Gyroplane accidents and Training.

[Bumperdog]

Originally Posted by Resasi

An awful lot of 'I think...' leads to accidents.

It's 'I know...' that makes for safety.

Did you all forget about Stan's lawn mower bursting into flames a while back. Now " that could be dangerous".

[Vance]

Originally Posted by molemoore

I spent some time reading every NTSB report from 2000 to today, and I did take note of the experience and training level of those involved. There was a disproportionate number of low hours/low training pilots.

I was just hoping that John had this data available and could exclude the low hours/low training accidents. This would provide actual numbers to show the value of experience and training.

If this data does not exists in a usable form, then I guess someone should start putting it together...

If nobody has it, I may take it on as a side project.

Hello Mark,

In my opinion part of the challenge with analyzing the information from the NTSB reports is there are not enough data points for a good statistical analysis and the reporting is not consistent.

I feel it would be helpful if someone would spend time with the reports and pull some meaningful data out.

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association does an annual report of fixed wing accidents and analyzes it in a number of ways. They have more data points and access to more information than is in the reports. I find the AOPA report interesting and sort of informative.

With so few gyroplane data points some sort of statistical regression needs to take place and that combined with the inconsistent reporting makes it more of an opinion than an analysis.

I feel there are a lot of “getting the feel of the controls” or “he did not intend to take off” accidents.

When I read the pilots version of what happened it appears to me that many don’t have an understanding of how a gyroplane flies.

In my opinion often the investigators conclusions are absent of gyroplane knowledge.

An example of pilot ignorance would be “she drifted right and I gave her more left rudder but she continued to drift right until _________.” The misconception that the rudder is what steers the aircraft is popular among fixed wing pilots too.

An example of investigator ignorance is “the pilot allowed the rotor RPMs to decrease”. Granted a low G event can allow the rotor RPMs to decrease but this is generally not what they are talking about. I have not found the rotor RPM control on the gyroplane I fly.

I find value in reading all the latest aircraft NTSB reports as part of my preflight.

It reminds me of the chain of decisions that lead to an aircraft accident and helps me to identify it sooner if I am headed down that path.

Thank you, Vance

[molemoore]

I have started a spreadsheet that I will share once I have made some progress. What data points are missing that could be pulled from the reports? I was going to try and pull out pilot experience (in gyros) training (if any, number of hours if available, etc...), Pilot age.

[Vance]

Originally Posted by molemoore

I have started a spreadsheet that I will share once I have made some progress. What data points are missing that could be pulled from the reports? I was going to try and pull out pilot experience (in gyros) training (if any, number of hours if available, etc...), Pilot age.

Thank you for you efforts.

The reports on gyroplane accidents are often missing the pilot’s ratings and hours in type.

Most are missing the level of training.

I feel the phase of flight is important information, the location and weather conditions.

It is a judgment call but I like to think about if there was a mechanical defect involved

To give you an idea of what you are up against on 3/31 there was a training accident in an RAF in Anahuac, Texas that is listed under helicopters. Even though it is the factual (final or full narrative) report it does not list the instructor’s ratings or the student’s hours.

It is more common to report ratings and hours in a fatal accident.

The manufacture of the kit is useful information although many people modify the kit to the extent that it is not representative of the design.

I suspect as you work through the process you will find the most useful way to present the information.

Thank you, Vance

[Fl90]

Vance,
in response to a page and a half ago. A lawn mower is used for destructive purposes, in close proximity of the operator. There are a slew of placards, warnings, and cautions associated with them. There are thousands of incidents each year reported and some percentage not. I have been treated by a doctor for injuries from operating a lawn mower, yet have not from operating a gyro. My grandfather was in a helicopter accident in the late 60's and took many years to recover from his injuries. In the late 90's he was involved in a lawn mower incident, resulting in a head injury. His health declined for the following two years, resulting in his death.

Everything can be done dangerously, however, calling something outright dangerous should be reserved to activities that participants are almost always injured at some point. Like, motorcross, where it's comon to say "when I wreck" not "if I wreck".

But, I can see there is a big trend tward thinking this is a daredevils recreation. We strive to scare the hell out of people in the hopes that they take up another. At least the incidents will decline as fewer people dare to ride a gyro.

In fact, I'm convinced. It's too dangerous for me now, I'm going to drop the sales price of my gyros by 20% to get them sold by the end of the month, to save on the hangar rent.

It was fun while it lasted, Phil.

[Vance]

Originally Posted by Fl90

Vance,

Everything can be done dangerously, however, calling something outright dangerous should be reserved to activities that participants are almost always injured at some point. Like, motorcross, where it's comon to say "when I wreck" not "if I wreck".

It was fun while it lasted, Phil.

Hello Phil, I suspected it was a semantics challenge.

Dangerous: involving risk. This is the definition I was using.

It is still just my opinion, no reason to change your life’s path.

I feel that pretending there is no risk involved is a poor substitute for working to mitigate that risk.

I hope you find a way to get over this hitting you wrong or at least stop reading my opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion and your semantics.

I suspect there are lots of potential customers for your aircraft that feel flying a gyroplane is not a dangerous activity and would be comfortable teaching themselves to fly.

All the best, Vance

[WaspAir]

Originally Posted by Fl90

Everything can be done dangerously, however, calling something outright dangerous should be reserved to activities that participants are almost always injured at some point. Like, motorcross, where it's comon to say "when I wreck" not "if I wreck".

Your definition doesn't work in my reality.

I am an avid mountaineer, and I've never been hospitalized from any climbing injury. Most of my climbing buddies have never been injured climbing. The majority of them never will be. But three of my friends have died doing it (two on climbs with me, while I came through without a scratch) in just the last 1-1/2 years.

Climbing mountains is a hazardous activity. And aviation offers similar hazards; many will have no injuries at all, while some will die.

[Redbaron]

I find it odd how cierva designed the gyro so fixed wing pilots wouldn't stall and spin into the ground, yet man tinkered with the design enough to make the prop contact the rotor and fall from the sky when the rotor got unloaded.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_de_la_Cierva

[karlbamforth]

I find it odd how cierva designed the gyro so fixed wing pilots wouldn't stall and spin into the ground,

That didn't work then, fixed wing pilots still do it. Not sure how designing a autogyro will have any affect on a fixed wing or its pilot anyway.



I know what you meant Red but I couldn't resist.

[Fl90]

use the definition or reality of your choice. I use the gyro for transportation to see friends and family, I prefer it to the automobile. I am fortunate to have chosen to live in an area rural enough to be able to land at their property or on lightly traveled roads close to their residences. I do not feel these machines are any more a daredevil's toy than an auto. I'm sorry if my oppinion down plays the excitement of being in control of such a death trap. Beware of self fulfilling prophecies.

[Vance]

Hello Phil,

Please don’t pretend I said something I didn’t

I do not consider myself a daredevil and do not feel a well designed gyroplane is a deathtrap.

I feel there is risk involved with any sort of flying and I work to mitigate that risk.

I have tasted fear and found it bitter.

In my opinion fear limits the ability to make good decisions and execute those decisions in a timely way.

I love the freedom of flight and the way it opens the world for me.

I find pleasure in things I never imagined before I flew a gyroplane.

I love to learn to be a better pilot and I find the exchange of ideas stimulating.

In my experience pilots love to share their knowledge and are usually willing to help me understand something that has eluded me. I am grateful for their help.

I find adventure in the simplest flights and I enjoy exercising the things I have learned.

You are entitled to your opinion Phil and I am not trying to make you wrong.

I am comfortable with my perspective.

Thank you, Vance