Tag Archives: ignorance

On “Aspiring” Helicopter Pilots

Posted on by
5

Get a clue.

Earlier this week, I pulled together clips from a two-hour flight between Phoenix and Page, AZ and made it into an eight-minute video set to some solo piano music. It’s not a masterpiece of video editing — hell, that isn’t what I do. It was just a way to create some fresh marketing material for Flying M Air using what I thought was some pretty awesome video footage from my flight.

I blogged about the trip and embedded the video here.

A Tiny Bit More about the Video

I need to make a few points about this video before I start my rant:

  • Route to PageThe purpose of the flight was not to make the video. The purpose of the flight was to get from Phoenix to Page as quickly as possible. My clients paid for two hours of flight time; every minute past that was being paid for out of my pocket. I flew nearly a straight line, as shown in this Google Earth plot created from actual GPS points. (I sometimes run a geologger while I fly; I happened to have it running that day.)
  • The primary purpose of the video was as a marketing tool. I had good, smooth footage of places I often fly. The lighting for some of the flight was excellent. The footage was representative of what a client might see while flying with me. Why not turn it into a marketing video?
  • The only footage in the entire video that I considered not including were the low flight clips over the Navajo reservation, including the clip where I fly between two buttes. The reason: it is not representative of what a client might experience when flying with me. Why? Because my Part 135 certificate requires me to maintain minimum altitudes of 300 feet AGL with passengers on board during a Part 135 flight. Coincidentally, this footage also documented some of the more exciting portions of the flight — 110 knots at low level isn’t exactly dull when you’re experiencing it.
  • The overall tone of the video is peaceful and serene. I was showing off beautiful scenery that floated by beneath us. The music seemed to work with it.

I shared the video on this blog (as mentioned earlier) and linked to it in a few places, including a social networking site for helicopter pilots. I got a lot of positive feedback that made me feel good.

Enter, the “Aspiring Pilot”

On the helicopter site, a lot of pilots complemented me. A few asked questions, which I answered. And then Dan (not his real name) commented:

I’ll still look like a little jerk, but god that that flight is boring. I dare not imagine the other 112 minutes. A helicopter is made for fun, caution kills the fun !!

I was immediately taken aback. I never intended the video to be exciting. Hell, if I made it too exciting, it would have raised all kinds of red flags with my contacts at the FAA. It was just a marketing video.

And then I started thinking about what the little jerk — hey, it was his self-applied label — had just said: “caution kills the fun!!” What kind of pilot would say such a thing?

I checked out his profile and it became clear. He was an “aspiring pilot.” In other words, he wasn’t a pilot at all.

Instead, he was an immature, idiotic wannabe.

I knew the type. They think flying helicopters is cool, mostly because of what they’ve seen in the movies. (I assume not the scenes where the helicopter explodes.) They’ve never been at the controls of a helicopter, they’ve never read anything about helicopter aerodynamics or maneuvers. They don’t know the first thing about flying helicopters. Maybe they’ve never even been close enough to a helicopter to touch it — let alone sit in one.

But they’re experts!

“A helicopter is made for fun, caution kills the fun!!”

They hang around helicopter forums, trying to fit in, trying to make cool comments that’ll score points with people they see as their peers. Instead, they just spout inane bullshit:

“A helicopter is made for fun, caution kills the fun!!”

The helicopter forums are full of little jerks like this — which is why you won’t find me on the helicopter forums. I have no patience for the kind of crap put out by wannabe helicopter pilots who haven’t got a clue about flying helicopters.

“A helicopter is made for fun, caution kills the fun!!”

Attention “aspiring pilots”: a helicopter is not “made for fun.” It’s a utility aircraft that can perform maneuvers and operate in situations impossible for an airplane. It is a complex piece of machinery. It takes real skill and knowledge to fly.

A lot more skill and knowledge than you’ll get playing with your Flight Simulator.

And caution? Well, that’s what keeps you alive so you can fly again tomorrow. It’s also what keeps your passengers alive so they can tell their friends about how great it was. It keeps your helicopter in one piece so its owner doesn’t take a huge financial hit. It keeps the FAA off your back so you keep your license. That’s what caution does.

Flying helicopters is serious business. It isn’t a game. Any pilot who doesn’t take flying seriously is a pilot I don’t want to see at the controls of an aircraft.

Wanna Be a Pilot?

Stop pretending and start studying.

And shut the hell up until you know what you’re talking about.

Act Like an American

Posted on by
1

Stop being close-minded, fearful bigots.

Act Like an AmericanOne of my Facebook friends shared this wonderful image the other day. It’s apparently a reproduction by Al Haug of an image that’s been floating around the Web for a while. He found a smaller version of the image on Salon.com but even the author of that post didn’t know where it originated.

I think it says a lot about what’s going on these days in America. We used to be a strong, proud country, tolerant of different races and religions. Now we’re the victims of fear-mongering radio show hosts and failed governors who feed us hate until we’re afraid of everything different from what we are.

And don’t even get me started on the war against science.

It makes me sick to see what this country is becoming.

Read this sign. Share it with your friends. Remember the message. Stop fearing. Stop hating.

Act like an American.

Yes, Most Helicopter Operations ARE VFR

Posted on by
Comment

And I always assumed most helicopter magazine editors-in-chief were helicopter pilots.

Batten down the hatches and prepare for another rant. Not a big one, but one that needs to be shared with my fellow helicopter pilots.

Rotor & WingYesterday, I got around to reading the February 2010 issue of Rotor & Wing. Rotor & Wing used to be the premier helicopter industry magazine. Somewhere along the way, it turned into a monthly collection of press releases, advertisements, and columns about narrow segments of the helicopter population: North Sea, Military, etc. It improved a bit under the editorial guidance of Ernie Stephens, who added a Helicopter Training column and made some design changes. Now there’s some information of interest to mere mortal commercial operators like me who have absolutely no interest in the politics of the North Sea or unmanned reconnoissance aircraft.

When I read a magazine, I always start with the editor’s page up front. This one, by Editor-in-Chief Joy Finnegan, really stuck in my craw. Titled “Stay Proficient,” it wasn’t about practicing emergency procedures, flying with a CFI, or even staying current with night flight. Instead, it zeroed in on an accident that had been caused by a pilot’s attempt to fly VFR at night into IMC conditions. In other words, a stupid pilot trick.

That didn’t bother me. It’s always good to analyze the mistakes of other pilots and use their situations and decisions as learning tools to avoid the same mistakes in the future. I have done so on several occasions in this blog. (For examples, read “Not Ready for Solo?,” “What if You Crashed a Helicopter and Didn’t Tell Anyone?,” and “Chasing Race Cars Isn’t For Every Pilot.”)

What bothered me were the few revealing statements about her own experience that Ms. Finnegan made, starting with:

I was shocked to learn that many helicopter pilots not only rarely fly IFR, they don’t even bother to keep current.

Hello? Ms. Finnegan? I’d venture to guess that half the helicopter pilots out there — many of which are flying tour, charter, air-taxi, survey, and utility work — don’t even have instrument ratings. I can think of at least a dozen helicopter pilots I know personally who don’t — including me.

She goes on to relate how every flight she did as a commercial airplane pilot was flown IFR, regardless of the weather. She then goes on to make what I consider an insulting statement:

VFR was for amateurs, weekend puddle-jumper jockeys who were out for their $100 hamburger flight.

Nice attitude about your fellow pilots, Ms. Finnegan.

But here’s the paragraph that made me wonder why this woman is Editor-in-Chief of what may still be the best known and most widely read helicopter industry magazine:

But I understand that it’s just the opposite for helicopter operators and that the vast majority of flights conducted in helicopters are VFR. I have also heard that some operators even discourage operations under IFR (again I’m talking flight rules not IMC). This is so very contrary to the way the fixed-wing world works that I had to call around and make sure I understood the situation correctly. After many calls and e-mails, I’m still having difficulty with the concept.

Then why the hell are you editing a helicopter magazine?

I don’t know about the rest of the helicopter pilots out there, but when I turn to a magazine about helicopters and helicopter flight, I want the person responsible for the magazine’s content to be a helicopter pilot. I want that person to know at least what I know about flying helicopters, but preferably more.

And taking two paragraphs to share her own stupid airplane pilot trick — perhaps to show off her ability to follow the instructions of ATC or brag about her coolness in a tough situation — really doesn’t make me feel any better about her experience, capabilities, or connection to the helicopter world.

Instead, I’m left angry by being fed advice by someone who obviously doesn’t have a clue about what helicopter operations are all about.

Food for Thought for American Conservatives

Posted on by
2

More good content floating around the Web.

This morning, @derekcbart tweeted a link to a site with the below-quoted content. I’m trying to find the source and the closest I seem to get is this post on reddit.

The author of this put a lot of thought into it. Although his grammar leaves a bit to be desired, and his original title is sure to turn off anyone who actually is a conservative (which is why I edited it), he’s 100% correct in his statements. I’m reposting it here as some food for thought. (If you are the author of this post and would like it removed or would like attribution, please contact me.)

I AM AN AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE [REDACTED]

this morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US department of energy. I then took a shower in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility. After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC regulated channels to see what the national weather service of the national oceanographic and atmospheric administration determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built, and launched by the national aeronautics and space administration. I watched this while eating my breakfast of US department of agriculture inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the food and drug administration.

At the appropriate time as regulated by the US congress and kept accurate by the national institute of standards and technology and the US naval observatory, I get into my national highway traffic safety administration approved automobile and set out to work on the roads build by the local, state, and federal departments of transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the environmental protection agency, using legal tender issed by the federal reserve bank. On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to be sent out via the US postal service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the department of labor and the occupational safety and health administration, enjoying another two meals which again do not kill me because of the USDA, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to ny house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and fire marshal’s inspection, and which has not been plundered of all it’s valuables thanks to the local police department.

I then log on to the internet which was developed by the defense advanced research projects administration and post on freerepublic.com and fox news forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can’t do anything right.

As an American with empathy for those struggling against the odds to survive in financial hard times, I think health care reform will provide relief to many, many people. Please understand that the reform proposed by the Obama administration is nothing like the socialized medicine the NeoCons want you to think it is.

And if anyone knows the real source of this passage, please use the comments to share it. Do not use the comments to share untruths meant to scare the public; they will not appear on this blog.

Not Ready for Solo?

Posted on by
2

This one is too absurd to pass up without comment.

I was going through the NTSB reports for helicopters today, looking for a specific accident in Arizona that hasn’t yet been listed on NTSB.gov. I did, however find this report that seems to indicate a training problem with a solo student pilot that has 64 hours of helicopter flight time:

According to the pilot, she departed Frederick Municipal Airport (FDK), Frederick, Maryland, about 0745, with an intended destination of Lancaster Airport (LNS), Lancaster, Pennsylvania. The pilot reported that she conducted the cruise portion of the flight at an altitude of 3,000 feet above mean sea level (msl), at an airspeed of approximately 110 knots. After she established communications with the LNS air traffic control tower, and was getting ready to begin her descent to the airport, the pilot noticed that the vertical speed indicator was indicating a descent of approximately 1,000 feet per minute, and that the airspeed was approximately 120 knots. The pilot “raised the collective” pitch control in an effort to reduce or stop the descent, but the helicopter did not respond as the pilot expected, and the descent continued. She determined that she would not be able to reach LNS, and selected a field suitable for a landing. The helicopter landed hard in a soybean field approximately 8 miles west-southwest of LNS. It remained upright, and the engine continued to run after touchdown, until the pilot shut it down using normal shutdown procedures.

The preliminary report goes on to say that when investigators tested the aircraft’s engine, they didn’t find anything wrong with it. It was up to date on all maintenance, the fuel samples were clear, and there was no evidence of a problem.

Is it me or is the problem as simple as what can be gleaned from the above-quoted paragraph? Let’s review:

  • The helicopter was descending at 1000 feet per minute, which is pretty quick, but not nearly as quick as an autorotation or a steep descent from altitude. (I commonly descend at at least 1500 feet per minute when coming off the Weaver Mountains (4500 feet) to Congress (3000 feet) toward Wickenburg (2400 feet).)
  • The helicopter’s airspeed was up to 120 knots from 110 knots. That’s fast, even for an R44. I normally cruise at 110 knots when alone; I have to push pretty hard to get it up to 120 knots without adding power or beginning a descent.
  • The pilot “raised the collective.” Helicopter Flying 101 says that when you pull pitch (raise collective) on a helicopter with a governor or a correlator (or both, as this helicopter has), you’re increasing power.

So the pilot is already zooming through the sky, but she adds power to stop the descent? Doesn’t she understand how the cyclic works? Pull it back to slow down. If you keep your power setting the same, you should also slow your descent rate.

Here’s what I think happened, based on the information provided in the preliminary report and a little research. The pilot was cruising at 3,000 feet. She was “getting ready to begin her descent” to an airport at an elevation of 403 — a required descent of 2600 feet. What she didn’t realize is that she had already begun the descent. Possibly with the airport in sight, she’d pushed the cyclic forward, perhaps to adjust the sight picture of the horizon before her. (This is something I recall doing more than once when I was a new pilot descending from altitude, so I can understand how she might do it, too.) The net result of a forward movement of the cyclic without a power change is to speed up and descend — which is exactly what happened. With a power setting of 18 to 20 inches of manifold pressure, she could easily get into this situation.

Rather than attempt to slow down by pulling the cyclic back, she elected to arrest descent by adding power. This would only make the problem worse if she didn’t add aft cyclic. It was probably a flare near the bottom — perhaps drilled into her by numerous practice autorotations — that slowed her down and enabled her to touch down without slamming any harder into the ground.

What should she have done? As soon as she realized she was going so fast and descending, she should have added aft cyclic. This should both slow her down and reduce her descent rate. It doesn’t matter how much power is available; if the rotors are not stalling, the helicopter will fly. Gentle aft cyclic should enable her to get a better idea of what the problem is — if there is indeed a problem.

But it’s hard to imagine a power problem if there’s no loss of RPM or yawing to the right — neither of which is mentioned as a symptom of the problem. And believe me, if a Robinson has low rotor RPM, you’ll know it — the damn horn starts blaring at 97% RPM; she would have had enough power to fly with RPM as low as 85% (or probably lower).

What do I take away from this? This solo student pilot was not prepared for her solo flight. She evidently did not understand how the controls work together to manage airspeed and climb or descent rates. (This may have something to do with her experience as an airplane pilot.) When she noticed the descent rate and high speed, she possibly panicked and did the first thing that came into her mind: raise the collective to stop the descent. But if she had been properly trained and knew what was going on, she would have reacted properly by simply pulling the cyclic back to slow down and reduce the descent rate.

As a result, a helicopter is destroyed, the NTSB is required to waste time and resources to investigate, and a student pilot, although lucky to be alive, has an accident on her record.