Robinson Safety Courses
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slowrotor
I'd be very interested in hearing more about those six out of six rotor blades on R22s being found to be debonded. Have to say I haven't heard anything about that.
You aren't getting it mixed up with the R44 which had two blades debond earlier this year are you?
There has not been any mention of any R22 blades debonding here that I know about.
Headsethair
Mr. Zuckerman needs to be taken with a large grain of salt. This debate about WD-40 reared its head in discussion about those above-mentioned R44 blades when they debonded.
Someone mentioned WD-40 and Mr. Z had the stuff hung, drawn and quartered even before I had time to state that I knew the owner and the machine and the pilot and all swore that WD-40 had never been near the machine. The blades were fairly new and hadn't had the paint worn off enough to need corrosion prevention.
Further he stated categorically that RHC had list of forbidden chemicals that were not allowed near the blades and WD-40 was on that list.
I wrote to RHC (cos I was very worried now because I use it on my blades because we have a high humidity and and are next to the ocean - high salt etc environment) and I voluntarily grounded my machine till I got an answer). Pat Cox wrote back to me stating the RHC did not and never did have such a list but said they were happy for me to keep using WD-40 so long as it was not sprayed near the non metal parts of the head.
He stated that other waxes etc could also be used but could affect re-paint causing fish-eye in paint if not cleaned off properly. Then he he mentioned not using power sanding tools to sand back paint - due to heat above 175 degrees (I think that was the temp) causing problems with the bond.
I posted Mr. Cox's email to me on the discussion.
In another mind-boggling episode of conclusion jumping Mr. Z. stated he once (in Iran) measured the surface temp of a plane wing in the sun and it was 160 degrees therefore as it gets hot in northern australia this was obviously the cause of the blades de-bonding. No doubt about it!
Too bad the facts would spoil a good story.
We never get the temps he was talking about in this part of the world.
This all happened on the one R44 and all the other R22s and R44s in this part of the world, in all that same heat, have not debonded blades.
All the above stuff (including my post of Pat Cox's reply to me on WD-40) is on previous postings if you want to find it.
Mr. Z. caused me a lot personal worry and anguish with his ill-informed comments hidden behind a blustering of qualifications. Take what is said as worthy of consideration but ask people who actually know to detirmne the truth. RHC are very approachable and always have answered my emails with useful information.
And one more tirade
Quote L.Z.:
"Here is their response: the FAA has not approved WD-40 for any use"
I don't know how to interpret this response.
Here in OZ CASA (our version of FAA) don't actually approve or disapprove of such things, they open end their statements by saying such things as "in a manner approved by the Authority" which when you delve deeper means in a "manner the manufacturer dictates".
Do the FAA approve or not approve things for use on aircraft or is it up to the manufacturers of the "thing" and the aircraft to approve it's use?
Is the lack of FAA approval because they have tested it and found it a risk or is it because they don't actually get involved in the business of approving such things?
I'd be very interested in hearing more about those six out of six rotor blades on R22s being found to be debonded. Have to say I haven't heard anything about that.
You aren't getting it mixed up with the R44 which had two blades debond earlier this year are you?
There has not been any mention of any R22 blades debonding here that I know about.
Headsethair
Mr. Zuckerman needs to be taken with a large grain of salt. This debate about WD-40 reared its head in discussion about those above-mentioned R44 blades when they debonded.
Someone mentioned WD-40 and Mr. Z had the stuff hung, drawn and quartered even before I had time to state that I knew the owner and the machine and the pilot and all swore that WD-40 had never been near the machine. The blades were fairly new and hadn't had the paint worn off enough to need corrosion prevention.
Further he stated categorically that RHC had list of forbidden chemicals that were not allowed near the blades and WD-40 was on that list.
I wrote to RHC (cos I was very worried now because I use it on my blades because we have a high humidity and and are next to the ocean - high salt etc environment) and I voluntarily grounded my machine till I got an answer). Pat Cox wrote back to me stating the RHC did not and never did have such a list but said they were happy for me to keep using WD-40 so long as it was not sprayed near the non metal parts of the head.
He stated that other waxes etc could also be used but could affect re-paint causing fish-eye in paint if not cleaned off properly. Then he he mentioned not using power sanding tools to sand back paint - due to heat above 175 degrees (I think that was the temp) causing problems with the bond.
I posted Mr. Cox's email to me on the discussion.
In another mind-boggling episode of conclusion jumping Mr. Z. stated he once (in Iran) measured the surface temp of a plane wing in the sun and it was 160 degrees therefore as it gets hot in northern australia this was obviously the cause of the blades de-bonding. No doubt about it!
Too bad the facts would spoil a good story.
We never get the temps he was talking about in this part of the world.
This all happened on the one R44 and all the other R22s and R44s in this part of the world, in all that same heat, have not debonded blades.
All the above stuff (including my post of Pat Cox's reply to me on WD-40) is on previous postings if you want to find it.
Mr. Z. caused me a lot personal worry and anguish with his ill-informed comments hidden behind a blustering of qualifications. Take what is said as worthy of consideration but ask people who actually know to detirmne the truth. RHC are very approachable and always have answered my emails with useful information.
And one more tirade
Quote L.Z.:
"Here is their response: the FAA has not approved WD-40 for any use"
I don't know how to interpret this response.
Here in OZ CASA (our version of FAA) don't actually approve or disapprove of such things, they open end their statements by saying such things as "in a manner approved by the Authority" which when you delve deeper means in a "manner the manufacturer dictates".
Do the FAA approve or not approve things for use on aircraft or is it up to the manufacturers of the "thing" and the aircraft to approve it's use?
Is the lack of FAA approval because they have tested it and found it a risk or is it because they don't actually get involved in the business of approving such things?
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slings and errors.
To: RobboRider
QUOTE: Mr. Zuckerman needs to be taken with a large grain of salt. This debate about WD-40 reared its head in discussion about those above-mentioned R44 blades when they debonded.
RESPONSE: If you read the thread completely I was responding to headsethair when he quoted Pat Cox as saying it was OK to use WD-40 on the underside of the blades. My comment had nothing to do with the other thread on debonding of R-44 blades. My comments and ultimate contacting the WD-40 Company was to get clarification of the use of WD-40 in this application. Please re read the comment by the WD-40 Company about the FAA not approving the use of WD-40 on ANY aircraft and that includes the Robinson helicopters. If Pat Cox made these statements internal tests and verification that the WD-40 does not cause problems on the blades must back him up. Pat Cox said do not get it on the rotorhead so he knows that if it does it could cause problems and the tests must be submitted to the FAA for their approval. The question begs asking, did they perform the tests and did they submit the tests and did they contact the WD-40 Company to get their approval. The answer to at least one of these question is no and I believe the other answer is no.
In either case Pat Cox is placing Robinson in a bad light if something goes wrong as a result of using a non approved product.
QUOTE: In another mind-boggling episode of conclusion jumping Mr. Z. stated he once (in Iran) measured the surface temp of a plane wing in the sun and it was 160 degrees therefore as it gets hot in northern Australia this was obviously the cause of the blades de-bonding. No doubt about it!
RESPONSE: I don’t remember exactly what I said in the post and I’m too lazy to check it out. However I will try to reconstruct what I said relative to temperatures. In Iran we measured the air temperature at 113-degrees F. The ground temperature was 168-degrees F and the internal temperature of our helicopters topped out on the thermometer at 180-degrees F and it was killing our avionics.
Here is another tidbit from the Lord Company that makes Elastomeric Bearings ©. They indicated that the total exposure to temperatures of 160-degrees F was 1 hour in the life of the bearing. Exposure to in excess of one hour total at 160-degrees F would cut the life of the bearing by 50%.
You don’t have to have an air temperature at 160-degrees F to reach that temperature on a blade or any other part of the aircraft. What does the dirty work is solar radiation. The air temp can be 70-degrees F and the skin temperature can be far in excess of that. If I mentioned solar radiation temperatures and applied it to the R-44 blades then I was talking about the temperature cycling from static at very high blade skin temperatures to flight when the blades cooled down and then back to static and so on. This temperature cycling can have an effect on the bond line and possibly cause a bond separation.
The manufacturer in order to expand their sales base will perform all types of tests that show that their product will not harm any metals or chemicals or paints and many other things. This testing is done by an independent laboratory in accordance within specific guidelines. If the product passes all of the tests then and only then can the FAA approve it for general use on aircraft. The manufacturing company can then show in their advertising that it is FAA approved. Boeing did this for a preservative as did Corrosion X. Based on what WD-40 stated this testing and subsequent approval was never done.
Did I really state that Robinson had a list of secret chemicals and WD-40 was or was not on that list?
I personally believe that your product loyalty is clouding your vision when you read my posts.
QUOTE: Mr. Zuckerman needs to be taken with a large grain of salt. This debate about WD-40 reared its head in discussion about those above-mentioned R44 blades when they debonded.
RESPONSE: If you read the thread completely I was responding to headsethair when he quoted Pat Cox as saying it was OK to use WD-40 on the underside of the blades. My comment had nothing to do with the other thread on debonding of R-44 blades. My comments and ultimate contacting the WD-40 Company was to get clarification of the use of WD-40 in this application. Please re read the comment by the WD-40 Company about the FAA not approving the use of WD-40 on ANY aircraft and that includes the Robinson helicopters. If Pat Cox made these statements internal tests and verification that the WD-40 does not cause problems on the blades must back him up. Pat Cox said do not get it on the rotorhead so he knows that if it does it could cause problems and the tests must be submitted to the FAA for their approval. The question begs asking, did they perform the tests and did they submit the tests and did they contact the WD-40 Company to get their approval. The answer to at least one of these question is no and I believe the other answer is no.
In either case Pat Cox is placing Robinson in a bad light if something goes wrong as a result of using a non approved product.
QUOTE: In another mind-boggling episode of conclusion jumping Mr. Z. stated he once (in Iran) measured the surface temp of a plane wing in the sun and it was 160 degrees therefore as it gets hot in northern Australia this was obviously the cause of the blades de-bonding. No doubt about it!
RESPONSE: I don’t remember exactly what I said in the post and I’m too lazy to check it out. However I will try to reconstruct what I said relative to temperatures. In Iran we measured the air temperature at 113-degrees F. The ground temperature was 168-degrees F and the internal temperature of our helicopters topped out on the thermometer at 180-degrees F and it was killing our avionics.
Here is another tidbit from the Lord Company that makes Elastomeric Bearings ©. They indicated that the total exposure to temperatures of 160-degrees F was 1 hour in the life of the bearing. Exposure to in excess of one hour total at 160-degrees F would cut the life of the bearing by 50%.
You don’t have to have an air temperature at 160-degrees F to reach that temperature on a blade or any other part of the aircraft. What does the dirty work is solar radiation. The air temp can be 70-degrees F and the skin temperature can be far in excess of that. If I mentioned solar radiation temperatures and applied it to the R-44 blades then I was talking about the temperature cycling from static at very high blade skin temperatures to flight when the blades cooled down and then back to static and so on. This temperature cycling can have an effect on the bond line and possibly cause a bond separation.
Do the FAA approve or not approve things for use on aircraft or is it up to the manufacturers of the "thing" and the aircraft to approve it's use?
Did I really state that Robinson had a list of secret chemicals and WD-40 was or was not on that list?
I personally believe that your product loyalty is clouding your vision when you read my posts.
Last edited by Lu Zuckerman; 23rd Sep 2003 at 23:21.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slowrotor
I just found that ATSB report about the six out of six blades having some debonding.
******.. I'm back to being worried again
Slowrotor
Forgot to add. I don't think there have been many rotorhead failures of undetirmined cause. There have been rotorhead failures of detirmined (or at least fairly reasoned out causes) and perhaps a couple of unknown cause. The causes seem to be known for most and they are pretty much all avoidable, provided the pilot knows how to avoid them.
That isn't to say the problems don't exist but that there are thousands of pilots flying thousands of hours every week who are quite sucessfully avoiding those problems.
You have to keep it all in perspective.
One other comment about minimums of 20 hours for solo on R22s. I suspect most people aren't ready for solo before then anyway, legislation or not. I don't know that flying another brand of wirlygig would lower that time either.
Slowrotor
Forgot to add. I don't think there have been many rotorhead failures of undetirmined cause. There have been rotorhead failures of detirmined (or at least fairly reasoned out causes) and perhaps a couple of unknown cause. The causes seem to be known for most and they are pretty much all avoidable, provided the pilot knows how to avoid them.
That isn't to say the problems don't exist but that there are thousands of pilots flying thousands of hours every week who are quite sucessfully avoiding those problems.
You have to keep it all in perspective.
One other comment about minimums of 20 hours for solo on R22s. I suspect most people aren't ready for solo before then anyway, legislation or not. I don't know that flying another brand of wirlygig would lower that time either.
I just found that ATSB report about the six out of six blades having some debonding.
******.. I'm back to being worried again
Slowrotor
Forgot to add. I don't think there have been many rotorhead failures of undetirmined cause. There have been rotorhead failures of detirmined (or at least fairly reasoned out causes) and perhaps a couple of unknown cause. The causes seem to be known for most and they are pretty much all avoidable, provided the pilot knows how to avoid them.
That isn't to say the problems don't exist but that there are thousands of pilots flying thousands of hours every week who are quite sucessfully avoiding those problems.
You have to keep it all in perspective.
One other comment about minimums of 20 hours for solo on R22s. I suspect most people aren't ready for solo before then anyway, legislation or not. I don't know that flying another brand of wirlygig would lower that time either.
Slowrotor
Forgot to add. I don't think there have been many rotorhead failures of undetirmined cause. There have been rotorhead failures of detirmined (or at least fairly reasoned out causes) and perhaps a couple of unknown cause. The causes seem to be known for most and they are pretty much all avoidable, provided the pilot knows how to avoid them.
That isn't to say the problems don't exist but that there are thousands of pilots flying thousands of hours every week who are quite sucessfully avoiding those problems.
You have to keep it all in perspective.
One other comment about minimums of 20 hours for solo on R22s. I suspect most people aren't ready for solo before then anyway, legislation or not. I don't know that flying another brand of wirlygig would lower that time either.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slowrotor:
Be careful with that 300. There have been at least nine catastrophic in-flight failures caused by a design fault which has still not been corrected in most of the first 550 aircraft built. For full details contact Dennis Kenyon.
Be careful with that 300. There have been at least nine catastrophic in-flight failures caused by a design fault which has still not been corrected in most of the first 550 aircraft built. For full details contact Dennis Kenyon.
Cool as a moosp
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Mostly Hong Kong
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slowrotor,
You write:
<I cannot attend the safety course without a heli pilot certificate. That doesn't make much sense to me.>
I can assure you that it makes a lot of sense to the vast majority of people who attend the course and to the Robinson company who produce it.
Listen to your instructors who have attended the course, and learn. After around 150 hours on the Robinson type, go on the pilgrimage to Torrance. Your time will be wasted if you go before you can sensibly answer the questions that may be posed.
I went at 120 hours R22 time and only just managed to avoid looking inadequate. Then again I have been flying planks for 40 years.
You write:
<I cannot attend the safety course without a heli pilot certificate. That doesn't make much sense to me.>
I can assure you that it makes a lot of sense to the vast majority of people who attend the course and to the Robinson company who produce it.
Listen to your instructors who have attended the course, and learn. After around 150 hours on the Robinson type, go on the pilgrimage to Torrance. Your time will be wasted if you go before you can sensibly answer the questions that may be posed.
I went at 120 hours R22 time and only just managed to avoid looking inadequate. Then again I have been flying planks for 40 years.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, but thanks for volunteering to be the unofficial PPRuNe Spy! Of course, you should realize that we all expect you to snoop around and see what engine they have on the dynamo. Is the next ship diesel or turbine?
Last rumor I've heard is that the main project is to develop an air conditioning system for the R44 in-house. There is a company in Florida that just got FAA approval for an add-on kit, and that probably puts a burr in Frank's bonnett. They don't like ANY modifications after leaving RHC. I've also heard Frank mention that any "new" ship is at least 3-5 years away. I'm assuming that is because they are focusing on the R44 air conditioning system?
Last rumor I've heard is that the main project is to develop an air conditioning system for the R44 in-house. There is a company in Florida that just got FAA approval for an add-on kit, and that probably puts a burr in Frank's bonnett. They don't like ANY modifications after leaving RHC. I've also heard Frank mention that any "new" ship is at least 3-5 years away. I'm assuming that is because they are focusing on the R44 air conditioning system?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RD: R44 a/c was being tested inflight at the factory in September. I don't think they are far off releasing it. (Of course here in the UK it'll be an age before certification - the CAA will want to prove that it can float... :-) )
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Paris
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How do they manage to get 60 odd pilots through the flying part of this course in 2 and a half days. I am guessing that they must each fly 1.5 hours, that would be 90 flying hours.
Does the factory have a large training fleet?
Marc
Does the factory have a large training fleet?
Marc
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the factory, only four company helicopters, 2 R44s and 2 R22s. Customer ships are also used for the course. Pilot wise, we use a variety of excellent instructors from the area that only teach the course plus some pilots from production flight test.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Paris
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Customer's machines are also used for training.
Copter Driver
I assume you work for the factory by the phrasing of your response. Tell me you are joking when you say customer's machines are used for training. You dont mean new machines do you?
Marc
I assume you work for the factory by the phrasing of your response. Tell me you are joking when you say customer's machines are used for training. You dont mean new machines do you?
Marc
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Gaithersburg, MD
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I went to the RHC Safety Course, I got about 1.5 hours flying time in the course. Each new machine must be run through the paces by a Test Pilot. Often, students in the Safety Course will ride one of these new machines during training with said Test Pilot / Instructor.
It's not a big deal, and we don't beat up the aircraft... everything is done within the POH. In fact, when I flew with Tim, we discovered the CAT gage was a little loose (black cardboard background rattled inside the instrument gage). He said, "that's why we do a test flight with every aircraft."
Before everyone jumps on the safety issue about students being "test pilots," bare in mind that each ship goes through an extensive QA process before it even gets to that point. Also, both the Instructor and student pre-flight the aircraft. I'm sure Copter Driver can describe more details.
It's not a big deal, and we don't beat up the aircraft... everything is done within the POH. In fact, when I flew with Tim, we discovered the CAT gage was a little loose (black cardboard background rattled inside the instrument gage). He said, "that's why we do a test flight with every aircraft."
Before everyone jumps on the safety issue about students being "test pilots," bare in mind that each ship goes through an extensive QA process before it even gets to that point. Also, both the Instructor and student pre-flight the aircraft. I'm sure Copter Driver can describe more details.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Customer machines are used, but like RD said, flown within all limtations and it is good because you do find squaks that need to be tended to, nothing major just little issues. The aircraft are not abused whatsoever, the instructors know this is someone ship
But rest assured that the helicopters go through a complete five hours of flight testing by flight test. This includes an extensive seven page checklist plus many many thorough inspections before and after the aircraft comes through flight test before it is placed in the delivery center. These things arent put together like tractors on an assembly line, every helicopter is different and everything on the aircraft has certain tolerances that must be met, from how far the fresh air vent knob pulls in and out to the force it takes to pull the mixture out.
But rest assured that the helicopters go through a complete five hours of flight testing by flight test. This includes an extensive seven page checklist plus many many thorough inspections before and after the aircraft comes through flight test before it is placed in the delivery center. These things arent put together like tractors on an assembly line, every helicopter is different and everything on the aircraft has certain tolerances that must be met, from how far the fresh air vent knob pulls in and out to the force it takes to pull the mixture out.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Paris
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be good to hear from someone who has been on the course, exactly what sort of testing is being done while "student pilots" are at the helm of Mr Expecting's new machine.
Quite honestly its laughable if not dishonest. Do they tell their customers about this? I hope so.
Marc
Quite honestly its laughable if not dishonest. Do they tell their customers about this? I hope so.
Marc
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No testing is being done, all flight tests have been completed and the aircraft has obtained its Airworthiness cert. But if you happened to come across a bad gauge or burnt out light then its fixed.
If somone has not payed for a helicopter yet, then they do not own it. If they have, then the aircraft is not flown in the course.
If somone has not payed for a helicopter yet, then they do not own it. If they have, then the aircraft is not flown in the course.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Giro, my thoughts exactly... I went to do the RHC safety course just after i had ordered a new raven 2 and was completely gobsmacked that new machines just out of the 5 hours flight testing were being used for the courses.....Franks attitude to this is that these are his machines until they are handed over to the new owners- its very much a one way conversation!
however my machine arrived safely and i cant get too excited about it now....the instructors are highly experienced and responsible people. so no harm done i guess...
cest La Vie
however my machine arrived safely and i cant get too excited about it now....the instructors are highly experienced and responsible people. so no harm done i guess...
cest La Vie
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Paris
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Copter Driver
OK, now you are saying no testing is being done, fair enough. Then persumably you are getting value by selling time to someone else (ie the student) using someone else's machine without their approval.
Let me put another point to you. If they are registered, and an airworthiness certificate is issued, then persumably they are no longer new. Are you selling them as new aircraft or used?
Marc
Let me put another point to you. If they are registered, and an airworthiness certificate is issued, then persumably they are no longer new. Are you selling them as new aircraft or used?
Marc
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theres not much one can do about it. Frank has been doing this forever, and with over 5000 ships out the door, there has not been a problem.
The ships are still registered to RHC, and if not payed for then RHC is the owner and can use the helicopters. If they are payed for in full then they are not used. When an owner comes to cut a check, he or she should thoroughly examine their aircraft, ask questions and if it was used for a flight or two and they dont like it, no one is forcing them to buy it. I am not selling these aircraft, nor have anything to do with the sale of them.
The ships are still registered to RHC, and if not payed for then RHC is the owner and can use the helicopters. If they are payed for in full then they are not used. When an owner comes to cut a check, he or she should thoroughly examine their aircraft, ask questions and if it was used for a flight or two and they dont like it, no one is forcing them to buy it. I am not selling these aircraft, nor have anything to do with the sale of them.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crazy discussion. How "new" do you think your new car, cellphone, laptop is ?? If you think that product comes off a production line, gets polished and sold straight to you, think again.
My "new" car has more than likely spent a couple of months sitting in the open air on a disused airfield in the UK, alongside several thousand others. Then it gets taken to a dealer who gets the lowly-paid apprentice to do a PDI. Then the next person who gets to drive it is me! Hmmmmmm - safe.
I am delighted with RHC's approach. Every machine gets a complete 5-hour check by their team before being delivered to customers. And when the majority of RHC customers are in different parts of the globe, it makes good sense that all shakedowns are carried out at Torrance.
I have a machine on order - and I do not care if it does get used for some RHC Safety Course work. Having done the course, I can assure you that there is no grief given to the machine. No to-the-ground autos, no wild flying.
I'll leave that to the certification pilot :-)
My "new" car has more than likely spent a couple of months sitting in the open air on a disused airfield in the UK, alongside several thousand others. Then it gets taken to a dealer who gets the lowly-paid apprentice to do a PDI. Then the next person who gets to drive it is me! Hmmmmmm - safe.
I am delighted with RHC's approach. Every machine gets a complete 5-hour check by their team before being delivered to customers. And when the majority of RHC customers are in different parts of the globe, it makes good sense that all shakedowns are carried out at Torrance.
I have a machine on order - and I do not care if it does get used for some RHC Safety Course work. Having done the course, I can assure you that there is no grief given to the machine. No to-the-ground autos, no wild flying.
I'll leave that to the certification pilot :-)