Pilot Debrief

ROBINSON HELICOPTER COMPANY R44 II near Miami, FL — 2021-09-28

Final reportERA21LA387
Sign in to save
Date
2021-09-28
Location
Miami, FL, USA
Airport
TMB
Aircraft
ROBINSON HELICOPTER COMPANY R44 II
Registration
N212HT
Category
Helicopter
Highest injury
Minor
Fatalities
0
Phase of flight
Landing

Probable cause

The pilot’s loss of helicopter control after landing. Also causal was the pilot’s intentional operation of the helicopter without the required training, experience, and endorsements.

NTSB narrative

The pilot landed the helicopter following a local sightseeing flight with three friends. Review of surveillance video revealed that, after touchdown, the passenger in the helicopter’s left front seat began removing his shoulder harnesses and headset. The passenger moved the headset to his front when the helicopter began a rapid yaw to its left and rotated around the main rotor mast. After one full revolution, the helicopter lifted rapidly from the ground and climbed immediately out of the camera’s view as it continued to rotate rapidly around the main rotor mast. Seconds later, the helicopter descended back into view in an uncontrolled descent. The main rotor disc severed the tailboom in two places ahead of the tail section, which included the tailrotor and tailrotor gearbox, before ground contact. The pilot stated that he had reduced the throttle to idle after touchdown; however, review of the video indicated that the helicopter’s main rotor speed remained constant at its maximum rpm throughout the approach, landing, ground operation, and the accident sequence. The accident helicopter make and model was the subject of a Federal Aviation Administration Special Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR), which specified academic, flight training, qualification, and currency requirements for pilots acting as pilot-in-command. Review of the pilot’s logbook revealed that he had not received the proper endorsements for operating the helicopter as pilot-in-command as a student pilot, nor had he complied with the annual requirements of the SFAR after receiving his private pilot certificate. Additionally, at the time of the accident, he did not meet the currency requirements specified by the SFAR for carrying passengers in the accident helicopter make/model. Examination of the helicopter revealed no evidence of preimpact mechanical anomalies that would have precluded normal operation. Based on the available information, the pilot’s loss of control and the helicopter’s uncontrolled takeoff was likely due to his misapplication of collective control after landing or his failure to guard the collective against the passenger’s interference. The pilot displayed a history of intentional noncompliance with regulations, including the SFAR and medical certificate requirements. The pilot's loss of helicopter control after landing is consistent with his lack of recent flight experience and his failure to comply with the training and currency requirements of the SFAR.

Analysis

Primary failure mode
Human factors
First missed decision gate
Pilot did not ensure proper endorsements to act as pilot-in-command before flight.

NTSB coding

Evidence available

  • Video
  • Photos
  • 12 docket documents
View NTSB final reportView NTSB docket

Docket documents12

Related mishaps