Here's a clearer view of his approach. Seem like he got alittle antsy with the cyclic w/ the first bounce

https://www.facebook.com/reel/706123948945379

I knew it was Arrow's logo... but i haven't researched it.... i thought they just operated AStars and thought maybe a private owner contract.... not sure i'd want my logo on there... :ouch:

Along with landing downwind!

Serious tail wind??

As Charlton Heston famously quoted in “Counterpoint”, “Prostitution isn’t the only profession that has been ruined by amateurs!”

In the video linked above on FB, you can see the pilot landed downwind!

It is only a couple knots, and he is already back in ground effect—-has nothing to do with the crash in my book.

Looks like an 8-10 knot tailwind to me. I found the 130 to be a handful. With the skids set so far back, just a very small amount of forward cyclic will pitch it forward when light on the skids, especially with a tailwind. This guy forgot that. I've seen it happen plenty and it happened to me once. You really have to keep flying it when on the ground and slowly lower the collective. The 130 is not a helicopter for low timers.

Not necessarily pertinent to this case, I had to guard all the controls in the 350 all the time with passengers aboard. I seldom flew with dual controls (pilot seat on the right front) with a front seat passenger but even in those few cases people equated the cyclic with car steering wheel properties and would push it around, usually forward for more leg clearance. I always wondered if the 350 would go over the nose. Now I know that it could with some power applied..
Even without dual controls, you should guard the collective- the 'critters' might set their bag (and strap) between the seats, often fouling the FFL, pushing it down to shut off or pulling it up from idle to useful power. The twist grip B3s were much much better cockpits.

I loved the 350... except the Lycoming D.

This appears to be a dynamic rollover incident due to improper/loss of aircraft control. To be determined is the reason for the improper control inputs (incapacitated pilot, control interference, hydraulic hard-over, control system failure, etc.) A contributing factor appears to be the selected landing direction vs. wind azimuth, which would exacerbate the forward pitch due to the wind’s influence upon the horizontal stabilizer (4” wider on the EC-130 vs. AS-350) and aft landing gear fairing. Potentially, a forward CG could have had increased the susceptibility to the forward roll-over, as the EC-130 has an expanded forward CG range as compared to the AS-350. Of note, is that while the landing gear on the EC-130 gives the appearance of being further aft when compared to the AS-350, they share virtually the same forward point of contact.

Or you could say they landed downwind.

That’s what we said in the old days