Comments on: Photo flights and tail rotors

By: Alex Kovnat

Alex Kovnat — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:12:42 +0000

The matter of LTE in helicopters utilizing the usual one main rotor and one tail rotor configuration, is of interest because if you look at Mac McClellan’s latest blog on the EAA website (www.eaa.org), a group of helicopter enthusiasts have been discussing the merits and de-merits of Kamov helicopters. The Kamovs utilize counter-rotating coaxial rotors and therefore, don’t need a tail rotor. One wonders if Kamov helos might be better for missions where you have to hover or fly slowly (relative to the ground, that is) while making short-radius turns so as to keep a television news camera pointed at whatever is of interest.

By: Obelix

Obelix — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 06:01:08 +0000

I think this article is very pertinent. It is really not too difficult to get into LTE during an OGE hover especially when nearing power limits and/or with a tailwind or crosswind. Also, where LTE is, low rotor rpm is often not far behind. I do a lot of photo flying and I have never experienced full-on LTE but I have felt it coming on on a few occasions and avoided it by picking up some forward airspeed.
I think the most important thing is to be aware of it’s looming danger whenever in a low airspeed situation and have a plan of recovery. It’s really not difficult to recover from if you recognize it early and leave yourself the space and altitude to do so.

On a side note: I have so often heard that R22′s and R44′s have such exceptional tail rotor authority. I think this is a bit of a myth to be honest, I really don’t find either model to have that great TR authority. If anything the R22 is quite good, the R44 I would almost say lacks some authority. I think that the industry had become accustomed to the quite bad B206 TR authority when Robinsons came around and hence they seemed great by comparison. But if you really want to experience excellent TR authority try flying an AS350.. it will redefine your concept of TR performance. It is almost too powerful.

By: G Beck

G Beck — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 00:53:37 +0000

Always a good topic to be reminded of, not only with respect to photo flights but any HOGE situation. I was flying nearby a crop-spraying helicopter just this week who was reminded in a hard way. The machine is a total loss but thankfully no injuries. He made a low-speed turn at about a 30 foot altitude into a 15 knot tailwind at high weight, experienced LTE, reacted with a hard left pedal input which stole his power and RPM and resulted into settling between a row of trees that proceeded to chew his helo to pieces. All happened very fast and was a stark reminder to all of us nearby. Thanks for the topic.

By: Mike Borkhuis

Mike Borkhuis — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:01:51 +0000

Another consideration is things flying out open doorways when you’re doing a photo flight with the doors off. Could either camage or get caught in the tail rotor.

By: Ehud Gavron

Ehud Gavron — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 16:18:14 +0000

I’ve used a headset-holder mounted camera to videotape some flights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRQ9TikRlEk) and I also have a camera that fits on my head, so where I look it records. These don’t present any challenges — I ignore them and fly.

I’ve had CFIs tell lots of stories about “The photographer that wanted X.” X is usually something entirely unsafe but sounds cool. “Hover at 50 ft above those train tracks.” “Get me right up to the power lines so I can shoot them with the mountains as the background”, etc.

The key isn’t to be a high-time experience pilot, but to be decisive enough to say NO and refuse to do a flight outside of parameters with which you’re comfortable. If the requested location, altitude, heading, and airspeed aren’t what you know in your guy is appropriate… tell the photog you can’t do it.

My 2¢.

By: pdxpilot

pdxpilot — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 15:13:23 +0000

Good stuff – never hurts to be reminded of this stuff – I shoot video while I fly – but once the camera is set I don’t touch it.