Worst FM I've come across

[Hone22]

Hi all,. .. .Been boning up on the As350 and I've gotta say it's the worst laid out, print font, unexplained graph laden FM I've yet seen.. . <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> . . Admittedly the A/c in question is a 1980 model, but even the FM for the H300 imparted more info.. .. .It's leaves me with a couple of questions. .. .1. Power check....... Yep theres a graph and not too bad an explantion. But it appears to me this is to check the engine is servicable ie; developing the correct power ( is this a topping check?). .. .Whats the rough guide for a "Power Check" to see if you can land at a LZ at x Dalt?. .. .eg. speed xxkts S & L, TQ xx must have 5% more TQ to land or whatever. .. .2. The pre flight in this FM tells you nothing about anything. Is there a better one out there?. .. .3. Bell 206 same question re power check.......how? anyone got the numbers?. .. .cheers & fly safe. .Hone

[CTD]

The power check simply validates the performance charts in the flight manual. They are developed based on a minimum spec engine.

[paco]

Yeah, even an Apple Mac gives you a better manual than a $1.2m helicopter........ .. .Phil. . . . <small>[ 05 March 2002, 13:40: Message edited by: paco ]</small>

[CyclicRick]

Maybe it's me but I got on fine with it (anno 1984). It's very simple alright but then again so is the AS350.. .The only problem I've had with performance is with a sticking bleed valve, something like 98-99%NG on take off with just over 70% indicated torque. The damn things been replaced twice or even three times but still re-occurs now and again. All said and done, nice to fly and damn reliable, I like it. My favorite version is the BA, faster than a B and a B2 but with a miserable intercom system.

[Shawn Coyle]

Slight correction on a previous posting on power checks. The purpose of the power check chart is to make sure your engine meets the minimum specification, on which all the rest of the performance of the aircraft is based.. .Most civil manuals are pretty poor in terms of performance information, especially in comparison to military charts (at least the US military style charts).. .The post about the sticking bleed valve is an excellent case in point- does the engine pass the power check? At the power settings where the bleed valve is sticking?

[Lu Zuckerman]

The main reason military flight and technical manuals are better than their civil counterparts is that the government pays for them. They have a style manual that the manufacturer adheres to and the level of technical content is quite high. . .. .Civil manuals on the other hand are not paid for in the contract and although there is a style manual (ATA 100) the manufacturer can determine the level and detail of the technical content. Since the level of technical content is not specified the manufacturer of the aircraft will cut costs by minimizing technical content while still adhering to ATA-100. There is a problem on the horizon, as the military will soon if they already haven’t specified that military manuals will be produced in accordance with ATA-100.. .. .If you want to see poor procedure writing that is vague and in some cases leaves the mechanic hanging by the short hairs just read the R-22 and R-44 maintenance manual under rigging procedures.. . . . <small>[ 07 March 2002, 00:13: Message edited by: Lu Zuckerman ]</small>

[John Eacott]

"Civil manuals on the other hand are not paid for in the contract and although there is a style manual (ATA 100) the manufacturer can determine the level and detail of the technical content". .. .I suggest that civil manuals are paid for, and are exceptionally expensive. Initial purchases are $thousands (my BK117 maintenance manuals cost me about $20k, 5 years ago) and annual upgrades are also high, depending upon the manufacturer. Even microfiche from the likes of ATP aren't much cheaper, eg about $US900/annum for an A109.. .. .Part of the upgrade of my 117 to -B2 standard was $US2500 for a 'new' flight manual, which was effectively the -B1 manual with charts interpolated an extra 150kg, and all the pages changed to read -B2 instead of -B1 <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" />

[Lu Zuckerman]

To: John Eacott. .. .When a contract is let for a series of commercial aircraft it is specified that the manufacturer of the aircraft provide so many manuals used in direct support of the aircraft and all necessary shop manuals to support second and third level maintenance. Suppliers of appliances used on the aircraft must provide second and third level maintenance handbooks in support of those appliances. None of this is paid for. If a change is made to the manuals these changes must be provided at no cost. ATA now requires that these manuals be available in electronic form which allows reproduction of the technical material as many times as necessary.. .. .Regarding helicopters, they are not usually ordered in large numbers but if the customer is sharp in his negotiations he will request the necessary support manuals for each helicopter purchased. If additional manuals are requested over and above those contracted for then the product support department will sell them to the buyer.. .. .I guess since you had to pay so much for your manuals then obviously there is no hard and fast rule. It is also obvious that the manufacturer has priced the manuals in order to recoup his investment in their production.

[CyclicRick]

To Shawn Coyle;. .Yes it does when it doesn't stick! The trouble is you never know when. All the power checks I've carried out in our particular 350 were well within limits.. .Ive had it stick on me out of the blue after reducing power on a decent to find that the damn thing stuck just when you need it. Next flight it was fine! Must be a woman

[widgeon]

Rick , is it the wonderful Team audio that you have ?. We have installed NAT eclusively for the last few years with few complaints.

[Shawn Coyle]

To Lu-. .The FAA, Transport Canada, CAA, DGAC, etc. all have standards for the minimum information the flight manual must contain. . .Since this is the minimum, that's about all you get, mostly for liability reasons. . .But there is a minimum requirement. Most manufacturers want to give their customers good data, but have to tread a fine line between data and liability issues.

[paulgibson]

Hone22,. .. .We are taught the following procedure for your query about performance and suitability to get 'into' and more importantly 'out of' a spot, in a Bell206.. .. .1)Establish 80KIAS 500' above intended landing area and note torque reading.. .2)To hover IGE, add 20% torque.. .3)To climb back out, add another 10%. .4)Add 1% extra for every 15Kg you pick-up. (ie freight/pax). .. .hope this is what you were looking for.

[Hone22]

papagolf,. .. .Bang on! Just the thing I was after.. .. .I guess you try to pull the max torque (a-la piston) to make sure you're not going to temp out prior to torqing out?. .. .Anyone out there got a similar "rule of thumb" for the AS350?. .. .cheers + fly safe. .Hone. .. .edit to add as350 line. . . . <small>[ 08 March 2002, 11:28: Message edited by: Hone22 ]</small>

[Devil 49]

My recollection of a suggested procedure (after high recon and at a safe altitude) as taught by Dave Denham:. .. . Establish hover;. . Check ng (compute limit with estimates prior to departure and adjust for actual) & tq;. . 1 per cent ng equals 7 per cent tq equals 200 lbs lifting power.. .. .Confined area departure-add for apparent wind:. . 1 per cent ng if 0-7 knots wind (holding hover well outside ETL);. . 2 per cent ng if 8-15 knots (buffeting at hover). . 3 per cent ng if hovering without decelerating through etl.. .. .My rule of thumb to compute NG mentally-1 degree C equals 0.25 per cent ng.

[the coyote]

Hone22. .. .As papagolf said, I have used the same numbers and it works well for the B206. A suggestion for any aircraft:. .. .Pick it up in the hover, ideally nil wind, and note the power required. Then take off and climb to 500' AGL, establish the aircraft straight and level at a reasonable airspeed, I use 60 Kts. Note the power required again and the difference between the two (hover vs. 60 Kts at 500 AGL). Just add that power doing a prelanding power check for HIGE nil wind at around 500' lower. You can also do the same regarding additional weight: Hover nil wind at X weight, note the power then do it again with another 100Kg or whatever. After awhile and quite easily you can develop your own numbers to use. Hope this helps!. . . . <small>[ 09 March 2002, 05:47: Message edited by: the coyote ]</small>

[Shawn Coyle]

We need more "rules of thumb" to keep us out of trouble. . .If we don't develop them and use them, we'll end up with more other rules...