Robinson R44
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R44 Tail rotor gearbox question
Hi all,
The 44 Astro I have been using was seeping a little of it's tail rotor gearbox oil, but nothing bad, had it checked and refilled yesterday and today it managed to vent nearly all the oil in 1.8 hours flying.
Engineers are a bit baffled, there is obviously a bit too much pressure in there for some reason, anyone experienced any similar problems?
Thanks
The 44 Astro I have been using was seeping a little of it's tail rotor gearbox oil, but nothing bad, had it checked and refilled yesterday and today it managed to vent nearly all the oil in 1.8 hours flying.
Engineers are a bit baffled, there is obviously a bit too much pressure in there for some reason, anyone experienced any similar problems?
Thanks
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No definately not overfilled, yesterday, pre 1.8 hour flight and was refilled today and was still venting quite badly post 20 minute check flight, telatemp normal.
Also checked gearbox by hand post refill flight today and temp felt was normal.
Very little oil left post 1.8 hour flight even when the rear of the aircraft was lowered
Mystery continues?
Also checked gearbox by hand post refill flight today and temp felt was normal.
Very little oil left post 1.8 hour flight even when the rear of the aircraft was lowered
Mystery continues?
I can't help with the troubleshooting, but a critical component is leaking oil, and it's not known where the oil is going to. When will the aircraft next be flying, and will you be at the controls ?
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeenshire
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft is at the engineering facility and won't be flown until this problem is thougly checked and resolved.
It's just that they have looked at it a couple of times and are a bit stumped and I wondered if anyone else had had a similar experience and could throw any light on the problem
It's just that they have looked at it a couple of times and are a bit stumped and I wondered if anyone else had had a similar experience and could throw any light on the problem
Flew an Astro that other day for the first time in about 12 months, since then I have been flying a HYD Clipper.
To be honest I found no problems with it, jus the initial felling of the controls being "heavier".
Flown the R44 alot in the past few years and always enjoy it, the Raven's are great with the HYD's, but as previously mentioned they are a pain in the @rse without them, regular practice of HYD's off training is a good idea, just to be safe!
The R44 is a great machine 2 people up, with 4 (in a Clipper with the added bottle and cr@p) is becomes short on power and you got to be careful and not red line it!
Overall - I love it, use it every day and find it great for dotting my client around the country, next to the Jetranger!
Happy Flying,
TiP
To be honest I found no problems with it, jus the initial felling of the controls being "heavier".
Flown the R44 alot in the past few years and always enjoy it, the Raven's are great with the HYD's, but as previously mentioned they are a pain in the @rse without them, regular practice of HYD's off training is a good idea, just to be safe!
The R44 is a great machine 2 people up, with 4 (in a Clipper with the added bottle and cr@p) is becomes short on power and you got to be careful and not red line it!
Overall - I love it, use it every day and find it great for dotting my client around the country, next to the Jetranger!
Happy Flying,
TiP
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
r22/r44 doors
Anyone out there have any ideas on this
I had a query by a client who spends alot of time in our 3 r44's regarding the doors and if we had to ditch or suffered a hard landing for whatever reason that the doors became jammed in some way can they be knocked out, (windows or breaking the hinges).
I hadn't though about it that much but the doors are flimsy particulary when you get clients even after they're breifed slamming them or putting to much weight on them.
cheers r44tropic
I had a query by a client who spends alot of time in our 3 r44's regarding the doors and if we had to ditch or suffered a hard landing for whatever reason that the doors became jammed in some way can they be knocked out, (windows or breaking the hinges).
I hadn't though about it that much but the doors are flimsy particulary when you get clients even after they're breifed slamming them or putting to much weight on them.
cheers r44tropic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Scotland
Age: 56
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was always taught that if you are going down over water, then one of your last drills was to open the latches, so you would not suffer this problem.
Nobody ever gave me an answer when I asked if you do the same over dry land and every auto to the ground that I have done, the doors have always remained closed.
Personally, over dry land, if it looked like it was going to be a pretty serious bump, then I have always thought that I would open the doors.
C.
Nobody ever gave me an answer when I asked if you do the same over dry land and every auto to the ground that I have done, the doors have always remained closed.
Personally, over dry land, if it looked like it was going to be a pretty serious bump, then I have always thought that I would open the doors.
C.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: qld
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
r44tropic, if you were over the water i would ensure to do a huet escape course...would be great insurance.
also r44tropic, i suppose clients never listen to what we say anyway on breifings....
also r44tropic, i suppose clients never listen to what we say anyway on breifings....
Better red than ...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a bigger chance with a heavy landing of the damn things popping out than jamming ....
Have to be unlucky if all four jammed.
Have to be unlucky if all four jammed.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually the guy is huet trained and yeah he's heard all the breifings before, just ask him. A good point though is that the doors being flimsy enough would fail.
Creiff-ite i have also been taught that when ditching to unlatch doors, its in the manual, and i've never made a practice on opening the doors during an auto either
Im not considering getting myself into any situation that this could be a problem but the quesion was asked and why not put it out there for some feedback....
cheers
Creiff-ite i have also been taught that when ditching to unlatch doors, its in the manual, and i've never made a practice on opening the doors during an auto either
Im not considering getting myself into any situation that this could be a problem but the quesion was asked and why not put it out there for some feedback....
cheers
As all stations said, do the huet, fact is it will save your life if you are ever unfortunate enough to need it. Overwater if I had the chance I would consider popping the door. Don't think I would over land though. A door on a gas strut in auto could open up other problems particularly if there are no split pins in an r22/44 door. The other thing to consider over water is the door damaging the floats on impact. Most other aircraft are a bit more solid in that area but I dont think an r22/44 door would stand in between me and the light to survival in an emergency.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno about you guys, but if I was in one of the front seats of a Robbo and I wanted out quick, my size 10 RM's would be kicking out that flimsy windscreen and I'd be straight out through the front. Push from the front, and the screens are as stong as you like, push from the inside and they pop straight out.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Australia
Age: 47
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are looking at the possibility to purchase an Factory overhauled raven 1 , this particular machine used to be an astro. anyone had any experience with purchaseing factory overhauls compared to new.?..
we would be saving around $100k AUD this way, and im not really bothered if the machine doesnt have bubble windows or adjustable pedals etc.
we are flying punters around most of the time, with a bit of corporate and survey work as well.
any comments?
we would be saving around $100k AUD this way, and im not really bothered if the machine doesnt have bubble windows or adjustable pedals etc.
we are flying punters around most of the time, with a bit of corporate and survey work as well.
any comments?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: That Bit up the Top Down Under
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can tell you from accidental experience that it doesn't take much to bust a side window on the 44. Only a size 9 shoe...not too much force..(Accidentally stepped on it once taken it off, got distracted by pax asking more of those dumb questions, had put it down to take other door off.....won't mention the fact that i was probably well past being adequately rested 
) But just ask the engineers how much harder it is to put a new window in than bust the old one out... 
I wouldn't pop my doors in auto over land either....over water yes. Have also seen how easy the bubbles come out if given some encouragement.....
But since i spend all of my time with at least 2 of the 4 doors off, guess it doesn't really matter....
) But just ask the engineers how much harder it is to put a new window in than bust the old one out... I wouldn't pop my doors in auto over land either....over water yes. Have also seen how easy the bubbles come out if given some encouragement.....But since i spend all of my time with at least 2 of the 4 doors off, guess it doesn't really matter....
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Midlands
Age: 71
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robinson tail strikes
I know that this subject has been debated many times.
Whilst patiently waiting for my new R44 I have spent many hours researching this.
Accidents don't just happen to other people and I am well aware of my responsibilities to my innocent passengers, especially as the ink on my PPLH is still wet.
One report well worth reading is this one - a huge 115 pages.
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1996/SIR9603.pdf
Many of the accidents described find no reason why the main rotor struck the tail. One second everything is fine, the next...disaster and death.
Bird strikes have been mentioned and in one case bird debris has been found on a blade but still not cited as the most probable cause.
You don't need to be a scientist to understand that even a small bird hitting a rotor blade in the cruise will be a serious impact in view of the speeds involved.
The NTSB speak about wind tunnel testing. I can't find much on this specific subject.
Has this, for example ever involved the simulation of a heli in the cruise - possibly involving sets of run-out blades - and firing birds directly at the blades?
In the case of homicide, very sophisticated DNA technology is brought into play and positive results achieved with microscopic samples. I wonder if similar technology is used to examine rotor blades?
A bird strike could surely provide the very force necessary to distort a blade in such a sudden and devastating way, yet not necessarily leave evidence visible to the naked eye?
My guess is that this has all been specifically debated here many times but I am a relative newcomer.
Any help will be gratefully appreciated.
HP
Whilst patiently waiting for my new R44 I have spent many hours researching this.
Accidents don't just happen to other people and I am well aware of my responsibilities to my innocent passengers, especially as the ink on my PPLH is still wet.
One report well worth reading is this one - a huge 115 pages.
http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1996/SIR9603.pdf
Many of the accidents described find no reason why the main rotor struck the tail. One second everything is fine, the next...disaster and death.
Bird strikes have been mentioned and in one case bird debris has been found on a blade but still not cited as the most probable cause.
You don't need to be a scientist to understand that even a small bird hitting a rotor blade in the cruise will be a serious impact in view of the speeds involved.
The NTSB speak about wind tunnel testing. I can't find much on this specific subject.
Has this, for example ever involved the simulation of a heli in the cruise - possibly involving sets of run-out blades - and firing birds directly at the blades?
In the case of homicide, very sophisticated DNA technology is brought into play and positive results achieved with microscopic samples. I wonder if similar technology is used to examine rotor blades?
A bird strike could surely provide the very force necessary to distort a blade in such a sudden and devastating way, yet not necessarily leave evidence visible to the naked eye?
My guess is that this has all been specifically debated here many times but I am a relative newcomer.
Any help will be gratefully appreciated.
HP
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HP: some of your logic is a bit worrying. If a large bird hit the moving rotor of most light helicopters, the chances are that the damage to the rotor would end your day in any case - the tail strike would be supplementary.
Your worries are understandable - but think too deep and you'll question why you've bothered to order a helicopter.
Take the train of thought to its ultimate and realise that the human body was only ever designed to do 8 miles an hour.
What ? Leave the house ? Me?
Whilst you wait for your glorious machine, why not spend just a little more $$ by enrolling on the RHC safety course. Have a few days at Torrance. Do some great LA flying.
And relax.
"One second everything is fine, the next...disaster and death."....that's a bold statement to make. Are you sure that's what the evidence states ? Assuming these were non-survivable accidents, how could anyone possibly know what happened prior to the calamity ?
BTW: the report you've pointed us at is for R22 model.........I am not aware of any R44 tail strike NTSB reports.
Your worries are understandable - but think too deep and you'll question why you've bothered to order a helicopter.
Take the train of thought to its ultimate and realise that the human body was only ever designed to do 8 miles an hour.
What ? Leave the house ? Me?
Whilst you wait for your glorious machine, why not spend just a little more $$ by enrolling on the RHC safety course. Have a few days at Torrance. Do some great LA flying.
And relax.
"One second everything is fine, the next...disaster and death."....that's a bold statement to make. Are you sure that's what the evidence states ? Assuming these were non-survivable accidents, how could anyone possibly know what happened prior to the calamity ?
BTW: the report you've pointed us at is for R22 model.........I am not aware of any R44 tail strike NTSB reports.
Hairy - the usual reason the R22 blades hit the tail boom is due to negative (or just a sufficient reduction in positive) G.
A teetering head helicopter hangs underneath its rotor and tilting the rotor drags the fuselage along with it, be it in pitch or roll.
When the aircraft is subjected to negative (or reduced positive) G, the effective weight of the fuselage reduces (to zero at zero G) and the rotors can move wherever they like but the fuselage won't follow as the teetering head cannot exert any leverage on the fuselage (unlike on an articulated or semi-rigid rotor).
So the only thing producing any thrust that can affect the fuselage is the tail rotor. In a low G situation the pilot is more likely to make large cyclic control inputs (trying to control the attitude) which will have negligible effect until normal G is restored and this results in mast bumping or, in extremis blade contact with the tail boom.
And people wonder why I don't like Robinsons.
A teetering head helicopter hangs underneath its rotor and tilting the rotor drags the fuselage along with it, be it in pitch or roll.
When the aircraft is subjected to negative (or reduced positive) G, the effective weight of the fuselage reduces (to zero at zero G) and the rotors can move wherever they like but the fuselage won't follow as the teetering head cannot exert any leverage on the fuselage (unlike on an articulated or semi-rigid rotor).
So the only thing producing any thrust that can affect the fuselage is the tail rotor. In a low G situation the pilot is more likely to make large cyclic control inputs (trying to control the attitude) which will have negligible effect until normal G is restored and this results in mast bumping or, in extremis blade contact with the tail boom.
And people wonder why I don't like Robinsons.
crab:
Are you old enough to have trained on the Sioux ? Flown a Huey, or a Jet Ranger ?
Please - don't let your prejudice about one type colour your common sense about teetering heads - especially when it's not the aircraft, it is generally a low time pilot who comes to grief.
Good explanation, BTW.
Are you old enough to have trained on the Sioux ? Flown a Huey, or a Jet Ranger ?
Please - don't let your prejudice about one type colour your common sense about teetering heads - especially when it's not the aircraft, it is generally a low time pilot who comes to grief.
Good explanation, BTW.