I don't think most of you realize your VNE is your wind limit. Limited by forward cyclic travel from blowback. Very few if any other wind limits exist. Performance data is a different story in which emphasis is put on crosswind "limitations" what are essesntially demonstrated data. So let's stop beating our chests about what wind you've flown in. As long as it's off the nose there is nothing to brag about, and if it's cheating with crosswind well you're approaching test pilot territory.

Have fun with that.

vne is for retreating blade stall. we know all about rfm and gom wind limitations. you need to find some other dumb thing to get upset and cry about.

There are many reasons for VNE. Not just retreating blade stall.

wind limits exist he says. where do these clowns come from lol

Methods 

My God you people out here amongst us. Please pick up a book sometime. Or maybe just stick to driving for Uber

We covered this along with a solid lesson in math 

Well said and spot on correct.

Just a quick BTDT.  Left the receiving hospital 120 miles from home and the winds were a bit strong at home, but not too bad.  By the time we got home, they were 40G65.  Straight down the pipe though, there is a reason they build runways the directions they do.

Landed safely and with no real issues, as the acft was parked into the wind.  While tying the blades down, the medic and I watched a C152 land into the wind.  He was fine until he tried to exit the runway.  As soon as he turned 90 degrees onto the taxiway the airplane tipped onto it's downwind wing!  The pilot shut the engine down and, as soon as tyhe wind calmed down enough, a few of us helped him get it upright and pushed into a hangar.

Such is life....... 

next time check the weather first

I think everyone is concerned about turbulance.  So if you're over the ocean in 70 knot winds, it's not the same as crossing a 12000' ridge with 70 knot winds.

Happened in Colorado.  While the winds were indeed high, they were not "VNE".  It's all about turbulence.

Happened in Colorado.  While the winds were indeed high, they were not "VNE".  It's all about turbulence.

When I first qualified on AS350s/355s (1987), cracks in the Starflex weren't uncommon. If one noted a "crack" on preflight, you checked crack length and location with maintenance to ensure airworthiness and I would mark the end of the crack with a pencil line and check every postflight for propagation, lengthening of the crack. If the crack lengthened, it was no longer flyable.

We were told that that the rie-down socks were not sufficient to protect the Starflex, were issued rigid braces for the blade socks, which limited, somewhat, the 'bounce' at the blade tip. I was always uncomfortable with those, as 50, 60 knot winds were not uncommon in the Gulf of Mexico and the blades would unload and the brace struts move on the deck, adding additional stress to the blades themselves.

I don't know what was changed, material or design, but I haven't seen similar cracks in years, decades.

All wind is relative.  For the younger among us thats why its called "relative wind".  It is a known fact that you can't handle the same amount of wind when you are inverted as you can when straight and level.  Oldendirt is right on the Starflex.  I had the same experience.