Originally Posted by
nigelh
So if you have gained , as in this case , a maximum of 20-30m by reversing ... you are at say 30-40m height . How much airspeed will you have available to settle back to the same spot ? Enough to be in transition ? I wouid say no . Enough to eliminate possible vortex again no . So what really are you gaining ? You could eliminate all the risks we have discussed in exchange for having to come down admittedly more vertically?
maybe not a point but in the 109 I would rather do vertical because when near transition speed she shakes and rattles like hell !
212 .. just seen your message . Fair enough !!
it really doesn’t matter what you think about the profile, nor what anyone else on here thinks about it. The important point is that it is the flight manual procedure, certified following extensive testing by company test pilots.
I flew the AS33L2. It had a backing-up Cat A helipad procedure. I also flew the EC225, it had a vertical Cat A helipad procedure. Both procedures were entirely valid. The backing-up one gives better view of the reject area but you are backing up into unseen territory and overdoing the backing up results in too much rearwards speed. The vertical one is easier provided you can keep the landing area in view. As a TRE/TRI I did more OEI rejects from just before TDP than I care to remember. What a surprise - none of them had any hint of vortex ring!