Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Two men died yesterday when their Robinson R22 helicopter crashed for a currently unknown reason or reasons, in the NE Wheatbelt region of W.A.

They were taking part in a club event with 10 other aircraft, travelling from Koorda to Jandakot, and the alarm was raised when they failed to arrive at Jandakot at 4:00PM.

AMSA commenced a search with their Challenger jet and the wreckage of the Robinson was located near the Cowcowing Lakes, S of Koorda shortly after. Police attended the crash scene and confirmed there were no survivors.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-03/helicopter-crash-in-the-wheatbelt-claims-lives-of-two-men/101495580

Posted

On the TV news I saw tail end of a report  of a helicopter crash in a built up urban area in WA. It appeared to be a different accident to the wheat belt one. There might have been two accidents and four deaths?

  • Informative 1
Posted (edited)

There's been only the one helicopter crash - the media are excellent for dragging out totally unrelated file footage of a different event - just as long as there's an aircraft of some sort in it.

The media haven't been to the Robinson R22 crash site to acquire images, as far as I know. The W.A. Police will have them, but I doubt whether they will be released for public viewing - certainly not until all the related families have been notified.

 

https://www.police.wa.gov.au/Media-Centre/Media-Releases/4669-Fatal-Helicopter-Crash--Booralaming

Edited by onetrack
Posted

No surprise there, what I saw was wreckage in someone's back yard there was video of the accident as well, total BS.

  • Agree 1
Posted

I have been told Robinson helicopters have low inertia main rotors and in the event of an engine failure you only have 1.5 seconds to react.

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1
Posted

My thoughts with these fellow aviators and their families. This may interest some on this thread re Robinson helicopters.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative 3
Posted

Thanks for posting that kiwiaviator.

Unfortunately, it's seems to be a fact of life that if you buy the cheapest of almost anything, you need to have some aside for the risks that you take.

Not that that would help the final outcome of many sad incidents.

I like many, have flown in them a good number of times, but always have some doubts in the back of my mind.

Too many parts in my view all relying on one another to keep them aloft.

  • Like 1
Posted

I don't think mast bumping is limited to Robinson helicopters. Anyhow it is described in the POH. Know your aircraft, know the limits.  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Posted
1 hour ago, Thruster88 said:

I don't think mast bumping is limited to Robinson helicopters. Anyhow it is described in the POH. Know your aircraft, know the limits.  

The video shows what seems on merit and past occurrences pointing to a need for a review of limitations on the model.  Look at the facts in front of everyone regarding the fuel tank issue and the sad accidents before things were sorted.  Not just aircraft but cars and boats as well were regulators move slower than ideal on recommendations that either improve safety or advise operators of the vehicle. 

Posted

Here's a closer photo of the wreckage. It has certainly been a high-speed impact. It seems like all the important components are within a short distance of the helicopter, but I'll wager the investigators will be giving the tail rotor a thorough examination.

There doesn't appear to be any indication of a mast bump on the boom, as one would expect that a mast bump would sever the boom, and it wouldn't be lying there neatly in one continuous section.

 

 

Robinson.jpg

Posted

Very sad. The owner of the helicopter and presumably the pilot on this flight was well known in the Jandakot flying community. 

  • Informative 2
Posted

part of the problem with Robinson fuel tanks is that owners did not comply with the requirement to modify and then had an accident.

  • Informative 1
Posted

Part of the problem with the fuel tanks was that when a change was mandated, a lot of commercial operators didn’t do it, so the cut-off date was delayed instead of the operators being grounded. A mate hired one of the unmodified ones, and now he’s dead. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Informative 3
Posted (edited)
On 04/10/2022 at 8:56 PM, sfGnome said:

Part of the problem with the fuel tanks was that when a change was mandated, a lot of commercial operators didn’t do it, so the cut-off date was delayed instead of the operators being grounded. A mate hired one of the unmodified ones, and now he’s dead. 

Very sad.

I imagine you are possibly referring to the incident at Panorama House.

If so, I saw where the rotor blades had clipped a tree just a few metres above the ground, and one would think that it may well have survived albeit damaged, had the fuel tanks not gone up.

A tragic outcome, and others that were similar.

Edited by planedriver
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Posted

my ruff understanding of 2 issues in this thread (NOT neccesarily related to the thread incident):

 

1. fuel tanks - an internal bladder had to be installed so if there was any tank rupture - the bladder fuel contents would be likely contained

 

2. Should Robinsons be flying in NZ video: mast bumping - the rotor head design of the Robinsons makes in possible for a must bump to occur (fast flying in turbulent conditions not recommended)

  • Like 1
Posted

Surprisingly these machines exist, I have been told in the event of a power failure after one and a half seconds they turn into a homesick manhole cover. I wouldn't get in one.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 2
Posted
6 hours ago, Teckair said:

Surprisingly these machines exist, I have been told in the event of a power failure after one and a half seconds they turn into a homesick manhole cover. I wouldn't get in one.

The R22 is the one with virtually no time for autorotation.

We had some really good threads on the R22 and R44 around 2010 -2012, as Motz was following the fuel fires which took a couple of his friends.

Posted
6 hours ago, Teckair said:

Surprisingly these machines exist, I have been told in the event of a power failure after one and a half seconds they turn into a homesick manhole cover. I wouldn't get in one.

Not unlike a thruster at MTOW. A PILOT will instantly note any change in engine sound and act accordingly. Know your aircraft.  

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

Not unlike a thruster at MTOW. A PILOT will instantly note any change in engine sound and act accordingly. Know your aircraft.  

Yes I agree the early Thrusters with the 503 would crash if you lost power on take off. With the 582 you could climb out at 65 kts which gave you time to get the nose down but you still had to be quick.

  • Informative 2
Posted
11 hours ago, Teckair said:

Yes I agree the early Thrusters with the 503 would crash if you lost power on take off. With the 582 you could climb out at 65 kts which gave you time to get the nose down but you still had to be quick.

Never in 100 lifetimes would any Thruster climb at 65kt. I've had power failure in a 503 with no problems maintaining control. We always maintained 50 till 250ft then 42.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
  • Informative 2
Posted

It was common knowledge that 503 Thusters were dangerous on take off. Are you calling me a liar ?

  • Like 1
  • Caution 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...