operate in remote locations with
infrequent vessel and / or helicopter support. This situation may mean that re-
supply of foam concentrate cannot be speedily undertaken.
Also, it is probable that the storage of large quantities of foam concentrate is

undesirable, with space at a premium. Therefore, the foam system(s) should be
designed to ensure that it has maximum flexibility for foam sampling and systems
testing without contaminating or using a full charge of foam concentrate.
Specifying a ‘one-shot’ system should be avoided at all costs.
On vessels, particularly those with forward mounted helidecks (e.g. on the

Foredeck), the design of fire protection systems should take into account the
exposure of equipment to the effects of operating in heavy seas. All permanently
fixed exposed piping systems, valves and supports, etc. should be robust. Where
possible, equipment such as hoses and nozzles should be stored in cabinets that
are adequately protected and preferably not placed in exposed locations.
For example, equipment and hose cabinets may be located behind the ‘bridge
wings’ for protection, provided they are easily accessible during helicopter
operations.
7.2.3.8 Helicopter Fuelling
Vessel motions constantly agitate liquids in storage tanks. If the owner specifies
helicopter fuelling, the system will require proper consideration during design
otherwise the fuel quality may be seriously affected during operations.
Where aviation fuel storage tanks (fixed or portable) are installed on vessels and
they are unlikely to be completely emptied it is highly recommended that the tanks
be equipped with floating suction systems. This arrangement is designed to
enable fuel to be decanted from the tanks above a level where disturbed
sediments and other impurities may be present.
65
The use of floating suction systems in transportable tote tanks is not
recommended. When empty and in transit the floating suction system becomes
extremely vulnerable to damage due to unconstrained movement of the floating
assembly (e.g. as a result of crane operations, wave motions, etc.).
(Photo courtesy of Shell Aircraft Limited)
Figure 7.3 - Example of damage to the floating suction system during transportable
tank transit when empty
The locations for aviation fuel storage tanks, pumping and dispensing equipment
should be selected to ensure that ingress of sea water into the aviation fuel system
does not occur. Also, the system components (e.g. Tote Tanks) should be well
secured to prevent damage in heavy seas.
7.2.3.9 Air Gap on MODUs
Too large an air gap under the helidecks of a MODU can be critical to vessel
stability. This is due to the potential for airflows under a helideck to generate
forces that may significantly increase the overturning moment of the structure for
certain wind and ballast conditions. Therefore, when determining the optimum air
gap for a MODU, the likely effect on vessel stability must be fully taken into
account. Refer to Section 10.
66
(Photo courtesy of Transocean Inc)
Figure 7.4 – Example of a fully clad drilling derrick with bluff sided module below.
Note: there is little or no air gap beneath the helideck
7.3 FLOATING PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
7.3.1 Introduction
Floating Production Systems (FPS), which include Floating Production, and

Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessels, are classed, when on location in UK
waters, as offshore installations.
A FPS featuring a vessel hull (e.g. VLCC tanker) will be typically moored using a
permanent, widely spread anchor system that is fixed to a turret arrangement
situated forward of amidships. This arrangement tends to allow the vessel heading
to ‘weathervane naturally’ into the prevailing wind, wave and current conditions.
(See Figure 7.5)
A FPS based on a semi-submersible hull is moored using traditional anchor

winches and chains located at each corner of the hull. The unit is generally held at
the location on a fixed heading within the anchor pattern. (See Figure 7.6)
Lloyds Register of Shipping – Rules for the Design, Construction and Classification
of Floating Production Systems. [Ref: 72]
67
(Photograph courtesy of BP plc)
Figure 7.5 – Schiehallion FPSO (turret moored with aft helideck)
7.3.3 Specific Features to Consider in FPSO Helideck Design
The following sections cover specific topics that are relevant to FPSO structures
(but differ from fixed installations) and require specific consideration during the
design of such FPSO structures. The requirements set out below are in addition to
those applied to fixed installation helidecks and should be read in conjunction with
the sections of these guidelines that deal with structures, equipment, etc.
Features to consider in design are broadly the same as MODUs (covered in

Section 7.2). These include:
• Operating environment
• Anchoring
• Dynamic positioning
• Drainage
• Helideck size, location and obstacle environment
• Materials of construction
• Helicopter fuelling
• Firefighting.
Parameters for the design of MODU helidecks that are specific to Floating
Production Systems, and should be considered by the designer, are set out in the
following sections.
68
(Photograph courtesy of Kerr McGee plc)
Figure 7.6 – Janice ‘A’ FPS based on a semi-submersible hull
7.3.4 Marine Operating Environment
7.3.4.1 Semi-submersibles
The marine operating environment of a semi-submersible is similar to a fixed

installation insofar as the helideck heading is generally fixed as a result of the
anchoring system. However, it differs from a fixed installation in that the helideck
has a dynamic movement in roll and pitch axes, heave, surge and sway due to the
vessel’s dynamic characteristics.
In addition to wind speed and direction, the normal helideck movement (velocity
and accelerations) induced by the floating structure must be fully accounted for
during both helideck and system design and helicopter operations. See Section
10.
69
7.3.4.2 Vessels
Taking advantage of the ‘natural weathervaning’ characteristics of a turret moored

vessel can help helicopter operations by keeping windflows at favourable angles
over the helideck. This may not be the case for all wind, wave and current
combinations.
However, advantages with wind speed and direction across the helideck should
normally be obtainable as a result of the ‘natural weathervaning’ that usually holds
the vessel heading within a few degrees either side of the vessel’s mean position
centreline. This feature should be fully exploited by the designer during design,
when optimising helideck location and orientation, so as to achieve the best
available landing and take-off sectors.
Additionally, where sufficient thruster power is available to move the vessel off
head, the ship’s crew may be able to further improve helideck orientation into the
most favourable winds for given approach and take-off sectors. This situation only
applies where it can be clearly demonstrated that moving the vessel off head does
not induce excessive adverse helideck motions (roll, pitch and heave), or
compromise vessel stability. Such capability may also be useful in minimising
potential hazards due to emissions and turbulence generators.
As in the case of semi-submersibles, normal helideck movement (velocity and

accelerations) induced by the floating structure must be fully accounted for during
both helideck and system design and helicopter operations. See Section 10.
7.3.5 Vessel / Helideck Classification / Verification Process
The unique nature of an FPSO as a marine structure, which is classed as both

vessel and an offshore installation, will invariably require close attention to be paid
to the helideck classification and verification processes.
Often the vessel or semi–submersible will retain its ship classification, therefore
the hull and marine systems will be designed and built to ships’ or MODU rules.
However, the design and construction of its production and utility systems will be
subject to the offshore verification process only if designated as an Offshore
Installation and deemed safety critical.
The helideck structure will usually be regarded as part of the ships structure.
Where this is the case, it is important to consult the appointed Classification
Society Ships’ or MODU Rules for Design & Construction and any International
70
Rules (e.g. IMO and SOLAS) that have been included in the owners specification
for the FPSO.
When designing an FPSO that will be operated in UK waters, helideck certification

will require compliance with CAP 437 and not the IMO or other national codes.
Because there are currently some differences between UK and international

maritime and offshore requirements, anomalies in the overall certification /
verification processes may arise. These anomalies will need to be resolved with
the appointed Classification Society and Verification Body, early in design.
7.3.6 Optimising Helideck Location and Layout
See Section 10, which deals specifically with helideck environmental effects.
7.3.7 Shuttle Tanker Operations
Helicopter landings on FPSOs during offloading operations may incur operating

restrictions for both marine and safety reasons.
Landings on bow mounted helidecks may be routinely permitted. However, where

the helideck is located at the stern of the vessel, helicopter operations will probably
be limited during shuttle tanker activities due to the shuttle tanker orientation and
obstructions caused by loading hoses, etc. temporarily infringing declared obstacle
free sectors.
As a result of these operational limitations, shuttle tanker operations will have a

direct effect on helideck availability and this should be taken into account when
undertaking helideck operability analyses.
71
(Photo courtesy of Bluewater BV)
Figure 7.7 – Shuttle tanker activity with an example of helideck approach paths
impeded by the tanker, mooring line, loading hose and FPSO flare / exhaust plumes.
7.4 SPECIALIST VESSELS
7.4.1 Introduction
A whole range of specialist vessels of varying type, design, size, displacement and
function work in the offshore oil and gas industry. Many are equipped with
helidecks. These vessels include:
• Seismic vessels
• Diving Support vessels
• Well Intervention vessels
• Pipelaying vessels / barges
• Floatels / Accommodation vessels.
Each of these vessel types will have unique capabilities depending on their primary
function. Additionally, there may be overriding constraints placed on the helideck
design and its operation.
72
(Photograph courtesy of Technip Coflexip)
Figure 7.8 – A typical well servicing vessel
Depending on vessel size, basic hull and superstructure design, it is normally the
primary function of the vessel (in addition to maintaining good vessel stability at all
times) that will dictate the vessel layout and thus the helideck location, size, shape
and elevation. Space and weight considerations will also dictate the locations (and
sometimes capacities) of the associated helideck support systems.
The earlier, in conceptual design, these features are given proper consideration,
the more likely the ship designer will be able to provide an efficient and operable
helideck.
CAP 437, Chapter 9.
7.4.3 Specific Features to Consider in Vessel Helideck Design
The following sections cover specific topics that are relevant to specialist vessels
(but differ from fixed installations) and require specific consideration during the
design of helidecks on specialist vessels. The requirements set out below are in
addition to those applied to fixed installation helidecks and should be read in
conjunction with the sections of these guidelines that deal with structures,
equipment, etc.
73
Potentially, specialist vessels can operate in many marine and meteorological
environments. However, several of the parameters and features to consider in
design are broadly the same as MODUs (See Section 7.2). These will include:
• Operating environment
• Anchoring
• Dynamic positioning
• Drainage
• Helideck size, location and obstacle environment
• Materials of construction
• Helicopter fuelling
• Firefighting.
In addition the following topics should also be addressed:
7.4.3.1 Icing Conditions
In UK waters icing conditions on Installations and vessels will occur occasionally.
The potential for icing conditions to occur and the effects this may have on
helicopter operations should be fully taken into account during design and vessel
operations.
The primary concern should be to ensure that helideck fire / safety systems
susceptible to malfunction during low temperature operations are fully protected.
A requirement of CAP 437 is to provide sufficient equipment to adequately deal

with snow / ice / frost removal from the landing surface.
It also prudent, when designing a helideck, to consider its location in relation to any
superstructures that may be affected by ice accretion during low temperature
operations.
Ice falling onto helidecks from superstructures has been reported in the UK, in the
past. This is a hazard to both aircraft and personnel safety and should be properly
accounted for (See HSE Safety Notice 5/96 [Ref: 22]).
7.4.3.2 Hinged Helidecks
Some vessels are designed with a portion(s) of the helideck hinged to provide a
helideck of adequate size or to make way for the primary vessel operation and for
74
coming into port. Examples of these arrangements include seismic vessels
equipped with foredeck and aft mounted helideck structures.
The primary concern for the helideck designer, from a helicopter operations
viewpoint, is to ensure that hinge systems do not create a hazard for the helicopter
whilst landing and manoeuvring. It is preferable to locate hinges on the underside
of the helideck however, where hinge systems protrude above helideck surface
level they should be kept to minimum height and be designed such that they offer
as small an obstruction as possible. Apart from the obstruction hazard, the hinges
should also be designed to avoid possible tyre damage.
Where hinge systems are fitted and they protrude above surface level they should
be clearly marked with ‘rectangles’ of painted yellow / black stripes. Protruding
hinges may significantly effect the operability of the helideck.
7.4.3.3 Combined Perimeter Safety Nets / Handrailing
Combined perimeter safety nets / handrailing are a common feature on specialist

ships such as seismic vessels. The performance of these systems may often fall
short both as a secure perimeter safety net and as handrailing.
Section 9.10 covers, in more detail, the design and construction considerations for
perimeter safety nets.
7.4.3.4 Fore Masts
At sea it is a maritime requirement for a vessel to have a foremast (e.g. to display

running lights).
Where a helideck is designed as an integral part of the foredeck structure the

foremast will pose an obstruction to helicopter operations. Therefore, retractable
foremasts are fitted to overcome this problem.
Where a retractable foremast has been specified it is essential to consider and

mitigate the following:
• The location of the assembly (when stowed) relative to the safe landing
area
• The size and extent of the surface obstruction and potential structural ‘soft
spot’ to be avoided by a landing helicopter
75
• Requirements for designation as a ‘restricted sector’ which requires
marking in accordance with CAP 437.
7.5 MOTION CONSIDERATIONS AND OPERATING LIMITS
All floating structures will encounter motions at the helideck as a result of a

vessel’s natural movement whilst afloat.
The effects of any helideck motions (roll, pitch, heave, yaw, surge and sway) have
a direct impact on a helicopter flight crew’s ability to make a safe landing and take-
off from vessel helidecks. Additionally, when stationary on a moving helideck, a
helicopter is constantly subjected to complex dynamic forces (accelerations) that
will have a direct effect on its stability, particularly when the rotors are turning.
The effects of these forces on a helicopter can cause sliding and / or tipping which,
if excessive, may cause the helicopter to overturn. Therefore, helideck motion
effects and their potential amplitudes should be calculated during the design
process and safe operating parameters established.
The limits of safe helideck performance should be fully accounted for during
operations.
See Section 10 for further details.
76
8.0 OTHER INSTALLATION ARRANGEMENTS
8.1 COMBINED OPERATIONS
8.1.1 Introduction
Combined operations can take several different forms. Essentially, they are a
situation offshore where there are two or more installations / vessels working
alongside each other. Generally this will mean that, to some extent, the
operational clearances and aerodynamics of the helidecks on each of the
installations / vessels may be impeded in some way by positioning the additional
structures alongside. In turn, this means that specific considerations have to be
taken into account during helicopter operations.
Consideration of the full implications of combined operations and the potential

adverse effects on safe helideck operations will be required during design where it
is intended to install (permanently or temporarily) an offshore structure (fixed or
mobile) in close proximity to another. The operating aspects of combined
operations are covered in detail in the UKOOA Guidelines for the Management of
1000 metres is the required horizontal distance to provide a clear unimpeded 210º
Obstruction Free Sector for any operational helideck. Therefore, any structure
located closer than 1000 metres in this sector will present an obstruction to
potential flight paths.
A structure located within approximately 250 metres of another installation with an

operational helideck, and not necessarily within the obstruction free sector, also
has the potential to create adverse turbulent and thermal conditions. These
conditions can seriously affect helicopter handling, increase pilots’ workload and
may impact on safe helicopter operations to that helideck. Adverse turbulent
conditions caused by adjacent structures normally emanate from windflows over
the structure, gas turbine exhausts thermal effects and process flares.
Additionally, adjacent structures and vessels (e.g. shuttle tankers) may also cause
hazardous flying conditions due to gas releases during process venting.
The arrangements and configurations defined as ‘Combined Operations’ can vary

considerably and are typified by:
1. One or more fixed installations (manned or normally unattended) bridged

to each other
77
2. A fixed installation (e.g. NUI) with a Jack-up rig alongside
3. A fixed or floating structure linked to a nearby sub-sea anchored loading

buoy (SALM) equipped with a helideck
4. Shuttle tanker operations to FPUs, FPSOs and loading buoys
5. A floatel bridge linked to an Installation (construction and operations

support scenarios)
6. Specialist vessel support operations adjacent to an Installation.
In all the above cases where there is a helideck intended to be used for routine
operations, all potential effects on the helicopter operating environment shall be
closely examined and the effects quantified and recorded.
(Photograph courtesy of British Gas Plc)
Figure 8.1 – Example of complex Combined Operations
Notes about Figure 8.1: The Jack-Up and Floatel are temporarily located as part
of production / drilling operations. Both the Jack-Up and Floatel helidecks are
78
accessible but the Installation helideck is inaccessible so it is NOT IN USE
(Landing Prohibited Marker in position). Relative positions of each helideck 210°
Obstruction Free Sector are shown approximately (dotted lines).
CAP 437, Chapter 6.
8.1.3.1 General Principles
Achieving the optimal position for locating a structure adjacent to another and
maintaining the required operational clearances for the helideck(s) may not always
be possible due to overriding marine, safety and other installation operating
constraints (e.g. anchoring dictates the position of MODUs working over a
template).
In such cases orientation of the structures should endeavour to minimise the

potential obstructions to flight paths and to maximise the anticipated and most
favourable prevailing winds over their helidecks.
8.1.3.2 Bridge Linking
When designing bridge links for a fixed or mobile installation to gain access to
another installation the designer should take fully into account the positioning of
gangway connection options and their likely effect on helideck operations in
relation to impeding all or part of the host installation / mobile unit helideck 210°
obstruction free sectors.
In some cases it may be necessary to forego the use of one of the helidecks and
to nominate the other as the primary landing site. In this case the ‘closed’ helideck
should display a ‘Landing Prohibited’ Marker.
In the case of two permanently bridged fixed structures, both with helidecks, it may
be decided that the newer structure with a helideck is the ‘operating’ helideck and
the other becomes redundant or may be used as a secondary or emergency
landing site if it remains accessible.
79
Clear 210º Sectors
MOBILE
UNIT
HOST
Bridge Link
INSTALLATION
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 8.2 – Example of Bridge Link avoiding 210° sector physical obstructions.
NOT TO SCALE Obstructed 210° Sector
MOBILE
UNIT
HOST
INSTALLATION
Clear 210° Sector Bridge Link
Figure 8.3 – Example of Bridge Link causing a 210° sector obstruction. In this
case the mobile unit would be designated the active helideck
8.1.3.3 Environmental Effects around Helidecks
The environmental effects around helidecks are a key consideration when

designing and operating offshore installations in combination. See Section 10.
Whether the combined facilities are permanent new build structures, an additional
installation to complement existing field facilities or a temporarily located mobile
unit, great care should be taken to assess the probable impact on helideck
80
aerodynamic performance and helicopter operations of one installation in relation
to another.
During initial design or subsequent modification of installations where additional

structures are planned it is imperative that the potential helideck aerodynamic
effects are modelled as a complete complex to ensure that any interactions
between the installations are fully understood and quantified.
8.1.4 Safety Cases
8.1.4.1 Permanent Arrangements
The Safety Case developed during the initial design (or if later modified) should
reflect all aspects of the combined facilities that will have potential impacts on
helicopter operations and flight safety.
Where it is intended that an additional permanent structure will be installed (within

1000 metres of the other), the effects on the helicopter flying environment around
the combined facilities should be fully re-assessed (whether or not both structures
have helidecks).
The information in the Safety Case should also be passed to the Helicopter
Operator / BHAB Helidecks in order for them to make an assessment of the extent
and form of any operating restrictions or limitations that should be applied. Flight
Crews will use the information for flight planning and flight management purposes.
8.1.4.2 Temporary Arrangements
Where fixed installations, floating structures (e.g. FPSOs and MODUs), Jack-Up
Rigs and vessels are temporarily bridged together, linked by an offloading system
(or other such mechanism) or are in close proximity to each other (1000 metres or
less), a Safety Case is normally required to address changes to on-board
processes and the management of operations, etc.
The Safety Case should reflect all physical aspects of the combined facilities
(including interim layout changes, e.g. helidecks out of use, vessel relocations /
movements, obstructions), their operations, management organisation and
responsibilities and any procedural changes that will have potential impacts on
helicopter operations.
This information should be passed to the Helicopter Operator / BHAB Helidecks in

order for them to make an assessment of the extent and form of any operating
81
restrictions or limitations that should be applied. Flight Crews will use the
information for flight planning and flight management purposes.
(Photograph courtesy of Shell Exploration & Production)
Figure 8.4 – Example of a temporary combined operation arrangement with a NUI

and accommodation vessel bridge linked. Note the NUI helideck is ‘INACTIVE’
(Prohibited Landing Marker displayed).
8.1.5 Management of Combined Operations Helidecks
During the management of combined operations the potential may exist for more
than one helideck to be available. Also, there is the possibility that a helideck(s)
will be inaccessible due to the temporary physical arrangement of the facilities or
activities taking place thereon.
The Field Operator in conjunction with other Duty Holder(s) and the Helicopter
Operator should:
1. Initially decide which helideck(s) will be designated ‘Active’ or ‘Inactive’
2. If one or more helidecks will remain available, introduce a combined

helideck management organisation in order to appoint the OIM, HLO and
Radio Operator who shall act as co-ordinator for the combined operations
helicopter activities
82
3. Agree any changes to normal operating procedures and, where
appropriate, develop helideck management and emergency procedures
that will properly accommodate safe helicopter operations during the
temporary works
4. Make provisions for the correct marking of ‘Inactive’ helideck(s)
5. Where appropriate, undertake a full assessment of any potential effects

from combined operations on the helicopter flying environment (e.g.
adverse aerodynamic and thermal effects on flight paths, obstructions,
crane operations, vessel movements, fugitive gas emissions, etc.)
6. Consider the possible effects on helideck management from increased

helicopter movements and make suitable provisions to mitigate these
effects. There may be increased passenger and freight flows through the
designated heli-admin and increased number of refuels requiring greater
fuel stocks to be held on board, etc.
8.2 NORMALLY UNATTENDED INSTALLATIONS
8.2.1 Introduction
NUIs are a unique type of facility that require considerable and proper thought
when designing the installation for helicopter operations.
To a large extent the design of the basic NUI helideck facility is little different from
a manned installation and the sections dealing with structures, systems, etc.
should be referred to. However, some readily accepted features that are provided
on manned platforms to support routine helicopter operations are often not
available on NUIs.
The lack of, or severe limitation to, some of the services available to the flight
crews and intervention teams on NUI operations should be fully investigated and
accounted for during design. Where it is possible and economically viable to
improve these features, it should be done. Common deficiencies include:
1. Limited or no water available in sufficient quantity / pressure for operating

water / foam fire monitor systems to improve fire cover
2. Ineffective bird exclusion devices (generally where there is an established

guano problem) so that visual aids become obliterated, friction surfaces
83
are impaired, there is increased potential for bird strikes during helicopter
movements and increased personnel exposure to guano raising health
issues
3. Limited water available at the helideck for efficient guano washdown and
disposal to retain efficiency of visual aids
4. Poor installation (side) and helideck identification signage, often as a

result of contamination due to bird guano.
CAP 437, Chapter 3.
8.2.3 Definitions
8.2.3.1 Remote Installation
An installation should be considered ‘Remote’ if it is more than 40 nautical miles

from the nearest manned installation or airport / heliport.
The distance of 40 NM has traditionally been used by UK helicopter operators as

the criterion for the definition of a ‘Remote’ installation.
Although recognised as arbitrary, factors taken into consideration in the definition

are the approximate range of VHF radio, line of sight limitations and areas of
similar weather conditions.
8.2.3.2 Normally Unattended
An installation that is normally unattended is defined as an installation where no

personnel are permanently present (See also MAR Regulation 4 [Ref: 6].
Personnel attending the Installation and working as intervention or maintenance
crews do so on a planned or un-planned basis for short periods (e.g. a working
day). The exceptions to these short periods are events where personnel are
compelled to remain on board because the means for their recovery to a manned
installation or heliport becomes unavailable for any reason (e.g. rapid weather
deterioration). This situation should be regarded as an emergency and therefore
suitable temporary accommodation and provisions should be made available.
In the event that personnel are to be continuously present on the installation (e.g.
for a period in excess of 24 hours) and helicopter operations are to continue for
84
routine crew changes, etc. the installation should no longer be considered normally
unattended. Therefore, the CAP 437 requirements for a normally attended
helideck operation should be met in full.
8.2.4 Seeking the Safest and Most Efficient Helideck Design Options for
Operations to NUIs
The helideck design for a NUI should adopt a similar approach to that used for a
manned installation as noted in the general sections of these guidelines.
Design considerations that are specific to NUIs, that normally have minimal
facilities, are detailed in the following sections.
8.2.4.1 Helideck Layout Considerations
If a helideck on a NUl is of a size which does not allow a second helicopter to land
in the event that the first becomes unserviceable, or the helicopter is unable to be
re-started whilst on deck, shutdown is not normally permitted.
If a crane is available on the installation that is capable of lifting an unserviceable

helicopter onto the deck of a supply vessel, shutdown may be permitted.
Shutdown is permitted on helidecks that are of sufficient size to allow a second

helicopter to land using the special procedures for operations to obstructed
helidecks in the helicopter operator’s Operations Manual.
Helideck size should comply with the minimum requirements specified in CAP 437.
BHAB Helidecks will not sanction operations to new-build helidecks that do not
meet ‘D’ size minima. Additionally, the helideck should be designed to
accommodate the weight of the heaviest helicopter intended to land on the
installation.
8.2.5 Equipment Design Considerations
8.2.5.1 General
The following are specific design considerations that need to be addressed when
specifying systems and equipment for NUIs. The listed topics are in addition to or
supplement the more detailed requirements covered in the general sections of
these guidelines.
85
8.2.5.2 Helicopter Start Unit
If helicopter shutdown is planned, external power start facilities should be

provided. See Section 11.10.
8.2.5.3 Lighting (helideck perimeter, floodlighting, obstruction)
The design of helideck lighting systems is covered in Section 11.3.
8.2.5.3 Helideck Net
Under normal circumstances, helideck nets are required on NUIs.
However, if due to special circumstances, there is good reason why a particular

helideck net should be removed this may be done, provided the helideck friction
requirements specified in CAP 437 are fully complied with and it can be
demonstrated that the helideck can be kept free of guano contamination.
8.2.5.4 Firefighting Equipment
The following equipment should be available on the installation.
1. A dry powder fire extinguisher having a capacity of not less than 45kgs;
and a carbon dioxide fire extinguisher with engine applicator having a
capacity of not less than 22.5kgs
2. Serious consideration should be given to the provision of a portable foam

unit. Such a unit should be self-contained, with a minimum capacity of 90
litres and should be fitted with an aspirated branch.
Every effort should be made to select equipment that will require minimum
maintenance.
8.2.5.5 Fireman’s Protective Clothing
Two sets of the following items of fireman’s equipment should be provided, and be
readily available adjacent to the helideck, for the intervention crew members
assigned to helideck duties:
• A protective outfit, including gloves, boots, a facemask or hood and a

helmet
• A self – contained breathing apparatus
86
• A portable battery-operated safety lamp capable of functioning efficiently
for a period of not less than three hours
• A fireman’s axe, safety harness and lifeline.
Serious consideration should be given to the protective clothing requirements for

firefighting (EN469) and the survival suit requirements for helicopter passengers.
Implicit in operating guidelines is the requirement to remove the survival suit to don
protective clothing for RFF purposes.
Whilst every effort should be made to obtain protective clothing that will meet the
requirements of both functions, an acceptable compromise may be to allow the
helideck fire crew to wear the survival suit under a suitable knee length fire fighting
bunker coat.
8.2.5.6 Crash Tools / Rescue Equipment
As per the requirement for manned installations.
8.2.5.7 Helicopter Operations Support Equipment
The following equipment should be provided.
1. Chocks and tie down straps
2. Scales for baggage and freight weighing (if freight is to be carried)
3. Equipment for clearing the landing area of snow, ice and other debris
4. If helicopter shutdown is planned, a suitable power source for starting

helicopters must be available.
8.2.5.8 Status Lights
For detailed information about status lights see Section 11.
8.2.5.9 Weather Measuring Equipment
For most NUls (e.g. satellite installations near to a manned facility) no weather
measuring equipment is required provided that weather patterns do not generally
differ from the ‘master’ or nearest manned installation.
87
For ‘Remote’ installations, equipment capable of providing the following
‘automatically relayed’ information is required.
• Windspeed and direction across the helideck.

• Outside air temperature.
• Barometric pressure (QFE).
Consideration should also be given to the provision of cloud-base measuring

equipment, but in the absence of practical automatic visibility measuring
equipment, the visibility should be obtained from the nearest manned facility.
A windsock, illuminated where night operations are planned, is an essential

requirement for all NUIs regardless of their proximity to the nearest manned
facility.
8.2.5.10 Remotely Operated Television System
On ‘Remote’ installations when, for any reason, operations are permitted where a
standby vessel is unlikely to be in attendance, full and serious consideration
should be given to the provision of a remotely operated television system which is
capable of monitoring the helideck and associated areas.
Such a system would be of considerable value in the following respects:
• Surveillance of the helideck to confirm safe helicopter landing / departure
• Security of the installation when unmanned
• Reducing the possibility of wasted flights, if for some reason, the helideck
is unsuitable for a landing
• Monitoring the ‘build-up’ of guano accumulations where the NUI is used

as a roost by seabirds. This has merit for maintenance planning and
avoiding helicopter landing restrictions.
8.2.5.11 Bird Exclusion Devices
Bird exclusion devices are covered in more detail in Section 11.11.
All NUIs should be fitted with an automatic bird-scaring device that may be
manually switched off during periods when the installation is manned.
88
8.2.5.12 Tie Down Points
Where insufficient tie down points are provided on the helideck, it will not be
permissible to conduct operations where a planned helicopter shut down is
required. This deficiency will obviously effect helideck operability and preclude
flights during strong wind conditions.
89
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
90
9.0 HELIDECK STRUCTURES
9.1 INTRODUCTION
This section indicates some of the structural considerations to be taken into

account to achieve a satisfactory helideck structural design. The helideck is the
foundation on which helicopter operations take place on an offshore installation,
MODU or vessel. The helideck and its supporting structure are safety critical
elements as a result of their role in emergency evacuation, as well as during
normal operations.
The helicopter facilities should have sufficient clear approach and departure paths
to enable any helicopter intended to use the landing area to land and take off
safely in any wind or weather conditions that permit helicopter operations.
The landing area should be situated so that it is located on the installation with
respect to prevailing wind conditions in such a position that structure-induced
airflow and temperature effects are minimised.
Designers should be aware of all of the types of helicopter likely to use the
helideck, both normally and in an emergency. The helicopter landing and take-off
area and parking area should be of sufficient size and strength and laid out so as
to accommodate the largest size of helicopter to be used and to adequately resist
impact from heavy and emergency landings.
Helicopter parameters for all of the known helicopters that will operate to the
helideck should be obtained from the helicopter manufacturers. It is recommended
the designer compiles a database for the helicopters, noting dimensions, weights,
contact areas etc. and reviews the data as necessary, including projections for
likely future helicopter developments, to ensure the helideck design will remain
suitable for use in the future.
The helideck and supporting structure should be designed to withstand the worst
likely emergency to be encountered. CAP 437 assumes that a single engine
failure in the hover at 9.14 metres wheel height (30 feet) is the case among likely
survivable cases which would generate the highest vertical rate of decent onto the
helideck.
The design engineer should consider all likely design loads and load combinations.
91
As well as helicopter landing loads, the helideck has to be designed to cope with
imposed loads on the deck from personnel, freight, refuelling and other temporary
equipment, as well as environmental loads from wind, snow and ice, rotor
downwash, etc, and its own self weight.
The design should also take account of wind turbulence and hot and cold gas
thermal effects. Turbulent airflow across the landing area can be caused by wind
flow around adjacent structures, including flare stacks and turbine exhausts (which
can also cause temperature gradients). These effects can seriously influence
helicopter landing and take-off performance characteristics.
Modelling methods such as wind tunnel testing or computational fluid dynamics

computer modelling should be used to determine suitable limits, on helicopter
operational weights and directions on take-off and landing, that may be necessary
for certain wind directions and installation operating conditions – see Section 10.
The supporting structure, deck plate, stringers and supporting beams should be
designed to resist the effects of local skid or wheel loads acting in combination with
other loads in the most severe location for the element of structure being
considered. Helicopters should be considered to land anywhere within the
designated landing area and parked or stowed anywhere on the helideck.
Helideck loadings should be analysed to determine the distribution of forces and

bending moments. The helicopter should be positioned to maximise the internal
forces on the component being considered.
9.2 MAIN REFERENCES
The codes and standards applicable to the structural design of the helideck will be
determined by where the helideck is to be operated and the national jurisdiction
governing the installation or vessel of which the helideck will become part. As a
general guide, the following design codes may apply:
• ICAO Annex 14 Volume II Heliports

• ICAO Heliport Manual
• ISO 19901-3 Petroleum and natural gas industries – Specific
requirements for offshore structures – Part 3: Topsides structure (currently
in draft – expected to be issued 2003)
• CAP 437 Offshore Helicopter Landing Areas – Guidance on Standards
92
• American Petroleum Institute - API RP 2L Recommended Practice for
Planning, Designing and Constructing Heliports for Fixed Offshore
Platforms
• Classification Society codes for the design of offshore structures from
Lloyd’s Register, DNV, BV, ABS, etc.
International standards such as ISO Codes, Eurocodes, or national standards, e.g.

BS5950, NORSOK N-004 or AISC may be specified for detailed design.
9.3 LANDING SURFACE
9.3.1 Wood
Hardwood (Greenheart timber) was used for some helideck surfaces constructed
in the early years of UKCS offshore installations. These wood surfaces can still be
found on a few of the oldest platforms in the North Sea.
9.3.2 Steel
Older installation and vessel helideck landing surfaces tend to be of traditional

steel plated construction. This material is relatively cheap and simple to fabricate
but the final assembly is relatively heavy compared with an aluminium or passive
steel deck.
Disadvantages of a steel panelled helideck in service are:
• The surface requires initial and periodic painting and may require the
incorporation and maintenance of non-slip aggregate to provide a suitable
friction surface, if this is specified
• The helideck surface may be subject to water and fuel puddling due to
minor in-service deformation of the panels.
9.3.3 Aluminium
Since the 1980s, aluminium helideck surfaces have tended to be the norm for
helidecks in the North Sea. This is because they have the advantage of being
lighter in weight than a comparable steel surface.
Normally, the aluminium surface is constructed from extruded ‘planks’ which are
locked into position to form a pancake assembly.
93
The ‘planks’ have built in friction surfaces formed by ribs on the extrusion surface.
Often, however, good friction values are only achieved in one direction (e.g. across
the ribs). The designer should therefore specify a requirement for the extrusions to
be ‘milled’ across the ribs to obtain adequate friction properties in all directions.
9.3.4 Passive Helideck
A passive type helideck can be fabricated from aluminium or steel. The surface is
perforated to allow liquid to pass through it into drainage trays beneath. There are
two types of ‘passive’ system. These are:
• With the void below the perforated deck surface partially filled with a metal
‘matting’ material. This prevents any unburned fuel from igniting. See
Figure 9.1
• With a foam spray system installed in channels beneath the open mesh
surface to extinguish any burning fuel.
The advantages of specifying a helideck design that offers passive fire safety
features should be considered. Such helidecks can:
• Potentially reduce personnel, helicopter and installation exposure to a

major helicopter fire, in the event of an incident
• Provide a highly effective ‘built-in’ non-slip surface and eliminate the need
for a helideck net (fixed platforms only)
• Significantly enhance the minimum fire safety provisions provided on

normally unattended installations
• Reduce the slipping hazard effects of potential guano accumulations.
Potential disadvantages of perforated surface helidecks can be:
• Loss of performance in the hover in ground effect (HIGE). This tends to

be more noticeable in some helicopters with small hover / thrust margins
and this will result in a payload penalty
• The collection of dirt, guano and debris that falls through the perforations.
This may be difficult to remove and periodically, may require the
replacement of ‘matting’ materials.
94
All helideck designs of this type should be fully assessed and tested to
demonstrate their passive fire safety performance and structural integrity. A
competent authority should verify them prior to acceptance as a design option.
(Photo courtesy of John Burt Associates Limited)
Figure 9.1 - Example of a passive helideck surface
9.4 SUPPORT STRUCTURE
9.4.1 Introduction
The helideck support structure connects the helideck to the main structural
steelwork of the offshore installation or vessel. It needs to be designed to transmit
all the helicopter landing loads, environmental, and live and dead loads derived
from the design of the helideck structure to the primary structure of the installation
or the vessel.
9.4.2 Materials
It is quite common for the helideck support structure to be fabricated from carbon
steel, whilst the helideck will often be fabricated from aluminium sections. Where
an aluminium helideck is used in conjunction with a carbon steel structure, then
adequate electrical isolation of aluminium from steel must be maintained.
95
Sufficient information on the materials and the isolation methods used, either in
manuals, or by placards or paint schemes fixed to the structure, should be
provided to users for subsequent operations and maintenance. The designer is
advised to consult with corrosion experts to provide a connection that satisfies anti-
corrosion requirements, as well as providing a suitable structural connection.
Materials used in the fabrication should conform to a suitable code. For example,
carbon steel should conform to a code such as BS 7191 Weldable Structural Steel
for Fixed Offshore Structures [Ref: 57], latest edition.
9.4.3 Design
Helideck support structures should be designed to carry all the loads imposed on
the helideck through to the primary structure of the installation or vessel. Helideck
loads derive from the parameters of the helicopter for which the helideck is
intended (landing impact forces and wheel spacing), the deck weight, plus
environmental loads (wind, snow and ice), and inertial loads due to installation or
vessel movement (where applicable). Additionally, the effects of live loads and
loads arising from parked helicopters (tied down) should be evaluated (See also
Section 9.6).
The designer of the support structure should ensure that all appropriate load cases
have been applied to the helideck, and that the resulting maximum load cases are
used in the design of the support structure.
Similarly, it is important that the load cases are accurately transposed to the
design conditions for the primary structure to which the support structure will be
connected.
The helideck support structure will also be used as the supporting structure for
appurtenances such as drainage and service lines to the helideck above.
Therefore, the selection of section types, and acceptability of these, need to be
considered in the design process.
9.4.4 Interconnected Modules
It will often be the case (and in particular on a fixed offshore installation) that the
helideck support structure will be positioned above a module on the deck, usually
the accommodation module. The designer therefore has to be aware of the
integration of the helideck design with the module design, as the structural
supports for both units may be common. As well as this, additional safety features
96
such as blast walls, etc., may form part of the module design and could also have
a bearing on the design of the helideck support structure.
9.4.5 Maintenance
It is quite common that the helideck support structure will have limited access once
installed. Therefore, the designer should ensure that the structure is as
maintenance free as possible and, wherever possible, easy access should be
designed into the structure to facilitate future planned inspection and maintenance.
A large number of helideck support structures are propped cantilevers. The
addition of purpose built anchor points for abseiling inspection access in the future
is recommended.
9.5 APPURTENANCES
In addition to the design of the primary steelwork of the helideck, the designer also
has to consider loads from the appurtenances associated with the helideck. These
appurtenances will include:
• Fire monitor / access platforms

• Stairways, ladders, walkways and handrailing
• Drains system
• Perimeter safety net
• General, perimeter and flood lighting fixings
• Tiedown fixings
• Helideck net fixings
• Refuelling dispenser skid (if fitted)
• Communications aerials and meteorological equipment (if fitted to the
helideck structure).
9.6 LOAD COMBINATIONS AND LOAD FACTORS
9.6.1 Introduction
Each design code recommends a particular set of load combinations and factors to
be considered. The designer also needs to consider the load conditions that can
occur during fabrication, lifting, loadout and transportation of the helideck, and both
static and dynamic forces that will be encountered.
97
The designer may also be asked to design suitable lifting points and sea-fastening
points. Any local strengthening should be considered as part of the overall design.
The following design load combinations should be considered:
• emergency landing
• helicopters at rest.
Both combinations should include appropriate serviceability requirements.

Helicopter loads should be treated as imposed loads and applied together with
other variable loads, permanent loads and environmental loads.
Under emergency landing conditions, local deformation of plate and stiffeners may
be tolerated provided that the overall integrity and function of the helideck are not
compromised. The designer should also give detailed consideration to the case
where a helicopter becomes unserviceable (U/S) on the offshore helideck and
there is no designated parking area for that helicopter. The U/S helicopter is then
required to park on the safe landing area of the helideck which will then encroach
on the available safe landing area for making a recovery helicopter landing. The
designer should give consideration to the case where the design case helicopter is
parked and recovery helicopter is required to land on the same helideck and
develop suitable load combinations as part of the design exercise for the helideck.
On completion of the design exercise, the information relating to the combinations
of parked / recovery helicopters shall be included in the Design and Operability
Report.
9.6.2 Emergency landing
Variable Loads
• Helicopter landing gear design collapse loads
• Structural response factor for supporting structure
• Area load
• Horizontal force as proportion of landing gear collapse load.
Permanent Loads
• Self weight of structure and fixed appurtenances.
Environmental Loads
• Wind, snow and ice, etc.
• Inertial loads.
98
9.6.3 Normal Operations and Helicopters at Rest
Variable Loads:
• Helicopter static loads (local patch loads on landing gear)
• Area load
• Helicopter tie down loads, including wind loads from a secured helicopter.
Permanent Loads:
• Self weight of structure and fixed appurtenances.
Environmental Loads:
• Wind, snow and ice, etc
• Inertia loads.
9.6.4 Design Loadings
The designer should consider the following design loadings within the load
combinations described above for a fixed or floating offshore installation.
9.6.4.1 Helicopter Landing Gear Collapse Loads
The maximum dynamic loads from an emergency landing may be determined from
the collapse loading of the landing gear. This should be obtained from the
helicopter manufacturer.
Alternatively, default values may be used for design by considering an appropriate

distribution of the total impact load.
A single main rotor helicopter may be assumed to land simultaneously on its two
main undercarriages or skids. Local patch loads should be used in design
corresponding to the configuration of the landing gear.
The design landing load is the landing gear load based on a percentage of the
helicopter's gross weight. The recommended percentage and helicopter gross
weight should again be obtained from the helicopter operator or helicopter
manufacturers supplied data. See also Appendices 4 to 13.
9.6.4.2 Structural Response Factor
The dynamic load determined as above should be increased by a factor for the
structural response of the helideck. This factor will depend on the natural
frequency of the deck structure. Unless values based upon particular
99
undercarriage behaviour and deck frequency are available, a minimum structural
response factor should be used.
9.6.4.3 Imposed Area Load
To allow for personnel and cargo transfer and snow and ice (in locations where
these are possible) for minor equipment left on the helideck, etc, a general area
load should be included. The imposed load is uniformly distributed over the entire
safe landing area including any solid safety shelves.
9.6.4.4 Horizontal Forces
A concentrated horizontal imposed action as a proportion of the MTOW of the

helicopter, shall be applied at the main landing gear locations and distributed in
proportion to their vertical loading. This shall be applied at deck level in a direction
to produce the most severe loading conditions for the elements considered.
9.6.4.5 Self Weight of Structural Members
The self-weight of the helideck supported by the member concerned should be

included with the appropriate load factor. The self-weight is the weight of decking,
stiffeners, support structure and accessories supported by the member or
substructure being considered.
The designer is recommended to make a conservative estimate of this load at the

start of the design process and to then confirm the dead load at the end of the
detail design to verify the accuracy of the design.
9.6.4.6 Environmental Loads
Helidecks on mobile installations must be designed for gravity and inertial forces
due to the unit’s motions and accelerations. Additionally, sea pressure and green
sea loads on the support structure may need to be considered.
The designer should make reference to the loading criteria used for the design of
the vessel to ensure that all loading resulting from vessel motions and external
wave loading will be fully allowed for in the design of the helideck.
The designer should take full account of wind loading on the helideck structure.
Wind loading cases should include pressure, lift and side loads, helicopter landing
side loads from Section 9.6.4.4 plus wind load at the limiting wind speed for
helicopter operation and, for the helicopter on deck case, side loads for deck and
100
helicopter at the maximum environmental wind velocity considered. Wind velocity
should be taken as the 3-second gust at helideck elevation above sea level. Wind
load may be determined in accordance with the guidelines set out in BS 6399 Part
1 Wind Loads [Ref: 58].
9.7 HELIDECK FRICTION SURFACE AND LANDING NETS
9.7.1 Friction Surface
An adequate non-slip surface should be provided for the whole of the helideck to
ensure the safe movements of both helicopters and personnel. The designer
should therefore properly consider the helideck surface materials of construction
and specify the correct and most appropriate friction surface for the helideck as a
whole and in particular the safe landing area, irrespective of whether a landing net
will be fitted.
CAP 437, Section 3.8.
All materials, coverings or coatings used to provide a non-skid surface should be

structurally fastened to the helideck or bonded with an adhesive agent that is not
chemically altered in the presence of fuel, oil and the effects of guano. This
includes both specialist paint systems used with aggregates and pre-formed /
coloured non-slip tiling systems.
101
Figure 9.2 – Example of a tiled friction surface
In the case of extruded aluminium construction an adequate non-slip profile

(effective in all directions) should be specified as part of the surface structure.
Alternatively, a high friction paint system should be specified.
It should be noted that where new, unpainted aluminium helidecks are exposed to
prolonged periods of strong sunlight high surface temperatures are likely to be
experienced. It is recommended that a high friction paint system be applied to
mitigate these effects.
The non-slip requirement for helidecks also includes all the helideck markings.
Therefore, these should be applied using a specification similar to the helideck
surface.
9.7.4 Helideck Landing Nets
9.7.4.1 General Requirements
Generally, helideck landing nets should be fitted on all helidecks on offshore

installations and vessels operating on the UKCS. Exceptions can be made,
subject to BHAB Helidecks acceptance, for some fixed installation landing nets to
be removed where the helideck meets the ongoing friction requirements specified
in CAP 437.
102
The removal of helideck nets is covered in detail in Section 9.7.6.
9.7.4.2 Main References
9.7.4.3 Helideck Net Specification
The helideck net should be manufactured from sisal rope (not nylon) and tautly
stretched with knotted or locked splice joints. Rope and mesh dimensions are
specified in CAP 437. It should be noted that, generally, helideck nets are initially
manufactured as a square assembly.
Sometimes it may be found that the helideck is of hexagonal shape and the
position of markings prevents the setting down of a square net in a manner that
allows proper positioning, fixing and the use of tensioning devices. Where this is
the case, the shape of the net should be altered. To ensure that only proper
modifications are made to the basic net construction, the supplier should make any
changes to the shape of the net.
9.7.4.4 Fitting and Routine Maintenance
The net should be maintained in good condition, adequately tensioned, and

positioned to cover the aiming circle completely, while leaving the name
identification, helideck size and allowable mass markings outside the netted area.
As a general guide, it should not be possible to raise any part of the net more than
approximately 250 mm above deck level when applying a vigorous vertical lift by
hand. The importance of maintaining adequate net tension, despite regular
changes that occur due to water saturation and drying–out cannot be over-
emphasised. It is essential to ensure that it is never possible for the helicopter’s
undercarriage to become trapped.
9.7.5 Helideck Net Fixings
When a helideck landing net is fitted, fixings should be installed to secure the net
properly and an adequate net tensioning system provided. The fixings should be
designed and dimensioned so that the tension strops lay flat on the helideck
surface. The sole use of ropes is considered an inadequate means for tensioning
the net.
103
It is preferable for the helideck net fixings to be fixed equidistant around the
perimeter of the helideck, except where they would present trip hazards at the
head of access stairways onto the helideck.
Examples of different types of fixings are shown in Figures 9.3 to 9.6. They may
be:
• Simple ‘loop’ or ‘hook’ bar fixings welded between the deck surface and
upstand, or
• Purpose made pad eye or ‘floating’ ring fittings welded to the deck.
Ideally the net should be capable of being positioned correctly (centrally over the
landing circle) and evenly tensioned from all sides.
Depending on the shape and size of the helideck, this may mean permanently
securing the landing net on one or two sides and tensioning from the remaining
sides.
Figure 9.3 – Tensioning system for net with perimeter hook system (arrowed)
104
Figure 9.4 – Pad eye type helideck net fixings welded to deck surface (arrowed)
Figure 9.5 – Floating ring type fixings welded to deck surface
105
Figure 9.6 – Hook type net fixings (arrowed)
It is best to avoid installing a helideck net fixing system:
• That has fixings on the helideck surface beyond the perimeter. These will
be additional ‘trip hazards’. However, such an arrangement may be
unavoidable on very large helidecks
• That does not allow adjustable strops to be used to tension the net
routinely
• That relies on a rope tensioning arrangement. Routine tensioning will be

very difficult and time consuming.
9.7.6 Helideck Landing Net Removal
The removal of helideck nets is not permitted on mobile installations or vessels

save in exceptional circumstances and with BHAB Helidecks acceptance. To
achieve this acceptance, an assessment may be required in order to demonstrate
that the risks are acceptable.
In the case of skidded helicopters, the fitting of nets is subject to the specified
requirements of the helicopter operator. Nets may constitute a particularly serious
hazard to skidded helicopters.
106
There are, however, operational disadvantages with installing helideck nets, such
as passenger trip hazards, obscuring deck markings, and restricting the clearance
of spilt fuel.
These operational disadvantages have prompted owners of fixed installations to

move towards providing and maintaining enhanced friction surfaces in lieu of
helideck nets. The enhanced friction surfaces may include tiling systems that to
some extent still provide visual cues for landing due to the ‘grouting lines’ being
visible from the air.
From a flying perspective, there may be a case for retaining nets on some offshore
helidecks.
The appearance of the three-dimensional mesh from some distance above, when
landing, provides flight crews with a good reference (visual cue) of the height
above the helideck and the closure rate, particularly at night when many other
visual clues are absent. Net removal will eliminate this valuable visual clue.
Approval to remove the helideck net will only be given if the friction surface
achieves average surface friction values (see CAP 437) using an approved testing
device. This approval for net removal is generally limited to fixed installations.
After approval has been given to remove a landing net, the surface friction will be
subject to routine re-testing, the periodicity will depend on the results achieved
from previous friction tests (See CAP 437 – Friction Requirements for Landing
Area Net Removal, CAA Paper 98002 [Ref: 42]).
9.8 ACCESS AND ESCAPE
9.8.1 Introduction
Access to and from helidecks is a topic that requires proper and detailed
consideration in order to avoid major problems arising during operations. When
planning access and escape systems for the helideck during design, it is
imperative that the designer fully understands the global picture and takes into
account a number of general considerations.
CAP 437, Chapter 3.
107
9.8.3 Access – General Considerations
Access considerations will need to take account of the helideck location relative to
the accommodation areas or temporary refuge and whether the helideck is to be
installed on:
• a fixed structure
• a mobile installation or FPSO
• a vessel.
Features to be considered in detail should include, but are not limited to:
• Limiting the steepness of accessways to assist safe personnel passage in

high winds and where excessive motions are present
• Providing the most direct route for the primary access from the heli –
admin office
• Being able to secure the helideck properly from un-authorised or

inadvertent access during helideck operations, etc
• Provision of efficient passenger controls
• Sufficient space for, and ease of laying of, fire hoses
• Easy and unrestricted access to rescue equipment
• Easy stretcher access
• Easy access for freight handling
• Easy access for baggage handling
• Separation of passenger movement from refuelling operations
• Provision of good clearances from helicopter tail rotor position for deck
crew and passengers
• The need to accommodate aircraft positioning in various wind directions
• The need to avoid infringement of the 5:1 obstacle protected surface.
108
9.8.4 Escape - General Considerations
• There should be minimum of two primary escape routes from the helideck
and preferably three
• Escape routes should take into account fire monitor positioning and the
likely effect of water blast impeding passenger escape
• Escape routes should be designed to direct passengers immediately away

from the helicopter, in particular the tail rotor area
• Easy access and quick arrival at a place of safety below helideck level
• Positioning of escape routes so as not to impede rescue operations
• One escape route can be a ladder system if a platform and stairs proves
to be an unworkable option
• Fireman and helideck crew escape from monitor platforms should access
to the helideck be cut-off
• Vessels with helidecks on the foredeck may be unable to provide a tertiary

escape other than via a hatch system to below deck. The designer should
therefore consider what happens if a stricken helicopter compromises the
hatchway and attempt to provide alternative options for the tertiary escape
• Vessels with forward helidecks will sometimes offer a very good escape
route to protected areas behind the bridge. The designer should take
advantage of this option.
9.8.5 Platforms
• Where possible, monitor / access platforms should be designed to provide

protection for the helideck crew during aircraft movements
• Ensure monitor / access platforms are big enough for fire equipment and
passenger access without impeding helideck crew working areas, and
without exceeding the requirements for unobstructed falling 5:1 gradient
as stated in CAP 437
109
• To assist with safe passenger movements, provide collapsible handrails at
the head of steps onto the helideck. The design should be kept simple
and robust. See Figures 9.7 and 9.8
• Ensure that monitor / access platforms are well lit.
Figure 9.7 – Folding handrail erected and locked with pins
Figure 9.8 – Handrail in lowered position
110
9.8.6 Walkways
• Walkways should be designed to provide maximum protection for helideck

crew and passengers
• The design of access and escape routes should be to a recognised

specification to ensure sufficient walkway width, ease of movement
between different levels and to provide adequate personnel protection
• Where possible, the primary access route from heli-admin should be

made as wide as possible (say 1.5 metres) to allow for easier baggage,
stretcher and freight handling
• Wherever possible provide high sided, protected walkways to and from

the helideck to assist personnel during adverse weather. Standard height
handrailing is acceptable in benign weather conditions, but may not
provide additional security for passengers in high wind conditions.
9.8.7 Stairways and Ladders
• The primary helideck access stairways should be designed with extra

width where possible
• All stairways and ladders should be designed in accordance with a

recognised specification (See Section 9.7)
• Long, very steep stairways should be avoided. It is preferable to have

intermediate landings
• The head of stairways onto the helideck should be provided with folding
handrails
• Ladders for normal access are unacceptable
• Similar to walkways, where possible, stairways should have highsided

handrail systems particularly where the outboard helideck access routes
are likely to be exposed to high winds and on vessels subject to wave
motions.
111
9.8.8 Control of Personnel Access to Helideck
Designers should provide a means to restrict unauthorised or inadvertent entry to

the helideck. The system used should not be a permanent barrier so as not to
impede or prevent personnel escape from the helideck in an emergency.
A simple frangible chain (plastic) with a notice suspended in the centre stating
‘Access Prohibited unless Authorised by HLO’ will suffice. One end should be
permanently secured, with a hook allowing easy removal at the other end.
Chains should be installed at each point of access to the helideck, preferably at the
initial entry point (e.g. bottom of stairway).
9.9 DRAINAGE
9.9.1 Introduction
Good drainage of helidecks is important. Water and aviation fuel puddling on the
landing surface is to be avoided as it may have an adverse impact during
operations, particularly in an emergency. A helideck with puddling problems can
also directly affect the safety of aircraft and personnel and the operability of the
helideck when icing conditions are present.
Helidecks should therefore be designed to remain free from standing water and
fuel accumulations at all times.
On vessels, MODUs and floating structures drainage may be assisted by the

vessel motions. This assumes that the scuppers are adequately designed to carry
away any standing liquids.
Low level, bow mounted helidecks may also be seriously affected by ‘green water’
or spray. This operational feature should be taken into account.
CAP 437, Chapter 3.
112
9.9.3 Environmental Considerations
Discharging pollutants from offshore installations, MODUs and vessels is generally

considered an environmentally unacceptable practice. It is therefore prudent to
carefully consider helideck drainage and any restrictions that may be applied.
However, there is currently no prohibition of draining pollutants (e.g. aviation fuel)

to the sea in an emergency, as would be the case in the event of a helicopter
crash, particularly if the event were to involve a fire.
MARPOL Annex 1, Regulation 11(a) states that, Regulations 9 and 10 of this

Annex shall not apply to: ‘(a) The discharge of oil or oily mixture necessary for the
purpose of securing the safety of a ship or saving life at sea;………’.
9.9.4 Operational Considerations
The helideck drain system should be designed with the following operational
requirements in mind:
• Good containment (within the confines of the helideck) of burning aviation

fuel
• Rapid and safe disposal of any liquids flowing onto the landing surface
• Potential for drains system blockages minimised
• Easy checking and maintenance of the system.
The surface selected for the helideck will determine the likely effects on surface
drainage. They are as follows:
• Steel plated - susceptible to puddling due to welded plate construction
• Aluminium Extruded - tend to remain relatively free of water providing the

surface profile allows good run off to the scuppers
• Safedeck - very little surface water retention due to perforated surface

design.
113
ICAO Heliport Manual [Ref. 54] recommends that a maximum camber of 1:100 be
provided on a fixed platform helideck to facilitate drainage. In the case of MODUs,
vessels and floating structures, see also Section 7 for further considerations when
operating helicopters to moving helidecks.
Whilst controlling a major helicopter fire and fuel spillage, monitor operations will
lay down massive amounts of water / foam compound. Therefore, the large area
of a helideck combined with the need to rapidly clear large fluid volumes from the
surface requires a highly effective drains system.
To ensure that the safety of an installation, MODU or vessel is not compromised,

the scuppers and drain headers should be designed:
• For the worst-case event (all monitors operating plus maximum fuel
spillage) to ensure that good drainage flow rates can be achieved
• With a good upstand around the perimeter of the helideck to prevent

accumulations of burning fuel mixed with the water / foam overflowing
onto areas beneath the helideck surface
• With adequately sized scuppers to collect and retain the liquids and then
direct them into the drain headers
• With debris traps to ensure that blocking cannot occur. These are
essential and should be removable to facilitate cleaning and maintenance
NOT TO SCALE
Drain Holes in Upstand
Drain
Scupper
Debris
Guard
Helideck Surface
Liquid Flow to
Drain Header
Figure 9.9 - Typical view of a practical helideck drain construction
114
• With effective flame traps incorporated to safely carry away ignited
aviation fuel including the additional volume of liquid resulting from the
use of firefighting media
• To discharge directly to the sea in a manner that provides adequate

protection to the installation, MODU or vessel from ignited fuel residues
on the sea surface.
Note: It is usually impractical to consider routing helideck surface drainage into the
installation, MODU or vessel hazardous drainage system because it cannot
accommodate the potentially high volume of fluid flow.
9.10 PERIMETER SAFETY NET
9.10.1 Introduction
The helideck perimeter safety net should provide a proper catchment for a person
falling anywhere on the exposed perimeter of the deck.
CAP 437, Chapter 3.
Other references can be found in the ICAO Heliport Manual, IMO MODU Rules,
etc.
In some jurisdictions there may be a requirement for the perimeter safety net not to
exceed 150 mm above the elevation of the helideck surface. This requirement is
included in the IMO MODU Rules for harsh environment, for example.
The overall dimensions, strength and configuration of the helideck perimeter net
should be adequate.
The construction materials should be fire resistant or protected.
The dimensions of a perimeter safety net: both the width and height above landing
surface, are critical. This is because it is necessary for the helicopter to be able to
clear the helideck perimeter net in the event of engine failure during take-off. See
Figure 9.10.
115
The angle of the perimeter safety net relative to the landing surface is also
important. Where the angle is less than 10° an individual falling onto the net is
unlikely to be adequately restrained from falling overboard. Therefore, the net
should be angled at approximately 10° from the horizontal.
Maximum Width (from edge of helideck) = 1500 mm

Maximum Height Above Spacer to
Helideck Landing Surface raise net
= 250 mm above
support.
Net Panel Support

Edge of Helideck
Angle not less or greater than

10°
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 9.10 - Typical details and critical dimensions for helideck perimeter safety net
9.10.4 Areas to be protected by Perimeter Safety Net
All areas of the helideck perimeter where a person may fall or be blown off the
helideck surface must be protected by a safety net. This includes all the seaboard
areas and all inboard areas not protected by handrails, with the exception of
access and escapeways.
Consideration should also be given to protecting the areas adjacent to fire monitor
/ access platforms, but not to the extent that efficient fire monitor operation may be
impeded.
9.10.5 Combined Handrail and Safety Nets for Vessels
On vessels, helideck perimeter safety arrangements can be comprised of various

systems. These may include:
1. Permanently fixed safety net around the entire exposed area
2. Part of the exposed perimeter equipped with a fixed safety net and the
remainder with hinged panels
3. The whole exposed perimeter equipped with hinged panels
116
4. In addition to the fixed perimeter safety net sections, removable handrail
panels may be provided to give additional personnel protection when the
helideck is not in use. This arrangement is seen on smaller vessels with
helidecks on the bow section (not elevated) and some aft mounted
helidecks.
Selection of the preferred arrangements to be used will depend on a number of

factors such as:
1. The extent of helideck use whilst the vessel is under way
2. The degree of exposure to marine crew when they are working on a

foredeck helideck area in heavy seas
3. Exposure during routine activities (other than helicopter operations) taking

place on the vessel / helideck for instance when rigging up and towing
streamers on seismic vessels.
9.10.6 Construction and Inspection Considerations
The netting should be adequately supported and fixed around the perimeter of the
frame(s) and have a good hammock effect, regardless of the selected mesh
material.
Stainless Steel banding at

approx. 150 mm spacing Small gap between net panels (may
also need to accommodate NDB Loop
Aerial support system)
Section of net
15 x 3 mm Steel panel frame
Stretcher Bar
50 mm Grade ‘A’ Plastic threaded through
Coated Wire Mesh or mesh
equivalent.
NOT TO SCALE
Figure 9.11 - Typical details of preferred fixings for wire mesh (or equivalent)
perimeter safety net panels.
117
Polypropylene netting should ideally be supported on all sides of a panel with a
substantial stainless steel wire (plastic covered) threaded through the net mesh.
The netting should either be wrapped or tied to the support wire at approximately
100 mm intervals.
Wire mesh net specification and fixings should be as noted in Figure 9.11 above.
Wire mesh should be secured at the outer edges with the wire ‘tails’ turned back to
ensure mesh integrity is fully maintained.
There are several important things to look for when designing or inspecting the
perimeter safety net.
The example in Figure 9.12 includes the following acceptable and unacceptable
features:
1. Perimeter safety net (polypropylene type) showing a good hammock

effect and no supports intruding into the netting that might cause an injury
when restraining an individual. ACCEPTABLE.
2. The support angle is significantly less than 10°. This suggests the net will
probably provide only limited outboard restraint for an individual falling
onto it. UNACCEPTABLE.
3 2
4 1
Figure 9.12 – Polypropylene safety net
3. The left hand NDB Aerial Support is, in this case, causing a 5:1
Infringement within the 180° 5:1 falling gradient. UNACCEPTABLE.
118
This support must be modified so that the support drops straight down
within the slope of the falling gradient over the edge of the safety net.
Where a support cannot be immediately modified it will be declared as an

infringement in the HLL and may lead to onerous operating restrictions,
particularly on take-off.
4. The NDB Aerial Support is raised above the helideck support frame.
This is generally an acceptable arrangement (a practical solution) on an

existing helideck and will be needed in order to retrieve the loop aerial for
maintenance.
The preferred solution on a new build or during a major helideck re-work

is to position the aerial supports inboard of the net and between the
perimeter net frames. When laid down the supports should be below
perimeter net level.
Other unsatisfactory Safety Net features the designer should be aware of are:
1. Mesh panel stretched too taut.
2. Mesh panel fixed to frames by a single wire wrapped around the

perimeter. Single point failure of the wire will render the net
unserviceable.
NOTE: On helideck inspections, it is frequently found that the securing ties are
too long. In the event of a tie breaking and unravelling, a large section of
the net can separate from its frame.
3. Mesh panel intrusion by support members (no spacers to keep net mesh
clear of supports).
4. Existence of large gaps at the points where safety net panels abut against
each other. There should only be a small gap sufficient to provide a
clearance between the panel frames and, when fitted, to accommodate
NDB loop aerial supports. Any gaps in the panel system should not be of
such size as to impair catchment of a falling individual.
5. On vessel helidecks, equipped with hinged perimeter safety net panels

that follow the bow line, provision should be made in the design to ensure
that large gaps are avoided in both raised and deployed positions.
119
6. On square aft helidecks equipped with hinged perimeter safety net panels
the design should also include an arrangement that ensures the corners
are properly protected when perimeter safety net panels are in the
deployed position.
Figure 9.13 - Example of NDB aerial fixings installed onto an existing perimeter net
Figure 9.14 - Example of unsatisfactory panel alignment. Quality should be

monitored during fabrication process.
120
9.10.7 Perimeter Safety Net Load Testing
It is necessary to load test the constructed perimeter safety net system to ensure
design and construction integrity.
Generally, this test requires the net system to be strong enough to withstand,
without damage, a 75 kg weight dropped from a height of 1 metre.
Ideally, the initial test should be carried out on an identical test panel, not a section
that is to be installed on an operational helideck. During helideck inspections,
often the date of the last drop test cannot be confirmed. A copy of the test
document should be kept readily available on the installation / vessel.
The test can be achieved using a sandbag of suitable weight released from a
suspension point above the panel.
9.11 TIEDOWN ARRANGEMENTS
9.11.1 Introduction
The tiedown fixings required on helidecks are an important and functional part of
offshore helicopter operations safety.
There may be occasions when it is imperative that a helicopter that is parked on

the helideck needs to be properly secured to prevent damage to the airframe, due
to high winds or excessive helideck motions.
CAP 437, Chapter 3.

Helicopter Manufacturer Data Sheets.
9.11.3.1 Tiedown pattern
Proper distribution of suitable tiedown fittings is essential and should comply with
CAP 437. This arrangement ensures that the ‘tiedown’ pattern required for
securing different helicopter types is adequate for obtaining the correct distribution
of loads through the aircraft ‘picketing fixtures’ and for achieving the correct angles
of tiedown strops relative to the helideck and aircraft.
121
Tiedowns should be designed to accommodate helicopters routinely using the
helideck and for helicopters which may use the helideck in case of an emergency.
9.11.3.2 Structural strength
Where deck penetrations for tie-down points are located, adequate structural
strength should be provided in the helideck surface and the tiedown fittings to
accommodate the anticipated loads.
Tiedown strops are normally rated in the order of 5000 kg (approximately 11200
lbs).
9.11.3.3 Drainage
Adequate drainage of the deck penetrations / tiedown fittings should be provided.

The drainage holes should be of sufficient size to avoid blockages and where it is
necessary to prevent fuel spillage etc. onto the areas below the helideck,
removable plugs should be fitted to seal the helideck surface. Sealing the helideck
surface is important where the helideck is mounted above an accommodation area
or the bridge of a vessel.
9.11.3.4 Tiedown fittings
There are different designs of tiedown fitting and they may be permanent or
removable. In both cases, the diameter of the bar or loop for attaching the tiedown
strop should not exceed 22 mm.
On an existing helideck where the bar or ring diameter exceeds 22 mm and is

therefore too large for the tiedown strop hook capacity, ‘D’ shackles or some other
means will be required to provide the necessary connection. Proper storage and
maintenance of these additional fixings in a location adjacent to the helideck will be
an operational requirement.
Permanent fittings
The designs of permanent tiedown fittings are generally:
• A recessed box with a cross bar (See Figure 9.15), or
• A semi-recessed ring assembly.
122
Figure 9.15 – Recessed box tiedown fitting (iced up due to blocked drain)
Removable Fittings
Removable fittings may be:
• Threaded rings, or
• Special block type fixings (normally used on perforated ‘passive’ helideck

surfaces.
When using removable tiedown fittings, there will be an essential operational

requirement to provide proper storage for the fixings in a secure location adjacent
to the helideck. Also, an adequate number of replacements should be made
available and the fixings (helideck surface attachment and the fittings) will require
routine maintenance and checking. Additionally, where removable tiedown fittings
are used, it is prudent to provide painted markings around the correct locations
where the fittings are to be positioned, when in use.
An essential design feature of any tiedown system and the fittings is to ensure that
they do not damage aircraft tyres or cause a personnel trip hazard. Permanently
fixed, surface mounted, tiedown rings are not acceptable. This type of fixing can
easily damage aircraft tyres and cause a personnel trip hazard.
Also, recessed boxes that are too large can cause an aircraft wheel to become
lodged in them during routine helideck operations or in situations when
manoeuvring the helicopter off of the landing area.
123
Figure 9.16 – Semi-recessed removable tiedown fitting. Note painted area to provide
a reference for re-fitting after removal.
9.12 HELIDECK SURFACE TRIP HAZARDS
Where tie-down points, net tensioners, perimeter lighting fixtures, etc. have been
located, proper attention should be paid to design and equipment selection to
eliminate potential trip hazards.
9.13 HELIDECK STRUCTURAL MAINTENANCE

Reference CAP 437, Chapters 5 and 7.
9.13.2 Introduction
The designer of a helideck should always take due notice of the requirements for
future maintenance and inspection work on the helideck. It is recommended that
the designer review historical statistical information from previous inspections to
determine any causes and trends in maintenance and inspection work, and to
allow for identification of any common factors.
124
The designer should also be aware that the helideck would be incorporated into a
fully integrated schedule of inspection on the installation when it becomes
operational. On fixed platform installations, it is common practice for a written
scheme of examination to be in place. This document maps out a series of
inspection tasks that are to be undertaken to a prescribed set of procedures on a
similarly prescribed inspection schedule. The schedule is determined by a number
of factors including the safety critical rating of the elements of the helideck in
question.
A structural integrity management contractor will use the output from the final
design report produced by the designer to identify safety critical elements on the
helideck. It is therefore the responsibility of the designer to ensure that the final
design report takes due note of the above point and a paragraph or section is
included in the design report which highlights specific areas / tasks recommended
for future inspection. The structural integrity management contractor can use this
in the future.
Similar inspection regimes will be in place for helidecks on other installations such
as drilling rigs, vessels etc.
The detail design of the helideck structure should also allow for satisfactory access
for all maintenance and inspection activities.
Access should be considered for both inspection of the main structural elements of
the helideck and 'local' access to facilitate removal of components if this becomes
necessary during the life of the helideck.
The designer should be aware of those helideck elements that will be subjected to
detailed maintenance and inspection in the future. These include:
• The helideck -supporting steelwork etc

• Corrosion protection systems
• Fire protection systems
• Visual aids - markings and lighting
• Communications equipment
• Miscellaneous equipment, de-icing equipment etc
• Refuelling system (if applicable).
These topics are addressed in greater detail in Section 11.
125
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
126
10.0 HELIDECK ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
10.1 INTRODUCTION
The safety of offshore helicopter flight operations can be seriously affected by

environmental effects that may be present around installations, vessels and their
helidecks. These environmental effects are typified by structural turbulence, the
thermal effects caused by gas turbine and diesel exhaust emissions, hot and cold
gas streams and vessel motions.
It is vital, in order to ensure the safety of helicopters operating to and from offshore
installations and vessels, that the best possible flying environment (minimum
turbulence and helideck movement) is maintained.
Where, for operational and/or meteorological reasons, ideal flying conditions do

not prevail, then flight crews need to have access to as much information as
possible on the anticipated turbulent conditions and helideck movements in order
to plan or abort flight operations.
This section addresses, in detail, the environmental effects likely to be

encountered, and provides information on how to identify problems during the
design process and ways that these adverse effects can be mitigated.
10.2 MAIN REFERENCES
CAP 437, Chapter 3.

CAA Paper 99004 - Research on Offshore Helideck Environmental Issues
[Ref: 41].
BMT Report - Helideck Design Considerations Environmental Effects [Ref: 68].
10.3 BACKGROUND
It is almost inevitable that helidecks installed on the cramped decks of offshore

structures will suffer to some degree from their proximity to tall and bulky
structures, and to gas turbine exhausts and flares. The objective of this section is
to help platform designers to create offshore installation topsides designs, and
helideck locations, that are safe and ‘friendly’ to helicopter operations and, as far
as possible, avoid the ‘environmental’ effects (mainly aerodynamic, thermal and
wave motion) which can affect helicopter operations. It is hoped that, if used from
127
‘day one’ of the offshore installation design process when facilities are first being
laid out, this section will prevent or minimise many helideck environment problems
at little or no cost to design or construction.
Guidance on the design and placement of offshore helidecks has existed for many
years in the CAA document CAP 437 [Ref: 40], which contains certain
environmental criteria relating to the occurrence of downdraft and higher than
ambient temperatures due to exhausts and flares. These criteria were set in order
to ensure safe helicopter operations by avoiding these hazards. Where these
criteria could not be met, or where pilots experienced other environmental
phenomena, an entry has been placed in the Helideck Limitation List (HLL)
(previously known as the Installation / vessel Limitation List - IVLL). These entries
are specific to particular combinations of wind speed and direction, and either
restrict helicopter weight, or prevent flying altogether in certain weather conditions.
The HLL system operated by the British Helicopter Advisory Board (BHAB
Helidecks) should ensure that landings on offshore helidecks are properly
controlled when adverse environmental effects are present. On poorly designed
helidecks, severe restrictions may be placed on operations resulting in reduced
payloads or cancelled flights. This can lead to significant commercial penalties for
the installation operator or vessel owner. Well-designed and ‘helicopter-friendly’
platform topsides and helidecks therefore result in efficient operations, and a
saving in cost for the platform operator.
A survey based on pilot responses to a questionnaire on workload and safety

hazards [Ref: 44] rated ‘turbulence around platforms’ as the largest source of
workload and presenting the largest safety risk of all aspects of offshore flight
operations. A review of offshore helideck environmental issues [Ref: 41] pointed
out that many of the decisions leading to poor helideck performance were made by
designers in the very early stages of design, and recommended that it would be
easier for designers to get these decisions right if comprehensive helideck design
guidance published by industry was available to run in parallel with CAP 437.
128
10.4 DESIGN ISSUES
10.4.1 Introduction
The design guidance in this section applies to all fixed installations (manned and
normally unattended installations), floating installations (including semi-
submersibles {e.g. MODUs, FPUs and specialist barges} and vessel hull based
FPSOs) and any other specialist offshore support vessels with a helideck (e.g.
seismic, diving support, pipelay).
The environmental effects described in this section fall into two classes;
• aerodynamic effects, and

• wave motion effects.
All offshore installations experience the aerodynamic affects described in Sections

10.4.3 to 10.4.7 but only floating systems experience the influences of wave
motions on the helideck as described in Section 10.5.
Turbulent airflows and thermal effects are in effect 'invisible' obstructions in flight
paths around installations and vessels. They can seriously affect flight operations
onto a helideck. These effects must be identified, quantified and taken fully into
account when establishing the operability of a helideck.
The environmental issues described in this section are clearly not the only factors
in the selection of the helideck design or location. It is also strongly influenced by
other important practical, safety and regulatory factors. For example, on many
installations the helicopter will be designated the ‘primary means of escape’, and
so the helideck must be close to the ‘temporary refuge’. Selection of the best
helideck location is therefore invariably a compromise between a number of
potentially conflicting requirements.
129
10.4.2 Aerodynamic Issues and Criteria
Figure 10. 1 - Sketch showing the main elements of aerodynamic flow interaction
Helidecks are basically flat plates and so are relatively streamlined structures. In
isolation they would present little disturbance to the wind flow, and helicopters
would be able to operate to and from them in a more or less undisturbed air
environment.
Difficulties arise because the wind must deviate around the bulk of the offshore
installation causing large areas of flow distortion and turbulent wakes, and
because the installation is also often a source of hot or cold gas emissions.
The effects fall into three main categories (see Figure 10.1).
• The flow around the bulk of the offshore installation itself. Platforms are
slab-sided, non-streamlined assemblies (‘bluff bodies’) which create
regions of highly distorted and disturbed airflow in their vicinity
• The flow around large items of superstructure, notably cranes, drilling

derricks and exhaust stacks. Like the platform itself, these are bluff
130
bodies, and it is the turbulent wake flows behind these bodies that are
important
• Hot gas flows emanating from exhaust outlets and flare systems.
The current design criteria are based ultimately on achieving two objectives:
• The vertical mean wind speed above the helideck at main rotor height
shall not exceed ± 0.9m/s for a wind speed of 25 m/s; this equates to a
wind vector slope of 2°
• The maximum temperature rise, averaged over a 3 second time interval,

in the vicinity of the flight path and over the landing area, shall not exceed
2oC.
These criteria are defined in CAP 437 [Ref: 40] and are taken to be the limiting
conditions for safe helicopter operation. If they are exceeded under any conditions
then the helicopter operator is to be advised, and in most circumstances an
appropriate flight limitation should be entered into the HLL [Ref: 69].
It should be noted that, at present, there is no criterion for the severity of

turbulence that can occur in the helicopter flight path. However, research is
currently in progress to derive one and later versions of these guidelines are
expected to contain such a criterion.
NOTE: The issue arises of how high above the landing area these criteria should
be applied. CAP 437 [Ref: 40] says ‘…at a height above helideck level
which takes into consideration the airspace required above the helideck to
accommodate helicopter landing and take - off decision points.’ The
recommendation in [Ref: 41] is more specific, saying ‘… up to a height
above the helideck corresponding to 30 feet plus wheels - to - rotor height
plus one rotor diameter’.
10.4.3 Plan Location of the Helideck
A key driver of the helideck location is the need to provide a generous sector clear
of physical obstructions for the approaching / departing helicopter, and also
sufficient vertical clearance for the helicopter to lose altitude in the event of a
single engine failure. This requirement is for a minimum 210o obstacle free sector,
with a falling 5:1 gradient below the landing area over at least 180o of this arc (see
Section 6.4).
131
Figure 10.2 - Sketch showing the helideck installed over a corner with 50% overhang.
From an aerodynamic point of view the helideck should be as far away from the
disturbed wind flow around the platform as possible. This objective, and the 210o
obstacle-free sector, are most readily achieved by locating the helideck on a
corner of the platform with as large an overhang as possible. In combination with
an appropriate elevation and air gap (see Section 10.4.4), the overhang will
encourage disturbed airflow to pass under the deck leaving a relatively horizontal
and clean flow over the top.
It is recommended that the overhang should be such that the centre of the helideck
is vertically above, or outboard of, the corner of the installation superstructure (see
Figure 10.2.
10.4.4 Helideck Height and Air Gap under the Helideck
The height of the helideck, and the presence of an air gap between the helideck
and the supporting module, are the most important factors in determining wind flow
characteristics. The helideck should ideally be located at a height above, or at
least equal to, all significant surrounding structures. This will minimise the
occurrence of turbulence and downdraft downwind of adjacent structures.
An air gap, separating the helideck from superstructure beneath it, promotes
beneficial wind flow over the helideck. If there is not an air gap under the helideck,
then wind conditions above are likely to be severe, particularly if the helideck is
mounted on top of a large multi-story accommodation block. It is the distortion of
the wind flow around the bulk of the platform that is the cause.
132
Figure 10.3 - Sketch showing the flow passing under the helideck and clean flow over.
Based on previous research work [Ref: 41] it is recommended that the air gap on
production platforms should be in the range 3m – 5m. Helidecks mounted on very
tall accommodation blocks require the largest clearance, whilst those on smaller
blocks and with very large helideck overhangs tend to require less. For shallow
superstructures of three stories or less, such as often found on semi-submersible
drilling vessels, a 1m gap may be sufficient.
In combination with an appropriate overhang (see Section 10.4.3), the air gap
encourages the disturbed airflow to pass under the deck leaving a relatively linear
and clean flow over the top (see Figure 10.3).
It is essential that the air gap is preserved throughout installation operational life,
and does not become a storage area for bulky items that might obstruct the free
flow of the air through the gap.
NOTE: However, it should be noted that CAP 437 recommends that the helideck
height should not exceed 60m above sea level. Above this height the
regularity of helicopter operations may be affected by low cloud base
conditions.
133
10.4.5 Proximity to Tall Structures
Offshore installations topsides tend to include a number of tall structures (drilling

derricks, flare towers, cranes, gas turbine exhaust stacks etc.), and it is usually
impractical to mount the helideck at a higher elevation. All such tall structures will
cause areas of turbulent, sheared or downdraft flow downwind that may potentially
pose a hazard to the helicopter. The severity of the disturbances is greater the
bluffer the shape, and the broader the obstruction to the flow. It is reduced the
greater the distance downwind.
It should be noted that the location and configuration of drilling derricks can vary
during the field life. The derrick position over the well slots can change, and
temporary work-over rigs may be installed from time to time. The assessment of
the helideck location should take into account the various derrick configurations
that are expected to occur during the life of the installation.
10.4.5.1 Clad Derricks
A fully clad drilling derrick is a tall and solid structure and generates a
correspondingly significant wake. The important flow property of the wake is that it
is unsteady and so, if it is upwind of the helideck, it subjects the helideck area to
large and random variations in wind speed and direction.
A general guide on wake decay from bluff bodies indicates that wake effects
largely dissipate within a downwind distance of 10-20 structure widths. For a clad
derrick 10 m wide at helideck level, this would correspond to a decay distance of
100-200 m (see Figure 10.4).
134
Figure 10.4 - Sketch showing plan view of flow behind a clad and an unclad derrick
Consequently it is best if the helideck is not placed closer than 10 structure widths
from a tall solid structure such as a clad derrick. However, few offshore
installations will be large enough to permit such a clearance to be included in the
design, and so the specification of a clad derrick is almost certain to result in a
significant operational limitation for helicopters when the derrick is upwind of the
helideck. It will be particularly important to try to ensure that the installation is
aligned such that this only happens in rarely occurring wind directions (see Section
10.9.4).
10.4.5.2 Unclad Derricks and Cranes
Unclad derricks are relatively porous. A wake still exists, but the turbulence is of
much higher frequency and smaller scale due to the flow being broken by the
lattice elements of the structure. An unclad derrick can therefore be safely located
closer to the helideck than its clad equivalent. Ideally the separation between the
helideck and an unclad open lattice derrick should be at least 5 times the derrick
width at helideck height (see Figure 10.4). Separations of significantly less than 5
derrick widths may lead to the imposition of operating restrictions in certain wind
conditions.
Crane pedestals and crane booms are also usually of lattice construction, and the
same approximate rule can be applied as for lattice derricks. Generally the
disturbed flow region will be much less due to the smaller dimensions.
135
10.4.5.3 Exhaust stacks
Gas turbine and other exhaust stacks, whether operating or not, also represent a
physical blockage to the flow and create a turbulent wake (as well as the potential
hazard due to the hot exhaust – see Section 10.4.6).
The same guideline as defined for the clad derricks is recommended, namely, a
minimum of 10 structure widths between the stacks and the helideck. If there are
multiple exhausts and these are located in close proximity to each other, then it is
recommended that the structure width be considered to be the overall span of the
group of stacks.
10.4.5.4 Other Enclosed Structures
Some offshore drilling rigs include large enclosed structures in close proximity to
the drilling derrick (e.g. shaker house). If the height of these structures extends to
helideck elevation, then they may give rise to large-scale turbulent disturbances
downwind, and should be treated much as for a clad derrick.
10.4.5.5 Lay-down Areas
A lay-down area in the vicinity of a helideck poses a number of potential problems

to helicopter operations. Bulky or tall items placed in a lay-down area close to a
helideck may result in turbulence and or downdraft. The temporary nature of such
lay-down areas increases the potential hazard because the helicopter pilots,
though perhaps familiar with the installation, may not be expecting turbulence.
The platform design should seek to ensure that lay-down areas are significantly
below helideck level or sufficiently remote from the helideck to avoid such
problems. If this cannot be achieved then it is essential that management
procedures are in place to ensure that appropriate limitations are placed on flight
operations.
10.4.6 Temperature Rise due to Hot Exhausts
Increases in ambient air temperature are a potential hazard to helicopters.

Increased air temperature means less rotor lift and less engine power margin.
Rapid temperature changes can also induce engine surge and even compressor
stall or flameout.
136
It is therefore extremely important that helicopters avoid these conditions, or that
the occurrence of higher than ambient conditions is foreseen and steps taken to
reduce payload to provide an appropriate performance margin.
Gas turbine power generation systems are usually the most important source of
hot exhaust gases on offshore production platforms, but diesel propulsion or
auxiliary power system exhausts on mobile units could also be significant.
For certain wind directions the hot gas plumes from the exhausts will be carried by
the wind directly across the helideck. The hot gas plume mixes with the ambient
air, and the mixing increases the size of the plume, and reduces the temperature
(by dilution).
Evaluations of likely temperature rise, based on a Gaussian dispersion model and

supported by wind tunnel tests, indicate that for gas turbine exhausts with release
temperatures up to 500°C and flow rates of 50 -100 kg/s, the minimum distance
required before the temperature rise drops to 2oC rise above ambient is in range
130-190 m (see Figure 10.5). Some gas turbine power generation systems may
include waste heat recovery systems that have lower exhaust gas temperatures of
about 250oC, resulting in reduced minimum distances in the range 90 -130m.
Figure 10.5 - Sketch showing the hot gas plume dispersing, and 2oC rise 130-190m downwind
Except for very large platforms, this implies that regardless of design, there will
always be a wind condition where temperature rise above the helideck exceeds
2oC. It is likely to be impossible, therefore, to design a helideck that is compliant
137
with the criteria under all conditions. The design aim becomes one of minimising
the occurrence of high temperatures over the helideck rather than eliminating
them. This can be achieved by trying to ensure that platform layout and alignment
direction are such that these conditions are only experienced rarely (see Section
10.9.4).
Many offshore installations have the power generation modules and exhausts
located close to the accommodation modules and helideck. This is because the
power generation is regarded as significantly less hazardous than drilling or
production modules. This can be a good location provided that the stacks are high
enough, are not wide enough to cause large amounts of turbulence, and do not
impinge on the ‘obstacle protected surfaces’.
The helideck should be located such that winds from the prevailing wind directions
carry the plume away from the helicopter approach path. To minimise the effects
for other wind directions, the exhausts should be sufficiently high to ensure that the
plumes are above the helicopter approach path. To achieve this, it is
recommended that the exhaust outlets be no less than 20-30 m above the
helideck, depending on the gas turbine flow rates and temperatures.
In the past, some platforms were fitted with downward facing exhausts so that the
hot exhaust gases were initially directed down towards the sea surface. This
arrangement is not recommended because the hot plume can rise and disperse in
an unpredictable way, particularly in light wind conditions.
NOTE: Where it is considered necessary to extend the gas turbine exhaust

outlets, it is important for the design project team to consider early on in
the project how the installation of extended outlets can reasonably be
achieved. Ideally, the engineering requirement should be established
before firming up the gas turbine prime mover specification(s). It is
important to consider the potential effects on operating performance and
extra maintenance requirements caused by extending the gas turbine
prime mover exhaust ducts, particularly when they are used in
conjunction with some waste heat recovery systems (it may result in an
increase in back pressure on the turbine). A complete picture of the
exhaust / flare plume and its potential extremities (i.e. under normal
operating and maximum output conditions) for a full range of wind
conditions is required. Test Houses will require project teams and
manufacturers to furnish them with full details for the varying load
conditions, mass flows and exhaust temperatures for all possible
operating conditions.
138
10.4.7 Cold Flaring and Rapid Blow-down Systems
Hydrocarbon gas can be released from the production platform process or from
drilling rigs at various times. It is important to ensure that a helicopter cannot fly
into a cloud of hydrocarbon gas because:
• concentrations above 10% of Lower Flammable Limit (LFL) might cause

the helicopter engine to surge or flameout with consequent risk to the
helicopter, and
• the helicopter poses a risk to the offshore installation because it is a

potential ignition source for the hydrocarbon gas.
Consideration therefore needs to be given to ensuring that gas release points are
as remote as possible from the helideck and helicopter flight path, and that any
unforeseen gas releases trigger the automatic activation of the helideck status
lights (flashing red). Planned gas releases should only occur when helicopters are
not in the area.
The blowdown system on a production platform depressurises the process system

releasing the hydrocarbon gas. It will normally be designed to reduce the pressure
to half, or to 7 bar, in 15 minutes (the API standard). For a large offshore
installation this might require the release of 50 tonnes or more of gas. Once down
to this target pressure in 15 minutes or less, the remainder of the gas will continue
to be released from the system. A blow-down may be automatically triggered by
the detection of a dangerous condition in the production process. Alternatively it
may be triggered manually.
The blowdown system should have venting points that are as remote as possible
from the helideck and, in prevailing winds, downwind of the helideck. It is common
to have this vent on the flare boom, and this will normally be a good location.
However, it should be noted that dilution of the gas to 10% LFL may not occur until
the plume is a considerable distance from the venting point. This distance could
be anywhere between 200m – 500m depending on vent size, venting rate and
wind speed.
Drilling rigs often have ‘poor-boy degassers’ which are used to release gas whilst
circulating a well, but a drilling rig is unlikely to release any significant quantities of
gas without warning, unless there is a sudden major crisis such as a blow-out. As
with production platforms it is unlikely to be possible to locate the helideck
sufficiently distant from the potential gas sources to guarantee 10% LFL or less,
and so the rig should not accept helicopter flights when well circulation activity is
139
going on, or when there are problems down the well. Helideck status lights should
be connected to the appropriate gas detection systems and automatically initiated.
10.5 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR FLOATING SYSTEMS AND

VESSELS
10.5.1 General
As well as experiencing the aerodynamic effects and potential hazards outlined

above, floating installations and vessels experience dynamic motions due to the
ocean waves.
These motions (see Figure 10.6) are a potential hazard to the helicopter, and
operational motion limits are set in order to avoid unsafe conditions.
Figure 10.6 - Vessel wave motions definition
The setting of these operating limits should involve consideration of two aspects:
• motion limits for executing a safe landing, and

• limits for safely remaining on the deck for the period necessary to effect
passenger and cargo transfer (usually not more than 10 minutes).
The former is mainly affected by the rate of the heave (vertical) motion, but also by
the roll and pitch motions, and is relatively easy for the pilot to judge visually. The
pilot can see the movements of the vessel, and can judge whether it is safe to
make the landing, and can choose the appropriate moment to set the helicopter
down.
140
The latter is mainly affected by helideck accelerations, which can be generated
directly by the motion of the vessel (heave, surge and sway), and indirectly due to
the inclination of the helideck (component of gravity due to pitch or roll angle).
Limits for remaining safely on the deck are also much more difficult to judge
because they should involve a prediction of the helideck motions over the next 10
minutes, and an assessment of the statistical risk of unsafe motions. Furthermore,
the options available to the pilot in the event of excessive motions building up
whilst the aircraft is on the helideck are limited.
10.5.2 Wave Motion Characteristics and Criteria
The setting of helideck performance limitations due to vessel motion is the

responsibility of the helicopter operator as AOC holder. Currently in the UK
offshore helicopter-operating environment the motions limitations for a variety of
vessels have been agreed and set jointly by the helicopter operators, and these
are published by BHAB Helidecks in the Helideck Limitations List. It is
recommended that vessel owners and designers consult with BHAB Helidecks
during conceptional design of new vessels or refits to determine the limitations that
are likely to be applied to the class of vessel for given helicopter types.
The limitations that currently exist apply to both the vertical linear motion (heave)
and the angular motions (roll and pitch). Large accelerations can cause the
helicopter to slide across the deck or tip over (though these do not at present form
part of the limitations applied).
The angle of roll and pitch experienced is the same for all points on the vessel or
structure, but the amount of heave, sway or surge motion experienced can vary
considerably, depending on the location of the helideck on the vessel.
The severity of the helideck motions and the operational limitations will depend on:
• The wave environment (e.g. more severe West of Shetland than in the
Southern North Sea)
• The size of the vessel (a small vessel generally tends to exhibit larger and
faster motions than a large vessel)
• The vessel’s motion characteristics (certain hull forms exhibit larger wave
motions than others, or are sensitive to particular sea conditions)
• Whether the vessel is moored, underway or under tow
• The location of the helideck (vertical motions tend to be greater at the bow
and stern of a ship than at midships, and sway motions due to roll tend to
increase with helideck height)
141
• The design of the helicopter itself (different motion limits apply to different
helicopter types)
• The time of day (more onerous motion limits are applied to helidecks on
smaller ships in the hours of darkness due to the degraded visual cues
available to the pilot).
NOTE: A new helideck motion criterion is currently under development (see

Section 10.12.1).
10.5.3 Sea State Characterisation
Sea states are usually characterised in terms of the significant wave height, an
associated wave period (usually either the mean zero up-crossing period or peak
spectral period) and a wave energy spectrum. Standard wave spectral formulae,
such as the JONSWAP or Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum, are commonly used in
design to define the way in which wave energy is distributed across the wave
frequency range. Wave spectra may be defined as either uni-directional or multi-
directional, the latter describing the proportion of wave energy coming from each
direction by means of a directional spreading function.
10.5.4 Vessel Motions and Helideck Downtime
The motions of a vessel or floating installation generally become larger as the

significant wave height and period increase, but may be especially severe at
certain wave periods (e.g. at natural roll or pitch periods), and may be sensitive to
the frequency content of the wave spectrum. The motion characteristics of a
vessel or floating platform may be reliably predicted by recourse to well-
established computer models, or to physical model testing.
Helideck downtime will occur whenever the motions of the vessel exceed the
criteria (see Section 10.13 for an outline of a method to estimate the downtime.)
10.5.5 Helideck Location Dependence
The heave motions of the helideck depend on its horizontal location, and on how
the vessel’s heave, roll and pitch motions combine at that location. The operability
of the helideck therefore depends on its location on the vessel or floating
installation, both longitudinally and transversely.
142
Figure 10.7 - Areas of larger wave motions on a ship-shaped vessel.
This location dependence is particularly marked for ships and ship-shaped

installations such as FPSOs. The pitching motion of a ship is such that the vertical
heave motion experienced by the helideck will generally be much greater if it is
located at the bow or stern, and will be least if it can be located amidships. Bow
mounted helidecks can also be particularly vulnerable to damage from green seas
unless mounted high above deck level.
Helidecks are also often located off the vessel’s centreline. In some cases they
are cantilevered over the side (which provides the benefit of an unobstructed
falling 5:1 gradient over at least 180o). In this case, downtime due to wave motions
will generally tend to increase because of greater helideck heave motions caused
by roll.
Semi-submersible drilling or production platforms, tension leg platforms and spar

buoys tend to have smaller motions at lower frequencies, and whilst the helideck
location on a spar or semi-submersible will have an effect on performance, this is
much less important than for a ship-shaped vessel.
However, the location of the helideck is generally determined by factors other than
the need to minimise heave motions. In the case of an FPSO or drillship, for
example, the central deck area is generally occupied by processing or drilling
equipment. The helideck also has to be conveniently located for access by
personnel, who are generally accommodated either near the bow or stern. As the
helicopter is likely to be the ‘primary means of escape’ the helideck needs to be
143
close to the ‘temporary refuge’, which is usually incorporated into the
accommodation.
Figure 10.8: Variation in helideck downtime with location along the length of a large
FPSO.
Figure 10.8 illustrates how wave motion downtime for a helideck typically varies
with its location along the length of a large ship (in this case: an FPSO) when
operating in a reasonably harsh environment. Maximum downtime occurs when
the helideck is located at the bow or stern, and minimum downtime when the
helideck is amidships. Variations in downtime in this case are a direct
consequence of variations in predicted heave motions.
Figure 10.9 illustrates how the helideck location affects wave motion downtime on
a small ship (e.g. a diving support vessel) operating in a moderate sea
environment. Once again, downtime tends to be greatest at the bow and least
amidships, although there is relatively little variation over the aft part of the ship. In
this case there is a marked difference between levels of downtime occurring when
the helideck is at the vessel’s bow and stern.
144
Figure 10.9 -Variation in helideck downtime with location along the length of a small ship.
This asymmetry in the downtime curve is not due to any marked difference
between the vessel motions at bow and stern, but is rather a direct consequence
of the more stringent motion limits for a helideck located at the bow of a small ship
than for a helideck at the stern. This more stringent requirement is because both
helicopter and ship will normally be facing into wind, and pilots landing on bow
helidecks will therefore have poorer visual cues to assist their landing.
10.6 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR FPSOs AND

DYNAMICALLY POSITIONED VESSELS
Most FPSOs operating in UK waters are turret-moored, and either weathervane

naturally with the wind, waves and current, or use thrusters to control the vessel
heading. A naturally weathervaning vessel has no control over its heading or
motions, whereas a thruster-controlled vessel has the ability to choose its heading
(within limits). For the latter, the heading is normally chosen in order to minimise
the wave motions, and this normally means heading into the waves.
Dynamically positioned drillships and other offshore construction vessels also often
operate with thruster heading control, with the heading invariably selected to
minimise the wave induced vessel motions (unless the drilling or construction task
demands some other fixed heading).
Whichever heading control strategy is adopted, the vessel’s wave induced motions
(and therefore helideck downtime) are sensitive to variations in the vessel’s
heading relative to waves. The heading of a naturally weathervaning vessel
depends on the relative strengths and directions of the wind, wind-generated
145
waves, swell and current. Swell and wind-generated waves can come from very
different directions, and especially complex heave, roll and pitch motions may
occur if swell onto the beam of the vessel occurs at the same time as a wind-
generated sea onto the bow. The vessel roll response in head-sea conditions is
sensitive to the amount of wave directional spreading, and a multi-directional wave
model may have to be used to obtain reliable estimates of maximum roll response
in these circumstances. Despite the complexity, all these effects can be taken into
account at the helideck design assessment stage (see Section 10.11).
The ability of a thruster-assisted FPSO, or other dynamically positioned vessel, to

turn to a desired heading can be used operationally to minimise helideck downtime
due to both wave motions and aerodynamic effects. It can be used during flight
operations to:
• ensure that wave induced motions at the helideck are minimised, and/or
• relative wind headings leading to downdraft, turbulence or hot gases over

the helideck are avoided.
Consequently a thruster-assisted FPSO or dynamically positioned vessel with

relatively poor inherent wave induced motions and helideck aerodynamic
limitations may nevertheless be operated in such a way that good helideck
operability is achieved. The benefit of this can also be taken into account at the
helideck design assessment stage (see Section 10.9). However, it should also be
recognised that a sudden loss of heading control during helicopter operations is
likely to result in a rapid increase in vessel motions (especially roll) with potentially
catastrophic consequences for a helicopter on the deck. This roll motion problem
will be particularly severe for vessels with high-mounted helidecks. Consequently,
heading control should not be relied upon unless the heading control system has
adequate redundancy and capacity to bring the vessel back onto heading, and the
risk of loss of heading control has been shown to be adequately low.
10.7 COMBINED OPERATIONS
10.7.1 Permanent Arrangements
It is common for offshore installations to consist of more than one platform or

vessel. In some cases fixed platforms are bridge-linked and in quite close
proximity (e.g. Figure 10.10), and are close enough for the aerodynamic effects
(turbulence, hot gases etc.) of one platform to be experienced at the helideck of
the other when the wind is in the appropriate direction.
146
(Photo courtesy of BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited)
Figure 10.10 – An example of bridge-linked platform.
In these situations the various effects considered in Sections 10.4.3 to 10.4.7 must
be considered for the platform complex as a whole. It will normally be necessary
for the helideck to be located on the platform corners remote from the other
platform(s) in order to comply with 210o obstruction-free sector, and for best
aerodynamic performance.
In some cases the platform complex may include more then one helideck, and it
will therefore be necessary to assess the design issues for each of these
helidecks. However, operational limitations which have to be placed on an
individual deck may cause little helicopter downtime if there is an alternate
helideck that can be used under these conditions. All such limitations need to be
fully investigated, documented, and communicated to the operators to ensure that
the various management procedures to control the use of the helidecks are put
into place.
10.7.2 Temporary Arrangements
Combined operations also refer to a temporary arrangement where one mobile

platform or vessel (e.g. a floatel) is operating in close proximity to another
permanent installation. In many cases there may be a gangway in place
connecting the two.
147
Whilst the detailed arrangements for these combined operations may vary
considerably from one circumstance to another (see Section 8.1), there are certain
aspects of design and platform topsides layout that, if optimised, can minimise the
need for helideck restrictions during combined operations.
Certain types of mobile platforms (e.g. flotels) have gangways and/or gangway
landing portals, and clearly this defines the side of the mobile platform that will
normally be closest to the fixed platform when combined operations are in
progress. Consequently the design of the floatel should have the gangway located
as far away from the helideck as practicable in order to maximise the available
obstruction free sector, and also to ensure that turbulence or hot gas plumes
caused by the adjacent fixed platform are as distant from the mobile platform
helideck as possible.
Whatever considerations and choices were made at the fixed or mobile platform
design stage, when combined operations are to be carried out, a helideck
assessment should be conducted to evaluate the effect of one platform on the
other, and determine any helideck restrictions that should be imposed. Apart from
the physical requirements for an unobstructed 210o obstacle free sector and falling
5:1 gradient (over at-least 180o), this assessment should consider the effect of the
turbulent wake from one platform impinging on the helideck of the other, and any
hot gas exhausts from one influencing the approach to the other helideck. The
helideck on a mobile unit is likely to be at a much lower level than the bulk of the
fixed platform it is alongside, and is therefore likely to experience severe
turbulence when downwind.
These considerations are likely to determine that, under certain wind conditions,
helideck operations to the mobile unit need to be curtailed. Where the combined
operations have more than one helideck available and a gangway platform for
personnel, it may be possible to switch from using one helideck to the other
depending on the conditions. All such limitations need to be fully investigated,
documented, and communicated to the helicopter operators to ensure that the
various management procedures to control the use of the helidecks are put into
place.
10.8 EXAMPLES OF GOOD AND BAD PRACTICE IN PLATFORM

HELIDECK LOCATION
This section contains sketches of the main types of offshore installation (fixed
jacket, semi-submersible, jack-up, tension leg platform and FPSO) with examples
of each, illustrating good and poor practice in helideck location.
148
10.8.1 Fixed Installations
Good: Helideck is above the level of

the surrounding main modules.
Bad: Two large clad derricks present

a major solid obstruction to the wind
flow and the helideck will experience
serious downdraft and turbulence
when downwind. A set of four gas
turbine exhaust stacks is also located
close to the helideck. They are not
high enough to prevent problems with
hot gas exhausts, and are also a
significant obstruction to the wind
flow over the helideck at certain wind
headings. The helideck has
insufficient overhang and air gap.
Good: The helideck is mounted

significantly above the level of all the
platform modules, and with an
appropriate air gap beneath. The only
structure above helideck level is the
derrick, which is unclad, and
therefore likely to produce little
significant turbulence at the helideck.
Bad: The installation has downward

facing gas turbine exhausts, which
may cause clouds of rising hot gas to
envelop the helideck and helicopter
approach path. This is particularly
likely to happen in light wind
conditions (when helicopter
performance is inherently poor).
149
Good: Being mounted on the top of a
separate accommodation platform
and with a significant air gap and
overhang, the helideck is unlikely to
suffer from any significant turbulence
problems.
10.8.2 Semi-submersible and jack-up drilling units
Good: All semi-submersible drilling

units are good from a wave motion
point of view unless they are floating
at a very shallow transit draft. At
operating or survival draft, motions
are generally of low amplitude and low
frequency.
Bad: Helideck is in close proximity to

a partially clad drilling derrick and
other adjacent solid structures, which
all extend to a height significantly
above the height of the helideck. The
helideck will experience significant
shear turbulence and downdraft when
the derrick is upwind. (The lack of an
air gap is likely to be less significant
due to the relatively shallow deck on
which it is mounted.)
150
Good: Good corner helideck location
with significant overhang and air gap.
Structures close to the helideck are
mainly open and porous to the wind.
Flare booms for well-test operations
are both reasonably distant from the
helideck and should be visible when in
use.
Good: The example jack-up drilling

platform shown here has a helideck
with large overhang and generous air
gap, and it is located higher than most
of the solid superstructure. Structures
above the level of the helideck are
generally porous. (Most jack-up drilling
platforms have good helideck
locations.)
151
10.8.3 Tension Leg Platforms
Good: This tension leg platform (TLP)

has a high corner location helideck
with an air gap. Also the generally
open and porous design of the
superstructure will reduce wind flow
problems. Wave induced motions are
generally small for a TLP. They are
almost zero in roll, pitch and heave,
whilst the larger surge, sway and yaw
motions are normally at very low
frequency.
Bad: The downward pointing gas

turbine exhausts directly under the
helideck are likely to result in a cloud
of hot gas enveloping the helideck in
light wind conditions.
Good: Wave induced motions for this

tension leg platform motions will
generally be small. They are almost
zero in roll, pitch and heave, whilst the
larger surge, sway and yaw motions
are normally at very low frequency.
Bad: The helideck is mounted

relatively low on the superstructure
and is close to a large solid
construction, which will cause
significant downdraft and turbulence
when up wind. Upward facing gas
turbine exhaust stacks are
insufficiently high to ensure that the hot
gas plume will pass above the
helicopter flight path.
152
10.8.4 FPSOs
Good: The high location of the

helideck and generous air gap mean
that it is very unlikely to suffer from any
aerodynamic turbulence, particularly
as the vessel usually operates heading
into wind.
Bad: The extreme forward location of

the helideck means that vessel pitch
will be experienced at the helideck as
heave motion and acceleration. The
high location of the helideck means
that vessel roll will be experienced at
the helideck as sway motion and
acceleration. Pilots also dislike bow-
mounted helidecks because of the lack
of visual cues when vessel is heading
into wind.
Good: Helideck at the stern will

experience lesser wave induced
motions than if it were at the bow. It is
also reasonably high compared with
the bulk of the superstructure, and is
unlikely to experience severe
turbulence even though the helideck
will usually be downwind. Pilots will
have good visual cues for approach
and landing.
Bad: Gas turbine exhausts pointing

down over the side may cause clouds
of rising hot gas to envelop the
helideck and helicopter approach path.
This is particularly likely to happen in
light wind conditions. If a shuttle tanker
can connect to the stern of the FPSO,
then the shuttle tanker may violate the
helideck obstruction-free sector and
the 5:1 falling gradient.
153
Good: The helideck cantilevered over
the port side of the vessel gives a clear
approach and overshoot path that is
free of obstructions and should be
largely clear of turbulence for head
winds. There will also be good visual
cues for the pilot.
Bad: The highly offset or overhanging

helideck location means that vessel roll
motion will be manifest at the helideck
as heave motion and, depending on
the roll characteristics and wave
conditions experienced, might severely
limit helicopter operability. A shuttle
tanker can connect to the stern of the
FPSO, and when present is likely to
violate the helideck obstruction-free
sector.
Good: Good visual cues and clear

approach path for head winds.
Bad: The helideck is mounted

relatively low, and in the wake of the
main superstructure. As a result
landing helicopters are likely to
experience turbulence, and a sharp
reduction in wind speed leading to loss
of lift. Any shuttle tanker connected to
the stern of the FPSO is likely to
violate the helideck obstruction-free
sector and the 5:1 falling gradient.
154
10.9 METHODS OF DESIGN ASSESSMENT
10.9.1 Introduction
The environmental effects described in this section are influenced by the wind and
wave conditions experienced by the offshore installation. Clearly these weather
conditions vary from day to day in a largely unpredictable way.
However, wind speeds and wave heights are both amenable to statistical analysis,
and data can be obtained which describe their statistical properties. These data
can be used with information about the flow patterns around the platform, and the
platform wave motions to:
• Estimate the likely helideck operational downtime

• Locate the helideck in the best location on the installation to minimise
helideck downtime
• Determine the best compromises between conflicting requirements.
The following sections outline methods of assessing the installation properties

(from experience, from wind tunnel tests and other modelling methods - see
Sections 10.9.2.1 and 10.9.2.2), the key statistical properties of the offshore ocean
climate (see Sections 10.9.3 and 10.9.4), and how they can be used together to
estimate operability and inform the design process (Section 10.9.6), and in
reporting any likely operating limitations to helicopter operators (see Section
10.10).
10.9.2 Wind Flow Assessment
10.9.2.1 Expert Visual Inspection
The main factors that influence the wind flow conditions over the helideck are the
prevailing wind direction and the location of the helideck relative to this direction.
Ideally, the helideck should be located so that, for the prevailing wind direction, it is
upwind of major obstructions such as drilling derricks and gas turbine exhausts. In
this way, for the majority of the time, the turbulent wake flows and high
temperature gas plumes will be blown away from the helideck and away from the
helicopter flight path.
Assessment can be made in a qualitative manner by expert review of the

installation topsides and helideck design in conjunction with information on the
prevailing wind directions. This may be appropriate in the very early stages of
design, and it may be possible to make an upper estimate of the helideck
155
downtime on this basis. However, in most cases it is preferable to obtain a
quantitative measure using flow assessment (Section 10.9.2.2), the wind climate
(Sections 10.9.3 and 10.9.4), and a calculation of the helideck downtime (Section
10.9.6).
10.9.2.2 Detailed Flow Modelling using Wind Tunnels and/or CFD
Wind tunnel testing and CFD are the principal tools available for predicting the flow
field around a helideck.
Wind Tunnel Tests

The main objectives of wind tunnel tests in the context of helideck design are to
predict the mean velocity and turbulence intensity components as well as the
mean and peak temperature rises for a range of wind angles and heights above
the helideck. Comparison of the results can then be made with the design
guidance.
The model scale should be sufficiently large to incorporate an adequate level of

geometrical detail to reproduce the correct local flow features around the platform.
Typical model scales that can achieve this are in the range of 1:100 to 1:200. At
these scales the discrepancies in flow patterns between full-scale and model-scale
are generally small.
The model scale should, however, be sufficiently small to minimise the blockage of
the model on the wind tunnel flow. A high blockage would result in the airflow over
the platform being adversely affected by the walls of the wind tunnel. It is
recommended that the frontal area of the model should not exceed 10% of the
cross sectional area of the tunnel working section.
The wind tunnel should accurately simulate boundary layer velocity and turbulence
profiles representative of the full-scale marine atmospheric wind flow. Target
profiles often used in offshore studies have been defined by NMD [Ref: 65]. Wind
tunnels designed to simulate atmospheric boundary layers tend to have very long
working sections to enable the boundary layer to be developed and controlled.
Such wind tunnels should also have a reasonable length of working section
continuing downsteam of the model to enable measurements of decaying
temperature or turbulence to be made at least one platform diameter downwind.
In modelling buoyant hot gas plumes, it is necessary to match the ratios of the
exhaust density to ambient density, the exhaust velocity to wind speed and the
plume inertia force to gravitational force to maintain similarity between the model
scale and full-scale exhausts. The latter ratio links velocity with buoyancy and
156
implies that the model test velocities have to be scaled as the square root of the
model scale (Froude scaling). For example, for a model scale of 1:100, a full-scale
wind speed of 10 m/s is represented by a model test wind speed of 1 m/s. This
scaling requirement imposes a practical limit on the model scale for a specific wind
tunnel facility, and the ability to run at low speeds with good stability is often
important.
The correct density ratio can be achieved in two ways. Heated air can be used
where the model release temperature is equal to the full-scale temperature. There
are practical disadvantages associated with this method in setting the high
temperatures of around 500°C in a wind tunnel. A practical alternative is to
release a buoyant gas mixture (e.g. helium-air) at ambient temperature with a
density equal to that of the full-scale exhaust plume. The local density decay of
the gas mixture is used as a direct analogue of the temperature decay. Any gas
mixture can be used provided that there is a convenient way to measure its
concentration.
The measurement of wind speeds above the helideck should be carried out using
instrumentation capable of resolving velocity and turbulence components. Hot
wire anemometry is the most widely used technique although laser anemometry is
an alternative.
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)

CFD methods allow engineers to model the behaviour of three dimensional,
turbulent, fluid flows by computer. The fundamental aim of CFD is the solution of
equations representing the conservation of mass, fluid momentum and energy,
throughout a computational domain which contains a geometrical model of the
object of interest (e.g. an offshore platform), and is contained within boundaries
upon which known values or behaviours of the flow can be defined (boundary
conditions).
Solutions are achieved within a defined computational domain using numerical

techniques. Among commercially available CFD computer programs, the so-called
finite volume method has become the most popular, mainly for reasons of
computational speed, versatility and robustness compared to other numerical
techniques. As its name suggests, the domain of interest is sub-divided into many
smaller volumes or elements to form a three dimensional grid. Volume averaged
values of fluid variables are located at points within this grid, and local numerical
approximations to the conservation equations used to form a very large system of
coupled, simultaneous equations. When known boundary conditions are applied,
these equations can be solved to obtain averaged quantities for each variable at
every grid point in the flow domain.
157
The extents of the computational domain should be sufficiently large to avoid any
numerical influence of these boundaries on the flow around the platform in
accordance with best practice guidelines [Ref: 61]. Typically, this should extend
several platform diameters away from the object of interest in all directions with an
extended computational domain in the downstream wake region. A marine
atmospheric boundary layer profile of velocity and turbulence should be generated
at the upstream boundary and maintained throughout the computational domain
using suitable roughness properties for the sea.
To obtain good quality CFD solutions, a sufficient number of finite volumes (grid
density) must be used, and their ‘quality’ must be such that the numerical
approximations used retain their formal mathematical accuracy. The grid density
should be sufficient to fit both geometrical features and flow behaviour (such as
shear layers and eddies). The overall aim is to achieve, as closely as practicable,
so-called ‘grid-independent’ solutions of the numerical formulations of the mass,
momentum and energy conservation equations. This becomes more difficult, of
course, as the Reynolds Number and the range of geometrical scales is increased.
Many engineering flows, including platform aerodynamics, are dominated by the

effects of turbulence. There is no single turbulence model that applies universally
to all flows. However there are a number of approaches for engineering
applications that have known ranges of validity and can be used with good
judgement. It is, nevertheless, best practice to validate CFD results by comparison
with physical measurements, or to follow procedures that have been established
as valid in this way [Ref: 61].
Direct and Large Eddy Simulation techniques have shown potential to predict
turbulence with reasonable accuracy but are not practical for helideck design due
to the excessive computing power and simulation time required. The most
common approach is to use a RANS turbulence model in which time averaged (or
occasionally ensemble averaged, for transient flows) values of the flow quantities
are solved. The role of the turbulence model is twofold. Firstly, it modifies the
mean flow field velocities, pressures and temperatures, and secondly it provides a
measure of the turbulence within the flow. Most commonly, this takes the form of
the turbulent kinetic energy and the dominant length or time scale of the energy
containing eddies. Both can be directly related to simple statistical properties of the
turbulence.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Modelling Techniques

Both CFD and wind tunnel testing can provide key information for the design of
offshore helidecks. The main strengths and weaknesses of each can be
summarised as (assuming best practice in each case):
158
• On balance, wind tunnel tests can provide reliable flow data for the safe
design of particular helidecks, whereas CFD is a tool best employed to
provide guidance on the effect of design variations and local flow features
• Wind tunnel testing will give, directly, measured data for turbulent
fluctuations, such as peak values, necessary for comparison with helideck
design guidance
• Extracting quality estimates for turbulence data from CFD requires

specialist expertise in application and interpretation
• Wind tunnel tests for helideck wind flows are normally not affected by
modelling at small model scale (Reynolds Number effects), but care
should be taken to ensure that this is the case and to suitably condition
the experiments if necessary
• CFD can provide results at full-scale flow conditions and hence model
consistently buoyancy (Froude Number) and turbulence (Reynolds
Number) effects
• Although some comparisons with full-scale measurements have been

made, neither technique can be said to have been fully validated at full
scale
• CFD results are available for the entire flow field. Wind tunnel data is
available at the instrumented measurement locations, although a large
number of measurements can be obtained in a relatively short period of
time
• Used without sufficient training and experience of the problem in hand,

poor quality spurious results are easy to achieve with CFD, and the
accessibility of this tool makes this, perhaps more likely, than with wind
tunnel testing.
159
10.9.2.3 Helideck Environment Report Contents
The helideck environment report should contain the following information as a

minimum:
Wind Tunnel Report

• Details of model design and construction including reasoning for the
choice of model scale and associated scaling parameters for replicating
full-scale flow conditions
• Details of wind tunnel set-up, instrumentation, instrument calibration,

model set-up and data acquisition system
• Details of the atmospheric boundary layer simulation and comparison of

mean velocity and turbulence intensity profiles above sea level with
standard target marine profiles (e.g. ESDU, NMD [Ref: 65]).
Measurements should be obtained at the model position without the
model installed
• Details of scaling techniques used and experimental conditioning applied

to achieve similarity with full-scale, e.g. enhanced model roughness to
achieve Reynolds Number similarity
• Tabular and graphical presentation of measured data in accordance with

the recommendations in Section 10.10
• Conclusions and recommendations to mitigate any adverse conditions

that may impact on helicopter operations
• Details of quality checks undertaken to ensure the accuracy of measured

data and appropriate reference to guidelines on model scale experiments
• A statement on the estimated error and uncertainty in the experimental

data.
Computational Fluid Dynamics Report

• Details of the CFD model with reasoning for the choice of computational
domain, geometrical simplifications, computational mesh, modelling
assumptions, sub-models (e.g. turbulence model, bulk resistance terms)
and range of validity of the sub-models employed
160
• Details of boundary conditions including the atmospheric boundary layer
at the inlet, heat sources and surface roughness parameters (e.g. sea and
platform surfaces)
• Comparison of the atmospheric boundary layer profiles of mean velocity

and turbulence intensity above sea level with standard target marine
profiles (e.g. ESDU, NMD [Ref: 65]). Data should be extracted from the
undisturbed free stream at a location approximately the same distance
from the upwind boundary as the model of the facility
• Demonstration of adequate mesh independence through grid resolution

sensitivity tests
• Demonstration of adequate convergence of the final steady-state solution

or iterative transient solution at each time step
• Tabular and graphical presentation of the simulations in accordance with

the recommendations of the helideck design guide (see Section 10.10)
• Conclusions and recommendations to mitigate any adverse conditions

that may impact on helicopter operations
• Details of quality checks undertaken to ensure the validity of the

computational results including comparisons with available experimental
data or empirical methods and appropriate references to best practice
guidelines
• A statement on the estimated error and uncertainty in the numerical

results.
10.9.3 Wind Climate
The wind climate is a description of the probability of experiencing certain wind

speeds and directions. It can be used to determine quickly if the wind climate is
benign or harsh, and if there are any strongly prevailing wind directions.
The severity of the wind climate is important because, the more severe, then the
more likely that turbulence and hot gasses from high exhaust stacks will be a
problem. In benign climates turbulence is unlikely to be a problem but hot gases
might still be a hazard, especially if downward facing exhausts have been utilised.
161
An example set of wind speed / direction frequency statistics is shown in Figure
10.11. The example is for a Northern European location, and it should be noted
that different geographic locations are likely to have very different wind speed and
direction distributions. The entries in the table represent percentage annual
duration for each wind direction and wind speed interval. In this case, the most
probable wind direction is south with a total duration of 16.5%. This means that for
16.5% of the year, or 60 days, the winds will be from the southern sector.
The right hand column also shows that this is a relatively severe wind climate with
the wind speed (expressed here as Beaufort number) being at Beaufort 7 or above
for about 14% of the time.
Beaufort Wind direction (from)
Number
N NE E SE S SW W NW Var Total
0 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0.3 0.5
1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.5
2 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.2 1.0 0.2 7.0
3 2.1 1.3 1.3 1.5 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.4 0+ 15.5
4 2.8 1.5 1.5 2.0 3.4 3.2 3.0 3.6 21.1
5 2.7 1.0 1.8 2.3 4.2 3.6 3.4 3.5 22.5
6 1.8 0.6 1.6 2.1 3.4 3.3 2.7 2.5 18.0
7 0.9 0.2 1.1 1.3 1.8 2.0 1.4 1.1 9.8
8 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 3.3
9 0+ 0+ 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7
10 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0.1
11 0+
12
Total 11.6 5.7 8.8 10.5 16.5 16.1 14.9 14.9 1.0 100
Figure 10.11 - Example of wind speed / direction frequency table.
This information is sometimes presented graphically in the form of a wind rose

(see Figure 10.12).
162
Figure 10.12 – Example wind rose presentation of Table 10.11
10.9.4 Prevailing Wind Direction
The wind frequency table or the wind rose can be used to identify the prevailing
wind directions. These may be defined as the highest probability directions with a
combined probability of occurrence of approximately 50%. For example taking the
data in Figure 10.11 we can rank the directional sectors as follows:
Wind Direction (from) Probability Cumulative
South (157.5° – 202.5°) 16.5% 16.5%
South-West (202.5° – 247.5°) 16.1% 32.6%
West (247.5° – 292.5°) 14.9% 47.5%
North-West (292.5° – 337.5°) 14.9% 62.4%
Figure 10.13 - Prevailing wind directions.
The prevailing wind directions are therefore defined to be in the range 157.5° to
292.5° with a cumulative probability of 47.5% (or 173 days in the year).
163
NOTE: It should be noted that wind directions are invariably defined in terms of
the direction that the wind blows FROM. However, occasionally such data
may be presented as directions TO (often to be consistent with wave
direction data, which is usually presented in this way). If there is any
doubt about the direction definition then it is essential that the data be
checked with the authority that generated or published it. An error of 180o
in determining the prevailing wind directions is likely to be disastrous for
helideck operability.
10.9.5 Upwind Helideck Location
When a pilot selects his approach direction to an offshore helideck he will take into
account a number of considerations such as:
• Direct approach wherever possible

• Clear overshoot available
• Sideways / backwards manoeuvring minimised
• Turbulence effects
• Right versus left seat pilot.
The balance (or relative weighting) between these considerations will change
depending on the wind speed. For example, if the turbulence is low, a pilot could
prefer to make a straight-in approach downstream of an obstacle rather than fly a
sideways manoeuvre. Hence there could be a trade-off between turbulence and
sideways and backwards manoeuvring, related to wind strength.
However, generally the helideck should be located such that winds from the
prevailing directions carry turbulent wakes and exhaust plumes away from the
helicopter approach path. To assess if this is likely to be the case, overlay the
prevailing wind direction sectors onto the centre of the helideck. Figure 10.14 to
Figure 10.17 give examples ranging respectively from most to least favourable
helideck locations for a platform with prevailing winds from the southwest.
Major items of obstruction, including drilling derricks and exhaust stacks should be
outside the areas embraced by these sectors as shown in the figures. If they are,
then conditions at the helideck are likely to be compliant for 50% of the time. If
obstructions are located within the prevailing wind sectors, then the following
options should be explored:
• Rotate the platform to adjust the prevailing wind sectors

• Relocate the obstructions
• Relocate the helideck.
164
If none of these are successful, then a more detailed assessment is required, and
an aerodynamic specialist should be consulted.
To minimise the effects for other wind directions, then obstructions should be
located as far away as possible from the helideck. In the case of the exhaust
stacks, these should be sufficiently high to ensure that the plumes are above the
helicopter approach path. To achieve this, it is recommended that the exhaust
outlets be no less than 20-30 m above the helideck.
NORTH
EAST
All obstruction locations
acceptable
WEST
292.5 degrees
SOUTH
Prevailing directions
157.5 degrees
Figure 10.14 - Most favourable helideck location is at the south corner. Regardless
of the location of the obstruction, the southwest prevailing winds will carry turbulent
wakes and exhaust plumes away from the helideck. The location also allows into-
wind approaches to be flown by the Captain for most prevailing wind directions with
minimum sideways manoeuvring and a clear overshoot path.
165
NORTH
292.5 degrees
WEST
All obstruction locations
acceptable
EAST
157.5 degrees SOUTH
Figure 10.15 - Second most favourable helideck location is at the west corner. Like
the south location, prevailing winds will carry turbulent wakes and exhaust plumes
away from the helideck. However, the location will require extensive sideways
manoeuvring on approach for many prevailing wind directions.
Acceptable obstruction
NORTH location
292.5 degrees
Prevailing directions EAST
WEST
157.5 degrees
Unacceptable
obstruction location
SOUTH
Figure 10.16 - Third most favourable helideck location is at the east corner. About
half the prevailing wind directions will carry turbulent wakes towards the helideck.
The location permits clear into-wind approaches to be flown but many prevailing
wind directions will have an obstructed overshoot path.
166
292.5 degrees NORTH
Acceptable obstruction
location
EAST
WEST
Unacceptable
obstruction location 157.5 degrees
SOUTH
Figure 10.17 - Least favourable helideck location is at the north corner. Like the
east location, about half the prevailing wind directions will carry turbulent wakes
towards the helideck. The location permits clear into-wind approaches to be flown
but many prevailing wind directions will have an obstructed overshoot path.
10.9.6 Estimating Helideck Downtime Due to Wind
The installation flow studies outlined in Section 10.9.2.2 are likely to identify
combinations of wind speed and direction which result in flow conditions over the
helideck that do not comply with the guidance requirements (0.9m/s downdraft,
2oC temperature rise etc.). Ultimately the wind speed and direction conditions that
lead to these will need to be communicated to the helicopter operator (see Section
10.10).
However, in these circumstances it is important to estimate the likely severity of

the flight limitations. It may be that they will be sufficiently limiting to operations
that the cost to the field operator will be too high (this cost being experienced in
terms of flights that cannot operate when required, and payloads that are less than
maximum). This operating penalty may be avoidable if design changes are made
to the helideck, its location or to other installation topside features (e.g. turbine
exhausts). These changes may involve additional capital costs that need to be
assessed against the operating penalty.
A rational decision can be made about such design changes if a quantitative

estimate of the helideck downtime is made and presented to the platform operator.
167
A wind speed and direction frequency table (see example in Figure 10.18) can be
used to make the estimate of downtime.
On the frequency table highlight all combinations of wind speed and direction that
flow studies have indicated will not fulfil the guidance requirements. Adding up all
the highlighted values will give the estimate of the total percentage of the time that
the helideck will be unavailable for flight operations or where payload limitations
may be imposed.
Beaufort Wind direction (from)

Number
N NE E SE S SW W NW Var Tota
l
0 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0.3 0.5
1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.5
2 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.6 1.2 1.0 0.2 7.0
3 2.1 1.3 1.3 1.5 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.4 0+ 15.5
4 2.8 1.5 1.5 2.0 3.4 3.2 3.0 3.6 21.1
5 2.7 1.0 1.8 2.3 4.2 3.6 3.4 3.5 22.5
6 1.8 0.6 1.6 2.1 3.4 3.3 2.7 2.5 18.0
7 0.9 0.2 1.1 1.3 1.8 2.0 1.4 1.1 9.8
8 0.3 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.4 3.3
9 0+ 0+ 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7
10 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0+ 0.1
11 0+
12
Total 11.6 5.7 8.8 10.5 16.5 16.1 14.9 14.9 1.0 100
Figure 10.18 – Example wind frequency table showing estimation of total downtime.
In the example the total of the highlighted cells is 14.3% indicating that, on
average, helideck restrictions may apply 1 day in 7. The direct cost and
associated inconvenience of these flight limitations can only be determined by the
field operator. If necessary similar assessments may be made on a seasonal
basis.
168
10.10 PRESENTATION OF WIND FLOW ASSESSMENT RESULTS
10.10.1 General
The results of wind flow assessment are used at two quite distinct stages of the
development of an offshore installation design.
In the first instance the results are used in design. They may be used to justify
changes to the layout to the installation superstructure and helideck location, and
they may be used to estimate the future operability of the helideck. This requires
detailed tabulations and plots of the aerodynamic features around the helideck,
and Section 10.10.2 below contains recommended formats for the presentation of
these results, and guidance on the range of different wind conditions and other
parameters that should be covered.
When the design process is complete, and any changes have been taken into
account, there is a need to summarise and present the data to the helicopter
operators and pilots through BHAB Helidecks. This ultimately needs to be a
concise assessment of the flow modelling results, interpreted in terms of the
restrictions that will need to be placed on flight operations. Section 10.10.3
contains recommended formats for the presentation of this summary information to
operators and pilots.
10.10.2 Presentation of Flow Assessment Results for Design
Data on helideck flow assessment takes a number of different forms, those with
defined limiting criteria being:
• Downdraft velocity data measured at 25m/s free stream velocity, and

compared with a 0.9m/s recommended limiting criterion
• Air temperature data, compared with the 2oC above ambient

recommended limiting temperature criterion.
In the future this is likely to be augmented by:
• Turbulence intensity compared with a recommended turbulence criterion.
Although no formal criteria currently exist, it is also sometimes helpful to present:
• Longitudinal velocity data at 25m/s free stream velocity (an indication of

the extent of shear in the flow).
169
There are a number of key issues that should be appreciated when this data is
presented, and is plotted or tabulated in terms of wind heading:
• The convention is that wind headings are always presented in terms of the
heading FROM which the wind is blowing. Nevertheless, labelling of
tabulations and plots should always include the words wind direction
(from) in order to remove any chance of misunderstanding
• The heading reference being used should always be explicit on every

tabulation and plot
• For fixed platforms in the early phases of design it may be convenient and
useful to present results in terms of headings relative to Platform North.
However, in later stages when data is being used in operability
assessments, or is being prepared for the production of a summary for
operations (see Section 10.10.3), then it is likely to be much more useful if
presented in terms of True North
• Installations such as mobile drilling rigs and FPSOs that can change their
heading as a result of the weather conditions or for operational purposes
should have their wind heading data presented relative to their primary
axis. Again the direction of this primary axis should be explicit
• In all the above, a small annotated plan view sketch alongside the table or
plot should be used to avoid any possibility of misunderstanding by the
reader.
It is recommended that data is presented at two levels, firstly a detailed level which
shows quantitatively the parameters of interest in relation to the acceptance criteria
(see Figures 10.19, 10.20 and 10.21 below), and secondly at a simpler summary
level, which illustrates the extent of non compliance with the limiting criteria as a
function of wind speed and direction (see Figures 10.22 to 10.24).
The tabular presentation of the data should comprise results from a polar survey
taken above the landing spot together with results from lateral surveys. The lateral
surveys should correspond to the worst-case wind directions identified in the polar
surveys. Typical examples of a tabular presentation are shown in the tables in
Figures 10.19 and 10.20.
The tables show results for peak temperature rise at a wind speed of 5 m/s but a
similar format should be used for other parameters. Empty cells evident in Figure
10.19 indicate where it was judged that measurements were not required. This is
170
often an easy judgement to make for temperature assessments but less so for
downdraft and turbulence. Consequently for downdraft and turbulence
measurements, a full range of wind direction should be tested.
For temperature rise measurements, results should be presented for a range of

reference wind speeds e.g. 5, 10, 15 and 20 m/s. This is because temperature
rise has an unpredictable dependence on reference wind speed. In contrast,
downdraft and turbulence can be re-scaled for any wind speed. For this re-scaling,
a reference wind speed of 25 m/s, taken to be a practical upper limit for helicopter
operation, is suggested.
To supplement the tables, it is recommended that the lateral survey results be

presented also as a contour plot as shown in Figure 10.21.
To highlight the wind conditions in which design criteria are exceeded it is

recommended that summary data be presented to provide an immediate visual
indication. Examples of such presentations for downdraft, temperature rise and
turbulence data are shown respectively in Figures 10.22, 10.23 and 10.24. In
these figures, the radial axis is the reference wind speed and the circumference
axis denotes wind direction (from), with respect to Platform North. The absence of
shading indicates compliance with the criteria.
171
Wind speed at 10 m = 5 m/s
z (m) z (m) Z (m) z (m) z (m) z (m)
Wind direction 5 10 15 20 25 30 MAX
(degrees from Platform N) 3 - second peak temperature °C
0
15
30 5.2 4.3 8.6 5.9 0.1 0.1 8.6
45 11.8 8.3 9.3 4.1 0.1 0.1 11.8
60 9.7 8.3 8.8 5.5 0.3 0.4 9.7
75 3.4 2.2 5.1 2.2 0.3 0.2 5.1
90
105
120
135
150
165 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
180 1.9 1.5 1.6 0.2 0.0 0.0 1.9
195 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1
210 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9
225 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
240
255
270
285
300
315
330
345
NOTE: Empty cells denote where measurements were judged to be unnecessary.

For temperature rise data, similar tables would be included for other wind speeds
e.g. 10, 15 and 20 m/s
Figure 10.19 - Polar Scan of 3 second peak temperature rise above landing spot
172
Wind speed at 10 m = 5 m/s
Wind direction (degrees from Platform N) = 45
z (m) z (m) z (m) z (m) z (m) z (m) z (m)

Y (m) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
3 - second peak temperature °C
-25 0.5 1.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2
-20 0.5 1.0 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2
-15 0.7 1.3 3.2 3.9 0.2 0.4 0.2
-10 2.2 4.6 6.7 5.9 3.5 0.3 0.4
-5 4.1 7.9 7.4 8.7 5.2 0.3 0.3
0 5.8 11.8 8.3 9.3 4.1 0.1 0.1
5 2.3 6.5 9.1 8.5 8.3 2.0 0.3
10 1.9 5.0 7.7 10.0 5.4 0.4 0.2
15 0.7 3.4 5.2 6.8 2.7 0.3 0.2
20 0 0.5 3.8 2.3 0.7 0.3 0.2
25 0 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3
NOTE: For temperature rise data, similar tables would be included covering the
other wind speeds and wind directions where any further local peaks were
identified.
Figure 10.20 - Lateral scan of temperature rise across the landing spot
173
Figure 10.21 - Plot of 3 second peak temperature rise above landing spot; Wind
speed at 10 m = 5 m/s; Wind direction (degrees from Platform N) = 45. For
temperature rise data, similar charts would be included covering the other wind
speeds and wind directions where any further local peaks were identified.
Figure 10.22 - Recommended presentation of downdraft data. The radial axis

denotes reference wind speed in m/s. Shaded bands denote the reference wind
speed at which the critical value is exceeded. The circumference axis denotes wind
direction (i.e. wind from), with respect to Platform North.
174
2-5°C
5-10°C
15-20°C
Figure 10.23 - Recommended presentation of temperature data. The radial axis

denotes reference wind speed in m/s. The circumference axis denotes wind
Figure 10.24 - Recommended presentation of turbulence data. The radial axis

denotes reference wind speed in m/s. Shaded bands denote the reference wind
speed at which the critical value is exceeded. The circumference axis denotes wind
175
10.10.3 Presentation of Flow Assessment Results for Operations
This section contains recommended formats for the presentation of a summary of

the helideck flow assessment interpreted in terms of the operational restrictions
that will need to be placed on flight operations.
This presentation should be prepared for each installation by a person competent

in the interpretation of the wind flow data in terms of helicopter operations. It
should then be submitted to BHAB Helidecks, together with the supporting detailed
flow assessment results (presented as in Section 10.10.2). It is anticipated that
BHAB Helidecks will then review the information, make any changes deemed
necessary to the summary presentation, and then issue this summary to the
helicopter operators.
It is intended that the presentation should be complementary to the Route Guide

(e.g. Aerad Plate), which currently provides the pilot with concise information on
the physical layout of the installation, together with navigational and radio
frequency information.
The requirements for this information are somewhat different if the installation is
fixed at a particular heading, as is the case for fixed jacket platforms, semi-
submersible production or drilling platforms, tension leg platforms etc., or if the
installation is an FPSO or mobile drilling unit which changes its heading according
to the weather and/or operational needs. Consequently two examples are
provided. In Figure 25 an example is given of a presentation for a fixed platform,
whilst Figure 26 contains an example for an FPSO.
176
Figure 10.25 - Example summary presentation of environmental limits for a fixed platform.
177
Figure 10.26 - Example summary presentation of environmental limits for an FPSO.
178
10.11 WAVE MOTION ASSESSMENT
10.11.1 Wave Induced Motion Estimates
The motion characteristics of a vessel or floating platform may be reliably predicted

by recourse to well-established computer models, or to physical model testing. In
either case the results are invariably presented in terms of linear transfer functions.
The transfer function contains an amplitude and phase component, and the
amplitude is often referred to as a Response Amplitude Operator (RAO). An
example response amplitude operator is given in Figure 10.27.
Figure 10.27 - Example Response Amplitude Operator (RAO).
Provided that transfer functions have been derived for all six motion components
(roll, pitch, yaw, sway, surge and heave) for a vessel at a defined reference point
(often at the centre of gravity, or amidships at the waterline), then RAOs can be
readily calculated for any helideck location on the vessel.
Using specialist software this data can be combined with wave climate data (see
Section 10.12.1) and limiting motion criteria (see Section 10.12) to derive
quantitative helideck downtime estimates (see Section 10.13).
179
10.12 WAVE CLIMATE
The probability of encountering a given combination of significant wave height and

period is defined using a ‘wave scatter table’, which describes the proportion of
time when the significant wave height and period lie within specified ranges. Wave
scatter tables for open-water sea areas may be obtained from standard reference
texts or computer databases (see example in Figure 10.28). Wave scatter tables
for specific locations (especially local in-shore conditions) should be obtained from
specialist metocean sources.
Wave Scatter Table

Worldwide Database , Sea Area 25, Jan - Dec , East
Sig Hgt Obs

(m) 28 167 323 278 140 49 13 3 1 1000
> 14
13 to 14
12 to 13
11 to 12
10 to 11
9 to 10
8 to 9 1
7 to 8 1 1 2
6 to 7 1 1 2 1 5
5 to 6 2 4 4 2 1 14
4 to 5 1 7 12 10 5 2 37
3 to 4 5 22 33 24 10 3 1 98
2 to 3 1 19 66 77 44 15 4 1 226
1 to 2 5 62 140 112 46 12 2 381
0 to 1 21 80 85 38 9 2 235
<4 4~5 5~6 6~7 7~8 8~9 9 ~ 10 10 ~ 11 11 ~ 12 12 ~ 13 > 13
Zero Crossing Period (s)
Figure 10.28 - Example wave scatter table.
Wave scatter tables defined on an ‘all-year’, ‘all-directions’ basis may be adequate

for vessels that are to operate at all times of year and whose motions are relatively
insensitive to heading (e.g. semi-submersible drilling vessels). Wave scatter
tables for directional sectors are needed in cases where vessel motions vary with
relative wave heading (e.g. ships), but the manner of analysis will vary depending
on whether the vessel heading is fixed or varies with the direction of the weather.
The vessel heading relative to waves should be considered in cases where the
vessel weathervanes, or operates under heading control (see Section 10.6).
10.12.1 Limiting Motion Criteria
Limiting motion criteria for landing a helicopter on a floating platform are at present
usually defined in terms of maximum heave, roll and pitch motions. Large heave
motions can make it difficult for the pilot to control the final stages of landing and
rate of descent at touchdown, and large accelerations can cause sliding across the
deck or a tendency to overturn. The motions used in this analysis must represent
the motions of the helideck (rather than the motions of the vessel at its centre of
gravity).
180
The maximum motion experienced during a given time interval depends not only
on the sea state, but also on the particular sequence of waves that occurs, and on
the length of the time interval. Significant variations in maximum motions often
occur between one sample time interval and another. The limiting motion criteria
are therefore normally interpreted as specifying ‘most probable’ or ‘expected’
maximum values occurring in a 10-minute time interval (i.e. the most likely or
average value of all maxima that can occur in different randomly-sampled 10-
minute intervals). Standard formulae for estimating the most probable and
expected maximum motion in a given sea state are available, and are often
incorporated into standard vessel motion prediction programs. Motion time series
obtained from time-domain simulation programs or model tests should be
processed statistically to obtain estimates of the most probable or expected
maximum values.
Special care should be taken to determine whether maximum motions represent

‘single-amplitude’ (i.e. from the mean value to the maximum) or ‘double-amplitude’
(i.e. from minimum to maximum) values. Standard helicopter landing criteria are
usually defined in terms of maximum double-amplitude heave motions (i.e.
measured from trough to peak), but maximum single-amplitude for roll and pitch
motions (i.e. measured from the true vertical).
A new approach to measuring helideck motion based on helideck accelerations is

currently being developed [Ref: 65]. The measure of motion severity employed is
simply the acceleration in the plane of the helideck divided by the acceleration
normal to the helideck. This measure is monitored on a continuous basis over a
10-minute period and processed statistically to produce a prediction of the most
likely maximum value for the next 10 minutes; the Motion Severity Index (MSI).
When this is introduced the height of the helideck above the vessel centre of
gravity will be of greater concern since the greater this distance, the greater the
horizontal acceleration generated by a given roll motion. Maximum MSI values
may be calculated and analysed using vessel motion models and procedures
similar to those used to determine maximum heave, roll and pitch, together with
the published MSI algorithms.
NOTE: The single-amplitude roll and pitch motions must be measured from the
true vertical in order that any vessel list or trim is properly accounted for.
181
10.13 ESTIMATING HELIDECK DOWNTIME DUE TO WAVES
Estimates of the likely helideck downtime can be made by combining the

information about the helideck motion characteristics (RAOs) (see Section 10.11)
with the expected operating wave climate in the scatter table (see Section 10.12),
and the helideck motion limits (see Section 10.12.1).
The process is similar to that described for wind in Section 10.9.6, but is more
complex because it involves the three parameters (wave height, wave period and
wave direction). The helideck wave motions in each of the seastates defined in
the scatter table are estimated, and the sea state probability summed if the
motions exceed the limiting operating criteria. This sum is the total probability that
the conditions will be unacceptable. The analysis should take due account of
vessel heading, which might be fixed, or may vary with changing wave directions.
The process should be performed by a competent naval architect using the
appropriate specialised software.
Once the helideck downtime has been estimated, the vessel operator can decide
whether it is at an acceptable level or not. Helideck downtime will lead to
disruption of the vessel operations, and these will have a cost. Relocating the
helideck to a vessel location with lesser motions and thus lower downtime may be
appropriate, but it should be borne in mind that for smaller ships the limiting motion
criteria vary depending on the helideck location on the vessel. Lesser motions are
permitted for bow mounted helidecks, owing to the poorer visual cues available to
the pilot.
182
11. HELIDECK SYSTEMS
11.1 INTRODUCTION
The items that make up the whole helideck facilities package cover a wide range of
individual systems and components. Each system and its components contribute
to the overall serviceability of a helideck, which is a Safety Critical Element (SCE).
Several discipline engineers, as part of their discipline responsibilities, will often

manage the work associated with the helideck systems and components.
However, there is a pressing need to ensure this work is properly co-ordinated to
ensure that the final product is ‘a fully certified helideck’ ready for flight operations,
preferably with no operating restrictions.
The following sections deal with the various systems and components in detail, to
provide designers with practical guidance for optimising designs and operation.
11.1.1 Hazardous Area Classification and Equipment Selection
The helideck should be positioned at a safe location on an installation or group of

installations, and under normal platform operating conditions be free from any
potentially explosive atmospheres created by the platform drilling and production
processes. In this respect the helideck should be located in, and classified as a
non-hazardous area.
However, in the event of a process upset condition and where potentially explosive
atmospheres (e.g. gas release) may occur, the effects of these events on the
safety of helicopters and helideck operations should be fully taken into account in
the installation safety case. Helideck safety systems such as automatically
activated status lights or, where appropriate, equivalent 'manual' alerting systems
should be in place, along with adequate platform emergency and communications
procedures.
Although the helideck may be classified as a non-hazardous area under normal

platform operating conditions, the specification and selection of electrical
equipment used for helideck lighting systems, etc. should be suitable for use in
potentially explosive atmospheres. This should ensure that the helideck could
remain fully operational for evacuating personnel, providing prevailing conditions
around the installation and at the helideck do not prohibit helicopter operations.
183
Additionally, the specification and selection of equipment used in aviation fuel
pumping and dispensing systems should be suitable for use in potentially
explosive atmospheres and is dependent upon the system design and where each
part of the system is to be located on the helideck or elsewhere on the installation.
When developing the design and preparing specifications for procuring helideck
systems and equipment, reference should be made to the following:
• Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002

[Ref: 12]
• Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres - Approved Code of
Practice and Guidance (L138). [Ref: 19]
• HSE Operations Notice No. 58 (Jan 2003) - Dangerous Substances and
Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 - A short guide for the offshore
industry. [Ref: 28]
• HSE Operations Notice No. 59 (Jan 2003) - The Equipment and
Protective Systems Intended for Use in Potentially Explosive
Atmospheres Regulations 1996 - A short guide for the offshore industry.
[Ref: 29]
• HSE Operations Notice No. 63 (Dec 2003) - A Guide to the Equipment
and Protective Systems intended for Use in Potentially Explosive
Atmospheres Regulations 1996. [Ref: 30]
11.2 VISUAL AIDS - MARKINGS
11.2.1 Introduction
Care is necessary to ensure that all markings on the helideck follow the guidance
of CAP 437 precisely, except where otherwise agreed with the BHAB Helidecks.
Where markings are found to be incorrect, this problem may have occurred during
preparation of the initial helideck design drawings, whilst painting a new build
helideck or as a result of repainting during helideck maintenance.
CAP 437, Chapter 4.
11.2.3 Helideck Markings
All helideck markings should be properly specified in accordance with CAP 437.
184
In particular, the offshore installation or vessel identification NAME should be
adequately sized, unobstructed and clearly visible to flight crews approaching the
helideck.
The safe landing area should be identified as ONLY the area that is contained
within the white perimeter line and within the 210° unobstructed arc, and does not
include other adjacent helideck areas such as a parking area (the parking area
should be painted in a contrasting colour).
If there is any doubt about particular helideck marking requirements, or where it

considered both appropriate and necessary to deviate from the markings specified
in CAP 437, designers should first consult with BHAB Helidecks or other
specialists.
11.2.4 Installation / Helideck Identification
11.2.4.1 General
The primary objective is to provide highly visible installation / vessel identification

from the air during a helicopter’s final approach (by day and night) and thus
minimise the opportunity for ‘wrong deck’ landings [Ref: 32].
There is no requirement under aviation regulations that stipulates the use of block
numbers or other designators. This is solely a marine requirement that comes
under the jurisdiction of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency in the form of a
‘Marking Schedule’ that was previously issued by the Department of Trade, Marine
Division. These marine requirements still exist but do not have relevance to
offshore helicopter operations. Therefore, installation side signage should be
unambiguous and unique and should be located high up on the installation.
For helicopter operations, ONLY the name should be used to identify the
installation / vessel, and this should be consistent with the installation / vessel
Identification Boards. Ideally, designers should consider locating installation /
vessel name boards at high elevations where they will be more visible to an
approaching helicopter at a reasonable range from the installation / vessel.
Company logos and block numbers should NOT be used on helidecks and side
signage so that opportunities for confusion are reduced.
185
11.2.4.2 Helideck
The NAME should ideally be clearly displayed between the origin of the obstacle
free sector and the touchdown marking. The identification NAME, should be the
same as the installation or vessel AVIATION CALL SIGN and ideally this should be
reproduced on the side identification panels.
The identification marking letters / figures should clearly contrast with the
background colour of the helideck surface. For greater effect, the white markings
can be outlined in a contrasting colour (e.g. black) if it is necessary to highlight
them against the helideck ‘base’ colour.
Particularly, this may need to be done on aluminium helidecks where the natural
surface remains unpainted. Also, on ‘passive’ design helidecks, the perforated
surface will rarely provided sufficient contrast without highlighting all the markings.
CAP 437 states a MINIMUM height of 1.2 metres for the identification marking
letters / figures. Where space permits, consideration should be given to enlarging
the markings to a height of 2.0 metres with a line width of 0.4 metres.
It is essential to ensure the helideck net (when fitted) does not obscure any part of
the identification NAME.
11.2.4.3 Installation Identification Boards
It should be recognised that the retro-reflective systems currently used for

installation identification boards do not provide adequate long-range identification
for pilots, particularly at night and in poor visibility. The use of advanced lighting
technologies (i.e. high intensity, long life LEDs - Section 11.3.3.4) should be
considered for installation identification boards in order to enhance long range
identification for pilots and mariners. See CAA Paper 92006 [Ref: 45].
Where possible, designers should consider placing the side signage panels that
are used for helicopter operations at as high a level as possible on the Installation.
Suitable locations may be found on drilling derricks and other elevated structures.
186
11.2.4.4 A Common Identification Requirement
The installation identification boards, radio callsign and the helideck identification
marking should all be the same to avoid any opportunities for confusion during
operations.
11.2.5 Obstruction Markings
The objective of providing obstruction markings is to identify and highlight physical

obstructions around the helideck and the installation environs that could present a
hazard to helicopters.
Designers should pay particular attention to identifying any physical obstructions

that could present a hazard to helicopter operations and to specifying markings in
accordance with CAP 437. Obstructions requiring marking may include:
• Cranes
• Drilling Derricks
• Burner Booms
• Flare Stacks
• Communications Towers
• Gas Turbine Exhaust Support Structures
• Any structures that infringe any of the obstruction free criteria and have
been identified as a helideck restriction by BHAB Helidecks.
• Any other structures that are adjacent to potential flight paths where
marking may provide additional and beneficial visual clues to flight crews.
11.2.5.1 Paint Schemes
The paint schemes selected for marking major structural obstructions should be
properly specified including the use of special high temperature finishes for flare
stacks and gas turbine exhausts.
Gas turbine exhaust systems and their support structures often do not present a
physical obstruction to helicopters due to their inboard location. However, there is
considerable merit in marking these structures to highlight them to helicopter crews
as the source of hot emissions that may affect helicopter performance and safety.
Normally, the markings on main structural obstructions should be RED and WHITE
bands dimensioned as noted in CAP 437. However, CAP 437 does allow alternate
colour schemes.
187
Although CAP 437 makes no distinction between the types of structural obstruction
and the colour schemes to apply, it is highly recommended that any structures that
are cited as infringements to the obstruction free criteria should be marked with
BLACK and YELLOW bands.
In the case of gas turbine exhausts, BLACK and WHITE / SILVER is acceptable.
High temperature paint systems suitable for gas turbine exhaust systems tend to
have limited colour ranges.
11.3 VISUAL AIDS - LIGHTING SYSTEMS
CAP 437, Chapter 4.

ICAO Annex 14, Volume 2 (Figure 5-9 for light isocandela diagrams).
DERA Research Paper into Helideck Lighting [Ref: 66].
CAA Helideck Lighting Interim Guidance (Letter dated 17 November 2003) [Ref:
47]
NOTE: The material contained in this section largely reflects the current standards.
However, a UK CAA proposal to change the standards and recommended
practices in ICAO Annex 14 Volume 2 was presented to the ICAO Visual
Aids Panel (VAP) in December 2002 and these changes have been
accepted by ICAO and will be adopted in the next update of Annex 14
Volume 2 and the Heliport Manual.
CAA plans to implement the changes in two stages with absolute cut-off for
compliance of Stage 1 by 1 January 2008 and Stage 2 by 1 January 2010.
CAA intends to update CAP 437 starting with Stage 1, probably in 2004.
CAA is conducting further trials prior to publishing a specification for lighting

technologies suitable for the Phase 2 changes. CAA is encouraging the
industry to implement the new Stage 1 standards as soon as practical.
In essence, three main problems exist with current helideck lighting systems
and they are:
• The location of the helideck on the platform is often difficult to establish

due to the lack of visual conspicuity of the perimeter lights.
188
• Helideck floodlighting systems frequently present a source of glare and
loss of pilots' night vision on the deck, and further reduce the conspicuity
of helideck perimeter lights during the approach.
• The performance of most helideck floodlighting systems in illuminating
the central landing area is inadequate, leading to the so-called 'black
hole' effect.
Phase 1 changes comprise:
• a change of perimeter light colour from yellow to green and revision of

the associated lighting specification.
• added emphasis on ensuring that floodlighting does not present a source
of glare to pilots if it is to be retained. In most cases this can be achieved
by the deletion of existing deck level floodlighting possibly replacing it
with a high mounted (0.05D) system located within the LOS. NB: There
are exceptions to this solution and these are spelled out in the CAA
interim guidance letter dated 17 November 2003 [Ref: 47].
Proposed Phase 2 changes are:
• provision of a lit aiming circle (circle of yellow lighting) and heliport

identification 'H' marking (green lighting). These lighting systems are
likely to be LED light sources but other light sources with equivalent
performance may be acceptable.
During this period of change and prior to updating CAP 437, interim guidance
has been produced in the form of a CAA letter [Ref: 49]. However, designers
who are currently designing new helidecks and constructors who are
undertaking helideck refurbishment are strongly advised to contact the CAA
or BHAB Helidecks for the most up-to-date information and advice.
11.3.2 Considering the Offshore Lighting Environment
Particular care should be taken to check that all lighting arrangements follow
precisely the guidance of CAP 437, except where otherwise agreed with BHAB
Helidecks.
Designers of helideck lighting systems should be highly sensitive to the need to

provide good quality and reliable helideck lighting in the offshore / marine
189
environment. Failure to do so can cause flight crew severe problems when landing
and taking-off from installations and vessels at night and in poor visibility.
Providing good helideck lighting on Offshore Installations, probably more so than

on vessels, is made more difficult because of the background lighting environment.
Light pollution from the vast array of general installation lighting will often compete
with the helideck lighting and, in some cases, has the effect of overpowering the
visual cues that have been specifically provided for flight crews. See Figure 11.2.
When locating and specifying luminaires for helideck lighting systems designers
should attempt to visualise the likely results (including probable background light
pollution) from a helicopter flight crew’s perspective, both in the air on an approach
to the helideck and whilst parked on the helideck itself. The key to this exercise is
finding the right balance.
The use of computer generated luminance diagrams (usually provided by

specialist lighting supply companies) may help to establish correct levels of
helideck lighting with respect to perimeter and floodlighting.
Much of the light pollution can be physically shielded from the approaching or on-
deck helicopter if sufficient thought is given to this problem during the design
phase. The designer should always give consideration to the visual tasks to be
undertaken by helicopter flight crews during approach to an installation or vessel
and the associated visual clues and aids available during each phase of the
operation. These are given in the following table, Figure 11.1.
PHASE VISUAL TASK VISUAL CUES / AIDS
Platform Location Sensor Search Contrast of platform against sea/dark background
Platform Observe defining features Position of platform in relation to others.

Identification Outline shape of platform
Sign board.
Helideck Acquisition Search within platform structure Shape of helideck.

Colour of helideck.
Luminance of helideck (floodlighting).
Perimeter lighting.
Final Approach Detect helicopter position in 3 axes. Apparent size and change of size.
Detect rate of change of position. Orientation and change of orientation of known
features / markings/ lights.
Hover & Landing Detect helicopter position and rate of change Known features / markings.
of position in 3 axes (6 degrees of freedom) Lights.
Helideck texture.
Figure 11.1 – Visual Cues Summary (Source: DERA)
190
(Photograph courtesy of Institute of Petroleum)
Figure 11.2 – Example of typical light pollution from an offshore installation
11.3.3 Specific Requirements for NUIs
If night operations are to take place, lighting, including floodlighting, must meet the
requirements of CAP 437, in full.
Consideration should also be given to the requirements for night emergency

flights. If it is decided not to install lighting in compliance with CAP 437, no night
emergency flights may be undertaken. Therefore helicopter evacuation or
medivac night flights must not be part of the Installation safety case or the
emergency procedures.
Floodlighting of the structure, especially below the helideck should be seriously

considered. The purpose of this floodlighting is to provide flight crews with good
visual cues and to avoid the ‘floating in space’ effect often experienced at night
when approaching NUIs for landing.
191
Providing the NUI is in a condition which is safe to accept helicopter movements,
the perimeter lighting and floodlighting MAY remain on. The system may be
controlled via a light sensitive switch with a manual override operable locally, or
from an appropriate manned installation or shore base.
11.3.4 Perimeter Lighting
11.3.4.1 Objective
The primary objective of perimeter marking and lighting is to delineate the limit of
the SAFE LANDING AREA particularly on the Limited Obstacle Sector side of the
helideck. A helicopter should be able to land within this area with adequate
clearance from any obstruction on the Limited Obstacle Sector side of the deck.
11.3.4.2 Equipment Specification
To comply with the latest edition of CAP 437, perimeter lighting should not exceed
250 mm overall height above deck level and should exhibit yellow lights of 25
candelas or above at maximum three metre spacing. A full technical specification
is given in ICAO Annex 14 Volume 2 (Note: CAA is in the process of proposing
amendments to the current specification).
Over the years, several types of light fitting have been used for perimeter lighting,
some poor and others adequate. In recent years more specialised equipment has
become available. Therefore, designers are now able to specify ‘fit for purpose’
units that will comply with CAP 437 and will be robust, reliable, have extended life
tubes / filaments and be relatively maintenance free.
When required, perimeter light fittings suitable for use in hazardous atmospheres
(Zone 1 and 2) are obtainable with IP Rated enclosures suitable for immersion in
seawater (e.g. spray on vessel helidecks and fire monitor discharges).
Perimeter lights can be obtained for surface fixing or semi-recessed applications.
Where perimeter lights are used on helidecks that are likely to suffer from guano
accumulations (e.g. NUIs), they can often be fitted with low profile ‘bird spikes’ to
deter seabirds from roosting on them.
192
(Photograph courtesy of Orga BV)
Figure 11.3 – Typical Surface Mounted Perimeter Light with ‘Bird Spike’
Figure 11.4 – Typical Recessed Perimeter Light
11.3.4.3 Electroluminescent Lighting Panels (ELP)
Electroluminescent lighting panels (ELP) offer another option for helideck lighting.
These lighting panels are more suited to those applications where it is necessary
to delineate the inner extent of the safe landing area on large helidecks with
parking areas and where a surface mounted arrangement is the preferred
structural option.
193
(Photograph courtesy of QinetiQ)
Figure 11.5 – Electroluminescent (ELP) Lighting Panel
These panels have recently been demonstrated during a CAA Research Project
lighting trial to provide a very effective illuminated ‘H’. In the future, such
enhancements to offshore helideck lighting may become a requirement.
When using these light fittings it is important to ensure that the construction is
sufficiently robust for helideck applications (e.g. environmental effects) and they
can withstand the weight and abrasive effects of anticipated traffic. Suitable power
supplies and enclosure rating should also be fully considered.
A technical specification for ELP lighting is given in ICAO Annex 14 Volume 2.
11.3.4.4 Light Emitting Diode (LED) Systems
A recent innovation when designing helideck lighting is the use of LED technology.
Recent lighting trials during a CAA Research Project have established that this
technology is probably superior to ELP panels because it provides clearer visual
signals and has potentially longer operating life.
The proposed future use of these systems for illuminating the 'H' and aiming circle
awaits the development of practical equipment.
11.3.4.5 Lighting Layout
Spacing of the lighting units should, as far as reasonable practicable, be

equidistant. To achieve a regular pattern it is preferred that more light units are
added and the maximum spacing be slightly reduced.
In the case of helidecks where the perimeter lights delineate a safe landing area
that is less than the overall size of the helideck surface (e.g. there is passenger
walkway, a parking or run-off area), semi-recessed fittings or ‘ELP lights’ may be
considered more appropriate. Placing this type of fitting across that section of the
194
helideck where personnel and aircraft movements may take place will present less
obstructions and trip hazards.
11.3.4.6 Power Supply and Control
There is considerable merit in designing the supply system for perimeter lighting to
operate from two separate power circuits. Alternate lights should be supplied from
different power supplies. This has the effect of at least providing half the perimeter
lighting if there is a malfunction circuit in one of the electrical supplies.
Control of the perimeter lighting should be from a location convenient to the

Helideck / HLO office. It may also be beneficial to have the lighting activated by
‘low light’ conditions using an appropriately designed PIR system.
If the helideck and / or installation is in an unsafe condition (i.e. not fit for helicopter
operations), the helideck lighting system should be switched off.
11.3.5 Floodlighting
11.3.5.1 Objective
The objective with floodlighting on offshore helidecks is to provide flight crews with
good visual cues during the approach and landing phase and to eliminate any
‘black hole’ visual effects in the safe landing area. At night and in low light
conditions the floodlighting also provides a safer work environment for helideck
crews and for passenger movements.
NOTE: During helideck lighting field trials, as part of a recent CAA research
project, it has been noted that by making use of combinations of modern
lighting systems (LEDs and ELPs) for the helideck markings and using
green perimeter lights, good light levels and visual cues can be achieved
with reduced use of low level floodlighting.
Also, with floodlights positioned in a raised position (0.05D above the

helideck surface) at the origin of the Limited Obstacle Sector and aimed
toward the centre of the SLA, overall performance can be significantly
improved. Data presented to CAA suggests that XENON floodlights now
available for use on offshore helidecks may, in some cases (e.g. low
cultural lighting), offer enhanced performance over the current generation
of halogen systems. Trials have indicated that deck level xenon systems
may have an application on NUI’s, when to use elevated halogen
floodlighting would create an obstacle in an otherwise obstacle free
195
environment. Duty holders who select xenon systems must be particularly
careful to ensure that lights are properly aligned and adequately shielded
to prevent glare to pilots. Therefore, designers should note that the
current floodlighting requirements might change in the future.
Such a change will not eliminate the need for general helideck floodlighting for the
purposes of safe personnel movements around the helideck during on-deck
operations.
11.3.5.2 Equipment Specification & Layout
The floodlighting systems should be designed and positioned to ensure adequate

illumination without affecting pilots’ night vision.
The spectrum of the surface lighting should be such that the colours used for the
markings on the helideck can be interpreted correctly. The average light intensity
on the landing area should be at least 10 lux. The maximum ratio between the
average horizontal and minimum light intensity should be 8:1.
Figure 11.6 – Typical Helideck Floodlight
Helideck floodlighting suppliers should be requested to verify the required lighting

levels from the layout specified and using the luminaires types supplied.
Great care should be exercised in selection of the type of luminaire to be used. It

should be noted that, generally, halogen systems would have the advantage of
‘instant’ light whereas sodium type systems require time to ‘warm-up’ before they
reach full output. The use of sodium lighting in this application may be
196
problematical where the electrical system design does not make proper provision
for loss of electrical supply (e.g. during changeover from main to emergency
supply), however short-lived.
Manufacturers of floodlighting should be asked to provide a methodology for initial

setting up (the angle between fitting brackets and deck surface is critical) and
subsequent regular checking once installed. Incorrect settings may dazzle the
pilot or cause a ‘black hole’ effect.
For small installations, (e.g. satellite installations, etc.) particular attention should
be paid to the floodlighting of the structure below helideck level with downward
facing floodlights. This enhances the 'visual cues' available to pilots during night
approaches to give depth perception.
On vessels with forward mounted helidecks, difficulties may be experienced with

exposed helideck fittings (such as floodlighting) being damaged or swept away by
waves, when the vessel is underway in heavy seas.
11.3.5.3 Combined Perimeter and Floodlights
Combined perimeter and floodlights are, as their name implies, an integrated

design.
Figure 11.7 – Combined Perimeter and Floodlight
Powered by a fluorescent luminaire they offered designers (in the early years of
offshore helideck designs) a compact helideck lighting solution. However, the
extent of the beam cast by the floodlighting is very limited and will invariably give a
‘black hole’ effect.
Combined perimeter and floodlights do not meet the current ICAO uniformity and
intensity ratio requirements and are therefore unacceptable and should no longer
197
be specified. When re-working or modifying a helideck they should be replaced or
supplemented by lighting units complying with the appropriate ICAO specification.
11.3.5.4 Floodlighting on Vessel Helidecks
Floodlighting units are available with an IP Rating suitable for immersion in

seawater. However, the fixings need to be very robust to withstand damage.
In this case it may be considered prudent to locate some helideck floodlighting

units at a higher elevation to protect them (e.g. on or under the bridge apron).
If this arrangement is to be considered acceptable, the designer must be able to

demonstrate to the BHAB Helidecks that the lighting will be able to cover the safe
landing area without creating night vision ‘dazzle’ problems for the flight crews.
The positioning (direction) of the lighting units should also be fully adjustable and
there should be proper provision (e.g. shutters or a deflector) to prevent unwanted
light overspill above the units.
Similar to perimeter lights, there is considerable merit in designing the supply

system for floodlighting to operate from two separate power circuits. Alternate
lights should be supplied from different power supplies. This has the effect of at
least providing half the floodlighting if there is a circuit malfunction in one of the
electrical supplies.
11.3.6 General Lighting
11.3.6.1 Objective
The objective of installing general lighting on offshore installations and vessels and
their helidecks is to provide a safe work environment for personnel, helideck crews
and for passenger movements at night and in low light conditions.
However, providing this general installation and helideck lighting can present a
flight safety problem.
Therefore, the design, location and maintenance of general lighting requires great
care in order that flight crew night vision is not affected and the helideck visual
cues are not compromised.
198
General Installation / Vessel

The selection of Installation general lighting is normally carried out as a separate
exercise to the helideck design. This will generally mean that selection and
location of lighting units will simply take into account the need to illuminate the
installation’s external walkways, stairways, work platforms, production and drilling
areas, etc.
It is important that the helideck designer influences the manner in which the layout
of general lighting proceeds. Ideally, general lighting units, particularly floodlights,
should be positioned and directed so that they cast their light INTO the installation
thus avoiding unnecessary ‘overspill’ that may pollute potential flight paths and the
helideck.
Where floodlights are directed outboard for specific purposes (e.g. lifeboat
launching stations, installation signage, etc.) care should be taken to ensure that
‘overspill’ is minimised, without compromising the intent of the lighting requirement.
Helideck
The general lighting around a helideck is normally confined to providing adequate
illumination on walkways, stairways, monitor platforms and the parking area if one
is provided.
This lighting should ideally be to the same specification as the general installation /
vessel lighting. The location and direction of the lighting units should be designed
to minimise ‘overspill’ onto the helideck yet, at the same time, satisfactorily
meeting the primary objective.
Power Supply and Control

Where general floodlighting is used on helidecks the control of this lighting should
be accessible to the HLO in order that it can be immediately switched off at the
request of the flight crew.
11.3.7 Obstruction Lighting
11.3.7.1 Objective
Significant structures on installations and vessels that may pose a threat to

helicopters in darkness and low visibility conditions should be clearly marked with
appropriately selected and positioned obstruction lights rated as noted in CAP 437.
Structures that may require obstruction lighting include:
199
• Flare / Vent Towers and Booms
• Drilling Derricks
• Radio Masts
• Gas Turbine Exhaust support structures
• Legs on Jack-up Rigs
• Crane Jibs and ‘A’ Frames.
As a general rule, obstruction lights are positioned at the highest point on an

obstruction and, in the case of very tall structures (e.g. flare / vent towers and radio
masts) additional lights are located at approximately 10 metre intervals over the
length of the structure.
Flare towers can be a problem for locating and maintaining obstruction lights.
Figure 11.8 – Typical 10 Candela Obstruction Light
200
Figure 11.9 - Typical Twin Luminaire 50 Cd Obstruction Light
The obvious problems associated with high temperatures at the flare tip mean that
placing an obstruction light where it is subject to extreme temperatures is not a
realistic proposition. Also, with a permanently lit flare (pilot flare in operation),
there is little to be gained by installing an obstruction light at the highest point
because there should be sufficient illumination at the tip for flight crews to see and
avoid.
Therefore, if obstruction lights are to be fitted to the flare tower then the highest
location should start at an elevation where the lights will be unaffected by radiated
heat and at a point that is accessible for maintenance.
An alternative to fitting obstruction lights on the flare structure is to flood light it

from a lower elevation. For instance, on an FPSO, locating the floodlight on top of
the ‘Turret’ may provide both a convenient and effective position to achieve a good
result.
201
Accurate sighting of the floodlight(s) is required to ensure that the structure is
properly highlighted and that light ‘overspill’ that may affect pilot night vision is
avoided. Before proceeding with this alternate arrangement, it is prudent to
consult with the CAA / BHAB Helidecks and to advise them of the design intent.
Vertical Gas Turbine exhaust support structures should also be fitted with
obstruction lights to give an indication to the flight crews of the origin of the heat
source.
Obstruction lights should be specified to provide an omni-directional light that is

clearly visible to an approaching helicopter.
Where there is significant light pollution from the installation / vessel general areas
that may reduce the overall visual effects of obstruction lighting, it may be prudent
to select higher-powered units.
It is preferable to specify either dual filament light units or install the lights in pairs.
This should ensure that the installation / vessel is not rendered non-compliant for
helicopter operations at night or in low visibility conditions as a result of a filament
failure in a single light unit.
Irrespective of the type of obstruction lighting selected, it should be specified with

enclosures consistent with the hazardous area classification for the area in which it
is to be located.
Power supplies to the obstruction lights should be connected to the emergency

switchboard and ideally, to ensure the lights switch on automatically in low light
conditions, they should operate via a PIR.
11.3.8 Windsock Lighting
11.3.8.1 Objective
The windsock(s) should be illuminated with white floodlighting (without impairing

pilots vision) where the helideck is to be used at night or in weather conditions
where visibility is less than 1500 metres.
Internally illuminated windsocks are available and these are the preferred lighting
option.
202
Figure 11.10 – Example of an internally illuminated windsock
Externally illuminated windsocks provide equally good lighting but tend to be more
vulnerable to damage. In both cases the arrangement for elevating the windsock
above helideck level should be designed to allow the windsock assembly to be
safely lowered for routine maintenance, filament and sock replacement. See also
Section 11.9.4 for details about the Windsock structure and its location.
In some instances (e.g. due to its location and the available electrical power
supplies), it may be considered desirable to illuminate a windsock from a remote
light source. For this type of arrangement to be acceptable it should be clearly
demonstrated that there is an overriding need to illuminate with a remote light
source(s) and that the lighting is both effective and does not impair pilot night
vision.
Figure 11.11 – Example of external windsock lighting configuration
203
11.3.9 Status Lights
11.3.9.1 Main References

CAA Paper 98003 [Ref: 46] Note this will be superseded by CAA paper 2003/6.
CAA Status Light Interim Guidance (Letter dated 31 December 2002) [Ref: 48]
11.3.9.2 General Requirements
Provision should be made to visually warn helicopter flight crews when a helideck
is unsafe for a landing, by activating a FLASHING RED light. In the aviation
context, the internationally understood meaning of a flashing red light is:
1. To an aircraft in flight - DO NOT LAND: aerodrome not available for

landing
2. To an aircraft on the aerodrome - MOVE CLEAR OF THE LANDING

AREA.
For this reason, helidecks on offshore installations and vessels should be

equipped with the means to indicate to helicopter flight crews when a condition
exists on the installation that may be hazardous to helicopters and passengers.
Helideck status changes may arise due to process upset conditions on the
installation or vessel (e.g. impending gas release).
NOTE: Recent HSE / CAA research into the environments around offshore
helidecks has indicated that an appropriate hazard level for helicopters in
respect of a hydrocarbon gas release should be set at a maximum limit of
10% LFL (Lower Flammable Limit) anywhere in potential helicopter
operating areas.
11.3.9.3 Requirements for NUIs
All NUls should be equipped with ‘Status Lights’ to indicate to flight crews when a
condition exists on the installation that may be hazardous to the helicopter and its
occupants or the installation.
The status lights should be capable of being switched off with a manual override
locally from an appropriately manned installation or shore base.
204
11.3.9.4 System Design Objectives
The warning system should:
• Be visible to the helicopter flight crew whilst in the air and on the helideck and
preferably be located close to the helideck exits so as to be visible to
Installation personnel
• Ideally be comprised of a pair of high intensity flashing red beacons, (at-least

one of which must be visible from all possible directions of approach). In the
event that one ‘main’ unit is sufficient to achieve this operational objective, the
second unit may comprise a repeater unit suitable for local helideck status
indication. (See CAA paper 2003/6 and CAP 437 for detailed lamp output
specifications).
• Normally be automatically initiated at the appropriate hazard level and have

test and manual override functions available. The HLO should be able to
manually operate the system, in particular, there should be an in-built facility
for dimming the lights whilst a helicopter is on deck and a means of
automatically returning the main lights to full intensity to eliminate inadvertent
system operation at "dimmed" level.
• Comply with the operational requirements (minimum intensity and beam

spread) set out in the Appendix to CAA Paper 2003/6 and CAP 437 (when
revised). Main lights must have a minimum ‘typical day’ viewing range of 900
metres (detectable) and 700 metres (conspicuous) based on the current
minimum meteorological visibility of 1400 metres.
• Be connected to the emergency switchboard (preferably an UPS) and have

adequate in-built redundancy to cater for individual lamp failures along with
appropriate procedures i.e. monitoring systems, in place to mitigate partial or
total system failure.
• Comply with helideck obstacle environment criteria.
• On normally unattended installations the system must be capable of being re-

set from an adjacent manned platform or a manned shore location.
205
• Performance of status light units must have been verified using an approved
test procedure (e.g. based on FAA AC 20-74) and been subjected to testing
to validate the effective intensity of the flashing lights.
Development work has been undertaken by CAA to establish the standards to be

used for specifying helideck status lights. A Technical Specification is available in
CAA paper 2003/6 and CAP 437.
(Photo courtesy of Orga BV)
Figure 11.13a - Typical Helideck Status Light
206
(Photo courtesy of Orga BV)
Figure 11.13b – Typical Helideck Status Light (Repeater)
Designers should note that normally there should be at least two lights fixed on the
helideck perimeter or at locations nearby. However, to ensure the warning signals
can be seen from a helicopter from all approach directions, in some cases there
may be a requirement to install more than two beacons.
11.3.9.6 Operational Requirements
When status lights are installed and operational on an installation or vessel, the
operator or owner should provide relevant information (e.g., switching logic, etc.) to
the BHAB Helidecks for notification (in the HLL) to all the helicopter operators and
their flight crews.
11.4 ELECTRICAL POWER SUPPLIES
11.4.1 General Philosophy
The provision of electrical power to the various systems used on the helideck
should fully take into account the requirement to keep the helideck operational at
all times, day or night.
This is because the helideck is normally identified as a functional part of

installation or vessel emergency preparedness and as such is a Safety Critical
Element.
207
It is also very important to note that once a pilot has committed to land on an
offshore helideck, any failure of a helideck system intended to provide visual cues
(e.g. helideck lighting) or safety information (e.g. installation to helicopter
communications and status lights) will seriously compromise flight safety and
potentially jeopardise a safe landing.
NOTE: During helideck inspections it is generally found that the perimeter and
floodlights are not connected to an UPS.
Often the lights are connected to the emergency generator / switchboard

and that may take 15 to 45 seconds to come on line. Load transfer for
these systems should be immediate.
It is recommended the ‘critical’ helideck electrical systems should be designed:
• To be powered from an uninterruptible power supply (UPS)

• With two separate cable and supply systems for each of the lighting
circuits.
11.5 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS
11.5.1 General
The Offshore Installations (Prevention of Fire and Explosion, and Emergency

Response) Regulations (SI 1995/7434) require in Regulation 5 the Duty Holder to
perform an assessment which shall consist (to quote from the regulations):
a) The identification of the various events which could give rise to:
(i) a major accident involving fire or explosion; or
(ii) the need (whether or not by reason of fire or explosion) for
evacuation, escape or rescue to avoid or minimise a major
accident.
b) The evaluation of the likelihood and consequences of such events.
c) The establishment of appropriate standards of performance to be attained

by anything provided by measures for;
(i) ensuring effective evacuation, escape, recovery and rescue to
avoid or minimise a major accident, and
208
(ii) otherwise protecting persons from a major fire or explosion; and
d) The selection of appropriate measures.
With regard to helicopter emergencies, Regulation 7 requires the Duty Holder to

ensure that equipment necessary for use in the event of an accident involving a
helicopter is kept available near the helicopter landing area. The equipment
provided will also need to comply with Regulation 19(1).
In addition to the PFEER requirements, detailed firefighting requirements for a

helicopter landing area are also contained in CAP 437 and are based on
international aviation standards and recommended practices contained in ICAO
and IMO requirements.
Further references are also provided by the following UKOOA Guidelines:
• Fire and Explosion Hazard Management [Ref: 52]

• The Management of Emergency Response for Offshore Installations.
11.5.3 Firefighting Safety Goals and Objectives
The goals of a helideck firefighting / hazard control system are to achieve the
following:
1. The preservation of life and rescue of helicopter occupants in a fire or

crash situation
2. The containment and extinguishment of the fire within the crash area
3. The minimisation of exposure of helideck crews to fire and crash effects
4. The minimisation of minor incidents to prevent escalation.
The means to be provided to achieve these aims, as far as is reasonably practical,

should include equipment and facilities to allow:
1. Rapid control of running fires and pool fires in all helicopter operating wind
conditions
2. Rapid control and smoke suppression during internal helicopter fires
209
3. Rapid control of other fires likely to be encountered, e.g. engines, avionics
bays
4. Containment and security of unignited (or extinguished) fuel
5. Rapid escape from the helideck area irrespective of location of the

incident
6. Ready availability and adequate protection of crash rescue and personnel

protection equipment from weather and fire/crash effects.
Achievement of the above objectives should be the prime consideration when

selecting equipment.
Proprietary equipment can, in most cases, meet objective 1 above, with either
manual or remote operated equipment. This supposes that design, maintenance
and operation are satisfactory.
Typical methods of meeting 1, 2 and 3 are through manual intervention using

portable equipment (complementary media) or by foam / water hand lines fitted
with an adjustable nozzle.
Technical advances and changes in international protocol are affecting the

provision of complementary media and consideration should be given to proven
alternates and replacements. All equipment should ideally have adequate capacity
and discharge rates, whilst being flexible and easy to use and deployable for use
inside the aircraft and in specialist areas such as engines.
Sound design and layout of the helideck and its associated facilities will achieve
objectives 4, 5 and 6.
With particular reference to 5, failure to provide clear evacuation routes could

result in trip hazards, or a compromise of escape arrangements.
Good maintenance of equipment, adequate operating procedures and personnel

training are necessary for continued achievement of the objectives.
Helideck monitors may be positioned to allow them to cover adjacent areas of the
installation, provided that this use does not inhibit their primary function of
protecting the helideck.
210
11.5.4 Requirements of a Foam System
The need for a fixed firefighting system should be determined by assessing the
risks to personnel, the practicalities of installing and operating the system, and the
contribution the system makes to preserve life. The following factors should be
considered:
• The crewing of the installation and the practicalities of operating the

system if it is normally unattended
• The frequency of flights
• The firefighting infrastructure on the installation (firepumps)
• Legislation
• Refuelling operations.
It is generally agreed that foam systems are currently the best method of achieving
rapid control of fires involving fuel spillage.
The effectiveness of a foam system depends on five criteria:
• Speed of response
• Reliability
• Coverage
• Quantity
• Quality of the foam.
These requirements should be considered carefully when designing any system as

well as during subsequent testing and maintenance. Weather conditions should
also be taken into account.
The possibility of a helicopter adopting a less than favourable final resting position
after an incident should be taken into account.
The incident may not remain confined to the landing area and it is always possible
that the aircraft may not remain in an upright position.
11.5.5 Design Criteria for Foam Systems
Foam systems should be specified to achieve:
• Adequate coverage of the helideck safe landing area

• Adequate application rates and foam quality
• Adequate response time and duration of application
211
• Suitability for the environmental conditions including low temperatures and
strong winds.
For guidance to achieve these specifications see CAP 437 - Rescue and
Firefighting Facilities.
Lightweight foam branch lines should augment fixed systems.
11.5.6 Design Considerations for Monitor Systems
11.5.6.1 General
Monitors are the most commonly chosen method of foam application for
installation / vessel helidecks, other than NUIs. However, Deck Integrated Fire
Fighting System (DIFFS – Pop-up foam head system) may also be considered.
For further guidance on DIFFS consult the CAA.
The following points should be considered in the design of any such monitor
system:
• Manual monitors are generally more flexible than self oscillating types but
serious consideration should be given to shielding the operators from
crash effects.
• Oscillating monitors combined with remote actuation have the advantage
of unmanned operation that enhances the safety of operations during
take-off and landing. However, designs are unable to compensate for
wind direction or the specific characteristics of a particular incident, and it
is important that they be capable of rapid disengagement of the oscillating
mechanism and reversion to manual operation.
(Photograph courtesy of Angus Fire)
Figure 11.14 – Typical oscillating fire monitor arrangement
212
11.5.6.2 Numbers, Location and Operating Considerations
Numbers
The size of most helidecks will require a minimum of two monitors (if installed) but
on larger helidecks three may be necessary.
Calculations of monitor coverage and foam spread might suggest that two
monitors would be sufficient for smaller helidecks, but when wind effects and
escape route locations are taken into account, the optimum arrangement is three
monitors unless other means of providing adequate foam cover are available (e.g.
foam branch pipes or foam / water hosereels).
Location
Monitors (particularly oscillating types) should be located so that they do not inhibit
access to escape routes from the helideck and should not be located directly at the
exits.
Operating Considerations
Oscillating monitors are effective but do not always give a continuous rate of
application. On spray setting, this is not critical, but monitors with excessive dwell
times at the limit of their travel would exaggerate these effects. The monitor
settings should be regularly checked.
A nozzle pressure of less than 5.5 bar is not likely to be sufficient to overcome the
worst weather conditions likely to be encountered.
When designing a monitor system it is imperative to ensure that the overall height
of the monitors relative to the helideck surface is adequate to ensure that the foam
/ water output can be properly applied to any part of the helideck. The height
dimension should not exceed 250mm (see CAP 437). Where it becomes apparent
that the height limitation may potentially be infringed, the designer should seek the
advice of CAA or BHAB Helidecks.
Consideration should be given to specifying self-inducing foam nozzles with top

entry foam input. This arrangement should prevent contamination of the stored
concentrate.
Where adjustable inductor mechanisms are installed, it is essential to ensure the

settings are correct for the percentage compound in use. This can be assured by
fitting a locking system to the ‘change lever’.
213
Oscillating monitors should not be left pre-set on straight jet because of the
hazards to escaping personnel and the relative ineffectiveness of the agent when
applied in this manner.
Operating levers are preferred to wheels for physically actuating the monitor
controls.
Monitors should be fitted with individual isolation valves suitably protected from
potential crash damage.
11.5.6.3 Foam Type, Supply and Storage
Foam Type
The preferred compound for the helideck foam system is a low expansion, high
performance AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) which is freeze protected (to at
least -3°C, dependent on the operating region).
NOTE: When selecting suitable 'Type B' foam concentrates, duty holders should
consider the requirement stated in CAP 437 to conduct annual tests of all
parts of the foam production system including the finished foam.
The compound can be supplied in various percentages of concentration. 3% and

6% foams have a significantly greater range of acceptable operating tolerances
when compared with 1% foams and, with this in mind, UK CAA recommends,
where practical, that duty holders select a 3% or 6% Type B foam concentrate.
Supply
The system should be capable of continuously supplying foam (aspirated or non-
aspirated) for at least 10 minutes at a rate not less than that prescribed by ICAO
for Performance Level ‘B’ standard foam (e.g. 5.5 litres per square metre per
minute).
NOTE: The performance standard is currently under review by European Aviation

Authorities and may be subject to change in the future.
During helideck inspections, the HLO should be able to identify whether

the foam monitors supply aspirated or non-aspirated foam and be
knowledgeable of the delivery rate of the system.
Output of the monitors should be sufficient such that in the event of failure
of one unit the remaining units can satisfy the helideck firefighting
214
requirements for the largest helicopter certified to use the helideck. Full
details should be provided to operations.
Where foam is delivered from the monitors non-aspirated, there must be a system
for providing aspirated foam to the Safe Landing Area (SLA) at the prescribed
minimum delivery rate.
Proportioning accuracy of – 0% and +0.05% should be specified, particularly when

using 1% AFFF compound.
Ensuring an immediate firefighting response at the helideck will require a readily

available firewater supply at sufficient pressure to operate the monitors (e.g. a fire
main with quiescent pressurisation).
Storage
Many installations and vessels have, in the past, specified central foam storage
systems with either a pressurised ‘bag tank’ or pumped supply system.
The disadvantages of this type of system are:
• The helideck monitors rely entirely on a remote foam supply (some

distance from helideck)
• The system will invariably suffer a time delay getting foam to the monitor
nozzles
• Any contamination of foam concentrate in the central storage tank will

render the helideck non-operational
• A ‘one shot’ system should be avoided because the system cannot be

operated without ruining the whole charge of concentrate. It also limits
opportunities for taking foam samples for analysis.
The advantages of a centralised system are:
• Less space required for equipment on the helideck monitor / access

platforms
• Reduced foam storage tank system(s) maintenance.
215
Separate foam storage tanks located adjacent to each of the foam monitors are
preferred because they offer:
• Quicker response times for foam production
• Any contamination of concentrate should be confined to one monitor.

Thus if 3 monitors are installed and the helideck foam system is sized to
provide coverage with any 2 monitors, the helideck remains operational
• Easier replenishment of foam tanks
Disadvantages of separate foam storage tanks are:
• More space required on helideck monitor / access platforms to house the

equipment
• Additional equipment to maintain.
NOTE: A ‘Certificate of Conformity’ should be available on the installation / vessel

verifying the quality of the concentrate and foam mixture for the monitors
and supplementary systems. The systems should be tested annually and
‘finished’ foam samples should be analysed in a laboratory at regular
intervals.
Apart from the foam concentrate contained in the system(s) tankage there is a
requirement to maintain on board, sufficient drum stock to re-charge the systems.
The selection of an appropriate storage area for the back-up foam supply should
take into account potential exposure to contaminants and to adverse weather
conditions that may affect the product performance.
11.5.6.4 Remote Operation
Monitors should be capable of remote initiation if not manned during helicopter

landings.
216
Figure 11.15 - Typical monitor control panel with properly identified operating
valves for each monitor mounted externally
The controls, switches etc. for foam systems should be arranged in such a way
that the foam supply starts automatically or can be initiated at the activation point
for the monitors.
With remote operation capability, the systems can be set up prior to use so as to
avoid the necessity to operate each of the monitor valves independently before the
system can be used.
Remote activation is operationally advantageous where the number of helideck

crew members are limited. Also, if the monitors are correctly set to douse the fire
area, helideck crewmembers are potentially less exposed to the fire hazard.
11.5.7 Water / Foam Systems
The provision of a water / foam hosereel system, in addition to the monitors,

provides greater operational flexibility when dealing with an aircraft fire or aviation
fuel spillage.
217
Compact, self-contained, skid mounted units can be obtained which provide the
designer with flexibility for locating the unit on the perimeter of larger helidecks,
outwith the zones that have a height restriction.
Figure 11.16 - Typical helideck foam / water hosereel cabinet
These units are supplementary to the main system, and their output is significantly
less than a monitor. The foam making capability (supply time) will be entirely
dependent on the size of the storage tank and the foam fill.
Normally, these units come fully equipped with a jet / fog nozzle and branchpipe
and approximately 30 metres of 1½’ hose.
It is essential to ensure there is sufficient hose length available to reach around the
helideck easily. On very large helidecks hose length may need to be increased.
11.5.8 Hydrant Systems and Equipment
Hydrant systems, hoses, in-line foam inductors, foam branch pipes and nozzles
are normally provided as supplements to the foam / water monitor system.
NOTE: On helideck inspections it is sometimes found that there are insufficient

hand hose lines to reach all parts of the helideck. For ease of use the
hand lines should be approximately 1½’’ diameter.
218
Hydrants and Hoses
Hydrants with flaked hose lines are often specified as supplementary equipment to
the fire monitors. Serious thought should be given to the practical use and
application of this type of equipment if it is being considered for ‘new build’ or
modified helidecks. On older installations and vessels 2½’ diameter units were
often specified.
Nowadays, the designer should consider the operational benefits of using a 1½’
system. It should be noted that under normal operating conditions it takes two
people to control a 2½’ hose which would give the greater discharge for directing
the nozzle stream at a fire.
The positioning and selection (e.g. straight or 45° angled couplings) of hydrant
outlet types on helidecks (that are normally located on the monitor platforms) must
take into account the available space and the lay and curvature of fire hoses when
they are under pressure in a confined space.
When hydrants are specified for use in conjunction with an in-line foam inductor
(with standpipe inserted into foam drum stock) and a foam branch pipe, proper
consideration should be given to the time and effort required to assemble the
equipment and for it to be used effectively.
Flaked Hoses, nozzles, etc., should be properly stored in easily accessible,

weatherproof cabinets adjacent to the hydrants.
Foam Inductors
Foam inductors are used to proportion foam concentrate correctly into the fire
water stream. They can be mounted in a fixed position on foam storage tanks
supplying concentrate to monitors or hosereel systems. They can also be
portable, for example when used with drum stock.
NOTE: Whichever system is used it is vital that the settings are fixed to the
correct concentrate percentage (e.g. 1, 3 or 6%) to avoid inadvertent
adjustment that will inevitably degrade the quality of delivered foam.
219
Figure 11.17 – Typical example of In-Line Foam Inductors

(Note stand pipe for use with foam drum stock)
Foam Branch Pipes

Foam branch pipes (low expansion) can be used in conjunction with both hydrant
and hoses or hose reel systems.
Their purpose is to generate aspirated foam to assist with good fire control.
Branch pipes offer a flexible solution for gaining access to the seat of a helicopter
fire where monitors may not be able to direct their foam streams effectively.
Ideally, the branch pipes should be equipped with a shut off valve.
Figure 11.18 – Typical examples of low expansion foam branch pipes

(Note: these examples are not equipped with integral shut-off valves)
220
NOTE: During helideck inspections, this equipment is not always found available
at the helideck. When they are located on site, they are often poorly
maintained. Proper storage should be provided adjacent to the helideck.
Nozzles
A variety of jet / fog nozzles are available for firefighting duty. The primary
consideration when specifying them for use offshore is their ease of use and
durability.
Figure 11.19 – Typical nozzle for water / foam jet or spray application
11.5.9 Complementary Media
A variety of minor fire incidents can be encountered during helicopter / helideck

operations. These incidents may include:
• Engine fires
• Avionic bay fires
• Transmission and hydraulic area fires
• Minor fuel leaks / fires.
To deal readily with such incidents, suitable and sufficient extinguishants should be
provided as noted in CAP 437.
The media commonly used are dry powder and CO2.
221
11.5.9.1 Specification
Complementary media are readily available in portable form either hand carried
and / or trolley mounted. For the helideck, trolley mounted units provide the
quantities specified in CAP 437. However, hand portable units can be more useful
in some minor firefighting applications (e.g. within a helicopter).
It should be noted that when specifying media for engine etc. bay fires, an
extendable lance applicator should be included.
However, it is essential to check that the design of the locking ring to extend the
lance is both secure and easy to operate. This is to ensure that, when in use,
failure or inadvertent operation of the lance extension is avoided.
NOTE: During helideck inspections, it is commonly found that fire extinguishers

are poorly located and their test dates have expired.
11.5.9.2 Location
One of the main problems with trolley mounted extinguishers on helidecks is

finding good storage locations where the equipment does not infringe height
restrictions, is both accessible and easily moved onto the helideck, and can be
properly secured (particularly on moving helidecks).
NOT TO SCALE Height of

Perimeter
Safety Net
‘h’ not to exceed 250mm Trolley Mounted

Fire Extinguisher
‘h’
Helideck Surface
Figure 11.20 – Example of recessed platform for trolley mounted extinguisher
Recessed platforms can be built into the helideck perimeter at appropriate

locations, coincident with the perimeter safety net. They should be capable of
restraining the trolley when stowed but should not be too deep or too steep to
222
prevent easy manhandling of the trolley by one person. Platform width should be
kept to the minimum required for the trolley(s) in order to reduce loss of the
Perimeter Safety Net coverage.
11.5.10 Helideck Fire Detection
There is no stated requirement in CAP 437 for providing fixed fire detection on the
helideck.
The assumption is that during helicopter operations the HLO and helideck crew will
be in the immediate vicinity of the helideck and they are responsible for ensuring
an initial emergency response to fire and crash scenarios that may affect a
helicopter. After the initial helideck crew response, back-up can be obtained from
the installation / vessel fire and emergency teams, if required.
From an offshore installation / vessel operations viewpoint, the management of all

emergencies that have potential for jeopardising the safety of the installation /
vessel, must immediately be identified and centrally co-ordinated. Therefore,
providing helideck fire detection and surveillance arrangements would be
consistent with normal installation / vessel emergency control philosophies.
Consistent with normal installation and vessel fire detection and protection
practices, the helideck should be designated a fire area and be assigned an area
on the Central Fire Control Panel.
Strategically located Manual Call Points (MCPs) should be installed on the

helideck. Normally, these will be located at each fire monitor / helideck access
platform. Where an aviation refuelling facility is installed, MCPs should also be
located strategically by the dispenser, pumping unit and bulk helifuel storage
areas.
The MCPs should be connected to annunciators on the Central Fire Control Panel.
11.5.10.2 Helideck Surveillance
Helideck surveillance both during helicopter operations and at other times is

prudent installation or vessel management and can be achieved in a number of
ways. Methods currently used are as follows and the option selected should be
based on a practical assessment of the helideck location and the installation or
vessels role, etc.
223
• Visual monitoring from a permanently manned control point (CCR, Bridge
or HLO Cabin) through a window overlooking the helideck.
• Closed Circuit Television ‘panning’ the helideck with a monitor at a

permanently manned control point. See also Section 8.2 for normally
unattended installations.
11.6 RESCUE EQUIPMENT PROVISIONS
Helicopter crash rescue equipment is a fundamental component of a properly

prepared and certified offshore helideck, ready for operations.
NOTE: During helideck inspections, it is often found that the crash rescue
equipment is incomplete and in poor condition. Also, access and lighting
at the storage locations is often poor.
CAP 437, Chapter 5.
11.6.2 Rescue Equipment Cabinets
The provision of at least one set of helicopter crash rescue equipment is required
in order to support helideck firefighting and rescue activities. The equipment must
be easily accessed by the helideck / fire crew, kept in complete and serviceable
condition, and be ready for use in the vicinity of the helideck.
On larger helidecks it may be considered appropriate to provide more than one set
of crash rescue equipment. This case may arise if gaining quick access to a single
set is difficult or, if it is likely that a single set of equipment could be compromised
as a result of a helicopter crash.
11.6.2.1 Location
An ideal location for Crash Rescue Equipment on installations is on the monitor /

access platforms providing there is sufficient space available and the cabinet or
chest can be protected from a conflagration on the helideck.
On vessels, location can be slightly more difficult and is dependent on helideck
location (e.g. bow or stern mounted, elevated or at main deck level) and the
224
availability of suitable adjacent space. On foredeck-mounted helidecks, there may
be space available behind the bridge wings.
Alternatively, the cabinet / chest can be located in close proximity to the helideck
on an adjacent access walkway or stairway platform. In this case it is imperative to
consider the location very carefully so as to avoid hindering personnel escape from
the helideck and causing problems for the helideck / fire crew in retrieving the
equipment when needed. Placing the cabinet / chest where several stairs have to
be negotiated is not acceptable.
Wherever the Crash Rescue Equipment Cabinet(s) are located, the designer
should ensure that the internals can be illuminated by some form of local lighting
(e.g. by placing the cabinet adjacent to general walkway lights or vice versa).
Helicopter Rescue Equipment cabinets should be robustly constructed and suitably

protected from the marine environment. Normally the cabinets are manufactured
from high quality GRP (glass re-inforced plastic) supplied ready coloured in RED.
The cabinet door / lid design should incorporate a storm proof seal, robust hinges
and secure locking arrangements. Door / lid stays should be provided. Drainage /
ventilation holes should be incorporated into the cabinet or an alternate means
employed to prevent condensation. Inside the door / lid a suitable arrangement
should be provided to hold the inventory checklist.
Ideally, the internals of the cabinet should include hooks and clips to secure each
individual piece of equipment and silhouettes to assist with easy location, keeping
the equipment in good condition and for easy inventory checking. The choice of
either a cabinet or chest will be dependent upon available space to meet the basic
requirement for good, long-term equipment storage.
A cabinet style arrangement is the preferred option because it provides easier

access to the equipment.
225
Figure 11.21 – Typical chest type crash rescue equipment storage
(Photograph courtesy of Bristol Uniforms Ltd)
Figure 11.22 – Typical cabinet type crash rescue equipment storage
226
11.6.3 Rescue Equipment Inventory
CAP 437 lists the minimum emergency rescue equipment that is required to be
located in the vicinity of the helideck. The largest helicopter for which the helideck
is certified determines the scale of equipment.
11.6.3.1 Equipment Specifications
Historically, the provision of crash rescue equipment has often resulted in

individual pieces (e.g. tools) being incorrectly selected and frequent replacement in
the field due to poor quality.
Should the designer be required to procure the crash rescue tools and equipment,
consultation with the installation operator, MODU or vessel owner is strongly
recommended in order to establish the preferred suppliers. Detailed specifications
for this equipment can be found in the UKOOA Guidelines for the Management of
11.6.4 Helideck / Firefighting Team Personnel Protective Equipment (PPE)
11.6.4.1 Introduction
The PPE for helideck crews is sometimes specified and procured by the Facilities
Design Contractor or it may be sub-contracted to a helideck equipment supplier as
part of the overall helideck miscellaneous equipment procurement.
It is strongly recommended that prior to specifying any helideck crew PPE, contact
is made with the installation, MODU or vessel operating company Safety or
Aviation Department to establish whether they employ standard equipment
throughout their operations and whether they use a preferred supplier.
Regardless of who is responsible for specifying helideck crew PPE it is essential

that the correct items be procured. Detailed specifications can be found in the
UKOOA Guidelines for the Management of Offshore Helideck Operations [Ref: 49].
227
11.7 HELICOPTER REFUELLING
11.7.1 Introduction
The decision to include a refuelling system in the facilities design is purely an

operational one. A decision should only be made after consultation with either the
installation operating company aviation or logistics representative, helicopter
operator or other specialist.
There is no legal requirement to hold and dispense aviation fuel but if a system is
provided it must be guaranteed to produce clean fuel.
When designing, maintaining and operating a helicopter refuelling system

reference should be made to CAP 437, Chapter 7 – Helicopter Fuelling Facilities.
11.7.3 Operational Considerations
Consideration to provide Jet-A1 refuelling facilities should be given where the

distance from shore to an installation or vessel (with an operational helideck)
exceeds 50 nautical miles.
The potential uplift of aviation fuel during operations should be properly calculated
and the results used to dictate minimum system sizing. Allowances should be
made for unusable fuel, potential re-supply problems (e.g. weather delay),
emergency reserves, etc.
It should be noted that the CAA also imposes requirements on helicopter operators
when planning offshore fuel diversions. Therefore, it is important to discuss non-
provision of refuelling facilities on an offshore installation or vessel with the
installation operator, MODU or vessels owner and helicopter operator.
If intending not to provide on-board refuelling on a fixed installation or floating

structure, the following factors should be properly evaluated and mitigated:
• The ready availability of alternate refuelling options within a short distance

of the installation or vessel
• The increased risks likely to be incurred when alternate offshore refuelling

sites have to be used (i.e. risks associated with increased take offs and
landings)
228
• The increased cost of using alternate offshore refuelling sites. Potentially,
these costs can be very high over the ‘life of installation’ due to the
additional flying time involved
• The potential for increased operating expense due to logistical delays.
11.7.4 General Design Considerations
11.7.4.1 General
The design and construction of an aviation refuelling system requires careful

consideration to ensure that the equipment can be safely and efficiently operated
and maintained.
System components such as the storage tanks and skid mounted pumping,
metering and dispenser units are generally designed, fabricated and supplied by
specialist manufacturers. The connecting pipework and storage tank areas are
usually the domain of a vessel builder / module fabricator.
11.7.4.2 Aviation Fuel Storage
Aviation fuel storage areas on offshore installations and vessels require

considerable thought during their design. There may be one or more areas and
they may contain fixed or transportable tanks or a combination of both. The
number of tanks and their capacities will be dictated by the aviation fuel
requirements calculated for the operation.
Aviation fuel tankage should be located where potential fire risks do not imperil the
installation / vessel. It is particularly important to note that the storage facility will
require an adequate fire detection / protection system (all round deluge coverage
is the preferred solution) and adequate containment and drainage systems. This
system should be an integral part of the installation / vessel loss control
specification.
It is equally important that aviation fuel transportable storage tanks are located
where they are easily accessible by the installation or vessel cranes to facilitate re-
supply. Also, the storage tanks should be in an area where they are free of
‘dropped object’ risks from routine crane operations.
Aviation Fuel transportable tanks should be located in a bunded area separated

from other bulk liquid supplies. The bunded area should be sized to contain at
least 110% times the volume of the largest sized transportation tank used.
229
Generally, these tanks are supplied with either 600 imp. gallon or 1000 imp.
gallon capacity.
Figure 11.23 – Typical aviation fuel transportable tank in bunded area
To assist with locating the transportable tanks during loading or back loading, the
bunded area should have a substantial purpose made steel frame around its
perimeter to act as a guide and buffer system. This is particularly important on
floating structures and vessels where restraining the tanks from movement due to
vessel motions should be fully taken into account.
A suitably specified, rigid pipe system will normally be installed for interconnecting
fixed aviation fuel storage tanks to the pumping system (skid mounted).
The supply to fixed aviation fuel storage from transportable tanks, or where no
fixed tanks are used, will normally be achieved by using flexible hoses from each
transportable tank coupled to a rigid piped gallery. It is imperative that the flexible
hose, coupling and tank are all properly bonded.
11.7.4.3 Aviation Fuel Pumping System
The aviation fuel pumping system and ancillary equipment (normally skid mounted)
should be designed and located to achieve good operating efficiency with easy
access for routine maintenance.
230
Figure 11.24 – Typical aviation fuel pump skid
11.7.4.4 Aviation Fuel Dispenser
The aviation fuel dispenser, ancillary equipment, supply system, stand-by and
manual systems should be designed and located to achieve good operating
efficiency.
Figure 11.25– Example of aviation fuel dispenser skid with low overall height
231
Figure 11.26 – Example of aviation fuel dispenser with high overall height.
Positioning adjacent to the helideck is critical to avoid infringing obstacle
clearances
Locating the fuel dispenser skid on the helideck, adjacent to the safe landing area
needs to be well thought out to ensure safe and easy access for refuelling
operations, routine maintenance and annual strip down, inspection and re-
certification.
The skid should have a ‘steady red’ light mounted on the top and connected to the
system to indicate when the system is in operation. The light should be visible
from all areas of the helideck.
Skid positioning on the helideck along with layout of the skid system components
and any access panels should fully take into account routine and annual
maintenance programmes (e.g. filter pack removal).
Routine fuel system and fuel quality checks should be capable of being carried out
simply and easily without risk of contamination (e.g. water / rain ingress).
11.7.4.5 Miscellaneous Provisions
Fuel Quality
System design and quality control procedures should be stringently followed in
order to ensure that fuel dispensed is fit for aviation purposes.
232
Materials of Construction
Material selection is very important to ensure that system integrity and aviation fuel
cleanliness is always maintained. For this reason stainless steel piping and
components are used throughout.
Aircraft Bonding Cable and Reel

The dispenser must be equipped with a securely mounted, retractable bonding
cable (hand, pneumatic or electric powered) with a substantial insulated crocodile
clip and quick disconnect plug incorporated into the cable at the aircraft end (in the
event that the helicopter departs with the bonding cable still attached). See Figure
11.27.
Refuelling Couplings
Pressure and open line fuel delivery nozzles should be provided.
System Colour Coding and Identification Markings

Jet-A1 fuel system components should be correctly marked with the appropriate
vessel and piping product identification codes. Additionally, appropriate Hazchem
labels should be sited at fuel storage and dispenser locations. See Figure 11.28
and 11.29.
Figure 11.27 – Interior of Dispenser showing securely mounted, hand retractable

bonding cable (quick disconnect plug arrowed) and pressure refuelling coupling
fitted
233
Figure 11.28 – Typical aviation fuel identification markings used on pipework with
flow arrow incorporated
Figure 11.29 – Typical aviation fuel identification markings used on major

components. Note also specification plate and inspection labels
234
11.8 COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT
11.8.1 Introduction
Communications equipment is a key part of helicopter operations in an offshore

environment. In the UK, there are specific radio and navigation equipment
requirements for supporting offshore helideck operations. Meteorological data
(See Section 11.9) is also an essential part of the information communicated to
flight crews during offshore helicopter operations. The procedures and practical
mechanisms for helicopter communications should be considered in conjunction
with the equipment arrangements provided for aeronautical communications.
During a design and construction project aeronautical communications equipment

will often be specified as part of a total package for the installation or vessel. It is
therefore important for helideck designers dealing with the aeronautical
communications requirement to liase with project and / or company communication
specialists. This should ensure that efficient and approved system coverage is
obtained.
Guidance and approval for all items of air-band radio equipment, etc. should be
obtained from the Air Traffic Safety Standards Department (ATSSD) of the CAA at
Gatwick. It should also be noted that all aeronautical frequencies (NDB and R/T)
are subject to international protocols and are controlled in the UK solely by
ATSSD.
Applications to CAA ATSSD will be required for using the specified equipment and
for frequency allocations. This procedure requires completion and submission of
official forms to CAA ATSSD and the process takes a considerable time to
conclude. This time period should be built into the project programme.
The designated radio callsign must be the same as the helideck and installation /
vessel identification markings. Callsign approval is also required.
CAP 437, Chapter 6.
235
11.8.3. Location of Equipment and Aerials
11.8.3.1 Equipment Location
Locations for the aeronautical communications and weather information control

equipment can vary considerably depending on the designated command and
control points of an installation or vessel. This may include locating the
aeronautical communications in a purpose made radio room or helideck control
cabin, the Central Control Room (CCR), on the Bridge of a vessel or in an area
adjacent to heli-admin, etc.
Wherever it is decided to locate the aeronautical communications, they should

ideally be grouped together in an ergonomic manner. This will allow the Radio
Operator / HLO to effectively make contact with helicopter flight crews during flight
to pass relevant information during helideck operations and to record routine
communications (in the radio log). Background noise can seriously affect good
radio communications, so providing a low noise area should be the objective.
Meteorological information is a key item during communications with offshore

helicopter flight crews, therefore the communications equipment and weather
station instrument indicators are best sited adjacent to each other, where
practicable.
The use of a PC based system (e.g. Weather Windows) for recording and
displaying the full range of meteorological measurements in a single package
should be seriously considered, in order to provide good operating efficiency.
On floating structures and vessels it is important to include the motion recording

equipment (whether PC based or analogue instrument system) into the basic
design considerations for aeronautical communications. Similar to meteorological
information, vessel motions are part of routine communications with flight crews
and the information should be readily available at the aeronautical communications
control point.
11.8.3.2 Aerials and Sensors
The siting of all types of communication aerials (usually ‘whip’ aerials) is often a
source of problems for helicopter operations (e.g. causing infringements in
obstruction free areas). The NDB aerial is often a ‘loop’ type and is strung around
the perimeter structure of the helideck (See Section 9.11 for more details).
236
Finding suitable aerial locations for good equipment performance and access for
maintenance can be difficult and areas around the helideck perimeter are often
chosen as a matter of convenience, particularly where there is no purpose built
radio tower on installations and floating structures. Vessels pose less of a problem
because often there is a suitable platform on the bridge top.
It is imperative that helideck designers in conjunction with communications

specialists plan the siting of aerials to ensure that they do not adversely impact
helideck operations.
Equally, remote sensors for meteorological instruments should not be sited where
they may adversely impact helideck operations. Also, the environment around an
offshore helideck during helicopter movements can seriously affect the operation
and accuracy of remote sensors (anemometers in particular) as a result of the
‘rotor downwash’, so this should be fully taken into account.
11.8.4 Aeronautical VHF Radio
Two main VHF aeronautical radio sets are required on installations and vessels
operating in the Central and Northern North Sea. Elsewhere on the UKCS a single
main set may be acceptable.
The purpose of installing two VHF sets for the Central and Northern North Sea is
to separate air and logistics communications flow onto separate frequencies, thus
reducing interference and overloading the air traffic channel.
In the event of failure of either unit, the remaining set can be used for both
purposes by switching frequencies.
Where only one main VHF set is required to meet the area requirements, it is
prudent to consider installing a second, standby aeronautical VHF set. Failure of a
single main unit can seriously limit helicopter operations.
The aeronautical band VHF radios should preferably have synthesised frequency
control.
All VHF sets must be ATSSD approved.
See Section 11.9.11 for power supply specification.
237
11.8.5 Marine VHF Radio
All ships must carry a marine VHF installation (see SOLAS chapter IV). The
purpose of providing a marine band radio is to provide communications between
vessels at sea (e.g. Standby Vessel) and for helideck crews to communicate with
crane operators in order to control their operation during helicopter movements
around the installation or vessel and whilst helicopters are on the helideck.
The HLO and appropriate helideck crewmembers should have the means to
communicate readily with crane operators and standby vessel crews, preferably
using a headset.
See Sections 11.8.3.1 and 11.8.3.2 for information about locating the equipment
and aerials.
11.8.6 Helideck Crew Portable VHF Sets
Portable VHF radios that can operate on aeronautical and marine band
frequencies should be provided in sufficient numbers for the HLO and members of
the helideck crew.
Operation of the radios should ideally be ‘hands free’; therefore a headset system
is the preferred option.
During helideck operations the HLOs set will be used for both transmitting and
receiving messages to flights crews, helideck crewmembers and the radio
operator. To reduce unnecessary r/t traffic, the helideck crew sets should be used
for ‘receive only’ unless it is necessary for a helideck crewmember to transmit a
message whilst acting in a safety capacity.
The HLO and helideck crew portable VHF radios, spare batteries and the charging
equipment should be kept in a safe storage area in heli-admin or the helideck
control cabin (if provided).
11.8.7 NDB Equipment
The Non-Directional Beacon is a basic navigation aid used on the UKCS by

offshore helicopters.
The HLO (or Radio Operator) switches on the equipment when requested to do so
by the helicopter flight crew. This will probably be during an approach to the
installation or vessel.
238
There may be a number of installations in an area with the NDBs operating on the
same frequency, therefore switching arrangements and their location should be
kept simple and easy to operate, to avoid spurious use.
Application for frequency allocation and equipment approval is required from

ATSSD.
See Sections 11.8.3.1 and 11.8.3.2 for information about locating the equipment
and aerials.
NOTE: During helideck inspections the use of single frequency NDB sets tuned to
410kHz has been noted. These are unacceptable to the ATSSD.
11.8.8 Public Address and Alarm Systems
An effective system of loudspeakers and telephones should be provided to ensure

good communications in the helideck environs. The arrangements should comply
with the requirements of PFEER Regulation 11.
Helideck public address and alarm systems are generally an extension of the
platform or vessel general alarm and PA systems. The exception to this is the
Status Light system specifically installed on helidecks to warn helicopter flight
crews that it is unsafe to use the helideck.
Details of the helideck Status Light system are given in Section 11.3.8.
The helideck PA and alarm system equipment is normally confined to extending

the systems of platform PA speakers and telephone handsets to the helideck to
ensure that adequate coverage is provided for raising alarms and for hearing
platform alarm signals.
Platform alarm beacons / lights may also be installed to comply with the need for
visual signals in high noise areas. However, this should no longer be necessary
where the helideck is equipped with Status Lights.
The PA speakers are normally located on the access monitor platforms and on
larger helidecks, additional speakers may be required in other locations (e.g. on
access walkways) to achieve good coverage.
It may not always be considered appropriate to locate PA telephone handsets on

the monitor / access platforms. Instead it may be preferable to locate them at
239
access points to the helideck (e.g. base of stairways) to provide better general
coverage and to place them in a less noisy environment.
11.8.9 Video Briefing System
Facilities for providing pre-flight briefings to helicopter passengers should be

provided in the flight departure area or another suitable location. The screen
should be located and positioned such that it can be easily viewed and the sound
system should be adequate to ensure that the instructions given can be seen and
heard by all persons in the briefing / departure area.
The equipment usually comprises a simple monitor screen and a remotely located
(e.g. in HLO office) VCR or DVD type player.
The established installation operator or vessel owner will probably have a contract
in place with an approved ‘video briefing’ service provider to generally provide the
playback equipment and briefing media that meets the legal requirements of the
contracted helicopter operator(s). The media may be video laser disc (DVD) or
videotape.
Helideck designers should establish with the installation operator or vessel owner
which ‘briefing’ system and equipment should be provided. Where the installation
operator or vessel owner has a number of established facilities / vessels and uses
a particular helicopter operator and helicopter types to support his operation, this
will dictate the media and equipment to be specified.
11.9 METEOROLOGICAL EQUIPMENT
11.9.1 Introduction
Flight crews involved in all types of aviation activity are heavily dependent upon
comprehensive and accurate meteorological information to properly plan their
flights and to maintain a high level of flight safety, whilst on the ground and in the
air.
Offshore helicopter operations are equally as dependent, if not more so, on

acquiring good meteorological information. It is because of the hostile
environments that offshore helicopters encounter at sea and the remote locations
of the landing sites; accurate information is required for the onshore departure
240
airfield, for the general navigation area and at the offshore installation or vessel
destination.
Historically, probably with the exception of those facilities equipped with automatic
weather stations or staffed by meteorological specialists, offshore weather reports
from installations and vessels have generally been of poor quality, often grossly
inaccurate.
Therefore, properly calibrated instrumentation to enable accurate meteorological

and flight information to be given to helicopter flight crews is an essential feature of
helideck systems design for offshore operations.
NOTE: During offshore helideck inspections it is often found that meteorological

instrument calibration certificates (e.g. anemometers and barometers) are
unavailable or out of date. It is essential the initial calibration documents
be passed to the Operator’s Maintenance Department to establish a
suitable record keeping process during operations. A copy of these
records should also be available on the installation or vessel.
CAP 437, Chapter 6.
11.9.3 Equipment Requirements
A windsock, airspeed indicator, air temperature probe, and barometric pressure

instrumentation are the minimum equipment requirements for providing flight crews
with essential offshore meteorological information.
Suitable equipment should be provided and the sensor / read out locations
optimised to provide an accurate means for ascertaining:
• Windspeed and direction (at the general location and over the helideck)
• Air temperature (ambient air temperature and at the helideck location)
• Barometric pressure (ambient pressure and at the helideck elevation).
In addition to these basic meteorological parameters flight crews also require

accurate measurements of:
241
• Visibility, and
• Cloud base.
Observation and estimation can be used to obtain visibility and cloudbase

readings, however the results are often poor. Ideally, specialised equipment
should be provided as part of a total aeronautical meteorological measurement,
recording and data transmission package.
See also Sections 11.8.3.1 and 11.8.3.2 for information about locating the
meteorological equipment and sensors.
11.9.4 Wind Velocity and Direction Measuring Equipment
Obtaining the wind velocity and direction for the general area around the
installation or vessel and over the helideck is achieved by installing windsock(s)
and anemometer(s).
Essentially, windsock(s) give flight crews an instantaneous visual clue of the

immediate wind environment during approach, landing, shut down, start-up and
take-off. Anemometers provide an accurate means for the HLO (or Radio
Operator) to transmit wind velocity and direction to the flight crews prior to
departure and at any stage during the flight.
11.9.4.1 Windsock(s)
At least one, preferably two windsocks should be installed on all installations and
vessels.
The windsock(s) should be of suitable size and located in optimum location(s) to

ensure they can operate efficiently and do not provide spurious wind speed and
direction indications.
Location
One windsock should be located in ‘free air’ at a high point on the installation /
vessel where it can operate in windflows unaffected by the structure of the facility
and is easily visible to approaching helicopters.
Another windsock should be located in the vicinity of the helideck, without

infringing the obstruction free area, to provide an indication of local windflows at
the landing site.
242
(Photograph courtesy of BP plc)
Figure 11.30 – Windsock in highly visible location on NUI (only one windsock
required in this case)
Equipment Specification
Purpose built equipment should be specified that incorporates:
• A folding mast (to assist with maintenance of the swivel assembly, sock
and lighting)
• A swivel assembly (designed for long life and low maintenance)
• A windsock (say, 2 metres long x 600mm diameter - coloured international
orange)
• A lighting system (to illuminate the sock either internally or externally).
Windsock lighting systems are discussed in more detail in Section 11.3.7. Where
integral lighting systems are employed it is imperative that the specification takes
into proper account the rating and security of any electrical slip ring arrangements.
See Figure 11.31 for the mechanical components of a typical windsock

arrangement.
243
Swivel Head Approx. 2 metres
Assembly
Sock Support Sock Envelope

Ring (Approx. 600
Sock Restraint mm Diameter)
Cage / Cables
Support Mast with Folding

Arrangement (Overall Height
determined by location) NOT TO SCALE
Figure 11.31 – Typical windsock mechanical assembly (lighting omitted for clarity)
11.9.4.2 Anemometers
At least one fixed anemometer should be installed on all installations and vessels.
In addition, a hand held anemometer should be provided to allow the HLO to
acquire actual helideck deck wind velocity readings, when required. The
instrument should be located at a convenient control point adjacent to the helideck.
Sensor Location
A fixed anemometer should be provided and located in ‘free air’ at a high point on
the installation or vessel where it can operate in windflows unaffected by the
structure of the facility.
Locating anemometers on DP (Dynamically Positioned) vessels is a particularly

important exercise because the outputs are often linked to the DP system.
It is vital to pick sensor locations that ensure an accurate readout of the wind
conditions over the vessel but at the same time the sensors do not pick up
helicopter ‘downwash’, etc. that may spuriously affect vessel heading control.
Indicator Location
The wind speed indicator should be located at a suitable control point where the
HLO and / or Radio Operator can easily obtain readings to transmit to the flight
crews (See Sections 11.8.3.1).
244
Figure 11.32 – An example of a good folding mast system with a poorly installed
windsock (windsock too small and restraint cables too long)
11.9.5 Air Temperature Measuring Equipment
Ambient air temperatures taken at least 10 metres above sea level and the air
temperature immediately over the helideck are required by the HLO to pass
operational information to flight crews.
The ambient air temperature is required for flight crews to compute aircraft
payload, etc. Any significant temperature variation (from ambient) over the
helideck (e.g. resulting from exhaust plumes) should be recorded and the
information passed to the flight crews by the HLO.
Either digital or analogue readout systems are acceptable. To be effective, the

sensors and temperature indicator should provide a rapid response to temperature
changes.
245
11.9.5.1 Sensor Locations
Locations selected for the sensors should take full account of the operating
conditions likely to be experienced on the installation or vessel with respect to
obtaining accurate and steady readings. In particular the sensor for obtaining
ambient air temperature should be sited where it is unaffected by transient
operating conditions.
11.9.5.2 Indicator Location
The temperature indicator(s) should be located at a suitable control point where

the HLO and / or Radio Operator can easily obtain readings to transmit to the flight
11.9.6 Barometric Pressure Measuring Equipment
Barometric Pressure is used to provide information to flight crews for them to

accurately establish their correct altitude relative to the fixed elevation height of the
helideck at the destination installation or vessel. It is imperative that the
information (QNH is essential, QFE is optional), when given to the flight crews, is
both accurate and current.
11.9.6.1 Sensor Location
Where the equipment has a remote sensor then its location at helideck level (as
near as practical to the helideck height) will follow the same principles used for
locating other meteorological equipment in respect of security from damage and
maintenance.
The instrument is sensing ambient air pressure so a remote sensor is unlikely to

be adversely affected by ambient conditions around the helideck environs.
Where the equipment is an integrated unit located in the radio room or helideck
control cabin, care must be taken to ensure that the air conditioning / ventilation
system does not pressurise the location to a value different from the ambient air
pressure.

The barometric pressure indicator(s) should be located at a suitable control point
where the HLO and / or Radio Operator can easily obtain readings to transmit to
the flight crews (See Sections 11.8.3.1).
246
A twin altimeter kit (the preferred option) or a precision aneroid barometer should
be specified.
Initial calibration should be done at the manufacturer’s facility and a check

calibration carried out following installation at site. Thereafter, the instruments
should be calibrated every twelve months.
11.9.7 Visibility Measuring Equipment
Visibility information is a key meteorological parameter in all types of aviation for

good flight planning and safe flight management. The Aviation Company’s
Operations Manual sets the operating minima for public transport operations that
comply with aviation regulations.
For helicopters operating to offshore installations and vessels, particularly in

hostile environments such as the North Sea, the final approach to the helideck is
flown under visual rules. Therefore, it is crucial for flight crews to receive accurate
visibility information at the destination installation or vessel.
For many years, visibility information that has been passed to flight crews by
personnel (who generally have limited meteorological training and competence) is
based on observation and estimation.
The equipment sensor should be located on the installation or vessel according to

the manufacturers instructions (normally somewhere around the helideck environs
with unobscured outboard views for the range finder). The equipment should
ideally be set-up and calibrated by a competent specialist familiar with the type of
equipment procured.
The visibility indicator should be located at a suitable control point where the HLO
and / or Radio Operator can easily obtain readings to transmit to the flight crews
(See Sections 11.8.3.1).
247
11.9.8 Cloudbase Measuring Equipment
Similar to visibility measurement (See Section 11.9.7), accurate cloudbase

measurements are required by flight crews for the same operational reasons. This
information is in addition to the observations of cloud formations and types that are
a fundamental part of meteorological forecasting in an offshore environment.
The equipment sensor should be located on the installation or vessel according to

the manufacturers instructions (normally somewhere around the helideck environs
with an unobscured overhead view for the range finder). The equipment should
ideally be set-up and calibrated by a competent specialist familiar with the type of
equipment procured.
The cloudbase indicator should be located at a suitable control point where the
HLO and / or Radio Operator can easily obtain readings to transmit to the flight
11.9.9 Vessel Motion Measuring Equipment
CAP 437 requires all floating structures and vessels equipped with helidecks and
operating on the UKCS to provide fully operational and serviceable equipment for
measuring helideck motions.
To comply with current requirements, floating offshore installations and vessels

with helidecks should be provided with equipment for ascertaining the vessel roll,
pitch, heave, yaw and heading. Ideally the system that is provided should be
automatic and should read and record the actual motion at the centre of the
helideck surface (in real time), forecasted (10 minutes look ahead) and log the
historical data electronically (recorded at 10 minute and 1 hour intervals).
NOTE: In the relatively near future CAP 437 will recommend the provision of
‘MOTION SEVERITY INDEX’ (MSI) in addition to vessel roll, pitch and
heave for a helicopter to land and remain safely on the helideck. Although
the MSI algorithms could be implemented in existing motion sensing
systems on vessels, it is likely that it will be provided by dedicated motion
sensing equipment. This will normally comprise an accelerometer
package which, ideally, is mounted under the centre of the helideck and a
remote PC-based processing and display package.
248
The single number MSI produced by processing a 10 minute ‘moving
window’ of helideck motion data. This number is reported to the
helicopter flight crew who will compare it with the limit of operability for
their aircraft. The limits will vary with wind speed, and a wind speed input
to the motion sensing system may also be required in connection with
determining deck handling procedures.
Designers are advised that either new vessels or vessels undergoing re-fit
that are currently in design or under construction for operations in the
UKCS should automatically be specified and equipped with helideck
motion sensing equipment that is at least capable of being modified to
produce the MSI.
See also Section 10
11.9.9.1 Location
Sensors normally located beneath the helideck at the centre of the safe landing
area are used to provide motion information at a control point where it is processed
to give readout on a PC.
The equipment should be capable of recording the maximum pitch, roll and heave
prior to a helicopter landing (recorded at 1 hour and 10 minute intervals) and the
measurement of heave should accurately reflect the motion being experienced at
the helideck.
Alternatively, where a vessel is already equipped with a motion sensor as part of

the basic vessel specification (e.g. dynamically positioned vessels) algorithms can
be developed (to give a correction for the centre of the safe landing area) which
can provide the same motion information.
11.9.10 Automatic Meteorological Instrument Station
The provision of an ‘on line’, fully automated and integrated meteorological

instrument package should be seriously considered for offshore installations,
particularly on floating installations
During operations, if a helicopter operator is able to obtain ‘on line’, full and
accurate weather data combined with vessel motions, etc. for an installation or
249
vessel, this can greatly assist with more accurate flight planning and establishing
payloads.
It should also reduce the opportunity for expensive ‘overfly’ flights where landings
have to be aborted on arrival at the installation due to the pilot encountering
excessive helideck movements that are outside the limits prescribed in his
company Operations Manual, thus preventing the execution of a safe landing.
11.9.11 Communications and Weather Equipment Power Supplies
Power supplies for the helicopter communications and weather equipment should
be taken from the emergency switchboard, supported by an un-interruptible power
source (UPS), where practicable.
11.10 MISCELLANEOUS HELIDECK EQUIPMENT
11.10.1 General
Where the helideck designer is required to specify miscellaneous helideck

equipment, reference should be made to CAP 437 to establish the minimum
requirements. Also, the UKOOA Guidelines for the Management of Offshore
Helideck Operations [Ref: 49] provides details of the equipment, appropriate
specifications and locations.
The installation operator, MODU or vessel owner should also be consulted

because often they may wish to specify scales of miscellaneous equipment
required specifically for their operations.
The equipment provided (where appropriate) will generally include the following
items:
• Aircraft Chocks
• Tie-down Strops / Ropes
• Scales for Baggage and Freight Weighing
• Freight Loader
• Helicopter Start Facility
• First Aid Equipment
• Helicopter Ground Handling Equipment
• Landing Prohibited Marker
• De-Icing Equipment.
250
All helideck miscellaneous equipment with electrical power sources should be
specified in accordance with the installation hazardous area classification.
11.10.2 Helicopter and Helideck Washdown and Cleaning Equipment
A readily available supply of fresh water should be available at the helideck in

order to washdown helicopters if they are doused with foam or seawater as a
result of an inadvertent fire monitor discharge.
Helideck wash down is a routine activity carried out in order to maintain the
helideck in a clean and serviceable condition. This activity is particularly important:
• When aviation fuel is spilt onto the helideck surface during helicopter
refuelling
• When guano accumulations need to be removed, particularly on Normally

Unattended Installations (NUIs).
An adequate supply of seawater should be provided at sufficient pressure to

effectively clean the helideck surface and any surrounding equipment. In the case
of removing guano accumulations this may require the addition of a high pressure
pumping system in order to be totally effective.
Either a fixed mains water supply (manned installations and vessels) or a portable
pump and transportable tanks (for NUIs) can be provided.
11.11 BIRD CONTROL DEVICES
11.11.1 Introduction
Bird / guano infestation problems are routinely encountered on installations in

some areas on the UKCS, in particular when the installations are normally
unattended. The effects of bird / guano infestation on the safety of offshore
helicopter operations, personnel health and the additional maintenance costs
incurred, cannot be ignored.
A measure of the importance attached by helicopter operators to properly

managing the problems caused by bird / guano infestation (e.g. obscured helideck
markings causing wrong deck landings, cancelled or aborted sorties, bird strikes or
251
near misses, etc.) is the helideck monitoring and reporting co-ordinated by BHAB
Helidecks. If a helideck fails to meet an acceptable level of cleanliness then
landing restrictions will be applied by BHAB Helidecks, thus limiting helideck
availability.
The levels of operational acceptance of helideck guano infestations by BHAB

Helidecks are shown in Figure 11.33. Any reporting above level 7 will incur flight
restrictions.
A significant part of the work to combat a bird / guano infestation problem will be
handled during operations by employing a management system to monitor
helideck condition and by building routine helideck cleaning into the maintenance
programme.
During a helideck design project, it should be established whether the potential for
bird / guano infestations exist. If there is likely to be a problem then provision
should be made for the installation of bird exclusion devices along with efficient
helideck cleaning / wash down systems.
1 Clean
2 Small isolated bird droppings
3 Noticeable, but not operationally significant
bird droppings
4 Markings beginning to be degraded
5 Obvious bird usage
6 Noticeable degradation of markings
7 Bird usage causing operational problems
8 Substantial degradation of markings
9 No night operations
10 Totally obscured - Daylight cleaning
operations ONLY
Figure 11.33 - Levels of operational acceptance of bird guano infestations by BHAB

Helidecks
It should be noted that individual bird exclusion devices are reported to have only
low to moderate success on most installations. Combined systems have been
more successful.
252
1. Operations Notice No: 39 - Guidance on identification of offshore

installations, Issued by HSE OSD December 1997. [Ref: 26].
2. Bird Guano Infestations and Their Effect On Offshore Helicopter

Operations [Ref: 31].
3. A Review of Wrong Deck Landings, Status Lamps and Signalling Devices

(HSE Task No: B\0015) - Issued by BOMEL Consortium June 1999. [Ref:
32].
Installing specialised equipment onto NUIs is generally a requirement to combat

the problem of sea birds on helidecks. When the equipment is fitted it also needs
to be maintained.
There are three classes of mitigation systems that can be used for dealing with the
bird problem - proofing, scaring and control.
Control (culling) is not a realistic option in the offshore environment and would also
be publicly unacceptable.
Proofing is used but this is generally limited to fitting bird spikes on the perimeter
lighting. The offshore industry has generally accepted bird scaring as the principal
means of dealing with the problem.
Audio bird scaring systems are the most commonly employed devices and these
reproduce bird distress and predator calls through loudspeaker systems, controlled
by microprocessor to randomise various characteristics of the sound. Such an
arrangement produces ‘a constantly changing audible hostile environment’ which,
although disliked by the birds, is harmless to them. The effect of bird decoys -
static models of predators - is very short-lived. However, where they can be
installed, water-spray systems have been found effective but require constant
surveillance and system activation from a remote location to control the problem.
Current methods have only partially solved the bird / guano problem offshore
therefore, the search for new and innovative methods of exclusion should
continue.
253
11.12 SAFETY SIGNS AND POSTERS
11.12.1 Introduction
A proliferation of random, irrelevant or ill conceived safety signs and posters on

and around the helideck and in heli-admin will serve little purpose. A complete
lack of good signs and posters is equally as bad. Getting the balance right should
be the primary aim.
NOTE: On helideck inspections safety and emergency notices are generally

found to be missing, inadequate or damaged.
Essentially there are two objectives for having helideck signs and posters. They
are:
• To clearly inform embarking passengers of the potential dangers and to

give specific instructions during helideck operations
• To provide safety and general instructions to all personnel, including the

helideck crew.
CAP 437, Chapter 6.
11.12.3 Specifying Safety Signs
When specifying signs and posters for use in the helideck environs it is imperative
that:
1. The instruction or advice is briefly, clearly and unambiguously stated
2. The signs follow EC shape, symbol and colour conventions for prohibition,
warning or advice, where appropriate
3. Signs are properly constructed in robust materials and fixed to robust

frames and secured to suitable hard points
4. Signs are placed clearly in the normal line of sight of embarking and
disembarking passengers and other operational personnel taking into
account the normal routes taken to and from the helideck from heli-admin.
254
11.12.4 General Helideck Signs
General helideck signs should include:
1. No unauthorised entry (Prohibition)

2. Tail Rotor hazards (Warning)
3. Anti Collision Light (Advice).
These signs are best grouped together and positioned on robust frames at all the
entry points to the helideck. See Figure 11.34.
Preferably they should be located at the foot of the stairways or landings leading to
the helideck surface. If possible, the signs should be located in a relatively un-
exposed position to avoid potential mechanical or wind damage.
Figure 11.34 – Example of helideck safety signs securely mounted on a robust frame
255
11.12.5 Heli-Admin Signs and Posters
Helicopter operators generally provide the signs and posters to be displayed in

heli-admin directly to the Installation operator, MODU or vessel owner. Further
information on this topic can be found in the UKOOA Guidelines for the
Management of Offshore Helideck Operations [Ref: 49].
256
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
257
APPENDICES
1. Contributors
2. References
3. List of Abbreviations
4. Bell 214 ST – Design Information
5. EH Industries EH 101 – Design Information
6. Eurocopter EC155 - Design Information (Incomplete)
7. Eurocopter EC255 – Design Information (Incomplete)
8. Eurocopter AS332 L/L1 – Design Information
9. Eurocopter AS332l2 – Design Information
10. Eurocopter AS365n – Design Information
11. Sikorsky S61N – Design Information
12. Sikorsky S76 – Design Information
13. Sikorsky S92 - Design Information
258
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
259
APPENDIX 1 - CONTRIBUTORS
HSE and the Author wish to express their thanks to the following for their individual
contributions during the preparation of these guidelines.
Dr. Shane Amaratunga BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited

Dave Andrew Bristow Helicopters Limited / BHAB Helidecks
John Bartovsky Westland Helicopters Ltd.
Ruth Bemment BOMEL Limited
Duncan Bliss PGS Geophysical / IAGC
Ian Bonnon BOMEL Limited
John Burt John Burt Associates Limited
Dave Casson Shell Aircraft
Mike Crabb BHAB Helidecks
Ian Evans Stena Drilling / IADC & BROA
Peter Garland CHC Scotia Helicopters / BHAB Helidecks
Dr. Paul Gallagher W S Atkins
Willie Hacking BHP Billington / UKOOA
Erik Hamremoen Statoil AS
John Hopson Civil Aviation Authority (Retired)
Dave Howson Civil Aviation Authority
Davie Hunter Shell Exploration & Production / UKOOA
Dr. Rob Johnson BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Derek Martin Atkins Consulting
Bob Miles HSE
John Monaghan BHAB Helidecks
Dr. Wim Morris BOMEL Limited
Graham Morrison HSE
Capt. Steve O'Collard CHC Scotia Helicopters / BHAB
Kevin Payne Civil Aviation Authority
Bill Quinn HSE
Tony Read Int’l Assoc. of Marine Contractors (Retired)
Des Richard CBE BHP Billington / OGP
Brian Robertson Technip Coflexip / IMCA
Steve Rowe BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Roy Singer Wood Group
Dr. Bob Standing BMT Fluid Mechanics Limited
Capt. Tony Steel Civil Aviation Authority
Capt. Brian Teeder Shell Aircraft Limited / UKOOA
Capt. Adrian Thomas Bristow Helicopters Limited / BHAB Helidecks
Martin Wheeler BP
Jim Williams Sikorsky Aircraft Corp
260
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
261
APPENDIX 2 - REFERENCES
LEGISLATION, GUIDANCE PUBLICATIONS, ETC.
Throughout these guidelines references are made to Regulations, Codes of Practice and
relevant official papers and reports. Where specific references are applicable to a particular
topic these are given at the end of the relevant paragraph for quick reference.
At the time these guidelines were published the following list of publications were current. It
is strongly recommended when making reference to any of these documents that the most
up to date revision is obtained and used.
LEGISLATION
Acts
1. Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974. HASAWA
2. The Civil Aviation Act 1982
3. Merchant Shipping Act 1995 ch. 21.
Statutory Instruments
4. Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (Application Outside

Great Britain) Order 1995 (SI 1995/263)
5. Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 1992 (SI SCR

1992/2885)
6. Offshore Installations and Pipeline Works (Management and MAR

Administration) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/738)
7. Offshore Installations (Prevention of Fire and Explosion, and PFEER

Emergency Response) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/743)
8. Offshore Installations and Wells (Design and Construction, etc.) DCR

Regulations 1996 (SI 1996/913)
9. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1992 MHSWR
262
(SI 1992/2051)
10. Noise at Work Regulations 1989 (SI 1989/1790)
11. Air Navigation Order 2000 ANO
12. Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations DSEAR

2002 (SI 2002/2776)
HSE PUBLICATIONS - GUIDANCE AND ACOP’s
13. A guide to the Offshore Installations (Safety Case) Regulations L30

1992.
14. A guide to the installation verification and miscellaneous aspects L83

of amendments by the Offshore Installations and Wells (Design
and Construction, etc.) Regulations 1996 to the Offshore
Installations (Safety Case) Regulations 1992.
15. A guide to the Offshore Installations and Pipeline Works L70

(Management and Administration) Regulations 1995.
16. Prevention of fire and explosion, and emergency response on L65

offshore installations. Approved code of practice and guidance.
17. Manual Handling. Guidance on regulations. L23
18. A Guide to the Integrity, Workplace Environment and L85

Miscellaneous Aspects of the Offshore Installations and Wells
(Design and Construction, etc.) Regulations 1996.
19. Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres – Approved L138

Code of Practice and Guidance
HSE PUBLICATIONS - LEAFLETS
20. How offshore helicopter travel is regulated. IND(G)

219L, 4/96
263
HSE PUBLICATIONS - SAFETY NOTICES
21. Mobile installations and vessels: movement of helidecks. Revised No: 1/94
and reissued January 2002.
22. Falling ice from installation structures - potential hazards. No: 5/96
Revised and reissued January 2002.
23. Offshore Helideck Design and Operability. Issued September No: 4/99
1999.
HSE PUBLICATIONS - OPERATIONS NOTICES
24. Marking of Offshore Installations. Reissued January 2002. No: 14
25. Status of technical guidance on design, construction and No: 27

certification. Reissued January 2002.
26. Guidance on identification of offshore installations. Reissued No: 39

January 2002.
27. Offshore Helidecks - Advice to Industry. Issued December 1999. No: 47
28. Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations No. 58

2002 – A short guide for the offshore industry. Issued January
2003.
29. The Equipment and Protective Systems Intended for Use in No. 59
Potentially Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 1996 – A short
guide for the offshore industry. Issued January 2003.
30. A Guide to the Equipment and Protective Systems intended for No. 63
Use in Potentially Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 1996.
Issued December 2003.
HSE PUBLICATIONS – RESEARCH REPORTS
31. Bird Guano Infestations and their Effect on Offshore Helicopter OTO 00:131
Operations
264
32. A Review of Wrong Deck Landings Status Lights and Signalling OTO 00:067
Lamps
33. A Study into Onshore and Offshore Based Rescue and OTO 01:039
Recovery (OBRR) Helicopters
34. HSE / CAA Inspection Project Offshore Helidecks 1991-1995 OTO 98:088
35. Helicopter Offshore Safety OTO 00:089
36. Helideck Structural Requirements OTO 01:072
CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY PUBLICATIONS
37. Air Navigation – The Order and The Regulations CAP 393
38. Aircraft Refuelling: Fire Prevention and Safety Measures. CAP 74
39. Aviation Fuel at Aerodromes CAP 434
40. Offshore Helicopter Landing Areas: A Guide to Criteria, CAP 437

Recommended Minimum Standards and Best Practice, 3rd
Edition October 1998.
41. Research on Offshore Helideck Environmental Issues. August CAA Paper

2000. No: 99004
42. Friction Characteristics of Helidecks on Offshore Fixed-Manned CAA Paper

Installations No: 98002
43. Motion Limits and Procedures for Landing Helicopters on Moving CAA Paper
Helidecks No: 94004
44. A questionnaire survey of workload and safety hazards CAA Paper

associated with North Sea and Irish Sea helicopter operations. No: 97009
June 1997.
45. Offshore Platform Identification Signs CAA Paper

No: 92006
265
46. Specification for an Offshore Helideck Status Light System CAA Paper
No: 98003
47. Helideck Lighting Interim Guidance CAA Letter

17/11/2003
48. Status Light Interim Guidance CAA Letter

31/12/2003
INDUSTRY AND OTHER RELEVANT PUBLICATIONS
United Kingdom Offshore Operators Association (UKOOA)
49. Guidelines for the Management of Offshore Helideck Issue 4, 2003.

Operations
50. Guidance for Offshore Personnel Handling or Using Tote Issue 1, 1996
Chemical / Fuel Transportation Tanks
51. Guidelines for Management of Safety-Critical Elements Issue 1, 1996
52. Guidelines for Fire and Explosion Hazard Management Issue 1, 1995
International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO)
53. Annex 14 Volume II and Heliport Manual
54. Heliport Design Manual Doc. 9261
55. Performance Level 'B' Standard - Firefighting Foam Specification.
British Standards
56. Structural Design Code BS 5950
57. Weldable Structural Steel for Fixed Offshore Structures BS 7191
58. Structural Design – Wind Loads BS 6399

Part 1
266
59. Classification of Hazardous Areas. BS5345
Part 2
European Standards
60. European Research Community on Flow, Turbulence and v1.0

Combustion (ERTOFAC) Best Practice Guidelines Jan 2000
61. Special Interest Group on Quality and Trust in Industrial CFD v1.0
(ERTOFAC) Best Practice Guidelines Jan 2002
International Standards (ISO)
62. Design Guidance for Offshore Structures: Topsides Structures 19901-3
American Standards
63. American Petroleum Institute – Recommended Practice for API RP 2L

Planning, Designing and Constructing Heliports for Fixed
Platforms.
Norwegian Standards
64. DNV – Design of Offshore Structures
65. Norwegian Maritime Directorate: Wind Tunnel Test Procedure,

Regulations for Mobile Drilling Platforms, 1999
Miscellaneous Papers
66. DERA - Research Paper into Helideck Lighting (Maycroft,

Annette, Smith, Flight Management and Control Department)
67. Helicopter Operations to Moving Helidecks: RAeS Conference

Proceedings, London, March 2001 (P Gallagher)
68. BMT Fluid Mechanics Ltd. - Helideck Design Considerations 43251/00

Environmental Effects, February 2003
69. Helicopter Limitation List – BHAB Helidecks
267
International Maritime Organisation (IMO)
70. Mobile Offshore Drilling Units Code
71. Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)
Lloyds Register of Shipping
72. Rules for the Design, Construction and Classification of Floating

Production Systems
268
APPENDIX 3 - LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AAIB Air Accident Investigation Branch

ABCB Association of British Certification Bodies
ACOP Approved Code of Practice
AEO All Engines Operative
AFFF Aqueous Film Forming Foam
ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practicable
AMSL Above Mean Sea Level
ANO Air Navigation Order
AOC Air Operator’s Certificate
API American Petroleum Institute
ATSSD Air Traffic Safety Standards Department
BHAB British Helicopter Advisory Board
BHAB Helidecks British Helicopter Advisory Board (Helideck Sub-committee)
BROA British Rig Owners Association
BS British Standards
CAA Civil Aviation Authority
CAP Civil Aviation Publication
CAPEX Capital Expenditure
CCR Central Control Room
COSHH Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations
‘D’ Overall length of Helicopter (See also CAP 437 definition)
DCR Design and Construction Regulations
DERA Defence Evaluation Research Agency (now QinetiQ)
DIFFS Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System
DNV Det Norsk Veritas – Norwegian Classification Society
DSV Diving Support Vessel
EERA Evacuation, Escape and Rescue Analysis
ELP Electroluminescent Lighting Panels
FPS Floating Production System
FPSO Floating Production, Storage and Offtake
FPU Floating Production Unit
HASAWA Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974
HLG Helicopter Liaison Group (OIAC)
HLL Helideck Limitation List (previously known as IVLL)
HLO Helicopter Landing Officer
HOMP Helicopter Operational Monitoring Programme
HORG Helicopter Offshore Route Guide
HSE Health and Safety Executive
HUMS Health, Usuage Monitoring System
269
IADC International Association of Drilling Contractors
IAGC International Association of Geophysical Contractors
IAS Indicated Airspeed
IATA International Air Transport Association
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation
ICP Independent Competent Person
IMCA International Marine Contractors Association
IMO International Maritime Organisation
IP Ingress Protection
ISO International Standards Organisation
IVLL Installations and Vessels Limitation List (superseded by HLL)
LDP Landing Decision Point
LFL Lower Flammable Limit
LOS Limited Obstacle Sector
MAR Management and Administration Regulations
MAUW Maximum All Up Weight
MCA Maritime & Coastguard Agency
MODU Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit
MSF Manufacturing, Service and Finance Union
MSI Motion Severity Index
MTOW Maximum Take Off Weight
NDB Non Directional Beacon
NM Nautical Mile
NMD Norwegian Maritime Directorate
NUI Normally Unattended Installation
OAT Outside Air Temperature
OBRR Offshore based Rescue and Recovery
OCA Offshore Contractors Association
OEI One Engine Inoperative
OGP International Association of Oil & Gas Producers
OHIR Offshore Helideck Inspection Report
OIAC Offshore Industry Advisory Committee
OIM Offshore Installation Manager
ON Operations Notice (HSE)
OPEX Operating Expense
OPITO Offshore Petroleum Industry Training Organisation (Now
COGENT)
OSD Offshore Safety Division of the HSE Hazardous Industries
Directorate
PFEER Prevention of Fire and Explosion and Emergency Response
Regulations Emergency Response Regulations
PIR Passive Infra-Red
270
PO Point of Origin
POB Persons on Board
PPE Personal Protection Equipment
QFE Indication of height above a set datum (e.g. and airfield or
helideck)
QNH Indication of altitude above mean sea level
RAO Response Amplitude Operator
RFF Rescue and Firefighting
RFFF Rescue and Fire Fighting Facilities
rms. root mean square
R/T Receive / Transmit
SCE Safety Critical Element
SCR Safety Case Regulations
SLA Safe Landing Area
SN Safety Notice (HSE)
SRG Safety Regulation Group (of CAA)
SSCV Semi Submersible Crane Vessel
TDP Take-Off Decision Point
TGWU Transport & General Workers Union
UKCS United Kingdom Continental Shelf
UKOOA United Kingdom Offshore Operators Association
UPS Un-interruptable Power Source
VHF Very High Frequency
WAT Aircraft Performance Curve (Weight, Altitude, Temperature)
271
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
272
APPENDIX 4 – BELL 214ST - DESIGN INFORMATION
GENERAL DESIGN DATA (See Reference 49 for Additional Operational Data)
Overall Length (= ‘D’) 18.95 metres
Max. All Up Weight 7936 kg (t = 8.0)
0.83D Obstacle Limit Dimension = 15.73 m
0.12D Inner Obstacle Limitation = 2.27 m @ Height 948 mm
0.21D Outer Obstacle Limitation = 3.98 m @ Height 948 to 2938 mm
Minimum Foam Application Rate 1552 ltrs per min
(where ‘D’ equals SLA)
RFF Category H1 / H2
Landing Net Size Medium, 12m x 12m
Passenger Access Sliding Main Cabin Door Both Sides
Refuelling Method Gravity only
Refuelling Point Locations Single point to rear of Starboard Cabin

Door
Fuel Type Jet A-1
Max. Fuel Load (Standard Tanks) 2840 lbs (2271 ltrs)
Undercarriage Tricycle
UNDERCARRIAGE FOOTPRINT (Not to Scale)
Nosewheels: 3.32m Mainwheels:

Contact Area (each): 123 cm² Contact Area (each): 290 cm²
Loading: 22 % Loading: 78 %
4.8m
273
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
274
APPENDIX 5 – EH INDUSTRIES EH101 - DESIGN INFORMATION
(Aircraft data supplied courtesy of Westland Helicopters Limited - See Reference 49 for
Additional Operational Data)
GENERAL DESIGN DATA
Max. All Up Weight 14600 kg (t = 15)

Landing Net Size Large, 15m x 15m
Passenger Access Starboard Sliding Main Cabin Door and

Port Forward crew Door
Refuelling Method Gravity and Pressure
Refuelling Point Locations 4 Gravity Fill Points on Starboard Side
Pressure Fill Point on Port Side
Fuel Type Jet A-1
Max. Fuel Load (Standard Tanks) 3360 kg (with 4 tanks)
UNDERCARRIAGE FOOTPRINT (Not to Scale) Nosewheels (at max fwd C of G):

Static Load on u/c Gear: 44944 N
Static Contact Area per Tyre: 178.0 cm²
Dynamic Load on u/c Gear: 73041 N
Dynamic Contact Area per tyre: 241.2 cm²
0.42m 3.34m 4.3 m

Mainwheels (at max aft C of G):
Static Load per u/c Gear: 57045 N
Dynamic Load per u/c Gear: 73943 N
7.0m
275
Note: Values are given for the twin main wheel option at touchdown vertical velocity limit of 2.0 m/s - some variants may be equipped
with single main wheels.
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
(Courtesy of Westland Helicopters Limited)
276
APPENDIX 6 – EUROCOPTER EC155 - DESIGN INFORMATION
Overall Length (= ‘D’) = 14.30 m
Max. All Up Weight = 4800 kg (t = 4.8)
Minimum Foam Application Rate

= 883 ltrs per min
Landing Net Size Small, 6m x 6m
Passenger Access Sliding doors on both sides
Refuelling Method Gravity
Refuelling Point Locations Filling point on port side.
Fuel Type Jet A-1
Max. Fuel Load (Standard Tanks) 1257 ltrs (332 US galls)
Nosewheels: Mainwheels:
Contact Area (each): ? cm² Contact Area (each): ? cm²
Loading: ? % Loading: ? %
3.91 m
277
1.90 m
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
278
APPENDIX 7 – EC225 - DESIGN INFORMATION
Max. All Up Weight = 10400 kg (t = 10.4)
Minimum Foam Application Rate = 1643 ltrs per min
Passenger Access Sliding doors on both sides
Refuelling Method Pressure and Gravity
Refuelling Point Locations Gravity filling point at each side. Pressure

connection on starboard side.
Fuel Type Jet A-1
Contact Area (each): ? cm² 3.00 m Contact Area (each): ? cm²
Loading: ? % Loading: ? %
5.25 m
279
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
280
APPENDIX 8 – EUROCOPTER AS332L1 - DESIGN INFORMATION

Pressure Fill Point on Starboard Side
Fuel Type Jet A-1

Loading: 35.5 % Loading: 64.5 %
5.26m
281
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
282
APPENDIX 9 – EUROCOPTER AS332L2 - DESIGN INFORMATION
Pressure Fill Point on Starboard Side
Fuel Type Jet A-1
3.0m
Loading: % Loading: %
5.28m
283
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
284
APPENDIX 10 – EUROCOPTER AS365N2 - DESIGN INFORMATION

Landing Net Size Small, 6m x 6m
Passenger Access Cabin Door Both Sides
Refuelling Point Locations Port side to rear of Cabin Doors
Fuel Type Jet A-1
Max. Fuel Load (Standard Tanks) 3184 lbs

3.64m
285
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
286
APPENDIX 11 – SIKORSKY S61N - DESIGN INFORMATION
Passenger Access Starboard Side Front and Rear Doors
Refuelling Point Locations Starboard side adjacent to Sponson
Fuel Type Jet A-1
Undercarriage Tailwheel
Mainwheels: Tailwheel:
Contact Area (each): 374 cm² 4.27m
Contact Area: 277 cm²
7.15m
287
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
288
APPENDIX 12 – SIKORSKY S76 - DESIGN INFORMATION
Overall Length (= ‘D’) 16 metres
Passenger Access Central Cabin Door on Both Sides
Refuelling Point Locations Both sides to rear of Cabin Doors
Fuel Type Jet A-1
Max. Fuel Load (Standard Tanks) 1850 lbs (839 kg)
Nosewheel: Mainwheels:
2.44m
Contact Area: 115 cm² Contact Area (each): 107 cm²
5.0m
289
INTENTIONALLY BLANK
290
APPENDIX 13 – SIKORSKY S92 - DESIGN INFORMATION
(Aircraft data supplied courtesy of Sikorsky Helicopters - Please note that helidecks
designed to facilitate S92 operations should use the higher MAUW to accommodate
planned future growth. All other dimensions remain the same)
GENERAL DESIGN DATA

Max. All Up Weight (current certified) = 11859 kg (t = 11.9)

Max. All Up Weight (planned growth) = 12837 kg (t = 12.8)
Minimum Foam Application Rate = 1883 ltrs per min

Passenger Access Starboard Side at Front
Refuelling Point Locations Gravity filling point at each sponson.

Pressure connection on port sponson.
Fuel Type Jet A-1
UNDERCARRIAGE FOOTPRINT - LOADS FOR PLANNED AIRCRAFT GROWTH

(Not to Scale)
Nosewheels (at max fwd C of G):

Static Load per u/c Gear: 4592 kg
3.18 m Dynamic Load per u/c Gear: 5970kg
Mainwheels (at max aft C of G):

Static Load per u/c Gear: 4453 kg
6.20 m
Dynamic Load per u/c Gear: 5788 kg
291 Dynamic Contact Area per tyre: 316.7 cm²
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
(Courtesy of Sikorsky Aircraft)
292

Heli Deck

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heli Deck

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OFFSHORE HELIDECK DESIGN

These offshore helideck design guidelines have been developed in response to an

Association of British Certification Bodies (ABCB)

TECHNICAL SPECIALIST & EDITOR

John Burt Associates Limited

2.0 THE OFFSHORE HELICOPTER OPERATING ENVIRONMENT 5

3.0 THE OFFSHORE HELIDECK DESIGN PROCESS 11

4.0 REGULATIONS, DESIGN CODES & VERIFICATION 17

5.0 DESIGN SAFETY CASES 27

6.0 HELIDECK AND FACILITIES LAYOUT 37

7.0 FLOATING STRUCTURES AND VESSELS 57

8.0 OTHER INSTALLATION ARRANGEMENTS 77

9.0 HELIDECK STRUCTURES 91

10.0 HELIDECK ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 127

11. HELIDECK SYSTEMS 183

APPENDIX 1 - CONTRIBUTORS 260

APPENDIX 2 - REFERENCES 262

APPENDIX 3 - LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 269

APPENDIX 4 – BELL 214ST - DESIGN INFORMATION 273

APPENDIX 5 – EH INDUSTRIES EH101 - DESIGN INFORMATION 275

APPENDIX 6 – EUROCOPTER EC155 - DESIGN INFORMATION 277

APPENDIX 7 – EC225 - DESIGN INFORMATION 279

APPENDIX 8 – EUROCOPTER AS332L1 - DESIGN INFORMATION 281

APPENDIX 10 – EUROCOPTER AS365N2 - DESIGN INFORMATION 285

APPENDIX 11 – SIKORSKY S61N - DESIGN INFORMATION 287

APPENDIX 12 – SIKORSKY S76 - DESIGN INFORMATION 289

APPENDIX 13 – SIKORSKY S92 - DESIGN INFORMATION 291

The introduction of helicopters in the early sixties as a routine offshore ‘workhorse’

Technologically, helicopters have improved significantly during the period they

These guidelines are intended to:

• Assist onshore and offshore personnel responsible for the management of

• Provide Independent Competent Persons (ICPs) who are undertaking

It is acknowledged that advances in technologies used in helideck design will

The offshore helicopter operating environment is viewed quite differently by the

• Installation Operators / Vessel Owners Management (Duty Holders)

Several individuals and organisations will be involved in the ‘lifetime’ management

2.2 THE OFFSHORE PLATFORM OPERATOR / VESSEL

An integrated and well-informed approach by operations and project management

2.3 THE OFFSHORE HELICOPTER PILOT’S OPERATING

Offshore flight operations are a highly complex and specialised process. It

Despite the many advances in aircraft technology, navigation, landing and

It is not necessary or appropriate to review the whole scope of helicopter flying in

1. pilot information, and

2. approach, landing and take off manoeuvres.

Helideck Designers are recommended to acquaint themselves with these topics.

2.4 HELIDECK PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED ON THE UKCS

UNRESTRICTED HELIDECKS RESTRICTED HELIDECKS

96 (25.6%) 279 (74.4%)

Restrictions referred to in the IVLL included notified non-compliances (e.g. physical

FLIGHT PHASE AT OFFSHORE INSTALLATION

APPROACH LANDING TAKE-OFF HOVER CLIMB

5 (27.8%) 9 (50.0%) 2 (11.1%) 2 (11.1%) 0 (0%)

FLARE / BURNERS TURBULENCE EXHAUST PLUMES PILOT ERROR

4 (22.2%) 7 (38.9%) 3 (16.7%) 4 (22.2%)

FLARE / TURBULENCE EXHAUST PILOT ERROR OTHER

0 (0%) 9 (50%) 2 (11.1%) 3 (33.3%) 4 (22.2%)

INSTALLATION DESIGN AIRCRAFT OPERATION

CAUSE 1975-1983 1984-1992 1993-2001

Aircraft Related Incidents

Installation / Vessel Related Incidents

(e.g. Helideck Operations, Adverse 2 6 2

From an aviation perspective the occurrences are typified by events such as

Other occurrences are helideck environmental issues, offshore helideck

Figure 3.1 – Defining the Basic Requirements for a Helideck