Much ado about nothing?
This is a most interesting thread...
Both sides of the argument here are meritous, though their delivery may not be so.
Response to helicopter industry colleagues...
OP (Original Poster) has clearly been scared by the occassion, and this is not good.
The helicopter industry is 'traditionally' up against it. The art which we call 'Rotorcraft Flying' is to most people, simply, a black art surrounded by myth and fantasy. "Helicopters can't glide....when you lose an engine you fall out of the sky....it's as hard as making love to your woman whilst standing up in a hammock!'; that sort of thing. (Ok, I'll admit to using the last one myself as a chat up line...but you get my drift!)
Couple that with the fact that helicopter crashes are always spectacular fireballs in which no one has a chance in hell of getting out...at least, that's what Hollywood would have you believe.
To top things off, we have our continual struggle against the NIMBY's (Not-In-My-Back-Yard) folk, who contiually try to shut us down with noise complaints to the local authority, anytime we encroach on their section of the world.
Public perception of our industry is not that good.
In that case, as helicopter pilots, we should be doing everything we can to improve the public view of what we do. That is, in our daily routine with passengers, in the sky with the layman looking up at us, and in forums such as these, where any anonymous person can get an insight into the kind of people we are; our own actions serve to either perpetuate the 'doom and gloom' which shrouds or work, or clear up misconceptions; its our choice. A better image will make all our lives easier.
If someone thinks we fall out of the sky like a brick when the engine fails, explain why we don't. If someone complains of our noise when we evacuate a victim from the sea and transport them to a hosipital, remind them that we'd do the same for them. If someone gets nervous with the movements of the machine in the air, fly so they can't feel them.
Maybe OP's pilot could consider why his passenger was so unhappy with his performance...did OP's pilot understand his passenger's concerns...did he 'sell' our industry?
We know that most people's fear is because of their ignorance. Yet, how can we expect our passengers to not be ignorant? They've not had the extensive training we have had. What seems simple and mundane to us, may be the most frightening event to the untrained eye. Sitting in the back, passengers have restricted view. They might not see the horizon from where they are, whereas you can see it clearly. If they can't see anything out of the front, they get scared, unless they understand our capabilities. Fly with that in mind. Keep them in the loop. Assure them.
-----------------------------------
However...
The OP has described an incident, which on the surface would appear very alarming, and deserving of shock and horror. Yet, we can't verify what actually happened.
If this was Inadvertant IMC, then there are definitely questions the pilot / operator should be asking. We all make mistakes, and Inadvertant IMC is well documented as one which the best of pilots can get into. However, there are some operations which should not be getting close to that. Through company policy, support for the pilots, a 'No Blame Culture' and all those other things we learn in the CRM courses we go to, operators should be able to demand / expect / acheive almost 100% security against Inadvertant IMC. So to that pilot / operator...ask questions.
On the other hand, we also know from our training, is when encountering IMC which you don't want to be in, do as OP describes...make a 180 degree turn back towards the VMC. It sounds to me that OP's pilot did the right thing. Yet, OP still calls him a retard.
We can't read too much into a 'layman's' account of speeds and altitude, and even the actual conditions. Unless OP was a pilot able to see the instruments and / or a meterologist able to make accurate assessment of the conditions, I am not going to be too alarmed by his account. A fearful person sees the worst.
OP's account of the incident has the hallmarks of being dressed up, either out of emotion, or for the sake of excitement. Probably a little of both. Lacking credible technical reference (how was the altitude / speed / rate of bank, what type of aircraft and how is it fitted, what were the actual conditions), the account suggests that this is a layman's account.
This is a problem when laymen tell their story. What they see may not be what happened. Let's not get too fussed over this, until the events can be verified.
-----------------------------
So what is my point?
I guses if anything, I'm trying to say that we in the industry should regard seriously any occasion when our customers are not happy. We should conduct ourselves at all times as if we were trying to sell our product. Whether we be in the air or not. That's because we have to.
At the same time, we cannot jump to conclusions based on a layman's account of an event. Take everything with a pinch of salt. Sure, where there's smoke there's fire...but how much? It could be that the pilot was absolutely absolutely in control of the situation, operating within company and personal parameters, and was taking a fair and calculated risk within his capability to recover. Maybe OP simply perceived the situation to be worse than it was.
OP's account was not the best way to address what happened. Piling into a helicopter pilot's forum with such a story was inevitably going to be met with some pretty emotional responses!
-------------------------------
My response to OP is thus:
Mate,
There's a way of doing things.
If you were concerned by the conduct of this pilot, then you have the right (and should feel no guilt) in raising the situation sensitively and discretely to the right people, and through the correct channels.
As you do, reflect on the fact that your own perception of the situation may be warped due to a number of factors. Consider your own experience, your ability to see and observe the crucial factors, your knowledge of aviation and helicopter operations and consider whether you have all the information with which to make such allegations. Support evidence with facts.
If you raise your concerns responsibly and carefully, then you will (should) get an equally responsible and careful response from the right people. Sometimes an air of rhetoric enquiry works better than straight out allegation. With good 'people skills', you'll get what you want. Stamping feet and shouting doesn't usually work!
On the other hand, throwing allegations around a public / anonymous internet forum does not help your credibility, and certainly is not the way to expect changes. You certainly haven't alarmed or shocked me.
Lastly, if there is any ulterior malicious reason for your posting (to get at someone personally), then you need to take a good look at your own self first, and really have no business posting here.
Good luck!
Consider this: A passenger on the left side of a large aircraft. He can't see much forward...only sky out of the front if he can even see the windshields at all. Out of the left window, he can see a cold front ahead, and clear sky abeam and behind. He sees the horizon in the distance.
The aircraft goes through a few whisks of cloud, and the pilot decides to turn and bug out, before going IMC. So the pilot executes a right bank. A higher rate than normal, but still safely in sight of the horizon in front, and within the parameters of the aircraft.
The passenger, now is looking upwards into this wall of cloud. No horizon, and therefore no visual reference. If the pilot looks out of the cockpit, he might see some sea out of the right side of the cockpit. The green blue blur of the ocean is all that is visible out of the right windows across the cabin.
The passenger has NO visual references. Last sensation was that they were entering cloud.
As the pilot banks, he also reduces speed in a level decelleration.
What does our Human Factors training tell us about somatographic illusion? What will the passenger feel is happening?
Exactly, the passenger will feel a pitch down attitude, giving the illusion that the aircraft is in a descent, when actually it is simply flying level and descellerating.
What you see as a passenger, is not always what is happening.
Last edited by cl12pv2s; 25th Jan 2012 at 04:40.