Training on grass
Think you might find on a Schweizer / Hughes the oleos compress way before the skids start to splay any significant amount along with the cross beams ! Granted way different on machines with no oleos
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
You may have some valid arguments about using tarmac instead of grass aa777888, but that one is complete fiction. search back for Nick Lappos' destruction of the 'bubble of air' theory of ground effect.
Keep straight, don't chase the attitude with cyclic and don't lower the lever until you have stopped during the run on and it doesn't matter what surface or pretty much what speed you land on.
It's cheap insurance to go to a hard surface no matter how good you are. Just like it's cheap insurance to take an instructor or check pilot with you when practicing auto's. It never hurts to have an extra set of experienced brains in the cockpit under those circumstances.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like these folk Robbiee? 
Chose the runway rather than the grass, as if they had a choice, wonder what the result may have been if they came down on the grass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr7hAJmq5Pg
Chose the runway rather than the grass, as if they had a choice, wonder what the result may have been if they came down on the grass.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr7hAJmq5Pg
Gordy not a bad one really as the grass and ground absorbs some of the shock as the aircraft touches down, hence you see indents in the ground. You can't seriously lell me that landing on a hard surface has less of a shock to the aircraft ? Of course the skids splay out as this is the first " crumple zone " the manufacturer puts in to protect us. The skids still start to splay on grass, you just dont get the harder shock especially when a student gets it wrong and one has to recover it
Tell me how this would play out on grass:
https://youtu.be/MvMcsJTOYI0
https://youtu.be/MvMcsJTOYI0
Misjudged one full down badly, getting in the lee wind behind of a line of buildings. Fell through and hit flat and hard, but no damage. I was in no doubt that had it been grass, I wouldn‘t have got away with it. Grass is great as long as you don‘t hit hard.
Like these folk Robbiee? Chose the runway rather than the grass, as if they had a choice, wonder what the result may have been if they came down on the grass.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr7hAJmq5Pg
Chose the runway rather than the grass, as if they had a choice, wonder what the result may have been if they came down on the grass.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr7hAJmq5Pg
,...oh, and did you read the comment on that video made by the R22 pilot?
Last edited by Robbiee; 20th May 2021 at 17:28.
I am reassured to be reminded that the UK must posess one of the most skilful sets of helo pilots worldwide as every single one, civvy PPL and military, do all their EOLs to grass with no awareness that it was considered remarkable. (AFAIK)
You are, after all, practicing for emergency landngs in fields...
You are, after all, practicing for emergency landngs in fields...
That's all quite wonderful, until a student doesn't do that, and his 200 hour super-pilot CFI doesn't sort it out in time.
Then because of the number of inevitable accidents caused by combining a helicopter unsuitable for basic training with instructors with little experience and ability, the insurance costs go up and people stop doing EOLS/full down autos. Dumbing down training because people 'have the right' to fly a helicopter.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Perhaps the concern is that rather than keep standards high, it is seen better to make things easier...............
And there is the other big issue - at 200 hours you have barely learned to fly a helicopter let alone teach other people to do so - this is justified by the need to hours-build to have a career progression.
Then because of the number of inevitable accidents caused by combining a helicopter unsuitable for basic training with instructors with little experience and ability, the insurance costs go up and people stop doing EOLS/full down autos. Dumbing down training because people 'have the right' to fly a helicopter.
And there is the other big issue - at 200 hours you have barely learned to fly a helicopter let alone teach other people to do so - this is justified by the need to hours-build to have a career progression.
Then because of the number of inevitable accidents caused by combining a helicopter unsuitable for basic training with instructors with little experience and ability, the insurance costs go up and people stop doing EOLS/full down autos. Dumbing down training because people 'have the right' to fly a helicopter.
As for our insistence on using 200 wonders to teach, I'm right with you on it being utterly ridiculous and one of the more idiotic things we do in this country. However, II' pretty sure its not the addition of Robby to the training environment that started this trend of having newbies teach newbies.
,...and if you want to do full downs in a 22 you can do full downs in a 22. You just have to find the right school. However, I noticed that combining the skills learned in power recovery autos with hover autoes is just as good.
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
I wouldn’t want to be taught by a 200 hour instructor. When I was sent, much against my better judgement some thirty seven years ago, to RAF Central Flying School to learn how to be a QHI I had just short of 1500 hours, most of it on twin engined helicopters. I really didn’t want to go that early in my career because I considered myself short on experience and the “Old Guard” had many times that many hours.
As I previously mentioned, every EOL we did was to grass. The one significant EOL accident I do remember was a borrowed RAF Puma....at Boscombe Down, by a test pilot.. and to a tarmac runway....oops.
Maybe he’d forgotten his big watch that day.
As I previously mentioned, every EOL we did was to grass. The one significant EOL accident I do remember was a borrowed RAF Puma....at Boscombe Down, by a test pilot.. and to a tarmac runway....oops.
Maybe he’d forgotten his big watch that day.
Mostly done autos to grass with Hughes500, expect I scared the crap out of him most of the time but never bent it. Another other thing an auto without the engine running at all is subtly different to one on idle
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
Robbiee - I know you will defend your machine to the death but I was type rated on the R22 many years ago and flew EOLs in it - compared to many other aircraft it is unsuitable for training, especially with inexperienced instructors.
The aircraft was never designed or envisaged as a trainer and only became so ubiquitous due to its relatively low costs.
The aircraft was never designed or envisaged as a trainer and only became so ubiquitous due to its relatively low costs.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The R22 is a fine training machine, except for practicing auto's, where it provides probably the smallest safety margins of any machine I can think of. I never enjoyed auto's in the 22. They are more fun in the 44, but I use the word "fun" somewhat loosely.
But...
This is much like the grass vs. pavement argument. If all you've ever had is grass to practice on, and you didn't experience any significant issues in doing so, then you are going to be happy with grass, or at least accepting of the risk it presents. The same is true for training in the R22. If it's all you've got access to, monetarily or otherwise, this definitely has an affect on your risk-related decision making. I would much rather have trained in, say, a 407. And be flying one today for everything I do. Alas, my choices are fly what I can afford monetarily, or don't fly. Everyone already knows how that decision will sort itself out!
But...
This is much like the grass vs. pavement argument. If all you've ever had is grass to practice on, and you didn't experience any significant issues in doing so, then you are going to be happy with grass, or at least accepting of the risk it presents. The same is true for training in the R22. If it's all you've got access to, monetarily or otherwise, this definitely has an affect on your risk-related decision making. I would much rather have trained in, say, a 407. And be flying one today for everything I do. Alas, my choices are fly what I can afford monetarily, or don't fly. Everyone already knows how that decision will sort itself out!
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Robbiee - I know you will defend your machine to the death but I was type rated on the R22 many years ago and flew EOLs in it - compared to many other aircraft it is unsuitable for training, especially with inexperienced instructors.
The aircraft was never designed or envisaged as a trainer and only became so ubiquitous due to its relatively low costs.
The aircraft was never designed or envisaged as a trainer and only became so ubiquitous due to its relatively low costs.
I've done full down autos in the 22, 44, and Enstrom as well as power recovery in the 300 and 206, I've also flown a 500 and S-55, so its not like the 22 is the only thing I've ever been exposed to. The little guy may not have been designed as a trainer, but it handles the job just as good as the others,...and I'm not going to fault the machine because of our ridiculously stupid first job program.
With insurance rates soaring on 22’s I reckon Frank hopes the cadet gets more traction.
The running costs aren’t much more, it can accommodate more American-sized pilots and is just safer than the 22.
Some forgiveness is required in training environments. A smaller, less tolerant and less-crashworthy aircraft like the 22 doesn’t help.
While underpowered, the Cabri’s design is orders of magnitude safer than a 22.
For that premium you may as well also consider a cadet.
The running costs aren’t much more, it can accommodate more American-sized pilots and is just safer than the 22.
Some forgiveness is required in training environments. A smaller, less tolerant and less-crashworthy aircraft like the 22 doesn’t help.
While underpowered, the Cabri’s design is orders of magnitude safer than a 22.
For that premium you may as well also consider a cadet.
With insurance rates soaring on 22’s I reckon Frank hopes the cadet gets more traction.
The running costs aren’t much more, it can accommodate more American-sized pilots and is just safer than the 22.
Some forgiveness is required in training environments. A smaller, less tolerant and less-crashworthy aircraft like the 22 doesn’t help.
While underpowered, the Cabri’s design is orders of magnitude safer than a 22.
For that premium you may as well also consider a cadet.
The running costs aren’t much more, it can accommodate more American-sized pilots and is just safer than the 22.
Some forgiveness is required in training environments. A smaller, less tolerant and less-crashworthy aircraft like the 22 doesn’t help.
While underpowered, the Cabri’s design is orders of magnitude safer than a 22.
For that premium you may as well also consider a cadet.
However, between 2003 and 2019 (my active rental years with four different schools) we only had three accidents. Two in the R22 (a bird strike and rear ending by an airplane on a night xc). Both pilots walked away from the resulting crash. The third was a fatal crash involving training in the R44.
During my training we had one accident. My instructor had a roll over in a 22 after his ppl student dumped the collective after a gust of wind. Not only did both of them walk away, but they were both back in the air within a week.
Its hard to imagine that any of these accidents would have ended differently had they been in a different helicopter.
Its hard to imagine that any of these accidents would have ended differently had they been in a different helicopter.
Every time I look at a 22....I eat another couple of double cheeseburgers and extra large helping of Fries (Chips to our British fellows).....so as to ensure I cannot fit through the entry door and thus not be able to get into one of the things even if I were to lose my mind and decide to give it go.