Jim,

Of those three, only one (N103LN) has an undetermined cause, despite "Examination of the helicopter control system [having] revealed no anomalies and all system components functioned appropriately when tested."

N851BP was attributed to "The pilot's encounter with a vortex ring state and his inability to maintain control of the helicopter."

N157BC was attributed to "The pilot's loss of situational awareness resulting in CFIT."

It's understandable that we as pilots are suspicious of any accident blamed on pilot error - especially in fatals, where the pilot is not there to defend himself - but studies have shown time and time again that pilot judgement & actions are factors in >80% of accidents.

Back to the AS350, if you have stats that show the AStar has suffered proportionally more undetermined accidents than other types, then that would be worth sharing. Until then I refuse to buy in to the conspiracy angle.

It would surely be worth focusing more on the question of whether the EC130 T2's "crashworthy" fuel tank will be carried over to the AS350?

.
The fuselage looked intact and probably survivable if not for the fire . Sad
.

My concern was not to establish that a conspiracy theory exists around the AS-350 and potential safety issues. However, during the short period that I was provided with an opportunity to operate both the AS-350 B-2 and B-3 in the Phoenix area we experienced two B-3 engine roll backs in flight and one crash in a strip mall. The engine roll backs were at that time never fully explained. I am not sure what the final investigation of the strip mall crash determined.

The attached video further explains my concern for the aircraft’s response to a hydraulic system failure.
( )

[thread_hijack_on]

@turboshaft:

True, only one was "officially" undetermined. However, I am very familiar (even peripherally involved) with the accident investigation conducted on the aforementioned N851BP. There were many issues there and the NTSB calling it an encounter with vortex ring with resultant loss of control is a stretch beyond reality.

Read this very detailed Canadian incident: http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-re...5/a05f0025.pdf (It’s not difficult to find more examples).

I was an Astar instructor for over 15 years. I’m a fan of the Astar, but I am aware of several incident/accidents that in my opinion are not conclusive "pilot error". No conspiracies, just a belief that there is some sort of insidious undetected failure mode involved in some of these incidents/accidents.

BTW, it is impossible to derive stats like you require since the NTSB will ALWAYS determine a "cause" in an accident.

[/thread_hijack_off]

Jack
There were other issues with this incident that had nothing to do with the aircraft. A hydraulic failure in an Astar can get your attention, but it is quite easy to handle......and the expectation is that all trained persons could land form one.

What is sad that from 100ft there is no guarantee of survival even without a fire.
From 300 ft it has proven fatal is likely (EC130 onto beach), even with so-called crash seats.

What is the crash worthiness of AS350 plastic tanks compared to bladders?

i might be incorrect, but i had thought that 350's generally did not burn up like this. the fuel tanks are well protected by structural members that are quite substantial.
of course, it is a possibility that the fuel in the tank of the vehicle it ended up on top of might have had something to do with it.

prepared to sit corrected...

ENG Ship down in Seattle
 

Assuming it was LTE or damage to tail rotor, the AS350 B2 is very difficult to recover from at low height due to the E-gate throttle located between the front seats. Basically you need a third hand for the throttle because it's not the twist grip variety.

If it were hydraulic failure, again it could be a handful at low level and no airspeed. Due to the fuselage rotations before the crash, I'm guessing it wasn't rubber band failure.

My 2 cents.

A handful...NOT. Assuming it was a rubber band failure, the accumulators would be fully charged and therefore one should get a minimum of three FULL movements on the cyclic before the controls even get stiff. Even then, the Astar can be hovered hydraulics off----admittedly it is tough.....but can be done.

What would cause a rotation...? Not following your logic here.....

Has anyone got the footage to show?
I understood it was caught on the TV network security camera.

I watched one burn after a take off mishap.

Tank is made of thick plastic, is it polycarbonate or something similar that is exotic and strong?

From my study of 147 aerial filming accidents my feeling is that the as350 frame does not do as well as other frames in protecting the occupants from crush injuries or ejection.
So fire is less an issue as occupants are probably already deceased.
I say probably as not all coroners reports are to hand.
If anyone wants the accident list for further research send me a PM


Mickjoebill

RevFlight:
Agree Engine twist grip should be on the lever.

Although lowering the lever first is the best action for T/R loss (height permitting) (ref: Brazillian ENG)

Is the AS350B4 a crash worthy tank where the AS350B3 is not? (Confirmation sought)