Hughes 369HS N193M

Summary

On 29 January 2013 at about 15:30 local time, a Hughes 369HS registered N193M, operated by Daniel Mills, was involved in an accident near London, Ohio, United States. 2 people were on board and nobody was injured. The aircraft was substantially damaged. The NTSB has published a probable cause for this accident; it is quoted in full below.

Date

29 January 2013 at 15:30

Classification

Accident

Location

London, Ohio, United States

Nearest airport

None

Coordinates

40.0508, -83.3867

Aircraft

Hughes 369HS

Registration

N193M

Category

Helicopter

Engines

1

Operator

Daniel Mills

Operating rule

Part 91: General Aviation

Purpose of flight

Personal

Phase of flight

Not recorded

Route

Canton → Dayton

Aircraft damage

Substantial

Weather

IMC

Light

Day

NTSB number

CEN13CA145

Nobody was injured.

The pilot's failure to comply with established cold weather operating procedures, which resulted in a total loss of engine power. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's excessive aft cyclic input during the landing flare, which resulted in main rotor blade contact with the tail boom.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record. This site does not paraphrase or interpret it.

Read the full NTSB narrative

The private pilot said the helicopter's turbine engine lost power after flying through an area of moderate to heavy snow. The pilot entered an autorotation and applied excessive aft cyclic during the touchdown in a field, which caused the main rotor blades to flex down and sever the tailboom. Weather reported in the area included snow and freezing fog, with a temperature of 16 degrees F. The helicopter was equipped with an automatic engine re-ignition and engine failure warning system, which was required per the rotorcraft flight manual (RFM) for operation in falling or blowing snow. The pilot said this system was armed at the time of the engine failure and the engine-out warning light illuminated and an audible tone sounded before the power loss. The RFM also stated that flight into known icing conditions was prohibited and fuel had to meet anti-icing capability of JP-4 when operating at 40 degrees or less. A review of fueling records revealed that no anti-icing additive was added to the fuel. The pilot was aware of the icing conditions, but he continued the flight. Examination of the engine found no mechanical anomalies that would have precluded normal operation.

Quoted verbatim from the NTSB record.