police incident
Guest
Posts: n/a
Qmax,
All certified helos have to demonstrate full autorotative capability at all altitudes and gross weights, tilt rotor proponent's opinions to the contrary notwithstanding. This assures that the auto in a twin is do-able, and that even though the odds are very low, a dual engine failure will be survivable.
They may be bricks, but they are autorotatable bricks!
All certified helos have to demonstrate full autorotative capability at all altitudes and gross weights, tilt rotor proponent's opinions to the contrary notwithstanding. This assures that the auto in a twin is do-able, and that even though the odds are very low, a dual engine failure will be survivable.
They may be bricks, but they are autorotatable bricks!
Nick.....you got me cornfused once again....it must be the years of ridiing around in something that couldn't decide which rotor head was supposed to be in front!
When you say the "odds are very low".....to what do you refer please.....the risk of a dual engine failure (and that would include all catagories...dual simultaneous, one followed very closely by the other, and a second engine failure after a previous one some time in the past but subsequent) .....or do you mean the resulting autorotation has a low odds of success?
I think I rightly assume you mean the odds of having to do an engines out autorotation is very low.
I must state the thrill one gets doing those is quite significant......and note for all and sundry gathered here.....never...never....trust a student to move any switches without watching him oh so very closely! The fuel valves are clearly marked in a Chinook...and oddly enough are placed on the correct sides of the panel....#1 on the left....#2 on the right....just like all sorts of other switches.....the dislexic rascal promptly shut off the wrong fuel valve....and with a Chinook...that quite promptly results in a deathly silence save the IP's blubbering!
The second occasion was when one engine wound down with a governoring failure.......on approach to a hover only mountain top LZ....Gia Re mountain near Xuan Loc....and the other one went into compressor stall just as we were in the very last stages of the approach to a hover with a sling load.....earned the callsign "Brown Shorts" that morning! It is amazing what the ol' Hook can do when you really need some help! Bleed the rotor rpm low enough and the gennies drop off line.....and even door gunners will swear off hard drink as part of their negotiation with the Almighty!
When you say the "odds are very low".....to what do you refer please.....the risk of a dual engine failure (and that would include all catagories...dual simultaneous, one followed very closely by the other, and a second engine failure after a previous one some time in the past but subsequent) .....or do you mean the resulting autorotation has a low odds of success?
I think I rightly assume you mean the odds of having to do an engines out autorotation is very low.
I must state the thrill one gets doing those is quite significant......and note for all and sundry gathered here.....never...never....trust a student to move any switches without watching him oh so very closely! The fuel valves are clearly marked in a Chinook...and oddly enough are placed on the correct sides of the panel....#1 on the left....#2 on the right....just like all sorts of other switches.....the dislexic rascal promptly shut off the wrong fuel valve....and with a Chinook...that quite promptly results in a deathly silence save the IP's blubbering!
The second occasion was when one engine wound down with a governoring failure.......on approach to a hover only mountain top LZ....Gia Re mountain near Xuan Loc....and the other one went into compressor stall just as we were in the very last stages of the approach to a hover with a sling load.....earned the callsign "Brown Shorts" that morning! It is amazing what the ol' Hook can do when you really need some help! Bleed the rotor rpm low enough and the gennies drop off line.....and even door gunners will swear off hard drink as part of their negotiation with the Almighty!
SASless, I think the Mogadishu episode had less to do with engine performance than putting themselves firmly in the threat band without actually assessing the threat. Strangely the funny little black guys had something slightly more dangerous than a piece of sharpened fruit (sorry Blackadder) to throw at them.
'They can't hurt us, we're Americans' hut!hut!hut!
'They can't hurt us, we're Americans' hut!hut!hut!
HeliFirst
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lincoln & Norwich
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point, I think, you were making was correct.
If engine failure was the cause.... then a second engine running would have eased the situation..
I don't think you were argueing for of against single/twin operations. Each are correct for the different situations.
Well feel better now.
If engine failure was the cause.... then a second engine running would have eased the situation..
I don't think you were argueing for of against single/twin operations. Each are correct for the different situations.
Well feel better now.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are all missing the point about one engine vs two. The extra engine is included purely to make the pilot appear even more god-like than he is. Two engines = two lots of dials in the pointy bit at the front.
When I show people round my twin they dont say "wow its got two engines", but "wow - look at all those dials". (It has a full set of co-pilots instruments too).
All Rotorheads know that what they are really saying is "wow you must be some kind of brilliant guy to be able to fly that".
Now where can I get my hands on an EH101?
PS Tip for all you R22 jocks out there. Halfords do a three-instrument pod with velcro backing that you can pop on top of the console. You can then have an ammeter, voltmeter and standby manifold pressure gauge up there instead of that useless Garmin 150 box. Looks the business. Alright!!!
When I show people round my twin they dont say "wow its got two engines", but "wow - look at all those dials". (It has a full set of co-pilots instruments too).
All Rotorheads know that what they are really saying is "wow you must be some kind of brilliant guy to be able to fly that".
Now where can I get my hands on an EH101?
PS Tip for all you R22 jocks out there. Halfords do a three-instrument pod with velcro backing that you can pop on top of the console. You can then have an ammeter, voltmeter and standby manifold pressure gauge up there instead of that useless Garmin 150 box. Looks the business. Alright!!!
Hoverman: Sorry you see it that way re the EMS thread. Thought you were someone who had a mature head on those shoulders of yours. Never mind, takes all sorts eh?
I don't see the problem with this 2 engine situation: I didn't mention common drive train malfunctions, or any other systems malfunction. I simply said that this guy had a problem with his frigging block! It wouldn't have been a problem if it had happened to a Uk frigging police frigging helo...would it?
General question for all those S.E. drivers out there:
What do your crash cards say when you get a chip light?
Why is it that in all light twins you are required to shut the engine down, or atleast to F.I.
I have had two engine shut downs (surge and turbine blade disintegrate) in the last 6 years both of which were over a built up area. My predecessor had an engine flame out in heavy rain at night. How different it would have been with only one donk on board.....................
I don't see the problem with this 2 engine situation: I didn't mention common drive train malfunctions, or any other systems malfunction. I simply said that this guy had a problem with his frigging block! It wouldn't have been a problem if it had happened to a Uk frigging police frigging helo...would it?
General question for all those S.E. drivers out there:
What do your crash cards say when you get a chip light?
Why is it that in all light twins you are required to shut the engine down, or atleast to F.I.
I have had two engine shut downs (surge and turbine blade disintegrate) in the last 6 years both of which were over a built up area. My predecessor had an engine flame out in heavy rain at night. How different it would have been with only one donk on board.....................
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Statistical whitewash !!
TC: "What do your crash cards say when you get a chip light?"
They say: "find the nearest convienient pub and make a normal landing."
Landowners permission NOT REQUIRED under these circumstances
How far are you supposed to fly with OEI ?
...and TC you are lucky you weren't over open land with no power wishing you were in a single and that someone had at least shown you how to make an EOL in your BRICK.
Nick L : How many pilots could actually perform an EOL in a twin? ... I am right that they are not actually practised/shown/taught? (quite rightly too)
They say: "find the nearest convienient pub and make a normal landing."
Landowners permission NOT REQUIRED under these circumstances
How far are you supposed to fly with OEI ?
...and TC you are lucky you weren't over open land with no power wishing you were in a single and that someone had at least shown you how to make an EOL in your BRICK.
Nick L : How many pilots could actually perform an EOL in a twin? ... I am right that they are not actually practised/shown/taught? (quite rightly too)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've always assumed that the reason for shutting down an engine with a chip light was to save the engine from further damage - it's an economic, not a safety, issue. If you only have one, you keep running it until you can land, which is usually not that long in a helicopter. I don't know if this is universal, but I did autorotations in both the 412 & S76 while being checked out, & do them regularly in the sim in recurrent training. Lots of fun in the sim, since you don't get hurt when you prang it really hard. 
It's nice to be able to intentionally do something wrong & see what happens, without getting fired for it.
It's nice to be able to intentionally do something wrong & see what happens, without getting fired for it.
GLS...I know of a place where training captains appear to be above the law when it comes to tearing things up as a result of being boneheaded.....and at the Sim...they don't give you a two week holiday and airfare back to yer home as a way of punishing you either!
Of course the greatest danger of saying never in classifying anything is that you have to consider every potential future event and occurence - not something that many operators or manufacturers (or individuals for that matter) would care to do!
If my memory serves correctly, I believe that the Met lost a Bell 222 following an engine failure.
With respect, perhaps we might discuss that incident from the past - long before any JAR mandated ops were ever in place?
If my memory serves correctly, I believe that the Met lost a Bell 222 following an engine failure.
With respect, perhaps we might discuss that incident from the past - long before any JAR mandated ops were ever in place?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere, Over the Rainbow
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahh, Twins VS Singles. I've talked on this subject before, but everything always ends up the same - some people say "A second engine is an aid, and I'll take any aid I can get" (my stance), while the others say "Singles have less to go wrong, engine failures aren't that bad, twins cost more, and I'd rather have xxx and xxx than double whiners above".
So, I've got an analogy (gotta love em). Having a second engine is like side-impact airbags. They cost more, yeah, they add more complexity and more to go wrong, yeah, they won't help you if you get hit head on or go under a semi truck, yeah, but they might just save your life if you get t-boned. All accidents aren't t-boning, but some are. They aren't wonder devices, but they just might save me if the situation permits. Kind of like "If we save one life, then everything has been worth it".
Twins can't take over the market, but I'll always prefer two over one going above me. And I'll be ordering side-impact airbags when I land a nice job flying suits around for the big bucks, but until then, my Volvo tank will just have to do
Mike
So, I've got an analogy (gotta love em). Having a second engine is like side-impact airbags. They cost more, yeah, they add more complexity and more to go wrong, yeah, they won't help you if you get hit head on or go under a semi truck, yeah, but they might just save your life if you get t-boned. All accidents aren't t-boning, but some are. They aren't wonder devices, but they just might save me if the situation permits. Kind of like "If we save one life, then everything has been worth it".
Twins can't take over the market, but I'll always prefer two over one going above me. And I'll be ordering side-impact airbags when I land a nice job flying suits around for the big bucks, but until then, my Volvo tank will just have to do
Mike
"Twins can't take over the market, but I'll always prefer two over one going above me. And I'll be ordering side-impact airbags when I land a nice job flying suits around for the big bucks, but until then, my Volvo tank will just have to do "
THM,
Quite agree, and the overriding factor: Money!! Clients who can be made to appreciate the added safety of a twin will pay for it, those who can't/won't accept the cost of a twin, get what they pay for. My 117 operates, carrying paying passengers, in the sort of conditions that I wouldn't even contemplate putting a single, and would rather walk away from than expose myself and my company to the possible risk of litigation. Fortunately, my clients agree and accept the cost.
Against that, it is a moot point to be operating over built up areas on a regular basis in a single, but the risk isn't seen as such a factor by many, even those professionals amongst us who are posting in this thread. Why? Because everyone does it? Because the clients have been convinced by all the operators offering cut throat rates on 25 year old machines that it is acceptable?
I don't have the answer, and I suspect none of us do. Market forces are driving our industry, from the antiquated offshore support aircraft to the 15,000 hour JetRangers flogging around on general charter. In an ideal world we would get new airframes at least every 10 years, and our choice of single or twin to suit the job and the risk factor. Until then, I'll have to put up with having side impact airbags in my car to drive to work, but providing the client with the machinery that he is willing to pay for, along with every other operator in the business.
THM,
Quite agree, and the overriding factor: Money!! Clients who can be made to appreciate the added safety of a twin will pay for it, those who can't/won't accept the cost of a twin, get what they pay for. My 117 operates, carrying paying passengers, in the sort of conditions that I wouldn't even contemplate putting a single, and would rather walk away from than expose myself and my company to the possible risk of litigation. Fortunately, my clients agree and accept the cost.
Against that, it is a moot point to be operating over built up areas on a regular basis in a single, but the risk isn't seen as such a factor by many, even those professionals amongst us who are posting in this thread. Why? Because everyone does it? Because the clients have been convinced by all the operators offering cut throat rates on 25 year old machines that it is acceptable?
I don't have the answer, and I suspect none of us do. Market forces are driving our industry, from the antiquated offshore support aircraft to the 15,000 hour JetRangers flogging around on general charter. In an ideal world we would get new airframes at least every 10 years, and our choice of single or twin to suit the job and the risk factor. Until then, I'll have to put up with having side impact airbags in my car to drive to work, but providing the client with the machinery that he is willing to pay for, along with every other operator in the business.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless, we all know that place, it's where we live. But so far, the first day of VFR emergency procedures has been a freebie, to play with. I'll let you know if it's still there in a month or so.
TwinHueyMan, I agree with you, I'll take a twin if I can get it, but I won't hold my breath until singles are made illegal. Money (& short-term money at that) drives everything. As long as the customers take singles at lower prices, singles will be out there, safety be damned. And at least in the US, the guv'mint ain't going to do a thing about it.
TwinHueyMan, I agree with you, I'll take a twin if I can get it, but I won't hold my breath until singles are made illegal. Money (& short-term money at that) drives everything. As long as the customers take singles at lower prices, singles will be out there, safety be damned. And at least in the US, the guv'mint ain't going to do a thing about it.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GLSNightPilot
The other way to think of shutting down your engine, is that it won't get any worse and cause collateral damage when a wheel or bearing lets go....
Heaven forbid.....and you won't see this in any RFM, but you could always start it again for your landing, or if something worse happens to your "Good" engine......so shut it down whilst it is still of some use.
I realise that this idea is not supported in the various RFM's........but hey...its your bum in the seat.
Much the same as running short of fuel and shutting down a perfectly good engine.........better fuel flow / nm traveled [up to the critical headwind component that is]....once again its your bum
Heaven forbid.....and you won't see this in any RFM, but you could always start it again for your landing, or if something worse happens to your "Good" engine......so shut it down whilst it is still of some use.
I realise that this idea is not supported in the various RFM's........but hey...its your bum in the seat.
Much the same as running short of fuel and shutting down a perfectly good engine.........better fuel flow / nm traveled [up to the critical headwind component that is]....once again its your bum
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ratio of exposure
... Since the twin is more dangerous in circumstances where a twin is not necessary and (probably) safer when it could be of use (hovering over the sea for instance) then it all comes down to the :
RATIO of EXPOSURE
.... and clearly becomes mission specific.
exposed time / non exposed will determine the logical choice (in this regard)
RATIO of EXPOSURE
.... and clearly becomes mission specific.
exposed time / non exposed will determine the logical choice (in this regard)