Help with another article please!
The Original Whirly
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Help with another article please!
Thanks again to all you lovely people who helped out with my article a couple of months ago. Now, if you aren't all sick of me....
This same editor wants an article on "The Dangers of Overloading". I said yes without thinking, then realised that apart from the problems of putting too many large people who lied about their weight in an R44, I know very little about it. Is it a problem in commercial work? Is it something you need to think about very often with turbine helicopters? Do you have any anecdotes or stories relating to overloaded helicopters (pm me if you don't want to tell these to the world!). And, R22 pilots, instructors etc, your stories are very welcome too.
Many thanks again in advance. Don't know what I'd do without you all.
This same editor wants an article on "The Dangers of Overloading". I said yes without thinking, then realised that apart from the problems of putting too many large people who lied about their weight in an R44, I know very little about it. Is it a problem in commercial work? Is it something you need to think about very often with turbine helicopters? Do you have any anecdotes or stories relating to overloaded helicopters (pm me if you don't want to tell these to the world!). And, R22 pilots, instructors etc, your stories are very welcome too.
Many thanks again in advance. Don't know what I'd do without you all.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Whirls,
The underslung load 'incidents' thread over on Mil Aircrew is an entertaining read, and has some anecdotes that may be suitable.
I/C
The underslung load 'incidents' thread over on Mil Aircrew is an entertaining read, and has some anecdotes that may be suitable.
I/C
I think, in simple terms, there are three types of overloading:
1. Will cause - as a minimum - reduced component life for both the airframe and engines, which may cause premature failure prior to their normal life. This may be minor, but costly - such as cracking in structural elements of the airframe - or there could be catastrophic failure at some later point in a component's life. The latter may take an entirely innocent pilot and pax load with it!
2. May not have obvious consequences, but will also include similar effects as above. In a more severe state, though, it may lead to loss of control due to lack of control authority.
3. I would think the effects are obvious, but for some graphic examples, please see the following video clips (with credit to Gary Spender's website):
Video Player » Griffin Helicopters | Mil Helicopter Crashes in the street
Video Player » Griffin Helicopters | A 206LT TwinRanger crashes trying to get
The other element to consider is that any pilot overloading an aircraft - with the exception of incorrectly manifested loads (for whatever reason) - is either a) ignorant of what they are doing or, b) recklessly ignoring limitations. You then have to consider how those traits manifest themselves in other areas of their flying!
Sorry - no anecdotes
- Above the RFM absolute TOM limits - with or without immediate consequences
- Outside the RFM C of G range
- Outside of the required performance range.
1. Will cause - as a minimum - reduced component life for both the airframe and engines, which may cause premature failure prior to their normal life. This may be minor, but costly - such as cracking in structural elements of the airframe - or there could be catastrophic failure at some later point in a component's life. The latter may take an entirely innocent pilot and pax load with it!
2. May not have obvious consequences, but will also include similar effects as above. In a more severe state, though, it may lead to loss of control due to lack of control authority.
3. I would think the effects are obvious, but for some graphic examples, please see the following video clips (with credit to Gary Spender's website):
Video Player » Griffin Helicopters | Mil Helicopter Crashes in the street
Video Player » Griffin Helicopters | A 206LT TwinRanger crashes trying to get
The other element to consider is that any pilot overloading an aircraft - with the exception of incorrectly manifested loads (for whatever reason) - is either a) ignorant of what they are doing or, b) recklessly ignoring limitations. You then have to consider how those traits manifest themselves in other areas of their flying!
Sorry - no anecdotes
Last edited by 212man; 17th Sep 2012 at 12:46. Reason: missed an apostrophe.....
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will you be treating "overloading" only as MAUW exceedance, or do you count loading below that but outside CoG?
I regularly fly EC120 close to MAUW and it can be intereting in gusty conditions. Down-wind taxi (in particular) can lead to running out of lever and (at worst) having to settle for a moment. Left-spot-turns can also be challenging at close to MAUW - which is why I tend to make them to the right when close to max power.
This EC120 http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...0B,_EI-IZO.pdf is below MAUW but loaded 5mm fwd of CoG limit. Uncommanded nose-down attitude possibly caused by wind gust did not prove to be controllable.
I regularly fly EC120 close to MAUW and it can be intereting in gusty conditions. Down-wind taxi (in particular) can lead to running out of lever and (at worst) having to settle for a moment. Left-spot-turns can also be challenging at close to MAUW - which is why I tend to make them to the right when close to max power.
This EC120 http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...0B,_EI-IZO.pdf is below MAUW but loaded 5mm fwd of CoG limit. Uncommanded nose-down attitude possibly caused by wind gust did not prove to be controllable.
Last edited by John R81; 17th Sep 2012 at 11:42.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: home and abroad
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I concur with 212-man.
Flying offshore our greatest risk is no. 3: outside the required performance range in case of OEI.
A short annecdote: at an offshore operator a certain Captain was considered "pedantic" by the handling agent as quite often he would refuse mailbags of 3-5 lbs because the helicopter would be above MAUW for (onshore) Take Off.
However, one bad day he (as well as his copilot and ground staff) failed to notice that a passenger got confused and joined the group travelling on his medium helicopter. They duly departed and it was not until they had been airborne for a good number of minutes that the error was spotted, an extra landing had to be planned to disembark the extra passenger and afterwards an occurrence report had to be filed.
While everybody had a good chuckle, he did exceed 1. and 3 and possibly 2.
Component life was recalculated and staff retrained but it could have ended badly if they had suffered a power failure.
Would be interested in reading the finished article.
Flying offshore our greatest risk is no. 3: outside the required performance range in case of OEI.
A short annecdote: at an offshore operator a certain Captain was considered "pedantic" by the handling agent as quite often he would refuse mailbags of 3-5 lbs because the helicopter would be above MAUW for (onshore) Take Off.
However, one bad day he (as well as his copilot and ground staff) failed to notice that a passenger got confused and joined the group travelling on his medium helicopter. They duly departed and it was not until they had been airborne for a good number of minutes that the error was spotted, an extra landing had to be planned to disembark the extra passenger and afterwards an occurrence report had to be filed.
While everybody had a good chuckle, he did exceed 1. and 3 and possibly 2.
Component life was recalculated and staff retrained but it could have ended badly if they had suffered a power failure.
Would be interested in reading the finished article.
I'll get me coat......
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gold Coast, Australia.
Age: 51
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe you could also address the reason WHY aircraft are sometimes overloaded.
The potential to overload our aircraft is something that occurs almost daily for me. The Jetranger is a great aircraft but in summer, with density altitudes of 5000' and passengers that routinely weigh over 100kg (220lbs), they struggle to do the job especially when the departure profile is near vertical! The client regularly asks why we only took two passengers when the aircraft has four seats. They begrudgingly accept the answer when we emphasise the safety reasons but at the end of the day the mighty dollar is the reason we are operating at the edge of the aircrafts ability instead of upgrading to an aircraft better suited to the task. In short the client expects champagne service on a light beer budget! I'm on a contract with a large oil & gas company so it's relatively easy for me to simply refuse to carry the loads in excess of MAUW, no one wants to be seen to be putting safety over profit, but not all pilots have it that easy. Unfortunately commercial pressure can be a powerful incentive to breach the rules because most of the time you'll get away with it.
CH
The potential to overload our aircraft is something that occurs almost daily for me. The Jetranger is a great aircraft but in summer, with density altitudes of 5000' and passengers that routinely weigh over 100kg (220lbs), they struggle to do the job especially when the departure profile is near vertical! The client regularly asks why we only took two passengers when the aircraft has four seats. They begrudgingly accept the answer when we emphasise the safety reasons but at the end of the day the mighty dollar is the reason we are operating at the edge of the aircrafts ability instead of upgrading to an aircraft better suited to the task. In short the client expects champagne service on a light beer budget! I'm on a contract with a large oil & gas company so it's relatively easy for me to simply refuse to carry the loads in excess of MAUW, no one wants to be seen to be putting safety over profit, but not all pilots have it that easy. Unfortunately commercial pressure can be a powerful incentive to breach the rules because most of the time you'll get away with it.
CH
The Original Whirly
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right, thank you, all becoming much, much clearer to me now. More most welcome; please keep 'em coming. Publication may not be for a month or two, and I can let you know when. However, if anyone wants me to send them a copy of the article when it's written just pm me your email address. I don't think it'll tell you much you don't already know though; many of you have much more experience than I do! My 'expertise' as a writer consists in knowing a little, picking brains of those who know more, and sounding like an expert when I'm not! 
There may be more than component life issues
Issues with respect to operating an aircraft outside of its prescribed weight and balance limitations are far more than just what physical effect it may have on the life of airframe and components. Many variables come into play while operating outside of published limitations. First amongst them to be considered is: Has the aircraft ever been tested in the condition or configuration? If not the following questions should be addressed.
• Are adequate control margins available to permit controlled flight throughout the flight envelope? As an example collective range may become an issue when operating above the published maximum. When increasing the gross weight limitations on the MH-53 the collective up stop was reached during takeoff thus requiring some restrictions on takeoff profiles and later physically moving the collective range. The aircraft’s light weight ability to autorotate was compromised in favor takeoff performance.
• Operating below the minimum takeoff weight as published may have similar issues.
• Lastly, operations outside the published limitations as listed the aircraft’s flight manual is in violation of the FARs. Should a mishap occur, it would not go well for the PIC if he had knowingly operated outside those published limitations.
• Are adequate control margins available to permit controlled flight throughout the flight envelope? As an example collective range may become an issue when operating above the published maximum. When increasing the gross weight limitations on the MH-53 the collective up stop was reached during takeoff thus requiring some restrictions on takeoff profiles and later physically moving the collective range. The aircraft’s light weight ability to autorotate was compromised in favor takeoff performance.
• Operating below the minimum takeoff weight as published may have similar issues.
• Lastly, operations outside the published limitations as listed the aircraft’s flight manual is in violation of the FARs. Should a mishap occur, it would not go well for the PIC if he had knowingly operated outside those published limitations.
When I was free-lancing regularly on the A109C, I got a job for an owner on the outskirts of London. The task involved collecting the helicopter from Biggin Hill, flying to collect him from about 10 minutes away then taking him to pick up his guests at the opposite side of London before dropping them at a hotel about another 15 minutes away for a spot of sunday lunch. I did the fuel calcs very carefully, as anyone who has flown the A109A/C series will be intimately familiar with. The outcome was that I'd need an intermediate refuel which I arranged to do whilst they were having lunch as it would have no impact on their schedule.
As I landed at the lunch location, I asked the owner if he wanted me to shutdown or whether he'd prefer a rotors running drop-off as I needed to refuel. This question was met with indignation from him as he expected me to shutdown and thought I was taking the p1$$ by needing to take on fuel. "Why didn't you get fuel before we left?".
The standard weight and balance response came but he wasn't impressed. What put the icing on the cake for me were his immortal words "Well, 'Dave' (the regular pilot) never has to refuel when we make this trip and we do it most weeks". (name changed to protect the guilty)
I can't remember the exact numbers now, but to make the trip with any sort of sensible reserve, would have put us 100kg over MAUM. Somewhat worryingly, 'Dave' is a well known pilot in those parts and revered in certain circles - but it wasn't the first time Dave's cavalier attitude had come to my attention. Needless to say, I didn't get invited back to fly for him; I can't say I was perturbed. I'm sure there are hundreds of similar anecdotes if you know who to ask.
JJ
(Edited for typo)
As I landed at the lunch location, I asked the owner if he wanted me to shutdown or whether he'd prefer a rotors running drop-off as I needed to refuel. This question was met with indignation from him as he expected me to shutdown and thought I was taking the p1$$ by needing to take on fuel. "Why didn't you get fuel before we left?".
The standard weight and balance response came but he wasn't impressed. What put the icing on the cake for me were his immortal words "Well, 'Dave' (the regular pilot) never has to refuel when we make this trip and we do it most weeks". (name changed to protect the guilty)
I can't remember the exact numbers now, but to make the trip with any sort of sensible reserve, would have put us 100kg over MAUM. Somewhat worryingly, 'Dave' is a well known pilot in those parts and revered in certain circles - but it wasn't the first time Dave's cavalier attitude had come to my attention. Needless to say, I didn't get invited back to fly for him; I can't say I was perturbed. I'm sure there are hundreds of similar anecdotes if you know who to ask.
JJ
(Edited for typo)
Last edited by jellycopter; 17th Sep 2012 at 14:34.
I think most of us have a "but Dave didn't need to refuel" story...
Mine was: I was new to the area, operator and type. We were doing short duration shuttles from a feeder site to a sporting event. I was one of two pilots flying the shuttle in similar machines, except that the other guy's was float equipped and had some other extra bits and pieces so was notably heavier than mine. He was carrying the same pax loads as me but i was refuelling every 40 min and he was flying for 1:10 at least between refuels! I spent the whole time trying to figure out what i was doing wrong - answer was: nothing - i was at MAUW so.... do the maths!
Thing was... a week later the machine he had been flying for the three days at that event started throwing gearbox chips (on another pilot) and was found to be knackered - over-torqueing was considered to be the cause.
Once again - this was a "well respected" pilot who was revered within the industry.
"Hauling the @r$e" out of an airframe will very often bite some other poor sod. Don't do it and don't tolerate others that do it. The person it falls to bits around could be you or someone you care about.
OH
Mine was: I was new to the area, operator and type. We were doing short duration shuttles from a feeder site to a sporting event. I was one of two pilots flying the shuttle in similar machines, except that the other guy's was float equipped and had some other extra bits and pieces so was notably heavier than mine. He was carrying the same pax loads as me but i was refuelling every 40 min and he was flying for 1:10 at least between refuels! I spent the whole time trying to figure out what i was doing wrong - answer was: nothing - i was at MAUW so.... do the maths!
Thing was... a week later the machine he had been flying for the three days at that event started throwing gearbox chips (on another pilot) and was found to be knackered - over-torqueing was considered to be the cause.
Once again - this was a "well respected" pilot who was revered within the industry.
"Hauling the @r$e" out of an airframe will very often bite some other poor sod. Don't do it and don't tolerate others that do it. The person it falls to bits around could be you or someone you care about.
OH
Whirls: the dangers of overloading, cause and/or effect? "Dave" stories will abound for effect, but cause can be due to many and various reasons pertaining to the operation as well as the aircraft. Lighter helicopters require actual weights (try that on some of the joyflight pax in a paddock in the bush!), larger stuff can get away with standard weights. Carry on cr@p, what does that add to either end of the spectrum? W & B, loading on some machines becomes critical and the moment arm takes over from MAUW as the thing to watch. iBal is a great little App to use on (for instance) the EC130 which can run out of fwd cg without blinking. The disconcerting 'bzzzz' when the load is out of limits will help to make larger pax understand why they are relegated to the back row and the more pleasant 'ding' comes up
NS ops many moons ago we operated 4 x 212's on rig shuttles with varying weights, seating and cg. It took me (Ops Controller for my sins) days to work out a standard load giving the expected range of loads and cg we could accept and which seats should be loaded first on each aircraft. But looking over your shoulder in a 15 seat configuration with each seat full and 3 standing passengers at night, just before pulling pitch, comes back to QA/supervision of the deck crew
Similarly, in a light 212 doing field taxi runs during the day picking up and dropping off all around the Brent, I was given a manifest for 20 litres milk with two pax: HDO asked where, no worries, into the boot for the milk. Loading was done by HDA's under supervision of the HDO, so when the thumbs up came, off I went: or tried to! Cyclic on the forward stop, nose up to the sky, no chance of putting it back on without a tail strike so pull and go. After a run on landing on a bigger deck there were 200 litres of milk in the boot: I didn't have the heart to work out how far aft the cg must have been, but certainly kept a better eye on the freight loading whenever possible in future flights.
Another 'Dave' story operating an early A109AII with not much performance, into the owner's business in the Australian Alps in summertime: 5700ft AMSL, 20C, not much room for error. The manager insisted on loading the machine to sea level weights (he'd obviously been taught something along the way) and could not accept restricted loads according to the day. One particular discussion ended when he patted me on the shoulder and advised me that "when you have 'Dave's' experience you'll be able to overtemp and fly from here like him"
(No, Dave was not the other guy's name).
NS ops many moons ago we operated 4 x 212's on rig shuttles with varying weights, seating and cg. It took me (Ops Controller for my sins) days to work out a standard load giving the expected range of loads and cg we could accept and which seats should be loaded first on each aircraft. But looking over your shoulder in a 15 seat configuration with each seat full and 3 standing passengers at night, just before pulling pitch, comes back to QA/supervision of the deck crew
Similarly, in a light 212 doing field taxi runs during the day picking up and dropping off all around the Brent, I was given a manifest for 20 litres milk with two pax: HDO asked where, no worries, into the boot for the milk. Loading was done by HDA's under supervision of the HDO, so when the thumbs up came, off I went: or tried to! Cyclic on the forward stop, nose up to the sky, no chance of putting it back on without a tail strike so pull and go. After a run on landing on a bigger deck there were 200 litres of milk in the boot: I didn't have the heart to work out how far aft the cg must have been, but certainly kept a better eye on the freight loading whenever possible in future flights.
Another 'Dave' story operating an early A109AII with not much performance, into the owner's business in the Australian Alps in summertime: 5700ft AMSL, 20C, not much room for error. The manager insisted on loading the machine to sea level weights (he'd obviously been taught something along the way) and could not accept restricted loads according to the day. One particular discussion ended when he patted me on the shoulder and advised me that "when you have 'Dave's' experience you'll be able to overtemp and fly from here like him"
(No, Dave was not the other guy's name).
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the reasons that I bought the EC120 was the fact that it records all excedences and the Pilot cannot cancel the flag. If you exceed MAUW and the simply pull enough pitch to lift it, and hence over-torque the machine, then you are going to get a flag, a bollocking and the bill. Same for over-temping. For this reason, I am confident of the history of the machine and the component parts and I know that if an exceedence occurs the engineers will have the correct calculations for impact on engine / gearbox life.
I agree with John E, the iBal is a splendid app. Given that you can configure it for your own aricraft - not just accept the standard machine - it is a really useful quick check.
I agree with John E, the iBal is a splendid app. Given that you can configure it for your own aricraft - not just accept the standard machine - it is a really useful quick check.
Many moons ago at Silverstone in a 341. first trip in to pick up pax, fuellers had put in too much fuel, you can see what 's coming !
landed at the racetrack furthest pad down the FATO, turn into pad with wind now on my 7 o clock. Loaders bring fat basta.d out and put him in the front, nice blonde with 15st hubby in the back and then fat basta.d's brother. Couldnt do the maths to see if within mauw in such a short time. Picked 341 to hover with tq light just flashing, right pedal turn ac straight back on ground. Left pedal turn and a cushion creep take off followed by a lot of expletives on private frequency. Lesson well learnt to a novice cplh !!!
landed at the racetrack furthest pad down the FATO, turn into pad with wind now on my 7 o clock. Loaders bring fat basta.d out and put him in the front, nice blonde with 15st hubby in the back and then fat basta.d's brother. Couldnt do the maths to see if within mauw in such a short time. Picked 341 to hover with tq light just flashing, right pedal turn ac straight back on ground. Left pedal turn and a cushion creep take off followed by a lot of expletives on private frequency. Lesson well learnt to a novice cplh !!!
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Dangers of Overloading"
It can be down to how you fly the aircraft.
For example, taking off at max performance under mgtow is no different to the engine than taking off slightly above mgtow, still at (not above) max performance.
The damage occurs when you exceed the torque or temps, right?
So a little overloading can be done safely provided you stay within the engine / transmission limits. IMHO.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chopjock,
That is a pretty limited view of the hazards of "overloading". There is more to it than exceeding engine/gearbox limits.
From my experience, I think the view you express is found in some PPLs (in the UK). Basically, they "weigh" the helicopter by seeing if they can get into a ground effect hover without exceeding engine/gearbox limits. They assume that if they can, then everything is OK - It isn't.
There are a whole bunch of extra considerations that should be considered.
That is a pretty limited view of the hazards of "overloading". There is more to it than exceeding engine/gearbox limits.
From my experience, I think the view you express is found in some PPLs (in the UK). Basically, they "weigh" the helicopter by seeing if they can get into a ground effect hover without exceeding engine/gearbox limits. They assume that if they can, then everything is OK - It isn't.
There are a whole bunch of extra considerations that should be considered.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: cornwall UK
Age: 80
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Overloading
I'm surprised to hear a professional?? pilot blithely talking about taking off above MTOW. The figure is there for a reason, determined by the designers and engineers who built the thing. Flying outside the figures, performance/weight/whatever, listed in the manual means you're in territory which no flight/component testing has guaranteed.
In any case, succeed, and you saved, what, money/time/reputation??, although you might quite possibly kill the next poor bloke who has to fly the aircraft, fail and you kill yourself and your passengers.
Dave (the bloke who pushes above the limits due to his 'experience') is always wrong.
In any case, succeed, and you saved, what, money/time/reputation??, although you might quite possibly kill the next poor bloke who has to fly the aircraft, fail and you kill yourself and your passengers.
Dave (the bloke who pushes above the limits due to his 'experience') is always wrong.
We Need Additional Threads to discuss all possibilities
Boslandew is correct. I can’t believe that more have not stepped up to express this side of the argument. We could start multiple threads for Vne, engine, torque, engine turbine temperature, engine N1or N2 exceedances. Rotor speed is another limitation that could be discussed. I am sure that there are as many stories of individuals that have operated on the incorrect side of the many published limits and not reported such having gotten away scot free with the belief that no issues existed as a result of the exceedance.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Its not just the engine and gearbox that can get damaged! : undercarriage/skids, other bits of airframe attached to undercarriage/skids, transport joints, any load-bearing part of the airframe, such as where the main rotor gearbox is bolted to the roof. Just cos you havent over-temped the engine doesnt mean to say the tailboom wont fall off if you have over-stressed the airframe. Anyone who deliberately flies overweight is a liability.