How to Set Up an Approach

[Spike]

With a R22, set the collective approximately 14” MP (give or take an inch) level attitude at 10 degree approach angle (trim string). The machine will almost fly itself to the spot……. Don’t over-analyze..

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

With a R22, set the collective approximately 14” MP (give or take an inch) level attitude at 10 degree approach angle (trim string). The machine will almost fly itself to the spot……. Don’t over-analyze..

 

Less is more, point taken.

 

I went a bit overboard on this one [and probably my last few threads...], and complicated it to the point where the original meaning & intention has been lost.

[helipilotm]

I wasn't going to say anything, I changed my mind.

There is no way you can do a "normal" approach using the cyclic to control decent period! Can it be done?!? You bet it would be a airplane style approach with a ton of A/S. Like spike said in a

R-22 set your power it will pretty much fly to the spot. You are trying to way over complicate the most basic maneuver a pilot can do.

 

We're still waiting to hear this "high bar" flight school....

 

Your no response to that question says one of two things.

1. Your just stirring the pot

2. You won't name the school because your not following their teaching standards

[Mikemv]

H_G_P,

 

Peace.....

 

Many here know me and that I mentor many pilots through FAASTeam programs, IHST Safety committee & training work group initiatives, HAI FIRCs & RSC classes, on site Seminars, text and e-mail communications, etc.

 

Go to my web site www.modernflighttraining.com to learn more about me.

 

E-mail me and I will try to communicate with you so I can understand your perspective on flying.

 

I am available to visit your flight school and educate & standardize your CFIs, implement SMS, etc.

 

I am passionate about working within the brother/sisterhood of helicopter pilots & operators to reduce accidents and CFIs are the first line of application to accomplish this.

 

So no "Blazing Guns" but an olive branch and offer of assistance.

 

I can help promote your school and have revenue generating Safety & Educational programs.

 

Sincerely,

 

Mike

[SBuzzkill]

I wasn't going to say anything, I changed my mind.

There is no way you can do a "normal" approach using the cyclic to control decent period! Can it be done?!? You bet it would be a airplane style approach with a ton of A/S. Like spike said in a

R-22 set your power it will pretty much fly to the spot. You are trying to way over complicate the most basic maneuver a pilot can do.

 

We're still waiting to hear this "high bar" flight school....

 

Your no response to that question says one of two things.

1. Your just stirring the pot

2. You won't name the school because your not following their teaching standards

 

It can also be done at a slower speed by setting hover IGE power and manipulating air speed to control your descent. Flirting with ETL.

Edited April 25, 2013 by SBuzzkill

[MileHi480B]

One good thing about this thread ... at least we're discussing flying issues instead of WOFT, networking, starting a career, etc.

[Wally]

Actually, approaches are simple. Simple isn't necessarily easy, try free-handing a straight line in any non-digital media. A straight line is as simple as there is...

 

You can't control angle on a normal approach with cyclic. At initiation you're on the positive side of the speed/power graph (decels are up) and the approach ends on the other side (decels are down). The principles that remain constant are yaw, power controls are used to affect descent rate, and cyclic controls speed- and closure. Pitch/power glideslope adjustments, dive bombing to point aside- Up & down are power, speed is pitch attitude.

The book says, my recollection, that you maintain initial airspeed until apparent rate of closure increases, then you decel and maintain a progressive deceleration until you reach a "brisk walk" (maximum) at or about loss of etl, and then progressively, imperceptibly (if possible) decel until you're motionless at the hover, or stationary at ground contact. The whole process should be seamless.

If you teach that, it's a book answer and the technique always works, and then your student can fly it in demonstration (check ride) and you start teaching the whys of doing it that way and refining technique to fit variables On some occasions a properly flown approach might lose ETL at other than 25-40' AGL, but it's not necessarily a failed procedure. Steep approaches, for instance, fly at translational down to 40' and you're in trouble, but "power is rate of descent and pitch attitude is speed", even on the back side of the power curve.

That technique also builds awareness that a flare at the bottom is most definitely not acceptable, which leads to developing positive power control. In the real world, those are your most common hazards- sticking your tail into something in the flare and falling through the hover for late or inadequate power.

[Rick20]

On an instrument approach you make your glide slope adjustments with the collective and airspeed should be constant.

Only for non-precision, if you're shooting an ILS your A/S doesn't mean anything. But for the topic at hand, collective controls the angle of descent. If he's using the cyclic, he's coming in hot!

Edited May 25, 2013 by Rick20

[Gomer Pylot]

if you're shooting an ILS your A/S doesn't mean anything

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Could you elaborate?

[Eric Hunt]

There some basic misconceptions being propagated here.

 

Attitude is airspeed

Power is rate of descent.

 

In a plane, you can use attitude for aim point and power for speed, but don't do that in a chopper.

 

From a "gate" position, about 300'agl and 60kt, with your aim point about half-way between the horizon and the top of the instrument panel, select the hover attitude - airspeed will slowly bleed back.

Use power to control ROD, and observe that the groundspeed looks like a walking pace over your toes.

Hold your aim point steady in the window - this ensures you will go direct to that spot. If it moves up the window (under-arc), bring power up to get back to steady. If it moves down (over-arc), take power down.

 

positive forward movement, controlled ROD.

 

As you approach 30kt, be ready for the power demand from the increased drag, and hold the glideslope.

 

Approaching 15kt, expect the loss of translational lift, be ready with more power.

 

Still got apparent walking pace over your toes. Stay straight.

 

Carry the skids to the aim point, and it is just a gentle raise of the attitude to stop the walking pace.

 

Piece of cake.

[pilot#476398]

Use power to control ROD, and observe that the groundspeed looks like a walking pace over your toes.

 

I never really thought about this before, but a "walking" pace can be very subjective. I remember once while at Magic Mountain with an old friend of mine. Walking around together he was complaining that he kept having to slow down because my walking pace (a mild shlep) was a lot slower than his (which I would call a power walking pace, but he considered normal).

 

Needless to say, if he were a pilot, his "walking pace" approach would be a lot faster than mine!

[JDHelicopterPilot]

That is one technique, and an acceptable one. But adjusting airspeed is also a practice that is used. There are advantages and disadvantages to both.

Adjusting airspeed to maintain glide slope is not acceptable nor the standard that is taught. To maintain a stable IFR approach on an ILS one should keep a constant airspeed on final approach (FAF inbound), and maintain glide slope by using the collective. This is also true when using the autopilot. A similar method is used on non-precision approaches. That is, using the collective for step downs and not increase airspeed. If you have flown IMC you will appreciate a nice stable approach using this method.

 

This is how it is taught by CFIIs, expected by DPEs and how my company expects me to fly an instrument approach. A pilot using airspeed to hold a glide path won't last long in flying IFR for a Part 135 company.

 

A review of how the H/V is created, when it applies and how it can be best used has been covered on this forum before. I might try searching for it and bring it back. This is often a sticky point for a lot of CFIs who don't understand the H/V chart in depth. If you want some really good information send a message to iChris or mikemv. I could explain it but they have a lot of references they could show you and I am sure they would be more than willing to help.

 

Keep it simple, it is best to teach angle with collective and closure with cyclic.

Edited May 25, 2013 by JDHelicopterPilot

[Guest pokey]

In fixed wing i was always taught to fly the approach at best glide speed for the airplane & pitch controls airspeed, and throttle controls altitude, seems pretty easy and straightforward.

 

In helicopter i was taught to fly approach at autorotation speed, and contol direction and airspeed with cyclic & my descent rate/altitude with collective, seems pretty similar to the fixed wing.

 

one exception to all of this is if you are flying a Fokker & the tower tells you that there is a heavy jet on your tail and to keep up your speed. Your most likely reply will be "i got this little Fokker going as fast as i can"

[ridethisbike]

 

In helicopter i was taught to fly approach at autorotation speed, and contol direction and airspeed with cyclic & my descent rate/altitude with collective, seems pretty similar to the fixed wing.

 

65 kts is what the POH calls for in autorotation in a 22. You mean to tell me you would fly 65 kts all the way to the ground?

[SBuzzkill]

Instrument approach.

Edited May 25, 2013 by SBuzzkill

[Gomer Pylot]

The technique for flying an ILS that I was taught, and that the checkpilots I've flown with expected, is to set power for an airspeed, and to stay on the glideslope using pitch attitude. This is only permissible within a rather narrow range, though. The usual parameters were +/- 10 knots, so if you have to change the airspeed by more than 10 knots, you change power. Futzing with the collective on an ILS causes all sorts of problems, and usually gives unsatisfactory results, but you have to make the aircraft do what you want it to, whatever control inputs that takes. Airspeed is important, and you have to keep it above Vmin until you're in VMC, and if you're reducing the visibility by half, you have to keep it under 90 knots, but otherwise it's pretty much your choice. Check pilots normally ask what the final approach speed will be, and then expect you to maintain that speed within 10 knots until you either initiate a missed approach or slow for landing. At least that's been my experience for many years.

 

None of this has anything to do with a VFR approach, though.

[ridethisbike]

Instrument approach.

 

That changes things then... I thought he was talking about VFR approaches.

[JDHelicopterPilot]

The technique for flying an ILS that I was taught, and that the checkpilots I've flown with expected, is to set power for an airspeed, and to stay on the glideslope using pitch attitude. This is only permissible within a rather narrow range, though. The usual parameters were +/- 10 knots, so if you have to change the airspeed by more than 10 knots, you change power. Futzing with the collective on an ILS causes all sorts of problems, and usually gives unsatisfactory results, but you have to make the aircraft do what you want it to, whatever control inputs that takes. Airspeed is important, and you have to keep it above Vmin until you're in VMC, and if you're reducing the visibility by half, you have to keep it under 90 knots, but otherwise it's pretty much your choice. Check pilots normally ask what the final approach speed will be, and then expect you to maintain that speed within 10 knots until you either initiate a missed approach or slow for landing. At least that's been my experience for many years.

None of this has anything to do with a VFR approach, though.

Some companies may differ I guess. I set 90kts for all approaches except hospital GPS approaches. Set 90kts prior to glide slope intercept and once I intercept I reduce power via collective to maintain that. Easy and stable.

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

The following is an article written by Andy Roe that describes, more or less, what I have been trying to articulate. I have highlighted the part that is relevant to approach technique.

 

The Art of Control: Approach and Departure with a Heavy Load

Saturday, June 20, 2009, 09:58 AM
Posted by Andy Roe

Fasten your seatbelts folks, we’re going in!

Recently, an enthusiastic 500-hour cyclic attendant came to us for an evaluation prior to a check ride with a prospective employer. Unfortunately, at the controls of a fully loaded helicopter, our sky captain could not get the aircraft through translation and into the climb at 100 percent power. Then, when confronted with a confined area, our subject started down the approach path, but had the landing been allowed to continue the engine’s transient limits would have reached record highs and the ship’s Airworthiness Certificate instantly rendered invalid due to airframe collapse.

Five hundred hours of experience is a commendable achievement for any new pilot, but, regrettably, some forms of helicopter time building don't call on the skills needed to fly commercial charter in off-airport terrain. For those pilots, and as a little recurrency for everyone else, let’s look at some key points on how to manage weight and power.

A hovering helicopter has lift support from the ground cushion of air under the rotor system. Ahead of translation, at a jogging pace, the helicopter acquires added lift from forward flight. If the helicopter is not too heavy, increasing power and applying forward cyclic will launch the aircraft through translation into climbing forward flight. ***Gee, Andy, why don't you tell us something that isn’t obvious!*** Okay, here goes. You will have to coax a very heavy helicopter across the surface on the ground cushion, until translation and forward flight can be achieved, because added power is not available. Yes, the stick you move up and down with your left hand has travel restrictions — just like Martha Stewart.

So, how about approaching into that confined area when the ship is heavy? In basic training, we learned how to fly the approach and pull power to slow the helicopter before landing. The cyclic controls speed and the collective controls height and rate of descent. But, approaching with a heavy helicopter requires understanding how to effectively use power, translation and the aerodynamics of speed.

The helicopter is far more versatile than many pilots realize. To fully appreciate the subtleness of helicopter control, we need to learn that the cyclic, not just the collective, can control height and rate of descent. ***The devil you say!***

The heavy helicopter has a great deal of aerodynamic lift in forward flight, ahead of translation at cruising speed, and the power setting is simply assisting the process. When the helicopter approaches to land, all of that speed and resulting aerodynamic lift will have to be scrubbed off and replaced with lift from brute horsepower. Power alone, though, may not be adequate, or even available, to slow the rate of descent of a heavy machine that is about to lose all lift from forward speed when its six feet above the ground.

When weight and rate of descent are high on a short final, and engine power is not able to slow and control the approach, we refer to the resulting hard landing as settling with power caused by pilot error. Entry into the vortex ring state close to the ground is a separate issue, but it’s pilot error all the same.

A ferry boat captain has to apply full power in reverse early on the approach to the dock to slow a heavy ship. Similarly, the helicopter pilot must slow down, apply power and increase blade pitch in anticipation of the upcoming confined area.

The weight of the ferry is supported on the surface of the water. The weight of the helicopter can also be supported, on translation. Slow the helicopter to translation early on an approach and you’ll be able to use high power plus lift from translation to control and support the weight of the helicopter on a predictable approach.

Slightly ahead of and behind translation, collective power will support the weight of the helicopter, and the glidepath can be maintained with small attitude adjustments. Remember, forward cyclic to climb and aft cyclic to descend. You are now magically controlling a heavy load on approach, with lift from constant high power and the aerodynamics of translation.

Conversely, a gliding approach does not have the same predictable outcome unless the helicopter is very light. Still, a late, scary burst of power may not allow you to control the helicopter the way you thought you could prior to landing.

What about departing a confined area with a heavy load? Before attempting a landing, put together a practice approach to determine the power required to land. Then, before committing to the spot, overshoot at full power at the nose pitch attitude you expect to use on departure. This way, you get a feel for the performance capability of the helicopter to exit the area. Arriving empty and departing with a heavy load you say?! In these situations, you will have to rely on good judgment and previous experience in similar departure situations.

Good helicopter drivers know the power needed to land in advance and how they’re going to get out before going in. Nothing is left to chance in rugged-terrain operations. When you know how to predict the outcome of each approach and departure, you will be able to fly confidently throughout the day.

Pilots who find themselves exhausted after only a few hours on the job are the ones not able to visualize how the events in front of them will play out. They lack the confidence to completely control the situations they are in. Remember, CONTROL is not only where Maxwell Smart and Agent 99 work, but is the needed ingredient for predictable, safe landings and departures with a heavy load.

 

This method is best applied in a steep approach; you set the collective pitch at a high power setting and make subtle adjustments to the attitude of the aircraft (cyclic) to maintain the approach angle w/ a stabilized ROD. The advantage of this is that there is no major change in power/torque at the bottom, minimizing the risk of exceeding manifold pressure, TOT or Torque limitations.

[ridethisbike]

Ok... I think I know where the miscommunication is. How high are you setting that power and using ETL to maintain your approach path?

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

Ok... I think I know where the miscommunication is. How high are you setting that power and using ETL to maintain your approach path?

 

There collective pitch is set at a power setting slightly below what would be required to hover IGE. However, ultimately, it is your ROD that determines how much collective to apply. The objective is to keep a very low ROD in order to keep the rotor system 'loaded' and your downward momentum to a minimum.

 

Depending on the steepness of the approach and wind velocity, you may or may not be able to maintain ETL. If you are forced to make the approach below ETL, you will have to make a slight, smooth increase in collective pitch as you transcend below ETL. Once you have applied enough collective to create a slow, stabilized descent you can make subtle cyclic pitch (attitude) changes to maintain the desired approach angle.

[Mikemv]

This is a great article written by Andy some years ago. All of his articles bring forth good info.

 

What he is talking about is NOT doing this on every approach and NOT about using the cyclic to fly the glide path but rather understanding the power required on either side of translation lift during approaches at heavy gross weights and how to recognize reserve power to terminate.

 

The idea is to have an actual realization of the power required and reserve power available or NOT to terminate in a high GW condition sometime long before applying power to terminate at the bottom.

 

HGP, let me ask, at what rate of descent do you think the rotor is loaded? What is your AGL altitude when you place yourself in this mode of flight? Do you have a fly away/path out of area available?

 

The original title stated "Setting Up an Approach". We have been talking about flying deep into the approach and hopefully not flying just above or below ETL from the time we initiate a descent (approach).

 

Being below ETL requires more power, above ETL less power respectively. Be extremely careful in putting yourself in a position below ETL and thinking that forward cyclic will make you climb immediately. You will be tilting the lift vector and need to have reserve power to apply.

 

Did anyone notice that the picture shows a ridge line and not a tight confined area?

 

All in all, a good discussion topic if understood but not a maneuver for new CFIs to be teaching at high GW near, at or below ETL. Go fly this with Andy or one of his peers.

 

Mike

[SBuzzkill]

I thought we were talking about instrument approaches...

 

I have used the technique Hand_Grenade_Pilot is talking about when flying manual throttle. Essentially slowing down and setting IGE hover power while OGE and letting yourself sink. To slow the sink rate push the cyclic forward and gain some airspeed, if you want it to increase your descent rate then slow back. It's useful to help reduce the amount of throttle adjustments on the approach.

 

I have also seen this technique during confined area training. It seemed to me like it was a method to teach getting the power in early.

Edited June 2, 2013 by SBuzzkill

[Hand_Grenade_Pilot]

In response to Mike,

 

What he is talking about is NOT doing this on every approach and NOT about using the cyclic to fly the glide path but rather understanding the power required on either side of translation lift during approaches at heavy gross weights and how to recognize reserve power to terminate.

I agree that not every approach needs to, or should be flown this way. I disagree that the cyclic cannot manage the approach angle.

Andy specifically writes, "Slightly ahead of and behind translation, collective power will support the weight of the helicopter, and the glidepath can be maintained with small attitude adjustments."

Going back to what I said; you are maintaining a relatively high collective pitch setting to support the weight of the helicopter, and making subtle adjustments to attitude (cyclic) to follow the desired approach angle.

The idea is to have an actual realization of the power required and reserve power available or NOT to terminate in a high GW condition sometime long before applying power to terminate at the bottom.

I agree. Which is why I said the primary benefit is reducing the risk of exceeding MP, TOT or Torque limitations. There shouldn't be a large increase in power at the bottom of the approach and you are already well aware of the power margin.

HGP, let me ask, at what rate of descent do you think the rotor is loaded? What is your AGL altitude when you place yourself in this mode of flight? Do you have a fly away/path out of area available?

I would say that the disk is 'loaded' when nearly the full weight of the aircraft is being supported by the rotor system. On a low speed approach with a minimal ROD (100-300'/min), the disk is not completely supporting the full weight of the helicopter, but it is supporting enough weight to give you a power margin.

The height AGL at which you enter this mode of flight is totally dependent on topography and obstructions around the landing site. Obviously, it would not make sense to initiate a low speed approach at an excessive height AGL; it adds unnecessary time to the landing. When I am preparing to land in a confined area, after completing a recon and power checks, I perform a 'step-down' style initial approach to lose excess altitude. After losing excess altitude, I begin to decelerate while maintaining constant altitude. Once I feel that my forward speed has decelerated to the point necessary to maintain the desired approach angle, I initiate the final stage of the approach (which I described above).

And yes, I do plan for an exit path. Prior to reaching the lower point of the approach where you are committed and a go-around is no longer possible, I have completed my low recon checks, the disk is almost completely loaded, power checks have been made and I am 100% certain that the landing will be completed safely. If something is amiss (change in wind direction, inadequate performance, previously unseen obstruction) I will begin a slow, smooth transition into forward flight and initiate a climb out.

The original title stated "Setting Up an Approach". We have been talking about flying deep into the approach and hopefully not flying just above or below ETL from the time we initiate a descent (approach).

Upon afterthought, yes the title is misleading. This discussion is focused around the later portion of the approach, when we are operating at lower forward speeds. If I could go back in time I would title this, "How to Complete an Approach".

Being below ETL requires more power, above ETL less power respectively. Be extremely careful in putting yourself in a position below ETL and thinking that forward cyclic will make you climb immediately. You will be tilting the lift vector and need to have reserve power to apply.

I understand that applying forward cyclic, without any application of collective, will not result in an immediate climb. If done too rapidly, you will lose altitude. I am fully aware that an increase in collective pitch is necessary to initiate an instantaneous climb-out.

Did anyone notice that the picture shows a ridge line and not a tight confined area?

I understand that if you are at the threshold of the helicopter's performance (high GW and DA), a pinnacle take-off is still possible; maintaining a steep angle of climb out of a confined area is not.

Regardless, I feel that this technique still works well when landing in a confined area. Careful power management is still an important skill to develop, even though in practice, you should have plenty of power available if landing in a confined area (in order to get out).

All in all, a good discussion topic if understood but not a maneuver for new CFIs to be teaching at high GW near, at or below ETL. Go fly this with Andy or one of his peers.

Perhaps one day I will be able to fly with Andy. Out of curiosity, have you flown with him? And if so, was the technique that he describes in that article demonstrated to you?

 

 

 

[Whistlerpilot]

Hey Andy Roe was my instructor at Chinook and taught me how to fly. The techniques he is describing were introduced quite early on in the training. Before solo we were working on feeling the effects of ETL and getting power set early and slowing right up to the edge of ETL and using very small cyclic inputs to maintain a stabilized approach with a constant power setting.

 

Don't misunderstand that was shown as "the way" to fly an approach. However all the training we did was with the premise of operational flying in the bush and mountains of Canada. I was taught the techniques that would transition into flying a heavy Jet Ranger into and out of confined areas.

 

One of the most important lessons that was really emphasized was the "dummy approach". This is an approach to the confined area but without committing, and flying away before descending in to it to test power available to depart. This is where the technique described shines because you are all ready at a high power setting on the edge of ETL, and a little forward cyclic will make you climb away without pulling collective.

 

The other application is for mountain approaches. The "Canadian" mountain approach is maximum 200 feet vertical over 2000 feet horizontal. Slow up to the edge of ETL get the disc loaded and keep a constant power setting and use small cyclic inputs to control the rate and angle of approach. This is a very shallow slow approach with high power set early. Keep your "out" until the last few seconds when you will decide to commit to the spot or fly away. Of course this is after your figure eight investigation with two eye level reccee's in each direction to check winds, determine skids down spot, and approach route in and out with "escape" options.

 

By the time I was around 40 hours Andy had me doing this kind of flying but strictly not on solo. The only time we were not doing "confines" in the entire training was back at the airport doing emergency procedures. Did about 200 full down autos in the 100 hour commercial course. I guess this is the advantage of training with a 20000 hour pilot in the Bell 47. The things he taught me right from the onset have served me well through my unfolding career. I can still hear him giving me heck for pulling pitch and leaving to quickly. "One day you will be over the trees by the time you realize you can't make it" he would remind me. Thankfully his "power check" procedures have saved my A$$ many a time.

 

Oh yeah we haven't even opened up the downwind departure can of worms with these "cyclic" approach/departure techniques. Andy and I started using "pucker factor" to describe the difficulty of certain things customers will want you to do with a helicopter. The training was all about investigation and having a large bag of tools to work with. That way you can say no with confidence, or figure out another way to make it work safely.

 

This cyclic approach/departure technique is one of those tools.