R44 Down on Melbourne Beach
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: US
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is my feeling that the governor in the 44 does a great job.
One of the weaknesses of it, (which is really poor pilot skill), is the possibility that a nervous pilot can override it without knowing. When they get nervous, they tense up and prevent the gov from working.
Something many forget is the job that the correlator does as well. It handles most of the change in power demand by automatically raising and lowering the throttle with movements of the collective. If you want to see how much, just raise the collective all the way up (while the ship is on the ground NOT running). Now lower it down and note how much the throttle is rotated.
I have had several people tense up at the bottom of an approach and set the horn off. You have to let the throttle do it's job. If this happens, you have to roll on throttle.
One way I like to surprise
students is load them up a little and have them set up an area for a nice confined area approach. When the collective is lowered on the initial decent, the correlator will roll down the throttle. I then grip my hand firmly, half way on the collective tube and half on the grip freezing the throttle in place. This way the student never feels me roll off the throttle. In their hand they feel nothing because I am not allowing it to roll back up as they pull more collective at the bottom of the approach.
I start distracting them on the way down, asking questions about wind and obstacles in the area....the whole time I am watching RPM s..l..o..w..l..y drop each time they add a small amount of power. They never even notice as it happens so gradually and I am doing the best I can to keep them loaded up.
Right as we start to go down in the hole, their attention is fully focused on where they are landing and remaining clear of obstacles......then usually at about 30-40' agl........ RAAAAAAAAAAAAA, they will pull just enough power to drag the RPM down below 97%.
Here is where it gets interesting.... Most just totally freeze, some try to lower the collective, even worse....a good amount will ADD collective thinking they are going to abort the landing. We are way to deep into the power required curve for that to work! None roll the throttle up (on the first time ...)
After the flight we talk about how the gov in the Robbie works and that you must roll on throttle when you hear the horn. Most never figure out how I lowered the throttle on them, without them feeling it... They dont feel it the next time either.....but most students make the right correction second go at it. They will not soon forget the sound of the horn and what the proper correction should be.
The reason I bring all this up, is I believe she froze on the throttle. Even if she lowered the collective after the horn, if her hand was frozen on the throttle, the correlator just rolls off the throttle as you lower it. You MUST roll on throttle.
One of the weaknesses of it, (which is really poor pilot skill), is the possibility that a nervous pilot can override it without knowing. When they get nervous, they tense up and prevent the gov from working.
Something many forget is the job that the correlator does as well. It handles most of the change in power demand by automatically raising and lowering the throttle with movements of the collective. If you want to see how much, just raise the collective all the way up (while the ship is on the ground NOT running). Now lower it down and note how much the throttle is rotated.
I have had several people tense up at the bottom of an approach and set the horn off. You have to let the throttle do it's job. If this happens, you have to roll on throttle.
One way I like to surprise
students is load them up a little and have them set up an area for a nice confined area approach. When the collective is lowered on the initial decent, the correlator will roll down the throttle. I then grip my hand firmly, half way on the collective tube and half on the grip freezing the throttle in place. This way the student never feels me roll off the throttle. In their hand they feel nothing because I am not allowing it to roll back up as they pull more collective at the bottom of the approach.I start distracting them on the way down, asking questions about wind and obstacles in the area....the whole time I am watching RPM s..l..o..w..l..y drop each time they add a small amount of power. They never even notice as it happens so gradually and I am doing the best I can to keep them loaded up.
Right as we start to go down in the hole, their attention is fully focused on where they are landing and remaining clear of obstacles......then usually at about 30-40' agl........ RAAAAAAAAAAAAA, they will pull just enough power to drag the RPM down below 97%.
Here is where it gets interesting.... Most just totally freeze, some try to lower the collective, even worse....a good amount will ADD collective thinking they are going to abort the landing. We are way to deep into the power required curve for that to work! None roll the throttle up (on the first time ...)
After the flight we talk about how the gov in the Robbie works and that you must roll on throttle when you hear the horn. Most never figure out how I lowered the throttle on them, without them feeling it
... They dont feel it the next time either.....but most students make the right correction second go at it. They will not soon forget the sound of the horn and what the proper correction should be.The reason I bring all this up, is I believe she froze on the throttle. Even if she lowered the collective after the horn, if her hand was frozen on the throttle, the correlator just rolls off the throttle as you lower it. You MUST roll on throttle.
BINGO! we have a winner..... InducedDrag nailed it and this explains the long rpm recovery, at least it sounds like possible reason.
But it's sad to hear that she(pilot) gave up flying after this incident.... probably because she never had any "mean n' nasty" instructor as InducedDrag
InducedDrag nailed it and this explains the long rpm recovery, at least it sounds like possible reason. But it's sad to hear that she(pilot) gave up flying after this incident.... probably because she never had any "mean n' nasty" instructor as InducedDrag
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: mostly in the jungle...
Age: 59
Posts: 502
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
interesting thread!!
Some of the listers mentioned as a recovery, to lower the collective, adjust the pedals and push forward.
It is amazing that even some old hands still use airplane technique to recover from low rpm (low speed in the plank).
If you push forward with low rpm you make it way harder to recover rpm.
FIRST get your rpm back, which in this case would be collective full down (even if you freeze the throttle this would get you into an auto)
when you got your rpm green again, then and ONLY THEN start to look for forward speed.
Saw the same mistake at a factory transition training session (AS350) with a very experienced jokey. He could not explain the principles of autoration, rpm control and speed control.
It was a big surprise to him that he lived all his live with "Get forward speed immediatly". Listening to some "experiences" he had over his career, confirmed his believe. Lucky he got away with this for some 15K+ hrs.
Wouldn't blame the girl on this, shame she quit.
As mentioned she seemed in over her head.
But praise the R-44 for their survival, had this happened in a Ranger with real LTE, the would be gone...
LTE does not exist on a properly rigged R-44 (It was mentioned that the bird was nearly new, so there should be no reason for incorrect rigging...)
You may run out of pedal, but the TR NEVER looses effectivness.
When on a certain photoshot I almost everytime had to hold with a 1/4ing left tailwind (the worst direction on the R-44) and the helo starts to really get itchy on the pedals to hold steady, but it will never let go.
I saw this demonstrated by a factory guy:
70% rpm, 1/2 fuel, 2 ft hover, 2 persons on board, less than 5 kts wind, hard surface, doing a slow pedal turn to both sides.
Try that in a 206, or anything else for that matter.
Saw the same demo at about 75 to 78% rpm in the R-22....
I even doubt VRS in the case discussed, decent rate was not fast enough for a full VRS.
Guess I would call it "uncontrolled paniced decent in own downwash!"
Hey **** happens (
sorry.....)
Someone pinch her somewhere
and get her back into the cockpit!!
No need to quit, I ran into worse BS and it (nearly) always was my own fault!
3top
interesting thread!!
Some of the listers mentioned as a recovery, to lower the collective, adjust the pedals and push forward.
It is amazing that even some old hands still use airplane technique to recover from low rpm (low speed in the plank).
If you push forward with low rpm you make it way harder to recover rpm.
FIRST get your rpm back, which in this case would be collective full down (even if you freeze the throttle this would get you into an auto)
when you got your rpm green again, then and ONLY THEN start to look for forward speed.
Saw the same mistake at a factory transition training session (AS350) with a very experienced jokey. He could not explain the principles of autoration, rpm control and speed control.
It was a big surprise to him that he lived all his live with "Get forward speed immediatly". Listening to some "experiences" he had over his career, confirmed his believe. Lucky he got away with this for some 15K+ hrs.
Wouldn't blame the girl on this, shame she quit.
As mentioned she seemed in over her head.
But praise the R-44 for their survival, had this happened in a Ranger with real LTE, the would be gone...
LTE does not exist on a properly rigged R-44 (It was mentioned that the bird was nearly new, so there should be no reason for incorrect rigging...)
You may run out of pedal, but the TR NEVER looses effectivness.
When on a certain photoshot I almost everytime had to hold with a 1/4ing left tailwind (the worst direction on the R-44) and the helo starts to really get itchy on the pedals to hold steady, but it will never let go.
I saw this demonstrated by a factory guy:
70% rpm, 1/2 fuel, 2 ft hover, 2 persons on board, less than 5 kts wind, hard surface, doing a slow pedal turn to both sides.
Try that in a 206, or anything else for that matter.
Saw the same demo at about 75 to 78% rpm in the R-22....
I even doubt VRS in the case discussed, decent rate was not fast enough for a full VRS.
Guess I would call it "uncontrolled paniced decent in own downwash!"
Hey **** happens (
sorry.....)Someone pinch her somewhere
and get her back into the cockpit!!No need to quit, I ran into worse BS and it (nearly) always was my own fault!
3top
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Darwin
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TET
Nice phrasing: how did it go again - was it "fresh clean, beautiful air through the rotor system" - well put! Do you moonlight as a poet? 
Nice too about lever down, cyclic fwd-- not unlike unstalling an aeroplane in fact. Which brings me to: VRS.
She was heavy, high, perhaps distracted, and down she goes. VRS starts like that for sure. But VRS does not make you spin either way and your RRPM does not decay.
So: VRS or not; there were other elements at play here. What made her spin, what decreased the RRPM?
thekite
Nice too about lever down, cyclic fwd-- not unlike unstalling an aeroplane in fact. Which brings me to: VRS.
She was heavy, high, perhaps distracted, and down she goes. VRS starts like that for sure. But VRS does not make you spin either way and your RRPM does not decay.
So: VRS or not; there were other elements at play here. What made her spin, what decreased the RRPM?
thekite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The complex situation looks like this to me:
1) Pilot gets slightly disoriented and gets way too slow. Aircraft backs into an OGE hover that is beyond its power capability.
2) The added power needs of the OGE hover cause the aircraft to descend rapidly as it slows.
3) the hover also is into a fairly strong wind at the tail, and the pilot is too slow applying pedal to correct it. The aircraft whips around to the right.
4) The pilot pulls up the collective and applies full left pedal as the descent and yaw are fully developed.
5) The collective/power that the pilot commands are beyond the engine's capability and the rotor rpm droops fairly low.
6) The low rpm makes the TR very ineffective, as well as the fact that the high main power now creates the need for even more anti-torque. The aircraft is entering VRS at the same time because the pilot is unable to arrest the descent with power alone. The pilot is confused and somewhat disoriented.
7) After flopping around through a thousand feet of basically uncontrolled descent, the pilot lowers the nose and the collective and accelerates out of the mess.
Cause: Pilot airspeed disorientation causing entering OGE hover inadvertently, misapplication of collective causing low rpm, loss of yaw control from low rpm
If you call it LTE, as the authorities did, you say the aircraft bit the pilot. If you call it poor airspeed control, you say the pilot bit the aircraft.
1) Pilot gets slightly disoriented and gets way too slow. Aircraft backs into an OGE hover that is beyond its power capability.
2) The added power needs of the OGE hover cause the aircraft to descend rapidly as it slows.
3) the hover also is into a fairly strong wind at the tail, and the pilot is too slow applying pedal to correct it. The aircraft whips around to the right.
4) The pilot pulls up the collective and applies full left pedal as the descent and yaw are fully developed.
5) The collective/power that the pilot commands are beyond the engine's capability and the rotor rpm droops fairly low.
6) The low rpm makes the TR very ineffective, as well as the fact that the high main power now creates the need for even more anti-torque. The aircraft is entering VRS at the same time because the pilot is unable to arrest the descent with power alone. The pilot is confused and somewhat disoriented.
7) After flopping around through a thousand feet of basically uncontrolled descent, the pilot lowers the nose and the collective and accelerates out of the mess.
Cause: Pilot airspeed disorientation causing entering OGE hover inadvertently, misapplication of collective causing low rpm, loss of yaw control from low rpm
If you call it LTE, as the authorities did, you say the aircraft bit the pilot. If you call it poor airspeed control, you say the pilot bit the aircraft.
Passion Flying Hobby Science Sponsor Work
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Belgium
Age: 68
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite interesting thread.
Could not really make up what really happened.
I assumed that given the load and hight it should not run out of power (assuming it was a II) Personnaly had many VRS's in that case but no low RRPM.
So perhaps it is as Nick says combined with InducedDrag's remark that as she approached hover she got nervous and frooze the trottle when starting to pull the collective this being the reason for lack of power.
d3
Could not really make up what really happened.
I assumed that given the load and hight it should not run out of power (assuming it was a II) Personnaly had many VRS's in that case but no low RRPM.
So perhaps it is as Nick says combined with InducedDrag's remark that as she approached hover she got nervous and frooze the trottle when starting to pull the collective this being the reason for lack of power.
d3
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Induced Drag..You the Man and I agree completely. That is SOP out here in Canada and had the priveledge of learning exactly the way you describe. Personally think all students in Robbo's should fly the first 25 hours with thumb and forfinger on throttle only but that's just me.
Now would somebody go find that poor pilot and sit her ass back in a machine! Your company would probably benefit greatly in the long run!
2 cents
BWB
Now would somebody go find that poor pilot and sit her ass back in a machine! Your company would probably benefit greatly in the long run!
2 cents
BWB
Join Date: May 2006
Location: victoria
Age: 50
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bravo
its exactly what happened. one of the previous posts mentioned from the camera vision that it happened quickly and to some extent "violent". The male voice tone mirrored that term.
to hear someone like that over the air gave me goose bumps form the point of view that he was relaying through his voice tone and level exactly what situation he was going through.
its exactly what happened. one of the previous posts mentioned from the camera vision that it happened quickly and to some extent "violent". The male voice tone mirrored that term.
to hear someone like that over the air gave me goose bumps form the point of view that he was relaying through his voice tone and level exactly what situation he was going through.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Nick has expalined the sequence much better than I, and I'll go with that. No one need get a siver star for working out that she "froze" on the throttle. That was bleeding obvious, along with the xmit button.
Crab mentioned that there should be covering sequences in the CPL syllabus.
I think we can go better.
Let me say that the 'esse' of helicopter flying is - departing from a hover into forward flight and arriving at a hover.
That is regardless as to whether we carry internal, external or nowt load.
It must make sense that every student - "every student"- phl or chl has the capacity to arrive at a hover at each of the only two basic requirements.
I.E. 1) with close visual cues in or out of ground effect. or
2) with minimal visual cues OGE.
In my case I was told, "yer wanta watch it when yer don't have much too look at" or, if "you are on a flat surface of water".
Neither was the more difficult situations ever demonstrated to me, nor was I required to demonstrate proficiency in the skill.
It is about time that it was included in all syllabi, and I suggest that it should be done prior to solo nav-ex.
I suspect that nearly all contributors here got the same sterling advice and they are still around to proffer advice.
And by the way, if you ever flew '47J's or KH4's with pax that fart, you will know a lot about "fresh beautiful clean air."
tet
Crab mentioned that there should be covering sequences in the CPL syllabus.
I think we can go better.
Let me say that the 'esse' of helicopter flying is - departing from a hover into forward flight and arriving at a hover.
That is regardless as to whether we carry internal, external or nowt load.
It must make sense that every student - "every student"- phl or chl has the capacity to arrive at a hover at each of the only two basic requirements.
I.E. 1) with close visual cues in or out of ground effect. or
2) with minimal visual cues OGE.
In my case I was told, "yer wanta watch it when yer don't have much too look at" or, if "you are on a flat surface of water".
Neither was the more difficult situations ever demonstrated to me, nor was I required to demonstrate proficiency in the skill.
It is about time that it was included in all syllabi, and I suggest that it should be done prior to solo nav-ex.
I suspect that nearly all contributors here got the same sterling advice and they are still around to proffer advice.
And by the way, if you ever flew '47J's or KH4's with pax that fart, you will know a lot about "fresh beautiful clean air."
tet
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a long time since I flew Robinsons, or did that kind of flying in anything else either, so the chat on "whys and wherefores" is interesting.
It seems to me, however, that the discussion is ignoring/avoiding another, more personal aspect to this incident.
I am disappointed to hear the girl has stood down, presumably voluntarily. A few gasps notwithstanding, and presuming it was her voice we were listening to, she didn't seem to get in that much of a flap about it - freezing up is one thing but she didn't lose control completely either, as evidenced by the aircraft continuing to a safe landing and remaining undamaged.
Who amongst us hasn't had a sphincter-tightening moment from which both we and the aircraft emerged unscathed due more to good fortune than experience?
Applying the old horse-riding theory that a fallen rider should be put back in the saddle immediately to avoid any fear-based loss of confidence, it seems a concern that the girl didn't get back in the air for a month after the incident (I may have misread this time element). Who was responsible for this?
There may be many factors of which I am unaware that made this happen, of course, but any delay could well have contributed to her deciding to stop flying? A few too many sleepless nights reliving the incident (including the voice of the cameramen screeching in her ear) without any proper debrief or even counselling where necessary, would have easily sent things off in the wrong direction.
So near the 1,000 hour mark - seems a shame!
"Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising again each time we fall!"
It seems to me, however, that the discussion is ignoring/avoiding another, more personal aspect to this incident.
I am disappointed to hear the girl has stood down, presumably voluntarily. A few gasps notwithstanding, and presuming it was her voice we were listening to, she didn't seem to get in that much of a flap about it - freezing up is one thing but she didn't lose control completely either, as evidenced by the aircraft continuing to a safe landing and remaining undamaged.
Who amongst us hasn't had a sphincter-tightening moment from which both we and the aircraft emerged unscathed due more to good fortune than experience?
Applying the old horse-riding theory that a fallen rider should be put back in the saddle immediately to avoid any fear-based loss of confidence, it seems a concern that the girl didn't get back in the air for a month after the incident (I may have misread this time element). Who was responsible for this?
There may be many factors of which I am unaware that made this happen, of course, but any delay could well have contributed to her deciding to stop flying? A few too many sleepless nights reliving the incident (including the voice of the cameramen screeching in her ear) without any proper debrief or even counselling where necessary, would have easily sent things off in the wrong direction.
So near the 1,000 hour mark - seems a shame!
"Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising again each time we fall!"
Last edited by heliski22; 9th Nov 2007 at 18:10.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We must assume that somebody on here knows who the pilot is and might encourage her not to give up, even at this stage. Heaven knows, there's a big enough shortage.
More importantly, there must be somebody who would take her under their wing to ensure appropriate steps are taken to re-establish proficiency in an orderly manner while also getting some work out of her - a balance between re-hab and gainful employment, so to speak, operating in controlled circumstances and away from, for the time being at least, the more demanding flight regime foisted upon her at the time of the incident.
As I noted earlier, possibly freezing on the controls notwithstanding, she didn't get into a complete flap about it and start over-controlling and all that good stuff but held on grimly to the end.
Given the ease with which this can happen in the absence of proper training, then does the evidence not suggest she has a goodly portion of "the right stuff" somewhere inside her?
If the "short flight afterwards" was carried out by the same people who sent her up there in the first place - under-trained and ill-prepared - it could hardly have been productive.
More importantly, there must be somebody who would take her under their wing to ensure appropriate steps are taken to re-establish proficiency in an orderly manner while also getting some work out of her - a balance between re-hab and gainful employment, so to speak, operating in controlled circumstances and away from, for the time being at least, the more demanding flight regime foisted upon her at the time of the incident.
As I noted earlier, possibly freezing on the controls notwithstanding, she didn't get into a complete flap about it and start over-controlling and all that good stuff but held on grimly to the end.
Given the ease with which this can happen in the absence of proper training, then does the evidence not suggest she has a goodly portion of "the right stuff" somewhere inside her?
If the "short flight afterwards" was carried out by the same people who sent her up there in the first place - under-trained and ill-prepared - it could hardly have been productive.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heliski22, I completely agree with your support for the pilot. Here is an exchange that I had a few years back on rec.aviation.rotorcraft that discussed the same point. A young pilot who fell into a spin during solo practice was flogging himself about it. My response :
Dear Student,
I've been flying professionally all my life. I've taught hundreds to
fly all kinds of machines, and I am now the chief R&D pilot for an
airframe manufacturer. From this view point, I see your learning
experience, and your reaction to it to be admirable and healthy. Don't
chastise yourself about missing some sleep the night before, and don't
lament the 90 degrees of rotation before you caught on. Instead,
consider how much you learned, and how the altitude you used as a
backstop when to practice the stall came in pretty handy.
My experience with pilots has shown me that those who feel bad and
accept the error are healthy, normal and likely to live and fly a long
long time. Those pilots who find an excuse, and rationalize the problem
to find some way of keeping their ego unpunctured are really somewhat
dangerous, and very likely to press on into weather, or make some other
blockheaded mistake.
Just be sure and keep that healthy respect for your capacity to make a
mistake, and plan on what to look for when it happens, and plan on what
to do to ameliorate it. Flying is a sequence of continuous error
corrections. Any pilot who tells you he never makes mistakes is telling
you he has never seen the mistakes he has made!
Good luck, and keep on flying and learning.
Dear Student,
I've been flying professionally all my life. I've taught hundreds to
fly all kinds of machines, and I am now the chief R&D pilot for an
airframe manufacturer. From this view point, I see your learning
experience, and your reaction to it to be admirable and healthy. Don't
chastise yourself about missing some sleep the night before, and don't
lament the 90 degrees of rotation before you caught on. Instead,
consider how much you learned, and how the altitude you used as a
backstop when to practice the stall came in pretty handy.
My experience with pilots has shown me that those who feel bad and
accept the error are healthy, normal and likely to live and fly a long
long time. Those pilots who find an excuse, and rationalize the problem
to find some way of keeping their ego unpunctured are really somewhat
dangerous, and very likely to press on into weather, or make some other
blockheaded mistake.
Just be sure and keep that healthy respect for your capacity to make a
mistake, and plan on what to look for when it happens, and plan on what
to do to ameliorate it. Flying is a sequence of continuous error
corrections. Any pilot who tells you he never makes mistakes is telling
you he has never seen the mistakes he has made!
Good luck, and keep on flying and learning.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Florida/Sandbox/UK
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TET / Crab -
I'm not sure exactly what you both feel should be included in a training syllabus that would have prevented this excursion from the flight envelope.
The pilot was unaware of her proximity to the edge of the envelope and whatever it was that caused the LTE and subsequent loss of control, I don't see how you can possibly put that responsibility onto any aviation authority.
What a fright this girl must have got, the video was terrifying.
3top, stating that LTE does not exist based on a controlled demo at 2 feet sounds odd to me.
Can anyone tell me if there is a maximum rate of yaw on the R44?
The reason I ask is that, I was once in a Gazelle where control was lost in a lookout turn at 5ft. Clumsy lead boot pilot, strong wind, unable to stop the turn. After about 6 x 360s, we crashed. Fenestron Stall (French LTE) was blamed and prompted an in depth study. In fact, it turns out that, after extensive testing, the French Test Pilots could not agree that the fenestron was stalling, it was simply not man enough to stop that rate of yaw. I tend to believe them, they're smart guys.
Combined with the effects of low rrpm, could this not be the case here?
tam
I'm not sure exactly what you both feel should be included in a training syllabus that would have prevented this excursion from the flight envelope.
The pilot was unaware of her proximity to the edge of the envelope and whatever it was that caused the LTE and subsequent loss of control, I don't see how you can possibly put that responsibility onto any aviation authority.
What a fright this girl must have got, the video was terrifying.
3top, stating that LTE does not exist based on a controlled demo at 2 feet sounds odd to me.
Can anyone tell me if there is a maximum rate of yaw on the R44?
The reason I ask is that, I was once in a Gazelle where control was lost in a lookout turn at 5ft. Clumsy lead boot pilot, strong wind, unable to stop the turn. After about 6 x 360s, we crashed. Fenestron Stall (French LTE) was blamed and prompted an in depth study. In fact, it turns out that, after extensive testing, the French Test Pilots could not agree that the fenestron was stalling, it was simply not man enough to stop that rate of yaw. I tend to believe them, they're smart guys.
Combined with the effects of low rrpm, could this not be the case here?
tam
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hihover
That's easy; Require the student to bring the A/C to a stationary position relative to a reference on the ground at least 1,000' AGL.
Do it with the wind from the four azimuths, nose, tail and each side.
Do it at varying wind speeds, but especially in zero wind speed and at the maximum allowed for the A/C in a xwind as per the POH.
re your Q. I think you should check Nick's post #45, Para 6 and 7.
Yes the T/R must run oput of puff eventually as the RPM spools down but really is that an issue when you are rapidly approaching rotor blade stall. Getting the M/R A of A to respectable form might be the first priority.
You say in your experience you crashed, run out of M/R lift did it? Perhpas you could bolt both a R44 and a Gazelle to a turntable, run them at a desired RPM and see what happens to the T/R effect. Possibly it would be a good idea to take a few airsickness tablets first, or a good shot of Rum.
I'm not sure exactly what you both feel should be included in a training syllabus that would have prevented this excursion from the flight envelope.
Do it with the wind from the four azimuths, nose, tail and each side.
Do it at varying wind speeds, but especially in zero wind speed and at the maximum allowed for the A/C in a xwind as per the POH.
re your Q. I think you should check Nick's post #45, Para 6 and 7.
Yes the T/R must run oput of puff eventually as the RPM spools down but really is that an issue when you are rapidly approaching rotor blade stall. Getting the M/R A of A to respectable form might be the first priority.
You say in your experience you crashed, run out of M/R lift did it? Perhpas you could bolt both a R44 and a Gazelle to a turntable, run them at a desired RPM and see what happens to the T/R effect. Possibly it would be a good idea to take a few airsickness tablets first, or a good shot of Rum.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Florida/Sandbox/UK
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't doubt that your suggestion would be a useful exercise, beneficial to some, however, suggesting that any authority should require it in a syllabus might take some justification. I can think of other more beneficial training that would take priority over high level hovering. Do bear in mind she was not attempting to establish a hover. She lost control in a turn.
If a pilot is required to hover at that height or operate at low speed at that height, the operator should be responsible for ensuring that the pilot is capable. Basic commercial training syllabii are just that - basic.
My question about the max rate of yaw is aimed at that first moment where yaw control was lost - before the low rrpm horn. If the wind weathercocked the aircraft at too high a rate of yaw, perhaps that was already in excess of max rate as she tried to stop the yaw.
Gazelle - run out of M/R Lift?? Not a chance. It has tons of power. Unfortunately, that huge keel surface was being whipped around by the 20 kt wind and at that rate of yaw even with full opposite pedal applied, it just would not stop. The pilot applied more power instinctively to get away from the ground and as we climbed we started pitching as well as yawing so he dumped it on the ground. All over in 10 seconds.
Your turntable exercise sounds fun, a bottle of Bundy's best would make it messy though.
If a pilot is required to hover at that height or operate at low speed at that height, the operator should be responsible for ensuring that the pilot is capable. Basic commercial training syllabii are just that - basic.
My question about the max rate of yaw is aimed at that first moment where yaw control was lost - before the low rrpm horn. If the wind weathercocked the aircraft at too high a rate of yaw, perhaps that was already in excess of max rate as she tried to stop the yaw.
Gazelle - run out of M/R Lift?? Not a chance. It has tons of power. Unfortunately, that huge keel surface was being whipped around by the 20 kt wind and at that rate of yaw even with full opposite pedal applied, it just would not stop. The pilot applied more power instinctively to get away from the ground and as we climbed we started pitching as well as yawing so he dumped it on the ground. All over in 10 seconds.
Your turntable exercise sounds fun, a bottle of Bundy's best would make it messy though.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hihover.
Perhaps you missed this:-
Quote:
‘The photographer, who was also a licensed helicopter pilot, reported that the helicopter had almost approached a hover as it turned downwind’
(corroborated from the ground)
.
Agreed, but there is not much more basic an action than being able to hover close to or far from visual cues.
We have had them where they would lose it just coming to a hover prior to landing. Those with a license I mean.
Further commercial work edicts - following a moving targert, especially one that runs away downwind, etc - should be the responsibility of the AOC holder, I agree.
Had this pilot been subject to the simple exercise as I suggest, almost certainly the A/C would not have had yaw control compromised, IF that was the case.
It is very hard for me to believe that the A/C could not have been brought under control much quicker, like in the first quarter of a turn.
I have experienced both R22's and 47J's, flick violenty for a quarter of a turn and recover instantly - and violently - when they got rid of the problematic recirculating air.
R44 T/R surely should have authority if it is given a chance.
tet
She lost control in a turn.
Quote:
‘The photographer, who was also a licensed helicopter pilot, reported that the helicopter had almost approached a hover as it turned downwind’
(corroborated from the ground)
Basic commercial training syllabii are just that - basic
Agreed, but there is not much more basic an action than being able to hover close to or far from visual cues.
We have had them where they would lose it just coming to a hover prior to landing. Those with a license I mean.
Further commercial work edicts - following a moving targert, especially one that runs away downwind, etc - should be the responsibility of the AOC holder, I agree.
Had this pilot been subject to the simple exercise as I suggest, almost certainly the A/C would not have had yaw control compromised, IF that was the case.
It is very hard for me to believe that the A/C could not have been brought under control much quicker, like in the first quarter of a turn.
I have experienced both R22's and 47J's, flick violenty for a quarter of a turn and recover instantly - and violently - when they got rid of the problematic recirculating air.
R44 T/R surely should have authority if it is given a chance.
tet
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Florida/Sandbox/UK
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I didn't miss it at all, the point I was trying to make was that she was not attempting to hover, she was attempting to turn.
I've never flown the 44 but I tend to agree with you, I am sure it could have been brought under control with a quicker action had the pilot been aware of the immediate situation she was in. But she wasn't aware and was bitten well, poor girl.
tam
I've never flown the 44 but I tend to agree with you, I am sure it could have been brought under control with a quicker action had the pilot been aware of the immediate situation she was in. But she wasn't aware and was bitten well, poor girl.
tam
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've never flown the 44 but I tend to agree with you, I am sure it could have been brought under control with a quicker action had the pilot been aware of the immediate situation she was in. But she wasn't aware and was bitten well, poor girl.