Not good news for those pilots, military helicopter crash

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

SVSUSteve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
3,893
Location
Evansville, Indiana
Especially the ones where the pilot is trying to impress the ground-pounders. Ooops. Guy will probably wish he were dead, after the CO gets done with him.
There was one a while back like that in England. Military crew ended up in prison if I recall correctly for negligent homicide or something along those lines.
 

JamesG

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
2,408
Location
Columbus, GA and Albuquerque, NM
The misjudgement was hot-dogging over the COB. But yes, probably a combination of the thin air and snow covered ground throwing off depth perception contributed to the crash.

That pilot's (AH's only have one PIC pilot, the other crew is a subordinate, a gunner) career is as crashed as that Apache. REALLY lucky lucky that no one was killed on the ground. Did you see guy barely missed by the tail rotor and all the people down range like bowling pins? Amazingly lucky. That will probably keep him out of jail, but he's going to need to look for another line of work.
 

BBerson

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
12,800
Location
Port Townsend WA
Funny listening to the reporter trying to explain the cause with no knowledge of helicopters.
 

hogheadv2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
127
Location
Booger finger of Michigan
Not that the data recorder did not have all of the pilot inputs and aircraft orientation logged... Even the pilots vision, targeting sensors would have been recorded.
The **** News knows about it now!!!!:ermm:
 

Nickathome

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
758
Location
S.E. PA
Looked like the tail plane took somebody off their feet....It said noone was killed, but I bet that dude was seriously hurt.....That pilot should face some serious disciplinary action, such as never being allowed to fly in the military again. Not to mention how many taxpayer dollars were flushed down the commode due to that stupid showoff stunt.
 

autoreply

Moderator
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
10,732
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
The misjudgement was hot-dogging over the COB. But yes, probably a combination of the thin air and snow covered ground throwing off depth perception contributed to the crash.

That pilot's (AH's only have one PIC pilot, the other crew is a subordinate, a gunner) career is as crashed as that Apache. REALLY lucky lucky that no one was killed on the ground. Did you see guy barely missed by the tail rotor and all the people down range like bowling pins? Amazingly lucky. That will probably keep him out of jail, but he's going to need to look for another line of work.
I always though that (at least in the Dutch airforce), the pilot/gunner was the same, while the commander did the navigation and long-range weapons? Is this different in the USAAF, or did I just remember it wrong?
 

JamesG

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
2,408
Location
Columbus, GA and Albuquerque, NM
I'm not sure how the Dutch have theirs configured but as designed the front seater has the main fire control equipment including the sight and radar for the missiles. He only has basic flight controls. Either can fly or conduct engagements, but in the US Army, the pilot sits in the back and flies, communicates, and commands the gunner.
[video=youtube_share;26eqFN1BB70]http://youtu.be/26eqFN1BB70[/video]
 

Jman

Site Developer
Joined
Oct 22, 2002
Messages
1,881
Location
Pacific NW, USA!
I was wondering if this video would make it on here. What an embarrassment to Army aviation..... Most likely this pilot got away with executing "Warrant Officer Recruiting" maneuvers like this in Iraq or back in the States near sea level. Mountains of Afghanistan are a different story all together.

I know two guys who have mushed through maneuvers like that and smacked the ground (they were actually doing the job though, not show boating). In both cases they could have missed the ground and flew back to base had they chose to overtourque the A/C (Pull more power than what you are supposed to based on the written limits). They might have taken some heat for pulling the guts out of it and trashing the engine or drivetrain, but using that extra power would have meant the difference between a crash and a precautionary landing after the fact. the problem is that preventing an overtourque is so ingrained in an army pilots psyche that 9 times out of 10 he will crash rather than pull power above that limit.

I've nearly done the same exact thing (excepet the showing off thing) and realized afterward that had the wind been a little worse or the altitude a little higher I would have hit the ground. And looking back at what I was thinking as the ground was rushing up at us and I'm trying to eek the power from 99 up to 100% to get that "last" little bit of power out of her, I would have pancaked too rather than bust the limit. Not only that but I would have planted myself right next to the objects of my aggression which had me making such a maneuver in the first place. Now the ground force is has to change their mission to come rescue my butt. Not good.
 

Head in the clouds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,983
Location
Gold Coast, East Coast of Australia
........they could have missed the ground and flew back to base had they chose to overtourque the A/C (Pull more power than what you are supposed to based on the written limits).......
Very good point Jake.

In freeze-frame at the time of impact, and just after it, even when the crash is inevitable and then has actually happened, you can see from the angle of his retreating blades that he still hasn't pulled anything like full collective!

That ingrained 'must not over-torque and leave the tell-tale on' is a real problem. Early in my career I had a journalist aboard photographing floods in the very remote far north of Oz. We'd landed on a ledge at the top of a waterfall and the rim of the ledge was lined with boulders about 3ft high. It was mid-summer and very hot, high, heavy and redline torque gave me a 2ft ground effect hover, no way over the rocks, no prospect of a breeze (tail to a cliff) and if I did a max performance lift off from skids on I might have got over the boulders but would probably sink rapidly with loss of ground effect and clout the tail on the edge.

I was a very long way from any fuel (3hrs) but nonetheless I did as taught and hovered at full power for 5 mins or so until I got lighter by burning fuel.... Later in my career I would have done a max performance and used whatever torque I needed to keep the tailrotor clear.


But I still reckon the torque turn should carry significant blame. During my training my instructor told me he was teaching me torque turns because they were in the curriculum but he said he didn't know why they taught them, they served no useful purpose - not even as an emergency quickstop.

He was right, I flew commercial rotary for 15yrs, the first 5yrs was mustering cattle and a lot of the rest was film work and both of them require wringing the clacker out of the machine at times with every manoeuver you can think up at the specific moment, and in that time I never once did a torque turn. It's stupid, they shouldn't teach it. During my training my co-student was the son of the CEO of Sea World here and they run Squirrels for joyflights. As soon as no.1 son qualified daddy let him take the whole family up in one of their Squirrels, he showed off with a torque turn and buried the lot of them in the beach - and they still teach TTs!
 

Aircar

Banned
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
3,567
Location
Melbourne Australia
That video comes up as 'not available in your area' but i think I get the gist of it from the comments -- without knowing if there was any wind at the time and adding to Alan's comments about flying into his own wake there is a possibility that the 'reverse dynamic soaring' effect could be part of it --namely pulling up when going downwind results in steadily decreasing airspeed in a high wind gradient (from near ground to several hundred feet ) An english glider pilot related his experience with nearly crashing after doing a (typical) low level contest finish --almost at ground level and at high speed with a STRONG TAILWIND --he started pulling up expecting to get a lot of height back in the zoom but found that was barely able to do the 180 and land straight ahead . The 'dynamic soaring' technique used by albatrosses etc exploits the wind gradient and the bird's inertia to extract energy (they go thousands of kilometres at wave top height doing inclined circles without a single wing beat ) --the reverse is also true .

I wonder if many cases of crashing in the low level turn are in fact due to this effect ? The old 'downwind turn myth' is regularly 'debunked' with references to a bird flying inside a C5A or some other arguments based on reference frames to 'prove' that there is no effect on the aircraft regardless of wind speed --which is true ONLY if there is no wind GRADIENT . Many crop dusters swear by the "downwind turn" effect but the difference is that they are operating right in the wind gradient zone and doing thousands of both into wind and downwind turns and alternate climbing and diving with each wind direction.
 
A

Alexey

Guest
Hi guys! In Russia too is not very good news. I am sorry for my english:





Double attack helicopter Ka-52 "Alligator" crashed 10 kilometers from the airport Torzhok in the Tver region. The navigator was killed on the spot, the pilot died later in hospital. The car disappeared from radar screens at 21.05 GMT on Monday. According to one version, the cause of the accident was bad weather.
The Ka-52 "Alligator" crashed near Torzhok in the Tver region, said on Tuesday, RIA "Novosti" with reference to the representative of the Defense Ministry.


According to "Interfax", the collapse of the Ka-52 under the Torzhok was due to bad weather conditions. On this assumption, the agency reported citing a source "familiar with the situation."

The first flight of the Ka-52 from the experimental batch was held in 1997. In October 2008, at the "Progress" has begun mass production of these machines. Previously, the Defense Ministry announced its plans to buy 30 Ka-52 to the end of 2012.

The Ka-52 helicopter is a double shock, developed on the basis of single-seat Ka-50. Unlike its predecessor, Ka-52 is a command vehicle and has the ability to carry out reconnaissance and target designation. The helicopter can carry 12 supersonic anti-tank guided missiles "Whirlwind" that brings the target by a laser beam automatically as well as standardized containers with machine-gun and cannon.

The range of weapons, "Alligator" includes 80 unguided rockets caliber 80mm missiles "air-to-air." The helicopter is equipped with 30-mm gun 2A42 with ammunition, 500 rounds.

According to developers, Ka-52 is equipped with evacuation of the pilots, which "provides rescue of two crew members in almost all possible situations in combat."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkjbZxpvMrY&feature=player_embedded
 

autoreply

Moderator
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
10,732
Location
Rotterdam, Netherlands
the problem is that preventing an overtourque is so ingrained in an army pilots psyche that 9 times out of 10 he will crash rather than pull power above that limit.
True words; unfortunately. Many things are so ingrained in the pilots brain that we do things in emergencies that - in hindsight - are incomprehensible.
I wonder if many cases of crashing in the low level turn are in fact due to this effect ? The old 'downwind turn myth' is regularly 'debunked' with references to a bird flying inside a C5A or some other arguments based on reference frames to 'prove' that there is no effect on the aircraft regardless of wind speed --which is true ONLY if there is no wind GRADIENT . Many crop dusters swear by the "downwind turn" effect but the difference is that they are operating right in the wind gradient zone and doing thousands of both into wind and downwind turns and alternate climbing and diving with each wind direction.
That might very well be the case. I've once had a (downwind) finish in a Janus, at VNE (120 kts). I pulled up at something like 3-4G's and scared the *beep* out of myself by having a high-speed stall and finding myself around 20 kts slower as I would have though. Those lower 50-100 ft of atmospheric boundary layer can make a lot of difference...
 
2
Group Builder
Top