Originally Posted by
G0ULI
I love that phrase! True or not, it represents the content of many of the posts in this thread, helicopters are apparently flying on the edge of the performance envelope quite frequently. If that is the case, then relatively small changes in density altitude, humidity and temperature could have quite large effects on the performance of helicopters and particularly so with relatively low powered, low rotor inertia helicopters.
Helicopter flying isn't for the faint of heart.
It's great, though. Give it a try.
Pete:
Note that I say "Cyclic back and collective (lever) down simultaneously, or in that order." It is simply wrong in my opinion to prioritize the collective ahead of the cyclic, especially if one's left hand is not on the collective. This would mean not moving the cyclic until the left hand could find the collective and lower it. This would be a huge mistake
I understand your point. As I pointed out earlier, and you seem to agree, the control inputs by either hand are not necessarily serial, they can be done together. The way you assert that one would NOT use the cyclic if one is not at the moment holding the collective strikes me as contradictory to that point.
Control Nr: that is the prime directive.
I may get slammed for saying this, but perhaps you gents in the civil sector could review what it means when the pilot says "I have the controls" or when there is only one pilot, just who has the controls, and what that means.
Like TC, I was military trained. You remove your hands from the controls, if ever, very briefly to do things like switch radios, write on kneeboard, copy clearances, etc. Then, your hands are on the controls if you are the pilot flying.
Please explain why this is not what you teach. Or did I misunderstand you? If so, apologies up front.
I realize that there are a lot of automation and autopilot features, but resting your hand on the controls while the aircraft is flying with automated assistance is not a taxing thing. I've done it plenty on those hours long drone-a-thons as radar or ESM picket, airborne, one each.
TC:
We (and the convertees) were taught to keep our hands on the controls as much as possible and never be too far away from the collective. But I do understand the impracticalities of keeping your hand on the collective always.
Agreed, but it's back on after a brief excursion.
I'll ask any of the experienced pilots and instructors here: how many fractions of a second does it take to get a left hand not on the collective back onto it to manipulate it?
Pete's point about 'not waiting' to control Nr with cyclic if necessary is a good one, if one is caught out ...
GF:
The multi-engine pilot response to a power failure is therefore slightly delayed (in principal) to that of a single engine pilot.
Really? When you get a power loss, do you always know it's only one engine when you are in a twin? Control Nr.
This delay is compensated for to some extent by the relatively low risk of double engine failures in twins.
No, it isn't, since the word you used there "compensated" has nothing to do with flying and engine failures. It may have to do with risk calculations and insurance actuarials.
With twins there are additional considerations, principally the second engine, and specifically determining which one has failed. The multi-engine pilot response to a power failure is therefore slightly delayed (in principal) to that of a single engine pilot.
Not quite. Single or twin, the correct response is: Control Nr, fly the aircraft.
This delay is compensated for to some extent by the relatively low risk of double engine failures in twins.
I'd say your reasoning has nothing to do with flying, and makes twin engine helicopter pilots out to be idiots.
I can't buy your line of reasoning.
Do you fly helicopters, GF?
