R44 Boom Strike - Sydney
 

An R44 from the newest school in Bankstown was conducting CAs to Little Africa in Sydney on Sunday last when it suffered a tailboom strike almost severing the boom (a slice almost 50% through including the removal of the beacon) following a heavy landing. Onboard were a recently rated instructor and the owner.
After one pilot go out and inspected the damage, they decided to fly the aircraft back to Bankstown, about a 15 minute flight requiring flight over several built-up areas!:* Damage to the aircraft is so great (twisted fire wall etc) that sources say the aircraft may be written off. Can anyone tell me what sort of clown would elect to fly this aircraft back to base with so much damage evident?:\
1. Two very lucky pilots!:p
2. Two very stupid pilots!:mad:
3. God knows how many very lucky people on the ground!:ugh:

Sounds like the sort of guy who would try to trace a gas leak with a lit match.

Guess thats what you get when you give a pilots licence to people who are swimming in the shallow end of the gene pool.

God help us all.

Has anyone got any more information on this. Have friends down there and they havent mentioned anything about it. How crazy would that be to fly it home. I would be bushing that di#@ckhead instructor.

Wow. Would like some fact before really winding up about this. I cannot believe that someone would fly like that, and I wonder what the facts really are. How could an attitude like that slip through the training system, especially on Robbos? No I find this one a little hard to believe.

I agree with helmet fire. This has to be pure fiction.

Hey, it IS a public forum of opinion... based largely on rumor! :E

R44 Tail Boom slicing
 

Pitch and Break
Nice story. I agree with 1,2&3

Banjo
Spot on, but people do it :{

Helmet Fire
I agree 100%, having flown a few myself but i find this hard to believe, but this is based upon a rumour Right?

Strop
Agreed, but don't get in a Strop for it, point was covered by Helmet Fire

RDRickster
That is why we are are a sucessful forum. We seem to have a nose for ****..hmmm :ok: Doesn't seem credible too me, and i am not that experienced, when it comes to the wealth of knowledge on PPRuNe, Rotorheads. :E

Safe Flying

MD :uhoh:

Mmmmmm
 

So if i read this right a R44 main rotor travelling at around 404rpm or so hits the boom, stops dead halfway through the boom and the pilots get out and removed the blade and fly it back to base. Puts a whole new angle to standing on the coke can then touching the side.

I put this one down to the R in Pprune!!

:ok:

Give me a break......
 

To all the naysayers.....It is 100% true....I saw the results with my own eyes....the aircraft is in Heliflites maintenance hangar....the aircraft has been inspected and the result is either back to Franks for major heart surgery OR written off (probably the latter!) The pilots were a newbe instructor and owner on board...and yes, it was flown back to base from the incident site.
:\ Evod, just to put YOU straight - with a blade strike, the blades very seldom are stopped (as in this case evidently) but the damage was significant as one could well imagine. The boom over 50% severed, severe buckling about the boom attachment point and the rear firewall seriously dsitorted!:uhoh: I personally wouldn't have started it up again let alone fly it home over the back suburbs of Sydney! and sorry; I don't have any pics but no doubt the team at Heliflite does!

Relax PandB,

it is just very hard to believe that not just one, but two pilots didn't have a stronger sense of self preservation. It is incredible enough to sound exaggerated.

Post some photos, cast the doubts aside.

Gibbo

It sounds unlikley as explained, If the cut was 50% the rotors would have made contact with the T/R drive shaft an item that is really quite substanstial despite it being Robinson, plus the tail boom of the R44 is a monocoque and would possibly have sagged upon impact of Hard landing, so rotors would also be badly damaged.

It is quite possible however to have a start up tail cone strike without severing the metal, but that sort of impact would also put the damage out of limits and cause a grounding until that section of cone was replaced, Rotor inspected and tested along with M/gbox for shock impact

On the latter I have witnessed that sort of strike firsthand, after the Wally pilot had flown back to his point of T/o after his first land away in the SFH R44 !

Vfr

:uhoh: The tailboom must have been held together by the T/R d/shaft.

Nice reality check Mr Selfish!

Regardless of the level of stupidity involved we have all been there or very close to it.

IMHO we can learn (as junior pilots or as supervisors) but should not condemn (lest we are smite with some bad Karma)

Gibbo

Mr Selfish,

I think I can remember that one.... was it the one at YPMQ??

A yellow 47

Hmm something smells on this thread...

Having disassembled several R44s prior to timex rebuilds I cannot see how the tail rotor drive shaft would still be intact if as Pitch and Break claims the tail boom is 50% severed.

Pitch and Break I challange you to back up your statement. If you can access the hanger you can take a picture. Put up or shut up.

I have been informed by a reliable third party- and after all this is a rumour network- that Pitch and Break is an associate of a certain individual who is the owner operator of a rival helicopter training company to the one involved in the incident (also at YSBK) well known for his underhand business practises which includes discrediting legitimate rivals with hearsay and conjecture up to disconnecting Hobbs meters on machines he cross hires in order to defraud the owners.

GIBBO: Sorry mate; couldn't disagree more! Regardless of the incident, pressure, circumstances, etc the reckless endangerment of 'other' lives just to get the machine back in the shed and outta sight is totally unacceptable and irresponsible and the PIC in this case needs a swift kick up the freckle!!!:\ There is absolutely no valid reason for flying a seriously damaged machine anywhere especially after it had already been safely on the ground (short of war that is) and any professional pilot who suggests otherwise needs a quick reality check.
OXI: Thank god someone else saw what I did - I was starting to think I might have dreamed the whole thing!
:ok:
47DEADBEAT: (name says it all) I think you are sadly mistaken and I have absolutely no idea who you are talking about nor do I have any idea who you might be - might be you condone this type of behaviour?:mad:

Pitch and Break (Name says it all- you probably pulled too much pitch and broke something).

In what way am I mistaken? Did I imagine taking several R44's apart?

I challange you to back up your statement- put up or shut up.

Can't imagine who I am talking about? Are you sure?

I do not condone ANY type of unsafe behaviour.

47 Deadbeat - could it be that you're running some type of defensive play for the operator in question. Nowhere in this thread has ANYONE mentioned any operator responsible for the incident but you quote...."I have been informed by a reliable third party- and after all this is a rumour network- that Pitch and Break is an associate of a certain individual who is the owner operator of a rival helicopter training company to the one involved in the incident (also at YSBK) ..."
So you do know that the incident actually happened....as confirmed by another poster (Oxi) AND as confirmed by your quote above. If you know the operator concerned, why the comment "PUT UP or SHUT UP"?
As to your claim that you suspect you know who I am....rest assured you don't - I really have no idea what you are talking about but it appears you want to hijack the thread for your own purposes:} whatever they might be.

Pitch and Break

I am not running any defensive play for anyone- hence me not naming ANY operators by name. I know of the operator concerned in this incident but this is not of any concern to me. Why should it be? I am merely concerned with the safety issues and the FACTS. (Which despite two requests by me and one by RDRickster you seem unwilling or unable to provide).

I challenge you- as an individual who claims to have seen the
damaged machine- to provide some evidence as to YOUR claim that 50 % of the tailboom was severed. I merely commented that in MY personal opinion based on MY experience I cannot fathom why the tail rotor drive shaft would remain intact. What is unreasonable about that?

As to my claims of your associations with certain operators I seemed to have touched a raw nerve!

Anyway I cannot see how this thread can progress in a CONSTRUCTIVE manner without some pictures of the aircraft concerned. I look forward to this and will reserve further comment until then.

Good Night and Thank You.

47DB