EASA lands ATO/FI full ground autorotation ?

[9Aplus]

After reading some recent local regulation, regarding out of airport/helipad landing in 9A,
just wondering in how many EASA lands or WW is not allowed to perform following safety training scenario:

You are FI under the ATO, have your student in training on board, trying to make him ready for all
challenges of profession, can you initiate full ground auto-rotation, out of airport area for
example while on route? (assuming that some solid and clean ground is available bellow)

At the moment, that is not possible without special authorization by CAA in 9A,
for my taste that fact, present serious safety issue. May be it is just me :P

[Non-PC Plod]

Originally Posted by 9Aplus

After reading some recent local regulation, regarding out of airport/helipad landing in 9A,
just wondering in how many EASA lands or WW is not allowed to perform following safety training scenario:

You are FI under the ATO, have your student in training on board, trying to make him ready for all
challenges of profession, can you initiate full ground auto-rotation, out of airport area for
example while on route? (assuming that some solid and clean ground is available bellow)

At the moment, that is not possible without special authorization by CAA in 9A,
for my taste that fact, present serious safety issue. May be it is just me :P

1. You cannot land without the landowners permission, so you would need to find and pre-arrange a suitable site.
2. If it goes wrong because of your site selection, you better have full instructor liability insurance!

[[email protected]]

Agree with Non PC Plod - you shouldn't be doing EOLs to an unrecced or non-approved area - that is just asking for trouble when you suddenly discover the ground is boggy or full of holes or on a bigger slope than it looked from height.

[chopjock]

Non-PC Plod

1. You cannot land without the landowners permission, so you would need to find and pre-arrange a suitable site.

Are you sure about that? If an engine failed for real you would most likely not have permission to land were you end up anyway...

[chopjock]

Originally Posted by [email protected]

Agree with Non PC Plod - you shouldn't be doing EOLs to an unrecced or non-approved area - that is just asking for trouble when you suddenly discover the ground is boggy or full of holes or on a bigger slope than it looked from height.

1. You cannot land without the landowners permission, so you would need to find and pre-arrange a suitable site.

"Shouldn't" and "cannot" are two different things. Which is it?

[9Aplus]

Originally Posted by Non-PC Plod

1. You cannot land without the landowners permission, so you would need to find and pre-arrange a suitable site.
2. If it goes wrong because of your site selection, you better have full instructor liability insurance!

1. that is the fact since JAR Ops 3
2. agree

Can you please answer the question, do you need to ask your CAA to initiate EOL out of registered airport?

[homonculus]

I note today is the longest day..........

[9Aplus]

Originally Posted by homonculus

I note today is the longest day..........

You Tube

[Mustapha Cuppa]

Originally Posted by 9Aplus

1. that is the fact since JAR Ops 3
2. agree

Can you please answer the question, do you need to ask your CAA to initiate EOL out of registered airport?

What does the ATO manual say?

What was the outcome of the risk assessment and how would the risks as outlined by Crab be mitigated? Might it be sensible to have fire and rescue cover?

[9Aplus]

No existing ATO therefore no valid manual.
No assessment - no ATO
Yes, for example training area of local fire brigade...

No one is ready to provide straight answer...
No wonder that things like Clutha tragedy can be repeated.
Come on champs, that kind of things are regular in some EASA lands

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by 9Aplus

Can you please answer the question, do you need to ask your CAA to initiate EOL out of registered airport?

To initiate an EOL? No, you don’t need to get CAA permission (or, at least, you never had to).

As long as you have completed your go around by 500ft AGL/things.

[9Aplus]

Right, assume that is for UK...
Any other EASA land ?

[nigelh]

Why 500ft ? There is no rule saying you can’t come down to just above ground level if no buildings etc
but common sense says you only do full touch down to sites you know and have permission. Personally I have never allowed touch down autos on any of my Helicopters because I think it is a pointless exercise which ends in countless bent machines for no good reason ...I also stipulate this to help my insurance.
if you can get to 5-6ft with no ROD and speed back at 10-15 knots you are home and hosed . I don’t really care about the final touch down as you should walk away from that . When I did my initial training in the States we almost never did full down autos and consequently never damaged anything!!

[md 600 driver]

I think what 9a is trying to say is
does any other CAA in easa land allow EOLs to the ground as special permission is required by his national authority
Even at airfields!
i dint know the actual rules in the uk but I have done EOL
to the ground in hu300 Hu500 HU 600
all types of Enstrom ,Gazelle and Alouette hiller12 in the UK and America

[9Aplus]

@MD600,
at airfields under ATO it is permitted in accordance to OM.

But it is the same in case of any out of airport landing.
You can not train legally your student for example on whiteout or brownout conditions.
Or even not simple wide and open forest meadow landing

[9Aplus]

The source of trouble is this document, automatic translation is not the best one...but you may figure somehow
https://translate.google.com/transla...6_57_1082.html


In Article 1. Under (2)
There are a) b) c) exclusions from the rule
d) /supposed to be/ helicopters in training operations under the ATO
Some of "smart" paper pushers changed that last moment and now we
have this...
So just wondering if any other CAA (Except Austrian CAA they are ...)
are doing this to own industry?!

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by nigelh

Why 500ft ? There is no rule saying you can’t come down to just above ground level if no buildings etc

There is now.

It changed under SERA to be 500ft above ground/water:

SERA.5005(f)(2): “at a height less than 150 m (500 ft) above the ground or water”


Keep up.

[Spunk]

In Germany it‘s even more complicated. We have the so called „Flugplatzzwang“ (compulsion to use an airfield, a law which was introduced at an epoch when men were wearing weird looking mustaches).
In general you have to land at an airfield unless you are a commercial operator with a general permission to make off-airport landings/takeoffs.
This does not count for flight schools though. Actually, during flight training you are not even allowed to operate below minimum altitude except for take-off and landing (at an airfield) which makes it impossible to train off-airport landings and t/o s not to mention autorotations (power recovery nor EOL) unless you have a playground at the airfield.

We explained this discrepancy to our local Aviation Authority (besides EASA and the National Aviation Authority (LBA) we have to deal with a third aviation institution) who, lucky us, are very pro-aviation orientated. They advised us to apply for a special authorization to operate below minimum altitude for the purpose of conducting training in emergency procedures and unplanned off-airport landings. Now we can train all that down to hovering height. The only thing we are not allowed to do is to touch down (unless we are at an airfield or have land owners permission).

For safety reason, EOL are only practiced at suitable airfields, which works perfect for us.

The catch is that the skill test at the end of the training phase or any other prof check is not covered by this permission.

[staticsource]

Originally Posted by Bravo73

There is now.

It changed under SERA to be 500ft above ground/water:

SERA.5005(f)(2): “at a height less than 150 m (500 ft) above the ground or water”


Keep up.

Not in the UK, ORS4 1174 Para 2 helps us a little bit👌

[pilotmike]

Originally Posted by chopjock

Are you sure about that? If an engine failed for real you would most likely not have permission to land were you end up anyway...

I'm wondering if it is just me, or whether other people also feel the urge to lash out wildly almost every time they read what chopcock comes out with?