To: YouWillSee
It seemsthat you have answered your own question. Why don't the people i consult with or work for not follow my suggestions on how to make their product more reliable, more maintainable and more safe. Why don't you believe what I have said in my posts. The answer to that is that you have a vested interest in that you are a flight instructor flying R22s and maybe R44s. You have been to the Robinson schools and you quote Tim Tucker. The reason that people dont listen to me or my fellow RMS engineers has to do with money or the fact that there is an adversarial relationship between product integrity engineers and design engineers. When a suggested modification of the design is presented to engineering they have a NIH attitude (Not Invented Here) and totally reject the idea. Another point is that on most government design programs they bring the RMS engineers on board after the design is almost cast in concrete. No matter how good your ideas are it is too late to incorporate them as it would be too expensive. Regarding your comment abouut me being a liar that is totally untrue.
Here is another point about the "Tad Left Cyclic" comment made by Tim Tucker. Although he was correct in making the statement he violated the instructions of Robinson POH as well as the instructions in the latest FAA Rotorcraft Flight Handbook. Regarding your comment as to why he didn't mention pulling the stick a tad to the left, he did tell it to some students in a training course in the UK. That statement is located somewhere in this thread.
He told me in a telephone conversation that he does not always follow the Robinson line.
It is my opinion that he was aware of the 18 degree offset and he compensated for it by bringing the cyclic stick back to the left. This is contained in three diagrams and fully referenced in my report.
For the readers of this post, I have contacted YouWillSee and asked his permission to send him the report and the diagrams.
------------------
The Cat