Helicopter safety record?

Status
Not open for further replies.


Helicopters are inherently less safe than fixed wing and although they can autorotate providing all the blades are intact it's a pretty heavy landing whether on land or sea and you don't get very far at the heights they normally operate at. Gearbox failure is catastrophic and tail rotor damage will send you into a spin from which it's usually impossible to recover. Most, if not all, do have flotation devices if operating over the sea but as all the weight is in the top end it's not always enough to keep the thing upright especially in seas that are less than calm. That's why they train North Sea workers to evacuate helicopters in a variety of situations, including inversion. I would hate to be in any flying emergency which is why I don't like flying very much despite working in the North Sea for 18 years but in the event of an engine failure I would really rather be in a fixed wing, ideally a Britten-Norman Islander which I have actually seen do what they call a 'dead-stick' landing, i.e. no engine power at all. I recall a story from a pilot who said his type of aircraft was one in which the Flight Engineer says " Number 12 is out Sir" and the Captain responds "Which side?"
 
rokerexile said:
Helicopters are inherently less safe than fixed wing and although they can autorotate providing all the blades are intact it's a pretty heavy landing whether on land or sea and you don't get very far at the heights they normally operate at. Gearbox failure is catastrophic and tail rotor damage will send you into a spin from which it's usually impossible to recover. Most, if not all, do have flotation devices if operating over the sea but as all the weight is in the top end it's not always enough to keep the thing upright especially in seas that are less than calm. That's why they train North Sea workers to evacuate helicopters in a variety of situations, including inversion. I would hate to be in any flying emergency which is why I don't like flying very much despite working in the North Sea for 18 years but in the event of an engine failure I would really rather be in a fixed wing, ideally a Britten-Norman Islander which I have actually seen do what they call a 'dead-stick' landing, i.e. no engine power at all. I recall a story from a pilot who said his type of aircraft was one in which the Flight Engineer says " Number 12 is out Sir" and the Captain responds "Which side?"
Click to expand...

Or even better a seaplane or float plane.

Now how many engines did the old spruce goose have ?
 
I went in one over Niagra Falls. Scary as owt walking over to chopper when blades are going even though they're a good couple of feet about you. Still pretty much crawled into the cockpit
 
gizmoganzee said:
Well if you want to be negative ..fine and choppers if they are weakly maintained can blow up in smoke

Less like likely and highly unprobable in the if looked after
Click to expand...
Tell that to the 5 poor sods in wales, the mull of kyntire lot, and all the rig choppers that crash each year.

Oh and that police chopper in Scotland

I haven't mentioned tail rotors yet, another weak point
Scotty said:
unless you have an actual rotor failure (as in in comes apart) you should always be able to auto-rotate in all 3 cases you've listed

lose a wing on a plane for example and you'll crash - no chance of a glide forced landing there
Click to expand...

Rusty said:
Doesn't auto rotation only work at specific height and speeds which vary between helicopters? So if your outside of those parameters your fucked as it's almost impossible to auto rotate?
Click to expand...
Yes

Hence helicopters crash a lot

Autorotation is hailed as an amazing thing, but it's like an airbag, it only works in certain situations
 
Last edited:
daveydavey said:
I notice on the Daily Mail another helicopter has downed , this time over Wales en route to Ireland from the midlands.

It has struck me that there seems to be a consistent flow of domestic helicopter crashes in the U.K., at least a handful every year - so the question is why? And are they a reasonable risk when considering travel?

I've googled some research but there are too many vested interests from helicopter enthusiasts.

Can anybody shed light ?
Click to expand...

Aye. It's metal, heavy, made up of nuts and bolts that rust and defies gravity. Get in one at your own risk ;)
 
There are more helicopter accidents statistically because most helicopters operate in areas without a supporting infrastructure, (out of radio contact, limited places to put down etc) where there are not as many written rules and procedures to cover the operation. The variety of tasks they are capable of and called on to perform are larger in number than the fixed wing world, and they operate closer to the margin of design than fixed wing aircraft. Flights are shorter in duration, and concentration more intense for longer periods.
If you look at accident rate per takeoff and landing, historically the most dangerous part of any flight, helicopters are significantly safer than nearly any fixed wing operation.
 
Typhoonftm said:
There are more helicopter accidents statistically because most helicopters operate in areas without a supporting infrastructure, (out of radio contact, limited places to put down etc) where there are not as many written rules and procedures to cover the operation. The variety of tasks they are capable of and called on to perform are larger in number than the fixed wing world, and they operate closer to the margin of design than fixed wing aircraft. Flights are shorter in duration, and concentration more intense for longer periods.
If you look at accident rate per takeoff and landing, historically the most dangerous part of any flight, helicopters are significantly safer than nearly any fixed wing operation.
Click to expand...
They also operate a lot closer to the ground which leaves less time to have a think on things and then do summat remedial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top