Fixed-wing or Rotary career? (incl Changing licence to Rotary)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Surrey
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know what you are saying Ascend and I agree that there certainly are some people that seem to have more money than sense in aviation. I also agree that a long career in airline flying and allowing yourself to get into a vegetative state is indeed a trap to be avoided.
However, I do get fed up with people on this site that seem to all too freely anonymously criticise and stereotype others whilst lauding their own skills and judgement. Whilst the gentleman you refer to may indeed not have the ability to upgrade to CPLH, with 20,000 hours of airline time he deserves a bit more respect and dignity than you offer.
Whilst far from being sky gods, with the right exposure and training the vast majority of airline pilots should easily excel in most areas of aviation.
There are many variations of a very true saying in aviation. The one I like is this: 'Be careful who you condemn in your world as one day you might find them condemning you in theirs'.
Many thanks to everybody for the tips though. Gives me some food for thought, keep em coming. Really looking forward to this.
However, I do get fed up with people on this site that seem to all too freely anonymously criticise and stereotype others whilst lauding their own skills and judgement. Whilst the gentleman you refer to may indeed not have the ability to upgrade to CPLH, with 20,000 hours of airline time he deserves a bit more respect and dignity than you offer.
Whilst far from being sky gods, with the right exposure and training the vast majority of airline pilots should easily excel in most areas of aviation.
There are many variations of a very true saying in aviation. The one I like is this: 'Be careful who you condemn in your world as one day you might find them condemning you in theirs'.
Many thanks to everybody for the tips though. Gives me some food for thought, keep em coming. Really looking forward to this.
Last edited by Officedesk; 12th Sep 2003 at 21:36.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Sunrise, Fl. U.S.A.
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Besides not having the free hand, and possible flare issues, remember that in the heli you will no longer have adverse yaw when banking, so no tail rotor pedal inputs are placed when entering/exiting the bank. You'll simply move cyclic to enter/exit.
Pedals are used in hover turns only to move the heli through the turn, and in most other situations only for maintaining trim.
Pedals are used in hover turns only to move the heli through the turn, and in most other situations only for maintaining trim.
Officedesk said:
"Whilst the gentleman you refer to may indeed not have the ability to upgrade to CPLH, with 20,000 hours of airline time he deserves a bit more respect and dignity than you offer."
I wasn't trying to put sh*t on him. When he first walked into my office and described his situation, I was impressed by him, his achievements, his ambitions, and his Lamborghini parked outside. I looked forward to flying with somebody who had twice my hours.
But as i flew more and more hours with him, the expected admiration turned to dismay and then horror, thinking of how dangerous he must have been in his own machine (thankfully in a different country). Perhaps with the passing years, some of his functions had deteriorated to some extent - and this was confirmed by him landing a 747 wheels-up. Takes some leadership to do that.
"Whilst the gentleman you refer to may indeed not have the ability to upgrade to CPLH, with 20,000 hours of airline time he deserves a bit more respect and dignity than you offer."
I wasn't trying to put sh*t on him. When he first walked into my office and described his situation, I was impressed by him, his achievements, his ambitions, and his Lamborghini parked outside. I looked forward to flying with somebody who had twice my hours.
But as i flew more and more hours with him, the expected admiration turned to dismay and then horror, thinking of how dangerous he must have been in his own machine (thankfully in a different country). Perhaps with the passing years, some of his functions had deteriorated to some extent - and this was confirmed by him landing a 747 wheels-up. Takes some leadership to do that.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Andover, Hampshire
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going from fixed wing to rotary is like a breath of fresh air. Although the helicopter is inherantly unstable, it is a dream to fly at a speed way below the stalling speed of most fixed wing aircraft. Having the ability to land in any field you want or land at any speed you want is amazing.
If the donkey stops, enter autorotation and touch down where you want at virtually zero speed.
Always remember, to fly is heavenly, to hover is divine!!!!!!
If the donkey stops, enter autorotation and touch down where you want at virtually zero speed.
Always remember, to fly is heavenly, to hover is divine!!!!!!
Ascend Charlie wrote:
and
Not to mention the two other guys in the cockpit being asleep...unless it was one of those single-pilot 74's the airlines keep pestering McBoeing to build. The fact that I hadn't heard about such an event does not mean that it did not happen. But...
Got a link?
...At my suggestion that he remain a private pilot and forget his commercial aspirations, he gave up, sold his H500, and went back to being a casual 747 driver - and soon after landed one wheels-up!!!
Perhaps with the passing years, some of his functions had deteriorated to some extent - and this was confirmed by him landing a 747 wheels-up. Takes some leadership to do that.
Got a link?
PPF1 - no link, but it happened after June 92 and before jan 95.
Company - Ansett.
One engine had been shut down, they made a decision to go to Sydney instead of Brisbane, didn't fully run the checklists to realise that the nosewheel wasn't down, and when they broke out of the overcast at 300' the tower called that the nosewheel was up, but they were in the flare by then, and ....... he doesn't work for them any more. In fact, NOBODY works for them any more, they are gone.
Company - Ansett.
One engine had been shut down, they made a decision to go to Sydney instead of Brisbane, didn't fully run the checklists to realise that the nosewheel wasn't down, and when they broke out of the overcast at 300' the tower called that the nosewheel was up, but they were in the flare by then, and ....... he doesn't work for them any more. In fact, NOBODY works for them any more, they are gone.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Global
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A-C
Nice, very nice.
I remember those days. The said 747 skipper was indeed a very qualified gentleman he could do this and that and park a big keroburner on a postage stamp, but put him in a VFR hands on helicopter he was a hack.
I have the same experiences now. I am a currently a training captain in the middle of qualifying a new batch of skippers. These guys generally have military backgrounds everything from Hueys to Hinds, F series to Migs and Sukhoi’s up to and including the 27.
They simply can’t fly the aircraft they have been assigned to, their autocratic methodology brings big CRM problems and their handling skills do not match the capabilities of the aircraft.
No matter how much experience you can obtain a Hack will usually remain a Hack until they retire from the organisation be that of their own choice or by that of the laws of physics.
You have never experienced life changing moments until the aircraft disintegrates around you (done that) or while one of these ‘experienced’ people decides to test the four wheel drive capabilities of aircraft during public transport operations (done that too). Some would say off runway, I asked where was the runway.
Ace from space on base with three in place……………
ps. here's the link http://www.airliners.net/open.file/021003/M/
Nice, very nice.
I remember those days. The said 747 skipper was indeed a very qualified gentleman he could do this and that and park a big keroburner on a postage stamp, but put him in a VFR hands on helicopter he was a hack.
I have the same experiences now. I am a currently a training captain in the middle of qualifying a new batch of skippers. These guys generally have military backgrounds everything from Hueys to Hinds, F series to Migs and Sukhoi’s up to and including the 27.
They simply can’t fly the aircraft they have been assigned to, their autocratic methodology brings big CRM problems and their handling skills do not match the capabilities of the aircraft.
No matter how much experience you can obtain a Hack will usually remain a Hack until they retire from the organisation be that of their own choice or by that of the laws of physics.
You have never experienced life changing moments until the aircraft disintegrates around you (done that) or while one of these ‘experienced’ people decides to test the four wheel drive capabilities of aircraft during public transport operations (done that too). Some would say off runway, I asked where was the runway.
Ace from space on base with three in place……………
ps. here's the link http://www.airliners.net/open.file/021003/M/
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Surrey
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ascend, I was just making a point that a valid question asking for helpful constructive responses always seems to end in some mud slinging session on this web-site. That is a shame and I wish people would stop and think before posting.
I would just like to give my informed half penneth worth on your condemnation of him for going off and landing one wheel up.
In a 747 you cannot simply ignore gear unsafe conditions. The approach attitude would be not as expected, it would be near impossible to slow to anywhere near planned safe approach speed (if the non-normal checklist had not been completed). Then you would get GPWS 'too low gear' alert then the landing config warning before touchdown. On top of that and as mentioned above there are is also at least one other trained pilot alongside who will be screaming out if any one these steps is missed.
It is always hard when another non-normal situation occurs, like an engine shut down (though in flight that is not a very serious emergency on a four engine aircraft). The 747 has many failsafes and the situation that you describe with the nosewheel is still likely to be the result of another serious failure that I am sure the crew did everything they could to sort before commencing an approach. I would be very surprised indeed if they quite simply ignored the fact that one of their big green lights was missing and then they still ignored further aural warnings.
Regardless of all that the point I am making is why do people use situations that they cannot know everything about them, to condemn.
I repeat my previous: Whilst he may not have the specific abilities to enter your world I suggest you be careful about criticising his.
Particularly when all I was asking for was a few helpful tips on flying rotarys. I didn't really ask for opinions of whether airline pilots could hack it on helicopters.
That's my last word on it now lets forget it.
I would just like to give my informed half penneth worth on your condemnation of him for going off and landing one wheel up.
In a 747 you cannot simply ignore gear unsafe conditions. The approach attitude would be not as expected, it would be near impossible to slow to anywhere near planned safe approach speed (if the non-normal checklist had not been completed). Then you would get GPWS 'too low gear' alert then the landing config warning before touchdown. On top of that and as mentioned above there are is also at least one other trained pilot alongside who will be screaming out if any one these steps is missed.
It is always hard when another non-normal situation occurs, like an engine shut down (though in flight that is not a very serious emergency on a four engine aircraft). The 747 has many failsafes and the situation that you describe with the nosewheel is still likely to be the result of another serious failure that I am sure the crew did everything they could to sort before commencing an approach. I would be very surprised indeed if they quite simply ignored the fact that one of their big green lights was missing and then they still ignored further aural warnings.
Regardless of all that the point I am making is why do people use situations that they cannot know everything about them, to condemn.
I repeat my previous: Whilst he may not have the specific abilities to enter your world I suggest you be careful about criticising his.
Particularly when all I was asking for was a few helpful tips on flying rotarys. I didn't really ask for opinions of whether airline pilots could hack it on helicopters.
That's my last word on it now lets forget it.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Global
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Officedesk Jockey
Please visit http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occu...ail.cfm?ID=331
Quote:
“The flight crew had the opportunity to recognise and correct the landing gear problem prior to landing. The pilot in command attempted to determine the actual landing gear situation from the flight engineer. Although the flight engineer's panel indicated the nose gear was not down and locked, the flight engineer did not recognise this and subsequent communication and co-ordination between the flight crew failed to detect this error.
During the latter part of the flight, the crew did not adequately manage the operation of the aircraft. The crew's performance reflected a lack of effective crew resource management, the crew's lack of knowledge about some of the company's procedures for B747 operations, the flight engineer's and the co-pilot's lack of experience in the B747 and perceived pressure.”
Put simply, the crew were faced with abnormals, they rushed the approach skipped items on the check list and when faced with bad WX poped out at the bottom and oops………
I fly planks now, all AC and myself want to say is don’t expect too much and you won’t be disappointed. Many people who fly high performance planks have an over inflated view of themselves and when they go from a controlled, multi crew environment to a single pilot, hands on scenario many come unstuck and sometimes with fatal consequences.
Don’t let this happen to you is what we are saying.
As for flying rotary my piece of advice a very capable instructor told me when I did my conversion, KEEP THE PICTURE FLAT.
IHD
Please visit http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/occu...ail.cfm?ID=331
Quote:
“The flight crew had the opportunity to recognise and correct the landing gear problem prior to landing. The pilot in command attempted to determine the actual landing gear situation from the flight engineer. Although the flight engineer's panel indicated the nose gear was not down and locked, the flight engineer did not recognise this and subsequent communication and co-ordination between the flight crew failed to detect this error.
During the latter part of the flight, the crew did not adequately manage the operation of the aircraft. The crew's performance reflected a lack of effective crew resource management, the crew's lack of knowledge about some of the company's procedures for B747 operations, the flight engineer's and the co-pilot's lack of experience in the B747 and perceived pressure.”
Put simply, the crew were faced with abnormals, they rushed the approach skipped items on the check list and when faced with bad WX poped out at the bottom and oops………
I fly planks now, all AC and myself want to say is don’t expect too much and you won’t be disappointed. Many people who fly high performance planks have an over inflated view of themselves and when they go from a controlled, multi crew environment to a single pilot, hands on scenario many come unstuck and sometimes with fatal consequences.
Don’t let this happen to you is what we are saying.
As for flying rotary my piece of advice a very capable instructor told me when I did my conversion, KEEP THE PICTURE FLAT.
IHD
Last edited by international hog driver; 13th Sep 2003 at 17:14.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many people who fly high performance planks have an over inflated view of themselves
International Hog Driver, you fly planks now, I guess it might just apply to you then? Ah, but wait, you're talking about all those other people with the over-inflated views of themselves!
another quote: "when they go from a controlled, multi crew environment to a single pilot, hands on scenario many come unstuck and sometimes with fatal consequences.
Don’t let this happen to you is what we are saying."
How patronising. I don't know how you guys ever let a 10 hour PPL student go solo. Oh wait, don't tell me, I know, I know, they don't have the transferal of learning problems, so in actual fact they're much more capable than the 10 000 hour plank driver.
The rotary guys I've converted on to jets have just been pilots like any others, some good, some bad. Strangely enough, they don't try to come to the hover before they land.
And the fixed wing guys I know who've gone on to helicopters have had no problems. They've been more than capable of realising there are certain traps and adapting to them, same as the rotary guys going on to fixed wing.
So I just don't see the point of bringing up this example of one unfortunate incident.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean their not out to get you. :rolleyes
Last edited by Maximum; 13th Sep 2003 at 19:30.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Global
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There by the grace of god go I......
Max I'm not going to tear you down, but I do need to clarify a few things.
an insulting, grossly biased generalisation then eh? - No, industry observation.
’guess it might just apply to you then? – Yes, but I don’t have ‘the over-inflated views of themselves’, I quite humbly cancel fights (mine and other crews), where the proposed operation exceeds the capabilities of crew or machine.
Officedesk wanted advice, I gave him an insight, like when you walk into the DFO’s or CP’s office and ask for a clarification. We look up to our peers usually that have attained the position because of their experience and capabilities. Officedesk has not done it, others have.
Don’t let this happen to you, How patronising. – Might be, but I don’t want to see another professional buy the farm, I’ve seen it too much already.
I don’t touch the 10 hour guys, the ones with thousands of hours have trouble enough doing what I do (company mins 1K hours on type) no matter what you have flown before.
We have one FO now with a little over 200 hours and yes she flies better than some of the experienced guys, so in actual fact some are much more capable than the 10 000 hour plank driver, I Agree.
“So I just don't see the point of bringing up this example of one unfortunate incident”. One incident….. quite the opposite there are many examples. Have a look at the number of ‘professionals’ inside and outside our industry who think they have what it takes to fly rotary. Not just 10K hr jet jockeys have an untouchable aura.
Clint Eastwood said it in one of his movies once.
“A good man always knows his limitations”
I know mine, do you know yours?
My intent is not to cut you down, but to open your eyes to the fact that there are many flight operations that your’s and mine experience my not have covered yet. In our own way we may be experienced and qualified professionals but we still may know nothing about how they guys across the apron do things.
Getting back to the topic for Ofiicedesk, besides keeping the picture flat, another thing you need to know in contrast to flying planks is SMALL CONTROL MOVEMENTS.
an insulting, grossly biased generalisation then eh? - No, industry observation.
’guess it might just apply to you then? – Yes, but I don’t have ‘the over-inflated views of themselves’, I quite humbly cancel fights (mine and other crews), where the proposed operation exceeds the capabilities of crew or machine.
Officedesk wanted advice, I gave him an insight, like when you walk into the DFO’s or CP’s office and ask for a clarification. We look up to our peers usually that have attained the position because of their experience and capabilities. Officedesk has not done it, others have.
Don’t let this happen to you, How patronising. – Might be, but I don’t want to see another professional buy the farm, I’ve seen it too much already.
I don’t touch the 10 hour guys, the ones with thousands of hours have trouble enough doing what I do (company mins 1K hours on type) no matter what you have flown before.
We have one FO now with a little over 200 hours and yes she flies better than some of the experienced guys, so in actual fact some are much more capable than the 10 000 hour plank driver, I Agree.
“So I just don't see the point of bringing up this example of one unfortunate incident”. One incident….. quite the opposite there are many examples. Have a look at the number of ‘professionals’ inside and outside our industry who think they have what it takes to fly rotary. Not just 10K hr jet jockeys have an untouchable aura.
Clint Eastwood said it in one of his movies once.
“A good man always knows his limitations”
I know mine, do you know yours?
My intent is not to cut you down, but to open your eyes to the fact that there are many flight operations that your’s and mine experience my not have covered yet. In our own way we may be experienced and qualified professionals but we still may know nothing about how they guys across the apron do things.
Getting back to the topic for Ofiicedesk, besides keeping the picture flat, another thing you need to know in contrast to flying planks is SMALL CONTROL MOVEMENTS.
How to crash a 747 in three easy steps!
Ascend Charlie wrote about a 747/H500 pilot he knew:
Well, it's not that simple, is it? It never is. I mean, it's not like the 747 captain was flying alone and simply forgot to put his wheels down, as happens at least a couple of times per week here in the U.S. There's more to it than that.
In "most" aeroplanes with retractable gear, the green "Gear Down" lights are arranged in a little triangle which gives the pilot a clear visual indicator that all three legs are extended. In the 747 this is not the case. The only thing the two forward-facing pilots see is one single "Gear Down" light. They refer to the Flight Engineer for "the rest of the story." He's the systems expert. Or, he's supposed to be.
The Captain knew that there were certain conditions in which the gear indicators could conflict with the actual gear position. Thus, he addressed the FO and asked for confirmation that the gear was indeed down.
On the FO's panel, there are five "Gear Down" lights. But they are arranged ambiguously. Four are set together in a horizontal row, and the fifth is separate- above and left of centerline. With that separate light dark, it might not be very obvious that it was supposed to be included with the four just below it. Of course, a sharp FO who was familiar with his a/c and systems would know this, but the accident aircraft was not so equipped.
In fact, all indications are that the FO erroneously turned the #1 Hydraulic system "OFF" when they shut the #1 engine down, although he certainly doesn't admit to that and neither would I. The PIC and the SO did expect that the gear and flaps would operate more slowly. But they did not expect, nor should they have, that those items would take up to ten times longer to operate than normal. So as they commenced the approach, the gear and flaps were still in transit. Then, as they tried to select Flaps25, they got the gear horn.
When the Captain asked if the gear was down, the FO gave a conflicting reply. On one hand, he said "Yep," but then he added, "I've got four green." He did not say, "I've only got four green," which would've or should've raised a red flag. Obviously, he did not understand the significance of what he was seeing.
Now...stop a minute. You're sliding down on final approach in a huge piece of flying machinery. You've had an inflight-emergency, but you've got it handled. So far, so good. You can see the runway ahead of you. The "landing expectation" is high. Then, at sort of the last minute, you get an indication (in this case the gear horn!) that something is amiss. In retrospect, we wonder why the Captain didn't cry out, "Great kookamooka! Balls to the walls, boys, let's get outta here! Go around!!" But he didn't. You know, you can blame "differences in airline policies" all you want (as all three pilots did). But the fact remains that you just don't LAND with the gear horn blowing.
But the whole crew was probably preoccupied with and depressed about the thought of grabbing yet another 747 and completing the trip in a day that would stretch beyond the normal duty-time limits. I know that would p*ss me off.
I was amused by one thing the Captain said about his mindset during the approach (i.e. before the embarassing nose-slide).
This is funny. It's not a stretch to imagine a pilot in a similar situation thinking the same thing: "I'm really gonna give it to these guys after we land" ...just before slamming into a mountain or something.
There are lessons aplenty we can learn from the Ansett accident. Yes, the Captain was deficient. But a 747 is not a single-pilot aircraft, and he was saddled with a very weak crew (in the case of the FO, borderline incompetent). So it's not exactly the same thing as going out and forgetting to put the wheels down before landing, which is what was implied in AC's initial two posts.
You know, we helicopter pilots are lucky in a perverse sort of way. Those of us who fly in single-pilot ops are SOLELY responsible for our pilot-error accidents. For better or for worse, it's all us. If we slam our BK into the trees, rip the skids off, break our wrist and have to do an extended-hover back at base while Maintenance tries to figure out how we're going to set the beast down, there's really no one else to blame. Even though I've never flown high-performance planks, for a long time I had that "over inflated view" of myself. But you know, the more accident reports I read, the more I know that it can happen to me.
With the proper attitude, any experienced pilot can easily learn to fly anything else. I suppose I could even learn to land the Space Shuttle...with one or two sessions of dual, of course.
But as i flew more and more hours with him, the expected admiration turned to dismay and then horror, thinking of how dangerous he must have been in his own machine (thankfully in a different country). Perhaps with the passing years, some of his functions had deteriorated to some extent - and this was confirmed by him landing a 747 wheels-up. Takes some leadership to do that.
In "most" aeroplanes with retractable gear, the green "Gear Down" lights are arranged in a little triangle which gives the pilot a clear visual indicator that all three legs are extended. In the 747 this is not the case. The only thing the two forward-facing pilots see is one single "Gear Down" light. They refer to the Flight Engineer for "the rest of the story." He's the systems expert. Or, he's supposed to be.
The Captain knew that there were certain conditions in which the gear indicators could conflict with the actual gear position. Thus, he addressed the FO and asked for confirmation that the gear was indeed down.
On the FO's panel, there are five "Gear Down" lights. But they are arranged ambiguously. Four are set together in a horizontal row, and the fifth is separate- above and left of centerline. With that separate light dark, it might not be very obvious that it was supposed to be included with the four just below it. Of course, a sharp FO who was familiar with his a/c and systems would know this, but the accident aircraft was not so equipped.
In fact, all indications are that the FO erroneously turned the #1 Hydraulic system "OFF" when they shut the #1 engine down, although he certainly doesn't admit to that and neither would I. The PIC and the SO did expect that the gear and flaps would operate more slowly. But they did not expect, nor should they have, that those items would take up to ten times longer to operate than normal. So as they commenced the approach, the gear and flaps were still in transit. Then, as they tried to select Flaps25, they got the gear horn.
When the Captain asked if the gear was down, the FO gave a conflicting reply. On one hand, he said "Yep," but then he added, "I've got four green." He did not say, "I've only got four green," which would've or should've raised a red flag. Obviously, he did not understand the significance of what he was seeing.
Now...stop a minute. You're sliding down on final approach in a huge piece of flying machinery. You've had an inflight-emergency, but you've got it handled. So far, so good. You can see the runway ahead of you. The "landing expectation" is high. Then, at sort of the last minute, you get an indication (in this case the gear horn!) that something is amiss. In retrospect, we wonder why the Captain didn't cry out, "Great kookamooka! Balls to the walls, boys, let's get outta here! Go around!!" But he didn't. You know, you can blame "differences in airline policies" all you want (as all three pilots did). But the fact remains that you just don't LAND with the gear horn blowing.
But the whole crew was probably preoccupied with and depressed about the thought of grabbing yet another 747 and completing the trip in a day that would stretch beyond the normal duty-time limits. I know that would p*ss me off.
I was amused by one thing the Captain said about his mindset during the approach (i.e. before the embarassing nose-slide).
When he selected flaps 30, the pilot in command had resolved that further pursuit of the cause of the warning horn was counterproductive, as he needed to monitor the aircraft manipulation by the co-pilot during the imminent landing. The pilot in command had decided that both the resolution of the warning horn problem and the approach were sloppy and that he would conduct an in-depth debrief for the flight-deck crew at an appropriate time after landing.
There are lessons aplenty we can learn from the Ansett accident. Yes, the Captain was deficient. But a 747 is not a single-pilot aircraft, and he was saddled with a very weak crew (in the case of the FO, borderline incompetent). So it's not exactly the same thing as going out and forgetting to put the wheels down before landing, which is what was implied in AC's initial two posts.
You know, we helicopter pilots are lucky in a perverse sort of way. Those of us who fly in single-pilot ops are SOLELY responsible for our pilot-error accidents. For better or for worse, it's all us. If we slam our BK into the trees, rip the skids off, break our wrist and have to do an extended-hover back at base while Maintenance tries to figure out how we're going to set the beast down, there's really no one else to blame. Even though I've never flown high-performance planks, for a long time I had that "over inflated view" of myself. But you know, the more accident reports I read, the more I know that it can happen to me.
With the proper attitude, any experienced pilot can easily learn to fly anything else. I suppose I could even learn to land the Space Shuttle...with one or two sessions of dual, of course.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: lake providence, la.
Age: 63
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Officedesk, I crossed over about four years ago in a Bell 47. One of the hardest things for me was the throttle: keeping the RPM in the green. I make my living crop dusting so being low to the ground and making corrections constantly weren't new to me. At first I stayed a little behind the helicotpter. What got me was the constant corrections you have to make, or maybe it has become so second nature in my crop duster. But, as all helo drivers know, when one control input is made you have to counter with all of the others.
Steep approaches was another thing that was hard to get used to. I kept over shooting the spot. Eventually it all came together.
There is one thing that struck me as different going from planes to helos. In my crop duster there are days when the turbulence is so bad that my helmet will bounce off the side glass on each side of me. I had always heard that the rotors absorb much of the bouncing around when flying in a copter but hadn't thought much about it until my first day going offshore, in a B206L, the platform called us on FM and told us to go back to the beach because the winds were gusting to 50 knots. At that time my front seat passenger said over the intercom that he was glad because it sure was rough. I thought about it for a minute and asked him if this was a rougher than normal trip. He looked at me as if I was crazy and asked me if I didn't think it was rough. I then told him that if this was as bumpy as it got in my crop duster I'd never complain about turbulence again.
Flying helicopters definitely takes more concentration and forethought. I think that it would be a lot easier to go from a helicopter to an airplane because in a sense you can be lazy in a plane; but, if you take the same attitude in a helo it will get you sooner of later.
It is also a lot more physical in a helicopter. For example, a couple hours spraying in a helicopter is equivalent to 4-6 in my Thrush. You just never get to relax.
I could go on and on but I'm going to a Tim McGraw concert and my wife says I have to get ready.
Barryb
Steep approaches was another thing that was hard to get used to. I kept over shooting the spot. Eventually it all came together.
There is one thing that struck me as different going from planes to helos. In my crop duster there are days when the turbulence is so bad that my helmet will bounce off the side glass on each side of me. I had always heard that the rotors absorb much of the bouncing around when flying in a copter but hadn't thought much about it until my first day going offshore, in a B206L, the platform called us on FM and told us to go back to the beach because the winds were gusting to 50 knots. At that time my front seat passenger said over the intercom that he was glad because it sure was rough. I thought about it for a minute and asked him if this was a rougher than normal trip. He looked at me as if I was crazy and asked me if I didn't think it was rough. I then told him that if this was as bumpy as it got in my crop duster I'd never complain about turbulence again.
Flying helicopters definitely takes more concentration and forethought. I think that it would be a lot easier to go from a helicopter to an airplane because in a sense you can be lazy in a plane; but, if you take the same attitude in a helo it will get you sooner of later.
It is also a lot more physical in a helicopter. For example, a couple hours spraying in a helicopter is equivalent to 4-6 in my Thrush. You just never get to relax.
I could go on and on but I'm going to a Tim McGraw concert and my wife says I have to get ready.
Barryb
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N20,W99
Age: 53
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It really depends on what is your FW flying background, over here we have a situation in which 90% of airline pilots went straight from their 180 Piper/Cessna hours into the cockpits of airliners. They have been flying by pushing buttons to go up, down or where ever, the little hand flying they have done has been in a easy to fly, stable acft. and their biggest handicap is that they want a checklist for everything, they need someone to tell them which way to land and where the wind is from, their decision making criteria is very unexercised.
And now they want to climb onto a helicopter, and sure teaching them to learn to manipulate the controls is difficult but not impossible, they eventually learn to solo and land by themselves, but the really hard part comes when you try to make them understand their enviorement, limitations, capabilities and the need for them to make serious operational decisions based on those factors. Their "old fashioned" airmanship skills are really low and they just choose to hover around the airport on nice days, and stay out of any spot that becomes a challenge.
But if your previous FW experience is more like Crop Duster then I am sure it will be an easy task.
And now they want to climb onto a helicopter, and sure teaching them to learn to manipulate the controls is difficult but not impossible, they eventually learn to solo and land by themselves, but the really hard part comes when you try to make them understand their enviorement, limitations, capabilities and the need for them to make serious operational decisions based on those factors. Their "old fashioned" airmanship skills are really low and they just choose to hover around the airport on nice days, and stay out of any spot that becomes a challenge.
But if your previous FW experience is more like Crop Duster then I am sure it will be an easy task.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gee, give us a break guys. Hog Driver, Ascend Charlie, Blender Pilot - I get what you're trying to say, but the way you say it.......
Blender, you say
well I'm sorry, but this is just such a broad generalisation. Have you flown a high performance transport jet? I admit what you say might be true for an inexperienced, low time new first officer.
But come on, don't you think we fly in some goddam awful weather, have system failures, engine failures etc, exercise all sorts of decision making while travelling at 8 miles a minute and manage to keep it all going sector after sector day after day all over the world.
Your gross simplification of airline flying is factually incorrect and insulting. And no, I don't have an over-inflated view of my own abilities. I just don't like my job being portrayed as it would be by laymen in the press who don't know any better. You should.
I can assure you that when you're in charge of a seventy tonne transport jet with two hundred people down the back, line training a new first officer, middle of winter, dark night, snow covered runway reported as slippery, gusty crosswind on limits, fuel rapidly approaching diversion minimums, all your diversion fields rapidly going out and faced with an offset VOR approach down to minimums, your
decision making criteria is extremely exercised, and I can also assure you the aircraft is anything but stable!!
And what I've described isn't that unusual a situation, it's just one of those nights out on the line.
I agree that fixed wing guys who haven't flown helicopters often have a strange view of them, and don't realise they are unstable and require constant control inputs. I agree that some (not all) helicopter ops require a "bush flying" mindset where you are totally aware of terrain, wind direction etc, and no one's going to warn you of an imminent f*** up.
But that doesn't mean that airline flying is the cliche that Blender describes it as. That's just plain stupid.
Blender, you say
They have been flying by pushing buttons to go up, down or where ever, the little hand flying they have done has been in a easy to fly, stable acft
But come on, don't you think we fly in some goddam awful weather, have system failures, engine failures etc, exercise all sorts of decision making while travelling at 8 miles a minute and manage to keep it all going sector after sector day after day all over the world.
Your gross simplification of airline flying is factually incorrect and insulting. And no, I don't have an over-inflated view of my own abilities. I just don't like my job being portrayed as it would be by laymen in the press who don't know any better. You should.
I can assure you that when you're in charge of a seventy tonne transport jet with two hundred people down the back, line training a new first officer, middle of winter, dark night, snow covered runway reported as slippery, gusty crosswind on limits, fuel rapidly approaching diversion minimums, all your diversion fields rapidly going out and faced with an offset VOR approach down to minimums, your
decision making criteria is extremely exercised, and I can also assure you the aircraft is anything but stable!! And what I've described isn't that unusual a situation, it's just one of those nights out on the line.
I agree that fixed wing guys who haven't flown helicopters often have a strange view of them, and don't realise they are unstable and require constant control inputs. I agree that some (not all) helicopter ops require a "bush flying" mindset where you are totally aware of terrain, wind direction etc, and no one's going to warn you of an imminent f*** up.
But that doesn't mean that airline flying is the cliche that Blender describes it as. That's just plain stupid.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: A big comfy armchair
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Officedesk
Once you've done a bit of time on rotary DON'T get too attached to the process of approaching to the hover. Leads to awfully big splats when you return to plank
(I speak from the experience of a friend who did exactly that. Fortunately he wasn't hurt, but he did get some impressive bills.)
Once you've done a bit of time on rotary DON'T get too attached to the process of approaching to the hover. Leads to awfully big splats when you return to plank
(I speak from the experience of a friend who did exactly that. Fortunately he wasn't hurt, but he did get some impressive bills.)
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I tried to blow a bull from under a tree just recently after 40 odd hours in a choppa.............. I was in a 172 at the time, they have a far less impressive hover than the R22...... some times 5000hrs in a fixed wing can be forgotten quite quickly.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N20,W99
Age: 53
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Maximum,
I really don't like to say things without knowing what I am talking about, and this is no exception.
I have a substantial amount of High Performance Jet time, old ones and new ones (Old Lears, Sabre and the New Hawker 400's faster, less equipped and with worse handling characteristcs than the Large Transport Acft you talk about)
without all the help and planning airline pilots get, internationally, (ever landed a jet, bad WX at MHTG, MMJA, MGGT, MMTN) into airports you wouldn't dream to put a 737 into, have flown and experienced "awful WX, sistem failures and engine failures (broken gears in acc gear box) at 8 miles a minute", you talk about.
all of this is nothing compared to a day fighting fires, an ILS in a B412 in stormy WX, or Hot and Heavy operations at altitude in confined areas with only 12 people on board, or doing full touchdowns with a 5 millon dollar acft with an inexperienced new offshore SIC.
The reason why there is so many more accidents in helicopters compared to jets is because operations are much more difficult, require more skill, and most of all, a great deal of common sense and airmanship skills. Not much more to help you here except yourself, most heli pilots don't attend all those nice sim rides all the time, nor get all those nice tons of manuals full of stuff that someone else previously has thought in advance so I don't mess up.
No app charts into remote fields in South America, no TWR to tell you where the wind is from, and when is the last time you have seen a wire or antenna in the approach end of a runway? Most heli pilots don't have a nice fat company SOP's to decide for you when to go to your alternate, we can't go over the bad WX at FL370, most helicopters don't have WX radar, FMS's, and GPWS, we can't try an approach a couple of times and if unable divert to our alternate at "8 miles a minute"
You talk about failures, in helicopters you are lucky if you have a back up system at all, on the contrary Jets have in many instances triple redundancy. Engine failures are just a matter of proper CRM and procedure in most modern passenger ACFT today, for every accident caused by mechanical failure in airplanes there is about 10 in helicopters and trust me a thrust reverser deployment is nothing compared to a TR failure.
Sorry I stand by what I say because I have experienced being on both sides.
I really don't like to say things without knowing what I am talking about, and this is no exception.
I have a substantial amount of High Performance Jet time, old ones and new ones (Old Lears, Sabre and the New Hawker 400's faster, less equipped and with worse handling characteristcs than the Large Transport Acft you talk about)
without all the help and planning airline pilots get, internationally, (ever landed a jet, bad WX at MHTG, MMJA, MGGT, MMTN) into airports you wouldn't dream to put a 737 into, have flown and experienced "awful WX, sistem failures and engine failures (broken gears in acc gear box) at 8 miles a minute", you talk about.
all of this is nothing compared to a day fighting fires, an ILS in a B412 in stormy WX, or Hot and Heavy operations at altitude in confined areas with only 12 people on board, or doing full touchdowns with a 5 millon dollar acft with an inexperienced new offshore SIC.
The reason why there is so many more accidents in helicopters compared to jets is because operations are much more difficult, require more skill, and most of all, a great deal of common sense and airmanship skills. Not much more to help you here except yourself, most heli pilots don't attend all those nice sim rides all the time, nor get all those nice tons of manuals full of stuff that someone else previously has thought in advance so I don't mess up.
No app charts into remote fields in South America, no TWR to tell you where the wind is from, and when is the last time you have seen a wire or antenna in the approach end of a runway? Most heli pilots don't have a nice fat company SOP's to decide for you when to go to your alternate, we can't go over the bad WX at FL370, most helicopters don't have WX radar, FMS's, and GPWS, we can't try an approach a couple of times and if unable divert to our alternate at "8 miles a minute"
You talk about failures, in helicopters you are lucky if you have a back up system at all, on the contrary Jets have in many instances triple redundancy. Engine failures are just a matter of proper CRM and procedure in most modern passenger ACFT today, for every accident caused by mechanical failure in airplanes there is about 10 in helicopters and trust me a thrust reverser deployment is nothing compared to a TR failure.
Sorry I stand by what I say because I have experienced being on both sides.
Last edited by BlenderPilot; 17th Sep 2003 at 11:14.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Aust
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back on track.
Fw to Rw conversions I've noticed.
Tendancy to try to fly the approach fast and use fwd cyclic (nose down pitch) to aid the descent.
Pedals during turns.
Trying to flare the HELO a la aeroplane onto the ground.
Checklist fixation (ok this is a doubled edged one but, lets be real the R22 is not a complex a/c to start & run up).
Flying to join the extended centreline for the 5Nm finals.
That loverly Fw trick of adding throttle to make the thing start (no, no, no!)
And once again as with the 1st, using fwd cyclic to descend.
uuuummmm? the rest is about normal for ab-initio or otherwise.
Small imputs, getting used to a new attitude picture, co-ordination, different terminology blah- blah - blah.............
You'll love it!!
John.
Ps: hopefully included something to annoy somebody.
Fw to Rw conversions I've noticed.
Tendancy to try to fly the approach fast and use fwd cyclic (nose down pitch) to aid the descent.
Pedals during turns.
Trying to flare the HELO a la aeroplane onto the ground.
Checklist fixation (ok this is a doubled edged one but, lets be real the R22 is not a complex a/c to start & run up).
Flying to join the extended centreline for the 5Nm finals.
That loverly Fw trick of adding throttle to make the thing start (no, no, no!)
And once again as with the 1st, using fwd cyclic to descend.
uuuummmm? the rest is about normal for ab-initio or otherwise.
Small imputs, getting used to a new attitude picture, co-ordination, different terminology blah- blah - blah.............
You'll love it!!
John.
Ps: hopefully included something to annoy somebody.