NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
- CYHeli
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1825
- Joined: Jun 2006
NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Article here.
Environment Canterbury is reportedly the latest organisation to suspend use of Robinson helicopters after the deaths of two men whose helicopter crashed in Northland on Monday.
The Department of Conservation today decided to no longer use the helicopters, which have also been put on a Transport Accident Investigation Commission "watchlist".
Environment Canterbury is reportedly the latest organisation to suspend use of Robinson helicopters after the deaths of two men whose helicopter crashed in Northland on Monday.
The Department of Conservation today decided to no longer use the helicopters, which have also been put on a Transport Accident Investigation Commission "watchlist".
What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others.
- rotors99
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 224
- Joined: Oct 2009
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Good news....the reality of the Crapinson Flimsicopter grows -the 'Widow maker'
- rotors99
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 224
- Joined: Oct 2009
-
- 2nd Dan
- Posts: 330
- Joined: May 2016
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Finally someone has stood up.
I once said if I had to get across a 100 km desert and my options were walking or a Robinson....................I would walk.
Been in one once about 30 yrs ago and would never get in one again.
Regards,
Gregory
I once said if I had to get across a 100 km desert and my options were walking or a Robinson....................I would walk.
Been in one once about 30 yrs ago and would never get in one again.
Regards,
Gregory
'Mankind has a perfect record in aviation - we have never left one up there!'
- Queestce
- 2nd Dan
- Posts: 347
- Joined: Oct 2008
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
The relevant articles all seem to highlight mast bumping as the primary concern. People are very quick to jump on the Robinson hate train, but if mast bumping is the main issue then does the fault not lie more with either incorrect flying techniques, or with the helicopter being operated in a manner, and in conditions, far exceeding it's designs intent? Is the Robinson design any more susceptible to mast bumping, or more likely to fail catastrophically during a mast bump event than other comparable teetering head aircraft?
-
- Gold Wings
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Jan 2014
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Gregory,
There is no need for someone to finally stand up. No one is forced to operate a Robinson. It's mainly a question of economics which I know you understand. The warnings and proper use of the aircraft is written clearly in the POH. The worrying trend is the disproportionately high accident rate in NZ. Is that training? Is it the location? Is is commercial pressure? There is a much more detailed thread on this on pee prune which includes a helicopter survey from NZ which makes interesting and scary reading.
The very nature of what the Robinson does and the numbers of them flying will always see it in an accident report somewhere. It's about mitigating risk versus reward. Other types also crash and unless the rotor mast actually detaches in flight (225) the pilot is nearly always to blame.
There is no need for someone to finally stand up. No one is forced to operate a Robinson. It's mainly a question of economics which I know you understand. The warnings and proper use of the aircraft is written clearly in the POH. The worrying trend is the disproportionately high accident rate in NZ. Is that training? Is it the location? Is is commercial pressure? There is a much more detailed thread on this on pee prune which includes a helicopter survey from NZ which makes interesting and scary reading.
The very nature of what the Robinson does and the numbers of them flying will always see it in an accident report somewhere. It's about mitigating risk versus reward. Other types also crash and unless the rotor mast actually detaches in flight (225) the pilot is nearly always to blame.
-
- Silver Wings
- Posts: 27
- Joined: Aug 2006
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Darkstar1996 "Been in one once about 30 yrs ago and would never get in one again"
Funny how the R44 didn't get certified until Dec 1992... Hardly 30 years ago..
Funny how the R44 didn't get certified until Dec 1992... Hardly 30 years ago..
-
- Gold Wings
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Sep 2015
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Blame the machine has always been the easy out for regulaters.
Sure there have been widow makers made, but the genuine ones dont see big sales.
Anything flown within its limits wont mast bump.
"Power steering" has a bit to do with i me thinks.
Sure there have been widow makers made, but the genuine ones dont see big sales.
Anything flown within its limits wont mast bump.
"Power steering" has a bit to do with i me thinks.
-
- 2nd Dan
- Posts: 330
- Joined: May 2016
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
20 yrs ~30 yrs I cannot remember yet I can try and track down an old mate in Boulder CO where I was living and flying and get an exact date.
My statement was based on my thoughts of that air frame, your welcome to fly it anytime I would never get in one again.
And that was the point. Other points were added as in potential training issues and the sheer numbers in action.
I wonder if people really want to fly Robinson's or it purely because they are cost effective?
Regards,
Gregory
My statement was based on my thoughts of that air frame, your welcome to fly it anytime I would never get in one again.
And that was the point. Other points were added as in potential training issues and the sheer numbers in action.
I wonder if people really want to fly Robinson's or it purely because they are cost effective?
Regards,
Gregory
'Mankind has a perfect record in aviation - we have never left one up there!'
- Twistgrip
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1169
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Is that training?
Saucepan is right here in my opinion, yes the aircraft has had its issues over the years i know first hand, I did an hour in one today with great success.
However an approach I saw recently which I commented to a colleague was one of the worst approaches I've seen in over 20 years. Was of a private chap in a 66 and his 3 mates approaching the pad (thought I was watching Chuck Aaron from Red Bull).
It cemented in my mind the underlying fact that initial training has a lot to be answered for and the major factor is of no supervision after licence has been gained,Its no wonder the stats reflect this in the private sector.
"You can watch things happen, you can make things happen or you can wonder what happened"
- Eric Hunt
- 3rd Dan
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
When operated inside its design parameters, it does a great job.
But when the companies decide to cut costs by using a less capable machine, and then do dumb stuff in it with perhaps junior pilots, errors will be made.
But when the companies decide to cut costs by using a less capable machine, and then do dumb stuff in it with perhaps junior pilots, errors will be made.
- bladepitch
- 3rd Dan
- Posts: 643
- Joined: Jul 2006
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
twisty my thoughts exactly.
I used to fly them and ive got a couple thousand of hours in them, the worst issue I ever had was a failed mag and even that wasn't an issue...
But over the years ive seen a few poor approaches and take offs from private weekend warriors and unsupervised junior commercial pilots that leaves me shaking my head and worried for their future.
These days from a position of experience its easy to be critical, over the years we all smarten from the odd foolishness of being juniors pilots
but still to this day i have not forgotten this effort.
I stood in disbelief at one experienced pilot who thought it was appropriate to test a new machine and fly a 44 backwards low level at speed in tight circles... i don't know why you would need to do this under any circumstances, can anyone explain this? im all for learning.....
I used to fly them and ive got a couple thousand of hours in them, the worst issue I ever had was a failed mag and even that wasn't an issue...
But over the years ive seen a few poor approaches and take offs from private weekend warriors and unsupervised junior commercial pilots that leaves me shaking my head and worried for their future.
These days from a position of experience its easy to be critical, over the years we all smarten from the odd foolishness of being juniors pilots
but still to this day i have not forgotten this effort.
I stood in disbelief at one experienced pilot who thought it was appropriate to test a new machine and fly a 44 backwards low level at speed in tight circles... i don't know why you would need to do this under any circumstances, can anyone explain this? im all for learning.....
- Twistgrip
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1169
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
fly a 44 backwards low level at speed in tight circles
Hi Bladepitch,
The similarities are scary as to what i saw, it was as you've described, however the guy i saw was newly minted in my opinion. He put on an airshow for his mates on approach.
We've all done a few split arse approaches in our careers don't get me wrong and id not normally care to write about it but what i saw the other day disturbed me somewhat as to the quality thats hitting the streets so to speak.
"You can watch things happen, you can make things happen or you can wonder what happened"
-
- Silver Wings
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Sep 2009
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Twistgrip wrote:fly a 44 backwards low level at speed in tight circles
We've all done a few split arse approaches in our careers don't get me wrong and id not normally care to write about it but what i saw the other day disturbed me somewhat as to the quality thats hitting the streets so to speak.
As much as people can be given all the right training, you'll occasionally find one that thinks they know better.
-
- Gold Wings
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Sep 2015
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Cameras, audience, low hours, a dash of eago, perfect recipie.
-
- 2nd Dan
- Posts: 330
- Joined: May 2016
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Making anything accessible to the masses then allows those that possibly should not be able to do something do it. Just because you can drive a car does not mean you are good at it, add the third axis and then the risk only increases.
You need 120 hours to drive a car and then mutliple P plates until a full license after 3 yrs or something, helis can be crammed in no time. Read up on the restictions now for new drivers, we all had a 2 mintue test in the backs streets and away you go.
And again as above just because you can fly a heli does not mean you are necessary good at it.
Making cheap helis that have low operating costs, makes then accessible to the masses. On another thread there was a statement of 1 job for every 10 new pilots and this is another effect of low cost airframes. A another thread talked about someone being offered 20~30$ per hour to fly, I think people making lattes make more than that.
Regards,
Gregory
You need 120 hours to drive a car and then mutliple P plates until a full license after 3 yrs or something, helis can be crammed in no time. Read up on the restictions now for new drivers, we all had a 2 mintue test in the backs streets and away you go.
And again as above just because you can fly a heli does not mean you are necessary good at it.
Making cheap helis that have low operating costs, makes then accessible to the masses. On another thread there was a statement of 1 job for every 10 new pilots and this is another effect of low cost airframes. A another thread talked about someone being offered 20~30$ per hour to fly, I think people making lattes make more than that.
Regards,
Gregory
'Mankind has a perfect record in aviation - we have never left one up there!'
- hand in pants
- 4th Dan
- Posts: 1615
- Joined: Sep 2006
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Just a few observations.
Never believe statistics. They can be misleading at best and made up at worst.
A lot of people on this site got their licence flying Robbies. A lot of the time, the first job these people had was in a Robbie. I'm one of them. Loved flying them and still do when I get the chance. My opinion, they are as safe as I make them. Treat them or any machine (including a fridge) with contempt and it will kill you. And so it should.
A lot of Robinson haters don't actually fly them or have done very limited time in them. Now these pilots are flying bigger turbine helicopters that are easier to work than the old piston jobbie. I think they may have gotten lazy and when a 44 or 22 comes up, "bugger that, I don't want to work that hard."
If they are so bad, why do they outnumber other piston helicopters like the H300, or the Enstrom, or the Bell 47. And according to statistics*, there are more Robinsons out there than all other piston helicopters combined.
* Classic example of statistics. Those quoted above were plucked from my white, hairy botna. Therefore, not to be believed until checked.
And Greg, if you believe that young people actually do 120 to learn to drive a car, I've got a bridge with a harbour view you can buy.
Not slagging off your opinion, but mate not a good comparison. It's like the old "I put in at least a year doing my training and I should be paid the same as a doctor or lawyer".
And as far as quality of training is concerned, the vast majority of schools turn out capable, competent pilots. Those that are tasked with testing these pilots can not assess them on their general attitude, only on how they behave on the day. Attitude these days is pretty poor with a lot of younger/low hour pilots, "I've got my licence, you can't tell me what to do now". I have witnessed this on a number of occasions. Chief pilots have a difficult job if the company is using low hour pilots.
One job for every 10 new pilots. I could believe that, just.
Never believe statistics. They can be misleading at best and made up at worst.
A lot of people on this site got their licence flying Robbies. A lot of the time, the first job these people had was in a Robbie. I'm one of them. Loved flying them and still do when I get the chance. My opinion, they are as safe as I make them. Treat them or any machine (including a fridge) with contempt and it will kill you. And so it should.
A lot of Robinson haters don't actually fly them or have done very limited time in them. Now these pilots are flying bigger turbine helicopters that are easier to work than the old piston jobbie. I think they may have gotten lazy and when a 44 or 22 comes up, "bugger that, I don't want to work that hard."
If they are so bad, why do they outnumber other piston helicopters like the H300, or the Enstrom, or the Bell 47. And according to statistics*, there are more Robinsons out there than all other piston helicopters combined.
* Classic example of statistics. Those quoted above were plucked from my white, hairy botna. Therefore, not to be believed until checked.
And Greg, if you believe that young people actually do 120 to learn to drive a car, I've got a bridge with a harbour view you can buy.
Not slagging off your opinion, but mate not a good comparison. It's like the old "I put in at least a year doing my training and I should be paid the same as a doctor or lawyer".
And as far as quality of training is concerned, the vast majority of schools turn out capable, competent pilots. Those that are tasked with testing these pilots can not assess them on their general attitude, only on how they behave on the day. Attitude these days is pretty poor with a lot of younger/low hour pilots, "I've got my licence, you can't tell me what to do now". I have witnessed this on a number of occasions. Chief pilots have a difficult job if the company is using low hour pilots.
One job for every 10 new pilots. I could believe that, just.
Hand in Pants, I'm thinking, my god, that IS huge!!!!!!!!
-
- Gold Wings
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Jan 2014
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Gregory, you don't have to be a good pilot, I'm more concerned with being a safe pilot. I can teach students anything on the syllabus, some pick it up quicker than others. The ones that worry me are the ones that don't plan. Don't check a DA, don't check the notams, the weather - on the return even, or guess they have enough fuel. And fly in marginal weather and conditions. As HIP says it's their attitude that will get them in trouble more than the machine.
A superior pilot will use their superior judgement to avoid getting into a situation that may require their superior skill.
A superior pilot will use their superior judgement to avoid getting into a situation that may require their superior skill.
- AgRattler
- 1st Dan
- Posts: 247
- Joined: Oct 2009
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Flawed design. Not suitable for the windy environment in NZ. A good ag wagon and on a nice day.
Be good to see 500 and shortranger hourly rates go up....
Be good to see 500 and shortranger hourly rates go up....
Redlining in neutral
-
- Silver Wings
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Oct 2013
Re: NZ Govt agencies ban the R44
Saucepan wrote:A superior pilot will use their superior judgement to avoid getting into a situation that may require their superior skill.
I like that saying.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests