CAA bans governor off training

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

So I am realiably informed that the UK CAA has just issued a ban on governor off training in Robinson helicopters but I can't find any official statement or directive can anyone help ?

CBS

[SFIM]

Not quite, I believe that Fred Cross has stated in an email to operators that governor off training should only be done as part of emergency procedures training as per POH, rather than as a demonstration in for example Ex.4 effects of controls as some instructors were apparently doing.

[Hughes500]

Sounds like stopping EOL's to the ground, a stupid idea !

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

Thank you for the clarification anyone doing anything outside what the poh says is asking for trouble so glad to see they trying to stop it. Personally I teach it pre solo just in case it fails and when covering malfunctions

CBS

[Tailboom]

CBS I'm not implying that this statement infers to you but from what I can see the people who want these things gone are the ones who either can't or have difficulty carrying out Governor off and EOL's to the ground

[nigelh]

Surely quite enough Robinsons crash as it is without doing eol to the ground ....
I have always believed that insurers should either ban them or charge an extra premium for those that insist on doing them . Granted , they are fun but when you pay your own insurance ( which the majority of the people on this site do not !) it is irritating to say the least when insurers hike premiums due to in part so many botched ones !! A 5 -10ft power recovery should be sufficient as writing it off in the last few feet is not really a concern to anyone .... Including the insurance companies . This is due to the incredibly rare occurrence nowadays . I think the helicopter training world is still stuck in the 1960,s and 70,s when total engine failures were more common . Nowadays we should be concentrating much more on good airmanship rather than playing all day
at eol,s !!!!
Ps I started to get really good premiums when I stated that none of my helicopters would ever do them and I have certainly never done one in the current machine !!

[Vertical Freedom]

should be banning Robinsons not the governor training :ugh:

[SFIM]

Personally I teach it pre solo just in case it fails and when covering malfunctions


That's exactly the right time to do it, Ex.14c, emergencies in the circuit.

And as usual, there is nothing wrong with a Robinson as long as they are flown within there limitations, but people will insist on going beyond them.

[helimutt]

and a lot of us self-improvers wouldnt be flying today were it not for Robinsons. Flown sensibly within limitations they are relatively safe. What about all of us who learned to fly them pre-governor? What about my students who had governor failures early on in their solo ppl training and had no problem flying the machine safely back to base? No big deal. Seems like the nanny state is well and truly catching us up.

[topendtorque]

I remember two new pilots who lost it when I popped the Gov. cb.

The poor little buttercups will have an issue in migrating to '47s won't they.

Plenty of times turbines need a bit of throttle handling too ain't there?

Nanny state alright.

[Spunk]

So what about the 300s in the world out there? No more teaching on them as well as most of them don't have a governor?

The authorities are so contradictory: On the one hand they want to produce more safety (by increasing the amount of paper to be used that is) and on the other side they no longer want us to teach the real life:


off airport landings
EOL
governor off procedures



And for you Vertical Freedom: should be banning Robinsons not the governor training

By now even the latest member on PPRUNE understands that you are happy with what you fly and that you don't like Robinson Helicopters.
But please, for the future share your extraordinary experience with us and quit posting these childish answers. Somebody with your experience should be able to contribute more to PPRUNE than just those polemical and hackneyed sayings.

Sorry, had to get rid of that.

[Bravo73]

So what about the 300s in the world out there? No more teaching on them as well as most of them don't have a governor?


The OP refers to Robinsons only:

So I am realiably informed that the UK CAA has just issued a ban on governor off training in Robinson helicopters

[Vertical Freedom]

Dear Spunk
Maybe thou should apply a major reality check & see the horoundius death related failures & incinerations; rather than spunk????

I speak (sadly) from experience rather than 'full of cum' hence my scathing but REAL remarks about the CRAP made by Robinson

Happy landings

[helimutt]

but the only machines I know to have crashed and injured or killed personal friends are Agusta 109's!!! Don't personally know anyone killed in an R22. Of course i've heard about them, and yes, there is always going to be accidents regardless of the helicopter type.

I once had to use the throttle on a B206 to be able to land. Luckily I had learned to fly using the throttle on a robbo eh? lol;)

[SFIM]

Just to restate here, nobody is banning governor off training, they are just asking for it to be done at the appropriate time in the course.
demo-ing it on exercise 4 is not a brilliant time to do it IMO, it seems a sensible clarification to me.

[ROTORVATION]

Dear the CAA,

Agree that the 22 POH says no Gov Off training unless practicing for emergencies.

That said, you the CAA, and EASA want better, higher quality training... So how do you teach exercise 4 as effectively as an instructor might, if you can't turn the Gov Off? We've been doing it this way for 15+ years on EX4 so seems a bit "Jobsworth".

EASA AMC does still show Gov Off Training within the course at 14 if I recall correctly. However, it doesn't show as being a requirement at all in the AMC's pertaining to the content of Instructor Courses, as far as I can see. (Please correct me if I'm wrong). Therefore the industry is expecting Instructor Courses NOT to teach those candidates on FI courses to do Gov Off, for those FI's to then have to teach it in the PPL Course? Am I reading these AMC's correctly??


I don't know anymore I really don't. Just remember this - to those in EASA and Fred and the like at the CAA - if this industry can't turn a corner and flourish, then there won't be much industry left, therefore there won't be any point in our regulators having a GA section- so you'll all lose your jobs! You'll be surplus to requirements.

I could go on.....

[misterbonkers]

Demonstrating the throttle during Exercise 4 is EASY with the governor on - after all - it's been designed so that you can override it by hand.

So leave the governor on and simply explain to your student how it all works, how it can be over ridden and make minor adjustments to the throttle by hand (even keeping it within limits results in enough of a change to be seen). Simples.

You can also show how the governor works when you start the aircraft by letting them see during the run up how the governor kicks in at 80% and then maintains things in the the green at the top end.

So everybody on here really is in a flap for no real reason other than a poorly titled thread.

[Hughes500]

Rotorvation :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
Nigel, sorry live in the real world. EOL's are easy, probably done over 2/3000 teaching people, haven't yet stuffed a machine in ( don't fly R22 though ) yet.
It is physiological though, if the student knows he can do it then it is a stressor gone if it happens for real ! The problem is the instructors and the nanny state not being capable enough to teach them / let them happen. We are breeding a bunch of very incapable pilots under the new regime !:ugh::ugh::ugh:
We will be stopped from teaching tail rotor problems soon as well, in fact why not teach everyone in a sim, no chance of an accident happening then !!!

[Cylinder Head]

MB,


I agree your technique for Ex 4 will be absolutely fine. You can always demonstrate difference between Gov On and Off on the ground at full ERPM/RRPM. Nothing to prevent that in the manual and I have always found doing so before getting airborne reassures me that the student understands the finesse required. Better than having their first go in flight when over controlling can lead to an interesting time.


My experience is that at Ex 4, most students are bombarded with so much information that they don't fully appreciate the role of the governor anyway and are much better placed to understand its operation pre-solo with a good few hours under the belt.


Only problem I see is the demonstration of effects of disc loading and airspeed on RPM. The student will get little out of a demonstration with Gov on. I assume that the CAA expect these specific requirements of the syllabus AMC 1 FCL.210.H (d) (v) (B) to be covered under the Emergency procedures as well. A bit of guidance wouldn't go amiss.

[Cylinder Head]

Apologies for the thread creep and note that the following is submitted firmly on the understanding that I am touching wood and am not tempting fate in any way.


IF you choose when and where to do EOL's in the R22 they are very straight forward and you can re-engage even right at the last second if the instructor doesn't' like what's developing. Go to experienced examiners who fly the R22 a lot and you will learn that they can be done perfectly safely when appropriate. There is no need to do them in unfavourable conditions or complicate them with unnecessarily difficult entry points - 500' downwind off airfield etc. all that can be handled with in power recoveries. The point of an EOL to the ground is to give the student a confidence booster that they can do it if they have to but there is no point in habitually throwing helicopters at the ground at every opportunity in all manner of conditions. We can't simulate every possible scenario and landing surface and would certainly bend far more helicopters if we tried. The important thing is to get the helicopter down to hover height with minimal forward speed and rate of descent with straight skids - after that your touch down surface is in the lap of the gods - but if you have confidence in the surface integrity, why not put them on the ground when conditions are right.

[VP-F__]

It is another example of dumbing down!

Gov off, autos to the ground, demonstrating the low g issue with the R22 (and how it is a non event when dealt with correctly) these are the exercises that should be flown by the student. If they scare a few off then maybe it will save a few lives! Anyone can do an auto to the hover, it is the last ten feet that make the difference on the phone call you make afterwards.

If you have been trained fully in how to deal with events in the air then you are much better prepared should the modern reliability of your equipment fail.

Having recently done a CRM refresher it was amazing to see how many recent accidents (f/w and rotary) would have been avoided had the pilots been less reliant on automatics and gone back to basics......trouble is it seems that some of the basics are not allowed to be taught anymore.

[Hughes500]

Train hard fly easy just about covers it me thinks !:D

[nigelh]

Ok . So you are all brilliant at autos to the ground . Well in that case why would my insurance company give me a really good discount for not allowing them on any of my aircraft ?!! Listen , I have also done quite a few and even with top of the tree instructors / examiners the odd one has got a bit ugly . The undeniable point which I defy you to disagree with is this ....... Far far more helicopters have been written off practicing autos to the ground than have ever been bent by real engine failures !!! The chances now of an engine failure are tiny , especially in turbines . As a low time pilot you are far more likely to have problems from 1) off airport landings at private houses with difficult approaches ( not generally covered properly in the syllabus. 2) inadvertent IMC trying to stay 500ft agl ( again nowhere near adequately covered . 3) high winds and turbulence in hills ( not really covered at all ) .
But do we spend sufficient time on these things ?? No , we are fully locked into an out of date view that engine failure is the big gotcha ..... It's not . How ever much you cock up the last 5ft you are going to be very unlucky to kill yourselves. Getting it wrong in 1) 2) or 3) and you will probably become another statistic . You just couldn't make it up , it's crazy .

[Hughes500]

Nigel

The problem is The CAA, by removing it from the syllabus instructors have become lazy and incompetent. Lets be honest most people are taught by those trying to get up the greasey pole. Where is the experience and knowledge from a guy teaching you who could have done less than 300 hours ??????
I agree entirely about confined areas, I spend a shed load of time with students doing that. Again it is all about subconscious, if you know you can do it !!!!

[AnFI]

nigel, i guess part of the point is that the ability to do a good engine off landing indicates a level of handling competance that might have a risk reduction spin-off. if a pilot has the competency to perform a good engine off landing then he can probably land calmly in a field under other circumstances rather than stacking it. He might not lose it when the wind changes etc

The learning process is being dumbed down so that the punctuation in the operations manual becomes more important than actually being able to fly. It is irrelevent where governor-off control is taught as long as it is taught. It is artificial to compartmentalise these training items to a system designed to be overseen rather than for the student's benefit.

[Peter-RB]

Hi Nigelh,

As much as I will never fly a Robbie again if that 5ft you mention is arrived at , at around 90 knots then there is a little problem, when I was taught (in a R22) I was shown the eol after the 2 nd lesson,.. reason I asked what it felt like, the instructor showed me and power recovered at about 50 ft, MUch later when I was ready I was taken through my own again to PR at about 50ft, and again and again until it was a none event( strictly speaking) for I was doing it with the happy instructor covering my every action, I accept that in all the past few years I cannot remember one person saying here on Rotorheads that they had an engine conk out, there must have been one somewhere but not reported on here, after that I went onto the 206, where again I was walked through the auto down to,.. this time GL the different instructor again followed my every action ...but to say it politely it was a non event it was so utterly easy and no panic that I was impressed when my then instructor showed me the famous pick up and 180 then down with the residual energy in those big Bell blades.,,,:D

Whilst I am only a pleasure flyer I still think that sort of action should be done and understood by every Heli Pilot being trained, for the Donk may run out of Go Juice, then you would need to know what you had to do in order to survive, IMO.....:ok:

[AnFI]

nigel don't you think that EOL training (and manual throttle control) means that pilot's will have greater handling competence? Perhaps having less accidents because they know how to fly.

Instead all the touchy-feely 'no EOL' and 'Gov Off is an Emergency, if it happens don't turn the throttle', Training Manegment Manual Audit and Safety Management Manual stuff seems to correlate with pilots not being able to handle safely anymore. Lovely Manuals all approved by the CAA, but aircraft littering the countryside recently.

First it was light/medium twins 6 in a row, now light singles 4 in a row. Follows the cronology of regulation introduction, strange.

[Hughes500]

Anfi

How synical , my SMS manual doesn't have among its 200 odd risks crashing however the caa asked what were the top risks to my operation. My top one was caa paperwork! Their own feedback obviously doesn't go anywhere as we are seeing currently in the number of crashes :ugh::ugh:

[Paul Cantrell]

nigelh: Ok . So you are all brilliant at autos to the ground .

Yes :rolleyes:

The undeniable point which I defy you to disagree with is this ....... Far far more helicopters have been written off practicing autos to the ground than have ever been bent by real engine failures !!!

I actually tend to doubt that. I would agree that probably more machines have been lost to practicing autorotations than to engine failures, but would suggest that most of those had nothing to do with autos to the ground, and instead occurred by allowing sink rate to get high while having inadequate airspeed, or by misjudging the flare and striking the ground even when a power recovery was intended. The fact is that most autorotation training in the R22 is to power recovery, until the candidate is working on his instructor rating, and a large percentage of autorotation training accidents is in R22 training during primary instruction, to a power recovery. This has a lot to do with less experienced instructors, and a pretty unforgiving amount of rotor inertia in that particular helicopter, and little to nothing to do with trying to take the auto to the ground.

Additionally, when I think about the machines I know of first hand that were smashed up (about 12), none of them had to do with autorotations... It was tail rotor strikes dynamic roll over, LTE (with a subsequent roll down the mountainside), and running out of gas (which involved an autorotation, but they weren't practicing autorotations when they ran out of gas :ooh:

While I know all of those people first hand, I actually don't know anyone first hand who has trashed a machine while practicing autorotations to the ground!

The chances now of an engine failure are tiny , especially in turbines..

It's not that small. I know a number of people first hand (8 that come to mind) who have had engine failures in singles (2 of those in turbines), including myself (but that was an airplane). And only two of those were really high time guys (but those were the turbine failures so I agree that piston power ups the chances a bit).

As for all the other things you think should be taught: I agree! I don't think it's an either or situation, though. A good training syllabus should be preparing pilots to deal with all kinds of usual and unusual occurrences.

As for whether we should be teaching touchdowns, I generally feel that at the private pilot level the student should have seen at least a couple by the time they get their ticket ( I usually demonstrate one just before solo and then again before they get their ticket ), just so they can understand the difference in the last few feet. By the time you get your commercial you should have seen a bunch and done at least a few yourself, and by the time you're an instructor you should have done quite a few yourself. Some of this depends on the machine. Certainly the R22 is a more difficult machine to take to the ground. An Enstrom, R44, or 206 is quite easy and involves minimal risk with an experienced instructor on board.

Shameless plug for one of my youtube videos on autos to the ground: https://youtu.be/8Tez1Npd0Gc

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

So to highlight the importance of this issue today while doing circuits in an R44 I had a gov fail with a runaway down ! For a split second till I realised what the fault was it did get the heart going :)

[Dick Sanford]

When did we get to a position where we started to think that teaching a student pilot how to manipulate a primary flight control (the throttle) was unnecessary?
I published an article about this subject last year, "Lost skills".

[feathering tickles]

FFS, at no time has anyone ruled that "gov-off" training shouldn't be performed on Robinson piston-engined helicopters.

It is an acknowledged requirement of all EASA (at least) training courses of on such a type.

The important point is how and when in the course the training is performed.

[timprice]

I agree with Dick, we are losing too many skills, too much automentation:D

[johned0]

I'm not sure how we had thread creep from the original question of govenor off to EOL to the ground. I think they are very different issues but I can certainly comment on govenor off training.

I had govenor failure in R22s, due to sensor failure, and I was able to comfortably diagnose the problem and continue the flight without fuss due to receiving the training prior to first solo. This training was then a fairly common recurrance over the years (including on Dick Sanford's most excellent course).

Thanks to the correlator, flying govenor off is a non-issue, if you have been correctly trained and fly appropriately.

Fly safe,
John