Missile Thrown At Helicopter
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
While I don't really agree with PPRuNeFan's attitude, I do agree with his overall message.
I'll preface this by saying that I'm currently a student, flying robbies. I also hold a private fixed-wing certificate.
As such, I find myself again and again thinking like an airplane pilot in my helicopter flying. I catch myself doing something because it's how I'd do it in an airplane, when there's a much simpler, more direct way to do what I wanted - as a helicopter pilot.
It seems to me that there is a lot of this attitude around. I try my best to think outside the box a bit, and hope I'll have greater success as I build experience.
Certainly it's not a bad thing to dig up and kick around the forum for a while - I'm sure everyone - no matter how experienced - find s themselves doing something the way they are 'just because'.
Anyway, there you go.
I'll preface this by saying that I'm currently a student, flying robbies. I also hold a private fixed-wing certificate.
As such, I find myself again and again thinking like an airplane pilot in my helicopter flying. I catch myself doing something because it's how I'd do it in an airplane, when there's a much simpler, more direct way to do what I wanted - as a helicopter pilot.
It seems to me that there is a lot of this attitude around. I try my best to think outside the box a bit, and hope I'll have greater success as I build experience.
Certainly it's not a bad thing to dig up and kick around the forum for a while - I'm sure everyone - no matter how experienced - find s themselves doing something the way they are 'just because'.
Anyway, there you go.
Avoid imitations
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,110
Likes: 1,083
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
PF#1,
Please take your credit where it's due. The "piece of lunacy" I just posted was yours entirely. I merely calculated the required rates of descent for the approach angles and speed you quoted in your earlier post, out of professional interest. What you were saying just didn't ring true so I did the maths, which you perhaps could have done yourself, seeing as you were posting such aggressive criticisms of professionals.
You really should have done the same with TOT's original quoted figures before you tore him off a strip with your allegation of a shallow approach. As I said before, his approach angle was actually steeper than you initially advocated. You really ought to get your facts correct, if your view of yourself as an expert is to be shared by others. Or can't you do basic vector diagrams or trigonometry?
However, it could just be that you are so busy jumping to conclusions and making blind criticisms of others that you fail to see your own errors and later try to pass them off as your flippancy (as you just did), or a fault in another. You are criticising professional people so be professional yourself, or what do you expect?
And no, I do sometimes fly in very windy conditions, thank you. Not too long ago I was required to fly both offshore and overland in severe typhoon conditions, on more than one occasion for the purpose of saving life. Thankfully it is seldom as bad as that in UK. Perhaps the wind in your part of the world does reach 50 kts or so more often, but perhaps some of it is self generated in your case?
Neither myself or any of my colleagues make unduly shallow approaches to an airfield or anywhere else so kindly refrain from your completely unfounded and slanderous remarks in that respect, I strongly object to unjustly being tarred with that brush.
Some of your responses have gone completly OTT, including your first.
PF#1, like Ascend Charlie, I too recall you being banned from this forum once before under a different username, later reappearing cap in hand wearing your new one. A phrase involving the words "leopard" and "spots" comes to mind....
I was rather hoping someone was about to come clean and admit this is all a setup, but I'm not sure it is.
Please take your credit where it's due. The "piece of lunacy" I just posted was yours entirely. I merely calculated the required rates of descent for the approach angles and speed you quoted in your earlier post, out of professional interest. What you were saying just didn't ring true so I did the maths, which you perhaps could have done yourself, seeing as you were posting such aggressive criticisms of professionals.
You really should have done the same with TOT's original quoted figures before you tore him off a strip with your allegation of a shallow approach. As I said before, his approach angle was actually steeper than you initially advocated. You really ought to get your facts correct, if your view of yourself as an expert is to be shared by others. Or can't you do basic vector diagrams or trigonometry?
However, it could just be that you are so busy jumping to conclusions and making blind criticisms of others that you fail to see your own errors and later try to pass them off as your flippancy (as you just did), or a fault in another. You are criticising professional people so be professional yourself, or what do you expect?
And no, I do sometimes fly in very windy conditions, thank you. Not too long ago I was required to fly both offshore and overland in severe typhoon conditions, on more than one occasion for the purpose of saving life. Thankfully it is seldom as bad as that in UK. Perhaps the wind in your part of the world does reach 50 kts or so more often, but perhaps some of it is self generated in your case?
Neither myself or any of my colleagues make unduly shallow approaches to an airfield or anywhere else so kindly refrain from your completely unfounded and slanderous remarks in that respect, I strongly object to unjustly being tarred with that brush.
Some of your responses have gone completly OTT, including your first.
PF#1, like Ascend Charlie, I too recall you being banned from this forum once before under a different username, later reappearing cap in hand wearing your new one. A phrase involving the words "leopard" and "spots" comes to mind....
I was rather hoping someone was about to come clean and admit this is all a setup, but I'm not sure it is.
Joined: Apr 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 10,959
Likes: 1,814
From: EGDC
PPF1 come and spend a couple of SAR shifts with me on dark and stormy nights and you can show me how your many hours of flying in a 'real job' can improve on my obviously pathetic skills!
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
From: Earth
as an observer to this forum (and someone that does not post much, as you can see), I'd like to give PPF1 his due, he is, if nothing else highly entertaining....And I'm loving this thread...
I'm a PPL studying for a CPL with not many hours and a SHED load to learn, but one thing I hope I can do is fly safe, and if I can change one thing about a flight that makes it .01% safer, then I'd do it....
but safety includes safety for the pilot, passangers, aircraft, people on the ground and the horses shagging in the field over there... And it's down to the pilot to weigh all options up and decide how to fly this particular 'flight'.
finish your approach (shallow or steep), land, shut the machine down and decide if you flew as safe as you could. If yes then great, if no, apply what you have learned and do it safer next time...Isn't that what it's all about??
s.
I'm a PPL studying for a CPL with not many hours and a SHED load to learn, but one thing I hope I can do is fly safe, and if I can change one thing about a flight that makes it .01% safer, then I'd do it....
but safety includes safety for the pilot, passangers, aircraft, people on the ground and the horses shagging in the field over there... And it's down to the pilot to weigh all options up and decide how to fly this particular 'flight'.
finish your approach (shallow or steep), land, shut the machine down and decide if you flew as safe as you could. If yes then great, if no, apply what you have learned and do it safer next time...Isn't that what it's all about??
s.
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Above and Below Zero Lat. [Presently at least]
Just dawned on me......
PPRUNE FAN#1 and Coning Angel are husband and wife..............which is which??
Who cares, their both taking up valuable space....
Sorry this is not my normal attitude......but some folk just deserve it....!!!
Who cares, their both taking up valuable space....
Sorry this is not my normal attitude......but some folk just deserve it....!!!
Last edited by Old Man Rotor; 1st May 2003 at 20:02.
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
From: CA
Hey Crab! I didn't know that you boets did SAR in R22's...... now thats impressive 
Please post a piccie of that for PPF1 
Nulian:
Be careful in the R22. As your instructor has no doubt made you aware the 22 has pickled a lot of ex-FW pilots due to them instictively reacting in a FW manner to an emergency. Have fun thou.
PPrunefan#1:
I think you need to do some high altitude work around BC or Alberta or even in some really hot environs at 40 deg C. Throw in a bit of longline as well and you might be change your opinion on steep approaches. True, they have their place at times but a loaded disc is a great advantage.
Please post a piccie of that for PPF1 Nulian:
Be careful in the R22. As your instructor has no doubt made you aware the 22 has pickled a lot of ex-FW pilots due to them instictively reacting in a FW manner to an emergency. Have fun thou.
PPrunefan#1:
I think you need to do some high altitude work around BC or Alberta or even in some really hot environs at 40 deg C. Throw in a bit of longline as well and you might be change your opinion on steep approaches. True, they have their place at times but a loaded disc is a great advantage.
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,670
Likes: 1
From: UK
Pprude: Perhaps you are another 'handle' reincarnated. What worries me is that some poor bas**rds out there have to work for you and reading your past threads leads me to think either you aren't who you say you are,
or,
you are for real and a complete di*k for a boss
But you do make this forum colourful at times....
Keep the crap coming sweetheart.
or,
you are for real and a complete di*k for a boss
But you do make this forum colourful at times....
Keep the crap coming sweetheart.
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 396
Likes: 1
From: US...for now.
My ONLY contention all along has been that if TOT been steeper that day (or chosen a slightly different approach path), perhaps he would not have had a p*ssed-off farmer try to shoot him down with a "missile"...er, cap. That's it, pretty simple. Over and out. QSY. 10-40, good buddy.
But dear Lord, some of you are so insufferable. So many assumptions on such scant information! I have very little respect for any of you lads. As for my "mysterious" identity, 007 has nothing on you lot!
Shy Torque:
Cap in hand? Not bl**dy likely! You all (including the mods) can kiss my a**. Cap in hand, oh please. You must be mistaking me for someone who cares about being banned from this board (don't any of you have anything serious to do with your lives?).
Sarik:
See? Even a mere PPL "gets it."
Finally, let's go right back to the horse's...er, mouth. I'm speaking of course of TOT, who started this melee.
Well I guess the only BAD points of view are the ones that differ with yours, eh? That adult of you. TOT goes on:
Yes. Normal approach. And that's your trouble, mate. You should've made it a steep approach, then maybe you wouldn't have had an angry farmer try to throw his cap at you. Do you see that now?
Well I never said you were in a Robbo...I think it was Shy of Torque or Thomas decoupling who leapt to that assumption. I assumed you were in a B47 or a B2B, but did not speculate because it did not matter and I do not care.
Oh, and real helicopter pilots do NOT refer to them as "choppers," which tells us all we need to know about TOT.
**** on, lads! (WINK! That word is "wink" I tell you! We just pronounce it differentlly here in SoCal. Why did you edit it??)
But dear Lord, some of you are so insufferable. So many assumptions on such scant information! I have very little respect for any of you lads. As for my "mysterious" identity, 007 has nothing on you lot!
Shy Torque:
PF#1, like Ascend Charlie, I too recall you being banned from this forum once before under a different username, later reappearing cap in hand wearing your new one. A phrase involving the words "leopard" and "spots" comes to mind....
Sarik:
as an observer to this forum (and someone that does not post much, as you can see), I'd like to give PPF1 his due, he is, if nothing else highly entertaining....And I'm loving this thread...
Finally, let's go right back to the horse's...er, mouth. I'm speaking of course of TOT, who started this melee.
Ok , thanks everybody for the various points of view, good, BAD and the ugly.
I STILL maintain it was a normal approach.
(Self-congratulatory wanking snipped) Just one thing, I am still NOT convinced Prune Fan I is a chopper pilot., come on PF1, I was NOT flying a R22, what WAS I flying that day?? I have told you the VNE (75 Kts). IF you are an EXPERT then I challenge you to tell me!!!
Oh, and real helicopter pilots do NOT refer to them as "choppers," which tells us all we need to know about TOT.
**** on, lads! (WINK! That word is "wink" I tell you! We just pronounce it differentlly here in SoCal. Why did you edit it??)
Joined: Apr 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 10,959
Likes: 1,814
From: EGDC
Yes PPF#1 and you are the biggest winker on this forum!
Steve76 don't let the MOD even hear a suggestion about using R22 for SAR - some bean counter will work out how cheap a yellow robbo would be even if we couldn't winch anyone with it (be a bit like a Whirlwind I suppose). I suppose with the R44 we could fly 2 pilots, 1 winchop and a winchman.....hmmmmmm still no room for the casualties though.
Steve76 don't let the MOD even hear a suggestion about using R22 for SAR - some bean counter will work out how cheap a yellow robbo would be even if we couldn't winch anyone with it (be a bit like a Whirlwind I suppose). I suppose with the R44 we could fly 2 pilots, 1 winchop and a winchman.....hmmmmmm still no room for the casualties though.
Avoid imitations
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,110
Likes: 1,083
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
PF#1 has now given us all the benefit of his wisdom. Regrettably, all that a number of us have learned is that we have a very angry man here.
Firstly, any approach shallower than 11 degrees is too shallow for his liking. 45, 50, 60 or even 90 degrees is far more normal for him.
What happens if the engine stops when you are making a 90 degree / vertical descent into an LS? A pilot less skilled than PF#1 doesn't have eyes in his arse, so most people prefer to fly an approach where they can actually can see obstructions ahead of them. A double angle approach is a far safer option, whatever the wind strength, so I will stick with that. Also, we haven't touched on Performance A / Class 1 approaches yet. By flying outside the required parameters you may be deemed negligent after an incident or accident. No aircraft I have flown includes such steep approaches in the certificated flight profiles.
He told us he eventually advised another pilot who is being given the benefit of his presence to climb a bit to help see an airfield but he says this requires him to "summon every ounce of self control" to do so. No good CRM or nav assistance coming from his side of the cockpit until then, by the sound of it, even though he was familiar with the airport and could have offered just a snippet of help earlier on.
On another flight he allows himself to be flown, by another pilot, too low over congested areas, for some time. Illegally flown, from what he says, at least by UK regs. Personally, I would have felt obliged to ask the pilot to climb or go around the congested bits, for the sake of my licence.
And he offers no early advice to the other pilot who finds himself short of ergs in a hot & high situation. Again, PF#1 sems to have been ahead of the game and was expecting it to happen, but he left it so late that he was obliged to over-ride the guy on the controls.
What happened to the multi-crew concept, good airmanship and CRM? What sort of professional pilot sees something that he is very unhappy with to the point of anger, lets the guy go further into the mire but says nothing, leaving the poor bloke (who is quite possibly finding it quite hard going with such an overbearing presence alongside him) to screw up, then berates him afterwards?
I just hope I never have to go anywhere near an aircraft containing Mr PF#1, previously known as Flare Dammit, until he has at least done a CRM course.
PF#1 said he doesn't care at all about this forum. But enough to find himself another username so he can continue here.
"Cap-in-hand" I said. Sorry the irony went over your head, Flare Dammit, bearing in mind the original post on this thread (not just the farmer's cap). I won't be taking up the kind offer of your ass, thanks.
Firstly, any approach shallower than 11 degrees is too shallow for his liking. 45, 50, 60 or even 90 degrees is far more normal for him.
What happens if the engine stops when you are making a 90 degree / vertical descent into an LS? A pilot less skilled than PF#1 doesn't have eyes in his arse, so most people prefer to fly an approach where they can actually can see obstructions ahead of them. A double angle approach is a far safer option, whatever the wind strength, so I will stick with that. Also, we haven't touched on Performance A / Class 1 approaches yet. By flying outside the required parameters you may be deemed negligent after an incident or accident. No aircraft I have flown includes such steep approaches in the certificated flight profiles.
He told us he eventually advised another pilot who is being given the benefit of his presence to climb a bit to help see an airfield but he says this requires him to "summon every ounce of self control" to do so. No good CRM or nav assistance coming from his side of the cockpit until then, by the sound of it, even though he was familiar with the airport and could have offered just a snippet of help earlier on.
On another flight he allows himself to be flown, by another pilot, too low over congested areas, for some time. Illegally flown, from what he says, at least by UK regs. Personally, I would have felt obliged to ask the pilot to climb or go around the congested bits, for the sake of my licence.
And he offers no early advice to the other pilot who finds himself short of ergs in a hot & high situation. Again, PF#1 sems to have been ahead of the game and was expecting it to happen, but he left it so late that he was obliged to over-ride the guy on the controls.
What happened to the multi-crew concept, good airmanship and CRM? What sort of professional pilot sees something that he is very unhappy with to the point of anger, lets the guy go further into the mire but says nothing, leaving the poor bloke (who is quite possibly finding it quite hard going with such an overbearing presence alongside him) to screw up, then berates him afterwards?
I just hope I never have to go anywhere near an aircraft containing Mr PF#1, previously known as Flare Dammit, until he has at least done a CRM course.
PF#1 said he doesn't care at all about this forum. But enough to find himself another username so he can continue here.
"Cap-in-hand" I said. Sorry the irony went over your head, Flare Dammit, bearing in mind the original post on this thread (not just the farmer's cap). I won't be taking up the kind offer of your ass, thanks.
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 396
Likes: 1
From: US...for now.
My daily internet time is limited, so I can't spend too much time debating point for point. But Shy of Torque makes some assumptions that are not correct. For instance, I'm not an angry man. But I get that way when I see pilots do stupid things without thinking.
When I fly with rated, supposedly experienced pilots in their own aircraft, "CRM" does not apply. Eventually, these chaps are going to be flying by themselves or with non-pilot family members onboard. You cannot spoon-feed them. They've been through the best flight schools (and in some cases factory schools) and they swear that they know what they're doing. In pre- and post-flight talks, I do give them the benefit of my years of experience but they continue to do it their way. For the most part, I let them - just as my mentors let me do some incredibly dumb things on the way to experience and seasoning. (I could tell you stories about some of my own early cock-ups, but Danny tells me that I'm limited to 2,000 words per post now.)
Sometimes the best way to learn something is to make the mistake yourself. Pilots are incredibly reluctant to learn from the mistakes of others. They say they do but they don't. If I'm flying with such a pilot and he does something dumb, as long as it does not jeopardize my personal safety or violate any rules then I let him run with it to see how he'll handle it. Will he recognize the situation, and how soon? How will he resolve it?
In the case of the pilot who liked flying low and descended so low that he could not see the airport, it took all of my self control to not react angrily, since I had repeatedly admonished this pilot against descending prematurely in the past. But he flew by rote. At this distance from the airport he needed to be this high. It was a formula he applied EVERY time, reguardless of conditions. I think the point finally got driven home...but I'm not sure. And no, we were not flying over "congested areas" by anyone's definition. Contrary to popular opinion, I am not stupid.
As for the pilot caught in the hot/high situation who almost pranged his ship, again, he'd been warned. We had talked about it repeatedly. So how far do you go? I knew that very shortly I would be leaving this chap to his own devices, operating from an airport based in the mountains, and summer was coming. Had he learned nothing up to that point? Evidently. I wanted him to see the folly of his shallow, airplane-like approaches. And it worked. I did over-ride him on the controls at the very bottom, but I would have been just as happy to leave the damaged aircraft and it's red-faced owner there and catch an airline flight home.
In these cases, I was not acting as CFI. There was no "crew concept" in place; these guys were essentially flying their own machines home SOLO, as they were legally and insurance-wise able to do. I went along on the ferry flights as uncompensated personal favors, to help with the nav and offer the occasional advice. In retrospect, I wish that I'd yielded the seats to these Robbo pilots who are always clamoring for stick time.
For the record, I do avoid approaches shallower than 10 degrees. I think they're unnecessary. Helicopters do very nice, very safe 10-12 degree approaches. Steeper than that? Sure, if the conditions warrant.
But I never advocated that pilots routinely or casually make 45-60 or 90 degree approaches. Anybody who read that into my posts is loony. Unfortunately, that particular brogan fits a number of you lot.
Let's keep in mind that in single-engine helis, with very few exceptions (AS-350 comes to mind), the H-V chart is located in the Performance section of the AFM...*not* the Limitations section. As such the chart guarantees nothing. It does not guarantee a safe autorotation if you stay outside of the shaded area, nor does it guarantee a crash if you fly inside the shaded area.
Further, the chart is derived from throttle chops performed in cruise flight at MGW over flat, smooth areas with a one-second delay in pilot response. Reduce or improve any of those things (or add some wind) and the shaded area shrinks. It can even disappear under the right conditions.
In an earlier post, a South African R-22 pilot known as "crab" went positively apoplectic at the mere thought of infringing on the shaded area. Many inexperienced pilots do. Shy of Torque thinks that you can be held negligent in a court of law after an incident or accident. So I posed three scenarios to this "crab" fellow - three common situations that pilots sometimes find themselves in:
1) Approach to an oil platform that is 100' feet above the water;
2) A landing to an off-airport site 100' in diameter surrounded by tall trees;
3) An approach to an airport where the designated landing spot is near the field boundary, where there are obstructions in the approach path.
I asked "crab" for his suggestions of possible technique. As I expected, no response. All he did was give a verbal hand-job to Shy of Torque for lambasting me. You guys can be very juvenile.
Each of the above scenarios requires a steep approach. Also, very likely each of those approaches will require that the pilot transgress upon the dreaded "shaded area" at some point and for some time. Perhaps "crab" has the luxury of always operating from airport runways where he can make those less-than-11-degree approaches that Shy of Brains feels so adamant about. But the rest of us fly in the real world.
On yet another flight with another very experienced pilot at the controls (who happened to be my boss), the tower directed us to do Scenario #3 - land right on the ramp of the gen-av FBO. As we neared the field boundary the approach we would have to make looked awful (to me). My boss however kept on going, intending to do as instructed. Yes, it would've worked out but it would not have been pretty. This time, because we *were* flying as a two-pilot crew, I intervened. I suggested an alternative: a shallower-but-lengthier approach to a taxiway that was parallel to the active runway with a hover transition to the ramp. My boss said, "They'll let you do that?" Only one way to find out, right? It was a military field and they did not get a lot of transient helicopters. The controller hesitated for a moment (conferring with his supervisor/trainer?) but ultimately cleared us as requested.
The point is that you cannot always follow orders blindly. You have to think about what's going on and be flexible.
Nevertheless, I would still be interested in hearing how "crab" would handle an approach to an oil rig in a 206L that was at or near MGW - in which he finds himself at 200' and back below ETL with a handful of power pulled. Or how he would handle picking up some executive at an off-airport site landing that was not as big as he'd like it to be. These are things I've had to do in my short career. And yes, sometimes I've had to come more or less straight down from 100 feet. That's not so bad. What I worry about is going more or less straight back up to 100' before being able to flying away. But such is the life of a commercial pilot sometimes. I'm just glad I don't do things that are really risky. Like logging...
When I fly with rated, supposedly experienced pilots in their own aircraft, "CRM" does not apply. Eventually, these chaps are going to be flying by themselves or with non-pilot family members onboard. You cannot spoon-feed them. They've been through the best flight schools (and in some cases factory schools) and they swear that they know what they're doing. In pre- and post-flight talks, I do give them the benefit of my years of experience but they continue to do it their way. For the most part, I let them - just as my mentors let me do some incredibly dumb things on the way to experience and seasoning. (I could tell you stories about some of my own early cock-ups, but Danny tells me that I'm limited to 2,000 words per post now.)
Sometimes the best way to learn something is to make the mistake yourself. Pilots are incredibly reluctant to learn from the mistakes of others. They say they do but they don't. If I'm flying with such a pilot and he does something dumb, as long as it does not jeopardize my personal safety or violate any rules then I let him run with it to see how he'll handle it. Will he recognize the situation, and how soon? How will he resolve it?
In the case of the pilot who liked flying low and descended so low that he could not see the airport, it took all of my self control to not react angrily, since I had repeatedly admonished this pilot against descending prematurely in the past. But he flew by rote. At this distance from the airport he needed to be this high. It was a formula he applied EVERY time, reguardless of conditions. I think the point finally got driven home...but I'm not sure. And no, we were not flying over "congested areas" by anyone's definition. Contrary to popular opinion, I am not stupid.
As for the pilot caught in the hot/high situation who almost pranged his ship, again, he'd been warned. We had talked about it repeatedly. So how far do you go? I knew that very shortly I would be leaving this chap to his own devices, operating from an airport based in the mountains, and summer was coming. Had he learned nothing up to that point? Evidently. I wanted him to see the folly of his shallow, airplane-like approaches. And it worked. I did over-ride him on the controls at the very bottom, but I would have been just as happy to leave the damaged aircraft and it's red-faced owner there and catch an airline flight home.
In these cases, I was not acting as CFI. There was no "crew concept" in place; these guys were essentially flying their own machines home SOLO, as they were legally and insurance-wise able to do. I went along on the ferry flights as uncompensated personal favors, to help with the nav and offer the occasional advice. In retrospect, I wish that I'd yielded the seats to these Robbo pilots who are always clamoring for stick time.
For the record, I do avoid approaches shallower than 10 degrees. I think they're unnecessary. Helicopters do very nice, very safe 10-12 degree approaches. Steeper than that? Sure, if the conditions warrant.
But I never advocated that pilots routinely or casually make 45-60 or 90 degree approaches. Anybody who read that into my posts is loony. Unfortunately, that particular brogan fits a number of you lot.
Let's keep in mind that in single-engine helis, with very few exceptions (AS-350 comes to mind), the H-V chart is located in the Performance section of the AFM...*not* the Limitations section. As such the chart guarantees nothing. It does not guarantee a safe autorotation if you stay outside of the shaded area, nor does it guarantee a crash if you fly inside the shaded area.
Further, the chart is derived from throttle chops performed in cruise flight at MGW over flat, smooth areas with a one-second delay in pilot response. Reduce or improve any of those things (or add some wind) and the shaded area shrinks. It can even disappear under the right conditions.
In an earlier post, a South African R-22 pilot known as "crab" went positively apoplectic at the mere thought of infringing on the shaded area. Many inexperienced pilots do. Shy of Torque thinks that you can be held negligent in a court of law after an incident or accident. So I posed three scenarios to this "crab" fellow - three common situations that pilots sometimes find themselves in:
1) Approach to an oil platform that is 100' feet above the water;
2) A landing to an off-airport site 100' in diameter surrounded by tall trees;
3) An approach to an airport where the designated landing spot is near the field boundary, where there are obstructions in the approach path.
I asked "crab" for his suggestions of possible technique. As I expected, no response. All he did was give a verbal hand-job to Shy of Torque for lambasting me. You guys can be very juvenile.
Each of the above scenarios requires a steep approach. Also, very likely each of those approaches will require that the pilot transgress upon the dreaded "shaded area" at some point and for some time. Perhaps "crab" has the luxury of always operating from airport runways where he can make those less-than-11-degree approaches that Shy of Brains feels so adamant about. But the rest of us fly in the real world.
On yet another flight with another very experienced pilot at the controls (who happened to be my boss), the tower directed us to do Scenario #3 - land right on the ramp of the gen-av FBO. As we neared the field boundary the approach we would have to make looked awful (to me). My boss however kept on going, intending to do as instructed. Yes, it would've worked out but it would not have been pretty. This time, because we *were* flying as a two-pilot crew, I intervened. I suggested an alternative: a shallower-but-lengthier approach to a taxiway that was parallel to the active runway with a hover transition to the ramp. My boss said, "They'll let you do that?" Only one way to find out, right? It was a military field and they did not get a lot of transient helicopters. The controller hesitated for a moment (conferring with his supervisor/trainer?) but ultimately cleared us as requested.
The point is that you cannot always follow orders blindly. You have to think about what's going on and be flexible.
Nevertheless, I would still be interested in hearing how "crab" would handle an approach to an oil rig in a 206L that was at or near MGW - in which he finds himself at 200' and back below ETL with a handful of power pulled. Or how he would handle picking up some executive at an off-airport site landing that was not as big as he'd like it to be. These are things I've had to do in my short career. And yes, sometimes I've had to come more or less straight down from 100 feet. That's not so bad. What I worry about is going more or less straight back up to 100' before being able to flying away. But such is the life of a commercial pilot sometimes. I'm just glad I don't do things that are really risky. Like logging...
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 3,670
Likes: 1
From: UK
Pprudee:
What helo is this then?
Your 'steeper than normal' approach philosophy, could now persuade newbies to err on the steep side...no health warning/mention of VRS...surprising coming from you with your pedigree.
Climbing takeoff's to 100'+ not your cup of tea? I occasionally do a standard restricted heliport departure to a TDP of 120'...straight up, as per the FLM...surprising coming from you with your pedigree, prudee..
Chinks appearing in your armour, sweetie. All is not right, methinks...
Keep it coming bumble bee.
you just might find yourself in a single-engine helicopter with a half-dozen other paying passengers on board, having to come to a 200-300 foot OGE hover as you approach to land on an oil platform
Your 'steeper than normal' approach philosophy, could now persuade newbies to err on the steep side...no health warning/mention of VRS...surprising coming from you with your pedigree.
Climbing takeoff's to 100'+ not your cup of tea? I occasionally do a standard restricted heliport departure to a TDP of 120'...straight up, as per the FLM...surprising coming from you with your pedigree, prudee..
Chinks appearing in your armour, sweetie. All is not right, methinks...
Keep it coming bumble bee.
Suave yet Shallow
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
From: half way between the gutter and the stars.
PPno.1 Said...
Why's that then? Does the nice nurse comes to put the sleevless jacket back on ya'? or perhaps because the medication kicks in and knocks you out cold for the rest of the day?
Chill fella...no point burstin a blood vessel over it...
My daily internet time is limited, so I can't spend too much...
Chill fella...no point burstin a blood vessel over it...
Avoid imitations
Joined: Nov 2000
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 15,110
Likes: 1,083
From: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
PF#1,
Well I'm glad we caught you when you were short of time and went for the "abridged" version. Whew! Here's my equally "short" reply, Whew! 
I just cannot agree that "CRM does not apply" in ANY circumstances where there is more than one qualified person in the aircraft, if for no other reason than if it's me up there, it's my arse (and my licence) on the line too, whether I'm paid for it or not. Good CRM does NOT mean you are "spoon feeding" people!
You say you aren't angry, but you certainly seem to be very highly frustrated by all these "failed" pilot who will possibly never meet up with your personal standards or match your own skills.
I too have instructed, as it happens. I have been required to teach students of widely varying experience and ability levels. I've taught on single engine (basic training) and multi engined helis (advanced and operational / tactical conversion to type, including ETPS staff pilots for evaluation purposes) also a fair bit of fixed wing stuff. Included in all that was aerobatics, close formation, confined areas, SAR winching, low level navigation, IF, USLs including firefighting, air to ground gunnery and night NVG stuff etc, as appropriate to type).
Some of my less experienced students were better than the supposedly more "experienced" ones. I too was sometimes surprised by mistakes that people made, sometimes there is a good reason for a persistent error if you look deeper.
I always took it as my duty to get the best out of each of them. In my experience, berating students NEVER works.
As far as making assumptions goes, I think that if you read the whole topic again, you might see that you are the undisputed PPRUNE champion, at least on this thread. There are at least 4 of us who quite early on were called names and were strongly criticised by yourself about our flying skills, mental state, ability and judgement - and you haven't even met us, let alone flown with us. If I was actually "loony" as you put it, I might not have got as far as completing even my first logbook and only a very small part of my career so far.
With regard to your questions about approaches to oil rigs and confined areas, of course sometimes it is necessary to make a less than ideal approach and sometimes a very steep or vertical final aproach is needed. A good pilot will make a correct analysis of the situation, weigh up the options and the risks and make the best decision to get the job done. However, to possibly put the aircraft and occupants more at risk at an airfield by making an uncomfortably steep approach because of a perceived concern over possibly angering a farmer (with a chicken coop stupidly placed immediately under very short finals to an established airport runway) is possibly not the most sensible decision to make. A slow, steep helicopter approach isn't necessarily the least obtrusive one in any event.
Would you rather ignore the mandatory requirement for operating a public transport aircraft iaw the RFM approach profile or risk annoying silly old Farmer Giles to the point where he throws his hat in the air? Get real.
Well I'm glad we caught you when you were short of time and went for the "abridged" version. Whew!
Here's my equally "short" reply, Whew! I just cannot agree that "CRM does not apply" in ANY circumstances where there is more than one qualified person in the aircraft, if for no other reason than if it's me up there, it's my arse (and my licence) on the line too, whether I'm paid for it or not. Good CRM does NOT mean you are "spoon feeding" people!
You say you aren't angry, but you certainly seem to be very highly frustrated by all these "failed" pilot who will possibly never meet up with your personal standards or match your own skills.
I too have instructed, as it happens. I have been required to teach students of widely varying experience and ability levels. I've taught on single engine (basic training) and multi engined helis (advanced and operational / tactical conversion to type, including ETPS staff pilots for evaluation purposes) also a fair bit of fixed wing stuff. Included in all that was aerobatics, close formation, confined areas, SAR winching, low level navigation, IF, USLs including firefighting, air to ground gunnery and night NVG stuff etc, as appropriate to type).
Some of my less experienced students were better than the supposedly more "experienced" ones. I too was sometimes surprised by mistakes that people made, sometimes there is a good reason for a persistent error if you look deeper.
I always took it as my duty to get the best out of each of them. In my experience, berating students NEVER works.
As far as making assumptions goes, I think that if you read the whole topic again, you might see that you are the undisputed PPRUNE champion, at least on this thread. There are at least 4 of us who quite early on were called names and were strongly criticised by yourself about our flying skills, mental state, ability and judgement - and you haven't even met us, let alone flown with us. If I was actually "loony" as you put it, I might not have got as far as completing even my first logbook and only a very small part of my career so far.
With regard to your questions about approaches to oil rigs and confined areas, of course sometimes it is necessary to make a less than ideal approach and sometimes a very steep or vertical final aproach is needed. A good pilot will make a correct analysis of the situation, weigh up the options and the risks and make the best decision to get the job done. However, to possibly put the aircraft and occupants more at risk at an airfield by making an uncomfortably steep approach because of a perceived concern over possibly angering a farmer (with a chicken coop stupidly placed immediately under very short finals to an established airport runway) is possibly not the most sensible decision to make. A slow, steep helicopter approach isn't necessarily the least obtrusive one in any event.
Would you rather ignore the mandatory requirement for operating a public transport aircraft iaw the RFM approach profile or risk annoying silly old Farmer Giles to the point where he throws his hat in the air? Get real.