R22 operational safety - somebody enlighten me
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Normalising data for statistical analysis is unlikely to be possible. In addition to total hours you would need to also know the pilot's experience, what the helicopter was being used for, etc. This information is not going to be available.
I did wonder whether there would be anything interesting in looking at the insurance insurance premium for aircraft as a ratio of hull value. This takes advantage of all the work that the insurance companies have already done in looking at the risk each type carries. There still would be a problem as I anticipate (I don't know) that the number of potential passengers in the machine will affect insurance premiums because of the greater risk of injury or loss-of-life payout (max passenger x1 R22, x3 R44, x4 B206, x6 EC130, etc).
I did wonder whether there would be anything interesting in looking at the insurance insurance premium for aircraft as a ratio of hull value. This takes advantage of all the work that the insurance companies have already done in looking at the risk each type carries. There still would be a problem as I anticipate (I don't know) that the number of potential passengers in the machine will affect insurance premiums because of the greater risk of injury or loss-of-life payout (max passenger x1 R22, x3 R44, x4 B206, x6 EC130, etc).
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Holmfirth, UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Off topic I know.. just curious, but say for a minute all you commercial drivers were given a brand new R22 as a gift which you weren't permitted to sell.
How many of you would refuse to fly it?
How many of you would refuse to fly it?
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Does the fact that more people have died in cars than helicopters over any given period mean that they are more dangerous? Not necessarily. Why? Because there are proportionately a lot more cars around, and as a percentage of those cars the likelihood of dying in one is actually comparatively small, there is a greater chance that if you get in a helicopter that you will die although less people die in them than cars.
Based on that argument, crossing the roads should be one of the safest things we can do.
Reported road accidents and casualties: 1950-2010
Of course those figures still don't show us how many people per year cross the road
, It's not the machine,
Meat servo failures are the number one cause for bent iron,
Aucky - you sound like my wife (God bless her) in that "you don't understand me darling":
I am not denigrating Uncle Frank - he has transformed private helo flying. Without him, it would still be seen as a dream for the majority of mortals. In fact I am not actually rubbishing the R22.
I am flagging up the fact that when Frank built this meccano kit, he built it with the bare minimum of everything: metalwork, horse power, systems, performance, TBO's, etc etc. He did it to keep costs down and to be able to build on a mass scale. He either forgot, or purposely ignored the key element: The squidggy soft fragile component that sits inside making it work.
92% of all R22 accidents are due to pilot error compared to the global average of 72%. This is where I come in. I am commenting on the fact that the Robbo is very unforgiving in the wrong hands. And if we can't reduce the number of squidggy soft fragile control modules wanting to fly helo's, then perhaps the next best option is to remove the Robbo?
In support of Frank and his mates, try this for a fast ball:
Robinson R-22 Accident Analysis 1979-1994
It states the Robbo is the safest ever light helo
But it can't get away from the fact that the NTSB hate robbo's with a passion (don't know why
).
Now this comes with a warning: The guy authoring this is also a rep from the
R22 & R44 Pilot & Owners Association and is an avid defender of the types.
Finally there is always this from an old buddy of ours (original Ppruners), who has sadly passed away now:
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/189...inson-r44.html
Lu absolutely detested Robbo's with a passion - however unlike me, he hated them because he genuinely thought they were unfit for purpose
Food for thought ...........................................
I am not denigrating Uncle Frank - he has transformed private helo flying. Without him, it would still be seen as a dream for the majority of mortals. In fact I am not actually rubbishing the R22.
I am flagging up the fact that when Frank built this meccano kit, he built it with the bare minimum of everything: metalwork, horse power, systems, performance, TBO's, etc etc. He did it to keep costs down and to be able to build on a mass scale. He either forgot, or purposely ignored the key element: The squidggy soft fragile component that sits inside making it work.
92% of all R22 accidents are due to pilot error compared to the global average of 72%. This is where I come in. I am commenting on the fact that the Robbo is very unforgiving in the wrong hands. And if we can't reduce the number of squidggy soft fragile control modules wanting to fly helo's, then perhaps the next best option is to remove the Robbo?
In support of Frank and his mates, try this for a fast ball:
Robinson R-22 Accident Analysis 1979-1994
It states the Robbo is the safest ever light helo
But it can't get away from the fact that the NTSB hate robbo's with a passion (don't know why).Now this comes with a warning: The guy authoring this is also a rep from the
R22 & R44 Pilot & Owners Association and is an avid defender of the types.
Finally there is always this from an old buddy of ours (original Ppruners), who has sadly passed away now:
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/189...inson-r44.html
Lu absolutely detested Robbo's with a passion - however unlike me, he hated them because he genuinely thought they were unfit for purpose
Food for thought ...........................................
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the Haven of Peace
Age: 79
Posts: 600
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have little of real value to contribute here, except to say how sad it is to see a thread hijacked in this way by a crowd of Robinson bashers.
It's sad that a helicopter had an accident at the delightful-looking private hotel landing site at lake Vrynwy, which I personally would love to visit in any kind of helicopter. I'm pleased that it was not fatal. Powys is a beautiful part of Wales and the old Victorian dam at the end of the lake is not only of historical interest, but will also undoubtedly still be standing there, long after the arguments on this thread have died out. It's easy to criticise the landing site as being very difficult or poo-poo it as being very easy, but with different camera angles and lens focal lengths it's difficult to say on the basis of a few photos. It's also true that one man's easy is another man's difficult, depending on overall experience, recency and role experience.
I am now, sadly, deemed by many blinkered regulators to be too old to fly CAT (would that I were an American or Australian), but spent 46 happy years flying "furious palm trees". I was an ab-initio instructor teaching on Bell 47s when Bristow Helicopters decided to replace them with R22s at the old Redhill flying train ing school, and thought it a very retrograde step, taken only for financial reasons. I well remember going for my first flight in one with a (now-late) former, much-respected contemporary of mine, David Dixon who at the time was the commercial director of Sloane Helicopters the (then) UK distributors. David turned up with his usual smile, bright braces (suspenders for our American readers) and winning ways and told me to open my mind and not pre-judge the R22, despite my telling him that he would never convince me to like it. Well, it was certainly very different from the Bell 47, but in a few short hours I had to agree with David: I loved it and to this day it is one of my three favourite helicopters (the other 2 being Eurocopter products; one a single and one a twin, which are also spoken of by many as being flawed). I consider it to be a fine basic trainer as long as its characteristics are well briefed to students. There are better (and much more expensive) trainers, but in the commercial world as opposed to the military, it's a sound commercial proposition for most helicopter schools (as is its main competitor, the Schweizer 300 CBi).
However, that's just my opinion and you can be sure that if you put 3 helicopter pilots in a crew room you'll always get 3 different opinions on which is the best helicopter and which is the best way to do something. To answer one question which was asked earlier; yes, if I won one in a prize draw I'd love to have it and would fly it as often as I could afford. Were I to find that I were the lucky winner of the Euro millions lottery, I'd probably buy an R44 for my own personal use, despite being most current on the Sikorsky S76. But then again, what do I know; in this modern age I'm just an old age pensioner and therefore my brain has decayed to the point where I'm no longer capable of rational thought
It's sad that a helicopter had an accident at the delightful-looking private hotel landing site at lake Vrynwy, which I personally would love to visit in any kind of helicopter. I'm pleased that it was not fatal. Powys is a beautiful part of Wales and the old Victorian dam at the end of the lake is not only of historical interest, but will also undoubtedly still be standing there, long after the arguments on this thread have died out. It's easy to criticise the landing site as being very difficult or poo-poo it as being very easy, but with different camera angles and lens focal lengths it's difficult to say on the basis of a few photos. It's also true that one man's easy is another man's difficult, depending on overall experience, recency and role experience.
I am now, sadly, deemed by many blinkered regulators to be too old to fly CAT (would that I were an American or Australian), but spent 46 happy years flying "furious palm trees". I was an ab-initio instructor teaching on Bell 47s when Bristow Helicopters decided to replace them with R22s at the old Redhill flying train ing school, and thought it a very retrograde step, taken only for financial reasons. I well remember going for my first flight in one with a (now-late) former, much-respected contemporary of mine, David Dixon who at the time was the commercial director of Sloane Helicopters the (then) UK distributors. David turned up with his usual smile, bright braces (suspenders for our American readers) and winning ways and told me to open my mind and not pre-judge the R22, despite my telling him that he would never convince me to like it. Well, it was certainly very different from the Bell 47, but in a few short hours I had to agree with David: I loved it and to this day it is one of my three favourite helicopters (the other 2 being Eurocopter products; one a single and one a twin, which are also spoken of by many as being flawed). I consider it to be a fine basic trainer as long as its characteristics are well briefed to students. There are better (and much more expensive) trainers, but in the commercial world as opposed to the military, it's a sound commercial proposition for most helicopter schools (as is its main competitor, the Schweizer 300 CBi).
However, that's just my opinion and you can be sure that if you put 3 helicopter pilots in a crew room you'll always get 3 different opinions on which is the best helicopter and which is the best way to do something. To answer one question which was asked earlier; yes, if I won one in a prize draw I'd love to have it and would fly it as often as I could afford. Were I to find that I were the lucky winner of the Euro millions lottery, I'd probably buy an R44 for my own personal use, despite being most current on the Sikorsky S76. But then again, what do I know; in this modern age I'm just an old age pensioner and therefore my brain has decayed to the point where I'm no longer capable of rational thought
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk
Age: 85
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To add two pence worth to soggyboxers post. When we swopped the Bell 47's for 22's, we assumed that the average hours to first solo would increase. Not so; there was no difference and this was before the the governors were fitted. However, I do go along with the premise that Robinsons in general and 22's in particular are so often flown by low experience people, with poor currency, or are operated in the training role which will always result in an increased risk. Ask the insurance companies!
The only gripe that I have with the 22 is that the instructor can never be too far from the controls whenever close to the ground and particularly during EOL's. This has resulted in several generations of flying instructors sitting like coiled springs whenever the student has control and also tending to employ the "heavy controls" technique, which is disastrous for a student's confidence. I have also noted an increasing tendency for instructors to prevent the students making mistakes before seeing whether he notices the mistake and sorts it out. After all sometime, when out by himself he is going to have to deal with his mistakes without prompting.
The only gripe that I have with the 22 is that the instructor can never be too far from the controls whenever close to the ground and particularly during EOL's. This has resulted in several generations of flying instructors sitting like coiled springs whenever the student has control and also tending to employ the "heavy controls" technique, which is disastrous for a student's confidence. I have also noted an increasing tendency for instructors to prevent the students making mistakes before seeing whether he notices the mistake and sorts it out. After all sometime, when out by himself he is going to have to deal with his mistakes without prompting.
