Wingovers at DHFS
 

I was told yesterday that wingovers have been removed from the syllabus at DHFS - anyone know when and why that happened?

They were formally taught from 1990 following a crash at Bishop's court because Sqn pilots would end up flying the manoeuvres anyway and it was sensibly deemed far better for them to be shown how to do it properly instead of experimenting and scaring themselves (not to mention trashing the aircraft).

RTS limits on the Griffin prevent them being taught.

I thought if you did a wingover badly and trashed the aircraft you got promoted? :confused:

:E

RTS limits on the Griffin prevent them being taught.

But surely Wingovers should be taught to all 3 services on the Squirrel? Failure to do so is bound to result in more accidents.

Why remove them from the syllabus?

Good for coordination,
Good for confidence bulding,
Useful tool in the belt for some applications,
They are fun :ok:

And yeh, teach them how to do a wingover properly before they teach themselves and do it anyway.

Turkey

If you know the pilot isn't allowed to do wingovers or anything out of the ordinary it makes it a lot easier to predict where he will be when your bullets arrive.

Interesting development - it just means it'll be up to OCU/Sqn QHIs to teach the appropriate technique on type. AAC had a similar experience - my first job on reaching my exchange Sqn was to teach the approved wingover method after some numpty made a pigs ear of just such a manoeuvre in Canada. Unfortunately for the pilot, he wasn't distracted at the top of climb by "terrorist activity" so he didn't get promoted afterward.

Actually, doing it at a later stage in training might not be a bad idea. What works in a Squirrel may well be totally inappropriate in a Merlin.

Are you seriously saying that we are training our future pilots on an aircraft that cannot do wingovers...??? You'll be telling me next that Torque turns are also banned..

Quite aside from the fact that wingovers may be seen as fun (Hence fun police removal from syllabus), they are a useful tool for teaching conversion of energy from kinetic to potential and vice versa.

They can even be used on occasion as an escape technique in some circumstances.

Mustn't stall the tail
 

A mate joined the Dark Blue already in possession of his PLP user's tie thanks to a torque-turn. He went on an acquaint visit to a Wasp-equipped frigate, and as he was FAA-bound, the handsome driver, rotary, took him for a ride. Proceeded to overcook the T-T, and they splashed, so he had to deploy his recently-learned survival skills.

Used to get a few funny looks at CU when he was a 705 sprog wearing the tie :ok:

What are CFS doing about this sad state of affairs. No helicopter pilot worth his salt could possibly argue against teaching wing overs. It is similar to flying a fast jet close to its limits. When students can do them half competently it does wonders for their confidence and just might get them out of a tricky situation one day. Absolutely unbelievable.
Tuck

H&S I bet - no Gonads at the top anymore. 'Oh ,Johnnies folks will be cross with me if I mess his hair!!!!' - No matter, I can't do them anyway!!!!

It wasn't a wing over. It was a turn at the end of a climb. They saw something suspicious.:rolleyes:

Sod the aircraft. What about the crewman they, sorry sleezy messed up. Still, Sleezy got promoted so at least some good came out of it. Is he still with PAS? I wonder if he still has that ridiculous teddy bear.:ugh:

Surely on a helicopter it is a "Bladeover"? :}

Wingovers are still taught on Squirrel at Shawbury unless they have been removed in the last 2 days. They are taught in the run up to FHT.

I don't think CFS hold any sway with Mr Bell. If he says his civvy helicopter cannot do something or he will invalidate the warranty, then the owner/operator has to listen.

IIRC the conversation went broadly like this:

CFS: "We'd like to change the way we do wingovers in the Griff to make them a little more sporty. What do you think FBH?

FBH: Well, we'd have to check with Bell first obviously, but shouldn't be a drama...

FBH>Bell: Bell, this customer of ours currently does Xdeg AOB wingovers, and would like to increase that slightly to Ydeg. Is that a snag?

Bell: Sorrry, you do WHAT with our aircraft? We've never tested it beyond 50deg AOB! You may want to replace all the important components that you've done this to!

FBH> Red faces all around

RAF: Much reading of contracts and sales pitches to ascertain responsibility and blame!

They are also taught on the CFS(H) course so that QHIs en route to any fleet know how to teach them.

pba target - thanks for that - I wondered what had driven the change.

It sounds like the Sea King - no RTS over 30 deg AoB, what a joke for any helicopter. Does it fall out of the sky if you exceed it? er no (allegedly:))

A properly executed wingover does not fatigue the aircraft any more than hovering on the edge of ETL or doing autos to FFR and, unlike in level flight, the amount of AoB used does not increase the load factor appreciably. There is bugger all difference in load factor between 50 and 90 deg AoB at the top of a wingover. There will be more fatigue doing punchy quickstops than wingovers.

Advanced handling is an absolute neccessity - the time to discover what you and your aircraft can do is not when you are facing the enemy or trying to get out of a difficult situation - we wouldn't dream of suggesting a FJ pilot shouldn't be taught aeros until he gets to the front line.