Robinson crash in FL
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: At the beach
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep. If I might dare to speculate. If the pilot did what the RFM required, and maintained orientation during night flight by visual reference to ground objects, presumably he would have arrived safely at destination and we wouldn't be having this discussion. It matters not whether an AH was fitted, he had to be able to see sufficient lights on ground, or have enough celestial illumination to see the ground, to get a proper sense of his orientation. Because without orientation you invariably end up flying into the ground, whether that be day or night.
Completely agree with this. I've flown over some areas that were so poorly illuminated that it all just looks like an endless sea of black. It's not possible to determine orientation using ground references when that happens.
Try googling autokinesis.
Non NVG night flight is a visual/instrument balance in anything but bright, full moonlight or over a built up area.
So obviously, if there are so few lights that it just looks like a sea of black, then its no longer "night" by the Robby definition, its IFR,...and you cannot legally fly a Robby by IFR.
I completely agree Robbiee - but I very much get the impression from posts here over the years that it is a widely abused definition and as long as someone can see a light somewhere, they justify it as night VFR.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I completely agree Robbiee - but I very much get the impression from posts here over the years that it is a widely abused definition and as long as someone can see a light somewhere, they justify it as night VFR.
Pilots of all experience levels are adept at crashing all variety of helicopters at night, even those with two engines, two pilots and certified for IFR. But doing it in a Robinson helicopter at night contrary to the RFM and the chances of an unfortunate outcome are quite high, especially for a pilot with virtually no experience. I dare say this accident was almost inevitable within a few minutes of take-off without adequate external visual reference.
Night takeoff in a rural area exposes you to the possibility that you might unexpectedly encounter a lack of sufficient lighting to maintain visual reference. The other possibility is that you might encounter a false horizon illusion.
Without an AH and instrument proficiency, you are up the creek without a paddle.
In FW it's commonly taught to stay on instruments after liftoff at night until you have 500'. By then there's usually enough lights on the ground and perhaps celestial for visual orientation.
Without an AH and instrument proficiency, you are up the creek without a paddle.
In FW it's commonly taught to stay on instruments after liftoff at night until you have 500'. By then there's usually enough lights on the ground and perhaps celestial for visual orientation.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly. You need to be able to see the ground at all times to maintain proper orientation, and be in no doubt about it. Hybrid IFR/instrument/visual technique is utter bollocks. Once airborne is not the time to discover you don't have proper visual reference and have no plan B, especially where the departure point is off-airport without runway lighting.
[QUOTE][First of all this was a R-22 so standard equipment for a R-44 is irrelevant/QUOTE]Confirming the accident aircraft was a R44, registered owner HICKS SEAL COATING & STRIPING LLC of 6758 SW COUNTY ROAD 344. The following link gives weather at the time along with track flown. Place mark bottom left of photo denotes crash site, aircraft heading NE, 2.16NM to run to the freeway, so one would have surmised towards reasonable well lit residential area, albeit country side not city.
Kathryn's Report: Robinson R44 Raven II, N442VB: Fatal accident occurred December 30, 2021 in Bronson, Levy County, Florida
Family home, own hangar, fixed wing and runway.
A little tiger country to traverse, a little over 5NM, may have been the trigger for the leans given the vis.
Kathryn's Report: Robinson R44 Raven II, N442VB: Fatal accident occurred December 30, 2021 in Bronson, Levy County, Florida
Family home, own hangar, fixed wing and runway.
A little tiger country to traverse, a little over 5NM, may have been the trigger for the leans given the vis.
Last edited by megan; 11th Jan 2022 at 01:53.
Hybrid IFR/instrument/visual technique is utter bollocks
You need to be able to see the ground at all times to maintain proper orientation, and be in no doubt about it.
Seeing lights on the ground is not the same as seeing the ground itself. However, lit structures can give you orientation and scale information - buildings, roads etc - but in order to form a coherent mental model of the outside world for orientation, you need a horizon or something that will serve as a horizon..
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Or, in fact, the safe way to fly VFR at night.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
And do please tell how you do that when it is dark (except with a cloudless night and full moon).
No, it's just suckering in people who don't have the skills or recency to give it a go, and when they give it a go and it turns out to be too dark the situation ends up exceeding their capability. If it's that dark that you need to cross reference to instruments it's too dark to be flying a helicopter that requires you to be able to see the ground to maintain orientation.
Using instruments while you gain height, in order to better achieve a visual reference, can be useful and it is how we were taught, along with avoiding an early turn-out on takeoff.
Get settled and get your perspective sorted, a basic scan can only help with that.
People that want to fly in IFR conditions aren't put off or encouraged by what tools they do or don't have.
Easy. The decision is made for you by the RFM. If you don't have a clear night with ample celestial illumination to see the ground
Just because you can look up and see the stars doesn't mean you can look down and see the ground.
In 40 years of flying I have only seen a few nights, some but not many, where you could honestly say you could fly in an unstabilised helicopter with sole reference to external cues and not need to look in at the instruments.
Originally Posted by [email protected]
..In 40 years of flying I have only seen a few nights, some but not many, where you could honestly say you could fly in an unstabilised helicopter with sole reference to external cues and not need to look in at the instruments.
That presumes you have had enough time for your eyes to become dark-adapted and that no lights in the cockpit or your airfield have affected your night vision.
Otherwise you are taking off without full knowledge of the conditions and ability to see the ground. Another reason to use an instrument/visual balance for departure.
If your eyes haven't dark-adapted before take-off it can take between 20 and 30 minutes to achieve reasonable night vision and be able to accurately determine whether you can see the ground or not.
Your cones can get reasonably adapted in about 10 mins but your rods - which provide scotopic or night vision - take much longer, it can take several hours to reach full night sensitivity.
This means you need to turn your cockpit lighting down in stages during the sortie so you allow maximum adaptation for the external references. It always amazes me how dim the lights can be after an hour or so and you can still read the instruments perfectly. Even with my old eyes
Otherwise you are taking off without full knowledge of the conditions and ability to see the ground. Another reason to use an instrument/visual balance for departure.
If your eyes haven't dark-adapted before take-off it can take between 20 and 30 minutes to achieve reasonable night vision and be able to accurately determine whether you can see the ground or not.
Your cones can get reasonably adapted in about 10 mins but your rods - which provide scotopic or night vision - take much longer, it can take several hours to reach full night sensitivity.
This means you need to turn your cockpit lighting down in stages during the sortie so you allow maximum adaptation for the external references. It always amazes me how dim the lights can be after an hour or so and you can still read the instruments perfectly. Even with my old eyes
Reading this sad thread over the past few days has reminded me of a number of CFIT accidents during my 30 year career in aviation as well as some personal hairy moments as I gained experience. Were I to buy a 44 today the one must have option would be the autopilot. Having flown a few hours recently with this option has convinced me of its value in marginal VMC, over water and at night. I fully accept the risk that low hour pilots (and perhaps high hour pilots) might see it as an IMC option or a capability to fly when they otherwise would not, but IMHO stabilisation, the ability to maintain height and the ability to reduce cockpit workload in VMC is a significant improvement.
Improving the handling qualities of your aircraft is absolutely the best thing you can do to improve safety - it reduces pilot workload and allows better lookout, better situational awareness and more capacity to deal with problems or changing weather.
I took part in a simulator trial at RAE Bedford in the late 90's where we had to repeat a task of medium workload while the boffins changed the handling qualities of the aircraft and the visual cues - it was an investigation into DVE.
The better the handing qualities, the worse visual cues we could cope with and vice versa.
Having a better handling aircraft won't make you fly in worse conditions - that is the pilot's decision - but it will make any flying more enjoyable and safer.
Given it's target market, the Robbie shouldn't be produced without an autopilot in my opinion - nothing clever just SAS.
I took part in a simulator trial at RAE Bedford in the late 90's where we had to repeat a task of medium workload while the boffins changed the handling qualities of the aircraft and the visual cues - it was an investigation into DVE.
The better the handing qualities, the worse visual cues we could cope with and vice versa.
Having a better handling aircraft won't make you fly in worse conditions - that is the pilot's decision - but it will make any flying more enjoyable and safer.
Given it's target market, the Robbie shouldn't be produced without an autopilot in my opinion - nothing clever just SAS.