Helicopters are useless and dangerous!!
"Just a pilot"
Helicopters are useless and dangerous?
I flew'em in Viet Nam. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers are alive today, because of helicopters.
I fly helo EMS.
I'll tell you with complete assurance that there is no truth to the engine failure below 400 feet statement BS. Yes, you can put yourself in a non-survivable situation in a helicopter- as you can in an airplane, automobile, canoe... However, there's an argument to be made that the safest single engine aircraft in the world is a helicopter. I know I feel safer, at least from a power failure aspect,in a helo.
The reason that there aren't more personal helos? Expense, and to a lesser extent, noise. I know professionals who can justify the cost of the few minutes saved and operate personal helos, but they are few and far in between. For ordinary mortals, $3-4 dollars a mile to reduce and hour's commute to 30 minutes is impractical.
Now, airplanes- they are truly ugly, impractical and dangerous. But they are cheaper.
I flew'em in Viet Nam. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers are alive today, because of helicopters.
I fly helo EMS.
I'll tell you with complete assurance that there is no truth to the engine failure below 400 feet statement BS. Yes, you can put yourself in a non-survivable situation in a helicopter- as you can in an airplane, automobile, canoe... However, there's an argument to be made that the safest single engine aircraft in the world is a helicopter. I know I feel safer, at least from a power failure aspect,in a helo.
The reason that there aren't more personal helos? Expense, and to a lesser extent, noise. I know professionals who can justify the cost of the few minutes saved and operate personal helos, but they are few and far in between. For ordinary mortals, $3-4 dollars a mile to reduce and hour's commute to 30 minutes is impractical.
Now, airplanes- they are truly ugly, impractical and dangerous. But they are cheaper.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Townsend,WA. USA
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dead man curve
OK, the responses seem to indicate that the so called "dead man curve" or height velocity envelope is really not always a situation that ends in death. Hmmm. thats very interesting. My idea about buying an enstrom for low level fun is looking better.
Anybody else have thoughts on just what part of the height/velocity envelope will really kill you?
Dave J,
Actually I looked at balloons with some interest, I considered "thermal airships", a hot air balloon with a motor for propulsion. They actually exist, and have some advantages over the heli, such as, silent hover, no down wash, portable in pickup truck and, of course, no "height velocity envelope". Top speed 15kts to 30 kts for the high performance models (I think). Do a google search on "thermal airship", sorry, I dont know how to post a pic here. They use em for sport events.
regards,
slowrotor
Anybody else have thoughts on just what part of the height/velocity envelope will really kill you?
Dave J,
Actually I looked at balloons with some interest, I considered "thermal airships", a hot air balloon with a motor for propulsion. They actually exist, and have some advantages over the heli, such as, silent hover, no down wash, portable in pickup truck and, of course, no "height velocity envelope". Top speed 15kts to 30 kts for the high performance models (I think). Do a google search on "thermal airship", sorry, I dont know how to post a pic here. They use em for sport events.
regards,
slowrotor
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The height/ velocity curve should be avoided where possible. Yes, I know that there are always situations where we creep into it to get the task done. As I said "avoid" it. If you do, you should not have any problems at all. I would not recommend hovering at say 80 or 100'. That would be a problem to say the least.
I have never thought that flying a helicopter is dicing with death. There are risks of course but a well maintained machine in the hands of a competent pilot should come back for dinner. I have had 3 engine failures in fixed wing aircraft in my time and none in helicopters but I know which I prefer. Helicopters every time when it goes quiet.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
I have never thought that flying a helicopter is dicing with death. There are risks of course but a well maintained machine in the hands of a competent pilot should come back for dinner. I have had 3 engine failures in fixed wing aircraft in my time and none in helicopters but I know which I prefer. Helicopters every time when it goes quiet.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ON A HILL
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helicopters are useless and dangerous!!
Can we get back to the 50 feet situation. 50feet in a Robinson, Rotorway Exec, or any two seat very light helocopter. No airspeed. Sudden engine failure, .No warning. Has anyone ever been in this situation?. A friend of mine had a power failure at about fifteen feet whilst accelerating through that part of the height velocity chart that indicated one had a reasonable chance of making a landing in an emergency. It required a JCB to extract the machine from where it was embedded in the ground, and this was in a three bladed machine with reasonably heavy blades, but the unexpected caught him out. Dont worry Slowrotor in was not an Enstrom.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MaxNg,
"200 kt torpedo!!!!!!! You drinkin again?"
Naughty, naughty you; to think that anyone on this forum would try to distort information.
Russian 'Rocket' Torpedo Arms Chinese Subs
Dave
"200 kt torpedo!!!!!!! You drinkin again?"
Naughty, naughty you; to think that anyone on this forum would try to distort information.
Russian 'Rocket' Torpedo Arms Chinese Subs
Dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
TIMTS
I don't normal come into Rotorheads but this caught my eye. I don't fly but had the pleasure ?? of working with fixed wing flyers for 10 years and unfortunately the general consensus on the flight line was exactly that!
In fact I have been told they are “a piece of piss to fly” and what is the big deal from someone who fly’s B757/767 and never to my knowledge flown one!
But after spending an lovely evening in the company of ppruners who fly helis and having a good friend who has convinced me otherwise. I watched the film posted on here where they fly everyway including sideways/backwards and upside down I would love to see a commercial Boeing chap do that with his 757!
Each machine is an engineering feat whether fixed or roto and should have its own merits for how it flies and what is it used for! Don’t think a fixed wing other than harrier can hover while rescue is being carried out or airlift those off burning ships/buildings and used to get RTA’s to the ER department when necessary etc! But it does upset a layman like myself, hearing that sort of thing from professional pilots who should have respect for their fellow flyers and they do seem to refuse to budge their view!
TnT
"they are useless because they are slow, and ugly" and "if the engine fails below 400' you are DEAD" came up with some regularity. The latter from a heli pilot……
but is this a common theme out there...or did I just stumble into the wrong place??
but is this a common theme out there...or did I just stumble into the wrong place??
In fact I have been told they are “a piece of piss to fly” and what is the big deal from someone who fly’s B757/767 and never to my knowledge flown one!
But after spending an lovely evening in the company of ppruners who fly helis and having a good friend who has convinced me otherwise. I watched the film posted on here where they fly everyway including sideways/backwards and upside down I would love to see a commercial Boeing chap do that with his 757!
Each machine is an engineering feat whether fixed or roto and should have its own merits for how it flies and what is it used for! Don’t think a fixed wing other than harrier can hover while rescue is being carried out or airlift those off burning ships/buildings and used to get RTA’s to the ER department when necessary etc! But it does upset a layman like myself, hearing that sort of thing from professional pilots who should have respect for their fellow flyers and they do seem to refuse to budge their view!
TnT
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Townsend,WA. USA
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
50 Feet
This business of a power loss at 50 feet is of interest to me and Bugdevheli also.
If I buy an enstrom and keep it in my yard like Gaseous does, it will be in a confined area about 100ft diameter with about 50ft high trees on all sides.
How dangerous is that? Survivable? Should I clear more land?
your comments appreciated,
slowrotor
p.s. I read several old postings about cattle mustering... these guys appear to fly in the avoid zone almost continuous and I guess they get special training (on the job) from experienced pilots.
If I buy an enstrom and keep it in my yard like Gaseous does, it will be in a confined area about 100ft diameter with about 50ft high trees on all sides.
How dangerous is that? Survivable? Should I clear more land?
your comments appreciated,
slowrotor
p.s. I read several old postings about cattle mustering... these guys appear to fly in the avoid zone almost continuous and I guess they get special training (on the job) from experienced pilots.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hovering at 50' with no airspeed is really not a good idea. An engine failure at that height in most helicopters will result in a crash. Whether it will kill you or not is not predictable as it depends on lots of factors. If you intend to operate out of an area that requires a vertical descent and a vertical takeoff you need to find somewhere else. It is not safe to routinely fly in and out like that in a single engined helicopter. I haven't even mentioned settling with power or vortex ring state.
I don't know what else to say. You would not dream of flying an airplane at stalling speed or over VNE would you? In the same way stay out of the height/velocity curve and you'll be safe. Your training will teach you all about safe flying.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
I don't know what else to say. You would not dream of flying an airplane at stalling speed or over VNE would you? In the same way stay out of the height/velocity curve and you'll be safe. Your training will teach you all about safe flying.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Townsend,WA. USA
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Chopperpilot47,
Info on results of power loss inside the dead man curve is hard to pin down.
Here is article about surviving in that situation by Ray Prouty. http://safecopter.arc.nasa.gov/Pages...y/ColPrty.html
I think because of the H/V limitations most helo operations(single engine) are restricted to areas with wide open approaches for an airplane like approach.
Yes, the helo can finish the approach with a hover and that is useful but a small ultralight airplane might be better in a power loss situation if 100ft or so of clear area is available to land. Both helo and ultralight have a similar glide so the same clear approaach area would be needed.
But the helo needs to establish autorotation, maybe the ultralight would win.
So we are back to the original posters question: are helicopters useless?
For search and rescue there is no question of the value.
For private use..... well that depends.
thanks
slowrotor
Info on results of power loss inside the dead man curve is hard to pin down.
Here is article about surviving in that situation by Ray Prouty. http://safecopter.arc.nasa.gov/Pages...y/ColPrty.html
I think because of the H/V limitations most helo operations(single engine) are restricted to areas with wide open approaches for an airplane like approach.
Yes, the helo can finish the approach with a hover and that is useful but a small ultralight airplane might be better in a power loss situation if 100ft or so of clear area is available to land. Both helo and ultralight have a similar glide so the same clear approaach area would be needed.
But the helo needs to establish autorotation, maybe the ultralight would win.
So we are back to the original posters question: are helicopters useless?
For search and rescue there is no question of the value.
For private use..... well that depends.
thanks
slowrotor
"Just a pilot"
100 foot square LZ and 50 feet of trees, surrounding, is a serious situation. It's not a death sentence, but the pistol's certainly cocked- I would not operate routinely from such a pad (I fly EMS). If and when something happens, you will have nowhere to go, except the trees or vertical into the hover hole. Worse, the smallish LZ makes distractions and error particularly unforgiving. If I had a penny for all the trees I've seen hit...
Specifically:
First, a 100 feet is not a lot of room, in spite of how it looks on the ground, It is small from the air.
Next, the trick to surviving a power failure from 50 feet is having the opportunity to hit the ground a glancing blow, and use aircraft structure to absorb energy. You can't do that in a hover hole. You're going to hit the ground vertically (bad), or tumble through the trees.
Power failures are what we all worry about, but urgent situations, and emergencies, come in zillions of varieties. You have no space to develop options in your planned base- you have up, down, and into the trees.
Specifically:
First, a 100 feet is not a lot of room, in spite of how it looks on the ground, It is small from the air.
Next, the trick to surviving a power failure from 50 feet is having the opportunity to hit the ground a glancing blow, and use aircraft structure to absorb energy. You can't do that in a hover hole. You're going to hit the ground vertically (bad), or tumble through the trees.
Power failures are what we all worry about, but urgent situations, and emergencies, come in zillions of varieties. You have no space to develop options in your planned base- you have up, down, and into the trees.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
slowrotor,
In all seriousness, perhaps the solution to your quest is the UltraSport helicopter. It appears that the craft is very capable of vertical descents. In addition, $7,000,000.00 was spent in its development and yet they were selling the 254 for around $30,000.00.
" Date: 13-Dec-01 23:26 ~ Author: CA BEATY ~ Subject: UltraSport
As an engineering exercise Gary, this machine is state of the art and thoroughly professional. I understand the design team was mostly moonlighting Boeing engineers.
The rotorblades are built around a carbon fiber "D" spar with syntactic foam core and Kevlar skins over a milled Nomex honeycomb afterbody. Expensive.
A purpose built planetary gear reduction drive. No bicycle chains but again, expensive.
The feathering bearings are music wire torsion packs encapsulated in polyurethane.
Whether a Hirth engine and an overhead stick are appropriate is a matter of some controversy. "
The Hirth engines were mounted vertically and they had problems getting oil to the upper crankshaft bearing, but since then their 'H' models are said to eliminate this problem. A floor-mounted stick was available.
Perhaps a 'personalized' helicopter could be built using some of the UltraSport's components.
Just a thought.
Dave
In all seriousness, perhaps the solution to your quest is the UltraSport helicopter. It appears that the craft is very capable of vertical descents. In addition, $7,000,000.00 was spent in its development and yet they were selling the 254 for around $30,000.00.
" Date: 13-Dec-01 23:26 ~ Author: CA BEATY ~ Subject: UltraSport
As an engineering exercise Gary, this machine is state of the art and thoroughly professional. I understand the design team was mostly moonlighting Boeing engineers.
The rotorblades are built around a carbon fiber "D" spar with syntactic foam core and Kevlar skins over a milled Nomex honeycomb afterbody. Expensive.
A purpose built planetary gear reduction drive. No bicycle chains but again, expensive.
The feathering bearings are music wire torsion packs encapsulated in polyurethane.
Whether a Hirth engine and an overhead stick are appropriate is a matter of some controversy. "
The Hirth engines were mounted vertically and they had problems getting oil to the upper crankshaft bearing, but since then their 'H' models are said to eliminate this problem. A floor-mounted stick was available.
Perhaps a 'personalized' helicopter could be built using some of the UltraSport's components.
Just a thought.
Dave
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Townsend,WA. USA
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devil49
Great comments.
I have 100ft cleared now with another 200ft of land to clear. I did not want to clear every tree but maybe a corridor for approach will improve the site. Also working on a buyout of the ajoining lot, that would give about 600ftx75ft or so.
Dave J.
Not sure how much I should post here about the Ultrasport heli but I will say this:
1)I called two builders with phone numbers provided by the company. First one said "I do not fly higher than 15ft above the surface" also "vibration makes my left hand go numb"
2) Second owner said "Main gearbox lasted only 10hrs instead of the 500hrs advertised"... " as a machinist I have made numerous changes because of poor design of the rotor head etc."... "had several engine failures"
3) The company has not improved the design as far as I know. When this was brought to their attention the person said: "well you know, it is sold as experimental".
4) It is not shown at Oshkosh. I think they have some difficulty keeping a demo ship flyable.
The Ultrasport does seem to have amazing autorotation, on the video they demonstrate a throttle chop at 25ft!
Dave, there may be some good parts of use in the Ultrasport but I think a clean sheet design is best.
I found that several companies are offering heli products to people with no aviation experience and I see glowing reports in Kitplanes magazine where the author never mentions any defects.Some of the designs in the magazines feb2005 directory have not and can not fly. Maybe thats a good thing.
slowrotor
Great comments.
I have 100ft cleared now with another 200ft of land to clear. I did not want to clear every tree but maybe a corridor for approach will improve the site. Also working on a buyout of the ajoining lot, that would give about 600ftx75ft or so.
Dave J.
Not sure how much I should post here about the Ultrasport heli but I will say this:
1)I called two builders with phone numbers provided by the company. First one said "I do not fly higher than 15ft above the surface" also "vibration makes my left hand go numb"
2) Second owner said "Main gearbox lasted only 10hrs instead of the 500hrs advertised"... " as a machinist I have made numerous changes because of poor design of the rotor head etc."... "had several engine failures"
3) The company has not improved the design as far as I know. When this was brought to their attention the person said: "well you know, it is sold as experimental".
4) It is not shown at Oshkosh. I think they have some difficulty keeping a demo ship flyable.
The Ultrasport does seem to have amazing autorotation, on the video they demonstrate a throttle chop at 25ft!
Dave, there may be some good parts of use in the Ultrasport but I think a clean sheet design is best.
I found that several companies are offering heli products to people with no aviation experience and I see glowing reports in Kitplanes magazine where the author never mentions any defects.Some of the designs in the magazines feb2005 directory have not and can not fly. Maybe thats a good thing.
slowrotor
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are lots of 'dependable' helicopters.
'Inexpensive' is a relative term.
The cheapest, in relative terms, are probably the R22 and Schweizer 300, but there's no such thing, in absolute terms, as inexpensive helicopter flying.
Good value for money if you can afford it though.
'Inexpensive' is a relative term.
The cheapest, in relative terms, are probably the R22 and Schweizer 300, but there's no such thing, in absolute terms, as inexpensive helicopter flying.
Good value for money if you can afford it though.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have nothing against experimentals or homebuilts per se but, I have had three students in the last 18 months who had a Rotorway and a Safari. We use Bell 47's for training, the two Rotorway pilots bought Bell 47's and the Safari pilot went back to flying it. I have to say it looks very nice and it seems well built with a factory Lycoming engine. The problem they all had was with insurance. They could not get insured on the Rotorway or the Safari with anyone for any price. No problem with the Bells. I think insurance is important. I really could not fly anything that I could not insure.
Your landing area seems fine now in terms of size. Have you considered a Bell 47? $60,000 should get you a good D1 or G model.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47
Your landing area seems fine now in terms of size. Have you considered a Bell 47? $60,000 should get you a good D1 or G model.
Regards,
Chopperpilot47