anyone know about helicopter crashes?

[egoprofit]

As most may know today 31 marines died in a helicopter crash. What a sad sad waste of human lives! My question here is that are helicopters dangerous?? i've heard a lot about helicopter crashes especially on a military level..

then again, if the helicopter was actually shot down maybe the military wouldn't be quick to admit that it didn't exactly "crash"...

thanks all.

[ultraist]

1. Yes, helicopters are dangerous

Especially when they are doing search and rescue exercises but I don't know the details of this case. A lot more soldiers die during practice than people realize. Many of their drills are very dangerous. My guess is they were either overloaded or shot down.

http://www.newsobserver.com/nation_world/story/2057127p-8441361c.html

A U.S. Marine helicopter transporting troops crashed Wednesday in the desert of western Iraq, killing 31 people, American military officials said. It was the deadliest crash of a U.S. military helicopter in Iraq.

A Pentagon source said the helicopter was a CH-53 Sea Stallion, which is normally configured to carry 37 passengers, but can take up to 55. There was no immediate word on how many people were on board or what caused the crash. The military officials did not specify the nationalities of those on board or say how many were soldiers.

It was the biggest loss of life in a helicopter crash in Iraq - and could be the deadliest single incident for American forces since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003. The helicopter went down about 1:20 a.m. near the town of Rutbah, about 220 miles west of Baghdad, while conducting security operations, the military said in a statement. The aircraft was transporting personnel from the 1st Marine Division.

A search and rescue team has reached the site and an investigation into what caused the crash is underway, the military said. "We can confirm casualties, but not what type or numbers yet," a U.S. spokesman, Lt. Col. Steven Boylan, said.

[Modem Butterfly]

15. Do we know where the Marines were from?

Have they told us the unit and/or duty stations?

[Liberal In Texas]

2. I've got 18 hours as a student in helicopters, this hardly makes me

an expert, but no, helicopters are not inherently dangerous.

In many ways, they're safer than fixed wing.

Mostly pilots get in trouble by being complacent, say, flying into the "dead mans curve" where the aircraft is to low and/or too slow to autorotate safely if the engines fails.

Flying into objects on the ground also causes crashes, as can bad weather.

[ProfessorGAC]

7. In Some Of The Larger Helicopters, though . . .

. . .the weight exceeds the ability of the autorotation of the prop to slow the vehicle sufficiently. In a smaller, say traffic copter, the fall rate can be slowed to as little as 20mph from a safe height. It's jarring, but unlikely fatal.

In a heavy industry or military transport machine, though, the weight is so intense that slowing the vehicle to less than about 60mph, at any height is unlikely.

My friend flew helicopters for Medivac for many, many years. (He's now a corporate jet pilot for Sears.) He learned in the service, back just after Vietnam. (Navy) I called him before i posted.

He would disagree with you, btw. He says he always feels safer in a fixed wing machine than in rotary wing. He says the power curve is much better and even in a corporate jet, the unpowered glide path is better than a chopper. (Although they would both resemble the glide path of a rock, i would think.)

Anwyay, just a different point of view from a different pilot.
The Professor

[Liberal In Texas]

9. Autorotation

Again, I want to say that I am not an expert, and I appreciate the though in your post. However...

The first time I experienced autorotation was in a "traffic copter" sized helicopter (Hughes 500). The pilot was practicing, we did not hit the ground at 20 mph. When done properly, it can't be distinguished from a normal landing.

When taking lessons, my instructors demonstrated autorotation several times (in a Schweitzer 300, the old Hughes 300). Again smooth as glass. I was about to start learning this procedure myself when circumstance and lack of money intervened.

I really can't speak about the very heavy machines, and will leave it at that. Certainly, any machine that is overloaded is not going to perform as expected.

As far as your friend goes, I guess it's all personal preference. If he feels safer in fixed wing, OK.

I also wonder if corporate jet pilots train for engine-out situations by landing unpowered? I've never heard of this, but I'll be they don't. I'll bet it's too dangerous. Chopper pilots train all the time by landing with simulated engine-out situations.

One more thing. I feel when I was flying, that I could get out of the way of other traffic better in congested areas. Our landing patterns are exactly opposite of fixed-wing, so we stay out of their way and we don't have to land on the runways.

If I see something I don't like, I can stop in the middle of the sky and hover. Try that with a fixed wing aircraft.

[ProfessorGAC]

18. You're Right. They Don't Train For It, Except In Simulation

Way too dangerous. After i read your post, i called him again. He said he would never want to be in a situation where he had to do it, but if something really bad happen, better to have trained for it in simulation than have no idea at all.

But, he said you're right. They'd never have someone actually try it just for practice.
The Professor

[Liberal In Texas]

20. Your friend must be scratching his head about all these phone calls

about now, hehehe.

Also, helos can make emergency landings over cities a whole lot better. If you have to you can put it down between parked cars in the Wal-Mart parking lot. (Just don't hit the light standard.)

Fixed wing certainly has it's own place. Flying long distances in helicopters is expensive, slow, and really not piratical.

Helicopters are, of course, good for medi-vac, traffic/news reports, rescue, fire fighting, police support, executive transport around downtown areas, etc. It just depends I guess on what you like best.
(Also, professional fixed wing guys make a whole lot more money on average.)

[sweetheart]

10. my friend died when he crashed his helicopter

appearantly flying at night over unlighted areas can be quite confusing
depending on the weather... one has to be "instrument rated" i guess
this means being able to fly the thing on guages alone... that you
dont trust your senses, only the guages.

I'm a total amateur, and i was able to take off, fly and land a small
fixed wing my friend let me handle.... but i wouldn't touch a copter..

Appearantly as well, flying over water can be really confusing as well.

Good luck getting many more hours... and being very safe and
respecting the potential of a helicopter. It only takes 1 odd weather
condition, 1 well-placed bullet, 1 RPG and 1 ill-judged maneouver at
low altitude to have a less than pleasant landing.

[Liberal In Texas]

17. VFR/IFR

There are 2 types of flying for both fixed and rotor wing aircraft.

To be real basic:
VFR or Visual Flight Rules is where you can see the things around you and can maintain a horizon without instruments.

IFR or Instrument Flight Rules is flying in conditions where instruments are needed when those things around you are obscured or the horizon is not visible.

Flying at night over a city in VFR can turn into IFR if you fly into the countryside and lose your points of reference due to darkness. For example, an empty desert with no roads or highways on an overcast night.

[Bridget Burke]

3. The age of the helicopter should be considered.

And the maintenance--or, is this another area where we're "cutting corners"?

I hope someone with more specific information will show up.

[Ready4Change]

4. Any transport mode is dangerous. Matter of risk levels.

Cars fail. Airplanes fail. And both will fail if/when hit by weapons fire. Helicopters are not different in that regard.

Helicopters do have a number of "single point failure" areas which are unique to them. That is, something which, when it fails, cannot be compensated for by other systems on the vehicle. These are things which cna make one nervous about them.

OTOH, they have advantages. No other vehicle can land safely in such a short distance, for example. No other vehicle can so easily use terrain to mask its movements. No other vehicle can operate from as close to the line of combat, respond to those needs quicker, nor operate as close to support friendly ground units. Thats why the military uses helicopters in the first place.

What brought down this particular helicopter? Was it two who collided? (pilot errors, not vehicle fault.) Was it a failure in maintenance? Was it weapons fire?

Not enough info.

[Liberal In Texas]

5. There is really now way to know without more information

Ground resonance? Debris? Engine failure while too close to the ground?

We'll have to wait for awhile, I'm afraid.

[leftchick]

12. and SAMs

We have not seen those being used in a while.

[Scurrilous]

6. List of fatal helicopter crashes in Iraq:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=6&u=/ap/20050126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_helicopter_glance

[Bigmack]

8. From a grunt's perspective...

1. Helos have a piss-poor glide ratio.
2. If the "Jesus nut" comes off... you're fucked.
3. No place to dig a hole and hide.

Black, grunt humor.

Seriously, my (younger) brother Marines died for nothing. If I believed in Hell, I'd wish Bush there, and soon!

[DS1]

11. Don't forget

Never step on a helo that isn't visibly leaking hydro fluid - because it's empty

[Liberal In Texas]

14. That's a new one. I don't think I'd get on one that is. n/t

[lectrobyte]

13. Dangerous? By my standards, not especially, but you have to

factor in a lot of things like operating in the desert (I've heard the sand if very powdery, and clogs up machinery quickly), maintenance, age of the helicopter, pilot fatigue (I hear they are short handed and way overworked), avoiding ground fire, and a lot of other things I'm probably not thinking of.

A sad waste of life indeed for a bunch of Bush lies. Where is the outrage?

[DubyaSux]

16. I have a little experience...

....with helicopters, and here's my take.

Helicopters generally are safe. As noted (except if you lose a Jesus nut - where if that thing comes off, your only recourse is to pray to Jesus), helicopters can lose power and land via auto rotation or slide ons.

But the CH-53 is a complete piece of shit. I can't believe they are still in service. Remember the Iran hostage attempt? Hold that thought...

There are good things about the CH-53 and why they are still in use. First, they can carry a shitload of weight. Troops, jeeps, materiel...you name it. Secondly, they are the Cadillacs of helicopters when it comes to comfort. When properly trimmed, they fly as smooth as any airplane and have minimal vibration - a true pleasure to ride in.

The bad things? For every hour of flight time you get out of them, you need to spend 3 hours fixing them. Hydraulic failures are not uncommon (fortunately, usually only intermittent). Electrical system failures are routine. Oil leaks are the rule...not the exception.

When I was stationed at New river air station in Jacksonville North Carolina as a Huey UH-1N avionics crew chief (there weren't many of those, but I was one) long ago, I got deployed on 2 Med cruises. Since we only had 4 "skids" (Huey and cobras), I had to spend a fair amount of time working on what we called "shitters". I did everything I could to stay away from them because they were just plain unsafe. Every flight deck emergency we had on both cruises I went on were because of CH-53s even though there were more CH-47's on board.

One of my best friend's roommate's name was George Holmes. Just before we left for the Med, he disappeared. His mom got a phone call from him but he could not even tell her where he went. Dewey Johnson was an old salty Marine from the neighboring squadron that could go on for hours about his wartime stories (Vietnam). He disappeared the same way as well.

We found out later they went to Arizona for desert training with 5 CH-53's. They took the particle separators off them so the sand would blow straight through the intakes, did some practicing, and went to Iran to die. Carter tried to get the hostages back with those birds and couldn't do it. After the crash, they did not have enough operational 53's left to complete the mission (I think it was 2 of them "down" for maintenance) and they had to abort.

Crashing in the helicopter is as bad as it gets. When you hit, you stay put no matter what until the blades stop. If you try to get out, it's highly likely you'll make it out - in two or more pieces. Of course, this assumes nothing has landed on top of you - like an engine.

The friction of no load on the transmission creates a lot of heat (excess RPM). So much heat in fact, that the metal will ignite? How's that you ask? The transmission and brakes are made of magnesium. Very strong and light, but will even burn underwater. If you get caught in that fire, it's game over.

This was a horrific crash that unfortunately, is somewhat routine. What is not routine, is the amount of souls lost.

I hate Bush and I hate the war, but I want our troops to prevail and remain safe. God love 'em all.

[henrik larssonisking]

19. great explanation

my experience is mainly with lynx's and pumas but i gotta say your explanation nailed the question.

[Liberal In Texas]

22. The "Jesus Nut"

I tried to address this this afternoon but bloody Firefox crashed and I lost the whole thing I was writing and got so pissed I walked away (OK, end of rant, and now I feel better.)

I noticed in this post several references to the ubiquitous "Jesus Nut" and wanted to comment.

The "Jesus Nut" generally refers to aircraft that have the rotors attached by one connecting piece at the top of the mast. The Bell JetRanger is one example.

Without doing research, I'm pretty sure that most helicopters do not use this system. (Look at the picture at the bottom, you can see how the Cobra has this configuration.)

- I apologize for the size of the pics, don't know how to make them smaller-

Then look at the Eurocopter picture below. They don't use the "Jesus Nut" system.

Why? You might ask, are most of our troops using aircraft like the one on the top pic.

Because it's CHEAPER.

Thank you * and your whole gang of vampires.

[Valerie5555]

24. OMG So you actually are 1 degree of separation from Messrs Holmes and

Johnson. Wondered if you also knew that Mayo fellow or Joel Mayo, the Air Force guy who perished in that same rescue attempt. Holy moly I can't believe I'll be the age he was when he died on that mission (34) next birthday.


Just wondered how reliable are C 130's for I read that Amb. Taylor actually arranged the evacuations of Canadians from Iran on those birds. I also read that they were also used on that SAME ill starred hostage rescue attempt and I was also quite sure I remembered reading how Amb. Taylor assisted with that mission by providing "specifics" and information about the "Tehran" end of things.

[Maiden England]

21. bump - so my helicopter mechanic hubby can find this and weigh in

Me, I believe the gray ones are particularly prone to crashes, but the yellow ones are quite safe.....

...really, I know even less than that...

:dunce:

[Liberal In Texas]

23. I would love to hear from your hubby...I'm just a dilettante. n/t