R44 corrosion/"stoppo motors" merged threads

[Mike Barnard]

A good friend of mine in the UK has a 2 year-old R44 which is already showing signs of corrosion from beneath the paint in the tail area. No chips, always hangared, regularly used and serviced, personal use only etc. Has anyone else experienced a similar problem?

[belly tank]

Mike,
You beat me to the thread!!.......im so glad youve raised this because we are experiencing the exact same problem....we run a few machines here on the east coast of australia and some being R22 / R44's we have a 18 month old
R44 R1 which the tailboom is riddled with signs of corrosion and at the next 100 inspection we are forced to remove the tailboom due to this problem, for a complete strip down.
We are going to have to do a proper job through our maintenance dept......our R22 is 10 months old since brand new and has signs of the same...we have written to our distributer who informs us that Robinson is none the less interested and states buy another product if your not happy...well we are not happy at the slightest..........imagine you bought a 500,000 dollar motorcar and after 10 months corrosion starts popping through the paintwork..........you would tell them to go to h%ll.
we will not cop the cost of this as ive stated to our distributer......unfortunately Mr Robinson has the monopoly on the range and his product is slipping in quality......his machines 10 years ago were much better..........look out heli expo next year i will get my own back at the robinson party via copious amounts of beer:D:yuk::yuk::yuk:
same as Mike.our aircraft are always hangared, regularily washed and shamied, and only corrosion in the tail area:{

[havick]

Only in the tailboom? that's really bizarre.. Are the tailbooms manufactured at a different plant to the rest of the airframe?

[206Fan]

Bellytank, do yous use that corosionX i think its called provided by robinson? Im going to austrailia in april to work for a year and do my CPL hopefully with PHS helicopters!

[belly tank]

do yous use that corosionX i think its called, provided by robinson?
Are you telling me they are addmiting to the problem........surely not:=.......
Maybe robinson should provide a product called Proper preparation X.....wonder if that comes in a spray can.:ugh::ugh::yuk:....sorry can't help but be synical

HAVICK.........To answer your question..NO same plant......just the paint is thinner:{

[206Fan]

Wel its been mentioned to me breifly before and its mentioned on this forum also http://flyinginireland.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2724

You need a hangar. They are prone to corrosion. Really keep it clean and waxed also very important. Use CorrosionX for the leading edge, not WD40 (ever on a helicopter)

[turboshaft]

It looks like R44 deliveries are significantly down on last year. Is this a further sign of quality issues at Torrence, or just a change in demand?

[BHenderson]

We left our Raven outside in the rain one day. When it came to put it away a substantial amount of water drained from the tail when it was lowered. Could this be part of the problem?

[InducedDrag]

It is an option to have the Clipper corrosion protection on any 44. It can be ordered even if you aren't getting floats. It is recommended for ships based in coastal areas. All the alum panels are zinc chromated before assembly. It adds a small amount of weight but provides a lot of protection.

Before you blame Robinson, maybe some owners should consider equipping the ship for the environment in which it will be operated. Some may fire back and say it should be standard.... Well not all owners want the weight or have a need for it. As far inland as I am.....It would be a waste of money and just dead weight.

[ericferret]

If you have a substantial outflow of water on lowering the tail that suggests there is someting amiss with the aircraft drains. Either something is blocked or the design is wrong.

I have seen corrosion problems with R22 in the past. We had a one year old aircraft where the transmission support frame was a write off due to corrosion. Every inch of the frame was affected. It looked like something out of a car scrap yard.

[Graviman]

RHC is very reluctant to recommend any corrosion protection, so we are left to figure something out. So lots of brushing, zinc chromate and paint, followed by a good wash program.

I get very annoyed about corrosion. An organisation serious about it's reputation would dedicate resource to investigate and test the many different options that exist in the market to avoid corrosion. There is just no excuse in 2007.

Corrosion is caused by a galvanic cell between the metal and oxygen, and is catalysed by small pH differences in each water droplet contacting the metal. Factory applied high temperature wax is makes an effective barrier to stop water contacting the metal. These guys might be a good place to start investigating solutions:
http://www.waxoyl.com/en/produkte/index.htm

After market WaxOyl (available from Halfords in UK), should be applied with extremely careful consideration. It is an oil based product, so can cause deterioration in rubber hoses, bushes, belts etc. Also it will lubricate so should not be used in between bolted joints (since clamping friction will be reduced). It will also be flung off from rotating components, and melts in a warm environment. In the right conditions it may support combustion.

There are cold processes for electrolytic zinc coat. If i was trying to find a solution i would search the yellow pages, then discuss options with the OEM. Water in the UK is a fact of life, and the design just should cater for it.
Yellow page search for UK Anodisers (http://www.yell.com/ucs/UcsSearchAction.do?scrambleSeed=42074492&keywords=anodisers&companyName=&location=UNITED+KINGDOM&search=SEARCH&searchType=advance&M=0&atoz=on)

Hope this helps - the OEM should have done all this... :hmm:

[slowrotor]

My thoughts as a retired aircraft paint shop owner are this:

The fancy modern polyurethane paints can trap moisture and corrosive salts between the paint and the skin. Urethane is more waterproof than the old enamels. Water will get in, but the moisture cannot get out.
The only fix is a layer of primer. Alodine without primer might work but alodine with epoxy primer is best to protect the aluminum from the topcoat.

[LIMIT NOT TARGET]

I think Frank should leave California, where he is being restricted with pollution requirements for that state. Either that or slow production down to increase quality. Another option would be to release the helicopters in a very thin primer, to which it can be painted properly to the owners requirements at his or hers country, or state if it staying in the USA.
I have seen this corrosion problem on numerous Robinsons and it is manufacturing problem that needs to be rectified.

[Graviman]

What annoys me is that there are solutions. Corrosion is every bit as important as fatigue on component durability. I understand the need to keep production volumes up, but there should be a corrosion task force set up to cure this problem. It should consist of a very small handful of design, test and manufacturing engineers.

One machine would need to be sacrificed for continuous salt spray testing - it is the best way to get accelerated corrosion results. It needs to be driven from within the organisation, so that the processes fit in with production techniques, and do not affect the performance of an otherwise good bit of design.



PS: Interesting comment about emissions, LNT. Is the light aviation industry about to be bitten by the emissions bug? That Lycoming 0-320-B2C (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycoming_O-320) engine could probably have valves modified to run on unleaded, but the combustion chamber design is getting dated now...

[thekite]

I do believe that I used to work for your distributor, and well believe your account of his reaction (Hi Lindsay) :=

However, Frank is a totally different matter and will go for a fix, if I know him.
Yes, seems there is a problem there, but neither the problem nor the fix are exactly rocket science.

But he can hardly do recalls, so resign yourselves to doing a very low-tech fix yourselves to this mundane matter. :ok:

thekite

[ericferret]

Paint problems with american manufactured aircraft are nothing new. When easyjet took delivery of its 737-700's virtually every aircraft was subject to a warranty respray.

Aircraft arrived on their delivery flight with paint missing and gradually they developed cases of measles as the rivet heads shed their paint.

Whether this was due to poor surface prep or the type of primer they are forced to use I do not know.

[scooter boy]

My 4 year old clipper II lives inside a converted cowshed hangar in a very damp humid (humidity up to 100% most days occas dropping to about 65% in the height of summer) corner of the UK (Cornwall).
I have a (2nd hand) industrial dehumidifier (£250) on in the winter 24/7 and it extracts 3-5 gallons of water every 24hrs between Nov and Feb.
I went for the clipper partly because of the extra corrosion-proofing and it seems to be holding up well.
The only parts showing corrosion are the extra night kit brackets that the CAA require for night flying in the UK (Non-Robinson parts) and the very tip of the candy-cane at the tail.
I think the dehumidifier helps and would strongly recommend it for sucking the dampness right out of your hangar and protecting your machine.;)

SB

[Gaseous]

My Enstrom lives outside with a cover on. The cover is breathable but it is often wet with condensation inside. Corrosion on the tailcone used to be a problem and it has had to have the paint touched up.
A few years ago I started to use Lear ACF50 inside the tailcone (and everywhere else) . It is 'misted' using a fine spraygun so it penetrates everywhere. It works by neutralising the corrosion cell. It has solved the problem.
It is expensive at around £100 for 4 litres but this will last for ages. Fantastic stuff. Doesn't seem to harm anything and protects everything.
Just a very satisfied customer.
Check with your engineer before applying to your aircraft.:=
PS I do mine 4 times a year. It takes about 50cc and 10 minutes to do the whole aircraft. Wear a mask. Its bloody awful if you breathe the spray.

PPS The aircraft is 32 years old and was last painted in 1988.

[rotorvision98]

Hi Our R22 is showing the same signs of corrosion it is due to a reaction with incorrect self etch primer proir to painting (machine less than 3 years old). I also know of a less than 2 year old R44 with the same problem. The Distributor tried to say it was down to the area in which its used which is a load of bollock! Does your Bentley Or Aston have to have a different coat of primer for use in damp conditions? I think not likewise If your Bentley or Aston developed this type of corrosion you would play balls with the dealer Not the manufacturer additionally all the dealer would do is put in a warranty claim. I think we are being shafted here? There is something in the sale of goods act which says " Fit for the propper purpose for which it was intended" More people should shout a lot louder about this afterall its these people that are making the dealers (Worldwide) and the manufacturer a lot of money by spending their $$ with them. Isnt the customer right? well some of the time anyway

[airbourne1]

Was just wondering how many other people out there are finding their aircraft riddled with corrosion? My machine has not got signs of corrosion on every tailcone joint plus the stabs and a couple of places on the fuel tanks it has always been hangared etc and nearly 18 months old.:)
I suppose weve got to fight for warrany now?

would appreciate your views.

[homonculus]

The story I heard was that Robinson changed to a water based primer some time ago. Aircraft built before the change seem to be OK but I know of several owners with problems on fairly new machines.

[TiPwEiGhT]

I agree with the above. I have similar problems with tailcones and stabs, also around some of the rivits on the main fuel tank. Not handy!

[delta3]

I also agree,

Raven I (until 06/2005) no problem,
Raven II, already corrosion spots, most in the tail fin and cone.

Always hangared.

d3

[206dvr]

Thanks for bringing this up guys. I was looking to get a second smaller machine as a spray ship. The R44 was near the top of the list as a docile spray ship for a low time pilot. But now I will be taking them off the list all together. Maybe old technology is the way to go "If it seems to good to be true it probably is" rings true here I think. I hear amazing things about how cheap they are to run but the costs come round to bite you in the bum latter.

[Nicolas Rehbein]

As an owner of an immaculate R44 Clipper 2 I have to confess to being disturbed by the excessive amount of unplanned maintenance.New clutch actuator,New hydraulics,new clutch switchs(3),New hydraulic jacks.Replacement gearbox mountings 7 starter motors maybe 6 my ability to count is being eroded and finally three sets of ring gear. Latest theory by maintainer is that the pilots are to blame .Odd theory that one because we run an additional Clipper with no such problems and the same group of pilots .My car starts perfectly everytime never had a starter motor replaced . Oh and what about Robinsons Warranty !! Thats a real corker . Any body want A two year old machine with 500 hours and a starter motor poltergeist .I am losing the will to live :{:{:{

[anti-talk]

mmmm - familiar story
We have 4 R44's - one Raven II that has consistently eaten starters and accordingly taken out ring gear.
3 so far have actually cracked the cases (one within 20hrs of installation), substandard manufacture I guess (we have also installed 6 in 700hrs on a 2007 ship).

I think it has a lot to do with poor design coupled with poor starting technique.

The student starts the aircraft with the starter button and as the engine catches they push in the mixture but fail to let go of the starter button - causing the gear to drag on the ring gear - and consequently damage it.

The other scenario is a hot aircraft that has been overprimed and wont start, the student cycles the motor for 3 or 4 secs multiple times to start it the battery runs out of power and hey presto ring gear wrecked with a hung up gear. Our machine is a pig to start when hot.

Not withstanding the fact that the starters draw huge amounts of current and the batteries cant cope with extended draw - its very difficult in a training environment to avoid damage.

Our Raven II has also proved to be far more fragile than our Raven I's in many other areas. The RII is an expensive machine (relatively speaking!!) for a flight school to operate - the older Raven I's are pretty much bomb and student proof.

The RII list of new parts installed in 700 hrs is quite simply amazing where one of Raven I's has had nothing but plugs,filters, fluids and other normal preventative maintenance parts such as mags etc and one Alternator in 800 hours!

[Nicolas Rehbein]

very interesting!the problem with the latest ring gear is a 6" strip has been taken out of the ring gear by the starter by a professional pilot who not only trains on the 44 but flies it commercially.This ring gear and starter were replaced only 6 flying hours (6 starts) after the last lot. All sounds a wee bit fragile to me .We've got the teeth to prove it.

[500e]

Sounds like someone wants to sink them into Robinson
They were all under warranty I expect :E

[mikelimapapa]

Sounds like a recurring theme here....we operate a Raven I and have gone thru 3 starters and a ring gear in the first 500hrs :ugh:

[Heli-phile]

Is this a problem with Robinsons build or are these parts provided by lycoming??
Occasionally happens with fixed wing starters but never heard it so consistantly.:confused:

[Clyde Parthangel]

I have just had the tail rotor gearbox replaced. Engineers are baffled...they say it is making a horrible noise but otherwise seems OK. They have now boxed it up and sent it off to Torrance with a note saying ' please take this apart and when you find out what is wrong, let us know.'
Does anybody know of any other R44 tailrotor gearbox probs....or has one of my self-fly hires been ham fisted?? :{

[helipan]

We also have a R44 which is chewing starters, 5 starters & 3 times the ring gear, interesting comments from all.....but we are now working on a magneto promblem in the retard timing.....!!! not sure what this means any one got any idea??
:sad:

[JimBall]

When a pilot has a failed start, there is an impatience sets in. This means they fire the starter again before the motor has finished its first cycle. And that's what buggers the teeth and the gear.

If the start fails, wait until you hear the motor has stopped running. And never start with your headset on your ears.

[CRAZYBROADSWORD]

have been flying 4 differant clipper 2's without probs maybe i have been lucky? try starting with the mixture aleady in they should start much better and only prime a hot machine for a split second, a hot machine sounds dif when you start it just hold button for a couple of secs and then let go.

[ShyTorque]

but we are now working on a magneto promblem in the retard timing.....!!! not sure what this means any one got any idea??

If an impulse magneto isn't working correctly at low rotational speed (i.e. retarded), it is possibly causing a "kickback" when the engine fires too early in the stroke. This will put a very large strain on the ring gear and starter motor.

[Nicolas Rehbein]

latest ring gear debacle new one fitted last Friday.judged as needing replacement yesterday (Tuesday).11 starts in total including 4 during maintenance.Starter motor ok though.So thats now three sets of ring gear and two starters in three weeks anybody beat that.Yippee Guinness book of records here we come.Home management very unhappy with the cost :{:{:{

[jemax]

This bleedin thread has put a curse on me, all was fine in my R44 Raven II life until I read this. I was flying an R44 on behalf of the owner and it is now stranded in his back garden with a jammed starter motor.

It's getting electrical power to it, but there is no movment of the starter motor when start is attempted. It appears they are now fitting upgraded starter motors as a replacement.

Only 1 year old and 65 hours. Ring gear seems OK.

After some digging it appears to be a common problem.

[Nicolas Rehbein]

Replacement motor probably the old type B and C. New type fitted on mine to start with is apparently designed to disintegrate before damaging the ring gear- Least expensive option. Old style B and C bit gutsier chews up ring gear Methinks Robinson needs to go back to the drawing board and redesign .All very well cutting down the cost of production and presumably weight but at what cost to owners and RHC reputation. Hope you get it started and out of the garden without resorting to the tow truck

[scooter boy]

Hi Nicolas,
Please tell us more, for example:
Is the aircraft used for training?
How experienced are the group members?
How often do they fly?

IMHO the major downside of group ownership is that aircraft reliability is only as good as the least experienced group member.

SB - R44 Clipper II 570hrs from new (all by me) kept at home in private hangar, no major maintenance issues (except useless maintenance company - see my previous post).

[Shawn Coyle]

Is there a way for UK operators to send in the equivalent of Service Difficulty Reports?
How about the HAI maintenance recording system, whatever that's called?
If this is a recurring problem someone in an authority ought to know about it. (although from a safety standpoint, if you can't start, you can't fly, and that safe...)

[moosp]

Shawn you have a point about whether it is a safety issue, but whilst there is an inflight start procedure in the POH then I believe there is a good case to say it is a safety issue.

As a previous poster pointed out, Robinson does have a problem with this old engine, and though it is not the fault of their engineers it comes back to sales and marketing as to the overall quality of the machine, with a vengeance.

[Exo.]

Scooter, yes, the aircraft is used in training, and also for self fly hire; as well as AOC work by the commercial pilots at the outfit.

The irony is that there are two R44's at the same base, and that the other R44 (not Nic's machine) has always been more touchy about starting, needing a longer hold before it catches. Yet this other aircraft has not [yet!] fouled any of its ring gears, and has murdered less than half the starters (despite Robinson's best efforts to provide dubious lightweight models) when compared with Nic's.

On the note of re-engaging before letting it wind down, the instructors do ensure they brief every student to wait the listed 30 seconds between start attempt. So this, although potentially a big issue, should not be the case in this scenario.

[Gaseous]

The lycoming starter ring gear problem is not new. Enstroms have suffered the same problem for 30 years.

The mechanism of failure is that while the starter is energised the retard points are active but as soon as the start switch is released, the main points are activated. If the start fails and the starter is unfortunately released at the exact instant the main points open, the engine will kick back while the starter is still engaged with the ring gear. This will either crack the starter housing or remove teeth from the ring gear or both. The only solution, unfortunately not authorised, is to hold on the retard points until after the starter has dropped out of mesh with the ring gear. An old dodge was to put in a manual switch to keep the retard points active until the engine was running and then manually switch across to the main points. This solves the problem 100%. A simple timed relay will do the same job automatically. Kick back is impossible while the retard points are in control.

As this is not a legal mod I'm afraid you got to live with it. :sad:

My Enstrom has had 14 ring gears/starters in its 30 year life.

This is not so much of a problem with fixed wing as the momentum provided by the extra weight of the prop prevents the destructive kick back.

Edit. By the way, its much more likely to happen if the starter is sluggish or the battery is down. Keep the timing right as well. Check all connections are good especially the battery and earthing straps. It is more likely to happen with higher compression engines running more ingition advance hence the problem for non turbo enstroms and raven 2s.

And to add a bit more, its not pilot error. Keeping the starter activated for a short while after the engine starts will not harm the starter. There is a clutch on the starter pinion of a B&C to protect it. Activating the starter with the engine running will make a horrid noise but the gears will not mesh so there will be no damage apart from polished edges of the teeth. Not a good idea to do it too much though.

The only thing that will provide enough energy to smash castings and strip gears is a kickback with the gears in mesh. The pilot has no control over that.

[2 per rev]

In reply to Shawn's post: here in New Zealand our CAA gathered up all of the R44 sprag (overunning) clutch problems by serial number, and on realizing that they weren't lasting long, issued an AD requiring inspection at 500 hours instead of 2200 hours. This data was presented to Robinson (about 23 occurences I think). An improved clutch is now available I believe. One has been fitted in NZ as a trial. So yes, if the data is collected and presented by the regulator, the FAA and Robinson do listen.

[airframe50]

Gaseous IS TOTALLY CORRECT!
on a ship that has had 5 ring gears and starters from starting kickback
in less than 300 hrs ! and all long flights the time delayed switch is the fix or remote switch!! Has Robertson adressed this issue?? and as far as legal well i'll like to see a well dressed attourney in the remote wilderness of Alaska either at -40 in the winter our summer in a bug infested swamp waiting for me to get a starter that has busted our drive gear that need replaced!! its in the slick start as soon as power is dropped the primary points kick in if the engine is not turning over enough it will kick back
i think all you owners of R-44 with this starting system should write the factory i just work on fixed wing mostly but i think this needs to be adressed the owner of this R 44 has spent alot of money in Labor and parts and i know its not his starting technique! I see not one SB addressing this issue

Steve

[Saint Jack]

A number of posts on this thread have referred to running down the battery as a result of starting difficulties. I understand the R22/44 series helicopters do not have external power receptacles, although I may be mistaken. If they don't, is a Robinson option or an STC installation available?

As one contributer explained, don't simply accept these repetitive mechanical failures, make sure Robinson and Lycoming are fully aware of them by whatever means possible. Also, don't assume that either manufacturer is fully aware of what is happening with their products in service, it is only with feedback from operators that they can develope product improvements. Remember, repeated technical problems adversley affect the image and reputation of the product, i.e. their 'bottom line', and this is a sure fire way to get someones attention.

[500e]

I would have thought that a manufacturer who values customers would have noticed the posts on web sites, or the larger than expected?? take up of parts of any description (Sprag Clutches) would at least come up with a subsidised repair :E until a fix found.
If we as owners keep paying and not making our displeasure felt they will not address the problems, start by Emailing the factory EVERY time there is a problem, ask what they are doing to cure your problem, Email CEO, service, AOG department, and if no reply keep emailing till they do.
Also remember there are other machines out there.

[Shawn Coyle]

I assume you are all submitting Service Difficulty Reports on this problem...
Only way this can be documented completely. Might get the attention of the authorities. Certainly will get the attention of attorneys....
(the authorities might take the view that if you can't start, you can't fly, and that's a safe thing... but the counter is that if you had to do a restart in the air, it might not work!)

[Kernowpilot]

Try leaving the mixture in and no priming on starting when it has already run within the previous half hour or so and especially when it's hot.

[cockney steve]

I have always been staggered at the way aviators are prepared to bend over and drop their pants.

UK consumer law decrees "fitness for purpose"....a starting -system that can be called "disposable", is not fit for the job.

Many manufacturers try to hush-up non-critical,non-safety recalls,- they cost a disproportionate amount in resources and time.

This Robinson fiasco would not be tolerated if it was a mass-market car /tractor / truck......If a machine is "experimental", you takes your chances

You accept that this is a developing product and as an "early adopter" you may get unexpected reliability and durability problems....likewise ,operating outside standard conditions (racing or rallying cars, you expect to exceed the performance envelope.)

This is a production helicopter, volume-produced and has a large and varied consumer-base.

Don't insult my, or the customers' intelligence by suggesting they are not aware of the vastly disproportionate number of starters and associated components they are selling.

A concerted campaign of writs for unmerchantable quality/fitness for purpose could well concentrate their minds on an approved redesign/mod.

If you add up the costs of some people here, it'd be cheaper to just leave it permanently idling :}

[500e]

Well said CS. but it is not only Robinson that has the theme it was the customers fault, so they pay:{
The other problem with most IC engined helios is the basic engine was designed 60 +years ago and we expect a higher reliability, how do you over rev a modern motor under 5000 rpm, & as for the oil consumption :{ the problem is cost of certification of a new design, this has led to no one designing\or even radically redesigning a more cost effective unit

[imabell]

the same problems are just as bad in australia, lots of people very pissed off with robinson.

plenty of ring gears on the scrap heap and plenty more to come.

always the pilots fault never theirs, no no no.

90 hour rotor blade corroded and unserviceable at a dealers premises,
our machine less than two hundred hours the same thing but its our fault. we have been operating for thirty years with all different types with no problems and all hangared and cared for but it is our fault because we are not looking after them properly.

frank is in complete denial.

class action.

[Runway101]

Brand new 2008 R44 II with about 100 hours, private ship with 1 pilot only and no start problems ever. Ring gear starts to show problems. This is indeed disappointing.

[500e]

Imaell I understand Frank dont own anything all leased, there was a post about law suits either on pprune or another site

[Jackboot]

Hi all,

I dont know what you are talking about.

When my 11 month old R44 started corroding - tail boom, empennage, tanks etc - they immediately shipped new replacement parts. They even applied the registration letters to it. Further, they put a £2k credit on my account in order that I could hire a machine while mine was down. I was up and running again in 7 days.

And then I woke up........

Comlete denial of responsibility, 'we cannot warrant against corrosion due to the vagiaries of the UK environment' etc. etc.

The vagiaries of the UK environment were restricted to the conditions inside my airconditioned hangar - it never got wet.

It cost me a busting load of money and several weeks down-time.

The best they offered - no acceptance of liability of course - was for me to ship the bits over at my expense for repair. I took the quicker. lower-cost option and had it done in the UK. They did offer to supply the paint...

Its a great aircraft despite. However, I think its important for any potential customers to know exactly what level of support they can expect from the factory.

In this way, their attitiude to complaints from unsuspecting punters - probably used to a loaner and top class service from their local car dealer irrespective of model - wont stress them out too much.

Later...

JB

[Gaseous]

This is symptomatic of the legal and regulatory environment that has stifled development in light aviation. The technology is ancient. Magnetos - FFS its 2009!! I cant remember the last car I had with points let alone a magneto. Sure they work but can anyone seriously say that magnetos are the ignition system of choice now?:ugh: I have had 2 magnetos fail in flight so why we are still forced to use them is beyond me.

The kickback problem would not occur with a modern ignition system.

Even if the magnetos are retained it should be a $50 fix.

While the bloated and idiotic regulatory system heaps ludicrous costs on anyone hoping to fix a problem like this, let alone update the system, it ain't likely it's going to get fixed anytime soon.:yuk:

The only hope, as has been said before, is to keep complaining to the manufacturer.

[imabell]

plenty of tail boom corrosion problems in australia as well, all in machines that are very well kept and hangared. no help from the factory at all. it is all our fault.

any type of corrosion protection at manufacture would help the problem but that would cost a few pennies wouldn't it frank?

[heliduck]

Frank might not have a solution for the corrosion, but he certainly has one for the ring gear & magneto faults - the R66!!! At least then you'll have a new corroded turbine machine in the hangar with it's tail boom off rather than a new corroded piston machine in the hangar with it's ring gear off. I can't wait.:rolleyes:

[that chinese fella]

One of the greatest laughs around - Robinson warranty. Great if you live in Torrance and can hand deliver your broken item, not so good from anywhere else where freight costs are prohibitive.

I asked RHC if they would appoint an Australian agent who could investigate and address warranty issues - 'not being considered' was the response. Fantastic.

Air con issues abound, pi** poor fittings, switches etc etc. Local approved mods do the trick, get your local automotive mobile air con repair van down and after they get a great laugh looking at the rubbish fitted to the 44 system they will manufacture quality items. All followed up by engineering approvals for those who question. Why bother RHC with it, freight costs too much and on the odd chance they do approve warranty you will only being refiting the same crap that failed in the first place. :ugh:

Mufflers - rubbish. Air filtration integrity - rubbish. Repainting blades every 100 hrs - rubbish. The list goes on...........