Jump to content

407 vs 172 on the Taxiway


rotor91

Recommended Posts

EMS Pilot and he's a Gardner!

 

I remember coming into a narrow path in Panama(44 Astro), a mile long, but only x amount of feet wide. On the approach, doing S-turns to avoid the overhang branches.....and then we heard "BBBRRRAAAP"! Yep, did some gardening that day, inspected the ship after we landed, and everything was A-OK! It sounded like I was standing next to a Howitzer....LOUD!

 

407 pilot was bit fast on his air taxi, but not sure why he didn't see the 172, sun was in his eyes a bit. Not sure if it was controlled or uncontrolled either?? Good reflexed though....this is why you hover taxi at that altitude, any lower..the stinger would've been in the ground!

 

R91

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice videos R91!

 

I remember a few years ago I had set up an LZ for (2) ems ships (A109 and an AS350) to take on two patients from a headon collision late one evening. Both ships landed into the wind, and by doing so they were taking up all three lanes (northbound-southbound and a turnlane) in an intersection. We had the highway shut down to the general public, but Emergency Vehicles could come past the barracade and a FF manning it. Low and behold a 3rd johnny-come-lately ALS ambulance arrived and blew thru the manned barricade trying to get to the scene down the road past the LZ, and drove behind the A109 that had just landed and was idling hot while the FN's did there thing. The med unit passed the semi-invisible tailrotor less than 5 feet to spare as I sat dumbfounded watching the strobe light reflect off the ambulance and back into the tailrotor. It was a sinking feeling knowing that there wasn't a damn thing I could do. Lucky for all of us that no contact was made. The pilot had no idea anything happened, until later.

 

The following day the ambulance company manager received several hot phone calls, not sure what happened to the driver/crew but have a suspicion it was not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the 407 was exiting the runway to the taxi way and judging by the wind sock the 172 was taxi-ing to the threshold for t.o. Due to my bias against fixed wing pilots i'm saying the 407 pilot was expiditing his exit from the runway to avoid the flow of more fixed wing traffic. keep you eyes peeled yall.

 

Your correct. Rule #1 - it's always the fixed-wingers fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your correct. Rule #1 - it's always the fixed-wingers fault.

 

Paisley- I fully agree

 

Rob, great post. I think AStar's are rated for leafy trees and shrubs, but pretty sure if you want to trim branches you need the modifications done to the main rotor. I couldnt tell from the video if they had the chainsaw teeth installed on the leading edges or not.

 

Roger- Three weeks ago I set up an LZ for Air5, an H3, and a damn big one at that. Just as we moved all the cones (so they wouldnt blow into the rotors during start up) a van pulled up, ignored my partner waving him off and decided they should occupy the turnout. As the van was driving towards the now spinning tail rotor, I jumped in my unit, hit the lights and drove straight towards the van at full speed (tires smoking!). I had already decided that I was going to ram the van right at the front axle if he didnt stop. Striking that spinning tail would not only have wrecked a ship, it would have taken out the family in the van as well......I was able to get in front of him and block him from going any further. He stopped about 15 feet from the tail, oblivious to life. It was about 2 seconds of sheer terror...all he wanted to do was drive around the back of the nice helicopter...geez !

 

Heres a shot I took just before Air5 started up...

 

OK, I just spent the last 10 minutes searching for the file.....you guys will have to wait and I'll upload it tomorrow..it was starting to snow ( yes, it does snow in LA) and the vis was getting low so we were in a hurry to get them out of there..

 

Fly safe, dont drive into moving helicopters.

 

Goldy

 

Goldy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that some fault lies with both, but far more with the helicopter pilot. He was completely past the runway hold short lines, so he didn't need to continue forward to clear the runway. He was hover taxiing WAY too fast. Should have just air taxied to his parking spot at those speeds. His speed and altitude would have made it hard for anyone to know his intentions and react accordingly.

 

If I was in the 172, I would have probably stopped when I first saw the 407 start turning. However, the visibility in an airplane is piss poor compared to a helicopter, and it is possible the pillar was in the way.

 

I would say this is a perfect example of poor judgment requiring the use of one's superior skill. Remember, the superior pilot uses superior judgment to avoid situations which require the use of their superior skill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to tell you but the 172 was in the right of way. If helicopters are going to use the runway and then the taxiway you better act more like an airplane. The 407 came screaming in on final, decided to blast off the runway and not stop beyond the hold short line and either call ground or on CTAF call clear of the runway and taxi intentions. This would be unless there was a tower controler whom instructed the 407 otherwise.

 

You will notice that ground traffic doesn't stop at every runway exit while going down the taxiway, and they don't have to unless instructed to hold at such a point by ATC. If the airport is uncontrolled then don't expect the traffic to stop on the taxiway while you exit the runway and they won't. You must come to a stop, clear each direction then taxi from there.

 

We can't really tell exactly what happened because we don't know if the airport was controled or not(ATC). It would make a difference.

 

This video should be a lesson to others that being aggressive, hot dogging and not taking the time to finish one thing before starting another can lead to an accident.

 

In my opinion this was not a professional way to make an approach and exit the runway. However, I am guessing the airport was uncontroled. If not then there may be some fault on the ATC side of things, but we may never know.

 

Just because we are helicopter pilots doesn't mean we own the airport. We need to think of how our actions will affect others including bystandars and other aircraft in motion or not.

 

It's really better to land at the point of parking if you can or close to it. This way you can avoid the airplane guys moving around on the ground. You'll still have to watch ground movment and non-movment areas for moving planes or those that are about to taxi. If you cut one off or hit one, I'd say the FAA will most likely fualt the helicopter that was landing/taking off and not the aircraft on the ramp or taxiway.

 

JD

 

PS: Yes I am an airplane guy too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to tell you but the 172 was in the right of way. If helicopters are going to use the runway and then the taxiway you better act more like an airplane. The 407 came screaming in on final, decided to blast off the runway and not stop beyond the hold short line and either call ground or on CTAF call clear of the runway and taxi intentions. This would be unless there was a tower controler whom instructed the 407 otherwise.

 

You will notice that ground traffic doesn't stop at every runway exit while going down the taxiway, and they don't have to unless instructed to hold at such a point by ATC. If the airport is uncontrolled then don't expect the traffic to stop on the taxiway while you exit the runway and they won't. You must come to a stop, clear each direction then taxi from there.

 

We can't really tell exactly what happened because we don't know if the airport was controled or not(ATC). It would make a difference.

 

This video should be a lesson to others that being aggressive, hot dogging and not taking the time to finish one thing before starting another can lead to an accident.

 

In my opinion this was not a professional way to make an approach and exit the runway. However, I am guessing the airport was uncontroled. If not then there may be some fault on the ATC side of things, but we may never know.

 

Just because we are helicopter pilots doesn't mean we own the airport. We need to think of how our actions will affect others including bystandars and other aircraft in motion or not.

 

It's really better to land at the point of parking if you can or close to it. This way you can avoid the airplane guys moving around on the ground. You'll still have to watch ground movment and non-movment areas for moving planes or those that are about to taxi. If you cut one off or hit one, I'd say the FAA will most likely fualt the helicopter that was landing/taking off and not the aircraft on the ramp or taxiway.

 

JD

 

PS: Yes I am an airplane guy too.

 

I generally agree with you, but I don't think you can equivocally say the 172 had the right of way. It's like the teaser videos you see in the news. You get to see so little as to form a truly informed opinion. As you said, we don't know if the airport was ATC controlled, and it certainly could make a difference.

 

That said, asssuming the 172 did have the right of way, merely having the right of way and prudently exercising it are two different things. The 172 pilot appeared to be oblivious to the helicopter. Either he did not see it (not good), or he saw it and assumed the helicopter would stop (even though it was pretty clear he was not going to) and asserted his right of way in spite of due caution. If you had the right of way and wind up dead, it doesn't matter that you had the right of way.

 

Either way it looke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I generally agree with you, but I don't think you can equivocally say the 172 had the right of way. It's like the teaser videos you see in the news. You get to see so little as to form a truly informed opinion. As you said, we don't know if the airport was ATC controlled, and it certainly could make a difference.

 

That said, asssuming the 172 did have the right of way, merely having the right of way and prudently exercising it are two different things. The 172 pilot appeared to be oblivious to the helicopter. Either he did not see it (not good), or he saw it and assumed the helicopter would stop (even though it was pretty clear he was not going to) and asserted his right of way in spite of due caution. If you had the right of way and wind up dead, it doesn't matter that you had the right of way.

 

Either way it looke

 

Get real.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...