helicopter - safe ?

[johnm]

Don't know much about them strange whirly things ............ so in the interests of a ding dong are there any helicopter pilots out there that would refute either or both statement a) & b)

 

a) If the wings are travelling faster than the fuselage, it's probably a helicopter - and therefore unsafe

 

b) If something hasn't broken on your helicopter, it's about to

 

 

[facthunter]

Neither statement is either scientific or logical, if you examine them. so I will limit my response to that on the direct questions.

 

They are complex aircraft often assigned to operations in difficult circumstances. They are maintenance intensive and failure of any mechanical component can cause real difficulties.

 

The American attempt to get to Iran resulted in the failure of all Helicopters involved to make the journey which must have looked like the monumental failure it was.

 

In the mid 70's a survey I saw had 27% of all registered helicopters in Australia written off in a 12 month period.

 

I prefer fixed wing, but there are jobs only helicopters can do. Many of the craft in the above survey were working in dangerous conditions. Nev

 

 

[Downunder]

In the last few years I've noticed a lot more choppers around.

 

Rescue, fire fighting, fire setting, joy flights, private, etc

 

Sometimes it seems like there's more of them than fixed wing.........

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Most people have an unreasoned distrust and fear of helicopters which is usually based on ignorance about them. If I had a dollar for every time someone's said to me that they wouldn't fly in a helicopter because if the engine stops it would surely plummet to the ground ...

 

Then you get those same people onto their first helicopter flight (because skeptical they may be, but perversely everyone still wants to go in a chopper) and they are instantly converted, the delightful sensation of stationary flight is something they could never have imagined and they then realise that helicopters are the nearest thing to a magic carpet that we'll ever have.

 

As far as safety is concerned, certainly some particular models have had their problems but they have mainly been things which do not manifest until the pilot has stuffed up - the Robinsons rupturing their fuel tanks and catching fire if you crash them is a good example of that. In terms of normal operations you'll be very hard-pressed to find a helicopter pilot who would say that a helicopter is less safe than a fixed-wing, in fact they'll mostly say that a helicopter is many orders of magnitude safer than a fixed-wing in virtually any type of operation. I, for one, would never fly a fixed-wing again if I could still own and operate helicopters but having a commercial operation made it cost-effective whereas to own and fly helicopters in private operations requires a substantial personal fortune. And that's another strange thing, in general the public believe that aeroplanes are more expensive to own and operate than helicopters, so they are always rather shocked at the cost of helicopter flights compared with fixed-wing ones.

 

As far as reliability is concerned, I have about three times the amount of rotary hours as fixed-wing hours and I've had about the same number of forced landings in each type. From that one sampling it makes the fixed-wings three times less reliable than the rotary wing, but admittedly doesn't take into account 4 stroke piston and turbine engines in helicopters vs 2T and 4T engines in fixed-wing. All that said though, most forced landings in helicopters were not engine related (systems, hydraulics, gear-boxes, clutch, belts, vibration etc) whereas most forced landings in fixed-wing were engine related (magnetos, coils, plugs, icing - no carb heat available, broken crank, PSRU etc) and contaminated fuel but can't blame the engine for that.

 

The Bell 206 Jetranger held the honour for decades, and probably still does, of being the safest single-engined aircraft of all time and that included rotary and fixed-wing and was based on pax miles flown as well as pax hours flown. When I had 206s their Allison C20 turbine engine mechanical failure rate was hovering (pun intended) at around 1 failure per 120,000 flight hours which meant that once you'd got it started, and if you didn't run it out of fuel, there was very little chance of it stopping.

 

I'd far rather be in a helicopter in event of a forced landing, a clear space the size of a tennis court is quite sufficient.

 

Another little-mentioned aspect is the safety of helicopters when bad weather develops. You can push on into quite bad conditions by just slowing down and flying lower (perfectly legal under "Helicopter Special VFR" regulations which allow for reduced minima) and if it turns too bad it's always easy to find somewhere to land and let the weather pass. We all know what happens when you push on into bad weather in a fixed-wing.

 

 

[johnm]

thats what we want to know about HITC - thanks

 

 

[alf jessup]

Helicopters are as safe as anything else flying, it is the human input in maintaining & flying them just as it is with fixed wing that makes all types of flying seem dangerous to the outside world.

 

Alf

 

 

[Yenn]

I get ADs automaticlly sent by CASA and nearly all of them relate to helicopters, especially Agusta, a few relate to Airbus or Boeing and recently the poor old Tiger moth has featured.

 

As for choppers being able to operate in bad conditions I seem to remember a couple of rescue helicopters who proved that wrong. With loss of innocent lives. My personal opinion is that in the past there were a lot of cowboys flying choppers but happily that situation seems to have been fixed.

 

 

[Thirsty]

I have many hours flying in and working around helicopters and I reckon they are as safe as fixed wing insofar as mechanical failures go. It is true that there are many more linkages in the flight control system of a helicopter that, if one were to fail, would lead to the end of the helicopter as opposed to a fixed wing aircraft. Arguably the only really important flight control in fixed wing is the elevator whereas in a helicopter they are me all equally important.

 

I can't recall an accident in a helicopter where it has been proven a mechanical fault was the cause. So we come back to my favourite way of thinking about flight, aircraft fly beautifully until a "pilot" touches the controls whereas a helicopter will only fly with the pilot manipulating the controls. So, almost all accidents are the pilots fault.

 

 

[M61A1]

I get ADs automaticlly sent by CASA and nearly all of them relate to helicopters, especially Agusta, a few relate to Airbus or Boeing and recently the poor old Tiger moth has featured.As for choppers being able to operate in bad conditions I seem to remember a couple of rescue helicopters who proved that wrong. With loss of innocent lives. My personal opinion is that in the past there were a lot of cowboys flying choppers but happily that situation seems to have been fixed.

I suspect that you'll find when rescue heli's go down because of bad conditions, the conditions are really bad, stuff that you wouldn't dream of in a fixed wing. Rescue pilots can get very mission focused, because there are usually lives at stake, and then get in too deep.

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

I have many hours flying in and working around helicopters and I reckon they are as safe as fixed wing insofar as mechanical failures go. It is true that there are many more linkages in the flight control system of a helicopter that, if one were to fail, would lead to the end of the helicopter as opposed to a fixed wing aircraft. Arguably the only really important flight control in fixed wing is the elevator whereas in a helicopter they are me all equally important.I can't recall an accident in a helicopter where it has been proven a mechanical fault was the cause. So we come back to my favourite way of thinking about flight, aircraft fly beautifully until a "pilot" touches the controls whereas a helicopter will only fly with the pilot manipulating the controls. So, almost all accidents are the pilots fault.

I have experienced an elevator circuit failure for real - and landed it (Jabiru) safely. David Eyre landed the prototype Seabird Seeker safely after an aileron circuit failure that left him with no aileron control. A correctly designed fixed-wing aircraft can survive such failures.

Yes, I've flown in helicopters - and even flown one briefly. Had a little bit to do with the Victa gyroplane, too. The Bell 206 is a remarkable example. A helicopter is roughly three times as costly to own & operate as a fixed-wing aircraft of similar disposable load. No, for a similar level of design effort, a helicopter is NOT as safe as a fixed wing aircraft; it's an order of magnitude more complex to design for an equivalent level of safety. Fixed-wing aircraft fly because of the principles involved; helicopters fly in spite of them. But helicopters can do things that fixed-wing aircraft cannot - and vice-versa. You are comparing apples and oranges.

 

 

[rankamateur]

I have had a great respect for helicopter pilots since I heard flying them likened to "riding a unicycle on a beach ball", every input seems to have secondary and tertiary effect which have to be further corrected for.

 

 

[Russ]

The "autogyro" ( gyrocopter.....gyro plane ) was birthed, and from that helos evolved.

 

Somewhere.......I read, the jet ranger was second to none, hrs flown re incidences. And that was over many yrs of history checks.

 

Mate owns a Canadian Kiowa ( army jet ranger ) great brute of a thing, cruise 90ish, at 90L per hr.......yikes. ( good for approx 3hrs duration max )

 

He "works" to pay the rediculous running costs. ...loves his helo.

 

 

[rgmwa]

I recently spent an hour with the pilot and crew chief of `Elvis' the 9,000 HP, S-64 Skycrane currently over here for fire fighting duties. The crew chief said they do two hours maintenance for every hour flying. Don't know if he was exaggerating or not, but they had a team of three looking after it.

 

rgmwa