Jump to content


Recommended Posts

Is my theory flawed?


STATEMENT: Reciprocating "engine-outs" can be avoided easier in a helicopter than in a fixed-wing.


THEORY: When we monitor instrument trends in a fixed wing and notice a problem (i.e. high temps, low pressure, chips, other warning lights, etc) we try to make it to an airport because "off airport" landings need more ideal conditions than a helicopter.


But when we notice troubling trends in a helicopter we can land almost anywhere to check it out.


Of course, this does not include sudden catastrophic failures -- but even most of those failures are preceded with warning signs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The theory is fine, in theory, and considering the long-term average. In reality, every malfunction is different, and it's just not possible to accurately predict what will happen. Don't underestimate the desire of helicopter pilots to get back to the base without making a precautionary landing either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ain't so sure. There can be ideal landing locations, and there can be crappy landing locations. It all depends where you are, what your options are, terrain, weather... Thus, the ideal landing location can become crappy, and the crappy location can become ideal. Fact is, you gotta work with what you got to the best of your ability.


When the engine quits, just remember the procedures and do your best.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...