Bxcar32

My apologies, I seem to have misspoken and not communicated my intended response. I was inferring that each respective aircraft community hears about mishaps and/or accidents before official information is dissiminated down from higher HQ’s, and substantually quicker then when the general public hears about it. Also, the un-commanded roll maneuver is believed (due to pilot report) to be due to a hydraulics gremlin and was not to be reproduced.

Everyone fears something. For us, we accept that helicopters can be dangerous. To this point emergency procedures are continually discussed, studied and trained to the point of being instinctual. You get nervous at times when first starting out, and then with experience you gain more confidence with your ability, aircraft and operating environment. There is always the knowledge that something could happen. But pilots can’t function as pilots being afraid of this. The best analogy to describe this is driving a car. There are risks associated with driving that could kill or seriously injure you. Though the specific risks are different, there is still risk. Does this stop you from driving? Do you drive with the constant fear that someone will run into you? Most people accept the risk associate with driving and with experience you gain confidence in your ability, automobile and conditions. Pilots do the same thing.

I have the video of that CH-46 crashing in the water. It is pretty interesting to see how fast the pilot was coming in. He just missed the deck.

Anyway the CH-46 Sea Knight (civilian designation BV-107) (the Marines nicknamed it the Phrog) was manufactured in I think the early 60’s. So they pre-date the CH-47 Chinook (civilian designation BV-234) by a few years. The Navy had different requirements, so they are smaller, more ground crew friendly, and have a lower load hauling capability. Both have similar flight characteristics, controls, handling and shape.

Happy Landings