Steve Hislop killed in helicopter accident: threads merged
Nervy:
Preliminary reports only appear to be issued where there is a major risk to large-scale public transport (e.g. 747 from Stansted some years ago).
No disrepsect to the deceased, but one R44 and one casualty - the report won't be seen until it's ready, and then in a normal monthly bulletin.
Preliminary reports only appear to be issued where there is a major risk to large-scale public transport (e.g. 747 from Stansted some years ago).
No disrepsect to the deceased, but one R44 and one casualty - the report won't be seen until it's ready, and then in a normal monthly bulletin.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: ISLE OF MAN
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst stood with my thumb up my ar$e at Parliament Square today, waiting for the Parade Lap after the Senior TT, there was about half an hour on Hizzy on Manx Radio.
Why don't we just wait for the AAIB report, and let what was a good man on a bike have a bit of peace? As has been said, Robbos are a bit prone to bumps,(for whatever reason) and I doubt we will learn anything new from this one.
Why don't we just wait for the AAIB report, and let what was a good man on a bike have a bit of peace? As has been said, Robbos are a bit prone to bumps,(for whatever reason) and I doubt we will learn anything new from this one.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Scotland UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What happened!
Glad I'ts anonymous and happy to let you know what happened but I can't reveal how I know at this stage.
(Please believe I DO KNOW what will be in the official report)
The official report will say WX.
Entry into IMC followed by loss of control and the result speaks for itself.
I don't know why the results have not been published yet.
R.I.P Steve
(Please believe I DO KNOW what will be in the official report)
The official report will say WX.
Entry into IMC followed by loss of control and the result speaks for itself.
I don't know why the results have not been published yet.
R.I.P Steve
zxcvbn:
It's probably taking some time because what was left of the aircraft was unrecognisable as an R44 from the tailboom / fuselage join forwards - having seen the wreckage in the AAIB hangar November 2003.
Generally, it seems to take a year / 18 months or more for a fatal accident report to be published, probably because all the loose ends need tying up.
It's probably taking some time because what was left of the aircraft was unrecognisable as an R44 from the tailboom / fuselage join forwards - having seen the wreckage in the AAIB hangar November 2003.
Generally, it seems to take a year / 18 months or more for a fatal accident report to be published, probably because all the loose ends need tying up.
'AAIB report is being contested by the family'
Is this possible? Do the next of kin get to see accident reports before publication? I can understand a family wanting to do this, but was not aware they were consulted, apart from pertinant background information relating to the cause or possible cause.
Can anyone comment?
Is this possible? Do the next of kin get to see accident reports before publication? I can understand a family wanting to do this, but was not aware they were consulted, apart from pertinant background information relating to the cause or possible cause.
Can anyone comment?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, it's possible.
The AAIB provides copies of draft reports to all interested parties (including the next of kin) to allow them an opportunity to make any comments/suggestions on the draft findings and recommendations before the final report is published. ('Interested' in this context means people or bodies directly concerned in or with the findings/recommendations, not just curious.)
The AAIB takes submissions into account, but doesn't necessarily accept them.
Tudor Owen
The AAIB provides copies of draft reports to all interested parties (including the next of kin) to allow them an opportunity to make any comments/suggestions on the draft findings and recommendations before the final report is published. ('Interested' in this context means people or bodies directly concerned in or with the findings/recommendations, not just curious.)
The AAIB takes submissions into account, but doesn't necessarily accept them.
Tudor Owen
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alderney or Lancashire UK
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a pilot rated on both Enstrom and R44 I find this report very interesting.
I think the crucial fact is made in the report that the R44 is unstable, but the relative stability of the Enstrom that Steve trained on, and did his instrument appreciation on is not mentioned. Steve would have been more used to the stable,centrally trimmed position of the Enstrom.
I have been in IMC in both types of machine and of the two, the R44 is much more challenging because the cyclic has no centrally biased position. One is truly immediately on instruments. An Enstrom is totally different. The thing will fly hands off and it is a conscious effort to move from the straight and level and is easier to control in IMC. This gives one time to gather ones thoughts. I was lucky and escaped both times.
While I obviously can't say whether this handling difference contributed to the accident I believe it is a point that any pilot converting from Enstrom to Robinson should consider.
The full AAIB report has lots of information on blade stall that I have not seen anywhere else. I think it is recommended reading for Robinson pilots.
I do not wish to upset Steves family, but why are they dissatisfied with the report?
Steve, my thoughts are with you.
I think the crucial fact is made in the report that the R44 is unstable, but the relative stability of the Enstrom that Steve trained on, and did his instrument appreciation on is not mentioned. Steve would have been more used to the stable,centrally trimmed position of the Enstrom.
I have been in IMC in both types of machine and of the two, the R44 is much more challenging because the cyclic has no centrally biased position. One is truly immediately on instruments. An Enstrom is totally different. The thing will fly hands off and it is a conscious effort to move from the straight and level and is easier to control in IMC. This gives one time to gather ones thoughts. I was lucky and escaped both times.
While I obviously can't say whether this handling difference contributed to the accident I believe it is a point that any pilot converting from Enstrom to Robinson should consider.
The full AAIB report has lots of information on blade stall that I have not seen anywhere else. I think it is recommended reading for Robinson pilots.
I do not wish to upset Steves family, but why are they dissatisfied with the report?
Steve, my thoughts are with you.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: West Wales and Zug, Switzerland
Age: 63
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that the report should be read by Robbo pilots all 26 pages of it. The fact that it hints that as Steve was a biker (throttle management) this could have been a problem and that he flew into cloud may have been why the family objected.
Having done all my initial training on the 22 the 44 seems quite stable to me!
Having done all my initial training on the 22 the 44 seems quite stable to me!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Age: 60
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a biker myself, I can absolutely agree with the report on throttle direction.
During PPL training, I have turned it the wrong way for an auto (on instead of off), and on startup I have turned it off instead of on, more times than I considered reasonable for a simple error. The instinct on a bike is to roll it towards you for on, away from you for off. The more chopper hours you do, the less of an issue is because you think 'helicopter' not just 'hand on throttle', but after a history of doing it wrong several times, I now think positively about it every time I turn it. The bike instinct for this pilot was massive, mine was maybe 6 years?
I was concerned that I was getting it wrong during training, and just thought it was stress. It wasn't until I read the report above that I realised what the reason might have been.
In my opinion, the report is right to say what it does: there are a bunch of explanations for what happened, and some are compelling. But nobody will ever know. The family, who knew him best, will clearly feel that he was unlikely to make a one of the more serious errors laid out. Some pilots will feel that in stressful situations, that was exactly what happened. What is clear to me is that whatever happened he didn't intend it and it is unlikely that he did anything which he believed at the time to be significantly risky.
The best we can hope to do is take on board the possible scenarios and learn from them so that irrespective of whether they were or were not the cause of his accident, they don't become the cause of one of ours.
BW
During PPL training, I have turned it the wrong way for an auto (on instead of off), and on startup I have turned it off instead of on, more times than I considered reasonable for a simple error. The instinct on a bike is to roll it towards you for on, away from you for off. The more chopper hours you do, the less of an issue is because you think 'helicopter' not just 'hand on throttle', but after a history of doing it wrong several times, I now think positively about it every time I turn it. The bike instinct for this pilot was massive, mine was maybe 6 years?
I was concerned that I was getting it wrong during training, and just thought it was stress. It wasn't until I read the report above that I realised what the reason might have been.
In my opinion, the report is right to say what it does: there are a bunch of explanations for what happened, and some are compelling. But nobody will ever know. The family, who knew him best, will clearly feel that he was unlikely to make a one of the more serious errors laid out. Some pilots will feel that in stressful situations, that was exactly what happened. What is clear to me is that whatever happened he didn't intend it and it is unlikely that he did anything which he believed at the time to be significantly risky.
The best we can hope to do is take on board the possible scenarios and learn from them so that irrespective of whether they were or were not the cause of his accident, they don't become the cause of one of ours.
BW
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alderney or Lancashire UK
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jarvy,
Yes, I see what you mean about the throttle management bit.
Steve was primarily an Enstrom pilot so probably had a better appreciation of throttle control than most Robbie pilots.
As for the human factors bit implied by being a biker, The throttle is in the opposite hand so the automatic response bit doesn't really follow. Take an example of an automatically programmed activity such as playing a musical instrument like a guitar. Turn it round and try to play left hand and it just doesnt happen. I am a biker too but have never found any cross over between bike and helicopter. When I was a student I got it wrong but I also got the pedals wrong and I cant see a precident for that. Students who are non bikers get the throttle wrong.
According to the report it takes 1.1 seconds after the throttle chop to get to 80%. That should be long enough to realise you have gone the wrong way and open it again. Steve's reactions were pretty good. I saw him race.
I was surprised there was less emphasis on the possibility of carb icing, particularly as the carb heat assist would have pulled the heat off during the climb and there was visible moisture and low Nr blowback.
Maybe thats why the family aren't satisfied.
The message is clear yet again. Avoid IMC.
Edit :
BW :
You posted while I was writing and it is interesting we take the opposite point of view.
What is the experience of non bikers turning the throttle the wrong way?
Yes, I see what you mean about the throttle management bit.
Steve was primarily an Enstrom pilot so probably had a better appreciation of throttle control than most Robbie pilots.
As for the human factors bit implied by being a biker, The throttle is in the opposite hand so the automatic response bit doesn't really follow. Take an example of an automatically programmed activity such as playing a musical instrument like a guitar. Turn it round and try to play left hand and it just doesnt happen. I am a biker too but have never found any cross over between bike and helicopter. When I was a student I got it wrong but I also got the pedals wrong and I cant see a precident for that. Students who are non bikers get the throttle wrong.
According to the report it takes 1.1 seconds after the throttle chop to get to 80%. That should be long enough to realise you have gone the wrong way and open it again. Steve's reactions were pretty good. I saw him race.
I was surprised there was less emphasis on the possibility of carb icing, particularly as the carb heat assist would have pulled the heat off during the climb and there was visible moisture and low Nr blowback.
Maybe thats why the family aren't satisfied.
The message is clear yet again. Avoid IMC.
Edit :
BW :
You posted while I was writing and it is interesting we take the opposite point of view.
What is the experience of non bikers turning the throttle the wrong way?
Last edited by Gaseous; 13th May 2005 at 10:03.
A very thorough and most proficient report. All thanks to the AAIB for their professionalism - so that others may learn.
However, I would suggest this is as close as they are permitted to come (formally and publicly) to condemn the handling characteristics of the R22/44 class of helicopter, I would suggest.
These helicopters have been the subject of considerable adverse debate for a long time, now. When will someone somewhere take charge of the issue and do something about it?
If I was a prospective buyer, reports like this would be enough to put me off a particular product for ever!
Trouble is the education process is hit and miss. Some see the cheaper helicopter as the way to go, others do their research properly and wisen up!
RIP: big guy.
However, I would suggest this is as close as they are permitted to come (formally and publicly) to condemn the handling characteristics of the R22/44 class of helicopter, I would suggest.
These helicopters have been the subject of considerable adverse debate for a long time, now. When will someone somewhere take charge of the issue and do something about it?
If I was a prospective buyer, reports like this would be enough to put me off a particular product for ever!
Trouble is the education process is hit and miss. Some see the cheaper helicopter as the way to go, others do their research properly and wisen up!
RIP: big guy.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: SE England
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am convinced that there is an inherent difficulty for an experienced motorcyclist who is an inexperienced helicopter pilot as regards throttle control.
I had amassed probably well in excess of 100 000 miles of emergency services motorcycling when I came to do my PPL(H). Despite it being the "wrong hand", so to speak - which was my instructor's argument against it - I found the instinct to roll the throttle the opposite way was overpowering. Now, riding motorcycles far less frequently than I fly, I feel I have mostly overcome the problem, but in an emergency? I'm not so sure.
DBChopper
I had amassed probably well in excess of 100 000 miles of emergency services motorcycling when I came to do my PPL(H). Despite it being the "wrong hand", so to speak - which was my instructor's argument against it - I found the instinct to roll the throttle the opposite way was overpowering. Now, riding motorcycles far less frequently than I fly, I feel I have mostly overcome the problem, but in an emergency? I'm not so sure.
DBChopper
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Age: 60
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomas: As a buyer (!) I think many of us are only too aware of the handling issues.
It partly comes down to affordability: I think most buyers would fly the best they can afford, sadly some of us can't afford much, so we wisen up but still buy the cheaper option. I have a 22, would prefer a (safer IMHO) 44 but would be happiest in an EC120 or 206. It's a 22 or nothing.
Anyone who buys an R22/44 and hasn't perused some or all of the UK, US and possibly australian and canadian accident report databases, is nuts. Every possible accident you could have is already there to be learned from.
Ignoring the truly unforeseeable, my way out as a low hours private pilot is to fly only when the weather is well within the envelope, try to be very conservative even then. Low cloud, high density altitude, near MAUW, anything tricky, just walk away, and until you have say 250-300 hours in a Robbie, only fly with rated pilots (like the Robinson factory does) - don't take distracting passengers when you have limited skills.
BW.
It partly comes down to affordability: I think most buyers would fly the best they can afford, sadly some of us can't afford much, so we wisen up but still buy the cheaper option. I have a 22, would prefer a (safer IMHO) 44 but would be happiest in an EC120 or 206. It's a 22 or nothing.
Anyone who buys an R22/44 and hasn't perused some or all of the UK, US and possibly australian and canadian accident report databases, is nuts. Every possible accident you could have is already there to be learned from.
Ignoring the truly unforeseeable, my way out as a low hours private pilot is to fly only when the weather is well within the envelope, try to be very conservative even then. Low cloud, high density altitude, near MAUW, anything tricky, just walk away, and until you have say 250-300 hours in a Robbie, only fly with rated pilots (like the Robinson factory does) - don't take distracting passengers when you have limited skills.
BW.
I've read the report and although obviously highly distressing for the family to read, I fail to see why they would be unhappy with what the AAIB have found; a very thorough investigation I'd have said.
I do think it is a little easy to jump on the Robinson, though. If EC-120s and B-407s were the same price as a Robinson, you'd still get 75 hr PPLs crashing after going IMC. Just look at the FW PPL statistics; between 1985 and 2004 the biggest cause of accidents was CFIT (according to LASORS 2005). Bear in mind small FW are much more stable a/c than small helicopters, and normally have a reasonable instrument fit too. If anything, bigger aircraft may cause more of a problem because they are faster and get you into trouble quicker.
It's not just low hour PPLs either; look at the crash a few years ago with the 355 and the Chelsea Manager. Spatial disorientation can kill anyone.
I do think it is a little easy to jump on the Robinson, though. If EC-120s and B-407s were the same price as a Robinson, you'd still get 75 hr PPLs crashing after going IMC. Just look at the FW PPL statistics; between 1985 and 2004 the biggest cause of accidents was CFIT (according to LASORS 2005). Bear in mind small FW are much more stable a/c than small helicopters, and normally have a reasonable instrument fit too. If anything, bigger aircraft may cause more of a problem because they are faster and get you into trouble quicker.
It's not just low hour PPLs either; look at the crash a few years ago with the 355 and the Chelsea Manager. Spatial disorientation can kill anyone.
