R44 owners or light category, question about SAS and autopilot in helicopter...

[glockrecoil]

I heard that they already have STC approved in the r44... do anyone have an update?..

I think in the light category they have 2 now... the chelton/cobham helisas and the cool city avionics type... based on anyone's knowledge what is the difference between the 2?.. and what's the difference between this one and the expensive one that most of the medium to heavy kind of helicopters have?..

Is it really affordable compared to those circulating in the market today?

Thanks...

[glockrecoil]

Another thing, I just want to ask if it's really useful in the light category... or it is just another novelty?.. thanks...

[[email protected]]

A basic stability augmentation system (SAS) will give you rate damping and therefore smooth out your control inputs and make the aircraft less twitchy - the downside is that you lose some of your responsiveness to control inputs.

An autopilot will give you the facility to hold an attitude, heading, speed or height depending on which inputs it receives from which sensors - this will clearly be more expensive.

For general private flying I would suggest a SAS is enough, it is when you get to IFR and similar regimes that an autopilot is useful to reduce pilot workload.

The above information is generic, I have no knowledge of the specific products for an R44.

[212man]

Kumusta kuya?
I'm pretty sure Shawn Coyle has flown at least one of those products and reported on it in a magazine - I guess he'll come along soon and reply! How useful it would be will depend on the type of flying and how much of it you do.

Ingat

[hands_on123]

this?


http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/401703-cobham-chelton-helisas.html#post5437526

[Shawn Coyle]

Here I am!
It was several years ago that I flew the prototype HeliSAS on an R-44. It was a substantial improvement in stability in the cruise and even in the hover.
It didn't have any autopilot features, but such a system has been easily adapted to that on the Bell 206. Not expensive from what I understand, and certainly a life-saver in an inadvertant IMC encounter.

[EN48]

Unofficial update on Cobham/Chelton HeliSAS:

Have been waiting for the FAA to approve the 206/407 STC since about July, 2010. Latest word from Edwards is that FAA approval likely in the April, 2011 time frame.

I flew a 407 with this system installed (registered "experimental") in April, 2010 and was quite impressed. It is my understanding that the flight testing is long since complete and now the Feds are the hold up with paperwork. As far as cost, be thinking around $90,000 for the B407 (and that includes AP functions like heading hold, coupled approaches, etc.).

It is also my current understanding that Cobham has decided not to offer the HeliSAS for the R44 due to certain insurance issues.

[Soave_Pilot]

Why would ever want an auto-pilot in a ship that is not IFR Certified? That is just pointless in my point of view.

As a low level type of flight most of the times, i think the pilot should be at the controls at all times!

cheers.

[Shawn Coyle]

Soave Pilot:
It's to save your bacon when you run into bad weather / inadvertent IMC.
Lose sight of the horizon? You're probably not long for the world in most light helicopters. This system will help keep you alive.

[mickjoebill]

It's to save your bacon when you run into bad weather / inadvertent IMC.
Lose sight of the horizon? You're probably not long for the world in most light helicopters. This system will help keep you alive.

If one inadvertently enters IMC under manual control, what is the procedure for switching this system on and how long does it take to stabilise the craft?


Mickjoebill

[[email protected]]

Mick - I spent a few days in an RAE simulator a good while back looking at handling qualities of stabilised and unstabilised helos - all to do with anti-tank ops and low level manouevring. We also looked at reduced visual cues and what was the best mix of HQ and cues - the worst case was an R22 in cloud where 90% of the time a crash was inevitable especially when any other pilot tasks were introduced.

As the level of stabilisation was increased so the survivability of the IMC encounter improved.

The answer to your question is that you fly with it on all the time or there is no point in having it fitted.

[Runway101]

If one inadvertently enters IMC under manual control, what is the procedure for switching this system on and how long does it take to stabilise the craft?

As per those two videos, you have two ways. Simple press the ON/OFF switch at the console (next to temp gage in video), or you press the TRIM button on the cyclic for 2 seconds or longer and it comes on (start second video for the buttons). Once the system comes on, it returns to "a nearly level bank angle and pitch attitude" immediately.

3U_CU4UppgI

AMcSb_E4fKw

[glockrecoil]

We cannot just try to be unconcern with the fact that the helisas for light piston/turbine helicopter will be a very instrumental tool in keeping the pilot and most importantly the passengers of this aircraft safe...

I first saw that video (above) and I was amazed with the performance and the safety features that the helisas can provide.

Besides the fact that it can certainly ease the workload of the pilot it can sometimes helps him to balance the aircraft in dangerous situations...

Remember also this... robinson r44 and r22 has the most number of aircrafts sold... many people will benefit from this...

If the price can be lower though... Do anyone of you knows the estimated price for this kind of equipment... I just hope that it will be reasonable...

Thanks for the replies...

[EN48]

If one inadvertently enters IMC under manual control, what is the procedure for switching this system on and how long does it take to stabilise the craft?




The HeliSAS system is intended to be switched on before lift off, and off after touchdown. It is a "fly through" design which provides stability all the time. The AP functions are a secondary benefit.

[Peter-RB]

This system is fantastic for the R44, I think it would have saved many sad endings..!

PeterR-B

[Hell Man]

Mostly good advice so far on this thread.

Couple light helo ops with the fact that a high percentage of them are flown by low time drivers and sas makes even more sense.

Owners would be doing themselves a favor by budgeting such a unit for their bird.

HM

glockrecoil: I own several Glocks. Reliable quality weapons. :ok:

[What Limits]

I disagree.

We should be discouraging pilots from raising the likelihood of Inadvertant IMC encounter above REMOTE.

In other words, pilots who feel that having extra technology will enable them to fly in marginal weather where IIMC is likely are fools.

Discuss.

[monkeyking]

Nice technology... but I want to see you on a R22, in which you have less than 2 sec to lowering the collective, watching a map and having an unexpected shut down engine...

[EN48]

pilots who feel that having extra technology will enable them to fly in marginal weather where IIMC is likely are fools.



What's to discuss? Your statement is irrefutable. But then it would not exactly be inadvertent IMC, would it? BTW, only some pilots would have this feeling.:eek:

[Runway101]

Nice technology... but I want to see you on a R22, in which you have less than 2 sec to lowering the collective, watching a map and having an unexpected shut down engine...

That's why they developed it for the R44, where you have 4 seconds :E

[monkeyking]

I know it... I said that because I read that it was designed for small helos:}

Anyway, 4 sec is not too much when you ride with no hands

[HeliChopter]

"We should be discouraging pilots from raising the likelihood of Inadvertant IMC encounter above REMOTE."

I understand that during WW1 that they didn't allow pilots parachutes, didn't want to encourage them to be cowardly, what!

[RVDT]

In the future you will just buy a UAV and become SLF! :cool:

[Runway101]

I know it... I said that because I read that it was designed for small helos

My guess would be that a hydraulic pump and a few other parts are minimum requirement for something like SAS or AP retrofit.

[Runway101]

Here is a post that Roger Hoh made to the Robinson Helicopter Owners Group in March 2010:

The HeliSAS autopilot and stability augmentation system received STC for installation on the Robinson R44 on Oct 30, 2009 (STC SR02254LA). It is installed on one R44 helicopter, which has a standard airworthiness certificate and it works great.

HeliSAS consists of an attitude-command-attitude-hold SAS that can be engaged from engine start to shutdown. With the SAS engaged, the helicopter maintains level flight with hands off the controls, and has been demonstrated to automatically recover from extreme unusual attitudes. Hands-off hover, takeoffs, and landings have also been demonstrated. HeliSAS will be offered as a SAS-only or full autopilot option. The full autopilot option includes heading hold, altitude hold, GPS and VOR navigation modes, ILS, backcourse, and LNAV/VNAV approach capability.

Unfortunately, HeliSAS is not being sold for installation on the R44 at this time because of liability insurance issues. The problem is that the Robinson Helicopter Company does not carry liability insurance. Therefore other insurer's are unwilling to be "first in line" . Work is in progress to resolve this issue.

Work to achieve approval for HeliSAS as a factory option was halted in April 2009 so that Robinson engineering could focus 100% on R66 certification. It has come to our attention that there is a rumor circulating to the effect work was stopped at the factory because the technology is "not sufficiently mature". This is not the case. HeliSAS has been certified to the latest FAA rules including extensive DO 160F environmental testing (including the new HIRF rule) and the software was certified to the highest available standard (DO 178B Level A). This is the same standard that is used for certification of software for fly-by wire transports (e.g. Airbus).

The market for HeliSAS for R44 helicopters is not known. Any input from members would be very useful to understand the viability of this product for the R44/R66 market.

[EN48]

My guess would be that a hydraulic pump and a few other parts are minimum requirement for something like SAS or AP retrofit.


HeliSAS does not utilize hydraulic components - servos are electric. However, it is designed to be used with helicopters with hydraulicly boosted controls, presumably because hydraulic boost isolate the HeliSAS servos from aerodynamic loads and provide a light, consistent control force.

[Runway101]

That's what I meant. Attaching those servos directly to control rods of helicopters without hydraulic system (or at the wrong end of the hydraulic system) would probably turn out very ugly.

On page 8 of this document you can actually see the components used (for a 206B):

http://www.helisas.com/UserFiles/File/HeliSASTechnicalOverview.pdf

[glockrecoil]

the link above is a good read...

It seems that it is updated...

When will robinson approve it for their units...

Can't wait for the reviews...

Thanks for the link...