# Kobe Bryant Crash



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 26, 2020)

A very sad day in the sports word hearing this news. At this time it looks like Kobe Bryant, his daughter and 7 other people were killed as the Sikorsky S 76 they were flying in slammed into some hilly terrain to the north west of LA. The NTSB is on their way and so far (from what I've seen) there hasn't been too much speculation about this incident. I was surfing the internet and came across some interesting information.

This site not only had information about the aircraft but a flight tacker of today's flight. Since I used to live (and fly) in Southern California, this caught my attention.

Kobe Bryant among nine killed in helicopter crash near Los Angeles | International Flight Network

N72EX - Sikorsky S-76B [760379] - Flightradar24

It looks like he took off from John Wayne airport, flew a low level helicopter route to Glendale CA, where the helicopter seemed to circle over the city. He continued north and then over Granada Hills started tuning to the south west, it looks like they were 1200' MSL. Over Woodland Hills they being to follow the 101 freeway remaining at 1200' MSL until they got over Las Virgenes Rd, made a turn to the south east and flew into higher terrain to the east of Las Virgenes Rd. Prior to the turn they were cruising at about 130 knts GS. After they made that turn they abruptly slowed down to 110 knts and then began to climb and gain ground speed The tracking ends at 1700 MSL. 153 knts, 17:45z. Looking at some online sectional and terminal chart products, it looks like terrain in the area was over 2000'.

I didn't pull up weather reports but eye witnesses who saw the helicopter before the cash said it was "cloudy and foggy" which I know is typical in that area, especially during this time of the year during AM hours.

The site also shows the helicopter being operated several days prior to this crash.

Amazing the online resources available but I'll still let the NTSB do their job, but I do know these resources are pretty reliable.

RIP Kobe, Gianna and all who perished!


----------



## michael rauls (Jan 26, 2020)

R.I.P.....Really sad already but when I heard the daughter perished in the crash as well that was just overwhelmingly tragic.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 27, 2020)

ATC recording - the obvious is evident but I'll let the NTSB give the last word. So sad.


----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 27, 2020)

Those hills and surrounding ranges in SoCal have claimed a good number of lives as far back as aviation goes.

Sad to hear of the tragic news


----------



## Wurger (Jan 27, 2020)




----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 27, 2020)

I hate to speculate but...

The more I listen to the radio conservation, the more I think the pilot was not instrument rated. That would explain the “special VFR”, and why he was trying to follow the roads. He was trying to stay below the clouds and maintain visual reference and flew them into a mountain.

Just speculation on my part. The NTSB investigation will tell.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Jan 27, 2020)

At first when I heard this, I wasn't sure it was for real. Evidently it was.


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jan 27, 2020)

I heard an initial report that the original pilot refused to fly and that another pilot was hired to make the flight. Not sure if it's true or not, was just a blurb on the radio and could be just more confusion in the initial reporting.

Too bad it happened, I give zero sh!ts about sports figures and "celebrities" but I don't like to see them die, especially needlessly. Seems like a case of "Get-theritis" but I could be wrong. I hope that doesn't come off sounding cold hearted, it's just they mean so little to me I can't get too emotional or upset about it.

Although I am sorry to hear his daughter was also killed and of course his family will be devastated, but no more than the thousands of non-famous people that pass every day in obscurity. 

I agree with Adler, sounds like a VFR pilot in over his head, just more proof (if needed) that no matter how much money and fame you have, you can't overcome Mother Nature in an aircraft.


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 27, 2020)

Sad news indeed. Be interesting what the investigation shows.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 27, 2020)

MIflyer said:
This newspaper has a good account of the circumstances associated with the helicopter crash that all the news has been covering.
I have flown Special VFR in the LA basin exactly ONCE, and it certainly was not under conditions remotely similar to what is described. We took off from Torrance in Cessna 172 with the usual California coastal "horizontal overcast" of about 500 ft thick. Typically SFR is used to get away from the airport a short distance to a VFR area.

Helicopter that crashed killing Kobe and 8 others circled for 15 minutes over Burbank | Daily Mail Online


----------



## MIflyer (Jan 29, 2020)

I talked to a commercial helicopter pilot yesterday and he said that the S-76 is intended to be flown by two pilots. He also says that it has an autopilot but that it disengages at about 55 kts because it assumes if you are going that slow you are preparing to land. So no creeping through the scud with that copter!

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 29, 2020)

We had several 76’s at my last company. They were always flown with two pilots.

Also, the 2004 crash of a 76 that resulted in the NTSB recommending the use of TAWS and GPWS was one of ours. The aircraft flew controlled at high speed into the water.


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 29, 2020)

MIflyer said:


> I talked to a commercial helicopter pilot yesterday and he said that the S-76 is intended to be flown by two pilots. He also says that it has an autopilot but that it disengages at about 55 kts because it assumes if you are going that slow you are preparing to land. So no creeping through the scud with that copter!


It's certified for single-pilot operation when operated VFR as this one was (it had a special VFR clearance). The two pilot requirement is when operating under IFR (unless it's equipped appropriately, which includes a 4-axis autopilot among other things). Adler, I'm guessing that you were operating IFR?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Jan 29, 2020)

I have a feeling this will turn into an awkward case of celebrity, authority and wealth meets weather and an unfortunate pilot.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Jan 29, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I have a feeling this will turn into an awkward case of celebrity, authority and wealth meets weather and an unfortunate pilot.



You might be right, the news reports said the L.A. PD choppers were grounded that morning due to weather conditions. *shrug* not the first time for a case like that, not the last either I'm sure.


----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 29, 2020)

The overcast in the Southland can be tricky at best.

Even during summer, conditions can go from CAVU to pea-soup in less than an hour - add to that, the various hill ranges between the coast and the San Gabriel/San Bernardino mountains can get a pilot in trouble fast.


----------



## pbehn (Jan 29, 2020)

GrauGeist said:


> The overcast in the Southland can be tricky at best.
> 
> Even during summer, conditions can go from CAVU to pea-soup in less than an hour - add to that, the various hill ranges between the coast and the San Gabriel/San Bernardino mountains can get a pilot in trouble fast.


There was a woman on UK radio from L.A. explaining that with the road traffic there, celebrities just HAVE to use helicopters to do their business. In view of the loss of life to be at a junior basketball game I don't think she realised how stupid she sounded. You never have to get in a helicopter and fly around some mountains in fog.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Zipper730 (Jan 29, 2020)

This is purely a speculation: I'm wondering if the pilot selected for this flight was selected on the fly. Some people when they want something won't take no for an answer, choosing to adopt the mindset that "If you can't do it, I'll find someone who will".


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 29, 2020)

Some info - gumbyk got it right, single pilot ops "IS" approved for the S-76B, what is not currently known is what avionics was in the aircraft and whether IFR operation was authorized. The S-76D is certificated for single pilot IFR operations.

Bryant didn't own the helicopter, it was owned by Island Express Holdings. Island Express is a 135 helicopter operation that does flights to Catalina Island and charters. Bryant may have been leasing this aircraft and it may have been operating under Part 135. If that was the case, authorized IFR operations would be indicated in the operator's FAA approved operation specifications, providing the aircraft was authorized for single pilot operations.

The NTSB will do their job - personally I believe this pilot (although instrument rated) got into IMC and was attempting to turn around and head back, possibly to KVNY.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Jan 29, 2020)

Peter Gunn said:


> You might be right, the news reports said the L.A. PD choppers were grounded that morning due to weather conditions. *shrug* not the first time for a case like that, not the last either I'm sure.


I know the only connection is celebrity but it reminds me of the death of Princess Diana. In all the wild conspiracy theories the fact is she got in a car with a drunk driver and didn't even put a seatbelt on. It seems possible that you can be so famous, rich, powerful whatever that you believe the normal rules of life don't apply. They leave a lot of sad people asking WHY?

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 29, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Some info - gumbyk got it right, single pilot ops "IS" approved for the S-76B, what is not currently known is what avionics was in the aircraft and whether IFR operation was authorized. The S-76D is certificated for single pilot IFR operations.
> 
> Bryant didn't own the helicopter, it was owned by Island Express Holdings. Island Express is a 135 helicopter operation that does flights to Catalina Island and charters. Bryant may have been leasing this aircraft and it may have been operating under Part 135. If that was the case, authorized IFR operations would be indicated in the operator's FAA approved operation specifications, providing the aircraft was authorized for single pilot operations.
> 
> The NTSB will do their job - personally I believe this pilot (although instrument rated) got into IMC and was attempting to turn around and head back, possibly to KVNY.



That's my thinking at the moment as well, with what has been described, but I'm half a world away...

I suspect that this wouldn't have happened if they were operating IFR unfortunately.


----------



## Zipper730 (Jan 29, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I know the only connection is celebrity but it reminds me of the death of Princess Diana.


I figure she was assassinated -- I don't know the exact reason, but it adds up. It's surprising how easy one can send a car off with a PIT maneuver or some variation.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 29, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> That's my thinking at the moment as well, with what has been described, but I'm half a world away...
> 
> I suspect that this wouldn't have happened if they were operating IFR unfortunately.


Agree - some other stuff that came up on my radar;

"IF" the pilot was authorized to fly IFR, he would have been compelled to shoot an IAP at his destination. They were on their way to Bryant's basketball center, there is a helipad there and I'd bet dollars to donuts there is absolutely no IAP for that LZ. About 20 miles to the north is Camarillo Airport, all kind of IAPs there.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 29, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> It's certified for single-pilot operation when operated VFR as this one was (it had a special VFR clearance). The two pilot requirement is when operating under IFR (unless it's equipped appropriately, which includes a 4-axis autopilot among other things). Adler, I'm guessing that you were operating IFR?



No, it was just company policy. It did not matter if we were VFR or IFR. Only the small ships were allowed single pilot.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 29, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I have a feeling this will turn into an awkward case of celebrity, authority and wealth meets weather and an unfortunate pilot.



i think you are right.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 30, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I have a feeling this will turn into an awkward case of celebrity, authority and wealth meets weather and an unfortunate pilot.


Feb 3, 1959
The Day the Music Died

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Agree Agree:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 30, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I have a feeling this will turn into an awkward case of celebrity, authority and wealth meets weather and an unfortunate pilot.


"If there's a rock n' roll heaven, you know they got a helluva band!"
Jim Croce
Otis Redding
Patsy Cline
Lynyrd Skynyrd
Stevie Ray Vaughan
Ricky Nelson
Glenn Miller
The Barkays
and on...
and on...
and on...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Jan 30, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "If there's a rock n' roll heaven, you know they got a helluva band!"
> Jim Croce
> Otis Redding
> Patsy Cline
> ...


Not only rock and roll, add Graham Hill (F1 driver flying unqualified in fog) and Trafford Leigh Mallory, No aircraft would have the temerity to hit a mountain with an air chief marshall and and his wife on board, would it? From wiki my bold.…..... On 16 August 1944, with the Battle of Normandy almost over, Leigh-Mallory was appointed Air Commander-in-Chief of South East Asia Command (SEAC) with the temporary rank of air chief marshal.[21] But before he could take up his post, on 14 November, he and his wife were killed en route to Burma when their Avro York _MW126_,[1] flown by Squadron Leader Charles Gordon Drake Lancaster (DFC and Bar),[22] crashed in the French Alps, killing all on board.[4] *A court of inquiry found that the accident was a consequence of bad weather and might have been avoided if Leigh-Mallory had not insisted that the flight proceed in such poor conditions against the advice of his aircrew*.[


----------



## Admiral Beez (Jan 30, 2020)

I don’t understand, if you’re in an aircraft that can fly straight up and you can’t see forwards or to the sides, why wouldn’t you hover, call for clearance and climb straight up out of the fog to get your bearings?


pbehn said:


> I have a feeling this will turn into an awkward case of celebrity, authority and wealth meets weather and an unfortunate pilot.


This does remind me of The Day the Music Died.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 30, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> I don’t understand, if you’re in an aircraft that can fly straight up and you can’t see forwards or to the sides, why wouldn’t you hover, call for clearance and climb straight up out of the fog to get your bearings?
> This does remind me of The Day the Music Died.



For starters, had he did that he would have possibly violated 91.157 as he had to stay "clear of clouds." Although this aircraft might have been IFR capable, it may have been illegal for it to be operated single pilot IFR. Bad enough to paint yourself into a corner, even worse when you're flying Kobe Bryant. Yes, it seems like it would have been better to take a violation than die. Sadly the decision making process lead to the death of 7 people. According to the unofficial flight tracks, it seemed he did slow down substantially, possibly to assess his situation then increased airspeed and altitude.


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 30, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Had he did that he would have violated 91.157 as he had to stay "clear of clouds." Yes, it seems like it would have been better to take a violation than die.


Ain't hindsight 20/20...

I'm fairly confident that heli pilots try to avoid hovering in IMC. Maintaining a hover is hard enough when you've got an external horizon to work from, I can't imagine what it's like without external reference.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 30, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> Ain't hindsight 20/20...
> 
> I'm fairly confident that heli pilots try to avoid hovering in IMC. Maintaining a hover is hard enough when you've got an external horizon to work from, I can't imagine what it's like without external reference.



Very true - and hover in IMC when you know you have rising terrain to your sides and in front of you.

Having lived in Southern California on and off for 20 years, I know exactly where he crashed, even flown over the area several times. Not a place to be flying at low altitude during this time of the year.


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 30, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Very true - and hover in IMC when you know you have rising terrain to your sides and in front of you.
> 
> Having lived in Southern California on and off for 20 years, I know exactly where he crashed, even flown over the area several times. Not a place to be flying at low altitude during this time of the year.


In fact, if he were doing a spiral climb, which is a reasonable thing to do in the situation, and got the 'leans' then that is a plausible explanation.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 30, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> For starters, had he did that he would have possibly violated 91.157 as he had to stay "clear of clouds." Although this aircraft might have been IFR capable, it may have been illegal for it to be operated single pilot IFR. Bad enough to paint yourself into a corner, even worse when you're flying Kobe Bryant. Yes, it seems like it would have been better to take a violation than die. Sadly the decision making process lead to the death of 7 people. According to the unofficial flight tracks, it seemed he did slow down substantially, possibly to assess his situation then increased airspeed and altitude.



I get that it is restricted from single pilot IFR, but couldn’t he have have declared IMC?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 30, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I get that it is restricted from single pilot IFR, but couldn’t he have have declared IMC?



Absolutely - but had he done that, got vectors back to Van Nuys or on to Camarillo, more than likely he would have been told to call the tower upon landing and I'm sure the FAA would be looking at enforcement/ violation. It's times like this when commercial pilots put their careers ahead of their lives and sometimes and unfortunately ahead of the lives of their passengers.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 30, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Absolutely - but had he done that, got vectors back to Van Nuys or on to Camarillo, more than likely he would have been told to call the tower upon landing and I'm sure the FAA would be looking at enforcement/ violation. It's times like this when commercial pilots put their careers ahead of their lives and sometimes and unfortunately ahead of the lives of their passengers.



Yeah I get all that, but it just leade back full circle to the poor aeronautical decision making that occurred here. Never should have taken off to begin with. If the company is pressuring you to fly in it, you don’t want to work for them. If Passenger (Kobe in this case) is pressuring you to fly, you don’t want to fly them.

it’s sometimes best to be on the ground wishing you were up in the air, than being up in the air wishing you were on the ground.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Winner Winner:
4 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> I don’t understand, if you’re in an aircraft that can fly straight up and you can’t see forwards or to the sides, why wouldn’t you hover, call for clearance and climb straight up out of the fog to get your beari


As a confirmed (and prejudiced) fixed wing pilot who has tried a time or three (unsuccessfully) to learn to hover a helicopter, I can tell you it's difficult, and without immediate visual feedback, nigh impossible. Without nearby visual references you can be slipsliding in any direction and not realize it.
The only safe IMC capable hover I'm aware of is one I've observed in use in a Navy SH3 intended for sonar dunking. That was in the form of an autopilot coupled to a Doppler radar system that could keep the sonar hydrophone stationary in the water as the bird was getting pushed back and forth by wind gusts. We weren't hunting subs, just picking up Cuban refugees who were in pretty tough shape, but it was awesome watching the cyclic and collective moving on their own as the lift operator vectored us in on the boat and the flying pilot twisted knobs on the autopilot to command our approach. We were bouncing around in the breeze, but the penetrator seat moved in on the boat steady as a rock.
Needless to say, Kobe's chopper didn't have any such device, and being below radar coverage, couldn't have been issued an IFR clearance in any case.
No cheers today.
Wes

Reactions: Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Admiral Beez (Jan 31, 2020)

X
 XBe02Drvr
thanks, that’s good info, I didn’t understand that the instruments didn’t indicate sideways motion. Too bad he didn’t just declare he can’t see and climb. Reports say he was moving slowly but the impact site was 500 feet long. Doesn’t that suggest a high speed CFIT?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 31, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> X
> XBe02Drvr
> thanks, that’s good info, I didn’t understand that the instruments didn’t indicate sideways motion. Too bad he didn’t just declare he can’t see and climb. Reports say he was moving slowly but the impact site was 500 feet long. Doesn’t that suggest a high speed CFIT?


Look at the flight tracker posted earlier. He slowed down then accelerated while climbing and turning.


----------



## michael rauls (Jan 31, 2020)

Just a thought/question for the actual pilots here. Perhaps I'm looking at this too simplisticly but it seems if you get into heavy fog and you know the highest mountain in the immediate area is say 2500 feet wouldn't the safest thing to do be get up abouve that altitude and fly in the direction of the nearest airport reporting clear skies?
Of course if it turns out to be mechanical trouble that wouldn't apply to this incident but I keep hearing reporters speculate on what the pilot may have been trying to do, set it down, go back to where they took off from etc. but given the abouve non of it makes much sense to me.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jan 31, 2020)

Ok I just read an article about the crash: Helicopter company in Kobe Bryant crash not certified to fly in poor visibility: Reports

It states that company was not certified to fly in poor visibility, but the pilot and aircraft was. Is this rating held by the company itself and not the pilots????


----------



## Admiral Beez (Jan 31, 2020)

This just seems so bloody avoidable and senseless. If I'm a billionaire celebrity I'm not scrimping on my safety, and I'd be demanding top grade pilots with both top drawer experience AND a carrier with clearance and drilled for IFR/IMC.

That doesn't guarantee safety of course. Here in Canada we've had helicopters crash transiting between Newfoundland and offshoring drilling platforms, but those are almost always mechanical issues. When they have to (often they wait for weather to clear) those oil platform pilots fly in the soupiest fog the Grand Banks can create. Those are the guys you want flying your celebrity copter. Any ex-RCN CH-124 pilot would be tops in my books too.

But damn it guy, just climb!


----------



## davparlr (Jan 31, 2020)

I've heard several times that the rate of decent at time of crash was 4000 to 5000 f/min. If this is true it is very confusing. In the soup looking around for visual references, looking inside to check instruments, could be vertigo, been there, done that. Glad I had a copilot. Does these types of commercial aircraft have any type of recorders aboard?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

davparlr said:


> I've heard several times that the rate of decent at time of crash was 4000 to 5000 f/min. If this is true it is very confusing. In the soup looking around for visual references, looking inside to check instruments, could be vertigo, been there, done that. Glad I had a copilot. Does these types of commercial aircraft have any type of recorders aboard?



According to his ADS-B data his rate of descent was 4864 feet per minute.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)




----------



## mikewint (Jan 31, 2020)

davparlr said:


> could be vertigo,


We went through this before in another crash but don't remember the exact circumstances possibly JFK Jr's crash into the ocean. I know nothing definitive about this accident but do understand vertigo. It takes a highly trained person to trust a gauge (which do malfunction) when there are no visual references and every sensory input you have is screaming that you are climbing, diving, etc. Unfortunately habit kicks in and you trust your senses.
I would strongly suspect that this is the cause of this crash. White above, below, and to all sides, with no sense of up or down...vertigo and panic set in


----------



## davparlr (Jan 31, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> According to his ADS-B data his rate of descent was 4864 feet per minute.


That's a high rate of descent for any type of normal flight especially in limited visibility. I once got that in the C-141, but I was just showing off. Center asked for expedited descent to low altitude so I thought that it was a good time to see what the plane could do. I pulled the throttles to idle and deployed the spoilers and slowed to below 200kts indicated then lowered the nose and accelerated to 250 kts (the limit below 10k ft). We were going down like a rock. That's not what you would want to do at low altitude in fog. Something else seems to be at work here. Vertigo could have caused that.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

vikingBerserker said:


> It states that company was not certified to fly in poor visibility, but the pilot and aircraft was. Is this rating held by the company and not the pilots?


Both. When operating under FAR Part 135 (Air Taxi) rules, the aircraft, the pilots, and the division of the company operating the aircraft have to be certified for IFR under the Operations Specifications issued to that company by the FAA. These "ops specs" define precisely what the company and its pilots can and cannot do and under what circumstances. The ops specs for a commuter airline operating several aircraft types can be thicker than a King James Bible, and when you go for your FAA checkride you WILL be quizzed extensively on it.
For example, at the commuter I flew for, operating an aircraft that was single pilot authorized, there were two classes of captains. Junior captains had to fly with a First Officer at all times, regardless of the type of operation. Senior captains who had taken a separate additional checkride with the FAA could fly single pilot on non-revenue flights, such as ferrying, maintenance test, or training. This was all spelled out in our Ops Specs.
Back in the day, a 500 hour pilot could fly VFR charters under the air taxi rules, and a lot of pilots built time that way, but I believe that loophole has been plugged. (As well it should!) It led to lots of Kobe-style scud running, with consequences to match.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jan 31, 2020)

Thanks Wes!


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

davparlr said:


> Something else seems to be at work here. Vertigo could have caused that.


Panic in the passenger cabin has turned more than one hairy situation into a tragedy. In IMC the "seat of the pants" sensations accompanying that ADS-B profile would have been unsettling, to say the least, especially to the uninitiated.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

davparlr said:


> That's a high rate of descent for any type of normal flight especially in limited visibility. I once got that in the C-141, but I was just showing off. Center asked for expedited descent to low altitude so I thought that it was a good time to see what the plane could do. I pulled the throttles to idle and deployed the spoilers and slowed to below 200kts indicated then lowered the nose and accelerated to 250 kts (the limit below 10k ft). We were going down like a rock. That's not what you would want to do at low altitude in fog. Something else seems to be at work here. Vertigo could have caused that.



I would not be surprised if it was spatial disorientation. His mind and inner ear telling him he was climbing or wings level, but was in-fact in a dive.

I experienced that once after going IMC. We were in-fact wings level, but I thought we were inverted, and in a dive.

Trust your instruments...

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I experienced that once after going IMC. We were in-fact wings level, but I thought we were inverted, and in a dive.


Happened to me in my pre-instrument days in a T34 with old tired gyros that precessed at a phenomenal rate. Flew inadvertently into a cloud on a moonless night and suddenly realized my rotating beacon was reflecting back at me on all sides. Tried to fly the gages, but got befuddled and wound up in a graveyard spiral where nothing seemed to make any sense and "needle-ball-airspeed" seemingly refused to play by the rules. Came out of the bottom of the clouds at <1000 feet MSL in a 200+ Kt downward spiral and almost pulled "a JFK Jr", but thanks to a 9G airplane, didn't. I saw the reflections of my nav lights in the water before I got the descent stopped, and the G meter recorded 6+. Life is a wonderful thing.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

michael rauls said:


> Just a thought/question for the actual pilots here. Perhaps I'm looking at this too simplisticly but it seems if you get into heavy fog and you know the highest mountain in the immediate area is say 2500 feet wouldn't the safest thing to do be get up abouve that altitude and fly in the direction of the nearest airport reporting clear skies?



Almost correct, in my view; 1st, transition to instrument flight safely minimizing abrupt turns. 2nd, adjust controls for a maximum climb attitude and airspeed while begining turns away from obstacles and make your EMER IIMC call to ATC. 3rd; turn away from the highest obstacle(s) in your immediate flight path maintaining a positive climb. 4th; climb to at least minimum vectoring altitude for your airport of destination. 5th; set up your systems and instruments for the at least an ILS with preferably a PAR back-up...and, and go have few cigarettes.

As well, on shit weather days a few mental plans and the cockpit set up with IAPs at the ready just for event of such.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

Husky said:


> at least an ILS with preferably a PAR backup...


They still have Precision Approach Radar?? Where? I thought those went away decades ago. They used to be a lot of fun. Used to go out to the GCA trailer and play cards with the ACs on duty to help them stay awake through those long boring nights with no traffic. They used to beg us flying club types to go out and shoot some approaches, just to have something to do.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

Husky said:


> ...and, and go have few cigarettes.


And prepare to surrender your license to the Feds.


----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> And prepare to surrender your license to the Feds.



I've been IIMC a handful of times, almost always under NVG's and mostly in formation flights....nothing happened to us by the Feds or host nations. But as well, I was never in a tightly congested flight area where me declaring an IIMC emergency would have disrupted traffic or cause a safety issue to other aircraft.

But, in any case, I, my crew, my passengers and aircraft would be on the ground.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

Husky said:


> I've been IIMC a handful of times, almost always under NVG's and mostly in formation flights....nothing happened to us by the Feds or host nations.


The "privileges" of operating entirely in the military sphere. As civil operators on military property, we had to keep both sides happy. But then again, we were not expected to fly "in harm's way". And NVGs were still in the future.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Happened to me in my pre-instrument days in a T34 with old tired gyros that precessed at a phenomenal rate. Flew inadvertently into a cloud on a moonless night and suddenly realized my rotating beacon was reflecting back at me on all sides. Tried to fly the gages, but got befuddled and wound up in a graveyard spiral where nothing seemed to make any sense and "needle-ball-airspeed" seemingly refused to play by the rules. Came out of the bottom of the clouds at <1000 feet MSL in a 200+ Kt downward spiral and almost pulled "a JFK Jr", but thanks to a 9G airplane, didn't. I saw the reflections of my nav lights in the water before I got the descent stopped, and the G meter recorded 6+. Life is a wonderful thing.
> Cheers,
> Wes



Wow. Never experienced something like that, and don’t ever want to.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jan 31, 2020)

Yea, I'll stick to my first stall during lessons for my soiling of the flight suit.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
Wow. Never experienced something like that, and don’t ever want to.



vikingBerserker said:


> Yea, I'll stick to my first stall during lessons for my soiling of the flight suit.


Once was enough for me.


----------



## pbehn (Jan 31, 2020)

If visibility is closing in what is the legal position for a pilot if he just descends and lands, or even crash lands on uneven ground in preference to flying into a mountain?


----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

pbehn said:


> If visibility is closing in what is the legal position for a pilot if he just descends and lands, or even crash lands on uneven ground in preference to flying into a mountain?



Done it three times; once in a shopping center parking lot, once in a cut corn field and once a golf course par 4 with a flight of six Blackhawks. The store manager brought out snacks and drinks after I used their phone to call the FAA, the farm couple cooked us dinner after I used their phone to call the FAA and the U.S government had to pay for repairs to the divots in the golf course.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

We landed a Blackhawk in a German farmers field due to bad visibility and weather. Sweet lady, kept bringing coffee and pastries out at the aircraft. She was probably excited about the check the Army was about to cut her for the damage to her field.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Jan 31, 2020)

pbehn said:


> If visibility is closing in what is the legal position for a pilot if he just descends and lands, or even crash lands on uneven ground in preference to flying into a mountain?


Husky and DerAdler both replied for the military side. The civil side is less forgiving. The official position is "Pilot Error", you shouldn't have been there in the first place. Likely results in a violation and a penalty.


----------



## pbehn (Jan 31, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Husky and DerAdler both replied for the military side. The civil side is less forgiving. The official position is "Pilot Error", you shouldn't have been there in the first place. Likely results in a violation and a penalty.


I was once given a meeting schedule that resulted in me leaving a meeting in Genoa and having to be at Lecco in Como up in the Alps the next morning. The car hire company helpfully upgraded me to a BMW 318 (all front wheel drive cars taken). It was snowing when we first arrived in Milan, by the time we got to Genoa it was starting to lay, passing Milan on the way back to the Alps we were in heavy snow. I of course crashed the car into the central reservation and smashed every light and panel but the car was drivable, so I continued. Eventually we got all done but I tore my boss off a strip and told him I would never ever accept any such schedule again. I did learn one thing, Japanese engineers turn a sickly grey/white in a car going backwards on snow in Italy, poor Mr Hiroe hadnt ever been in a car in snow and had never been further than 20 miles in a car before.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Husky and DerAdler both replied for the military side. The civil side is less forgiving. The official position is "Pilot Error", you shouldn't have been there in the first place. Likely results in a violation and a penalty.



I can imagine so. After flying Alfa, Charlie and Enhanced Hawks for 20 years I did a few years civil flying Bell 412's, Bell 222's, Bell 206's and Bell 407's....if I was doing a long distance flight...I filed IFR, even if clear blue and 22. All the aircraft were IFR equipped, and the 222 had a almost take you to the ground auto-pilot.


----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I was once given a meeting schedule that resulted in me leaving a meeting in Genoa and having to be at Lecco in Como up in the Alps the next morning. The car hire company helpfully upgraded me to a BMW 318 (all front wheel drive cars taken). It was snowing when we first arrived in Milan, by the time we got to Genoa it was starting to lay, passing Milan on the way back to the Alps we were in heavy snow. I of course crashed the car into the central reservation and smashed every light and panel but the car was drivable, so I continued. Eventually we got all done but I tore my boss off a strip and told him I would never ever accept any such schedule again. I did learn one thing, Japanese engineers turn a sickly grey/white in a car going backwards on snow in Italy, poor Mr Hiroe hadnt ever been in a car in snow and had never been further than 20 miles in a car before.



That's a hoot.

I was flying this full bird colonel in Honduras who wished to inspect from the air this new road he was responsible for building in a pretty rugged mountainous area. We'll the clouds and mist started creeping in over tops and flowing into the valleys to the point I continue slowing and getting lower and the full bird is in back bitching about he cannot see 'his' road very well. There were a couple points I would be scraping my chin bubbles off trees limbs climbing up a ridge to try and peek into the next valley. He continues bitching to the point I end the mission, turn my bird parallel to the ridge, confirm instrument set ups of my and my co-pilots shit, confirm my location and hazards and heights, then pop into the clouds away from the higher stuff...the pop out the clouds at around 4500 ft all clear and sunny. He ordered my to get back down there...I responded with a polite No sir, the weather is too poor and you've just witness. Then I had to provide him a lesson on a few passages out of the Army regulation that states the Pilot-in-Command is the final authority for operation of the aircraft. He didn't much care for that...and it reinforced my opinion most Full Bird Colonels are complete assholes.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## pbehn (Jan 31, 2020)

Husky said:


> That's a hoot.
> 
> I was flying this full bird colonel in Honduras who wished to inspect from the air this new road he was responsible for building in a pretty rugged mountainous area. We'll the clouds and mist started creeping in over tops and flowing into the valleys to the point I continue slowing and getting lower and the full bird is in back bitching about he cannot see 'his' road very well. There were a couple points I would be scraping my chin bubbles off trees limbs climbing up a ridge to try and peek into the next valley. He continues bitching to the point I end the mission, turn my bird parallel to the ridge, confirm instrument set ups of my and my co-pilots shit, confirm my location and hazards and heights, then pop into the clouds away from the higher stuff...the pop out the clouds at around 4500 ft all clear and sunny. He ordered my to get back down there...I responded with a polite No sir, the weather is too poor and you've just witness. Then I had to provide him a lesson on a few passages out of the Army regulation that states the Pilot-in-Command is the final authority for operation of the aircraft. He didn't much care for that...and it reinforced my opinion most Full Bird Colonels are complete assholes.


I originally put "authority" as a driver to accidents. I wonder what would have happened to Leigh-Mallory's pilot if he had said, "No, Mr Air Chief Marshall Sir, it is too dangerous for me to fly you and your wife". Maybe he would have been drummed out of the service, but he would still be alive as would the dippy Air Chief Marshall and his wife.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 31, 2020)

michael rauls said:


> Just a thought/question for the actual pilots here. Perhaps I'm looking at this too simplisticly but it seems if you get into heavy fog and you know the highest mountain in the immediate area is say 2500 feet wouldn't the safest thing to do be get up abouve that altitude and fly in the direction of the nearest airport reporting clear skies?
> Of course if it turns out to be mechanical trouble that wouldn't apply to this incident but I keep hearing reporters speculate on what the pilot may have been trying to do, set it down, go back to where they took off from etc. but given the abouve non of it makes much sense to me.



That's the scenario you train for but in reality many pilots (sometimes very experienced pilots) focus on an immediate solution. Most of the time you're not going to "get up above that altitude" as there's going to be more "soup" immediately above you most of the time. The right answer is to turn around, something I believe this pilot was attempting, unfortunately he already painted himself into a corner.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 31, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> View attachment 568274



Some observations here - the rapid rate of descent began when there was still a constant ground speed (17:45:11) By the end of the chart (17:45:33), the data shows a 50 knt airspeed increase and about a 600' decrease in altitude. All this happening within a 22 second band. This is ADS-B data and the least accurate data would be vertical speed. I believe in the middle of that time is where the collision with the terrain took place and you had perpetual data being transmitted as the aircraft was bouncing and breaking up. 4864 fpm equals about 55 MPH according to my calculations. At 17:45:29 there's a spike in vertical speed and a 30 knt drop in airspeed, about this time 400' of altitude is lost. There's a similar but smaller spike at 17:45:31 showing similar data.

Reactions: Informative Informative:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

Sectional of the area


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 31, 2020)

Know the area well, used to live and fly there. I know exactly where he crashed, 101 and Las Virgenes Rd


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 31, 2020)




----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

Thanks for marking the spot. Some 3000 foot stuff there. I can't seem to find LAX's terminal VFR sectional.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

Husky said:


> I can imagine so. After flying Alfa, Charlie and Enhanced Hawks for 20 years I did a few years civil flying Bell 412's, Bell 222's, Bell 206's and Bell 407's....if I was doing a long distance flight...I filed IFR, even if clear blue and 22. All the aircraft were IFR equipped, and the 222 had a almost take you to the ground auto-pilot.



Who did you fly 412’s, 222’s, 206’s and 407’s for?


----------



## Husky (Jan 31, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Who did you fly 412’s, 222’s, 206’s and 407’s for?



Air Methods out of Centennial, CO back in the early 2000's

Reactions: Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 31, 2020)

Husky said:


> Air Methods out of Centennial, CO back in the early 2000's



Ah ok cool. I was wondering if it might have been one of the three big off-shore companies.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 31, 2020)

Husky said:


> Air Methods out of Centennial, CO back in the early 2000's



I work at Air Methods today! Started one month ago. Also worked for them in 2003-2004.


----------



## Husky (Feb 1, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I work at Air Methods today! Started one month ago. Also worked for them in 2003-2004.



I was there from 2001 to 2002.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 1, 2020)

Husky said:


> I was there from 2001 to 2002.



Way different company today.


----------



## Husky (Feb 2, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> View attachment 568350



This has some very interesting gaphics:

Kobe Bryant crash: Helicopter was flying in 'very scary conditions'

Remember, when you see the attitude read; that is in MSL and not AGL. The aircraft was probably operating at times less that 100-200 feet AGL.
Here's the final in the series:

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 2, 2020)

Great graphic! Just a note - the area between the area and impact and the opposite side of the 101 is not very wide. Additionally from the view looking at this, the terrain is rising as you head north west on the 101.


----------



## Admiral Beez (Feb 2, 2020)

Are all USN/RN/RCN helicopter pilots fully trained on IFR/IMC? I assume if you’re in an ASW role you need to fly in all weathers. How do these guys stay alive? Of course training, drill, training, sims, etc.... but are military helicopters somehow better equipped for all weathers?


----------



## Husky (Feb 2, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Great graphic! Just a note - the area between the area and impact and the opposite side of the 101 is not very wide. Additionally from the view looking at this, the terrain is rising as you head north west on the 101.



Gotcha...and kind of appears so, the terrain rising on 101 to the NW. 

But, here's my "Hmmmm": if the last reported altitude and airspeed from his transponder to ATC is that last vertical red line then why turn left up that small rising valley to the impact point? Wasn't the aircrafts route still about 90 degrees to the right of that valley in the low ground?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 2, 2020)

Husky said:


> Gotcha...and kind of appears so, the terrain rising on 101 to the NW. But, if the last reported altitude and airspeed from his transponder to ATC is that last vertical red line then* why turn left up that small valley to the impact point? * Wasn't the aircrafts route still about 90 degrees to the right of that valley in the low ground?


Panic and yes. I think he ran into a wall of soup and thought to avoid IMC he could climb and turn, possibly thinking he was further east of his position


----------



## Husky (Feb 2, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Panic and yes. I think he ran into a wall of soup and thought to avoid IMC he could climb and turn, possibly thinking he was further east of his position



That's what the conclusion I come to as well, and with the rising flatter terrain to the right of his original course...there was probably 'soup' there too.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 2, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> Are all USN/RN/RCN helicopter pilots fully trained on IFR/IMC? I assume if you’re in an ASW role you need to fly in all weathers. How do these guys stay alive? Of course training, drill, training, sims, etc.... but are military helicopters somehow better equipped for all weathers?


Flying in poor vis over the ocean is a lot less risky than over land. I'm way out of date, but all the choppers I saw in the Navy were IFR capable, and practice was constant, although we seldom saw serious IMC in the Keys.
Our helicopters were all retired sonar dunkers and had the Doppler auto hover capability.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Flying in poor vis over the ocean is a lot less risky than over land. I'm way out of date, but all the choppers I saw in the Navy were IFR capable, and practice was constant, although we seldom saw serious IMC in the Keys.
> Our helicopters were all retired sonar dunkers and had the Doppler auto hover capability.
> Cheers,
> Wes



My brother was a Navy SH-60 driver that did plenty of ASW work, plus whatever else they do, and when I told him (in the late 80's) how us Army pukes fly under NVG's (that at the time were modified grunts NVG's), moon illumination, formations, weather, terrain and such....he said; "That's just F&^%ing crazy!". I gather he concluded much like you XBe02Drvr.

The Army did suffer a fair amount of accidents, incidents and loss of life during that learning transition to becoming "Night fighters".


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

My unofficial NTSB summary report for the crash of aircraft N72EX:

Pilot Error; due to excessive operating speed at low altitude in a low ceiling/low visibility environment severely reducing pilot response time to avoid obstacles and hazards with a possible addition of some spatial disorientation.

…or, something to that effect in official gov'ment NTSB verbiage. 

Now...why did a reported 8,000 hour, IFR certified pilot neglect and ignore one of the most unique capabilities that make rotorcraft so valuable, particularly in low ceiling/low visibility circumstances and operate his craft like an airplane at such low altitude and in such weather?

I'm going to conclude it was "on-time-itis". The high value, high profile customer had a schedule to keep and he had already lost 15-17 minutes loitering doing circles awaiting ATC authorization. He needed to make up time.


OK, I'm ready for the darts.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Winner Winner:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Glider (Feb 4, 2020)

I suspect that you are right, no darts from here. At the end of the day if you are unsure of your position at night or in bad weather the golden rule is of course climb to a height where you cannot hit anything, then you can sort things out in safety. 
No one has mentioned any mechanical or shortage of fuel issues, so that only leaves time


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 4, 2020)

No darts from me. It is pretty much what I have been thinking all along.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> I'm going to conclude it was "on-time-itis". The high value, high profile customer had a schedule to keep and...... He needed to make up time.


Casey Jones at the throttle. Age old tale. And we tout ourselves as an intelligent species.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Peter Gunn (Feb 4, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> *SNIP* _And we tout ourselves as an intelligent species_.



Speak for yourself...


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> OK, I'm ready for the darts.


Not a dart. Just a question from a rotary ignoramus to the fling wing fliers in our midst. How does a hotrod like the S76 handle in a slow speed steep gradient climb, as in NOE in low vis in hilly terrain? Is it a comfortable flight regime or a "hairy edge" exercise? Does it leave you with a "speed is life" kind of feeling? Just curious.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Peter Gunn said:


> Speak for yourself...


Lucky - most of the time. Intelligent? - maybe occasionally....er....VERY occasionally. Experience is a more reliable guide in the long run.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Not a dart. Just a question from a rotary ignoramus to the fling wing fliers in our midst. How does a hotrod like the S76 handle in a slow speed steep gradient climb, as in NOE in low vis in hilly terrain? Is it a comfortable flight regime or a "hairy edge" exercise? Does it leave you with a "speed is life" kind of feeling? Just curious.
> Cheers,
> Wes



Never flown an S-76. But, the development of the S-76 used many developmental ideas from Sikorsky's development of the UH-60 Blackhawk in the 70's utilizing many of the same mechanical concepts....just on a smaller scale for the S-76. For instance, the 'fully articulating rotor-head' (which is a study in itself --- helicopter rotor-head designs).

The UH-60, when 'slick' and even at basic planned operating weight (which would be near 3/4 of it max gross wt.) is a dream to fly. The rotor-head design provides an incredibly responsive aircraft, makes one confident in 'flicking' the bird around with ease at near any speed. Again, depending upon aircraft configuration, the engines provide sufficient power reserve (depending upon weight and DA) to cover near all profiles of flight up until maybe 8k feet, but then one has to fudge in some aerodynamic effects on rotor lift during rapid maneuvers and engine power demands.

But from sea level to 6-7k feet configured 'slick' at operating weight at standard temp and pressure...one gets comfortable very quickly, the aircraft provides easily...it's the pilot that becomes the "hairy edge" of limits.

"Speed is Life"? Not for a rotorcraft. Agility, maneuverability, power reserve, tail-rotor authority and the ability to transition between modes of flight and speeds quickly and safely without having to 'babysit' system limitations come to mind. "Speed"..."Airspeed" in a rotorcraft can be very helpful...but, also a hindrance...I, suppose, the answer is; the correct speed for the correct circumstance(s).

Did that help at all?


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> Did that help at all?


Yes it did. One more quick question. I hear rotary pilots talk about "translational lift", which I gather has something to do with airspeed. A little hazy on the details. Can you educate us?
Thanks,
Wes


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Yes it did. One more quick question. I hear rotary pilots talk about "translational lift", which I gather has something to do with airspeed. A little hazy on the details. Can you educate us?
> Thanks,
> Wes



Very basically; 'Translational Lift' is this odd period main rotor lift is transitioning from a hovering rotor system to a rotorcraft's main rotor commencing in forward flight as it sheds the recirculating air it has accumulated by hovering lift into a fresh new rotor flight dynamic of forward lift. (hovering - being very inefficient lift creation wise as well as fuel and engine power consuming).

Typically, at around 15-25 knots forward airspeed, this recycling air begins move behind the turning blades and the blades receive this 'new and fresh' incoming air increasing blade efficiency, lift and overall performance of each blade and the entire rotor system. There is normally and slight lateral shudder of the airframe as the rotor system proceeds through this for a second or two...then, power to maintain flight is significantly reduced as well as fuel consumption and the aircraft begins kinda flying like an airplane.

It also occurs in reverse...or coming from forward flight to a hover.

The graphic below is very simplistic...but may get the point across:

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

Would this help?

Small story:


*Anecdotal Times*

*Finessing the girl*


Take off for Albania, summer 1996

Our detachment of four UH-60A’s self-deployed to Tirana Albania for a sixty day joint exercise that I actually have no fucking clue why we should go there. Except, maybe as a diplomatic overture of friendship and cooperation, seeing as we are part of the first U.S. Army units to set foot in that country since the fall of the Soviet Union and break up of the Warsaw Pact.

We took off from our base Ansbach, Germany in some seriously over laden beat up and abused Alfa model Hawks. Every bird is near maximum structural gross weight (or exceeding it slightly) primarily due to the fact we mounted the Extended Range Fuel System (ERFS) wings and 2 X 230 gallons external tanks, plus stuffing in all the living and maintenance support shit one has to have to operate self sufficient for 60 days or so. I took the aircraft with the weakest set of engines, just because I got the most flight experience of the team and I didn’t want any of these pussy ass pilots to bitch and moan or use “marginal power” as an excuse if they happened to ball one up; again, because none of these weenies have really operated our aircraft where power management is critical before, so allow me to whine about it here. I took all the pilots out the week prior on nearly an hour flight each to simulate and practice power limited; take-offs, and approaches then tossed a few emergency procedures for good measure.

I know my bird is gunna be heavy and the old girl is weak – so I’ve done two engine washes on the gal, as we fondly refer to them as ‘douches’, to clean the turbines; hoping that’ll maybe allow me just another sliver or two more percent of power engine reserve – hell one half of one percent would be cool.

I’m lead ship, planning to depart on our little runway here (and ya, I mean it’s little), but seeing how there’s a 5 to 7 knot cross wind, and, well, I want every damn knot of wind on my nose (headwind) as possible today I decide to launch our little band of aircraft from the adjacent grass field heading diagonally away from the tiny runway. Unfortunately not a wind full in the face headwind, but better than a complete crosswind. I’ll have to settle for quartering left headwind to avoid over flight of the high school – I mean if even an engine hiccups anywhere along takeoff – rotor RPM is going to drop faster than Paris Hiltons panties and we’ll be joining some teacher’s classroom. It’s better to take flight over the football field and then the only other obstacles; the 12-foot high fence a quarter of a mile away and the light poles of the high school football field, but we can fly between them.

Finesse Mister, finesse this girl, like the time you did on that one wheel landing at 10,000 feet atop that boulder to drop off those firefighters in Yellowstone.

Smooth boy, smooth.

Everyone’s lined up. I reposition my hands and fingers on the controls, light touch, very light. Left thumb, index and middle finger in the outside edge of the collective stick. The right thumb and middle finger lightly riding on the cyclic stick. Feet light on the pedals to feel her torque. It seems like I have to pull the collective up to my arm pit just to get this heavy girl light on the wheels, and she’s groaning as first the right wheel slowly leaves the ground and then the left wheel (this is known as Translating Tendency Effect) then the tail wheel very smoothly rises from the ground as I tenderly apply left pedal to counteract the main rotor torque. She hovers in a much more level attitude, not so much nose high like normal because of the external fuel weight forward on her frame.

She feels good, heavy as hell, but good.

I continue to very slowly increase power to get to our standard 10-foot hover height for a power/weight check. I can hear the engines wailing, giving all they can give, but my baby won’t go, eight feet is as high as she’ll hover and I’m at maximum power or 96% torque.

Ya, we’re going to have to milk this one together sweetie.

OK, that’s enough power check for me I allow the aircraft to settle down 3 feet, to a 5 foot hover. Confirmed. We are fat like four motherfuckers, maybe five. I’m guessing I’m about 500-800 lbs over maximum structural gross weight with 3% power to spare at a damn 5-foot hover – Christ!

I already hear a couple of pilots whining over the radio as they call in completing their power checks. Seems everyone else has 6-8% power to spare. Fuckers.

Glancing at my co-pilot: “You wanna do the take-off?”

“OH Hell NO!! You see everyone looking at us? The commander, the rest of the company, our wives and kids all standing by the hanger?” “Shit, AFN is here with a camera!”

“I know. I was thinking if we can’t get enough altitude and snag that fence, its gunna be slightly embarrassing - and, well… I wanna be able to blame it on someone else.”

Hmmm, OK, guess not.

As I instructed last week, in severely power limited situations – this is not a time to bad ass jerk handle this bird like some rabid lust fuck, this lady will slap you down hard, and at your own peril if you disrespect her. She requires an intimate sensual interlude, with soft and caressing touches, hints and tender gliding control, intently listening and feeling the responses of what she needs and desires. It is plainly, tender gentle sex.

I tell my co-pilot; “Watch my power, rotor RPM, and TGT (engine temperatures). We only got 3% power available to fuck with so I may ride rotor RPM down to 96-97% at maximum power – no worries – cool?”

“Ahh ya 96-97% rotor RPM…if gets lower start worrying.” My co-pilots responds.

“Exactly.” “Chief, keep an eye outside on the main landing gear would you? The aircraft will descend a few feet on this takeoff, just keep me read in when we got maybe 2 feet between the ground and the wheel – cool?”

“Yes sir.”

OK, now let’s split.” Pressing the mic switch to the second detent; “Break. Flight, 23 is on the go.”

Then by virtually thinking, and no perceivable control input – she starts hovering forward very slowly, then to walking speed, and then slightly faster then a walking pace.

Good girl. You feel great.

I motion up tenderly just a cunt hair on the collective – There! Max power of 96% Torque with both engines at TGT limiting and rotor RPM dipping to 99%.

Com’on, ride it honey.

As Effective Transational Lift (ETL) nears the aircraft will shudder slightly and may drop in altitude a few feet. This occurs because basically the aircraft out flies all that old nasty recycling air that circles through the rotor system at a hover (and eats up significant power) and begins entering fresh undisturbed air (requiring less power than moments prior to ETL). Ya, I know this is fascinating shit, but it’s a significant aerodynamic phenomenon, particularly today, particularly on this take-off, because – Like, I need to get to ETL so I have more fucking power available, so I can get this fat lady over the rapidly approaching 12 foot barb wire wrapped fence, before we play like a fly caught in the spider web with it.

Our speed is slowly but constantly increasing – 10 knots. I can feel it, your struggling girl. Her nose wants to climb (Blowback Effect) – No, no honey, not yet, as I hold her nose level with care.

“Rotor RPM 98%.”

“Copy.”

We are about half way to the fence. Just passing a street light a ways off to my left that I’m using as my point of no return marker. Well damn – maybe that was not a good one - should I pick another one real quick?

“Rotor RPM 97%”

“Copy”

A smidge of left cyclic to maintain my ground track – I cannot let the wind or translating tendency keep us off our intended ground track. I have an urge, a real urge to pull more power (collective) so we can climb – but knowing fully it won’t work, the engines computers have sensed 850 degrees Celsius TGT which equates this morning to be 96 % Torque and it sends a signal to the fuel control to sequence fuel on and off to maintain and not exceed that temperature to protect the engines. My engines are giving everything they can. Pulling up collective, while having an immediate, and quite temporary, psychologically satisfying and comforting feeling, will…be like very bad, as the big fan above my head will slow considerably unable to provide hardly any sustaining lift and we will crash. Not good, and it would be bad for my self-image.

“96% Rotor RPM!”

We are over three quarters of the way there. 20 Knots, Com’on babe. I feel ya, you’re close…A slight shudder…the aircraft begins settling…more lateral shuddering (Transverse Flow Effect)…

“Sir, wheels are about a foot of the grass.”

“Ya ya, let’s hope there are no ant hills.” Com’on babe I know you can do it.

25 knots.

You’re there babe! Immediately followed by a pronounced lateral shudder and shaking of the aircraft because of our weight and the slow measured takeoff, as my girl begins to lift in a positive climb in our wonderful new fresh air aerodynamic environment as we cross 8-10 feet above the fence in between the light poles.

Ok, Mr. Mister lower the power and let the rotor RPM comes back to 100%, now let’s tag a 65-knot attitude for climb out.

Hot damn! Babe you are soooo sweet to run my fingers over. Are we good together or what?

Well, that was fun. Whew.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> Finessing the girl


"You've violated your PG13 limits and are in X-rated territory now. Expect extremely limited distribution of your productions from now on." 😎
But a helluva story!

Nice explanation. Light now shines upon the topic. Leads to one more question. So if you're hover-climbing up a steep hillside with rock outcroppings and other obstacles under an indefinite 100 ft ceiling with a forward RVR of 400-600, aren't you more or less perpetually in the "transition to forward flight" mode, half in and half out of the "dirty" air and thrashing the bejesus out of your powerplant, transmission, and rotor system? Sounds ugly, specially if hot and heavy.
Thanks again,
Wes


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

BTW, Husky, is your username by any chance a reflection of a certain Kaman "eggbeater" of a half century ago?
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> "You've violated your PG13 limits and are in X-rated territory now. Expect extremely limited distribution of your productions from now on." 😎
> But a helluva story!
> 
> Nice explanation. Light now shines upon the topic. Leads to one more question. So if you're hover-climbing up a steep hillside with rock outcroppings and other obstacles under an indefinite 100 ft ceiling with a forward RVR of 400-600, aren't you more or less perpetually in the "transition to forward flight" mode, half in and half out of the "dirty" air and thrashing the bejesus out of your powerplant, transmission, and rotor system? Sounds ugly, specially if hot and heavy.
> ...



By how your position your question, I gather, already I have at least enough power to operate transitionally between forward flight and hovering flight.

There are plenty of conditions one can operate and move between those aerodynamic transitionals/translationals. I've hovered and slid laterally, climbed, descended and gone through translational lift...then, come out of it again slowing. Or, I've operated somewhat continually in that aerodynamic transition. That is where engine power reserve comes in primarily. 

I'm I able to transition to a hovering power requirement at this temp, pressure and weight this moment?

I'll ride transitional/translational flight, sure, depending if taking of or landing. Taking off, I generally wish to get to forward clean air. Landing, I know I'm gunna go through 'dirty' air...it's just how I wish so/need so.

Again, primarily depending upon the environment (pressure altitude and temp), and your weight...one may not be taking the aircraft to the limits at all...or, one could be operating beyond its limits.

Then, there's the whole IGE and OGE hover thingie.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> Would this help?
> 
> Small story:
> 
> ...



thanks for sharing this.

Good old Ansbach, Germany. I was stationed there for 6 years (lived there for 6 additional years as a civilian for 12 years total).

Flew a Blackhawk to the Balkan region several times. Flew from Ansbach, Germany to Linz, Austria, to Hungary, then to Mostert, Bosnia, and then to Kosovo. Flew into Albania a few times while there.

1st trip was a flight of two Blackhawks from Kosovo to Ansbach. Flew from Rammstein to Kosovo on a C-130 to pick up the UH-60’s for maintenance. Flew them back in one day.

2nd trip was from Ansback to Kosovo when we deployed. Refuel stop in Linz. Overnight stop in Hungary. Refuel stop in Bosnia.
3rd trip was just the reverse as we re-deployed back home to Ansbach 10 months later.

Flying through the alps in Austria, and along the Croatian coastline was just beautiful though.


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> BTW, Husky, is your username by any chance a reflection of a certain Kaman "eggbeater" of a half century ago?
> Cheers,
> Wes



Negative....just part of a very early call sign in my flying career.


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> thanks for sharing this.
> 
> Good old Ansbach, Germany. I was stationed there for 6 years (lived there for 6 additional years as a civilian for 12 years total).
> 
> ...



Why Damn! We may have passed one another. Was there 96-98. Of course, didn't spend much time there.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> Why Damn! We may have passed one another. Was there 96-98. Of course, didn't spend much time there.



96-98 I was in Stuttgart, and still in High School...lol 

My dad was stationed there.

I lived in Stuttgart from 88-98, and in Bad Kreuznach from 80-83. I was in Ansbach from 2000-2012 (2000-2006 on active duty Army).


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> 96-98 I was in Stuttgart, and still in High School...lol
> 
> My dad was stationed there.
> 
> I lived in Stuttgart from 88-98, and in Bad Kreuznach from 80-83. I was in Ansbach from 2000-2012 (2000-2006 on active duty Army).



I may have a few years on ya then..lol

Reactions: Funny Funny:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 4, 2020)

What you unit were you in at Ansbach though? Several of the guys in my unit had been there around your time as well.


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> What you unit were you in at Ansbach though? Several of the guys in my unit had been there around your time as well.



571st MEDEVAC


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> I may have a few years on ya then..lol.


C'mon guys, you're makin' me feel like an auld fahht.


----------



## Husky (Feb 4, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> C'mon guys, you're makin' me feel like an auld fahht.



Never. I feel kinda young reliving again. It was a time. Before GPS...still had to relay on ole 'dead reckoning'


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> 571st MEDEVAC



Down in the hangar across from the shopette.

I was over in 2-1.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 4, 2020)

Husky said:


> Never. I feel kinda young reliving again. It was a time. Before GPS...still had to relay on ole 'dead reckoning'


 You know, the "grey eagles" back in my student days decried our tendency to "slavishly" track the VOR, and declared that pilotage and dead reckoning were dead and we didn't know how to navigate without our "electronic Mama". This despite our own instructors demanding an accurate plot, precise timekeeping, and constant heading and ETA corrections, along with a constantly updated fuel howgozit, and constant traffic scan while working the whizwheel.
Now we old farts decry the youngsters' dependence on electronics to aviate, nevermind navigate, and wonder if they can even handle a basic no-automation airplane anymore. Cycle of the generations.
"There's no such thing as a safe monoplane!"
"How can you fly safely if you can't feel the wind on your face or hear it in the wires?"
"You can never trust landing gear that's designed to fold up!"
"It may be okay for Jimmy Dolittle, but you'll never catch me barging around inside a cloud, no sir!"
"What, no propeller?? Just a blowtorch? Sounds pretty fishy to me!"
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## Husky (Feb 5, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> You know, the "grey eagles" back in my student days decried our tendency to "slavishly" track the VOR, and declared that pilotage and dead reckoning were dead and we didn't know how to navigate without our "electronic Mama". This despite our own instructors demanding an accurate plot, precise timekeeping, and constant heading and ETA corrections, along with a constantly updated fuel howgozit, and constant traffic scan while working the whizwheel.
> Now we old farts decry the youngsters' dependence on electronics to aviate, nevermind navigate, and wonder if they can even handle a basic no-automation airplane anymore. Cycle of the generations.
> "There's no such thing as a safe monoplane!"
> "How can you fly safely if you can't feel the wind on your face or hear it in the wires?"
> ...



Fine, I'm all good with it...if pilots understand how the information comes together to produce the final data.


----------



## Husky (Feb 5, 2020)

Husky said:


> Fine, I'm all good with it...if pilots understand how the information comes together to produce the final data.
> 
> View attachment 568762


So, if I typed in the in puter 2000ft and 20 degrees C and a desired true airspeed of 120 kts at an aircraft weight of 18000 lbs; what's my est fuel burn for hour? Max rate of climb speed and fuel burn? And maximum range speed and fuel burn?


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 5, 2020)

Husky said:


> So, if I typed in the in puter 2000ft and 20 degrees C and a desired true airspeed of 120 kts at an aircraft weight of 18000 lbs; what's my est fuel burn for hour? Max rate of climb speed and fuel burn? And maximum range speed and fuel burn?


Oh boy, a multi variable performance chart! Haven't done one of those in awhile. My professional flying stopped 25 years ago, due to deteriorating vision. And not being a math maven, it isn't the sort of thing I do for fun.
Well, as it looks to me on my tiny cellphone screen, 120 Kt TAS cruise should burn about 840 lb/hr @ 2000'.
Best R/C should happen at 78 TAS, or 72 IAS, at about 740 lb/hr.
Best Range at 134 TAS, 130 IAS, at 1010 lb/hr. In practice, I'd plan on a little fudge factor on these numbers, as operational engines are never as fresh as flight test engines.
The aircraft isn't specified, but I would guess from the fuel flows and speeds it's a pretty efficient rotary wing bird with a pair of 600-700 HP turbines. No fixed wing turboprop would have such a low fuel flow at Vy, nor such a low Vy speed. (Except maybe a Twin Otter or a Dornier 228; and I don't think their best range speeds and fuel flows would fit this profile.) Thanks for the exercise. I needed a good workout.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## Husky (Feb 5, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Oh boy, a multi variable performance chart! Haven't done one of those in awhile. My professional flying stopped 25 years ago, due to deteriorating vision. And not being a math maven, it isn't the sort of thing I do for fun.
> Well, as it looks to me on my tiny cellphone screen, 120 Kt TAS cruise should burn about 840 lb/hr @ 2000'.
> Best R/C should happen at 78 TAS, or 72 IAS, at about 740 lb/hr.
> Best Range at 134 TAS, 130 IAS, at 1010 lb/hr. In practice, I'd plan on a little fudge factor on these numbers, as operational engines are never as fresh as flight test engines.
> ...


Nice. 
Wasn't that fun? LOL


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 5, 2020)

Husky said:


> Nice.
> Wasn't that fun? LOL


Gangs of fun! Old home days.
BTW, what manual did you get that from?
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## Husky (Feb 5, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Gangs of fun! Old home days.
> BTW, what manual did you get that from?
> Cheers,
> Wes



Alfa model Blackhawk with 2 X GE T700 engines


----------



## Freebird (Feb 5, 2020)

pbehn said:


> I know the only connection is celebrity but it reminds me of the death of Princess Diana. In all the wild conspiracy theories the fact is she got in a car with a drunk driver and didn't even put a seatbelt on. It seems possible that you can be so famous, rich, powerful whatever that you believe the normal rules of life don't apply. They leave a lot of sad people asking WHY?


Ultimately, the celebrity has to be the responsible one.
Were the conditions that foggy at take off?


----------



## pbehn (Feb 5, 2020)

Freebird said:


> Ultimately, the celebrity has to be the responsible one.
> Were the conditions that foggy at take off?


I am in UK, as I understand it the police there had grounded their helicopters. I didn't mean a celebrity as in a person I meant the celebrity world, I doubt Kobe was looking around for a pilot any more than Diana was looking for a driver. They trust it all to "providers" but frequently when the provider is told a pilot wont fly they just look for one that will, not accept that its too dangerous, because that may cost them their job as a "provider". Ordinary members of the public don't end up in dodgy planes with unqualified pilots on a scheduled flight, wannabe celeb footballers like Emiliano Sala do.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 5, 2020)

Freebird said:


> Ultimately, the celebrity has to be the responsible one.
> Were the conditions that foggy at take off?





pbehn said:


> I am in UK, as I understand it the police there had grounded their helicopters. I didn't mean a celebrity as in a person I meant the celebrity world, I doubt Kobe was looking around for a pilot any more than Diana was looking for a driver. They trust it all to "providers" but frequently when the provider is told a pilot wont fly they just look for one that will, not accept that its too dangerous, because that may cost them their job as a "provider". Ordinary members of the public don't end up in dodgy planes with unqualified pilots on a scheduled flight, wannabe celeb footballers like Emiliano Sala do.



The pilot was ultimately responsible for the safe operation of this flight.

With that said, the weather conditions at take off were actually VFR (1000' overcast, 4 miles visibility). Not the greatest weather but perfectly legal for the helicopter to take off. The fact that the "police grounded their helicopters" was just media sensationalism feeding the uninformed general public.


----------



## Freebird (Feb 6, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> The pilot was ultimately responsible for the safe operation of this flight. With that said, the weather conditions at take off were actually VFR (1000' overcast, 4 miles visibility). Not the greatest weather but perfectly legal for the helicopter to take off. The fact that the "police grounded their helicopters" was just media sensationalism feeding the uninformed general public.


----------



## Freebird (Feb 6, 2020)

The pilot is indeed responsible.
I just hope he wasn't pushed/threatened by management or the client to fly in unsafe conditions to make a timetable


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 6, 2020)

Freebird said:


> The pilot is indeed responsible.
> I just hope he wasn't pushed/threatened by management or the client to fly in unsafe conditions to make a timetable


I read in one of the innumerable reports that the pilot was Kobe's chosen pilot and loyal friend. Sometimes a relationship like that, if true, can push a pilot even harder than malevolent management can, especially if both parties are goal oriented go-getter types.


----------



## rochie (Feb 6, 2020)

pbehn said:


> Ordinary members of the public don't end up in dodgy planes with unqualified pilots on a scheduled flight, wannabe celeb footballers like Emiliano Sala do.



i would bet there are lots of pilots without the correct certification making regular flights to and from the UK using loop holes in the regulation to carry passengers when they are not supposed to.

i believe one guy has been quoted as saying it would only take a famous person to die to shine a light on this sort of thing

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 6, 2020)

Freebird said:


> The pilot is indeed responsible.
> I just hope he wasn't pushed/threatened by management or the client to fly in unsafe conditions to make a timetable



That's something we'll never know. Personally I don't believe that was an issue.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 7, 2020)

For what it's worth the NTSB announced today that Bryant's helicopter was making power when it crashed, so much for those witnesses who heard "sputtering."


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 7, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> For what it's worth the NTSB announced today that Bryant's helicopter was making power when it crashed, so much for those witnesses who heard "sputtering."



i Shook my head when I heard the sputtering report. Turbines don’t sputter...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Shortround6 (Feb 7, 2020)

But, But, But witnesses don't lie...............................
They heard the sputter, heard the crash and looked up and saw the impact, we all know that sound travels faster than light

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 8, 2020)

Shortround6 said:


> But, But, But witnesses don't lie...............................
> They heard the sputter, heard the crash and looked up and saw the impact, we all know that sound travels faster than light


And normal rotor noise sounds like sputtering.....when recalled from memory after the fact. Especially if there was a sudden last minute pull on the collective before impact.


----------



## swampyankee (Feb 8, 2020)

Shortround6 said:


> But, But, But witnesses don't lie...............................
> They heard the sputter, heard the crash and looked up and saw the impact, we all know that sound travels faster than light



Eyewitnesses don’t need to lie to be unreliable; our eyes aren’t video cameras and our brains aren’t hard drives. Our brains store interpretations of events with a lot of details interpolated during recall. They even do this while events are in progress.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 8, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> And normal rotor noise sounds like sputtering.....when recalled from memory after the fact. Especially if there was a sudden last minute pull on the collective before impact.



I don’t think it sounds like sputtering at all. It’s more like a thwapping.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 8, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> And normal rotor noise sounds like sputtering.....when recalled from memory after the fact. Especially if there was a sudden last minute pull on the collective before impact.


Hmmm.... Maybe to someone who’s not around helicopters or engines (reciprocating or turbine) very much. Most people don’t even know that most helicopters are turbine driven.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 8, 2020)

An R-22 might sputter because it is powered by a reciprocating engine...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 8, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> An R-22 might sputter because it is powered by a reciprocating engine...


LOL - it sputters because it could barely get out of it's own way!

Reactions: Funny Funny:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 8, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Hmmm.... Maybe to someone who’s not around helicopters or engines (reciprocating or turbine) very much.


You mean like the general public? "Turbine, what's that? I HEARD it sputter! Like a stuttering sound!" Doesn't the S76 have a four or five blade articulated system, not a "thwapper" like the old two blade Bells?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 8, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> You mean like the general public? "Turbine, what's that? I HEARD it sputter! Like a stuttering sound!" Doesn't the S76 have a four or five blade articulated system, not a "thwapper" like the old two blade Bells?



The S-76 still sounds nothing like a sputter. It is very similar to H-60 and more like a buzzing, beating sound. Still more like a thwap than a sputter.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 8, 2020)




----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 10, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


>



You know and I know what a sputter and a helicopter sound like (although that sputter clip sounds like a Clerget or Oberursel rotary with a decoupe button being used to provide less than full power by intermittent ignition interruption), but we're around these things all the time. Do you really think the average American, stressed by witnessing a high profile tragedy, would be as sophisticated and accurate in their acoustic memory as you or I would be expected to be?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 10, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> You know and I know what a sputter and a helicopter sound like (although that sputter clip sounds like a Clerget or Oberursel rotary with a decoupe button being used to provide less than full power by intermittent ignition interruption), but we're around these things all the time. Do you really think * the average American*, stressed by witnessing a high profile tragedy, would be as sophisticated and accurate in their acoustic memory as you or I would be expected to be?


Again, my point. And to compound this the media sucks this up.


----------



## Admiral Beez (Feb 10, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> The pilot was ultimately responsible for the safe operation of this flight.
> 
> With that said, the weather conditions at take off were actually VFR (1000' overcast, 4 miles visibility). Not the greatest weather but perfectly legal for the helicopter to take off. The fact that the "police grounded their helicopters" was just media sensationalism feeding the uninformed general public.


I don't understand why VFR certification even exists. I live in Canada, it snows for half the year, we have a lot of fog and low visibility days, but I can't get a driver's license that permits me only to drive on dry roads with clear visibility. I took my final motorcycle on-highway examination in a torrential downpour, where visibility was so poor I could hardly see the examiner's car behind me. But I now know I am trained and capable of it, and licensed to do it.

Why aren't all pilots required to have basic IFR and IMC certification and ongoing qualifications? Is it cost, lack of available trainers and training facilities, insurance cost? Or is IFR and IMC qualifications simply not needed if pilot's stay out of weather? But weather happens all the time.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 10, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> I don't understand why VFR certification even exists. I live in Canada, it snows for half the year, we have a lot of fog and low visibility days, but I can't get a driver's license that permits me only to drive on drive roads with clear visibility. I took my final motorcycle on-highway examination in a torrential downpour, where visibility was so poor I could hardly see the examiner's car behind me. But I now know I am trained and capable of it, and licensed to do it.
> 
> Why aren't all pilots required to have basic IFR and IMC certification and ongoing qualifications? Is it cost, lack of available trainers and training facilities, insurance cost? Or is IFR and IMC qualifications simply not needed if pilot's stay out of weather? But weather happens all the time.



1. Costs

2. Your average pilot is a clear, blue 22 private pilot who is going to put around the clouds within 50 miles of his home airfield. The cost associated with the risk of flying in instrument weather is not justified.

3. You are trained to make better decisions.

You are trained to look at the weather before hand, and go “Well damn, weather is a no-go. Looks like I will be flying the couch today.”

I am a private pilot, and only have a VFR license. I don’t fly on questionable weather days. I have the mandatory minimum hours of instrument training required to get my license, so that hopefully if I ever get into unforecasted weather, I can get myself out of trouble, but I am trained to hopefully make good aeronautical devisions, be a smart pilot, and not get into the situations.

Don’t take me wrong, I would recommend all pilots getting their instrument rating, as it could save their life one day. As soon as my kids are older and I have more time and money I plan on getting my instrument rating, as well as my commercial and CFI.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## gumbyk (Feb 10, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> 1. Costs
> 
> 2. Your average pilot is a clear, blue 22 private pilot who is going to put around the clouds within 50 miles of his home airfield. The cost associated with the risk of flying in instrument weather is not justified.
> 
> ...



I've got an instrument rating. Haven't used it in 20 years, so I'd be no better off than your average VFR pilot. It's not simply the cost of getting the rating, but of maintaining it.

As to why VFR only exists? simple, most aircraft are only VFR capable. By the time you put all the equipment in a two-place aircraft to bring it up to IFR standards, it becomes a single-place aircraft, so you need more equipment.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 10, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> I've got an instrument rating. Haven't used it in 20 years, so I'd be no better off than your average VFR pilot. It's not simply the cost of getting the rating, but of maintaining it.
> 
> As to why VFR only exists? simple, most aircraft are only VFR capable. By the time you put all the equipment in a two-place aircraft to bring it up to IFR standards, it becomes a single-place aircraft, so you need more equipment.



Agreed, you need to maintain IFR proficiency or it will kill you too.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 10, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> Why aren't all pilots required to have basic IFR and IMC certification and ongoing qualifications?


It's the age old conflict that afflicts nearly every field of endeavor: the freedom to participate on an amateur level vs the pressure to require a professional level performance at the entry level for reasons of safety or economic exclusion.
We used to have two designated flight test examiners in our area, one was a 747 training captain for TWA, and required every applicant at all levels to perform to ATP standards, seldom passing anyone on the first attempt. The other was a longtime flight instructor who flew an Aztec for a small corporation and could smell a dangerous or incompetent applicant before they even sat down for the oral. He saw the Private as a license to learn, but if he decided an applicant truly didn't have it in them, he would call us and chew us out for bad judgment and make us come retrieve the student and airplane. No student who received that treatment ever continued in aviation. He would report such episodes to the FAA and we would get visited. Best safety tool in the business, IMHO.
To require or not require an IFR rating, that is the question. Around here, a VFR only pilot has to accept a lot of restrictions, as the climate and terrain are challenging. This makes business use of a plane too limited to be worth the expense unless it's all weather, multi-engine, certified for known icing, and has a crew to match. This puts the financial threshold out of sight for smaller companies and most individuals, thus fueling the growth of shared ownership outfits like Netjets, and driving small mom-and-pop flight schools and rental/charter operations out of business. AFAIK, there are only three flight school/airplane rental businesses left in my state, one of which is largely inaccessible to walk-in customers, as it is tied to the state technical college's professional aviation program.
Costs, regulation, airspace restriction, public pressure, and global warming awareness are slowly driving private aviation out of business, so sometime soon you may see your wish come true of IFR for everybody and professional credentials required for access to the airspace. Europe's been on the edge of that for years.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 10, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> I don't understand why VFR certification even exists. I live in Canada, it snows for half the year, we have a lot of fog and low visibility days, but I can't get a driver's license that permits me only to drive on dry roads with clear visibility. I took my final motorcycle on-highway examination in a torrential downpour, where visibility was so poor I could hardly see the examiner's car behind me. But I now know I am trained and capable of it, and licensed to do it.
> 
> Why aren't all pilots required to have basic IFR and IMC certification and ongoing qualifications? Is it cost, lack of available trainers and training facilities, insurance cost? Or is IFR and IMC qualifications simply not needed if pilot's stay out of weather? But weather happens all the time.



Not needed depending on the type of flying one is doing. It's assumed that VFR pilots will not go IMC (easier said than done). When you are earning your PPL you do have some training under the hood, but it's very basic. Most VFR pilots die within 30 seconds of going into IMC.

If you're flying with a commercial rating you need to be instrument rated or you're limited on how far you can fly with passengers, that regulation a result of the Buddy Holly tragedy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Admiral Beez (Feb 10, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Not needed depending on the type of flying one is doing. It's assumed that VFR pilots will not go IMC (easier said than done). When you are earning your PPL you do have some training under the hood, but it's very basic. Most VFR pilots die within 30 seconds of going into IMC.
> 
> If you're flying with a commercial rating you need to be instrument rated or you're limited on how far you can fly with passengers, that regulation a result of the Buddy Holly tragedy.


Perhaps that’s where the line should be, if I’m flying passengers commercially, as a business I should be qualified for all comers. I can’t imagine paying a carrier to take me someplace and carrier’s pilot isn’t qualified to do it.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 10, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> Perhaps that’s where the line should be, if I’m flying passengers commercially, as a business I should be qualified for all comers. I can’t imagine paying a carrier to take me someplace and carrier’s pilot isn’t qualified to do it.


Commercial pilots without instrument ratings are very rare and will not get much work. Most of the ones I know are towing gliders or crop dusters

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 10, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> Perhaps that’s where the line should be, if I’m flying passengers commercially, as a business I should be qualified for all comers.


Agreed! Back in the day, VFR-only charters (crosscountry transportation, not just local sightseeing flights) were legal, and so were single engine IFR with certain restrictions. Neither of these required ATP level pilot qualifications, and lots of scud running and fatalities ensued. My employers held a VFR charter certificate, and wanted to put me on it, but I was having none of that. They had a VFR only instructor on their certificate and were turning away customers on non-CAVU days, but thought with my instrument rating they could become an all-weather business. I told them any day they wanted to spring for a twin engine, known icing airplane and a copilot to come talk to me. End of conversation.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Admiral Beez (Feb 10, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Commercial pilots without instrument ratings are very rare and will not get much work. Most of the ones I know are towing gliders or crop dusters


I think I’ve got my terminology wrong. By commercial pilot, I’m referring to a pilot who’s undertaking commerce, or business, i.e. getting paid to transport paying customers, like Kobe Bryant and his group.

If I’m a near billionaire and frequent helicopter user like Bryant, I’d be demanding the best all weather kit and crew. Why scrimp? I imagine those LA copter charter outfits are now under the scrutiny of celebrities, their agents, producers, team owners and insurance underwriters now.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 10, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Commercial pilots without instrument ratings are very rare and will not get much work. Most of the ones I know are towing gliders or crop dusters


These must be real oldtimers, as the FARs were revised, effective 1975, to require an instrument rating for a commercial license. I had a VFR-only commercial and CFI, and had to get off my lazy duff and finish up my instrument rating.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 10, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> I think I’ve got my terminology wrong. By commercial pilot, I’m referring to a pilot who’s undertaking commerce, or business, i.e. getting paid to transport paying customers


Get with the jive, man! On demand transportation of passengers or cargo is charter. Sightseeing flights, crop dusting, glider towing, flight instructing, pipeline/powerline patrol,, dropping jumpers, aerial photography, etc, etc, are commerce too. A commercial license is needed for all of these activities.
The requirements for charter flying are a little more extensive, including additional specialized training and a checkride.


Admiral Beez said:


> charter outfits are now under the scrutiny of celebrities, their agents and insurance underwriters now.


Ah ha! Insurance underwriters! You've unerringly hit the nail on the head. They, more even than the FAA, control what goes on in the air. They often require stricter standards than the FAA before they will write a policy at an affordable premium.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 10, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> These must be real oldtimers, as the *FARs were revised, effective 1975, to require an instrument rating for a commercial license*. I had a VFR-only commercial and CFI, and had to get off my lazy duff and finish up my instrument rating.
> Cheers,
> Wes



Not exactly Wes

§ 61.123 Eligibility requirements: General.
To be eligible for a commercial pilot certificate, a person must:
(a) Be at least 18 years of age;
(b) Be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language. If the applicant is unable to meet one of these requirements due to medical reasons, then the Administrator may place such operating limitations on that applicant's pilot certificate as are necessary for the safe operation of the aircraft.
(c) Receive a logbook endorsement from an authorized instructor who:
(1) Conducted the required ground training or reviewed the person's home study on the aeronautical knowledge areas listed in § 61.125 of this part that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought; and
(2) Certified that the person is prepared for the required knowledge test that applies to the aircraft category and class rating sought.
(d) Pass the required knowledge test on the aeronautical knowledge areas listed in § 61.125 of this part;
(e) Receive the required training and a logbook endorsement from an authorized instructor who:
(1) Conducted the training on the areas of operation listed in § 61.127(b) of this part that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought; and
(2) Certified that the person is prepared for the required practical test.
(f) Meet the aeronautical experience requirements of this subpart that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought before applying for the practical test;
(g) Pass the required practical test on the areas of operation listed in § 61.127(b) of this part that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought;
(h) Hold at least a private pilot certificate issued under this part or meet the requirements of § 61.73; and
(i) Comply with the sections of this part that apply to the aircraft category and class rating sought.

Nothing is mentioned about having to first hold an instrument rating - I know this because I had a commercial rating before my instrument. I was working on both almost at the same time and it was easier for me to knock out my commercial first. This was way after 1975.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 10, 2020)

61.133 Commercial pilot privileges and limitations.

(b) Limitations.

(1) A person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category or powered-lift category rating and does not hold an instrument rating in the same category and class will be issued a commercial pilot certificate that contains the limitation, “The carriage of passengers for hire in (airplanes) (powered-lifts) on cross-country flights in excess of 50 nautical miles or at night is prohibited.” The limitation may be removed when the person satisfactorily accomplishes the requirements listed in § 61.65 of this part for an instrument rating in the same category and class of aircraft listed on the person's commercial pilot certificate.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 10, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> 61.133 Commercial pilot privileges and limitations.
> 
> (b) Limitations.
> 
> (1) A person who applies for a commercial pilot certificate with an airplane category or powered-lift category rating and does not hold an instrument rating in the same category and class will be issued a commercial pilot certificate that contains the limitation, “The carriage of passengers for hire in (airplanes) (powered-lifts) on cross-country flights in excess of 50 nautical miles or at night is prohibited.” The limitation may be removed when the person satisfactorily accomplishes the requirements listed in § 61.65 of this part for an instrument rating in the same category and class of aircraft listed on the person's commercial pilot certificate.




I think you meant "CFI"


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 10, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> I think I’ve got my terminology wrong. By commercial pilot, I’m referring to a pilot who’s undertaking commerce, or business, i.e. getting paid to transport paying customers, like Kobe Bryant and his group.
> 
> If I’m a near billionaire and frequent helicopter user like Bryant, I’d be demanding the best all weather kit and crew. Why scrimp? I imagine those LA copter charter outfits are now under the scrutiny of celebrities, their agents, producers, team owners and insurance underwriters now.



A commercial license is required to fly for hire, regardless of if involves passengers or not.

For instance, per 14 CFR Far Part 61.113, as a private pilot, I cannot fly passengers or cargo for compensation. If I am taking friends up with me when I go somewhere, they are allowed to pay no more than their pro rata share of the operating expenses. Lets say there 4 souls on board including myself, and the operating expenses were $200, I have to pay at least $50 of the cost of the flight. The other 3 can come up with the other $150, and the money can only go to the operating expenses, nothing else.

A commercial pilot on the other hand can fly people, cargo, anything really for hire. Someone can pay you to go and fly circles over a field for the sake of flying circles over a field, and you can charge them whatever you want. It does not apply just to charter or airline pilots. With the airlines you get into the ATP license.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 10, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I think you meant "CFI"


I think there has been a loosening of restrictions at some point. The only spray applicator in the state had to keep all his non instrument rated pilots on a 50NM leash. (Kinda silly, since none of his Stearmans were IFR capable!) At one point I was the only CFI on staff with an instrument rating (the other two were local only), and I had to do all the forest fire and "bug patrol" flights, all the night instruction, and all the long crosscountries.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 10, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> I think there has been a loosening of restrictions at some point. The only spray applicator in the state had to keep all his non instrument rated pilots on a 50NM leash. (Kinda silly, since none of his Stearmans were IFR capable!) At one point I was the only CFI on staff with an instrument rating (the other two were local only), and I had to do all the forest fire and "bug patrol" flights, all the night instruction, and all the long crosscountries.
> Cheers,
> Wes



61.123 hasn't changed in years as the 61.133 requirement which was implemented after Buddy Holly. Now I do remember when you were able to hold a CFI without an instrument rating, I believe that changed in the 1980s.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 11, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> 61.123 hasn't changed in years as the 61.133 requirement which was implemented after Buddy Holly. Now I do remember when you were able to hold a CFI without an instrument rating, I believe that changed in the 1980s.


I got my "old school" CFI in 1975 (just days after the rules changed) and in 1976, finished up my instrument rating and had to go to the FSDO and upgrade to a "new style" CFI before I could do any more instructing. (I didn't qualify for a "grandfather", so my teaching privileges under the old rules expired one year after the date on my certificate.) Didn't matter, as my GI Bill approval came through for the CFII course, and I was off to Embry Riddle.
One of the quirks of the new rules was you had to take the CFI checkride in a complex airplane, whereas before, they wanted it done in a primary trainer, with evidence of having passed a complex aircraft phase check. So I had to fly the complex plane on my dime to the FSDO two states away, chauffeur an inspector around for a couple hours, then all the way back.
Last maneuver in the ride was worth the price of admission. The inspector said: "OK, you'll do. Now since every checkride should also be a lesson, I'm going to demonstrate a maneuver to you. My airplane. See that 152 going by down there? This is how you fly a pursuit curve. You want to arrive in his six o'clock high without being seen, execute your firing pass, then turn and climb away shielded from view by his wing. Watch!"
You could have knocked me out of the seat with a feather! He's long since passed away, and legends of his flying career keep rising to the surface. Just one of those people who make flying a memorable experience.
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## gumbyk (Feb 11, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Commercial pilots without instrument ratings are very rare and will not get much work. Most of the ones I know are towing gliders or crop dusters


There aren't too many IFR qualified helicopter pilots down here in NZ, mainly those doing offshore support. I can't understand requiring an IFR rating for a helicopter pilot, even a commercial one.

Often a VFR pilot is safer in these situations because they have a clearer line of 'no-go'. If you're an IFR capable pilot, in a VFR equipped aircraft, you're more comfortable pushing the envelope.


----------



## PWR4360-59B (Feb 11, 2020)

I don't know about now, but back in the 70's a private pilot got instrument training, no not flying an IFR flight plan but some time flying and controlling the plane on instruments, night flight in a very dark area is similar to IMC conditions. Some of us low timers had no problems depending on the instruments and recovering from an unusual attitude. 
This day and age there is no excuse for even an inexperienced pilot going out of control from entering IMC, all planes should be equiped with GPS synthetic vision and enhanced vision as well as TCAS , Terrain avoidance systems, and such should be incorporated into those systems. All for hire aircraft especially should have to have it. Those systems give a real time view of what the plane is flying over even in a dense cloud. And let you know where the other planes are that could run into you. All planes should have altitude reporting transponders.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 11, 2020)

PWR4360-59B said:


> All planes should have altitude reporting transponders.


Even no-electric system ragwing cubs, Aeroncas, and T-crafts hedgehopping in the desert miles from any controlled airspace or radar coverage? Or should we just bite the bullet and outlaw them entirely? Declare the EAA and the SSA terrorist organizations? They're almost there with ADS-B. You can't even fly a model airplane now unless it and you are registered for drone operations and are ADS-B compliant.
Cheery, huh?
Wes


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2020)

PWR4360-59B said:


> I don't know about now, but back in the 70's a private pilot got instrument training, no not flying an IFR flight plan but some time flying and controlling the plane on instruments, night flight in a very dark area is similar to IMC conditions. Some of us low timers had no problems depending on the instruments and recovering from an unusual attitude.



Private pilots today still do “hood training”. During my training I did 4 hours under the hood. Learning how to maneuver, navigate, do stalls etc., under instruments.



> This day and age there is no excuse for even an inexperienced pilot going out of control from entering IMC, all planes should be equiped with GPS synthetic vision and enhanced vision as well as TCAS , Terrain avoidance systems, and such should be incorporated into those systems. All for hire aircraft especially should have to have it. Those systems give a real time view of what the plane is flying over even in a dense cloud. And let you know where the other planes are that could run into you. All planes should have altitude reporting transponders.



And sorry, but you would unfortunately be wrong. Since you are specifically referring to inexperienced pilots, that would mostly be private aircraft. Many planes are not equipped with GPS (which will not prevent you from getting visual illusions such as spacial disorientation anyhow). Most non-commercial or charter aircraft do not have a TCAS either.

As for, for hire aircraft, that is such a broad term. A Piper Cub can be a for hire aircraft for instance. There is no law disctating that it has to have that equipment. Only what types of conditions you can fly in with said equipment.

And finally as stated above, none of that equipment will stop any pilot from spacial disorientation or any other other visual illusion caused by loss of visual reference. Once you get those illusions, its very hard to combat them, even with instruments because you begin to second guess the instruments.

the only “non excuse” is to stay on the ground when the weather is questionable.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## Admiral Beez (Feb 11, 2020)

Perhaps the future is pilotless VIP charter helicopters. Removing the pilot seems to be removing the cause of these IMC mishaps.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 11, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> Perhaps the future is pilotless VIP charter helicopters. Removing the pilot seems to be removing the cause of these IMC mishaps.


The technology requires a LOT of maturing before that becomes feasible. Not in my lifetime. Over my dead body.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> Perhaps the future is pilotless VIP charter helicopters. Removing the pilot seems to be removing the cause of these IMC mishaps.



Hopefully not. I’ll take the human desire to survive over a computer in an emergency situation 9 out of 10 times.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2020)

Human error is the cause of probably most injuries and deaths in every aspect of our lives.

Do we replace Dr.’s for instance with robots too?


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 11, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Do we replace Dr.’s for instance with robots too?


They've already got apps that do better than the average Dr. at diagnosing obscure forms of cancer.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> They've already got apps that do better than the average Dr. at diagnosing obscure forms of cancer.



i’m referring to performing surgeries.


----------



## mikewint (Feb 11, 2020)

Let's imagine 1000 or so cars traveling at 70 mph 5 feet or so apart all under computer control on some highway of the future. Then a momentary power surge/outage/glitch and control fails for a second or two. Obviously the cars will have redundant safeties but all it takes is for one or two of those to fail...
How abou a sky full of commercial aircraft taking off and landing a few minutes apart all under nice safe computer control...then hiccup....


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 11, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> i’m referring to performing surgeries.


Scary thought, but what does a surgeon do? Analyze symptoms and history, then compare to knowledge and experience. If a standard procedure is indicated, proceed according to protocol, observing for abnormalities and accomodating as necessary. These processes are not too far beyond what industrial robotics are currently capable of. Consultation, innovation, and bedside manner still need a lot of work, but who wouldn't like to swim up from under the anesthesia to be welcomed by an observant, intelligent Siri?
Again, scary thought!
Cheers,
Wes


----------



## mikewint (Feb 11, 2020)

"To Serve and Obey and Guard men from Harm" - "With Folded Hands" (1947) by Jack Williamson. 
*"the best possible machines, designed with the best of intentions, become the ultimate horror" 
-*Jack Williamson on _The Humanoids_


----------



## gumbyk (Feb 11, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Human error is the cause of probably most injuries and deaths in every aspect of our lives.
> 
> Do we replace Dr.’s for instance with robots too?


Well, a Dr's far more likely to kill you than a pilot.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 11, 2020)

mikewint said:


> How abou a sky full of commercial aircraft taking off and landing a few minutes apart all under nice safe computer control...then hiccup....


That computer control would have to be a distributed redundant system like FBW, but what worries me is not hiccup, but hack, or maybe even EMP.
ADS and TCAS technologies could be the basis for airborne autonomous conflict resolution, reducing dependence on centralized control computers. Great idea until the day the entire GPS constellation gets vaporized at the same time. We're the only nation in the world that is planning on decommissioning all its surface based air navigation systems.
Cheery thought, huh?
Wes


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> Well, a Dr's far more likely to kill you than a pilot.



Agreed on that 100%


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 11, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Scary thought, but what does a surgeon do? Analyze symptoms and history, then compare to knowledge and experience. If a standard procedure is indicated, proceed according to protocol, observing for abnormalities and accomodating as necessary. These processes are not too far beyond what industrial robotics are currently capable of. Consultation, innovation, and bedside manner still need a lot of work, but who wouldn't like to swim up from under the anesthesia to be welcomed by an observant, intelligent Siri?
> Again, scary thought!
> Cheers,
> Wes



the problem is when something goes against what it is programmed to do

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## gumbyk (Feb 11, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Agreed on that 100%


In the words of Bill Voss (ex chair of Helicopter Safety International) _"the difference is, they kill people one at a time"_


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 11, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> the problem is when something goes against what it is programmed to do


Just like aviation; rules written in blood. That patient dies, written off to collateral damage, and the software gets revised yet again.


----------



## gumbyk (Feb 11, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> Just like aviation; rules written in blood. That patient dies, written off to collateral damage, and the software gets revised yet again.


Nothing like aviation... The safety culture isn't there in medicine to be able to learn from mistakes. The medical field almost always write deaths off as 'one of those things' and unavoidable - something aviation dismissed a long time ago.

I'd hate to think what would happen if they got involved in the programming of AI for medical procedures.


----------



## mikewint (Feb 11, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> what it is programmed to do


One addition Chris: What we *thought *we programmed it to do


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 12, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> I'd hate to think what would happen if they got involved in the programming of AI for medical procedures.


That's exactly what we were discussing. Like it or not, automation is creeping into health care, and you or I are not going to stop it. You're right about the safety culture deficit in medicine as it's currently practiced as a collection of competing independent fiefdoms. My comment was acknowledgement that there will be casualties along the way as automated procedures are perfected. And the lessons learned will be written in blood.
Unfortunately the disparity in clout between the institutions and the injured will likely preclude any accountability for the institutions' fatal mistakes during the development process. Not a pretty picture.
Wes

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## mikewint (Feb 12, 2020)

I haven't seen an actual M.D. for almost 2 years. All my appointments have been with RNPAs (Registered Nurse Physician Assistants) who "say" that they discuss everything with the actual Doctor. When I have a test performed a "Technician" calls to "discuss" the results. The answer to any question is "Well you'll have to discuss that with the Doctor" who, of course isn't available. I was also told to see him (Doctor) in 6 months, OK, Appointment Desk response - "Sorry we can't book Doctor that far in advance. Check back in a month or two" 
So I don't know, a Robot might actually be a good thing. 
Oh yea, my insurance requires a co-pay to see a "Specialist". ME - "I wasn't aware that a RNPA is a "Specialist" - "Well Sir, they work directly with the Doctor so he is in control of your care and we have to charge the fee"


----------



## mikewint (Feb 12, 2020)

2015 in the Washington Post

It started all started when a 2-year-old pit bull terrier came down with a fever last June. Its jaw was rigid, drool dripped from its mouth and it began to cough up mucus tinged with blood. After an overnight stay at a vet clinic, the dog was humanely put down.

But a few days later, the owner started feeling sick, he too had a fever and was coughing up blood. A local hospital diagnosed him with pneumonia using an *automated identification system*, but the patient (who isn’t named in the report) didn’t respond to treatment. He was transferred to another hospital and a blood sample was sent to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment for study. That’s when health workers realized that this wasn’t any old case of pneumonia — they were dealing with the plague.

Researchers reached out to more than 100 people who’d come in contact with the dog and his owner and found three other people who had come down with similar symptoms. Two were employees of the vet clinic where the dog was put down. Though neither was as ill as the dog’s owner, they both sought treatment after being told that they’d been exposed to the plague. The third patient was a woman described as a “close contact” of the dog’s owner. She had touched the dog’s body after its death, but she’d also been around the dog’s owner while he was coughing up blood.

If the fourth case was caused by the man and not his pet, it would be the first time someone has contracted the plague from a fellow human since a Los Angeles outbreak in 1924, CDC researchers say.

The authors of the report pointed out several lessons from this outbreak. For one, there’s the unfortunate finding that domestic animals may harbor the plague in areas where the disease is already endemic among rodents. They also highlighted the dangers of the first patient’s delayed diagnosis. *Because the automated system misidentified the cause of his illness*, the plague bacteria wasn’t spotted until 10 days after he started showing symptoms. At one point the man had to be intubated to help him breathe, and he wound up spending 23 days in the hospital.

“Delayed recognition because of inaccurate laboratory tests … can lead to high numbers of potential exposures,” the researchers wrote. This case “reinforces the need for *critical evaluation of results from automated systems.”*


----------



## gumbyk (Feb 12, 2020)

mikewint said:


> I haven't seen an actual M.D. for almost 2 years. All my appointments have been with RNPAs (Registered Nurse Physician Assistants) who "say" that they discuss everything with the actual Doctor. When I have a test performed a "Technician" calls to "discuss" the results. The answer to any question is "Well you'll have to discuss that with the Doctor" who, of course isn't available. I was also told to see him (Doctor) in 6 months, OK, Appointment Desk response - "Sorry we can't book Doctor that far in advance. Check back in a month or two"
> So I don't know, a Robot might actually be a good thing.
> Oh yea, my insurance requires a co-pay to see a "Specialist". ME - "I wasn't aware that a RNPA is a "Specialist" - "Well Sir, they work directly with the Doctor so he is in control of your care and we have to charge the fee"


Well, I'd make some comment about the American health system, but that'd get political...


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 12, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> Well, I'd make some comment about the American health system, but that'd get political...


Every move we make, every word we speak, every thought we think is a political act these days. There's too darn many of us, and we can't dream, fart, or brush our teeth without stepping on someone's toes or violating someone's personal space.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 12, 2020)

And on that note, lets steer this back to the original topic.


----------



## gumbyk (Feb 12, 2020)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> And on that note, lets steer this back to the original topic.


In fact, I think this topic's been done to death (at least until more info is known, or the conspiracy theory comes out).


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 12, 2020)

gumbyk said:


> In fact, I think this topic's been done to death (at least until more info is known, or the conspiracy theory comes out).



Agreed, at this point, until the investigation is completed everything is just speculation anyhow.


----------



## mikewint (Feb 13, 2020)

One last comment but personally I'm tired of hearing Kobe Bryant everything as if only his life counted. Famous in human terms - He could really jump high and put a ball into a hoop.
Now before the beatings start I am very sorry that he, at only 41YO' was killed in a horrible crash but personally I feel that it is more of a tragedy that his 13YO daughter *Gianna* whose life had hardly begun was also killed. In addition, one hardly ever hears of the other lives so tragically lost. 
The crash claimed the lives of *Payton Chester*, also only 13YO; her mother *Sarah Chester*, 45; whose death left two 16YO boys motherless. *Alyssa Altobelli*, only 14YO ; her mother *Keri Altobelli*, 46; and father *John Altobelli*, 56YO; head coach of a Jr. College baseball team; the three were just hitching a ride on the helo to save an 80mi drive. *Christina Mauser*, 38; Kobe's defense specialist left a husband without a wife, two daughters 3 and 11 and a son who is 9YO without their mother. Finally the helicopter's pilot, *Ara Zobayan*, 50.; a helo pilot for over 20 years and a certified instructor.
IMHO, Todd Schmidt, a former principal of the elementary school that Payton had attended said it best:
“While the world mourns the loss of a dynamic athlete and humanitarian, I mourn the loss of two people just as important,” he wrote. “Their impact was just as meaningful, their loss will be just as keenly felt, and our hearts are just as broken.”


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 13, 2020)

Sorry Mike, but not a single person says that the others who lost their lives were any less important. Kobe however was known by millions around the world, and that is why he gets the attention he does. Just because he could “jump high and put a ball in hoop” does not mean that he did not touch and inspire millions around the globe.

Using your logic, Joe Smith who dies in a car wreck driving home today needs to be plastered all over the media.

Sorry but to make more out of the media attention, and quite honestly ignore (or maybe even not comprehend) the facts above is ridiculous.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 13, 2020)

Next you will post the tiresome Kobe vs. fallen soldiers narrative...


----------



## fubar57 (Feb 13, 2020)

This is why I now have him blocked


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 13, 2020)

Take Anthony Bordain for instance. He was a celebrity, and his suicide touched me deeply and personally because he inspired me on certain levels and influenced my life. He too got a lot of attention. People commit suicide every day, and they don’t get the same attention from the media or from me. It does not mean they were any less important. I just don’t know them, and neither did millions of other people.


----------



## Husky (Feb 23, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> Perhaps the future is pilotless VIP charter helicopters. Removing the pilot seems to be removing the cause of these IMC mishaps.



Perhaps. And that solves, what? Remove the pilot? Then who or what is flying? Drone fly from a remote spot? Auto pilot remote?

Really?

Training, training, training stims the cause of these IIMC mishaps.


----------



## Admiral Beez (Feb 23, 2020)

Husky said:


> Perhaps. And that solves, what? Remove the pilot? Then who or what is flying? Drone fly from a remote spot?


There’s four questions there. I’m not sure which has priority, but yes, pilotless drones.


----------



## Husky (Feb 23, 2020)

Admiral Beez said:


> There’s four questions there. I’m not sure which has priority, but yes, pilotless drones.



Flown from where, by whom? If that in your mind. Or autonomous like some new vehicles? Then, how do they govern their flight parameters? If the sensors detect less the 1000 foot ceiling and/or 3 miles visibility the aircraft automatically aborts the mission and returns to base? That is basic VFR minimums 1000/3.

Or, what is it? For your autonomous or remote aircraft? Minimum VFR? Special VFR? Or some operating weather in between? Then who decides that? And when the next death(s) occur because the aircraft wasn't flown within parameters or the software/firmware/hardware couldn't adapt to the changing weather and the parameters...who is responsible?

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Husky (Feb 23, 2020)

If I didn't miss, about autonomous aircraft - I believe the whole fairly recent 'Boeing' thing makes my point.

I do not like or enjoy too much auto control in my aircrafts....and if have, I need to completely understand them and how they can fail, interrupt and/or cause a flight control issues. Then, I need know to over-ride, or lock it out.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 23, 2020)

Husky said:


> I do not like or enjoy too much auto control in my aircrafts....and if have, I need to completely understand them and how they can fail, interrupt and/or cause a flight control issues. Then, I need know to over-ride, or lock it out.


I'm with you on that. I want to be master of my machine and not second guessed by my mount.
BUT, let's face it, you and I are old school and subject to the prejudices of our age. If ten times the computing capacity of the entire Redifon B727 simulator I worked on in 1974 can fit in the smartphone I'm typing this on, then an autonomous helicopter/drone that can select a route, file a flight plan, obtain a clearance, fly to a destination, and land, while sensing and remaining clear of terrain and all objects on the surface or in the air, can't be far away. There are commuter airliners flying today whose GPWS systems have the entire topography of the globe stored in their memory and compare their radar altimeter, GPS location, and "topo map" continuously in real time. They're even smart enough to recognize when an instrument approach procedure is in progress and refrain from false alarms when their basic parameters have to be exceeded to comply with the approach. My airline friends say the one in the Embraer is so smart that it tracks a stabilized approach and keeps quiet, but if you get outside the donut and have to make largish corrections, it sounds off and busts your checkride. Now couple that with TCAS and ADS-B and a high resolution short range rotary scanning radar, and you've got the makings of an autonomous air machine that doesn't care about VFR, or visibility, or any of our eyeball-centric concerns. Scary thought, but it's closer than you think.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 23, 2020)

Husky said:


> If I didn't miss, about autonomous aircraft - I believe the whole fairly recent 'Boeing' thing makes my point.


The 'Boeing thing' IMHO, is a combination of a bargain basement automation feature resulting from a case of decay in the safety culture, and exacerbated by a faulty (non-existent) man/machine interface. It wasn't about automation per se, but automation badly done. Now that the microscopes are focused on Boeing, other "weak points" in the safety culture are coming to light. To paraphrase The Bard: "Methinks something is rotten in the kingdom of Renton!"
As long as humans and automation are going to have to co-exist in the cockpit, the interfaces MUST be designed by pilots, not digital wonks.
Cheers,
Wes

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 23, 2020)

XBe02Drvr said:


> The 'Boeing thing' IMHO, is a combination of a bargain basement automation feature resulting from a case of decay in the safety culture, and exacerbated by a faulty (non-existent) man/machine interface. It wasn't about automation per se, but automation badly done. Now that the microscopes are focused on Boeing, other "weak points" in the safety culture are coming to light. To paraphrase The Bard: "Methinks something is rotten in the kingdom of Renton!"
> Cheers,
> Wes


Don't forget the fact that many of the engineers and managers behind this have little or no actual "hands on old school" design experience, something mentioned several times on here with today's manufacturing world.


----------



## mikewint (Feb 23, 2020)

I think that it is also wery important to remember that any "automation" is a human production and akin to a "new" Windows operating system or a Jurassic Park automation or a Hubble telescope whoopsie.
Glitches are going to appear at the worst possible times and places. Then there are the sensing units that feed information to the automation systems.
But the ultimate scary is this drive towards AI and autonomous machines and systems.


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 23, 2020)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Don't forget the fact that many of the engineers and managers behind this have little or no actual "hands on old school" design experience


Nothing so dangerous as an "ink still wet on the diploma" MBA with a "Science of Management" mindset.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## XBe02Drvr (Feb 23, 2020)

mikewint said:


> Glitches are going to appear at the worst possible times and places.


Like all the other developmental paths of aviation, this one will be paved with blood.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------

