R22 Hard Landings

[joker]

Wow,

 

This thread is begining to get complex! Where to start?

 

Grass or Hard Surfaces

 

Flyby Heli. Just like Goldy, you are right, but miss the point of my query. What I want to know is am I going to be slammed into jail for negligence for practicing these on grass. Am I now considered 'unsafe' if I do one / 5 / 10 on grass? Am I working against a manufacturer’s recommendation? Is there data out there supporting the notion that the airframe stresses cause incipient damage?

 

On grass/dirt, you just never know.

This is why your technique must be closer to perfection.

 

The instinctive thing to do when you feel this, is to pull the cyclic back

Nope. Not with good training.

 

Is there a possibility that by always practicing always on the most ideal surface, a false sense of security creeps in?

 

I am sorry to sound argumentative. I don't mean to be. I agree with what you say. Don't get me wrong, I will consider these points next time I go out to perform that maneuver.

 

All I am asking is whether this is a new official line that, if not followed renders me defenseless, or whether this is simply an idea which has gathered momentum over the years, to become good practice. I am asking someone to provide me with evidence that the stresses on the aircraft are damaging beyond what the aircraft is capable of withstanding.

 

Nsqdjr

 

I agree with you in part.

 

On charts or maps; well they are two different things. If someone came into my shop (if I had one) and asked for a chart, I'd give them a chart. If they asked for a map, I'd give them a map. If I wasn't sure what they wanted, I'd ask them. To me, that is not semantics. They are two different things, and misuse of that term could cause confusion.

 

On hover autos; well that term 'hover auto' has become the name of that drill, and its relevance to the aerodynamics has been lost over the years. Still, there is only one thing that springs to mind when someone says 'Hover Auto'. What is important is the technique used, because at the speed that it happens you don't wonder whether there is 'autorotative flight'. Most people learn the technique way before they understand the physics. So in this case, I agree with Nsdqjr. I don't call them hover autos because I think I autorotate when doing them. I call them hover autos because that's what I call them, that's what my father called them, and that's what my father's father called them...and his father's father's father.

 

That being said, I don't mind to change what I call them, if that's what people are doing these days. It really doesn't bother me either way. Getting hung up on this (when the thread is about the maneuver) is a case of semantics.

 

I guess we all get hung up on what interests us. Me, charts and maps (I'm a nautical sort), others hover autos and engine failures in a hover. If someone cares to correct me on my terminology then fine, because I know I correct others.

 

Spelling; well, it depends on the amount and types of spelling and grammatical errors in a person's post. When I type a post, I read and re-read it many times. For two reasons.

 

1. A well written (w.r.t. grammar, punctuation, and spelling) text is easier to read.

2. By taking the time and care over my posting, I show more respect to the reader.

 

When someone posts a question, which is riddled with spelling errors, poor punctuation and horrific grammar simply because they have been too lazy to correct that post, then I don't feel like spending the time to reply. So this is important to me.

 

The odd typo here or there is tolerable. I don't let those distract me from the focus.

 

Awaiting flames.

 

Joker

Edited February 22, 2007 by joker

[coanda]

however, in a forum it's just semantics. I'm interested in thoughtful and insigthful answers to questions that are posted here, not filler about how cool someone is because they know a more proper verbage.

insigthful (sp)

haha just messin.

[FlyNHighNFast]

Joker: In reference to spelling and grammatical errors: Please keep in mind, VR is an international forum, and english may not be the native language of some of the people on here.

 

It may not be a case of laziness on the poster's part, even though some postings make you want to cringe

[FauxZ]

Just another comment for the Grass/hard surface debate:

 

The R22 is designed to soak up vertical loads (bouncing) by flexing the skids out, not up. If you touch down in grass/dirt, this spreading, even within acceptable limits, is going to be restricted and transmit that force vertically through the tubes/airframe.

 

As for seeing it in the POH, I don't recall ever seeing it mentioned in the POH, but it's been a while since I've gone through it word for word.

[Superman]

QUOTE(Superman @ Feb 21 2007, 19:20 )

 

My "guess" would be the drive belts and or the sprag bearing

 

Fly Safe

Clark

 

How does the belt tension system work, and would this be affected by the difference in distance, or are you thinking alignment?

 

C-G

 

I was originally thinking alignment. After looking at the belt actuator assembly (clutch) I would say that you would have a drive belt tension problem.

BearingAssembly_2_.pdf

Any other thoughts?

 

Fly Safe

Clark

[C of G]

Alignment is an issue, but I'm not thinking belts. Belts would be a problem, but you should see signs of that developing. If nobody bites, I'll give you my opinion, but here's a hint: it may be evident during a preflight with what I would consider the most awkward system check, you almost have to be a contortionist. I haven't looked at a POH to see if this check is standard, but I always included it on my pre-flights. Think along the lines of simulated engine failures in the hover. Maybe I'm being too obscure. Thanks for your response though...........................

Edited February 23, 2007 by C of G

[flyby_heli]

Joker:

 

I know my post wasn't an answer to your query, and wasn't meant as such either. I just wanted to add a couple factors that are important to consider for anyone doing these maneuvers to a, potentially, soft surface.

Secondly, pulling back the cyclic is not something you do if you have received good training, i agree. But, it is the instinctive thing to do. That's why we get training in the first place, isn't it? To avoid doing things instinctively.....and learn a new set of instincts.

Edited February 22, 2007 by flyby_heli

[brushfire21]

Wow, I am gone a few days and this poor thread explodes. As far as the "Hover Auto" terminology, its expressed as both a power failure in a hover and hover auto in my training (roll off throttle and pull collective/pedals as needed to land). I am aware that its not the same as entering an auto at altitude (collective down / cyclic back & RRPM in the green).

 

In the future I will try not to call it a hover auto, and please forgive those of us that do use by accident. People use the terms xerox and copy interchangeably all the time (ie I need to make some xeroxes (sp) of my log book).

 

How about Settling with Power and Vortex Ring State? I have heard people say they are the same, and then others say that VRS is an extreme version of SWP. The debates go on, cheers guys!

[delorean]

nsdqjr,

 

In this thread, did anyone correct anyone else's spelling? NO. Did anyone correct anyone else's grammar? NO. I pointed out a terminology error that has led to people banging-up helicopters. While calling it a “slang” here on the forum does not directly lead to accidents, it very well could indirectly since more people may subconsciously associate it with something it’s not.

 

Let me ask you this........do you still call Class D airspace a “Control Zone” or Class C an “ARSA”? I mean, that’s what they called them prior to 1993, so by god why would you change your ways? BECAUSE, no one trained after 1993 would know what the f’ you were talking about--that's why.

 

If you want to call it a hover auto with your students, go right ahead. Send that student in for their CFI checkride and see what FAA Inspector thinks of it. They dinged me for saying “roll on the throttle” or “roll off the throttle”. It’s “open” or “close”; no “on” or “off”. I still passed, but it’s what my instructor always said and it sticked. It’s hard to unlearn improper terminology and the feds what everything to a "t" as per the PTS.

[joker]

C of G - Should we be talking of elephants here?!

 

FlyNLowNSlow - So true. Of course there may be second language issues and I take that into consideration, but that is often easy to spot when someone is making mistakes due to that. If you are German, French, American, Swiss or whatever, then it is hard to write in English. I know!

 

Brushfire21 - Here's how I describe it. VRS is the aerodynamic state where the 'downwash' is recirculated through the disc due to relative direction of motion of the disc and net lift is reduced yadda yadda yadda....(or there abouts).

 

I take a more all-encompassing definition of SWP - any time increase of power (pitch and throttle) does not result in more lift or actually decreases lift. Thus my definitinon (a result of a long chat with an inspector) can include VRS, over pitching, confined area circulation and all those other phenomenom.

 

However, the maneuver for the moment is still 'Settling with Power'!!!

 

Delorean - I think you are totally right. We as instructors are the ones who must take the changes to terminology and phraseology forward. I admit I have been out of the states for a while, so if someone tells me there is new terminology, I am happy. That's exactly why I frequent this board...to stay on the leading edge of aviation! A change from H-Auto does make sense. However, while the changes are happening, I think the important word is 'tolerance'. Gentle persuasion might work better than chastising!

Edited February 23, 2007 by joker

[Superman]

Alignment is an issue, but I'm not thinking belts. Belts would be a problem, but you should see signs of that developing. If nobody bites, I'll give you my opinion, but here's a hint: it may be evident during a preflight with what I would consider the most awkward system check, you almost have to be a contortionist. I haven't looked at a POH to see if this check is standard, but I always included it on my pre-flights. Think along the lines of simulated engine failures in the hover. Maybe I'm being too obscure. <_ thanks for your response though...........................>

 

C of G

 

OK, the only thing I can think of would be the actuator lower bearing. This is on the preflight checklist. LOWER BEARING TELL-A-TEMP - NORMAL ... LOWER BEARING - NO LEAKS. If the engine were to shift in the mounts, it would most likely affect the alignment of the lower bearing (as well as the belts) and could cause it to bind, leak, overheat and fail. First signs of damage would probably be a leak in the sealed bearing and or a higher reading on the tell-a-temp...... Yes ...... No ........ Maybe?

 

That is my final answer

 

Clark

[C of G]

C of G

 

OK, the only thing I can think of would be the actuator lower bearing. This is on the preflight checklist. LOWER BEARING TELL-A-TEMP - NORMAL ... LOWER BEARING - NO LEAKS. If the engine were to shift in the mounts, it would most likely affect the alignment of the lower bearing (as well as the belts) and could cause it to bind, leak, overheat and fail. First signs of damage would probably be a leak in the sealed bearing and or a higher reading on the tell-a-temp...... Yes ...... No ........ Maybe?

 

That is my final answer

 

Clark

 

 

My last hint, then I'm off, luckily I get to ferry a helicopter to Heli Expo today. I'll check back tomorrow:

 

What does the correlator look like in the R22?

 

The tension ought not be a problem with the belts. Anyone else?

[Pogue]

My last hint, then I'm off, luckily I get to ferry a helicopter to Heli Expo today. I'll check back tomorrow:

 

What does the correlator look like in the R22?

 

The tension ought not be a problem with the belts. Anyone else?

Well, part of my preflight walk around is to roll the throttle off (into the spring loaded detent) and pull full collective. The throttle lever on the carb should just start to move at the end of collective travel. If I don't see that movement I'll try again with the throttle off (not in the detent) and should see some throttle linkage movement along the way. If I don't then the correlator isn't working. If that's where you're going with this I'm not convinced that would be enough of an indicator of a misalignment. I'll have to go and look at a ship in rework and look at the actual mechanism involved.

[Goldy]

Joker and guys- Holy *****, I agree with Brushfire that this post has EXPLODED

 

Joker, Yes the grass vs hard surface is definitely taught and covered in the official RHC safety course.

 

Second, yes, there was a great article on this recently..check it out.

 

Third, you will NOT find a reference to this in either the POH, The Official Flight Training Guide or in Safety Notices SN1- SN40. So, your off the hook.

 

Hopefull this answers your question, and this thread will die its deserved death !

 

Fly safe, Goldy

[joker]

Hallelujah

 

Thanks Goldy, that's all I was after all along!!!

 

As for 'exploding threads', well they're fun aren't they? So many other things to talk about.

 

Joker

[randalrowles]

Great thread! I wanted to touch on a few points discussed. The FAA uses both "Power failure at a hover" and "autorotation" in the PTS under the same task. In addition, they also use the term"Power failure at altitude" when descibing a power failure where the collective IS lowered. The intent of the name change had nothing to do with confusion of terminology. The intent of the FAA was the method of examining the task.

 

The straight-in and 180 deg auto are considered performance maneuvers, thus the applicant/student will enter/complete the maneuver without ANY assistance from the Examiner. The maneuvers where the term "Power failure at (whatever)" is used is in the Emergency Operation section. The intent is the Examiner will induce the emergency (ie, roll of the throttle).

 

As for grass, SAFETY should be your primary concern. Each aircraft will perform differently on a soft surface. The lower the inertia of the rotor, the faster the transfer of the weight of the aircraft from the rotor to the skid gear against the surface. If the aircraft lands with forward speed on a soft surface, soon after touchdown (almost immediately) the weight of the aircraft is fully on the skids. If the aircraft shifts its weight to either side of the aircraft (working the pedals), the skid will increase its depth in the surface. If your nose is straight, MAYBE no problem....BUT if your nose rotates at all...you have a pivot point.

 

One more thing...every time you close the throttle you should make some assumptions. One that should always be made during practice autorotations is that "the engine is going to quit". With this in mind, a level, firm surface under you will allow you to safely complete a touchdown autorotation (most likely with considerable forward speed) more safely. This is simply because your recognition of the engine getting quiet and ground contact are often tenths of seconds apart.

 

Just a few thoughts.

 

Take care,

 

Randy Rowles