MaxNg, I am well aware that the avoid curve is based on S & L flight parameters but that does not mean you can ignore it on approach especially if you are steep and by implication have low speed and high power settings (to contain the RoD).
I was trying to highlight to the wind-up merchant some aspects of helicopter flying that his I-spy colouring book guide to helicopters might not have included because the print was large and the words kept simple.
PS PPrune fan - there are as yet undiscovered tribes in the Amazon Basin who know that air taxiing is not the same as transitioning!

PF#1

You illustrated my point very nicely by jumping straight down the hole I left for you.

You say you can't make full flap glide approaches in your fixed wing because it might not be safe.

Yet you think a helicopter can make a safe approach at an approach angle of 50 or 60 degrees, or even 90 degrees as you stated earlier?

You have made contradictory statements regarding whether you fly rotary or not, but no matter. You imply that the correct place to look out on finals to an airfield is at the ground. Who the hell taught you to fly? Are you one of those many GA pilots that I am often obliged to take avoiding action from because they either haven't seen my aircraft or don't know or disregard the rules of the air?

You call others "self proclaimed experts"? Your ignorance seems to know no bounds, my friend.

After doing the airfield boundary inspection I found a peak cap lying in the grass. Thinking I may be able to return it to the owner, I searched for a name printed on the inside. Unfortunately I could only make out the words “PPRUNE FAN#1”. This didn’t sound like a typical name so I placed the cap in lost and found.

If your out there PPRUNE FAN#1, you can come and claim your hat. :E

HAAAAHH!, HAHHH!, HAAAAH!, HAAH, this is the best thread for ages, keep up the good work!

Well, I take my hat off to the lot of you. Never read so much egging-on in my life. Given the right approach this thread could run and run. Well done!:p

TOT, getting to the nitty gritty, if you consider he was endangering your aircraft, it's an offense so report him. If you don't think he was, report him for it anyway. He might get lucky next time.

Shy Torque:Shy, you must not know much about helicopters. At least, that's the assumption I'll proceed from.

Listen up now: A helicopter can make a very steep approach perfectly safely. As long as you keep some airspeed up you will be able to keep the power lever down. I'm not talking about an autorotative approach, just a very steep one flown above ETL. You might even be in the shaded area (the knee) of the H-V chart slightly. No big deal. You have your hand on the collective (which is at a reduced power setting), you're already coming down, and we'll assume that you're into the wind. If the engine were to quit you'd be in a very nice position to land. I have made thousands and thousands of such approaches in my career and never did I think that I was doing something horribly unsafe.

Would I make a 90-degree (straight down) approach? Perhaps. If the wind was strong and/or I was very light and the site was very, very small...sure! EMS pilots do it all the time - or a variation of it.

And Shy, as for my traffic-scanning skills, you need not worry. I do watch for nitwits like you. But I also am very aware of the ground I'm flying over. That's part of my "job." And I do not fly low unless absolutely necessary.

I was checking a pilot out in a new ship recently (he was flying). We went to a nearby airport for pattern work. Five miles out he had descended to 300 feet AGL! We were flying over all sorts of houses, businesses...whatnot. I pointed down below and told him this: "Most of those buildings down there have people in them. I always assume that those people hate helicopters. YOU might assume that those people love helicopters. In any event, I'd rather be wrong about my assumption. Would you?"

Unfortunately, he'd never really thought about it, and it didn't sink in. This pilot continued to fly very low - not just around airports, but as a habit. He and I got into some major...let's say "disagreements" about the philosophy of flying neighborly - not to mention safely.

Where I live there are helicopters flying over my house constantly. And you know what? They're bl**dy annoying! Sure, it might be music to you, mate, but not everyone hears it that way. I certainly don't. If one flew over my cuckoo's nest at 75 feet, I might be tempted to throw my cap at him too. And I'm probably not alone.

Personally, when I'm approaching an airport in a helicopter, unless there is a compelling reason not to, I try to maintain at least 500 feet until I could crash on the airport if the rotor fell off. Sometimes that means that I have to do a steep approach. Oh gee-whiz, poor me.

As I've stated, there is NO reason on the planet for a helicopter to fly a 3-degree glidepath unless that helicopter is in IMC. Pilots who do so in VFR conditions are showing how truly inexperienced, unknowlegeable, inconsiderate and unprofessional they are. Some of us have a lot to learn about noise and the non-aviator's reaction to it.

pee prude: would you admonish any of your employees if they flew any of your a/c on an approach like that?

Here comes my 4 pennies worth.

Agree with keeping noise pollution down.

Object to people who complain about noise who choose to live close to an airport. (Assuming the airport was there 1st)

The original post seems to indicate the pilot was doing as requested by ATC/ normal practice at the airfield. I reckon 12 degrees (75', 100m) is plenty steep enough. Following HAPIs at 7 degrees is steep enough! Good job it wasnt a plank - 17 ft at 100m on a 3 degree glide slope - the hat would have hit! Never could understand the fascination plank drivers have with deliberatly hitting the ground at 60 odd kts!

We aim to teach about 6 degree approach in light two seaters because it is safe for all. Recommending a steeper approach might cause the farmer to get really mad. His chicken coups might end up in a smoldering heap with a tail boom sticking out.

This is a universally accepted fact,

If during an approach to a runway, in most airports in the world, you are within reach of some hat being thrown by a farmer, YOU ARE TOO LOW.

P E R I O D.

But then lets look at the other side of the coin . . . .

http://homepage.mac.com/helipilot/PPRuNe/320low.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/helipilot/PP...ncontin727.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/helipilot/PPRuNe/uyuyuy.jpg

75 feet? Hom........
 

What you really want to do is come snotting in at 50 feet agl and 140 KIAS and quick stop to the threshold. That way the farmer wont see you until you've passed and certainly wont be able to hit you with his hat, which by the way, he would be hard pressed to throw 75 feet into the air!!!

Oh and make sure your helo weighs around 20 tons to get a bit of downwash blowing over his 'coups'. Thoughts anyone? :ok:

Ps Blenderpilot, is that pic of the Air France jumbo real or fake? Great beach spot.........

or do it at dusk with a night-sun attached....and dazzle the swine...:=

and I the air france pic is real...St Martin or something like that. I've got a load of pics from that beach on my pc at work...will email them if anyones interested...pm me

PPF1 have you ever tried doing an engine off landing from 100' and 15-20 kts (ie just above ETL on a steep approach) no I thought not - it is not a safe approach and despite the comments about the HV curve being for straight and level flight you are very unlikely to establish autorotation at min RoD speed ( the best configuration for surviving an EOL.

crab:::::Sigh:::: Oh crab, why do you make such assumptions? Do you enjoy making an ass out of yourself? For the record, no crab, I have not done an auto from the parameters you describe. However, I have done plenty of them from a 100' hover and they work out fine as long as you're ready for them and don't sleep for one second before reacting. I would have no objection to cutting the engine in a descent on approach at 100'/20 knots.

To claim that something is definitively "safe" or "unsafe" is unwise. I think you know that (at least I hope you do) and are just reacting in anger and not thinking rationally. Something that might not be advisable in a Robbo might be perfectly okay in an Enstrom or 206. You have to set your terms.

Helicopter pilots need to think "outside the box." They need to realize that there are an infinite number of ways of making an approach. The speed, angle, and azimuth are all variables that can and should be managed. There is no "cookie-cutter" approach that works for every landing. An approach that avoids any infringement of the shaded area in the H-V chart is simply not always possible. Okay, get over it. Accept it and fly the aircraft.

Now I'm not suggesting that an approach to a wide open area like an airport should be made deep inside the shaded area. All I am saying is that helicopter pilots *should* fly steeper approaches than they do, and not come dragging in on a long, low final merely because they're approaching a runway and that's what airplanes do.

TOT's original post left a lot to be desired. Was TOT's estimate of being "100 metres" from the threshold really accurate? (This would mean that the farmer's land actually extended to within 100 metres of the runway pavement, which I find doubtful.) Or was he really further out than that as I suspect?

What was it about the approach that made the farmer so mad at TOT? Did the farmer throw his hat at every aircraft that landed on that runway? Was there a VASI or other approach-slope indicator installed? Was there an instrument approach to that runway? If so, what was the HAT? Was there a displaced threshold?

I've made hundreds of helo approaches to airports (maybe thousands, actually). Of course I wasn't in the ship with TOT that day. And I'm glad I wasn't, because we probably would have had words. I think he and his stick-buddy made a judgement error. I've said it before and I'll say it again: The time to notice that there are people/things on the ground that might object to a the presence of a helicopter is *not* when they come out throwing stuff at you.

@[email protected]

An autorotation from the conditions you describe is not by any means an easy manuver, but you talk about it as if it were hardly survivable or extremely difficult, have you ever practiced this?

I learned to auto from conditions you describe at PHI(or even from a hover) and me the instructor and the heli are still here, intact. I know the difference between an actual EOL and Auto's is considerable, but I still think of it as something survivable, although the helicopter will for sure be damaged.

Autorotations all the way down from 100FTAGL/Hover are part of everyday training at PHI, this is just in case the engine quits coming out of a rig, Autos from all parts of the shaded area of the HV diagram are required training at PHI for all 206 pilots, (haven't worked there just went for training).

Important note:
These autorotations from the "shaded area" are taught as a survival manuver, and only practiced in helicopters with fixed floats in order to cushion the touchdown with the water, the splash is always a good one, (crawfish on the windshield everytime!), collective movement down and up has to incredible rapid and you usually end up with the collective in your armpit in about 3 seconds.

PF#1

You had the right idea at first, but now you are overdoing it and making it an aggresive personal battle, referring to others disrespectfully creates an upleasant atmosphere.

Pprunejuice: would you object to any of your employees doing this sort of approach in any of your helo's?

C'mon answer the question.....sulky knickers

PF#1,

I certainly seem to know more about helicopters than you do about basic maths and you had no reason to call me a "nitwit" other than my disagreeing with your view. BTW, I'm not your sweetheart or your mate either.

You said that an approach at 50 kts can be flown at a 45 or 60 degree approach angle. This equates to approximately 3600 and 4500 ft /min ROD. I don't know what type of helicopters you fly but they must have very unusual flight characteristics to achieve those figures.

You imply TOT is a liar and you seem unable to post anything without name calling which IMHO does nothing at all to further your argument. You must be a delight to fly with. :yuk:

The pilot you "checked out" (checked out for chicken coop spotting?) would be liable to prosecution in UK for illegal low flying, and you too would be implicated if you are a professional pilot, you allowed it to continue for some time by your own admission and presumably you were captain as "check pilot".

To put TOT in the same category is ridiculous. He was making a steep approach in accordance with an ATC instruction, as you would have realised had you thought a little before posting your first rant.

BTW If you made one of your "recommended" 50 /60 /90 degree approaches carrying passengers with my company you would be looking for a new job shortly after lunch (and possibly a nose job too if some of our typical passengers were on board... :ouch: )

BlenderPilot - no I haven't chopped the throttle and completed an EOL from this condition because, as you correctly state, the likelyhood is that the helo will end up badly bent but it would be a survivable crash because helos are stressed for vertical impacts. You would be far better placed for any engine off in a 206 rather than an R22 but TOT was talking about an R22 ( if I can remember all the way back to the beginning of the thread correctly).

PPF1
The whole point of the HV (avoid) curve is that in the shaded regions you are unlikely to achieve autorotation at min RoD speed following an engine failure (after the obligatory one second delay for recognition). You will almost always be able to get the lever fully down regardless of where you are in terms of height and speed but the deeper into the shaded region you are the more it is going to hurt when you reach the air/ground interface.
If you are outside the shaded area, providing you are not a complete F***wit you should achieve auto at min RoD speed and have the MAXIMUM chance of a perfect EOL where the aircraft does not get bent.

So here we have the question - do you:

a). always fly steep slow approaches knowing that if the donkey stops you might walk away from it but you will trash the aircraft

or b). try whenever possible to keep outside the shaded area (yes even on the approach) safe in the knowledge that the potential for a safe and controlled arrival at the bottom is always an option if it goes wrong?

My answer would be b but I bet PPF1 picks a!!!

I think it is TOT who is lucky he was not flying with you rather than the other way round, he might have had to point out that your risk assessment skills are rather poor!
I spend a great deal of my working life in the avoid curve (fortunately in a twin but still with insufficient OEI performance to go anywhere other than the crash site if a donk stops.

Oh dear, it gets this way every time I have a discussion with a group of helicopter pilots - I come away with such a splitting headache! Some of you are truly dense...or maybe daft. Or maybe narrow-minded. Limited? Yeah, that's it. Crab? Step up to the podium, please and get your award. Stop making such inane, blanket statements. It really makes you out to be quite the fool. By the way, TOT only mentioned that he was in a two-seater and gave three possibilities. He did NOT state that it was an R-22. Crab, please try to pay attention.

Let's clean up some loose ends and revue: I recommend steep approaches. There, is that so hard? If you can keep it out of the shaded area, great. (It *is* possible to fly a steep approach in such a manner.) If not, then don't have a heart attack. Saying things like, "A real auto from such-and-such parameters *WILL* result in a bent bird" is just plain silly. There are too many factors/variables involved. And we all know guys who've had the donk quit in rather precarious positions yet...somehow...unbelieveably...they got the ship down with no damage. How could it be??? Crab says it's quite impossible!

There are those who maintain that the H-V chart only applies to takeoffs. Others say it was derived from straight-and-level flight. I say it doesn't matter. But let's be realistic. Suppose we're at 45 knots and 200 feet, outside the shaded area for this particular aircraft, but only just. Which is worse: full power and a rate of climb, or reduced power and a rate of descent? Of course, WE all know the answer to that, but crab seems to want to debate the issue ad nauseum.

My advice to my pilots is that they fly steep rather than shallow approaches. It lessens the pitch-attitude change at the bottom, and gives better control of the aircraft as you near your "aim point" (you did pick a specific one, DIDN'T YOU?). But more than that, I try to get my pilots to THINK.

Two quick stories.

1) The aforementioned pilot I was checking out and I were on a ferry flight in his new ship. As we approached a refuel stop (an airport unfamiliar to him but not me), this dimbulb again descended to about 200' AGL. Lo and behold, he couldn't find the airport even though it showed quite clearly at 12 o'clock and one mile on the moving map GPS. Frantic, he started to turn away from it in an effort to...well, I'm not sure what he intended to do. (And this was a commercial pilot and flight instructor!) Finally, I could take it no more. "If you'll just climb up a bit, I'm sure you'll find the airport," I said as calmly as I could with every ounce of self-control I could muster. The place was hidden by a treeline. Sure enough, from 500 feet, the whole airport was visible from miles and miles away.

2) With yet another pilot, on yet another new-owner ferry flight. Landing for fuel. FBO is way at the other end of the runway at an uncontrolled field. This genius descends to about half a rotor disk and flies down the runway, decellerating. Gets to more or less where he wants to come to a hover and, and guess what...it's too hot/high to hover! Oops! What to do! He pulled max power as the ship settled ungraciously onto the heels. Of course it rocks forward but I was ready for it and by this time was pushing on the cyclic and we slid even more ungraciously.

Now mind you, these were not freshly-rated PPL's, they were (supposedly) experienced pilots with advanced ratings. Did I let them both go too far? Yes. Hey, it wasn't *my* aircraft and I wasn't giving them any "official" instruction as neither needed nor had asked for any. I had told them what I wanted to see, but they both just had to do it "their way." Fine. Go kill yourself if you like! (Actually, one of them eventually did, doing something he'd been repeatedly warned against.) Just don't do it with me in the aircraft.

In his original post, TOT made some claims that I found "suspicious." It's not that I was calling him a liar - I just think his distance judgement might not have been accurate.

Shy Torque posted this bit of lunacy: Okay, I was being flippant, so sue me. If there is some wind, a 50 knot approach could very well be vertical. Shy, do you always fly in a windless world?

Thomas coupling asks: What type of approach is that, Thom? Steep? I certainly would not object. But where is the line drawn between "steep" and "unsafe"? Like most things in aviation, it's a judgement call. And of course it depends on the landing site, doesn't it? But I'll tell you what - if I saw one of my pilots flying so low on an approach to a runway that a farmer on property adjacent to the airport threw his cap at the ship, then I definitely would counsel my pilot! (By the way, I prefer "Ppruneface" as it more accurately describes my appearance.)

Here's another thing that helo pilots sometimes forget: We are allowed to maneuver. I've seen helo pilots fly low right over hangars and other airplanes to get to an on-airport LZ when they could have chosen a different and more clear path. This is part of our "job." Just the same when approaching a runway. You don't *have* to line-up on the extended centerline. In fact, if there are chicken coops out there, you *might* want to pick a different path! Oh but see, that takes staying ahead of the aircraft, something that so many of you seem to have problems doing.

This all gets slightly off-topic with respect to TOT's original post. But again, it gets to the philosophy of flying. Do you do stuff "just because?" Or do you actually think about your helicopter's position in space and time?

Crab, if you ever graduate from flying that little Robbo and get into a real job, you just might find yourself in a single-engine helicopter with a half-dozen other paying passengers on board, having to come to a 200-300 foot OGE hover as you approach to land on an oil platform. What will you do? ...Or you might find yourself in an EMS 206L circling above a scene at night where the LZ is a dark, clear spot surrounded by 100' trees. What WILL you do?? ...Or maybe, just maybe you will be on approach to an airport runway and the tower wants you to come straight-in to land at some spot near the field boundary, but there are buildings and cars and people and wires all along the street that borders the airport. WHAT WILL YOU DO?????

If I were as presumptuous as some of you lot, I'd suggest that crab's response would be "Uhh, Tower, unable. I'll have to circle around so that I can find a way of making a normal approach to that pad or I'll have to choose another airport."

Ok , thanks everybody for the various points of view, good, BAD and the ugly. I STILL maintain it was a normal approach. The one part of my original question hasn't been commented on, what if this had upset a fairly new student ?? Let me tell you a bit more about us two guys on board. I fly 20 different types of helis, from the smallest right through to heavy twins, my mate on board flies a HUGE of range of fixed wing , from J3 cubs right through to 747 400'S. Just one thing, I am still NOT convinced Prune Fan I is a chopper pilot., come on PF1, I was NOT flying a R22, what WAS I flying that day?? I have told you the VNE (75 Kts). IF you are an EXPERT then I challenge you to tell me!!! :ok: