Surfboards tied to the skids?

[John90290]

I've seen it in movies but has anyone done this or know someone that has? seems like it would be a bit like flying with floats

[Eric Hunt]

Not TIED to the skids, but on specially-made racks, certified by correctly qualified engineers.

 

They held two boards per side (on a LongRanger) and we could do around 90kt happily. We did it for a Pepsi commercial back in 94, never used them for real and they never flew again, still sitting in the hangar somewhere.

 

But on the all-black machine, with colourful boards, it looked pretty good!! Specially the shots looking down on us as we scooted across the breaking waves at zot feet and with a pod of dolphins surfing the same wave.

[John90290]

Sounds epic. One day...

[Witch]

How about a couple of U shaped flatbar held on by hoseclamps and secure the whole shebang with several bungee ropes. I bet you could get everything at your local hardware store and bungee jumping dealer. I wish I could draw a figure. That'd make it more clear.

 

Later

[Goldy]

How about a couple of U shaped flatbar held on by hoseclamps and secure the whole shebang with several bungee ropes. I bet you could get everything at your local hardware store and bungee jumping dealer. I wish I could draw a figure. That'd make it more clear.

 

Later

 

 

Witch- you wanna risk your life plus about 60K worth of tail rotor damage to a hose clamp and some made in China 60 cent bungee cords??? Might as well be flying an exec !~!!!! ( boy, that'll get comments by the home builders !)

 

Goldy

[Tenacious T]

How about a couple of U shaped flatbar held on by hoseclamps and secure the whole shebang with several bungee ropes. I bet you could get everything at your local hardware store and bungee jumping dealer. I wish I could draw a figure. That'd make it more clear.

 

Later

 

Please be joking.

[Gomer Pylot]

I suspect he's not joking. Unfortunately, this is the kind of thinking that kills people. I've had offshore hands try to get me to do stupid things like that, and fortunately I've always said no. Nancy Reagan was right, about the wrong thing. When customers want you to do stupid stuff, you have to just say no. Loudly and often. Bungee cords are worthless for anything but holding small stuff in the back of your pickup truck. They won't even work on a surfboard there, much less in flight.

[HelliBoy]

Eric- did you need class A external load certs. for the job??

[Witch]

Maybe use duct tape instead?

 

I was kinda joking. My thought was if someone really wanted to do that, this may be a solution that might be a lot better than tying them on the skids rather than making a sort of rack system. My IP once was looking at a way to get snowboards up to a mountain but couldn't figure one out. I suggested a similar rig and secure with a netting material around the whole shebang. Either that or set the boards in a big bag and tie it to the hook underneath. Just thoughts.

 

Later

[Eric Hunt]

"Eric- did you need class A external load certs. for the job??"

 

It wasn't an external load, because it wasn't on the hook and we couldn't jettison them.

 

The engineer certified a rack for attaching the boards to the hard points on the fuselage and the ground wheel lugs on the skids. The boards were held on by aircraft standard ratchet tiedowns, with loose ends taped securely. They wouldn't have come off at 300kt.

 

Only trouble with the job was when i flew through a rain front enroute to the film job, and the special black spray-on plastic paint started to peel off on the right side. Made a weird noise! A quick call for the paint specialist who arrived the next day to retouch it, meanwhile only film the left side as the paint was still OK there.

 

And Witch, duct tape is only for ducts, quact quact.

[Gomer Pylot]

Eric, that is an external load.

 

3. CLASSES OF AUTHORIZATION.

A. Class A External-Loads. Class A is an external load

that cannot move freely, cannot be jettisoned, and

does not extend below the landing gear. An example of

Class A operation is the carriage of supplies in an

approved cargo rack, bin, or seat affixed to the exterior of

the aircraft. A cargo rack may be certified with or

without a cargo envelope. The FAA-approved flight

manual supplement that is required for the cargo rack

installation specifies the approved configuration. If the

cargo carried is within the envelope specified in the flight

manual supplement, the rotorcraft MAY BE operated in

accordance with part 91 or 135. If the cargo rack is certified

without a cargo envelope or the cargo carried

exceeds the specified envelope, flight operations MUST

BE conducted in accordance with part 133.

 

......

 

4. OPERATING RULES.

A. Rotorcraft Load Combination Flight Manual.

Rotorcraft external-load operations must be conducted

in conformity to the Rotorcraft Load Combination

Flight Manual prescribed in 14 CFR part 133,

§ 133.47. The rotorcraft must be operated in compliance

with 14 CFR § 133.45; the rotorcraft and rotorcraft-

load combination are authorized under the

operating certificate.

8700.1 CHG 21 4/10/01

96-2 Vol. 2

B. Carriage of Persons. Part 133 does not provide

for "passenger carrying" operations, but does provide for

the "carriage of persons" in accordance with 14 CFR

§ 133.35. If passenger carrying operations are conducted,

they should be done in accordance with part 91 or 135.

No Class A, B, or C external-load operator may allow a

person to be carried during external-load operations

unless that person is a flight crewmember; is a flight

crewmember trainee; performs an essential function in

connection with the external-load operation; or is necessary

to accomplish the work activity directly associated

with the operation. An operator with Class D approval

may be authorized to carry persons other than a crewmember

or persons directly connected with the externalload

operation. The inspector must ensure that any

proposed external-load operations are not a guise for

passenger carrying operations conducted for compensation

or hire.

(1) The carriage of snow skis as a Class A

external-load when skiers are on board the rotorcraft is

clearly a passenger carrying operation that is not

permitted under the provisions of 14 CFR § 133.35.

Baggage carried in a Class A external-load attaching

means (such as racks on top of fixed floats) is another

example of an operation not permitted by 14 CFR

§ 133.35. However, if these items are carried in

approved cargo racks as described in paragraph 3A,

the operation could be conducted under part 91 or 135,

which allow for carrying passengers.

 

If you attach anything to the helicopter, it's an external load, whether Class A, B, C, or D. You must have FAA approval to do this, have a certificate issued under Part 133, and the pilot must be qualified.

 

Whether it extends below the helicopter or whether it can be jettisoned only changes the class, not whether it's an external load. Flying external loads without approval can result in revocation of the company operating certificate and the individual pilot's certificate. Be careful about doing this.

[FauxZ]

Eric, that is an external load.

 

 

If you attach anything to the helicopter, it's an external load, whether Class A, B, C, or D. You must have FAA approval to do this, have a certificate issued under Part 133, and the pilot must be qualified.

 

This piques my curiosity. Does this mean ENG pilots must be qualified to fly with the microwave antennae on the bottom of the bird?

 

Pardon my ignorance, I haven't quite yet started commercial training, and I'm guessing this is where you start going over most of these regs. I just noticed that the microwave dome on the bottom of a local news bird is quite large.

 

ps: Damn the internet. A re-read of this strikes a tone of sarcasm more than sincerity, that's not what I'm after.

[Eric Hunt]

"You must have FAA approval to do this, have a certificate issued under Part 133, and the pilot must be qualified. "

 

No I mustn't.

 

Not in this case.

 

Before you leap in with more excerpts from FARs etc, remember that other places in the world have different rules. This flight was in accordance with our rules, and I even carried actors during the filming - you would call them essential crew. All OK and legal, so don't jump down my throat. FAA has no jurisdiction this side of the puddle.

[Gomer Pylot]

Ok, I made an unwarranted assumption. But I still think it's an external load, even if the rules of your country don't cover it.

 

Anything permanently installed on the aircraft, such as antennas, cameras, etc, are part of the aircraft, and not an external load. At least in the US, on non-public use aircraft. If a Form 337 has been used to cover the installation, it's legal and the only thing you have to worry about is complying with any limitations in the RFM supplement. Flying, in the US, is rather highly regulated, and you can't just add something to the aircraft on your own. It's even more highly regulated in other countries, especially in Europe.

[Bassbone]

I fly ENG and all of our camera gear is approved by our FSDO. On another note I am a little reticent to say this but...........one summer up north I flew a couple of our mechanics up to another machine which blew an engine on top of a 4500 msl mountain. The dumb part was allowing them to talk me into flying with a ladder strapped to each landing gear. Not my best decision but at least I made them use nylon loading straps instead of the 100 mile an hour tape they first proposed. Some times wonder what would have happened if I needed to deploy the floats???? DOH!

 

One other thing comes to mind. I use to subscribe to several motorcycle magazines. In the mid 80's one issue had a feature story of a MD500 in Hawaii with a small street bike mounted on each skid to be flown to some remote location. One of the bikes was piloted by the King himself, Kenny Rogers. Last photo was of KR riding his RZ350 into the surf. BB

[Eric Hunt]

"and you can't just add something to the aircraft on your own. It's even more highly regulated in other countries, especially in Europe."

 

And there goes another assumption - I am across the OTHER puddle, not the one to your east.

 

And it wasn't added on my own - as I said before, the racks were designed by an engineer and certified by our regulator to be a permanent fixture to the aircraft. We even carried out test flights to determine the flight manual supplemental limitations on them, which were then included in the conditions of approval.

 

I just didn't include all this garbage because the post was intended to be short and light-hearted, rather than a didactic dissertion on airworthiness. Rest assured, the whole shebang was legal.

[Guest pokey]

I saw a movie long ago where guy was water skiing from a Hughes 500. Would this be considered external load? I am only guessing, but i would think maybe it would have something to do w/ the weight (load) of the skiier?

[Gomer Pylot]

Eric, the last paragraph wasn't directed at you. It was in reply to FauxZ's question about the antennas. Sorry I didn't make that clear. Relax, try not to be so defensive, and remember that text doesn't properly convey any conversation. If you say your flight was legal, I don't dispute it.

[Witch]

I still like the duct tape/bungee cord idea.

[Eric Hunt]

"Relax, try not to be so defensive"

 

Heh heh, Gomer, if I was any more laid back, I would be upside down.

 

I just enjoy a little banter.

[Guest pokey]

I still like the duct tape/bungee cord idea.

 

 

duct tape is fine for ALOT of stuff as long as ya dont quack up (i know i know) speekin of duck jokes? didja hear about?!,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[Voluptuary5]

Sorry to dredge-up an old thread but I just have to ask Eric Hunt a question.

 

After falling asleep on the couch last night I woke up to a Girls Gone Wild infomercial. I don't know how or why I remembered this thread but after re-reading it, sounds like this may have been the "shoot" Eric was talking about.

 

Anyway, just wanted to ask if that was it.

 

It must have been horrible working will all those ugly girls...

 

Happy New Year everyone!!!

 

-V5

[Eric Hunt]

In my remote corner of the world, we don't have Girls Gone Wild - sounds like a desperados-at-2am channel.

 

My shoot was 100% Pepsi, done in Oz with Oz girls. I have a short version of it on my hard drive, but haven't yet investigated how to post it here. Gimme a simple clue, and I'll do it.

[james28]

i'd like to see the video clip as well. upload it onto youtube or putfile or one of those hosting sites and give us a link.

[Eric Hunt]

OK, here it is. Apologies to Mister Pepsi for putting his commercial on the net.

 

 

Missed the start - it was taped off a VCR 12 years ago, too slow to press the Record button when it came on the TV. The good-looking guy in the front seat, dressed in black like Johnny Cash, is me. Don't blame me, the director said that the chopper had to be black and the same for me.

Edited January 2, 2007 by Eric Hunt