Punto
thank you
"allowing pilots to enter the pull more get less zone without warnings"
you have been warned and the vibration and the rapid increase in energy consumption are thought to be sufficient
Lala
The first happens when you do have sufficient energy available from somewhere and the second occurs when there is not, just pulling more that the engine has doesnt get you to the limit of the blades untill the RRPM has been reduced whereupon the CA will be approximately the same for both cases
Brian Abraham
No official accident reports mention limit of Rotor Thrust being the cause. You are right, Strange when there are so many accidents like that, you'd have thought 'they'd' notice.
I think they just say if you hit the ground then you were too low (as Crab said) indisputably true and reasonably obvious.
JD
and the many of the Bell family because they don't have independant flapping hinges or coning hinges and the difference needs to be taken up by sheer loads on the blades (or elastomerics where present), so chosing an average coning value minimises the stresses. As you know well. (and some tail rotors that don't have coning hinges have pre-cone)
Crab
Still pricking away, eh? "AnFi thinking out loud to see what people thought of his idea?" yes that is partially true, and I am a little surprised at either how few got it or were willing to support it out aloud who did get it.
thank you for your time, especially those that gave it genuinely