To: RobboRider
The Robinson so I have been told has a very sensitive cyclic input
so moving the cyclic all over the place may be an over statement. However on most helicopters the movement is significant enough to be noticed (that is if your are looking for it).
On compensation for tail rotor translation I was not inferring that the cyclic would be moved forward.
Regarding rearward drift I would assume that you would compensate with forward cyclic. QUOTE: By your explanation I should be using forward to compensate for the lateral CG and right for the tail low rearward drift. UNQUOTE
I think your explanation is backwards. Forward for rear drift and lateral for CG placement.
Regarding for compensation for blowback: QUOTE Yes. Nose will pitch up noticeably if you don’t keep the cyclic forward. (Not to the right as your theory would suggest) UNQUOTE
I was addressing only the forward movement of the cyclic and not compensation for the offset. That is a problem in itself. The purpose of my post was to point out that the cyclic is under constant movement to compensate for the aerodynamic input into the rotor system.
[QUOTE]Are there any helicopters (rigged in any way) that don’t have all these effects. I thought these were characteristics of pretty much all rotor discs. The cyclic movements aren't "all over the place”, as your post would suggest. UNQUOTE
According to Frank Robinson the R-22 is not very susceptible to most of these conditions because it has a 72-degree phase angle
and according to him there is no phase angle shift. At least that is what I got out of his posting.
I will post on phase angle shift and perchance it will either enlighten some and infuriate others.
