Helijet S76 loses 2 tail rotor blades in lightning strike, and lands safely
 

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/helijet-damage...oria-1.6615284

Those Pilots need to go buy a Lottery Ticket while there good luck is with them!

Well Done, excellent airmanship!

They deserve all the time off they want....with pay!

IIRC, a 76 lost a paddle in NYC many years ago and landed at one of the heliports safely. The crew sad they had an unusual vibration. Could believe it.

Amazing! Glad they were able to continue and land safely with 12 passengers in the back and a helicopter with half a tail rotor left!

Wonder if manufacturers test for this.

A little different cause, started a 76 for its first flight of the day and had an unusual vibration, tarmac hand came to the door and said the the tail was bouncing up and down six inches, later told it was water in one of the tail rotor paddles.

Is a situation like this taught/practiced in a Sim as part of regular training?

Horizontal stab bite too
 

Zoom in and look at the chunk bit out of the horizontal stab!!! It’s wild! How much more pitch would be needed? A power of two I suppose.

Perhaps a new C - - mod coming out

12 pax, full load (3-rows of 4, none of that candy-ass limited seating like offshore). Looks like a departing blade took a bite out of the horizontal stab. Over water, they flew past Victoria airport and landed at the Camel Point Heliport on one of their 1D helipads elevated from the water. Gutsy move to counter that near 100% torque in a hover with half a tailrotor. Maybe they didn't know the extent of the damage.

Not Helijet's first lightning strike with a 76, last one left spot welds on a bunch of dynamic components - but the tailrotor remained intact.

The long answer is no, as manufactures don't test for this sort of scenario (loss of blades) as far as I'm aware. Loss of tail rotor drive (tail rotor no longer rotating) and tail rotor control stuck at a fixed setting (low or high power, or some point in between) is.

​​​​​​​I would think that they didn't know they were missing tail rotor blades, otherwise I can't imagine they would've chosen Camel Point. The reduction of tail rotor thrust may not have even been all that apparent until final approach.

Yes, half the number of blades would require about twice the angle of attack on remaining blades to maintain same overall tail rotor thrust.

I wonder if both blades departed at 'same' time or whether the massive vibration of imbalance after one parting caused the opposite one to then also fail shortly afterwards due to overload?

Lucky for it to end so well.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....4112e025bc.png

Loss of TR blade/blades leaving whats left in the only configuration that retains some semblance of balance and function is unbelievable. Very lucky people.

Something similar to a Super Puma in the North Sea 30 years ago. 2 main rotor blades each lost part of their structure following a lightning strike and whilst there was a lot of vibration, the amount lost on both sides was fairly equal, so it stayed flying. Lightning works in mysterious ways - Maybe we should always have even numbers of main and tail rotor blades!

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/75393


Examination of the main rotor blades revealed that all four had suffered extensive damage and two diametrically opposite blade tips were badly damaged, each losing about 40% of their area

https://www.lightningmaps.org/?lang=...d=2;dl=2;dc=0;
Useful site for avoiding areas of lightning activity .

In a separate thread re USAF AW-139s on 30th Sep 2018 SASless had written: "I know some OH-6A'S flew with half the blades gone from the rotor head....it was a dire emergency but it worked". I was keen to understand more about such cases. This S76 incident reminded me of the comment by SASless once again.

Yes, I think we can assume that they would have diverted to an airport if they'd had any clue.

There was an AS365 (Aero Contractors) in Nigeria that had a loud bang after departing from a riverside helipad (Agip's Brass Terminal). They misdiagnosed it and shut and engine down then returned and lost control on short final, bounced off the pad and into the river - because the actual failure was a fenestron blade detaching, and the rest of the blades then shredding themselves on the shroud. Can't recall the fatality count, but included both crew.

Speaks volumes as to the robustness of the S76 tail rotor design if, as has already been observed, the crew had no reason to think they'd lost any tail rotor authority. To make matters worse, one wonders if one/both AP's remained ON after the lightning strike. Be bad enough losing a couple of blades at the back end, wouldn't imagine it'd be any fun having both AP's drop at cruise speed.

I know somebody onboard!
 

so it turns out a friend of a friend was onboard. There was a loud crack/bang and the helicopter rolled to the side/pitched down violently. (A passengers version of violently may differ from crew mind you.) I speculate that when the instruments went blank from the lightning they lost all AP.

it was apparently quite startling and ‘he legit thought he was going to die’ for a few moments. Once they descended and levelled off - everything was relatively normal. No alarming vibration levels he said. He and the other pax calmed down and the 8-10 mins of the rest of the flight seemed OK. There was a holy **** moment on the ground once everyone realized the condition of the tail.

The 212 I was just flying got hit by lightning a few years ago, also in a tail rotor blade. The current traveled through the aircraft and down the attached 150ft long line, into the pond he was dipping out of.
The tail rotor stayed on with a tiny burn hole, but according to the pilot, pretty much every circuit breaker popped on the overhead panel, and he got a false engine fire light. Interesting how completely different the effects of lightning can be.