Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Crusty

CH148 Cyclone missing on ops

Recommended Posts

ya, their explanation isn't great.  I think what they're saying is that the pilot was trying to perform manoeuvres with the autopilot still coupled in ALT and IAS mode.  If the pilot then tried to perform a descending, slowing turn the autopilot would try to keep the aircraft on it's selected course.

I would need some more information about the cyclone fbw system but I think it did as it was programmed, it tried to maintain IAS and ALT while the pilot was doing otherwise.  Why it ended up hitting the surface is beyond me, we still haven't been told how high the a/c was when it turned.  Was it 200ft agl?  100ft? 50ft? 10ft?  The lower you go the less time for reaction.

Also, the s92/cyclone platform is not a racecar, it's a bus.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anybody notice how easy it is to plagiarize information from Vertical and post it as their own source, CBC is trying to sound like they have an in with the Military, for their information Vertical has more flying hours in helicopters by its members than the Military will ever achieve.

In the commercial flying world, accidents that do happen are covered by Liability Insurance paid for by the operator, for passengers and aircraft. Should the Insurance company cancel the operators insurance, he loses his operators licence, out of business. 

The Canadian Taxpayer is the Owner of any equipment the Military has, in other words, the insurance company shareholders, the Liability Holder is the taxpayer.

The incompetent Generals run the different Departments and spend the money from the budget with no oversight from Parliament. As for the Cyclone debacle, who cares its only Taxpayer Money and they are to stupid care, we dont answer to them.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if this is similar to the 737 max we will be waiting for the next one...I would not want to be driving a Cyclone right now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know the 92 with FBW, but the one with regular flight controls that I have flown had limitations of when to use the Flight director in relation of the height and speed of the A/C. On top of my head it was 120 knots below 200 feet you could not fly the aircraft couple with the FD. Also other type that I have flown, the use on the automation during low level fly was not recommended.

 

FH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, FlyingHead said:

I don't know the 92 with FBW, but the one with regular flight controls that I have flown had limitations of when to use the Flight director in relation of the height and speed of the A/C. On top of my head it was 120 knots below 200 feet you could not fly the aircraft couple with the FD. Also other type that I have flown, the use on the automation during low level fly was not recommended.

 

FH

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 20/06 I actually had an attachment to the statement by FH on the Sikorsky 92 (Cyclone), and his statement raises the question, why does the Military have to have a FBW helicopter, when a perfectly equipped commercial helicopter, carrying passengers,with a standard auto-pilot and flight director to the offshore oil platforms on a regular basis.

I am attaching an article from AVweb magazine that explains what the Generals in their enlightened way were trying to achieve.

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/fly-by-wire-helicopter-military-pilot-had-conflict-before-fatal-crash/

Lack of oversight is the PROBLEM and not from the politicians.

Happy Reading and hopefully someday we will have decision makers who know what they are talking about.

What's the old adage, Helicopters don't kill people, people do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If and I say if.........................the aircraft was flying slow on the downwind leg and then started a turn for final, its possible the A/C entered into Vortex Ring State.  They most likely would have had to pull in some power in the turn to prevent losing altitude. An aircraft in Vortex ring state will not respond to pulling in power to prevent descending and only makes the condition worse. The only thing one can do at this point is to increase airspeed to fly out of it and if possible reduce power.  If this was the case, then the aircraft would have failed to respond to the control input if he used the collective to stop the descent.

 

What the report is saying in plain language, McWha said, is that the pilot attempted to correct some sort of problem, but the aircraft failed to respond to his control inputs and crashed, hence the conclusion that the aircraft “did not respond as the crew would have anticipated.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torque Split

On 6/20/2020 at 8:09 AM, FlyingHead said:

I don't know the 92 with FBW, but the one with regular flight controls that I have flown had limitations of when to use the Flight director in relation of the height and speed of the A/C. On top of my head it was 120 knots below 200 feet you could not fly the aircraft couple with the FD. Also other type that I have flown, the use on the automation during low level fly was not recommended.

 

FH         This from an experienced PILOT on the S92 .

The main problem is DND, it was a problem from Day One on the Cyclone with the magic box.

I would like to know who authorized the FBW, because it was not required for submarine warfare as indicated by Flying Head, it was an added cost to the taxpayer.

Was DND involved in a little patronage with Sikorsky as is Bell Helicopter with the sole source contract to refurbish the Griffon 412.

Personally, I think the RCMP should have a look see at some of the going ons in the WardRoom with the Generals.

But, again the RCMP have their own problems and WHO CARES, it's only taxpayer money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2020 at 4:17 PM, Torque Split said:

If and I say if.........................the aircraft was flying slow on the downwind leg and then started a turn for final, its possible the A/C entered into Vortex Ring State.  They most likely would have had to pull in some power in the turn to prevent losing altitude. An aircraft in Vortex ring state will not respond to pulling in power to prevent descending and only makes the condition worse. The only thing one can do at this point is to increase airspeed to fly out of it and if possible reduce power.  If this was the case, then the aircraft would have failed to respond to the control input if he used the collective to stop the descent.

 

What the report is saying in plain language, McWha said, is that the pilot attempted to correct some sort of problem, but the aircraft failed to respond to his control inputs and crashed, hence the conclusion that the aircraft “did not respond as the crew would have anticipated.”

I don't think they'd have time to enter vrs,  it looks like they're pointing at the flight director or some part of the system that prevented recovery from some unusual condition.  It was a very high energy crash, so I'm assuming at speed.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The flight director may have been trying to increase collective to maintain altitude, if they were losing altitude due to VRS  which would exacerbate the situation. Increasing collective is the one thing you don't want to do when in Vortex Ring State. High energy crash could mean going down vertically with a high rate of descent which happens very quickly in VRS as you have no lift.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Guest
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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...