From an aviation lawyers website;Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman | Wrongful Death and Personal Injury Lawyers

Above stats do not include recent crashes.

Mickjoebill

Actually for 10,000 helicopters built, the large majority of which are involved in either basic flight training or low time pilots flying them, that is an extremely good safety record. Especially when you look at the per hour fatality.


Fly safe, fly conservative, fly within your abilities.

Crapinson Flimsicopter
 

'Crapinson Flimsicopter' - if the crash don't get ya...........
the post-crash FIRE will!!!

:ugh: :{ :yuk: nuff said :mad: :eek: :yuk:

http://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/aviation-press-releases/robinson-helicopter-colombia-crash.php :ooh:

Ok VF eliminate the Robinsons. That reduces the piston helicopters available for training by say 85%. Assume the other manufacturers have the space and funding to increase production by a third so the reduction is only 80%.

What are you going to train tomorrow's commercial pilots on? The guys I see coming through are really struggling financially as it is. They simply can't afford to train on turbines.

So fewer pilots, less engineers, a smaller industry. How many other industries promote their own destruction? Those that can afford more substantial ships are indeed fortunate, but more normal mortals.......

Agree with VF. These Crapinsons have claimed the lives unnecessarily of 3 mates of mine and nearly my own. I will never step foot in one again.:{

Homonculus - arguing in favour of a poorly designed helo, surely is worse than having it removed in the first instance.
One would hope that eventually someone - either another entrepreneur or FR himself might build a more user friendly lawn mower in future simply because of the onslaught of complaints about it.
Of course you are right - because of the Robbo, many more are now flying....but you know what I'm about to say next, don't you: many more are now dead :sad:

Cant argue with you TC. What is needed is clarity about the level of risk combined with good training and an appreciation of one's limitations. The individual can then decide the level of risk he is prepared to take and whether they can fly to that level of risk. In that respect the decision process is no different than many other industries.

What I dont see in other industries however is the incessant baying from within the industry to attempt to eliminate a major proportion of itself. Especially when the initiating event has not been reported and may well be pilot error, not aircraft design. We simply do not know if the impact would have been survivable in the absence of fire.

Now back to the lawn mower

Cheap poorly designed helicopters allows cheap poorly operated flying schools which attract poorly motivated non aviation dreamers who think they can become helicopter pilots.
Next we have a plethora of in experienced instructors and and some less than highly skilled examiners.
This allows a bunch of in experienced low skilled ppls who take themselves and often there loved ones to their doom primarily because they do not really understand what they are doing especially in tough conditions or in emergencies. Yes all the paper work says they are ready to go but in fact many are not capable of handling some situations.

Please note the goods one always will make it and do well, after they have stopped flying Robinsons.

A few decades ago I did my Ag rating with a very experienced Ag pilot in a Hiller 12E(bladder fuel tank), & back then he refused to fly in a Bell 47 due to its propensity to burn after a heavy landing as the fuel tanks came down through the engine bay. I'm too young & internet chat forums weren't around at the time, but I wonder if this same conversation was had at the time about Bell 47's? Deja-vu all over again, we're slow learners.

With the wrapped tanks and breakaway valves I've know of many Bell 47's crashes that didn't burn. Great trainer too and what a work horse with an Allison engine.

Not too many '47's ever burnt, I know of two out of a very large number over a thirty year period when they were used extensively right across Northern Oz by a number of companies. One hit the ground so hard that it had to burn, another back in '71 or '72, an American pilot in the Kimberlies WA, we never really worked it out but reports were that he was on fire before he hit the ground..

Heliduck that training pilot of yours (not BC by any chance?) suffered from the same problem that VF does, A stigma based on blaming the goods instead of the poor training as many have indicated is the main problem. And as I have reminded him before, plenty of those plastic tanks squirrel turnouts have burnt to a cinder of late.

I could up until recently have shown you about thirty '47 wrecks, not one of which lost the fuel tank mounting integrity or were ruptured.. So, yes definitely he was dribbling utter bulloney. We on the other hand viewed the Hillier with very much the jaundiced eye with their history of engines and xmon's complete crashing thru the cabin over the centre mounted pilot and then burning with the ruptured belly mounted fuel tank. That is how one dude got killed not far from here in fact back in '76..

The thing most of us worried about in a '47 was the stab bar coning down to take the top of one's head off, however that seems to have been merely hypothetical also, as I can't recall any that did..

I don't dispute at all that R44's suffer badly in mainframe distortion upon a severely heavy arrival, even when the skids are level, but I know of only a very small number of R22's that have burnt and they were ONLY those that arrived so hard and fast that they had to burn and there was no hope at all for those on board. Even so we constantly see many examples of terrible crashes in R22's where there was no fire, the one in England a bit more than 12 months ago being typical..

The reason I don't like the R22 for a trainer is that it's tight RRPM limits and low inertia system don't allow a trainee to have time to make a mistake and then still have time to realize / recover before the instructor has to rescue it. Even the Hughes is much better in that regard.

Correct, but when the crash does occur, in this day and age we expect a more crash worthy vehicle.
The crash in oz witnesses say that it lost control after hitting trees, landed on skids, rotors turning, then bounced a few feet and rolled over.
Passengers that were observed were seen alive, with one opening a door popping head out and saying he was stuck.

In something as common as a rollover, this craft can entrap its passengers then incinerate them.

If only a beefed up cabin frame and fuel bladder had been fitted from day one...

Mickjoebill

Can someone explain why there has been such a long time between the decision to put in fuel bladders and that actually happening. 3 friends of mine each with R44's have complied with the sb/ad, but it appears some owners (50% in Aus??) haven't. At a cost of say 20k to achieve is it that expensive? Given the results that we have seen now a few times in Australia. When does the regulator step in and say "That's enough! Get it done guys" In this accident, the fact the aircraft became airborne again even monentarily leads me to think it may have been survivable for all inside. I've done 1000hr in 44's and love them but I think that the tanks must now be done without delay. My experience with Eurocopter and ad's ( whilst annoying) lead me to think that it would not carry on nearly as long as an unfixed problem. In other words they send out an ad, and it gets fixed, and too bad about the expense.

Purely cost. Until it becomes an AD and is forced on some owners they will choose not to have the SB carried out.

I am trying to find out if this is a training procedure and if so what it is for?

Excellent entry for the Darwin awards,:ok: but - failed this time.:{

training procedure? It's not April 1st until Sunday pal!

Bladder tanks
 

Hi all,

I had bladder tanks fitted to my G-Regd 2008 R44 Raven 2 at the last Annual. I decided that I could never forgive myself for saving the money/downtime/ slight reduction in load and accepting the known risks on behalf of my innocent passengers.

The case for bladder tanks has been well made and is a no-brainer. Pay the money, get it done. Fly safer.

Hairy

Pay the money, get it done. Crash safer.