Pilot Exiting While Rotors Turning

[g0lfer]

During a recent trip to a small Caribbean island near Venezuala I watched the local pleasure flight pilot exit an R44 with the rotors still turning at what seemed to me to be quite a high speed. They continued for several minutes in very breezy conditions. This seemed reckless to me given the heli was surrounded by water also. Does anyone know of any incidents when this sloppy approach has caused problems? I guess it wasn't his heli?
Incidently, on his next flight he didn't do a walkaround or sprag clutch check before lifting. Decided not to fly with him.

[Rotating Star]

gOlfer

You don't say in your thread if the engine had been shut down. If the aircraft is fitted with a rotor brake you should always shut down and bring the rotors to a stop before leaving the controls. I know of at least 2 instances when this wasn't done. The first involved the partial scalping of a passenger who was being guided out of the disc area by a pilot who had not shutdown his aircraft. The autopilot had not been disengaged and had unknown to the pilot motored the disc forwards.:ouch:

The second occasion occurred at Battersea Heliport when a "celebrity" pilot left the controls with engine running to assist with passenger unloading. Needless to say he received the mother of all rollickings from ATC. :=

Both incidents were caused by a desire to save time. It ain't worth it.

[g0lfer]

RS

Yes the engine was shut down but the blade sail was quite significant in the breeze. Being an R44 it was relying on the frictions to hold the controls in place, presumably a strong gust could move the stick, tilt the disc and good bye tail?

[JimBall]

Hope it didn't stress your holiday.

[Oldlae]

I have heard of two occasions of the pilot leaving the cockpit with rotors turning with frictions tightened. A Jet Ranger pilot had to unload the baggage bay after landing on a rig, he opened the baggage bay door, removed the contents and when closing the door pushed too hard and the a/c started to yaw and eventually went over the side of the rig into the sea, I don't know how he got home. The second case was during a Bell 212 ferry to Nigeria, the battery temperature warning system indicated an overheat, they landed near a lake and with rotors running etc., the pilot and engineer removed the battery and placed it in the lake and then carried on with the ferry, arranging for a battery to be shipped out to them.

[Hughesy]

Easy to fix that.....dont fly Bell products then :E

[bvgs]

Was it Aruba by any chance??

[bullshitproof]

Well I never,but "HEY you never, can be two carrfull though, Keep safe thats what I say.

[bladeslapper]

I saw several instances of 'blades turning and no pilot', while in New Zealand. I actually watched one pilot wash down his Jet ranger, eat his lunch prior to climbing back into his still running a/c. I presume very secure and positive locks are fitted and perhaps the regs are not the same as the UK.
Clearly the concept seems to work for them!

[brett s]

When I was doing ag work it was the norm - sometimes you'd be working by yourself, filling your own tanks among other things.

Never at flight rpm, and always with a positive collective lock (not just collective friction) in addition to cyclic friction. Never had any trouble, nor did anyone else I worked with.

There weren't any non-crew people around to walk into a blade, so it was an acceptable risk in this situation.

[BHenderson]

The ANO says:

'An operator must ensure that a helicopter rotor is not turned under
power without a qualified pilot at the controls.'

It would therefore be legally acceptable in the UK whether wise or not.

[VeeAny]

BHenderson

Sorry for nitpicking but the ANO actually says An operator shall not permit a helicopter rotor to be turned under power for the
purpose of making a flight unless there is a person at the controls entitled in
accordance with article 26 of this Order to act as pilot-in-command of the helicopter.

There is a common misconception that it says what you posted. Whilst it is similar, its not quite the same. If the purpose is not to go flying then seems it is still acceptable for students to start helicopters. Also allows non-pilot engineers to carry out ground runs.

I am sure that in this thread the intention would be to then go flying, so the ANO def would still apply. Knowing where to find some of the minutae can be handy sometimes.

I am not trying to be an arse, just point something out.

I can't express an opinion as to whether its sensible to leave a helicopter rotors running, as I am UK based and we don't tend to do it. But the rest of the world seems to manage quite happily without an inordinate number of accidents.

What other countries than Australia and Canada, and I think the USA is it a normal practice ?

Gary

[jeepys]

Okay okay, if it really bothers you that much what somebody else does then go and hibernate. I drove my car on the motorway at 80mph and it is killing me knowing that on a drivers spotters website I am being condenmed as a lunatic but hey, life goes on.

Getting out the cab with rotors running is not something I have done or will do but people do do it and on their head be it (or maybe off with their head).

Is this topic that serious that we must start a campaign against anyone who has a left a chopper with the blades turning.

Calm down and get a life.

[outofwhack]

An experienced Bell 47 AG operator I know says he always jumps out after engine start to check for oil, hydraulic or fuel leaks during the warm up. Seems like a reasonable thing to me when operating with hard worked machines. Better than discovering a problem while airborne surely.

[Hughesy]

I fly tourist's during the of NZ summer season, and we land at 7000amsl on the top of the glaciers t let the tourists get out and have a walk on the snow. Now we leave the machines running the whole time, for a few good reasons.
1: Up there the weather can change really fast, it always amazes me just how fast. You can go from a picture perfect day to having cloud rolling in a matter of minutes and then the whole valley is gone...but then it can clear just as fast. So I dont really want to get stuck up there with the pax, so if it turns, we can bundle them in and get going again.
2: On a good day, we can do over 20 flights up there, so shutting down every 20-40 mins seems pointless, plus costly. Also if you cant restart.....see above. PLus refueling, seeing we only carry upto 56%, and dont ever go below 20%, it takes hardly anytime to refuel so again its easier to leave it running.

Now before anyone jumps up and down saying it only takes 30 sec to shutdown....we operate Super D's and D2's....which have a 2 min cool down time. I have refueled in that time.

It is not without its risks, but careful pax managment and proper safety briefings then the risk is reduced vastly.

cheers all

Hughesy

[NickLappos]

Back in 1968, the US Army taught students to friction the controls at idle and get out to do a solo area recon for confined area practice! The bet was this was better than having us shutdown and then fail to restart, with the ensuing goat-rope to recover all the stranded helos!

[havoc]

Wind gust



MORRISTOWN - A helicopter pilot died this afternoon in an apparent freak accident, authorities said.

The pilot had stopped to refuel his chartered helicopter at Morristown Air Service on Old Highway 11E around 3:30 p.m. when the top rotor blade struck him and cut off the top of his head, Morristown Police Department Lt. Michelle Jones said. He died at the scene.

The man's name, age and destination weren't immediately available.

The helicopter carried two passengers from West Virginia, police spokeswoman Bonnie Langdon said. They had gone inside the airport, and the pilot had paid for the fuel and was climbing back into the helicopter when the blade hit him, police said.

The Federal Aviation Administration has been called in to investigate the death.

[BHenderson]

Gary I think we have crossed wires. Golfer in his original post stated that the engine had been shut down. Now in the UK according to the ANO, it is acceptable to get out in this instance. If the engine was running however the ANO does not allow this. Simple.

[212man]

Whilst it is similar, its not quite the same. If the purpose is not to go flying then seems it is still acceptable for students to start helicopters.

So how do you suppose student fly solo?? :ugh:

[VeeAny]

212man

Thats the bit that causes arguments in flying schools around the country.

How does a solo student start up on his own ? Last instructor seminar I was at, this caused a it of debate, and the FIEs opinion was that until someone has completed their first solo, they can't start the helicopter on their own, after that they are suitably qualified.

I think it is left open to interpretation which does none of us any favours.
Edited to Add, Article 26 looks clearer than the last time I read and seems to have been reworded and now reads like it allows solo students to do what was causing all the confusion when they first reworded article 50.

I've edited this again to stop the entire thread going off on a tangent. I find no evidence of changes to article 26, like I originally thought had happened , and on reading it again today it seems pretty clear in its intentions.

Here is a link to the thread were the confusion over this was discussed earlier this year http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=275418&highlight=navigation+order+helicopter+rotor&page=2

GS

[Gaseous]

In days gone by it was accepted normal practice at a local school to leave fuel injected aircraft running, with the clutch disengaged for quite long periods between flights, blades going round but not under direct power. This was because they are not easy to restart when hot. Engine running refueling was also normal practice.
It was not unusual to see a couple of unattended, running aircraft. The type in question did not rely on friction to hold the cyclic central.

The practice has now stopped I believe at the request of the airport operator. They must have done a risk assesment and didnt like it. As far as I know it never caused any problems. It just made one careful on the apron.:ooh:

I'm sure many other PPRuNers will have seen this too.

[Flaxton Flyer]

Gaseous - are you talking about rotors running refuels on piston-engined training aircraft? If so, I presume that's Robbies, Enstroms, H200 or Bell47. Don't they all have their tanks "up top"?

The danger there if you have a fuel spill and fuel ends up over the engine / exhaust. I could understand taking that risk out in the boonies with the chance of the engine not starting and you getting eaten by dingoes, but for training - and on your home field?

[g0lfer]

JimBall

No it didn't stress my holiday, just meant I had to stay in the bar and not go flying! Had a great holiday in any event.

BVGS
You got it.

[I Build 92's]

At one time we actually had an option on the S76A so you could do this! Small flip out fork from under the instrument panel that you velcro'd the cyclic into... This was prompted by a VIP aircraft that came into the Service Center one fine day....when he exited the aircraft with rotors turning at 100% there wasn't a ground crew man in sight to greet him!!:=

[Pofman]

If subject to JAR-OPS 3, then Subpart D JAR-OPS 3.210(d) applies.

An operator shall not permit a helicopter rotor to be turned under power without a qualified pilot at the controls.

[Gaseous]

Flaxton. Correct on all counts. Presumably, the commercial pressure to keep aircraft flying determined the policy. I'm guessing as I was a student. Some pistons really can be impossible to restart when hot.

I didnt lose any sleep over it.

I am quite happy to do an engine running refuel on my Enstrom. I Just make sure I dont spill any.

[helonorth]

I stopped in to see if I could get a job flying tours in Tennessee. They
had a 206 sitting on the pad idling unattended for at least 45 minutes.
They thought engine cycles cost more than fuel. It was still running
when I left. Didn't have any Robinson time, so no job.

[bvgs]

I've flown with these guys in aruba and I have seen them leave the heli while the rotors were still turning but they had almost stopped. The one thing that did make me feel uneasy was that the pilot had the carb heat locked down, ie no carb heat at any point during the flight or landing. really didn't like that. was there 4 weeks ago and decided not to go up again, partly because I'd done it a few times already and partly 'cause I didn't enjoy the last flight as my eye was on the carb heat guage. When quized he said that it wasn't really applicable due to their climate, the flight was uneventful and we landed wuth no carb heat and all was well....apart from my heart! My advice and advice I was given while training, if in doubt the answers NO!

Glad you enjoyed Aruba.....great place!

[somepitch]

i'm surprised at the difference in outlook between the uk and canada...here it is common practice (though avoided if possible) and even approved in our company operations manual. i feel it is safe to do so with the frictions on at idle, obviously within reasonable wind limits a decent landing site. i suppose a large part of the reason for it being so common over here is the inaccessability of the landing sites we use.

[Gaseous]

Somepitch,
Well said:D:D:D
The 'British Outlook' pervades all aspects of British society - especially the workplace. As a nation we are so risk averse, paranoid, willing to be ruled, threatened, regulated, overtaxed and generally ordered obout that we are conditioned to condemn and generally flap about over any practice that mildy offends us. So many times I come across the attitude that "there ought to be a law against it - and if there isnt we'll make one up anyway". It rears its ugly head on PPRuNE regularly.
Rant over.
Phil, Anarchist.

[g0lfer]

BVGS
Aruba is great and I will return (3rd time) but won't be flying with Aruba Helicopters after what I witnessed and you confirmed. Not just the rotors turning bit but no pre flights checks either. An accident waiting to happen?

Gaseous
So do you abandon your own Enstrom once you've swithched the engine off with rotors still whizzing?

Somepitch
I don't understand the link you make between inaccessible landing sites and abandonong ship with rotors turning. Can you explain?

[Gaseous]

Occasionally in private when there is no risk to anyone but me. There is minimal, if any, risk to the aircraft which I am comfortable with. Sitting in it doesnt reduce that risk.

I wouldnt do it in a Robbie as it relies on the frictions holding to prevent damage plus the brake makes the process quick enough. There is no brake on the Enstrom,the blades are heavy and it takes a long time to stop.

Never when pax or onlookers present or at a public site, although I would get out if errant trespassers or animals put themselves at risk. Im sure shooing them off is safer than waving from the cockpit while steadfastly holding the cyclic in the middle. Its nice to know the aircraft wont self destruct if this were ever required.

As I said, it used to be standard practice at a local school until comparatively recently. Done it plenty of times at that particular airport but not anymore.

[Mars]

************************************************** ******************************
** Report created 11/16/2007 Record 1 **
************************************************** ******************************

IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 555BH Make/Model: B407 Description: Bell 407
Date: 11/09/2007 Time: 2110

Event Type: Accident Highest Injury: Fatal Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Unknown

LOCATION
City: MORRISTOWN State: TN Country: US

DESCRIPTION
N555BH, A BELL 407 ROTORCRAFT, WHILE STANDING WITH ROTOR STILL RUNNING, THE
PILOT WALKED INTO THE TURNING MAIN ROTOR AND WAS FATALLY INJURED,
MORRISTOWN, TN

INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 1
# Crew: 1 Fat: 1 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:

WEATHER: NOT REPORTED

OTHER DATA
Activity: Unknown Phase: Standing Operation: OTHER


FAA FSDO: NASHVILLE, TN (SO03) Entry date: 11/13/2007

[Gaseous]

There are plenty more like that one too. Perhaps the most graphic and relevant to the title of this thread:

Arriving back at a rural location after a flight in a small Robinson helicopter, the pilot had shut the aircraft down and exited the aircraft while the rotors ran down. According to reports, his four-year-old daughter approached him and was fatally injured when he lifted her onto his shoulders – and into the still moving main-rotor disc….

Whether you do or don't is up to ones own risk tolerance but its clear that moving under the disk in motion is not without peril. Its a bit like crossing the road. With care it can be accomplished reliably and safely but get it wrong and you can end up very dead.

[skidbiter2]

I wonder how one is to unload the passengers?
Do I have to shut down and wait for the blades to stop with every load?
If I am sitting in the heli while the blades stop turning is that going to stop the blade sail? (with no rotor brake)
Not sure how I would go about shutting down when doing a hover exit/entry?

Go fly planes, they like all the rules!

[Gaseous]

This is what I was taught.
Preferably with everything stopped. This is the only way my wife will do it.
If it must be rotors running, do it with RRPM at flying speed, pax approaches in line of sight of pilot - not on a slope, and at a pre arranged signal from pilot. Pax keeps head down, pilot keeps tip plane up. Keep eye contact. Pax gets in. Do not allow boarding at idle as the tip plane will be much lower and the pilot cannot control it. Getting them out is pretty much the reverse. It may be different for other types.
Blade sail? With an Enstrom once the grips are on the droop stops the pilot has no control over the rotor. You can do what you like with the cyclic it makes little difference. It takes a big gust to upset an Enstrom rotor.
With a teetering head one does ones best with the cyclic and its in the lap of the gods.

[sitigeltfel]

Not a rotorhead but this thread reminded me of a story I heard many moons ago.

A Heliski pilot in the Alps had dropped of his pax but his base could not raise him on the radio. Another chopper was sent up to look for him and they found the pilots body by the tail rotor, which he seemed to have walked through. There was some speculation that he may have got out for a slash.

Possibly just one of those "stories" that go around?

[FH1100 Pilot]

Do not allow boarding at idle as the tip plane will be much lower and the pilot cannot control it.
Err, what?

Not in the helicopter I currently fly...nor any of the ones I've ever flown.

..and they found the pilots body by the tail rotor, which he seemed to have walked through. There was some speculation that he may have got out for a slash.
Sounds like he got one.

[Gaseous]

FH1100, just to clarify,

Tip plane path = a flat disc traced in the air by the spinning rotor blade tips.
I'm sure you know that.

It is nearer the ground at idle RPM because the blades droop. It is therefore more likely to lop your nut off. Also cyclic control is not effective as the blades are not flying.
unless there is no gravity in Pensacola;)

edit: It occured to me that if you fly a jet powered thingy (FH1100 perhaps)the idle speed may be significantly higher than a piston Enstrom. I dont know about jets and I did qualify it by saying it may be different for other types.

An Enstrom at idle with the clutch disengaged will be doing about 40-60 RRPM depending on how it is set up. Not enough to lift the blades off the stops but enough to give you a fair headache.

[perfrej]

I recall discussions of said practice (leaving the machine with rotors turning under power) during basic flight training. The general idea was to NOT leave a machine subject to gound resonance with rotors turning under power. Machines not subject to ground resonance was considered OK to leave. I guess it makes sense, and in my humble opinion it is worse to leave it with rotors spinning down with engine shut down because of the risk of blade drooping and sailing.

If my memory serves me correctly, machines with semi-rigid or rigid rotor heads can not get into a state of ground resonance, while fully articulated can (hence the oleo dampers on the 500, 300, enstroms and what have you, and the abscence of dampers on the Bo105 and the 206).

Point me in the general direction if I'm in over my head in this...

/p

[skidbiter2]

It's mostly only the three bladed systems you need to worry about with ground resonance, you can get it with a h500 but with all those blades it doesn't give the same problem.
Although I have been wrong before:ooh:

[somepitch]

golfer,

flungdung has it spot on. if i'm on the top of a mountain or in the arctic by myself where another machine could not get in to land to fix a machine that wouldn't start, or where the climate would make it very uncomfortable/dangerous to live without a helicopter heater, i definitely would take the small risk of leaving it running while i fuel, put on a longline/etc.

[Pilot DAR]

I'm only a 40 hour helicopter student. I have found that the self disipline of sitting and tidying up the cockpit after a flight to be very relaxing, while the blades coast to a stop in their own time. That's what the operator's checklist says to do, and I do everything else on the checklist, why not finish the job properly?

I have not walked the mile in the other pilot's shoes, so I'm not critisizing, and I suppose there will be a time when letting it wind down on it's own will make some sense to me, but for now, I'm still a little scared of screwing up!

I'll wait!

Pilot DAR

[Fareastdriver]

At the FOB at Bessbrook in the mid 70s a loaded Puma approached the LZ. There was a Scout and a Sioux rotors running on the small pads in front of the main pad the Puma was going for. IA with SOPs the Puma transmitted his arrival for the benefit of the two helis burning and turning.
The Puma landed. The Sioux exited stage left upside down and a frantic army pilot entered stage right from the Ops hut.

[Gaseous]

Morning Perfrej,
Ground resonance is not an issue at anything other than flying RPM with a little collective pitch applied. It is stopped by either lifting off or lowering the collective from that point. It certainly won't happen with the engine shut down. Again related to the type I fly only.
Pilot Dar, I do that too and often sit for some time in the cockpit afterwards as well. Its a place of great tranquility after a flight - but sometimes the priority is to get the thing covered up and clear off so I go and get the cover. By the time I get back its stopped.
Minimal risk to me. No risk to aircraft. No risk to anyone else. Not illegal and was quite acceptable when I did my training.
Not acceptable to a lot of PPRuNers apparently though.

[jeepys]

Gaseous, good morning again.

I know it may be going off the original thread a little but with the ground resonance if you are subjected to it on landing then quite rightly lift off again, however if you land on get resonance and shut the engine down the damage has been done and the a/c may continue to get wrecked unless you stop the rotors sharpish - I think.

[Fareastdriver]

There is a world of difference between heavy padding and ground resonance.
If you have ground resonance you have not got time to shut the rotor down.

[[email protected]]

Gaseous - Ground resonance more often than not occurs during start up when the Nr is not at normal speed. Designers try to make sure that the rotor does not excite any natural resonant frequencies of other components (particularly landing gear) but unequal tyre pressures/oleo pressures or uneven ground can negate this. You do not need collective pitch applied.

[FH1100 Pilot]

Fareastdriver:
At the FOB at Bessbrook in the mid 70s a loaded Puma approached the LZ. There was a Scout and a Sioux rotors running on the small pads in front of the main pad the Puma was going for. IA with SOPs the Puma transmitted his arrival for the benefit of the two helis burning and turning.
The Puma landed. The Sioux exited stage left upside down and a frantic army pilot entered stage right from the Ops hut.
I suppose there may be many(?) of these anecdotal stories about small helicopters being flipped over by big helicopters. In the above-mentioned case of The Puma And The Sioux, I doubt that the Sioux driver could have done anything even if he had been at the controls...other than roll it up to 3100 and fly away before the Puma got there.

Teetering systems have no...as in ZERO...control power when the skids are on the ground. This applies whether the MR rpm is at idle or full. Doesn't matter what you do with the cyclic. For the cyclic to "work" the helicopter has to be in the air. And even then, cyclics in teetering helicopters have little control power as Nick, Shawn et.al. have constantly explained.

The Sioux was likely more downwind of the Puma than the Scout, I'd say, and at least the pilot was not along for the ride to possibly be injured.

I've flown just about my entire career in two-bladed systems. In 10,000 hours-plus, this is my experience: Sitting at idle, I've had all kinds of helicopters come in and park next to me, and I've had all kinds of weird wind gusts impact on the helicopter. Never...and I do mean *NEVER* have I had to actually do anything with the cyclic. Oh, sometimes the ship will shudder and shake and slide around a bit, causing me to throw the clipboard up in the air and grab the sticks in panic - not that there was anything I had to (or could) do. Never have I had to move the cyclic in response to a "sudden gust" of wind.

If the cyclic stays centered, then it will *ALWAYS* bring the rotor back to that trim position within a blade or two - it can't help it.

Now, let's talk about the sustained downwash from a big ship landing immediately adjacent and upwind. I reckon that if a Puma landed so close to me as to blow my helicopter over, then it's his fault for landing too close and MY fault for not realizing that he's a dumba** and getting out of there when I had the chance...or stopping the rotor and securing the blade/ship.

At PHI, we had to tie the *aircraft* down to the platform with big straps if a medium (e.g. 412) was to land beside us. But we could not even be on the deck, tied-down or not, even if there was room, if a "big ship" (Puma, 214ST) landed.

To sum up, at idle there is not a lot you can do. If the gust is small and brief enough to cause a rotor divergence, the cyclic will bring it back (if the cyclic has been properly frictioned, of course). If the gust/upset is so large that it moves the helicopter, the hapless pilot is just along for the ride. Good luck getting it spooled up to 100% before it falls over. At that point, the only thing the pilot is good for is securing the engine, fuel valve and master switch.

I don't know what happened with the most recent case where the *pilot* of the 407 got whacked and killed by the MR blade. I'm baffled at the sequence of events that lead up to that mess. How could that pilot have left the disk so low in the front?? When I'm "hot-loading" in my 206, which I do quite often in my operation, I pull the cyclic almost all the way right-rear. (I know that the blades won't hit the tailboom even at full aft cyclic.) If I get out of the ship while it's running (and sometimes I do - horrors!), I make sure that the cyclic is centered laterally and aft of center longitudinally (given the 206's forward mast tilt) to get the disk way up in front.

This whole thread would be needless if pilots would just exercise some common sense once in a while. Unfortunately, as we see all too often in our industry, pilots do not come so-equipped.

I keep in mind the amusing image of the lone S-76 pilot in Los Angeles, California a couple of years ago who got out of his big Sikorsky (without anyone else in the cockpit) to check a door while it was running at 100%, only to have the dang thing try to take off without him. Now *there* was a Real Man Of Genius! One can only imagine how the ensuing phone call to the Chief Pilot went, but it must have been hilarious.

[skidbiter2]

FH1100

I'm not sure if you have time in the 407 or not?
But, it's mast is tilted forward so the blades are low in front like the astar/squirrel, so any uneven ground can have the blades coming quite low, the 407 also has a light that comes on telling you to center the cyclic if you have it to far from what it calls center, I guess it has to do with the stress on the head?
So I'm not sure how far aft you could safely leave the cyclic?
I'm not familiar with that accident, but maybe it was uneven ground?

Hmmm...I seem to be full of questions :hmm:

[Fareastdriver]

FH1100 Pilot.
Good post. Actually, which has been proven many times, a Sioux can take a Puma landing beside it as long as the Sioux is under control.
This thread has a lot of people justifying why they leave the heli turning and burning to do something else. I have no experience in their particular operations so I am not prepared to argue, as opposed to some arnchair warriors who know nothing about it. In my facet I do things that other disciplines would regard as suicidal, but I do it, again and again.
How many people have walked into the rotor of a heli running unaccompanied? Not a lot, and those who have should have know better. Should it work for operations where it is neccessary then let it be. There are horses for courses, just accept that and let sleeping dogs lie.

[AB139engineer]

I can not believe all the banter about whether its is acceptable or not to leave a helicopter running unattended without a qualified person at the controls. I have personally had to run out on to the ramp and shut down 2 machines over the years that were shuffling along the ramp with no one on board while the pilot(s) was on the phone or he had forgotten the JLB.
I also know of a long ranger(engine running) that slid down a mountain side while the pilot landed for a leak, and another time the pilot got out of a running helicopter and walked into the main rotor while on uneven ground. So if you dumb enough to walk away from your helicopter with the engine running, your dumb enough to get killed.

[FH1100 Pilot]

Not to be argumentative, but...

skidbiter2: "So I'm not sure how far aft you could safely leave the cyclic?"

Light or not, I would at least leave it high enough that it wouldn't whack me own head off! (Is it a red light? I've got at least two amber caution lights illuminated in my B-model when I'm at idle.)

I've never flown the 407, but is the mast tilted forward more steeply than a 206? I thought the S-76 was bad!

Fareastdriver: "Actually, which has been proven many times, a Sioux can take a Puma landing beside it as long as the Sioux is under control."

Apparently not!

Control? What control? Again, at idle rpm in a helicopter with a teetering system there is NOTHING that a pilot can do but hang on. At idle that baby was goin' over! Teetering rotors have *NO* control power on the ground at idle and flat pitch. The only thing that would have saved the Sioux is if the pilot ran it up to 100% and was prepared to lift off. Which he couldn't do because he wasn't in attendance at the moment - oops!

I'd bet that there was some wind "helping" the downwash and outflow velocity of the Puma.

[skidbiter2]

FH1100

Not sure on the comparison to the 206, never done a lot in them, but on flat ground I can grab the blades out front of the 407 when they are stopped, of coarse they are higher when turning and I agree you are or should be aware of your blades when you hop out, although we as humans are prone to brain farts at times.

oh and I'm only a short arse so the blades are pretty low.

No not a bad red light, just an amber "center cyclic" light if you don't have it centered.

And on back on the topic, I have no problem with getting out with the engine running, always have done and still will, never had a problem, yes there could be a day that I do, but as long as you are careful and you don't go far away (eg inside for a coffee) It makes the job run better, as a bush pilot you don't always have a crew man to help out, in fact I never seem to have one? hmmm....maybe I will run take a shower! :confused:
I think our camp water supply has been thawed out?

[ShyTorque]

FH1100,
Now, let's talk about the sustained downwash from a big ship landing immediately adjacent and upwind. I reckon that if a Puma landed so close to me as to blow my helicopter over, then it's his fault for landing too close and MY fault for not realizing that he's a dumba** and getting out of there when I had the chance...or stopping the rotor and securing the blade/ship.

You have obviously not been to Bessbrook. It was a main helicopter base in Northern Ireland; an operational theatre at the time (i.e. certain locals were shooting at helicopters with some effective weaponry). It was really too small for the requirements of the helicopters using it and at that time was an extremely busy landing site and was surrounded by a rocket fence.

I would say that in the circumstances the dumbass was almost certainly not the Puma pilot! To leave an unattended helicopter of any sort running there was a stupid idea because it was highly likely that someone else would have to overfly your parking slot on the way in or out and in the British military it is always assumed that a running helicopter is manned!

BTW, Pilots were told where to land by "Buzzard" and it often meant overflying very close to other aircraft. You didn't hang about on the approach, to minimise the risk of an "AK-47 welcome" or worse by the boys from just over the border. No room to pussyfoot about in the hover inside the rocket fence waiting for someone to finish his pee break! :rolleyes:

[Fareastdriver]

Personally. I wouldn't leave my car with the engine running.

[Trojan1981]

Several years ago in East Timor I was flying as a crewman on Russian MI-8s, assisting the loadmaster whenever Jordanian or Kiwi units required resupply.
On several occasions we arrived at LZ early and had to wait for pers from the recieving unit to arrive. When this happened the pilots would often leave the cockpit, with the helo turning and burning, and light up a smoke.

When it first happened I was a bit shocked, I asked the Loadie if it was safe, he mumbled a few words in broken English:confused: and it soon became routine. I think I have it on video, I would post it but its on HI-8 and I don't know how to convert it to digital.

[Saint Jack]

I was recently asked by a helicopter pilot if there is any legislation, or data of equivalent status, that specifically permits or prohibits the sole pilot of a helicopter from exiting the cockpit with the rotors running and I couldn't give a difinitive answer.

The question arises from the perenial problem of ensuring that all doors have been properly closed - with the seatbelts inside the helicopter - after dropping-off passengers and continuing with a flight. No qualified ground-staff are present.

Yes, I know the Flight Manual states something like "..pilot to remain at the controls until the rotors have stopped..." and may be construed as the answer to the question, but this is usually an item of the engine shut-down procedure and therefore it could be reasonbly argued that as the pilot does not intend to shut-down, then this requirement is not applicable.

Can anyone out there point me in the right direction?

[SayItIsntSo]

Answered you own question!! It is also in your local air law and usually a good ops manual.
Get out of the helicopter and leave it on its own at your own peril! Been there, done that, got the T-shirt...the thing left without me.
Never drop passengers any where you can’t shut down if doors and seat belts are a potential concern, as at least once in a career you will get caught out. Do it every day and your really pushing your luck...and you wouldn’t work for me / my organisation, you are too big a risk. I am older and wiser now! Please learn from my mistake and the mistakes of people like me.
P.S. Remember the Dauphin fatality at Penang a few years back? I believe that was another example of just how wrong it can go.

[paco]

JAA/EASA require a competent person to be at the controls (must be a pilot for helicopters), but it is legal in Canada as long as the controls are immobilised. Dunno about other countries.

Phil

[John Eacott]

Also legal in Australia for skid helicopters with the controls locked (and a few other provisos). St Jack's scenario would certainly meet the requirements here for a skid helicopter: but in regards to which country's legislation is he asking?

CAO 95.7

7 Exemption from general requirement for pilot to be at controls

7.1 If the condition set out in paragraph 7.2 is complied with, a helicopter is exempt from compliance with subregulation 225 (1) (but not subregulation 225 (2)) and subregulation 230 (2) of the regulations.

7.2 The exemption given by paragraph 7.1, in relation to a helicopter, is subject to the condition that a pilot must, from the time of starting the engine or engines until the time of stopping the engine or engines at the end of the flight, be at the controls of the helicopter unless:
(a) the helicopter is fitted with skid type landing gear; and
(b) the helicopter is fitted with a serviceable means of locking the cyclic and collective controls; and
(c) if a passenger occupies a control seat fitted with fully or partially functioning controls or is seated in a position where he or she is able to interfere with such controls, the controls are locked and the pilot is satisfied that the passenger will not interfere with the controls; and
(d) the pilot considers that his or her absence from the cockpit is essential to the safety of the helicopter or of the persons on, or in the vicinity of, the helicopter; and
(e) the pilot remains in the immediate vicinity of the helicopter.

[Saint Jack]

Thanks for the quick replies guys.

SayItIsntSo: Fully understand and agree with your sentiments. I'm leaning towards advising the pilot to ensure that a small handful of 'competant persons' at every possible location he may find himself be given 'awareness instruction' with regards to personnel movement around helicopters with turning rotors and proper operation of doors etc. Not full-fledged handlers perhaps, but competant to ensure safe passenger embarkation and disembarkation. Or simply shut-down the helicopter wherever possible. However, there is an Asian way of thinking that that insists a mechanic be carried if a shut-down away from base is anticipated. Ever seen a 206B with 2 crew and a mechanic turn-up for a pleasure flight? Happens regularly in one Asian country.

Yes, I do remember the Dauphin accident at Penang. It was in the local newspapers dated Saturday, 1st April 2006 and despite the date it was certainly no joke. On that occasion, the Dauphin was giving joyrides to local children and immediately prior to what would have been the fifth flight the person handling the children during the rotors-running change, not the pilot who was at the controls, inexplicably walked forward away from the helicopter "...and a thud was heard..." I still have a cutting of the newspaper article, complete with a very graphic colour photograph, and regularly use it to illustrate the dangers of turning rotors, particularly when I'm visiting an S76 location.

paco: Thanks, do you know the actual JAA/EASA reference?

John Eacott: Thanks also, the helicopter is a privately-owned 206L4 on the Indian register.

[parabellum]

Back in 1968 in Iran an AB206A on pop-out flotation gear, (High skids etc), landed on the metal heli-deck of a rig and all pax got out and disappeared down the stairs, leaving the pilot with a heavy HF radio, (or similar), in the baggage bay and the helicopter out of balance. The rule was, 'never shut down on a helideck if there is only room for one', the logic being that if you couldn't get a start you were stuck until sea born help arrived.

The captain frictioned down and went round to get the piece of equipment out but the 206 started to move, (metal skids over a metal deck), and the helicopter eventually went over the side. Luckily it went into the sea and no one was injured.

[MOSTAFA]

I have to say on many occasions we left the Scout (single pilot) running at GI in (single) jungle clearings; sometimes for as much as 30 minutes whilst disappearing into the ulu.

Twas also not uncommon to get out on the jungle platform and unload the back whilst running!

Wonderful days.

[Winch-control]

Sat on Bobs Peak in Queenstown , New Zealand last week and watched Squirrels coming and going all day with the a/c brought to ground idle (rotors running) and the Pilot letting pax in/out, no one at the controls. Pilot walking the pax safely to the edge of the heli pad before returning to the cab.

[JimL]

Saint Jack,

JAR-OPS 3.210(d) (CAT):
(d) An operator shall not permit a helicopter rotor to be turned under power for the purpose of flight without a qualified pilot at the controls
ICAO Annex 6 Part III, Section II, Chapter 2.2.4.2 (CAT):
2.2.4.2 A helicopter rotor shall not be turned under power, for the purpose of flight, without a qualified pilot at the controls. The operator shall provide appropriately specific training and procedures to be followed for all personnel, other than qualified pilots, who are likely to carry out the turning of a rotor under power for purposes other than flight.
ICAO Annex 6 Part III, Section III, Chapter 2.17 (GA):
A helicopter rotor shall not be turned under power for the purpose of flight without a qualified pilot at the controls.
Jim

[bolkow]

did hear a horror story about a close miss when the pilot of a bolkow heli on a rock lighthouse got off after making the controls safe but with the rotors turning under power, heli began to skip accross the pad as a resuolt of the wind updraught in that area, a quick thinging lighthouse keeper saved the day by throwing himself accross the skid until the pilot seeing what was happeneing jumped back in and took control

[paco]

Just for the record, here is the CARS reference:

Starting and Ground Running of Aircraft Engines

602.10 (1) No person shall start an engine of an aircraft unless

(a) a pilot's seat is occupied by a person who is competent to control the aircraft;

(b) precautions have been taken to prevent the aircraft from moving; or

(c) in the case of a seaplane, the aircraft is in a location from which any movement of the aircraft will not endanger persons or property.

(2) No person shall leave an engine of an aircraft running unless

(a) a pilot's seat is occupied by a person who is competent to control the aircraft; or

(b) where no persons are on board the aircraft,

(i) precautions have been taken to prevent the aircraft from moving, and

(ii) the aircraft is not left unattended.


Phil

[WikiRFM]

What about the POH? Under the limitations for the R22 and R44, it specifies "Minimum crew is 1 pilot".

[Gordy]

Here in the U.S. you can get it written into your 135 ops specs to allow the pilot to leave the controls. I had it in Hawaii when I flew there. We had FAA approved procedures for it, and also had procedures for ground crew to do a "control hold" if we needed to run to the "blue room".

It read words to the effect of:

"Exiting the aircraft with engine running. The pilot may leave the pilots seat and remain within the immediate vicinity of the helicopter in order to check for fuel levels, oil levels, seat belts, headsets, etc."

In fact, my op specs required the pilot to "visually inspect the fuel level in the tank", so one was in violation if you did not get out and check.

I still have copies of them somewhere in my office, they are standard for all tour helicopters in Hawaii that conduct engines running re-fueling.

[FH1100 Pilot]

This is one of "those topics" that always sets off a firestorm of emotional outbursts. One school shouts, "DON'T GET OUT!" while another says, "Eh, what's the big deal?"

As Gordy points out, the U.S. FAA doesn't seem to have a problem with it. They've even issued one of those non-binding Advisory Circulars about how to do it "safely" (AC91-32b which still uses images of a Bell 47J so that tells you how old it is).

Anecdotally, we hear horror stories...some awfully questionable...like the one about a person who threw himself over a skid to stop a sliding Bolkow? Uhhh...not! Once a mighty Bo105 gets sliding, no mere mortal is going to stop it. If it stopped, it stopped on its own.

Then someone mentioned an AB206 that got blown off an oil platform in...what?...1968? Oh, how timely! Haven't we had a more recent example than that?

Look, getting out of a running helicopter is not dangerous in and of itself. In all my years of flying helicopters for money (28 so far), I've never been in one on the ground at idle rpm that did anything wierd that I could do anything about other than hang on. And I worked for PHI offshore for 13 years. I've never had one catch on fire or blow up. The controls are ineffective at idle.

Legal or not in your particular country, the problem with "getting out while running" is that it requires common sense. And that is something that is strangely lacking among our peer pilot group, evidently. Common sense items would include (but are not limited to):

IDLE RPM!
Light winds
IDLE RPM!
Stable surface
IDLE RPM!
Controls frictioned
IDLE RPM!
Low likelihood of a Chinook or Skycrane landing next to you

Seems simple enough, no? If you cannot vouch for all of the above, don't get out! Shut down. Alas, we are not as a group known for 100% expert judgment, as evidenced by the continuation of accidents as time marches on.

My helicopter has components that are cycle- as well as hour life-limited. In fact, it's a toss-up as to whether my #1 and #2 wheels time-out or cycle-out first. It is patently absurd to suggest that my passengers will -every time, mind you- sit through a complete two-minute cooldown and then rotor coastdown to a stop (no rotor brake). Me? I get out when it's appropriate. I take all the precautions, and I don't think that I'm doing anything horribly unsafe or even needlessly risky. I know that idling helicopters do not spontaneously explode or roll over on their own. But passengers do walk into tail rotors. Seen that happen once for real. Wasn't pretty, is all I'll say.

Obviously, others will have an opposing viewpoint. And that's cool. The debate rages on...

[Benet]

Paco, those rules contain a lot of 'and' and 'or'. I don't see how they prohibit leaving an idling helicopter.

Part (1): let's assume the engine was started by the pilot, sitting in the pilot's seat. All good so far. Then he decides he wants to get out - either before or after committing aviation.

Part (1) no longer applies, so we're into part (2) - leaving an engine running. Assuming he's going to fail 2(a) by leaving the pilot's seat empty: as long as he complies with ALL of (b), (i) and (ii), then he's in the clear to get out - as long as nobody else is on board, precautions have been taken to prevent the a/c from moving (frictioning the controls perhaps?) and somebody is keeping an eye on the a/c (obviously not from on board!)

Benet

[parabellum]

Then someone mentioned an AB206 that got blown off an oil platform in...what?...1968? Oh, how timely! Haven't we had a more recent example than that?



The point being made is as relevant today as it was in 1968, so despite all your 'years of flying' it hasn't all sunk in yet, has it?

When it is metal, (skids), against a metal heli-deck even with the RPM at idle and the controls frictioned down there is enough torque to cause the aircraft to move of it's own accord, nothing to do with being,' blown off!:rolleyes:

[FH1100 Pilot]

parabellum:When it is metal, (skids), against a metal heli-deck even with the RPM at idle and the controls frictioned down there is enough torque to cause the aircraft to move of it's own accord, nothing to do with being,' blown off!:rolleyes:

Well gee, I wonder why then, in the 13 years and oh...7,000 hours or so of flying 206's (and Bo105's) offshore onto metal oil platform decks, did this never happen to me? Not once did my aircraft "torque" itself around on its own. If that were the case, one would expect that a helicopter on fixed floats would spin "on its own" on the water at idle. But, um, they don't. They just sit there with neutral pedals. They translate sideways due to tail rotor thrust, but they don't spin. Try it sometime. And water doesn't even have as much friction as metal!

To get a 206 sliding on metal deck, you must be parked crosswind. PHI's wind limit for offshore operation was 40 knots. Let me tell you, that's a-blowing. Through years of experimentation, I found out exactly how much of a crosswind B-models and L-models can take before they slide. If you're dumb enough get out of a 206 that's parked in a crosswind on an wet, metal offshore platform, you deserve your fate.

Parked into the wind, at idle rpm, a helicopter will not move "of its own accord." Not even on a metal deck. Roll your eyes at that, sport.

[Saint Jack]

Thanks a lot guys, a lot of very useful information recieved.

parabellum: The AB206A that went over the side of a rig in Iran was an early model (obviously) and was almost certainly equipped with a hydraulically-boosted tail rotor. If the tail rotor controls were not rigged properly with the proper minimum friction and bias-spring tension etc, the pedals had a tendancy to 'creep' if you took your feet off them. Older pilots who flew early 206's will remember the 'tap' check on the pedals to check for this condition. Also, remember this was 1968 when the JetRanger was a new type and both pilots and mechanics were unfamiliar. I'm not saying this was the cause of this particular accident, but the condition was known to exist. By the way, the French pilots radio call from the rig to base reporting the loss of the virtually new helicopter, "....ze 'elicopter, ze is gone..." is now part of Bristow folklore.

JimL: Thanks, great stuff - just what I wanted. However, I can't help feeling that the wording of the regulations "An operator shall not permit a helicopter rotor to be turned under power for the purpose of flight without a qualified pilot at the controls" could open up that old debate of engineers/mechanics performing engine ground-runs. Or was the wording chosen to specifcally permit this - but this will be for another thread.

Finally, I think FH110 Pilot, in his first post, gets it essentially correct when he states that the prime ingredient here is simple old fashioned common sense (for each specific event and circumstances). But, as he goes on to say, common sense can be conspicuously uncommon. Couldn't agree more.

[EN48]

If you cannot vouch for all of the above, don't get out! Shut down.
Anything short of shutting down is a tradeoff - yes, you can get away with it many times, but the next time may be different.

Alas, we are not as a group known for 100% expert judgment, as evidenced by the continuation of accidents as time marches on.


Amen! The "It cant happen to me" mindset prevails!

[JimL]

Saint Jack,

Yes, it was deliberately worded so ground runs could be performed by engineering staff (as was the ICAO text).

Jim

[flyer43]

Jim, the wording also leaves it wide open for a pilot to leave the controls if he has stopped the engine(s) and the blades are no longer being turned under power.
This relates to the original post on this thread where a pilot left his machine with the blades still turning after shutting down the engine.
BT

[parabellum]

For all your bluster F1100 the fact is it did happen, it didn't happen to me, thank God. Since the rig was in a shallow part of the Gulf the platform, on top of a leg, was totally unobstructed and about 100 to 150 feet above the sea, landing into wind assured, I had been on the same operation only a month earlier. The pilot also had several thousand hours on helicopters and had no option other than shutting down, a definate SOP 'no-no' at the time. You have obviously been fortunate, it is not a common practice though, as the posts here show.