Fatal Helicopter Accident WA Pilbara

[Rotorwork]

Another site mentioned that Ross was flying a single seat Mosquito

 

Very Sad

 

Fly Safe RW

 

From ABC

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-29/missing-wa-helicopter-pilot-confirmed-dead-in-crash/6658164

 

Police have found the body of a missing pilot and the wreckage of his helicopter in Western Australia's Pilbara.

 

Arthur Percy Ross McDowell, 62, left Indee Station, about 70 kilometres south of Port Hedland, at 4:00pm yesterday.

 

He planned to fly to Roy Hill Station in Nullagine in the single-seat helicopter, about 300 kilometres away.

 

An extensive search was launched for Mr McDowell when he failed to arrive.

 

Eight helicopters and two planes as well as ground crews were involved in the search, which covered a 3,000-square-kilometre area.

 

Police said the wreckage was found about 11 kilometres north of Roy Hill station.

 

Mr McDowell was well known locally and had more than 40 years' flying experience.

 

 

[Rotorwork]

ASN has the helicopter as VH-JEW

 

A Cicare CH- 7bt

 

First registered 25 June 2015

 

RIP Ross, thinking of his family & friends

 

RW

 

 

[fly_tornado]

he survived less than 10 weeks in a new helo?

 

 

[Montymagic]

300 km is a fair distance for an ultrllight. heli. hope it wasn't fuel starvation. RIP.

 

 

[Rotorwork]

300 km is a fair distance for an ultrllight. heli. hope it wasn't fuel starvation. RIP.

Range: 480 km (298 mi; 259 nmi) with standard fuel load

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heli-Sport_CH-7

 

 

[Birdseye]

Nasty things these light helos. Even if structurally sound and engine operating normally, they can be taken so easily into parts of the flight envelope that it's just impossible to get out of.

 

 

[rankamateur]

But the price is appealing, such a high price though!

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Nasty things these light helos. Even if structurally sound and engine operating normally, they can be taken so easily into parts of the flight envelope that it's just impossible to get out of.

While it doesn't actually say anything at all, this is a very authoritative statement that suggests you know something that others don't. I assume you do know a lot about helicopters in general, so what are you actually saying about light helicopters? What do you mean when you say they're 'nasty things? What parts of the flight envelope can they be taken into that's any different from any other helicopter?

 

Would you say that light helicopters are somehow different, when compared with heavier helicopters, than say, LSAs are when compared with GA aircraft?

 

 

[Guest asmol]

I dont take the credit for this but when someone was asked about these light helicopters he said.

 

"I wouldnt fly in one, Have you ever seen a vintage helicopter fly-in ?" I rest my case !

 

 

[Birdseye]

Would you say that light helicopters are somehow different, when compared with heavier helicopters, than say, LSAs are when compared with GA aircraft?

Of course I would, what a strange question.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I loved flying in the old Bell 47s they felt solid like a truck but those R22s felt so flimsy and twitchy just never felt safe in them.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

Of course I would, what a strange question.

Not a strange question at all, however yours is a rather strange answer and suggests that you're denigrating light helicopters without knowing enough about them.

 

It's not correct to think that "light helicopters are somehow different, when compared with heavier helicopters, than say, LSAs are when compared with GA aircraft", because the comparison is a very good one. The only noticeable difference that could be described as 'more difficult' when flying a light, very light or ultralight helicopter, compared with a medium-heavy, for example, is the much lower rotor inertia in event of a power failure. That means that you need to react by lowering the collective quicker, just as you need to react quicker in an LSA fixed-wing than in a GA - and neither of those differences are sufficiently difficult to warrant calling the machines, whether helicopter or LSA, 'nasty'.

 

In my career I flew helicopters from medium-heavy (twin engined Bell 222), medium (Bell Longranger), medium-light (Bell Jetranger, Hughes/MD/Kawasaki 500 series/Squirrel etc), Light (Bell47, KH4, R44, R22, Rotorway Exec) Ultralight (Mini 500 and a couple of homebuilts). Contrary to what most people would expect, the heavier helicopters are far more sensitive to fly and from a handling viewpoint are more likely to have you in trouble than the lightest ones.

 

The big Bells have a parallelogram suspended floating mast system to isolate the cabin from the vibration of the heavy teetering rotor system. The vibration without it would be intolerable, and is so extreme that hydraulic assisted controls are essential to make it flyable for any period of time. A hydraulic failure requires landing immediately. That same teetering system presents a real hazard to operations at higher speeds too, as mast bumping with the potential breakage/loss of the mast is a real danger when manoeuvring, specifically when rolling left with an anticlockwise system.

 

As the helicopter gets smaller the hydraulics become less critical, B47 is unpleasant to fly un-assisted for any length of time but it can be done if necessary to complete a critical task, and the R44 didn't originally have any hydraulics. In the R44 the vibration transmitted into the cyclic control column was quite significant though, and unpleasant, so the first 'solution' provided by the Robinson factory was to hang a leather bag full of lead shot on the top of the control column. After a while the vibration turned some of the lead shot to powder and soon after that the leather bag started to come apart spilling the shot through the cabin. The factory eventually recognised the need for a less agricultural fix and developed the hydraulic system in use today.

 

Moving to the ultralight helicopter, they are an absolute delight to fly. When a pilot first gets endorsed on helicopters that are larger than the one they trained on,* they are invariably astounded to discover just how sensitive the Jetranger is, particularly in roll, and most have quite some difficulty holding them steady enough in the hover to be able to land. Conversely ultralight helicopters are very stable and easy to hover. In USA there is/was no requirement for a licence to fly any aircraft under 254lb empty weight and many ultralight helicopters fit into that, consequently there are a number of people there who have flown their homebuilt 'copters without any formal training - you wouldn't want to try that even with something as small as an R22.

 

*unlike fixed-wing, you have to have a separate endorsement for each type of helicopter you fly and these days most people train on R22 and go to the Jetranger after a while.

 

So much for the basic handling - the smaller the helicopter, the less likely you are to come unstuck, and the bigger machines have more quirks - that's why it's pilots with more experience that fly the bigger machines.

 

That only leaves the flight regime itself, and in that regard there's little difference between them either, and where there is a difference once again the lighter the helicopter the less 'nasty' it is. If you operate behind the so-called 'dead man's curve' (height/speed graph) you're likely to get hurt or killed if you have a power failure, and in that case it doesn't matter what size the helicopter is. Small helicopters are much more forgiving than large ones if you get into vortex-ring state (aka settling with power), the lower total inertia of the small helicopter allows you to get out of it quickly and with minimal height loss. Similar with tail-rotor vortex ring, and dynamic rollover is a problem with the larger helicopters equipped with oleo suspension, not with the ultralight helicopters with relatively rigid skids. The lower total inertia of the ultralight helicopter also reduces its vulnerability to mast-bumping when manoeuvring unless you are very aggressive on the cyclic. Retreating blade stall and compressibility are similar for all types regardless of size.

 

So - what's so "nasty" about the "these light helos" Birdseye?