Main reason for accidents?

[KNIEVEL77]

As a trainee who is about to start his PPL(H), I was just wondering if there is a list of the main reasons for a helicopter being involved in an accident or is there one main reason even?

[Pandalet]

I believe one of, if not the most common cause of aviation accidents (at least, according to my ATPL(H) notes) is CFIT, or controlled flight into terrain.

Common and received wisdom seems to indicate that many accidents result from press-on-itis, or (to look at it in another way) flying in conditions that exceed your skill levels and/or the limitations of your aircraft.

The least experienced press on, while the more experienced turn back to join the most experienced, who didn't set off in the first place.

[KNIEVEL77]

Pandalet,

I've seen that 'saying' a few times, and how true it probably is!

I read somewhere that accidents are very very rarely down to mechanical breakdown of the aircraft but usually due to 'operator error', is this true?

K77.

[Flyin'ematlast]

K77

Try reading
Fatal Traps For Helicopter Pilots

by Greg Whyte (£23.99 from Flightstore)

http://www.flightstore.co.uk/fatal_traps_for_helicopters.pilot.books/use.id.10.item_id.499.dept.12.dept_l2.52.dept_l3.0/

It is compelling reading but you might want to leave it until part way through your training.

Ian.

[Whirlygig]

There are statistics and if you hunt around enough on the CAA website you may find them! I reckon Panda's right - CFIT!

I remember being shown them at a CAA Small Helicopter Safety Seminar; not sure if these are still being run but they were useful!

Cheers

Whirls

[KNIEVEL77]

Thanks Ian,

Not sure if i'd even start my training if I read that book!!!!!

Looks like it is a must read though at some point!

[firebird_uk]

When I did the Robinson Safety Course I believe Richard said that the top 3 were;

CFIT
Loss of rotor RPM control
Wire strikesI think these were derived from US stats where wire strikes are more common because they hoon around at zip feet. Not sure if these are Robinson only stats, but I'd bet they're fairly consistent across all makes.

I guess (like a lot of stats) you can read them more than one way. Was an engine failure followed by loss of rotor rpm control by the pilot a hardware or warmware problem?

Do your walkrounds, make sure the machine is well maintained, fly within your limits and weather conditions - live long and prosper!

[KNIEVEL77]

Just typed the letters CFIT into Wikipedia, what a fantastic explanation they give with many detailed examples of where CFIT has been the cause.

[Non-PC Plod]

Research published last year suggests the single largest cause of small helicopter fatal accidents were CFIT and spatial disorientation/loss of control. Following that is obstacle/terrain strikes in the low-level environment, and training mishandling accidents. See CAA Paper 2007/03 "helicopter flight in degraded visual conditions". Clearly the driver is the weakest link.

[Hughesy]

Hey mate, good luck with your training.
Now once you get into it, perhaps start reading accident reports, including fatal ones. Don't let them put you off though, but treat them as a learning tool. As in Gregs book (well worth reading) it says "there are no new ways to crash helicopters, as its all been done before."
By reading these, you will learn a few things from others unfortunate events.

[rudestuff]

I used to think that pilots got a raw deal as they always seemed to take the blame. Now that i'm a pilot a realise the reason - 99% of the time aircraft crash because the clot flying it made a mistake. A bit like car crashes - cars don't tend to fall apart driving down the road & they don't crash - people crash them. If you're airworthy and stay above 500' next to big open fields you'll last a long time as a helicopter pilot. Except you won't - because thats no fun.

[poor southerner]

i was always thought (as a former ga plank driver, just about to get into ga flying again via the rotary way) that fuel starvation (including carb ice) was pretty close to cfit. is it not such an issue on the heli world :confused:

[manfromuncle]

The pilot is the weakest link and is the cause of most accidents.

But the CAA deem two engines are somehow 'safer'. Yeah right...

[johned0]

The CAA is your friend :eek:

http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=2887

Also take a look at :
AIC 100/2007, (Pink 129), 8 November, Safety
HELI-GASIL 2002

John

[helimutt]

K77, This is exactly the sort of thing we hope to cover on our safety evening meeting at Newcastle. This and a lot more and also some true stories from some of the slightly more experienced members. :hmm:
With such wonderful titles as:-
I learned about flying from that!
My friend piled in in bad weather!
How to kill yourself in 60 seconds!
etc etc

How not to kill yourself?? Stop and think.

It's A real simple concept!

:-)

[Bertie Thruster]

Snow .

[malaprop]

As in pretty much all other accidents, car, home, etc etc

Loss of situational awareness, summed up as "What is going on around me and why, and what can go wrong in my present circumstances"

[Whirlygig]

Snow???? Have you been sniffing the Taittinger again Bertram?

Cheers

Whirls

[O27PMR]

K77

Whether it is CFIT or wires, press-on-itis in clouds, fog or snow or any other name we care to put on these things, all of them boil down to the same thing... Pilot error!

Of course there are times when there is a catastrophic mechanical/structural failure and there is little a pilot can do but more often than not...

Have a punt around the AAIB website if you haven't already, it makes for some interesting reading:sad:

PR

[What Limits]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2040/2242337063_45ea6f355c_m.jpg

Snow?! This is snow and about -25C. Later in the week it got down to -50C but we kept the aircraft in the hangar!

[MartinCh]

I wouldn't bother buying Fatal traps for full listing price.
Use amazon UK instead. Bought Chickenhawk and Tales of Helicopter pilot for good money. I wouldn't buy anymore 'Nam heli books as it gets boring after a while. All the killing, explosions etc. Yeah, low level flying, night flying etc, but still pointless killing each other.

Main reason of accident in this kind of books' situations is having hydraulics,fuel tank or engine sieved by bullets.

As mentioned elsewhere here, I'd leave Robinson safety DVD and Fatal traps until after PPL.. Safety material that won't make us feel 'safer'. Funny irony.

[wiisp]

Hello KNEIVEL77,

The most common thing is SIFU; Self Induced **** Upp...
Putting yourself where you don't have control of the situation. Can be weather, technical, fuel, lack of skills or whatever..
You have to know your machine, your skills and the enviroiment you are flying in to minimize the risks..
It is all process, starting with the first flight and continues through your career. And it's great fun all the time, if you do it open minded and honestly.. It's just like some games; A minute to learn, a lifetime to master !

Fly safe !

[rotorspeed]

Whilst poor weather is the most obvious big killer, I'd say the most likely cause of an accident if you're starting flying, especially in an R22, will be messed up engine offs then rolling the acft on landing, and loss of control in the hover. Then once you're off with your new licence, heavy landings or worse from misjudged take offs and approaches when you're too heavy, or lose (often translational) lift, usually through unrecognised tailwind components.

Just what seems to crop up the accident reports most!

[Bravo73]

But the CAA deem two engines are somehow 'safer'. Yeah right...


manfromuncle,

Do you understand the concept of 'redundant systems'?

[Torquetalk]

Poor Southerner

Re. your question on carb icing: it is certainly an important risk in carburetted piston helicopters. The requirement for the rotor to freewheel for autorotation means the engine is more likely to stop as ice builds, there being no windmill efect from the rotor to help turn the engine. Better no engine than no RRPM though...

TT

[Fortyodd2]

Gravity....

....especially at the air/ground interface.

[emanners]

Have a look at the Safety Tips in the back of the Robinson R22 Pilots Operating Handbook - pretty comprehensive coverage of the many ways of killing yourself in a helicopter (and how to avoid them).

[topendtorque]

Mainreason? FINGERS.

every day put them on the ground and jump on 'em. then every month after you get to 5000 hours, forever.

[Bravo73]

manfromuncle,

Do you understand the concept of 'redundant systems'?


manfromuncle,

I take it from your silence that that's a 'no'! :hmm:

[skypest]

My first instructor used to say "helicopters don't crash, pilots do."

[manfromuncle]

I do, I just can't be bothered to drag up the old myth that two engines are safer. Just look at the US/USA accidents stats, etc etc.

[AndrewTaylor]

As a fairly low (350) hourage pilot who managed (thank God!) to survive a 22 crash with "only" a broken pelvis, pubic bone and three ribs, I would say this:

The ground school and understanding of 'the principals of flight' etc. is as important (if not MORE important) than initally the actual flying. Alot of flying schools are happy to take your money, get you up in the air, then fix you up with the fancy student "flight bag" full of books and say INITIALLY, "get on and read them!". YOU NEED "BOARD WORK" before and after every flight!!!!!!!!!!!!

The "main reason for accidents...", I feel (as a guy who got his license 2 years ago) is PPLs with little real (true) understanding of the limitations of the heliciopters they choose to train in, and how those limitations then change so so much depending on other factors such as weather etc. etc. etc.

My Instructor once said to me....... when you get your Private Pilots License, you are then Licensed to kill yourself!!!!!

There is no greater feeling in the world than flying helicopters, enjoy your training, don't set an objective to try and get thru in the minimum number of hours, get thru when YOU are comfortable with all the professional instruction and training received enabling you to pass your test and exams.......and, fly safe!

Enjoy.:ok:

[borjaracing]

Ok Bravo73, we all understand the redundant concept. Only that out of the 150 or so critical components in a helicopter, I rather use the extra weight of another engine into those components and make them redundant, instead of the engine.

This might be really difficult for a smart guy like yourself to understand, but the engine is not a critical component in an helicopter. If you are good enough a pilot, you should walk away from every engine failure you could possibly think of. Give it some thought before enlighten us with another one of your fast-smart comments, thanks very much

Safe flying

[nigelh]

To be fair there are twins and there are twins ....some, on one engine, can carry on flying , hovvering or climbing and some will take you the scene of the accident. Also some operations over water or forestry would make a second engine helpful !! For me though just normal ops in the uk i dont feel any safer in the AS 350 or the A109 as, as far as i am aware, statistically they are equally safe and we can do the same job with the single , apart from ifr. I also have to admit that night flying would feel better with 2 engines but have managed all these years with one quite happily :ok:

[Bravo73]

Fine, borjaracing.

Put yourself in IMC and have an engine failure. I know that I'm personally very happy that I've got a second engine which, hopefully, means that the original failure won't be critical.

It doesn't even have to be an engine. If you've only got one generator or one invertor, a failure of either of these isn't going to be very nice whilst in the gloop. Once again, it's nice to be carrying 'spares' of both.

In an ideal world, I'm sure that it would be great if we had complete redundancy throughout the aircraft ie extra gearboxes, drivetrains, tailrotors etc. It might even be technologically possible. But you're not going to be left with much effective payload left, are you? The designers have got to draw the line somewhere and two engines (and their related systems) is where that line is at the moment.



Anyway, these are concepts that manfromuncle doesn't seem to grasp when he keeps on moaning and whinging about twins. Which, by the way, was the reason for my original post. :ugh:

[manfromuncle]

I grasp all those concepts. I moan and winge because the UKs obsession with twins is what is holding a lot of people back in this industry. You don't need 500 hours twin to be able to do these 'decent' jobs, but that is what employers often ask. Who knows why, maybe it's the new version of "the old boys club", "the twin club".

[rotorspeed]

manfromuncle

Having flown singles and twins extensively I have no doubt that for most business flying, twins both are safer, and importantly, feel safer for pilot and pax. Apart from anything else, you do have to give some credence to the views of the world's regulatory bodies.

Accident stats need to be viewed carefully to compare apples with apples. Don't forget many twins are actually used in more hazardous operations - especially night and IMC.

No question pilot error still heads the accident cause list, but when you consider the small number of mechanical failures that do occur, engine failure is quite significant. As Bravo 73 says, twins (esp IFR) come with a lot more redundancy than singles, apart from the engine.

When I'm flying at night, in IMC, over water and making congested/confined area approaches that second engine provides me - and my pax - with a lot more confidence. With justification.

[topendtorque]

"High ground kills"



I'll bet a carton of beer to a pound of peanuts that all of the so called high ground that is referred to above is located BELOW the Lowest Safe Altitude on any area map.

Once again, it's finger trouble.:ugh:

[BoeingMEL]

Knievel's question was about "accidents"... no mention of "fatal"..... and the general thrust of your replies is CFIT!

Checking AAIB statistics over the last few years shows basic mishandling accidents outnumber CFIT by a ratio of akmost 10:1!

Oh well, that's my 5 centsworth.... and I'll never ever have to fly a Robbo again (glad I did though).

Cheers bm :ugh:

[borjaracing]

Bravo and cia,

Fair points raised about redundancy and "feeling" of security a twin has on pax and many pilots. However, twin are being given too much credit, and apparently jaa and the like are looking into the 2 engines solution the answer to all accidents...... WRONG!!!

Somebody said in previous posts that having another engine gave him a security feeling.... :uhoh: . That is what worries me, because we might be lulled into a false feeling of security wich invariably leads to the REAL main cause of accidents, i.e. pilot error. I am not implying that a good pilot is one that doesnt make errors, that´s is uthopic at best. We are all prone to errors and sooner or later we will make them. It all depends on timing, situational awareness, how far from the safe envelope we are when that happens, etc, etc. And of course, how lucky we are!

For instance, an example I know well. Traffic police in Spain were using single turbine EC-120 and sometimes single Ecureil (b3 and the like). Well, no accidents and no close calls in a fair amount of years. Then JAR came into the picture and the goverment decided that everything had to be twin-engine (scary when politicians decided what is best for us....), so they upgraded to the twin EC-135. Not a single pilot from the company is happy about it, rather far from beeing happy, i should say. The margin they had on the single has become lessened now, and still they do the same kind of flights. Scary, very very scary. And the private operators, that is even worse. Because they have paid for a twin helicopter, ir training maybe and mcc, they assume they can do the same jobs as before, and even they reckon the limits should be puss even further than in the past. So you are left with less power, doing the same jobs than before, even worse. All of us know how close to the accident-limit line we get more often than not. Now, because you have two engines, you should be able to push the limits and make the deadlines still, but with less power available......... Very, very scary.

So, yes I agree twins (at least some) might be safer and more redundant on the engineering side and in theory, BUT, the understanding that JAA and every state´s civil aviation authorities are getting, it is going to cause more accidents than prevent them, in my opinion. Aside the fact that is making new pilots really hard to make it, but that is another kind of subject.

My 0.5 pence worth :)

Safe flying every1

[Shawn Coyle]

bojracing:
Not sure what you mean by 'the margin they had in the single has become lessened'.
In general, having more system redundancy should (and I emphasize should) mean that there is greater pilot awareness of the aircraft and knowledge of what to do should one of the systems fail. A generator failure, for example, in one of these twins is a pretty spectacular non-event, where it is of more immediate concern in a single, especially one with electronic displays.
If it means more complex decisions, that should also not be too difficult to deal with, given proper training (and again, I stress proper training)

[VeeAny]

As part of the planned safety evenings research I've gone through every accident report involving a UK helicopter that I can find since 01 Jan 2000, mainly these are AAIB reports but some are from foreign investigation bodies.

The primary cause of UK registered accidents is mishandling / loss of control in the hover causing heavy landings and / or tail rotor strikes usually followed by some sort of rollover. Most cases involved a training sortie of some kind some dual, some solo, figures on those will follow shortly.

The primary cause of UK registered fatal accidents is Loss of Control in IMC.

The figures are here http://www.helicoptersafety.org.uk/commonaccidents.asp.

The figures will be expanded slightly later this week to show in more detail what I state about accident causes.

I plan to go further back through the accident reports if time ever permits.

[Dysfunctional]

Um.
Take a small group of helicopter pilots, who have a few decades of experience. Talk to them. Privately. I bet you will get most of them to admit that at SOME STAGE, they scared the stuffing out of themselves, by doing something so STUPID, they couldn't believe it themselves.
My point: Believe it.
Been there. Gotten away by the skin of my teeth, with jangling nerves, thinking: "WHATDAF#@!??K was I THINKING???"

It slows you down...
We are human. Once in a while, along comes that great learning experience, that humongous scare, that moment when you KNOW your heart for ever has your teeth marks on it (it was in your mouth)...
After that... you slow down. Checklist? Oh, yes, checklist!!
Company flight manual? Oh, yes, flight manual!
Weather? Oh, yes, weather!!!!

So many checklists and ops manuals are written, literally, in blood.

Why do helicopter jockeys crash?

I think they forget...how fallible, how human, how prone to distraction, they are.

I'm working hard on being an old fart. Kind of like being an old fart. With a lot of time. And a bunch of bar stories. I do find... myself backing out much earlier. Saying "no" much sooner. And watching guys with a quarter of my flight time rushing straight on in...


Have I bent one yet? No. Have I been "OH! SO CLOSE!"
Yep... Yep.... Yep-yep-yep.

:rolleyes: