Do you ever think about the Danger Involved?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Isn't there something like an international designer standard that dictates the way this things should be?"
Perhaps we could start with all rotors turning the same way, and the captain's seat always being on the same side?
Perhaps we could start with all rotors turning the same way, and the captain's seat always being on the same side?
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guidlines for designers.
To: BlenderPilot
In military design programs the constructors of the aircraft will have a product assurance department consisting of Reliability, Maintainability, Systems Safety and Human Factors Engineers. Two of the documents that drive the design for Human Factors are MIL-STD 1472 and MIL-HDBK 759A. 1472 is titled Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities. 759A is titled Human Factors Engineering Design for Army Material.
Both of these documents address the design and layout of control panels and the switches and control devices applicable to those panels but not specifically those used in aircraft or helicopters. This would include the desired direction of switch movement in order to standardize the operation and control of differing equipments. Because of these documents you will find a high degree of commonality between different systems employed by the military. It is not to say that the designers will adhere to the documents to the letter but in most cases the systems will be inspected by representatives of the military service that will employ the systems and if they feel that the design is “Non-Standard” they will recommend a change. If in certain cases the manufacturer has limited experience in the design of the required system (Hughes had no experience when they won the Apache contract) so they hired a former Army combat pilot experienced in the Cobra and he finalized the design of the cockpit.
When some companies design an aircraft or helicopter to spec, that is, to penetrate the market there are no outside guidelines to adhere to. On a military contract RMS&HF are a part of the contract and the customer is billed for their design input. On a commercial development the participation of these groups is limited and what the customer gets is what the company designs which may or may not adhere to the two controlling documents described above.
In military design programs the constructors of the aircraft will have a product assurance department consisting of Reliability, Maintainability, Systems Safety and Human Factors Engineers. Two of the documents that drive the design for Human Factors are MIL-STD 1472 and MIL-HDBK 759A. 1472 is titled Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment and Facilities. 759A is titled Human Factors Engineering Design for Army Material.
Both of these documents address the design and layout of control panels and the switches and control devices applicable to those panels but not specifically those used in aircraft or helicopters. This would include the desired direction of switch movement in order to standardize the operation and control of differing equipments. Because of these documents you will find a high degree of commonality between different systems employed by the military. It is not to say that the designers will adhere to the documents to the letter but in most cases the systems will be inspected by representatives of the military service that will employ the systems and if they feel that the design is “Non-Standard” they will recommend a change. If in certain cases the manufacturer has limited experience in the design of the required system (Hughes had no experience when they won the Apache contract) so they hired a former Army combat pilot experienced in the Cobra and he finalized the design of the cockpit.
When some companies design an aircraft or helicopter to spec, that is, to penetrate the market there are no outside guidelines to adhere to. On a military contract RMS&HF are a part of the contract and the customer is billed for their design input. On a commercial development the participation of these groups is limited and what the customer gets is what the company designs which may or may not adhere to the two controlling documents described above.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the last few years I've lost two very close friends to accidents. One of them hated aviation for its dangers and always poured scorn on my passion. He was killed falling off a mountain in Scotland in a fog. The other was an incurably addicted helicopter pilot who died in a road crash in Syria.
Do your checks, calculate your risks and don't do nothin' dumb, but never let fear stop you flying, because your time will come in turn. If you die without a mark on you, that's just gravy.
Do your checks, calculate your risks and don't do nothin' dumb, but never let fear stop you flying, because your time will come in turn. If you die without a mark on you, that's just gravy.
Senis Semper Fidelis
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lancashire U K
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fear< is that thing that grips your inards, just above your stomach and just below your rib cage, when it grips you then realise that the thing is starting to go pear shaped, it is your speed of reaction, and then memory that teaches you the lesson!
I used to pause for a second every time I pulled my helmet on and say to myself "...I could die doing this stuff...". I didn't dwell on it, just reflected on the fact that it is dangerous and to switch on. It didn't stop me from being involved in a crash; however, I was lucky enough to get out of it and lived to fly another day.
Now, I believe I am a safer pilot - more conservative probably, but the trick is to stop this conservatism from turning into fear. And fear will turn you into a seagull.
Now, I believe I am a safer pilot - more conservative probably, but the trick is to stop this conservatism from turning into fear. And fear will turn you into a seagull.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: ----------
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On reading T/Cs comment on the tread I have skipped through to add to his, really
I have spent an awfull lot to get where I am Low time with the right ticks in the boxs the job prospects are not good and the pay so far is to say the least poor
I wish to fly to achieve my final goal to fly hems this is not for the money but the job.
I did as most of you are aware 23 years in the fire service and found the go home at the end of the day and say that I made a differance was what it is all about. hems would give me both job satisfaction and do something that I like doing flying but to get there having students trying to kill you on a daily basis and to be paid poorly for the privalige is still a pill I am struggling to come to terms with but to get where I want to be you have to put up with.
But I love to fly
Regards
Bravo 99 (AJB)
I have spent an awfull lot to get where I am Low time with the right ticks in the boxs the job prospects are not good and the pay so far is to say the least poor
I wish to fly to achieve my final goal to fly hems this is not for the money but the job.
I did as most of you are aware 23 years in the fire service and found the go home at the end of the day and say that I made a differance was what it is all about. hems would give me both job satisfaction and do something that I like doing flying but to get there having students trying to kill you on a daily basis and to be paid poorly for the privalige is still a pill I am struggling to come to terms with but to get where I want to be you have to put up with.
But I love to fly
Regards
Bravo 99 (AJB)
I gave alot of thought regarding the danger involved many years ago, pretty early on in my career. I came to the conclusion that if I was asking myself the question, I was pushing, or allowing myself to be pushed, far too hard. What I ended up doing was setting very rigid standards for myself and not breaking them for anything. If I had the slightest concern for my saftey, I was obviously doing something very wrong, had made some unwise decision, and I would turn-around/land/not-take-off...whatever the case may be. It's just a job, and if you consider what you do dangerous, you probally shouldn't be doing it. Every decision should have a very solid "what-if" consideration behind it, worse-casing every foreseeable eventuality, and the decision based on the safest course of action. Zero-tolerance and a HUGE margin of safety, and if you do make a mistake, something we all do, you should have plenty of room to correct it safely. I look back at the decisions I was making when I asked myself the same question...and I shudder and thank my lucky stars I didn't hurt myself or anyone else.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 48 Deg South
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its interesting reading all these comments from pilots out there. From my side I know exactly how dangerous this industry is. Travelling around the world meeting operators, pilots, mechanics and owners in all corners gives you a lot of insight into how different people and the way they run their businesses can be, as well as giving you the chance to make some great friends. Because of this the number of funerals I have attended over the last couple of years has increased substantially.
If pilot error is involved, in my opinion, its easier to accept and understand, but when its an "unexplained mechanical failure" then it starts to grate on me because they have no control over the cause, only some minimal control, if at all, over the outcome, and its usually bad. A classic example of this is a long time friend who was killed a couple of years ago here in Kiwiland. Those down this part of the world would have known Simon Green. He took me for one of my first helicopter rides in a 500C when flying out of Taihape, NZ. He was flying along in his UH1H for Wanganui Aero Work when something let go, the machine rolled inverted, after having the blade come through the cabin, and the rest was history. That was the end of a great man, as well as his crewmates, and it was because of a "mechanical failure". Simon did thorough preflights every time he flew the machine so if something looked wrong he would have picked it up. Its accidents like this that hurt more than anything.
I know a lot of you have the advantage of flying for the same operator every day, or at least operators you know and trust their operations to provide you with healthy machinery. How about swapping for my job for a period. Over the years I have become more cautious on who I fly with and in what. The disadvantage of my job is I dont know the engineers for the company I go and visit, I dont know the attitude of the pilot I am flying with, I dont know the maint history of the helo I am going to fly in, and its all based on trust. Every time we take off my fate is in someone elses hands, period. Thats why I am now very selective of where I go and what I fly in. Call it self preservation.
I have only really had a couple of majors when it comes to crossing to the other side. First was in the back of an F-16 doing a photo shoot over the Florida Keys. Short version, we had a midair, one F-16 crashed into the ocean and we limped home. Second one would have been 100% fatal. Was on the fjords of Norway in an AS350 shooting some air to air shots of the Kmax doing a power line job near Alesund.
We went out and hovered over a fjord while Daniel flew around us in the Kmax. We were at 900ft and then Daniel screamed at our pilot to descend. Everyone was puzzled. Found out when we landed that we had been hovering right under a wire across a fjord and were only about six feet below it. We had been slowly increasing in height to get better pics so if Daniel had not said anything five of us would not be here today, thats a forgone conclusion.
Anyway just my two cents worth. This industry is dangerous, everyone just has to manage the risks, therefore start practicising risk management with every flight you do.
Autorotate.
If pilot error is involved, in my opinion, its easier to accept and understand, but when its an "unexplained mechanical failure" then it starts to grate on me because they have no control over the cause, only some minimal control, if at all, over the outcome, and its usually bad. A classic example of this is a long time friend who was killed a couple of years ago here in Kiwiland. Those down this part of the world would have known Simon Green. He took me for one of my first helicopter rides in a 500C when flying out of Taihape, NZ. He was flying along in his UH1H for Wanganui Aero Work when something let go, the machine rolled inverted, after having the blade come through the cabin, and the rest was history. That was the end of a great man, as well as his crewmates, and it was because of a "mechanical failure". Simon did thorough preflights every time he flew the machine so if something looked wrong he would have picked it up. Its accidents like this that hurt more than anything.
I know a lot of you have the advantage of flying for the same operator every day, or at least operators you know and trust their operations to provide you with healthy machinery. How about swapping for my job for a period. Over the years I have become more cautious on who I fly with and in what. The disadvantage of my job is I dont know the engineers for the company I go and visit, I dont know the attitude of the pilot I am flying with, I dont know the maint history of the helo I am going to fly in, and its all based on trust. Every time we take off my fate is in someone elses hands, period. Thats why I am now very selective of where I go and what I fly in. Call it self preservation.
I have only really had a couple of majors when it comes to crossing to the other side. First was in the back of an F-16 doing a photo shoot over the Florida Keys. Short version, we had a midair, one F-16 crashed into the ocean and we limped home. Second one would have been 100% fatal. Was on the fjords of Norway in an AS350 shooting some air to air shots of the Kmax doing a power line job near Alesund.
We went out and hovered over a fjord while Daniel flew around us in the Kmax. We were at 900ft and then Daniel screamed at our pilot to descend. Everyone was puzzled. Found out when we landed that we had been hovering right under a wire across a fjord and were only about six feet below it. We had been slowly increasing in height to get better pics so if Daniel had not said anything five of us would not be here today, thats a forgone conclusion.
Anyway just my two cents worth. This industry is dangerous, everyone just has to manage the risks, therefore start practicising risk management with every flight you do.
Autorotate.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SE
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Me have been thinking for a while.
Assume that you would have to carry out an operation meaning that you would use an aircarft to fly a person from A to B.
Given an identical route with exactly the same conditions (wx, technical maint., pilot exper.), - which type of operation would give the highest risk exposure of say a R22 helicopter or a Cessna 172 fixed-wing.
Bear in mind that the we shall assume that the pilots also have been trained in exactly the same conditions (except for fixed-wing vs. rotary) and they have reach the same level of experience (in terms of hours, maturity, academic background, risk management skills etc.)
I am not after each categories absolute risk exposure, only the relative one among these two categories.
Would the operation from A to B be more exposed to risk operating it with an R22 (or say single engine piston helicopter) than with a SEP fixed-wing?
What I am really curious to find out is if helicopter flying is inherently dangerous (due to the helicopter's instability or whatever reason) or if it is the operations which helicopters are involved in wich introduces the extra element of risks into rotary flying.
Personally I would feel better if the answer would be that it is the operations wich introduces the extra elements of risk as this would give me a feeling of tthat it is possible to controll my "fate" to a higher level.
Anyone got an idea?
Assume that you would have to carry out an operation meaning that you would use an aircarft to fly a person from A to B.
Given an identical route with exactly the same conditions (wx, technical maint., pilot exper.), - which type of operation would give the highest risk exposure of say a R22 helicopter or a Cessna 172 fixed-wing.
Bear in mind that the we shall assume that the pilots also have been trained in exactly the same conditions (except for fixed-wing vs. rotary) and they have reach the same level of experience (in terms of hours, maturity, academic background, risk management skills etc.)
I am not after each categories absolute risk exposure, only the relative one among these two categories.
Would the operation from A to B be more exposed to risk operating it with an R22 (or say single engine piston helicopter) than with a SEP fixed-wing?
What I am really curious to find out is if helicopter flying is inherently dangerous (due to the helicopter's instability or whatever reason) or if it is the operations which helicopters are involved in wich introduces the extra element of risks into rotary flying.
Personally I would feel better if the answer would be that it is the operations wich introduces the extra elements of risk as this would give me a feeling of tthat it is possible to controll my "fate" to a higher level.
Anyone got an idea?
"Assume that you would have to carry out an operation meaning that you would use an aircarft to fly a person from A to B.
Given an identical route with exactly the same conditions (wx, technical maint., pilot exper.), - which type of operation would give the highest risk exposure of say a R22 helicopter or a Cessna 172 fixed-wing. "
I would take the R-22!
If the weather turns ****ty, you can land anywhere.
If you get inflight fire, you can be on the ground in seconds.
If you have engine failure, you only need space big enough for the rotor to autorotate and land.
I personally would feel much safer in the helicopter if doing a A to B transport.
Given an identical route with exactly the same conditions (wx, technical maint., pilot exper.), - which type of operation would give the highest risk exposure of say a R22 helicopter or a Cessna 172 fixed-wing. "
I would take the R-22!
If the weather turns ****ty, you can land anywhere.
If you get inflight fire, you can be on the ground in seconds.
If you have engine failure, you only need space big enough for the rotor to autorotate and land.
I personally would feel much safer in the helicopter if doing a A to B transport.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying in the high mountains of Chile and Argentina, around Aconcagua, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger was a constant companion.
Flying over the dense jungles of Borneo, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger was a constant companion.
Flying across oceans, beyond sight of land, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger was a constant companion.
Hovering 150 feet over a seismic load, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger is a constant companion.
Come to think of it, everywhere I seem to go, and everything I seem to do, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger remains a constant companion.
Flying over the dense jungles of Borneo, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger was a constant companion.
Flying across oceans, beyond sight of land, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger was a constant companion.
Hovering 150 feet over a seismic load, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger is a constant companion.
Come to think of it, everywhere I seem to go, and everything I seem to do, in a single engine helicopter, the thought of danger remains a constant companion.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Everytime i'm flying, I say to myself " Where is the wind coming from? And where would I go if the engine stopped?"
I think it helps to overcome complacency, and gives me options if and when it ever happens.
It's somthing I say to my students EVERYTIME I fly with them. And pretty soon I get an instant response from them each time.
" The Wind is from there, and I would go there."
Does anyone else have any tricks like that they teach to students? Or say to themselves?
Cheers
Hughesy
I think it helps to overcome complacency, and gives me options if and when it ever happens.
It's somthing I say to my students EVERYTIME I fly with them. And pretty soon I get an instant response from them each time.
" The Wind is from there, and I would go there."
Does anyone else have any tricks like that they teach to students? Or say to themselves?
Cheers
Hughesy
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The danger involved
Back in '82 I started training for my CPL. With only a few hours and before I soloed I was invited to go for a ride in a 206 as a passenger in the back seat. Just after liftoff the engine flamed out and we crashed. Fortunately, no one was hurt but the bathtub and skids were damaged. So in answer to your question, yes, I always think about the danger involved every time I get in a helicopter!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alderney or Lancashire UK
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think about the risks of my profession. The suicides, alcoholism, drug abuse, crippling spinal injuries, depression, death before retirement age due to cardiovascular disease which are all statistically high for ..... dentists.
Helicopter pilots are not the only profession to deal with danger at work. Its just a different kind of danger. Of the two professions I would rate the professional pilots that I know as the happier bunch of people.
Helicopter pilots are not the only profession to deal with danger at work. Its just a different kind of danger. Of the two professions I would rate the professional pilots that I know as the happier bunch of people.
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dangerous?? Never considered that. I knew there was some reason I should have graduated from Kollege. Other than having the Sh1t scared out of me I guess I have been pretty lucky, but Ive only been flying 34 years.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just before I fly I think of the dangers every day. Or I could think about my other job which rates as one of the most dangerous too. Sea-going engineer!. Risk of crankcase explosions, collisions, (I was on a ship in the UAE two years ago which collided with another off Fujairah. Our ship was a 299,000 dwt tanker and the other? a 475,000 dwt fully loaded tanker. ) No explosion that time luckily but there are risks in every profession. You could slip on a dropped burger in maccy d's and break your neck.
Would you be having as much fun at work though?
Would you be having as much fun at work though?
HPB,
I'm with you: although the 40th anniversary is fast approaching
As to the question in the title: not at the time, but occasionally after a flight. There was even a time when we questioned the sensibility of flying 24hrs a day in 100 foot vis off Ark, for about a week. Did wonders (not) for the boss's brownie points, but I wouldn't have given much chance to finding anyone who ditched
And I was only a kid at the time
Life's too short to worry: you're a long time dead
I'm with you: although the 40th anniversary is fast approaching
As to the question in the title: not at the time, but occasionally after a flight. There was even a time when we questioned the sensibility of flying 24hrs a day in 100 foot vis off Ark, for about a week. Did wonders (not) for the boss's brownie points, but I wouldn't have given much chance to finding anyone who ditched
And I was only a kid at the time Life's too short to worry: you're a long time dead
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N20,W99
Age: 53
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any new thoughts on this subject?
The Danger Involved
Has any of you ever thought of quitting flying helicopters because of the higher danger involved in respect to say airplanes or a regular land job?
Please admit it, flying helicopters, doing other than say, VIP, ENG, etc. is more dangerous than average jobs.
In 1999 I left helicopters to go fly Beechjets for a fractional program, there I realized that the difference in safety is enormous, in the 1 year I was there, I was never in a situation where I was anything more than having fun, or plain bored while flying, I never felt there was much I could do, or not do, that could seriously endanger myself, on the other side . . .
In helicopters over the past few years I've had a couple of close calls, even being extra careful and thinking eveything twice, there are just some things that are out of your control.
One thing I will never forget is an accident few years back where a Bell 412 was brought down by fireworks from a fair that was below, 8 people died and the pilot was as carefull as there are, I have more examples but what's the use, you know already.
Anybody who's flown helicopters for a while is missing a friend or two today, this gets me thinking sometimes, after all I've never met an airline pilot or corporate pilot who feels this way.
Please share your thoughts/experiences/opinions.
Has any of you ever thought of quitting flying helicopters because of the higher danger involved in respect to say airplanes or a regular land job?
Please admit it, flying helicopters, doing other than say, VIP, ENG, etc. is more dangerous than average jobs.
In 1999 I left helicopters to go fly Beechjets for a fractional program, there I realized that the difference in safety is enormous, in the 1 year I was there, I was never in a situation where I was anything more than having fun, or plain bored while flying, I never felt there was much I could do, or not do, that could seriously endanger myself, on the other side . . .
In helicopters over the past few years I've had a couple of close calls, even being extra careful and thinking eveything twice, there are just some things that are out of your control.
One thing I will never forget is an accident few years back where a Bell 412 was brought down by fireworks from a fair that was below, 8 people died and the pilot was as carefull as there are, I have more examples but what's the use, you know already.
Anybody who's flown helicopters for a while is missing a friend or two today, this gets me thinking sometimes, after all I've never met an airline pilot or corporate pilot who feels this way.
Please share your thoughts/experiences/opinions.
Guest
Posts: n/a
mmm...
everyday of the week, in an r22, i do autos, 180s, hover autos, vortex ring, throttle chops, flying over water at night, diving towards the ground with the horn blaring and the student gripping the controls during an auto, etc
do i think about the dangers? when driving home, sometimes yes. i think "sh*t, some of that could have gone really wrong"
but then i put it out of my mind, much like when i get on a motorycycle.
i think if i constantly thought about the dangers i wouldnt do the job.
i just thank lycoming/frank for making such a reliable aircraft.
everyday of the week, in an r22, i do autos, 180s, hover autos, vortex ring, throttle chops, flying over water at night, diving towards the ground with the horn blaring and the student gripping the controls during an auto, etc
do i think about the dangers? when driving home, sometimes yes. i think "sh*t, some of that could have gone really wrong"
but then i put it out of my mind, much like when i get on a motorycycle.
i think if i constantly thought about the dangers i wouldnt do the job.
i just thank lycoming/frank for making such a reliable aircraft.