Hughes 300 "beheaded" in Brazil - ground resonance?
Thread Starter
Hughes 300 "beheaded" in Brazil - ground resonance?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,574
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Doesn't sound or look like ground resonance to me.
Firstly, the report said the aircraft was airborne at the time of the problem. Secondly, ground resonance usually ends up with the helicopter lying on its side.
The photos sugggest a catastrophic gearbox problem, or other airborne failure, leading to a very heavy landing. The fact that there is no main rotor gearbox present could have occurred from a MRG seizure or as a result of the very heavy landing.
Hopefully the injured occupants will recover, this looks very nasty.
Firstly, the report said the aircraft was airborne at the time of the problem. Secondly, ground resonance usually ends up with the helicopter lying on its side.
The photos sugggest a catastrophic gearbox problem, or other airborne failure, leading to a very heavy landing. The fact that there is no main rotor gearbox present could have occurred from a MRG seizure or as a result of the very heavy landing.
Hopefully the injured occupants will recover, this looks very nasty.
Blimey
Never ever seen a 300 ( this looks like a 269B) with no mast tube on let alone the disc completely missing, where has it gone ??? Even more so when you consider the rear x beam has done its job and collapsed, either the disc came off in flight and luckily the ac landed upright( unlikely) or the impact was so severe the blades drooped down and cut off the cabin and the mast failed ( more likely) as there is a chunk of horiz stab missing, so disc came off going backwards or to one side taking out the stab)
Think they were rather lucky
Never ever seen a 300 ( this looks like a 269B) with no mast tube on let alone the disc completely missing, where has it gone ??? Even more so when you consider the rear x beam has done its job and collapsed, either the disc came off in flight and luckily the ac landed upright( unlikely) or the impact was so severe the blades drooped down and cut off the cabin and the mast failed ( more likely) as there is a chunk of horiz stab missing, so disc came off going backwards or to one side taking out the stab)
Think they were rather lucky
Just had another look one mrb is just visible on th eground next to tailboom. The machine must have landed very hevily on the rear as front x beam shows no deformation. Perhaps ac touched down on rear, full forward cylic which then cut off cabin and caused mast to fail ??
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the lack of cabin top may have more to do with rescue cutters than rotor blades. All the uprights are neatly severed, some at the same height & not ripped unevenly and the fella in the RHS is clearly not in good shape. If back injuries are suspected as the description suggests, it is a likely scenario.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: AMSL
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the look of the landing gear and shocks id say the pilot has at least suffered spinal compression, evidence of the pilot sitting upright in the cockpit after the accident would suggest this. Surprised how he is relatively intact in comparison to the cabin
Rotor Incrsion Zone
I've seen on the Schweizer/Sikorsky website one of the features of the H300 on the brochure is that the MR blades are designed not to encroach into the crew area in the event of an incident.
I have always wondered if that's really going to work, with some scepticism.
Given the available pictures of the poor guy on the deck receiving medical attention, and from what I can see of the injuries, I guess it works as well as can be expected. Mind you he looks a bit shorter than me - but there must have been debris going everywhere, time to be wearing a helmet visor down, gloves etc etc..
What I find interesting is the stigma associated with wearing a helmet for anything other than where it's mandated (Rigs, EMS, etc). I have mixed views on the subject but I have heard people I respect poo-poo-ing the idea. Am I being over sensitive?
CC
I have always wondered if that's really going to work, with some scepticism.
Given the available pictures of the poor guy on the deck receiving medical attention, and from what I can see of the injuries, I guess it works as well as can be expected. Mind you he looks a bit shorter than me - but there must have been debris going everywhere, time to be wearing a helmet visor down, gloves etc etc..
What I find interesting is the stigma associated with wearing a helmet for anything other than where it's mandated (Rigs, EMS, etc). I have mixed views on the subject but I have heard people I respect poo-poo-ing the idea. Am I being over sensitive?
CC
Thread Starter
Another article (google translation) gives the injuries as "both were in serious condition, having suffered Geovani orthopedic trauma, vascular, and Daniel, limb trauma.". A later report quotes them as "now being stable", thank goodness
The article includes a photo of one of them being treated on the apron before being put onto a spine board. Plenty of blood so only look-see for the non-squeamish, and hence pic not added to this post.
The article includes a photo of one of them being treated on the apron before being put onto a spine board. Plenty of blood so only look-see for the non-squeamish, and hence pic not added to this post.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: US
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
helihub: The images appear the same as those of the link in post #1.
cc:
Would love to see that piece of propaganda. Crash dynamics are notoriously unpredictable and I wonder how Sikorsky would be able to make such a guarantee.
I am not aware of any industry sectors where helmets are mandated by the FAA (or other body) and in offshore operations (globally) it is still a rare practice with Australia being one of the foremost users.
Most non-military helmet use has been spawned by organizational culture (imported from the military) such as among EMS and police which are the highest users followed by the aerial work sector.
Why do you give a damn about what others think or say? A helmet (the right kind) can save your hearing and maybe even your life and is appropriate for just about all types of work except maybe exec ops.
HM
cc:
the MR blades are designed not to encroach into the crew area in the event of an incident
where it's mandated (Rigs, EMS, etc).
Most non-military helmet use has been spawned by organizational culture (imported from the military) such as among EMS and police which are the highest users followed by the aerial work sector.
Why do you give a damn about what others think or say? A helmet (the right kind) can save your hearing and maybe even your life and is appropriate for just about all types of work except maybe exec ops.
HM
P212
Look in the bottom right corner you will just see the curled tip of a main rotor blade !
Have seen 4 crash remains of 300's not one has had the mast removed, all have had both cross beams bent at more than 90 degrees , blades have stayed attached to machine along with rotor mast, so God only knows what happened here,must be trx failure with a sieze to take that lot off. But hey I am only speculating
Look in the bottom right corner you will just see the curled tip of a main rotor blade !
Have seen 4 crash remains of 300's not one has had the mast removed, all have had both cross beams bent at more than 90 degrees , blades have stayed attached to machine along with rotor mast, so God only knows what happened here,must be trx failure with a sieze to take that lot off. But hey I am only speculating
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Deep South
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hughes500 i thought that was the tail rotor! I can see it now. I too have seen some wrecked 300's over the years and as you say the mast has always remained. This has to be a catastrophic MR gearbox problem. I wonder if the box has been overhauled recently?
I generally meant mandated by the commercial organization rather than the CAA/JAA/FAA - in the UK we have so much Health and Safety focus, they won't even let us carry handguns around. Strange but true!
"Why do I care what other people think"
Erm... My actual question was "Am I being too sensitive" - I guess so, still if we didn't care what other's think, we wouldn't be reading and commenting.
I also saw the little frag of "blade" but I thought it was possibly the aerofoil from the top of the cabin as it didn't seem fat enough to be MR blade, but who can say?
Picture on page 8 of the brochure below but I think someone else pointed out there are a couple of bits (pedals, vertical fin) that make it look like a "pre-269C/300C" so might not be 100% valid on earlier models but if the MR Mast went without striking the ground, as it potentially seems to have done, the picture kind of depends where the MR Mast is at the time.
http://www.sacusa.com/products/pdfs/300C_TechData.pdf
Good news about the crew
OOPs and I realised I can't spell Incrsion - DOH !
CC
"Why do I care what other people think"
Erm... My actual question was "Am I being too sensitive" - I guess so, still if we didn't care what other's think, we wouldn't be reading and commenting.
I also saw the little frag of "blade" but I thought it was possibly the aerofoil from the top of the cabin as it didn't seem fat enough to be MR blade, but who can say?
Picture on page 8 of the brochure below but I think someone else pointed out there are a couple of bits (pedals, vertical fin) that make it look like a "pre-269C/300C" so might not be 100% valid on earlier models but if the MR Mast went without striking the ground, as it potentially seems to have done, the picture kind of depends where the MR Mast is at the time.
http://www.sacusa.com/products/pdfs/300C_TechData.pdf
Good news about the crew
OOPs and I realised I can't spell Incrsion - DOH !
CC
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: australia
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like blood on the front bottom window
blades could not reach stabilizer could they unless they were displaced? tail boom not bent? wouldn't a heavy vertical with blades attached normally impact the boom?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could the mast bearing have seized? Then the driveshaft would have fractured and most likely broken through the M/R mast. Meanwhile the blades would have abruptly stopped and flapped down ito the cabin.
Rnut think you will find that there would be too much torque for the thrust bearing to cause a seize ie the drive system would overcome the bearing. The main rotor trx seizing would cause the driveshaft to shear off, however the mast is a serious piece of metal to let go !
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'500
You are probably right. Having helped disassemble a mast on a 269B I know how strong it is. But I haven't heard of a 300 M/R gearbox failing - for that matter a T/R gearbox on a 300 series.
You are probably right. Having helped disassemble a mast on a 269B I know how strong it is. But I haven't heard of a 300 M/R gearbox failing - for that matter a T/R gearbox on a 300 series.