AS 350: "Hold my beer son and watch this!"
Bhutan / Crab ..... you may be right but it looked to me like an abrupt climb and roll which is what would’ve happened in jack stall .....also it looked to me to go fully inverted which is not a wing over . Either way he wouldn’t be flying my 350 again if I saw that !!
Nige - if he retains positive G throughout, the helicopter doesn't know whether it is inverted or not and there is no difference in the stress on the aircraft at that point than there is in a 'normal' wingover.
As someone pointed out earlier, the recovery with high speed, if you let the nose drop on exit too much, is probably the most stressful - but no more than flying at VNE when heavy and encountering some chop or turbulence. Would you sack a pilot for having that experience and 'overstressing' your aircraft?
As someone pointed out earlier, the recovery with high speed, if you let the nose drop on exit too much, is probably the most stressful - but no more than flying at VNE when heavy and encountering some chop or turbulence. Would you sack a pilot for having that experience and 'overstressing' your aircraft?
Wasn't aerobatics, just a steep pull-up and wingover. A reverse-half-cuban would be the closest description, but carefully flown to not overstress or to get too close to zero or negative g. Smoothly done, with slight positive g throughout. Helicopter doesn't know it is inverted, all it knows is what g forces it is experiencing. Not just the realm of the military, though at least that would have some sanction and probably better organized training.
Typing too slow, looks like Crab beat me to it.
Typing too slow, looks like Crab beat me to it.
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Paro
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This guy rolled inverted, yes well executed, but that does not change the facts. (If you kill someone but do it skilfully, does that make it OK?). The rules are there to protect. What if he made a mistake ito his energy management or evaluation of the conditions? At relatively low level? What if he was not on top of his game at that particular day and misjudged the speed and g-load? You condone this kind of behaviour, it says something about you.
Rules are not written in terms of what the aircraft knows. Mostly they are written in blood.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Nige - if he retains positive G throughout, the helicopter doesn't know whether it is inverted or not and there is no difference in the stress on the aircraft at that point than there is in a 'normal' wingover.
As someone pointed out earlier, the recovery with high speed, if you let the nose drop on exit too much, is probably the most stressful - but no more than flying at VNE when heavy and encountering some chop or turbulence. Would you sack a pilot for having that experience and 'overstressing' your aircraft?
As someone pointed out earlier, the recovery with high speed, if you let the nose drop on exit too much, is probably the most stressful - but no more than flying at VNE when heavy and encountering some chop or turbulence. Would you sack a pilot for having that experience and 'overstressing' your aircraft?
It would be considered unnecessary for civilian flying and which operator would have that as SOP?
Is it good airmanship or is it just someone showing off their superior skills? the latter being a shorter route to statisticsville.
Great to watch and if this was a military display then there would be a big thumbs up, for everyone it appears like overcompensating for other inadequacies
Banks over 60°? Check
Pitch attitude over 30°? Check
"Aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight."? Check
Pretty much aerobatic. I wonder, if Airbus found out whose ship that was.
You may do that in a controlled environment like the military ... as a test pilot, but in the civil world, there is just no need for it. If you want to do it, look first at the Flying Bulls BO 105 and the additional maintenance aerobatics require.
It is always the same: "carfully flown" justifies everything? From my point of view, the video quality is much too low to see if it was "carfully flown". I am not sure, if there was always positive g in the right direction. Actually I doubt it. "Carfully flown" you might be able to roll an R22, but the margin is so small, I would not try it, even if I had rolled the BO 105 a thousand times. The margin of a squirrel is much bigger, but still, it isn't made for it.
I have seen operators where the chief pilot and owner does stuff like that. Unfortunately his company has a high accident rate and I lost a friend who worked for him, due to maintenance issues with one ship. This attitude creeps into everything in a company and makes everything unsafe.
Pitch attitude over 30°? Check
"Aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight."? Check
Pretty much aerobatic. I wonder, if Airbus found out whose ship that was.
You may do that in a controlled environment like the military ... as a test pilot, but in the civil world, there is just no need for it. If you want to do it, look first at the Flying Bulls BO 105 and the additional maintenance aerobatics require.
It is always the same: "carfully flown" justifies everything? From my point of view, the video quality is much too low to see if it was "carfully flown". I am not sure, if there was always positive g in the right direction. Actually I doubt it. "Carfully flown" you might be able to roll an R22, but the margin is so small, I would not try it, even if I had rolled the BO 105 a thousand times. The margin of a squirrel is much bigger, but still, it isn't made for it.
I have seen operators where the chief pilot and owner does stuff like that. Unfortunately his company has a high accident rate and I lost a friend who worked for him, due to maintenance issues with one ship. This attitude creeps into everything in a company and makes everything unsafe.
crab ..If it is no big deal then show me videos of someone doing one ! Even Dennis doesn’t get anywhere near that inverted in his display. No one is disputing that you can fly inverted with no negative g ...but can you do it without over stressing parts ?
chuck aaron obviously can’t as he has to have a titanium head etc etc and life items are slashed !!
chuck aaron obviously can’t as he has to have a titanium head etc etc and life items are slashed !!
I've sat and watched the video a number of times and I'm not sure he ever is inverted. I think the camera angle may make it appear that way but I'm not convinced. Pretty crazy thing to do nonetheless in the world of youtube and narcissism social media and everyone on earth carrying a video camera in their pocket. I expect his boss won't be best pleased.
Last edited by Evil Twin; 3rd Jul 2018 at 08:04. Reason: typo
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Paro
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've sat and watched the video a number of times and I'm not sure he ever is inverted. I think the camera angle may make it appear that way but I'm not convinced. Pretty crazy thing to do nonetheless in the world of youtube and <strike>narcissism</strike> social media and everyone on earth carrying a video camera in their pocket. I expect his boss won't be best pleased.
I'm with Evil Twin - nowhere near inverted and if you download the video and look at it frame by frame possibly nothing above 90 degrees anywhere.
Camera angles can lie.
As for "jack stall" - miles away from it. People banging on about "stress this and stress that" how much G do you think you can actually pull in a helicopter?
Looks like a B3 to me - it can probably lift its own weight on the hook - and then you make a 60 degree turn - 2G but not sustainable - 4 times it's empty weight - that would make a load of about 3.5 times what you see here.
The movie looks "interesting" in that it is unusual but not as extreme as made out to be.
Camera angles can lie.
As for "jack stall" - miles away from it. People banging on about "stress this and stress that" how much G do you think you can actually pull in a helicopter?
Looks like a B3 to me - it can probably lift its own weight on the hook - and then you make a 60 degree turn - 2G but not sustainable - 4 times it's empty weight - that would make a load of about 3.5 times what you see here.
The movie looks "interesting" in that it is unusual but not as extreme as made out to be.
<br /> ET, so we debated "aerobatic", now are going about "Inverted"? I don't want to engage in this but I don't think this is going to turn out better than before. It will continue to put the "It's OK" group in a poor light. As a professional pilot, one should be able to show that ability to distinguish.. ?
I'll watch from the sidelines from here on.
> how much G do you think you can actually pull in a helicopter?
I've often wondered that. One thing that struck me about the R44 (maybe others too) is that it has no published G limit (not in the PoH anyway). Is this because you will run out of lift long before you break anything? Or what? Some helicopters CAN be looped - leaving aside the question of whether it's a good idea or not (yes, I do know it isn't) - meaning they can pull at least 3G. I asked my instructor at the time why there were no limits and he didn't really know. Yet every fixed wing aircraft, even if all it has is a 65HP engine, has published G limits.
I've often wondered that. One thing that struck me about the R44 (maybe others too) is that it has no published G limit (not in the PoH anyway). Is this because you will run out of lift long before you break anything? Or what? Some helicopters CAN be looped - leaving aside the question of whether it's a good idea or not (yes, I do know it isn't) - meaning they can pull at least 3G. I asked my instructor at the time why there were no limits and he didn't really know. Yet every fixed wing aircraft, even if all it has is a 65HP engine, has published G limits.
Give the pilot the benefit of the doubt re camera angles ....also agree it is v unlikely to be jack stall as he looks v light . I think we all need to be aware that when people video you wazzing around it may end up on a public site !!!! It was definitely not very mechanically sympathetic and still on that basis he wouldn’t fly for me .
I have flown a helicopter with a Gmeter fitted - some of the Mk 7 Lynx at Middle Wallop that were used for the Blue Eagles displays - and I have flown all the display manoeuvres many times including loops, barrel rolls and back flips.
The prime area of concern regarding component life was in fact the TR - the TRGB is on a long lever away from the MRH.
A loop was generally 2 to 2.5 G depending on how smoothly you pulled up and pulled out and a barrel roll about the same; even a back flip to flyaway was under 2.5 G. The only manoeuvre that exceeded that was the back flip from hover to hover - 1000' to 700' followed by a second back flip - it was difficult to get it back to the hover at the required height in much less than 3G.
Air combat manoeuvring involved 180, 270 and 360 wingovers, almost all around the 2G mark - exactly the same as a 60 degree AoB sustained turn.
I am not giving carte-blanche to cowboy flying but a well-trained pilot can conduct some of these 'acrobatic' manoeuvres quite safely and with less stress on the aircraft than a heavy USL or flying at VNE for hours at high AUM.
Helicopters tend to look inverted even at substantially lower AoB so don't be misled by a poor quality video.
The prime area of concern regarding component life was in fact the TR - the TRGB is on a long lever away from the MRH.
A loop was generally 2 to 2.5 G depending on how smoothly you pulled up and pulled out and a barrel roll about the same; even a back flip to flyaway was under 2.5 G. The only manoeuvre that exceeded that was the back flip from hover to hover - 1000' to 700' followed by a second back flip - it was difficult to get it back to the hover at the required height in much less than 3G.
Air combat manoeuvring involved 180, 270 and 360 wingovers, almost all around the 2G mark - exactly the same as a 60 degree AoB sustained turn.
I am not giving carte-blanche to cowboy flying but a well-trained pilot can conduct some of these 'acrobatic' manoeuvres quite safely and with less stress on the aircraft than a heavy USL or flying at VNE for hours at high AUM.
Helicopters tend to look inverted even at substantially lower AoB so don't be misled by a poor quality video.
I asked my instructor at the time why there were no limits and he didn't really know. Yet every fixed wing aircraft, even if all it has is a 65HP engine, has published G limits.
Stronger machines with a rigid head like the BK117 have a published limit of -1 to +3.5, so there is still a fudge factor above that one.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Zealand
Age: 52
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to see how "inverted" or not he got, the easiest way to see is to get a model helicopter and hold it at the same angle as can be seen in the vid.
The point where it gets really difficult for the pilot is when the skids cross over each other while the head is pointed at the ground, try doing that with the model and get the same sight picture, he is well past 90*.
If you really want to see how smooth you are doing turns etc, simply stick a load on your hook, with a weigh gauge. Done badly you could almost double the weight of the load, done well the load on the gauge shouldn't change much at all. I agree that smoothly done turns could have less strain than flying in rough weather, as i have seen hook loads vary by quite a bit while flying through turbulance, however it also comes down to is it necessary, and how much of a cowboy do you need to be.
If that flight is alright, whats everyones opinion of the video of the guy flying his 22 into the landing spot in his hangar? Just because you can, should you? and where is Airmanship in both cases? is one ok because its a 350, the other one not because its a 22? or one is fine because its Europe the other must be insane because its outside of Europe??
The point where it gets really difficult for the pilot is when the skids cross over each other while the head is pointed at the ground, try doing that with the model and get the same sight picture, he is well past 90*.
If you really want to see how smooth you are doing turns etc, simply stick a load on your hook, with a weigh gauge. Done badly you could almost double the weight of the load, done well the load on the gauge shouldn't change much at all. I agree that smoothly done turns could have less strain than flying in rough weather, as i have seen hook loads vary by quite a bit while flying through turbulance, however it also comes down to is it necessary, and how much of a cowboy do you need to be.
If that flight is alright, whats everyones opinion of the video of the guy flying his 22 into the landing spot in his hangar? Just because you can, should you? and where is Airmanship in both cases? is one ok because its a 350, the other one not because its a 22? or one is fine because its Europe the other must be insane because its outside of Europe??