Joined: Feb 14, 2008 Posts: 888 Location: Stavanger, Norway
Posted: Tue Nov 04, 2008 9:25 pm Post subject:
That 206 incident was during a pleasure lfight at an event. Notice the position of the windsock when he flies past it after the incident... downwind! Routines like this should always be finished in to wind and be flown by experienced pilots who know what their doing, unfortunately they too can make mistake and misjudgements. Dennis K's prang in the states is an example. _________________ ATPL(H) IR(H): SK92, AS355, EC120, R22/44
"When the tough gets going, the tough eat haggis!"
Joined: Aug 23, 2005 Posts: 266 Location: On a course.... golf course
Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:34 pm Post subject:
The general definition of a hammerhead is as you would see it if you threw a hammer vertically.
It would sail up head first, stop, start to descend tail first, then flip onto its back or flip over forwards, and come down head first again.
In a helicopter, that can only be done in a rigid rotor like a BO 105 or BK 117. A teetering head will come off.
The move that has been described before is a torque turn, with the nose always leading the movement. It is a common practice in ag flying, to go from speed at low level in one direction and reverse it 180 to start again in the same spot, displaced slightly to one side.
Joined: Jul 10, 2008 Posts: 61 Location: Australia - North Queensland
Posted: Sun Jan 18, 2009 2:00 pm Post subject:
I'd very much go along with Haggis Hunter. Nice to see/practice with an experienced instructor only. There's a reason why it's not in the syllabus.
Torque turns and anti-torque turns were part of my training..many moons ago.... and I use them daily (mustering) though not at the speed and severity of the video. Once you get then down pat it saves a lot of stress on pilot and machine...the aerodynamics do all the work. I find the ideal situation is when flying cross-wind....torque turn into wind and anti-torque turn into wind on the following turn...you are turning into wind when at slowest airspeed.
Joined: Jan 12, 2007 Posts: 54 Location: The DEEP south
Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2009 10:05 am Post subject:
I was told that the 206 featured in that video was (a) brand new at the time of the 'airshow', (b) the 'airshow' pilot was NOT authorised to conduct any such manoeuvre (it was supposed to be a benign level fly past), and (c) the resulting UNINTENDED touchdown damaged the aircraft. Oh, by the way, because the damage was caused by flying the machine in a way it wasn't intended to be flown the damage to components wasn't covered under warranty AND Bell refused to do anything to certify that machine post repair...it ended up being a complete write-off.
A cheap lesson for all you folks on the early part of the flying career...someone is always watching and if it feels like your tempted, THINK CAREFULLY before acting. More people get into strife doing that flypast or beat up after a family flight and thats where things come unstuck.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum