Microlighters

From the CAA Occurrence Reports for 2008:

21/04/08 8481 (ZS-ETA) Accident Namibia O/B Gyrocopter (Ela-07) Private On landing, aircraft veered to avoid sheep
24/04/08 8483 (ZU-DHK) Fatal Accident Bela-Bela Limpopo Gyro Magni – 16 Private Crash landed in a game reserve
27/04/08 8487 (ZU-EBL) Accident Kirkwood E/C Gyrocopter (Ela-08) Private Low level flying, lost air speed while trying climb, collided with object on the ground and broke nose wheel.
12/07/08 8518 (ZU-DSM) Accident Rhinopark GP Ela Avia Gyro Plane Private Crashed landed just after take-off
28/07/08 8530 (ZU-WLL) Accident Keetmanshoop O/B Gyro MT 03 Private A/C blown by wind after landing
09/08/08 8531 (ZU-DLL) Accident Middleburg Aero FS Gyrocopter (Ela-07) Private A/C blown by strong wind on take-off
11/09/08 8550 (ZU-EHD) Fatal Accident Harrismith KZN Auto Gyro MT-03 Private A/C crashed during inclement weather condition
25/09/08 8555 (ZU-ERH) Accident Aliwal North EC Gryrocopter ELA – 07 Private Pilot experienced wind shear, damaged airframe
25/09/08 8557 (ZU-EZU) Accident Upington Aero NC RAF 2000 GTX SE Training A/C landed hard and rolled over
30/11/08 8588 (ZU-ETR) Fatal Accident Vryheid KZN Gyrocopter MT03 Private Aircraft struck power lines (1 fatality)
21/12/08 8600 (ZU-ONS) Accident Groot Morico Farm LIMP MT-03 Gyrocopter Private Loss of control
29/12/08 8602 (ZU-RCW) Accident Springs GP Y021 (MTOSport) Gyro Training Practicing forced landings, hit ground

Broadly reviewing the above, and acknowledging that they are not the final or conclusive CAA Accident Investigation Reports, perhaps there are some insights to be gained from these incidents for all of us gyro pilots...

Let's start with the good news - none of the accidents seem to be directly attributable to structural or mechanical failure of any kind. I figure that says something about the design, manufacture and overall flying integrity & reliability of gyros - and also that we've hopefully been on top of our game when it comes to servicing and maintenance.

So what are the areas of concern? Well, whilst we appreciate that gyros are able to "tolerate" windy conditions, it seems worth bearing in mind that they're not immune to Mother Nature's blustery outbursts! Windy conditions still need to be respected - especially during take-offs and landings. With our relatively slow approach speeds and short ground-roll I guess it's all too easy to become just that little bit complacent about landings. Lets remember to stay vigilant and alert...and to expect the unexpected!

For my own part, I learned a valuable met lesson a few weeks ago whilst flying along the Southern Cape coastline. Returning from a flip along the coast, I rounded Cape Agulhas to discover that a bank of cloud with a base of about 2000ft had swiftly (and unexpectedly) moved in over my destination airfield at Bredasdorp. I could see a distinctly isolated downpour close to the airfield and was beginning to think that I could just skirt around it and land - but something struck me as being a bit odd about the scenario and although I couldn't put my finger on it, the Live Coward in me elected to divert to Andrew's Field instead (where the sky was clear) and I proceeded to climb to joining altitude. Looking back towards Bredasdorp I could now clearly see above the cloud layer - and to my horror the isolated downpour was in fact a thundershower emanating from a very ugly looking CB lurking unseen above the lower cloud layer!!!

So my 2009 promise to myself is to remain a very Live Coward and hope that all my fellow gyro pilots will do so too! We fly wonderfully safe aircraft and it would be so fantastic to see the gyro fraternity take the lead in adopting a genuinely "fly safe" attitude and help stem the tide of "pilot error" accidents which cast a dark shadow over general aviation in recent times.

Dave

The safest gyro is a Sycamore.
No accidents in them for 2008.

t-bird you biscuit! I deliberately stayed away from making comparisons as this would simply be futile speculation in the absence of comparable flying hours and numbers flying etc
The general picture I was trying to paint is that the accidents do not seem to be as a result of any particular make of gyro's shortcomings or otherwise, but rather that they present an opportunity for us all to try and avoid these types of incidents in the future (regardless of what make of gyro we fly) by increasing our vigilance and adopting a safer attitude and approach to our flying.

Well done - thanks for bringing your experience to the rest of us.

Fly safe in 2009!!

Tony

Hi Dave,
Have also started to investigate the accidents and My list goes back to about 2000. What was interesting here is that I have now gone right back to the original instructor and "bingo" things are starting to form a picture.
There is one instructor who is "responsible" for almost 80% of these accidents ie., these guys were trained by him. On further investigation I found that there are certain dangerous exercises (not part of the training syllabus) that this guy is forcing down on his students.
I have already spoken to him about his accident rate as far back as 2001 and his attitude was not exactly that of a person wanting to comply.
Unfortuneatly some of these facts were known at the last AGM in Cape Town but were still under investigation at the time - I had to keep my mouth shut!!!!
The time is coming when the facts will be made known to all and to hell with the after effects. I am certainly becoming tired of the story that gyro's are dangerous mainly due to the training methods of one individual. The result has been a massive increase in insurance as well as a heavy eyebrow from the SACAA. Only we, the concerned people can now stop it within our own ranks.
Eric

Don't know where you are going with this one eric, but be careful of drawing conclusions from one source.
Just for the record. my stat 21/12/2009 ZU-ONS cannot be ascribed to any instructor.
The CAA summary of my accident as posted elsewhere on this thread is not quite what I reported to the CAA. Brevity has it's pitfalls.
Just remember one thing, The true learning comes from within.
It happens in your own time and also mostly only once you have your licence, so don't pass judgement too quickly.

gyrosa wrote:...On further investigation I found that there are certain dangerous exercises (not part of the training syllabus) that this guy is forcing down on his students...

Eric, are you talking about the actions during an engine failure after take off of doing a 180 and landing back on the runway?

Hi Glen
Yes, in this particular accident, the pilot executed a 180 after simulated engine failure, and tried to return to the runway. The engine then actually failed. The old story may not quite apply to gyros where a 180 is done after engine failure on take off ie "you stall, you spin, you die". However, and this is the point I wish to stress, after engine failure on take off, (presuming that there is no runway left), the course of action is to land within 15 degrees of center line. Any PPL, COM or ALTP pilot will apply this rule. Why are we different?
Turning back will cause major loss of height during the turn, leaving precious little for anything else, not to forget that guy who experienced radio failure, saw the take off, and is now putting his wheels onto the runway behind you, only to find that he is now in a spot because of a head on collision situation.
In the particular case in question, the instructor had actually taught the guy, as a student, to do 180 degree turns in the event of an engine failure after take off, and, the sad part is that he is still doing it!!!
Eric

Hi Old no 7
I agree that one should not draw conclusions too early, however, I have known this particular instructor for many years, and when addressed in the past about the accident record of his students as well as past students, he did develop a very aggro attitude. The question is why does he have so many accidents connected to his name through students or past students, and other instructors, who are also full time, have very few or none?
I am also not saying that all the accidents are directly related to what the guys were taught, or, that they are all related to that instructor. What I am trying to say that there is a pattern that has developed, and this pattern is now pointing to one person.
Eric

I was shown the 180 degree manoeuvre, during my conversion onto the MT-03. Maybe a controversial one, but it is good to know what the gyro can do. I wouldn't recommend it for guys that are new to gyro's however - bit too advanced a manoeuvre.

I do think it has its merits, but one has to understand the big picture of what is going on around you before attempting it, not easy when under pressure with an engine failure to cope with. If there is an a/c on the runway behind you, or with a strong tailwind landing to contend with.

I have practiced it many times, and I do believe it can be a life saver when there is no where to land straight ahead, as long as one understands the limits of one's gyro. It only works if you are at 300ft or higher above the upwind threshold, any lower and forget it, landing with 30 degrees of the runway centreline.

A small weakness of the MT-03, and this issue has been raised before, is that because the tank is a square shape, and the fuel pickups are at the rear, any dramatic nose down attitude can result in fuel starvation. During the 180 manoeuvre, after applying full rudder, at 300ft or higher, facing the opposite direction, with almost zero airspeed, the nose has to be lowered quite significantly for the speed to increase again to around 60 mph. Eric I guess this was the reason the simulated engine failure became a real one? Was there damage from this accident in this case? Another thing to bear in mind is that a windmilling prop would probably still produce some residual thrust, whereas when the engine is dead, it's just a dead donkey, and the gyro will descend that much quicker.

Hi Glen
The engine failed during the turn of the simulated exercise ie returning to the runway. Altitude above ground was about 400 feet. During previous practice, the pilot did manage it with the engine at idle.
The whole fact of the matter remains Glen, that if this type of exercise is condoned, and we steer away from the norm, we will get more accidents. This particular gyro rolled onto it's side.
As far as training is concerned, an instructor does not show a student this type of exercise ie turning 180 degrees to return to the runway at all. The instructor's job is to explain why you land ahead, and show the student how to do it.
Once again, in this particular accident, there is area at both ends of the runway in order to complete a forced landing in a gyro, but not in much else.
The other issue here is also the manner of the turn, which was close to the "stall turn." Loss of height during this turn, (with about 400 feet below you) is not the way to go at all.
Finally, the 180 degree turn after take off, is a no-no. It cannot be condoned at all. Bear in mind that it is not part of the syllabus at all, and seen by a rookie and taken up by that rookie can be a disaster. We need to fly with a lot more responsibility.
Eric

The whole thing boils down to training methods.
I support Eric 100% in this one. I had the chance to be trained by a helicopter instructor who barely knew any stunt in a gyro.
Coming from PPL, with aprox 1000 hrs, I converted in 3.5 hours in a gyro. I was shown forced landings, circuits and basically nothing more. When he told me that I was ready to go solo, that was at Grand-Central with 5 other aircrafts in the circuit, I said to myself, if I don't take that opportunity, I'll never do it. I did my circuit without any probem. On landing, the instructor told me : "You have now a licence to learn. Experience cautiously and no drastic test in what ever manoeuvre you do." I had 22 different planes on my licence at the time and this has been the best instructor I ever had. I have learned by myself many things but VERY PROGRESSIVELY. I definitely don't think that brain bashing a student with fancy stuff is the answer. He should be tought the plain vanilla stuff and let him experience gradually.
Now maybe a non-compulsory advance training program could be put in place for those who want to learn more ? There are too many accidents in the training phase of manoeuvres that are apparently meant to prevent accidents, both in helicopters and gyros. It is not worth risking ones life in learning those.

Jean-Pierre

Vertical Tango wrote: Coming from PPL, with aprox 1000 hrs, I converted in 3.5 hours in a gyro.

Maybe Eric can help with this licence type question. I'm a 12 000 hr ATP, and when I did my Gyroplane Licence about 10 yrs ago (not just a conversion, it requires a separate licence), I had to do 25 hrs. Under part 61, is this still the case?

Hi Glen
Yes, a separate license is still required and as far as I am aware, it is now 30 hours. (I am not instructing any more).
About 10 - 11 years ago I was pushing for 40 hours training of which at least 20 would be solo. The SACAA at the time ignored things and kept it at 25 at that stage.
Eric

Thanks Eric. Not too sure how VT "converted" in only 3.5 hrs ...Glenn