Thoughts on this flying?

[amenra]

 

Just curious.

[james28]

well in the notes it says that's the pilots specialty, but that still seems a little over zelous especially with passengers. but i still thought it was really cool.

[Bayou06]

I didn't see any "extreme" manuevering going on, a few steep banks and some low level flight. But as you can see, it's a twin engined aircraft and all the PAX had parachutes on. In summary, the flight had a degree of risk, but it was greatly mitigated by the aircraft and passenger equipment.

 

just my .02

 

Bayou06

[Gomer Pylot]

The pax were obviously looking for thrills; after all, they're skydivers. Provided the route has been previously reconned, to check for wires, I saw nothing that extreme. The video has obviously been heavily edited, so it's hard to see exactly what was being done, but it appears that some rapid descents and cyclic climbs were done, but those aren't inherently dangerous in a 412, nor are the banks at altitude, which appear to be ~30 degrees, not extreme at all. It's hard to tell what was real and what were camera effects. It's one thing to do these maneuvers with paying passengers expecting just to be transported from one place to another, and something else when you're flying skydivers asking for a thrill.

[delorean]

That guy is a real big "HIT" at the skydiving meets. Every year in Quicny, Rantoul, or another IL city they have a joint national Balloon and Skydiving convention/meet/whatever in August.

 

About 4 years ago in Rantoul that guy in the 412 hit a video'ing spectator on the ground with MR blade. After being told to stay out of the loading & t/o area, the guy ran and hid in some corn, then ran out when the 412 started its run. The pilot didn't see him, started a tight bank as seen in the video, and cut the guy in two. DOA

 

BTW, wearing parachutes below 1000' AGL doesn't do anything for you......in the video, it appears they're below 100-200 ft most of the flight. Any skydivers here?? If memory serves, it takes about 1000' to inflate the chute on freefalls, and a little less on static line jumps. Watch the end, it took at least 5 seconds for that chute to fully inflate at 100+ mph freefall. Not to mention they were probably strapped to the helicopter so they did fall out during the sharp maneuvers. If anything would have happened, they would have gone down with the ship.

[mechanic]

I like this video best. I saw him perform this in a military helicopter and flight suit. Maybe he is a high time German military pilot? I know they speak German in the video. I had a friends wife translate it for me. It is very funny. On lift off you hear the pass ask "Are you still in control?" THen at the top he asks again "Is that it?" If you know someone who can speak German get them to translate....My friend did not give me word for word because she was laughing and her English is rusty. It is the BO105 helicopter.

 

Helicopter Ride from Hell

 

Here is the other video, same pilot.

 

BO 105 Aerobatics

Edited December 26, 2006 by mechanic

[mechanic]

delorean,

 

Did the accident happen on the old Chanute AFB flight line? I lived in Rantoul for a short while in 88'-89' and made a few short returns for training. Last time I was at Chanute was in 91'.

Edited December 26, 2006 by mechanic

[delorean]

delorean,

 

Did the accident happen on the old Chanute AFB flight line? I lived in Rantoul for a short while in 88'-89' and made a few short returns for training. Last time I was at Chanute was in 91'.

 

Yep, that's where it happened. Watch the video closely, is that Rantoul? I can't tell, but it's either Rantoul, Quincy, or Peoria. That's the three city that usually host the balloon & skydiving conventions.

 

BTW, if you haven't been to the Octave Chanute Museum since then, you need to check it out. They expanded it in the late 90s. It can't be compared to the USAF Museum at Wright-Patterson in Dayton, OH or Air & Space Museum, in DC but it's the next best in my book.

 

 

Here's the link to the accident report on that: http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=2...01314&key=1

[DynamicallyUnstable]

Look at about the 2 min, 30 second mark. THATS what my concern as a pilot would be. The PAX holding a video camera out the side door while doing manuvers like that. Could be a bad situation real quick, especially that LL.

[as350b3]

I'm sorry to disagree with the rest of the posters on this thread, but that was absolute stupidity on the pilot's part for flying these thrill rides in a 412.

 

After watching the video only once, I find it very easy to point out several things that were illegal. I'm sure closer scrutiny would lead to finding additional violations.

 

As another poster already pointed out, parachutes are completely useless in close proximity to the earth and with the exception of the last few seconds the rest of the video was NOE and low level flying. So he willfully endangered his passengers. None of the maneuvers were necessary for the completion of the flight - it was solely to satisfy a need for thrill.

 

It is one thing to have adrenaline junkies for passengers, but an entirely different thing to cave in to their request. Anyone that has flown tours or done heliskiing knows what I'm talking about. The mark of a professional pilot is to weigh all the risks and rewards and chose an outcome that doesn't unnecessarily endanger other people's lives.

 

What happened to the pilot's brain that is supposed to be engaged in professional decision making? I don't see any smart choices on his part when watching that video.

 

Behavior as exhibited in that video gives us all a bad reputation. Somehow I keep hoping that experienced pilots do know better and are capable of conducting themselves in a professional and honorable manner. This video clearly proofs me wrong.

 

Instead of admiring his piloting skills, I'd rather find a way to get rid of people like him.

 

You don't have to agree with me - this is a free forum after all - but I hope you at least go look at that video again and this time keep asking yourself what would happen if he had a high-side failure or a t/r drive shaft failure. How many of his passengers would walk away?

[Falcon1184]

I'm sorry to disagree with the rest of the posters on this thread, but that was absolute stupidity on the pilot's part for flying these thrill rides in a 412.

 

Why exactly is it stupid to give a thrill ride if thats what they want? As long as you do it within your limits and the limits of the aircraft, I don't see what the big deal is. Obviously if they were normal passengers looking for a tour or something I might feel differently. I'm sure these people knew they were taking an elevated risk by having a thrill ride in a helicopter. From the looks of their hobbies, they don't seem to concerned.

 

After watching the video only once, I find it very easy to point out several things that were illegal. I'm sure closer scrutiny would lead to finding additional violations.

 

Out of curiosity, name a few violations he did. I didn't watch with that in mind, so point out a few for us.

 

As another poster already pointed out, parachutes are completely useless in close proximity to the earth and with the exception of the last few seconds the rest of the video was NOE and low level flying. So he willfully endangered his passengers.

 

I completely agree here. Parachutes are definately useless in 90% of his maneuvering.

 

None of the maneuvers were necessary for the completion of the flight - it was solely to satisfy a need for thrill.

 

I'm not sure I understand this completely. What exactly is the problem here? I occasionally perform aerobatic manuvers in various airplanes, which one can say is not necessary and just satisfies a thrill. Whats wrong with that? Even if I recovered below 1500' agl a time or two, just because I broke a rule or two means I was doing something dangerous?

 

It is one thing to have adrenaline junkies for passengers, but an entirely different thing to cave in to their request. Anyone that has flown tours or done heliskiing knows what I'm talking about. The mark of a professional pilot is to weigh all the risks and rewards and chose an outcome that doesn't unnecessarily endanger other people's lives.

 

I tend to agree here, but to an extent. It can be dangerous to give in to passengers wanting a thrill, but thats where the pilots decision making comes in. Again, I feel if the passengers want a little extra thrill, its the pilots responsibility to decide if the time and place is right, and to only perform within his limitations and that of the aircraft. So if I'm an inexperienced pilot, and my passenger wants an extra thrill, I don't see any problem doing something within my limts. Shortly after getting my airplane private, I had friends wanting a little thrill in the C152. My experience was limited, but I felt ok giving them a few steep turns and some powre off stalls. They were something I felt 100% comfortable doing, and gave them their thrill. No harm done.

 

What happened to the pilot's brain that is supposed to be engaged in professional decision making? I don't see any smart choices on his part when watching that video.

 

Behavior as exhibited in that video gives us all a bad reputation. Somehow I keep hoping that experienced pilots do know better and are capable of conducting themselves in a professional and honorable manner. This video clearly proofs me wrong.

 

Instead of admiring his piloting skills, I'd rather find a way to get rid of people like him.

 

You don't have to agree with me - this is a free forum after all - but I hope you at least go look at that video again and this time keep asking yourself what would happen if he had a high-side failure or a t/r drive shaft failure. How many of his passengers would walk away?

 

I honestly think people sometimes make too big a deal about things like this. There are going to be people who are 100% conservative in flying, people who take elevated risks, and people who push it too far. Thats just the way it is. Honestly, who do you think has a better chance of having an incident/accident? A student on his first few solos or this guy? What do you think about the 50 hour private pilot who takes up his buddies in strong winds, or incoming thunderstorms? I learned to fly in the mountains where thunderstorms were not really common. If I heard anything rumble the slightest bit, I was tying down the aircraft and driving home, simple as that. I always felt that was good decision making. Then I see another pilot come in and land with the storm chasing behind him, closing in fast. Winds are gusting, lightning striking, ect. He cut it close. Turns out he did his flight training in Florida, so landing with a thunderstorm right behind him closing in fast is second nature to him. Can you honestly compare us and decide who is right and who is wrong? Maybe that 412 pilot flew apaches in Iraq or something, who knows. Just a different way of looking at things.

[Witch]

Neato

[Goldy]

Neato

 

 

Hey at least its done in a twin turbine 412 and not an R 22 like the last video !.

 

You can read my previous comments on aggressive low level flight...I reckon I have seen too many dead bodies that used to be "aggressive, live for the moment " types...either that, or I'm just getting old....actually, I like getting old: its better than getting dead.

 

Witch- nice new avitar.....better than the star wars look alike anyday !

 

Goldy

Edited December 28, 2006 by Goldy

[coanda]

When is the last time anyone has seen a "safe" helicopter video on a youtube type site? They're all wild. Hey mechanic thanks for the translation, i've been watching that video for awhile now and always wondered what that passenger was saying! I think that pilot died last summer.......in his helicopter.

Edited December 28, 2006 by coanda

[Linc]

Witch- nice new avitar.....better than the star wars look alike anyday !

 

Goldy

Space: 1999, although it was nothing like 1999. Edited December 29, 2006 by Linc

[Witch]

Two things:

 

I'm reading the test prep book and I come across a section about acrobatic flight. The book says that an aircraft can't pitch nose up more than 30* or bank more than 60* unless the occupants each have a parachute. The helo looks to exceed those limits, and the occupants are wearing chutes... but at less than 1000'? Crop turns I know. I did a few with Nick. I like it just a little, not much. And what does this do for Army pilots that fly NOE? Just wondering out loud.

 

Also, Goldy, That wasn't a ship from Star Wars mind you. That, my right honourable friend, was an "Eagle" from Gerry Andersons short lived sci-fi adventure series "Space 1999". This, my friend, was the most utilitarian in the concept of space ship design and function. Not only was it a transport, but medevac, science lab, and, for lack of a better word, crane. This puppy is the equivalent of the Sikorsky Skycrane. So, in fact, the ship is basically a helicopter in space. HA!

 

Besides, I have a few more avatars to change in the future.

 

Later

[Gomer Pylot]

The aircraft in the video never got close to 60 degrees of bank or 30 degrees of pitch.

[Goldy]

Sorry Witch..Goldy is not much of a Science Fiction fan...although I did meet William Shatner once at the Academy Awards.....maybe that will put me back in good graces !

 

Also the Army doesnt pay much attention to the FAA rules...way beneath them.

 

Goldy

Edited December 29, 2006 by Goldy

[Linc]

Actually, the Army has to fly within the NAS system, so the primary aviation regulation defines how the Army will comply with the FARs. There are a few exceptions from the FARs that the Army has, but most of them deal with military-specific operations and are evaluated to make sure they don't pose a threat to civilian traffic. Other FAR compliance measures are built into each aircraft's operating manual. For instance, the prohibition against aerobatic flight.

 

"Crop turns" are what we call "pitch back turns", similar to what we used to call "Return To Target" (RTT), but much less dramatic. They are used similar to crop turns, to reengage the area you just passed with little need to find it again. The pitch back turn falls within the 30-60 pitch/bank limits.

[james28]

some parachute information.

 

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2005/KristinaArthurs.shtml

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/quarters...llparachute.htm