Quebec R44 missing.

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by pelmet »

Heliian wrote: Sat Aug 10, 2019 6:07 am Low g pushover.
I believe that is what is was. Then the rotor hits the tail and that's it. So, the large amount of fixed wing time is possibly fatal. That is where one needs to perhaps use some experience and judgement to say...forget it. I will look into a type that doesn't have this deadly potential. Instinct can be extremely difficult to overcome.

Something to think about.

http://www.helicopterinstruction.com/mast-bumping/
---------- ADS -----------
 
P-40
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 9:54 pm
Location: FL360

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by P-40 »

---------- ADS -----------
 
jakeandelwood
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 453
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2018 11:45 pm

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by jakeandelwood »

Well that little video is "to the point" :shock: I know absolutely nothing about helicopters but why wouldn't the rotor be designed so that it's physically impossible for it to touch any other part of the helicopter? It seems to just be common sense to me, but again, I'm ignorant of helicopter design. To me it looks like the Robinson has a much higher/longer mast than other helicopters
---------- ADS -----------
 
Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by Heliian »

They forgot the blades breaking off mid flight.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by PilotDAR »

The article is overly dramatic. There's truth in it, but those truths apply to many Bell helicopters also. I agree that a low cost, entry level helicopter, coupled with a simple airframe and systems makes it a more vulnerable combination. The Bell 206 is also vulnerable to mast bumping if mishandled, and it has happened, but Bell 206 and larger Bells are probably flown by more experienced pilots, and not subject to the same "maneuvering" which may be being attempted in the Robinsons. The R22 and R44 just are not designed for the same aggressive maneuvering as other types. They'll do it, but not with the margin of safety of a three or more blade main rotor.

I flew the R22, and having done that, chose the SW300 for my training, and am still happy with my choice. Yes, one can blame inexperienced pilots, but any certified aircraft must not require "unusual pilot skill and attention" to safely fly. In my opinion, the R22 and R44 are a little closer to that line, and typically being flown by recreational pilots who may have less training, experience and self discipline.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by Heliian »

PilotDAR wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:08 pm The article is overly dramatic. There's truth in it, but those truths apply to many Bell helicopters also. I agree that a low cost, entry level helicopter, coupled with a simple airframe and systems makes it a more vulnerable combination. The Bell 206 is also vulnerable to mast bumping if mishandled, and it has happened, but Bell 206 and larger Bells are probably flown by more experienced pilots, and not subject to the same "maneuvering" which may be being attempted in the Robinsons. The R22 and R44 just are not designed for the same aggressive maneuvering as other types. They'll do it, but not with the margin of safety of a three or more blade main rotor.

I flew the R22, and having done that, chose the SW300 for my training, and am still happy with my choice. Yes, one can blame inexperienced pilots, but any certified aircraft must not require "unusual pilot skill and attention" to safely fly. In my opinion, the R22 and R44 are a little closer to that line, and typically being flown by recreational pilots who may have less training, experience and self discipline.
Bell had a blade issue several years ago but actually did something about it quickly. The 206 has always had bladder tanks and burns jet fuel, much safer. The biggest difference is in the rotor head and blades. The 206 is a high inertia, seesaw setup. The robinson's use low inertia with a double teering hinge. Both are underslung.

You'd be better to compare the robinson's with other piston powered helicopters of similar size.

The numbers also speak for themselves, the r44 is the most dangerous.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by PilotDAR »

You'd be better to compare the robinson's with other piston powered helicopters of similar size.
Yes, I agree with your highlight of the differences to a Bell 206, and yes, the reasons stated make the Bell 206 safer, plus it has several decades more experience. The Bell 47 would be the next closest piston light helicopter, though again, immense experience. Otherwise, the SW300 does not compare to the R44, as the rotor system is entirely different. Though I have no experience with Enstroms, I suspect that the same applied there too.

The R44 captured a market which was there to be had, though it was a compromise market, on the low cost side. If an aircraft has to compromise one way, that compromise should be off set by greater operational skill/caution applied. I'm not sure that the typical operator of an R44 is in the greater operational skill side of things - so caution!
---------- ADS -----------
 
blue thunder
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by blue thunder »

PilotDAR wrote: Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:08 pm The article is overly dramatic. There's truth in it, but those truths apply to many Bell helicopters also. I agree that a low cost, entry level helicopter, coupled with a simple airframe and systems makes it a more vulnerable combination. The Bell 206 is also vulnerable to mast bumping if mishandled, and it has happened, but Bell 206 and larger Bells are probably flown by more experienced pilots, and not subject to the same "maneuvering" which may be being attempted in the Robinsons. The R22 and R44 just are not designed for the same aggressive maneuvering as other types. They'll do it, but not with the margin of safety of a three or more blade main rotor.

I flew the R22, and having done that, chose the SW300 for my training, and am still happy with my choice. Yes, one can blame inexperienced pilots, but any certified aircraft must not require "unusual pilot skill and attention" to safely fly. In my opinion, the R22 and R44 are a little closer to that line, and typically being flown by recreational pilots who may have less training, experience and self discipline.
Well said......Thanks for that.....no horse in the race but lets not make this about one type of aircraft...................pretty sure that in 1983, they didn't even teach us about this shite flying the 206 or the 47 at Canadore........am I wrong here?
---------- ADS -----------
 
J31
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1233
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 7:21 am

Re: Quebec R44 missing.

Post by J31 »

https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... q0109.html

Main rotor blade failure in flight caused the fatal impact with the ground near Lac Valtrie, Quebec, in 2019
Dorval, Quebec, 31 March 2021.


On 10 July 2019, a privately registered Robinson R44 helicopter was conducting a day visual flight rules flight from Lac de la Bidière, Quebec, to Saint-Sophie, Quebec, with one pilot and one passenger on board. The aircraft never reached its destination. It was reported missing the following day to the Joint Rescue Coordination Centre in Trenton, Ontario, which began the search. No emergency locator transmitter (ELT) signal was detected.

The Canadian Armed Forces launched an air search with the assistance of the Sûreté du Québec, the Canadian Coast Guard, and volunteer air search and rescue organizations in Quebec and Ontario. A ground and water search was also undertaken. The aircraft was found on 25 July, 14 days after it was reported missing, in a remote, densely wooded area near Lac Valtrie, Quebec. The aircraft was located using historical data from the occupants’ cellphones, which helped to perform several triangulation calculations until a precise point was identified 193 m from the wreckage. The aircraft was destroyed, and there was no fire following the impact with the ground. The occupants were found dead.

During the examination of the wreckage, one of the blades was found to have multiple adhesive failures, which resulted in the breakup of certain sections of the joint between the lower skin and the spar, causing humidity to infiltrate below the skin, weakening the adhesive bond joint over time. The investigation determined that a sudden increase in these failures likely contributed to significantly reducing the stiffness of the blade, causing severe vibrations. The rotational speed of the main rotor then fell too low, preventing the aircraft from remaining in flight. This was followed by a vertical drop and impact with the ground. No compliance with Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2014-23-16 to daily inspect the main rotor blades.

The investigation also found that no flight plan or flight itinerary had been filed. In such situations, there is a risk that a search will not be initiated within a reasonable timeframe, especially if no ELT signal is detected, which reduces the occupants’ chances of survival and deprives search and rescue teams of important information needed for the search.

Following the accident, the TSB issued an air safety advisory requesting that Orolia, the manufacturer of Kannad ELTs, and Transport Canada (TC) revise ELT periodic inspection procedures so that a failure of the switch locking system can be detected and corrected in the future. In its response to TSB’s advisory, Orolia indicated, among other things, that a warning was added in the documents containing switch operating instructions to clarify the instructions and avoid inappropriate manoeuvres that could result in breakage of the switch locking latches. TC published a civil aviation safety alert on ELT inspections and focuses on directing attention to switches on ELTs.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”