Thoughts on the N.J. S-300 crash

[Nearly Retired]

Let's talk about this recent S-300 crash in New Jersey.

 

The helicopter company was based at a fairly large general aviation airport. As far as i know, the 500-hour pilot went up on a demo/sightseeing ride with a passenger. At some point the pilot discovered that his throttle had become disconnected from the carburetor. He must have been at a fairly high power setting, because apparently he could not slow below a certain speed without climbing. Nor could he reduce the collective at all without the engine and rotor overspeeding.

 

Reportedly, he had a conversation over the radio with his Ops and discussed the various EP's for the situation (which was supposedly broadcast on LiveATC.net although I have not heard it). Ultimately the 300 pilot chose to shut the engine off and perform an auto. During the maneuver something went horribly wrong. Witnesses on the ground reported that the main rotor appeared to be turning very slowly and the rate of descent was really high, hinting that the helicopter was not established in a stable autorotation. Sadly, it crashed and both occupants were killed.

 

Over on Facebook the usual firestorm erupted. Many people did not understand the nature of the emergency. There was much confusion over the term "hovered." Here's a clue: To the media and "normal" people, the word "hover" means a very different thing than it means to us pilots.

 

Immediately, there were lots of expert-idiots on Facebook to armchair quarterback the pilot, claiming that he "should have" done this or that. Or that *they* would've done this or that differently...with the implication that if *they* had been flying, Goose would still be alive.

 

One of the suggestions was that the pilot should have somehow maneuvered the helicopter down and done a high-speed run-on landing at the airport. Someone else opined that he pull back on the cyclic until he got back to an OGE hover and then descended vertically to the ground.

 

He chose to do an auto. It was reported by those who've heard the conversation on LiveATC that the pilot was "uncomfortable" with the prospect of doing a full-down auto.

 

And here's where ol' Bob comes in...

 

The Scenario: You're at 1,000 feet and you've got climb power pulled. You discover that your throttle is no longer hooked to the carb. When you reduce the collective the engine and rotor rpms overspeed. The ship wants to keep climbing. You're over a big airport. There's plenty of wind, but it's not exactly lined up with the runways.

 

I can understand the guy not wanting to try a run-on landing at 60, or 70 or 80 knots or whatever it would have ended up being. Who actually does that? And even if you did such a thing (or had it demonstrated to you) you'd still be able to manipulate the rpm with the throttle. With no throttle and no governor/correlator, the rpm would've gone...where?...during the touchdown/run-on portion. And that's not the time you'd want to be taking your hand off the controls to pull the mixture or kill the mags.

 

So I'm okay with the pilot's choice of doing an auto. That's what I would've done. In fact, in an informal poll of other high-time professional pilots, the consensus is that it's what we all would've done.

 

But here's the deal: I cannot wrap my head around the fact that a Commercial/Professional helicopter pilot would be uncomfortable with doing an auto. It literally boggles my feeble mind. The possibility of *having* to do an auto in a single-engine helicopter is always there, ever-present in the back (or front) of our minds. Isn't that how we're trained...to always be looking for a place to set 'er down because the engine might quit at any moment? It was when I went through flight school.

 

We all probably pompously think that *we* will remain cool and calm under pressure and handle every emergency with the deadpan aplomb of Chuck Yeager. "Uh, Muroc? Uhh, yeah the ahhh, wings just broke off this here X-1...so I'm ahhhhh, gonna try to make it back. But I may just have to put 'er down at Panchos..."

 

The sad fact is that not all of us are Chuck Yeager. Or Aaron.

 

So I understand that the 300 pilot was probably rattled. He had an emergency that he'd probably never even thought about before. Disconnected throttle...WTF?? On top of that, his passenger was a famous country music star who was scheduled to perform there, that evening. The tragic end result was that they both lost their lives.

 

I wish it had turned out differently, but I suppose that whichever course of action the pilot had chosen, it probably would've worked out the same way. So I won't criticize or second-guess his choice. I just wonder why he wasn't comfortable with the idea of doing a full-down auto? If you call yourself a professional pilot and you fly a single-engine helicopter, you better be!

[adam32]

We've already been discussing it here on VR...look a couple threads down.

 

So far I haven't seen anything in much detail about what actually happened.

 

This is the first I've heard the throttle came completely disconnected. If that's the case,I don't believe the carb would go wide open, usually carbs are designed to close if the cable comes off...???

[r22butters]

In my experience with the 300 I was at full throttle at 70 kts with two people at sea level.

 

I have no idea what happens when the throttle linkage disconnects (I recall the report saying he could roll the throttle, but it had no effect on rpm), but I do know that this scenario has never come up during any of my training, recurrent training, BFRs, Wings seminars, or five trips to the Robinson Safety Course!

 

I think he just got too hung up on overspeeding? A working CFi not being comfortable with an auto does seem strange, and I can't help but wonder if he screwed up that auto, or was their some other mechanical issue that caused him to lose rpm?

 

This one's gonna be with me for a while!

[Nearly Retired]

 

We've already been discussing it here on VR...look a couple threads down.

 

I know that, Adam. Contrary to popular belief, I'm not an idiot. I wanted to start a new thread, my own thread on the subject, the focus of which being: why was he "uncomfortable" with the thought of doing an auto? But I guess that's not alright with you. Does a new thread bother you? Is it a problem of some sort?

 

Sorry.

 

In the future I'll be sure to ask your permission before making any posts.

 

Your Humble Servant,

Bob

[takefootoff]

He was up there flying around for 20min or so. Lotta time to build the nerves up.

[adam32]

 

I know that, Adam. Contrary to popular belief, I'm not an idiot. I wanted to start a new thread, my own thread on the subject, the focus of which being: why was he "uncomfortable" with the thought of doing an auto? But I guess that's not alright with you. Does a new thread bother you? Is it a problem of some sort?

 

Sorry.

 

In the future I'll be sure to ask your permission before making any posts.

 

Your Humble Servant,

Bob

Doesn't bother me.

 

I just wasn't sure if you had seen it yet.

 

But yes, next time make sure you run all your posting ideas thru me first

[Wally]

Did the accident helicopter, a 269C-1 have an engine governor?

[HeliHunter]

 

I wanted to start a new thread, my own thread on the subject, the focus of which being: why was he "uncomfortable" with the thought of doing an auto?

 

Just pure speculation, but I could see many reasons why he was uncomfortable with doing an auto. For one if he knew if it was the real deal then that means there is no chance of a go around. I can count on on hand the number of full down autos performed and always with a second pair of eyes watching. If your at a job doing tours you might not even practice autos except once every 6 months, maybe it had been awhile. Not to mention the stipulation in this industry that you can go practice autos for an hours and that is considered "safe" but the moment you ask about full downs, it's an unacceptable risk and not worth the little extra benefit so "unsafe?" That's what us low time pilots see it as. Otherwise I can't help but think some pilot's ego would be more than happy for a chance to show off a skill he had.

 

Another possibility is if he trained at a school similar to mine, the mentality is the moment anything is off or wrong you do a go around. Got the horn and light. Airspeed less than 65 knots. Rpm is at 99% go around. Well if you never had a chance to fixed a botched auto sure I would be nervous too. Take you a couple of tries to get to a flare. Let's ignore the fact that an engine failure doesn't care about you entering into a perfect auto, but whatever it takes to pass the checkride right?

 

But you can be nervous and still perform marginally well. I personally know many pilots that have been in accidents but even though the helicopter was totaled, pilot/passengers walked away with little to minor injuries. One major injury. (All Robinsons btw) I was always taught that an auto should be survivable as long as you flare and mess up everything else. That is what I find odd about the story......

 

Hope that helps nearly retired from the aspect of a new kid on the block.

[ARM_Coder]

It's hard to judge the pilot's action on an emergency. Years ago, here in São Paulo, a TV news chopper (an A-Star) crashed on the city's Jockey Club raceway due to a tail rotor failure.

 

The pilot was aware of the failure (he radioed about it), approached the raceway (that's an enormous flat, grassy terrain), and was expected to enter an auto. But suddenly... he lost all the airspeed, with the power still applied.

 

The chopper fell vertically, pirouetting left. Only then the pilot killed the engine, but it was really too late. He died, and the camera operator survived but with very severe injuries.

 

We are trained to cope with emergencies, but we are humans, and not all of us will react the right way.