Repost from Feb. 2002: " forgiving training heli" by Bob Barbanes

Howdy,

I don't check the newsgroups that I used to follow religiously as much as I did
in times past - too many irons in the fire - but I thought I'd share some of the
excellent postings that Bob B has made in years past. He hasn't been around here
as much as he was a few years ago, but I (and many other readers) thoroughly
enjoyed his prose - and some of us suggested he make a book about his time
flying helicopters.

I saved quite a few of his postings there for a while, and since no book has
been forthcoming so far (hell-OO Bob!), here is the first post of his that I
saved, verbatim. Enjoy!

I will post what I have saved, as the mood strikes, and more importantly, as
time permits. Please be patient for the next episode of our hero's exploits! 8^)

Dave Blevins



Rocky Kemp wrote:

(snip)
When a new pilot
goes hunting for his/her first job that has a different machine than
they trained in, if they are accustomed to a machine that forgives
their sloppy technique or lack of understanding or just plain
inexperience, when faced with any normal operational challenge they
may be in over their heads before they are even aware of it. It even
happens to experienced guys like me, or Stan, or nearly anyone of the
regulars here in the NG....well perhaps with the exception of Bad Bob
Barbanes ggg

Uh-uh, Rocky, even me! Quick story:

I work part-time for this guy who plans on restarting the FH-1100 production
line. He's got a bunch of old hulls from the first production run (back in the
1970's) which he is in the meantime refurbing and selling. One such ship was
rolled out recently, and my boss invited me up for the initial ground-runs and
test-flights. Just to make things more interesting, the new owner of the
aircraft was also invited to watch what we hoped would be a few quick test hops
before departure on the delivery flight. Heh-heh-heh...what's that phrase
about the best laid plans?

As the ship was a complete and total refurb, (re)built with many brand-new (not
overhauled) parts, my boss did the initial hover work to verify that it was at
least put together correctly, which was okay by me. I took over from there for
the initial test flights and main rotor tracking. With the new owner standing
by and watching, I rolled 'er up to full throttle and prepared to pull pitch...

Now, the FH-1100 has a typical two-blade, underslung rotor system, but it flies
like no other similar configuration. In the first place, it has dual hydraulic
systems, but the pressure is very low - more like a Bell 47's than a 206's.
Also, it has SAS (stability augmentation system) which, imparts a stiffness to
the controls even when turned off. PLUS, there is an electric stick-positioner
(force trim) which is always on. In the past, I always found it better, when
hovering, to hold the stick-trim button down, thereby disabling it and making
the ship feel more like other "two-blades" that I'm familiar with.

So there's the owner, standing eagerly by and getting ready to see his new
pride-and-joy take to the sky for the first time. And there's me, who hasn't
flown an FH-1100 in...when was it...1980? And I'm thinking "How am I gonna do
this without looking like a TOTAL spaz? This guy thinks I'm some hot-shot
expert FH-1100 test pilot..." On top of all that, I'm not all that current in
*any* helicopter, since I don't fly regularly anymore.

The liftoff to a hover felt really, really bad and squirrelly. Lord, it took
me back! I grit my teeth and hoped the new owner wasn't too unimpressed. I
figured that I'd excuse the sloppiness of the hover by explaining that we were
still "bleeding air out of the hydraulic systems"...yeah, that's it!

However, the video of the flight does not show that to be the case. Funny how
our perceptions of how badly we're flying are sometimes exaggerated. I managed
to pedal-turn, hover out and depart for closed-traffic without rolling it over.
By the time I hovered back in it looked more or less like I knew what I was
doing. But let me tell you, it was WORK! Talk about being over my head!

The ship ended up having some niggling problems (mostly related to that damn
obsolete Allison C-18 engine) that are taking some time to work out. They
will soon be fixed, and the bird and the new owner will be reunited. Hopefully
by that time I'll have some more recent FH-1100 time to my credit and will be
able to lift off to a hover without breaking a sweat. I envy these natural
pilots (I'll bet Rocky is one) who make it look so easy because for them it is.
For me, it ain't.

When I worked for PHI, there would sometimes be long periods in which I did not
fly a 206. Then, for some reason I’d have to get back in one. Transitioning
from the multi-blade, rigid-rotor Bolkow to the teetering system 206 was always
fun. My initial lift-off and hover work were sights to behold! It was like
I'd never flown one before in my life. I’d look down at my hand, which was
making all kinds of incorrect, involuntary and out-of-synch control movements
and I'd yell at it, “STOP MOVING!” And after awhile, it’d all come back.
And although I have considerable fixed-wing time, I had a lot trouble adapting
to the Aero Commander Shrike that a friend let me fly regularly, which seemed
particularly sensitive in pitch even when properly trimmed.

Every aircraft is different. Low-time pilots go on and on about whether a
high-wing airplane is "better" than a low-wing airplane and vice-a-versa.
H-500's fly differently than 206's which fly differently than 47's. Who cares.
The only constant is that in a helicopter, when you pull up on the stick to
your left, the houses get smaller (to *******ize a fixed-wing expression).
It's a challenge to see how quickly you adapt to the control feel of a new
aircraft and not blame the ship for "sloppy flying."

Should a trainer aircraft be more or less "forgiving?" Hell if I know. The
Piper Tomahawk turns out good pilots even though it is not a very "forgiving"
airplane in many respects compared to a Cessna 150/152 (which has turned out
many fine pilots over the years), but guess which airplane of the two is still
preferred as a trainer today? Perhaps the question should really be: Which is
better ifor the instructor:/i an aircraft which is more forgiving or less?
Because in reality, it's the instructors who are always going to be a half-step
behind the students when it comes to correcting for improper control inputs.
In a helicopter, that can spell the difference between a profound learning
experience and disaster.

Bob i-still learning-/I Barbanes

"The dignity of the craft is that it creates a fellowship."
Antoine de St. Exupery

wrote:

I saved quite a few of his postings there for a while, and since no book has
been forthcoming so far (hell-OO Bob!), here is the first post of his that I
saved, verbatim. Enjoy!

I don't recall ever seeing that one, thanks.

More!

Dave
"Bad Bob" and I had a nice visit a short time back and he gave me the
quick tour of their FH1100 mfg facility. It's a kick to see some of the
things we said in the past that come back to haunt us, or to be
rehashed and regurgitated.
Seems like the same subjects come up over and over as new people come
on line or find the forums. There are more than a few who I've gotten
to know via the various NG's in the past 15 or so years thanks to the
internet.
Cheers
Rocky Kemp