MD600
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MD600
FYI for all those who fly the 600. Both Sheriff departments in So. California, and I have also heard Border Patrol have grounded all of theirs. Started with L.A. County finding a broken mounting bolt for the tailboom to the fuselage. Then Orange County found an enlongated bolt and stress cracks. L.A. County went back and found all of the ones they have to have stess cracks. I have heard that Border Patrol has found cracks also.
Just info as the normal process can be slow, and the results of the boom coming off is something that I would hate to hear about.
Just info as the normal process can be slow, and the results of the boom coming off is something that I would hate to hear about.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have been sent some photos of the la sherrifs but i was not aware of the same problems with the border patrol
is there any border patrol people out there to confirm they are grounded
hover bover u anything to say
regards all
is there any border patrol people out there to confirm they are grounded
hover bover u anything to say
regards all
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ha Ha ,
Guess what, on our 2nd 600s first 6 month/100 Hour one of the captive nuts (of which there are 4 which hold the bolts which hold the tailboom on)was stripped so only 3 M8 bolts holding tailboom on !!!! It seems the captive nuts are spliting if over tightened, then you cant change the captive nuts without deskinning part of the airframe!
I hadnt heard about the splits around the bolts, but I know that the slots in the tailboom are prone to cracking at the end of the slot!There has also been a mod to the tailboom around the bolt holes, it was a complete new tailboom part No. though I think, from memory Im sure ithad something to do with the holes in the tailboom having metal inserts or something.
It aint fallen off yet !!!!
Regards
Hover Bover.
PS
Hows the fadec Mr 600, all fixed !!!!!
Guess what, on our 2nd 600s first 6 month/100 Hour one of the captive nuts (of which there are 4 which hold the bolts which hold the tailboom on)was stripped so only 3 M8 bolts holding tailboom on !!!! It seems the captive nuts are spliting if over tightened, then you cant change the captive nuts without deskinning part of the airframe!
I hadnt heard about the splits around the bolts, but I know that the slots in the tailboom are prone to cracking at the end of the slot!There has also been a mod to the tailboom around the bolt holes, it was a complete new tailboom part No. though I think, from memory Im sure ithad something to do with the holes in the tailboom having metal inserts or something.
It aint fallen off yet !!!!
Regards
Hover Bover.
PS
Hows the fadec Mr 600, all fixed !!!!!
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
Check the maintenance manual to see if it calls for a dry torque. If it does, check if the mechanics are adding a bit of anti seize compound (or other kind of lubricant). In some cases the mechanic will add this compound or some lubricant because he feels that the boom is on for life and if it ever has to come off the lubricant will make it easier to break the torque on the bolts and captive nuts. This was a major problem on B-214s and AH1-Js in Iran. The anti seize or lubricant can double or triple the tensile stress on the bolts and the bolt and nut threads causing the bolts to fracture or the nut to fracture.
I would like to add this, sometimes the maintenance manual does not address wet or dry torques. I would strongly suggest you check with your techrep and have him check with MD Engineering.
[ 29 October 2001: Message edited by: Lu Zuckerman ]
I would like to add this, sometimes the maintenance manual does not address wet or dry torques. I would strongly suggest you check with your techrep and have him check with MD Engineering.
[ 29 October 2001: Message edited by: Lu Zuckerman ]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hover bover
yes fadec now all ok. had a eng out the other day with 110 lbs in the tank there was no fuel in the hmu
auto from 70 ft i now know i can do a auto on my own [big thanks to mike at mdhi mesa ] i never knew if it was me or him that did the last bit.
got some other pics of cracks on la sherrifs if you want them regards
yes fadec now all ok. had a eng out the other day with 110 lbs in the tank there was no fuel in the hmu
auto from 70 ft i now know i can do a auto on my own [big thanks to mike at mdhi mesa ] i never knew if it was me or him that did the last bit.
got some other pics of cracks on la sherrifs if you want them regards
I noticed with interest that MD states that the cracks are not "flight critical".
This is probably a factual statement, as if all the MD-600's in the world never flew again, would anyone notice?
This is probably a factual statement, as if all the MD-600's in the world never flew again, would anyone notice?
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
To: Cyclic Hotline
Assuming that MD Helicopters performed an FMEA as a part of the design process it may have been determined that three of the four bolts are capable of reacting all normal structural loads. It would also be assumed that the inspection program would uncover the defective nut or bolt and it/they would be replaced before further damage could occur. However one poster indicated that the boom or fuselage had to be deskinned in order to access the captive nut. This is poor design and if the nut or bolt are not accessible then the remaining three bolts would be operating at a higher stress level and be subject to failure. If this were the case the remaining two bolts would be incapable of reacting the loads and would eventually fail and there goes the boom.
[ 01 November 2001: Message edited by: Lu Zuckerman ]
Assuming that MD Helicopters performed an FMEA as a part of the design process it may have been determined that three of the four bolts are capable of reacting all normal structural loads. It would also be assumed that the inspection program would uncover the defective nut or bolt and it/they would be replaced before further damage could occur. However one poster indicated that the boom or fuselage had to be deskinned in order to access the captive nut. This is poor design and if the nut or bolt are not accessible then the remaining three bolts would be operating at a higher stress level and be subject to failure. If this were the case the remaining two bolts would be incapable of reacting the loads and would eventually fail and there goes the boom.
[ 01 November 2001: Message edited by: Lu Zuckerman ]
Scalextric for Men
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern England outside the M25
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could someone explain to me. Why the nuts would be affixed to the airframe. Is this because difficulty of access. Does anyone have photos to display?
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
On many helicoter designs the bolts and or the nuts are accessible from the outside. If the helicopter must be deskinned to gain access then it constitutes poor design. On some larger helicopters you you can acess the nuts and bolts from the inside.
To: Capn Notarious
On a good design the nuts are of the barrel type and are not attached to the airframe. On this type of installation the nuts are installed from the outside and slid into pockets in the airframe. On other larger helicopters the nuts and bolts are of conventional design.
[ 03 November 2001: Message edited by: Lu Zuckerman ]
To: Capn Notarious
On a good design the nuts are of the barrel type and are not attached to the airframe. On this type of installation the nuts are installed from the outside and slid into pockets in the airframe. On other larger helicopters the nuts and bolts are of conventional design.
[ 03 November 2001: Message edited by: Lu Zuckerman ]
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You want one? L.A. Sheriff is selling all three of theirs. Although they are the "newest" of the fleet, they are the first to go (fleet is being replaced by AS350-B2's). And that has every pilot except one, dancing. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" /> . .. .Really, although the new "YSAS" helps them, it only covers up the problems they have. They are a 500 frame designed for 420hp now putting out 600hp+. They are having cracking problems in the internal structures. And I do not believe we have seen the last of it.. .. .They are a handful in turbulance. In a right hand turn, the fusalage covers the airflow over the tail (at slow speeds) and due to this, it will tuck its nose down and spin to the right. You can stop it, just that it will do it. L.A. Sheriff has always practiced full touchdown auto's (and have some bent frames to show), but will not do it in the 600. If there is a crosswind, the 600 will turn itself into the wind during the flare, and you can not stop it. Add the 400 foot+ skid to go on top of it after the flare.. .. .They have wind limitations in relationship to weight and altitude, which puts a big damper on it operating at high altitude.. .. .Nick will be able to say it better, but look at the rotor blades. They are designed for the 520N (okay, the 500 with a foot more), not the 600. All they did was put the sixth blade on. You can point to most of the problems with it as the blades not able to handle the power and weight.. .. .And it really needs hydraulics!. .. .But it really is fast. And accelerates faster then most any other ship.. .. .Transition is fairly easy if you have NOTAR time. It you have no NOTAR time, it takes getting use to the tail and how it reacts (slow). The tail takes a lot of horsepower to run it and in an auto, that translates into a lot higher rate of desent.. .. .Although there will be some on here that like them, you can see I do not.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Helimark,. .. .I would have too disagree ! The 600 will only tuck its nose when flown out of trim, not in a balanced turn to the right. Its to do with the air traveling across the nose of the A/C, thats why it has that funny serrated foil up the screen, to try and disturb the airflow. But I agree it will tuck its nose. Biggest time to be wary is not actually in the turn to the right but when transitioning away with a strong wind from the port side, as if you arent flying the ball and you are keeping the skids straight across the ground it will tuck its nose as you are effectively flying out of trim, and you will quickly learn as its a real attention grabber!. .. .Autos are no biggy, but if you are used to a jetranger then I guess it could be interesting.. .. .It flys quick and very smooth, as helimark says the notar has its quirks but I guess you get used to them, the 600 is great for putting in five people and flying quick for 2hrs 15mins. .and putting down again, It is not good for slow speed flight ( I would guess that is why all of the law enforcement dont like them) Keep the 600 between 40 and 140 knots and its happy, fast transitions are the way to go , the less time spent between 15 and 40 knots the better.. .. .Got about 400 hours on the 600, and no major problems just as long as the tailboom doesnt fall off. LOL.. .. .Regards. .HoverBover
I do not know anything about the MD600 from personal experience, only a few passing comments from friends and colleagues who have operated them and the 520. Never heard anything good about them.
I would qualify that statement by adding that I think that the Hughes/MD/Boeing/MDH (whatever) products I have had the misfortune to operate are the most labour intensive, unreliable, expensive and poorly supported product from any manufacturer. I wouldn't have another one if you gave it to me for free!
I would like to know if the points raised by the GAO report on the INS MD600 purchase were remedied? I found many of them to be equally applicable to the MD500 series, and the majority of those deficiencies had been around for decades, not the short term.
GAO site
Enter MD 600 in report search.
Apologies for the difficulty in accessing this report. Can't get the UBB code to work correctly.
Edited for new software
I would qualify that statement by adding that I think that the Hughes/MD/Boeing/MDH (whatever) products I have had the misfortune to operate are the most labour intensive, unreliable, expensive and poorly supported product from any manufacturer. I wouldn't have another one if you gave it to me for free!
I would like to know if the points raised by the GAO report on the INS MD600 purchase were remedied? I found many of them to be equally applicable to the MD500 series, and the majority of those deficiencies had been around for decades, not the short term.
GAO site
Enter MD 600 in report search.
Apologies for the difficulty in accessing this report. Can't get the UBB code to work correctly.
Edited for new software
Last edited by Cyclic Hotline; 4th Apr 2002 at 04:31.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for correcting me Hoverbover. You are right. Keep it in trim and that problem will not appear unless the conditions are right.. .. .Not sure if this applies for the whole tailboom, but when the test pilot (do not remember his name)lost the tailboom during testing, he used the collective to keep the attitude under control and get it to the ground without being a lawn dart. He gave a lecture about it where I work and it was pretty interesting.. .. .There is also a rumor running around about several other cracks in different locations other then the one the AD covers. If so, MD is doing a pretty good job covering it up.. .. .Last I heard about the GAO report, the YSAS fixed most of the problems (covered it up).
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hover bover . .totaly agree with you . .the 600 can be a handfull at times but does not all performance machines take more handling . .the tail has cracked [but they have stayed on no chopping through tailbooms like other performance types . .. .note to mdhi WHERE IS THE YSAS KITS EVERY BODY IS WAITING FOR..
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know about the 600N but I have over 1000Hrs on the 520N and I tell you it's the best helicopter to do Long line slingning. The Notar system is also taking off presure of the pilot shoulders when your landing in dirty confined aerias fifty times a day. It is a lot safer. It is also ez to fly when you get used to it. Not to mention that it can be easely landed with an antitrust failure. But it does need a bit a maintenance.. . The questions you to answer first is where will you operate and what you want to do with it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" />
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ylhelico, I am not sure how you get that the NOTAR is safer in an anti-thrust failure. The factory will tell you that it is not. They just use the line that it is very unlikely that you will have that problem. Look at all the warnings in the flight manual.
Guest
Posts: n/a
NOTARs have a tail rotor, it is that fancy variable pitch fan inside the tail cone. They also have a mandatory stability system, and a full control system for the slot in back. There are by far more parts to go wrong, more handling problems, more wasted power with the Notar than with a regular tail rotor.. .. .OTOH, the Notar is much better protected so that the danger of a tail strike is almost nil (unless you bang up the rotating mechanism that diverts the air), and the Notar is quite a bit quieter than most tail rotors.. .. .The question is never as simple as "Do you want a Notar or not?" It is always stickier, and involves choices, such as "Do you want a Notar, or an extra passenger?" or "Do you want a Notar, or would you like to launch VFR without a SAS system?". .. .Let the customer decide!