IMC in an R22 - anyone done this?

[topendtorque]

No-one, to my knowledge, has ever crashed into the ANO!

excellent logic. but please slow down as you are allowed to, to look out for wires.

[darrenphughes]

IMC in a R22, ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND??

[helimutt]

Anyone who takes a student into IMC, in a single eng a/c, not equipped or legal for such flying, is out of order. I don't care how it's dressed up. My instructor showed me how to do a wingover and also how to balance on a fence post after only 5 hours or so flying in an R22. No prizes for what I went out and did straight after PPL. ???!!!!

You live and learn. I think we're wasting our time and effort sometimes, and yes, I think the 5 hr instrument requirement is b*ll*x.

You are doing a VFR licence, in a VFR machine. Period. No need to see what it's like in IMC. Teach them well enough to know not to be there in the bloody first place!

Anyone ever heard of 'Duty of Care' ?????

Rant over!!!

[jellycopter]

Helimutt

The point I was trying to make is that the foggles DO NOT in any way equip a pilot effectively for flight in IMC - despite what the JAR regulators would try and have us believe. The 5 hour instrument flying element to the current JAR PPL(H) syllabus must be the only part of any flying course I'm aware of, either private, professional or military, that is effectively teaching the student to fly the aircraft in an 'illegal' manner.

I firmly believe that this requirement is wrong, and if it isn't already, will very soon be responsible for fatalities.

JJ

Edited to prevent this turning into a slanging match.

[VfrpilotPB/2]

Add on from my earlier reply,

I know my limitations, a good friend of mine who is well covered in lots of years R/w and is fully IMC able, took me with him one day to help him at the other end of the flight, the Wx was not that good but he explained he had flown above the clouds from the midlands to where he collected me, full of eagerness I boarded the Twin Squirrel and off we went he explained he had dialled in all the values in the A/P and the machine would do the rest, despite all this tricky machinery and my pal watching over things I had this huge urge to ask him to do a 180 and fly underneath, I could not make out any form of direction or level or even if we we climbing or diving( I could if I looked at the gauges) but sat there looking at the pure white of the water vapour I was mesmerised , I consider myself to be a very safe flyer, but that flight taught me more about myself and my self belief in the few minutes we were in the white stuff than I ever thought would be possible, since that day I have stood at the side of quiet a few SFH copters and made the decision not to fly because of what I could see was waiting for me.
I may sound like a bit of a softy, but I will fly anywhere to any point and arrive, but I will never give you guys the need to read about me having flown when I should not!

Vfr PilotPB/2

Peter R-B

[VeeAny]

I am on the fence as to whether illegal IMC with a test candidate is a good or bad thing (from a training point of view).

Apart from the legal issues, putting your trust in the only AI on board, which when new costs about £2500 (in aviation most things are expensive I consider this quite cheap and they do wander off more than I like) may not be overly sensible.

However I know a lot of pilots who have had this experience with examiners far more experienced than me and it taught all of them the same lesson.

I think that some people like JJs quoted examiner are MORE than capable of handling themselves in situations likes this but that is a whole different discussion I think and one on which I am not necessarily qualified to comment on. My concern would be if the experience taught the exam candidate that IMC was ok because he handled it on the day (with an examiner ready to take over from him if it went wrong, thus lowering the perceived pressure on him).

I've went IIMC for 30 odd seconds (pre my IR) towards a hill, made a 180 degree turn and GOT AWAY WITH IT several years ago and scared myself shi1tless and vowed never to do it again.

After the fact I wished someone had done it to me to teach me a lesson.

If we all operated within the rules GENERALLY we would be ok, but the one thing newly qualified or inexperienced pilots lack is an ability to assess while in the air whether what they are doing is legal, questionable or stupid / illegal.

My view while on the ground at the planning stage the flight should be legal then safe, in the air flying it should be safe then legal (they are not always the same thing, and as JJ points out no one has ever flown into the ANO).

Sorry if I am going off on one, but I've been preparing the safety presentation for Redhill since 0630 this morning and this seems relevant.

Cheers


Gary

[Ioan]

Interesting thread this. I for one think that the PPL syllabus is lacking, notably in the practice of off-airfield landings. Speaking to one new PPL not so long ago he'd actually passed a PPL without EVER having landed off an airfield; confined areas were done onto a small HLS on-airfield and sloping ground with one skid on the edge of a taxiway and one off.
Now on the one hand he's being told "don't push on - land on", while on the other hand he's planned his whole flight well with 'don't go below' MSAs, he's sat air law exams and knows all about the possible legal consequences of breaking the 500' rule...
I consider myself quite lucky that during PPL training we did make a precautionary landing in a field. Going through the whole experience of talking to London Info, doing a recce, setting up an approach while there's still time etc took all the stress out of it; I'll be far far less hesitant about doing it in future. So much easier on the heart to be sitting in a pub grouching about the weather than being up there trying to carry on through it

Foggles training in the PPL - I understand why some people are against it, yet to borrow someone's analogy if I was dumb or unlucky enough to get myself IIMC in a 22 I'd rather have that one empty chamber in the Smith and Wesson than not. I'm under no illusions about how serious it is. After a PPL and CPL (what's that? 15 hours foggles?) I thought I had this 'instrument flying' lark pretty nailed. The first IR flight in the sim, where everything went white at 300', I suddenly realised my mistake.
Maybe that would be a useful addition to a PPL. IMC in a decent sim, turbulence turned on and force trim turned off.

To answer the original question, no I've never been IMC in a 22 or any other non-IFR helicopter. One night flight in a 22 with misty stuff forming below and a strong headwind slowing our progress back to the airfield I was uncomfortable, uncomfortable enough to have made me more thorough about weather planning now, and less hesitant about making 'turn back' decisions faster in the future.

I guess you live and learn. I'm determined to keep doing both!

[helimutt]

Ioan, Good post. Thank you.

[biggles99]

as I'm one who knows you, Ioan, I'll second that.

A good post indeed, and you will not only live and learn, you'll do well.

Big Ls.

[DBChopper]

However I know a lot of pilots who have had this experience with examiners far more experienced than me and it taught all of them the same lesson.

As someone who hopes to be taking the CPL(H) course around this time next year, would whoever examines me please not do that? I hate to see a grown man cry, especially when it's me!

Thanks

[Whirlygig]

DB, the chances are that your examiner will be from a choice of one!! And I doubt he'd do that to you!!!

However, I had it done to to me during my PPL. It did the necessary .... my sphincter muscle thankfully still operational!!! I would not have believed, at the time, how disorienting and scary it was and I would rather have been shown it than to encounter cloud, thinking I could do it, when I was flying solo or, worse still, with a passenger!!

Cheers

Whirls

[agust119]

no imc in non IFR Machine

I did my training is a R22 a few years ago and I was amazed at the comments of fellow students in my theory class re IMC, no one thought it a big problem for a short time. “Just turn around and fly out or just punch through it, etc”. The reason, no one had ever been IMC, to be fair the instructor did advise not to do it, but without the conviction of someone who had been IMC.

I was amazed as I had some experience of unofficial flying in a full IFR fixed wing with a current IFR pilot. Autopilot off just before we flew into a solid bank of cloud I tried to hand back to the pilot, he said no you have a go. After a very short period of time I felt we where in a 45 degree bank and after about 3 minutes (I checked the clock before go IMC) we where 30 degrees of course as I was concentrating on the AH. The pilot took over with much relief from me. Thank God I did not need to do a 180 degree turn and the aircraft was in trim and the air reasonably stable!

I have never been IMC in a VFR machine nor will I because of that experience.

Every VFR pilot needs the experience of what IMC is like, the weird feeling of banking when you’re not so they never try IMC!

[helicfii]

All this begs the question- maybe there should not be a ppl for helicopters?

If people want to fly their own helicopter, they will just have to obtain a commercial license. It is not a poor man's sport, after all....

It would certainly reduce the number of accidents

[blave]

I flew this aircraft (N70144) a week before this accident, and sorta kinda knew the rated pilot on board, but not the CFI, other than meeting him as they were getting ready to take this trip.

I do not know this as fact, but my recollection of being told about this is that they were low on fuel where the accident occurred, and pretty much had to "get down soon". I would have to look at maps to see if this makes sense but- well, I'm not going to at this particular moment.

My comments:

1) yes, they had get-there-itis. They were under some pressure to deliver the aircraft "on time", for an airshow the next day (if my memory serves).

2) anyone here that's posted about this particular event doesn't have any knowledge of the accident other than the NTSB report, and therefore should keep his piehole shut rather than criticize the actions of the PIC. I firmly believe that he did NOT intentionally "go IMC" (no person of any pilot-compatible IQ would do so in a Robinson) and was caught out on low fuel and non-improving conditions. (In an area that he was not that familiar with, methinks.)

FWIW, I have learned a lesson here (again) that the ol' Monday morning quarterbacking (caveat: that may be a USA-unique term) is worth the paper it's printed on, and that NTSB reports don't always tell the whole story.

Did the PIC have poor judgement? I have opined so in my own head, knowing the "back story", but in the end none of us was in the cockpit and have no idea how those unfortunate fellows got into the situation that killed them.

Dave Blevins
San Jose, CA, USA

[VeeAny]

Personally I think there is definitely a case for some IMC exposure at the PPL level, to scare pilots away from it when they are allowed to fly on their own or with passengers.

A number of different ways this can be achieved seem to be

• Illegal IMC in an unstabilised helicopter.
• Ride Along as an observer with an IFR pilot in an IFR machine, perhaps even get a go.
• A session in a simulator where the visuals are good enough to start off VMC and transition to IMC in flight.

I've asked around and a lot people have been taken into cloud at some point during training or testing, and found it valuable. Most examiners that do it, take the candidate 100' or so into cloud so as to minimise the risk to themselves and the aircraft.

I regularly take newly qualified(ish) FIs and CPLs along as co-pilot / observers to get them some exposure to IMC / IFR flying and to see more of the country they operate in, but generally its not possible for them to fly so perhaps of little training benefit from an IMC recovery standpoint.

A session in the sim is a great tool, but unless you are immersed enough in it to be convinced you are IMC, the stress is not there, the possibility of a fatal accident just isn't there so whilst valuable I believe its not got quite as much impact as a simulated IIMC exercise in the real thing.

I don't know what the right answer is, we can't expect the authority to condone things which are illegal, its their job not to. However it does always seems to fall to the guys in the industry to do their best, but if it goes wrong they'll get the bullet.

Perhaps VMC on top of a high layer of cloud and under foggles would make a decent compromise, keeps things legal and takes the candidate out of sight of the surface with just white beneath his feet and no visible horizon. Then the problem becomes the unpredictability of when you will get those conditions to fly in.

Cheers


GS

[paco]

It would certainly reduce the number of accidents

Helicfi

Sadly, there are plenty of commercial pilots who I wouldn't trust with a pram, and plenty of PPLs whom I would trust with anything. It's not a matter of qualifications but mental attitude!

Phil

[Sgtfrog]

Paco,
I agree - just because you hold a CPL does not make you any better/worse than a PPL.

I don't know the right answer but if any IMC "training" for PPL/CPL was approached with the same attitude as vortex ring perhaps it would get the message across? Maybe there should be a greater emphasis placed on Met training with a suitably qualified person...?

SF

[helimutt]

my advice is to pay for an hour in an fnptII. After say 20 minutes flying the circuit with full visuals, and getting used to the sensitivity of it all, have the viz brought down to say 2k or so and add some rain. fly around like that for 5 minutes then just climb into a nice grey environment. Funny how quickly you become immersed and how real it feels. I'm hoping this exact thing can be shown by Paco.

Whirly, if your instructor took you into IMC in a 300 or R22 then can you tell me why he thought it a good idea? Apart from the fact it was probably illegal even if he did have a valid IR.
Ask the one guy who does the CPL/FI flight test and see what his thoughts are on it all?
The thought that just climbing 100' into cloud? Again, how do you know you're only going to go 100' into it? My experience is that most people, never having experienced it, want to slow down once IMC and instinctively pull aft cyclic, losing airspeed and climbing. Great combination!!

[Whirlygig]

Actually, I think he did have an IR! I can't ask him now as he's no longer at the school having moved on to the North Sea. Illegality to one side, I suspect the rationale was to demonstrate what it was like and to make sure I never did it. It worked.

This wasn't on a grey murky day but a very sunny day with only a few small clouds and it wasn't for very long!!! I don't know whether that mitigates it or not - just that those were the conditions.

Cheers

Whirls

[Flingingwings]

With thanks for the honesty so that we can all learn, AND not wishing my comments to be an aside/negative view on either of the posters

After a PPL and CPL (what's that? 15 hours foggles?) I thought I had this 'instrument flying' lark pretty nailed.

I know of an examiner in the UK who has recently flown IMC with PPL(H)s in unstabilised singles

Perhaps these two quotes show clearly what the CAA and flying schools should be targetting. And the extent of the 'problem' that pilots themselves are trying to address, of course acknowledging that only those interested and willing to learn will attend the evenings.