Caco's trial helicopter flight.....

[Ex-Ascot]

Seems a bit odd. What is the difference in dumping it on land or water. What happens if you put it down on the beach and the tide comes in? Do you have to wait until it goes out again?

[Cacophonix]

Seems a bit odd. What is the difference in dumping it on land or water. What happens if you put it down on the beach and the tide comes in? Do you have to wait until it goes out again?

Having had the pleasure of landing a de Havilland Beaver a couple of times on the water in Cape Town I can vouch for the fact that judging landings, particularly on calm days and actually steering the aircraft and berthing, docking etc. is a skill that needs to be learned and polished in a fragile aircraft. I suspect the same pertains just as much to an amphibious float equipped helicopter that can land on water as well as land.

Caco

[Woody]

Now we know what Caco is upto

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business- ... -australia

[Woody]

Not sure if you are going to be at Headcorn this weekend Caco, but a BBMF Spitfire is due to overnight on Saturday.

[Cacophonix]

Not sure if you are going to be at Headcorn this weekend Caco, but a BBMF Spitfire is due to overnight on Saturday.

Cheers Woody I am of a mind to go down to Headcorn on the basis of your advice. Do you know what time the Spitfire is due at Headcorn?

Caco

[Woody]

It’s down as an overnight at Headcorn, so late afternoon I guess, probably update on the BBMF website

[Cacophonix]

It’s down as an overnight at Headcorn, so late afternoon I guess, probably update on the BBMF website

Will look out Woody. Cheers.

Caco

[Cacophonix]

In the interim I have been studying the Principles of Flight and aircraft systems and have been somewhat on nonplussed to see how many examples of R44 mistakes have been noted in South Africa, one occurring within the grounds of my alma mater back in 2011.

Accidently switched of the hydraulics...



Didn't look out, wire strike...




Ran out out of fuel over UCT





Fortunately nodbody was killed or seriously hurt in any of these accidents but a lot to think about here.


Caco

[Cacophonix]

In the interim I have been studying the Principles of Flight and aircraft systems and have been somewhat on nonplussed to see how many examples of R44 mistakes have been noted in South Africa...

Accidently switched of the hydraulics...

Caco

This is possibly one of the most embarrassing helicopter crashes ever. If the pilot is reading this – we apologise – but you can’t hide stuff like this for long.

The pilot of this particular craft was transporting three actors from a local TV show from one shoot location to the next, when things went belly up. After some initial hesitance, the helicopter takes off – only to do a loop and crash into the road just 15 metres from its initial starting point.

Apparently one of the actors had asked to turn back so that they could pick up a cameraman.

A man in the clip shouts something about the hydraulics failing. But the accident report revealed that the hydraulics were working perfectly fine. The authorities suspect that the pilot inadvertently flicked the hydraulic switch off when he meant to switch the speakers on.

cwqvc.jpg (23.76 KiB) Viewed 780 times

Caco

[CharlieOneSix]

Back in my Ferranti days I was the subject of a base check on a JetRanger at Biggin Hill. On one circuit the TRE switched off the hydraulics...or thought he did. It's a fairly innocuous failure on a JetRanger, all the controls go rather stiff and instead of a hover a slow running landing is recommended. On this particular model there were two identical 'up and over guarded' switches about 4 inches apart on the instrument panel. One was silver - the hydraulics switch and the other was red - the fuel on/off switch.

The TRE had switched off the fuel switch. I saw what he had done, shouted 'fuel switch' and went into autorotation. He instantly realised his mistake and switched the fuel back on. Luckily the engine kept going....

[Cacophonix]

Super day and a good flight and even managed to hover adequately for 3 minutes using all controls in quite a stiff breeze before flapping back and allowing what's left of my brain to explode. I flew the aircraft up to 6000 feet (the R44 climbs like the proverbial rocket compared to the R22) just west of Hastings and practised descents and and was even allowed to set the aircraft up in the circuit and descend to 50 feet on final before the instructor took over and positioned the helicopter for more hovering. Didn't do too badly given the gusty conditions. I am beginning to believe I can do this thing and he seems perfectly happy with my progress. Really enjoyed today's flight.

Headcorn is a super little airfield, bustling and full of people doing aviation stuff and making a living out of it. I approve entirely. Even the parachutist fraternity seem cool.

Aviation stuff.JPG (34.15 KiB) Viewed 726 times

Caco

[CharlieOneSix]

6000ft in a helicopter!!! Jeesh, you need oxygen and a parachute up there! Good on you though, Caco - sounds as though you're more relaxed. As an aside, I think I've mentioned somewhere here that during ab initio training in the RN we did one session in a Whirlwind up to 10000ft for effect of controls at altitude and in the ensuing autorotation I managed to miss the field my instructor had chosen for me. Too much time to think perhaps...

[Cacophonix]

6000ft in a helicopter!!! Jeesh, you need oxygen and a parachute up there! Good on you though, Caco - sounds as though you're more relaxed. As an aside, I think I've mentioned somewhere here that during ab initio training in the RN we did one session in a Whirlwind up to 10000ft for effect of controls at altitude and in the ensuing autorotation I managed to miss the field my instructor had chosen for me. Too much time to think perhaps...

C16 I have just looked at my log and realise it was 5000 feet (perhaps the hyperbole came from hypoxia) . Bumping against the TMA off the coast there at Hastings. I started to relax. I am assured that the R44 will take my bulk to +- 14,000 feet!

Yes, I have started to relax.

Talking of aurotrotation the basics will be taught at my next lesson. Thoroughly enjoying it.

Caco

[Cacophonix]

Let us count the ways you can wreck a helicopter engine....

Putting too heavy a boot full of right rudder pedal in while raising the collective in the hover and watching the engine RPM rise towards the red line!

Fortunately I have not done this but began to realise how easy it might be to screw up an engine and given the cost of piston engines (let alone turbines) what a bad mistake this would be to make after reading this report.

http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... 002-09.pdf

A polite question for the pro's here from a tyro, what stops you getting a +- £1000,000 bill for a repaired turbine (apart form your preternatural skill set). Do turbine engned helicopters have a rev. cut off to stop this kind of egregious mistake?

Caco

[Cacophonix]

Let us count the ways you can wreck a helicopter engine....

In pursuit of my own answers and jumping way ahead of where I actually am in my training I got to wondering about turbine conversions and was reading this quite useful article...

There are reasons for the basics, if you want to keep the rotors straight and on the top side. I always got frustrated when my students would throw the nose of the helicopter over on departure, and then yank in a bunch of collective to prevent a sink (poor piloting skills). Even in a piston helicopter, this often results in an over-torque, but no ones usually knows it because they don't know what torque limitation in a piston powered helicopter is, they only know about manifold pressure, but there you have it; "never use the collective to fix a cyclic error". Often even pilots who should know better develop bad habits over time, all too often pilots become bored and begin to fly sloppy.

c28.gif (48.42 KiB) Viewed 678 times

(In the photo, Rolls Royce 250 C28 engine) By the time you're ready to transition to turbine powered aircraft you should already be a good pilot and capable of maintaining altitude and heading. During this training, you need to focus on the turbine idiosyncrasies. The few hours you will spend in turbine transition need to be about the differences of flying these aircraft; basic flight training doesn't need to be a part of it. I expect that when a heading and/or altitude is assigned, at this level of flying; the pilot will be able to maintain it.

Turbine engines are less forgiving to pilot mistakes than a piston engine is, that's why most operators won't hire a pilot without at least some turbine experience. Remember that a hot section repair on these engines can easily cost $150,000 dollars and even much more. One screw up and the engine is toast.

Torque and temperature are critical with turbine helicopters. Some pilots get into bad habits of rapid shutdowns with piston engines and this bad habit will follow you and haunt you. In fact many habits that you develop as a student and as a pilot building time will be hard to break. It is far better to follow checklists and do it right habitually from the start. In the commercial world when you do something foolish to save time unnecessarily that could damage a valuable helicopter, it could cost you your job. There are people watching you who know!

From the beginning of training and forever, remember this: Never use more power, or fly riskier than is necessary for the operation at hand. By this I mean don't use 24 inches of manifold pressure to do what you could with 22 inches, or 100 percent torque where you could have used 80 percent etc. There is no benefit to aggressive flying when it is not necessary...

With the Robinson R66 now on the market, it will rapidly pass the Bell Jet Ranger as the primary turbine transition aircraft. That doesn't change the fact that the instructional methods should not incorporate methods particular to a single make of turbine aircraft when there are better methods that will aid a pilot in transitioning into any other aircraft. Most aspiring pilots will fly many makes and models so they should be taught ways that will better accommodate those transitions. For example, a pilot should not be taught only that aircraft start with modern electronic aids such as FADEC, when many do not. It is important that all pilots transitioning to turbines get their monies worth and understand those differences especially where it applies to other light helicopters that they are likely to be flying in the not-to-distant future like for example the Robinson R66, Bell Jet Ranger, Bell Long Ranger, Bell 407 and the AS 350; all of which have different, but similar starting procedures.

There are many videos on youtube showing pilots doing other things during the automated start never looking at the instruments, but if something goes wrong the resulting hot start will be their fault.

http://helicopterflight.net/turbine.php

Lots to think about and many ways to screw up or get it right here. Back to the piston engine R44 for the next 12 months now. Failure or screw up are not options!

Caco

[FD2]

Caco:

I think you will find a turbine machine a much easier thing to cope with than a piston one. FADEC protects you from over-speeding or over-temping the engine but not from over-torquing the transmission or over-pitching if the power is not available. Having manual control of the piston engine through the throttle grip on the collective is a really good foundation as it marries collective/cyclic/yaw and power and when you move on to more complicated machines you will find it much easier to handle -especially as a lot of the thinking is done for you by automated systems.

[Cacophonix]

Caco:

I think you will find a turbine machine a much easier thing to cope with than a piston one. FADEC protects you from over-speeding or over-temping the engine but not from over-torquing the transmission or over-pitching if the power is not available. Having manual control of the piston engine through the throttle grip on the collective is a really good foundation as it marries collective/cyclic/yaw and power and when you move on to more complicated machines you will find it much easier to handle -especially as a lot of the thinking is done for you by automated systems.

FD2

Many thanks for your answer. I take some comfort from the knowledge that in the future the FADEC will be there to help out in more complex aircraft.

I guess my questions are arising from my growing awareness of what is really going on in the piston engine aircraft and I am also learning to trust less in the R44's governor which can easily be over-ridden, inadvertently switched off, fail or hunt and which can, at certain stages, if mishandled, like start up and engine pre-flight checks, cause more problems than it solves, with potentially damaging consequences for the aircraft, and most likely caused by, over trusting and ham-fisted novices like me.

The R44's governor is inactive below 80% RPM (+- 17 inches manifold pressure at Headcorn which is near sea level) regardless of the governor switch position anyway and the governor's correlation with RPM becomes less precise above 4000 feet as I discovered the other day at 5000 feet. At high power at over 4000 feet it quickly became clear that the RPM needed to be controlled with the manual twist on the collective anyway.

My slightly over zealous right pedal (see previous post) while hovering also made me realise that the governor would not stop me over revving or over torqueing the engine either.

The other point noted by my instructor was that the governor can also mask carb icing as it compensates for RPM loss until it suddenly can't give any more power. As I am flying two models of R44, one fuel (or with me flying perhaps that should be fool) injected and the other one normally aspirated I am leaning to check for this scenario whatever the case.

Apparently flying in areas of high Electro Magnetic Interference, like next to a VOR or radio mast (like the one they used to have on final for Stapleford's runway 03) can cause erratic behaviour from the governor as well.

So much for automation!

Once again I appreciate the benefit of your experience and comments which are very helpful.

Caco

[FD2]

It certainly doesn't sound easy Caco but I'm sure it will get easier with more experience. Back in pre-historic times we went from Hiller UH12E to Whirlwind 7 and then straight from those fairly primitive machines to the Sea King Mk 1. Getting familiar with the aircraft systems was a mountain to climb but actually just flying it around was easier! The engines stayed at matched torques and the Nr stayed at 100%. There was even a heading hold which stayed engaged unless you put your feet on the pedal micro-switches. The only time you had to watch the Nr was in autorotation when it was possible to overspeed the head if not very careful. So don't despair, the future's FADEC. The Sea King Mk 1 (don't know about later versions) was also primitive compared to fully automated machines like the KLM S76B which would fly you down the ILS and up the runway at 50 ft (if you let it...) with great accuracy. I have a feeling that's old technology as well nowadays!

You'll get back from your early trips sweating and suffering from brain overload , rather like those first driving lessons, but it does get easier and it helps if you can take the early lessons as close together as possible if you can afford it. I'm sure I'm just repeating what CharlieOneSix has said in earlier posts but there's a second opinion for you!

[CharlieOneSix]

I agree with all that FD2 says. I've never experienced a true FADEC machine but I put this forward for consideration.

Our domestic iron has a fail safe where after a certain amount of time of remaining static it switches itself off to prevent any accidents. I continually try to get Mrs C16 to turn the power to the iron off if she is leaving it even for a few minutes but she tells me it's not a problem as the safety cut out will turn it off if she forgets - as she often does. Wrong attitude! It's the same with FADEC - it takes the protection out of the pilot's hands but at the end of the day FADEC can fail and the pilot must monitor everything and not rely on the almost infallible safety systems.

Re "Putting too heavy a boot full of right rudder pedal in while raising the collective in the hover and watching the engine RPM rise towards the red line", as it is an American design, on the R44 putting in left boot in the hover will result in even more power demand on the engine than putting in right boot. French and Russian machines are the opposite to Amercian and British helos due to the different direction of the main rotor, ie right boot results in more power demand.

[Boac]

One 'FADEC' story to frighten Caco - at CFS RAF Little Rissington, several years ago, a BAE Jetstream 201 was taxying quite happily when FADEC shut down both engines..............