UK Raf fatality report.

[Aussie_Paul]

Not sure if this has been widely read. Aussie Paul.


http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_avsafety/documents/page/dft_avsafety_023917.hcsp

Aussie Paul

[Rotornut]

One of its features is a mast design which is claimed to improve handling in pitch. Dual controls are fitted, including dual throttles.


OM GOSH!!! Not the Magic Mast Again! MJ :)

Thanks for the Link Paul.

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

M J :

Do you remember when Don LaFleur described the magic mast as a device that controlled the " Rocking Horse " action of the RAF? :D :D

Chuck E.

[Russell]

Right from the web site!
Safety Recommendation 2003-03

It is recommended that the CAA should assess the RAF 2000 for compliance with the requirements of BCAR Section 'T', as amended, and, if necessary, require appropriate modification to achieve compliance. :eek:

[Udi]

How sad. :(

Note that the pilot was, once more, an Airline Transport Pilot with gazillion hours of experience. The last fatal RAF accident, that I am aware of, was the one in Virginia, also involving an ATP.

A fixed wing pilot is trained to instinctively react to upsets in a way that is just opposite to correct gyroplane flying. The RAF is especially sensitive to wrong FW pilot reactions. Having lots of hours in a FW airplane is a liability, not and asset, when flying unstable gyroplanes.

If there are any ATPs reading this thread - please DO NOT fly unstable gyroplanes. The RAF is one of the most unstable gyroplanes in existence.

Udi

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Udi :

Please allow me to elaborate further on your thoughts.

Beyond any doubt high time airline pilots will have built in reflexes that can prove to be fatal with an unstable gyroplane.

However, proper understanding of the subject combined with proper training will instill the proper thought pattern and control actions when flying different types of aircraft.

I am a high time ALTP, however I also am trained and experienced in both fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft and have zero difficulty going from one type to another.

In fact I have held flying jobs where I would randomly switch from fixed to rotary wing several times a day.........

It is all predacated on your mind set, training, experience and awareness of the task at hand.

Of all flying machines the gyroplane is the least difficult to fly, having said that no, I repeat no, unstable flying machine is easy or safe to fly.

It is all about knowledge and awareness of the task at hand.

If you get out of your car and on to your motorcycle do you stop the motorcycle with your feet resting on the pegs and let it fall over?

Chuck E.

[Doug Riley]

The relatively gentle wind conditions reported do not tell the whole story. A pitch-unstable gyro becomes a handful when it encounters thermal activity. This sort of activity often occurs in the mid-day hours on days with light wind, strong sunshine and mild air temps. These days are very inviting visually, with bright blue sky and puffy cumulus.

Fly a pitch-unstable craft on such a day, however, and you may wish you were back on the ground. The nose will rise in every updraft, producing a series of uncommanded mid-air flares that rob you of your airspeed. You may be tempted to keep power on and shove the stick forward to preserve airspeed (especially if you're a high-time fixed-wing pilot). However, a thermal is often surrounded by a "tube" of sinking air. As you wrestle with the thermal, you may end up throwing the stick forward just you leave the rising air and enter the falling air. This can induce low G and create a PPO if the power setting remains high.

To have the best chance of surviving in turbulence in a pitch-unstable gyro, you have to back off power as much as you can while still maintaining controlled, level flight just above backside-of-power-curve airspeed. Avoid large control corrections and maintain a stick grip that's light enough to allow a small amount of "float" of the handle within your closed hand. When the gyro balloons in an updraft, let it do so, and only gradually apply gentle forward pressure to regain your airspeed. Close the throttle instantly if you feel a downdraft (lightness in your seat).

Better yet, build a stable machine so we don't have to keep reading these depressing death reports. An otherwise stock RAF with an add-on HS is NOT going to test out to be pitch-stable, although it may be less unstable than one with no HS at all.* Adjustment of the thrustline-CG relationship is necessary for a complete fix.

*I'll post more on this under the RAF thread.

[gyroman]

I wish the NTSB reports read more like this report. Seems like the investigator really understands what's going with the flight characteristics of a gyroplane.

[Screw]

Screw-In

I too liked the way they reported the accident. Not to much of the "While operating under part 91 of the..."

They kinda spoke plain and gave more detail then what we would get here in the states.

I hate RAF! Was that machine one with the "flying surface" on the mast to control occilation? This is enough! Isn't there anything the FAA or anybody can do to shut them down? How many people have to get killed before they realize their product is SH*T.

Screw-Out

[Udi]

In the US, John, you are allowed to mount an engine to a wheelbarrow, connect a door sideways with rubber bands, and fly it legally. You have to have all your marks and placards in place though!!! There is nothing anyone can do about a poorly designed kit.

In the UK microlights are regulated but, paradoxically, these regulations do not allow to install a HS on the stock RAF! Come on Brits. Get your act together!

I am a little disappointed they sell the RAF on Aircraft Spruce though... Hopefully the Sparrow Hawk will take its place soon enough.

Udi-

[Udi]

...However, proper understanding of the subject combined with proper training will instill the proper thought pattern and control actions when flying different types of aircraft...

I disagree, Chuck. You are not a good example of an ATP. The diverse nature of your flying keeps you from acting on instincts but the typical FW ATP has the FW emergency procedures drilled so hard into their psyche that they cannot, without hundreds of practice hours, get rid of these instincts.

For FW drivers, safety is - nose down add power. For rotorcraft drivers safety is - off power ease back on the stick. This is just opposite. Transition can be learned, but old habits are real hard to get rid of after years and years of doing just one thing.

Udi-

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Udi :

I guess you are correct, a lot of airline pilots are being trained in SOP's and I guess it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks.

I don't know weather to be ashamed or proud that I am not a good example of an ATP, :D :D , is being competant on many diverse flying machines so unusual? I thought there were many of us in the industry.

You don't want me to even start on some of the problems I have trying to train airline types to fly a flying boat. :D

Chuck E.

[PW_Plack]

John,

This was a 2002 accident report. The RAF "stabilator" was still undergoing extensive scientific tests in the lab and wind tunnel at the time, and the company's staff of pilots and engineers had not completed the rigorous instrumented testing required to confirm that the device was safe for sale to the public.

[KenSandyEggo]

Paul, could you name their "staff of pilots and engineers," they're credentials and how long they've been with the company? Plural denotes at least 2 pilots and 2 engineers. Can you expound on the "scientific tests" a little? Which "lab" and which "wind-tunnel" did they employ? :confused:

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Kenny :

RAF has a wind tunnel right at their factory, it is the parking lot where their company president and test pilot smacked up one of the factory machines testing it in high winds.

They use parked vans for restraint devices so the wreckage does not spread out onto city property.

It is also noteworthy that they have had four people die flying these research flights at the factory.

Chuck E.

[Mike Jackson]

I disagree, Chuck. You are not a good example of an ATP. The diverse nature of your flying keeps you from acting on instincts but the typical FW ATP has the FW emergency procedures drilled so hard into their psyche that they cannot, without hundreds of practice hours, get rid of these instincts.

For FW drivers, safety is - nose down add power. For rotorcraft drivers safety is - off power ease back on the stick. This is just opposite. Transition can be learned, but old habits are real hard to get rid of after years and years of doing just one thing.

Udi-

Hey UDI,

Where did you gain so much expertise regarding airline and other FW pukes?

I'm sick of hearing about the "typical ATP slug" and his lack of instinct where gyros are concerned. I am a believer of good training, design, and flight discipline. I don't confuse helos, gyros, or Big Boeing products. Maybe others do. It might be interesting to see statistics of fatalities to determine the relative percentages of "run of the mill gyro morts" and "ATP bubbas flying their gyro" morts.

Lighten up on the ATP FW guys. Other than that, I like your engineering insight to the sport.

Mike

[Udi]

Hey UDI,
Where did you gain so much expertise regarding airline and other FW pukes?
Mike

Mike - you don't need to be an expert of any kind to know that active ATPs practice emergency procedures regularly. As a former FW puke, I have some personal insight into the transition from FW to gyros. After about 20 years of flying various FW aircraft, I find it very hard not to ram the stick forward and add full power on the slightest sign of an imminent stall. I am no ATP and I can only assume that my instincts are very shallow compare to pilots who fly for a living and practice stall recovery on a regular basis.

I agree with you that practice makes perfect. But I believe that ATPs need much more practice than unspoiled newbe pilots to first, get rid of well grounded old habits.

I should have probably mentioned - it's all my opinion, and I am no expert.

Udi-

[Mike Jackson]

Udi - Just a couple statements. ATP guys don't necessarily practice stalls on a regular basis - every 6 months - in the box mostly. Slamming a stick fwd is not necessarily the thing to do depending on altitude. Most FW's stalls are doscile unless in an unsymmetric pwr scenario. But.........who cares about FW. I"ll never believe the addage it's harder to train FW guys than guys with a blank slate. Just my opinion - I'm not a gyro IP.

Cheers,

Mike

[WN]

Mike,

You raised an interesting question, so I decided to research it.

Mike said: "It might be interesting to see statistics of fatalities to determine the relative percentages of "run of the mill gyro morts" and "ATP bubbas flying their gyro" morts."


Research data 1993-Present, USA Only.

Total Gyroplane Accidents: 117
Total Pilots Killed: 45

of those........

Total ATPs piloting those aircraft: 15
Total ATPs killed in those aircraft: 7

I don't know if this supports Mike or Udi's argument, but this is the data.


Steve J Weston

[birdy]

Chuck E,
There's somethi'n wrong ere mate,I'm agree'n with ya.
BTW,It's good to hear from you again,What you been up to??[You said a while ago that you was com'n to Oz,don't s'pose you know when,where???] If you are goi'n past Alice Springs I'll make a point of tryi'n to catch up.[seriously]

[Heron]

Hi Chuck! Are you still coming to São Paulo?
I will be here till the 27 may . . .in Rio!! :D
heron (RAF sucks)

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Birdy:

Go to. www.pprune.com

Got the thread. " Aviation history & Nostalgia. "

Find the subject. " Chuck is back in a Cat. "

Then you will know what I have been up to lately. :D

Yeh, sooner or later I will be down under and we can terrorize the wild life.

Heron :

I don't know when we are going back to Brazil, everything is still up in the air so to speak and we do not have any contract signed yet.

Chuck

[Hognose]

I too liked the way they reported the accident. ....They kinda spoke plain and gave more detail then what we would get here in the states.


John and all, that is typical of AAIB reports. They also often contain photos or other exhibitys, where required, unlike the version of NTSB reports that are slapped on the web by an overpaid contractor. You can PAY the contractor for the full report on CD, and you will find that most of the illustrations are a xerox of a xerox of a microfilm -- totally illegible. AAIB does a much better job across the board (and I've never known them to change a probable cause because an influential person brought pressure on them, unlike NTSB).

I hate RAF! Was that machine one with the "flying surface" on the mast to control occilation?

Hating anybody isn't going to make anybody safer, although I know you are just sounding off out of frustration. FWIW the "rotor stabilator" is not approved in the very conservative UK system. Unfortunately that same system assumes that the manufacturer is the last word on knowledge of his machine.

Isn't there anything the FAA or anybody can do to shut them down?

Not really. FAA couldn't help with Revolution Helicopter, whose Mini-500 killed far more people percentage-wise of flying machines than RAF ever did. The Brits can and do shut down manufacturers they have safety issues with; they did that with an earlier version of Air Command (please note: the current Air Command makes a safer, CLT machine. Coincidentally [?], the hazardous Air Commands and the hazardous Mini-500s were made by the same guy, who is not presently in the business).

The bottom line is in an experimental aircraft, it is YOUR hiney on the line, and it is YOUR decision whether it safe to fly. The FAA washes its hands of experimental safety; you play in this sandbox at your own risk. The British CAA and PFA take more control from the individual in the interests of safety. It's a tradeoff (and it may actually boomerang, as in the case where RAF stabs are banned in Britain, because RAF Marketing Inc. is opposed to them).

Finally, a stab is not a panacea. The Northam RAF (the fatal in Virginia) was equipped with a Parham stab, according to pre-crash photos. Yet it still tumbled and crashed.

The stab I like for an RAF is the AAI Stability and Control Kit, personally.

cheers

-=K=-

[PW_Plack]

Ken,

Perhaps my attempt at humor was a little too dry for the internet medium!

[C. Beaty]

Ol’ Ken J. must be slowing down if he didn’t recognize that as hyperbole

[birdy]

Thanx for that Chuck,now I know what you look like I'll recognise you when you turn up here.
You certainly have an interesting life.

[KenSandyEggo]

Paul, you caught me asleep at the switch. :o I thought that maybe you sent away for the video, talked to them and swallowed it all. I should have known better. I thought for a moment that you had become a convert. How embarrassing on my part. Excuse me while I go lube and polish my tail-hook.

[Aussie_Paul]

It's not that difficult Ken!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL :D

[schipperke]

Udi?, " I find it very hard not to ram the stick forward and add full power on the slightest sign of an imminent stall."

Seriously, you should get some proficiency training. I have no idea what kind of fixed wing you are flying, but for the most part GA aircraft do not need any spectacular control/throttle inputs to recover from an "imminent stall"

Many people write this nonsense about "fixed wing response". How many fixed wing pilots have the need to respond to the nose suddenly shooting up? I was taught, and read to chop the power and ride it out, basically as Doug has posted. We see that this may not necessarily work, though unfortunately have no black box to confirm control/throttle movements before the pilots demise

[KenSandyEggo]

Be quiet, Paul B. Go check on your "Roo" herd. I think a few of them need their toe-nails trimmed.

[Udi]

...Seriously, you should get some proficiency training. I have no idea what kind of fixed wing you are flying, but for the most part GA aircraft do not need any spectacular control/throttle inputs to recover from an "imminent stall"...

schipperke - who are you? The rules of this forum require members to have their full name posted at least in their public folder. And I like to know whom I am talking with. Are you a pilot? What kind of gyro do you fly? What is you FW experience?

Although I suspect that you and Mike may have taken my description of stall recovery way too literally, I think that your attitude towards stall recovery may shed some light on the high number of stall/spin accidents in GA.

Spectacular control? no. Decisive? yes!

How many fixed wing pilots have the need to respond to the nose suddenly shooting up?

Not many. But that is exactly the point! A stable FW (as well as a stable gyro) does not need much pilot intervention when flying through unstable air. The RAF may "feel" stable, until you hit the first strong gust or thermal. Pilots who were trained to fly stable aircraft are not prepared to deal with the diverging response of an unstable aircraft. Add to that the gyroplane control response lag time, and some out of place instincts, and you have disaster written all over it.

Udi-

[Screw]

Screw-In

Well put Udi.

Screw-out

[Dean_Dolph]

Well, certainly no one is going to mistake me for an expert so all I can do is relate what I heard Doug O'Connor say more than once. Those of you who have been in the PRA, for more than 5 years or so, remember Doug as the writer of the 'Captain's Corner' in the PRA magazine. And the guy that flew his Snobird from Galveston to Canada to celebrate The PRAs first Mentone convention in 1996. Doug has been flying forever in anything and everything including cropdusters, and sailplanes. He is an American Airlines captain and a Stearman owner.

When FW pilots would approach Doug and ask him how much of their skill would translate to the gyro his response was not much and that he constantly had to fight his FW control instincts. Maybe Doug is just a bad pilot. ;)

Thaaats all folks!

[C. Beaty]

The misconception that fixed wing experience cannot be transferred to gyros, Dean, arises from the fact that up until a few years ago, nearly all gyros were unstable to a greater or lesser extent.

Experience gained from flying a stable fixed wing aircraft is of little value when transitioning to an unstable gyro.

Loading enough shot bags in the tailcone of a C-150 to ensure the CG was well behind the aft limit could have rectified that. Then the experience gained from flying such an aircraft would have been transferable.

On the other hand, light fixed wing aircraft and stable gyros are very similar as to control response.

I expect that nearly anyone current in a Champ or Cub could fly a Little Wing with a bit of coaching in rotor handling.

I’ve allowed several fixed wing pilots fly my gyros over the years and there was never a serious problem.

The last was the editor of the French ultralight magazine, Vol Moteur at Bensen Days, 1998. It was my understanding that was his first time in a gyro. He had no difficulty whatever and managed to take enough data with portable instruments to write a test report which was published in the June ’98 edition of his magazine.

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

-Chuck :

As you and I have discussed on several ocassions flying a gyro is not a difficult skill to learn. Nor is flying a fixed wing airplane.

But that holds true only if the gyro and the airplane are stable and react normally to control inputs.

When I first flew an RAF I very quickly recognized that it was very unstable in pitch and moderately unstable in yaw, however I did not know the reason until I joined the group on Norms forum and Craig was the first to point out the thrust off set in the RAF.

My first suggestion to RAF in 1991 was to put a horizontal stab on their machine, they of course reacted as if I had suggested sodomizing their mothers.

Once again may I give my opinion that flying a properly designed gyro should be the easiest and safest mode of flying.

And I do not agree that pilots cannot seperate how to fly different types of aircraft, all it takes is understanding what you are flying and treat it accordingly.

If it is unstable it is dangerous, nevermind hard to fly.

Chuck E.

[Udi]

Dean's example is exactly what I was talking about. My argument was intended specifically for ATPs stepping off of a jetliner into an RAF or any other unstable gyroplane. This is what I wrote at the beginning of this thread:

If there are any ATPs reading this thread - please DO NOT fly unstable gyroplanes. The RAF is one of the most unstable gyroplanes in existence.

Of course the risk would be much much smaller if the same ATP was to step into a Magni, a Sparrow Hawk, or a Little Wing.

I guess those who get upset by this statement may actually believe that the RAF is a good and stable gyroplane. Oh well.

Udi-
ps. I believe that Steve W's accident statistics support this argument. 1 in every 6 fatalities in the past 10 years was an ATP. I don't think one in every 6 gyro pilots is an ATP. Not even one in 20. We had a poll for ratings held on the old forum, and I don't recall more than one ATP, in about 50 replies.

[KenSandyEggo]

If someone from AAI could pipe in here, I believe that non-experienced pilots are soloing in about the same time it takes a F-W student. I had about 27 hours of dual in unstabbed RAFs before I soloed and still almost wet my pants when I did it. My 850 hours of F-W time meant nothing. I mentioned before, my AAI mod now flies more similar to a Cessna than a rocking horse on crack.

[raghu]

The misconception that fixed wing experience cannot be transferred to gyros, Dean, arises from the fact that up until a few years ago, nearly all gyros were unstable to a greater or lesser extent.

Experience gained from flying a stable fixed wing aircraft is of little value when transitioning to an unstable gyro.

Loading enough shot bags in the tailcone of a C-150 to ensure the CG was well behind the aft limit could have rectified that. Then the experience gained from flying such an aircraft would have been transferable.


Well said Chuck! The only diffrence in flight between a FW and a gyro is that a FW quits flying at a high angle of attack while a gyro quits flying at zero angle of attack. Between these two extremes, from a stability point of view, a FW and gyro behave alike.

Just to add to my collection of anectodal evidence, do you have a copy of the frenchmans flight report of your gyro? Thanks!

[C. Beaty]

Yes, Raghu, I do have a copy of Vol Moteur, June '98 that I located a few days ago. Unfortunately, it was at the bottom of a stack of stuff that got wet when my barn flooded. I'm going to attempt steaming it open and redrying. If successful, I'll scan it and send you a copy.

[Doug Riley]

My experience in training fixed-wing pilots in my Dominator Tandem is that they can handle it pretty well almost instantly. The D.T. has heavy control pressures (for a gyro), making it fixed-wingish. With its positive G-stability, it requires the usual back stick in turns, again making it like a FW. (Unstable gyros, such as an old no-HS Air Command, require forward stick in turns, a rather bizarre trait). The Dominator's stick movements are smaller than they are in most G.A. aircraft, but not so small that people over-control seriously. With the damping afforded by the HS, over-control does not readily lead to PIO, just to sloppy flying at first.

The steeper glide angle and very low flare altitude (six inches instead of ten feet) do require some adjustment for the FW pilots. And, of course, juggling airspeed, ground speed and rotor speed on takeoff is a whole new deal for these folks. Some fixed-wingers also fiddle with the rudder pedals more than they need to.

Overall, I've found it much easier and quicker to transition FW pilots to a stable gyro than it is to train those who've never flown anything at all.

[raghu]

Yes, Raghu, I do have a copy of Vol Moteur, June '98 that I located a few days ago. Unfortunately, it was at the bottom of a stack of stuff that got wet when my barn flooded. I'm going to attempt steaming it open and redrying. If successful, I'll scan it and send you a copy.

Thanks Chuck, I appreciate your efforts!

[Screw]

Screw-In

Doug, I had a similar experiance. After flying my gyro for a while and not having flown a FW in about 8 mo. I called my CFI so that I could get current on my FW ticket.

We flew a 172 and the controls felt extremely heavy compared to what I was used to in my gyro. I bounced 2 landings and my CFI asked why I was flying like a girl. After that I had a nice day from there.

I Didn't have any problems going back to the gyro though, but I imagine if I had been flying fixed wing straight for 8 months with no gyro time, First gyro flight might be a little dicey.

Udi, Interesting statistic, I noticed there have been no ATP ratings as of yet.

Screw-Out

[Dean_Dolph]

I would guess that what Mr. O'Connor was relating was from his experience with his gyro which, for all I know, may not have been the most stable. He was asked about his experience which he related and while it may have sounded like a blanket statement, I don't believe that was the case

In looking back 5 - 10 years ago, I would say that there has been some progress in the area of stability. Heck, I'm not sure you have to go back further than 3 - 4! Certainly there has been an increase in the awareness and understanding in the general gyro community. Consequently if a FW pilot is transitioning to one of the machines that is accepted as being stable then it is reasonable to expect it to be accomplished with out too much effort. However, if the transition is into one of the still available unstable machines, which is probably the majority, then I think it is also reasonable to expect some problems. If that last sentence is accepted then I think Udi's comments and observation have merit.

This brings up a question or two that belong in another thread so if my memory functions long enough for me to remember to start another one I will!

(I started a thread under training to post my questions)

[Aussie_Paul]

Doug, I have found the same. I now much prefere to train a fixed winger into my stable gyro. With the pitch unstable ones that I used it was much easier to start from scratch!!!

Even better if the student has had some sailplane time.

Aussie Paul.