High altitude vs sea level training: Which is best?

[anichels]

Can I get opinions on whether learning in a high altitude environment is better than learning at sea level? Is it true that if I learn at sea level that I would have to transition to flying in the mountains? Do I limit myself from getting a job as an instructor or later as a "real" pilot? Got any recs for a good high altitude school? Thanks.

[John Bicker]

Depends what you call "high altitude". Specific training is still available in Canada I think. No ideas about the US.

As for "ab initio" training at high altitude it would take a while to notice the subtleties required. On the other hand I doubt you will find a school that operates training types at high altitudes. High altitude flight in a helicopter can be difficult and continues to catch some very experienced people out. It's possibly not the altitude itself it's just all the other things that can come with it like snow, whiteout ( very dangerous and highly misunderstood by most), wind, slopes, sling loads etc.

[HeliMark]

I would not be to worried about high altitude stuff right now. Best would be to train where you can get the best for the buck, and after some experiance, find an instructor who knows high altitude flying.

It is hard enough starting out without having to deal with trainers with marginal performance at altitude.

[pa42]

I thought of the same contrast, but AFTER getting rated at sea level. So I took my R22 to high country (Salt Lake & Grand Canyon) and very cautiously experimented with hi DA operations (6000-8000' DA).

A non-issue. True, performance is reduced; but if you're doing conservative maneuvers, then it's just a new set of numbers (lower climb rate, etc) and slightly more lethargic power recoveries. R22 governor gets very twitchy (searching for right combination) , almost overwhelmed, above 7000 DA. No big deal.

ERGO it's probably more economical to train at low-altitude bases, get more circuits-per-hour, less real physical danger in autorotations, etc. Then when you have a chance a year down the line you can self-train when the opportunity presents itself. But BE ALERT--my good fortune was that when low-power low RPM snuck up on me, I was in a 5' hover over sagebrush, astonished to be going DOWN while pulling up on collective. So I landed. No damage. Sadder but wiser. Sea-level reflexes CAN hurt you, just as fixed-wing reflexes can (!? rolling into steep turns with a big dose of PEDAL??).

For what it's worth, I also self-trained on night operations (having had umpteen thousand hours fixed-wing before heli, I had, years before, gone straight to Comm heli add-on, so no night heli experience required). An utter non-event; night is night is night.

Still want to train at high altitude? Most interesting program I've seen is at Prescott, AZ (7000' MSL), where they have an entire 30 hour course on high density altitude flying. Everything you ever wanted to try in thin air, and then some!

[The Nr Fairy]

pa42 :

I don't know about anyone else, but your post raised my eyebrow a notch, if I've interpreted it correctly.

Even though your experimentation was "cautious", did you not have the services of an instructor available to you ? And as for the night thing - if you're operating off a runway then f/w = heli, but an engine failure at night is a different proposition - what would you have done then ? And if you're in a confined area at night then f/w definitely <> r/w.

anichels :

Personally, I'd train wherever's convenient and the price is right. If you get the opportunity during later stages of training, or after you've got your ticket, then ask to go somewhere with mountains - I know Miami is on a par with Holland for high spots, but I'd recommend you train at high DAs with someone who knows what they're doing.

[pa42]

Dear Nr:

Well, actually, no, I did not have the services of an instructor available. Two reasons: a) Pathfinder insurance, in its infinite wisdom, will not cover me if the left-side controls are installed UNLESS the instructor is named on the policy! So IF I track down a local instructor, I lose insurance coverage when flying with him! Strange but true. b) Being a gypsy, full-time RV travel with R22 on trailer, I am literally never in one locality for more than a week or two, so have no established training contacts.

(Admittedly, c) is not much excuse, I'm extremely distrustful of the run of flight instructors, who will, in general ASSURE one that they have LOTS of experience, and then proceed to preach utter hooey and doublespeak in the cockpit. As, for instance, in the fact that various instructors--20 or so in 17 years--have "converted" me to four very different versions of "maximum performance takeoff," each while insisting that there is only ONE proper m.p.t., and revealing ignorance (denial) of the other three.

Got me started, didn't you! Here's more: as a retired pilot examiner and senior f/w instructor (36 years + grey hair), I am aghast at the sorry state of helicopter instruction compared to f/w. A single example (from my limited r/w observation) is the H-V curve, which has been the survival guide for decades--not until Robinson factory safety school did I hear that H-V is purely a takeoff consideration, not really relevant to approaches (because blade pitch/induced drag/rpm droop are so much less in descent), so there is no flight test info on survivable approach profiles--just individual-pilot-guesstimates of how far to stretch the takeoff H-V.

Do you differ with me? WONDERFUL. I eagerly seek enlightenment, and/or published peer-reviewed analyses of performance issues. Perhaps we ought to go off the board (& exchange emails as individuals) so as not to bore our compatriots on pprune; but all knowledge is good knowledge!

For those pursuing the hi-altitude training thread: yes, that's where you are; small digression in this post (!). Thanks for the excuse to rant.

Dave

Even though your experimentation was "cautious", did you not have the services of an instructor available to you ? And as for the night thing - if you're operating off a runway then f/w = heli, but an engine failure at night is a different proposition - what would you have done then ? And if you're in a confined area at night then f/w definitely <> r/w.

[BlenderPilot]

In my opinion,

Most of the flying I have done has been above 7,300 FTAMSL My home airport is at 7,340 and my other base is at 8,445, whenever I fly to the coast nothing seems difficult. You get so accustomed to having reduced performance in the hot and heavy enviorement that you get this grin on your face whenever you pull power at sea level, everything seems like a piece of cake.

Then on the other side pilots who are accustomed to SL ops. have to go thru a whole new learning process when they first come up here, and sometimes this learning process involves some "interesting" unexpected surprises.

Flying at altitude demands more planning, technique and skill which can be gained thru experience if you get a chance to learn in such conditions its always a good thing, though not a must.

[[email protected]]

Pa42, we have been around the H-V curve argument a few times on recent threads, some choose to ignore it or discount it for specific flight regimes eg approaches. The HV curve is a good ballpark indicator of whether or not you will be able to achieve autorotation at minimum RoD speed so that you stand the highest chance of making a safe engine off landing. It is not a gurantee of walking away from the landing nor keeping the aircraft in one piece.

Can you survive an engine failure when you are in the avoid curve - Yes if luck and terrain are on your side.

Do you put yourself at higher risk of bending yourself/the aircraft following an engine failure if you operate in the avoid curve -yes.

Since judging the likely outcome of an engine failure is a very imprecise science at least the HV curve gives you somewhere to start.

[JimL]

...but it does have to be validated by the manufacturer of course.

[HeliMark]

What scares me is the statement:

"ERGO it's probably more economical to train at low-altitude bases, get more circuits-per-hour, less real physical danger in autorotations, etc. Then when you have a chance a year down the line you can self-train when the opportunity presents itself. But BE ALERT--my good fortune was that when low-power low RPM snuck up on me, I was in a 5' hover over sagebrush, astonished to be going DOWN while pulling up on collective. So I landed. No damage. Sadder but wiser. Sea-level reflexes CAN hurt you, just as fixed-wing reflexes can (!? rolling into steep turns with a big dose of PEDAL??)."

Were you lucky? Yup. Maybe from the experiance in fw that most other newer helicopter pilots do not have. Had that happened at 30-40 feet it really could have been very interesting. How many new pilots could get out of that situation? Know how to recognize that you may not be able to fly out of it and have to do a run on landing, or take it to the ground without a hover? A better plan would have ment that sagebush would not have been in front of you. Or be over a hard surface.

Self teaching is great in most respects, but for something like that, where you do not have the power to give yourself a second chance, is to me is just asking for trouble.

Sorry for the rant, but I do a fair amount of mountain search and rescue and that area is not for a newer pilot without training.

[Arm out the window]

anichels, there are many things that can get up and bite you at high density altitude compared to sea level, so don't be tempted to just jump into it yourself. At the very least, do a lot of reading beforehand.
If I interpret your post correctly, you're starting out, and replies such as those made by Pa42 are arrogant and dangerous, in my view.
I would suggest doing your training wherever it is convenient and cost-effective, if you're happy with the people instructing you and their credentials, and once you can fly a helicopter reasonably well, start looking into high DA / mountain flying training if you are so inclined. It's not just the high DA effects that can surprise you, but a whole heap of things (eg. lack of 'real' horizon, less tail rotor effectiveness, IAS/TAS illusions, limited power - the list goes on).
I'm not saying any of these things are reasons to not fly in the hills, but you need a good awareness of them before venturing into what can be a very demanding flying environment.
Pa42, as an experienced FW instructor, you should know better.
You're effectively encouraging people to go out and try to kill themselves.

[pa42]

Helimark and ArmOut:

There's much in your comments, good thing you're there to keep me honest.

Now I feel guilty, especially having myself posted similar cautionary thoughts on other forums when people seemed to be setting bad examples.

Bottom line: consider carefully the training to be had, don't just jump in. (Which, in fact, was the thrust of the original post!)

[Arm out the window]

Well said, pa42.

[Snapsimo]

Even though AD elev is 1620ft AMSL, often we get days of DA upwards of 8000ft due to the extreme heat, is this considered some sort of altitude flying or is altitude only recognised when the AD elev is upwards of 6000ft?

[The Nr Fairy]

Snapsimo :

The aircraft will feel the effect of DA, not purely pressure altitude.

All the R22 and R44 performance charts, although the Y-axis is "Pressure Altitude", have grids on them to convert that plus temperature to DA.

[John Bicker]

At YBAS 061800Z 27005KT CAVOK 03/M05 Q1022 would mean a DA of 528', granted it was OAT of 3C.

If it was 73C it might be 8000'. Even in really extreme conditions - say QNH 990 OAT 50C and DP 45C it would just crack 8000'.

Which books have you been reading or are you taking the p*ss?

Where I landed the other day it was 10,300, OAT+10, QNH 1002, DP 8 = 12,629.

Accurate enough is 30' per mb deviation good or bad from ISA MSL pressure and 120' per degree C from ISA MSL temp.

Give back your licence immediately or get this right before venturing into the higher landing spots, at least your error might keep you out of the poo!

[troglodytis]

Prescott is 5045 ft msl.


Training is great here. SMOOTH is the word.

[Flyting]

I did my training in South Africa in Johannesburg... 5270ft alt and temps ranging from 0 to 35 degrees C from winter to summer. I now train students in similar circumstances.

For me it was the place to be trained and for training...
If you learn to fly at alt going to sea level is a gift.

Here we always have to keep an eye on limits as our DA is always high - mostly running with limited fuel for sorties of an hour or so. Teaching students to fly a R22 on limited power at altitude makes for a better, more cautious pilot. Even if we have students wanting to learn on a R44 or bigger, we start them on the R22, just sothat they learn flying with limitations.