Kit helicopters vs R22

[QDMQDMQDM]

I am not a helicopter pilot, but I am intrigued.

How do the Rotorway Exec and the Safari (http://www.acehelicopter.com/) compare to the R22? The R22 gets a slating for being a dangerous machine with low rotor inertia and the teetering head thingy which I don't understand. Are these better? The reviews I have read, certainly on the Rotorway, say yes.

If you didn't have to build them, which would experienced Rotorheads choose as a basic 2-seat piston helicopter out of these three examples? In this case, I am ignoring the Bell 47 and the Hiller, but could maybe add in the Schweitzer as being comparable?

QDM

[22clipper]

One of the differences between the kit builts and the R22 is range & endurance. The 22 cruises at 80 kts for 3 hours for a 340nm range while the kits are more like 60kts for 2 hours. I looked long & hard at both the baby belle & the Exec90 ten years ago & found that for the same money I could get a good used R22. A thousand hours later I've flown it to all Australian states & generally had a ball. I will now put a saucepan on my head & duck under the desk while the kit built guys open fire. Cheers.

[tangovictor]

r22 / rw

Hi, it seems your from the UK, best visit http://www.rotorway.org.uk/
where many questions can be answered, suffice to say, you spend as much time working on a rw, as flying it,
I'm learning in a r22, and sure they are a bit skitish, however, i'm sure if you can fly a r22, any other comparable machine would be easier

[Heli-kiwi]

"The R22 gets a slating for being a dangerous machine with low rotor inertia"

The Robbie used to get a slating back in the early eighties,Today all your kitset helis have way less inertia than a modern R22. Remember that Robinson have made over 5000 helis and every one that goes out the door now has 27 years of proven R and D, Safety courses, Good and bad experiences from all over the world which is taught and learnt about by todays pilots.
These R22s do not do tens or hundreds of hours like Rotorways but thousands of hours day in day out all around the world - If you have a problem someone else has had it too and you can get proper help to fix it, If you want to sell or upgrade it you can do it instead of losing thousands of dollars on a homebuilt project, The element of mystery is not present and all you have to do is fly it. Just look at the sales figures........money talks.
If I had 150k to spend on a budget helicopter the R22 would get it hands down.

[muffin]

I looked at the Rotorway before I bought my R22. I flew one for an hour and was actually very inpressed with it. It was a lot cheaper, but it is generally said that you have to do around 2 hours maintenance for every hour you fly it. As I wanted something to fly rather than tinker with all the time, that was a major reason to go for the R22 instead. I do have a kit fixed wing plane that I maintain myself, but there are rather less moving parts and things to go wrong than there would be with a helicopter. Also, I wanted to share the operating costs with another pilot, and there are very few Rotorway rated pilots around (or even those who will fly in one), so my potential market was that much smaller. The R22 despite its detractors is a well proven and reliable design, and as such has an excellent resale market. The only snag is the time/hours life that really hits you with the depreciation. There are always several Rotorways available for sale so the resale market is that much thinner.

Having said all that, I am delighted with my R22 and would not swap it for anything other than maybe an R44, but I don't need the extra passenger capacity so I doubt if I ever will.

[Helifan]

CH7 Kompress

Has anybody got some info/owned/associated with the Heli-Sport CH7 Kompress or Aerokopter’s AK1-3 SANKA ?

[glyn thrash]

here ya go in the Aerokopter:

http://www.aerokopter.co.za/

http://www.copter.com.ua/EN/about.php

glyn

[rotorboater]

I remember reading about a guy with 300 hrs on rotorways and he admits to having to have made 4 forced landings in that time in various different Rotorways!
In the same time, I havn't had to make any in Enstroms or Robinsons!

[nervouspassenger]

Ongoing Rotorway Issue

I did some research into the viability of owning a Rotorway and came up with one worrying issue time and time again. The main rotor is driven through a sequence of belts and pulleys. The final pully is mounted on what's called the secondry shaft. Earlier RW's had a 30mm secondry shaft and they were breaking at an alarming rate resulting in complete loss of power to the rotorhead. RW upgraded the shaft to 35mm but there are still grave concerns about it's reliability (they have broken). there are also aftermarket alternatives to try and cure the problem but non are CAA approved for use on UK registered machines. Also, a lot of pilots have an issue with the belt driven tail rotor but they seem to work.

It has to be said that the RW is a very pretty machine, aethetically knocking spots off the R22. There was a review in both Pilot and Flyer magazines a year or so ago.

[tangovictor]

in defence of the rw

I don't own a rotorway or a r22, come to that, however, as I understand it, the newer drives from rw, dont break, with the chain drive, which is supplied with the rw kits, the problems seem to be, based around "alterations" made to the standard, and quite rightly stated, the CAA will NOT allow any NON standard, items to be fitted to a UK rotorway,
As I previously mentioned, much more can be found out on the UK RW site
http://www.rotorway.org.uk/
the UK RW guru Ivan I'm sure will answer any questions

[QDMQDMQDM]

True, it is hard to beat track record, as with the R22.

What about the Safari, aka Baby Belle?

QDM

[tangovictor]

re safari

As far as I'm aware, there's only 1 safari being built in the UK, by the importer
( pm me for he's email address, should you require it )
its not completed yet, and he, doesn't know if the CAA will, accept it, which seems a little strange, as it appears, to me anyway, more "mainstream" than the RW

[rotornut]

The R22 is a certificated helicopter whereas the kit machines are not. This means they can't be used commercially which affects their desirability and hence their resale value.

[tangovictor]

resale

form what I gather, the residual value of the r22, is quite good, even very high hours, attract reasonable prices, ( if maintaned )
However the kit's don't attract anywhere near the cost, and the magic 2000 hours time, is the end, as I see it

[IFMU]

Not how I remember it...

tangovictor,

I thought I remembered a factory rotorway used for training that had a secondary shaft failure. So I searched - and found this:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...11X00199&key=1

Here's the body of it:

*******************************

NTSB Identification: LAX03LA084.
The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact Records Management Division
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, February 05, 2003 in Casa Grande, AZ
Probable Cause Approval Date: 12/28/2004
Aircraft: Cobb International Rotorway Exec 90, registration: N9876D
Injuries: 2 Minor.
The helicopter made a hard landing following a failure of the antitorque system. While in the landing pattern, the student and CFI heard a "bang." The CFI took the flight controls, initiated an autorotation, and turned to an open area for an emergency landing. During the autorotation the CFI noticed a loss of his ability to maintain directional control. He lowered the collective and continued with the autorotation. As he pulled collective to cushion the landing the helicopter yawed to the left, landed firmly on the ground, and rolled over on to its right side. The CFI's execution of an autorotative landing failed to adjust for the engagement of the engine when he pulled in collective to cushion the landing. Engagement of engine power in the autorotative flare caused the helicopter to yaw left, which was not compensated for by the failed tail rotor. The helicopter encountered ground resistance when it landed, and the force of the uncontrolled left yaw rolled it over onto its right side. The FAA Rotorcraft Flying Handbook describes the appropriate response to an antitorque failure as an entry into an autorotation profile by reducing the collective and rolling off the throttle. Rolling off the throttle will prevent the engine from engaging during the autorotative landing. The manufacturer's flight manual does not address the issue of performing an autorotative landing with a tail rotor failure. Examination of the helicopter revealed that the secondary drive shaft appeared to have fractured between the lower bearing and the lock collar. Examination of the shaft revealed fretting and corrosion in the area contacted by the lock collar. The fracture was a result of fatigue cracking that initiated in the area of fretting and corrosion. This secondary drive shaft had been involved in one helicopter rollover and two tail rotor strikes. It is possible that excessive loads generated during these previous events was sufficient to loosen the lower bearing on the shaft and initiate the fretting and corrosion process that eventually led to the initiation of a fatigue crack.


The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

the flight instructor's failure to maintain directional control of the helicopter during the flare and landing. Factors in the accident were the failure of the secondary drive shaft and inadequate tail rotor failure procedures specified by the manufacturer.

*******************************


tangovictor, if you are right, then shame on them for not using their own parts.

-- IFMU

Originally Posted by tangovictor

I don't own a rotorway or a r22, come to that, however, as I understand it, the newer drives from rw, dont break, with the chain drive, which is supplied with the rw kits, the problems seem to be, based around "alterations" made to the standard, and quite rightly stated, the CAA will NOT allow any NON standard, items to be fitted to a UK rotorway,
As I previously mentioned, much more can be found out on the UK RW site
http://www.rotorway.org.uk/
the UK RW guru Ivan I'm sure will answer any questions

[nervouspassenger]

Actually I read somewhere that there have been several incidents of secondry failure on both RW's own and privately owned machines, all of which were factory standard (35mm shaft and chain drive). It's not just an issue with aftermarket modified machines using stuff from Pro-Drive.

Tango Victor - don't get me wrong. I'm not slating the Rotorway across the board. As previously stated I think it's a great looking machine and once the issue is resolved, I would give serious thought to buying one.

Here's a couple of links to interesting RW sites with more info for anyone who's interested.

http://www.rotorwayfun.com/
http://www.rotorwayownersgroup.com/ (need to register for this one)

[2PWRR]

[QUOTE=2PWRR]Maybe this question about comparison R22 VS Rotorway should be put to some of the test pilots on this forum ie Mr Coyle because that is what I think you would be if you decided to buy an experimental aircraft, just my opinion lol also I don't have the skills or knowledge to become a test pilot.

Cheers Taff

[NickLappos]

Thanks 2PWRR,
There is simply NO comparison between a certified helicopter and a home built or experimental.

The process of certification is long, expensive and worth it. A certified helo has govenrment approval that it has the strength, handling qualities and performance required by law. Government engineers and pilots have poured over the design reports, test reports and flight/maintenance manuals to assure that public safety requirements have been met. The manufacturer of an experimental has not done this work, and very likely cannot pass these tests. In other words, an experimental helo has nothing, literally nothing in the way of assurance in these areas.

Are experimentals inadequate? Not necessarily, but you just don't know. Are they cheaper? Yes, they had better be, they are worth less. Are they sub-standard? Absolutely, since they do not meet the standard. Are they a bad idea? No, as long as you know what you are getting from the outset, and as long as you are willing to take the risks.

[Shawn Coyle]

My two cents worth.
I've never flown a Rotorway, and not even looked up close at one. The tail rotor drive being a series of belts (three in series, any one of which could break) doesn't strike me as an elegant engineering solution.
I've also had some email conversations with someone with very detailed engineering experience of internal combustion engines and gears, who discovered why the Rotorway main drive gear was failing and proposed a solution - I believe this may be the aftermarket solution alluded to earlier in this thread. In a certified helicopter, the failure rate of this critical part would have certainly attracted the interest of at least some part of the airworthiness authorities, followed by appropriate analysis and re-engineering.
But it probably would have been fixed even before it got to production by the requirements for long tie-down testing at various power settings and RPMs. That sort of thing tends to highlight problems pretty quickly - which is why it's done.
After that, the manufacturer does 'function and reliability flying' where the machine is again subject to loads of different tests in flight - all to prove the systems work as advertised (things like cycling every switch in the cockpit every 5 minutes).
It's worthwhile to look at what the highest time any of the homebuilt machines has accumulated without failures - but you probably won't find the data anywhere because there isn't any requirement to keep or submit it anywhere.
And as someone said 'When you buy a certified aircraft, you know you are getting a minimum standard product- maybe not much more than a minimum, but at least it's a minimum. And if the minimum weren't good enough, it wouldn't be the minimum...."
'Nuff said?

[tangovictor]

I agree with most people here, I dont own a Rotorway and probably never will, although I do think that the shaft breakages reported were either the factory prior to modifying to 35mm or with belt drive, Im lead to believe that there hasnt been a 35mm shaft breakage whilst running standard factory chain drive. ( I do stand to be corrected here )
Suffice to say, working on a machine, for 2 hours to fly 1 hour, don't do much for me