Bell 206 crashes in the Hudson river

[Not_Karl]

6 dead, including 3 children
CNN:

(...)
The passengers included a pilot and a family visiting from Spain, he said.
(...)
FlightRadar24 reported the aircraft to be a Bell 206L-4 LongRanger IV, based on ADS-B tracking data. It was built in 2004 and had an airworthiness certificate issued in 2016 that was good until 2029, according to Federal Aviation Administration records.

(...)
The path up the Hudson is a popular sightseeing route.

When the helicopter crashed, it was cloudy with winds around 10 to 15 mph with gusts up to 25 mph according to various weather reports in the area.

Visibility at the surface was good — 10 miles — but it was cloudy as a system is moving into the region, bringing light rain to the region this afternoon and evening.(...)

Video shows the fuselage, having lost both its rotor and tail-boom, crashing inverted.

[elaw]

indeed!

That was one hurtin' helo... is it possible somehow for the rotor blades to hit the tail boom and sever it (destroying themselves in the process)?

Or... an explosion? Engine failure seems an unlikely cause as they're on top. Where is the fuel tank located?

[3WE]

I think this video is slightly longer.

https://fb.watch/yU7ov07gbT/?

Isn’t there some condition where if you unload the blades they go wonky and can whack tail parts.

Or something (from that thread I started) broke and something similar ensued.

Kind of nice to have your wing stationary (in a relative sense) with not so many hinges and linkages.

[flyboy2548m]

Evanie the Most Qualified Rotorcraft Expert says it was fist-bumping. Or something.

[3WE]

Evanie the Most Qualified Rotorcraft Expert says it was fist-bumping. Or something.

Thank [obscure god] there is back up.

[Not_Karl]

Evanie the Most Qualified Expert in All Topics, Issues, Subjects and Matters says it was fist-bumping. Or something.

Fixed.

[elaw]

Video from another angle: https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comme ... side_view/

[elaw]

NTSB briefing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDXwQ0uJlJA

[3WE]

There is gossip that the operator was having financial and maintenance issues, but I’m thinking the pilot deviated from procedures.

[3WE]

Schmo says it was celebratory fist-bumping after improvising on type-specific procedures and THINKING they had gotten away with it.

Sorry, I had to.

[Gabriel]

I know that Juan is doesn't have particularly engaging or attractive videos, and this is no exception.

But the photos, videos and explanation is good, in my opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Q8XuqlyMQ

[3WE]

I know that Juan is doesn't have particularly engaging, short or attractive videos that get to the point , and this is no exception.

Blah blah blah, in my opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Q8XuqlyMQ

Care to provide some summary statements or key time stamps?

[elaw]

Seems the rotor has been found. Attached to the transmission. Which in turn was attached to its seemingly-intact mountings: https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comme ... er_update/

[Gabriel]

I know that Juan is doesn't have particularly engaging, short or attractive videos that get to the point , and this is no exception.

Blah blah blah, in my opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Q8XuqlyMQ

Care to provide some summary statements or key time stamps?

Start with the accident photo and video in 8:15 - 8:50 and see if these 45 seconds leave you craving for more.

In a single line: Full rotor departed the helicopter apparently intact and with the transmission still attached.

[flyboy2548m]

I know that Juan is doesn't have particularly engaging or attractive videos, and this is no exception.

But the photos, videos and explanation is good, in my opinion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Q8XuqlyMQ

I believe Juan has as much rotorcraft time as Schmo. Also, he has a lot of entirely meaningless credentials.

[3WE]

In a single line: Full rotor departed the helicopter apparently intact and with the transmission still attached.

Yeah, I saw that in Eric’s Reddit link.

[3WE]

...8:15 - 8:50...

Thanks for making my point: I have to kill 8:15 in a 9:20-long video to get to the good stuff.

I don't fault Dan JAUN for a comprehensive review, but, much like your writing, it often doesn't help me get to the more critical information.

I concur with flyboy that Dan JUAN's attitude -without saying it- is look at my credentials.

[3WE]

So, just to be an ass-hat, I'm guessing that:

Major structural decay...

The tail breaks off due to a good ole solid bump in the gusty- albet not_excessive- winds/turbulence.

The thing pitches up and overloads the structure that holds the rotor crap to the rest of it.

Further blabbery:

I note the discussion of a mechanical seizure. TOTAL UN CREDENTIALED ASS HATTERY- If it siezed, wouldn't the rotors bend/break..

Acknowledged that the seizure could have twisted the tail boom off, and acknowledged that if it siezed, we will see twisty failure modes.

[flyboy2548m]

I concur with flyboy that Dan JUAN's attitude -without saying it- is look at my credentials.

I mean...this is the same Juan who once did a video from a hotel room in which he was staying during a work trip. He called it a "field office" and did the video without even taking his shoulder boards off. Douchebaggery of the highest degree.

[3WE]

shear bolts and pins…

It’s a common-sense adaptation for cases where almost-unstoppable forces meet almost immovable objects.

Some of them are fancy and reset semi-automatically.

…and I seem to recall that the helicopter pilot, I once visited with said there was a system that allowed the rotor to keep rotoring if the drive train quit…

Makes this uncredentialed outsider think there are “mechanisms” to keep that a seized gearbox from ripping rotors off…

But hey, I’m only here to learn…and stir cow shit.

[elaw]

NTSB prelim report: https://www.youtube.com/redirect?event= ... 7A7j253jT0

And Mr. Browne's analysis of said report, concluding that the accident was caused by cheap crackerbox composites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7A7j253jT0

I'm not sure I agree with his conclusion that (paraphrasing) the gearbox could not have failed because if it did, they'd have an emergency AD out already. It seems to me if they had any convincing evidence the accident was caused by a particular mechanical issue, they'd have an emergency AD..., no matter what the issue is. OTOH if they do think the vertical oscillation is the cause, maybe they feel they know the "what" but not the "why" and therefore have nothing to base an AD on.