Autorotation landing

[Para_Bellum]

I've captured one of my better attempts at an autorotation landing on video:

 

 

Still need to improve a lot with synchronizing rudder, cyclic and collective inputs, but I'm slooowly getting there. The actual touchdown was surprisingly smooth, looks worse in the vid.

 

Oh, and to the guys at Belsimtek/DCS: awesome job!

 

:thumbup:

[Vlerkies]

Thats not bad at all, the level of panic is equal to that of my normal landings under power hehe

[Derbysieger]

That doesn't look bad at all. I need to train that - a lot! :D

[Devrim]

"Very smooth" I wrote. :) Very nice. I wouldn't do it without destroying the rotor. :)

[EchoMasterMind]

Pieces before landing: 1

Pieces after landing: 1

 

Good job! :D

[Para_Bellum]

Thanks, guys!

 

Pieces before landing: 1

Pieces after landing: 1

 

Good job! :D

 

 

Hehe... yeah, that's my checklist after touchdown, too.

 

:megalol:

[EchoMasterMind]

I set up a similar scenario. Took me 6 attempts before I got a non-explosive landing :D

 

Are pilots covered by explosive life insurance?

[Robert1983NL]

You start leveling off very high though, I'd start trading in airspeed for a lower rate of descent at around 100 feet and land with a forward airspeed of about 25-30 knots.

[sorcer3r]

one of my attempts:

 

 

touchdown was a bit too heavy. :joystick:

[Vlerkies]

Well done sorcer3r

Felt like i was in the no.2 seat holding onto the Hand Holds for dear life to brace myself for impact there watching that :cry: , but you pulled it off proper!

:clap_2:

[Robert1983NL]

You're supposed to land an autorotation with forward speed. You pulled it off to land without any forward speed, but that's just REALLY dangerous and something no one would want to try in real life.

[AlphaOneSix]

Surely there are some times that an autorotation with no forward speed makes sense. I can think of a couple.

[ScottishMartialArts]

Just nailed my first autorotation landing. Honestly, landing without power almost feels easier than landing with it. :P

[HuggyBear]

It's certainly easier to land with forward airspeed, as long as you have a long smooth surface with no obstacles.

 

Since this doesn't appear regularly outside an airfield, zero-zero autorotations are preferred and they are very manageable in a H model.

 

I've landed many zero-zero autorotations in H models and never damaged the aircraft (during autorotation).

 

The high inertia blades allow for a lot of cushion potential in the last few feet and the skids and seats will deform and collapse to absorb impact. Landing with forward airspeed and hitting an obstacle or tipping the aircraft greatly increases the danger to the crew and passengers.

 

In training, practice run-on until proficient enough to progress to zero-zero, try to protect the aircraft.

 

In operations, zero-zero and screw the aircraft. :)

 

- Bear

[Robert1983NL]

It's not like you need 100 meters or something. I'm talking about sliding like around 20 meters. You fly helicopters irl? I really wouldn't always aim for zero zero landings. It's so much safer to have some forward speed.

[HuggyBear]

They're designed to crash vertically. Seats collapse, skids spread, yaw won't matter much if you come straight down.

 

Forward speed means people can fall forward into controls and instruments, obstacles or trees can strike the vulnerable noise and windscreen, uneven ground or yaw can tip the aircraft over.

 

Forward airspeed makes things easier, so it's great for learning and gaining confidence in autos, as well as protecting a valuable helicopter, but once outside the airfield fence landing surfaces aren't guaranteed. :)

 

A successful zero-zero is the best possible outcome and in a H it's very achievable with practice.

 

I have about 1250 hours in the H.

 

- Bear

[Robert1983NL]

Ok, I have around 12 hours on the Huey. I know what you're saying but a zero zero auto rotation just doesn't feel natural to me. Maybe it's because I fly Chinook (750 something hours) and with the Chinook you NEED NEED forward speed, most of the time there is suitable terrain to land and roll on, but I guess the Chinook can take more of a beating with it's gear than skids on a Huey.

[HuggyBear]

I also flew about 700 hours on the Chinook with some of that as a Maintenance Test Pilot, so I know how different wheels can be.

 

Remember in the Chinook once the aft gear are on you can use all your collective to slow yourself while still in a flared nose-up attitude, then jump on the brakes and drop the forward gear down to stop in a very short space.

 

Also thanks to large, heavy transmissions the Chinook effectively has quite low-inertia blades compared to the Huey, which will cause them to slow quickly without airflow.

 

Zero-zero is still an option in the Chinook though, it just means you're almost certain to seriously damage the aircraft and likely to injure yourself. If you lost both engines (unlikely) over thick trees you'd want to come straight down.

 

Try it in the simulator next time, you'll likely never use it for real, but it's just another tool available to you.

 

- Bear

[Robert1983NL]

I do autorotations in the simulator regularly, zero zero won't work without crashing. Your NR droops way too quickly. Are you familiar with the safe autorotational approach corridor of a Chinook?

 

And ofcourse, everything is possible if you accept seriously damaging the aircraft and injuring yourself and your crew as an end state. But I don't think that's what we do, right? :)

[HuggyBear]

Maybe you're confusing the term zero-zero here.

 

Fly a normal auto profile at 70 KIAS, start the flare at 150', wrap it up aggressively in the last 50' to bring your airspeed back to zero just as you sharply initial, aggressively level, then cushion with the thrust lever up into your armpit.

 

Doing it to a level surface makes things a little easier in that you can try to touch down the aft gear as your airspeed reaches zero.

 

It's difficult, but it's possible, I've done it in the sim.

 

I was suggesting that aircraft damage and injury were preferable to aircraft loss and death, but I'm guessing you knew that.

 

- Bear

Edited May 4, 2013 by HuggyBear

[Robert1983NL]

I know exactly what you mean with zero zero.

 

But I just don't agree. It's not something I would do in real life, if need be. I would still land with forward speed. Coming down with 70kts (too slow) and flaring at 150' (too high) is everything but ideal.

I would want to come down with 80kts and flare at 100', bleed off airspeed to about 40kts at 10' and then just roll it against the ground and brake.

 

We are still talking about autorotational landings here, not controlled crashes.

[Vlerkies]

Can I ask, if you have a serious loss of power after take-off, is there an Alt sort-off range where you are certainly dead meat, before you could irl pull off an auto-rotation?

 

edit: in the Huey?

[HuggyBear]

Robert, if there's nothing in front of you that'll work just fine.

 

If there is... you'll hit it at 40 knots.

 

Just because you weren't taught something doesn't mean it's impossible.

 

Vierkies, there's a diagram of the avoid curve, not sure if it's in the flight manual but I'll have a look.

 

- Bear

[Vlerkies]

Got it Huggybear, its diagram 3.19 in the manual, pg 35.

 

thx

 

All helicopters carry an operator's manual that has an airspeed versus altitude chart similar to the one shown in figure 3.19. The shaded areas on this chart must be avoided. This area is referred to as the "dead man's curve" and "avoid curve". The proper maneuvers for a safe landing during engine failure cannot be accomplished in these areas.

Edited May 4, 2013 by Vlerkies

[Robert1983NL]

Robert, if there's nothing in front of you that'll work just fine.

 

If there is... you'll hit it at 40 knots.

 

Just because you weren't taught something doesn't mean it's impossible.

 

Vierkies, there's a diagram of the avoid curve, not sure if it's in the flight manual but I'll have a look.

 

- Bear

I know, but like I said, we were talking about autorotational landings, not controlled crashes.