>lose tail rotor function while flying a blackhawk
>doesnt just full throttle it, gain altitude
>then straighten out while descending from the height
>possibly even landing softer out of hostile territory
Wow I just avoided TWO blackhawks from being downed in enemy territory.
>>doesnt just full throttle it, gain altitude
I'd imagine that would just make you spin more
You turn into a sitting duck even worse when you try to rock out of it, there was no good way about it honestly.
It would make you spin less actually. If you tilt the stick forward while travelling at a high rate of speed. From, for example, a descent. You will straighten out and the fact you have no yaw control will not matter unless you want to, well. Turn at low speed.
A blackhawk can climb over 1000 feet per minute. Blackhawks are designed to take small arms fire from their belly. I see no reason why rocking out of it, especially this early into the battle. Would have ended up any worse than the immediate aftermath.
this is why Ian hates this place. full of retards
>what is physics
Wait. Do YOU not know physics? When you lose your tail rotor you only lose the yaw. You can still tilt and manage throttle.
m.youtube.com
Watch this. The pilot is wasting his time fighting the stick. When he should have just gunned it.
Bump. Jow Forums needs to learn this was a recoverable crash and it makes no sense that a skilled pilot would spend so much time fighting the stick.
He instead could have gained altitude, tilted in the direction he wanted to go. And straightened out. While then landing in a less hostile location.
Yaw is pretty damn important for going in a specific direction
>Another instance of a retarded fag thinking he knows more about piloting helos than actual helo pilots
No it isnt. Youre only supposed to use yaw at low speeds. Banking is an easier change of direction at high speed. Helicopters are designed to cruise going forward. So the aerodynamics of the helo straighten it out.
Which is why its not worth anything to use yaw at those speeds, since youre working against the aerodynamics of the helicopter harder than banking.
So what youre supposed to do when youre at low speed and lose yaw is to gain altitude and airspeed in really ANY direction. So you can get the helicopter to straighten out with its own aerodynamics. Then you can control the landing better.
If lm led to believe that both helicopters suffered LTE before their crashes. Then I will assume that these pilots werent correctly trained on how to recover from them.
where were you trained to fly, OP?
>learned to fly from wikipedia
so uhhhh is this saying you've never actually flown?
>He doubts the highly informative FAA handbook. Just because it was cited on wikipedia
Retard.
Loss of tailrotor is a recoverable fault in every single helicopter.
Who fucking cares what that fucking retard thinks?
When I was in Afghanistan I heard a story where an apache lost its tailrotor and ended up landing by doing what OP said.
Im not sure if itd work on a blackhawk but l know it has happened.
It's hard to do autorotation without a functioning tail rotor.
Its easy to do autorotation when you have a main rotor to gain speed and altitude with first. Which both blackhawks in mogadishu still had control over before they crashed.
An RPG hit to the posterior of a helicopter, that leads to a loss of a tail rotor, on the other hand is not a "recoverable fault".
Actually neither is a a "simple loss of tail rotor". You can't safely autorotate if you are flying low and fast. Civil aviation loss of tail rotor function generally entails flying high and flying slow, which is why it can be considered a non-critical situation (even though it absolutely is by anyone ever that got into one).
I know this sub is frequented by 19 year old autists with 15 minutes in DCS, but I am pretty sure even that disability does not inherently mean you should be incapable of realising how explosions work and that autorotation isn't something that is done without first consulting your shat pants and the dead man's curve.
But hey man, just push cyclic, reduce power. Nevermind that you just lost the hydraulic help to actually do any of those effectively while tumbling around the skies at a low height.
OP is a retard that gets his 'facts' from video games.
He wasn't talking about autorotation, he is talking about using the shape of the helicopter and airflow to straighten it out and prevent a crash.
It's pretty amusing to see people strawmanning OP and seemingly not even bothering to read his posts.
>what are aerodynamics
>how does a weathervane work
>even the FAA states this is a recovery method
It's okay, I'm sure you're only pretending to be retarded
>Jow Forums - armchair pilots
>160th SOAR
>not properly trained
1/10 b8
I will absolutely admit that hindsight is 20/20 and being fired upon while spinning over some shithole city is enough to make a pilot stressed the fuck out.
I do however know there was a way out of both of these wrecks. Or especially the 2nd one. And it was to go full tilt on the throttle.
>this sub
>sub
Go back to your shithole, shitholer.
>I do however know there was a way out of both of these wrecks.
No you don't. I don't care how many hours you put into your flight sims, you'll never know. It's not even clear if the rotor being shot out was the only mechanical issue the bird was experiencing at the time. The men who flew and who currently fly in that unit are trained to the edge of a human's capability to fly those helicopters. They put in more sim time, more real flight hours and practicing recovery from catastrophic mechanical failures than a vast majority of helicopter pilots on this Earth.
Is human error a potential factor? Yes. Can anyone here, hell can anyone but the dead attest to the exact conditions in that cockpit? No. We have one surviving pilot from the other bird. I'm keen to take his word over that of an out of shape autistic dip shit on the cesspool of the internet.
The please give me a full break down of how it went down.
What altitude was super 6-1 and 6-4 at when they were hit, what were the atmospherics on the day in question, were the in a left or right hand bank or were they above 24KIAS and outside translational lift. What was the g load on the rotor system when they were hit. And what do you mean by full tilt on the throttle? Pushing forward on cyclic? Full collective? Opening the throttle will do far less to increase forward airspeed as foward on the cyclic will.
Emergency procedure for loss of tail rotor is auto-rotate if below a 40 knots.
If above then what you suggested will work.
>There are two ways to stop a helicopter from spinning – you can dive and pick up speed to straighten the helicopter out; we didn’t have the altitude to do that,” said Durant. “Or, you can shut the engine off. We flew like a vending machine.”
>The helicopter plummeted to the earth. Durant managed to put it down on the wheels in an undeveloped part of the city, likely saving his and his co-pilot’s life, at least for the time being.
So there was still room here for them to gun it. He didnt and the pilot picked the wrong choice.
Without a tail rotor what compensates for main rotor torque? How will making out the main rotor not make the bird spin like a top?
This
What about the first bird. You KNOW it was recoverable. The reality is you are fucking retarded and think you know better than a man who was talented enough to fly in the most competitive and competent air transport wing of the Army. Let me guess, you are a pimple faced teenager, maybe in your twenties with a couple thousand hours in DCS or whatever other nerd sim you play?
Refer to
m.youtube.com
In the video you can see the helo about to crash, yet it's moving laterally. Which means the pilot is still fighting the stick against a bad yaw.
Yet the main rotor is still pointing up, and if Im to believe he still had power to it. He could have throttled up and climbed the hell away from his eventual doom.
If you're going fast enough, aerodynamic forces on the aircraft are enough to give limited yaw control. most helicopters also have tail stabilizers to reduce power requirements of the tail rotor in forward flight, which will also help keep you oriented. But you have to be going pretty quick, and you have to enter an auto to land.
The eventual descent that will come after the climb, which will stabilize the vehicle.
lmao my man do you think these autists even know half of the aviation principals you just asked them?
nah obviously it was just so easy, why didnt they pull up?
nice troll post you got me to reply a few times
Yeah. Why didnt they? They still apparently had the ability to tilt and control the main rotor. As evident in the video and in testimony from one of the pilots.
Instead they decided to cut power and rely on auto rotation, which caused them to "fly like a vending machine" in their own words.
>why didn't he pull up
or as the OP so eloquently put it "Go full tilt on the throttle"
so is there proof enough that the bird was going fast enough to autostabalize, or was the pilot just supposed to endure the spin?
The SkyKing pulled off a barrel roll from pure vidya knowledge, jus sayin
how did he land again?
No. My point is that if the two pilots had used their still presumedly and claimed main rotors that still worked. They could have climbed to a height that would have lead to a stabilized and controlled descent.
Shot down by F18s.
It's also easy to say that it's recoverable after the fact. When you're flying and at low altitude, you have literally seconds to react starting from the moment the problem happens. Some smaller birds only have enough inertia in the rotor system to give you 1 full second to react to a power failure before your rpm drops below the recoverable limit. That's hardly enough time to even realize you've lost power
Inside job
Which brings me back to the second part of my question. Was the pilot just supposed to endure spinning like a top after gunning his main rotor? Because I can't see how at low altitude and low speed with no tail rotor not spinning like a beyblade after maxing out your main.
Yes. Endure the spinning until youve reached a height that will allow a comfortable descent.
Even better. Fight the stick on the climb to put your momentum into the direction you want to go to rid of the spinning ASAP.
This thread makes me want to be a helicopter pilot.
Where do I start?
Yes it's all just that easy. You are a fucking moron. Your video games are nothing like a real helicopter. Enduring the amount of spinning and g forces that comes with that much collective means you do not have competent command of your stick. Children man, I swear.
Doesnt matter. Youre still higher up than the ground you idiot.
You're not if you can't stabilize while jamming the collective, which requires competent command of the stick. Go back to your video games you fucktard.
How many g's you estimate after 10s of full main user? Im thinking 6.
Jamming the collective doesnt turn the helicopter upside down.
I just started a few months ago. Tomorrow is my first solo. Shits bitchin yo, but it's not for the high strung or dullards
The descent isn't what stabalizes the ship, it's the airspeed. Of course, descending helps build airspeed, but climbing is just to give you the power and altitude required to build your airspeed so you can enter a proper autorotation.
Yes. And thats the method that should have been used instead of "fly like a vending machine"
This place is becoming worse than F-16.net each days it passes. My god OP is retarded.
Gaining altitude with no tail rotor makes you spin even more when you’re already dizzy as fuck and can’t see shit. That’s the whole point of the tail rotor is to prevent that you fucking retard. Also, when youre 600 feet in the air and your helicopter is spinning out of control, you don’t “just gain altitude” and possibly cause even more issues with the bird and kill everybody on impact with the ground when a probably 5-10 ton war machine falls out of the sky. Jesus fucking Christ you backseat pilots and wannabe generals are fucking stupid. Thank god you people aren’t in the military.
You keep quoting that line but you have no idea what it means
You would rather humilate another person on this website than doubt the actions of an overstressed dizzy pilot.
There was an opportunity to correct the helicopters. It wasnt made. Im right. The pilots werent bad they just made a mistake.
Couldn't tell you, never flown a helicopter. Rode in a bunch though. Always felt like flying coffins to me. Felt safer looking out of an aircraft's door with a thin parachute on my back than I did getting from A to B on a rotary wing death trap. Always respect the pilots though, tough gig and lots of danger.
It doesn't magically make you go straight up into the air gracefully either, Flight Simlulator X.
Yes it does. The whole point of the main rotor is to "magically" go up and down. These fucking behemoths can ascend at over 1000 feet per minute
Let's pretend that an unbalanced torque won't make you angularly rotate because you are accelerating forward, or going super fast, lmao.
Let's pretend the pilot could have pulled up up and away, then speed off.
How the fuck is he supposed to slow down and land then, you fucking retard?
you are without a doubt one of the most retarded people I have ever seen on this board. a straight up 0 KIA ascent puts retarded amounts of stress on the air frame. and those 1000 FPM ascensions you are talking about don't happen with 0 forward air speed
>death traps
Helicopters are safe as hell. Only people that think otherwise simply don't understand them
No, vertical lift requires stability. Otherwise you are just imparting momentum at whatever angle(s) the top of the blades are facing. Unless you have a stable bird, that is not straight up. If you are spinning without a rotor you are also wobbling. Large amounts of upward thrust on a wobbling platform generally results in terrible consequences. Honestly, how old are you? You are absolutely retarded.
Statistically they are safe, sure. They feel like death traps to most grunts, especially once you and/or your friends have been involved in not-so-graceful landings, which happens a lot more often than most people think.
>How the fuck is he supposed to slow down and land then, you fucking retard?
I have the decency usually to not call someone retarded, so let me put this into a nice post for you.
>climb up while spinning
>tilt main rotor while climbing to gain some lateral movement
>now you have climbed to a height where you can fall from
>convert vertical energy to horizontal energy
>the aerodynamics of the helicopter straighten it out as you gain in horizontal velocity
>now youre flying straight yet you are dropping
>slightly tilt the helicopter back in its descent to slow its horizontal and vertical speed down
>land on autorotation outside of mogadishu
Take note. In the video l posted twice in this thread.
6-1 spends over 8 seconds rotating while travelling laterally to its eventual crash site.
The tallest building in mogadishu was under 10 stories at the time. Or less. If he had throttled up at the beginning of the spin, those few seconds would have cleared any nearby buildings.
>Endure the spinning
>Fight the stick on the climb
I honest to God hope you suffer a devastating before the new year begins you fucking mouthbreather.
Throttling up wont do shit
This is some Zed grade shitposting, start a thread with just enough truth sprinkled into a pile of bullshit to make it contentious and then act like an arrogant fuckwad throughout
>I would rather crash and possibly die in Mogadishu instead of gaining altitude in a helicopter with no tail rotor.
Its one of the worst ones i have seen since that whatgripwhatstock faggot started shitting up generals
Are you absolutely positively certain that raising the rpm of the main rotor on a helicopter wont cause it to ascend?
Loss of hydraulics after being hit by a fucking rocket means that the best bet is to put the bird on the ground as soon as possible before you are left with zero control except maybe throttle.
youre gonna look back in a few years and realize how much of a jack ass you are
No I wont. Because Im right. Loss of tailrotor is a survivable failure to have on a helicopter.
Ok you are now in an accelerating 6g spin at a few thousand feet and have sprayed all of your hydraulic fluid out of the gaping hole where the tail used to be. To which god do you offer your last prayer as you grey out?
Angle of attack is what generates the lift. A symetrical blade with a 0* AOA generates no lift. Regardless if its 10RPM or 10000RPM
Well, obviously, Durant survived.
Lol,
>tilt main rotor while climbing to gain lateral velocity
How are you supposed to keep the rotor pf a rotating helicopter tilted in the same direction?
Lateral is always changing! You'll just put more stress on a failing, burning airframe while gaining potential, kinetic, and rotational energy. Are you just pretending to be retarded? Can you not make free body diagrams?
>OP
And yet you disregard that the helicopter was moving at an angle for over 8seconds before its crash.
It could have raised rpm to the main rotor and used the angle it was at to gain altitude. The fucking thing wasnt upside down.
The airframe was not burning. It was not failing. The only failure Durant claims it had was a disintegrated tailrotor.
Of course it is you jack ass, just like a heart attack is survivable depending on the context. What aircraft are you rated on? How many hours do you have?
No Balls
If you lose your fucking tailrotor in a helicopter and you find a way, after all that training, to fucking die on impact. Your training was for naught.
A heart attack is not comparable to a tailrotor loss. A mainrotor that gets locked up is more comparable.
Many pilots have landed, and reused the craft after, without a tailrotor. There is a whole procedure in place for when it fails.
>claims
Bro, the helicopter had no control. Doing anything other than what Durant did would have been a reckless gamble, at best. You're not flying if all you can do is spin around in larger and larger circles higher and higher off of the ground.
There is a distinction to be made between 'isolated mechanical failure of tail rotor' and 'tail boom hit by anti-tank rocket' wherein the latter case may include some complicating secondary faults and failures not included in the former.
Raising rotor rpm would have meant dumping to collective down which then dropped the pitch of the blades which then would have resulted in 0 lift being produced
The same shit you posted earlier about recovering is based around the idea that the tail rotor is still present, just not effective at the time. Yet you are trying to apply that same train of thought to a situation where the tail rotor is just fucking gone.
Still better using my plan of rocking the fuck out than crashing in fucking mogadishu.
Your plan involves crashing harder with less choice as to where you end up.
0/10 b8 that lakota still has a way of counter acting torque