Power Off Touchdown Autorotation

No offence or insult taken.
I am ambivalent about the subject because I can see both sides of the
argument and I haven't seen any quantitative evidence that one or the other
is statistically better.

I think the post down the list about the army's cyclical including and
excluding full touch-downs says a lot. If there was a clear answer based on
evidence we would all be doing it. Until then there is a lot of gut feeeling
in it and nothing much to hang a hat on - one way or the other.
Guess it's like most things with some "damned if you do damned if you don't"
in it.

Interesting - about your comment about a "super instructor". In Oz that is
how it is - in a way.
As I recall from my student days (in the 90s) - our more junior instructors
can teach the students, the CFI (In Oz that's Chief Flying Instructor- the
super instructor) has to have interaction with each student on a regular
basis and he's (or she's) the one who signs off that you're ready for the
flight test etc. So it would be easy enough here to ensure that - say if you
were training in an R22 - you did power recoveries with the grade 2
instructors then did full downs with the boss-man. or something along those
lines.
Don't know how you system works in USA

Well doesn't that add to what I said about a machine that isn't safe for
training?

Maybe. Certainly it is a harder machine to train in and probably does exceed
the skill limits of some student pilots. But if UH-1s can exceed the skills
of some pilots then there's no hope for Robbies :-)

At some point we have to be practical and say "this is what we got - now
lets make the work we have to do with it safe as possible". If it were
legislated that R22's couldn't be used for training I would guess the costs
would go up so lots of people would be forced out when they would otherwise
accept the risk.

"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote in
message ...

What I've been told over the past few months is full down autos are
not required for PPH, but will be required for the commercial ticket.
I think they (full downs) should be taught starting on day one. If
the noise behind me stops for some reason, I want to be able to walk
away from it. Seems to me if you can auto without balling up the
ship, your chances are pretty effing good you're going to unstrap and
walk away.

Right now, the consensus between us students is that we have the
skills to save our lives, but the helicopter will be a write off and
we'll probably end up in the hospital.

I've heard the same thing about PPH students. Are they "changing" the rules
for commercial pilots? If so, I think that's a good thing.

I agree that "full downs" should be taught from day one. I've never liked
the idea of my first full down auto being the one that's "for real!" I've
always kept an eye out for anything related to helicopters in the news and
I've seen, as I'm sure we all have, "many" news reports of helicopter
crashes through the years. The thing the worries me about modern training
is that, in the past 20 to 25 years, virtually all the autorotative landing
they've shown on TV have resulted in the loss of the aircraft. Most times,
the pilots/passengers walked away from it but the aircraft, as you say, was
a write off, and these were supposedly relatively high time commercial
pilots and not students or low time private pilots either. The "one" ship I
remember seeing that was still on the skids was an MD500 (don't remember the
exact model) and it was still missing the tail boom.

I guess my point is that, while I've heard all the rhetoric from helicopter
pilots about how they can put it down in someone's back yard if they have to
or only touch down at 5 to 10 mph with no problems, most of them don't seem
to be able to do it. Now, it's very likely that the news folks aren't
bothering to tell the stories of the helicopter pilot that safely landed his
aircraft after the engine failed. If it's not all bent up, it's not worth
reporting. Still, I can't help but get the impression that most folks could
use "a lot" more training in this area.

Fly Safe,
Steve R.

I know this is a contraversial subject but I had the experience to do
a full down auto in the R22. Maybe I was lucky because I did not
damage the heli and did not even slide on. It was a bit of a rough
landing but otherwise ok. I have a total of apprixmately 300 hours
heli time. Enstrom, Mini 500, R22 etc.
I was never taught to do a full down but Rocky might add some comments
to what I want to say.
I think you should FLY THE HELI UNTILL YOU ARE ON THE GROUND
Just remember even with the low rotor rpm horn sounding you still have
control.
In the R22 you have still got control at 80% rotor rpm but I do not think it
can be
streched any further.

I might have been lucky with mine but it is a lot easier to just land the
heli than to
do a power recovery.

Regards

Hennie

"Hennie Roets" wrote in message ...
I know this is a contraversial subject but I had the experience to do
a full down auto in the R22. Maybe I was lucky because I did not
damage the heli and did not even slide on. It was a bit of a rough
landing but otherwise ok. I have a total of apprixmately 300 hours
heli time. Enstrom, Mini 500, R22 etc.
I was never taught to do a full down but Rocky might add some comments
to what I want to say.
I think you should FLY THE HELI UNTILL YOU ARE ON THE GROUND
Just remember even with the low rotor rpm horn sounding you still have
control.
In the R22 you have still got control at 80% rotor rpm but I do not think it
can be
streched any further.

I might have been lucky with mine but it is a lot easier to just land the
heli than to
do a power recovery.

Regards

Hennie
*****************************
Hennie
One of the things that prompted my original post was recalling that at
most of the helicopter repair shops I have visited, you can nearly
always find a tail boom that was chopped off by a hard landing. I have
been puzzled by that for years and always asked how it happened. In
most cases it was the direct result of a flawed pilot technique in a
full down auto, either actual or practice. I could never figure out
why it happened so often and came to the conclusion it was from poor
pilot technique that came from poor training or just sloppy flying.
With all that I have done with different machines and without further
damage has me wondering. Don't misunderstand me...I'm not the ace of
the base by any means. Did I get lucky and get some superb instruction
(compared to today), or was it just luck? I did break a machine
(phyxed wing) back when I was a new pilot and had an engine failure at
night over the trees, and one while crop dusting. Never bent any
helicopters.
And you are right about flying it to the ground but I admonish all my
students to fly it until the dust settles !! gg Boer mak a plan
Hennie
Cheers
Rocky

I hope that full touchdown auto's would become a requirement for any
license. I know the insurance companies do not want to hear this, but
the training that comes out of it is what everyone should have.

I never did a full touchdown for any of my training, until I started
working at the current place I fly for. We do nothing but full
touchdown auto's (unless it doesn't look like it will work). I guess
that I have done several hundred or so now. If my engine quits, I know
what to expect all the way to the ground. There is a measured
difference on how the helicopter reacts during that last several feet.
And it is loads of fun to boot....


On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:04:25 -0800, The OTHER Kevin in San Diego
skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote:

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:26:01 GMT, "Steve R."
wrote:


I've heard the same thing about PPH students. Are they "changing" the rules
for commercial pilots? If so, I think that's a good thing.

Like I said, I'm not entirely sure. I'll need to poke around in the
AIM and the PTS books behind me and see what I can dig up. I'll also
be asking Q when I go fly tomorrow (Should be interesting since I've
not flown in over a week now)

I agree that "full downs" should be taught from day one. I've never liked
the idea of my first full down auto being the one that's "for real!" I've
always kept an eye out for anything related to helicopters in the news and
I've seen, as I'm sure we all have, "many" news reports of helicopter
crashes through the years. The thing the worries me about modern training
is that, in the past 20 to 25 years, virtually all the autorotative landing
they've shown on TV have resulted in the loss of the aircraft. Most times,
the pilots/passengers walked away from it but the aircraft, as you say, was
a write off, and these were supposedly relatively high time commercial
pilots and not students or low time private pilots either. The "one" ship I
remember seeing that was still on the skids was an MD500 (don't remember the
exact model) and it was still missing the tail boom.

The only full down autos I've see with no damage to craft or occupants
was on Discovery Wings and it was an instructional flight in a Gazelle
where the engine was literally shut down and the student had no other
option than a full down (He made it look SOOOOO easy)

I guess my point is that, while I've heard all the rhetoric from helicopter
pilots about how they can put it down in someone's back yard if they have to
or only touch down at 5 to 10 mph with no problems, most of them don't seem
to be able to do it. Now, it's very likely that the news folks aren't
bothering to tell the stories of the helicopter pilot that safely landed his
aircraft after the engine failed. If it's not all bent up, it's not worth
reporting. Still, I can't help but get the impression that most folks could
use "a lot" more training in this area.

I've got a magazine around here somewhere that had an article in it
about some advanced helo school in the Southwest (I want to say Las
Vegas) where all sorts of advanced maneuvers were taught. For autos,
students were required to hit a specific square in a grid painted on
the ground, regardless of the position of the ship when the throttle
was chopped. If you've got the skills to to that, THEN you can use
the "I can put it down in someone's back yard" rhetoric. I hope to be
that good some day. Right now, I'll settle for a balled up ship and
having to call someone to come pick me and the "carcass" up.

hellothere.adelphia.net wrote in message
...
I hope that full touchdown auto's would become a requirement for any
license. I know the insurance companies do not want to hear this, but
the training that comes out of it is what everyone should have.

If my engine quits, I know
what to expect all the way to the ground. There is a measured
difference on how the helicopter reacts during that last several feet.


And THAT is why it should be taught and insurance companies be damned!

Fly Safe,
Steve R.

Yeah I had it slightly wrong. Until the dust settles next time

Ha-ha

Hennie

And you are right about flying it to the ground but I admonish all my
students to fly it until the dust settles !! gg Boer mak a plan
Hennie
Cheers
Rocky

Many good observations here pro & con. My personal experience is that
when I obtained my helicopter license in 1981, all my autos to that
point were with power recovery. My first full touch down auto was a
180 full touch down auto after an engine failure at 500' agl. I landed
in a bean field & didn't put a nick the Bell 47G2 I was flying. I was
very fortuate that I was in a somewhat rural area. There was not much
to hit except for the ground. Everything happened so fast, I just
reacted. I had maybe 60 hours total at the time. I was far from a hot
stick, still am for that matter.

Given a choice, I'd do full touch down autos but not in my helicopter.
Ever price new skids? I'll pass on doing full touch downs in a R-22.
In fact, I'll pass on doing anything in a R-22.

"The OTHER Kevin in San Diego" skiddz "AT" adelphia "DOT" net wrote in
message ...
Back in the mid 90's when I did the fixed wing thing, I basically
forced my instructor to teach me spin recovery. I knew it wasn't
required, but at the time, I subscribed to several aviation related
magazines and was amazed at all the spin related incidents I'd read
about in almost every issue. Once I did a few, they were no big deal
to recognize and recover from. To tell the truth, they were pretty
damned fun!

I got taught spins when I was doing my PPL(A) after about five or six hours.
I was then told to stop grinning as I wasn't supposed to be enjoying them so
much!!

Si

Given a choice, I'd do full touch down autos but not in my helicopter.
Ever price new skids? I'll pass on doing full touch downs in a R-22.
In fact, I'll pass on doing anything in a R-22.

Biff I do not think you should write off the R22 that quick.

There are about 80% more new R22 sold than any other helicopter in the
world together. More of them are
used for training than any other heli. If you look at the hours flown
worldwide they fly the most as well.
I saw statistics a while ago on the internet about helicopter accidents in
Australia and do you know who came
out on top. Guess?????
It might not be the most rugged helicopter in the world. I also do not have
the highest inertia in the main
rotor blades but I can tell you if you can safely fly an R22 you will not
have problems with any of the others.


Regards

Hennie