R66 Turbine - Could It Be Better?

[Yellow & Blue Baron]

With the R44 you got a 100% increase in capacity but the R66 .. what a let down!

Doesn't old man Robinson (aka Frank the *ank) realise that having delivered economy we now want MORE SPACE and just a little bit of style!

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/as-the-croft-flies/FrankRobinson_blog.JPG

If he was unable to extend or broaden this helo then couldn't he have bought the rights (they'd probably give them away) for the arcane FH100 and applied his economy engines, simple designs and composite components to it!

At least we would have had space for pax plus a back pack and just the tiniest amount of style!

http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages/fh1100_achimludwig.jpg

I don't know how your British distributor does it ... selling both the ugliest and most attractive helicopters on the market!

[Hell Man]

Interesting idea Swedish PpRuNe - A Robinson RH1100!

The FH1100 never really seemed to penetrate the market but was in the running (so I recall) with the Hughes 500C and Bell 206 - they all emerged around the same time.

If I'm not mistaken there have been several attempts to revive the 1100 but its just never caught on. I believe they even made an attempt at making it more pretty with some sort of nose mod.

There was a very public indicent in the early days involving an 1100 (can't remember the details) but I think it was an airshow and this may have put people off.

You're right about the Robo's space limitations and lack of design - very sad.

[moscovite]

For starting American desiner he throw away middle gearbox for FH1100 tail rotor because this cost money. Then you must push tail boom up or keep it low and sell helicopter for also cutting grass - in Russia R22 is cosidered for this purpose hey hey ...

The langing system is also heavy for Robinson must make from tube aluminum and everything must not be heavy and all inside fittings become very cheap - then it can become Robinson 1100.

[Tallguy]

Y&BB are you aware the R66 has a seperate baggage compartment capable of fitting a number of largish suitcases in or more than one set of golf clubs plus a couple of bags or even a full sized adult, and no I won't be posting that picture...! So your pax with a backpack will not be an issue.

[fijdor]

It was a good aircraft, HellMan the public accident you are referring to is probably the one that happened at an airshow, during a demonstration the aircraft had a tail rotor failure in flight and the aircraft destroyed itself before hitting the ground.

There is a video of it and I have seen it, don't remember where but it could be on youtube.

JD

[Gordy]

This one:

<object width="500" height="405"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7P3zYDgnYew&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7P3zYDgnYew&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="500" height="405"></embed></object>

[krypton_john]

R66 has a 5th seat and a baggage compartment - what more could you ask for?

[RVDT]

A Type Certificate?

[fluffy5]

Yep, a fifth middle seat that only a midget could fit on.
Just admit robinson have produced a R44 with a turbine, one midget seat and bagage space for one adult or two midgets.
:}
fluffy

[krypton_john]

Are the back seats *that* much worse than than that that in a B206? Or a 500?

Anyone actually sat in one yet?

[Hughes500]

KJ

Yes but the 206 and 500 were designed in the early 1960's 50 years ago !
Both products will outfly a Robinson product, shows how good thigs were in the 60'S

[Trans Lift]

Both products will outfly a Robinson product, shows how good thigs were in the 60'S

I've often screamed passed a Jetranger in a 44. One time I was heading into the mountains flying a 44 and a jetranger beside me for an aerial survey. They had to ask us to slow down. We were at full capacity too!

[ReverseFlight]

Personally I prefer the 206 over the R44/66 any day. It's not just about speed.

Bear in mind that Frank is not growing younger every day and probably does not want to re-invent the wheel, hence the R66.

[stix]

Tell us reverseflight, what is the r66 like to fly? Frank keeps the design simple to keep cost, weight and maintenance down which are all essential to make the thing work and actually make a profit.

[Hughes500]

Translift

Bet you havent screamed past a 500 ;)

[Hell Man]

Gordy: Thanks for the clip - depressing.

I'm wondering whether a t/r failure while entering a climbing left turn at moderate speed would result in the same outcome for most helo types - any views?

Trans Lift:

I've often screamed passed a Jetranger in a 44.


I'm trying to imagine this, but ... I can't!

Y&BB:
old man Robinson (aka Frank the *ank)

Swedish PPRuNE ... why the disrespect???

[Yellow & Blue Baron]

I still think the FH1100 is a better alternative than the R66.

Hell Man - (my old sparring partner) - good idea to edit instead of adding more posts!

Old man Robinson's nick name is not a disrespect and not a reference to some form of self pleasure :mad: but originates from the early days when he was considering a Wankel engine before he selected the Lycoming! ;)

[biggles99]

Blimy Guys,

have you ever considered how easy it is to bitch about a helicopter (in this case the R66) as opposed to designing, building, certifying, selling, supporting one?

Give credit where credit is due -- Robinson is one of the few helicopters that was born out of private finance, as opposed to billions of dollars of tax payers money through military contracts.

We are all entitled to our subjective opinions on the merits of any particular design, but the only guys that I know on this forum that has earnt the right to comment on the good/bad design is BudDevHeli, and possibly Bruno Guimbal - the guy who has designed and built and certified the Cabri.


They are the do-ers, we are the whingers.

Big Ls.

[Yellow & Blue Baron]

Dear BudDevHeli & Bruno Guimbal,

Biggles99 says says you are the only two people on PPRuNe to have earned the right to comment on whether a helicopter design is good or bad.

Because I am only a whinger, could you kindly express your views as to whether the newly turbine powered R66 (marketed as a revolutionary step up from the R44) is in fact a revolutionary step up from the R44!

To most of us whingers it appears as nothing more than an R44 with a turbine engine and, in which case (in whinger-speak) might better have been marketed as the R44T (or similar).

Also, if you have the time, do you think - in your well considered right to comment - that the ancient FH1100 could be revamped to offer a better alternative than the R66?

Whingingly yours

Y&BB
Stockholm
Sweden

[Hell Man]

Swedish - why don't you buy an FH1100?

[Yellow & Blue Baron]

Yanky - because of the video posted by Gordy!

[FH1100 Pilot]

About that video... There is controversy about what caused that crash. If it was a tail rotor failure, the cabin appears to be rotating the wrong way. The tail rotor failure I had (in a 206) caused the nose to go to the right. In the video, the 1100 clearly yaws to the left.)

I still think the FH1100 is a better alternative than the R66.

Oh no. Ohhhhhhhhh no. No way.

As good a design as the FH1100 was/is, it has some real weaknesses that make it unsuitable in today's market. The R66 will be a better product.

Around 2000, before I joined the company that was trying to put the FH1100 back in production, the owner of the TC (Georges) took it to one of those helicopter conventions (I think it may have been Dallas). Frank came over and spent some time talking to him and examining the 1100. It was clear even then that he was considering a turbine version of the R44.

Perhaps the biggest drawback of the 1100 is that damn vertical mast. It is simply not suitable or comfortable for any kind of high speed cruise. Ten degrees nose-down at 110 knots, it's as bad as a Bolkow. Ugh. (I've got 2500 hours in Bolkows. My back and neck are permanently arched into that "Bolkow slouch.")

On a daily basis, we used to curse the original Hiller design engineers for not putting any forward tilt to the transmission. But they only envisioned it as a 100 knot helicopter, and in the early 1960's let's remember that no helicopter went very fast. Hiller set the 1100's VNE at 127 mph (110 knots). With a C20B engine installed, you could easily bump up against that even without pulling max power. We thought about going through the certification process of increasing the VNE...but...why?

We looked at every way possible to get some tilt to the mast. But changing one thing then required so many other changes that it was just impractical. Plus, the trans already intruded on the center-rear passenger seat. Tilting the trans any further forward might have rendered that fifth seat as comfortable as the center-rear seat of a 500*.

Speaking of that seat... People were skinnier back in the 60's. The 1100 was originally meant as a four-seater, which is what the Army LOH specs called for. So it is not very wide. Georges used to say that it was "just as wide" as a 206 but it is not. Three in the back is tight. In addition, there is a center tunnel (the fuselage structural box beam where the control pushrods, cables and electrical stuff are) that the center passenger must straddle. No "broom closet" like a 206 because it's on the floor between your legs.

The R66 is better in this respect. Frank made it bigger and wider than the R44. The center-rear seat of the R66 is also tight yes, but let's be honest, it's better than an 1100 - probably better than a 206 too.

Finally, let's talk about weight. Every C20B-equipped 1100 I ever saw weighed around 1700 pounds, some more than that. But the MGW was only 2750. Our useful load was around 1000 - 1050 pounds. One of our projects was a MGW increase, but that is not as simple as just asking the FAA to let you do that and then inserting a supplement into the RFM. So, put four adults in (800 pounds) and you can only carry 200 pounds of fuel (30 gallons) which is just one hour. Such a cabin load puts you at MGW and right at the forward c.g. limit. (Carrying women or lighter men would make a difference, obviously.)

There were some structural concerns with increasing the MGW of the 1100. There were some things we would have had to beef-up - which would have made them heavier. Hmm, vicious cycle. Plus, what would a MGW increase have done to the component lives of the items in the powertrain? We know that Hiller tested the machine to some ungodly heavy weight just to see what it could do, but that doesn't mean the ship could have operated at that weight and it would be silly to assume so.

Frank says that the R66 will weigh around 1280 pounds empty vs. a MGW of 2700 pounds. *IF* he can keep the "completed" empty weight down to 1300 he'll have a useful load of 1400 pounds. That's a useful useful load, given that the RR300 engine might have better fuel specifics than the 250-C20B which - no matter how you slice it or turn the fuel control down, it just GOING TO burn 25 or 26 gallons per hour...which is what my current 206B does...which is what the FH1100 I flew in Honduras did.

(Georges, God love him, used to say that the 1100 had much less fuel burn than a 206 - like down around 22 or 23 gph. That's because the Hobbs in an 1100 runs with the engine. And sure, measuring your fuel burn that way will always give you a good number. But out in the real world, skids-up to skids-down, the 1100 and 206 are just about the same.)

Don't get me wrong, I love the FH1100. I wish it could have survived and thrived. In its day, it was a great helicopter. It does certain things really well. It is tough, simple, reliable and easy to maintain. With the advantage of 40 years of product improvement like the 206 got, it might even be a great helicopter today. ...As long as you didn't need to go faster than about 100 knots or carry more than four adults including the pilot. But at the end of the day, the FH1100 is just no competition for a 206B-III.

People like new. No matter what we did to the 1100, it was always going to be perceived as "ohhhhh, that helicopter they used to make back in the 70's." (Is the EC120 all that much better than a 206? Nope. People buy it because it's new.)

As ugly as it is, the R66 will be a very good product - in the role that most people are going to use it. Frank will undoubtedly sell every one of them that comes off the assembly line. His loyal customers will buy them. His service centers all over the world will take care of them. Plus, it is new.

People like new.


*I know, I know, the 500 doesn't have a center-rear seat. It was a joke.

[Yellow & Blue Baron]

FH110 - Thanks for this reply. It really helps put things into perspective. Didn't relize the 1100 was so much of a 'dog'!

Re: 206/120 I am pretty sure the operating costs are better on the 120 and which I think was part of ECs original strategy.

[AdamFrisch]

I'm probably the only one in the world who thinks Robinson's big R44 and R66 look really good.

[Freewheel]

I'll go out on a limb and say Frank probably thinks they look great too!

[the beater]

Forget what it looks like, just look at how cheap it is to run.
According to an article in 'Blades' magazine that has just arrived today it only costs 1.37 cents a mile. It'd cost more in shoe leather to walk!
Robinson reckon on $287.80 total operating cost per hour so at 1.37 cents a mile it's also staggeringly fast! With zero depreciation!
:ok:

[ReverseFlight]

Frank keeps the design simple to keep cost, weight and maintenance down which are all essential to make the thing work and actually make a profit.
Agreed, but I couldn't sleep well at night even if I had all my profits stashed safely away in the Bahamas. I keep thinking about all those guys who didn't come back ...
Griffin Helicopters | Accident Database (http://www.griffin-helicopters.co.uk/accidents.asp?actype=R44)

[lelebebbel]

...here we go again.

Think about Robinson what you want, but pointing to an accident database doesn't prove or even indicate anything - Only that the most common helicopter in the world is also involved in the most accidents, which is hardly surprising.

[Hell Man]

Is the R22 now the most populous helicopter in the world?

[toptobottom]

I'm probably the only one in the world who thinks Robinson's big R44 and R66 look really good

I think the R44 is a fantastic machine for the money, but it sounds like an old tractor and looks like it was designed by an 8 year old. With that enormous mast, the R66 looks even worse, but at least it sounds like a helicopter now. Luckily these are not the ugliest helicopters in the world - that honour must surely go to the ice-cream cone: the Enstrom...

[FH1100 Pilot]

Luckily these are not the ugliest helicopters in the world - that honour must surely go to the ice-cream cone: the Enstrom...

Ah, beg to differ, mon ami! You must surely have meant to say "Brantly" when you said the E-word. Enstroms are beauty queens compared to Newby's folly. Especially the 280.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3235/2993170549_fd93aa4497_b.jpg

Ugh.

"Hey, Newb, when you designed the cabin you didn't leave enough room for the pilots' heads!"

"Hmm, I'll be darned! Yeah you're right. Let me think on it for a bit. I'm sure I'll come up with something..."

[krypton_john]

That thing's an oil painting compared to one of these:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/S-52-3.jpg/800px-S-52-3.jpg

File:S-52-3.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:S-52-3.jpg)

[krypton_john]

Stick a pointy nose and a cowl on it and it's purty!

http://www.vertical-aviation.com/assets/images/Hummingbird_060.jpg

Hummingbird 260L Kit Helicopter - Vertical Aviation Technologies (http://www.vertical-aviation.com/hummingbird-kit-helicopter.php)

[Hell Man]

FH1100: Cool Dude! The Brant really does look like an ice cream cone!

TopToBottom: The Enstrom, she ain't so bad (the 280 Shark). If someone offered you one would you throw here away? Semi-aerobatic too!

Krypton John: I actually think that Helo (S-52) looks better (well maybe not quite) than the R66.

It's sad but there's just something about Robinsons that just want to make me ... vomit!

[toptobottom]

FH1100, Damn, you're right! Forgot about the Brantly; now that really is REALLY ugly!! Wallace and Gromit would be proud!

The S52 looks like someone welded an R22 canopy onto a Bo 105 fuselage - what a mongrel...

But let's not forget that other work of art, the Piasecki H21 "Flying Banana"! Looks like someone stepped on it and broke its back...

http://i851.photobucket.com/albums/ab71/prooner/122661.jpg

What a beauty :}

[jim63]

qEC6imyU71U

[Hell Man]

Not totally sure of the point you're making with this vid jim63 (other than the helo being a Brantly).

Just happens to be one of the most pointless (and unnecessarily risky) pieces of flying I've had the misfortune to watch!

Looks like the efforts of someone with about 70 hrs experience who's had a labotomy in the area that governs better judgement!

[krypton_john]

I think the B2 has 'character'. Like a 'little helicopter that could'. An underdog in the helicopter world that makes you just want to take it home, like a lost puppy.

Or is it just me?

As to the crazy flying - looks too skillful for a 70 hour pilot to me. I don't think he would've survived to 70 hours learning to fly like that!

[ascj]

yes i agree to hell man. fancy letting someone film you in a brantly!!:}

[jim63]

Hell Man,Like you already stated,no point other than it being a Brantly.
As for the comment about the pilot only having 70 hrs,or there abouts,I tend to agree with krypton_john.

[rotorrookie]

since you guys started posting pictures of ugly helicopters this one has to be there: Sikorsky/Westland Dragonfly
http://www.military-aircraft.org.uk/helicopters/sikorsky-h-5-westland-dragonfly.jpg
:eek::{
It makes the R44 and 66 look rather nice actually.

[Hell Man]

RotorRooks- Pls post your image again coz it ain't showing!

The reason I believe the Brantly driver has low time is because I just don't see someone with considerably more experience taking those unnecessary risks. To me it appears more like luck and bravado than skill - I was actually waiting (but glad it didn't happen) to see the thing roll into a ball.

No professional driver I know would plant one skid with that force on an imbalanced plane. Just a little harder and he could well have lost control. The whole episode smacked of low experience. I could be wrong, I mean I've only trained ... hmmm let's see now .... around 68 students in my time! ;)

ASCJ- Fancy letting someone film you in a brantly!!

Classic comment dude!

[787-1]

Not totally sure of the point you're making with this vid jim63 (other than the helo being a Brantly).

Just happens to be one of the most pointless (and unnecessarily risky) pieces of flying I've had the misfortune to watch!

Looks like the efforts of someone with about 70 hrs experience who's had a labotomy in the area that governs better judgement!

I think this is what he was going to post :E

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jv7c4JjpvpM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jv7c4JjpvpM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

[Hell Man]

It is depressing to see who they let loose behind the controls these days. I had a 23 year old in the 80's who I didn't qualify until he reached 95 hrs. Why? He was just a slow learner I suppose, quite safe once he grasped the basics but just took longer than most to do it.

He didn't have an endless supply of funds and completing the additional hours was hard for him but ... when we reached the point where most would be ready for their GFT .. he just wasn't.

Thankfully, rather than running off to find someone who would test (and pass) him he took my advice.

The last I heard of him he had clocked up over 1,500 hrs incident free.

Don't let them go if they're not ready! :=

[Senior Pilot]

I've heard of thread drift: but I was sure this is about the R66 shortcomings?

:hmm:

[ReverseFlight]

I've heard of thread drift: but I was sure this is about the R66 shortcomings?


Agreed.
In case stix is having a go at me again (see post #14), for the record I have not flown the R66, but I'll start with this one : the T-cyclic. :ugh:

[Hell Man]

Sorry SP! :O You know how us desk pilots can get so easily carried away!

Going back to YBBs original question: The R66, Could It Be Better?

... I think the answer has to be yes - considerably - but its done now.

We'll just have to see what comes out of the Robinson stable in the future.

[Bravo73]

We'll just have to see what comes out of the Robinson stable in the future.

Well, we all know what that's going to be, don't we?

http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/209292-new-robinson-r88.html


:E

[Hughesy]

If I was in a R44, I would be screaming also!!
Will stick to my 206's, 500' and as350/355's

[madman1145]

Have you guys considered what the cost running the R66 is compared to the Jetbox, EC120 and H500 - I mean, hands down in favour for the Robby ..
In my calculations, it sits right in the middle of the R44 and the EC120/B206 market running costwise ..

And usefull load with full fuel is similary to, lets say the EC120. And if the tailrotor authority is anything near the R44, hands down again over the EC120/B206 and especially the Longranger ..

OnboardSystems just need to make a sling hook for it and you got your replacement for your old precious Jetbox and Hughes ..

Or am I wrong ??

- madman

[Hughes500]

madman
But will it be man enough for the job ?

[lelebebbel]

maybe there will be a R66 Mk.2 with increased manliness.

[waragee]

New Robinson type is rumored to be under development in back corner of Franks LA factory.

The R11 is due to hit the shelves by August 2011.

RC model owners and operators are said to be very excited.

[SuperF]

Could the R66 be better. heck yes. ok the 44 is and i guess the 66 will be quicker than a JR, but the 500 and 120 are faster, and there has been room for all of them.:ok:

Costs will be more than a 44, yes, less than a 120 or 500, no probs, may be as cheap as a JR, will have to wait and see. will be difficult to ever compare a new 66 against a new JR doing same ops, over a 20 or 30 yr life tho..

I would love to see a 66 after over 30 yrs of Ag/utility work like our JR has done, and to see the costs at that point. how many 2000hr o/hs will it have been through$$$$$$$$$. remember that engine will have been back in the shop how many times.:eek: also it will have to have done more hours than the others, as it may have nearly the same lift as a 120, but no way it will match a 500 or JR, on production work.

I saw somewhere only about 1000lbs between max AUW and empty means that you have no where near the capacity of 500 or JR, which have 1500lbs or more avail. Also the 66 has a 300?hp engine, limited to 220 ish, thats a 44's power, and wouldn't like to have one of those with 5 onboard chomping 100ltrs/hr...while the others have up to 400 or more hp from their engines. can't use it all at sea level but once you get up a bit it can help. 66 may be a bit lighter tho, can't remember:ugh:, so less horses may not be the straight equation.

Why didn't they throw the RR500 in it, that would have given it some real grunt. maybe that will be the R66II, or the R88.;)

Doesn't matter tho. heaps of robby guys out there, and some of them will take them on and then try to make money with them. no wire strike kit will take some clients out of the equation... For the price of a 66 i could put two very nice JR's in the air, and then return twice the $$$$/hr. same goes for a new 120, or 500 tho, and that hasn't stopped people buying them, so will be interesting to see what happens.

Don't bring the Long Ranger into it, twice the machine the 66 will ever be.