So you flew in both roles?

No, saw the kit and some of the footage but spent my time below 50' or above 2000'.

All right. Since nobody came up with some horrible numbers of VRS-accidents, I searched again. Pumas and Cougars are apparently not very benign in this regime. Apart from the one we already discussed, there is another Cougar accident in France that had VRS as a main factor. All in all I found 7 accidents where contributed to VRS, and two more where it was a factor. Most of them happened close to the ground, as was expected and something else also happened almost always. Most of the pilots tried to add power to stop the sink rate and in some cases that led to a loss of RPM.
But anyway, reading the accident reports makes something painfully clear, the problem is not getting out of it. What should be the emphasis of the training, is not getting into it. Most pilots only realised afterwards, what was going on. Some of them were already under stress and that lowers your mental capacity significantly.
All the one, two, three rules are very nice, but as pilots, we should train to be capable to plan our approaches in a better way, to avoid what is lurking there. Also going around is not a shame and crashing is way more dangerous.
I still prefer the classic method, because it is natural just to go around. In my experience, in the very early incipient state, lowering the collective isn't even necessary (but still a good idea), speeding up is mandatory.
Two of the pilots landed hard (bad back injuries in one case). If they where flying sideways and still had crashed, that would have been quite the bigger mess. Again, as Bob Hoover always said, fly the plane into the crash as long as possible. I would not want to go cross control in that situation.

That is what I could find, but it seems, VRS isn't the oh so deadly thing some people want us believe, because they are very rare and by far most of them ended without fatalities. It will take at least a few hundred years to safe a thousand people.
I think we have other things killing us, who are far more important.

Vuichard's claim to have a place in the Smithsonian might not become reality so fast.
A few links:
French Cougar

Mixing VRS and SWP
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...20121015X91617
https://www.accidents.app/summaries/...0627X00938Some more accident identifications:
NYC06LA062
DEN02GA085
ERA16LA159

HAI paper about VRS
HAI for Vuichard

We can probably just let this thread die in peace now.

Perhaps I am being thick here ( high probability ) but if you apply maximum allowable power with collective ( as stated in the video )then apply full power pedal will one not have a problem with over torque or loss of rrpm ?

No, you're not being thick:ok:

If only we could let the Vuichard technique die in peace but it seems some still think it is a magic bullet rather than a very limited solution to an almost non-existent problem.

Does he sell snake oil too?

Its a rising star in the training world. I wouldn't be surprised if it replaces the traditional recovery technique in a decade or so.

Well said Rotorbee. I’d give you a like if there was the option.

Everything else aside with the technique that is one thing I never understood. People generally get VRS at very low levels. Introducing sideways flight makes no sense.

You are going to love this. Sums it up nicely.
Airbus Safety Notice regarding VRS

Sitting on the fence there Airbus......

They should emphasis that NEITHER technique will recover you from fully developed VRS in 50-100'.

Geez, Crab, can you at least once acknowledge, when something goes in the right direction? I think Airbus very carefully choose their words, just not to get into that fight.
I would have done the same thing and I think the wording is very clear, don't use it unless you absolutely have to - it is your last option. That should make you happy. And they are absolutely right, if you ask me (which you don't, I know). Any trick that keeps you alive is good.
As I read it, Airbus is not happy at all, that everybody is using their ships to show of the Vuichard technique. Hence the recommendation to use a freaking simulator for dangerous stuff like that.
As far as I am aware, there has never been a thorough test campaign with calibrated instruments, cameras (for blade/tailboom clearance for example) and what not, to either prove or disprove one or the other method.
All we have are people one youtube that have tried it in a training environment and are convinced, that he is right. Nobody seems to go any length to do independent research. Why? Beats me. Probably it is just not worth it.
The first HAI paper clearly shows, that SWP (yes, Settling With Power, the thing where you run out of power) vastly outnumbers VRS in deadly accidents. Yes, VRS might come right after you got into SWP, but in that scenario Vuichards technique of pulling even more power does not do any good. I think everybody can see this. You have to reduce power in SWP and absolutely not push the power pedal. Why is that so complicated to understand? Still HAI gave him an award.
Anyway, Crab, we are going to loose this. There will never be enough scientific and statistical evidence that shows, which method saves more lives. All that matters, is who sells the story better. Vuichard is way ahead of us. He is the star quarterback with the cheerleader harem and we are the geeks getting beaten up for being different.
I don't know if you realise it, but in any thread, where VRS is mentioned, Vuichard's method shows up and we get this heated discussion (and get relegated to this thread). Any time a Vuichard fan shows up, we go down hard on them with facts and they leave. Robbie being the exception (but his own experience made him think about it). They don't leave because we have convinced them, they leave because they think we are wrong. Because the majority can not be wrong and the majority are those who can make more noise. Since Robinson is the number one in training helicopters - which you hate, I know, I rather like them - and Tim Tucker is Vuichard's first disciple, the crowd is against us. Let's just suck it up and move on. We have said what is to say. Whatever Vuichard does, it will not make a difference in fatal accidents. At least I truly hope it will not make it worse.

I am now convinced Vuichard hasnt actually experienced fully developed vortex ring. I have been in it once and I could assure him that the aircraft was not in a nice flat hover attitude ( as per his video ) it was pitched up by what felt like 75 to 80 degrees ( same atitude as top of a torque turn )falling on its tail. I cant really see how applying full power and full power pedal would actually do anything. To get out i dumped the lever, full forward cylic and applied full non power pedal, which seemed to work, pulling out about 100 ft from teh ground followed by a change of underwear.

Rotorbee - Airbus are exactly the people who should get into that fight, as are other big helicopter manufacturers - they are the ones with all the test pilots, wind tunnels and calibrated aircraft who could test and call foul on Vuichard.

Yes, they said it might be a better option only if you are downwind but they should clearly state that fully developed VRS is NOT recoverable in 50 to 100' as Vuichard et al keep claiming.

I understand the concern about stresses on the aircraft but the UK Mil were teaching full VRS in the Sea King until 2000 and no bits fell off doing it.

I fully agree with your comments re SWP - if someone used the Vuichard technique in that condition it would get worse very quickly.

Vuichard is a con but people see a way of monetising the threat of VRS with a 'training' package to save you from it - what a world we live in..............

Crab ol’ pal, you are right on all accounts, just it isn’t going to happen.
Over all those years, neither Nick nor any other test pilot lurking here took sides. Nick probably because of his employer (who certainly preferred you do all those nasty things where bits could fall off, in a sim). The manufacturers will not pay for this. The better option would be either NASA/FAA/Army or EASA or even any CASA doing it. They’re the one it concerns in the first place. But they seem to slowly move to the dark side. Why? Frankly beats me. They should know better.
The best you can hope for, is that the manufacturers could mention that problem in an unofficial way, like some hints from test pilot to test pilot during a certification process. It could be, that Airbus et. all. have done their homework and know exactly what is going on, but rather stay out of the fight. That safety notice could be the result of just that. Do not use it, unless there is no other option.
Airbus legal department would have a joint heart attack, if somebody wrote in a safety notice „you can not get out within xxx feet“. You would have every macho moron in the helicopter industry trying to prove them wrong. With absolutely disastrous results. Youtube would loose half of its helicopter stuff contributors, but Vuichard would have field day, by doing a new video where you can’t see the VSI. Would make him even more famous. Let it go, Crab. Vuichard is on the first peak of the Dunning Kruger Effect, I am in the valley of despair. You, I don’t know, but somewhere ahead of me. But we do not stand a chance against the marketing machinery he has unleashed. The only thing that could change it right now, would be an accident with somebody using this technique - and for heavens sake I don’t want that to happen. Look at it like homeopathy. You can show people again and again, that it is just a placebo. Show them, how stupid the logic is behind it (and frankly disgusting), tell them, that all the water remembering things is absolutely bollocks and not only because there is no water left on the stupid sugar balls they swallow. They don’t want to know. A big portion of our society will gladly run to any spirit healer, because all the scientific stuff is just bad and only there to make bad people rich. Understanding VRS just in a basic way, took me hours and hours of reading papers and searching for more information. And also thanks to you, I got there in the end (that was before Vuichard wasn’t even a thing. It was the SWP/VRS controversy. Yep, I was on mount stupid then). The only thing that can be done is collecting the facts and presenting them in logical consistent way and then leave it at that. You can lead a horse to the water, but you can’t make him drink.
Just one more thing. Remember Robbie's comment when he got a bit of VRS? He couldn't even recall how to use Vuichard's thing. He was so stressed, he just shoved the stick forward a flew out of it. Who knows, the magic trick is perhaps never going to be used, because it is too complicated.

Seems like this is just a case of old dogs not willing to learn a new trick. I have been trained in the Vuichard method in the 206, 135, 109 and the 407 and it's a much quicker recovery. You people need to stop hyperventilating over this and go train on it. Nothing dangerous about it.

What rate of descent did you have when you initiated the recovery and what was your height loss during recovery?

I don't think Airbus gives a !!!!.

Haven't answered my question though....

Usually not much of either but as everybody knows, early recognition is the key. Much less than pushing forward on the cyclic and sitting there waiting for something to happen, that I can tell you. If you are going to argue that it's ineffective (I don't know this) in full blown VRS at 2000'+ per minute, you're missing the point.

HeloNorth
I am really curious so what were the parameters of the aircraft when you were told to recover it ? To be precise fwd airspeed and ROD ?

It has been the same at all the operators I have worked for, how I was originally taught and how I instructed: climb to minimum 2,000 AGL, bleed off all the airspeed while keeping some power applied and wait for the shudder. Watch the VSI for the descent. The bottom drops out pretty fast. Do the recovery of your choice. I used to commonly see 2,000 FPM descent and a loss of 500' before recovery when lowering the collective and using forward cyclic. I have never seen it anywhere close to that using the Vuichard. Once again, the key to this whole thing is early recognition. You 're training as much for the recognition as the recovery.

Oh helonorth, Airbus does care, because especially in your corner of the world, there will always be somebody to sue the one with money. Airbus does have to cover their backs and that is why they wrote this:

The “classical technique” is effective in avoiding penetration beyond the incipient stage of VRS. However, the “Vuichard recovery technique” may be applied in case of early warning detection in specific operational conditions like rear wind in final approach or helicopter in front of an obstacle.

... and this:Quote:
Airbus Helicopters has performed tests to gather data for a more complete understanding of the aerodynamic loads on the helicopter. Airbus Helicopters does not consider VRS as a normal part of the flight domain of any rotorcraft. Dynamic loads on some components of the rotor system increase significantly in full VRS and are not completely taken into account in the components service life. As an aircraft manufacturer, we do not recommend to place the helicopter in fully developed VRS.
... and this:
Quote:
Recovery technique from fully developed VRS should not be practiced in flight. However, it could be performed without risk in a flight simulator if this one is considered as realistic enough. In flight simulator, both “classical technique” and “Vuichard technique” may be trained.

and this:
Quote:
In flight, in case the pilot has not recognized the early warnings and is in a fully developed VRS, the “classical technique” is effective for the recovery.
However, the “Vuichard recovery technique” may be applied in case of fully developed VRS in specific operational conditions like rear wind in final approach or helicopter in front of an obstacle.
Airbus Safety Information Notice 3463-S-00

And in the incipient stage it doesn't really matter, well except if you have something dangling from the belly, are in SWP not VRS or like Hughes500 are looking at the sky instead of the horizon.

How is anybody going to make money off of this? Number of views from a Youtube video? It's a simple maneuver, taught by any instructor.

So you did not realise, the Vuichard is travelling the world, selling training courses to various companies, organising trainings with flight school where the students pay money to see him? He has his own website where you can book him.

You seem to really want to read something in the notice that's not there. They say use the Vuichard if you need it. To me, the main takeaway is they definitely don't want you training full blown VRS with either method. Since the Vuichard is the more effective method, that's what I will do. I like recovering sooner rather than later but I'm funny that way.

Fine. So what. Can you add full power, left pedal and right cyclic? Congratulations, you can now perform the Vuichard method, free of charge.

Oh my, helonorth, now you are reading something I never wrote. I always said, that if the method get’s you out of trouble, use it (as does airbus, but they caution you to use it in certain scenarios only). The points most of us are making, are:

a. Nobody has flown independent flight tests with all the necessary instrumentation to lock at all the aspects AND PUBLISHED THE FINDINGS IN A SCIENTIFIC PAPER. For example, some of us are concerned, that the blade flapping, already excessive in VRS (the aerodynamics are really a mess and not completely understood to this day), might become even worse and the blades might get too close to the tail boom in that regime.

b. That in case you have SWP and not (yet) VRS, you make it even worse with the Vuichard method. The classical method get’s you out of both. The Vuichard method is really not a good idea if you have no more power left. (Yeah, I know, bad planning if you don’t have always some power left)

c. As Robbie said from his own experience, when you get in there, especially as a relatively new pilot, the stress level might be too high, to do all the mental decisions in a short time. The classical method is so easy and logical and just works, too. Even experiences pilots can be overwhelmed with everything else going on. For example in one of the accidents, the pilot tried to make a precautionary landing because of some funny noises from the engine or the gearbox. In that case, all of us have limited mental capacity and must rely on as simple procedures as possible. When he could not control the descent rate, he flew straight and touched down hard, but stayed upright. Imagine flying sideways with a possibly broken engine close to the ground.

d. If you use what you learned as you describe it, in an H120, H125, H130, H155, H160, H175, H215, H225 or anything MiL, you’r in for a surprise, because you would have pushed the wrong pedal. And since many pilots switch between types of helicopters, every time they would have to think about which pedal to push. That’s not something you want to do in a high stress situation. I wonder what the KA-32 does.

e. In some some aerial applications, like sling loading, you create a whole bunch of new problems going sideways (and the load the other way).

f. The whole VRS danger has been blown out of proportion. There aren’t thousands of fatal accidents from VRS. There are thousands of accidents from SWP, but that is not a problem Vuichard’s method solves. On the contrary, it might make it worse.

That’s what we are discussing here. While I and others (even Crab is open to it, I think) accept, that you can get out of VRS faster, there are other factors to consider, which makes us question the viability Vuichard’s method, not a least the problem with the not completely understood aerodynamics.

Helonorth - next time you do it - same conditions of entry you were using on these training course - just add full power and see what happens.

You will almost certainly recover as quick if not quicker than with the Vuichard technique.

Why? Because you are in the very early stages of VRS (you recognised it early because you put yourself into it) and pretty much any recovery technique will work.

The only reason you compare it to the 'standard' recovery so unfavourably is because the 'standard' technique is the ONLY one that works in fully developed VRS and therefore it was taught for any VRS conditions.

Guess what? If you lower the lever and push the nose forward, the RoD increases and you lose a lot of height compared to raising the lever and cross-controlling.

But also guess what? If you are in full VRS, the 'standard' technique is the only one that is going to save you.

Now if you think this 'new' training will help if, heaven forbid, you do actually enter full VRS then you are going to be sadly disappointed.

Go and try your 'new' technique but hold the shudder until the VSI starts to point hard down and see how good it is. - In fact don't do that as you will probably crash.

Light helicopters with lower disc loadings are more susceptible to VRS as their downwash speed is lower and it takes less RoD to catch it up and ingest it.

All Vuichard is doing is selling early recognition - something that has always been taught - and added a twist to make it look and sound sexy.

Well all that is happening with a 500ft minute rate of descent ( and < 20 kts )is you are going down. The shuddering you are feeling is the loss of translational lift and ones own inability to transition from fwd flight to a hover with almost no reference points . Go try that again with an ROD of 500 ft a minute, this time pull power and watch the aircraft climb out of it.( As Nick Lappos said " the aircraft is muscling its way out of it ). You havent caught up your downwash so are not in or close to vortex ring. Come over to the Uk and I will show you exactly that in a 300

You're making an approach to a rooftop. You have maybe 30kts showing on your airspeed indicator and a high rate of decent. You are making this approach downwind and the heafty tail wind has caused the rotor to lose ETL. Combined with the high rate of decent you find yourself in the vortex ring state.

Will Vuchard get you out of this?

As Rotorbee says - if Vuichard had found a magic bullet to avoid SWP (er perhaps good planning, power awareness and handling) then he might have something to bring to market.

Seems like us dinosaurs all seem to think the same thing:ok:

... and we have survived much longer than any mammal.

Geez Robbie, good question. You'r in deep sh*** there. How high are you over the roof top? Can you avoid crashing on the rooftop by using Vuichard by going sideways? Rather crash on the roof top and not falling of it?
Do you have power left or is the RPM already decaying? Why are you downwind anyway? Obstacles? Probably you shouldn't have tried that approach in the first place. That would be the right solution. Planning and avoiding.
No really, can't say I would know.

Good question! Probably, but you were an idiot to get yourself into this spot and I hope whatever it is you do, you don't end up crashing.

Looks like the goal posts have been moved all the way out to the parking lot. Anything else?

yes, you don't actually have a reasoned counter-argument to our assertions regarding Vuichard technique. Other than that you are smack on topic..........

You don't know this and you are guessing. Early recognition and the Vuichard method will get you out faster. Ever been in a helicopter at the onset of VRS and did the normal recovering and sat there while nothing happened? But sure, tell me how pushing that mush cyclic forward in full on VRS is going to save your ass in time.

Its from video footage of an R44 accident they show at the Robinson Course. They were downwind to get the best angle for a photo shoot (they were the ones being videoed making an approach to the roof of a new hotel).

They hit the roof hard, slid across into dynamic rollover and fell off the other side. Everyone died. Its assumed the pilot didn't realize he was in vortex ring, plus this was long before Vuchard was a thing in the Robby world.

They attributed it to the vortex ring state (as at one point you can clearly see the rate of decent increase significantly) yet they still appear to have forward momentum.

We always practice the recovery from a HOGE into a vertical decent, so it got me wondering if this new sideways hop would still work if you had some forward momentum?