Robinson R22 Corner [Archive copy]
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Find the u shaped part on the frame where the belts run past that seems to serve no other purpose than to keep the belts from wobbling. It is just below the top sheave but I can't remember which side. Just under that, using you middle finger, push directly in on the belt. Disengaged, you should be able to push your middle finger in so that the second knuckle sits under the u shaped belt guide.
So it appears that belt tension isn't the problem. The micro-switch explanation seems to make most sense so far.
I'm surprised that there seems to be no concensus; I thought I must be the only R22 pilot in the world who didn't know about this. Obviously not.
Any more suggestions. Lu, where are you when we need you?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Harwich
Age: 65
Posts: 777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[thread creep] This is related to start-up; it's that time a short while later when you've wound the rpm up ready to lift. The check I was taught began 'lights OUT, rpm 104, MAP 13-14...' and the one I was flying that had just finished a 2000-hour overhaul had a MAP of 17...
Am I lucky to still be here? (Lu, I know I was lucky every time regardless of the readings.) [/thread creep]
Am I lucky to still be here? (Lu, I know I was lucky every time regardless of the readings.) [/thread creep]
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High MP when on the ground with no load!
and the one I was flying that had just finished a 2000-hour overhaul had a MAP of 17...
1. MP Guage error
2. Induction System Leak
3. Carb Icing
With a difference this big, I would definitely get it checked out! An induction leak could leave you without power just when you need it most.
The pre-takeoff MP checks are the only times you'll be able to spot this. In flight, the governor may mask any of the problems above.
You should know what to expect (and check for) MP guage indications at three pre-takeoff stages; before engine start; engine idle; engine operating ERPM with no load.
cl12pv2s
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robinson's Phase Lag ~ The true story.
Lu you have always wondered where Frank Robinson's extra 18-degrees of phase angle went. Much searching has been done on PPRuNe over the years and it is time that the true story becomes known.
The honest to goodness truth is that; on a Saturday night in late October many years ago, Frank came up with the design that he wanted for his rotorhead. Before going to bed, he sketched this design on a sheet of paper, for the shop to make on Monday. Because he was quite tired, he simply used the hours of the clock to define the azimuths of the various components in the plan view.
The next morning he got up, took another sheet of paper, and sketched out the flight controls for this rotor. Again, he used the hours of the clock to define the azimuths of the various parts in the plan view.
On Monday the shop built the rotorhub and flight controls. The following day these parts were attached to the mast of a test helicopter. All the tests were a success. The Robinson hub was born and the rest is history.
Years later, Frank's biographer discovered that on that particular Saturday night the time changed. Frank had laid out the azimuths of the rotorhub during Daylight Saving time and then laid out the azimuths of the flight controls during Standard Time. This caused the controls to be out of phase with the rotorhub by one hour; so to speak. However, everything worked well, so it was decided that the lost phase angle would stay lost.
And lost it was, until the sleuth Sherlock Zuckerman (alias; Lu to a few) went looking for the elusive 17-degrees.
The honest to goodness truth is that; on a Saturday night in late October many years ago, Frank came up with the design that he wanted for his rotorhead. Before going to bed, he sketched this design on a sheet of paper, for the shop to make on Monday. Because he was quite tired, he simply used the hours of the clock to define the azimuths of the various components in the plan view.
The next morning he got up, took another sheet of paper, and sketched out the flight controls for this rotor. Again, he used the hours of the clock to define the azimuths of the various parts in the plan view.
On Monday the shop built the rotorhub and flight controls. The following day these parts were attached to the mast of a test helicopter. All the tests were a success. The Robinson hub was born and the rest is history.
Years later, Frank's biographer discovered that on that particular Saturday night the time changed. Frank had laid out the azimuths of the rotorhub during Daylight Saving time and then laid out the azimuths of the flight controls during Standard Time. This caused the controls to be out of phase with the rotorhub by one hour; so to speak. However, everything worked well, so it was decided that the lost phase angle would stay lost.
And lost it was, until the sleuth Sherlock Zuckerman (alias; Lu to a few) went looking for the elusive 17-degrees.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 426 Likes
on
225 Posts
Here we go again!
Right, that's it - I'm off on holiday for a few days to escape this one...
Senis Semper Fidelis
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lancashire U K
Posts: 1,288
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have requested my wife to get the armchairs ready and will pipe this thru to the big screen, my pals are comming round bringing with them plenty of tubes of the Amber Nectar, ... it will help if we can have some indication of when this will start!
Vfr
Vfr
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: W'n. USA--full time RV
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Degree-Saving-Time
Alas, the secret is finally out, the fallacy of Saving Daylight (a fundamentally crippled notion which should never, ahem, have seen the light of day), has been revealed.
(Frank was tangled up with the cosmic space warp phenomenon known as Degree Saving Time (DST), and the geometry of R22 rotor heads (rotorheads?) is forever frozen in a space-warped 17-degree incongruity.)
Dave, you've gone and revealed the Secret Warp of the Highly Secret Rotor Head Lodge! For shame!
(Frank was tangled up with the cosmic space warp phenomenon known as Degree Saving Time (DST), and the geometry of R22 rotor heads (rotorheads?) is forever frozen in a space-warped 17-degree incongruity.)
Dave, you've gone and revealed the Secret Warp of the Highly Secret Rotor Head Lodge! For shame!
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
Now class, pay attention.
I just don't understand you guys. I buy you books and I send you to school and you just don't understand.
It is 18-degrees not 17-degrees.
It is 18-degrees not 17-degrees.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 426 Likes
on
225 Posts
In any event, all pilots know that 1 hour on the clock = 30 degrees. We've all got HUGE watches that say so.
Jeez, to think that these guys might be designing the stuff that we trust our backsides to......
I'm off out to drive south soon.....unless these two have had any input into 4 wheeled transport....... in which case I'd probably better walk....
Jeez, to think that these guys might be designing the stuff that we trust our backsides to......
I'm off out to drive south soon.....unless these two have had any input into 4 wheeled transport....... in which case I'd probably better walk....
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robinson's Phase Lag ~ The true story.
Look! its real simple. That rotor head design gets round a number of problems, but there is nothing magic about the phase lag. A rotor head that has this digree of freedom will only work at a certain phase lag and remain controllable (just) and that is the one the designer settled on and has stuck with. If the 44 is slightly different its because the bigger blades and different speeds dictated what the phase angle needed to be on this machine. These machines have a self centering rotor system and that why the rotor balance is a bugger and the main reason that when it gets into an out of balance situation however caused it is catastrophic.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 1,635
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShyTorque,
" all pilots know that 1 hour on the clock = 30 degrees."
Now let's see. If it was a 24 hour clock, would it be only 3-degrees off.
Heck, literary license allows some 'degree' of freedom.
" all pilots know that 1 hour on the clock = 30 degrees."
Now let's see. If it was a 24 hour clock, would it be only 3-degrees off.
Heck, literary license allows some 'degree' of freedom.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 426 Likes
on
225 Posts
Hey Dave,
Literacy licence allowing some "degree" of freedom?
Certainly, but you wanted 13 degrees.
"Now let's see. If it was a 24 hour clock, would it be only 3-degrees off."
As you are aware, I'm a thoroughly professional pilot who has to be so precise and positive in everything I do, so I would probably answer: "Er, yes, maybe, sounds about right!! Or maybe not...'ere, 'ang on a mo' me watches stopped again
Literacy licence allowing some "degree" of freedom?
Certainly, but you wanted 13 degrees.
"Now let's see. If it was a 24 hour clock, would it be only 3-degrees off."
As you are aware, I'm a thoroughly professional pilot who has to be so precise and positive in everything I do, so I would probably answer: "Er, yes, maybe, sounds about right!! Or maybe not...'ere, 'ang on a mo' me watches stopped again
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R22 Instructors and Pilots - Required Endorsements
Hello,
I just want to clarify something amongst R22 pilots and instructors.
I have had two recent instances where students have come to me from another school (the same school) to continue helicopter training (here in the US).
When I checked through the logbooks of these students (both rated private pilots), I could not find a PIC endorsement.
Yes, I found 'solo' endorsements required by part 61, and I found the SFAR endorsements for awareness training SFAR 73 paragraph 2 (a) (3) (i-v).
But no PIC endorsement! SFAR 73 (2)(b)(1)(ii)(A-C)
So (as I understand it) these pilots are not legal to act as PIC in this aircraft.
The SFAR requires TWO endorsements for a pilot to act as PIC. If you / your student does not have these, then check it out.
These are in ADDITION to the endorsements required by Part 61. So therefore the solo endorsement for Rotorcraft Helicopter checkride does not count!!!
The second line of the SFAR states this (my emphasis):
***1. Applicability. Under the procedures prescribed herein, this SFAR applies to all persons who seek to manipulate the controls or act as pilot in command of a Robinson model R-22 or R-44 helicopter. The requirements stated in this SFAR are in ADDITION to the current requirements of part 61.***
I advise pilots / instructors to check to see if they are meeting these requirements.
Regards,
cl12pv2s
P.S. I found a pretty comprehensive list of endorsements which include the SFAR endorsements.
http://www.verticare.com/CFI_help/wade/p1.htm
I just want to clarify something amongst R22 pilots and instructors.
I have had two recent instances where students have come to me from another school (the same school) to continue helicopter training (here in the US).
When I checked through the logbooks of these students (both rated private pilots), I could not find a PIC endorsement.
Yes, I found 'solo' endorsements required by part 61, and I found the SFAR endorsements for awareness training SFAR 73 paragraph 2 (a) (3) (i-v).
But no PIC endorsement! SFAR 73 (2)(b)(1)(ii)(A-C)
So (as I understand it) these pilots are not legal to act as PIC in this aircraft.
The SFAR requires TWO endorsements for a pilot to act as PIC. If you / your student does not have these, then check it out.
These are in ADDITION to the endorsements required by Part 61. So therefore the solo endorsement for Rotorcraft Helicopter checkride does not count!!!
The second line of the SFAR states this (my emphasis):
***1. Applicability. Under the procedures prescribed herein, this SFAR applies to all persons who seek to manipulate the controls or act as pilot in command of a Robinson model R-22 or R-44 helicopter. The requirements stated in this SFAR are in ADDITION to the current requirements of part 61.***
I advise pilots / instructors to check to see if they are meeting these requirements.
Regards,
cl12pv2s
P.S. I found a pretty comprehensive list of endorsements which include the SFAR endorsements.
http://www.verticare.com/CFI_help/wade/p1.htm
R22 Blade separation accident in NZ.
Got this emailed to me today.
There are 3 photos and I will be sending those to Heliport forthwith to include in this thread.
Get the magnifying glass out.....
Steve
To all R22 pilots, owners, operators and passengers,
Many of you will have heard of the Robinson R-22 that had an accident in the central North Island on Saturday morning. The Beta 2 was spraying and had just lifted of with a load when it fell to the ground and injured the pilot destroying the helicopter.
CAA investigations are at an early stage, but first inspection shows one main rotor blade has separated outboard of the blade grip where it joins the blade skins. This is a solid block at the root end of the MR blade that has failed. See below!!!
The blade its self was found some distance away in a fence with the root still attached to the rotor head.
The other blade was still attached to the head. The blades fitted are -2 and have flown a total of 700 hours since new.
Robinson have a warning that any increase in MR vibration requires the helicopter to be placed on the ground. In this case it was, and the pilot inspected the blades and head, but could find nothing wrong.
This is a warning to all involved in R22 helicopters that the warning is for real. With any change in MR vibration the helicopter should be placed on the ground and an engineer inspection carried out before further flight.
It is anticipated CAA and Robinson will be taking some further action once further analysis confirms it was an in flight separation.
In order to reduce the accident rate and to stay alive we need to all be vigilant.
Done. Heliport
There are 3 photos and I will be sending those to Heliport forthwith to include in this thread.
Get the magnifying glass out.....
Steve
To all R22 pilots, owners, operators and passengers,
Many of you will have heard of the Robinson R-22 that had an accident in the central North Island on Saturday morning. The Beta 2 was spraying and had just lifted of with a load when it fell to the ground and injured the pilot destroying the helicopter.
CAA investigations are at an early stage, but first inspection shows one main rotor blade has separated outboard of the blade grip where it joins the blade skins. This is a solid block at the root end of the MR blade that has failed. See below!!!
The blade its self was found some distance away in a fence with the root still attached to the rotor head.
The other blade was still attached to the head. The blades fitted are -2 and have flown a total of 700 hours since new.
Robinson have a warning that any increase in MR vibration requires the helicopter to be placed on the ground. In this case it was, and the pilot inspected the blades and head, but could find nothing wrong.
This is a warning to all involved in R22 helicopters that the warning is for real. With any change in MR vibration the helicopter should be placed on the ground and an engineer inspection carried out before further flight.
It is anticipated CAA and Robinson will be taking some further action once further analysis confirms it was an in flight separation.
In order to reduce the accident rate and to stay alive we need to all be vigilant.
Done. Heliport
Not enough $$$ ...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew an R22 a couple of weeks ago with the "new" stainless steel blades. I'm told they are much nicer to fly with, have better autorotation characteristics, etc, but this may be just as much the newness of the machines they are on, I don't know. I have so little experience I wouldn't have known the difference.
How many blade separation accidents have happened with these newer blades? I don't remember reading anything specific in the reports that says what type of blades they've been.
My point is this - many of the accident reports I've seen about these Robbie accidents seem to involve some sort of manufacturing defect that has initiated the crack. Is this nothing more than a case of poor QC on the manufacturing line of the blades? Of course I'm making a big assumption about this particular one above, but the question remains.
Before Lu and Nick take up their spitballs and catapults in this thread, does anyone else have any comment about manufacturing processes of rotor blades?
Cheers,
wishtobflying
--
You cannot achieve what you have not first imagined ...
How many blade separation accidents have happened with these newer blades? I don't remember reading anything specific in the reports that says what type of blades they've been.
My point is this - many of the accident reports I've seen about these Robbie accidents seem to involve some sort of manufacturing defect that has initiated the crack. Is this nothing more than a case of poor QC on the manufacturing line of the blades? Of course I'm making a big assumption about this particular one above, but the question remains.
Before Lu and Nick take up their spitballs and catapults in this thread, does anyone else have any comment about manufacturing processes of rotor blades?
Cheers,
wishtobflying
--
You cannot achieve what you have not first imagined ...
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Queensland Australia
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There 3 series of blades A016-1, A016-2 and now A016-4. (I don't know where the A016-3's went)
As far as I understand all the blade separation accidents in Oz have been in 016-2.
All 106-1 blades should now be past their usable life so none should be flying. There are plenty of 016-2's still around.
The difference between the -2 and -4s is basically:
The 016-2s
Have aluminium skin with a stainless leading edge. I am told they have 4 bearings in the spindle and the 016-4s have 5. (can't vouch for that) The root has several bolts that hold the leading edge spar onto the blade root. The problem area in the Australian accidents was found to be the bolt hole closest to the hub. The cracks began in spots of corrosion deep in the bolt hole and propagated sideways then backwards in an arc until they got so far through the blade separated.
The bolt and hole is covered by an aluminum plate held on by some sort of glue. The ATSB suggestion is that there were defects in the glue which allowed water to get in and track into the bolt hole where it set up pin points of corrosion.
The British machine that got the big crack in the root had it in a different place. The one mentioned in this thread seems like it was in an further different place since it started at the back from what I can work out and propagated forward.
Other blades have had problems with corrosion and and/or separation of the aluminium skin from the steel spar. Partly this is due to two dissimilar metals which set up a galvanic current and rapid corrosion if water gets in between the two.
Robinson now say if you park you machine outside, live in a tropical, coastal or humid area then you should replace the blades (016-2) every 5 years! The 016 -4s aren't subject to this recommendation.
The 016-4s:
Have stainless steel skin and stainless leading spar. The leading edge of the root is different to look at. It has a sharp leading edge running right to the rounded root with no flat plate over the bolt hole. I don't know what the inner design is like. I would assume they have still got bolts holding the leading edge spar on but they must have covered them up better to keep the water out.
I can tell you what the difference is to fly with them as I have just got new 016-4s on my machine after having new 016-2s for some months.
They are not as nice as the 016-2s were. They have needed quite a bit of work and they are still not quite right. The main problem has been the collective rides up rapidly while on the ground if the friction is off. The first time I fired it up the machine took off on its own when I took my hand off to change radio frequency. Even after lots of adjustments it still rides up slowly.
The other thing is that it sometimes gets a vibration on climb or when increasing throttle which stops when back in level flight or when the throttle settles to a new level. It's not much but is noticible.
Attempts to isolate the problem have been unsuccessful so far.
The auto characteristics may be a little better but I'm not sure. I do know that when I did the Auto RPM testing on these blades I was getting very low rates of descent (like 900 ft a minute) at 53 knots indicated compared with about 1300 to 1500 on the 016-2s at 65 knots. But it was a bit hard to compare cos it was at different speeds and density altitudes. I never did autos with the old blades at 53 knots at the same altitudes.
I liked the 016-2s more. They were smooth as silk and the collective stayed where I put it. But I guess the new design may help get rid some of the really disasterous problems.
I haven't heard of any cracks in the new 016-4s but that may just be because there are less around and they are all new. I hope its that they aren't ever going to get them again
As far as I understand all the blade separation accidents in Oz have been in 016-2.
All 106-1 blades should now be past their usable life so none should be flying. There are plenty of 016-2's still around.
The difference between the -2 and -4s is basically:
The 016-2s
Have aluminium skin with a stainless leading edge. I am told they have 4 bearings in the spindle and the 016-4s have 5. (can't vouch for that) The root has several bolts that hold the leading edge spar onto the blade root. The problem area in the Australian accidents was found to be the bolt hole closest to the hub. The cracks began in spots of corrosion deep in the bolt hole and propagated sideways then backwards in an arc until they got so far through the blade separated.
The bolt and hole is covered by an aluminum plate held on by some sort of glue. The ATSB suggestion is that there were defects in the glue which allowed water to get in and track into the bolt hole where it set up pin points of corrosion.
The British machine that got the big crack in the root had it in a different place. The one mentioned in this thread seems like it was in an further different place since it started at the back from what I can work out and propagated forward.
Other blades have had problems with corrosion and and/or separation of the aluminium skin from the steel spar. Partly this is due to two dissimilar metals which set up a galvanic current and rapid corrosion if water gets in between the two.
Robinson now say if you park you machine outside, live in a tropical, coastal or humid area then you should replace the blades (016-2) every 5 years! The 016 -4s aren't subject to this recommendation.
The 016-4s:
Have stainless steel skin and stainless leading spar. The leading edge of the root is different to look at. It has a sharp leading edge running right to the rounded root with no flat plate over the bolt hole. I don't know what the inner design is like. I would assume they have still got bolts holding the leading edge spar on but they must have covered them up better to keep the water out.
I can tell you what the difference is to fly with them as I have just got new 016-4s on my machine after having new 016-2s for some months.
They are not as nice as the 016-2s were. They have needed quite a bit of work and they are still not quite right. The main problem has been the collective rides up rapidly while on the ground if the friction is off. The first time I fired it up the machine took off on its own when I took my hand off to change radio frequency. Even after lots of adjustments it still rides up slowly.
The other thing is that it sometimes gets a vibration on climb or when increasing throttle which stops when back in level flight or when the throttle settles to a new level. It's not much but is noticible.
Attempts to isolate the problem have been unsuccessful so far.
The auto characteristics may be a little better but I'm not sure. I do know that when I did the Auto RPM testing on these blades I was getting very low rates of descent (like 900 ft a minute) at 53 knots indicated compared with about 1300 to 1500 on the 016-2s at 65 knots. But it was a bit hard to compare cos it was at different speeds and density altitudes. I never did autos with the old blades at 53 knots at the same altitudes.
I liked the 016-2s more. They were smooth as silk and the collective stayed where I put it. But I guess the new design may help get rid some of the really disasterous problems.
I haven't heard of any cracks in the new 016-4s but that may just be because there are less around and they are all new. I hope its that they aren't ever going to get them again
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've never flown a Robinson, as pilot or passenger and if I am honest, I never want to. They may be perfectly safe, the best helicopter ever made, but having read and heard so much bad publicity about them from this forum and other sources, I'll pass on the opportunity thanks.
My pension beckons, and I intend to be drawing it for a long, long time.
Fly safely,
Chopperman.
My pension beckons, and I intend to be drawing it for a long, long time.
Fly safely,
Chopperman.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Daylight Saving Free Zone
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The blade has separated alright, but did that occur before or after the machine hit the ground?
The tip of the separated blade looks like it has contacted dirt.
Would a clean separation of a blade (in flight) cause it to bend like that?
(Just asking)
The tip of the separated blade looks like it has contacted dirt.
Would a clean separation of a blade (in flight) cause it to bend like that?
(Just asking)