Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Robinson R44

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Robinson R44

Old 15th Feb 2006, 23:56
  #741 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 2
I think what actually happened was that Q figured out that with three hours of fuel he could fly for four and a half and then set off to reach the pole and come home again. DOH!!!!
houndogjess is offline  
Old 15th Feb 2006, 23:58
  #742 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Ireland
Posts: 22
I remember something about a ditched 407 but non of the politics........I don't do politics! The two R44 trips (round the world and south pole) were both without serious incident. As far as I remember..........I don't do politics
nervouspassenger is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 00:01
  #743 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
I dont do politics either, just trying to recall the actual facts !

the 407 was a different incident that crashed on land in antartica.

1 of the pilots was jennifer murray who did the first round the world trip in a 44 with Q, no other connection I think

regards

CF
Camp Freddie is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 06:57
  #744 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 593
Camp Freddie :
didnt they also lose one in water near antartica with a range extender and then refuse to cooperate with the AAIB about the amount of fuel carried on board yada yada yada !
FACTS:

There is an STC'd range extender for R44 which will give up to 7 hrs duration. And yes - contact Heli Air Denham if you want more detail.

There were two successful RTW missions and two successful Pole landings. RTW 1 one R44 with 2 pilots, RTW 2 was 2 R44s with a pilot each. Both pilots were Jennifer Murray and Quentin Smith.

The Bell incident was a South Pole attempt by Jennifer Murray and Colin Bodill which failed with a white-out incident.

The successful North and South Pole landings were in an R44 piloted by Steve Brookes and Quentin Smith. G-NUDE for North, and Steve's "N" 44 for South

One South Pole attempt ended with a ditching after a gradual loss of power. G-NUDE carried the evidence to the bottom.
headsethair is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 06:58
  #745 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Pewsey, UK
Posts: 1,911
nervous:

AAIB report here.
The Nr Fairy is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 08:36
  #746 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
headsethair,

from the AAIB report page 2:

"The pilots would not provide details of the amount of fuel carried on board but reported that it was sufficient for the crossing. Their flight plan specified an endurance of 7 hours 30 minutes. An unmodified R44 fitted with an auxiliary fuel tank, carrying its maximum capacity of 185 litres of usable fuel would have given an endurance of just over 3 hours."

this sounds quite factual

regards

CF
Camp Freddie is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 10:00
  #747 (permalink)  
PPRuNe Enigma
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 427
Er... but the endurance of an unmodified R44, whilst factual, would have little relevance to the incident in question ?
Grainger is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 10:35
  #748 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 593
Camp: Yes - it's very common for an R44 with standard tanks and an endurance of around 3 hrs to set-off on a non-stop journey that might take 7h 30m.......

I'm not certain what point you are trying to make in this discussion. As you say, "I don't do politics". So what are you doing ?

"I don't do politics" is that doubtful way of starting a sentence - along the lines of David Cameron recently saying "I believe in freedom of speech, but........."
headsethair is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 15:43
  #749 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
headsethair,

your man 22clipper is being recomended to a company who set off with 7 hours 30 of fuel according to their flight plan (I estimate that to be 675lbs of fuel plus 2 guys plus APS weight), unless that was in jerry cans on the back seat with a tube to the tank, that would suggest a range extender was fitted.

grainger,

unmodified is relevant because details of any modifications eg range extenders appear not to have been supplied to the AAIB or they wouldnt have said:
"The pilots would not provide details of the amount of fuel carried on board but reported that it was sufficient for the crossing"

finally it was nervouspassenger who said "I dont do politics" I just agreed with him.
as far as I can see there is nothing I have written that is not true and in the public domain

regards

CF

Last edited by Camp Freddie; 16th Feb 2006 at 17:29.
Camp Freddie is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 18:15
  #750 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 593
Camp:
finally it was nervouspassenger who said "I dont do politics" I just agreed with him
So - that would mean you don't do politics ?

Methinks you do. And the above quote proves you are adept at double-speak. You should get into Parliament asap.

Now - about the original question......there is an STC'd range extender for the R44. It will give you 7+ hours and lose 2 seats.
headsethair is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 18:56
  #751 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 18 Degrees North
Posts: 699
now I am not being funny just asking, and I havent checked my figures but:

how does the MAUW weight work with these range extenders ?

A R44 Raven for example MAUW is I believe 2400lbs
typical APS weight maybe 1500lbs for a light one (I know they vary a lot)
2 blokes typical 360lbs, but lets be generous say 300lbs.
range extender fuel 7.5 hours x 15USG PH x 6lbs USG = 675lbs (ball park)
1500+300+675 and with no luggage or anything else.

I make that 2475lbs being generous, is there a clearance to fly over 2400lbs with one fitted from the CAA or other authority for a private flight or is there some weight you can lose, how do people do the math to make it work or do they just not bother?

regards

CF
Camp Freddie is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 19:37
  #752 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: europe
Posts: 148
Interesting, I checked G-INFO to see if it was a Raven II (2500lb AUM) but apparently it was an Astro...
Did it have pop-out floats too?

Out of interest, when you fit the range extenders do they merely render the back seats unusable, or are they partly / totally removed?
mongoose237 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 20:37
  #753 (permalink)  

Better red than ...
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,403
Ladies, ladies, please. An end to "yah! booh! politiks" pliz.

The range extender replaces the ability to use the rear seats. (Kind of sits on top if the space).

You could get more range also by fitting an EGT lean-o-meter and lean to max plus fly higher. So you can get more than 3hrs from a standard R44 without the extra drop tanks (but the PoH does not recommend leaning) - see sep thread on this somewhere here.

h-r
helicopter-redeye is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 20:47
  #754 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,724
Originally Posted by helicopter-redeye
You could get more range also by fitting an EGT lean-o-meter and lean to max plus fly higher. [snip]...(but the PoH does not recommend leaning)
h-r,

The wording in the POH is actually a bit stronger than 'not recommended':

From a RavenII POH, page 7-9, under Systems Description, Engine Controls (page date 3 Oct 2002) it states:

CAUTION
In-flight leaning with engine mixture control is not allowed. Mixture must be full rich during flight.


It might well be different for the carburetted versions though.

HTH,

B73
Bravo73 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 21:00
  #755 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: europe
Posts: 148
Thank you Helicopter-Redeye. Do you have any pictures of the extender tanks by any chance?

Bravo 73, the appropriate passage from the same page in the Astro/Raven handbook is:
Caution
If mixture control is leaned at high altitude, be sure it is pushed back in before descending to lower altitude, otherwise, engine may quit.
Revised 5 Nov 1999, so may have been superceded
mongoose237 is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 21:34
  #756 (permalink)  

Better red than ...
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,403
There are some in JM's book 'now solo' (ISBN 1 84018 506 6).

I'm at Heliair tomorrow so I'll ask Mike Smith if there is anything published on the tanks which can be viewed on line. I have always assumed that these are manufactured by a third party (or hired from a forth ...) for R44 certified use.

h-r
helicopter-redeye is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2006, 22:47
  #757 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Northern England
Posts: 112
Originally Posted by The Nr Fairy
nervous:
AAIB report here.
this is a fascinating report to those of us never in the situation.

interesting how the passenger jumped into the water at 20ft and then the helicopter was turned into the wind, all under autorotation. i was generally taught (i'm obviously not exactly talented) to set up the helicopter into wind in the latter stages of autorotation to lessen any impact and to coordinate the flare and touch(splash)down, but turning in the last 20ft in auto must be challenging (but maybe easy for a top notch flyer). Any reason why the ditching without power should be different?

if the heli had extended fuel tanks, why did it need to wait for favourable tailwinds, rather than just for for unfavourable headwinds to abate?

finally, it is interesting how the pilots "would not" rather than "could not" provide fuel details to the investigators. to what extent are pilots under investigation in the UK allowed to withhold information (such as fuel state) from the AAIB? Flying lawyer?
Draco is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2006, 08:05
  #758 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Left Seat, Up Front
Posts: 57
Robinson R44 weight limits ?

Can someone tell me if the R44 has the same seat limit (109Kg/250lb) as the R22 ?

Ive tried a few searches and the Robinson website but cant find answer.

Thanks.
FlugWeasel is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2006, 10:56
  #759 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in a skip
Posts: 130
R22=240lb/seat
the beater is offline  
Old 25th Feb 2006, 12:29
  #760 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 2,724
From RavenII POH, Section 2 (Limitiations) page 2-3:


Maximum per seat
including baggage compartment...................300lbs (136kg)

Maximum in any baggage
compartment............................................50lbs (23kgs)



Be aware, though, that at these weights, you are more likely to hit the 'gut/rear cyclic movement' limitation first!
Bravo73 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.