Ground effect is most definitely important to a helo. I believe the rule of thumb is that any helicopter is within ground effect if it is within 1 rotor diameter of the ground. This would be 53 feet for a PaveHawk. A Sea Hawk requires 10-20% more power to hover out of ground effect than in ground effect. Since hovering actually requires a lot more power than forward flight, this 10-20% margin can make a huge difference. Lots of stories about Navy helos hovering just fine when over the ship, but then settling into the water as soon as cross over the deck edge and are no longer in ground effect. (yes they get back into ground effect when they approach the water, but it’s too late to overcome the downward momentum.)
It can get screwy if part of the rotor arc is in ground effect and part of the rotor arc is out of ground effect. This could well have been another contributor.
Why did the USAF® risk a crew and airframe (what’s the $ value of those two items?) to rescue these knuckleheads?
If a similar circumstance had ocurred while I had been out “yachting”, the USCG would have called the locals to pick up the bodies, and a local tow service to drag my boat back to port.
Where did these junior “mountaineers” get the idea that the full assets of the military will be used to pull their butt out of the fire when they screw up?
You know, if this was the Pit I’d open with a long dissertation on what an insensitive jerk you are, but since this is GQ I’ll have to restrain myself.
My experience living near Lake Michigan (a not-insignificant body of water) is that the USCG is not in the habit of asking the “locals” to “pick up the bodies” but actually attempts to rescue people in distress whenever there is still hope of life.
Second, our society does try to rescue people from grievious harm and/or death, even when self-induced. Think about that next time you have a problem with your car along the interstate or other circumstance where you require assistance.
The “failure” of this mission is mainly a result of the accident - on the whole, there are more live bodies (albeit in the hospital) than there likely would be otherwise. Had the chopper not gone down then it would have been hailed as a brilliant feat of flying and rescue. Problem is, stuff happens.
Also, one Pave Hawk does not represent the “full assests of the military”. It’s certainly no more unreasonable that the use of helicoptor ambulances to transport victims of car crashes on the highway to hospitals.
Also, what makes you think these were “junior” mountaineers? The fact they had an accident? Accidents happen all the time mountaineering, it’s a dangerous sport on any level. Even the most careful and professional people can have an accident or injury. A snow covered crevasse doesn’t always give a warning of its existance before you fall into it.
Then, too - these same folks are (presumably) citizens who pay taxes - the taxes that pay for things like the military and Pave Hawks. Is it so unreasonable to rescue the taxpayers?
And, while there have been some cases of the local and federal agencies taking people to court to recover costs of rescue that is usually reserved only for the worst sorts of idiots, or repeat offenders.
The Pave Hawk was attempting to extricate an injured climber when there was an apparent wind change.
Sensing the danger the pilot reversed the chopper to protect those on the ground, at the same time a crew member hit the switch to disengage the cable holding the victim they were extricating.
The pilot deliberately backed away from ground rescuers (safety reasons) while attempting to regain control of the aircraft.
Unfortunately, the aircraft remained unstable and the tip of the fueling probe made contact with the snow. The blades then hit the snow and you can see the rest.
How do I know about this unpublished theory? I was at Mt. Hood NF headquarters at the time. Beyond that, we’ll just have to wait for the offical report, but my co-workers (more knowledgeable in this area than me) are not often incorrect.
Okay. The military aviation assets are authorized to fly the aircraft a specific number of flight hours each year. They are required to fly a certain minimum number of flight hours in order to maintain currency in specific modes of flight. These hours are budgeted and tracked closely, and this information is forwarded to the DOD monthly.
They are going to fly those hours in training, no matter what. So no “extra” money is spent if they happen to be rescuing clymers on Mt. Hood, or showing off at the Indy 500, it’s just the taxpayer getting at least some return on their money.