Robinson R22 Corner [Archive copy]
Guest
Posts: n/a
>>Anyway, if I demonstrate an auto as an AFI I can only do them to a recover to the hover anyway. I personally don't see the point of going to the ground because the important part of an auto is an entry. If the student masters the initial entry, control all the way down, and knows the drill, then he has every chance of saving himself.
We all have our own ideas on this I guess.
I learned to fly using the R22 HP without a governor, and , having the lower tail, was great fun drawing lines on grass strips with the stinger!!!!!! <<
I agree with this although I have yet to do one to touchdown in the 22 myself (once my CFI did one from straight in and 180 for show).
I love doing straight auto's, 180 autos .... Am I supposed to be nervous at the end
So far sometimes, however I'll soon be doing them to the ground itself, my thought was always "What if I have to do one for real?" Well, I'll nail the entry and ride down, and figure if I have that part done, then when I'm near the ground, pre flare and flare will commence and then I see it as keeping skids level and a bit of forward if any.
Maybe I'll get down and then flip over (seems to be the norm in most training auto mishaps I've read) but I'm convinced that I likely will survive the experience.
We all have our own ideas on this I guess.
I learned to fly using the R22 HP without a governor, and , having the lower tail, was great fun drawing lines on grass strips with the stinger!!!!!! <<
I agree with this although I have yet to do one to touchdown in the 22 myself (once my CFI did one from straight in and 180 for show).
I love doing straight auto's, 180 autos .... Am I supposed to be nervous at the end
So far sometimes, however I'll soon be doing them to the ground itself, my thought was always "What if I have to do one for real?" Well, I'll nail the entry and ride down, and figure if I have that part done, then when I'm near the ground, pre flare and flare will commence and then I see it as keeping skids level and a bit of forward if any.Maybe I'll get down and then flip over (seems to be the norm in most training auto mishaps I've read) but I'm convinced that I likely will survive the experience.
Guest
Posts: n/a
the only thing that surprised me during my first full touchdown was the increased requirement for right pedal (american helos and the like) as the tail rotor speed diminished, and I think even the novice who is faced with the real thing for the first time will instinctively add more pedal when he/she sees the nose swinging left. The rest seemed pretty straightforward and as I had imagined.
[This message has been edited by lmlanphere (edited 08 February 2001).]
[This message has been edited by lmlanphere (edited 08 February 2001).]
[This message has been edited by lmlanphere (edited 08 February 2001).]
[This message has been edited by lmlanphere (edited 08 February 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Helimutt and RW-1
You both will soon be doing full on auto's and then like me (1000+ full on EOL's) probably not do pwr recoveries again.
Try this tech for when you are just overhead the only safe landing spot in stong winds and the chance that a 180 turn might leave you short!!!
2000' S&L 70 kts into wind (10kts+)
Hasell chk and all that good instructor stuff
enter and set attitude for ZERO airspeed,
Control Rrpm 98-100%
ROD approx 1800-2200 fpm
groundspeed -10kts (you are now Going Backwards), at 800' adopt normall 60kts attitude, at 500' decide whether or not you will make the spot, go around if not set up properly. If you are happy continue and complete EOL. If you are confident with the a/c then you will be more relaxed, if you are more relaxed you will enjoy the flying more, If you enjoy the flying more your student will be more relaxed, and he in tern will be relaxed and then he is better plced to Learn. Its a thin line between an advanced demo and showing off. the differance being the objective of the demo.
You both will soon be doing full on auto's and then like me (1000+ full on EOL's) probably not do pwr recoveries again.
Try this tech for when you are just overhead the only safe landing spot in stong winds and the chance that a 180 turn might leave you short!!!
2000' S&L 70 kts into wind (10kts+)
Hasell chk and all that good instructor stuff
enter and set attitude for ZERO airspeed,
Control Rrpm 98-100%
ROD approx 1800-2200 fpm
groundspeed -10kts (you are now Going Backwards), at 800' adopt normall 60kts attitude, at 500' decide whether or not you will make the spot, go around if not set up properly. If you are happy continue and complete EOL. If you are confident with the a/c then you will be more relaxed, if you are more relaxed you will enjoy the flying more, If you enjoy the flying more your student will be more relaxed, and he in tern will be relaxed and then he is better plced to Learn. Its a thin line between an advanced demo and showing off. the differance being the objective of the demo.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The only times I've been really scared during practice Autos/EOLS are the few times I've done them to a hover recovery. It all goes way too wild far too close to the ground for my liking! Flare, flare, flare, check level, cushion. None of this hauling in power, dancing on the pedals, checking RPM (yup, a couple of them in pre-governor R22s). And I know just how far the damn' things skid on snow when you haven't flared off enough forward speed!
Towards the end of my CPL course, my instructor used to suggest a competition at the end of dual sorties, to see who could perform an EOL to stop astride a couple of paving slabs in the middle of the field. He'd have control, I'd call the entry, I'd have control, he'd call the entry: straights, 180's and a couple of 360's. He nailed it every time. Me? Short, long, wide, the works. By the end of the course, though my misses were only by a matter of a few feet, so the exercise worked. I still owe him several crates of beer, though!
Towards the end of my CPL course, my instructor used to suggest a competition at the end of dual sorties, to see who could perform an EOL to stop astride a couple of paving slabs in the middle of the field. He'd have control, I'd call the entry, I'd have control, he'd call the entry: straights, 180's and a couple of 360's. He nailed it every time. Me? Short, long, wide, the works. By the end of the course, though my misses were only by a matter of a few feet, so the exercise worked. I still owe him several crates of beer, though!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Not able to fly today. Luck of the draw, 4VH in for it's 100 hour.
But R.J. has a point I was thinking about today, and auto to touchdown has to be so much easier than one to a power recovery, for the thing's outlined in the post ...
Soon ...
------------------
Marc
But R.J. has a point I was thinking about today, and auto to touchdown has to be so much easier than one to a power recovery, for the thing's outlined in the post ...
Soon ...
------------------
Marc
Guest
Posts: n/a
Dare I mention the R22?
Toe goes into water......
Still got ten up to now....
OK, someone asked me a question yesterday and I still can't answer it with confidence.
"Why do you recommend pulling the tail down to check TR gearbox oil contents when the POH makes no mention of this?"
True, it only says 'Full and no leaks".
How do you check it is full, especially on the first pre-flight of the day when all of the oil has sunk to the lower level of the front section of the gearbox, not showing in the sight glass without lowering the tail?
If the R22 had a side viewed sight glass like other types then no tail lowering would be necessary, but it doesn't.
If this is a practice that is recommended elsewhere than the POH (eg. a safety course) then where is the source of the advice? All I can remember is being taught it during 'Helicopter pilot 1/1' and I have used it in my first preflight of the day ever since. That is why I have never questioned it I guess.
BTW, it does show me that I can read what I want to read, even to the point of reading things that are not there because if anyone has read that POH from cover to cover many times and still does so (like I do with all types I fly) its me.....
Food for thought?
Replies will be welcomed!
Still got ten up to now....
OK, someone asked me a question yesterday and I still can't answer it with confidence.
"Why do you recommend pulling the tail down to check TR gearbox oil contents when the POH makes no mention of this?"
True, it only says 'Full and no leaks".
How do you check it is full, especially on the first pre-flight of the day when all of the oil has sunk to the lower level of the front section of the gearbox, not showing in the sight glass without lowering the tail?
If the R22 had a side viewed sight glass like other types then no tail lowering would be necessary, but it doesn't.
If this is a practice that is recommended elsewhere than the POH (eg. a safety course) then where is the source of the advice? All I can remember is being taught it during 'Helicopter pilot 1/1' and I have used it in my first preflight of the day ever since. That is why I have never questioned it I guess.
BTW, it does show me that I can read what I want to read, even to the point of reading things that are not there because if anyone has read that POH from cover to cover many times and still does so (like I do with all types I fly) its me.....
Food for thought?
Replies will be welcomed!
Guest
Posts: n/a
SPS,
The main reason we use to pull down the tail is to have a look at the flex plate that connects the T/R drive shaft to the gear box. Always a good idea. You have probably noticed that there is an inspection hole for just this sort of thing. I remember a Robinson video (actually it may not have been Robinson) for flying schools that showed the pulling down of the tail boom. The only other thing that I can add is that there have been a couple of types of T/R gear box housings, one of which had a lower sight glass.
Hope this helps, cheers.
The main reason we use to pull down the tail is to have a look at the flex plate that connects the T/R drive shaft to the gear box. Always a good idea. You have probably noticed that there is an inspection hole for just this sort of thing. I remember a Robinson video (actually it may not have been Robinson) for flying schools that showed the pulling down of the tail boom. The only other thing that I can add is that there have been a couple of types of T/R gear box housings, one of which had a lower sight glass.
Hope this helps, cheers.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The tail gearbox itself isn't "level" until you bring down the boom a bit, therefore you lower the boom slightly, which you have to do anyway to check the aft flex coupling.
The other thing one can do when checking the tail sight glass and aft flex coupling, is you can do a check of the main blades when each comes around to you, the angle gives you a good look at the upper surface, etc.
I also look at the tail blade drain holes at this point, as since I'm holding the boom down, I have a good view down to them, rather than looking up as they spin by, (also noting that the blade tip weights are installed)
------------------
Marc
The other thing one can do when checking the tail sight glass and aft flex coupling, is you can do a check of the main blades when each comes around to you, the angle gives you a good look at the upper surface, etc.
I also look at the tail blade drain holes at this point, as since I'm holding the boom down, I have a good view down to them, rather than looking up as they spin by, (also noting that the blade tip weights are installed)
------------------
Marc
Guest
Posts: n/a
Very good points all of them and good for those who read only. But the POH still makes no mention of lowering the tail boom for any of these checks and I want to know if this is a 'spurious' practice that has been passed around on the Pilot network or is it in some literature or directive?
By definition we have to work by prescribed
'rules' and this does not figure in them. That is not to say it is an unacceptable practice, it may be interpretation of what you have to do, eg. check TR Gbox is 'Full' of Oil. (But you can only do it by lowering the tail.)
A trip to engineering today might throw some light on it.....Then again.....it might not !
RW, are your TR blades rotating as you check the drain holes?!
Thanks for the replies up to now.
By definition we have to work by prescribed
'rules' and this does not figure in them. That is not to say it is an unacceptable practice, it may be interpretation of what you have to do, eg. check TR Gbox is 'Full' of Oil. (But you can only do it by lowering the tail.)
A trip to engineering today might throw some light on it.....Then again.....it might not !
RW, are your TR blades rotating as you check the drain holes?!
Thanks for the replies up to now.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I once asked my friendly engineer that question and he told me that the sight glass should be full when the tail is right down to the ground, so that is what I do. the oil is usually so thick when it is cold that that is the only way you can see it anyway.
Problem is that if your pasenger gets in because it is cold standing waiting, the tail is very heavy to pull down!
It also checks that the skids are not frozen to the ground as happened recently in a UK accident.
Problem is that if your pasenger gets in because it is cold standing waiting, the tail is very heavy to pull down!
It also checks that the skids are not frozen to the ground as happened recently in a UK accident.
Guest
Posts: n/a
SPS,
As Rotorque says, the (POH) reason you are pulling the tail down is to check the tail rotor Flex Coupling. Any other checks you may be able to do whilst there are a bonus.
Personally, I find that I have so much going on holding the tail down, rotating the TR, trying to keep clothes and arms away from it, counting bolts on the Flex Coupling etc etc, that I prefer to check the other stuff mentioned by RW-1 with the beast resting back on its skids.
As Rotorque says, the (POH) reason you are pulling the tail down is to check the tail rotor Flex Coupling. Any other checks you may be able to do whilst there are a bonus.
Personally, I find that I have so much going on holding the tail down, rotating the TR, trying to keep clothes and arms away from it, counting bolts on the Flex Coupling etc etc, that I prefer to check the other stuff mentioned by RW-1 with the beast resting back on its skids.
Guest
Posts: n/a
SPS, No, at the point where I have a tail blade where I want it, I stop to look at it and continue ....
Muff, don't know about "all the way tot he ground" though ... you only need to level the boom itself to take the sight glass reading, you'll go further to do your aft flex coupling check. I level the boom in prep for that, and verify oil level int he gearbox, then bring the boom down further for the coupling check.
You could consider the POH for a cessna, if I remember correctly (don't have it here to check) for the walkaround it has check flaps, but you learn from others to lower the flaps for the walkaround (and to check them)
For that matter, when first learning the Robbie preflight, my orig manual has notes onthe pre-flight, such as noting the number of nuts on the coupling (duh) and even better it has the teletemps check (Main gearbox area and upper and lower bearing, and on some the driveshaft from clutch to main tranny), but doesn't specifically tell you in the POH how many you are checking ....
------------------
Marc
Muff, don't know about "all the way tot he ground" though ... you only need to level the boom itself to take the sight glass reading, you'll go further to do your aft flex coupling check. I level the boom in prep for that, and verify oil level int he gearbox, then bring the boom down further for the coupling check.
You could consider the POH for a cessna, if I remember correctly (don't have it here to check) for the walkaround it has check flaps, but you learn from others to lower the flaps for the walkaround (and to check them)
For that matter, when first learning the Robbie preflight, my orig manual has notes onthe pre-flight, such as noting the number of nuts on the coupling (duh) and even better it has the teletemps check (Main gearbox area and upper and lower bearing, and on some the driveshaft from clutch to main tranny), but doesn't specifically tell you in the POH how many you are checking ....
------------------
Marc
Guest
Posts: n/a
Muffin
Don't know if you were being serious when you mentioned 'Problem is that if your pasenger gets in because it is cold standing waiting, the tail is very heavy to pull down!'
This puts all the stress through four bolts holding your tail on and should be avoided.
Don't know if you were being serious when you mentioned 'Problem is that if your pasenger gets in because it is cold standing waiting, the tail is very heavy to pull down!'
This puts all the stress through four bolts holding your tail on and should be avoided.
Guest
Posts: n/a
More....
Maintenance say that the correct TR gearbox oil level is when the oil is halfway filling the sight glass with the aircraft in the 'rigged' position, ie. when it has the front of the skids raised to such a height that a spirit level placed by the mixture control (pointing fore/aft) shows the aircraft is level over the ground, not relying on the skids.
The amount that the skids must be lifted (and the tail moved down) would depend on the individuality of R22's, something which is due to many things. (not least that they are all hand built and vary from new) A major factor is how the undercarriage may have changed from its original shape due to engine off landings and so on. It is one of the reasons the 'stinger' has to be over 36" from level ground on an R22B.
The tail is higher with the skids fully aground than it would be with the Heli. in the rigged position. Does this suggest that the Gbox oil level cannot be properly checked unless the tail is lowered?
I did give some thought to another aspect. If moving the Heli out of a hangar (or anywhere) for the first flight of the day you'd be using the wheels and lowering the tail to push and steer.....So, the sight glass should show its level then and no separate lowering of the tail is required......Until you have to do the aft TR flex coupling check!
This has been an interesting exercise in understanding the POH. It seems that even these can have anomalies and it looks as though at least two have shown up here. The POH should tell you how to check the oil level, from which position and how to get it to the required position, not just say 'Full and no leaks'.
I'm sure that more info will come to light yet.
....And it HAS....
Rotorhead 4 is correct, POH 8.8 says this;
'If the sight gauge of the Helicopter does not fill when the tail of the Helicopter is pulled all the way down, oil muct be added'
and it goes on to describe how oil is added... (Although I'm sure you'd have to be a licenced engineer to do it).
So, two pieces of info suggect that you should lower the tail and one fails to tell you to do it in the pre-flight. Confusing?
Well it could be!
Anyway, I'm sure that some find this interesting and others find it all rather boring but there was a point to it -
If a habit of incorrectly checking TR Gbox oil had circulated, one which did not appear in the POH then it might just have been significant. Would any of us advocate tilting the engine to make the dipstick read apparently more sump oil content?
Finally for Muffin... Today I had a description of a 'crease' being put in the front lower part of the tailcone by someone who tried to do the check whilst his passenger was in the cockpit....Repair bill
$15,000 NZ.
The advice that tail lowering can be a good way to check that your skids are not stuck to the ground was included in a previous post and I just happen to know the guy who gave it..!
Thanks all.
Maintenance say that the correct TR gearbox oil level is when the oil is halfway filling the sight glass with the aircraft in the 'rigged' position, ie. when it has the front of the skids raised to such a height that a spirit level placed by the mixture control (pointing fore/aft) shows the aircraft is level over the ground, not relying on the skids.
The amount that the skids must be lifted (and the tail moved down) would depend on the individuality of R22's, something which is due to many things. (not least that they are all hand built and vary from new) A major factor is how the undercarriage may have changed from its original shape due to engine off landings and so on. It is one of the reasons the 'stinger' has to be over 36" from level ground on an R22B.
The tail is higher with the skids fully aground than it would be with the Heli. in the rigged position. Does this suggest that the Gbox oil level cannot be properly checked unless the tail is lowered?
I did give some thought to another aspect. If moving the Heli out of a hangar (or anywhere) for the first flight of the day you'd be using the wheels and lowering the tail to push and steer.....So, the sight glass should show its level then and no separate lowering of the tail is required......Until you have to do the aft TR flex coupling check!
This has been an interesting exercise in understanding the POH. It seems that even these can have anomalies and it looks as though at least two have shown up here. The POH should tell you how to check the oil level, from which position and how to get it to the required position, not just say 'Full and no leaks'.
I'm sure that more info will come to light yet.
....And it HAS....
Rotorhead 4 is correct, POH 8.8 says this;
'If the sight gauge of the Helicopter does not fill when the tail of the Helicopter is pulled all the way down, oil muct be added'
and it goes on to describe how oil is added... (Although I'm sure you'd have to be a licenced engineer to do it).
So, two pieces of info suggect that you should lower the tail and one fails to tell you to do it in the pre-flight. Confusing?
Well it could be!
Anyway, I'm sure that some find this interesting and others find it all rather boring but there was a point to it -
If a habit of incorrectly checking TR Gbox oil had circulated, one which did not appear in the POH then it might just have been significant. Would any of us advocate tilting the engine to make the dipstick read apparently more sump oil content?
Finally for Muffin... Today I had a description of a 'crease' being put in the front lower part of the tailcone by someone who tried to do the check whilst his passenger was in the cockpit....Repair bill
$15,000 NZ.
The advice that tail lowering can be a good way to check that your skids are not stuck to the ground was included in a previous post and I just happen to know the guy who gave it..!
Thanks all.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I'd have to say that I perfered the power recovery in the R22 for a simple reason. Landing at the airport was not as good a teaching tool after the initial procedure is mastered.
The autos should be done out in the area, surprises, to whatever fiels is available. The site hasn't been inspected, so always overshoot or power recovery.
I also find the power recovery in the R22 quite manageable, there is too little time with the inertia available to allow a student good leeway and still be able to fix a mistake on the touchdown autos.
Just my thoughts.
The autos should be done out in the area, surprises, to whatever fiels is available. The site hasn't been inspected, so always overshoot or power recovery.
I also find the power recovery in the R22 quite manageable, there is too little time with the inertia available to allow a student good leeway and still be able to fix a mistake on the touchdown autos.
Just my thoughts.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Helo -
I was taught to switch the governor out and hold the throttle right up to the detentif going to the ground. There is not much chance (if any at all) of the instructor (or student) recovering RPM if it all goes wrong close to the ground, maybe the student is 'frozen' and clamps the throttle closed with fear (not all, of course).
More and more in UK instructors were converting to leaving the governor on
and this is the case in NZ, no one switches it out (for many reasons) and many leave the throttle set just below 80% for the fastest possible RPM recovery.
It is easy to recover as just a 'tweak; causes the governor to 'catch' and affords a lot of protection if going to the ground.
Agree on the need for 'surprises' as a string of approches to nice firendly airfeids gets away from the real point and much prefer to focus on getting to 10ft/10kt or so.
I was taught to switch the governor out and hold the throttle right up to the detentif going to the ground. There is not much chance (if any at all) of the instructor (or student) recovering RPM if it all goes wrong close to the ground, maybe the student is 'frozen' and clamps the throttle closed with fear (not all, of course).
More and more in UK instructors were converting to leaving the governor on
and this is the case in NZ, no one switches it out (for many reasons) and many leave the throttle set just below 80% for the fastest possible RPM recovery.
It is easy to recover as just a 'tweak; causes the governor to 'catch' and affords a lot of protection if going to the ground.
Agree on the need for 'surprises' as a string of approches to nice firendly airfeids gets away from the real point and much prefer to focus on getting to 10ft/10kt or so.
Guest
Posts: n/a
full touchdowns require the throttle be rolled completely off to keep the correlator from adding power on the collective pull- and getting the throttle of an R22 to stay in the overtravel spring takes a good grip (especially when you're sweating bullets) so Helo is right about recovery time being more critical once you have committed yourself to the full touchdown - one good thing about the overtravel spring on the r22 is that when let go the throttle tends to add power on its own, helping get the engine back up to speed... problem is getting a frightened student to let go
Guest
Posts: n/a
I agree there, letting go is usually enought to spring it into the governor low limit range and if I add at the proper time the governor brings it back up. I don't have to move it too much myself. It is a strong spring though, sometimes I'll slip on descent and it will want to climb up on me.
I suppose we could say "Thankfully" if it's a real engine out procedure it won't be resuming power on one would it?
------------------
Marc
I suppose we could say "Thankfully" if it's a real engine out procedure it won't be resuming power on one would it?
------------------
Marc