Anyone flown (or fly) the Huey?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strakes for Hueys?
NAVAIR PATUXENT RIVER, MD - Press Release
Faced with increasing fatigue cracking in the tail booms of aging UH-1N Huey helicopters, H-1 program engineers here recently applied a commercially available aerodynamic device to help prolong the helicopter’s life as well as reduce pilot work load.
The device, a strake kit, developed by Boundary Layer Research, Inc of Everett Wash., consists primarily of an aerodynamically shaped strip of metal attached to left side of the Huey tail boom, according to Bob Moore, senior systems analyst with PMA-276.
“We were looking for something to fix our fatigue problems in the Huey tail booms in the short term,” Moore said. “We’ve got tail boom fixtures and other fixes in place, but we needed to reduce the stresses on the tail boom that cause the fatigue. We found this and saw it as something that would reduce the fatigue and help get us to our long-term fix for the tail boom.”
NASA, according to Moore, initially developed the technology. The technology was then bought by BLR and marketed to civilian single-rotor helicopter operators.
By manipulating boundary layer airflow produced by the helicopter’s main rotor as it passes over the tail boom, the strake kit improves the helicopter’s hover stability, climb and cruise characteristics, according to Dave George, spokesman for BLR.
Originally, the problem NASA discovered was that rotor wash passing over the tail boom of single rotor helicopters, like the Marine Corps’ UH-1N Huey, creates a fluctuating low pressure area along the advancing blade side of the tail boom. This results in a strong “suction” (or lift) force opposing the tail rotor thrust, thus requiring more power to the tail rotor to be effective.
With these increased opposing forces at work, affected helicopters experience increased component wear, greater fuel consumption, structural and performance degradation, increased pilot workload and a restricted flight envelope, according to BLR engineers.
And with older helicopters, the problems are even more manifest.
“We’ve been having consistent fatigue cracks,” Moore explained. “Between the two types of aircraft we support, the UH-1N for the Marines and the HH-1N for the Navy, we see a lot of hard flying. The UH-1N operates in the utility mode with lots of maneuvering, landings, etc. The HH-1N operates at higher altitudes, high winds and high gross weight.
“Both of them see a lot of stress,” he added. “And both of them are old.”
An aerodynamic process, called vortex shedding, is the culprit, according to BLR engineers.
The rotor downwash only flows smoothly down the sides of the tail boom for a short distance before curling into a vortex. The vortex gets bigger as it flows down until it is too big to “hide” under the tail boom and gets swept away. Meanwhile, the next vortex forms on the opposite side of the tail boom and the process repeats.
This alternating vortex shedding causes the tail boom to wag back and forth, and the associated vibration and oscillation causes increased fatigue and stress in both airframes and pilots trying to counteract the problem.
Enter the strakes.
The NASA research indicated that the strakes, when installed, would eliminate the problem by dramatically decreasing the vortexes and their effects by smoothing the airflow around the tail boom and eliminating the alternating sideways lift.
Moore, and his H-1 program colleagues who support fielded UH-1N’s and HH-1N’s, found out about the NASA research and the BLR strake kits and with the engineering support of Maj. Rick Bowen, the PMA-276 deputy program manager for UH/HH-1N Huey, they were soon testing a kit on a Huey assigned to Rotary Wing Test Squadron 21 here.
The kit, as applied, consisted of two strakes, each of which was formed from three 42-inch segments attached to the left side of the tail boom.
Rotary Wing’s Maj. Pat Lindauer evaluated the strake kit installation in 10 flight hours flown over the course of nine flights Feb. 5-14. His maneuvers included turns, approaches and departures, hovers, level, climbing and descending flight, and simulated engine failures.
“I was a little skeptical we would see all of the benefits [the BLR and NASA representatives] said we would see (lower power required to hover, lower tail boom loads, better pedal margins, more stable hover in yaw axis, etc.),” Lindauer said. “Because we did just a quick look, we were unable to measure some of the benefits and others were within the error of the standard aircraft instrumentation. However, the stab bar aircraft we did the test on was noticeably more stable in the yaw axis.”
The end result for the Fleet?
“I think the biggest benefits the fleet will see is improved flying qualities of the stab bar Hueys.”
Pilots at Marine Corps Air Station New River, NC have already agreed.
“The first time I picked up, I was over controlling the aircraft, but then it smoothed out,” reported Maj. James Judkins, maintenance officer for HML/A-167 at New River, and evaluator of the strake kit, after a recent flight in a strake-equipped UH-1N Huey. “It almost felt like I was flying in [a helicopter equipped with an automatic flight control system]. Hover performance seemed improved dramatically, and flying straight and level seemed to be easier than normal.
“I truly believe this modification is one the entire fleet should desire to get,” he added. “It’s an outstanding modification to the overall aircraft.”
With the initial indicators so good, the strake kits are on their way to the Fleet, according to Tom Boswell, program management support for the Huey deputy program manager.
“It follows that if you put this thing on the aircraft,” Boswell said, “and you need less tail rotor authority, it must mean you have less stress. We’re going to do a lot of qualitative testing to make absolutely sure we’re reducing fatigue and how much we’re reducing it by. In the meantime, we’ll have a formal Engineering Change Proposal approved within 180 days and then a Technical Directive will be released to the Fleet to authorize installation.”
Testing will also take place here to determine if the strakes will yield the same benefits when installed on an AH-1W SuperCobra.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Just over there....no there.
Age: 61
Posts: 364
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old hat I'm afraid, I've been flying them for over two years now on 205's, makes a hell of a difference.
Be interesting on 206's, I wonder when they will be on the market?
Be interesting on 206's, I wonder when they will be on the market?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Chilliwack, BC Canada
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting comment Rick.
I haven't heard such a strong positive statement on them before. Some have said "no change" and some have said a bit of a change. We have a few of the fleet outfitted, but the jury is still out......
What model of the 205 do you fly, what type of work, what altitudes, etc ??
I haven't heard such a strong positive statement on them before. Some have said "no change" and some have said a bit of a change. We have a few of the fleet outfitted, but the jury is still out......
What model of the 205 do you fly, what type of work, what altitudes, etc ??
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Citizen of the globe
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi guys
I,m with Rick on the Strakes. Flown them lots on 204's and the difference is very positive. The aircraft is a lot more stable "out of wind" and the increase in performance is very noticable when moving from a strake machine to a non strake machine (we estimate 8-12% performance improvement).
I suspect that the unloading of the vertical stab will be a benefit structurally down the road but only time will prove me right or wrong on this one.
I,m with Rick on the Strakes. Flown them lots on 204's and the difference is very positive. The aircraft is a lot more stable "out of wind" and the increase in performance is very noticable when moving from a strake machine to a non strake machine (we estimate 8-12% performance improvement).
I suspect that the unloading of the vertical stab will be a benefit structurally down the road but only time will prove me right or wrong on this one.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hello Kitty City
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditto...the difference is significant!
So significant in fact that you need to be careful about hitting the RIGHT pedal stop in auto rotation with just a small breeze from the left....
...concur with the rest too! Esp the increased tail rotor authority in a heavy OGE hover.
**for what is worth the Brits have had them on their Sea kings for donkeys years!
So significant in fact that you need to be careful about hitting the RIGHT pedal stop in auto rotation with just a small breeze from the left....
...concur with the rest too! Esp the increased tail rotor authority in a heavy OGE hover.
**for what is worth the Brits have had them on their Sea kings for donkeys years!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Just over there....no there.
Age: 61
Posts: 364
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It didn't really hit me at first, but the most noticable thing was that I was using at least 50% less pedal movement, especially on approach and hover. I haven't really noticed that much more lifting performance though I must admit.
407 driver: we use A Bell 206B's and Augusta-Bell B3's. No hot and high stuff but plenty of max AUW flying and lots of pleasure flights ( 40-50 lifts a day with 4 pax) in some very interesting confined little landing sites so I would be really interested in the strakes for the 206, especially given the weak tail rotor.
407 driver: we use A Bell 206B's and Augusta-Bell B3's. No hot and high stuff but plenty of max AUW flying and lots of pleasure flights ( 40-50 lifts a day with 4 pax) in some very interesting confined little landing sites so I would be really interested in the strakes for the 206, especially given the weak tail rotor.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have/had strakes on our UH-1H. The report from the Aircraft Research and Developement Unit (ARDU), aussie equivelent to Pax river, is not as positive as the comments above. It provided no tangible power improvement. It provided better pedal authority in some wind azimuths at HAUW. I don't believe the stability issues were that different. This is all from memory after attending briefs, reading the report (about 4-5 years ago) and ofcourse flying the aircraft.
On the other hand NASA and the Kiwis were very positive about the benifits. It just wasn't reflected in our testing. My own experience operating High and heavy on operations is that it makes ****** all difference.
On the other hand NASA and the Kiwis were very positive about the benifits. It just wasn't reflected in our testing. My own experience operating High and heavy on operations is that it makes ****** all difference.
Bell Huey operating costs
Does anyone here have an approximate figure on the direct operating costs for a Huey UH1H in restricted category?
Also how much fuel does it burn pr/hr? We don´t quite agree on it but I seem to remember having heard somewhere about 100 USG pr/hr!
Also how much fuel does it burn pr/hr? We don´t quite agree on it but I seem to remember having heard somewhere about 100 USG pr/hr!
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
Ain't the internet wonderful?
To: Aesir
Here are the hourly costs for the Huey (205):
Consumables
Fuel (95 GPH) @$1.50 US Gallon $142.00
Oil and lubricants (3% of fuel costs) 4.28
Maintenance and labor @ $35.00 162.40
Airframe maintenance parts only 320.00
Engine costs
Overhaul or exchange 145.54
Line maintenance 14.89
Total direct cost of operation 790.30
Normalized cost of operation 100%
Here are the hourly costs for the Huey (205):
Consumables
Fuel (95 GPH) @$1.50 US Gallon $142.00
Oil and lubricants (3% of fuel costs) 4.28
Maintenance and labor @ $35.00 162.40
Airframe maintenance parts only 320.00
Engine costs
Overhaul or exchange 145.54
Line maintenance 14.89
Total direct cost of operation 790.30
Normalized cost of operation 100%
Lu:
Unfortunately the Huey costs are different from the 205, because they keep bringing out Service Bulletins to change expensive things and do expensive inspections.
Our Huey costs about $30,000* PER HOUR when you look at all the costs!!
* But it only flies 12 hours per year!! But still horribly expensive when you aren't allowed to carry anybody.
Unfortunately the Huey costs are different from the 205, because they keep bringing out Service Bulletins to change expensive things and do expensive inspections.
Our Huey costs about $30,000* PER HOUR when you look at all the costs!!
* But it only flies 12 hours per year!! But still horribly expensive when you aren't allowed to carry anybody.
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
Huey v 205 I goofed
To: Ascend Charlie
The prices quoted in my post reflect the cost of operating the Huey not the 205. The prices were a cost comparison between the Huey and the Huey II upgrade. I can't verify the accuracy but they were quoted on the internet so that must mean that they are accurate.
The prices quoted in my post reflect the cost of operating the Huey not the 205. The prices were a cost comparison between the Huey and the Huey II upgrade. I can't verify the accuracy but they were quoted on the internet so that must mean that they are accurate.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Cape Town
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Restricted category UH-1H can only be the famous ZU 205 flying pax from the African aviation forum.
Good old South African aviation authorities saw fit to allow paying public access to old warbirds including a UH-1H in Cape Town.
Now then the law as written gives special dispensations and different rules about AD's etc and also allows other non factory mods to be done which are a considerable cost saver. You are also allowed to overhaul your own components.
Additionally there are other suppliers who have legal STC'd mods which peeve Bell off as they are approved but are a quarter of the price.
I believe a restriced 205 under these conditions can cost less than a 206!!!!
Good old South African aviation authorities saw fit to allow paying public access to old warbirds including a UH-1H in Cape Town.
Now then the law as written gives special dispensations and different rules about AD's etc and also allows other non factory mods to be done which are a considerable cost saver. You are also allowed to overhaul your own components.
Additionally there are other suppliers who have legal STC'd mods which peeve Bell off as they are approved but are a quarter of the price.
I believe a restriced 205 under these conditions can cost less than a 206!!!!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Harwich
Age: 65
Posts: 777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you tried Bells' website? I've looked at various manufacturers' sites; most of them make you aware of the existence of a model of machine and that's it. A look at Bell's site, on the other hand, will enable you to build one yourself from raw materials - the difference was that pronounced when it came to detail.
Thanks guy´s for the replies! I kinda have the feel that maybe a AS-350BII would be cheaper to operate for sling work than the UH-1H now! I don´t have enough work for a B-407 yet.
To "Hilico" I must say that in my experience NEVER ever trust anything that the manufacturer of a helicopter tell´s you!!! Although "if" I would trust any one´s word it would be the word of Bell helicopters.
Mostly the people in the field who operate these ships day to day are the one´s to ask and the one´s who know the actual cost of running the helicopter types.
I am a "BELL" man, but thats mainly because I know them and I know what I have, they break down and have their problems like any other helicopter. But I´ll try everything to get a Bell aircraft to do the job before I try anything else.
To "Hilico" I must say that in my experience NEVER ever trust anything that the manufacturer of a helicopter tell´s you!!! Although "if" I would trust any one´s word it would be the word of Bell helicopters.
Mostly the people in the field who operate these ships day to day are the one´s to ask and the one´s who know the actual cost of running the helicopter types.
I am a "BELL" man, but thats mainly because I know them and I know what I have, they break down and have their problems like any other helicopter. But I´ll try everything to get a Bell aircraft to do the job before I try anything else.
"hatches, harness, heater, demister, electrics, volt/loadmeter, force trim off, caution panel out, fuel quantity pressure selection, Ts and Ps, audio, auto, full throttle, 66..."
There ya go!
There ya go!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UH-1Y successfully completes special warfare testing
NAVAIR PATUXENT RIVER, MD
The Marine Corps’ newest utility helicopter, the UH-1Y, completed testing of its Special Warfare Kit at Marine Corps Base Quantico, last week.
The 10-day long event tested the helicopter’s ability to insert Marines into special warfare situations where landing the helicopter is not possible.
Static line hung jumper evaluation, SPIE rig, rappelling, fast rope, and free-fall parachute operations from heights including 10,000 feet comprised the evaluations of the new helicopter’s abilities.
Correcting power deficiencies in the currently fielded Hueys is one of the primary reasons for the upgrade, as well as providing a platform for the Marines capable of inserting small combat teams into confined or rugged areas.
“We’ve restored the power margin lost in the N model,” Metzger added. “The Marines will be getting a good platform for helicopter rope suspension techniques.”
The improvements incorporated in the UH-1Y, including more powerful General Electric T-700 engines and an all-composite four-bladed rotor system, give the new Huey a vastly improved capability to conduct these special warfare missions over the currently fielded Huey, the UH-1N.
“Our special warfare missions play an essential role in the Marine Corps’ MAGTF concept and Seapower 21 Sea Strike core capabilities,” explained Maj. Brad Schieferdecker, H-1 Upgrades deputy program manager for Engineering and Manufacturing Development here. “The UH-1N’s restrictive power margin and weight restrictions have reduced our ability to do these missions in recent years. With the UH-1Y’s expanded performance, we’ll get back to being the Corps’ workhorse for these missions.”
The program recently passed a major milestone by gaining approval from the Defense Acquisition Board to begin low-rate initial production. Full-rate production of the 84-percent common AH-1Z and UH-1Y helicopters is scheduled to begin in 2006.
After remanufacture, the aircraft will feature the latest technology in rotor and drive train design, avionics, sensors and weapons. They also share approximately 84 percent of their parts, making them far more maintainable, supportable, survivable and deployable than today’s H-1 aircraft.
The H-1 Upgrades integrated test team here currently has achieved approximately 1,500 flight test hours with five aircraft (three AH-1Z and two UH-1Y test aircraft, of which all but one AH-1Z are production representative). The test aircraft have flown 220 knots, maneuvered from –0.4 to +3.5 g’s and been well above the 10,000-foot altitude mark.
By 2014, the Marine Corps will have procured 100 UH-1Y Hueys and 180 AH-1Z Super Cobras.
The Marine Corps’ newest utility helicopter, the UH-1Y, completed testing of its Special Warfare Kit at Marine Corps Base Quantico, last week.
The 10-day long event tested the helicopter’s ability to insert Marines into special warfare situations where landing the helicopter is not possible.
Static line hung jumper evaluation, SPIE rig, rappelling, fast rope, and free-fall parachute operations from heights including 10,000 feet comprised the evaluations of the new helicopter’s abilities.
Correcting power deficiencies in the currently fielded Hueys is one of the primary reasons for the upgrade, as well as providing a platform for the Marines capable of inserting small combat teams into confined or rugged areas.
“We’ve restored the power margin lost in the N model,” Metzger added. “The Marines will be getting a good platform for helicopter rope suspension techniques.”
The improvements incorporated in the UH-1Y, including more powerful General Electric T-700 engines and an all-composite four-bladed rotor system, give the new Huey a vastly improved capability to conduct these special warfare missions over the currently fielded Huey, the UH-1N.
“Our special warfare missions play an essential role in the Marine Corps’ MAGTF concept and Seapower 21 Sea Strike core capabilities,” explained Maj. Brad Schieferdecker, H-1 Upgrades deputy program manager for Engineering and Manufacturing Development here. “The UH-1N’s restrictive power margin and weight restrictions have reduced our ability to do these missions in recent years. With the UH-1Y’s expanded performance, we’ll get back to being the Corps’ workhorse for these missions.”
The program recently passed a major milestone by gaining approval from the Defense Acquisition Board to begin low-rate initial production. Full-rate production of the 84-percent common AH-1Z and UH-1Y helicopters is scheduled to begin in 2006.
After remanufacture, the aircraft will feature the latest technology in rotor and drive train design, avionics, sensors and weapons. They also share approximately 84 percent of their parts, making them far more maintainable, supportable, survivable and deployable than today’s H-1 aircraft.
The H-1 Upgrades integrated test team here currently has achieved approximately 1,500 flight test hours with five aircraft (three AH-1Z and two UH-1Y test aircraft, of which all but one AH-1Z are production representative). The test aircraft have flown 220 knots, maneuvered from –0.4 to +3.5 g’s and been well above the 10,000-foot altitude mark.
By 2014, the Marine Corps will have procured 100 UH-1Y Hueys and 180 AH-1Z Super Cobras.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 421 Likes
on
222 Posts
Caption to photo no. 1:
"On approaching Kemble, sensing that PF#1 was about to demonstrate his notoriously steep approach to runway 31, the senior passenger made an executive decision."
"On approaching Kemble, sensing that PF#1 was about to demonstrate his notoriously steep approach to runway 31, the senior passenger made an executive decision."
Shy Torque:
Very funny. But I don't think ten to twelve degrees is "notoriously" steep, especially for a guy (TOT) who claimed to have as much experience as he did. You'd think he would've known better, given the well-publicized noise-sensitive nature of Kemble. But what can you do...
Maybe if helicopter pilots made steeper approaches they'd be looking more downward and not outward and wouldn't hit wires with their Gazelles? Just a thought.
"On approaching Kemble, sensing that PF#1 was about to demonstrate his notoriously steep approach to runway 31, the senior passenger made an executive decision."
Maybe if helicopter pilots made steeper approaches they'd be looking more downward and not outward and wouldn't hit wires with their Gazelles? Just a thought.