EC 130 down at the Grand Canyon
I'm curious what people's understanding of dead mans curve is, and how you might apply a HV chart in an operational context.
From the eye witness account the helicopter was out of control, and the tail boom was chopped off before it hit the ground. Engine failure is still a possibility...the eye witness description might fit a low RRPM situation during an auto-rotational descent.
From the eye witness account the helicopter was out of control, and the tail boom was chopped off before it hit the ground. Engine failure is still a possibility...the eye witness description might fit a low RRPM situation during an auto-rotational descent.
Hope the survivors are on way to recovery and managing to provide any cirtical information just before the accident.
Cheers
Just a thought.
Lets say the pilot flies in gusty/turbulent conditions, orbits for a place to land?! for maybe a ''land as soon as possible'' scenario?!, bleeds off his airspeed inadvertently and ends up in a decent with zero indicated airspeed and tailwind at 7-8 thousand feet Density altitude with a full load of pax.....
Lets say the pilot flies in gusty/turbulent conditions, orbits for a place to land?! for maybe a ''land as soon as possible'' scenario?!, bleeds off his airspeed inadvertently and ends up in a decent with zero indicated airspeed and tailwind at 7-8 thousand feet Density altitude with a full load of pax.....
That still shouldn't result in chopping the tail off - if that is what happened.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's possible to chop your tail off in most types
some types you have to try harder
tech failures particularly to aero surfaces on the tail can help the pilot acheive tail chop
one example is the 365 of our passed friend CF where tail was chopped
EC130 has known tail cracking issues to boom and horiz stabilizer
very unlikely to be engine although all things are possible
some types you have to try harder
tech failures particularly to aero surfaces on the tail can help the pilot acheive tail chop
one example is the 365 of our passed friend CF where tail was chopped
EC130 has known tail cracking issues to boom and horiz stabilizer
very unlikely to be engine although all things are possible
Everyone is assuming, based on sketchy witness info (we all know how accurate that can be), that there was a tail strike.
Could that have been a secondary effect?
Driveshaft failures can also damage the tail can they not?
The prelim NTSB report will hopefully contain something more scientific, especially having interviewed the pilot and pax.
Could that have been a secondary effect?
Driveshaft failures can also damage the tail can they not?
The prelim NTSB report will hopefully contain something more scientific, especially having interviewed the pilot and pax.
Anecdotally, of the operators I have worked for with mixed single/twin fleets, over many years, the frequency of engine failures in singles is probably about 10 times more than engine failures in twins. I don't know how to explain that, whether hours flown by type might even out that number...what I do know is every engine failure in a single resulted in a forced landing, and most of those forced landings resulted in damage to the aircraft, and several resulted in multiple fatalities. The only instance I recall of an engine failure in a twin that resulted in damage to the helicopter happened after it was landed without a scratch but some bad guys put an RPG in it and turned it to ash.
I might win the Lotto and get lucky with the girlfriend and her twin sister too!
Can you add just one more “if” to your conjecture?
Can you add just one more “if” to your conjecture?
Just a thought.
Lets say the pilot flies in gusty/turbulent conditions, orbits for a place to land?! for maybe a ''land as soon as possible'' scenario?!, bleeds off his airspeed inadvertently and ends up in a decent with zero indicated airspeed and tailwind at 7-8 thousand feet Density altitude with a full load of pax.....
Lets say the pilot flies in gusty/turbulent conditions, orbits for a place to land?! for maybe a ''land as soon as possible'' scenario?!, bleeds off his airspeed inadvertently and ends up in a decent with zero indicated airspeed and tailwind at 7-8 thousand feet Density altitude with a full load of pax.....
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
NTSB preliminary report out:
Location: Peach Springs, AZ
Accident Number: WPR18FA087
Date & Time: 02/10/2018, 1715 MST
Registration: N155GC
Aircraft: EUROCOPTER EC130
Injuries: 3 Fatal, 4 Serious
Flight Conducted Under: Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter - Non-scheduled - Sightseeing
On February 10, 2018, about 1715 mountain standard time, an Airbus Helicopters EC130 B4 helicopter, N155GC, was destroyed when it impacted a canyon wash while on an approach to land at Quartermaster landing zone near Peach Springs, Arizona. The commercial pilot and three passengers sustained serious injuries and three passengers were fatally injured. The airtour flight was operated by Papillon Airways, Inc. under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 136. The helicopter departed Boulder City Municipal Airport, Boulder City, Nevada at 1635 and had intended to land at Quartermaster landing zone, a group of landing pads within Quartermaster canyon. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and a company flight plan had been filed.
A review of the recorded radar data showed that the helicopter departed Boulder City and continued on the Green 4 standard helicopter route prescribed in the Grand Canyon West Special Flight Rules Area 50-2. Witnesses reported that as the helicopter neared the vicinity of Quartermaster, they observed it on a flight path consistent with the pilot aligning to make a downriver-wind landing to a pad on the west. The helicopter began to slow after it passed over the river and maintained a southern course as it entered a canyon wash adjacent to the landing pads. While maintaining the same altitude, the helicopter entered a nose-high attitude and then began a left turn toward the Quartermaster landing zone. During the turn, the helicopter transitioned into a nose-low attitude and as it began to face the landing pads it began to slightly drift aft. The helicopter then maneuvered into a nose-level configuration and continued in the left turn. Subsequently, the helicopter made at least two 360° left turn revolutions as it descended into the wash below where it impacted terrain and a postcrash fire ensued.
Accident Number: WPR18FA087
Date & Time: 02/10/2018, 1715 MST
Registration: N155GC
Aircraft: EUROCOPTER EC130
Injuries: 3 Fatal, 4 Serious
Flight Conducted Under: Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter - Non-scheduled - Sightseeing
On February 10, 2018, about 1715 mountain standard time, an Airbus Helicopters EC130 B4 helicopter, N155GC, was destroyed when it impacted a canyon wash while on an approach to land at Quartermaster landing zone near Peach Springs, Arizona. The commercial pilot and three passengers sustained serious injuries and three passengers were fatally injured. The airtour flight was operated by Papillon Airways, Inc. under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 136. The helicopter departed Boulder City Municipal Airport, Boulder City, Nevada at 1635 and had intended to land at Quartermaster landing zone, a group of landing pads within Quartermaster canyon. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and a company flight plan had been filed.
A review of the recorded radar data showed that the helicopter departed Boulder City and continued on the Green 4 standard helicopter route prescribed in the Grand Canyon West Special Flight Rules Area 50-2. Witnesses reported that as the helicopter neared the vicinity of Quartermaster, they observed it on a flight path consistent with the pilot aligning to make a downriver-wind landing to a pad on the west. The helicopter began to slow after it passed over the river and maintained a southern course as it entered a canyon wash adjacent to the landing pads. While maintaining the same altitude, the helicopter entered a nose-high attitude and then began a left turn toward the Quartermaster landing zone. During the turn, the helicopter transitioned into a nose-low attitude and as it began to face the landing pads it began to slightly drift aft. The helicopter then maneuvered into a nose-level configuration and continued in the left turn. Subsequently, the helicopter made at least two 360° left turn revolutions as it descended into the wash below where it impacted terrain and a postcrash fire ensued.
WTF is a canyon wash?
Originally Posted by [email protected]
WTF is a canyon wash?
skadi
crab,
Often referred to as a "dry wash" for obvious reasons.
Often referred to as a "dry wash" for obvious reasons.
Preliminary Repory
What is the report saying, if anything? Maybe the long winded explanations make sense to somebody who is familiar with the area?
If accurate and succinct language is a sign of competence or intellectual rigor, then what does this report tell us about its author?
The helicopter then maneuvered into a nose-level configuration
Couldn't they just call it a gully?
And what do they mean by a downriver-wind landing? Do they mean he is heading downriver or heading down wind or both?
The nose high attitude followed by the turn and then a nose low attitude whilst drifting aft has me imagining some disorientation and then recognition of aft drift which was corrected by shoving the nose forward.
Was he in fact affected by brown-out on approach as I had thought earlier?
That report hardly clears anything up and, as hot and hi says, isn't brilliantly worded.
And what do they mean by a downriver-wind landing? Do they mean he is heading downriver or heading down wind or both?
The nose high attitude followed by the turn and then a nose low attitude whilst drifting aft has me imagining some disorientation and then recognition of aft drift which was corrected by shoving the nose forward.
Was he in fact affected by brown-out on approach as I had thought earlier?
That report hardly clears anything up and, as hot and hi says, isn't brilliantly worded.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Couldn't they just call it a gully?
Having never seen a EC-130....can anyone enlighten me about possible Yaw Control issues at the loading and DA the aircraft was operating at when it crashed?
Does the 130 have similar limitations similar to the Bell 206 series at certain altitudes/wind directions?
Two 360 rotations as described does suggest a possible lack of sufficient yaw output or a loss of thrust due to a failure of some kind.
I too wonder what the “down river/wind” comment was actually saying.
Was the approach down wind?
Does the 130 have similar limitations similar to the Bell 206 series at certain altitudes/wind directions?
Two 360 rotations as described does suggest a possible lack of sufficient yaw output or a loss of thrust due to a failure of some kind.
I too wonder what the “down river/wind” comment was actually saying.
Was the approach down wind?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: here
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having never seen a EC-130....can anyone enlighten me about possible Yaw Control issues at the loading and DA the aircraft was operating at when it crashed?
Does the 130 have similar limitations similar to the Bell 206 series at certain altitudes/wind directions?
Two 360 rotations as described does suggest a possible lack of sufficient yaw output or a loss of thrust due to a failure of some kind.
I too wonder what the “down river/wind” comment was actually saying.
Was the approach down wind?
Does the 130 have similar limitations similar to the Bell 206 series at certain altitudes/wind directions?
Two 360 rotations as described does suggest a possible lack of sufficient yaw output or a loss of thrust due to a failure of some kind.
I too wonder what the “down river/wind” comment was actually saying.
Was the approach down wind?
Suggesting that he turned to face up river and into wind.
Just my interpretation of it.
HTC
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Himalayas
Age: 62
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having never seen a EC-130....can anyone enlighten me about possible Yaw Control issues at the loading and DA the aircraft was operating at when it crashed?
Does the 130 have similar limitations similar to the Bell 206 series at certain altitudes/wind directions?
Two 360 rotations as described does suggest a possible lack of sufficient yaw output or a loss of thrust due to a failure of some kind.
I too wonder what the “down river/wind” comment was actually saying.
Was the approach down wind?
Does the 130 have similar limitations similar to the Bell 206 series at certain altitudes/wind directions?
Two 360 rotations as described does suggest a possible lack of sufficient yaw output or a loss of thrust due to a failure of some kind.
I too wonder what the “down river/wind” comment was actually saying.
Was the approach down wind?