Robinson: Greatest Helicopter of all time
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have over 6000 hrs in Robbies and they never let me down.....Wait for the facts before jumping to conclusions.
Robinsons are a great helicopter and like most other makes and models they have their problems. Show me a helicopter that hasn't!
Don't be hating!
And I agree with Eddie Heli
MG
Robinsons are a great helicopter and like most other makes and models they have their problems. Show me a helicopter that hasn't!
Don't be hating!
And I agree with Eddie Heli
MG
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: who knows....
Age: 38
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes.... I can't see anything wrong on flying a Robinson.
What a stupid comment.
and just for information I'm not flying only Robinson helicopters, but some light twin too (109 family and 135... they have problems too) .
What a stupid comment.
and just for information I'm not flying only Robinson helicopters, but some light twin too (109 family and 135... they have problems too) .
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just the thread to throw in the Robbo "verbal handgrenade".
done quite some hours in Robinson's too, had our moments we have but only less than a handful, far far fewer proportionally than with 47's.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: In the saddle or in the air
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely more pilots and passengers have been killed in recent years in Robinsons is due to the very high percentage of such machines in the private and VFR corporate market. With several thousand hours and many years in them as an owner and operator, they seem to do just what it says on the instructions. But they cannot be abused, they must be flown and maintained in accord with the regs. If you fly in poor vis in the dark or you hit a tree with your tail rotor there is a fairly good chance that the result will be expensive tragic or both. Surely that is the same for most machines.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FF,
Well said.
Does anyone have a list of SALES of all helicopters ?
I suspect that (for example) R44's have been sold in greater numbers than any other type - 206 Jetranger (s) being the only machine I can think of that could have been sold in greater numbers, mainly due to the great length of time they were in production.
Arrrj
Well said.
Does anyone have a list of SALES of all helicopters ?
I suspect that (for example) R44's have been sold in greater numbers than any other type - 206 Jetranger (s) being the only machine I can think of that could have been sold in greater numbers, mainly due to the great length of time they were in production.
Arrrj
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robinson products certainly divide opinion.
However, I believe there was a time when the number of R22/R44 accidents was disproportionately high, measured against other a/c on a per hour flown comparison. Not seen more recent figures though, but would suspect this has improved.
However, I believe there was a time when the number of R22/R44 accidents was disproportionately high, measured against other a/c on a per hour flown comparison. Not seen more recent figures though, but would suspect this has improved.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
A great site here;
Griffin Helicopters | Home Page
With some amazing stats;
Griffin Helicopters | Accident Statistics
Griffin Helicopters
Robinson R22 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
R22 - As at end 2007, 1131 accidents out of a total production of 4000 at the time.
Does that mean that a quarter that have been produced have had an accident ?
Griffin Helicopters | Home Page
With some amazing stats;
Griffin Helicopters | Accident Statistics
Griffin Helicopters
Robinson R22 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
R22 - As at end 2007, 1131 accidents out of a total production of 4000 at the time.
Does that mean that a quarter that have been produced have had an accident ?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
possibly more applicable in the AW 139 thread at the moment, not healthy flying around thinking about losing yer tail.
Does that mean that a quarter that have been produced have had an accident ?
I tried to decipher the Hiller stats, looks like 793 out of 3,000. Almost the same percentage. Having the smarter military types on them for training would mean a slightly lower %, I say as a coat grabbing statement.
I know of company in OZ quite some moons ago, that started a year with 5 of them and finished the year with minus 7. How's that pretty good, eh? Hillers that is.
Regards
tet
Over 90% of all light helicopter accidents, fatal or otherwise, are due to pilot error.
End of.
It strikes me that Robinson haters fall into 3 categories:
1 People who've never flown them and keep repeating something they once heard.
2 People who've flown them and struggle. Let's not call them "pilots".
3 People who've only ever flown much heavier and more expensive machinery, normally supplied by A N Other-Deeppockets or the taxpayer.
For those of us who adore them and have over 3000hrs experience in actually paying the bills by doing successful work, these 3 groups are to be ignored.
End of.
It strikes me that Robinson haters fall into 3 categories:
1 People who've never flown them and keep repeating something they once heard.
2 People who've flown them and struggle. Let's not call them "pilots".
3 People who've only ever flown much heavier and more expensive machinery, normally supplied by A N Other-Deeppockets or the taxpayer.
For those of us who adore them and have over 3000hrs experience in actually paying the bills by doing successful work, these 3 groups are to be ignored.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hiding between the Animal Bar and the Suave Bar
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does that mean that a quarter that have been produced have had an accident ?
Got plenty of time in the R66 now. They're a bloody good aircraft. Happy to trust my life to them, and frequently do so
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
Over 90% of all light helicopter accidents, fatal or otherwise, are due to pilot error.
End of.
End of.
JB
I'm not sure I 'adore' them, but very well said. Robinson products are built to a budget and appeal to a lot of private owners and training schools because they're more affordable than most other helicopters. As a result, they also tend be flown more by low-timers than other types and, at the risk of getting flamed, most of the owners I've met are 'type A' entrepreneurs and successful in their own industry.
Robinson helicopters are not dangerous per se or they wouldn't have approval to leave the ground, but given the above, it's not surprising that there may be proportionately more accidents in Robinsons than other types. I've lost several mates over the years flying in AS355, AS350, SA341, B206, R44 or R22. Only one accident was definitely not due to pilot error (the twin); the others either certainly were, or almost certainly were.
Without exception, every individual I know who enjoys criticising Robinson products have big egos, small dicks and an empty bank account, yet seem determined to behave as though the exact opposite was true. Is that the definition of a snob or just an inferiority complex?!
Over 90% of all light helicopter accidents, fatal or otherwise, are due to pilot error.
End of.
It strikes me that Robinson haters fall into 3 categories:
1 People who've never flown them and keep repeating something they once heard.
2 People who've flown them and struggle. Let's not call them "pilots".
3 People who've only ever flown much heavier and more expensive machinery, normally supplied by A N Other-Deeppockets or the taxpayer.
For those of us who adore them and have over 3000hrs experience in actually paying the bills by doing successful work, these 3 groups are to be ignored.
End of.
It strikes me that Robinson haters fall into 3 categories:
1 People who've never flown them and keep repeating something they once heard.
2 People who've flown them and struggle. Let's not call them "pilots".
3 People who've only ever flown much heavier and more expensive machinery, normally supplied by A N Other-Deeppockets or the taxpayer.
For those of us who adore them and have over 3000hrs experience in actually paying the bills by doing successful work, these 3 groups are to be ignored.
Robinson helicopters are not dangerous per se or they wouldn't have approval to leave the ground, but given the above, it's not surprising that there may be proportionately more accidents in Robinsons than other types. I've lost several mates over the years flying in AS355, AS350, SA341, B206, R44 or R22. Only one accident was definitely not due to pilot error (the twin); the others either certainly were, or almost certainly were.
Without exception, every individual I know who enjoys criticising Robinson products have big egos, small dicks and an empty bank account, yet seem determined to behave as though the exact opposite was true. Is that the definition of a snob or just an inferiority complex?!
Again well said.
If it wasnt for the R22 there would be a lot less pilots coming through due to rising costs and insurance requirements on other machines.
As for crash stats, its a bit like saying the Ford Fiesta or similar is a death trap but who drives them? Learners, low experience drivers love them because they are cheap to buy, run and insure (sound familiar?)
I have been lucky to learn on one then move on to other machines but what I did learn on the R22 has helped in future years with working within tight power margins etc.
Agreed that the power margins can catch people out as does the lightness of the aircraft in some conditions but the machine doesnt get you into that situation in the first place the pilot does.
I was lucky enough to shake Franks hand some years ago and I siad thankyou. Without his little invention I would still be saving up to do my next hour or course.
If it wasnt for the R22 there would be a lot less pilots coming through due to rising costs and insurance requirements on other machines.
As for crash stats, its a bit like saying the Ford Fiesta or similar is a death trap but who drives them? Learners, low experience drivers love them because they are cheap to buy, run and insure (sound familiar?)
I have been lucky to learn on one then move on to other machines but what I did learn on the R22 has helped in future years with working within tight power margins etc.
Agreed that the power margins can catch people out as does the lightness of the aircraft in some conditions but the machine doesnt get you into that situation in the first place the pilot does.
I was lucky enough to shake Franks hand some years ago and I siad thankyou. Without his little invention I would still be saving up to do my next hour or course.
Siloe SId "Have you a link to that data Jim?"
Dear Sid,
The data acquired by my own reading of every UK helicopter accident report since 1988, drizzled with the accurate stats held by the FAA. If you're a "data" fan, then it's more reliable than trying to get stats from our own CAA - they are fixated with fatals and the heli data is lost in "GA".
90% is probably a low figure. Talk to experienced civilian instructors and CPL/ATPL(H) as I do every day and you will soon get the picture. There aren't many accidents at all - but when they happen they tend to be pilot error (or instructor error - most R22 incidents have an instructor onboard according to RHC and the FAA)
The RHC safety course is another good source - they plainly have a constant stream of data from the FAA and many other aviation bodies worldwide, seeing as they are the world's largest manufacturer by volume. The figure they give out is never below 90% - and that's just the fatals.
Dear Sid,
The data acquired by my own reading of every UK helicopter accident report since 1988, drizzled with the accurate stats held by the FAA. If you're a "data" fan, then it's more reliable than trying to get stats from our own CAA - they are fixated with fatals and the heli data is lost in "GA".
90% is probably a low figure. Talk to experienced civilian instructors and CPL/ATPL(H) as I do every day and you will soon get the picture. There aren't many accidents at all - but when they happen they tend to be pilot error (or instructor error - most R22 incidents have an instructor onboard according to RHC and the FAA)
The RHC safety course is another good source - they plainly have a constant stream of data from the FAA and many other aviation bodies worldwide, seeing as they are the world's largest manufacturer by volume. The figure they give out is never below 90% - and that's just the fatals.
Purveyor of Egg Liqueur to Lucifer
I'll take that as a No then 
Having also read a lot of reports, although I could never claim to have read every report since 1988, I totally agree that the vast majority of all light helicopter accidents are caused by the actions of the handling pilot.
However in the case of R22/44's one of the common things I see and therefore you must also have noticed, is the phrase 'Low Rotor RPM sounded'.... resulting in the incident.
Just a small observation, but if the setting was designed so that it warned the pilot of this seemingly common situation of low rrpm earlier, then a vital second or 2 might be enough time to allow corrective action to be effective.
I'm sure that if a 'learner type' car was designed so that the brakes weren't effective until a second after application, and that type of car had a lot of 'incidents, the issue would be addressed pretty sharpish!
Yes the R22 is a cheap training aircraft used by many an inexperienced pilot after getting the license, but it seems to be called a learner aircraft simply by virtue of its price and not by ease of use and handling!
Having also read a lot of reports, although I could never claim to have read every report since 1988, I totally agree that the vast majority of all light helicopter accidents are caused by the actions of the handling pilot.
However in the case of R22/44's one of the common things I see and therefore you must also have noticed, is the phrase 'Low Rotor RPM sounded'.... resulting in the incident.
Just a small observation, but if the setting was designed so that it warned the pilot of this seemingly common situation of low rrpm earlier, then a vital second or 2 might be enough time to allow corrective action to be effective.
I'm sure that if a 'learner type' car was designed so that the brakes weren't effective until a second after application, and that type of car had a lot of 'incidents, the issue would be addressed pretty sharpish!
Yes the R22 is a cheap training aircraft used by many an inexperienced pilot after getting the license, but it seems to be called a learner aircraft simply by virtue of its price and not by ease of use and handling!