G2 down in Switzerland - 15 June 2022
 

Just came across this video on a Dutch website:
https://www.dumpert.nl/item/100034058_461b7738

Likely linked to this accident?
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/279275
https://www.polizei-schweiz.ch/epagn...r-abgestuerzt/

Looks like a close call initially... :ooh:
Great save and survivable landing apparently.

Well that one didn't want to go quietly, did it? :eek:

Hopefully no serious injuries caused.

G2s crashworthiness is truly amazing 👍

I bet there was a change of underwear required there

Wonder if there's some similarity to the UK crash..

Any crash requires new underwear!!!

You have no idea what happened in this incident yet you knock the G2? I thought this crap was over.... yawn.

Good effort. :ok:

Seems more like a knock on the pilot.

How on Earth did he/she save that? Tremendous outcome.

Feels good to see a light helicopter with its tail boom still attached after that tiny bit of aerobatic.

Don't think a Robinson would have survived those gyrations intact even before the ground intervened.

​​​​​​
I knew a Robinson that had a tail rotor failure (bird strike) shortly after takeoff (as described here). It survived long enough to get them down, and they both walked away.

Since Robisons were certified a long time ago, when crash worthiness and general strength wasn't so high on the list, no probably not. Neither would have a JetRanger or a H300 and many other helicopters. Composite materials have their advantage. It is absolutely impressive, how the Cabri holds together. And how the pilot saved it.
On the other hand, Robinson helicopters are know for their good tail rotor authority. Probably the same accident wouldn't have happened in the same way with an R22.

In the days, I had situations in the R22 where it started to spin with full opposite pedal, because the customer wanted me to fly very slowly with a (light) tail wind (Notice to self: learn to say NO when you are still young and alive). A bit of forward speed and everything was fine again. But I learned two methods to stop the spinning when I felt it coming. Just wiggle the cyclic for a second and it disappears. The second is a quick down and up movement of the collective. Don't like that one, but it works, too.

But that it the second accident with a spinning Cabri in a few days. In this accident, after the plunge toward the earth, the pilot recovered and flew for a very short while straight and level and the spinning started again. This might point to a mechanical failure.
On the other hand, if the Cabri can get away from you and you can't to nothing against it (if that is the case), I wonder if it is such a good training tool. Students tend to be a bit slower or wrong in their reaction and I feel, that a good training helicopter should be more forgiving. Strong it is already, no doubt about that.

Is it just me thinking chopping the throttle might have led to a less exciting arrival? That or make sure your right boot is touching the perspex...

Weird. S-300C AFM states something like hovering with wind from all directions has been demonstrated for up to 17 kts. :E

Being the curious guy that I am I tested that on a 10-15 kts day, right on the apron, 20 ft below the tower and 25 yards from emerg. vehicles garage.
After all the LTE stories and wind azimut caveats I was very very cautious. Of course the smack at the fuselage when wind direction swung past 180° is impressive, but it was clearly hoverable in a controlled fashion.
Up to now I not sure what is wrong with tail wind or wind from 5 or 7 'o clock below say ~12 kts when hover taxiing. :8

I admit that looong ago I reversed for ~ half a mile from the training square to the gas station when nasty wind picked up to 20ish kts.
Felt stupid and looked inept for sure, but we didn't want to do a full circuit on low fuel.

Well, pilot was 65 and his passenger 70….that in itself requires it.

do we actually know if was a mechanical failure or a pilot failure ?

Nick Lappos, long-time member of this forum and chief test pilot for Sikorsky (and later Bell) would have something like this to say:

When the US Army had bought a lot of early model B 206 / Kiowa, they had a lot of accidents where the pilot lost yaw control. Army asks Bell to investigate, and rather than admit that the tail rotor was too small to do the job, they came up with LTE.

Their spin merchants were VERY good at their job, even convincing FAA and a lot of others that LTE was real, and applied to every helicopter, and was the cause of the loss-of-yaw-control accidents. Pilot error for letting the wind get into the wrong quadrant, rather than an inadequate tail rotor. LTE appeared in every text book, pilots then said "It was LTE" for any and every case where the pilot didn't control the aircraft, or put it into a situation where the piddly tail rotor could not perform.

A bigger tail rotor subsequently appeared, but the LTE Urban Myth still persists. And mysteriously, it has never been proven to exist on any other helo type, especially NOT the Robinson line, because Frank was a tail rotor specialist and designed it correctly from the start.

Just for the record, I never said I had LTE. What I experienced in the R22 was a rather gentle affair. Nothing like the wild spinning of a Cabri. And it wasn't LTE. I suspect that it was just an interaction of the main blade tip vortex and the tail rotor.
Anyway, if you live in a legal system - the US legal system -, where admitting a mistake can bring a company down due to stupid lawsuits that make at least the lawyers rich, the culture is bound to move towards spin doctoring, creatively finding explanations that are natural causes that could not be seen because physics wasn't advanced enough.