FAA drops touchdown autorotations from FI tests

[chopper2004]

Touchdown autorotations removed from helicopter CFI test - AOPA (http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2016/April/12/FAA-drops-touchdown-autorotations-from-helicopter-instructors-test)

[BOBAKAT]

Next step ? No more autorotation ?

[Wageslave]

No, next step is no more flight test, the "examiner" will never leave the ground; merely sign the stude off on the basis of a statement of competence from his instructor.

Much less risk for the examiner you see, avoiding all this unnecessary and hazardous flying.

Pussies.

[Reely340]

Stop bitchin' this is only an appropriate conclusion from learning that even police CPLs doing NVG flights fail to autorotate properly, let alone to the ground.
I predict this: "in unanimous agreement with major helicopter and turbine industry experts the FAA will mandate triple engined helos as the minimum for passenger flight and twins as minimum for long lining and high tension line washing, as computer simulation has show that these setups will make total engine failures even less probable..." the rest of the statement, speaking of fuel management guidelines will not be heard anymore due to the noise of champagne corks popping at the table of the nearby industry experts...

*sheesh* I'm becoming increasingly proud of actually having done an unplanned auto rotation to the ground during inital training.
As current insurance policies waive liability if the renter of a helo does practize emergency ops and examiners happily declare auto rotations till 10ft as "perfect, we'd have waked away from this one, you pass" it might have been the only one to the ground I'll ever have done.

[Vertical Freedom]

Having had 2 x engine failures over past 26 years I am grateful that I was taught & still do practise Auto's :D a sad & pathetic day for the spineless non-skilled industry dropping Auto's, rather than upping the skills level, they're accommodating the unskilled :yuk::{:yuk:

[havick]

The candidate still has to be endorsed that he/she has satisfactorily demonstrated touch down auto's in their instructor rating prep.

Personally I think the ruling makes sense. A DPE can do an instructor rating flight test in any aircraft type, and they may not be current in that type.

The candidate is still being signed off to do touchdown auto's but it sounds like it us to help mitigate having an accident in the flight test.

It doesn't read to me that the industry is dropping touch down auto's altogether and no longer teaching them.

[Vertical Freedom]

The candidate still has to be endorsed that he/she has satisfactorily demonstrated touch down auto's in their instructor rating prep.
No chance of slipping through the net here...I'm sure (surely not) :oh:

[havick]

No more so than DPE's that haven't bothered with it even though they were supposed to.

I'm not defending anything, I couldn't really care less. I just honestly think that it doesn't really change what is/was already occurring.

[whoknows idont]

The more obvious solution would have been to require the examiner to be rated and current on type.

[albatross]

In Canada a type rating is required for every helicopter.
Fixed wing only above 12500 lbs.

[whoknows idont]

Right, I forgot, everything is possible in the land of the free and the home of the brave...

[Gordy]

Just for clarification, I went to the Practical Test Standards, revised, and copied the text for you all:

FAA CFI Practical Test Standards Here (https://www.faa.gov/training_testing/testing/test_standards/media/FAA-S-8081-7B.pdf)

Bold and underline added by me for clarification:

Performance of Autorotations
Instructional knowledge must be demonstrated on the practical test in
autorotations, either straight-in or 180°, as per Area of Operation X for a
helicopter class rating.

An examiner may accept, at his or her discretion, a logbook endorsement
in lieu of demonstrating these tasks during the practical test.

This logbook
endorsement must be given by a current flight instructor with a rotorcraft
category and helicopter class rating on his or her flight instructor
certificate that provided the training and can attest to the applicant’s
competence in these tasks. The following areas must be trained, and
documented in the endorsement, as evidence of instructional knowledge relating to the elements, common errors, performance, and correction of
common errors related to straight-in and 180° autorotations.
This logbook endorsement may be accepted, at the discretion of the
examiner, provided the practical test is not a retest as a result of the
applicant failing the previous practical test for deficiencies in instructional
knowledge pertaining to the elements, common errors, performance, or
correction of common errors related to straight-in or 180° autorotations.
In the case of an applicant who was found deficient in these areas, the
examiner must test the applicant in the instructional knowledge pertaining
to the elements, common errors, performance, and correction of common
errors related to straight-in and 180° autorotations. The applicant must
provide a helicopter appropriate for performing autorotations if
demonstration of this task is required during the retest.

So, in reality nothing has changed other than giving an examiner the ability to accept an endorsement from a more current CFI. This would be in line with a proper Flight Risk Assessment by the examiner.

As Wageslave so eloquently put it:

Much less risk for the examiner you see, avoiding all this unnecessary and hazardous flying.


Until he became an ass:

Pussies.

Why he feels the need to be like that I do not know-----and yet is is this side of the pond that gets accused of being the assholes.

[AnFI]

it is preparation for the mandating of twins

step 1 dumb down the pilots so they can't autorotate successfully
step 2 cry out for something to be done

the USA has some pretty good outcomes from autorotations in general (eg the 300hr girl in Hawaii downtown)


(anyone believing its ok to briefly fly through the hv curve in a twin? i could do with some help on the HV thread)

[whoknows idont]

-----and yet is is this side of the pond that gets accused of being the assholes.

No, you only get accused of having an air ambulance fatally crashing every third week or so... :oh:

[Gordy]

No, you only get accused of having an air ambulance fatally crashing every third week or so...

There is that....can't fix stupid, or I should say you cannot fix some of the stupid decisions to get airborne when all the evidence suggests staying on the ground. Although that happens everywhere I guess. (Clearly I do not fly EMS).

[vaqueroaero]

Well as a DPE I can assure you that anyone coming to me for a check ride will have to demonstrate a touchdown. All the other DPE's I have spoken with are of the same opinion.

The only people in the helicopter industry that aren't current on the maneuver are the FAA themselves. Due to a serious lack of funds they hardly get to fly. As of a couple of weeks ago there were 38 current helicopter guys in the FAA. For the entire nation.

My local FSDO has two helicopter pilots that haven't flown in nearly two years. The problem lies within the FAA itself and is certainly not meant to cover a DPE's lack of currency or skill.

[EN48]

The problem lies within the FAA itself and is certainly not meant to cover a DPE's lack of currency or skill.

This ^^^. Memory (perhaps flawed) says FAA policy requires that CFI check rides are supposedly done by FAA employees (and by DPE's only when specifically authorized by a FSDO on a case by case basis). Some of the CFI's I hang with do recurrent training for FAA Inspectors and generally report a surprising lack of proficiency. If all this is so, no wonder FAA doesnt want their staff doing touchdowns. (Not intended as a swipe at FAA folks, just recognition that FAA budget for recurrent training has been under pressure for some time.)

[Ascend Charlie]

There was a case in Oz back in the 80s when 2 "Examiners of Airmen" as they were known then, took an R22 out to Camden (towered airfield about 30nm from Sydney) for some refresher training.

They were doing touchdown autos, sort of successfully, and when the examiner at the controls had finished one auto, he called "Ready".
The tower said "Are you sure?"
Examiner says "Yes, why do you ask, two dogs?"
Tower replies "Your tailboom is lying on the ground behind you."

[Gordy]

Tower replies "Your tailboom is lying on the ground behind you."

Kinda like this:

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j35/helokat/Helo-general/mkcrash.jpg

[rick1128]

TorqueStripe,

Here in the US helicopter examiners have to be rated in each model helicopter they conduct checkrides in.

[Dynamic Roller]

I wonder if the FAA's decision is related to this (http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief2.aspx?ev_id=20100526X84456&ntsbno=ERA10FA283&akey=1) accident.

[Mike Flynn]

Did mine on the R22 at Jandakot Western Australia back in 1989. Right down to the ground many times with Colin who ran West Coast Helicopters. No doors in a hot climate with your hand always on the collective. I can't say I enjoyed it but Colin is always there at the back of my mind. The Robbo is an uncomfortable little helicopter but traches you to fly just like the PA 38 fixed wing. If you want a nice aircraft never buy either.

Is Colin still around? Must be in his 70's if so.

[Rotorgoat8]

No doubt a result of the hazards associated with the cheapest form of helicopter training in the cheapest available machine. Not to mention any particular helicopter manufacturer, of course!

[AnFI]

CAA examiners in the UK can't rescue an EOL either, so they fudge it in the UK too, the only guy from the 'Campaign' (Against Aviation) who can do it is FC, and then only just !

pathetic !

[Paul Cantrell]

Dynamic Rollover said: I wonder if the FAA's decision is related to this accident.

That was our local examiner who died in that one. I'd flown with him once or twice; a good guy and a good pilot. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that was partly why they've changed the requirement.

The other thing that relates is that a few years back the requirement for touchdowns was suspended for a while... What we were hearing on the East Coast is that it was lobbying by some of the California schools - they were claiming that their insurance companies were not allowing it. I suspect that if the rumor was even true, it was more about trying to reduce insurance rates than being told it wasn't allowed.

As Rotorgoat8 hints, the R22 can be a pretty difficult machine to stay current on touchdowns. I have about 2.5K in R22s but I haven't flown one in a few years, and I'm sure I'd have to work back up to proficiency after having flown higher inertia machines for quite a while now. The difference between a pretty good touchdown and a really bad one in an R22 can be just a couple feet of altitude when the RPM starts to run out.

I'm against the current change because I think the change is reasonable, but will be abused. I suspect flight instructor candidates will have a couple touchdowns demoed to them, and then will get to do one or two (with his/her instructor right there on the controls to prevent any problems) and then will be declared ready for checkride, i.e. without really the experience to do it by themselves.

I grant you that if you can get within 5 feet of the ground you're probably going to walk away from an autorotation, but you can mask a lot of errors during a power recovery... It's really the touchdown that shows you that you aren't cheating... that you in fact have enough energy/RPM to achieve a safe landing.

Obviously those of us lucky enough to be teaching in higher inertia machines will continue to teach touchdowns, but given the vast numbers of R22 trained instructors, it does worry me that this requirement is being changed.

[cattletruck]

Worth repeating:

a sad & pathetic day for the spineless non-skilled industry dropping Auto's, rather than upping the skills level

The modern corporate world is driven by risk aversion, they have a whole encyclopaedia on the topic, because that's how the bean counters think that's how to make money.

It's also a sad and pathetic day when saving money is put ahead of saving lives.

[AnFI]

it all part of dumbing down and de-skilling

[Arm out the window]

"Your tailboom is lying on the ground behind you."

AC, sounds a bit like the Army Kiowa doing fixed float autos to the water on Ross River dam in behind Townsville - had been broadcasting ops normals and then couldn't get radio contact, wonders why and then sees his tail boom come floating past ... something like that anyway!

[rotorfossil]

The problem with EOL's in low inertia helicopters like the R22 is that there is no half way house in terms of practice. As instructors and examiners, you either do them all day, every day as I used to or none at all. No two autos to the ground on the same day same conditions finish up exactly the same. Tiny variations in wind and flare make large differences to what happens at the bottom. There is no one size fits all technique that you can get away with like on 47's, 300's and 206's. Lack of practice ends in tears.