ATSB/R22 mustering report

[thekite]

According to today's Friday aviation section in 'The Australian" newspaper, the ATSB has released a report on mustering in R22s that concludes that the R22 has a relatively good safety record compared with other small helicopters and that record had improved since the early '90s.

Ha! I knew it. Despite rotor blade and belt drive problems, the R22s are still better that the museum pieces that try to compete in the mustering game.

thekite

[Pitchpull]

Robinson death traps

I can't agree at all with your sentiments. The Robinson helicopter is the dodgiest machine or should I say death trap machine ever built. It’s the helicopter that has killed more pilots than any other machine on the planet!!! Some blades delaminate even in the box prior to installation, sad & very scary. Many young (time wise) pilots blindly worship them as if they were the best thing since a trusty ole' 47, sadly though the wrecks of machines & wrecked families lives paint a different story. Ask on honest L.A.M.E. who has worked on a variety of machines for a few years for their appraisal of a Robinson airframe.

[thekite]

Pulling pitch and other things

I rest my case. Read the report.
ATSB B20040292
thekite

[2leftskids]

Argue all you want. It's all there in black and white. The report was actually looking into the stresses placed on the aircraft during the course of mustering operations. The accompanying statistics do seem to point to a relatively safe aircraft though.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2007/B20040292.aspx

[HeliCraig]

The Robinson helicopter is the dodgiest machine or should I say death trap machine ever built. It’s the helicopter that has killed more pilots than any other machine on the planet!!!

That may or may not be true. However, are Robinson's not the world's best selling helicopter?

If 80% of us drove Ford's then more accidents would involve Fords... does that alone make Ford's designs bad? (Interest to Declare: I work for a Ford owned business!).

As Disraeli said:

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics

Queue debate about safety statistics -vs- AME opinion -vs- Robinson -vs- Bell -vs- ... ad infinitum.

[topendtorque]

Interesting.

I will ask the company concerned for their thoughts.

I note that certification testing involves (LOTS) less ground idle time???
Do they specifically wait for Eng / Xmon temperature stabilisation on shut down, or not?

By Gees???

There are no comments re the maneuvres on the certification test regime????????

There are no comments on the extraordinary high loads imposed upon the M/R spindle bearings by ab-initio training????????????

note. Auto RPM exceedance is often done even by experienced instructors who seem to think it fair game to have high auto RPM set on their machines.

By Gees again!
HIGH AUTO RPM ALWAYS GIVES HIGH ROD UPON IMPACT.
NUFF SAID.

There are no comments on the extraordinary high power fluctuations imposed by very gusty wind conditions with "Governor" selected "ON".

I think we will find many more holes the size of floodgates as we look into the report.

However ATSB must be complimented for pursuing the argument and putting to bed a lot of unecessary criticism of what is a very good product.

We in the world of product use will still have criticism's, I hope Frank can handle it.
tet

[RVDT]

One thing you need to keep in mind.

Nowhere does Frank R endorse the use of the aircraft for anything apart from personal use.

Frank R covers the liability for the aircraft.

Nowhere does he say it is a trainer, or mustering, or Ag machine or whatever.........

If you are operating it in a way that is not endorsed by the company then they are hardly going to be found liable for it!

[topendtorque]

RVDT
I accept that, however, personal use is also private use. Private mustering operations? etc?. Happens right outside Frank R's back door. Please don't tell me that he is short sighted.

I don't remember seeing any photos of him wearing spectacles!

In the states they live by the rule of essential supplies. Here I talk about drive belt standards. We are again ( like twenty years ago) embroiled in this issue.

Five failures (that I know of) in the last few months, some as quick as just a few hours, with bugger all indications except for the acrid smell about fifteen seconds before failure.

Any comments??
cheers tet

[RVDT]

tet,

Can the drive belt standards keep up with the design?

An idler would have been a better solution but where would you put it? (300's don't spit belts)

There are any number of reasons.......................

Probably about the only time the pulleys are in line are when the engineer checked them and was conscientious enough to make sure they were OK.

Thereafter it's probably a bit of a lottery!

Buy yourself one of these http://www.gates.com/brochure.cfm?br...cation_id=3539 and maybe one of these http://www.gates.com/brochure.cfm?br...cation_id=3538 for a bit of field analysis.

[rotorvision98]

Well PITCHPULL What a load of crap you talk!!! and at least Helicraig is talking some sense! I have many thousands of hours in both R22 & R44 and thats out of choice as I have no desire to fly around with local plod in the back of a 109 or an AS355 thinking thaey are gods gift to aviation and have also been in some pretty sticky situations and the machines perform admirably. On the one point about statistics that helicraig raised I totally agree with you just look at the statistics they massage to justify air ambulances. Have a nice day guys and happy flying. Now that I have just lit the touch paper I am going to retire

[heliduck]

Next time 500 head of Brahmans turn around at the entrance to the yards & start to run under my helicopter, scattering into the trees in the blink of an eye, I will refer to the performance chart rivetted above my head. On this chart I will compare the pressure height & temperature I am operating in to come up with a max power setting I am allowed to use, after all it is 30 degrees hotter now than when I did the calculation in the dark this morning (?!?!?!). This max power setting will ensure I do not overstress the drivetrain (including the belts) or suffer from an unexpected RRPM decay. Yeah right!!

Mustering is an operation in which the machine is occassionally operated to the machine limits, not the manufacturers design limits. The problem of shredding belts on the R22 became more prevalent with the release of the Beta 2, & coincidentally this model has more engine power available than previous models & sold like hotcakes to the musterers. My opinion of RVDT's question is that the drive belt standards have kept up with the design, as long as pilots operate within the design limits. There are many machines in other sectors of the industry which have done a full life on the belts with no problems, but then it only takes one to spoil your day.
I'm sure Frank is happy to reap the rewards of his helicopter sales to the mustering sector, but he has demonstrated that he is equally happy to wipe his hands of anyone who operates his machines outside the design envelope.
A story to emphasise a point - Years ago I had the opportunity to speak to a Toyota Landcruiser design engineer, & I asked him why they don't improve the standard of the suspension. His reply at the time was "when people stop buying them we'll spend money on Research & Development". Years later the Nissan patrol was increasing its' market share with the coil cab & now the Landcruiser has coil suspension. My point - Stop buying R22's & I suspect Frank will beef up the drivetrain. While I'm holding my breath waiting for that, I personally will keep a close eye on the belts & change them more frequently than required if I operate outside the design envelope.
The blade delaminating I struggle with. I understand how the blade bolts can be bent by MR overspeeds, but I don't accept that the manouvres conducted during any operation can cause a blade to delaminate. I would have thought if a manouvre was severe enough to contribute to blade delamination the machine would turn inside out! I am a big fan of the Robinson product, but I do believe he has a significant design problem with the method of blade manufacture, & as I stated previously if we stop buying them I'm sure he'll address it.

[mustering guru]

puller,

I have flown this machine to all extremes for about 6000 hrs and it never let me down once! With the scheduled maintenence and good daily inspections these machines are very safe! this is fact your statement is opinion....

[topendtorque]

your statement is opinion....

Perhaps even Libelous opinion?

As promised I spoke with the company who provided the platform for the testing. I was assured that the pilots were instructed to fly, - "as you do every day".

'Why?' I said, those instructions.

His response was, "easy, I have total confidence in the machine that we have been flying in mustering for twenty or so years, I know it won't let me down in this test".

It was also a variety of pilots not just one pilot who may have nursed the recorders.

I have not viewed the data sets, I would like to one day. However after a couple of hundred hours many things will be become obviously repetiitive and typical of routine mustering. Namely steady flying whilst the painstaking work of observation goes on.

So, rest easy.

[thekite]

My Way or the Highway

Get back to work, Puller of Pitch and other things, or seek a change of carreer.

Case dismissed!

I mustered in H300s and even today can walk up to one, blindfolded, and tell you a horror story about whatever I touch.

I can also put up my hand as "an honest LAME" and tell you that you will not even the beloved JetRanger is better designed.

thekite

[Sir HC]

The fact is that the R22 is a very competent mustering machine. It would not be used by so many operators both commercially and privately relatively incident free if this weren't the case. The problem is that Frank Robinson is is trying to boost his profit margin. Only a few years ago belts would go the full 2000 hours. I have heard of a case where a set of belts went upwards of 3000 hours. These were the days before you could scrunch up a set of belts to fit in your palm. Now, why else would Frank go away from a proven design to something that now only lasts 500 hours (maximum). Same goes for the A029-1 tail rotor blades, they were lifed at 5525hrs. Now for the same money, you can get a set of -2 blades that will last 2200hrs. Genius. RVDT, only 2 factors really affect the sheave alignment. Engine mounts, which will sag when new and then gradually over time, and the belts, which will stretch and do the same. Aligning the sheaves and checking the clutch shaft angle is not a difficult thing to do. Also, if Frank only covers the R22 for personal use, why does he sell a Tuna Boat bubble cover? I personally can't wait for Frank to kick the bucket and let some new blood flow through the company. With his stubbornness and tight fisted mindset, it is only a matter of time before more pilots are killed due to these problems which should have been sorted out decades ago.

[topendtorque]

Good post Sir HC

What you are talking about is pragmatism, in fact steeped and myopic pragmatism.

This is criticism that Frank and others, me too, will find hard to handle.

Why?

Because I am informed that he takes every incident to heart and then copiuosly tries to better the product to short circuit repetition of, "the incident".

That's OK, and good.

The current belts (not the latest stye) on my machine sre sitting pretty good at 908 hours. Mind you when I have all day strong wind turbulence at low level I switch off the governor rather than have it fluctuate for all day at 1.5 seconds intervals at 3", ad infinitum.

I believe that the aversion of self inflicted masochism and a 'little' experience, easily helps me arrive at that deciision.

I DON"T LIKE TO FEEL THE WHOLE DRIVE TRAIN GRUNT AND STRUGGLE EVERY 1.5 SECONDS. Takes my mind right off the usual enjoyable mind wandering subjects I can say??

In the meantime I will fly the main rotor in easy manner, as one should.
tet

[Ag-Rotor]

Robinson seems to be the helicopter of choice for mustering due to its simplicity and most maintenance organisations with any skill at all can maintain them. I recently had a discussion with a very experienced mustering pilot buying a new machine and the only reason he did not buy a H300 was because of the lack of skilled engineers to do the maintenance. The 300 is well suited to the harsh flying environment of mustering operations, there are no MR blade issues, no manovering limitations and well proven reliability. You can tell its built tough because you only have to log "skids off to skids on" time in the MR, not like the Robbo, where Frank makes you log "engine on to engine off" time in the MR. By only logging actualy flying time and charging engine time repesents approx 25% or better hourly rate you can achive from operating a 300 compaired to a R22. You can charge the same hourly rate but achieve a 25% better MR / hour income. This is a significant operational advantage, and a signifiacant lift to the bank ballance. There is an alternative to the Robinson, there just needs to be an effort made to get engineers interested in working an something else.

[Pitchpull]

The R22 is by far the most popular machine, granted. but one must ask why?? The ONLY reason is because of acquisition price $$$ its cheep!!! end of story, its cheep & its nasty. Beginning & End of story. The reality is the 300 is a far superior machine but requires a skilled engineer to maintain which are less available especially in remote areas. There are soon to be some very nice new contenders being certified to compete with the so called safety record of the Robinson. Safety comes at a price, less price = less safety

[[email protected]]

From the report

A total of 299 files containing data from the MaxLife system were recorded, providing information on 350 hours of R22 operations. AeroStructures reported that these 350 hours accounted for around 55 per cent of the total hours operated by this helicopter over the 26 weeks of the study. AeroStructures could not determine the reason for the difference between the total number of hours the aircraft operated and the number of hours recorded by the MaxLife system, but concluded that the 350 hours of MaxLife data provided a suitable basis for further analysis.

Well isn't that convenient? only just over half the hours flown ended up recording data which then just comes within what Frank deems acceptable for the aircraft.

The phrase 'whitewash' comes to mind since Frank isn't going to complain when he sells so many helicopters to the mustering fraternity.

In many other helicopter operations, the fitting of HUMS/HOMP is mandatory - why do I get the feeling this is conveniently ignored in the mustering game because the real picture of abuse of an airframe not designed for the job would emerge?

[ReverseFlight]

To be fair to Frank, he didn't design the R22 with mustering or instructional use in mind. However I must admit I'd hate to fly the R22/R44 again - scares the carp out of me.