PPRuNe Forums


Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21st Mar 2017, 19:57   #841 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 68
Posts: 1,002
You know what happens when you "assume"!
SASless is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 21st Mar 2017, 20:15   #842 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 509
I'm not going to get beaten with that hosepipe again?
Non-PC Plod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st Mar 2017, 21:46   #843 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 470
Shy
Thanks for bringing this CAA Safety Notice up. Overall I must say I think it is a good effort from the CAA, particularly as it is for guidance. As you say too, important that they clearly accept private site IMC departures. Whilst I'm with Crab (and probably you) that 0/0 departures are not a problem given training and a good AFCS, the issues ref Vmini in the RFM are valid and achieving Vmini is a much easier departure technique. One thing I would say ref their criteria for establishing suitable AOM, is the loading of the acft, which was not mentioned. Ultimately it is all about acceleration, and there is a huge difference in a mid weight acft, which may achieve Vmini in 250m, and one at MTOW when well over twice that may be required, with a much lower climb gradient subsequently.
rotorspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st Mar 2017, 22:04   #844 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 5,926
Non-PCPlod - the Vmini will be mainly due to the inacuracies of thec pitot.static system since very few give IAS below 40 or so kts with any reliability and some airspeed tapes dont have any figures below 30 kts.

Since that speed is required to fly the aircraft accurately (notwithstanding what a good AP is allowed to do using other sensors), it is no surprise that they don't test or certify it in the low speed instrument regime.

It's not that the aircraft can't do it because we all know they can but no-one is going to risk the litigation when someone spears one in flying in cloud at 30 kts by saying it is safe to do so.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st Mar 2017, 22:17   #845 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 470
Shy
Thanks for bringing this CAA Safety Notice up. Overall I must say I think it is a good effort from the CAA, particularly as it is for guidance. As you say too, important that they clearly accept private site IMC departures. Whilst I'm with Crab (and probably you) that 0/0 departures are not a problem given training and a good AFCS, the issues ref Vmini in the RFM are valid and achieving Vmini is a much easier departure technique. One thing I would say ref their criteria for establishing suitable AOM, is the loading of the acft, which was not mentioned. Ultimately it is all about acceleration, and there is a huge difference in a mid weight acft, which may achieve Vmini in 250m, and one at MTOW when well over twice that may be required, with a much lower climb gradient subsequently.
rotorspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 08:54   #846 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 231
rotorspeed, couldn't agree more. The Emmental lines up very quickly with 'it's in my tool bag' ... 'I was shown this once 3 years ago' .... instructors should be explaining this guidance to the pilot to allow him to challenge the customer, negotiate the payload deduction, point out lack of experience, refuse the flight - as they also say they have been brave enough to do, on their posts on this site.
tistisnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 11:51   #847 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 509
Crab-
If they certify the SAR modes so that you can do a TU from the hover, it has kind of been proven that it is both possible and safe (if you have this phase of the software). Therefore, the Vmini should not be an issue. It kind of seems pointless having a TU mode if you can't use it IMC - e.g. at night over the oggin.
Non-PC Plod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 12:45   #848 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 5,926
The SAR modes will use other sensors (GPS, accelerometers, inertial nav, even doppler) to give the speed which is why they are allowed to control TU/TD at low speed.

If the aircraft had a low speed display (LVI or groundspeed on the PFD/ND) then it could be used by the pilot for low speed IF but whether such 'extras' would be specified during the certification process I don't know.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 14:24   #849 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 509
Quote:
Originally Posted by crab@SAAvn.co.uk View Post
The SAR modes will use other sensors (GPS, accelerometers, inertial nav, even doppler) to give the speed which is why they are allowed to control TU/TD at low speed.

If the aircraft had a low speed display (LVI or groundspeed on the PFD/ND) then it could be used by the pilot for low speed IF but whether such 'extras' would be specified during the certification process I don't know.
Exactly - which kind of makes the VMini a strange restriction if you have the other kit.
139s all display groundspeed, and provide a "hover display" as an HSI option, to show low speed vector (both direction and speed)
Non-PC Plod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 14:59   #850 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 5,926
Yes, perhaps it should be 'Vmini when hand flown' or similar - it's all a bit of a nonsense.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 16:06   #851 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere in the Baltic Sea
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Non-PC Plod View Post
Exactly - which kind of makes the VMini a strange restriction if you have the other kit.
139s all display groundspeed, and provide a "hover display" as an HSI option, to show low speed vector (both direction and speed)
Hello Gents!

I am an average SARpilot (currently flying with AW139) and doing my best to follow your discussion. Just curious: how would You describe a SAFE 0/0 takeoff with coupled modes? Any suggestions?
Search&Rescue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 16:19   #852 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 68
Posts: 1,002
No knowledge of the 139, but I assume there is Force Trim, Heading Hold, Attitude Hold, and the ability to Trim the Attitude Datum while the Pilot can control power setting via the Collective position?

Last edited by SASless; 22nd Mar 2017 at 17:11.
SASless is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 16:33   #853 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: on the cusp
Age: 45
Posts: 143
Quote:
Originally Posted by crab@SAAvn.co.uk View Post
Yes, perhaps it should be 'Vmini when hand flown' or similar - it's all a bit of a nonsense.
Sadly Crab the rules for certification are not that accommodating.
dClbydalpha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 17:20   #854 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: LOS
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Search&Rescue View Post
Hello Gents!

I am an average SARpilot (currently flying with AW139) and doing my best to follow your discussion. Just curious: how would You describe a SAFE 0/0 takeoff with coupled modes? Any suggestions?
Come on Geoff, I know you can explain this
Outwest is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 18:10   #855 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere in the Baltic Sea
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
No knowledge of the 139, but I assume there is Force Trim, Heading Hold, Attitude Hold, and the ability to Trim the Attitude Datum while the Pilot can control power setting via the Collective position?
I was just wondering if there is a procedure (published or not) which guarantees either safe landing or flyaway during 0/0 takeoff?
Search&Rescue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 18:16   #856 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Deplorable but happy as a drunken Monkey!
Age: 68
Posts: 1,002
Is there a guarantee for such for any takeoff if one includes all contingencies?

Aviation is based upon accepting reasonable risks is it not?

Consider the 225 situation extant!



Quote:
Originally Posted by Search&Rescue View Post
I was just wondering if there is a procedure (published or not) which guarantees either safe landing or flyaway during 0/0 takeoff?
SASless is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 19:44   #857 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere in the Baltic Sea
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
Is there a guarantee for such for any takeoff if one includes all contingencies?

Aviation is based upon accepting reasonable risks is it not?

Consider the 225 situation extant!
Thanks for your kind reminder! "Guarantees" was not an optimum word. Point taken And of course there are risks involved, even if you
are flying Cat A profiles... On the other hand the RFM describes e.g. how to use RHT/HOV and TU-modes...
Search&Rescue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 20:01   #858 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: England
Posts: 256
Search&Rescue,
How do you do it?
jeepys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 20:20   #859 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere in the Baltic Sea
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepys View Post
Search&Rescue,
How do you do it?
You are talking/asking about takeoff techniques? Describe takeoff/landing site and WX conditions. Even if I am flying SAR, we do have WX restrictions...
Search&Rescue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd Mar 2017, 20:32   #860 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: England
Posts: 256
Horizontal departure - from hover engage TU and once past min if speed (50/60kts) engage ALTA.
Vertical departure - from auto hover (30ft) increase collective height bug to suitable height (500ft for example). At safe height to clear obstacles increase hover position forward to 60 kts then follow ALTA as above.

The basic 139 has autohover and therefore a vertical departure can be followed as above which I guess was an option for LABL. Practice using auto modes is essential if you intend to fly in such conditions.
jeepys is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 01:41.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1