Guardis civil helicopter incident

[Flying Bull]

Hello,

a pilot "f..... up" taking of,
turning the Bo105 around his position - instead around the tailrotor - or first moving sideways to clear the space for the tailrotor.
Luckily, after tailrotorcontact, he reacted fine and didn´t try to fly away...
The tailwind didn´t help either I think.

Un helicóptero de Guardia Civil accidentado en una exhibición en Las Palmas. eldia.es. (http://eldia.es/sucesos/2016-10-08/16-helicoptero-Guardia-Civil-accidentado-exhibicion-Palmas.htm)

[SilsoeSid]

... he reacted fine and didn´t try to fly away...

Best post incident comment I've read in a while :hmm:

[Vertical Freedom]

:= incredible display of incompetence; zero situational awareness by the Pilot, hopeless pick-up, amazingly he didn't fly away after botching up the lift-off from a huge H :ugh:

[Max Contingency]

We all make mistakes but where do you start with that one? its off the scale. If you pick up a helicopter like that then you are destined for a dynamic rollover incident at some point in your career and there are just too many ways to have avoided that tail strike to list them all!

[Spanish Waltzer]

Was that really a qualified professional helicopter pilot at the controls?

[212man]

When they said "it's bring your kid to work day", they should have mentioned that did not include letting them take the controls!

[hihover]

You guys are being very harsh.

It might well be a local community programme to allow those living in the Blind Institute next door to experience helicopter flight. Or the helmet may have slipped on take-off, or she may simply have been injecting some realism into a tail rotor failure demo.
:eek:

[TeeS]

You have to accept it is a good advert for the yellow bum line 212man!

TeeS

[212man]

Anther interesting view here:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/UYpZ2VA0c4I

UYpZ2VA0c4I

It somewhat contradicts the official statement:

Sources of the Civil Guard have stressed that the incident occurred during a static display and on the ground to mark the patron of the body was on land that did not endanger the audience, who was away because the area was bounded and closed with a fence with chains.


I see they use the same training academy as the Greek Air Force!
https://www.youtube.com/embed/lv7T1OXWMwo

lv7T1OXWMwo

Can't work out how to use the Youtube imbed button!

[Bell_ringer]

On that last YT video did anyone catch the coning angle? :mad:

[Geoffersincornwall]

I've said it before and I'll say it yet one more time. More than 50% of the pilots I see in the course of my job cannot be described as competent. Maybe they have the potential to be competent but they would need a lot more 'input' to realise it. When will we wake up and understand that 'attending' a course is not the same as 'passing' a course. We are not served well by the way we are doing things in the world of licensing pilots.

It's not just me, the Ryanair HoT said at a recent conference that 50% of those applicants for flight deck jobs FAILED their selection process.

Come on guys - we can do better than this.

G.

[Evil Twin]

Showboating in a confined area with public very close by :sad::sad:

[Max Contingency]

We have all been guilty of showboating before. Words of advice I was given as a young pilot: If your impromptu audience are general public then a Low and Slow fly past (beach bimble) is more impressive than a high energy manoeuvre and 10 times safer. The public get a good view and experience the noise, vibration and whirring rotors and you get more time to wave at the cute ones.

[gedney]

Bell_ringer,

Very drole! ��

[ShyTorque]

It never fails to surprise how readily some pilots stupidly put themselves outside of their personal limits, or those of their helicopter. Most of these "wing-over" crashes are totally avoidable.

The inexperienced and foolish see the wing-over as an easy manoeuvre, but they are very easy to get very badly wrong.

[jayteeto]

Max, you are Soooooooooo correct in that statement. At airshows, the helicopter explores the full flight envelope, the crowd are mildly impressed. A Tornado takes off on reheat; guess which video goes on YouTube?
I ALWAYS fly as smooth as possible when doing famil flights, whilst watching other pilots scaring pax fartless, all the time thinking they are impressing them.
Just fly normally in all situations, the public don't care how good you are.......

[Ascend Charlie]

After dinging the tail rotor, the video runs for quite a while but the pilot still hasn't pulled the throttles back to idle.

[megan]

On that last YT video did anyone catch the coning angle?Hingeless rotor, so no coning. Definite case of bad blade stall though I think. :D Where's AnFI with his encyclopaedic knowledge when you need him?

[ShyTorque]

Surely, the B105 in the OP suffered LTE.

(After it departed the airframe).

[SilsoeSid]

More recent Spanish Civil Guard 105 action;

Spanish mountaineers saved by a pilot who flies so close to a cliff they can step on (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3834067/Is-daring-helicopter-rescue-Stranded-mountaineers-saved-skilled-pilot-flies-close-cliff-face-step-aboard.html)
WBwSqgaPxm8

[Octane]

Was that ballsy or a little bit silly?!

[twinstar_ca]

i wonder what my friends at Canadian Mountain Rescue would say about flying that close to the face with a 407?!?!?

[Delta Torque]

Hard to tell from the camera angle. There may be a lot more tip clearance than it appears at first glance.

[[email protected]]

Looks quite reasonable to me - the references are all on his side so he can best judge the clearances, he has an escape route to the left at all times in case of malfunction and it looks like the guys on the ground picked a bit of a ledge rather than a vertical cliff-face.

There appears to be a little turbulence judging by the tail movement but otherwise - if you don't have a winch fitted - a reasonable way to extract the climbers/rescuers. Possibly safer than nosing in to a snow covered slope which I believe is common practice in the Alps.

[311kph]

:ok:
"Now look at them yo-yo's that's the way you do it
Lemme tell ya them guys ain't dumb
Maybe get a blister on your little finger
Maybe get a blister on your thumb"

[Thomas coupling]

Happen to agree with Crab. Safe manouevre with good escape route at the ready. Very clean crisp pick up.

[Octane]

Novice question, how does one judge how much clearance you have between an obstacle and the tips of the rotor blades? Is it an intuitive thing that you learn with experience?

[John R81]

you can see the tip path

[Max Contingency]

Novice question, how does one judge how much clearance you have between an obstacle and the tips of the rotor blades? Is it an intuitive thing that you learn with experience?

You listen very very carefully to your crewman. If you don't have a crewman and you are concerned about your rotor tip clearance against the side of a mountain then you are in the wrong helicopter/place/job (delete as applicable)

[Octane]

Thank you for enlightening me guys...

[helisdw]

Crab - in Post 24 you state that balancing laterally on the skid is possibly safer than nosing in. Other than being able to 'fall'/peel away into the possible escape route, could you explain what inherent safety benefits the former technique has over the latter?

In my mind, the benefits of the "toe in" approach include being able to conduct an instrument scan more easily as the slope is directly in front of the panel (minimal head movement required), there is probably less chance of snagging a skid and the machine often feels more stable in the pitch axis rather than the roll axis, especially with CofG changes on entry/exit.

Furthermore, some machines effectively have a wider disc laterally than fore/aft so steeper ground may be achieved going nose first.

Saying all that, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

[AnFI]

helisdw further to climb to the door with nose in

megan "Hingeless rotor, so no coning." really ?

[megan]

You'll understand the term Lock number no doubt. For an articulated rotor it's value lies between eight and ten generally. For hingeless, between five and seven.

So yes, there is coning, but the post was a slap at the ridiculous posts you continually put up, nothing more, nor less.

An expert no less, had the following to sayThere will come a time when you good ppruners will realize that AnFI is able to counter any argument with excellently phrased pap, and make it sound scientific.Thanks Nick for your erudite summation.

[helisdw]

Thanks AnFI - I'd suggest that the proximity of the door depends on the type of helicopter being operated and how many people are getting in/out (front seat vs. rear) so I don't really see how it directly impacts safety.

I'd still like to hear from Crab as to why he feels using a 'nose in' technique is possibly more unsafe (this is a genuine query, aimed at learning from other people's experience).

[megan]

I don't really see how it directly impacts safetyAs has been said, side on gives an immediate escape route. The other consideration in my mind is that being side on forms a barrier to the people being picked up, preventing them from miss stepping and going down the cliff. But no two cases are the same, and you have to decide how to approach the matter on the day, including saying no.

[Camp Freddie]

I've said it before and I'll say it yet one more time. More than 50% of the pilots I see in the course of my job cannot be described as competent. Maybe they have the potential to be competent but they would need a lot more 'input' to realise it. When will we wake up and understand that 'attending' a course is not the same as 'passing' a course. We are not served well by the way we are doing things in the world of licensing pilots.

Mr Geoffers, said this, he has summed up the situation perfectly, I completely agree with every word of it.

Also the level of Base knowledge amongst many seems to be lower than it was, I was told of an example of a pilot with APTL/IR who was flying the AW139 offshore who when questioned didn't know the difference between altitude and height !

Also these same people are less willing than ever to serve an apprenticeship as a co-pilot, they think they deserve to go to captain almost immediately regardless of the fact that they don't know the job at all and walk straight into the simplest traps with there size 12's on and looked horrified when I tell them it took me 5 years to get command (many people I know it took 7 years), that's just how it was before!

[SilsoeSid]

I was told of an example of a pilot with APTL/IR who was flying the AW139 offshore who when questioned didn't know the difference between altitude and height !

Would that AW139 have a radar altimeter fitted?
http://www.navfltsm.addr.com/collins-ra.gif

Reminds me of the question:
Where's the science in the saying, 'i' before 'e' except after 'c'.

:ok:

[stilllearning]

If you allways fly offshore you might end up forgetting the difference between altitude and height ;))

[[email protected]]

Helisdw - my main issue with the nose-in is the lack of options in the event of pretty much any malfunction but certainly engine failure. You are also poorly placed in your ability to flyaway if hit by a downdraught or a lowering cloudbase. You don't know what is happening in the mountains behind you (deteriorating weather).

An instrument scan that close to the rock face would not be top of my to-do list.

I agree with megan about being easier for the rescued to get in as well.

However your comment ref width of disc laterally compared to forwards is very valid. I'm not saying that it is a bad technique, there are clearly some scenarios where it is appropriate but it wouldn't be my first choice - that would be to have a winch and do it without needing to be in contact with the mountain.:ok:

[gedney]

Given that he has got his right skid on the ground I'm not convinced that he has retained any benefit from side-on as opposed to nose-in. With a skid in contact I reckon that his chances of flying away from a power loss malfunction or an encounter with down-draughting are drastically reduced.

I accept that I don't know the story behind the clip, but those embarking look un-injured and don't look to be in immediate peril. Risk vs benefit? I'd say no and wait for the winch-equipped aircraft or the MRT.

[Vertical Freedom]

From post #20...that style of Rescue in the Himalayas is an SOP :8 nudging in on Your right side with your rear door open is fine, good view & good escape options.... I'd never toe in ;)

Happy Happy

VF

[[email protected]]

Gedney - I would expect that he only has a very light contact with the ground such that he is essentially in the hover rather than having landed - this would allow lateral cyclic and the most minimal addition of collective to effect a flyaway, even if he dragged the skid a bit towards the cliff edge.

Try doing the same thing with both skids in contact when the only option is a rearward movement - not impossible but much more difficult.

I agree a winch-equipped aircraft would be better but many countries don't have that facility either by choice or necessity.

[tistisnot]

SilsoeSid

I'll bite ...... "The rule only applies when the sound represented is ‘ee’. It doesn’t apply to words like science or efficient, in which the –ie- combination does follow the letter c but isn’t pronounced ‘ee’.

Neither does the rule apply to any word without the ee sound, even when there is no c involved, such as foreign, feign, beige, forfeit"

[SilsoeSid]

Thats weird, what species are you tistisnot?

[tistisnot]

SilsoeSid ...... Purveyor of Pedants, perhaps?

[helisdw]

Crab and Megan - thank you for your replies.