Robbie crash, Kroonstad South Africa June 2008
The pilot stated there was a decay in rotor rpm shortly after take-off when the helicopter was at a height of about 20m agl. It banked to the left, rapidly loosing height and in the flair hit the ground tail first. At the same time the Mazda pick-up approached and the helicopter's right skid hit the roof of the pick-up and shattered the windscreen. It then fell onto its left side and broke in two.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Mrs Miggin's
Age: 47
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it just me or is that narrative of the accident different to what we're seeing in the video,the aircraft is turning to the right not the left after takeoff,there is a slight drift to the left but that looks more like an attempt to miss the pick-up,the poor driver of which seems to be getting some of the blame for appearing in front of the 44! If there was a decay in rrpm why did he turn back towards the hotel,surely you'd continue into wind?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with others, they are talking about a different crash with the quote below, or cannot tell the left from the right, - yaa.
In recips you live or die with the memorised sound of your engine and rotors, not the lights on the dash.
That engine either quit or was rolled off, the sound of the rotors in the final seconds of flight is definately the sound of one in autorotation.
So, i suggest,
Film crew?
cameras?
an auto demo totally f**** up?????
or
a simple explanation of the engine quitting just as the pilot did a smart arse turn back to where he did a heavy pull up to translate?
It would be good to see an overview of the surrounding country side before prejudging the accident to finger trouble.
I feel very sorry for the limo driver, however almost certainly with four occupants the fate of the machine in the final configuration just prior to motor car impact would have left very little room for a painless landing.
Before answering to mine, listen again to the sound of the RRPM.
It banked to the left, rapidly loosing height and in the flair hit the ground tail first.
That engine either quit or was rolled off, the sound of the rotors in the final seconds of flight is definately the sound of one in autorotation.
So, i suggest,
Film crew?
cameras?
an auto demo totally f**** up?????
or
a simple explanation of the engine quitting just as the pilot did a smart arse turn back to where he did a heavy pull up to translate?
It would be good to see an overview of the surrounding country side before prejudging the accident to finger trouble.
I feel very sorry for the limo driver, however almost certainly with four occupants the fate of the machine in the final configuration just prior to motor car impact would have left very little room for a painless landing.
Before answering to mine, listen again to the sound of the RRPM.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft had hydraulics when I flew it a couple of years ago.
This flight was reported to be carrying three persons including 'stars' of a South Africa soapie. Kroonstad Airport is 4700', the sun was shining and it looks like a lot of fuel ran out.
There was another R44 incident (nose over during take off, then tail into ground, crash and burn) at Pietersburg Civil Airport during an air show a few days before so some accounts might be confusing the two.
This flight was reported to be carrying three persons including 'stars' of a South Africa soapie. Kroonstad Airport is 4700', the sun was shining and it looks like a lot of fuel ran out.
There was another R44 incident (nose over during take off, then tail into ground, crash and burn) at Pietersburg Civil Airport during an air show a few days before so some accounts might be confusing the two.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well, it certainly sounded like an auto at the end. Maybe he was trying to do an auto, or came in too fast, saw the ground rushing up, panicked, pull the lever up, RRPM decay, and splat.
It's stuff like this that re-enforces the "why do helicopters always crash?" public mentality.
It's stuff like this that re-enforces the "why do helicopters always crash?" public mentality.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Oakdale Ca.
Age: 60
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can a switch accidentally shut off Hyds.
Just lucky than nobody was killed or hurt.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=656_1390504003
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=656_1390504003
NOVEMBER 2013, According to the CAA, The pilot made a statement that the hydraulic system of the helicopter had failed. The hydraulic system was tested after the accident and was found to be in a serviceable condition.
The pilot was caught off guard when he inadvertently selected the hydraulic switch to the off position instead of selecting the speaker to the on position and was therefore unable to control the aircraft prior to impact.
The pilot and two of the passengers were not injured, the passenger that was seated in the left front seat sustained minor injuries and was taken to hospital. The helicopter sustained substantial damage to the fuselage, main rotor blades, skid gear and tail boom.
The pilot was caught off guard when he inadvertently selected the hydraulic switch to the off position instead of selecting the speaker to the on position and was therefore unable to control the aircraft prior to impact.
The pilot and two of the passengers were not injured, the passenger that was seated in the left front seat sustained minor injuries and was taken to hospital. The helicopter sustained substantial damage to the fuselage, main rotor blades, skid gear and tail boom.
Last edited by jim63; 26th Jan 2014 at 22:04.
A switch can cut of hydraulics, but the helicopter should remain flyable, albeit with much heavier control forces. I can't imagine an aircraft designer making a helicopter with a switch that, if operated in flight, would result in complete loss of control for a competent pilot!
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Google R44 hydraulic switch brings up loads;
Common occurrence it seems
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...UG%2002-10.pdf
R44 RAVEN II Hydraulic switch
Pic of switch WATCH: Crazy Helicopter Crash In Kroonstad [VIDEO] | 2oceansvibe.com
Etc
Common occurrence it seems
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...UG%2002-10.pdf
R44 RAVEN II Hydraulic switch
Pic of switch WATCH: Crazy Helicopter Crash In Kroonstad [VIDEO] | 2oceansvibe.com
Etc
Control forces
I had a trial lesson in an R22 about, oh god, years and years ago. I was "in control" for almost the whole time (say 95% or more). The thing I most clearly recall was that the cyclic took about as much force as a pencil scribbling on paper. My instructor insisted that the stick should be held between thumb and the opposed fore and middle fingers (or something like that - it was a while ago).
How can an R44 possibly need hydraulically assisted controls?
How can an R44 possibly need hydraulically assisted controls?
How can an R44 possibly need hydraulically assisted controls?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JimJim
I own & fly both R44 (Clipper II) and EC120. Hydraulics out, the EC120 is easier to fly than the R44, though both are certainly flyable / controllable. There is marginal difference in the control force required to move the blades between the two machines - despite the higher AUW of the 120; the R44 has a 2-blade teetering head - but the 120 does not suffer cross-feed from the closed hydraulics and that is what makes the R44 'heavy' to control without hydraulics.
In the Clipper 2 the cross-feed causes lever down & cyclic forward to be linked (and v.v.) which means that the pilot has to overcome that when trying to make fine control movements. It makes the un-practiced pilot look rather "jerky" in controlling the ship. Hydraulics on I fly the R44 with two fingers and a thumb with my hand resting on my thigh but hydraulics-off I need a firm, full hand grip due to the cross-feed.
Without hydraulics I find it easier to make a running landing with the R44 than to hover her, though I know others who are very happy to hover sans-hydraulics. In the EC120 with hydraulics off I have always come to the hover before landing.
I haven't flown the R22 so I can't compare
John
I own & fly both R44 (Clipper II) and EC120. Hydraulics out, the EC120 is easier to fly than the R44, though both are certainly flyable / controllable. There is marginal difference in the control force required to move the blades between the two machines - despite the higher AUW of the 120; the R44 has a 2-blade teetering head - but the 120 does not suffer cross-feed from the closed hydraulics and that is what makes the R44 'heavy' to control without hydraulics.
In the Clipper 2 the cross-feed causes lever down & cyclic forward to be linked (and v.v.) which means that the pilot has to overcome that when trying to make fine control movements. It makes the un-practiced pilot look rather "jerky" in controlling the ship. Hydraulics on I fly the R44 with two fingers and a thumb with my hand resting on my thigh but hydraulics-off I need a firm, full hand grip due to the cross-feed.
Without hydraulics I find it easier to make a running landing with the R44 than to hover her, though I know others who are very happy to hover sans-hydraulics. In the EC120 with hydraulics off I have always come to the hover before landing.
I haven't flown the R22 so I can't compare
John
