Being Ushered in down wind

[Edna Cloud]

Just recently I had occasion to fly into a well known airfield/airport on the South West of the UK for fuel. The runway in use was 220, and the field was active with many fixed wing AC ( Jet and Piston) using this approach.
Being rotary (Gazelle with 4 up) the controller deemed appropriate for us to make the reciprocal approach to the helipad for fuel. The wind at this time was approx 20 Kt, so we made a VERY cautious approach ( as we all know about the Gazelle's funnies at the rear!) being completely down wind. Behind us, given the same routing was an Enstrom ( 480?? - not sure but was a turbine) who was asked to do the same. Now both are reasonably powerful AC, however what if an R22 or other light machine?

Note that this is not the first time I have experienced a controller advising an approach which is not favourable, but is given because being rotary we can land from any direction - Right!

Any one else care to comment about the apparent lack of awareness exhibited by some controllers with respect to rotary craft?

And yes I appreciate we can always request a conventional approach

Edna

[Dantruck]

Speaking as a R22/R44 driver (with the luxury of all the time in the world to ponder this one) my thoughts run thus:
Were I full of passengers and unfamiliar with the airfield, I think I'd have elected for a standard join, especially in a 20kt wind. If I was a bit lighter AND I knew there was plenty of room to make a fast (minimum 55kts IAS) downwind approach before bending it impressively round the corner and into wind for the final transition to the hover, I'd have accepted the controller's instruction with glee.
I guess the 'correct procedure' ultimately depends on a mix of aircraft performance, pilot confidence/ability and weather. I'd say the controller's instruction was not unreasonable, but for any low time pilots reading this I'd add: Remember, you're the captain. Don't accept an instruction you are uncomfortable with, particularly if there's a reasonable alternative; like joining the fixed-wing circuit.
All that said, helicopters joining the circuit is not without its own perils. I was once refused a straight in, into wind approach at Newcastle, UK, (a manoeuvre that would have combined maximum aerodynamic safety with minimal delay to the many departing airliners IMHO) and required instead to join downwind to await a 757 on long long final. I was flying an R22. Having flown for a full four minutes downwind the 757 duly appeared a couple of miles ahead. The controller then gave me 'No 2 to land behind the 757 - keep it tight'
Remembering my turbulence training, I can tell you that keeping it tight was the last thing I was going to do. I gave that big bird a wide birth, climbed to avoid the wingtip rollers I now saw reeling toward me as I flew base leg behind him, and stayed well above his glideslope all the way back to the field. This was at least made easy given my runway exit/aiming point was most of the way toward the far end of the runway (where I'd wanted to go in the first place), but I could sense the captains of all those airliners queued up to depart cursing me as I crossed the threshold a full 600ft above them, plodding slowly as only an R22 can in a crosswind. Total added/circuit time was 10mins, and I still had to bend it 90deg right in the last few feet to bring it to a stable into-wind hover.
Still, t'was all good experience, says I. Just don't go believing too many controllers understand helicopters.

[Happy Landing !]

Hi Dan....

Hope you weren't in my machine !

Give me a bell when your next in the UK

G & C.J

[Dantruck]

Who'd ya think taught me to 'bend it impressively?'
Pass the suncream, someone:p

[Happy Landing !]

Git:*
We have 400mts VIS with cloud @ 600' !

Sorry to deviate the thread... Will send a P.M

G

;)

[Vfrpilotpb]

Most controllers are very good, but do not understand Helis or the querky R22/R44 stable of thorobreds, the pilot has control of the craft and it is up to him or her to land accordingly! unless of course you are landing at Wolverhampton International:rolleyes:

[AllyPally]

As a professional helicopter with 30yrs exp ranging from Army support thru' SAR and offshore oil support I would never do a downwind approach unless I absolutely had to. The beauty of the helicopter is that it does not require long strips of concrete that may or may not be oriented into wind, so into wind approaches can nearly always be flown.

In my early days of military life I was taught the gate approach. This was a profile which meant you could approach the gate from any direction and at any speed but you had to pass thru' the gate heading into wind at a certain speed. From memory for the Wessex the gate was 100ft agl and 50kts

If ATC try to make you approach from a certain direction then using the gate approach may save your bacon should your power margin be small or tail rotor authority be marginal.

The performance penalties that occur during a downwind approach should not be taken lightly.

AP

:D

[Helinut]

Earlier in my flying career I had a couple of experiences along the lines of those raised that caused to warn me to be careful with this sort of issue.

I was departing from a coastal regional airport in a full-laden R22, on a day when the wind was blowing off the sea at quite a rate and it was also turbulent. I was offered/asked to depart downwind.

The airfield had lots of different types of users, including Dauphin offshore helicopters, so maybe they were used to more powerful helicopters - perhaps a case of overfamiliarity with a certain class of helicopter.

I felt really unhappy about the "offer" but I was not very confident and worried about what ATC would say if I suggested something else; I had just enough confidence to ask if I could depart into wind with an early turn. ATC came back immediately with no problem and the into wind departure was completed
with the turn.

Very often ATC may well offer such things because they nthink they are helping and expediting your flight. With a lot more experience now, I have no difficulty or hesitation in decling a clearance and/or offering an alternative if I am unhappy about it.

The other extreme is the "Newcastle" experience; I too can recall a very similar situation to the one mentioned above. Forced into the bomber fixed wing circuit in a R22 with a strong wind down the runway, I took forever to land on finals with a low ground speed, causing all sorts of problems for a following 737 and grumbles on the frequency. At the time I remember being very embarrassed - it was not my problem or fault though. I was just doing what I was told.

Newcastle has a single E/W runway. Why they could not let VFR helicopters in good VMC approach from the South or North direct to the runway I do not know. I have not been there for a while; maybe they have changed??

[Arm out the window]

You can always require, not request, a certain course of action or refuse ATC instructions that you feel are unsafe.
This may lead to delays and a degree of narkiness on the part of the air trafficker, but ultimately you have to make captaincy decisions that you will be happy with, not allow someone else to paint you into a corner you don't want to be in.
I'm not trying to stir up our ATC mates here; most times in my experience they are helpful and efficient.
I refer only to that small minority of occasions where they want you to do something that's not consistent with what would be considered normal and safe operations for your particular aircraft and experience level.

[RobboRider]

Have to agree with "arm out the window"

I fly my R22 in and out of an international airport with lots of heavy traffic, often with the fully loaded 747s doing downwind departures for (I think) noise abatement requirements over the city. I've been asked to do some worrying things by ATCs, quite a few downwind approaches and rapid base turns while directly abeam my touchdown point while still at 800 ft and only able to reach it by doing an auto essentially straight down over buildings!

I don't think it was because they were being mean but because they thought it was something we could with no trouble (A lot of my bigger tourist operator colleagues in B 206s etc probably do do it) and because it fitted into the pattern at the time.

But even in my releative low-hour state I've just come back and said "Sorry but I can't comply. Request into wind landing" and I have never been knocked back or questioned or asked to explain my reasoning further. Always had a rapid and helpful response. I noticed after I made the request a few times the ATC guys haven't asked me to do funny things again so we seem to be all happy now.

The real problem arises when you follow the ATC request and the whole thing turns pear shaped. If the bum falls out of your approach when you get below translation speed and you roll it up in a ball no-one will say the ATC is responsible, it will have been the captain of the ship's call.