Best Auto Distance

[levo]

What is the best distance say @ 80/90kt 1000 feet agl you could get out of ,R22 R44 H300 H500 Enstrom Jet Ranger Bo 105 Puma etc / eney type of helicopter, which one will buy you the most time.

Thanks Levo.

[Helipilot1982]

The R44 and the Bell 206 have a very good range due to the higher inertia blade systems that these aircraft have.

Not a twin pilot so dont know about BO105 and puma etc - (do they practice autos in those things?)

The bell 47 is very nice in auto. I know a guy that can auto to the ground, lift it into the hover and do a 360 in it before putting it on the ground again - not got the balls to try it myself yet though!!!!:ok:

[helimutt]

work on about 1/4 mile per 1000' in a R22. It might give you a rough estimate but you would have to factor in MAUW, W/V, etc etc. That's what I was taught, but never used the figures in real life. Go out in whatever heli you're using, start at 1500' and auto to 500' recovery. Use ground markers to see how far you get. Even going for a range auto doesn't exactly give you another 1/4 mile. No matter what you fly, I can pretty much guarantee you won't get where you want to be if you have to do it in anger! :hmm:

[arismount]

A good autorotation to a bad place works out better than a bad autorotation to a good place.

[rotors88]

Helimutt, why recover @ 500'? theres a lot more to go after that. Yes the entry & working out where you are going & how is vital but the bottom - flare, level, initial & cushion is the finish, practising autos without putting them on the ground is a waste of time.

[ShouldItDoThat]

The various forms of auto are almost worthless in most cases. In an R22 90% rpm and 80kts will buy you about 20' from 1000' because although your groundspeed is higher so is your rate of descent. Unless over forest, built up area or sea, wouldn't even consider them. Also forget 0 speed autos you're better off with 360 turns or S turns.

[Head Turner]

B47 and B206, auto at recommended IAS and with the RRPM reduced to the bottom of the RRPM band. AUM will have little effect in practice, just fly the needles and be in balance. That's the best you can hope for.

[MLH]

Raven II glide is at least 5,000' from 1300'.

[MightyGem]

Helimutt, why recover @ 500'?
Because in the UK you can't go below 500' unless you are intending to land etc etc.

[Whirlygig]

What is the best distance say @ 80/90kt 1000 feet agl you could get out of ..... H300

You wouldn't be getting 90kts out of a Schweizer! 55-60kts would be more like it!

Cheers

Whirls

[NickLappos]

The "best" speeds for autorotation exactly mirror the best speeds for powered flight. For best glide, the idea is the same as best range - least energy expended for most ground covered, and the speed is about the same. For least rate of descent, the idea is least energy expended to stay up, so the speed is very similar to the best rate of climb speed. For helos with appreciable speed range between Vbroc and Vbr, the glide speeds are useful. For helos with very slow cruise speeds 9Bell 47, anyone?) there is not much payoff to change speeds.

Also, like best range flight speed, the best glide speed increases with a head wind (by something like the wind speed) and

For the S76, the best glide in auto is about 115 knots, close to Vbr of 125. For least ROD, the auto speed is 74 knots, almost identical to the Vbroc of 65 to 75.

BTW the "best" speeds have nothing to do with blade inertia, because the speeds are used in steady state conditions. Inertia is your best friend at auto entry and near touchdown. On entry the stored energy in the inertia buys you time to drop collective. On touchdown, the inertia gives you a longer collective pull to find the ground.

[MD900 Explorer]

Helimutt

start at 1500' and auto to 500' recovery
Ok, then i take Mighty Gem's Quote
Because in the UK you can't go below 500' unless you are intending to land etc etc.

So if you are doing auto's to a fixed point on an airfield, thats good, you can touch down or do a power recovery depending on your status as an FI if you are teaching, cos throttle management is'nt taught in the UK, from what i've seen to pilots.. So what if you need to auto and do throttle management like a fire in flight (power on) or loss of tail....hmmmm... i'll come back to that

I think you are probably describing PFL's, even then, no good powering out at 500'. Where the accidents happen is where studs or pilots don't know how to flare out and manage the last bit without mangfering themselves and or pax!!
Pointless unless you do them all the way, even with a power recovery at 5 feet, they are usefull, but 500'. Nah Mike, talking bollocks!!

rotors88

total agreement there ;-)

Regards
MD :E

[The Nr Fairy]

MG:

Not strictly true - 500' from persons, vehicles, vessels or structures. During FI course last year, I spent a fair bit of time below 500' AGL in unoccupied pieces of countryside, at one point even doing a power recovery to a hover (apparently a bit late, according to Leon) in a field.

You can only "infringe" the 500' bubble when "landing or taking off in accordance with normal aviation practice", if memory serves.

And I'll second MD900's comments . . .

[nigelh]

I dont think there is any law that says you cantas belt over moorland or hill at 50ft is there ?!!
Rotors88 I hope you are not going to be one of those Twats that piles in doing his 100th EOL .....it is pointless as a 5-10ft recovery proves the point just as well . 100,s of perfectly good helis have been wrecked practicing for something that hardly ever happens :ugh: and barely a handfull have been wrecked due to the genuine thing.

[helimutt]

MD900 says,
So if you are doing auto's to a fixed point on an airfield, thats good, you can touch down or do a power recovery depending on your status as an FI if you are teaching, cos throttle management is'nt taught in the UK, from what i've seen to pilots.. So what if you need to auto and do throttle management like a fire in flight (power on) or loss of tail....hmmmm... i'll come back to that

So MD900, you have flown with non-instructors and had autos done to a hover/ground have you? You really do shoot yourself in the foot when you try to have a go at real instructors who also fly commercially in the real world. Some of us don't even instruct anymore. So come on, tell us what you know about throttle management for engine fire in flight?
Then again, maybe like your 'Single Engine' holds out in Norway eh? Go back to the bit about tail rotor failures please as you say you will. Interested to hear your views there mate.
Pointless eh? You, John, are fighting a losing battle here and would be better off putting your energies into something you were good at. Just a quick question? How many exams have you passed for CPL to date? :EThe most important part of an auto is what? Getting into one in the first place if you ask me. You can practice the landings all day but if you don't get into auto immediately when required to do so, what follows is pointless! (see robinson safety video!!) If its for real, get into auto, control the descent, find somewhere half reasonable to land and then flare, level and then pull pitch. I'm sure the insurance company will sort out the last 6'.:D
Rotors88: Q/ Why recover at 500'? A/ See MightyGems answer above".
I was using it as an example to see how far you would get from 1000' if you were just practising distances etc. You could even use 2000' down to 1000' feet if you wanted !!!
The question wasn't how low should I go when practising autos or even anything to do with landings, unless I can't read.....:hmm:
Ask a stupid question!!! :confused:
Nr Fairy: even a fence is classed as a structure so would depend on how big your field was. I'm not even getting into this argument.

[bh214st]

For your smaller helicopters I always consider the best rate of climb speed to give me the minimum rate of descent which corresponds to the most time for selection of suitable landing areas or the most favorable whichever is of paramount consideration.

[TheFlyingSquirrel]

play with all the airspeeds and it hardly makes any difference to your rate of descent. Vertical velocity is only around 20 knots anyway at 2000ft per minute - that aint gonna kill you - the tree coming through the perspex will though !!:ouch: Playing with the airspeed in auto will give you a staggering rate of accuracy in selecting your touch down point - as long as you get enough back on for flare time of course !:E

[Flingingwings]

IMHO maximum distance in auto as a yard stick to flying SE's is a slippery slope.

It is always easier to lose height than gain distance. A nearer field you can guarantee making is a far better option than chancing a distant field that you might make ( unless of course the distant field is the only option! Although the way things are going here that will turn into an airmanship discussion).

Few people die falling 6-8 feet. All die falling a couple of thousand. As an ex FI I'd insist a ppl could enter auto well,and make a reasonable job of the flare. Throttle control in a real auto is not required so why overload a ppl before they're able. The reality is that in a real auto 99.9% would mess up the flare and do the aircraft some damage.

[MightyGem]

Not strictly true - 500' from persons, vehicles, vessels or structures.
Yes, I know, hence the etc etc.

[helimutt]

Totally agree with Flinginwings and FlyingSquirrel. They were/are instructors, unlike our friend who is but a PPL!:E

Anyway, I think the original question has had an answer now.:D

[nigelh]

Helimut or whatever you call yourself.....who is John ? If by any chance you are referring to me i think you will find that a LOT of owners and operators agree with me re EOL,s but they are the ones paying the bills. I assume you either do not own your own and therefore dont pay the insurance ( or have a robbo ...so dont bother !!)
ps I possibly had my cpl and cfi before you could climb over the skids .........and possibly even a real life engine failure before you did yr ppl :rolleyes: however i totally agree that the No1 point is to actually get into auto without rotor speed loss etc the last 10 ft is the least important .
I also agree that a poor auto to a good spot is worse than a good auto to a poor spot.

[Flingingwings]

NigelH,

In his abscence I'll clarify for Helimutt..............
You aren't the John referred to (If your name is John:confused:). The main focus of helimutts lengthier reply is fairly obvious. Et voila :ok:

Standby for incoming from Robbo owners upset at your generalisation :ugh:

Time I left me thinks :\

[Lynx206]

The best and most spectacular auto I ever did in a 206 was on a PFL initiated just as we were leaving a pinnacle at about 9 500 feet in the PNG highlands. At min ROD airspeed (60 kts) I was in auto for about 1 1/2 minutes at about 200 feet above ground level. Nice long slope!

[helimutt]

ps I possibly had my cpl and cfi before you could climb over the skids .........and possibly even a real life engine failure before you did yr ppl
Get You! :D


nigelh, I would have thought your name was Nigel, not John? Never mind. My previous post was directed at someone else, (not hard to figure out who). The person in question professes to know all, but knows little. He's only a PPL holder and has often told some untruths on this forum. As for yourself Nigelh, I gathered you maybe own a helicopter (or two), are much older than myself, and yes, I happen to agree with you on EOL's and the pointless destruction of helis carrying out certain training excercises. :ok:
Not good for insurance, eh?
Oh well, what is it with some people. Insecurity?

[Lenticular]

Flingingwings

The reality is that in a real auto 99.9% would mess up the flare and do the aircraft some damage.

Not sure where you get that statistic from but if that is the case it is a very poor reflection on the standard of flying and more to the point the standard of instruction received in the first place.

Don't know much about the robo but used to instruct on the Enstrom & B206. The students would have to consistently be able to demonstrate a level of proficiency to carry out a full touch down auto to a defined area before they would be presented for test. The same would apply once qualified before being able to self fly hire.

Would agree that with a less forgiving A/C a power recovery is the more sensible option. However the flare and control of NR and the subsequent ruduction in flare for the touch down is still valid albeit at 10ft with the engine responding.

[Flingingwings]

Lenticular,

Wasn't a guaranteed statistic, more a generalisation to add to the throttle management during auto's for PPL's discussion.

In the run up to PPL test I've no doubt most students are proficient. Six months + down the line though? Know of plently of ppl(h) holders who aside from the mandatory annual revalidation take no additional training each year. Reckon they'll manage a perfect auto with no damage?

Even when I did my FI test the CAA examiner had his hands following the controls. I'm aware of more than one AAIB report detailing demonstrated full down autos conducted by instructors that have gone wrong. There is also a marked difference between training and actual. Training you have an instructor beside you. For real you have the added fear factor where in some cases all logic can go out the window.If a CPL can get lost flying to Epsom and Ascot why do you feel a ppl will be guaranteed to make a perfect auto? I don't have specifics to hand but i recall the Robbo driver who suffered a failure on the eng tach (no other probs). He entered auto (desite there being no other signs of an engine failure) auto'd into a field and fluffed the flare. As I said - For me a good auto entry is essential as is landing site selection (and defensive flying in the first place). A good attempt at the flare is nice but anything close will make the incident probably survivable. If you only do five or six a year I don't think thats an unrealistic expectation.

I don't teach anymore and haven't flown a Robbo for nearly 18 months. Could guarantee i'd enter auto and pick a field perfectly. Given the differences between my current ratings and an R22 would I make a good attempt at the flare etc. Yup. would I GUARANTEE no damage? Nope.

It's not a reflection on training standards per se, some schools and instructors are better than others ( and the same is true of some ppl's). More an indication that many (NOT ALL) shun recurrency training and view the LPC as a nuisance. That and the personal belief that the brevity of some LPCs is insufficient in some cases.

[NickLappos]

flingwings has more than a grain of truth in his comment about avoiding best glide tricks.

When should you use best glide?

After the successful transition to a good autorotation - rotor in the green and steady, pedal trimmed, speed about right,

and after the turn toward the wind.

and only when you realize that the ONLY good landing place is too far away, and little else is usable, at all.

Then, you bend over to best glide, set the aircraft up, and see if you will make it. This is a test, and recognize it as such. A test to see if you really can make that far away alternative.

Can you make it? You can tell easily once you have stabilized in the best glide, because the place where you will hit the ground is the only place on the bubble that stays in place while every other place slides up the bubble (too far) or down the bubble (close enough).

How do you know if the far away place passed the test? The place had better be moving down the bubble, cause all your prayers won't make the helo go one yard farther!

And if the place is OK, plan to get into it, past the edge, and be too steep on it, cause you can burn off height.

If the place is not ok, too far away? Just slow back down to best ROD, turn toward the best bad landing area, tighten your shoulder harness, and get ready for loud noises.

Does Best Glide speed really make a difference? Yes, absolutely, Try it next time you are out.

[rotors88]

If your going to teach autos, then do all of it, yes PFL's are a valid & important exercise, but then get back to some familiar ground & go all the way. This power termination is a wank, it proves nothing, because you used the engine to save your arse rather than your skills applied to the aerodynamics of a helicopter in auto & you just demonstrated to a student that you cant do an EOL. If the conditions get wrong during the auto - then of course recover with power, go round & get it right. An auto is 1. the correct entry. 2. sort out where are you going & how are you going to get there. 3. adjust glide for getting there. 3. Flare. 4. initial pitch pull (if required) 5. level & 6. the cushion. After you place all the ingredients for creating a cake into a pot & prepare for baking, there ain't much point if you then don't finish & don't bake the cake to complete the job. Same with autos. The lack of schools & instructors doing EOL's is I suspect possibly a reflection of skills?? It is a requirement in the syllabus. Our students must achieve EOL's without intervention from the instructor before a license test.

[FayeDeck]

Levo,

If you are interested in particular speeds for data recording, fair play to you, record away. (Gazelle 95kias, EC135 90KIAS).

If however it is to help achieve decent PFLs in any aircraft, my advice is to not complicate matters too much.

Most turbine helis will be decent for range at about 90 KIAS. The difference in range speed between those you have listed is negligible and indeed clearly limited by pilot accuracy whilst trying to select a field, shut down engs, etc etc.

Remember too that there is a big difference in an Autorotation and a PFL.

An auto is an academic exercise,it is about hitting numbers and noting glides, nr etc. Autos at different speeds and NRs give you a tool box of skills to pull out whenever you need them........that would be during a PFL; Or a real one I suppose:)

A PFL is all about making a field suitable, if that entails flying at 60 kts for a bit, then 72, then 96, all that is fine. If you are into the first third of a field, with sufficient energy to land safely with either a flare and cushion or just a constant attitude cushion it was a good PFL.

If you manage to shut down engs, get a call out, warn crew/pax etc etc.................a very nice bonus.:ok:

Happy Flying mate.

[Shawn Coyle]

Rotors88
I disagree that there is no point in power recovery autorotations. The aim is to teach someone how to get to a position over the ground they want to land on, and get there with a minimum of foreward speed and vertical speed. You don't need to touch down, and in fact there are a lot of places where you'd like the student to practice getting to that would not be good to touch down on. Power recoveries, if done right give 90% of the teaching points at 5% of the risk.

[rotors88]

the cake, remember the cake, if your going to bake a cake you add ALL the ingredients, prepare & finally you bake to perfection. An auto is much the same, without the end (EOL) you ain't done. If the ground is suitable then do he complete package from beginning to end, otherwise your not teaching all that is required, again its in the Helicopter VFR syllabus.

[Tailboom]

I do agree with rotors88 I think an auto should be to the ground, the problem is that alot of instructors out there can't manage it, yes the R22 can be a bit of a handfull but its quite interesting that quite a lot of the students I have flown with have never been down to the ground in an EOL.

I recently EOL landed a R44 and a R22 both from 10,000 feet it enabled me to demonstrate speed/roto rpm for what felt like ages and gave the student plenty of time to have a go himself. A 40 knot EOL in a R44 is something else !!!!

[rotors88]

Thank you Tailboom, may common sense, safety, airmanship & the ingredients (contents) of the Heli VFR syllabus prevail. Happy & Safe Flying :)

[mrwellington]

You need to know which way the wind blows before you take a p*ss.
Promoting touchdowns autos to newbees shows a complete lack of sensibility towards learning curves and teaching methods.:=
What's next....real tailrotor failures ?
Murphy is ready for your kind.

[rotors88]

Yeah we teach those too, & to the ground. Failed tail-rotor, jammed left, jammed right, jammed lever in different positions (max pwr, min pwr, lever full down) jammed cyclic & yes all to the ground. We teach our students these techniques so they may have the best possible opportunity to survive one of these occurrences. Again its in the syllabus so required to be taught. :=

[FayeDeck]

The Army Air Corps have stopped doing EOLs in Gazelle, apart from training at middle wallop I believe. This is due to the "risk/reward" ratio not being sufficiently stacked in favour of EOLs.

Rotors - How many Eng failures or deliberate shut downs have you had to date??

How many AC have been banged by practicing for something that is unlikely at best.

I personally think that students should be demonstrared EOLs during training or Type Rating and then possibly a currency of every 5 years or so, a flare recovery PFL is sufficient at other times.

For new studes following this, there is some questionable terminology being used......

Auto - Academic exercise to note glides at various speeds etc

PFL - Utilising Auto to make a landing site, normally recovered by a specified height.

EOL - Using auto to complete a landing without the assistance of the engine. Basically a PFL to land ...without the engine going:cool:

[rotors88]

Hello Fayedeck, in 19 short years of flying I have had 2 real jammed pedals & 1 real engine failure, all 3 landed without incident except maybe some unintended excessive moisture in my undies. Since instructing we practise EOL's & jammed controls at least 3, 4 or more a day, every day. No incidents, accidents or bang ups on my record from these training sorties, thank you. Interesting to note the Australian Army still goes all the way with both jammed controls & EOL's. Again read the BLOODY VFR Helicopter syllabus its a BLOODY requirement to teach these!!!!!!!! :8

[nigelh]

typical ausy eh :ugh:
ps would love to see your jammed cyclic landing :rolleyes: and even more the " oops my blades have delaminated in my R22 landing " Thats a MUST:D

possibly even a " my head appears to be stuck up my arse " landing too ??:ok:

[rotors88]

Lucky we don't fly the Robinson, which quite possibly is the must unsafe, fragile machine ever made, which has probably killed the most pilots due catastrophic airframes failures in history. There are even blades delaminating in the box before being flown!!:\ How do you deal with a delimitation in flight?? Easy don't get into a dodgy Robbie

[NickLappos]

rotors88,

Such explosions do little to convince others of your case, and leave me thinking that you have much to learn. It is easy for the ignorant to espouse such drivel.

It is far easier to toss a rock through a window than it is to roll a sheet of glass.

It could instead be said that the Robinson has introduced safe, affordable helicopter training and flight to thousands across the world.

[Bravo73]

It is far easier to toss a rock through a window than it is to roll a sheet of glass.


Nick's wisdom ROCKS! :ok:

[FayeDeck]

Rotors, sorry, I appear to have rattled your cage, you are not really getting my point which is....... maybe the book is wrong??

I too have been flying some 20 years with all the various dramas that statistically entails, mind you a SEF on a Lynx MK1 used to be so common it was moved from the red to the white pages of the FRCs!

I just think that the risk/reward ratio is stacked in favour of being shown some emergencies at certain stages of training and then as my previous post stated....

[FayeDeck]

Oh Levo,

Sorry this has drifted off topic a bit.

If you want to chat give me a shout by PM or e mail me

[email protected]