Jump to content

Notice: Effective July 1, 2024, Vertical Forums will be officially shut down. As a result, all forum activity will be permanently removed. We understand that this news may come as a disappointment, but we would like to thank everyone for being a part of our community for so many years.

If you are interested in taking over this Forum, please contact us prior to July 1.

Long Lining?

Recommended Posts

"As part of my training background, we often entered autorotation to touchdowns inside the edge of that chart.


Additionally, every "normal" approach you complete (aka the standard site picture and walking pace) goes right through the middle of that chart."


The H/V chart is not valid(ated) for approaches. Above the knee it covers the cruise, below that the climb out.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think it was mentioned before that there is a manual supplement for the 205 that allows for the operation of sling/long-line that no longer limits the flight through the HV Curve.













The Height-Velocity Diagram is not a limitation for external cargo

operations under an appropriate operating certificate.



Link to comment
Share on other sites


Good question....

The stats provided were not mine, but belong to a US organization called NASA.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) performed a study of US Civil Rotorcraft Accidents over a 34 year period.


The link above will provide you with the entire 300+ page report.


The previous post was to show that twin turbine helicopters may reduce the frequency of engine failures, but the increase in airframe/component failures offset any advantage to twin turbine.


Single turbine helicopters are the backbone of this great industry, so I would expect that they may be involved in more long line operations than twin engine helicopters. I do not have any data to confirm this though.


Helicopter accidents for 2010 were 1.64 accidents per 100,000 flight hours and 1.44 accidents per 100,000 flight hours.

These numbers hardly represent a significant safety advantage of twin over single or visa versa.

If you want to know which numbers belong to which class of helicopter, you can buy the copyrighted report, as I did, from Robert E Breiling Associates.


From a legal standpoint mentioned in the original post, you may want to do a Google search for “helicopter burn victim lawyers” I think they may have a much more persuasive argument to a jury rather than trying to prove negligence by operations in the H/V curve, which is not a limitation on most helicopters.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

For your consideration;


Loss of engine power accounted for 31% of the single turbine first event category accidents.

Loss of engine power accounted for 13% of the twin turbine first event category accidents.


Airframe/component failure accounted for 30% of the twin turbine first event category accidents.

Airframe/component failure accounted for 12% of the single turbine first event category accidents.


First event is the physical event that adversly affected the rotorcraft or unusual occurance that the aircrew became aware of.


We train for engine failures throughout our careers.


Some airframe component failures can be very difficult or impossible to train for.


Taken from NASA US Rotorcraft Accident Study.






To quote Disraeli: "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."


As you well know, they can be used to prove anything you want.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...