Leaving helicopter with engine/rotors running - merged threads
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety First
I am having a hard time seeing everyones concern about the pilot closing the door on an operating 206. In the US at least, have a read of AC 91-32B, "Safety in and around helicopters" Even the FAA gives guidelines for just such operations. Some fixed wing inspectors have had elevated conversations with me about this until I enlighten them on the Agency written policy. I am especially sensetive about the "safety" aspect of pilots leaving the controls while rotors turning. Think about the risks of passengers boarding or disembarking from your aircraft with or without bags as you set studiously strapped at the controls while these untrained or even trained (executives) persons wander all around your operating rotors. At least while at the controls, the pilot can shut the engine down after the rotor/skull strike has happened. To me the obvious choice (single pilot) is for the the pilot to meet the pax at the rotor disk edge and have a quick brief and load the pax and secure all doors seat belts, and baggage stowed. Same applies for pax off load, everyone keeps their seats until escorted by the pilot safely away from the A/C with their bags.
Why not just shut down? This question obviously comes from persons NOT paying the maintenance bills. Turbine cycle retirement, starter/gen wear, 15 minute waiting period before initiating the restart for the reqd TOT drop, hot batteries, and hot starts. In the scenario first mentioned in this post, this would not have even happened if the crew had secured the doors personally before departure. Our policy is always PIC last in, first out hot or cold. I don't see, given the statistics any safer way.
B.T.W.,this is all based on Bell 206 series aircraft and Allison R/R powerplants. Twist grip to flight idle, frictions full on, into the wind, no ice/snow/mud surfaces. No policy is without its exceptions.
Why not just shut down? This question obviously comes from persons NOT paying the maintenance bills. Turbine cycle retirement, starter/gen wear, 15 minute waiting period before initiating the restart for the reqd TOT drop, hot batteries, and hot starts. In the scenario first mentioned in this post, this would not have even happened if the crew had secured the doors personally before departure. Our policy is always PIC last in, first out hot or cold. I don't see, given the statistics any safer way.
B.T.W.,this is all based on Bell 206 series aircraft and Allison R/R powerplants. Twist grip to flight idle, frictions full on, into the wind, no ice/snow/mud surfaces. No policy is without its exceptions.
rotorboy
I have been there and done that many times too it is just that it is a bit of a touchy one here and I wouldn't admit to it, but I just did
If it is covered in your PM than disregard my comments and accept my apolagies
topendtorque
I suspect you are talking about Tevvy. I spent a bit of time with him and he was a true gentlemen. It was a crying shame that he met his fate like that.
I really don't think there is a great drama with leaving the controls if you are certain of the control security before you jump out. It has to be done.
I saw a pilot/engineer running an R22 and he jumped out and ran it up to 100% and walked around the back to feel the fan and that frightened the abselute bejeebers out of me. Taking the luxury a little too far.
I have been there and done that many times too it is just that it is a bit of a touchy one here and I wouldn't admit to it, but I just did
If it is covered in your PM than disregard my comments and accept my apolagies topendtorque
I suspect you are talking about Tevvy. I spent a bit of time with him and he was a true gentlemen. It was a crying shame that he met his fate like that.
I really don't think there is a great drama with leaving the controls if you are certain of the control security before you jump out. It has to be done.
I saw a pilot/engineer running an R22 and he jumped out and ran it up to 100% and walked around the back to feel the fan and that frightened the abselute bejeebers out of me. Taking the luxury a little too far.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: queensland australia
Age: 77
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
the added (non factory) bungee cord or other collective locking devices developed for australian bush helicopters is the norm.
these devices are installed because the factory frictions are not strong enough to hold the collective down for extended periods.
we have to exit the machines regularly during the course of a normal working day to get or give directions from the ground crew and it is not practical to shut down during the more difficult stages of cattle mustering. we exit the helicopter about four times a day, rotors running.
when we used bells there was not such a big problem but robinsons collectives have a habit of rising if they are not held down. with the overcorrellation of the r22 throttle and the increase in rpm that follows a rising collective there have been a few instances of machines becoming airborne and flogging themselves to death.
people have forgotten to use these added devices and have suffered the conseqences but generally since their introduction the accident rate has dropped to nearly zero.
this is not a big deal.
these devices are installed because the factory frictions are not strong enough to hold the collective down for extended periods.
we have to exit the machines regularly during the course of a normal working day to get or give directions from the ground crew and it is not practical to shut down during the more difficult stages of cattle mustering. we exit the helicopter about four times a day, rotors running.
when we used bells there was not such a big problem but robinsons collectives have a habit of rising if they are not held down. with the overcorrellation of the r22 throttle and the increase in rpm that follows a rising collective there have been a few instances of machines becoming airborne and flogging themselves to death.
people have forgotten to use these added devices and have suffered the conseqences but generally since their introduction the accident rate has dropped to nearly zero.
this is not a big deal.
fostaire,
is one side of the calculation which can be used in the Risk Assessment of the practice. The second part of your paragraph
puts forward an argument for adequate procedures (mitigation) once the practice has been Risk Assessed and found to be necessary.
Look at the post by '800'
which appears to indicate that the first element is a Risk Assessment to establish whether this activity is "essential to the safety of the helicopter or of the persons". I would agree with '800' in his assessment of the FOI's thought process.
The problem is that, in this thread, there is already an assumption that it is necessary/safe; in my opinion fostaire, your economic factors do not balance the risks in an area where accidents have already occurred. I do however applaud you Risk Assessing the activity, which itself is a giant step beyond the argument that we do it so it must be necessary/safe.
You can rest assured that there has already been a Risk Assessment by a body of professional pilots when they formulated the text of Annex 6 -they (we) couldn't condone the practice. I would also argue that CASA did a similar exercise when they provided their regulations - but in their case the additional knowledge of their State's environment prevented prohibition; they therefore permit the responsible person to Risk Assess and decide. What they were not doing was to provide a carte blanche acceptance.
One of the issues with a bulletin board like PPrune is that whilst it is read by the professional pilot who feels confident in his/her training, experience and wisdom (a mixture of intelligence and experience), they are seldom persuaded into unsafe practices by the content. However, the same may not be true for the inexperienced, or the pilot in basic training who, because of their experience level, can be persuaded into unsafe practices.
If I wanted to leave a thought for the less experienced to ponder, it would be that the underlying issue here is one of understanding risk; knowing that there have been accidents and that this practice is frowned upon in Commercial Air Transport, try to understand why that is!
Jim
Why not just shut down? This question obviously comes from persons NOT paying the maintenance bills. Turbine cycle retirement, starter/gen wear, 15 minute waiting period before initiating the restart for the reqd TOT drop, hot batteries, and hot starts.
In the scenario first mentioned in this post, this would not have even happened if the crew had secured the doors personally before departure. Our policy is always PIC last in, first out hot or cold. I don't see, given the statistics any safer way.
Look at the post by '800'
Also the term "essential" when in the context of "essential to the safety of the helicopter or of the persons". Some CASA FOI's deem refueling by the pilot with the rotors running not to be essential. As is to say it is an operational convience to not shutdown and not an essential requirement when put in context.
The problem is that, in this thread, there is already an assumption that it is necessary/safe; in my opinion fostaire, your economic factors do not balance the risks in an area where accidents have already occurred. I do however applaud you Risk Assessing the activity, which itself is a giant step beyond the argument that we do it so it must be necessary/safe.
You can rest assured that there has already been a Risk Assessment by a body of professional pilots when they formulated the text of Annex 6 -they (we) couldn't condone the practice. I would also argue that CASA did a similar exercise when they provided their regulations - but in their case the additional knowledge of their State's environment prevented prohibition; they therefore permit the responsible person to Risk Assess and decide. What they were not doing was to provide a carte blanche acceptance.
One of the issues with a bulletin board like PPrune is that whilst it is read by the professional pilot who feels confident in his/her training, experience and wisdom (a mixture of intelligence and experience), they are seldom persuaded into unsafe practices by the content. However, the same may not be true for the inexperienced, or the pilot in basic training who, because of their experience level, can be persuaded into unsafe practices.
If I wanted to leave a thought for the less experienced to ponder, it would be that the underlying issue here is one of understanding risk; knowing that there have been accidents and that this practice is frowned upon in Commercial Air Transport, try to understand why that is!
Jim
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Paradise without the View
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JayBee007
This was a common occurence in my early days. The following methods I used reduced this by up to 90% (1) I would ask who would like to be the nominated helicopter loadmaster at the destination. They would be in charge of putting the seatbelts inside and closing all the doors. This works well with English speaking pax. (2)Monitor the exit of pax, and if they looked like doing a runner before closing the door, I would give a long blast on my umpires' whistle. This was always loud enough for someone up to 10/15 feet away. Wave them back to the helicopter and get them to shut the door.
Then as a last resort I had no problems in getting out and closing the door myself.
Then as a last resort I had no problems in getting out and closing the door myself.
JimL, you had an incident and a bit of a scare, ok, tell us what happened.
You did not answer my question, have you ever worked in the bush/remote area? You seem to be saying because of what happened to you no one else should be doing it?
"Risk Assessment by a body of professional pilots" What was there background Jim, military with some local civilian flying and the North sea? Any of them worked the top end of Canada, remote area Africa or Australia? and I don't mean flying heavy machines with large crews. There seems to be the attitude on this forum that if the rules didn't originate from, or are not used by JAA, then they wrong/unsafe.
Helicopters do not fly away by themselves. There is a reason (collective not latched down on the R22 for example, or un-even ground in high wind, etc)
A 206 parked on flat ground is going to quite happily idle away until the fuel runs out, without going anywhere.
You did not answer my question, have you ever worked in the bush/remote area? You seem to be saying because of what happened to you no one else should be doing it?
"Risk Assessment by a body of professional pilots" What was there background Jim, military with some local civilian flying and the North sea? Any of them worked the top end of Canada, remote area Africa or Australia? and I don't mean flying heavy machines with large crews. There seems to be the attitude on this forum that if the rules didn't originate from, or are not used by JAA, then they wrong/unsafe.
Helicopters do not fly away by themselves. There is a reason (collective not latched down on the R22 for example, or un-even ground in high wind, etc)
A 206 parked on flat ground is going to quite happily idle away until the fuel runs out, without going anywhere.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There seems to be the attitude on this forum that if the rules didn't originate from, or are not used by JAA, then they wrong/unsafe.
Some people on the forum have that attitude - but not everyone, not even everyone from JAA countries.
The Brits are famous (notorious?) for their love of rules, and for being quick to criticise anyone who bends/breaks them. Maybe it's a result of operating under the UK CAA's heavily regulated regime where there are rules about almost everything? But not all Brits think that way.
Maybe some in Europe have the attitude you describe because most of the flying is so very different from operating in the parts of the world you mention?
Good discussion - great to see the different opinions.
Interesting to see if opinions relate to the sort of flying people have done and where they've done it.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For years in the UK when I was operating Jetrangers I had it enshrined in my Ops Manual that the pilot could hop out rotors-running to usher in pax, check doors etc when necessary That died the death in the 90's when the CAA stepped on it. (Along with single-engine public transport night flying and so on!)
In a 206 land into wind on a flat grass surface where possible, screw on the frictions, come back to idle and don't kick the pedals/ cyclic climbing in and out. No problem.
Depends where you are I think, I certainly wouldn't shut down in the bush...or somewhere where a 4x4 can't get to you. A failure to restart (..and sH1t does happen) and you can be catapulted from Lord of the Skies into a survival situation.
What I wouldn't do is hop out of a running R44 at Epsom on Derby Day in front of a senior CAA man to have a chinwag with my mate in the next door (also running) helicopter!
In a 206 land into wind on a flat grass surface where possible, screw on the frictions, come back to idle and don't kick the pedals/ cyclic climbing in and out. No problem.
Depends where you are I think, I certainly wouldn't shut down in the bush...or somewhere where a 4x4 can't get to you. A failure to restart (..and sH1t does happen) and you can be catapulted from Lord of the Skies into a survival situation.
What I wouldn't do is hop out of a running R44 at Epsom on Derby Day in front of a senior CAA man to have a chinwag with my mate in the next door (also running) helicopter!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I wouldn't do is hop out of a running R44 at Epsom on Derby Day in front of a senior CAA man to have a chinwag with my mate in the next door (also running) helicopter!
Once CAA approached he de-selected the clutch from outside the heli and waited for the engine revs to rocket until pulling the mix control. All done with his feet on terra firma and CAA watching.
He was no mate of ours!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,154
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
1000.A No pilot or pilots, or person or persons acting on the direction or suggestion or supervision of the pilot or pilots may try, or attempt to try or make or make an attempt to try to comprehend or understand any or all, in whole or in part of the herein mentioned Federal Aviation Regulations, except as authorized by the Administrator or an agent appointed by, or inspected by the Administrator.
1000.B If the pilot, or group of associated pilots becomes aware of, or realizes, or detects, or discovers or finds that he, or she, or they, are or have been beginning to understand the Federal Aviation Regulations, they must immediately, within three (3) days notify the Administrator in writing.
1000.C Upon receipt of the above mentioned notice of impending comprehension, the Administrator will immediately rewrite the Federal Aviation Regulations in such a manner as to eliminate any further comprehension hazards.
1000.D The Administrator may, at his or her option, require the offending pilot, or pilots, to attend remedial instruction in Federal Aviation Regulations until such time that the pilot is too confused to be capable of understanding anything.
Phil
1000.B If the pilot, or group of associated pilots becomes aware of, or realizes, or detects, or discovers or finds that he, or she, or they, are or have been beginning to understand the Federal Aviation Regulations, they must immediately, within three (3) days notify the Administrator in writing.
1000.C Upon receipt of the above mentioned notice of impending comprehension, the Administrator will immediately rewrite the Federal Aviation Regulations in such a manner as to eliminate any further comprehension hazards.
1000.D The Administrator may, at his or her option, require the offending pilot, or pilots, to attend remedial instruction in Federal Aviation Regulations until such time that the pilot is too confused to be capable of understanding anything.
Phil
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: THE MANGROVE SWAMPS (RETIRED)
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Things don't have to go wrong with the rotors.....
many, many years ago a pilot of a Mayne-Bristow Wessex 60 landed on a rig in Oz and shut down the starboard engine and rotor, leaving the port engine running with main drive disengaged. He nipped down for a quick pee, tea and sarnieee.... but imagine his horror when he returned some minutes later to discover that a fuel leak had caused his helicopter to catch fire
I operated in the bush in Africa for many years (yes, not just the boring drag out to offshore from Eket) but after that I always shut down to refuel from drums and mostlly to pick up pax as well (usually at the insistence of one of the clients). Always made sure that I called up base on HF so they knew where I was and approximately I'd shut down for (and in latter years we always carried a satellite phone of course). I've left the aircraft running a few times when single pilot, but only in times of really dire need, and always with frictions on (where fitted). Trouble is that in something like a 76 if you don't stop the rotor with one engine running, you could have a failure of the cyclic mag brake with rather nasty consequences (and yes despite what PPF#1 Fan says, I have had several mag brake failures
).
So, even though I had nothing to do with JAA or FAA or CAA for many a long year, I have to agree with Jim L and say that you should carry out a short risk assessment and decide whether it really, truly is necessary to leave the rotors running and leaving your helicopter. There are circumstances in which it's justified as has been pointed out by many posters on this thread and I don't disagree with it being done....... but do thimk first about the things which could go wong, because sometimes, they just do
many, many years ago a pilot of a Mayne-Bristow Wessex 60 landed on a rig in Oz and shut down the starboard engine and rotor, leaving the port engine running with main drive disengaged. He nipped down for a quick pee, tea and sarnieee.... but imagine his horror when he returned some minutes later to discover that a fuel leak had caused his helicopter to catch fire
I operated in the bush in Africa for many years (yes, not just the boring drag out to offshore from Eket) but after that I always shut down to refuel from drums and mostlly to pick up pax as well (usually at the insistence of one of the clients). Always made sure that I called up base on HF so they knew where I was and approximately I'd shut down for (and in latter years we always carried a satellite phone of course). I've left the aircraft running a few times when single pilot, but only in times of really dire need, and always with frictions on (where fitted). Trouble is that in something like a 76 if you don't stop the rotor with one engine running, you could have a failure of the cyclic mag brake with rather nasty consequences (and yes despite what PPF#1 Fan says, I have had several mag brake failures
). So, even though I had nothing to do with JAA or FAA or CAA for many a long year, I have to agree with Jim L and say that you should carry out a short risk assessment and decide whether it really, truly is necessary to leave the rotors running and leaving your helicopter. There are circumstances in which it's justified as has been pointed out by many posters on this thread and I don't disagree with it being done....... but do thimk first about the things which could go wong, because sometimes, they just do
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i once saw an experienced pilot land his AS 350 on an oval at MT tamborine, gold coast hinterland in australia. he landed then throttled down somewhat, though the rotors were still moving very fast. he herded passengers on while they were spinning, they where inside while he was out, though they seemed to think he knew what he was doing.
was this irresponsible/illegal
bally.
was this irresponsible/illegal
bally.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Aus
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An answer to save me!
If the pilot knew the regs & had conducted some sort of risk assessment (ie the pilot made a decision to do it) then the pilot could say it was "essential to the safety of the of the persons", when taken in the context quoted while complying with any other operational requirements!
ie SAVED
The pilot gets to fly another day.
Hey, got to know the rules to use the rules!
800
ie SAVED
The pilot gets to fly another day.
Hey, got to know the rules to use the rules!
800
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA CAO 95.7 anomaly
Heliport is onto one aspect. I wonder also do many of the posts relate to informed opinion of what others do. If they are not informed, they are not interested, if they are not interested, there’s the door – strong but life saving jungle talk.
ICAO rules are a reflection of the political weight that formed them; on this subject, way out of pace it seems with reality in everybody’s backyard. ICAO therefore needs purging, to regulate in conformance with reality. Those that quote ICAO should give over, take the blinkers off. There are many instances where leaving your place of employment in a hurry for safety sake is a reality.
Shutting down unnecessarily in a hostile remote environmet is also stupid.
Often when mustering it was imperitive to be back in the air very quickly when refuelling or risk losing control of your task.
However to adopt the practice of seat departure in any air transport op, or say fire fighting ops where everything is laid on with equipment, manpower etc after many deliberations on SOP’s months before has obviously got to be questionable.
ICAO rules should reflect the imperatives of the different environments to protect their constituents.
There are a couple of pertinent points
1) as per Eacott's quote of the OZ CAO 95.7 (immediate vicinity) this does not mean as Shy quoted, about some dude retiring to the latte’ society for a recharge whilst Rotors are still in motion (RIM).
Neither does it mean walking around Fox Glacier to look at the view having just descended from the 1 million dollars worth of viewmaster machinery?? - Bloody hell. !! And on an RPT tourist flight into the bargain!!
2) Mr Bally has hit on another and I’ll put it to bed as well as him because I could be on a mission to tuck him in on another thread.
Bally you say,
“How is a gust of wind going to knock a helicopter over when the blades are flat against it (180degs)?”
I’ll not be disappointed if you answer in the negative when I ask did you ever get taught to lean the disk into wind a bit if there is a storm coming and to always park the machine off-line the incoming storm wind 15 degrees so as when blade sailing occurs during shutdown you don’t cut the tail off. The reason I’m not surprised if you say no, is because I know of an identical case recently in an R22 where that happened. The 3000 hour pilot was simply not told of the phenomena and didn’t have the scone to work it out.
But Bally what is it that we do all day, lift the collective and select the desired direction with the cyclic?
Well yes, but really we are varyibg the A of A on the blades. To first slip the surly bonds of earth we lift the collective for symmetrical lift.
When we move the cyclic in the desired direction we are altering the A of A of the blades in each half of the disc to create a dissymmetry of lift and thus create a thrust moment toward the desired direction? Operating the throttle during these sequences is to replace power used in the manoeuvres to maintain RPM as we compensate with more collective and or pedals.
Now let’s go to your bit about the ‘gust of wind with blades flat against it.’
Remember the references to landing in Wolf Crater, “the wind was blowing straight down”? Ever been in northern OZ during the build-ups when you can often look out the window and see the tree leaves all pointing straight down, or for that matter ever stood on an ocean jetty with a prevailing sea current and wondered why most of the time all the water is going the wrong way? No? I didn’t think so! Obviously at times when the wind is going straight down there are other times when it is going straight up, or any other which way!
A wind forecast is merely an ‘expression’ of the time that it is estimated that two differing atmospheric pressures may tend to equalise, expressed as a wind velocity and direction. Of course they never do and neither is any of the close to ground interferences ever accounted for in that forecast. As low level pilots we have to think of that and we encounter these ‘situations’ hundreds of f’n times every day, especially when we park our machine with RIM facing into a gusting wind that can and does vary continuously, thus changing the A of A on the blades continuously.
Bally, let’s take another small step. Let’s say you’re in a light helicopter; its flat pitch power requirement is say 13”. You take off at daylight, yourself and full fuel and gee whiz you only need another 8-9” to get off the ground. At the end of the day, temps are about the same, you’re in a hurry to close a gate behind the cattle, you’re just about out of fuel, that is, suddenly there is 400 pound less in the machine compared to take off with full tanks this morning, it’s sitting at flat pitch, blades level, you left the RPM inadvertently at operating RPM, collective is locked down and the bloody wind gusts upwards over the little rise in front of you and hey presto, the helicopter nose is climbing.
Note two things;
a) In a Bell 47 one inch equals 100 pound, straight up, and
b) It takes stuff all wind to turn a big powerful windmill.
Compensated power is not an issue, as the damage is done and RPM simply decays now as the machine lifts, unless of course you are in a Robinson with those idiot electric governors and you like an idiot left it switched on, then they just fly higher before crashing.
So, Bally at your expense I have finally isolated an anomaly in CAO 95.7, it refers to something that we have always done.
What should be included is a section to detail that the rotors should always be set well below operating RPM and therefore not capable of generating enough lift to lift the empty machine when the pilot is to get out. They should not just be - at flight idle - which might be interpreted as operating RPM with the throttle under the detent.
If that and a Governor-off requirement for the Robinsons are included in 95.7 it may help blokes like you as it should then have been included in a training sequence.
Thanks mate you’ve been a great help, oh, and in the future, think!
ICAO rules are a reflection of the political weight that formed them; on this subject, way out of pace it seems with reality in everybody’s backyard. ICAO therefore needs purging, to regulate in conformance with reality. Those that quote ICAO should give over, take the blinkers off. There are many instances where leaving your place of employment in a hurry for safety sake is a reality.
Shutting down unnecessarily in a hostile remote environmet is also stupid.
Often when mustering it was imperitive to be back in the air very quickly when refuelling or risk losing control of your task.
However to adopt the practice of seat departure in any air transport op, or say fire fighting ops where everything is laid on with equipment, manpower etc after many deliberations on SOP’s months before has obviously got to be questionable.
ICAO rules should reflect the imperatives of the different environments to protect their constituents.
There are a couple of pertinent points
1) as per Eacott's quote of the OZ CAO 95.7 (immediate vicinity) this does not mean as Shy quoted, about some dude retiring to the latte’ society for a recharge whilst Rotors are still in motion (RIM).
Neither does it mean walking around Fox Glacier to look at the view having just descended from the 1 million dollars worth of viewmaster machinery?? - Bloody hell. !! And on an RPT tourist flight into the bargain!!
2) Mr Bally has hit on another and I’ll put it to bed as well as him because I could be on a mission to tuck him in on another thread.
Bally you say,
“How is a gust of wind going to knock a helicopter over when the blades are flat against it (180degs)?”
I’ll not be disappointed if you answer in the negative when I ask did you ever get taught to lean the disk into wind a bit if there is a storm coming and to always park the machine off-line the incoming storm wind 15 degrees so as when blade sailing occurs during shutdown you don’t cut the tail off. The reason I’m not surprised if you say no, is because I know of an identical case recently in an R22 where that happened. The 3000 hour pilot was simply not told of the phenomena and didn’t have the scone to work it out.
But Bally what is it that we do all day, lift the collective and select the desired direction with the cyclic?
Well yes, but really we are varyibg the A of A on the blades. To first slip the surly bonds of earth we lift the collective for symmetrical lift.
When we move the cyclic in the desired direction we are altering the A of A of the blades in each half of the disc to create a dissymmetry of lift and thus create a thrust moment toward the desired direction? Operating the throttle during these sequences is to replace power used in the manoeuvres to maintain RPM as we compensate with more collective and or pedals.
Now let’s go to your bit about the ‘gust of wind with blades flat against it.’
Remember the references to landing in Wolf Crater, “the wind was blowing straight down”? Ever been in northern OZ during the build-ups when you can often look out the window and see the tree leaves all pointing straight down, or for that matter ever stood on an ocean jetty with a prevailing sea current and wondered why most of the time all the water is going the wrong way? No? I didn’t think so! Obviously at times when the wind is going straight down there are other times when it is going straight up, or any other which way!
A wind forecast is merely an ‘expression’ of the time that it is estimated that two differing atmospheric pressures may tend to equalise, expressed as a wind velocity and direction. Of course they never do and neither is any of the close to ground interferences ever accounted for in that forecast. As low level pilots we have to think of that and we encounter these ‘situations’ hundreds of f’n times every day, especially when we park our machine with RIM facing into a gusting wind that can and does vary continuously, thus changing the A of A on the blades continuously.
Bally, let’s take another small step. Let’s say you’re in a light helicopter; its flat pitch power requirement is say 13”. You take off at daylight, yourself and full fuel and gee whiz you only need another 8-9” to get off the ground. At the end of the day, temps are about the same, you’re in a hurry to close a gate behind the cattle, you’re just about out of fuel, that is, suddenly there is 400 pound less in the machine compared to take off with full tanks this morning, it’s sitting at flat pitch, blades level, you left the RPM inadvertently at operating RPM, collective is locked down and the bloody wind gusts upwards over the little rise in front of you and hey presto, the helicopter nose is climbing.
Note two things;
a) In a Bell 47 one inch equals 100 pound, straight up, and
b) It takes stuff all wind to turn a big powerful windmill.
Compensated power is not an issue, as the damage is done and RPM simply decays now as the machine lifts, unless of course you are in a Robinson with those idiot electric governors and you like an idiot left it switched on, then they just fly higher before crashing.
So, Bally at your expense I have finally isolated an anomaly in CAO 95.7, it refers to something that we have always done.
What should be included is a section to detail that the rotors should always be set well below operating RPM and therefore not capable of generating enough lift to lift the empty machine when the pilot is to get out. They should not just be - at flight idle - which might be interpreted as operating RPM with the throttle under the detent.
If that and a Governor-off requirement for the Robinsons are included in 95.7 it may help blokes like you as it should then have been included in a training sequence.
Thanks mate you’ve been a great help, oh, and in the future, think!
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: THE MANGROVE SWAMPS (RETIRED)
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tet,
Before you bite bally's head off again look at his profile and his previous posts - he's not a pilot, he's a schoolboy, so judge him not too harshly lest ye yourself be harshly judged one day.
Apart from that I liked your post
Before you bite bally's head off again look at his profile and his previous posts - he's not a pilot, he's a schoolboy, so judge him not too harshly lest ye yourself be harshly judged one day.
Apart from that I liked your post
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mama.
Mon dieu! ~ Point Taken ~ Merci.
I have now checked, I guess I was lulled into a false sense of his knowledge and experiences by his quote or exercise in hole digging (below) found in another thread, which I’ve addressed over there.
“friday-saturday party too much alcohol. your right though, i did say something stupid. the adf is the best in the world, we even taught the americans how to fight during vietnam. i guess i was just upset after watching the gangs in dili with the aussies not capable of doing much. answered by fire on the abc, backs that up back in 1999. notice the gov't didnt help the timorese for 25 yrs until they realised timor was just a stepping stone for the indonesians.”
No doubt if / when young bally becomes a legislator he will have plenty of answers.
Regarding the thread:-
Today was another typical seven hour low level uncomfortable experience. Big highs have kicked in down south meaning at a hover - er - stationary position at 100 feet the ASI indications over every ten second cycle go down to zero and up to 32 knots.
Power reqd for that with the governor off is fairly steady at 18 inches. With the governor on the MAP indicates something totally abhorrent to me, a St Vitas dance of fury for the whole drivetrain, oscillating between 15” and 21” several times in that cycle. Someone please tell me these governors are good for the aircraft!
Economy was @ 25 lts/hr, 11% less fuel burn than usual and being light on the seat every ten minutes or so is the norm. A bit like being dumped by the breakers, certainly no place for an unattended little R22 on the ground at full RPM!
However, small beer compared to many other jobs!
Mon dieu! ~ Point Taken ~ Merci.
I have now checked, I guess I was lulled into a false sense of his knowledge and experiences by his quote or exercise in hole digging (below) found in another thread, which I’ve addressed over there.
“friday-saturday party too much alcohol. your right though, i did say something stupid. the adf is the best in the world, we even taught the americans how to fight during vietnam. i guess i was just upset after watching the gangs in dili with the aussies not capable of doing much. answered by fire on the abc, backs that up back in 1999. notice the gov't didnt help the timorese for 25 yrs until they realised timor was just a stepping stone for the indonesians.”
No doubt if / when young bally becomes a legislator he will have plenty of answers.
Regarding the thread:-
Today was another typical seven hour low level uncomfortable experience. Big highs have kicked in down south meaning at a hover - er - stationary position at 100 feet the ASI indications over every ten second cycle go down to zero and up to 32 knots.
Power reqd for that with the governor off is fairly steady at 18 inches. With the governor on the MAP indicates something totally abhorrent to me, a St Vitas dance of fury for the whole drivetrain, oscillating between 15” and 21” several times in that cycle. Someone please tell me these governors are good for the aircraft!
Economy was @ 25 lts/hr, 11% less fuel burn than usual and being light on the seat every ten minutes or so is the norm. A bit like being dumped by the breakers, certainly no place for an unattended little R22 on the ground at full RPM!
However, small beer compared to many other jobs!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks topendtorque,
as youve just found out, im no pilot- but every bit off info you give me gets me one step closer to stealing a robby from the local aerodrome...
actually thanks for enlightening me on the whole:" how can a gust of wind blow a helicopter over when the blades are 180degs" thing.
CHEERS!
bally.
as youve just found out, im no pilot- but every bit off info you give me gets me one step closer to stealing a robby from the local aerodrome...
actually thanks for enlightening me on the whole:" how can a gust of wind blow a helicopter over when the blades are 180degs" thing.
CHEERS!
bally.