Re: Pop out floats on a 206BIII

[Mike Th...]

We operate floats on all our Jetrangers and our 407. For a 206BIII, I think
the weight difference compared to high skids is about 75lbs. As for an
effect on airspeed I'm not so sure because I'm on the maintenance side of
the company. Yet I figure 5-10 knots. If you want some precise numbers I can
check for you on Tuesday.

mike

"Bart" > wrote in message
...
> Anybody know how much airspeed is really affected by popout floats on a
> Jet Ranger, and what the weight of them is?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Bart
>

[Rhodesst]

>We operate floats on all our Jetrangers and our 407. For a 206BIII, I think
>the weight difference compared to high skids is about 75lbs. As for an
>effect on airspeed I'm not so sure because I'm on the maintenance side of
>the company. Yet I figure 5-10 knots. If you want some precise numbers I can
>check for you on Tuesday.
>
>mike

Question: I've heard these will float the helicopter, just not necessarily
right side up! :-o

How stable is the helicopter while it's sitting in the water on these floats?
Obviously, rough seas will pretty much doom the aircraft but will it be
reasonably stable on calm water?

Just curious,
Fly Safe,
Steve R.

[Bart]

The floats are supposed to keep the machine upright in seas up to 2
feet. According to what I've heard they may or may not keep the machine
afloat for very long. The important thing is that they allow a much less
scary and more orderly egress compared to the murky, oxygen deprived,
upside down one you're assured to have without them.

Bart

Rhodesst wrote:
>>We operate floats on all our Jetrangers and our 407. For a 206BIII, I think
>>the weight difference compared to high skids is about 75lbs. As for an
>>effect on airspeed I'm not so sure because I'm on the maintenance side of
>>the company. Yet I figure 5-10 knots. If you want some precise numbers I can
>>check for you on Tuesday.
>>
>>mike
>
>
> Question: I've heard these will float the helicopter, just not necessarily
> right side up! :-o
>
> How stable is the helicopter while it's sitting in the water on these floats?
> Obviously, rough seas will pretty much doom the aircraft but will it be
> reasonably stable on calm water?
>
> Just curious,
> Fly Safe,
> Steve R.

[Stan Gosnell]

(Rhodesst) wrote in
:

> How stable is the helicopter while it's sitting in the water on these
> floats? Obviously, rough seas will pretty much doom the aircraft but
> will it be reasonably stable on calm water?

On calm water, they'll usually keep it up. The problem is that the CG is
very high, & the helicopter will roll upside down very easily, especially
if the wind & seas get up. Trying to tow the the helicopter will almost
always result in it turning turtle & tearing itself apart.

The floats do slow it down, especially the modern 6-pack floats. The older
pan floats didn't slow it down very much, but in a BIII 100 kts is about
all you can expect with floats, especially with a load. Light, you might
get 110, but then again you might not. I used to plan on 100 & that was
usually pretty accurate.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Mike Th...]

Yes, the cruise on our machine is about 100 knots.
I have some pictures of a 206 ditched in San Francisco and the floats held
it upright. let me know if you'd like to see them.

mike

"Stan Gosnell" > wrote in message
...
> (Rhodesst) wrote in
> :
>
> > How stable is the helicopter while it's sitting in the water on these
> > floats? Obviously, rough seas will pretty much doom the aircraft but
> > will it be reasonably stable on calm water?
>
> On calm water, they'll usually keep it up. The problem is that the CG is
> very high, & the helicopter will roll upside down very easily, especially
> if the wind & seas get up. Trying to tow the the helicopter will almost
> always result in it turning turtle & tearing itself apart.
>
> The floats do slow it down, especially the modern 6-pack floats. The
older
> pan floats didn't slow it down very much, but in a BIII 100 kts is about
> all you can expect with floats, especially with a load. Light, you might
> get 110, but then again you might not. I used to plan on 100 & that was
> usually pretty accurate.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Stan
>

[Rhodesst]

>Yes, the cruise on our machine is about 100 knots.
>I have some pictures of a 206 ditched in San Francisco and the floats held
>it upright. let me know if you'd like to see them.
>
> mike

Hi Mike,

I'd be interested in see the pictures if you don't mind sending them.

Thanks!
Steve R.

[Steve Waltner]

In article >, Rhodesst
> wrote:

> >Yes, the cruise on our machine is about 100 knots.
> >I have some pictures of a 206 ditched in San Francisco and the floats held
> >it upright. let me know if you'd like to see them.
> >
> > mike
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> I'd be interested in see the pictures if you don't mind sending them.
>
> Thanks!
> Steve R.

This might be the one Mike was referring to... In January 2003, a
heilcopter on a tour in San Francisco was forced to ditch into the bay.
Jeremiah Cohick, who was one of the passengers in the helicopter, is
one of the people that was featured in Apple Computer's Switch
campaign. The first link has a few wide-angle pictures of the
helicopter sitting in the bay, and the second is Jeremiah's account of
what happened. There used to be some much better pictures on the web,
but I can't find them right now.

http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/01/14.7.shtml
http://www.jeremiahlee.com/life/2003-Jan.html
Scroll down to 1/10/2003

Steve

[Rhodesst]

>This might be the one Mike was referring to... In January 2003, a
>heilcopter on a tour in San Francisco was forced to ditch into the bay.
>Jeremiah Cohick, who was one of the passengers in the helicopter, is
>one of the people that was featured in Apple Computer's Switch
>campaign. The first link has a few wide-angle pictures of the
>helicopter sitting in the bay, and the second is Jeremiah's account of
>what happened. There used to be some much better pictures on the web,
>but I can't find them right now.
>
>http://www.macobserver.com/article/2003/01/14.7.shtml
>
>
>Steve

Mike was kind enought we send me a couple of jpegs from the story in the link
above. Thanks, Mike!

The helicopter sits much lower in the water, relative to the floats, than I
would have thought. While the water conditions aren't that rough compared to
what San Fransisco Bay is capable of, there is some wave action and the Jet
Ranger looks like it's sitting there just fine.

I noted the reporter writing the article refered to the incident as a "crash."
All I can say is, if that's a crash, then any landing a helicopter makes also
qualifies as a crash. Looks to me like the pilot did a first class job
handling the emergency.

The "vast" majority of emergency autorotations (I'm assuming that's what this
was?) that I've seen on the news over the past 20 years ended in a roll over,
seperation of the tail boom, or some other significant damage to the aircraft
whether there were any injuries or not. This Jet Ranger looks to be completely
intact. Cudo's to the pilot!

Fly Safe,
Steve R.

[Stan Gosnell]

(Rhodesst) wrote in
:

> The helicopter sits much lower in the water, relative to the floats,
> than I would have thought. While the water conditions aren't that
> rough compared to what San Fransisco Bay is capable of, there is some
> wave action and the Jet Ranger looks like it's sitting there just
> fine.

The floats are on top of the skids, & inflate up to the doors, so it sits
lower than it does on the ground. This is essential, since the CG is still
pretty high, & the helicopter is rather unstable in the water. It rolls
fairly easily.

> The "vast" majority of emergency autorotations (I'm assuming that's
> what this was?) that I've seen on the news over the past 20 years
> ended in a roll over, seperation of the tail boom, or some other
> significant damage to the aircraft whether there were any injuries or
> not. This Jet Ranger looks to be completely intact. Cudo's to the
> pilot!

Soft autos to the water are easier than to the ground. Properly done,
during an auto to the water it's difficult to feel when you touch down.
There may be a big splash, but you don't feel the impact that much, because
the floats absorb the impact more slowly, and the water parts as you go in.
I've done innumerable practice autos to the water on fixed floats, & it's a
lot of fun, much easier to do than on skids on concrete. If the seas are
up, though, you'd better get out, because the thing will turn turtle in a
heartbeat. We've had lots of cases of engine failure in which the pilot
put the helicopter in the water with no damage at all, but the helicopter
was almost destroyed during the salvage attempt.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Bernie the Bunion]

Interesting thread.

I've got a few helicopter pics showing the machines on these pop out
floats and wondered a few times what would happend if they were needed.

My curious question is how come operators don't use the old permanent
floats. You know, the ones that looked like cigar tubes, nice and
plump, etc.

I presume it would have to do with performance, speed, etc.

Would those types of floats be safer compared to the pop outs or
would still be iffy on roughish water.

[Stan Gosnell]

Bernie the Bunion > wrote in
:

> Interesting thread.
>
> I've got a few helicopter pics showing the machines on these pop out
> floats and wondered a few times what would happend if they were needed.
>
> My curious question is how come operators don't use the old permanent
> floats. You know, the ones that looked like cigar tubes, nice and
> plump, etc.
>
> I presume it would have to do with performance, speed, etc.
>
> Would those types of floats be safer compared to the pop outs or
> would still be iffy on roughish water.
>

They have been used, but they're unstable on land, you can't autorotate
successfully to land with them, they slow the helicopter down dramatically,
and you have to carry a hand pump around & pump for a long time when they
lose air (and they lose air regularly). Plus they mount rather low, and
the CG is higher than with popouts, so they'll roll on you even though
they're usually mounted further outboard than the regular skids. PHI has
one, for use in training, but they just aren't practical for everyday use
offshore.

--
Regards,

Stan

[Bernie the Bunion]

> Stan Gosnell > wrote:

> They have been used, but they're unstable on land, you can't autorotate
> successfully to land with them, they slow the helicopter down dramatically,
> and you have to carry a hand pump around & pump for a long time when they
> lose air (and they lose air regularly). Plus they mount rather low, and
> the CG is higher than with popouts, so they'll roll on you even though
> they're usually mounted further outboard than the regular skids. PHI has
> one, for use in training, but they just aren't practical for everyday use
> offshore.

Thanks Stan...... I never knew they had so many bad things going
for them.

I can imagine that fixing a slow leak in the field ( so to speak ) and
then having to pump it up by hand would be a little tedious.

[Stan Gosnell]

Bernie the Bunion > wrote in
:

> Thanks Stan...... I never knew they had so many bad things going
> for them.
>
> I can imagine that fixing a slow leak in the field ( so to speak ) and
> then having to pump it up by hand would be a little tedious.
>
That's why A&P's were invented. However, they aren't always available and
if they are, they can often be surly about doing actual physical labor.

--
Regards,

Stan

P.S. That's a joke. I wouldn't want to insult anyone of that religious
persuasion. Some of my best friends are A&P's............

[Micbloo]

>This might be the one Mike was referring to... In January 2003, a
>heilcopter on a tour in San Francisco was forced to ditch into the bay.

I just returned from a trip to California and spent 3 days in SF. Who flies
the LongRanger and 407 that does the tours of the Bay area? I see they have a
pad in Sausolito off 101. Back in 84 when I was last there they had a pad on
Fishermans Wharf that was used for the tours but if I recall the "powers-to-be"
tossed them out of there.
BTW, these guys fly in some very dramatic changing weather. One afternoon I
saw the 407 flying UNDER the Golden Gate Bridge into the Bay because the
ceiling had obscured the top of the bridge.
It could be sunny in SF and foggy/low clouds to the north or east. That has to
keep a pilot on his toes for sure.

Gerard

[Walter Hawn]

Fixed floats are always in the way when you enter and exit the aircraft.
Serious loss of cruise speed. Memory is 90 kts IAS vs 100, 105 on six-pack.
Reduce max gross, 3000 vs 3200 for B3.
Exaggerate pitch and especially roll when you're on boat, rig, or any
surface with motion. Especially boats.
Wally

[JIM105]

Gerard/micbloo said

>I just returned from a trip to California and spent 3 days in SF. Who flies
>the LongRanger and 407 that does the tours of the Bay area? I see they have
>a
>pad in Sausolito off 101. Back in 84 when I was last there they had a pad on
>Fishermans Wharf that was used for the tours but if I recall the
>"powers-to-be"
>tossed them out of there.
>BTW, these guys fly in some very dramatic changing weather. One afternoon I
>saw the 407 flying UNDER the Golden Gate Bridge into the Bay because the
>ceiling had obscured the top of the bridge.
>It could be sunny in SF and foggy/low clouds to the north or east. That has
>to
>keep a pilot on his toes for sure.
>

That would be S.F. Helicopter Tours. Thread a while back about the
ditching/auto/landing just outside the Gate. They have the Sausolito
concession now but have limited times for operation there.

The old company that operated out of both Saus. and Fisherman's Wharf was
Commodore helicopters. Talk about a money making machine! 3 minute rides for
$20.00 (or something like that...it's been many years ago!) Cash only for the
main portion of the company's existence. The trips under the bridge would be
charged as extra tip money right into the pilots coffee cup!

As far as weather around the Bay, yes it can be extremely sunny in the East Bay
and Low IFR around the Penninsula. You get good about micro-meteorology around
here.

Glad to hear you had a good trip out here. For all the foolishness of CA. it
truly is a beautiful place.

Jim

[Micbloo]

>Glad to hear you had a good trip out here. For all the foolishness of CA. it
>truly is a beautiful place.

We had a wonderful time starting in Encino (LA) in the Valley where we stayed
with friends then the drive up US1 which was absolutely breathtaking AND scary
at the same time, then three nights in SF.
I was impressed witn the beauty of the state like I never was the last two
times I was there (84, 93). The views of the San Fernando Valley as we drove
from Santa Monica back to Encino through Topanga Canyon. The incredible drive
up US1 to SF. The beauty of the redwoods in Muir Valley. Just so so nice.
Oh and helicopters also. LOL. In LA they're all over especially the PDs and
FD.
In SF with the exception of the sightseeing ships I did see a dark colored
S-55(58?) come flying over the Wharf and two CG Dophins flew over low one
afternoon.
Then in Oakland while dropping the car off at the rental agency I saw three
ships at Sierra and what looked like a dark colored A109 came in to land. My
kids cued me in on that but I was driving at the time and my wife "Gently"
advised me to keep my eyes on the road and not the sky. And as our plane (Jet
Blue RULES) taxied out from the terminal I saw Oakland PDs three copters parked
adjacent to the taxiway.
Yes, it really is a beautiful state.
And thanks for the other info.

Gerard

[Guy Alcala]

Micbloo wrote:

> >Glad to hear you had a good trip out here. For all the foolishness of CA. it
> >truly is a beautiful place.
>
> We had a wonderful time starting in Encino (LA) in the Valley where we stayed
> with friends then the drive up US1 which was absolutely breathtaking AND scary
> at the same time, then three nights in SF.
> I was impressed witn the beauty of the state like I never was the last two
> times I was there (84, 93). The views of the San Fernando Valley as we drove
> from Santa Monica back to Encino through Topanga Canyon. The incredible drive
> up US1 to SF. The beauty of the redwoods in Muir Valley. Just so so nice.
> Oh and helicopters also. LOL. In LA they're all over especially the PDs and
> FD.
> In SF with the exception of the sightseeing ships I did see a dark colored
> S-55(58?) come flying over the Wharf and two CG Dophins flew over low one
> afternoon.

I wonder if that was Friday. I was enjoying a more sedate mode of transport that
day, taking a cruise on the Liberty Ship S.S. Jeremiah O'Brien from Pier 45 up the
bay and through the delta to Sacramento. One of the Dauphins made a few passes
over/around us as we passed by Point San Pablo or maybe Point Pinole. Then, an
hour or two before we got into the Port of Sacramento, a couple of news copters
from Sacramento stations came out to get some video; one was (I'm guessing) an
AStar, the orther a Jet Ranger. While the first was hovering off to the side, a
Coast Guard HC-130 made a fairly low pass overhead from stern to bow, which must
have looked good on the video. I don't know how the helos appreciated being
constantly tracked and "shot down" by the 3"/50 gun mounted at the bow and manned
by some enthusiastic high-school kids (I'd already had my fun tracking C-5s going
into Travis AFB).

> Then in Oakland while dropping the car off at the rental agency I saw three
> ships at Sierra and what looked like a dark colored A109 came in to land. My
> kids cued me in on that but I was driving at the time and my wife "Gently"
> advised me to keep my eyes on the road and not the sky. And as our plane (Jet
> Blue RULES) taxied out from the terminal I saw Oakland PDs three copters parked
> adjacent to the taxiway.
> Yes, it really is a beautiful state.

Since you've tried Highway 1, next time you might want to try and drive up (or
down) the east side of the Sierra on US 395, then go over Tioga Pass (Hwy. 120)
through Yosemite, or else continue up to Tahoe. Death Valley's great in the late
fall/winter/early spring too. And then there's Mount Shasta up north on I-5, and
the Shakespeare Festival in Ashland just across the Oregon border.

As Mark Twain said, the coldest winter he ever experienced was a summer he spent in
San Francisco. I've lived in the East Bay west of the hills all my life, but I
must have San Francisco genes in me (my mom was a native) because I can walk around
in shorts and no shirt while it's snowing. Summer gives the weathermen in the Bay
Area a vacation, because they can almost always just repeat the previous day's:
night and morning fog along the coast, clearing inland by midday. The further east
you are, the earlier it clears; it may never do so if you're on the peninsula, and
if you're east of the Oakland-Berkeley hills you never get the fog at all; just
lots of heat and smog. The nice thing about California and especially the Bay Area
are the numerous micro-climates; as the saying goes, if you don't like the weather,
just move five miles and you'll be in an entirely different climate zone.



Guy

P.S. Ah, but the beautiful winter days immediately after a storm, that's when I
really like the City. So, try and come back a little sooner.

P. P.S. BTW, given your interests were you able to get to the Hiller museum?

[Micbloo]

>I wonder if that was Friday. I was enjoying a more sedate mode of transport
>that
>day, taking a cruise on the Liberty Ship S.S. Jeremiah O'Brien from Pier 45
>up the
>bay

Actually it was Thursday but I do remember seeing the cruise ship out in the
Bay as we headed back to SF. I wondered
where it was going.

>
>Since you've tried Highway 1, next time....<
Yes. If we had a few more days. I was reading about Yosemite, etc.

>P. P.S. BTW, given your interests were you able to get to the Hiller
museum?
No. I wasnt aware it was nearby.

Gerard

[Guy Alcala]

Micbloo wrote:

> >I wonder if that was Friday. I was enjoying a more sedate mode of transport
> >that
> >day, taking a cruise on the Liberty Ship S.S. Jeremiah O'Brien from Pier 45
> >up the
> >bay
>
> Actually it was Thursday but I do remember seeing the cruise ship out in the
> Bay as we headed back to SF. I wondered
> where it was going.

H'mm, there was a real 'cruise ship' heading out of the bay while we were passing
Alcatraz, but that was a modern slab-sided thing that looked like an apartment
building that floats. The O'Brien, OTOH, is one of only two WW2-built Liberty
ships left (it turned 60 this year), and AFAIK the only one that still is mobile,
and looks like your typical navy-gray cargo steamer from that era (plus the
guns).

> >Since you've tried Highway 1, next time....<
> Yes. If we had a few more days. I was reading about Yosemite, etc.

Just so you know for next time, typically 3.5-4 hours or so from the Bay Area to
Yosemite Valley, depending on traffic, if you go in via Hwy. 120. The tourists
(read lots of motor homes) typically take Hwy. 140. Getting to Tuolomne
Meadows/Tioga Pass is another .5-1.0 hour. Personally, I won't go into the
Valley from Memorial Day through Labor Day owing to the crowds, smog and traffic,
but hang out in the high country. Still, if you're pushed for time and just have
to do the '5 sites in 3 days' bit . . . But IMO the best time to see the valley
is Spring (the waterfalls are at their peak, and the flowers are out) or fall
(nice color, albeit nothing near New England), and winter's nice too.

> >P. P.S. BTW, given your interests were you able to get to the Hiller
> museum?
> No. I wasnt aware it was nearby.

Right down the peninsula from San Francisco, at the San Carlos Airport. FYI:

http://www.hiller.org/

Guy

[Micbloo]

>H'mm, there was a real 'cruise ship' heading out of the bay while we were
>passing
>Alcatraz, but that was a modern slab-sided thing that looked like an
>apartment
>building that floats.

Yeah, that was the one I saw. BTW, can you go all the way up to Sacramento
by water? I was checking my AAA atlas last night and didnt realize how close
Sacramento was to SF.

>Just so you know for next time,<

Thanks for the info.

>Right down the peninsula from San Francisco, at the San Carlos Airport.
FYI:

Wow, didnt realize how close it was.

Gerard

[Guy Alcala]

Micbloo wrote:

> >H'mm, there was a real 'cruise ship' heading out of the bay while we were
> >passing
> >Alcatraz, but that was a modern slab-sided thing that looked like an
> >apartment
> >building that floats.
>
> Yeah, that was the one I saw. BTW, can you go all the way up to Sacramento
> by water?

Yes, or to Stockton. There are deep water channels to both. There's a deep water
cut channel to Sacramento, west of the Sacramento River north of Rio Vista; ships
can take the San Joaquin River itself all the way to Stockton; the two rivers
split at Antioch. Sacramento loads a lot of rice in the port, while Stockton used
to have the Navy Ammo station at Rough and Ready Island, so both routes can take
fairly large ships.

> I was checking my AAA atlas last night and didnt realize how close
> Sacramento was to SF.

If you'd just come into state a bit earlier and stuck around a bit longer, you too
could have run for governor;-) It takes about an hour/hour and a half from the
East Bay/SF to Sacramento by car, via I-80. We took about 10 hours by ship, but
that's at a max. of 8.5 knots or so, with some dawdling waiting for the tugs to
bring some press types out to us who had to climb aboard by rope ladder, and then
swing us around in the turning basin for docking (we entered the Port with our
dock to our port, but our gangways were on the starboard side, so they spun us
around and we backed alongside the dock).

And now, I think my off-topic posts have been patiently indulged by the other NG
readers long enough, so I'd better quit.

Guy

[Micbloo]

>> Yeah, that was the one I saw. BTW, can you go all the way up to
>Sacramento
>> by water?
>
>Yes, or to Stockton.

Cool. Thanks.

>If you'd just come into state a bit earlier and stuck around a bit longer,
>you too
>could have run for governor;-)

LOL. Yeah, that did seem to be the major story while i was there. Beats a
blackout we had here.

>And now, I think my off-topic posts have been patiently indulged by the
other
>NG
>readers long enough, so I'd better quit.

Yeah. But at least we weasled in some helicopter material. Thanks again for
all the info.

Gerard

[Mikko Pietilä]

On 02 Sep 2003 15:51:22 GMT, Stan Gosnell >
wrote:

>"Walter Hawn" > wrote in
:
>
>> Fixed floats are always in the way when you enter and exit the
>> aircraft. Serious loss of cruise speed. Memory is 90 kts IAS vs 100,
>> 105 on six-pack. Reduce max gross, 3000 vs 3200 for B3.
>> Exaggerate pitch and especially roll when you're on boat, rig, or any
>> surface with motion. Especially boats.
>> Wally
>
>Or wind. Sit on a pitching barge with about 30 kts of wind with fixed
>floats, & you're just about out of control because it pitches so far. It
>gets bad on a fixed surface with the wind. Add motion from the surface,
>and you often can't crank or shut down.

There are also some problems with everyday maintenance operations.
When moving the aircraft on ground, in and out of hangar etc., it is
very easy to puncture them (This is from personal experience during my
national service years ago. Fortunately it was quite easy to patch
them too. Like patching a bicycle tire.)

Also during winter time they needed adjustment of pressure every time
when moved outside from hangar or back in to prevent sagging when
cooling down to outside temperature or bursting when brought back
inside.

Mikko