Vuichard again
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
So you flew in both roles?
All right. Since nobody came up with some horrible numbers of VRS-accidents, I searched again. Pumas and Cougars are apparently not very benign in this regime. Apart from the one we already discussed, there is another Cougar accident in France that had VRS as a main factor. All in all I found 7 accidents where contributed to VRS, and two more where it was a factor. Most of them happened close to the ground, as was expected and something else also happened almost always. Most of the pilots tried to add power to stop the sink rate and in some cases that led to a loss of RPM.
But anyway, reading the accident reports makes something painfully clear, the problem is not getting out of it. What should be the emphasis of the training, is not getting into it. Most pilots only realised afterwards, what was going on. Some of them were already under stress and that lowers your mental capacity significantly.
All the one, two, three rules are very nice, but as pilots, we should train to be capable to plan our approaches in a better way, to avoid what is lurking there. Also going around is not a shame and crashing is way more dangerous.
I still prefer the classic method, because it is natural just to go around. In my experience, in the very early incipient state, lowering the collective isn't even necessary (but still a good idea), speeding up is mandatory.
Two of the pilots landed hard (bad back injuries in one case). If they where flying sideways and still had crashed, that would have been quite the bigger mess. Again, as Bob Hoover always said, fly the plane into the crash as long as possible. I would not want to go cross control in that situation.
That is what I could find, but it seems, VRS isn't the oh so deadly thing some people want us believe, because they are very rare and by far most of them ended without fatalities. It will take at least a few hundred years to safe a thousand people.
I think we have other things killing us, who are far more important.
Vuichard's claim to have a place in the Smithsonian might not become reality so fast.
A few links:
French Cougar
Mixing VRS and SWP
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...20121015X91617
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...0627X00938Some more accident identifications:
NYC06LA062
DEN02GA085
ERA16LA159
HAI paper about VRS
HAI for Vuichard
We can probably just let this thread die in peace now.
But anyway, reading the accident reports makes something painfully clear, the problem is not getting out of it. What should be the emphasis of the training, is not getting into it. Most pilots only realised afterwards, what was going on. Some of them were already under stress and that lowers your mental capacity significantly.
All the one, two, three rules are very nice, but as pilots, we should train to be capable to plan our approaches in a better way, to avoid what is lurking there. Also going around is not a shame and crashing is way more dangerous.
I still prefer the classic method, because it is natural just to go around. In my experience, in the very early incipient state, lowering the collective isn't even necessary (but still a good idea), speeding up is mandatory.
Two of the pilots landed hard (bad back injuries in one case). If they where flying sideways and still had crashed, that would have been quite the bigger mess. Again, as Bob Hoover always said, fly the plane into the crash as long as possible. I would not want to go cross control in that situation.
That is what I could find, but it seems, VRS isn't the oh so deadly thing some people want us believe, because they are very rare and by far most of them ended without fatalities. It will take at least a few hundred years to safe a thousand people.
I think we have other things killing us, who are far more important.
Vuichard's claim to have a place in the Smithsonian might not become reality so fast.
A few links:
French Cougar
Mixing VRS and SWP
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...20121015X91617
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...0627X00938Some more accident identifications:
NYC06LA062
DEN02GA085
ERA16LA159
HAI paper about VRS
HAI for Vuichard
We can probably just let this thread die in peace now.
Perhaps I am being thick here ( high probability ) but if you apply maximum allowable power with collective ( as stated in the video )then apply full power pedal will one not have a problem with over torque or loss of rrpm ?
No, you're not being thick
We can probably just let this thread die in peace now.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
If only we could let the Vuichard technique die in peace but it seems some still think it is a magic bullet rather than a very limited solution to an almost non-existent problem.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
If only we could let the Vuichard technique die in peace but it seems some still think it is a magic bullet rather than a very limited solution to an almost non-existent problem.
All right. Since nobody came up with some horrible numbers of VRS-accidents, I searched again. Pumas and Cougars are apparently not very benign in this regime. Apart from the one we already discussed, there is another Cougar accident in France that had VRS as a main factor. All in all I found 7 accidents where contributed to VRS, and two more where it was a factor. Most of them happened close to the ground, as was expected and something else also happened almost always. Most of the pilots tried to add power to stop the sink rate and in some cases that led to a loss of RPM.
But anyway, reading the accident reports makes something painfully clear, the problem is not getting out of it. What should be the emphasis of the training, is not getting into it. Most pilots only realised afterwards, what was going on. Some of them were already under stress and that lowers your mental capacity significantly.
All the one, two, three rules are very nice, but as pilots, we should train to be capable to plan our approaches in a better way, to avoid what is lurking there. Also going around is not a shame and crashing is way more dangerous.
I still prefer the classic method, because it is natural just to go around. In my experience, in the very early incipient state, lowering the collective isn't even necessary (but still a good idea), speeding up is mandatory.
Two of the pilots landed hard (bad back injuries in one case). If they where flying sideways and still had crashed, that would have been quite the bigger mess. Again, as Bob Hoover always said, fly the plane into the crash as long as possible. I would not want to go cross control in that situation.
That is what I could find, but it seems, VRS isn't the oh so deadly thing some people want us believe, because they are very rare and by far most of them ended without fatalities. It will take at least a few hundred years to safe a thousand people.
I think we have other things killing us, who are far more important.
Vuichard's claim to have a place in the Smithsonian might not become reality so fast.
A few links:
French Cougar
Mixing VRS and SWP
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...20121015X91617
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...0627X00938Some more accident identifications:
NYC06LA062
DEN02GA085
ERA16LA159
HAI paper about VRS
HAI for Vuichard
We can probably just let this thread die in peace now.
But anyway, reading the accident reports makes something painfully clear, the problem is not getting out of it. What should be the emphasis of the training, is not getting into it. Most pilots only realised afterwards, what was going on. Some of them were already under stress and that lowers your mental capacity significantly.
All the one, two, three rules are very nice, but as pilots, we should train to be capable to plan our approaches in a better way, to avoid what is lurking there. Also going around is not a shame and crashing is way more dangerous.
I still prefer the classic method, because it is natural just to go around. In my experience, in the very early incipient state, lowering the collective isn't even necessary (but still a good idea), speeding up is mandatory.
Two of the pilots landed hard (bad back injuries in one case). If they where flying sideways and still had crashed, that would have been quite the bigger mess. Again, as Bob Hoover always said, fly the plane into the crash as long as possible. I would not want to go cross control in that situation.
That is what I could find, but it seems, VRS isn't the oh so deadly thing some people want us believe, because they are very rare and by far most of them ended without fatalities. It will take at least a few hundred years to safe a thousand people.
I think we have other things killing us, who are far more important.
Vuichard's claim to have a place in the Smithsonian might not become reality so fast.
A few links:
French Cougar
Mixing VRS and SWP
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...20121015X91617
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...0627X00938Some more accident identifications:
NYC06LA062
DEN02GA085
ERA16LA159
HAI paper about VRS
HAI for Vuichard
We can probably just let this thread die in peace now.
Everything else aside with the technique that is one thing I never understood. People generally get VRS at very low levels. Introducing sideways flight makes no sense.
Sitting on the fence there Airbus......
They should emphasis that NEITHER technique will recover you from fully developed VRS in 50-100'.
They should emphasis that NEITHER technique will recover you from fully developed VRS in 50-100'.
Geez, Crab, can you at least once acknowledge, when something goes in the right direction? I think Airbus very carefully choose their words, just not to get into that fight.
I would have done the same thing and I think the wording is very clear, don't use it unless you absolutely have to - it is your last option. That should make you happy. And they are absolutely right, if you ask me (which you don't, I know). Any trick that keeps you alive is good.
As I read it, Airbus is not happy at all, that everybody is using their ships to show of the Vuichard technique. Hence the recommendation to use a freaking simulator for dangerous stuff like that.
As far as I am aware, there has never been a thorough test campaign with calibrated instruments, cameras (for blade/tailboom clearance for example) and what not, to either prove or disprove one or the other method.
All we have are people one youtube that have tried it in a training environment and are convinced, that he is right. Nobody seems to go any length to do independent research. Why? Beats me. Probably it is just not worth it.
The first HAI paper clearly shows, that SWP (yes, Settling With Power, the thing where you run out of power) vastly outnumbers VRS in deadly accidents. Yes, VRS might come right after you got into SWP, but in that scenario Vuichards technique of pulling even more power does not do any good. I think everybody can see this. You have to reduce power in SWP and absolutely not push the power pedal. Why is that so complicated to understand? Still HAI gave him an award.
Anyway, Crab, we are going to loose this. There will never be enough scientific and statistical evidence that shows, which method saves more lives. All that matters, is who sells the story better. Vuichard is way ahead of us. He is the star quarterback with the cheerleader harem and we are the geeks getting beaten up for being different.
I don't know if you realise it, but in any thread, where VRS is mentioned, Vuichard's method shows up and we get this heated discussion (and get relegated to this thread). Any time a Vuichard fan shows up, we go down hard on them with facts and they leave. Robbie being the exception (but his own experience made him think about it). They don't leave because we have convinced them, they leave because they think we are wrong. Because the majority can not be wrong and the majority are those who can make more noise. Since Robinson is the number one in training helicopters - which you hate, I know, I rather like them - and Tim Tucker is Vuichard's first disciple, the crowd is against us. Let's just suck it up and move on. We have said what is to say. Whatever Vuichard does, it will not make a difference in fatal accidents. At least I truly hope it will not make it worse.
I would have done the same thing and I think the wording is very clear, don't use it unless you absolutely have to - it is your last option. That should make you happy. And they are absolutely right, if you ask me (which you don't, I know). Any trick that keeps you alive is good.
As I read it, Airbus is not happy at all, that everybody is using their ships to show of the Vuichard technique. Hence the recommendation to use a freaking simulator for dangerous stuff like that.
As far as I am aware, there has never been a thorough test campaign with calibrated instruments, cameras (for blade/tailboom clearance for example) and what not, to either prove or disprove one or the other method.
All we have are people one youtube that have tried it in a training environment and are convinced, that he is right. Nobody seems to go any length to do independent research. Why? Beats me. Probably it is just not worth it.
The first HAI paper clearly shows, that SWP (yes, Settling With Power, the thing where you run out of power) vastly outnumbers VRS in deadly accidents. Yes, VRS might come right after you got into SWP, but in that scenario Vuichards technique of pulling even more power does not do any good. I think everybody can see this. You have to reduce power in SWP and absolutely not push the power pedal. Why is that so complicated to understand? Still HAI gave him an award.
Anyway, Crab, we are going to loose this. There will never be enough scientific and statistical evidence that shows, which method saves more lives. All that matters, is who sells the story better. Vuichard is way ahead of us. He is the star quarterback with the cheerleader harem and we are the geeks getting beaten up for being different.
I don't know if you realise it, but in any thread, where VRS is mentioned, Vuichard's method shows up and we get this heated discussion (and get relegated to this thread). Any time a Vuichard fan shows up, we go down hard on them with facts and they leave. Robbie being the exception (but his own experience made him think about it). They don't leave because we have convinced them, they leave because they think we are wrong. Because the majority can not be wrong and the majority are those who can make more noise. Since Robinson is the number one in training helicopters - which you hate, I know, I rather like them - and Tim Tucker is Vuichard's first disciple, the crowd is against us. Let's just suck it up and move on. We have said what is to say. Whatever Vuichard does, it will not make a difference in fatal accidents. At least I truly hope it will not make it worse.
I am now convinced Vuichard hasnt actually experienced fully developed vortex ring. I have been in it once and I could assure him that the aircraft was not in a nice flat hover attitude ( as per his video ) it was pitched up by what felt like 75 to 80 degrees ( same atitude as top of a torque turn )falling on its tail. I cant really see how applying full power and full power pedal would actually do anything. To get out i dumped the lever, full forward cylic and applied full non power pedal, which seemed to work, pulling out about 100 ft from teh ground followed by a change of underwear.
Rotorbee - Airbus are exactly the people who should get into that fight, as are other big helicopter manufacturers - they are the ones with all the test pilots, wind tunnels and calibrated aircraft who could test and call foul on Vuichard.
Yes, they said it might be a better option only if you are downwind but they should clearly state that fully developed VRS is NOT recoverable in 50 to 100' as Vuichard et al keep claiming.
I understand the concern about stresses on the aircraft but the UK Mil were teaching full VRS in the Sea King until 2000 and no bits fell off doing it.
I fully agree with your comments re SWP - if someone used the Vuichard technique in that condition it would get worse very quickly.
Vuichard is a con but people see a way of monetising the threat of VRS with a 'training' package to save you from it - what a world we live in..............
Yes, they said it might be a better option only if you are downwind but they should clearly state that fully developed VRS is NOT recoverable in 50 to 100' as Vuichard et al keep claiming.
I understand the concern about stresses on the aircraft but the UK Mil were teaching full VRS in the Sea King until 2000 and no bits fell off doing it.
I fully agree with your comments re SWP - if someone used the Vuichard technique in that condition it would get worse very quickly.
Vuichard is a con but people see a way of monetising the threat of VRS with a 'training' package to save you from it - what a world we live in..............
Crab ol’ pal, you are right on all accounts, just it isn’t going to happen.
Over all those years, neither Nick nor any other test pilot lurking here took sides. Nick probably because of his employer (who certainly preferred you do all those nasty things where bits could fall off, in a sim). The manufacturers will not pay for this. The better option would be either NASA/FAA/Army or EASA or even any CASA doing it. They’re the one it concerns in the first place. But they seem to slowly move to the dark side. Why? Frankly beats me. They should know better.
The best you can hope for, is that the manufacturers could mention that problem in an unofficial way, like some hints from test pilot to test pilot during a certification process. It could be, that Airbus et. all. have done their homework and know exactly what is going on, but rather stay out of the fight. That safety notice could be the result of just that. Do not use it, unless there is no other option.
Airbus legal department would have a joint heart attack, if somebody wrote in a safety notice „you can not get out within xxx feet“. You would have every macho moron in the helicopter industry trying to prove them wrong. With absolutely disastrous results. Youtube would loose half of its helicopter stuff contributors, but Vuichard would have field day, by doing a new video where you can’t see the VSI. Would make him even more famous. Let it go, Crab. Vuichard is on the first peak of the Dunning Kruger Effect, I am in the valley of despair. You, I don’t know, but somewhere ahead of me. But we do not stand a chance against the marketing machinery he has unleashed. The only thing that could change it right now, would be an accident with somebody using this technique - and for heavens sake I don’t want that to happen. Look at it like homeopathy. You can show people again and again, that it is just a placebo. Show them, how stupid the logic is behind it (and frankly disgusting), tell them, that all the water remembering things is absolutely bollocks and not only because there is no water left on the stupid sugar balls they swallow. They don’t want to know. A big portion of our society will gladly run to any spirit healer, because all the scientific stuff is just bad and only there to make bad people rich. Understanding VRS just in a basic way, took me hours and hours of reading papers and searching for more information. And also thanks to you, I got there in the end (that was before Vuichard wasn’t even a thing. It was the SWP/VRS controversy. Yep, I was on mount stupid then). The only thing that can be done is collecting the facts and presenting them in logical consistent way and then leave it at that. You can lead a horse to the water, but you can’t make him drink.
Just one more thing. Remember Robbie's comment when he got a bit of VRS? He couldn't even recall how to use Vuichard's thing. He was so stressed, he just shoved the stick forward a flew out of it. Who knows, the magic trick is perhaps never going to be used, because it is too complicated.
Over all those years, neither Nick nor any other test pilot lurking here took sides. Nick probably because of his employer (who certainly preferred you do all those nasty things where bits could fall off, in a sim). The manufacturers will not pay for this. The better option would be either NASA/FAA/Army or EASA or even any CASA doing it. They’re the one it concerns in the first place. But they seem to slowly move to the dark side. Why? Frankly beats me. They should know better.
The best you can hope for, is that the manufacturers could mention that problem in an unofficial way, like some hints from test pilot to test pilot during a certification process. It could be, that Airbus et. all. have done their homework and know exactly what is going on, but rather stay out of the fight. That safety notice could be the result of just that. Do not use it, unless there is no other option.
Airbus legal department would have a joint heart attack, if somebody wrote in a safety notice „you can not get out within xxx feet“. You would have every macho moron in the helicopter industry trying to prove them wrong. With absolutely disastrous results. Youtube would loose half of its helicopter stuff contributors, but Vuichard would have field day, by doing a new video where you can’t see the VSI. Would make him even more famous. Let it go, Crab. Vuichard is on the first peak of the Dunning Kruger Effect, I am in the valley of despair. You, I don’t know, but somewhere ahead of me. But we do not stand a chance against the marketing machinery he has unleashed. The only thing that could change it right now, would be an accident with somebody using this technique - and for heavens sake I don’t want that to happen. Look at it like homeopathy. You can show people again and again, that it is just a placebo. Show them, how stupid the logic is behind it (and frankly disgusting), tell them, that all the water remembering things is absolutely bollocks and not only because there is no water left on the stupid sugar balls they swallow. They don’t want to know. A big portion of our society will gladly run to any spirit healer, because all the scientific stuff is just bad and only there to make bad people rich. Understanding VRS just in a basic way, took me hours and hours of reading papers and searching for more information. And also thanks to you, I got there in the end (that was before Vuichard wasn’t even a thing. It was the SWP/VRS controversy. Yep, I was on mount stupid then). The only thing that can be done is collecting the facts and presenting them in logical consistent way and then leave it at that. You can lead a horse to the water, but you can’t make him drink.
Just one more thing. Remember Robbie's comment when he got a bit of VRS? He couldn't even recall how to use Vuichard's thing. He was so stressed, he just shoved the stick forward a flew out of it. Who knows, the magic trick is perhaps never going to be used, because it is too complicated.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Age: 59
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems like this is just a case of old dogs not willing to learn a new trick. I have been trained in the Vuichard method in the 206, 135, 109 and the 407 and it's a much quicker recovery. You people need to stop hyperventilating over this and go train on it. Nothing dangerous about it.
Seems like this is just a case of old dogs not willing to learn a new trick. I have been trained in the Vuichard method in the 206, 135, 109 and the 407 and it's a much quicker recovery. You people need to stop hyperventilating over this and go train on it. Nothing dangerous about it.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Age: 59
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haven't answered my question though....
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Age: 59
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
What rate of descent did you have when you initiated the recovery and what was your height loss during recovery?