and was even more fun to teach from the LHS when only the RHS had brakes!

Exactly, seems a very touchy device even with a fully professional crew.
Something that zillionaires chose to ignore at their peril.

Indeed it was. Along with the other dirty little tricks that type could play on an inattentive pilot! Turmo engines without anticipators backing right off then being very slow to catch up next time they were needed, in flight Y/R divergence and “wrong pedal” takeoffs, BARALT hold dropping out below 80kts and the aircraft wanting to surreptitiously go into a descent, etc.

3 entire left rotation did not prompt the pilot to counteract with right pedal ? Nor down collective and close the throttle?these are memory items! BTW Leonardo why an helicopter need a wheel lock in first place?
did the pilot checked free of movements of all the controls before takeoff? maybe not. Embarrassing.

An aircraft in perfect shape destroyed in seconds because more or less full left pedal is applied on ground.
I have never flown a plane but somehow I am sure not following the RFM and SOPs is a path to wreck a perfect airplane as well.
This has nothing to do with low safety standards. Planes crash all the time as well. Already forgotten the 737 Max?

i assume checking the nosewheel lock is off/out is part of a pre-landing checklist?

In this situation, it's in the pre taxi checks, which it's being assumed, were missed.

Well,
there is some information, we don’t have yet
ie who pressed the unlock switch?
Could have been without proper crew coordination and caught out the pilot by surprise (not excusing the inputs already applied and not reducing them when coming to a stop for error analysis)
You have to be 100% there to react fast enough- or you turn into a passenger in a matter of seconds.

About the need of nose wheel locks - yes, you need them, when you do a fast run on landing, ie with a tailrotor malfunction.
You can see on the accident video, how much torque could be counteracted with a locked wheel- excactly what you want in case of tailrotor emergencies.

Full and free movement of controls won’t test the nose wheel, its freely rotating - if not locked

Damn, you are talking about a design from 2012 correct? :confused:

Even 60 years old S300Cs have peerless throttle correlators (no closed loop, but working very fine).

How can BARALT hold drop out except for clogged static port? :bored:
I can understand that RADALT can do funny thing when over water or crossing a dropoff,
but BARALT hold should be super reliable, except maybe when close to mining explosion with noticeable shock wave.

And what is a "wrong pedal takeoff" in an AW169 ?
Its MR turn Bell-style, so even non-metric pilots from overseas should feel at home.

No. He's talking about the original SA330 Puma, first designed in the early 1960s.

which had a rather late 'mid-life' upgrade and will be scrapped by 2025.

The Pumas were notorious for their lack of anticipators and the crewman would loiter between the seats to call the Ng/N1 above 75% - below that, at large application of collective would droop the Nr and drop the electrics and AP off line ISTR.

Well, perhaps the analog is the A-340 crew destroying a brand new aircraft by running up the engines without wheel chocks. (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/etihad-a340-accident/)
Still is very sobering to see how fast things can go pear shaped.

Pheeew, that is reassuring. thx

Correct! As I joined the RAF Puma fleet (over 40 years ago), I was handed a formal Flight Appraisal report written by a Boscombe Down test pilot. It mentioned the issues I included and the conclusion was along the lines of “until these design faults are corrected, this aircraft should not be accepted into service.”

Anyway, as we approach the Puma’s 50th anniversary in RAF service.....at least they fitted decent engines a decade or so ago. :D

The list was a lot longer than that ,Shy.......!

and wait 3 turns before realizing that some thing was wrong? Wait two entire 360 before apply right pedal and kill the torque by lowering the collective? I don’t think so. The rudder was jammed. Btw if I will buy that helicopter I will request skids !...

sorry Zagorfly,
you are showing, that you have no clue about what went on and which forces are working.
First mistake was not to unlock before starting to roll
second mistake was to increase pedal and collective, when the intended turn didn’t work - you can see the helicopter already tilting, which feels extremly odd and should make one uneasy...
third mistake was stopping with brakes instead of lowering the collective first - still torque applied
fourth mistake was to unlock the nose wheel in that configuration
and you think a pilot, not knowing what he did the whole time will be quick enough in his reactions and able to overcome the centrifugal forces after the first turn?
He needed to dump the collective within the first 90 to 180 degrees, if there ought to be a chance of recovery- after that he is only a passenger...

And this is the problem with pprune :rolleyes:

I've flown two aircraft with lockable tailwheels (Wessex and Sea King) and two with lockable nosewheels (AS365 and AW 139) and they all need a little wiggle on the yaw pedals moving forward slowly to ensure the pin comes out and the wheel is unlocked - not a great bootfull of pedal like this guy did.

If it doesn't unlock, lower the collective, check the handle/selector and then try again - gently!

Just very poor piloting.

Still the only helicopter in the world where the pilots have to crawl over the jump seat to get into the cockpit; the perfectly serviceable cockpit entry doors being mandated as to be permanently locked in 1972.