Spatial Disorientation
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I recently had the pleasure of flying an R-44 equipped with an AFCS that was designed specficially to keep people out of trouble. (you can find the article in an old edition of Helicopter World).
Basically the reason for the system was to prevent accidents caused by loss of the sight of the visual horizon - a significant percentage of helicopter accidents, by the way.
With the system on, you can trim the helicopter for pitch attitudes between 5 degrees nose up and 5 nose down and 10 degrees of bank (or something similar) If you want to roll to 30 degrees of bank - you have to hold the stick into the turn to maintain the angle of bank. If you let go, it will roll to wings level (or up to 10 degrees angle of bank if that's what you had trimmed it for).
Wonderful system - easy to use, transformed flying the R-44 into a piece of cake - in one 20 minute leg in light turbulence I had to use the trim release 5 times from hover to hover. The system made the same input I would have made, but about one-half to one second before I would have.
I'm waiting for it to get certified...
Basically the reason for the system was to prevent accidents caused by loss of the sight of the visual horizon - a significant percentage of helicopter accidents, by the way.
With the system on, you can trim the helicopter for pitch attitudes between 5 degrees nose up and 5 nose down and 10 degrees of bank (or something similar) If you want to roll to 30 degrees of bank - you have to hold the stick into the turn to maintain the angle of bank. If you let go, it will roll to wings level (or up to 10 degrees angle of bank if that's what you had trimmed it for).
Wonderful system - easy to use, transformed flying the R-44 into a piece of cake - in one 20 minute leg in light turbulence I had to use the trim release 5 times from hover to hover. The system made the same input I would have made, but about one-half to one second before I would have.
I'm waiting for it to get certified...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: England/Arizona
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shawn I too have spoken to pilots who have seen the system and I have used simillar with the SAS on the wonderful SA341/2. The trouble again is that the system will only help if used correctly.
Sadly one of the pilots I chatted to (and it was out of three people so not good odds) was already mentioning how it would help him get over the cloud on the high ground to the clear stuff on the other side. Simply climb above the hills set it up and let it take him through the cloud. On the other side he could carry on normally.
I agree a good bit of kit when in the s**t. Sadly though we all know idiots that will use it to kill themselves and while we can not prevent all such people from doing so we can try to cut the numbers down with good teaching of pilot captaincy skills and a better awarness of the dangers of flying. (thats waffle to some I know, sorry).
Sadly one of the pilots I chatted to (and it was out of three people so not good odds) was already mentioning how it would help him get over the cloud on the high ground to the clear stuff on the other side. Simply climb above the hills set it up and let it take him through the cloud. On the other side he could carry on normally.
I agree a good bit of kit when in the s**t. Sadly though we all know idiots that will use it to kill themselves and while we can not prevent all such people from doing so we can try to cut the numbers down with good teaching of pilot captaincy skills and a better awarness of the dangers of flying. (thats waffle to some I know, sorry).
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: stand by one
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With all these wise words of wisdom is it possible for ppruner’s to put together a set of immediate actions that a pilot should take at an early stage in the flight if the pilot suspects poor weather conditions ahead?
I was thinking something along the lines of,
1. Identify the problem: Low Cloud, Poor Vis etc.
2. Identify the hazard: High ground to the west
3. Identify escape routes: Is it a 360 degree poor vis or a 180 degree poor vis
4. Identify low-level safe routes: Locate Railway line or road.
5. Take appropriate action depending on the answers to 1-4 above, such as low and slow over a railway line, put down near a town / village now rather than a filed in the middle of no where.
So rather than panicking at the onset of poor conditions the pilot would have a mental formula that could assist in the decision making process in the absence of 1000’s of hours experience.
Raven
I was thinking something along the lines of,
1. Identify the problem: Low Cloud, Poor Vis etc.
2. Identify the hazard: High ground to the west
3. Identify escape routes: Is it a 360 degree poor vis or a 180 degree poor vis
4. Identify low-level safe routes: Locate Railway line or road.
5. Take appropriate action depending on the answers to 1-4 above, such as low and slow over a railway line, put down near a town / village now rather than a filed in the middle of no where.
So rather than panicking at the onset of poor conditions the pilot would have a mental formula that could assist in the decision making process in the absence of 1000’s of hours experience.
Raven
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab
First point is that I didn't simply say use a 500ft minimum height. I said: "we have the 500ft rule if relevant and common sense judgement", so refer to two things, (a) the law and (b) sensible judgement. That might mean 800ft; it might be 300ft, as you know.
I generally agree with your points and whilst I can understand that you feel my advice is too simple, I was trying to reduce the endless detail of advice we could all write, much of it generalised, to the one key thing that could save someone's life if disaster approaches, and that is, whatever you do, keep sight of the ground. Now I agree entirely that it would be much safer if people turned around when the conditions deteriorated below, say, 1000ft base and 5k vis. So of course in theory everyone should decide the appropriate limits, check the weather and not go if not confident they can be maintained.
Except of course, in the real world, advice limited to this will not prevent all accidents. Pilots will sometimes push on if conditions deteriorate, so what advice are we going to give now? Pilots flying VFR are (thankfully) not controlled by ATC so individual judgement will always be crucial. It will always be a grey area and hence the importance of the critical advice in the ultimate situation. I have never said specifically how low you should go, or how slow; I have just said that following that advice to whatever limits are sensible considering pilot experience, law, terrain, etc, can pretty much guarantee you can continue to see the ground and avoid going IMC.
Gomer
You presume I have not got much experience. Depends on how you define that I guess, but I have around 5000 hrs. Not as much as many I admit, but enough to have a valid view.
My position stands, but if consensus really is that inadvertent IMC entry is a hazard that cannot be avoided our various authorities better start the process of implementing minimum training standards and aircraft minimum equipment levels to enable pilots and their passengers to survive such encounters.
So what does anyone thing these standards should be then?
First point is that I didn't simply say use a 500ft minimum height. I said: "we have the 500ft rule if relevant and common sense judgement", so refer to two things, (a) the law and (b) sensible judgement. That might mean 800ft; it might be 300ft, as you know.
I generally agree with your points and whilst I can understand that you feel my advice is too simple, I was trying to reduce the endless detail of advice we could all write, much of it generalised, to the one key thing that could save someone's life if disaster approaches, and that is, whatever you do, keep sight of the ground. Now I agree entirely that it would be much safer if people turned around when the conditions deteriorated below, say, 1000ft base and 5k vis. So of course in theory everyone should decide the appropriate limits, check the weather and not go if not confident they can be maintained.
Except of course, in the real world, advice limited to this will not prevent all accidents. Pilots will sometimes push on if conditions deteriorate, so what advice are we going to give now? Pilots flying VFR are (thankfully) not controlled by ATC so individual judgement will always be crucial. It will always be a grey area and hence the importance of the critical advice in the ultimate situation. I have never said specifically how low you should go, or how slow; I have just said that following that advice to whatever limits are sensible considering pilot experience, law, terrain, etc, can pretty much guarantee you can continue to see the ground and avoid going IMC.
Gomer
You presume I have not got much experience. Depends on how you define that I guess, but I have around 5000 hrs. Not as much as many I admit, but enough to have a valid view.
My position stands, but if consensus really is that inadvertent IMC entry is a hazard that cannot be avoided our various authorities better start the process of implementing minimum training standards and aircraft minimum equipment levels to enable pilots and their passengers to survive such encounters.
So what does anyone thing these standards should be then?
Rotor speed - the problem is that you expect every pilot out there to be a good pilot - as you say 'good piloting skills will prevent inadvertant IMC'.
The differing levels of experience and currency mean that those with a tenth of your flying experience will make different decisions to you and me.
There will also always be good instructors who have frightened themselves in the past and will proffer advice and guidance to their students to prevent it happening to them. But, and it is a big BUT - it is not mandated training and many low time pilots are out there instructing with not much more than a PPL themselves.
I believe there should be mandatory 'post graduate' training for all PPLs as much of the skill-base in aviation is perishable and needs constant practise - IF being of particular note.
The differing levels of experience and currency mean that those with a tenth of your flying experience will make different decisions to you and me.
There will also always be good instructors who have frightened themselves in the past and will proffer advice and guidance to their students to prevent it happening to them. But, and it is a big BUT - it is not mandated training and many low time pilots are out there instructing with not much more than a PPL themselves.
I believe there should be mandatory 'post graduate' training for all PPLs as much of the skill-base in aviation is perishable and needs constant practise - IF being of particular note.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab
I guess you're probably right, and that the level of skills of low time PPLs is variable, to say the least. Don't have any contact with that area but as you say some instructors may have had limited weather appraisal experience too.
Totally agree that better - and recurrent up till say 500 hrs - poor weather training ought to be introduced and carried out by experienced instructors to make some pilots more aware of just how careful you need to be in poor weather, monitoring it continually and making decisive decisions when appropriate. Agreed with Coorong's focus on this too, earlier on this thread. Of course though when you want it a bit ropey it will be CAVOK!
There are just far too many bad weather accidents and they are avoidable. Apart from the tragic loss of life, it doesn't do the image of helicopter travel or insurance premiums any good at all. Wonder if this thread will make any difference? Hope so!
I guess you're probably right, and that the level of skills of low time PPLs is variable, to say the least. Don't have any contact with that area but as you say some instructors may have had limited weather appraisal experience too.
Totally agree that better - and recurrent up till say 500 hrs - poor weather training ought to be introduced and carried out by experienced instructors to make some pilots more aware of just how careful you need to be in poor weather, monitoring it continually and making decisive decisions when appropriate. Agreed with Coorong's focus on this too, earlier on this thread. Of course though when you want it a bit ropey it will be CAVOK!
There are just far too many bad weather accidents and they are avoidable. Apart from the tragic loss of life, it doesn't do the image of helicopter travel or insurance premiums any good at all. Wonder if this thread will make any difference? Hope so!
Not enough $$$ ...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just wanted to thank everyone who's had input on this thread. This thread, more than any other I can recall reading on PPRuNe, has raised my awareness of instrument flight to a whole new level.
Stay safe out there, and respect the soft fluffy stuff. To bastardise an old quote: "There's rocks in them thar clouds".
Maybe this should be a Sticky for a while ... ?
Stay safe out there, and respect the soft fluffy stuff. To bastardise an old quote: "There's rocks in them thar clouds".
Maybe this should be a Sticky for a while ... ?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotorspeed, if you have flown 5000 hours in a helicopter and never been in inadvertent IMC, or at least very close to it, you are a very lucky man, or else it has taken you a long time, flying only in excellent weather for short periods. I remember very well my last flight in the US Army, coming up the Rhine valley with a brand-new aviator fresh from West Point and Ft Rucker, with the weather as good as it ever got there and forecast to continue. Around Heidelberg we suddenly had to come to a hover over very high powerlines because of a fogbank that appeared in front of us, turned around, and had a fogbank behind us. It wasn't forecast, and just suddenly appeared. We flew a GCA to minimums, and barely got down. It happens to everyone, sooner or later. If we're lucky, we have time to land or go IFR, but if not then we become a statistic. Even instrument-rated pilots sometimes become statistics. The weather changes, and sometimes it does so very suddenly, and the guessers often get it wrong. Certainly landing before the weather deteriorates is the best option, but sometimes there just isn't enough time, because the weather can go to nothing before you can react. If you keep flying, eventually you'll see it, and I hope you don't become another statistic.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GLS
No, never been inadvertent IMC in 5000 hours; yes have been close to it, and have certainly flown in a lot of ****ty weather.
Maybe you're right and I have just been lucky over those hours. However what I do know is that I have been absolutely obsessed with never losing sight of the ground when I have not been able to go IMC, either prior to being instrument rated or since, but when going IMC has not been a viable option.
I've turned back many times and I've landed in fields waiting for weather to improve quite a few times. Maybe I'm more cautious than others, who knows.
No question this is out there to bite any of us any time, so don't anyone think I am over-confident or complacent that it couldn't happen to me. This is probably the biggest killer and continually needs the greatest efforts to avoid.
No, never been inadvertent IMC in 5000 hours; yes have been close to it, and have certainly flown in a lot of ****ty weather.
Maybe you're right and I have just been lucky over those hours. However what I do know is that I have been absolutely obsessed with never losing sight of the ground when I have not been able to go IMC, either prior to being instrument rated or since, but when going IMC has not been a viable option.
I've turned back many times and I've landed in fields waiting for weather to improve quite a few times. Maybe I'm more cautious than others, who knows.
No question this is out there to bite any of us any time, so don't anyone think I am over-confident or complacent that it couldn't happen to me. This is probably the biggest killer and continually needs the greatest efforts to avoid.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wembury, Devon
Age: 51
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard an old proverb yesterday which immediately made me think of this thread. 'A smooth sea never a master mariner made'. I guess this can be applied to helicopter pilots also.
You experienced guys talk about ****ty weather. Define ****ty in terms of cloud base and viz and what your limit would be. Obviously terrain would be a factor also.
It would be nice if ****ty weather was defined for the ppl and a minimum number of hours were flown in these conditions going through the drills of finding a suitable field and making approach etc. This would do a lot to quell anxiety which must be a big factor in inadvertant imc, especially for low timers and maybe reduce pressonitis.
You experienced guys talk about ****ty weather. Define ****ty in terms of cloud base and viz and what your limit would be. Obviously terrain would be a factor also.
It would be nice if ****ty weather was defined for the ppl and a minimum number of hours were flown in these conditions going through the drills of finding a suitable field and making approach etc. This would do a lot to quell anxiety which must be a big factor in inadvertant imc, especially for low timers and maybe reduce pressonitis.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alderney or Lancashire UK
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
****ty weather = cloud base lower than you and highest obstacle higher than you.
Seriously though, the sort of sky that I have found most difficult to judge is when it is an even grey colour from horizon to vertical.
We specialise in them in Lancashire.
Seriously though, the sort of sky that I have found most difficult to judge is when it is an even grey colour from horizon to vertical.
We specialise in them in Lancashire.
