what part does not look up to the job
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ON A HILL
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what part does not look up to the job
nearing completion of a little rotary project, i was looking at some components and asking myself the question. what would be the result of a failure of this particular part. What parts of your machine do you look at and wonder, " what if " . for example r22 flex plate Bug.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What parts of your machine do you look at and wonder, " what if "
BUT,
I found out a long time ago to never look at the rotating bits in flight - out of the skylight of a 206 at the main rotor hub, or out the back of a 47 or an Alouette II and see just about everything thrashing round........... horrible.
For way too many years I always had a feeling I would see a Main Rotor Blade zinging off into space at the Two O'Clock direction.
Don't ask me to explain that....as there is no logical, sane, rational reason one would ever arrive at that thought.
What is odd....there are a few aircraft I feel quite safe in re mechanical design.
105 and 117's spring to mind.
Don't ask me to explain that....as there is no logical, sane, rational reason one would ever arrive at that thought.
What is odd....there are a few aircraft I feel quite safe in re mechanical design.
105 and 117's spring to mind.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a good way to discuss flaws or under engineered things...
I like all the as350's... But when I look at photos, see through drawings of the airframe, and how its only a floor with a rear firewall with a gbox loitering just overhead, in an accident they almost always end up with no roof and the seats hanging out
Thin floors on helicopters like the 206... isnt that a wee bit dangerous for many landings in remote locations? I have always had concerns about random fencing posts or cut stumps in long grasss injuring someone
The way cabin sections are constucted really scares me... Helicopters are usually all engine and drivetrain, and crew safety should be most important...
Isnt there a way to make the cabin area altitude pending ejecting capsule with stronger alloy frame with chute to slow its decent, and mount the driveline ant tail together so it will land clear off the crew
If youre in the dead mans curve then it wont help much, but if a major component failed in cruise and it all went sour with low autorotation chance i would love this option...
It may be a little far fetched but its 2009... We really should have our prioritys right
Simon
I look forward to see what else worries u all
I like all the as350's... But when I look at photos, see through drawings of the airframe, and how its only a floor with a rear firewall with a gbox loitering just overhead, in an accident they almost always end up with no roof and the seats hanging out
Thin floors on helicopters like the 206... isnt that a wee bit dangerous for many landings in remote locations? I have always had concerns about random fencing posts or cut stumps in long grasss injuring someone
The way cabin sections are constucted really scares me... Helicopters are usually all engine and drivetrain, and crew safety should be most important...
Isnt there a way to make the cabin area altitude pending ejecting capsule with stronger alloy frame with chute to slow its decent, and mount the driveline ant tail together so it will land clear off the crew
If youre in the dead mans curve then it wont help much, but if a major component failed in cruise and it all went sour with low autorotation chance i would love this option...
It may be a little far fetched but its 2009... We really should have our prioritys right
Simon
I look forward to see what else worries u all
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ChopperFAN
I agree with you that the 350/355 cabin is pretty soft and doesn't give much protection to the occupants - the standard 355 fuel tanks aren't too crashworthy either.
I think you'll find that the cabin floor of a 206 isn't as thin as you think. It's about 1.5+ inches thick honeycombe.
Jonasraf
I think that's happened to a 300, can't remember if it was in flight or if it happened after a tailstrike at the bottom of an EOL. Anyway, a loose T/R blade was found with evidence of it having hit the poor bloody pilot. The odds on that happening very often are pretty slim I'd have thought.
I agree with you that the 350/355 cabin is pretty soft and doesn't give much protection to the occupants - the standard 355 fuel tanks aren't too crashworthy either.
I think you'll find that the cabin floor of a 206 isn't as thin as you think. It's about 1.5+ inches thick honeycombe.
Jonasraf
I think that's happened to a 300, can't remember if it was in flight or if it happened after a tailstrike at the bottom of an EOL. Anyway, a loose T/R blade was found with evidence of it having hit the poor bloody pilot. The odds on that happening very often are pretty slim I'd have thought.
I was watching an S61 land yesterday and the size of the aircraft in relation to the part of the main rotor mast I could see!!!! 
Although up close it probably looks much more substantial?
Although up close it probably looks much more substantial?
TRC
You are correct there are at least two reported cases of parts of the tail rotor coming through the back of the hughes 300, the one at Biggin about 18 months ago after striking its tail on the ground on take off, and one back in 1975 where the tail rotor broke apart in flight and a fragment hit the pilot in the back of the head and killed him.
I've edited the above to include the word parts just to clarify.
GS
You are correct there are at least two reported cases of parts of the tail rotor coming through the back of the hughes 300, the one at Biggin about 18 months ago after striking its tail on the ground on take off, and one back in 1975 where the tail rotor broke apart in flight and a fragment hit the pilot in the back of the head and killed him.
I've edited the above to include the word parts just to clarify.
GS
Last edited by VeeAny; 14th Mar 2009 at 19:13. Reason: Clarification
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 504
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....there are at least two reported cases of the tail rotor coming through the back of the hughes 300,....
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was always less than impressed with Bell swashplates. From 2-per vibes on the 206 to cracks on the 205/212 series, it seemed Bell could never quite get it right. Other ships I worked on, like the Sikorskys, BO105, Astar, Puma, etc. had much more robust swashplate designs.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
If you assume the fuselage will generally hold together, the transmission will probably take the load, the Main Rotor will remain effective and the engine will keep turning, you always come back to a single item.
The lift from the Main Rotor is transferred to the MRGB, and hence to the aircraft. So let's look a little closer at that transfer between Main Rotor and the MRGB. The Rotor Mast is the mechanical connection, but how does the load transfer from the mast to the MRGB? The mast effectively holds the MRGB while simultaneously being driven by the gearing, so how does that lift/weight transfer happen? In most cases the MRGB top bearing secures the gear drive on the mast which is in turn driven by the the gearbox. So during flight the entire lift/weight coupling between the Rotor and the Gearbox is a function of a single bearing. OK, it's a well engineered bearing, but it's still the difference between continued happiness and a less enticing outcome every time you commit aviation.
Sure all those other bits are important, but only like a big house and a pension plan are important when compared to oxygen.
The lift from the Main Rotor is transferred to the MRGB, and hence to the aircraft. So let's look a little closer at that transfer between Main Rotor and the MRGB. The Rotor Mast is the mechanical connection, but how does the load transfer from the mast to the MRGB? The mast effectively holds the MRGB while simultaneously being driven by the gearing, so how does that lift/weight transfer happen? In most cases the MRGB top bearing secures the gear drive on the mast which is in turn driven by the the gearbox. So during flight the entire lift/weight coupling between the Rotor and the Gearbox is a function of a single bearing. OK, it's a well engineered bearing, but it's still the difference between continued happiness and a less enticing outcome every time you commit aviation.
Sure all those other bits are important, but only like a big house and a pension plan are important when compared to oxygen.
The aluminum chip detector housings/bodies used by Bell (made by TEDECO). In the past week we have had 2 different ones fail, thankfully discovered when changing the base o-rings during (1) an engine swap on the chip detector housing on a 206L4 Freewheeling Unit and (2)a lower detector on a 206L3 M/R gearbox. 2 different part numbers and styles with the same failure. The freewheeling unit one seperated completely when torquing the chip detector base (70-100 inch lb.) The base broke off and fell on the floor and the guts of it fell into the free wheeling unit housing.
Upon re installing our L3 main gearbox in the aircraft after an internal inspection, I could not get the chip detecting portion of the detector to engage and lock into the body. I changed orings, checked torque and could not get it to install. So I pulled the body and removed the oring and to my dismay saw a small hair line crack that was 3/4 the way around the entire circumfrence. When torquing against the oring and the xmsn case, the crack would allow the receptacle portion to move inside the gearbox not allowing the detector to be installed. Scary stuff seeing as just a few mm of aluminum is holding all your transmission oil in.
/
/
both cracks were located between the hex portion on one side and the gap to the right of the threaded portion where the sealing o-ring rests.
Upon re installing our L3 main gearbox in the aircraft after an internal inspection, I could not get the chip detecting portion of the detector to engage and lock into the body. I changed orings, checked torque and could not get it to install. So I pulled the body and removed the oring and to my dismay saw a small hair line crack that was 3/4 the way around the entire circumfrence. When torquing against the oring and the xmsn case, the crack would allow the receptacle portion to move inside the gearbox not allowing the detector to be installed. Scary stuff seeing as just a few mm of aluminum is holding all your transmission oil in.
/
/
both cracks were located between the hex portion on one side and the gap to the right of the threaded portion where the sealing o-ring rests.
