MY 2 CENTS By Randy Rowles


THE AUTOROTATION THAT ACTUALLY MATTERS “THE FIRST ONE”


In the helicopter industry, we spend a tremendous amount of time arguing about autorotations: Full down or power recovery? Straight in or 180-degree? Hover entry or low altitude? RPM decay rates… rotor inertia… training frequency… simulator fidelity… Are we arguing about the wrong things entirely?


The most important autorotation is not the prettiest one. It is not the one performed after six practice attempts with a warmed-up pilot and a highly prepared instructor. It is not the one demonstrated at a safety conference or executed by a factory pilot with 12,000 hours in type.


The most important autorotation is “the first one.”


Not the first one of your career or the first one of your recurrent training cycle. It’s the one that reveals who you really are as a pilot on the day before you knew the engine was going to fail. It’s that first maneuver that tells the truth.


Once a pilot completes initial qualification and earns the privilege to carry passengers or conduct commercial operations, the aviation system assumes competency. Rightfully so. Whether under Part 91, Part 135, public use, or utility operations, the pilot is now considered qualified to operate the aircraft safely within the privileges of that certificate and training.


Then something interesting happens—for many helicopter pilots, the training largely stops.


Yes, there are flight reviews. Yes, there are recurrent events. Air medical pilots operating under Part 135 often complete annual training and checking. Some law enforcement units train quarterly. Utility operators may have robust internal programs. However, a very large slice of the helicopter industry will go a year or longer without meaningful emergency- procedure practice.


Some private pilots only accomplish a flight review every other year. That’s two years! Think about that for a moment.


If you are not regularly practicing emergency procedures, proficiency fades—rapidly for some, gradually for others. But it fades for everyone.


That is not criticism; it is simply how human performance works.


Even highly experienced pilots are not immune. The pilot with 15,000 hours may maintain composure better than the pilot with 300 hours, but degraded proficiency is still degraded proficiency. Muscle memory is perishable. Decision-making speed is perishable. Aircraft handling precision is perishable.


The evidence of this degradation appears immediately during recurrent training. It appears on “the first one.”


Every instructor reading this article knows exactly what I mean. The first autorotation of the day is often ugly: rotor RPM excursions, delayed collective reduction, over-flare, under-flare, poor touchdown alignment, slow reactions, stiff control inputs, tunnel vision.


Then suddenly, after a few repetitions, the pilot “gets it back.”


The industry shrugs and says, ‘That’s why we train.’ Fair enough, but perhaps we should pause and ask a harder question: If the emergency had occurred yesterday instead of today, would the outcome have been survivable?


That question makes people uncomfortable because we already know the answer too often falls somewhere between maybe and hopefully. Yet, we continue treating this degraded proficiency as normal.


In some corners of the industry, we have even built entire training philosophies around avoiding


realistic exposure to emergency


procedures. Insurance pressures, operational costs, aircraft availability, instructor shortages, customer expectations, and organizational risk tolerance have collectively diluted emergency training to the point where many pilots are no longer truly prepared for the aircraft failures they are statistically most likely to encounter.


10 May/June 2026


Adding further concern is the increasing reliance on simulation in lieu of actual aircraft training. Now, before the simulator manufacturers sharpen their


pitchforks, let


me be clear: simulation absolutely has value. Tremendous value. Modern simulation is exceptional for procedures, instrument work, crew coordination, systems failures, and decision-making scenarios.


But simulation is not the same as reality. A


simulator cannot fully replicate the physiological response of an unexpected yaw event in a real helicopter. It cannot completely reproduce the visual depth perception of a low rotor RPM flare over uneven terrain. It cannot duplicate the physical tension in your shoulders during a hydraulics-off touchdown when the controls suddenly feel like they were filled with concrete by an angry mechanic. (Yes, somewhere in every hydraulics lesson, there is always one pilot silently thinking: This doesn’t seem OSHA approved!)


The FAA’s increasing acceptance of simulation in place of in-aircraft emergency training may satisfy regulatory efficiency, but it does not necessarily satisfy operational survival capability. That distinction matters—the objective of emergency procedure training should not simply be regulatory compliance; it should be survivability.


If a pilot cannot successfully manage an engine failure, hydraulic malfunction, or tail-rotor emergency to a survivable outcome, then the intent of training has not truly been achieved, regardless of what the paperwork says.


Meanwhile, operational reality quietly exposes what the industry actually believes about risk. Take the air medical world as an example. Many HEMS operators routinely perform vertical takeoffs and departures from confined or obstacle-rich environments. Why? Because operationally,


the industry has collectively


concluded that the probability of a wire strike or obstacle collision outweighs the probability of an engine failure during departure.


That is not necessarily reckless thinking. In many environments, it is logical risk


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102