SRG Small Helicopter Seminar - the Report

[Whirlybird]

Well, our esteemed moderator has asked me to write about this, so how can I refuse. :eek:

The discussed pre-seminar mini-bash never happened; as I was trying to drive to my overnight stop in thick fog, I got a call from Muffin to say he didn't feel like turning out again owing to the weather. Just as well, as neither did I! I called the Nr Fairy, who wasn't going to the seminar but who'd planned to meet us, and he'd even forgotten what day it was. :eek: So an early night seemed to be a the only option.

The seminar was in the main Quinetiq building at Farnborough; easy to find, and the first three arrivals seemed to be me, Muffin, and Pilotwolf. Obviously readers of this forum are keen and punctual. I think we were the only three PPRuNers; if anyone else was there, why didn't you introduce yourselves? You must have guessed who I was; everyone always does. :eek:

There must have been about a hundred people, though that's a very rough guess, and after a short introduction by Rod Dean, which was as forgettable as most introductions, David Cockburn talked on accident trends. I'm not sure I learned anything very new, but it was interesting, especially the fact that the small helo accident rate seemed to be coming down, if I remember rightly. Other than that...I did rather feel like I'd heard it all before, though that could be my memory.

After a break, David Broughton and John Gentleman talked on the use of GPS. First we got details of how it worked. This was all stuff I'd done for the CPL exams - and then forgotten - though I didn't realise how easily GPS can be jammed. Then info on using it, when not to use it, not to use it as the only means of nav as it can easily go wrong. Again, not much was new, and since I prefer map and compass, and only use the moving map on the GPS (can't get my head round coordinates; a map is easier), I didn't find it that inspiring, though again, all useful stuff.

Next was the visit to the AAIB hangars. This was definitely the most interesting part for me, by far. In fact, it was worth the long trip just for this. Most of the recent accidents we'd heard about were there, and the chap who took us round was very knowledgeable. They'd allowed more time for the trip than in previous years, and even longer would have been better IMHO.

After lunch, Nigel Talbot, CAA Chief Helicopter Test Pilot, gave a talk on helicopter handling and failures. There were the usual videos of wire strikes etc, and an interesting discussion on whether pilots can really respond to engine failures as quickly as it's assumed they can. Again, longer would have been better.

The open forum included all speakers, plus David Patterson, CAA Chief Helicopter Flight Examiner. Earlier we'd been given a summary of the proposed changes to Rule 5, and asked to discuss it during the open forum. Well, firstly there really wasn't long enough; secondly, I was amazed by how little the people involved - predominantly f/w pilots - seemd to understand about helo operations. I mentioned the problem with confined area approach practice and pinnacle approaches and other mountain flying, if the rule was made not below 500 ft agl. They said wasn't that covered in exemptions for takeoffs and landings? No, I said; you can't land in the Snowdonia National Park, where many schools go for mountain flying courses, but you can approach to a hover. They looked confused. When they said they were trying to prevent helicopter pilots flying low in marginal weather and thereby having accidents, I said would it help if they kept above 500 ft and flew into cloud? Quentin Smith said it could prevent them doing just what was safest; ie, flying low if necessary. I got the feeling the CAA bods didn't quite understand what we were getting at. At this point a suggested straw poll got an almost unanimous vote to leave Rule 5 as it is. I suggest we ALL write to the CAA, as they obviously need a simple explanation of how helicopters fly, and what helicopter pilots do!!!!!! :eek: Since I gather some of them read PPRuNe, hopefully they'll read this anyway.

So, overall verdict? I would have gone just for the tour of the AAIB hangars. And I go to as many safety things as I can anyway, as I feel you can't go to too many. And it's nice to have one that's orientated towards helo pilots. But to be honest I didn't learn very much new. It was all a bit rushed, and consequently a bit superficial. The rest of the open forum had to be cut short for lack of time, and this could have been the best bit. Dennis Kenyon almost had to insist on asking about having instrument flying in the PPL syllabus, which he disagrees with. That in itself could have been a useful discussion, probably more so than the intricacies of GPS operation. And I did feel that some of the speakers STILL didn't really understand about helicopter flying; for instance, mentioning that in some areas of the country it's not possible to find somewhere to land in the event of bad weather. Really? Where? Most mountainous areas still have flat areas; most towns and cities have parks etc. If you don't leave it too late, it can be done. And they did say this seminar was aimed at pilots with some experience.

So it was good, but could have been better. My opinion anyway. Muffin, Pilotwolf - what did you think?

[Cron]

on whether pilots can really respond to engine failures as quickly as it's assumed they can...

Can you say more on what the bloke said? Sounds interesting.

[pilotwolf]

Hi Whirly,

Glad you made it home safe.

Think you've pretty much summed it up already. Would agree completely about the rush - it was the same last year and more subjects were covered last year too. Definately need more time at AAIB, especially as there were more rotorcraft there this time.

Definately needs some helicopter input from the organisers - think some one like Mr Patterson CAA chief examiner needs to be on hand all day to balance the input a bit from the CAA side.

Learnt somethings about GPS I didn't know or had forgot - jamming bit was frightening!

The after dinner part from Mr Talbot was useful but I found it rather heavy going for an after lunch lecture! And I seem to recall different figures mentioned elsewhere for reaction times to engine failures. It was mentioned that the average approved pilot reaction time for the pilot to lower the collective was 1.0 seconds in the cruise and 0.3seconds during other phases of flight. It was emphaised that you ONLY had 1 second to react - the figures I heard were quite a lot longer, (relatively!), for one particular type from a well respected source.

Without exception it seemed that none of the lecturers would specifically name type or manufacturers when quote figures and performance details...

I wonder with the likes of Q and DK there the lecturers felt a bit out of their depth regarding rotary flight?

Overall a useful day but too much of a rush.

PS Sorry about the mini bash - especially as I suggested it but couldn't find accomodation which was suitable and couldn't make 2 journeys to Farnborough.

[Whirlybird]

The pilot reaction to engine failure thing was a bit confusing - or maybe it was me. :confused: As I understood it, the approved times were indeed one second in the cruise and 0.3 seconds in any other phase of flight. The rationale seemed to be that you might be doing other things in the cruise, but should be doing nothing but helicopter handling in any other phase of flight. Hmm...am I the only person who's ever been expected to respond to complicated instructions from ATC when on the approach? Be that as it may, it was implied that you only had a second to lower the collective, but ONLY if you did nothing else. In other words, if you flared, you had longer. With no types mentioned, and no times given if flaring as well, this was interesting, but not that helpful. The general feeling from the audience seemed to be that a second wasn't long enough, and Nigel agreed. But do we have any proof either way? If your INSTINCTIVE reaction to a low RPM horn is to lower the lever, you probably don't need a second. OTOH, the Robinson Safety Course now teaches that your instinctive reaction to the horn should be to open the throttle. The first sign of engine failure, everyone agrees, is sudden yaw, not the low RPM horn. And since throttle chops are no longer practised....

All this would have made a good discussion. But of course, there wasn't time was there?

[muffin]

The discussion forum could have been the most interesting and useful part of the day, but there was nowhere near anough time left for it. I too felt that the GPS session was a bit too detailed and the time spent could have been more usefully employed. The AAIB hangar visit was very thought provoking - as the group I was in entered the hangar everybody fell completely silent.

There were a lot of very experienced people in the audience including the two that have already been mentioned. With the combined knowledge of those present, a very interesting discussion forum could have developed for several hours. One point worthy of note is that the guy who has written the proposed new version of Rule 5 has only had about 20 responses so far. he is very keen to get some reaction, so an e mail to him would be carefully noted and may well carry some weight. His e mail address is on the CAA web site.

One very valid point was made by the CAA that I had never thought about before. I spent many years in a fixed wing environment flying from a succession of clubs. In that surrounding, the new and inexperienced pilot is subject to all sorts of peer pressure plus the wise old CFI and sundry instructors giving advice, particularly on whether conditions are right for you to fly or not. This helps you over a period of time to develop the ability to make a rational and safe go/no go decision. In the PPL helicopter world, no such environment exists - when did you last hear of a helicopter flying club? Hence the tyro pilot is kicked out much sooner into the world of having to make their own unaided go/no go decisions without the back up of experienced advice. Perhaps this is one ingredient that makes accidents more likely?

[misterbonkers]

wish i'd made it now! sounds fun!

I think the points you guys made on 500ft rule are good. I often pop across pennines and can remember very few days when it's good enough to be more than 500ft above the ground.

Maybe the CAA could really confuse things and have different rules for different parts of the country! how about it chaps?

he he

[nikki]

Thanks for the posts.
Always good reading from Whirly's play by play posts.

dam, I like this forum.

nik.

[Whirlybird]

Muffin,

The school I hire from now almost always has instructors around who are ready to give advice on weather conditions etc, as much as anywhere I've ever flown f/w. As was mentioned at the seminar, it's particularly private owners who are on their own, especially if they keep their machines at home or similar. For those of us who hire, it all depends on the individual place and the people involved.

[idle stop]

Whirlybird: thanks for your interesting summary of the seminar.
I happened to have, on my desk, a note that JAR Part 27.143 says that intervention time (for engine failure, etc) should be assumed as 1 second in the cruise or normal pilot reaction time if greater. It will doubtless be greater if you are hands off the collective and otherwise occupied!
A two-second intervention time used to be widely quoted and was, I believe, the certification basis for a number of helicopters with low-inertia rotor systems.
I could expand on intervention times etc if anybody is interested, but you may have to bear with me until I find my notes with the references. My handwritten 27.143 note is a left-over from a very old thread.
In a previous incarnation I used to demonstrate, as per approved CPL syllabus, engine failures in the climb in the R22, initiated by throttle closure at IAS > 60 Kts and above 200ft agl. Even with anticipation the RRPM was likely to reduce transiently to the flight minimum. It was, I hope, a lesson to both students and instructors alike to keep a hand on the lever in the climb and whenever else possible.

Edit: sorry Whirly, the gremlins (or the firemen?) got your 'Y' first time!

[pilotwolf]

IS..

Yes that was EXACTLY what was said now you ve reminded us! But it was stated that the FAA and JAA accepted that the 0.3 and 1.0 sec reaction times were actually greater than 'normal pilot reaction' times!

A point most of the group disputed!

[Helinut]

In the early years of the North Sea there was an accident where a helicopter (a Wessex I think) crashed in an uncotrolled way and low/zero RPM was diagnosed. Some research was done following that where engione failures were simulated in a simulator to commercial pilots. Unless my recollection is completely wrong, I am sure that EVERY pilot took more than 1 second to lower the lever, even though they knew "something" was going to happen.

I will try and dig out the source - I think it was an AAIB report

[Whirlybird]

It's official; the relevant people at the CAA read PPRuNe! If you have any suggestions for next year's seminar, and like me find actually writing them on the relevant feedback form and putting it in an envelope far too much like work, post them here and I guarantee they'll be read and noted. ;)

I'm too lazy to tell you how I know. :D But maybe it should be publicised - PPRuNe, hotline to the CAA!!!

Er...they know who Whirly is too. Better mind my ps and qs. :eek: :eek: :eek:

[What Limits]

I attended the seminar too and despite being an experienced Commercial/Police/HEMS pilot, learnt a lot about a lot of things. It was good to pass on a few tips to some of the pilots that I talked to.

Perhaps the discussion group at the end should include a number of luminaries from the helicopter world (like Q and DK) so that they can pass on some of their experience to the majority of attendees who appeared to be low hours private pilots.

Even if this seminar lasted two days, there would not be enough time!

[Vfrpilotpb]

Thank you Whirley,

After reading your report, I feel like I have missed a good seminar, just a side issue, about 18 months ago a very high time intructor showed me the ability of the R22 to get down to well below 90% rotorspeed and was still able to fly and manouver before things would start to go to Rat S**t, must admit though I had alsorts of small , medium and very large goosebumps starting to appear all over my body and they didn't go till that blasted horn ceased, but it showed me that you would have to be able to ignore the horn totally as trouble approached, I have only had a low speed horn once and it was like a spear up my back my then instructor had slowly twisted the throttle off a little to see what I would do, That was enough for me :eek: