Author Topic: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness  (Read 27601 times)

TheLurker

  • Goes well with magnolia.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #375 on: 02 July, 2021, 02:32:57 pm »
That's a professionals opinion of the relative safety of helicopters versus fixed wing.
*cough* *whispers*  I think TimC is a professional too.  :)

Me?  I'm all in favour of nice big aerofoils rivetted, welded, nailed, glued or even tied into place.  The glide angle may not be great on anything other than a sailplane, but I'd trust that sooner than auto-rotate or whatever the last-ditch please-don't-let-me-die manouevre is that they pull with helicopters.
Τα πιο όμορφα ταξίδια γίνονται με τις δικές μας δυνάμεις - Φίλοι του Ποδήλατου

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #376 on: 02 July, 2021, 03:23:41 pm »
That's a professionals opinion of the relative safety of helicopters versus fixed wing.
*cough* *whispers*  I think TimC is a professional too.  :)

Indeed, on fixed wing and his opinion is in line with that of my cousin who was a rotary wing professional.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #377 on: 02 July, 2021, 06:55:00 pm »
‘They crash a little more’…!

I think you need to be a little more specific with your stats. Let’s start with public-transport helicopters versus public-transport fixed-wing aircraft. I’m not interested in private aviation; that’s amateur hobbyists playing at it, with all the variability of talent, knowledge and skill that that implies. I’m not saying public transport helicopters are unsafe, but they are far short of public transport fixed wing in any sensible safety analysis.

Yeah, sure, if you exclude GA and airliners will be safer...but again, if helicopters flew like airlines, they would be pointless and might as well be..well, airlines.
Now, how would you rate your survivability chances of a forced landing away from any airfields?
Non-GA helicopters crash more due to the type of work they do. They only real fixed equivalent would be fixed wing crop dusting/aerial firefighting.

Me?  I'm all in favour of nice big aerofoils rivetted, welded, nailed, glued or even tied into place.  The glide angle may not be great on anything other than a sailplane, but I'd trust that sooner than auto-rotate or whatever the last-ditch please-don't-let-me-die manouevre is that they pull with helicopters.

The big difference is that unlike a fixed wing that needs a minimum speed in order to not crash and cannot go below that speed until it well, hits the ground, in a helicopter you can virtually eliminate the speed just prior to impact. I have practiced both in airplanes and helicopters and still much prefer helicopters. Even if you to crash into a forest/hillside/etc, at least you have the option of reducing the initial impact to a minimum, something that you can't in an airplane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqy_cWcwI48

Now, helicopters, do though, have many more ways of trying to kill you and can do so in an instant, so you do have to be a lot more vigilant.

He will not take anyone up for a joy ride in a helicopter. He will take them up in a light aircraft.

That's a professionals opinion of the relative safety of helicopters versus fixed wing.

Did he have access to a helicopter that he could take people for joyrides in?. For the same cost as doing it in a light airplane?

SoreTween

  • Most of me survived the Pennine Bridleway.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #378 on: 02 July, 2021, 08:50:52 pm »
Just when you think people cannot be any *more* stupid, thoughtless or selfish...
I don't think I've ever thought that.  (See also just there \/)
2020 targets: None
There is only one infinite resource in this universe; human stupidity.

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #379 on: 02 July, 2021, 11:32:17 pm »
Jakob, the point is not to crash in the first place. Helicopters are rather less good at that than aeroplanes. I've flown plenty of helicopters, from a Gazelle to a CH-53. They are great fun to fly, but in the interests of self-preservation I will not passenger in one unless there is absolutely no choice. I have survived an involuntary auto-rotated landing in a Whirlwind (as a passenger); it's not an experience I ever want to repeat. The aircraft did not survive the event in a repairable state... I have also had several engine failures in fixed wing aircraft in a career of 45 years and well north of 20,000 hours, and never needed to land anywhere other than a runway, in full control and with free choice of when and where it happened.

SoreTween

  • Most of me survived the Pennine Bridleway.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #380 on: 03 July, 2021, 08:46:48 am »
List of Westland Whirlwind crashesHow many :o  Is there one in a museum somewhere with a big shiny plaque under it 'This is the one that didn't crash'?
2020 targets: None
There is only one infinite resource in this universe; human stupidity.

PaulF

  • "World's Scariest Barman"
  • It's only impossible if you stop to think about it
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #381 on: 03 July, 2021, 09:21:55 am »
List of Westland Whirlwind crashesHow many :o  Is there one in a museum somewhere with a big shiny plaque under it 'This is the one that didn't crash'?


Some of those would have been the fixed wing fighter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westland_Whirlwind_(fighter) since the helicopter of the same name was only built from the 50’s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westland_Whirlwind_(helicopter)

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #382 on: 03 July, 2021, 12:55:40 pm »
List of Westland Whirlwind crashesHow many :o  Is there one in a museum somewhere with a big shiny plaque under it 'This is the one that didn't crash'?

In that list, the Whirlwind helicopter is appended S-55 - its Sikorsky type number. As Paulf says, the earlier ones are the twin-engined fixed-wing fighter.

The one I was in was the later turbine-engined version of the RAF SAR persuasion, belonging to SARTU at RAF Valley. Sometime around 1970.

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #383 on: 03 July, 2021, 07:22:42 pm »
List of Westland Whirlwind crashesHow many :o  Is there one in a museum somewhere with a big shiny plaque under it 'This is the one that didn't crash'?

Then don't look at Meteors:
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/dblist2.php?yr=&at=Gloster+meteor&re=&pc=&op=&lo=&co=&ph=&na=&submit=Submit

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #384 on: 03 July, 2021, 07:24:43 pm »
List of Westland Whirlwind crashesHow many :o  Is there one in a museum somewhere with a big shiny plaque under it 'This is the one that didn't crash'?

Then don't look at Meteors:
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/dblist2.php?yr=&at=Gloster+meteor&re=&pc=&op=&lo=&co=&ph=&na=&submit=Submit

(Also, on the whirlwhind list, see how many non-fatal accidents compared on the S-55s, vs the fixed wing version).

PaulF

  • "World's Scariest Barman"
  • It's only impossible if you stop to think about it
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #385 on: 03 July, 2021, 07:32:05 pm »
List of Westland Whirlwind crashesHow many :o  Is there one in a museum somewhere with a big shiny plaque under it 'This is the one that didn't crash'?

Then don't look at Meteors:
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/dblist2.php?yr=&at=Gloster+meteor&re=&pc=&op=&lo=&co=&ph=&na=&submit=Submit

(Also, on the whirlwhind list, see how many non-fatal accidents compared on the S-55s, vs the fixed wing version).

I haven’t gone through the list in detail but I suspect the majority of the fixed wing accidents were due to combat as opposed to the fixed vs. rotary debate.

SoreTween

  • Most of me survived the Pennine Bridleway.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #386 on: 03 July, 2021, 08:50:41 pm »
In that list, the Whirlwind helicopter is appended S-55 - its Sikorsky type number. As Paulf says, the earlier ones are the twin-engined fixed-wing fighter.

The one I was in was the later turbine-engined version of the RAF SAR persuasion, belonging to SARTU at RAF Valley. Sometime around 1970.
Thank you, I sit corrected again.  Mind, fixed wing only accounts for 16 of the 189 listed crashes.

Are you sure you want to click open the spoiler and the link within?
(click to show/hide)
2020 targets: None
There is only one infinite resource in this universe; human stupidity.

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #387 on: 03 July, 2021, 11:41:38 pm »
In that list, the Whirlwind helicopter is appended S-55 - its Sikorsky type number. As Paulf says, the earlier ones are the twin-engined fixed-wing fighter.

The one I was in was the later turbine-engined version of the RAF SAR persuasion, belonging to SARTU at RAF Valley. Sometime around 1970.
Thank you, I sit corrected again.  Mind, fixed wing only accounts for 16 of the 189 listed crashes.

Are you sure you want to click open the spoiler and the link within?
(click to show/hide)

It wasn't that one! I was a newly-minted Sgt in the CCF at the time, and my info could well be distorted by the passing of time, but I believe it was summer 1970. The aircraft lost the engine at about 200ft in the final descent to land just outside the cadets' barracks down at the Rhosneiger end of the airfield. The landing was abrupt and fairly violent, but no-one was injured - there were about 8 on board including the two pilots and the winchman. Both main gear legs collapsed, but not catastrophically. The aircraft was upright when we got out, but I think it lost one or more of its rotor blades. At the time they said it was repairable, but the Wessex was rapidly taking over the Whirlwind's jobs and it wouldn't be surprising if they decided it wasn't worth the effort to repair it. I don't have the registration, but we were told before we left that it was a write-off.

A few years later I returned to Valley as a fast-jet student on the Hawk. By then, all the Whirlwinds had gone and the S-58 Wessex was already slated for replacement by the S-61 Sea King. SARTU were definitely cognisant of that accident, and the briefings given to visiting ATC/CCF units were far more comprehensive about what to do in the event of an accident! It was during that tour that I flew the CH-53. As a fast-jet guy, I was supposed to be dismissive of anything that couldn't fly at Mach 2 and unleash holy hell in the process, but that aircraft deeply impressed me - not least because it was so easy to fly. I never got another go, but the experience has stayed with me. 

Adam

  • It'll soon be summer
    • Charity ride Durness to Dover 18-25th June 2011
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #388 on: 06 July, 2021, 07:08:14 am »
Jakob, the point is not to crash in the first place. Helicopters are rather less good at that than aeroplanes. I've flown plenty of helicopters, from a Gazelle to a CH-53. They are great fun to fly, but in the interests of self-preservation I will not passenger in one unless there is absolutely no choice. I have survived an involuntary auto-rotated landing in a Whirlwind (as a passenger); it's not an experience I ever want to repeat. The aircraft did not survive the event in a repairable state... I have also had several engine failures in fixed wing aircraft in a career of 45 years and well north of 20,000 hours, and never needed to land anywhere other than a runway, in full control and with free choice of when and where it happened.
I tend to agree with that!

I wonder if it's time for the Fairey Rotordyne concept to get updated?  :P

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne
“Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving.” -Albert Einstein

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #389 on: 06 July, 2021, 07:46:16 am »
The Rotodyne was very clever, but possibly the noisiest machine man has ever created. The V22 is another answer to the same problem: how do you make a payload-carrying vehicle that can land and take off vertically, and cruise at a useful speed. It works, and it’s nowhere near as noisy, but it took huge amounts of money to get it into service, and its not likely ever to directly spawn a civilian variant, so the problem has not yet been solved. The multi-rotor concept isn’t going to solve it either, but there are some interesting electric tilt-rotor proposals out there for light aircraft.

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #390 on: 06 July, 2021, 09:49:05 am »
If the Rotodyne was even in the same ballpark as the Republic XF-84H then it’s little wonder it was never going to be a massive hit with the public :D
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #391 on: 06 July, 2021, 11:36:55 am »
That's a new one on me! The pure-jet F-84Fs that used to be based at Wethersfield were apparently very noisy, according to local folklore, though I'm sure the F-100s that replaced them weren't quiet. However, when the Lightnings of the Wattisham wing moved to Wethersfield for a few months in 1971 or 72 while the runway at Wattisham was resurfaced, I'm sure the locals would have welcomed the F-84s back!

Beardy

  • What’s this do?
  • I’ve always wondered where this was
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #392 on: 06 July, 2021, 11:39:47 am »
Jet noise. The sound of freedom.  :D
Sorting my life out, one shed at a time.

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #393 on: 06 July, 2021, 12:46:16 pm »
We’d some fighter aircraft practising overhead last week.  Happens now and again round here but this time the clear skies meant they were visible. Very, very loud, earthshaking even. My cousin attributes his deafness to flying such aircraft as Phantoms.
Sic transit and all that..

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #394 on: 06 July, 2021, 01:54:08 pm »
I had a Boeing C-17A Globemaster III low level over the garden the other day.  Looking on FlightRadar24 and the number times it was buzzing the runway at a local airport but only landing a couple of times, before heading off elsewhere and repeating at other airports, I have to assume it was a jolly good fun training day.

Speaking of which, jumped on that site just now to get the history and I think this chap is a little lost.
https://www.flightradar24.com/BDN02/284e6de2


Beardy

  • What’s this do?
  • I’ve always wondered where this was
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #395 on: 06 July, 2021, 02:22:13 pm »
Thanks for that nutty, I’m trying to get on with my chores, and you posting links to FlightRadar really isn’t helping any!
Sorting my life out, one shed at a time.

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #396 on: 06 July, 2021, 03:13:41 pm »
I had a Boeing C-17A Globemaster III low level over the garden the other day.  Looking on FlightRadar24 and the number times it was buzzing the runway at a local airport but only landing a couple of times, before heading off elsewhere and repeating at other airports, I have to assume it was a jolly good fun training day.

Speaking of which, jumped on that site just now to get the history and I think this chap is a little lost.
https://www.flightradar24.com/BDN02/284e6de

The RAF's Institute of Aviation Medicine Hawk T1 out of Boscombe Down. As well as a number of research tasks, they are tasked with desensitising pilots who develop severe motion sickness due to high-g manoeuvring. Essentially, that means putting them through lots of aerobatics till they stop throwing up.

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #397 on: 06 July, 2021, 05:00:39 pm »
They told us cadets we'd have to clean it up if we were sick.  It was only Chipmunks but your head can only go as far as the floor anyway.  The pilots weren't really supposed to do aerobatics but if you asked nicely..
Sic transit and all that..

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #398 on: 07 July, 2021, 12:11:35 am »
The Rotodyne was very clever, but possibly the noisiest machine man has ever created. The V22 is another answer to the same problem: how do you make a payload-carrying vehicle that can land and take off vertically, and cruise at a useful speed. It works, and it’s nowhere near as noisy, but it took huge amounts of money to get it into service, and its not likely ever to directly spawn a civilian variant

Erhh, the AW609 is a thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6O0fe5Uzg4