Taking risks when you don't have to - Single engine

[B47]

Reading the thread about the Antarctic ditching prompts me to ask where do you pitch the risks of single engine ops when you have the choice?
The question applies more to the choices you have when pleasure flying, not commercial ops.
My point is that, if as reported, the R44 was not equipped with floats I'm fascinated by the decision to fly a single engine piston over a murderously cold sea.
I will not fly my B47 over water and even go around mature woodland. I have the choice as a PPL and the short detour isn't a problem. I find so many pilots think the engine will never ever stop and just because it hasn't happened to them it leads to overconfidence and complete trust that it never will. I wouldn't survive an engine-off into packed mature woodland and would find myself in 50' of water before I could get out of a sinking 47. The passenger would have no chance. All that flight manual bull about tipping it on its side to slow the rotors - you must be joking, it would sink like the lump of metal it is. Anything with no inherent bouyancy (especially with doors open as per manual...!) like the 47, H300 or R22 would not stay on the surface for a second.

I repeat, my caution over always avoiding hostile terrain with a single engine can't apply to you pros, but as a PPL(H) am I alone in taking no unecessary chances, when you have the choice?

B47
Although you said you wanted to discuss single-engine flying in general rather than the recent specific incident, you mentioned that incident more than once and made a comment about the pilots so it's not surprising people responded.
I've deleted those references and the posts which followed to avoid any further confusion.

Comments about s/e flying in general here.

Comments about the Antarctic incident on the thread currently running.

[Happy Landing !]

Flying around mature woodland is OK if you are only at 1000' AGL.

Try flying a bit higher !

[Flying Lawyer]

B47

"I'm fascinated by a decision to fly a single engine piston over a murderously cold sea."
Been there, done that, got the tee-shirt etc. It was a chance I was prepared to take after weighing up the risks. I fully accepted that, if the engine stopped, the chances of survival were virtually nil. Until the rules changed, many of the older ferry pilots didn't even carry a life-raft. They thought the chances of ditching, launching the life-raft and being able to climb into it in the North Atlantic were so remote that it was a waste of weight. They preferred to utilise the available weight carrying extra fuel.

Of course there are risks flying s/e over a hostile cold sea for long distances, but it's a personal decision everyone has to make for themselves. In my case, the opportunity to ferry an aircraft from Thruxton to Texas was irresistable.
Would I make the same decision again?
Yes, definitely. The excitement (and some last minute misgivings) when setting off; flying low-level over the Greenland ice-cap; flying over icebergs on the approach to Narsassuaq; the 'Is that land, or cloud, in the distance? approaching Canada; 'It's land!'; the "Made it!" elation on landing safely at Goose Bay.
The same flight's been done by thousands of times, ferry pilots do it several times a year, it's no special achievement - but it's special to me, and I'll have those memories for ever.
Would I do it again?
Well, I've done it now so, maybe not. But, who knows?
Come to think of it, that was in a fixed-wing. If I was offered such a flight in a helicopter with a professional pilot .......... yes, I'd jump at it. ;)

"I repeat, my caution over always avoiding hostile terrain with a single engine can't apply to you pros"
It does apply equally to professionals, many of whom fly s/e helicopters. Generalisations are always dangerous, but I think professionals are generally much more safety-conscious than PPLs. I'm only a PPL but I've been lucky to fly quite often with professionals, and never fail to learn something from them. They know more than we do, they know enough to see potential hazards we might not think about. They are conscious of the risks associated with engine failure - even when flying twins.
A year or so ago, I flew a twin with an experienced ATPL/TRE/IRE (and occasional contributor to Rotorheads) who, after a briefing, kindly allowed me to take off. As we climbed away en route, a voice from the back saying: "Typical single-engine pilot's take-off" caused much mirth amongst the three ATPLs on board. I realised the laughter was at my expense, but I didn't understand why. It wasn't my best departure, but it was my first effort in a new type etc.
The explanation: "Twin engine pilots take-off expecting one engine to fail; single-engine pilots always assume it won't!"
Oh well, another lesson learned from the professionals. :o

[t'aint natural]

Sensible choice? The only sensible choice is not to fly single-engine at all.
D'you really think you've got a fighting chance of getting an R22 into autorotation if the engine quits cold? A rattlesnake on speed might, but I wouldn't bet on it.
I get edgy crossing the Channel, even in summer. Cross the Atlantic? You've got bigger cojones than me mate. Round the world in an R44? I'll leave that to people like Jenny Murray and Q Smith.
The question of choice is a curious one. I sometimes think private aviators, who pay to fly because they must, have less choice than professionals, who can often be jaded and cynical and who could happily walk away from flying.
So if you're sensible, and you have the choice, stay on the ground. Me, I'm crackers.

[too young to die]

lawyer, you disapoint me, as a PPL I would of expected more from you, the 'Big boys' get the twins cause they earned it, they are expensive and the singles 'hand grenades' are all us pesants can come through on like most in a honest profession! I agree with some of what you say, howver at the end of the day, when you own a few million dollars or more of rotary precision your attitude may differ....
And T'ant.. Where have you been training in R22's. dont tell me you also terminate and join needles at 500 agl? They were made to make it to the ground.

[Steve76]

Its called ADVENTURE.
I would do it in a heartbeat but would also have a plan for something to go wrong. Obviously those two did and they had a good one cause it worked perfect.
It has nothing to do with one or two engines or none at all.
Unfortunately it is largely the domain of rich PPL's and not us working mugs....:(
Steve76 :)

[Heliport]

too young to die

I'm trying to follow.
What was/were your point(s)? :confused: :D

[jellycopter]

I often think pilots, and regulators for that matter, miss the point when considering single engined helicopters versus twins as being inherantly less safe. After all, however many engines you've got, you've still only got one main gearbox, one T/R, one pitch change link to each rotor blade etc. There are a long list of components you only have one of that if they fail, you're going to die, quickly! Why get so worked up about the need for more engines. J

[Thomas coupling]

When does a helicopter pilot become a "professional" it certainly has absolutely NOTHING to do with switching from PPL to CPL.
It also has nothing to do with hours, or money.
Just what is it...................?

[Nick Lappos]

I believe that Lawyer is speaking for the concept that all risks must be weighed, and blind adherence to absolute elimination of one risk (ie, never ever never even THINK about being in a place where an engine failure can't be easily handled) is not wise. No absolute is wise.

Weighing risks is what we do well, telling others how we weigh them we do fairly poorly. You will see that most folks who successfully operate their machines follow no absolutes.

Singles are quite safe, very efficient, and not sub-standard.

[rotorboater]

Having read a lot of the accident reports, it appears that it is not the engine failure that seems to kill as much as not getting the lever down and thereby losing rotor speed and in the case of the R22 the main rotor striking the tail rotor.
Also reading the reports, a large percentage of engine failures appear to occur on just 1 type due to carb iceing.
I have a lot of confidence in my 1 donkey but I am alway's ready for it to go pear shaped (said touching wood!).

[Old Man Rotor]

Jellycopter......

Yes you are correct....CFIT is the main culprit.......then collisions and then component failures [From memory I think thats about correct.......], and a bunch full of engines would'nt help you there......

But Hey........I have had two engine failures....one in a PT6 as a result of Turbine Rub and the other in a 1S1 with a bearing failure........and guess what, the second engine was real handy.

The laws of average were against me I guess.........singles are something I reflect back on.........shows I am getting Old!!

[Steve76]

On topic but slightly off...

I don't know "Q" (which is a very 007 type nickname eh! what!)

But what my mates and I would like to know is how the posy photo at the NORTH pole came about.
It was seen in all the right mags and there is nobody at the controls.
Two conclusions come to mind:
A) The controls are frictioned, engine running with both of them outside the a/c setting up for the photo. I will leave the judgement up to you fellas on that one.
B) The engine is shutdown and the rotors are winding down during the piccie. If this is true, then that is a bit silly....

Whats the story morning glory? :D

[kissmysquirrel]

....and thinking more laterally, an engine failure never killed anyone, unless pieces of it hit the unfortunate person. The blades stalling and coming off don't kill either. The sudden stop at the bottom of the uncontrolled descent usually does it. How can we do something about that?

[Draco]

Steve76

Leaving the rotors running? surely not.......;)

My first ever helicopter flight was as a passenger over Mount cook in New Zealand in around 1984/5. We landing high on the mountain on a ridge, and the helicoper sank in up to its belly in the snow on the apex of the ridge.

We all got out for a walk, including the pilot, leaving the engine running. I was too young and stupid to realise how dangerous it was.

If I knew how to, I would post the photo.

Maybe they still do it??????:eek:

[DBChopper]

Flying Lawyer,

Out of interest (and this is a genuine question, as I've only ever flown the R22), what was the difference in takeoff techniques that the ATPLs were referring to?

Thanks,

DBChopper

:cool:

[sandy helmet]

I agree with Nick in that its a question of risk assessment and management, which most pilots, either consciously or subconsciously, are constantly doing (or should be doing). The outcome of a decision is influenced by experience and knowledge.
mixed with comfort levels and external (e.g.job) pressures.

Just a couple of personal examples - My first season flying fires in Canada, in the beginning I nearly killed myself flying too close to smoke and fog.

After a few hundred hours flying in the bush I was comfortably doing IA with crews in an R44 (I know hard to believe) in +35, bombing around low level in 1/8 to 1/4 vis in smoke. Why?? It was being done, you developed a comfort level, and if you didn't do it, someone else would be earning flight pay instead of you.
So with the experience and knowledge gained, in tandem with your newly acquired comfort levels and pressure to get the job done, you reassess risk, and push the boundaries, and I think this is where its starts getting dangerous. How far do you push it; until you scare yourself silly (lucky), or become a statistic (not so lucky).

On the other hand I've also flown with a bunch of ex-mil Brit pilots 'pas mal', very experienced solid bunch, who however, with most of their time on twins, were very skittish about climbing into a single to do over water and off-airport ops, while the 'single' lads with considerably less experience were happily climbing in whistling 'hi ho, hi ho'.

To DBChopper

In a single takeoff profile you accelerate to Vy, then climb to safe altitude whilst in a twin you accelerate to VToss, a target speed, (Critical Decision Point), before which if you lose an engine, you can safely abort the takeoff, or, if reached, allows you to continue climb on a reduced rate to Vy and safe altitude. Twin Cat A profiles I think have been well addressed recently, so you can check back the threads.

[Flying Lawyer]

DB Chopper
I think I must have subconsciously ignored the risk of engine failure because it was a twin. When I reached transitional lift, I allowed the helicopter to climb too quickly . Having two engines doesn’t mean you can ignore the consequences of one failing - as Sandy Helmet has explained.
BTW, my error produced amusement and a bit of leg-pulling, not a sudden 'I have control!! It wasn't that bad. :)

too young to die
I didn’t intend to be disloyal to my fellow PPLs, and hope I wasn’t. It would be surprising if qualified professionals (commercial and instructors) weren’t in general better pilots than us. They’ve been trained to a higher standard, usually fly many more hours, and operate in places and conditions we generally don’t. It would be a little worrying if they hadn’t learned a few things over the years. For most PPLs (and I certainly include myself) most of our effort/concentration is taken up flying the helicopter; for professionals, flying the helicopter is a given - they operate. Big difference.
I entirely accept that some PPLs have a truly ‘professional’ approach to their flying and fly like professionals. But I can think of only two with whom I’ve flown. Ironically, I met each of them when I defended them against CAA prosecutions! One found himself caught up in a ‘Nimby’ campaign against a helipad at a South Coast boatyard (CAA withdrew the prosecution during the trial); the other was the pilot in the much-publicised Norfolk hotel incident where a lady claimed she was “blown through the air” by downwash (CAA withdrew their ‘reckless’ allegation during the trial.)

TC
Good question - but I can’t answer it.
Isn’t it a little like an elephant?
Difficult to describe, but you know when you see one! :D

[DBChopper]

Flying Lawyer and Sandy Helmet,

Thanks for the replies. I'll have a peek at the CAT A performance thread.

DBChopper

:cool:

[Vfrpilotpb]

Could be too early , have I missed something here, how many of you people have kicked off by being taught in "twins", even the mil types start in single engine craft, some even carry on in them Ala 341/342, to say that singles are not safe full stop is surely being a llittle Po faced and bringing in type snobbery, long live the single and all of us who can afford to fly them, when great Aunt Maud pegs out I will try to move upwards to greater quantities of Donks till then I suppose the nasty old R44's and B206's will sadly have to do! ;)

[Granny]

Draco
Having flown at MT Cook etc I know what you mean about getting out and leaving the A/C running, whats the big deal?
As long as the as the collective is down and engines at ground idle there seems to be no problem- in fact the pilot needs to be out of the aircraft I lost count of the times I had to rush to stop a pax running around the rear towards the tail rotor and to stop pax falling into creavases etc and keep them off sloping ice, believe me with excited passengers running around you need to be out of the aircraft. And in all the years tourist operators have flown in the South Island not one aircraft has made its own arrangements and gone home without its pilot or pax, and when pax have gone into main or tail rotor blades where was the pilot? - sitting in the drivers seat.

[StevieTerrier]

Granny -

There's a BIG difference between getting out of your running heli to save your passengers from doing something stupid - or for any other sound operational reason - and getting out to take a photo for your album, dont you think?

Risk assessment for North Pole photo -

(a) we stay in the helicopter and dont get a photo. Safe but no photo.

(b) we both get out of the helicopter and take the photo. Not safe but we get a photo.

answer? we get out one at a time and take a photo of each other at the controls at the North Pole.

Sorted

[Granny]

Stevie Terrier
I might have missed something here but I fail to see the difference between getting out at the Pole to take a piccy and getting out to protect the pax, as long as the aircraft is secure collective locked down etc it aint going no where. even in strong winds,- the only aircraft I wont leave is a lama. why is it not safe to leave an aircraft running to take a leak, refuel or eat lunch , even tried doing all 3 at once , the biggest danger is keeping an eye on people around the helicopter when on the ground and the best place to do that is from the outside.

[StevieTerrier]

Granny - perhaps I didnt phrase that too well. I agree there is no difference in the ACT of getting out at the Pole and getting out to stop your passengers getting diced. After all you still get out.

What I was trying to say was that there is a big difference in why you are getting out - one to maybe save someone's life - which is a sound reason, the other just for a lark which might not be considered quite so sound in most quarters.

Why not get out? Well, have you not read enough stories about guys who thought they had put the collective friction on, only to see their heli leave without them? Is it not possible for the friction to be worn, or for it to vibrate loose? Or maybe for the throttle governor on the R22 to malfunction and open up the throttle? Can you GUARANTEE that when you see somebody rushing headlong towards the tail rotor you will always put the throttle to ground idle, put the frictions on, turn the hydraulics off? Or that in your haste when you remove your seat belt the buckle doesnt slip under the collective and then snag your belt / the Leatherman dangling from it / your trouser pocket / boot whatever as you leap out?

I saw the aftermath of one incident at Long Beach where a 206L had been run up on a dolly for the engineers to inspect for leaks. The pilot of that one thought he had the collective friction on when he wound it up to flight idle. He then leaned out to talk to the techie, the collective lifted slightly and the next thing he knew
the apron was covered with pieces of LongRanger.

Secondly, do you think the insurance company would see it from your point of view if there was an incident?

Thirdly, it usually says something like "minimum flight crew one, to be situated in the right (left) hand pilots station" in the FM. As a "Flight" is defined as being from the moment the heli moves under its own steam to the moment the blades stop turning, then technically if you leave the cockpit there is no crew on board. The heli is then being operated outside limitations, hence the C of A is invalid, hence the insurance is invalid.

And finally - we are talking machinery here, and we all know that if somethings going to go wrong it will be at the very worst time.
I wonder how many thousand of Robinson hours the Intrepid "Q" has - and yet when he has to put it down for real, he's 100 miles out over the South Atlantic, not the forgiving fields of England.

Its just my personal opinion of course - so feel free to ignore it! - but helicopters can give you a nasty bite all by themselves - why make it easier for them?

[Grainger]

Couldn't agree more - I always work on the principle that you NEVER leave a motorised vehicle unattended with the engine running - not even a lawn mower. I've flown many an R22 with the "self-raising" collective and, as you say, frictions can work loose.

If something can go wrong, it almost certainly will sooner or later.

If you are flying the sort of pax who can't be trusted not to shred themselves even after a comprehensive briefing then the only safe way seems to me not to let anyone out until the rotors stop turning.

[Steve76]

Granny me ol countryman/brethren,

There is no doubt that operationally there are the few occasions that one has to depart the steering to visit the refueling or powerplant division. Been there done that plenty of times ;) ....specially when the generators a bit dodgy etc....
I do think twice about it nowdays, but I know what you are getting at for sure.

I thought that Steve T would hit the nail on the head but he just missed.
My point was that if the 44 took to hovering by itself and burnt to a cinder how were these two going to send for help and MOST importantly who was going to come and get them.

On the top of Mt Cook it will only be half a day before someone notices your not at smoko. Then it will only be a half hour or so before they find you. At the North Pole I would think it would be pretty lonely and cold without your tent/igloo making equipment while you wait for the nearest Navy to rescue you. :rolleyes:

Thus my decision upon making it to the North Pole. Stay in helo, stay safe and warm, pat meself on back and have photo taken by camera on remote. :}

Incidently, there was a really funny NZCAA report in the mid 90's about a fellow who departed his H500 with raincoat and gumboots on. He slipped while hopping out causing the coat to snatch and roll on the throttle. While he watched from the fuel drums, the 500 relocated to a nearby paddock and then to the wreckers.

[moosp]

Ref the "Pole" photo. Am I the only one who sees a face in the right hand seat of the '44? Perhaps it was taken at the refuel depot with the Otter pilot holding the collective down.

I have not seen any mention from the team involved that the photograph was taken at the pole. Perhaps just released to the press and let supposition do the rest?

As regards leaving the machine with the engine running you may well have seen the effective yet unauthorised mod to the R22 that the muster guys do so that gate opening, hot refueling, relieving a distressed animal etc. can be done with engine running. A neat aluminium U piece hinged to cover the collective on the ground ensures that the collective will not rise.

But don't tell Robinson. They'll make it themselves and charge you USD1,000 for it ;)

[OldBill]

Hot refueling with Avgas eh? - now there is a scary thought!:confused:

[John Eacott]

This is the relevant Section 7 from CAO 95.7 for helicopter operations in Australia:

7 EXEMPTION FROM GENERAL REQUIREMENT FOR PILOT TO BE AT
CONTROLS
7.1 If the condition set out in paragraph 7.2 is complied with, a helicopter is exempt from compliance with subregulation 225(1) (but not subregulation 225(2)) and subregulation 230(2) of the regulations.
7.2 The exemption given by paragraph 7.1 in relation to a helicopter is subject to the condition that a pilot must, from the time of starting the engine or engines until the time of stopping the engine or engines at the end of the flight, be at the controls of the helicopter unless:
(a) the helicopter is fitted with skid type landing gear; and
(b) the helicopter is fitted with a serviceable means of locking the cyclic and collective controls; and
(c) if a passenger occupies a control seat fitted with fully or partially functioning controls or is seated in a position where he or she is able to interfere with such controls the controls are locked and the pilot is satisfied that the passenger will not interfere with the controls; and
(d) the pilot considers that his or her absence from the cockpit is essential to the safety of the helicopter or of the persons on, or in the vicinity of, the helicopter; and
(e) the pilot remains in the immediate vicinity of the helicopter.

[SASless]

I address this question to the "Knee Dancing Champion of Alaska"......wonder how we got along all those years....hand pumping fuel...rotors running....hooking up our own sling loads ...rotors turning.....rigging a load...and hooking it up...rotors turning....making yellow test bores in the snow....rotors turning.....checking the gill net.....rotors turning....oops...scratch the gill net...honest we just thought about it! Sure glad the "Rules Nannies" had not caught up with yet.....sheesh!

I guess no one else ever flew in remote sites with a dodgy battery or starter or both.....and never shutdown until back at some safe place but still managed to fuel, load, etc....and did it safely....and without comment or concern.

[Hoverman]

SASless
There's often a big division of views on this forum between UK/European pilots and people like you who've spent your career working all over the world often in difficult conditions.
One of the good things about Rotorheads is we can read experiences and opinions from people like you. Most civvy pilots in the UK (like me) lead fairly sheltered lives.
I know SteveieTerrier will think I'm getting at him, I'm honestly not, but I don't think he'd deny he's had an even more limited flying career and much narrower experience than most of us. Steve's always worked at the same place doing pleasure flights, charters and safety pilot work for businessmen helicopter owners going to meetings etc. Don't get me wrong, Steve's a good solid reliable pilot, but your chalk and cheese in experience, so not surprising you have very different views. You've been flying out in the big wide world. I've done more than some but nothing like as much as you and some others on the forum.
That's maybe why I enjoy reading posts by people like you, but it's also a bit embarassing at times. Our opinions and attitudes are formed by our experience. A lot of UK/European civvy pilots have very narrow experience so attitudes are often a bit narrow as well.

[GLSNightPilot]

I swear I was not involved in any of the events described below.

In the U.S. Army flight school, Ft. Wolters, TX way back when, solo students were required to get out of the helicopter while it was running, in confined areas generally surrounded by mesquite trees & brush, to survey the area and determine the exit route. We walked around the area around the running TH55, & after pacing the required distance from the edge of the clearing, placed rocks at the point from which we should start. While surveying the area, it was sometimes felt necessary to water the dry brush & grass. One pilot saw the poor vegetation growth, & felt the need to add some fertilizer. He went a few yards away & proceeded to put down fertilizer. Somehow the throttle of the running TH55 wound up to full on, and the helicopter decided to fly. It took off, but didn't fly far before it turned turtle, & pieces flew all over Hell & half of Texas. The fertilizer-applying pilot apparently didn't hear this, or didn't know what was happening, since he still had his helmet on. A dual helicopter passing nearby saw the crash, & landed in the same confined area to see if anyone was still alive. Both the instructor & student got out & ran to the crash site, just before the fertilizee returned. He saw a running TH55, just where it should have been, climbed in, & took off. It took some time before the two unlucky rescuers were discovered missing, & considerable confusion ensued.

Usually, nothing bad will happen when a helicopter is left running unattended. But usually and never are not quite the same thing.

[Thomas coupling]

When I went through the helicopter instructors school, shawbury, UK in 1982, I heard that story, applied to an instructor and student who flew here 20yrs earlier!!! it's one of those international stories, I think, that changes shape over the years. Probably never really happened. :D

[ibgutless]

B'onn siúlach scéalach. I see that my name has been taken in vain. Yes, I am the "Knee Dancing Champion of Alaska" this title was awarded at an Anchorage watering hole by a blue eye Amazon (you had to have been there); I have on a many occasions written my name in snow with my yellow pen as the blades did turn. I have even pump fuel as they did so above my head. (Let it be understood that at no time did we hot refuel; we rapid refueled – hot refueling meant that something might be burning somewhere close) I have even hook my noisy charger to barrels, nets, and once and only once to fifty sheets of ¾ inch plywood and all the time them thing where turning above my head.

Now some may remember that years ago in a small town in Texas, we were shown how to lay sticks and rocks under turning blades to mark our hover path so that we would be clear and not clip any trees as we maneuver in a confined areas. Remember how much fun that was. All of this come down to ==

The only difference between us and Ladies of the Night is that Heilcopter Pilots don’t charge enough.

One more thought and I’ll be gone. How long will your battery last at -40 C or F which ever, and when your ready to go, will the sorry beast start?

[SASless]

Gutless....as I recall...that gal was so big ... she ran on diesel !!!

You might explain your successful technique for performing engine-out landings upon the terrain feature known in Alaska as nig...nig....nig...errr tundra tufts.....after all you did get a lot of practice doing them one year as I recall. How does the last bit go...roll right...or roll left.....?

[overpitched]

There is a mod? that we use over here on 22s and 44s and that is a small leather strap screwed down either side of the collective. When on the ground with engine running it is looped over the throttle end of the collective. Problem solved. Handy if you absolutely have to fuel up before the cattle or tourists get away :O

[StevieTerrier]

Hoverman -

Of course I dont think you're getting at me - we're buddies aren't we? And your point about the different experiences of pilots in various parts of the globe is a valid (if rather obvious) one. However the points raised in this thread were concerning safety, and you don't have to have 10,000 hrs in your logbook to realise that leaving an unmanned helicopter running without a very good reason or hot refuelling a Robinson isnt going to win you any prizes from Health and Safety, and could do you a power of no good. You'll no doubt think they are both splendid ideas, so you can disagree with me as usual!!

Just a couple of teeny points to take exception with...

"I don't think he'd (me that is) deny he's had an even more limited flying career and much narrower experience than most of us"

Most of us? From what I've seen about 50% of the posters on Rotorheads are PPLs / Instructors / Wannabees. No disrepect to any of them, we've all been there but I think with I might have a teeny bit more experience than most of them.

"Steve's always worked at the same place". You KNOW this for a fact, dont you, 'cos you're my buddy, right? Are you sure you've got the right person?

Cos if you know me, then you'll aso know that I went to the US, got my FAA CPL and worked for 6 months in California as a tour / camera ship / cable
patrol pilot?

And that I worked for the original FAST helicopters in Shoreham?

And that I have freelanced for Virgin, Heli-Scott, Leeds Central, Helicopter Services and Yorkshire Helicopter Centre?

"limited flying career and much narrower experience"

Yes I have flown lots of pleasure flights, charters, safety pilot and corporate work. Isnt that the staple of all UK Commercial work anyway? I have also done more than my share of TV / film work / aerial photo. I've done a six month stint on the Transco gas pipeline patrol. I've even done some lifting in the Peak District. (Well I do work for Heli-LIFT..) Can't really think of anything much left to do in the UK Commercial world that , short of IR.

Did I mention that I flew for 3 seasons as a co-pilot / radio tech on a Cessna 421 comms aircraft for the Manufacturers teams in the World Rally Championships, on all the European Rallies from Finland down to Greece?

If thats much narrower experience than "most of us" then I take my hat off to you and all your busy friends.

Ok so I'm not the worlds most experienced aviator. But I think I've done a teeny bit more than you gave me credit for.

Hoverman, I'm gutted. All this time we spend together, and you really didnt know me at all, do you?:p

[B47]

Re. getting out with engine running, the Flight Manual for my ex UK AAC Bell 47 Sioux has a routine and approved procedure for this (but checks are marked 'only when permitted by Army Regulations').

Frictions on, 2300 RPM and hydraulics off.

Whatever the risks are, it didn't seem to concern the Army.

[Old Man Rotor]

Can remember years ago in a AS350 with that little 16 gauge Collective lock firmly in place..........just normal stuff, no second thoughts until that snake scared the $#*& out of me whilst inspecting that cactus??

The "lock" works a treat.........nearly as many hours outside than I have inside??

Now in the BK.........those locks will firmly hold you down and prevent you from embarassing yourself.

Frictions are one thing.............Collective and Cyclic locks are quite another............

[Thomas coupling]

I still think you should check your flight manual, then dependant on what it says regarding the minimum complement required, check your CofA and finally but VERY importantly, check the small print in the insurance:)

[TeeS]

TC. What about the bit in the Eurocopter EC135 emergency checklist concerning a 'BAT TEMP' caption and gong.

IN FLIGHT
1. BAT MSTR sw OFF
2. LAND AS SOON AS POSSIBLE
after landing:
3. Engines Leave running in idle
4. Collective lever and cyclic stick Lock

NOTE Continue flight only if visual inspection reveals no indication
of battery overheating etc.

It does seem to suggest they consider it reasonably safe to leave the controls unattended for a short period of time.

TeeS

[StevieTerrier]

Datcon (or are you really Hoverman in disguise?)

Thanks for the comprehensive but largely incorrect CV updates.

The point of my posting was not to impress anybody with my wonderful, well rounded aviator's CV, but in reponse to Hoverman's posting which basically patted me on the head and said "well Steve is a solid enough pilot, but he hasnt enough experience to comment on these major safety issues like whether or not it's safe to leave a helicopter unattended with the blades running or hot refuel an R22... because hes only ever worked from one place and has had an even more limited flying experience than most of us"

In his wisdom he said two things which he knew for a FACT (as usual) :

(1) That I had always worked at the same place.

If I had worked at only one other place for five minutes, that first statement would have been incorrect, now wouldn't it? In fact I gave a list of 7 additional places I have worked, as a pilot for 6 of them. But as usual people like you will only see what you want to see. The only non-flying post was at FAST HELICOPTERS - I worked as Operations Manager because my legs weren't good enough to do the secretarial work. So that's that sorted, hopefully.

(2) Limited experience.

If I had say 10,000 hrs flying to the rigs off Aberdeen, would that make me a better / more experienced airman? Hoverman may have been talking helicopters or he may not. (In fact he said limited FLYING experience) I was talking aviation experience. Hence the inclusion of the references to fixed-wing operations, Ops. Manager work, Heliport Manager and the rest. I dont recall saying I had a fixed-wing licence, by the way. But if you think Tommy, Steve, Richard, Miles and the rest spent 6 + hours at the controls of G-PLANK, then you weren't there...


"Sorry to break it to you Stevie, but pleasure flying and safety pilot stuff for owners is what new CPLs do to build hours"

Dont know what this fixation with pleasure flying is. I do an organised pleasure flying day once a month, perhaps twice in the summer if demand warrants it. And just for the record, I did around 50 hours p/f in the last 12 months out of a total of 250 hours. Not really a major proportion is it?

Whats so terrible about it anyway? This is a one pilot operation, are you saying I should turn down pleasure flying taskings just because you consider it "not worthy" I'll just pop in and tell the boss not to expect that £35,000 income again this year, because DATCON has deemed it demeaning for me. Its called paying the wages, buddy. And if you were ever unfortunate enough to have had to suffer the indignity of pleasure flying, then you'll know that getting 50 gallons of Jet and the four members of the Tubby family off the ground in a 17,000hr B206 on a blustery, windswept field in the middle of nowhere is a tad more stressful than cruising around the airways in a nice corporate 76. (dont get involved you S76 guys, it was only an illustration....)

What now....ah yes the HELI-JET International Group. Do you mean the HELI-LIFT GROUP by any chance? Take the time to visit the website before you comment. And just in case you still need any help understanding the concept, if you have five companies its called a "GROUP". If you have bases and operations in three different continents, its called an "INTERNATIONAL GROUP" whether you like it or not. Not too complex, is it?

"Helijet hasnt even got an AOC". And your point is???

And I'm sure there was something else.....ah yes.

"Helicopter Services!!!! Steve - in case you've forgotten, that's your own company name for billing to look like self-employed for tax!"

Oh dear, oh dear. Where DO you get your facts from? No I havent forgotten what my company name is. In fact its Helicopter Support Services, and nothing to do with Helicopter Services at all, who I am sure would be disappointed that one so wise and knowledgeable as you dont know they exist. Buy hey, as I say, dont let the facts spoil a good story, eh?

And finally, if you think I'm doing anything "iffy" then you know where the CAA live, dont you?

Thank you for your time. I now consider the discussion about my CV, career, employer, shoe size etc as closed, as I have to go off and build some more P1 time pleasure flying.

ST

[Old Man Rotor]

You are a Worrywart..........

Never ever let the facts get in the way of a good story!!!!

[Thomas coupling]

Sorry about that old man;)

Tees, you've raised a very good point, back to the books:=