The Scariest Helicopter Ever

[Neerg rN]

I used to fly around in a Bell 47J with a carburettor and a float valve which in turbulence used to cause the engine to splutter and fart worse than the old crone down the road coming home from the pub... and to make that even worse we did it at night over the ocean landing on ships and oil platforms and I need several scotches just thinking about it which considering I don't drink is saying something... anyway, so my scariest helicopter ever is the Bell 47J... so what's yours... anyway this is all on my blog about helicopters in Kiwi Land and can be found on the following link;

Top Birds & Everyfing (http://topbirdsandeveryfing.typepad.com/top-birds-everyfing/)

Good luck!

Chris

[205jack]

I'll take the bait

Hughes 300 A model fuel injected STC'd for Mogas (Super) early 80's

Without blaspheming?? all I can say is that after two silent arrivals and fact that the ink wasn't dry on my licence so I was current the economic disavantages of Avgas in the hotter months were definitely preferable

You all take care now

205Jack

[sevenstrokeroll]

I would have to think that the scariest helicopter would be the russian one with an upward firing ejection seat. Granted the rotor blades were supposed to disengage/release, come off just prior to the ejection, but....

yup...copter, ejection se4at...u do the math

[Fareastdriver]

With syncronisation it is straightforward enough even with the blades attached.
A medium power ejection seat will cause the pilot leave the end of the gun at 60 ft/sec. The pilot and seat is about six feet tall so top to toe will take 1 tenth/sec to pass a certain point.
A 3 bladed main rotor turning at 240 Rrpm is turning at 9 blades/sec so if the seat is sequenced to fire as one blade is approaching the overhead the seat will be clear when the next blade comes around.
Should you have more or a faster rotor then part of the sequence would be to slow the rotors by whatever means to bring back the same time frame.

The advantage of ejector seats is that you can get rid of whining co-pilots.

[outofwhack]

Dont be silly - we all know the R22 is the scariest helicopter but we wont admit it.

[newfieboy]

Oh give me give me, can I have bang seats in the back as we'll please......wouldn't need GPS, I could just follow the trail of whiney drillers. Scariest for me, the three the donk went quite on.....

[SASless]

Mine was a Chinook that had one Engine runaway up....that would not respond to the published procedure....and a cloud deck at only 5,000 feet above me. Upon loading the rotor system with Collective....I then had two engines at Max or More than Max power. The only difference was the Ng speeds which had one at Topping....and one well beyond Topping! Talk about being on a Runaway Express Elevator! Smack dab in the middle of that small deviation from normal....we had to add IIMC....me with two students who between them had three hours of Chinook experience.

My Beer tasted very good that evening....despite being very foamy from all the shaking my hand was doing!

[Dynamic Roller]

A 3 bladed main rotor turning at 240 Rrpm is turning at 9 blades/sec so if the seat is sequenced to fire as one blade is approaching the overhead the seat will be clear when the next blade comes around.

3 x 240 / 60 = 12 blades/sec.
So with a time window of .1 second, something will have to give. :)

[VP-F__]

on current form it has to be the EC 225

[robin303]

Nice blog Chris :ok:

[alouette]

Enstrom F-28C...with this supposed to be turbocharged engine, and then R22...they go hand in hand!:}

[Ascend Charlie]

I agree, the Enstrom was the worst thing I have been associated with, it needed 30+ inches of boost just to be airborne, so if the turbo went on holidays, you went onto the ground.
Rattled, shook, refused to start for the second time on a hot day, the clutch was ridiculous, and the dashboard looked like a Leyland P-76, which was the crappiest car ever to be built in Oz.
Enstrom gives me shivers just reminding myself that I flew one.

[Armen Firman]

In 1978 aeronautical engineering students (maybe with Iranian Aircraft Industries) were assembling 6 Rotorway Scorpion kits at Ghale Morghi airport in Tehran. The Scorpion had a tail rotor driven by multiple V-belts.

The Scorpion was one of the first kit helicopter which really flew, but I don't know if these were ever finished and if they were if anybody was brave enough to fly them :}

[alouette]

@ Ascend Charlie; yep, when the turboboost went on holiday, the skid marks became bigger! I don't want to fly this thing ever again!!!

[FSXPilot]

I would rather be in an Enstrom than Robbie any day of the week. One is gentle and will get you to the ground in one piece the other is a widow maker.

[nigelh]

I do not understand how the Enstrom gets a mention with so many scary helicopters around .....you should get out more , the Enstrom is in fact the gentlest and least scary of ANY helicopter . Granted it may lack power but its never going to hurt you and has safest record in the world i am guessing . . For me it has to be the R22 . The first flight in around 1981 getting a student to enter auto after cutting the throttle in the cruise was enough for me . Never ever want to be in one again .:eek:

[Agaricus bisporus]

Seconded.

These opinions seldom come from anyone with any meaningful Enstrom time.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Seconded.

These opinions seldom come from anyone with any meaningful Enstrom time.

While I loved the B47 the model I flew (3GB1 iirc) had the hydraulic pump on the engine not the gearbox so if the donk quit you had a hydraulics off EOL to perform which is rather unkind.

[outofwhack]

If the engine stops in a B47 I guarantee you won't notice the lack of hydraulics - adrenalin will give you strength - just make sure you run on.
OOW ;)

[FLY 7]

Who'd fly this?

FZR600 deathtrap - Snippets - Visordown (http://www.visordown.com/snippets/fzr600-deathtrap/21858.html)

[500e]

One of Bugs builds there is a you tube of one in tethered hover

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6owTDBg8Zc

[Bravo73]

Who'd fly this?

FZR600 deathtrap - Snippets - Visordown (http://www.visordown.com/snippets/fzr600-deathtrap/21858.html)

Erm, him? http://www.pprune.org/members/66184-bugdevheli

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/400500-all-i-need-now-balls-try.html

[hillberg]

Rotormouse.mov:eek: on youtube:D Turbine powered:ok: ,Single pilot:{, cruise 180 mph,,,,:=

[JohnDixson]

Some may refer to it as a Zeppelin, but the Piasecki Helistsat looked scary to me from the outset. One day the phone rang in the SA pilots office and the pilot who had hired on to fly it wanted to talk to anyone. He got connected to the pilot in our office who was our strongest in the area of structures/ dynamics ( a former USMC aviator with an Engr MS in that area who came to us from SA Engr Dept. ). The caller was given a whole list of things to look into. Later events seemed to say that some basics were missed. I say that based on the published info which said the landing gear wheels started to shimmy, which then kicked off a mechanical stability ( ground resonance ) situation. With all of the military history of that subject, on that machine, the V-leg gear vs the Straight-legged gear etc, one would have thought that the importance of the landing gear would naturally have been a primary design issue.

[hillberg]

The S-58s on the helistat were gearless & tailless.:}
The pipe frame was an abortion at best,:eek: POS for the Forest Circus:uhoh:

[JohnDixson]

That was my point, Hillberg. Instead of the normal landing gear, which incorporates a damper, the Helistat was hard mounted on wheels. The S-58 landing gear is a part of the mechanical instability attenuating system, along with the main rotor dampers. Sometimes the onset of that sort of instability is exceedingly rapid, so that just retarding the throttles and applying a rotor break simply takes too long, leaving the alternative of grabbing a handful of collective and applying it NOW is the only salvation. My recollection of the accident footage showed a fairly slow attempt to lift to hover, but structural failure had already commenced.

[RVDT]

_7jENWKgMPY

[SASless]

I wonder how it would have worked if they had used old H-25 Airframes instead of the H-34's? I have never heard any discussion about the H-25's having a ground resonance problem.

That video does make one wonder about the level and quality of engineering that went into the design.

[JohnDixson]

Main reason for using S-58 vs HUP would be power: 1525 vs 550. I believe the HUP head was articulated, so the 2/3P inherent in the rotor was there. I don't know anyone to ask! Took a look at the video clip and one can see that the rotors are wobbling at a fairly low frequency but at " scary " ( sorry, couldn't resist ) amplitudes. Nobody around to report on whether they did a shake test on the frame to look for natural frequencies, and the other thing that comes to mind is that the 2/3P is a wobble, i.e., a combined pitch/roll excursion, which would transmit accompanying high oscillatory loads into the frame structure that it may/may not have been designed to take. The rotor is at high thrust in the clip, so the thrust is high, thus the oscillatory loads were high.

[SASless]

You are a Test Pilot Brother Dixson.....would you have flown that thing? Did each H-34 have a Pilot....and if so....how would you coordinate control of the machine?


An interesting link.....

Piasecki "Heli-Stat" helicopter - development history, photos, technical data (http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/piasecki_helistat.php)

[N707ZS]

This must rate high in the scary list. KA-26


J1xKhc77VXk

[JohnDixson]

SAS, the answer is no, with the information I had at the time, which was only that passed along by the Helistat pilot in the conversation reported in the earlier post.

You asked another question which pointed to discussion we had internally after that phone call. Specifically, it was our understanding that one pilot would fly the machine, thru interconnected controls. After the accident, it was reported that the four vehicles were manned. Perhaps those personnel were there to operate the engine and other basic S-58 systems? In any case the control runs were very long, and control slop and hysteresis, effects of frame structure deflection, statically and dynamically and a raft of related questions seemed to be open, again just our conclusion based on the phone call.

You may recall the CH-54 Twin Lift project, wherein the lifting power of two CH-54B's would be gained by utilizing a balance beam structure, the ends of which each of the two Cranes would pick up with their cargo hooks, after reeling out 50 ft or so of cable. While we did that manually, using the back seat controls, the plan was to link the two AFCS systems and couple up the control systems. We did one real flight with a load of 35,000 lbs, but it never went anywhere, as I believe that everyone realized that it was just too tricky to do on a regular basis in a tactical environment. I know that following that program, from time to time someone would ask me what I knew about twin lift, and I would plead absolute ingorance.

[SASless]

from time to time someone would ask me what I knew about twin lift, and I would plead absolute ingorance.

A very....very Wise Man you are too, Sir!

As one Inspector Callahan once said....."A Man must know his own Limitations!".

[JohnDixson]

The other three guys ( one each in the front and back seats ) played it the same way. It was a phantom project...nobody ever did it.

[skylimey]

Scariest - tie between R22 (duh!) and Enstrom. Enstrom due to 2 precautionary landings due to bits flying off at inopportune times.

[Good Vibs]

I think we can add the AS350 to the list of the R22 & R44!

[ShyTorque]

At the opposite end of the scale to the R22 and still scary....

kKsWTdjnXiw

Wider than a 747. Too big for its own good.

[trex 700]

As a fixed wing boy with only 2 hours on helicopters I think if had engines that were doing that i would jump out and run away to get the fire brigade and not get anywhere near it ever again

[g-mady]

I think the R22 is being an injustice here... Its great fun to fly. A rotorway on the other hand?!? Or even the 333 for a scary title...

MADY

[Thomas coupling]

My scariest helo: Wasp. Balsa wood tail rotor blades, bicycle chain used to alter the pitch rod. Engine with a power output of a lawn mower.
Undercarriage wheels canted outwards to act as brakes on landing. [And we all pracitced EOL's to running landings].:D

[Fareastdriver]

Story going around the Paris Air Show when the Mi 12 was there.

US and Russian pilots talking about it and the question was raised on how its certification was going. The reply was that one thing that was remaining was the landing without engines.
The Boeing pilots were amazed. "You've got four engines and you're going to dead stick it?"
"Yes, our government has got stupid rules as well."

Whether this ever happened is uncertain but the vibration harmonics was the problem that killed it off.

[SASless]

Overheard just before we started the engines every single time I flew with a certain fellow in Nigeria as he bowed his head and held his two hands pressed together in supplication: "Lord! Please don't me die in this Bristow maintained piece of **** today!"

I laughed at him for a long while....then saw the Light!

[Sikpilot]

Back in 1985....teaching students in an R22 A model. The A models had NO tip weights. Talk about low inertia rotors. Touchdown autos were NOT fun.

[Dennis Kenyon]

Please gents ... as a long time supporter of the Menominee product can I offer two pennorth.

Yes the Enstrom can be a mongrel to start. Put that down to the 'shower of sparks' system which heralded the cold & hot start problems circa 1978 plus poor maintenance of the ignition and mixture systems.

Yes, the Enstrom can give a 'bouncy ride.' Put that down to the legion of engineers who don't have type experience or don't understand type RB tracking.

Yes, a ridiculous clutch engagement system. Put that down to a poor design. Hughes and Robinson use an almost identical system but with multiple drive belts that give few problems. Fragrant 'French Chalk' will solve the noise aspect!

Yes, a poor hover performance that can require max permitted power just to hold a hover at 15 degrees OAT. Mainly due to poor maintenance again in getting the operating mixture correct. The PFM requires pilots to lean the mixture to 1550 degrees for maximum power* (not over 29 map) ... something that I've found few pilots will practice. (*or if fuel flow exceeds 130 pph)

And an item not mentioned is the rpm correlation. OK once a pilot has been instructed well and a proficient RPM aware pilot should be able to cope ... but the factory could sure do with something better. Like copying the Hughes/Schweizer/Sikorsky 300 system for a start.

BUT. BUT ... In forty years operations in the UK, there has never been a single fatal accident.

With some 6.500 type hours I've never had an engine failure and my log book tells me while instructing I've completed around 5000 full engine-off landings to the ground without a hint of difficulty.

The 225 BHP version has a ROC of 1475 fpm at max gross standard ISA. Please nominate another piston type that matches that.

The Enstrom has a seven cubic feet luggage locker. (100lbs weight capacity on 28F or FX) Please nominate another three-seat design that can beat that.

The Enstrom can be trimmed to fly 'hands & feet off' for as long as one wishes. Please nominate another type that can better that.

Properly electronically tracked, the Enstrom can be brought down to .1 IPS in the hover. With forward flight vibration level dittoed, the type can be as smooth as any type, piston or turbine, I've flown in 14,000 hours.

VNE is 117 on the 280 version. If leaned to 1650 degrees in the cruise the Enstrom turbo versions will give an 85 pph (11.75 gph) fuel-flow giving an average 240 sm still-air safe range.

The type has won a WHC 'freestyle' event three times. Nominate another type that has done that.

In fact, like owning a classic Ferrari, if one can accept the shortcomings or get them put right, Enstrom ownership can be a total delight and one might be forgiven for wondering why anyone would buy any other type in the price range! I've sold exactly 148 of the blighters. Well someone had to speak up!

Dennis K (head down again!)

[Thomas coupling]

Any shares in Enstrom Dennis?

Yes - but apart from all that, what has Enstrom done to prove itself? :E

Cracking post - best in years.:D

[RPM AWARE]

Hey Den

"a proficient RPM aware pilot"

Something in that sentence rings a bell, but I can't put my finger on it ;)

Of course, you are the UK's Enstrom sage, as is well known :ok:------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A rotorway on the other hand?!?"

And I see someone's had a pop, most likely without substance...fancy defending the type too ?

From 1m 06s
Rotorway Loop - YouTube

[chevvron]

I'm not a qualified helicopter pilot, just fixed wing, but I've scrounged rides in many types.
The first one I flew in (passenger only) hasn't been mentioned yet, the Brantly B2B. On startup, I could feel the engine pounding at my back, and it seemed grossly underpowered.

[jim63]

Looks to me like a scary situation,
LiveLeak.com - Helicopter/Blimp Crash

[krohmie]

Piasecki invented it with US Navy money for the US Forrest Service Piasecki PA-97 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piasecki_PA-97)

[defizr]

Paul Ludwig Hans Anton von Beneckendorff und von Hindenburg :ok:

[mattpilot]

Oh the huge manatee ....

[Arm out the window]

Unanticipated vibration! Struth, I'd say blind Freddie could have anticipated a vibe problem with that setup.

[Stanley11]

I'm speechless! In my years of being a heli pilot and engineer, I'm astonished that the designers, engineers, pilots all thought that that could work. Perhaps that was in the era of risk taking and throwing caution into the wind.
I think I saw pilots in each of those cockpits. How could they even coordinate their flight inputs? RIP to the fallen.

[Arm out the window]

Yes, I think there was a pilot per machine, with the designated lead guy calling the power settings (remember reading something about this years ago; didn't realise they'd flown it and people had died).

[Fat Magpie]

Good grief they built it, I remember seeing the idea as a concept drawing many yrs ago.
RIP the pilot, I wonder exactly how much testing was done before it went for a manned flight?

[Blackhorse]

Brantly (any model) Roberson (same but especially R22)

[heli1]

The Piasecki Helistat crashed due to structural failure of the low grade pipe work used to connect the H-34 fuselages to the blimp.The idea was to prove the concept before building a definitive version.Moral....don't do things on the cheap ( I still have a piece of the fabric saved from when I met the chief pilot quite a few years ago).
P.S. The Brantly was a lovely helicopter to fly,with a good safety record and a popular trainer in its day.

[rjtjrt]

John Dixon posted in
Post 24 of this thread re Piasecki Helistat
Scariest
Some may refer to it as a Zeppelin, but the Piasecki Helistsat looked scary to me from the outset. One day the phone rang in the SA pilots office and the pilot who had hired on to fly it wanted to talk to anyone. He got connected to the pilot in our office who was our strongest in the area of structures/ dynamics ( a former USMC aviator with an Engr MS in that area who came to us from SA Engr Dept. ). The caller was given a whole list of things to look into. Later events seemed to say that some basics were missed. I say that based on the published info which said the landing gear wheels started to shimmy, which then kicked off a mechanical stability ( ground resonance ) situation. With all of the military history of that subject, on that machine, the V-leg gear vs the Straight-legged gear etc, one would have thought that the importance of the landing gear would naturally have been a primary design issue.

[Brian Abraham]

Dennis, you may find the following story of interest. Friend was flying an Enstrom doing survey work in outback Oz. Heavy vibration set in so pilot, wanting to get on the ground as rapidly as possible, basically did a power recovery auto. Having put it on the ground the passenger made a comment to the effect "look, someone's been here before us, there's a tail rotor over there". The pilot was somewhat confused as the landing had been nothing out of the ordinary, despite the vibration. Hopping out everything looked normal, save for the obvious fact that the tail rotor had been chopped off by the main rotor. No other damage was evident, however investigation found the forward main transmission mounting bolts had let go (cause of the initial vibration) and at some point during the landing with the pitch pull the gearbox rotated aft and chopped the tail off. With pitch reduced the gearbox fell back into place.

[YankeeHotel]

For me, being just a humble fixed wing pilot, this construction looks pretty hmmm let's say interesting. Looking at the amount of fuel this guy takes with him, he is not only brave but very optimistic I think....
Skip to 5:00 for the take off if you're not interested in the extensive ground testing...

CwpksY1Sj64

[KG86]

I'm surprised that the Bristol Belvedere hasn't been mentioned up until now.

A bit before my time, but I have talked with those who flew it, and feared it. The engines were started with Avpin (an explosive, and deadly corrosive liquid), and start fires were common.

They told me that they would not strap in until the engines were started. The concept was to stand in the jump seat position, lean forward to press the engine start switch, and be prepared to run!

In addition, the sync shaft between the two rotors was none too sturdy, and a failure of that in flight was fatal.

[Dennis Kenyon]

Hallo Brian ... what a fantastic story. My first thought was that we all know a series of snags/errors etc, can build up and lead to the accident. Here's a situation where a series of problems happening in the right order, lead to a safe landing!!! Wonderful industry is ours. Thanks. Dennis Kenyon.

[Head Turner]

For the record I would also prefer to be in an Enstrom than an R22

[SASless]

Every time I see an R-22....I eat a couple more Double Cheeseburgers and Fries....along with a huge Chocolate Milk Shake.....and ensure i never get within the Payload limit of the dastardly things!

[Wander00]

I am not a rotary pilot, although I have flown a few times in RAF helicopters over the years, even a bit of stick time too, but on the basis of everything I have read, nothing would induce me to even climb into an R-anything

[Ian Corrigible]

This thread wouldn't be complete without mention of the Mini-500 (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/212271-mini-500-death-trap-what.html).

Re: the Helistat, its spiritual successor the Skyhook International JHL-40 (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/334439-new-heavy-lifter.html) -- which was to have used four complete CH-47 drivetrains -- appears to have gone the way of every other heavylift airship concept, with the original 2012 EIS date long forgotten and with the program now on indefinite hold pending the availability of $100M of public funding...

I/C

[Dave B]

KG86
Some slight exaggeration of the Belvedere problems, the starter system did use Avpin, but this was also used on the Hunter, and other aircraft with no problems, as an engine fitter on both aircraft, I was well used to handling the stuff, and there was no problem. (unless you accidently drank it, as one of our guys did with no lasting results). The problem was that unlike the Plessey system on the Hunter, the BTH system on the Belvedere , and Wessex 1 was cartridge initiated, ie, the cartridge operated on a piston, to pump the Avpin.
Sometimes the seals leaked, allowing the Avpin into the breach, resulting in an explosion, I don't believe anyone was hurt by this, it happened to me once, as I was sat in the co pilots seat, but it was the rear engine.
There was no jump seat as such, there was a bulkhead behind the pilots seats, then the front engine, then the crew mans seat facing aft, by the door, there was a walkway to the left of the front engine, behind the co pilots seat, alongside the engine. You had to be sat in the seat to operate the controls, as the rotor brake had to be off to operate the starter, and the rotors started turning immediately.
The yaw cables were always a source of worry, as unlike a conventional tail rotor aircraft, where a breakage would only lose you the tail control, on the Belvedere, a cable breakage would lose you all azimuth control of both rotors. This did happen at least once to my knowledge, to a pilot in Aden who was decorated for getting the aircraft safely onto the ground, unfortunately he was killed shortly after when an aircraft disintegrated in the air, the reason for which I don't think an answer was ever found.
People did talk about sync shaft failure, but I don't think there was ever a recorded case of this.
One of the biggest problems was Bristols illogical engine numbering system, the engines were number one at the front, and number Two at the back, but the controls and instruments were lateral, and for some reason, Bristol made number One on the right, and number Two on the left, because the Captain sat on the right. This of course was totally at odds with convention, and was possibly considered the cause of the first fatal accident in Germany, when it was thought that one of the pilots shut down a good engine after a failure of one.
Whatever ones thoughts of the Belvedere, tribute must be given to the work they did in Borneo, during the confrontation with Indonesia, when the poor old indons came across the border, in what they thought was thick jungle hundreds of miles from anywhere, and suddenly came under 105mm artillery fire from a hilltop where a Belvedere had dumped a gun.


For all its faults
What other aircraft in 1959 could cruise at 129 knots , sometimes going up to 140, had an all up weight of 22000 lbs, and could maintain altitude, AUW on one engine.

[Art of flight]

After 3500 hours on Lynx I had to gain a type rating for licence issue, 6.5 hours of terror in an R22 later and I escaped back to the relative safety of turbine twins in AS355 and EC135. Hats off to all Robbo drivers!

[SASless]

Dave,

I had many a great evening at the Lakers Pub listening to Jack Trigg recount his experiences flying the Belvedere. What a grand Character he was to listen to while telling his stories.:ok::ok:

[sycamore]

Dave B, concur with everything you said; unfortunately the `Bevelgear` was designed to carry torpedoes for the Navy, hence the `mantis` like u/c and attitude on the ground. So, it was given to the AirForce to operate in the tropics and the sandy places of the ME, with all the problems of dust, erosion, torrential rain, etc, and as said this led to a lot of problems, which in the fullness of time and tireless `enthusiasm` from the engineers, built up experience and serviceability, so in its latter days 66 Sqdn had a whole Sqdn flypast (somewhere on tube). One aircraft was lost in Borneo in `63 or 64, due, I think to the cables coming off the runners in the fuselage, and it went sideways. The PFCUs were all at the front, so cables/pushrods from there to the front/rear gearbox/rotors.

One aircraft had a synch shaft failure, possibly on airiest at Seletar in about `67, but landed ok. The rotors didn't have the same overlap as a Chinny, also had more vertical separation, and each engine drove each rotor, as long as the throttles were matched. A great aircraft, once it was `going`, like a train, but slowing down was best done in a turn (my experience of a few trips as an itinerant co-pilot..), and you also had to be careful to keep the yaw to a minimum as shown by the `OMD`(OLD MAID`S Delight) ..the bit that sticks out the front..

SAS, didn`t know Grandad had gone to Bevs? (JT, anyone over 30 was `old`, anyone over 40 was ancient to anyone who was 20 or so...)

rrtsk8-oXBA

[krypton_john]

This AvPIN malarkey sounds like loads of fun:

About Avpin, used to start the Hunter on No 1 Squadron, The Rhodesian Air Force (http://rhodesianforces.org/No1sqnavpin.html)

[sycamore]

Senior Pilot,many thanks for the memory..

[Dave B]

SAS
I seem to remember that Jack Trigg was in charge of pilot admin when I was at Redhill. Great video senior pilot, brings back a lot of memories.

[SASless]

Indeed Jack was....or at least substituted for George Puddy and Ken Smith.

He was very much the epitome of what a "Real Helicopter Pilot" was all about.

His tale of flying to Normandy one day early in June.....in a Tiger Moth was hard to beat!

All three of the fellows were real Gentlemen and always a pleasure to deal with.

[heli1]

If I recall rightly the issue with the Belvedere avpin was that on a mis start the fuel could gather in a u-bend ,resulting in a double dose on the second attempt and an explosion. At least one aircraft lost it's back end in the subsequent fire and another lost the front end so both were cannibalised to make one good one. Westland then made up a spare nose section out of of another crash, caused by a double engine close down in error , but it was never needed.

[Dave B]

The one that I was involved with was the first start of the day, when I was flying with our squadron commander who was in the captains seat.
As well as avpin getting where it should not have been, the other little trick was instead of one of the Three cartridges in the breech firing as it should have (it gave you Three starts before you had to reload), all Three would go off together, and blow the breech apart.


If any one comes across a Belvedere in a museum, take a look at the panel fit, door and window operation, and standard of the riveting and general structure, it makes messrs Westland and Sikorsky products of that era look like they were built by amateurs.

[soggyboxers]

There's so much nonsense written about so many things on this site these days. I never found a scary helicopter in quite a few years and more than a few hours. Yes, when I was a (very average, inept) student, they all seemed difficult, but later on I realised they were all just helicopters with their own individual quirks and problems. I was only ever scared twice, and each of those was by people, not helicopters. I realised after not too many years that the most unpredictable, unreliable part in any helicopter (or flying machine) was the MMI (man, machine interface) :rolleyes:

[SASless]

Soggs.......seems you done something right....you are still with us!:ok:

[soggyboxers]

Sadly no longer flying SAS, though at least I'm still working and still in Africa and may be going to visit Mogadishu soon, so life's still an interesting adventure :}

[heli1]

You are so right about the quality of the Belvedere. The one at the Helicopter Museum is unpainted at present and the finish is first class. .......almost a shame to paint it!
Sending you a pm too.