Formation Rotary Flying

[Capn Notarious]

Could we explore this subject:
There will be those, who have participated in the helicopter airborne assault and will say, --------We did the job-----.
So what is close heli formation flying about :: in your words consider all factors. No vendettas only learning. For those who might have to extract the innocent and defenceless.

[eden]

I can't help feeling that formation is misplaced with helos unless in a tactical scenario. I totally understand the concept in Fast jets but helo's it is just a way for helicopter pilots to add an extra bit of adrenaline to the body's system. Having said that I enjoyed my time flying formation displays around UK & Europe in 95 -96, so I should shut up really, especially as I enjoyed the adrenal rush so much. I suppose the simplest way to describe my mode of concentration in formation is that it requires an absolute level of trust in those you are formating with.

Moving on from that - the concentration is focused on the pre-planned, practised, discussed, re-planned, practiced and further practiced flying that should become engraved in your head. For those situations of change and variety then it is about working that bit harder to stay very focused on the blade tips of both aircraft and gratuitous use of peripheral cues combined with the ever present and regularly practiced line up features for the aircraft you are flying and the formation pattern you wish to achieve.

Anticipation, unswerving awareness of your machine's performance capability, practice and more practice plus maybe the odd bit of additional practice will keep you safe.

Close formation - during 1/2 rotor span spacing in 360 Wingovers (not loops) requires all the concentration of making the other other a/c your whole world and nothing but your world.

I could keep going, but it is going to get boring, if not already, writing about it ....... someone bring me a gazelle down to Goodwood and let's go and play !:p

[advancing_blade]

Never had the oportunity / reason to try, but would like to one day (after serious training, of course). "Chicken Hawk" by Robert Mason has some really interesting stories and tips of close formation flight. He was doing big V formations and landings in Vietnam. Well worth a read (or two)

[imooshiz]

Capn Notarious, heli formation is not for the inexperienced as the attached video clip will show!

www.emailfilms.com/media/pages/accidents/helicopter.htm

If you would like hear from someone who has done a fair amount of rotary formation please e-mail.

Regards.

[CyclicRick]

I think formation flying should be left to the fixed wing chaps, especially close in. I've done it a few times but always had the horrible feeling that there are too many moving parts up there which should not be that close.
Tactically speaking, what's the point? Just one big target to hit rather than lots of little ones and if the one in the middle or at the front gets it he's going to take a few with him...no thanks.:confused:

[VLift]

Having done and taught a great deal of formation flight, I believe there are two qualifiable uses, for helicopters, for formation flight:

1. Tactical. To maintain ground unit integrity by putting the most people onto or getting them off of the ground.

2. Air Shows.

Otherwise, formation flight only guarantees that lead will get to the destination with more fuel than anyone else will.

[Gibbo]

Define Formation, how close.

VLift, what about mutual support; Airmobile not the only battlefield helicopters?;)

[sling load]

I personally found formation flying very enjoyable, and its value in tactical situations essential. I can't think of any use for it other than military or paramilitary operations.

One of the most chilling helicopter collisions I ever saw was the two Super Pumas about 7 or 8 years ago doing a formation flypast in Kuwait, I think. The discs touched and it was quite gut wrenching to see the machines disintegrate like that.

Anyone else remember that?

[eden]

Yep - saw it, very chilling indeed. IMOOSHIZ post earlier in this thread has a video of part of the accident.

You can see the tipstrike and the subsequent shockload crack the tail pylons of the pumas, it is messy and very unpleasant to look at.

A sobering thought and very sad when the flypast was part of the celebration at the end of the war.

[ShyTorque]

The RAF define close formation as "no closer than 1 x rotor span" and it has no tactical use as such, it's normally only for ceremonial purposes but excellent for honing a pilot's confidence in himself and his machine.

It can be done safely but it requires proper training, briefing and currency, even for high-time pilots. Things can go wrong very quickly, especially if the leader isn't considerate of his wingmen.

The Kuwait collision illustrates the dangers. Note that the two aircraft involved in that tragic accident were from two different units and there had not been a proper face to face briefing. I spoke to one of the pilots a couple of weeks previously, although I have no info on how much formation training and experience they had.

Having done it, I can't recommend formation GCA approaches in very poor weather - but it certainly concentrates the mind when all you can see is the other tailboom and anti-coll light!

Night formation using NVGs is also very "interesting" but that does have its uses, for example I have carried out night air to air refuelling from a C-130, as I am sure a few other contributors have.

[mckpave]

I've flown a ton of formation, pretty much standard operations for my line of work. Basically, we fly two types, close formation less than 3 disks, and tactical, greater than 3. Note that tactical formation, while not being "close" is still considered formation because there is a definite formation lead and you utilize tactics that maximize mutual support and defensive maneuvers.

I'm sure that by the initial post we are talking about close formation here. It's quite fun to fly, even at night on NVGs, you get pretty comfortable with it. The key for flight lead is to remain predictable, maintaining a stable platform and gentle maneuvers. This gains more significance as the formation gets larger. I must admit that while it's fun, the only tactical use for it is mass on target. It's important to insure that the ground forces get as many troops on the ground in the shortest amount of time. That said, about the only time you get this close is during intial takeoff and during the landing phase, everything else is usually spaced out quite a bit.

Another use for formation is when air refueling, that too can be fun and quite safe. I tend to fly some close form in training simply to keep my skills up. As far as safety goes, don't quote me but I'd bet that there are plenty more midairs between non-form aircraft than formation aircraft.

[Heli-Ops]

One area guys that everyone seems to forget about is the air to air photography. I spend most of my time doing that and there are always a number of factors when doing this. I have had good experiences and bad experiences.

A lof of people will say mil trained pilots are better at it than civvy. Well in some cases I have found the opposite. More often than not it is the individual and not the service as a whole that is the contributing factor. The ones that have scared me is the pilot who thinks he is better at it than he really is, wanting to get right in very very close for that special shot. Many times I have had to tell them to back off, in one case the subject aircraft had his blades overlapping the photoship and didnt even realise it.

Its a very steep learning curve, air to air photography. Utmost faith in both pilots.

Heli Ops

[Arm out the window]

Re helicopter formation photography (from the ground, not air-to-air shots) - they always look like crap compared to fixed wing, because everyone's got a different attitude (slowing down or speeding up), and the blades are never in the same part of the orbit.
Video is different, generally looks good, but stills aren't real flash at all.

Tac form as I did it was about 2 - 3 rotors, with an arc of freedom so you could slide from side to side as lead manoeuvered - quite flexible and effective for getting everyone on the ground at once.

One of the most important things was to stay on plane (vertically) with respect to the lead, so as not to either get in someone's wash, or hit someone else with your own, leading to overtorques or other embarrassment.

Good fun but!:)

[Heli-Ops]

Arm OTW - Depending on the flying abilites of the pilots in the formation we have had the subject ship in to 2 disks away from us, making for some very dynamic images. A lot of times I find that those who havent done much formation flying will tend to fixate on the photo ship and get drawn closer to it. Thats why on most photo shoots we try to get two pilots onboard, both for that sort of problem and also for working as lookout etc.

A good example was the other day I was in Sydney doing an air to air shoot of Childflight's new SA-365N2. We had two pilots on each aircraft and it worked great, especially over Sydney harbour where there was a lot of other traffic.

One other suggestion for people and that is always have two pilots on photo ship if possible, so the subject ship doesnt have to worry about radios, talking to tower etc, less distractions so he can keep his head out of the cockpit. And having the second pilot in the subejct aircraft also allows it to have one pilot looking at the Ts and Ps while the other is concentrating on keeping formation.

Just some thoughts.

Heli Ops

[Arm out the window]

Heli-Ops,
I think the two pilots idea is generally a good one if you can work it.
In close form we always found it useful to have one person concentrating on the flying, and the other as you said watching the Ts and Ps, and also the skid ball - it's easy to get crossed up with cyclic away and pedal towards or vice versa, which naturally makes photos from the ground look funny.
Interesting that you get the subject aircraft to formate on the photo ship - wouldn't it give you more flexibility for the photo acft to formate on the subject, allowing you to move around it at will to get good shots? Or am I reading your comments wrongly?
Must be interesting work, anyhow.

[Heli-Ops]

Armotw - It all depends on what angles you are trying to shoot of the subject aircraft. I have found that if the photo ship is flying around the subject ship and they are working in front of it, then the pilot has a tendency to always pull a little back pressure on the cyclic when looking over his should to see where the other aircraft is. Invariably that brings the airspeed back and there have been plenty of times when I have wondered why the subject ship is slowing down and we, the photo ship, have come back to about 10 knots.

Therefore if I have the subject ship any further back than either 9 o'clock or 3 o'clock, depending on what side of the photo ship I am shooting from, then it is way way easier to have them formate on us. The other day on the Childflight shoot we had the BK-117 camera ship going sideways down the beach at about 30 knots with the SA-365N2 facing the doorway doing the same speed, and the shots were staggering. (Drop me an email and will send you some of the samples if you like). This was the best way to get a great head on shot.

Also getting a near vertical shot from straight overhead was easy to do as with the two pilots in the aircraft, the left one took over since at that time I was sitting in the left doorway. He was very very experienced and got me the straight above one I was after. Hope this gives a little insight.

Heli Ops.

[VLift]

Reference to mutual support provided in formation, Worked for bombers but they had tail gunners. Haven't yet seen that mod for a helicopter other than aircraft with rear loading ramps to mount a gun on.

[Gibbo]

VLIFT

Mutual Support not just about shooting in my mind; eyes and comms are a big part of it........but that s getting tactical;)

[Arm out the window]

And covering arcs of fire from the door guns - swivel mounts give you a good range of coverage.

[VLift]

Gibbo

I spent the first 26 years of my career operating and training in/for tactical environments.

Deployments on groups or singles is certainly decided by the threat. The formations I understand being discussed in this thread are groupings of targets.

Now, if you consider a lose or free trail in the context of this discussion, I'll buy the mutual support in terms flight following, someone to make some of the radio calls, and someone to pick you up when the contest does not go in your favor. Very familiar with those reasons for having a number of aircraft operating together.


Arm Out The Window

Covering arcs of fire? Thats Infantry tactic. In combat aviation use gunships! As many as necessary.

[mckpave]

This is a good discussion on formation decisions etc. Exactly the kinds of questions that get asked all the time when mission planning.

Mutual support is a broad term, doesn't simply mean firepower. The comm issues are a benefit, navigation backup, as well as self-SAR capability. With regards to fire power, it is a factor since gunships aren't always available nor do they have the range for certain mission areas. Again, enroute formation is widely spaced out, for several reasons, most importantly being the enemy. Not only does it take you out of the weapons engagement zone of the enemy but it also takes you out of the resolution cell of most radars, obviously dependent on several factors.

Tightening up the formation as you near the objective allows you to place several chalks of troops on the ground at once, or nearly so. This is strictly dependent on the ground force commander's plan. If it's not necessary then you don't need to do it. And fire support here again is a player, a good actions on the objective plan will allow each helo to cover certain areas with their weapons if necessary.

The possibilities can be endless but it's important that "formation" doesn't strictly mean 1-3 rotor disks and it is a tactically-sound method of employment. There are numerous pros and cons to flying formation.

[PlasticCabDriver]

Close formation seemed to go like this:

"That's close enough" = 2 rotor spans

"No, really, that's close enough!" = 1.5 spans

"JESUS CHRIST!" = 1 span.

If you were really good you could get the blades intermeshing, although you had to time the rotor starts carefully.