Engine offs to the ground

[cyclic flare]

I have been flying helicopters for almost ten years, instructing part time for 3 - 4 years but still not comfortable carrying out EOL's to the ground. I will only go to the ground if there is a 15 knot plus wind and dont actually shut the throttle intill i level the ship 6 - 8ft.

I believe the EOL's to the ground should be demonstrated regulary but suspect alot of instructors don't carry out this exercise due to obvious reasons.

How many of you do / dont carry out this exercise.

By the way i fly R22 / R44

[MamboBaas]

EOL = Engine Off Landing i.e. to the ground. If it's not to the ground it's not an EOL.

[Ikey Solomon]

I've been flying 22's and 44's out of Booker for the last 3 years and both training schools actively encourage them to the ground. My personal view is that I think it is imperative in all weather conditions to practice these as much as possible. It's a pity that to many schools train to a power recovery and not to the ground out of the fear factor.

[handyandyuk]

All the time I was training and SFH from Cambridge I did practice engine failures, with power recovery above 500' agl and practice forced landings/ EOL to the ground. Once in autorotation the most important part to learn and practice is within the last 100' or so before landing, so unless it is taught AND practiced regularly to the ground, how could any pilot really be considered fully current?
This would have to be more important for us SFH/private types who might get in the cockpit less than twice a month.

And if anyone wants the practice, see Liam at Cambridge... he loves them

[KENNYR]

Its like any other aspect of flying.....practice makes perfect (or close to it). I was a QHI in the Army and nearly every flight ended in an EOL. I practiced and taught them from every conceivable altitude, speed and configuration. It is extremely important to build a student or experienced pilots confidence by allowing them to practice the ultimate emergency.

The only EOL that I did not, under any circumstances, practice was the EOL at night. I did however teach the technique, but during day-light hours only.

I found the most difficulty with EOLs onto snow covered ground or static water.

[idle stop]

CF:
An EOL, distinct from an autorotation, is a JAR Syllabus exercise and has to be done.
Pity the poor student who has to do his first ever on GFT!
Or for real on a solo flight. Thinks.....legal liability.....?
In R22 or other low-inertia rotor helicopter, I have three suggestions:
1. Don't try (intentional) EOL until comfortably below MAUW.
2. Avoid gusty/windsheer conditions (and NB R22 Flight Manual Limitations on flying in strong winds)
3. Hover, Hover-Taxy or Constant Attidude EOLs: 10 kts minimum windspeed and Flare EOLs run on with 10kts through the disc.
And finally, if you get the chance, do some with another current FI to get your confidence up again!
Good luck!

[Old Man Rotor]

This is the perienial argument.........to do it or not to do it.............

And there is no simple answer......it really depends on where you are in the Industry.

A CFI at a basic training school, or the Blue Suits at BHT DFW can auto those things to a dime every time [is the one with that beer tummy still there?]..........but so what??

On the other side of the coin the need to auto to touch down in a S76 is just not justified..........

That is not to say that the guys arn't expected to auto to a "Spot" for the final flare..... but then the throttles are back at 100% for the cushion.........to get to that spot is the critical part, NOT THE LANDING.

Most heavy fisted folk with flat pitch, high NR and approaching the cushion will get the thing on the ground safety.........but getting to that point is far more difficult.
That "Spot" may be a break in the trees, a vacant house lot, a crossroad or a school yard......but the landing will be untidy to say the least if you can't get to the "Spot"

For those guys that preach the requirement to complete the Engine Off stuff to the ground.........try pulling the mixture to lean/Cutoff at 2000 ft, then switches off, fuel off......and your on your way.......the total effect is far different to just closing a throttle.........the silence is deafening to start with, the required NR control is far more sensitive with no residual engine power........until you practice that, you can't claim you practice Engine Off to the ground.

If it is a JAR requirement........just great, watch the number of wrecks increase, and the already huge hull and liability insurance premiums go off the scale.....another great JAR decision.

[Helinut]

Old Man Rotor,

Overall, I don't disagree with what you say. However, the requirement for full EOLs has been in UK requirements for ever, for singles anyway. So for the UK, the JAR makes little difference.

There was at least one training school that used to avoid EOLs (I am sure that there may be others). As a visiting examiner, I did a PPL test on one student there who went very pale when I asked for an EOL. I de-briefed the owner after the test, but they continued to ban EOLs "for insurance reasons". I did no more tests there. They went bust owing people a lot of money a short time later (not suggesting these were necessarily linked).

I think it is very much a matter of practice and currency - I would not want to do a practice EOL at the moment except dual with a current FI, as I am way out of practice (as I fly twins these days).

[cyclic flare]

EOL

Helinut,

However, the requirement for full EOLs has been in UK requirements for ever, for singles anyway. So for the UK, the JAR makes little difference.

This may well be a requirement but in reality it is ridiclous to expect a PPL to be able to carry out an EOL on his GFT. (Not my words but from several examiners who i have produced students ready for test)

A very experienced examiner from Blackpool said to me that he would not expect a pilot with less than 500 hours to be able to carry out an EOL sucessfully so how is it possible for a 50 hour ppl to complete this on his GTF, maybe the CAA know the answer?

One thing i do know for sure is they wont be completing this exercise in my machine.

In the UK we are fortunate to have many experienced pilots who are capable of completing the EOL sussessfully during training on an airfield. If you travel to the USA (Florida) and ask them for EOL training very very few are willing to complete this exercise.

[weedflier]

"This may well be a requirement but in reality it is ridiclous to expect a PPL to be able to carry out an EOL on his GFT".

I would have thought that the one time it is least ridiculous to expect a PPL to be able to carry out an EOL is on his GFT as that is the time when he should have had the most concentrated training he is likely to get.

" i have produced students ready for test"

If they aren't able to carry out an EOL on a GFT they're not ready for the test. Many years ago when I was an examiner (and yes it wasn't so long ago that the R22 hadn't been certified!) any PPL student who couldn't do an EOL on his GFT would not have gained his PPL(H).

[tippathplane]

Maybe i'm just not reading this properly but in the UK do you guys actually turn the engine off for this procedure? I trained in Australia and during my course most of the Auto's performed where to the ground. IE enter Autorotation at 1000ish throttle closed all the way down to around 75 roll it into the overtravel bit and land it from there, However not once did the instructor kill the engine for real. As I said maybe I just misunderstand the definition of you Engine off techinque.

[Helinut]

TPP,

We do the same as you in OZ; it would be foolhardy not to be able to recover from a poorly executed practice EOL. Never thought of it before, but maybe we should call it engine disconnected landing or something??

Cyclic Flare,

Are you saying that the examiners you mention don't follow the requirement to test pilots with an EOL??

[cyclic flare]

EOL

Helinut,

I am not saying that the examiners don't carry out EOL on the test i am sure they do. But i imagine this is a dual excercise or do you just sit back with your arms folded.

[soggyboxers]

When I used to conduct engine offs on a GFT it was very much a solo effort on the part of the examinee - but the air of nonchalance was entirely contrived and I was ready to take control in the final stages if need be! Naturally if that happened I'd congratulate the student on a good attempt and ask him to show me another one just like it, only better. This used to relax them as they felt I had confidence in their abilities. I don't remember anyone that I flew with failing a PPL test for failing to complete a satisfactory engine off. I wasn't looking for anything like perfection - just the ability of the candidate (and any passengers with him) to survive if it should ever happen.

try pulling the mixture to lean/Cutoff at 2000 ft, then switches off, fuel off......and your on your way.......the total effect is far different to just closing a throttle.........the silence is deafening to start with, the required NR control is far more sensitive with no residual engine power........until you practice that, you can't claim you practice Engine Off to the ground.

Can't say I've noticed any difference at all in Nr control, though the noise is marginally less. In 1990 Eurocopter had a problem with a faulty batch of freewheels on the AS350B and it was not permitted to reduce power below a certain level without shutting down the engine - naturally that required the engine to be shut down for all autos and EOLs. The requirement was only in force for a fairly short period of time but it certainly helped to concentrate the mind when conducting training or tests!

[Helinut]

Cyclic Flare,

It would depend a bit on what was being flown, but there would be no arms folded!. There are 2 drawbacks to doing flight tests, especially initial licence issue PPL(H):

under JAR an examiner is not supposed to have flown with the pilot before so he/she is an unknown to you (and you to him/her);
almost without exception and no matter how it is approached the pilot being tested is stressed up and can be full of surprises!

Without departing into a discussion of types, lets say that certain types have less margin for error than others. I would also vary what I did a bit, depending upon how the rest of the flight had gone.

Any doubts though, and I would take it or, at least sort out the bottom end. There is always the option to try again.

I do agree that what it is reasonable to expect of an ab-initio PPL(H) is less than a more experienced pilot. In my mind, I feel that what I wanted was for the pilot to be able to show that they could fly the thing to the ground to the flare etc. in such a way that whatever then happened, there was a high probability that all occupants would survive.

[Vfrpilotpb]

The lady Cfi who taught me the way to fly was totally commited to EOLs, and looking back through my log i see only three flights when we didnt carry out at least three attempts, so much so that I now do at least two on every flight , I am totally happy in the knowledge that if the noise ceased I would be able to put the craft down and talk about it afterwards ( that is my hope) I may crawl away but then we'll have to wait and see! lifes full of little supprises.

[t'aint natural]

Although I do EOLs to the ground, I'm convinced that they are counter-productive.
Modern helicopters are remarkably crashworthy. As long as you have a crack at the flare, you'll probably walk away.
The best pilot in the world will turn the machine over fifty per cent of the time when landing off-airfield.
What is really deadly, and what we do not practice, is getting into autorotation when the engine fails.
During practice, we give a warning, and enter relatively gently. It's not like that in the real world.
Research on Robinsons has been unable to turn up a single instance where a pilot who established autorotation was killed on landing - neither in countries where EOLs are mandated, nor where they are not.
Every pilot who was killed after the engine quit failed to establish autorotation.
What does that tell you?
We're polishing the wrong end of the autorotation, and writing off a lot of helicopters doing it.

[Irlandés]

T'aint,
my instructor would every now and again gently cut throttle on me while my hand was off the collective (dialling in the ATIS or whatever). He would also do it at night at the end of a nav-ex when I was tired and my guard was maybe lower than it should be. On hearing the horn he'd expect me to have the lever down well inside 2 seconds. The entry would always be messier than a 'HASEL' auto but it did teach good reflexes (Pavlov's dogs springs to mind). Once entered the auto would then be aborted more or less straight away. It was the entry he was worried about and not so much the rest. Like you, he firmly believed in the importance of polishing both ends. Do you ever do anything similar with your students?

Irlandés

[Helinut]

t'aint natural,

Not sure about your analysis of the problem, in the sense that I see both ends of the EOL as important.

There is more than one interpretation of the accident history you quote (assuming it is true). It could be that it ain't possible to get the lever down fast enough in a Robbo in some circumstances - but that would go back over old ground that I am not overkeen to revisit.

The guys I used to be most worried about were PPL private owners who never used to practise autos at all. When you eventually persuaded them to go and do some dual time, the autos were just horrible. I often felt they would not have responded to a real engine failure at all. But aside from extreme cases like that, just how difficult is it to push a lever down promptly??

I always used to do a small number of throttle chops instructing on the R22 (both demos and for the student). Mind, if there was any student hesitation the lever went down anyway, so I am not sure exactly what it proved. I always thought it worthwhile to give some practical idea of the indications of engine failure.

In the US of A, I believe that they do shed loads of chops, but others will be able to comment on that.

My feeling is that any pilot needs to be competent and current at both ends of the EOL, if you fly a single. The level of competence ought to be considerably greater, if you are a professional pilot.

[soggyboxers]

t'aint

Although I do EOLs to the ground, I'm convinced that they are counter-productive.

I don't see how that can be. I always tought my students to be able to do an EOL that they could not only walk away from, but (provided they had been able to pick an area where it was possible to carry out a successful EOL), the aircraft would also sustain minimum damage. This also ensures that it is an EOl you can walk away from.

The best pilot in the world will turn the machine over fifty per cent of the time when landing off-airfield.

Where exactly do you get the statistics to back up this assertion?

During practice, we give a warning, and enter relatively gently. It's not like that in the real world.

Once they had built up a reasonable level of competence and confidence, I never used to give my students any warning during practice autos, nor did we enter gently - I just used to chop the throttle sharply, even in a climb, and afterwards say 'practice EOL'. It's surprising, even in a Robinson, just how much time there is to enter auto, and when a student knows that it can happen at any time when he/she is flying he/she will start to develop the instinct of always expecting it to happen and be looking out for a suitable emergency landing site.