I am no great expert either but I would agree that static is merely the tipping past the C of G of the article be it a helicopter or a square box until it yields to the common gravity. I would also suggest that the two threads regarding the subject be merged as B Sousa has raised an important issue in the B206 slope landing thread.
However the word Dynamic I have had problems with, I think the use of the mathematical ‘Kinematics’ would more aptly describe some of the forces and accelerations and resultant actions that occur.
As far as (normal) students are concerned then the word “dynamic” is OK as it is a simple word of few syllables and should be imparted to them with profound and frightening facial expression on the central SYLLABLE, which should concur at a point in time with their receptive mute being broken open to the fact that the instructor is uttering a word. If that word is followed by full effect fright, simultaneously with the word ROLLOVER then hopefully they should have forever understood that this is a situation which is “not good” and should be avoided at all costs.
Whether or not they understand any of the kinematics behind it.
To my mind in simple state (as always) I would think that a dynamic rollover is one which is accelerated faster than a normal static roll because of an outside force that contributes to the rate of roll.
A sort of triggered roll such as when a car sliding sideways flick rolls because it has contacted a curb. Whirlybird nailed it the best I think, and in the way it was described to me - way back when.
Interesting to note the ‘Handbook’ ref from “GG” which differs from mine, revised in ’78, which doesn’t even mention it but I am positive my old first (now lost) edition bought in 1973 did for sure.
Of course with slope landings, don’t forget the old slide down the hill trick even if you can put the a/c down at or beyond published limits.
Now to the issue that B Sousa has raised that I would comment on when contemplating slope landings at or above the limits or at least ~ full cyclic deflection.
He mentioned mast bumping. Now I am (and I think he would be) most averse to this phenomena having read in various places that it is also “not good”.
What I suggest all pilots do if test flying an a/c immediately after major maintenance, or for that matter any daily insp, is to check the cyclic position relative to the swash plate position prior to start up. The swash plate should be at right angle to the cyclic, both fore and aft and laterally, and or if the cyclic is at right angles to the floor of the a/c then the swash plate should be at right angles to the mast.
If flying an aircraft with teetering or Articulated head only (I.E. not a ridged head where the following would be prohibited) then after start and warm up, at flight RPM, CAREFULLY and SLOWLY check the fully displaced cyclic position in each quadrant. Vibrations, hopefully not mast bumping vibrations, should be equal in all areas. If they are worse in one corner then shut down, inform the engineer why you shut down and ask him or her to check the nominal rigging of the flight controls.
The difference can be almost non discernable by eye but most obvious with the vibes.
The FAA AC 90-87 1/27/1986 gives good descriptions of what to watch for with regard to static and dynamic rollovers except for the definition - to my mind - of the word ‘Dynamic.’
Cheers TET