Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

R66 crash in Wikieup, Arizona, U.S.A., kills 2

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

R66 crash in Wikieup, Arizona, U.S.A., kills 2

Old 4th Jul 2016, 08:45
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Africa
Posts: 318
R66 crash in Wikieup, Arizona, U.S.A., kills 2

Helicopter crash in Wikieup kills 2 | 12NEWS.com

Police release believed identities of helicopter crash victims | 12NEWS.com

The Robinson R66 helicopter crashed Thursday afternoon (23 June 2016) while flying from Prescott to Riverside, California. Search crews found the wreckage of the helicopter early Friday morning. Authorities said the helicopter burned after crashing.

Here is a picture of the crash site; it looks like the Mohave Desert:

2 dead after helicopter crash near Wikieup - azfamily.com 3TV | Phoenix Breaking News, Weather, Sport

Time of crash is reported "afternoon". The flight was reported overdue on Friday 12:22 am only. It is not clear whether it crashed during legal daylight still, or at night.
Hot and Hi is online now  
Old 6th Jul 2016, 08:02
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 41
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...94600284090101

Looks like some of the upper guys at Guidance. Sad to see this.
nocarsgo is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2016, 00:04
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Western US
Posts: 70
Very tragic RIP . Unsubstantiated chatter on another internet forum indicated early thoughts were of mast bumping. In any case, from the NTSB preliminary report:

The helicopter came to rest in hilly desert terrain. The debris field was about 750 yards long and 150 yards wide. One of the first pieces identified was the outboard 5 feet of a main rotor blade afterbody that had separated from the leading edge spar. The left side of the helicopter was more fragmented than the right, and left side cabin pieces and instruments were distributed throughout the early part of the debris field. The tail boom was about midway into the debris field. The left side/nose cabin was in the same approximate part of the debris field with a straight separation line across one side. The cabin came to rest inverted about 600 yards into the debris field, and was destroyed by a postcrash fire. The engine remained attached to the cabin. The remaining piece of main rotor blade was about the same distance into the debris field, but 85 yards left of the debris path centerline. The transmission, mast, and second main rotor blade separated as a unit, and were about 100 yards past the cabin area in the direction of the centerline of the debris field.
givdrvr is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2016, 02:07
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Redding CA, or on a fire somewhere
Posts: 1,671
Word on the street is to watch for a change of VNE.
Gordy is online now  
Old 9th Jul 2016, 14:03
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 793
Originally Posted by givdrvr View Post
Very tragic RIP . Unsubstantiated chatter on another internet forum indicated early thoughts were of mast bumping. In any case, from the NTSB preliminary report:
Well, after that sobering description of the wreckage path/distribution there is realistically very little doubt that it is another tragic case of Mast Bumping.
henra is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2016, 15:43
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 7,413
But Robinson won't move away from their MR head design, despite how susceptible it is to this phenomenon.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2016, 18:29
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Florida
Age: 47
Posts: 409
How does one gather mast bumping from that? It seems that another possibility would be a blade failure. It wouldn't be the first time that's happened in a Robinson product.

Tim Brown was a highly experienced pilot, a master of the utility world. He spent many hours sock pulling in the wire environment. That he died in straight and level flight is a cruel end to a highly accomplished career.
vaqueroaero is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2016, 18:43
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Harwich UK
Age: 61
Posts: 30
Crab, Bell haven't moved from their 206 head design either.
Luther Sebastian is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2016, 19:44
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: LOWW
Posts: 289
Crab, Bell haven't moved from their 206 head design either.
True. That design is why another one died recently on IOM, apparently from turbulence induced mast bumping. And that design will contiue to kill people in the 505.

They may be a lot to be said in favour of twin bladed tethering Bells, from space savings in the hangar, over cool blade sound till great Bell customer service. But tethering rotor heads are stupid, dangerous, early ages designs. It should not be possible to get a new aircraft design certified using them.
Reely340 is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 13:46
  #10 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Africa
Posts: 318
Originally Posted by vaqueroaero View Post
That he died in straight and level flight is a cruel end to a highly accomplished career.
I agree. However straight and level at VNE can turn in a blink into exceedance of VNE. What do we actually know? Does anybody know the time of departure, estimated time of accident, t/o weight, and weather en-route?
Hot and Hi is online now  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 15:06
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 143
Very tragic indeed and sad that people are still buying and flying these things.
Reely, agree with your theory on teetering heads but no one in authority is
listening. For some, price seems more important than safety.
claudia is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 16:00
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Brantisvogan
Posts: 503
A great many hours have been flown safely on semi-rigid rotor systems.
Recently, people seem to hit problems at speed in turbulent conditions. This would appear to be more of a problem with education than the architecture of the machine.
Bell_ringer is offline  
Old 10th Jul 2016, 16:27
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 143
Yea Yea, Robinson offer this rather pathetic explanation / excuse also, but please
remember these were two very experienced guys. If it could happen to them it could happen
to most of us. --very very tragic indeed.
Surely a major re- design to that head and blade system is badly overdue. Please somebody
in authority take action before further unnecessary loss of life.

Last edited by claudia; 10th Jul 2016 at 17:28.
claudia is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 00:05
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 822
claudia
i think that applies to twin engine given how dangerous they are
you can strike your boom in anything if you try hard enough
AnFI is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 20:42
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: uk
Age: 39
Posts: 44
claudia
i think that applies to twin engine given how dangerous they are
you can strike your boom in anything if you try hard enough
More trolling irrelevance AnFi?

Which other manufacturer has to run safety courses for its products because they kill so many unsuspecting pilots??
Lala Steady is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 20:45
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 894
All helicopters kill their unsuspecting pilots if the unsuspecting pilots don't follow their training.
krypton_john is offline  
Old 11th Jul 2016, 22:13
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 386
But some seem to catch out even the very best pilots.
FLY 7 is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2016, 02:15
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 894
Some or most?
krypton_john is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2016, 13:20
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 7,413
Some or most?
Just the one seems to have the monopoly sadly. A design that can catch out the unwary newcomer is one thing but one that consistently takes out very experienced pilots as well is just a poor design.

Whilst all teetering head helos can be susceptible to mast bumping - few can get it badly enough to cut off the tail boom or skids with the frequency of that particular manufacturer.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2016, 17:17
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,359
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Whilst all teetering head helos can be susceptible to mast bumping - few can get it badly enough to cut off the tail boom or skids with the frequency of that particular manufacturer.
Crab, I've never flown a Robinson. Would a vigorous "push over" (using substantial /rapid forward cyclic) be enough to unload the head and cause the kind of problem you are referring to there?
Lonewolf_50 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.