R44 Crash Shobdon 15 Nov 2009

d9aplus · Starting to 'Torque Joined: May 11, 2008 Posts: 30

Another R44 written off on landing at Shobdon,
some more in hangar damaged?!

ORC · Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 10:03 pm Post subject:

ORC

d9aplus · Starting to 'Torque Joined: May 11, 2008 Posts: 30

ORC · Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:43 am Post subject:

veeany · Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:41 pm Post subject:

I split this off from the Macclesfield crash thread just to keep the two subjects seperate.

Bomb_Doctor · Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:20 pm Post subject:

paddywak · H Addict Joined: Mar 28, 2009 Posts: 537 Location: UK

Happened at (around) 16:10 , I wonder if the pilot could see, not sure what last light is there? It was rather windy too! At least there were no injuries.

ORC · Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:02 pm Post subject:

Thanks Bomb Doctor
_________________
R22 2.6 h/r wanting more, a hell of a lot more

James T Lowe · Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:54 am Post subject:

The AAIB have published their report into this accident, here

Paddy - interesting you should say it was "rather windy", the report (as submitted by the pilot) states "the wind was light and variable".
_________________
J.

d9aplus · Starting to 'Torque Joined: May 11, 2008 Posts: 30

ORC

paddywak · H Addict Joined: Mar 28, 2009 Posts: 537 Location: UK

Just looked in my log book and flew on 7.11.09 and 28.11.09 and was going to fly on 15.11.09 but my CFI said do nav planning because it was too windy for my abilities. This is not to say that it was too windy for another pilot. This was before I had my PPL but even today when I flew I'm still not keen on surface winds of 10kts + especially tailwinds. I tend to hover taxi low and slow in these conditions but I know others favour higher and faster.
It would be interesting to find out who prefers which method.

veeany · Posted: Sun Apr 11, 2010 7:01 pm Post subject:

Not that it really matters now, but I've just had a quick review of the METARs from that afternoon and it was Gusty earlier on that day at the time of the accident the wind was reported as southerly or southwesterly at around 7kts everywhere within about 100nm of Shobdon.

Interesting it was an Astro, I always hated the control feel in the hover of the Astro, last time I flew one the trim ranaway and it took two hands on the cyclic to fly the bloody thing down to the hover, I wonder if it was considered, I doubt a pilot with low Astro time would notice if it failed as they came into the hover and would end up overcontrolling quite a lot, I wonder if trim failures were covered in his training ?

I am not saying thats what caused it, just thinking out loud.

It is of course always easy to Grip the throttle too hard and wind the RPM down when effectively flying in manual control, used to be my favourite trick, and one I notice myself doing sometimes when operating hyd off in a newer R44 (rare though that is nowadays), just as I am about to land.
_________________
Gary

flip2 · High Flying 'Torquer Joined: Sep 05, 2009 Posts: 225

paddywak · H Addict Joined: Mar 28, 2009 Posts: 537 Location: UK

Yes interesting. The machine I flew yesterday was a Beta 2 and in conditions yesterday max take off power was 23.2 " with 22.3 continuous power. In ground effect yesterday I was pulling 19" in the hover so I had 4" in the bag, However I was using 20.5 ish" while taxiing downwind yesterday, so perhaps it does pay to match the wind to keep the cushion right under you.
One of the reasons I opted for lower and slower is I was cleared back to the hanger but giving way to 3 other aircraft on the way so I didn't want to be cause for concern to other pilots, but in general I feel happier with less airspeed closer to the ground. I suppose it is my lack of experience as I can imagine CPL's (time is money) flying very economically.