Recent Helicopter Accidents

[d10]

During my time in the GOM working for PHI, I used to hear "scare stories" all the time from pilots who had IIMC encounters. These heroes always saved the day! by getting on the gauges and doing...something (not always the right thing)...that got them out of their predicament. And yes, they always told the tale in the "heroic first-person" tense. Now me, I used to listen to these sagas and think to myself, "What a douchebag! If he'd used better judgment he wouldn't have gotten into that situation in the first place."

 

I've worked with one of these guys too. He likes to talk about how he's recovered from IIMC not once, but twice (all before 1000 hours), and he brings it up as if to say he's an expert on dealing with it now. Obviously not, since he didn't learn anything the first time and it doesn't sound like he gets it after the second time either. The worst part about this attitude is it leads others to thinking it's perfectly acceptable to go IIMC, even something to be proud of. A good, professional pilot should be able to recover from it every time, but it's still an emergency that could have been avoided.

[Wally]

My thoughts and experience:

 

If you are IIMC, you will need time to transition to the IFR techniques, effective scan, etc., and minimal maneuvering facilitates that. You will lose control and crash if you aren't successful in this process. Period.

 

Initiating a climb is a change and will interfere with the process of getting on the gauges, but one is usually low and the extra work to establish a climb and transition to IFR is offset by reducing the risks you encounter flying blind and low and trying to transition to IFR.

 

That said, if one is paying attention, you will be aware of weather trends and potentials, so you should be planning alternatives, including changes of courses and altitudes. That's when the 180 enters the picture. If it looks bad ahead and I have no realistic plan to circumnavigate the weather; if I encounter "X or Y" conditions, I would consider the 180, turning back to the non-threatening weather I just flew through, a decision before I'm IIMC- an emergency.

 

I have rules of thumb that simplify my decision process-

I never fly lower than "X" reasonable and customary cruising altitude- Down is the wrong direction unless you're landing

I never fly slower than max power (I know that's illogical because I do plan efficient cruise)

I never fly into a place that I can't 180 out of

And I always have a place to land if I have to, and preferably, an alternate.

I will abort if I'm working too hard at any of the above, even if I seem to be

making way.

 

Low, slow, nowhere to go and working real hard, it's time to quit.

Edited October 25, 2012 by Wally

[Mikemv]

My thoughts and experience:

If you are IIMC, you will need time to transition to the IFR techniques, effective scan, etc., and minimal maneuvering facilitates that. You will lose control and crash if you aren't successful in this process. Period.

Initiating a climb is a change and will interfere with the process of getting on the gauges, but one is usually low and the extra work to establish a climb and transition to IFR is offset by reducing the risks you encounter flying blind and low and trying to transition to IFR.

That said, if one is paying attention, you will be aware of weather trends and potentials, so you should be planning alternatives, including changes of courses and altitudes. That's when the 180 enters the picture. It looks bad ahead, I have no realistic plan to circumnavigate the weather, if I encounter "X or Y", I would consider turning back to the weather I just flew through, BEFORE I'm IIMC.

I have rules of thumb that simplify my decision process-

I never fly lower than "X" reasonable cruising altitude.

I never fly slower than max power (I know that's illogical because I do plan efficient cruise).

I never fly into a place that I can't 180 out of.

And I always have a place to land if I have to, and preferably, an alternate.

I will abort if I'm working too hard at any of the above, even if I seem to be making way.

Low, slow, nowhere to go and working real hard, it's time to quit.

 

Wally, the Climb is the second "C". Control is the first "C" so you would have transitioned to the gauges already. If you experienced an unexpected white out from temp/dew point/moisture and you are in the low altitude obstacle laden environment the Climb may be warranted.

 

With that said, I TOTALLY agree with having personal standards/limits and not needing any "C"s!

 

"Avoidance, avoidance, avoidance"

 

Mike