R22 Corner
PPRuNe Enigma
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that the main role of the R22 is for training, I'm not convinced that it would be a good idea to make it easier to hover or to fly.
How's the student going to learn if everything is done for them automatically ?
How's the student going to learn if everything is done for them automatically ?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dun Laoghaire
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grainger,
I agree. As has been said a billion times, if you can fly the Robby then you can fly anything. Also I think having to use carb heat is very good for pilot discipline as carb icing is not just one of these esoteric dangers that can grab you once in a million years. It's very real and as such forces you to keep an eye on things. I know that my instrument scan improved considerably with my understanding of carb icing. In fact I know one pilot who taught his girlfriend the significance of the CAT guage. She'd keep a very close watch on it and every now and again she'd say, "Darling, the needle's in the yellow!"
I think he regretted explaining it to her.
PPRUNE FAN#1,
whaaa??? Press-ups???? Nobody said I'd have to do press-ups!!!! Roll on the hydraulics!
Irlandés
I agree. As has been said a billion times, if you can fly the Robby then you can fly anything. Also I think having to use carb heat is very good for pilot discipline as carb icing is not just one of these esoteric dangers that can grab you once in a million years. It's very real and as such forces you to keep an eye on things. I know that my instrument scan improved considerably with my understanding of carb icing. In fact I know one pilot who taught his girlfriend the significance of the CAT guage. She'd keep a very close watch on it and every now and again she'd say, "Darling, the needle's in the yellow!"
I think he regretted explaining it to her.PPRUNE FAN#1,
whaaa??? Press-ups???? Nobody said I'd have to do press-ups!!!! Roll on the hydraulics!
Irlandés
Irlandes, you are right, I was not precise enough on the earlier posts because I needed to remind myself that a normally aspirated piston engine (with which I have had little dealing except in cars) has the problem of requiring atmospheric pressure to push the fuel air mixture in; unlike a supercharged piston or gas turbine engine when the compressor does the job and compensates for changes in said pressure.
But for all other cases other than the R22 and similar engines with the throttle fully open...THEN DA is the determining factor in engine performance which is illustrated by the R22 OGE graph to the right of the knee (which exactly matches the line on the limiting MAP placard that shows the throttle fully open position.)
This has been a very good thread and made me research some areas of heli ops and performance that I haven't looked at for a long time - even if I have had odd looks in the crewroom as I pored over graphs and PA/DA calculations!
But for all other cases other than the R22 and similar engines with the throttle fully open...THEN DA is the determining factor in engine performance which is illustrated by the R22 OGE graph to the right of the knee (which exactly matches the line on the limiting MAP placard that shows the throttle fully open position.)
This has been a very good thread and made me research some areas of heli ops and performance that I haven't looked at for a long time - even if I have had odd looks in the crewroom as I pored over graphs and PA/DA calculations!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Daylight Saving Free Zone
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The R23i Enhanced Performer
Ahem .. If you go with hydraulics on the R22 then maybe we could match it up with a simple three bladed main rotor system using elastomeric bearings in the head. Thus eliminating the inherent aerodynamic problems of the two bladed M/R.
Then if you go that far, you could throw in fuel injection ..... and single pilot IFR capability, auto hover and an EMS kit with rescue hoist as optional extras.
Then if you go that far, you could throw in fuel injection ..... and single pilot IFR capability, auto hover and an EMS kit with rescue hoist as optional extras.
Urm, sod it, lets just buy a 269 instead,
jeez, we have different helicopters at different cost for a reason. The 22 is fine as it is, so leave it, if you're not happy fly/buy something else.
jeez, we have different helicopters at different cost for a reason. The 22 is fine as it is, so leave it, if you're not happy fly/buy something else.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tail Bloater,
"What the Robbo needs is a fuel injection system to reduce the carb icing problem. "
The Robinson Beta-II uses the Lycoming O-360-J2A engine. Lycoming also produces the IO-360 series of fuel injected engines. It appears that the IO-360 engines are physically compatible with the O-360 engines, plus they deliver about 10% more power.
Alternatively, beef-up the rotor (considerably), install the AEIO-360 engine and do aerobatics.
CRAN,
Just some thoughts for consideration:
The Flettner FL-282 used a simple all-mechanical system to suppress rotor to cyclic-stick vibration, while not impeding the cyclic-stick to rotor commands.
"It we wanted to bring light helicopters up to the standards of performance of bigger machines, without requiring bucket fulls of power then more efficient rotor systems would be required which will inevitabley drive the control loads up and require at least an electric trim system but more appropriately. hydraulics."
One way to increase the rotor L/D ratio that does not incur an increase in control loads is to incorporate Variable Twist This concept varies the blade twist as a function of forward velocity. It does not entail a high rate of cycle at some harmonic of rotor RPM.
When considering what is required in light helicopters flown by low time pilots, the following report may inspire some creative thoughts. http://safecopter.arc.nasa.gov/Pages...P%20209597.pdf Section 5 is on Commercial Single-Piston Engine Helicopters.
Dave J.
"What the Robbo needs is a fuel injection system to reduce the carb icing problem. "
The Robinson Beta-II uses the Lycoming O-360-J2A engine. Lycoming also produces the IO-360 series of fuel injected engines. It appears that the IO-360 engines are physically compatible with the O-360 engines, plus they deliver about 10% more power.
Alternatively, beef-up the rotor (considerably), install the AEIO-360 engine and do aerobatics.
CRAN,
Just some thoughts for consideration:
The Flettner FL-282 used a simple all-mechanical system to suppress rotor to cyclic-stick vibration, while not impeding the cyclic-stick to rotor commands.
"It we wanted to bring light helicopters up to the standards of performance of bigger machines, without requiring bucket fulls of power then more efficient rotor systems would be required which will inevitabley drive the control loads up and require at least an electric trim system but more appropriately. hydraulics."
One way to increase the rotor L/D ratio that does not incur an increase in control loads is to incorporate Variable Twist This concept varies the blade twist as a function of forward velocity. It does not entail a high rate of cycle at some harmonic of rotor RPM.
When considering what is required in light helicopters flown by low time pilots, the following report may inspire some creative thoughts. http://safecopter.arc.nasa.gov/Pages...P%20209597.pdf Section 5 is on Commercial Single-Piston Engine Helicopters.
Dave J.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Crab,
I agree, this has been a great exchange!
I can't find any discussion in my texts or on line about the concepts of density altitude vs pressure altitude on piston performance, but the basic pressure cycle at different pressure altitudes must conribute to the net power output, so that lower altitude is favored for power output.
I agree, this has been a great exchange!
I can't find any discussion in my texts or on line about the concepts of density altitude vs pressure altitude on piston performance, but the basic pressure cycle at different pressure altitudes must conribute to the net power output, so that lower altitude is favored for power output.
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
That sounds familiar.
then maybe we could match it up with a simple three bladed main rotor system using elastomeric bearings in the head. Thus eliminating the inherent aerodynamic problems of the two bladed M/R.
Last edited by Lu Zuckerman; 5th Dec 2002 at 14:45.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So we will gather from the preceeding discusions that what you realy want to train on is a 269, which for those who know, will know of course that it was built as a training helicopter for the US Army to replace the Bell 47.
The R22 was not built/designed as a training helicopter. It was conceived to be the little, convenient, cheap to run, fun to fly safe and reliable helicopter that would be affordable to the majority. And that is what it is. The fact that due to it's low operating costs it has found it's way into training schools. should not cloud the issue. Also it is not because of the much mis-quoted saying that if you can fly a R22 you can fly anything. You can fly any helicopter model given the ability, the money and the instructor.
It is interesting to see that slowly some flight schools are changing over to 269s as there has been significant improvments in recent years in reducing the DOC's.
The R22 was not built/designed as a training helicopter. It was conceived to be the little, convenient, cheap to run, fun to fly safe and reliable helicopter that would be affordable to the majority. And that is what it is. The fact that due to it's low operating costs it has found it's way into training schools. should not cloud the issue. Also it is not because of the much mis-quoted saying that if you can fly a R22 you can fly anything. You can fly any helicopter model given the ability, the money and the instructor.
It is interesting to see that slowly some flight schools are changing over to 269s as there has been significant improvments in recent years in reducing the DOC's.
Grainger Stated:
"Given that the main role of the R22 is for training, I'm not convinced that it would be a good idea to make it easier to hover or to fly."
I'm afraid I don't agree with this. Many (but not all) private and recreational pilots fly relatively few hours and in many cases spend less time flying dual to polish their skills with a professional instructor than would be ideal. With this in mind would it not be better to have and ab-initio training and SFH platform that was easier to fly.
Surely it must be better to train pilots to a very high standard of airmanship and safety on a machine that is easy to fly, than to train them to a much lower standard in a difficult machine.
This just seems like common sense to me.
I look forward to your responses.
CRAN
"Given that the main role of the R22 is for training, I'm not convinced that it would be a good idea to make it easier to hover or to fly."
I'm afraid I don't agree with this. Many (but not all) private and recreational pilots fly relatively few hours and in many cases spend less time flying dual to polish their skills with a professional instructor than would be ideal. With this in mind would it not be better to have and ab-initio training and SFH platform that was easier to fly.
Surely it must be better to train pilots to a very high standard of airmanship and safety on a machine that is easy to fly, than to train them to a much lower standard in a difficult machine.
This just seems like common sense to me.
I look forward to your responses.
CRAN
PPRuNe Enigma
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely it must be better to train pilots to a very high standard of airmanship and safety on a machine that is easy to fly, than to train them to a much lower standard in a difficult machine.
Grainger,
Again I agree, but when practical limitations are put on the amount of training that can be given, be it financial, time (for the business types) or just an unwillingness to do more than is necessary to mee the minimum standard, then again an easier machine will allow you to get much further with the students and make them much safer pilots on type.
CRAN
Again I agree, but when practical limitations are put on the amount of training that can be given, be it financial, time (for the business types) or just an unwillingness to do more than is necessary to mee the minimum standard, then again an easier machine will allow you to get much further with the students and make them much safer pilots on type.
CRAN
PPRuNe Enigma
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But if the learning machine is too easy, those people might get a nasty shock when they move to a trickier type.
Helicopters are not for everyone. I'd suggest that an "unwillingness to do more than is necessary to meet the minimum standard" would be one of the excluding factors.
Fair enough, I'm not suggesting that machines should be deliberately difficult to fly - but equally I'm happy with where we are now with the R22, that's all.
Helicopters are not for everyone. I'd suggest that an "unwillingness to do more than is necessary to meet the minimum standard" would be one of the excluding factors.
Fair enough, I'm not suggesting that machines should be deliberately difficult to fly - but equally I'm happy with where we are now with the R22, that's all.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Canada
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calling R22 Pilots
I have a couple of questions for the R22 drivers who cruise this forum.
1) What is the difference between an R22 and a R 22 Beta?
2) What would be the nominal empty weight of a typical R22?
3) What is the Max Gross weight of a R 22 and the R 22 Beta?
4) Is there an Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) that would increase the Max Gross weight?
5) Is there an R22 web site?
Any responses would be greatly appreciated.
IHL
1) What is the difference between an R22 and a R 22 Beta?
2) What would be the nominal empty weight of a typical R22?
3) What is the Max Gross weight of a R 22 and the R 22 Beta?
4) Is there an Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) that would increase the Max Gross weight?
5) Is there an R22 web site?
Any responses would be greatly appreciated.
IHL
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Dun Laoghaire
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IHL,
the answer to your first question is that there isn't. The R22 is the family and then you've got the Standard, Alpha, Beta and Beta II. So you need to refine your question.
Most of your questions will be answered in the flight manual.
Interestingly the only difference between the Alpha and the Beta is the latter has a five minute rating and the former doesn't. So the difference is a question of certification. Otherwise they're identical machines.
As for web sites there is www.r22helicopters.com and that has plenty of links to other R22 sites. Or just do a search in Google or whatever search engine takes your fancy.
Hope that helps!
Irlandés
the answer to your first question is that there isn't. The R22 is the family and then you've got the Standard, Alpha, Beta and Beta II. So you need to refine your question.
Most of your questions will be answered in the flight manual.
Interestingly the only difference between the Alpha and the Beta is the latter has a five minute rating and the former doesn't. So the difference is a question of certification. Otherwise they're identical machines.
As for web sites there is www.r22helicopters.com and that has plenty of links to other R22 sites. Or just do a search in Google or whatever search engine takes your fancy.
Hope that helps!
Irlandés
They are all just like real helicopters, only smaller and with less power.
The answer to #4 is no, it won't pull the skin off a rice pudding as it is so increasing the AUM just means waiting until it's blowing 30 kts so you can get airborne!
The only advantage of the low inertia rotor system is that when the aircraft rolls over, the blades just bend and the engine stops instead of cartwheeling you around the field (I Know, I have tried this for real!)
The answer to #4 is no, it won't pull the skin off a rice pudding as it is so increasing the AUM just means waiting until it's blowing 30 kts so you can get airborne!
The only advantage of the low inertia rotor system is that when the aircraft rolls over, the blades just bend and the engine stops instead of cartwheeling you around the field (I Know, I have tried this for real!)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Shropshire
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apart from any minor differences between specific aircraft, the Beta was given an 0-320-B2C 160 bhp engine over the 0-320-A2B/C 150 bhp. The Beta 2 getting an 0-360-J2A 145 bhp.
Weights go like this;
Max Gross 22 & HP 1300lb (590kg)
Max Gross A, B & B2 1370lb (622kg)
Min Gross all types 920lb (417kg)
These weights assume keeping within weight and balance limitations.
There are variations and additional limitations on types i.e. Police, Mariner and Mariner 2
Apart from the Robinson Helicopters site www.robinsonheli.com there is an onofficial site www.r22helicopters.com
Hope it helps.
Weights go like this;
Max Gross 22 & HP 1300lb (590kg)
Max Gross A, B & B2 1370lb (622kg)
Min Gross all types 920lb (417kg)
These weights assume keeping within weight and balance limitations.
There are variations and additional limitations on types i.e. Police, Mariner and Mariner 2
Apart from the Robinson Helicopters site www.robinsonheli.com there is an onofficial site www.r22helicopters.com
Hope it helps.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simplicity
I feel strongly that all training ships should have no frills whatsoever. I had an early R22 (1990) with no govenor or carb heat assistance and it taught you well to monitor RPMs and carb heat. Later models make pilots lazy and more than one has come to grief when renting an early model where these things are not done for you. I always reckoned partial help is worse than no help at all - only fuel injection in light pistons solves the carb heat problem - I think the R22 is better off without any assistance.
My current machine, an ex AAC Bell 47, was always reckoned to produce good pilots because you learnt to 'fly with your ears'. You then take that awareness with you to whatever machine you fly. Good RPM management, as an aural skill, is best learnt on a machine like the B47 that has a poor correlator and no govenor.
Simple is best and training should not be made easier with switches and buttons. The higher the workload as a student, the better and safer the eventual pilot.
My current machine, an ex AAC Bell 47, was always reckoned to produce good pilots because you learnt to 'fly with your ears'. You then take that awareness with you to whatever machine you fly. Good RPM management, as an aural skill, is best learnt on a machine like the B47 that has a poor correlator and no govenor.
Simple is best and training should not be made easier with switches and buttons. The higher the workload as a student, the better and safer the eventual pilot.
My guess is that for a system of R22 size you would need <3hp.
Yes, it would be an unwanted power drain in the R22, but if you were replacing the electric trim system in the S300 or the Enstroms then you wouldn't notice it as the electrical system will drawn a similar amopunt of power when in use.
CRAN
Yes, it would be an unwanted power drain in the R22, but if you were replacing the electric trim system in the S300 or the Enstroms then you wouldn't notice it as the electrical system will drawn a similar amopunt of power when in use.
CRAN
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada/around
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With an aircraft that has a control feel as light as the R22 with no boost, hydraulics would do little to make the machine 'easier' to fly. It would just make light controls even lighter and take a minor vibration out of the pilot's hand.
Added complexity and operating cost for minimal benefit is rarely a good idea.
Added complexity and operating cost for minimal benefit is rarely a good idea.