You are wrong because I am right. If you disagree with that I am taking my toys home
To: t'aint natural
There are no design defects in the Robinson rotor system. However there are effects relating to the design that cause the problems.
The head design is unique in that the downward force of the weight of the rotorblades on the down stops keeps the rotor in the neutral position when static on the ground. This function is similar to the stops on Bell heads. However, this feature also prevents the teetering of the rotor by the pilot or engineer while the helicopter is at rest as to do so could cause damage to the rotor head. These same down stops can be contacted during flight if the blades flap excessively resulting in rotor incursion or mast bumping. However the Bell teeter stops are not contacted during flight. Why do the blades flap excessively? Because they are free to flap on the cone hinges. Why don’t’ Bell blades flap excessively because the are not free to flap (on cone hinges) and it is for this reason that Bell helicopters are not restricted from flying out of trim or fly in a side slip. You made the comment about "Taking a lend” (I assume this means following) of the operating instructions and you will not have any problems. The operating instructions you are alluding to are in place because of the “EFFECT” of the rotor design as outlined above.
I don’t remember if it was you that made the comment of me being a one-act pony but I would like to correct that statement. I am an equal opportunity Iconoclast in that I have criticized Bell products, Agusta products, Sikorsky products, Hughes products and Bell-Boeing products. Also if you have read my posts on the Tech Log Forum I openly criticized Airbus products. I don’t shoot from the hip as I make my criticisms as a result of having worked on the products in question in an engineering capacity. Any comments I made about the Robinson design stems from my past experience on the other designs listed above. This also holds true for my comments about gyroscopic precession and centrifugal force as well as rotor dynamics.
Don’t take this personally as it relates to many other members of this forum.
Rotorheads is a place where ideas can be exchanged between consenting adults. At times individuals can agree with the points being made and they can also disagree with the posters point of view and they can register their point of view in response.
However, first and foremost because the respondent disagrees with the ideas being presented does not mean that the original post and the poster are wrong simply because the respondent disagrees.
Cases in point:
1) Gyroscopic precession VS. Aerodynamic precession
2) Flapping to equality VS. Blowback or, Flapback
3) Centrifugal force VS. Centripetal force*
* Read the patent application for the Robinson rotor head design.