Jump to content

SFAR 73 to Part 61 Question


RotorWeed
 Share

Recommended Posts

Forgive me if this topic has already been addressed. I was looking at my 08' FAR/AIM SFAR73 where it states in last part "This SFAR Terminates on March 31, 2008, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. My question is has SFAR73 been renewed? or will it terminate at the end of March and then be replaced with something else?

 

RW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me if this topic has already been addressed. RW

You are forgiven. I have mentioned it a few times in SFAR related posts. It currently is set to expire in March. I know Robinson was making some comments...but don't know what the current status is. I highly doubt the FAA will let it expire, but I hope the new SFAR(if there is one) treats the R44 a lil differently this time around.

 

Goldy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
You are forgiven. I have mentioned it a few times in SFAR related posts. It currently is set to expire in March. I know Robinson was making some comments...but don't know what the current status is. I highly doubt the FAA will let it expire, but I hope the new SFAR(if there is one) treats the R44 a lil differently this time around.

 

Goldy

 

 

Hey Goldy -

 

SOrry if this is OT, but why would you want the R44 treated different..? :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Goldy -

 

SOrry if this is OT, but why would you want the R44 treated different..? :-)

 

 

I just dont think that the same level of risk/previous accidents warrants it. You still have the same if not higher risks of low G, but I can drink an entire cup of coffee while doing a hover auto in a 44.

I dont believe there is any more risk flying an R44 than a 206. Each one is different, each one has different potential issues just like any other helicopter. To put the R22 and the R44 in the same bucket doesnt make sense for me.

 

In fact, if you want to really take it to the next level of safety..why not treat each helicopter differently? Why not require 10 hours training in type before you can fly it. Right now, as you know, I could jump in just about anything and be "qualified" under the FAR's to fly it. A great 300 pilot may have a few issues in his first hour in an AStar...maybe not, but wouldnt you agree that after 10 hours of in type training that same pilot would be SAFER in the AStar than without any time in type?

 

Bottom line, the 22 had a lot of unique characteristics, some of which killed people, some of those have been fixed by technology, others still require specific pilot knowledge. I'm in favor of keeping the SFAR in some form for the 22....

 

I think currently the biggest risk we face in flying a fully loaded 44 is thinking that its ok to fly into 200 foot visibility...gadgets and gyros dont make a safe IFR ship but it lulls people to believe they can do it. Thats a pilot error/pilot training issue not a helicopter issue.

 

I've rambled...I hope you see my points...thanks for asking !

 

Goldy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just dont think that the same level of risk/previous accidents warrants it. You still have the same if not higher risks of low G, but I can drink an entire cup of coffee while doing a hover auto in a 44.

I dont believe there is any more risk flying an R44 than a 206. Each one is different, each one has different potential issues just like any other helicopter. To put the R22 and the R44 in the same bucket doesn't make sense for me.

 

In fact, if you want to really take it to the next level of safety..why not treat each helicopter differently? Why not require 10 hours training in type before you can fly it. Right now, as you know, I could jump in just about anything and be "qualified" under the FAR's to fly it. A great 300 pilot may have a few issues in his first hour in an AStar...maybe not, but wouldnt you agree that after 10 hours of in type training that same pilot would be SAFER in the AStar than without any time in type?

 

Bottom line, the 22 had a lot of unique characteristics, some of which killed people, some of those have been fixed by technology, others still require specific pilot knowledge. I'm in favor of keeping the SFAR in some form for the 22....

 

I think currently the biggest risk we face in flying a fully loaded 44 is thinking that its ok to fly into 200 foot visibility...gadgets and gyros dont make a safe IFR ship but it lulls people to believe they can do it. Thats a pilot error/pilot training issue not a helicopter issue.

 

I've rambled...I hope you see my points...thanks for asking !

 

Goldy

 

 

Goldy -

 

OK - I have to ask - Tall, Grande or Venti...? I just need to know so I have something to shoot for :D

 

 

Thanks for taking the time to reply. As a low time helicopter pilot, I am trying to get as much insight into these things that I can.

 

As a long time fixed wing pilot and instructor, we were always doing checkouts from one aircraft to another. Personally I think that if you are transiting from one aircraft into another (like your 300 to AStar pilot), prudence, safety and just plain common sense would suggest a checkout with a qualified instructor. Of course, I also think that drinking in a concourse bar and then climbing into the cockpit of a large passenger jet is not prudent, safe nor using common sense, but it happens!

 

Even going from something like a 152 to a 172 (I feel) should require a checkout unless the pilot has flown 182, 206s, etc.. But hey, I tend to err on the more conservative side when it comes to things like that. However, I do see your point, I don't think we need a SFAR part 172 ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...