Baltimore accident
 

Apparently tragic outcome!

Baltimore accident thread

priz

I think that is unfair, it doesn't come across to me like that

The last time a Cabri incident was reported he posted a video of "Another One Bites the Dust"

Prix, I’m with you on this view as well, I thought it was well out of line considering the circumstances.

Is this the same guy who was banned last year for inappropriate comments?

Actually, I was banned for making the same joke about Guimbos you all make about Robbos ALL THE TIME!

,...but if you hypocrites (who make waaay more "inappropriate comments" whenever a Robbie crashes) want to ban me again, feel free.

- butters

Now now children!

Handbags at dawn - excellent:ok:

We have no record of you having been banned: but you have had three inappropriate posts deleted.

A ban can certainly be arranged should you want.

.
Not bad for a small company ! :ok:

Vertical Magazine announces results of 2019 airframe & engine OEM surveys :

"Hélicoptères Guimbal scored the highest marks among airframe manufacturers"

http://www.verticalmag.com/press-rel...e-oem-surveys/
.

Congratulations to Bruno, Raphael, Roland and all the staff at the factory. Its well deserved and hard earned, they are a great company making a great helicopter with a lot more to come in the future. Just a shame they have such bad representation in the UK.*

Out of curiosity, why do you think they have bad representation in the UK?

Ahh. Yes. Now I understand.

What did he lie about?

While there are no outright factual lies stated in the article, the writing and article structure is subtly rigged against the Cabri as a helicopter. I'll try to avoid wading too deeply into the G2 vs. R22 debate here, and rather just point out issues with PM's article.

He opens with saying that he has no "petty vendetta" against the Cabri, rather "my questions stem from an interest in aviation safety". If this were truly the case, he shouldn't have spent about half a page listing in unnecessary detail the repetitive crash-after-crash theme. The same point could have been raised with "of these 30 crashes, an overwhelming trend is loss of directional control, often attributed or related to pilot unfamiliarity with Fenestron control". Spending more than half of the article talking about repetitive crashes relating to the fenestron, then subtly inserting the sentence "Guimbal has altered a few things on the helicopter - warning lights and so forth - but pilots keep having the same accident" subconsciously rigs an unsuspecting reader to think the Cabri's design is flawed and that Guimbal should change it but are sitting idle, not caring about the safety of their helicopter.

As a journalist (it was tempting to put air quotations around Journalist but taking cheap shots isn't worth it), his decision to make crashes the core element of an article named "We need to talk about the Cabri" isn't accidental. The entire article reads more along the lines of "look at all these Cabri crashes I can list off - meanwhile, look at how safe the R22 is".

Read the article with a decent eye for deceiving writing and it's clear to see he never intended to use the article for a positive or constructive purpose - rather he was given a platform to share his own personal views (albeit in a subtle way) and that he did, while dressing it up as an article for aviation safety.

*If you disagree with me, remember this is the internet and you can always ignore my point of view.

All helicopters are "flawed". That is to say they have design compromises that will bite you if you don't understand them. It is becoming pretty clear that the fenestron on the Cabri is one of those design compromises. Just like the performance limits of the tail rotor on the 206 are a compromise. Or the main rotor system on any Robinson. Or the Squirrely nature of the Squirrel on landing. Or, or, or...

Everyone has their favorite helicopter they like to defend. Everyone has their favorite helicopter they like to hate. Fly and maintain any of them, from Mosquito homebuilt to an MI-26, within manufacturer's limits and you will be just fine. The trick is doing just that. Some are harder than others to do that with. I've got a whopping 3 hours on feneston equipped helicopters between a G2 and an EC130, all after I supposedly knew how to fly helicopters. I found yaw control in the hover to be quite a bit more difficult compared to my first 10 minutes in an R22 before I even knew how to fly one. On the other hand, it still takes all my concentration to auto a Robinson. The first time I auto'd a G2 the entire thing was a yawn. Different helicopters, different challenges.

Bottom line: the truth hurts if it messes with your vision of reality.

Losses of yaw control on helicopters
 

The reproach that can be made about the article in "Pilot" is not what is said of the Cabri, but that it is presented as a problem of the Cabri only. A small look in accident reports databases.(and you could expect that from a journalist) shows that it is a global problem on small heicopters.
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....695022440b.png
Helicopters involved in loss of yaw control accidents found in accident reports databases (2010-2016)

You can make figures say whatever you want, just ask my accountant ! However if one looks at the table it is rather alarming. What would be interesting to know on the Cabri incidents, had the pilots flown nothing else or were pilots doing type ratings ?As I said in a previous post the early student ppl is very reactive and doesn't anticipate enough ( how can you until you have some experience ) In theory the pilot starting on a Cabri should be ok, but is this the case ?

This data presentation has almost a negative value as it has no reference to hours flown nor fleet numbers. As a simple raw number there is absolutely no useable correlation between aircraft types other than shock value to infer unproven handling issues.

Losses of yaw control on helicopters
 

I fully agree that the number of accidents should be related to the number of flight hours. I was not able to find the information.

I do not say that the helicopters that have the largest number of accidents are worse and in fact they are probably only the most numerous. It is however not fair to point out a specific one. The conclusion I would draw from that figure is that the huge number of losses of yaw control has surely little to do with the helicopter design.

Some more data to think about, trying to compare apples to apples (is it said the same way in the King's English?):

- As of the end of May there are 869 R22's of all types and 31 G2's in the FAA registration database for a total of 900 ships, so the G2 is 3.4% of those.
- Since Nov 2016 in the NTSB database when G2's started to appear there are 47 R22 incidents and 5 G2 incidents for a total of 52, of which the G2 accounted for 9.6%.
- On a per ship basis they are crashing nearly 3 times as many as R22's.
- Note that I did not say at "3 times the rate" as I don't have any fleet hour data (does anyone?)

Nevertheless, some interesting numbers to contemplate.

Guimbal needs to build a G2 Mark II with a slightly bigger engine and a regular tail rotor. Now that would be sweet (and cost the same as an R44).

I doubt they need to change to conventional TR as mostly the reason for the control loss sits between the earcovers of the headset:E

I don't think that article was all that bad. It simply points out that if you're going to fly a Cabri (especially if you're used to the Robby tail rotor) you need to pay more attention to the pedals. Just like in the old days, if you were going to fly a Robby after being used to a Schweizer, you need to pay more attention to well,...lots of things.

Anyway, seems like putting a real tail rotor in that thing would defeat the advertised purpose of the Cabri, which I believe was to make it easier for pilots to transition into other backwards spinning, fenestron equipped, Eurocopters?

,...and forgive my Yankee ignorance, but isn't it "The Queen's English"?

You could just as easily re-write that to say:

"On helicopter XXXX I doubt they need to change YYYYY as mostly the reason for the control loss sits between the earcovers of the headset." That's true, but my point is that some things are easier or harder than others on any given helicopter. The best helicopter would make everything very easy. But design trade-offs always seem to preclude doing that. All I know is that I became comfortable with an R22 tail rotor much more quickly than the fenestron. Others seem to fighting the same battle, and sometimes losing.

King's or Queen's English? I don't know! :}

Yes, exactly that.
Yes, but I would hardly call the conversion complete. I've only got 3 hours on fenestron equipped helicopters.
Of course it does. You have no basis for comparison.
No, it isn't nonsensical. Some things are harder to do than others on different helicopters. For instance, continuing the G2 vs R22 theme, and something I mentioned previously: do an auto in a G2, then do one in an R22. Then tell me which one is easier. I might whine a little (I'd hardly call it complaining ;)) about the fenestron in the G2, but I'd rather do auto's all day long in a G2 than a 22. Or a 44 or 66 for that matter!

I'll go you guys one further. When I was learning how to drive a stick, I first tried in my parents new '86 Acura and was jackrabbitting all over the place. My father then put me in this old '65 Mercades he had and I found it a hell of a lot easier to learn on! Simply put, the newer clutch had no 'feel" to it, but the heavier, older, pressure plate style cluch of the Merc made it easier for me to feel where the engagement point was.

So yeah, different designs do make a difference in the learning process.

The problem is that the accident history implies some pilots at least have not got used to it, or not got used to it in time. We can argue about whether it is justified design or whether training is inadequate but until something is done it appears a lot of expensive metal will be bent and there will be a risk of injury.

That safety gain is only for people who feel the need to walk around a running helicopter, not pilots, so is it really worth it?

,...its not like the Cabri is widely used in tours.

I guess one of the problems with communicating by text is that sometimes it is hard to spot a joke, especially a sarcastic one. It took me a couple of reads, but I did finally understand your witticism Robbiee. :D

there is a graph on this Cabri accident report showing thrust curves comparison between fenestron and conventional tail rotors, maybe its been on this thread before ? , anyway interesting read
https://www.caa.govt.nz/assets/legac...rts/ZK-IMZ.pdf

I'm not sure if those have been posted on here either, but any Cabri pilot should have seen those. Its a small excerpt from a 10-page Safety Letter (SL 12-001 A) that Guimbal released and has been offering training for inexperienced pilots / instructors for. That's why I call BS on PM's article to claim Guimbal has been sitting idle for all these incidents - they've been producing safety letters and offering further training to instructors etc. It's just a failure on each individual operator's part to pass down some of this info to the pilots actually flying them.

P.S. I've got the fully Safety Letter (SL 12-001 A) which I can PDF scan and share if anyone is interested.

SL 12-001 A
 

"Our design is awesome, if anything goes wrong its the pilot's fault". Typical Robinson Safety Notice.

,...oh wait :}