FAA mandates replacement of R22 & R44 main rotorblades
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ hairyplane
Judging by the replies my contributions have stimulated, I believe I may have bought something to the table.
You may like to check "rules of engagement" Viz.- "Play the ball, not the man"
@13snoopy The last time I looked, Rotorway was edging towards certification.....I merely used the Marque to demonstrate the gap in price and maintenance, between "experimental"(not allowed in UK) and mainstream Commercial machines.(there have been kits built in the UK and successfully registered via the CAA...it seems that 3 hours maintenance was needed , per hour's flight with earlier examples.)
One takes one's chances with Experimental.
One relies on professional evaluation and oversight BY THE CERTIFYING AUTHORITY in a C of A machine.
That Robinson managed to build a certified, Commercial machine at a price-point way, way below anything else in the same category, was a real achievement.
With the number of "substandard / design safety" components being mandated for change, one asks if the machine would get certification today.
IMO the Giumbal Cabri has established itself as THE machine that is one price-level above the Robinson, for initial purchase, but a whole lot better engineered and far, far lower TCO.
I am not the only person to think so....suggest you look at Heli Henri's posting, re- Growth of Guimbal, sales and hours of operation.
this "upstart" doesn't appear to have any major component, safety, handling or snow operation deficiencies, as yet.
@ BLAKMAX. tHANKS, I seem to recollect a very comprehensive technical posting you made a fair time ago...maybe in the "engineering"forum?...regarding blades, delamination, rebonding and tap-testing.
I leave Robinson to the sky-gods....
Anyone who denigrates the skill-level needed to fly RC, has obviously never tried it. I know of a full -scale Rotary-pilot who is an RC enthusiast as well, he claims that RC is is far more demanding....several fixed-wing pilots have said the same....so, don't knock it until you've tried it and learned a bit of humility!
Judging by the replies my contributions have stimulated, I believe I may have bought something to the table.
You may like to check "rules of engagement" Viz.- "Play the ball, not the man"
@13snoopy The last time I looked, Rotorway was edging towards certification.....I merely used the Marque to demonstrate the gap in price and maintenance, between "experimental"(not allowed in UK) and mainstream Commercial machines.(there have been kits built in the UK and successfully registered via the CAA...it seems that 3 hours maintenance was needed , per hour's flight with earlier examples.)
One takes one's chances with Experimental.
One relies on professional evaluation and oversight BY THE CERTIFYING AUTHORITY in a C of A machine.
That Robinson managed to build a certified, Commercial machine at a price-point way, way below anything else in the same category, was a real achievement.
With the number of "substandard / design safety" components being mandated for change, one asks if the machine would get certification today.
IMO the Giumbal Cabri has established itself as THE machine that is one price-level above the Robinson, for initial purchase, but a whole lot better engineered and far, far lower TCO.
I am not the only person to think so....suggest you look at Heli Henri's posting, re- Growth of Guimbal, sales and hours of operation.
this "upstart" doesn't appear to have any major component, safety, handling or snow operation deficiencies, as yet.
@ BLAKMAX. tHANKS, I seem to recollect a very comprehensive technical posting you made a fair time ago...maybe in the "engineering"forum?...regarding blades, delamination, rebonding and tap-testing.
I leave Robinson to the sky-gods....
Anyone who denigrates the skill-level needed to fly RC, has obviously never tried it. I know of a full -scale Rotary-pilot who is an RC enthusiast as well, he claims that RC is is far more demanding....several fixed-wing pilots have said the same....so, don't knock it until you've tried it and learned a bit of humility!
Whilst I agree that flying an RC helicopter is more difficult than the real thing, I cannot let this pass:
Brilliant!
so, don't knock it until you've tried it and learned a bit of humility!
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Give him a break!
I have sympathy for Cockney Steve here. You guys attack him because he has not flown in a Robinson as passenger or as pilot so how could he possibly know anything?
Well, I am not a pilot and I have never flown in an Robinson, (I twice declined Frank's offer of a free flight) but I assure you that I know far more about this blade issue than all of you put together.
You do not have to be a watchmaker to know how to tell the time!
Give him a break!
Blakmax
Well, I am not a pilot and I have never flown in an Robinson, (I twice declined Frank's offer of a free flight) but I assure you that I know far more about this blade issue than all of you put together.
You do not have to be a watchmaker to know how to tell the time!
Give him a break!
Blakmax
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
13 snoopy I assure you I am not Cockney Steve, and I have never met him. With regard to the blade issue, I suggest you read this and draw your own conclusions:
http://www.adhesionassociates.com/pa...d%20Joints.doc
Regards
Blakmax
http://www.adhesionassociates.com/pa...d%20Joints.doc
Regards
Blakmax
13
Slightly snide remarks I feel.
Have met BM & corresponded with him very knowledgeable & keen to impart his vast experience.
For a person at the top of the game he was more than helpful explaining to person who knows little regarding bonding, there was no suggestion, of talking down or superior knowledge just helpful information.
The last time in Europe he was lecturing on adhesive failures & testing to industry
http://www.adhesionassociates.com/pa...12%20Paris.pdf
Hope you are well Max
Slightly snide remarks I feel.
Have met BM & corresponded with him very knowledgeable & keen to impart his vast experience.
For a person at the top of the game he was more than helpful explaining to person who knows little regarding bonding, there was no suggestion, of talking down or superior knowledge just helpful information.
The last time in Europe he was lecturing on adhesive failures & testing to industry
http://www.adhesionassociates.com/pa...12%20Paris.pdf
Hope you are well Max
Last edited by 500e; 11th Feb 2015 at 09:51.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To the professional pilots I tender my most humble apologies for having the temerity, the bare-faced cheek, to post in a professional's forum.
If I told you I was a professional R.C pilot, displaying at competitions, model shows and the like, - would that be different?
Or perhaps if I flew the Yamaha R-Max?....No? I still would be a nerd playing with toys and not a sky- god?.....
Hows about I sit in a barracks, somewhere, watching a screen and "playing" with the RC transmitter in front of me, controlling a Drone some thousands of miles away?
Yes! Quick to jump all over someone who doesn't suit your profile/ views/opinions, from your lofty, arrogant, superior perch......We are all, by and large, in agreement, are we not?.... so why all the childish name-calling and petty, spiteful digs?
For it's price-point, I have always agreed, the Robinson is untouchable as an entry-level, low capital cost helicopter.
This cost -saving had to come from somewhere! I have made my case that there is a price to pay in terms of flight-characteristics, durability, safety-margins and ongoing costs.
(yes, I'd forgotten about the corrosion issue, the scrap tailbooms.......) never mind, you just have to grin and bear it.
If the Mods feel fit, they'll bar me. meanwhile, I'll leave this thread to the people who are happy to fly the product and watch the Guimbal and Enstrom threads instead.
If I told you I was a professional R.C pilot, displaying at competitions, model shows and the like, - would that be different?
Or perhaps if I flew the Yamaha R-Max?....No? I still would be a nerd playing with toys and not a sky- god?.....
Hows about I sit in a barracks, somewhere, watching a screen and "playing" with the RC transmitter in front of me, controlling a Drone some thousands of miles away?
Yes! Quick to jump all over someone who doesn't suit your profile/ views/opinions, from your lofty, arrogant, superior perch......We are all, by and large, in agreement, are we not?.... so why all the childish name-calling and petty, spiteful digs?
For it's price-point, I have always agreed, the Robinson is untouchable as an entry-level, low capital cost helicopter.
This cost -saving had to come from somewhere! I have made my case that there is a price to pay in terms of flight-characteristics, durability, safety-margins and ongoing costs.
(yes, I'd forgotten about the corrosion issue, the scrap tailbooms.......) never mind, you just have to grin and bear it.
If the Mods feel fit, they'll bar me. meanwhile, I'll leave this thread to the people who are happy to fly the product and watch the Guimbal and Enstrom threads instead.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Comment from the Moderators?
C-Steve
I think you raise a fundamental question about this forum. Is it a "pilots only" forum? I don't see that in the term "Rotorheads" but maybe others do. Yes it is Professional Pilots Rumour Network as pointed out by Helilog56, but if it is exclusively for PILOTS, then why are there threads for so many other non-pilot aspects of aviation? Maybe the structure of the threads should be reviewed so that rotary pilots can have their own thread where they can slag off at each aircraft type to their heart's content while there is a second thread where the technical aspects that actually may save lives can be discussed.
The ONLY reason I post mainly on "Rotorheads" is that I am a specialist in adhesive bond failure forensics and helicopters are a classic example of structures which absolutely depend on adhesive bonds for flight safety of principal structural elements. I am only here because I strongly believe I have unique expertise which can help advance flight safety (yes, I am talking to EASA and FAA directly).
Note that while I have some concerns about some types of helicopter I do not join in the Robbo (or any other specific manufacturer) bashing because in my experience there are issues with many bonded structures on rotary and fixed wing aircraft irrespective of the manufacturer. The difference is that for fixed-wing bonded structures the items are usually not principal structural elements. I do not usually comment on issues which do not relate to adhesive bonding. (The occasional comment on the humour page excepted.)
I think the opinions on this page (especially as it relates to the technical aspects of blade ADs,) should not be restricted to flight crew only. Mods any comment?
Blakmax
I think you raise a fundamental question about this forum. Is it a "pilots only" forum? I don't see that in the term "Rotorheads" but maybe others do. Yes it is Professional Pilots Rumour Network as pointed out by Helilog56, but if it is exclusively for PILOTS, then why are there threads for so many other non-pilot aspects of aviation? Maybe the structure of the threads should be reviewed so that rotary pilots can have their own thread where they can slag off at each aircraft type to their heart's content while there is a second thread where the technical aspects that actually may save lives can be discussed.
The ONLY reason I post mainly on "Rotorheads" is that I am a specialist in adhesive bond failure forensics and helicopters are a classic example of structures which absolutely depend on adhesive bonds for flight safety of principal structural elements. I am only here because I strongly believe I have unique expertise which can help advance flight safety (yes, I am talking to EASA and FAA directly).
Note that while I have some concerns about some types of helicopter I do not join in the Robbo (or any other specific manufacturer) bashing because in my experience there are issues with many bonded structures on rotary and fixed wing aircraft irrespective of the manufacturer. The difference is that for fixed-wing bonded structures the items are usually not principal structural elements. I do not usually comment on issues which do not relate to adhesive bonding. (The occasional comment on the humour page excepted.)
I think the opinions on this page (especially as it relates to the technical aspects of blade ADs,) should not be restricted to flight crew only. Mods any comment?
Blakmax
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Langley, B.C. Canada
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CS and BM....I have been flying rotary wing for 39 years, over 23,000 flight hours globally doing work like heli-logging, construction, and fire-fighting. I Do not spend my time bashing any manufacturer on any forum anywhere. I still fly Skycranes and yes, go help out on occasion at my friends helicopter flight school flying, 47's, 44's, and 206's.
Both of you and I, have nothing in common. I only state facts, not innuendo to form my opinions.....but, I do get critical when outsiders start forming little known opinions from second and third hand information.
So henceforth my sarcastic stab at reminding all (you) that this is a forum for flight crews. You are both guilty of bashing a product you know very, very, little about.
When I instruct on the R44, I feel confident and safe...I read all the A.D.'s and service bulletins...check maintenance being performed ( how and by whom), and ensure log books are accurate. So have you done that recently....either of you?
Not a sky god speaking with attitude....just a worn out broken down helicopter guy that gets sick reading a bunch of bleating from people with lack of knowledge and education that can only be found within our helicopter industry.
Off my soapbox now....
Both of you and I, have nothing in common. I only state facts, not innuendo to form my opinions.....but, I do get critical when outsiders start forming little known opinions from second and third hand information.
So henceforth my sarcastic stab at reminding all (you) that this is a forum for flight crews. You are both guilty of bashing a product you know very, very, little about.
When I instruct on the R44, I feel confident and safe...I read all the A.D.'s and service bulletins...check maintenance being performed ( how and by whom), and ensure log books are accurate. So have you done that recently....either of you?
Not a sky god speaking with attitude....just a worn out broken down helicopter guy that gets sick reading a bunch of bleating from people with lack of knowledge and education that can only be found within our helicopter industry.
Off my soapbox now....
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are both guilty of bashing a product you know very, very, little about.
Now you may not be interested in technical comments, but I am sure that there are other rotary wing personnel who are concerned about flight safety, irrespective of the manufacturer.
I await guidance from the Mods. Is this site exclusively for pilots? If so why are there threads for ground crews, freight handling, ATC etc. etc. These people are not all pilots. Maybe the solution as I said is to split the thread into Rotary flight crew and Rotary Technical Issues?
Regards
Blakmax
Chief Bottle Washer
No-one needs guidance from me on posting here. I amended the forum header a couple of years ago to read:
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them
This forum has always and will continue to be self moderating in all but extreme circumstances.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Langley, B.C. Canada
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quote from CS.......They are cheap for a reason! safety has been traded for the bottom line....so much so, that someone with a conscience has decided stuff like bladders and blade changes should be mandatory......If the machines weren't certified, the putative pilot would be much more wary (think Rotorway!)
there are very real limitations in the 2-blade, teetering-head rotor system but the alternatives are hugely more expensive.
When I read trash like this, he has treaded into territory I very much take exception to from someone with no aviation background and experience. You seem to want to defend someone speaking of something, they know nothing about...I mean really, his commenting on rotor head design that has been the forefront of many successful rotary wing manufacturers.
His smug and condescending attitude referring to pilots as "sky gods"....yeah, I get more than a bit agitated by that kind of attitude. Flying at the contols of a toy, that he thinks would be humbling and perhaps cause some humility...give me a break.
And as for in my long winded prior rant, I stated "flight crews", not specifically pilots.
That encompasses pilots, engineers, cabin crews, and ground support people...you know, ones that actually work in aviation.
That is what I consider, as the mod put it ...."helicopter professionals"!!!
I no doubt that you have an area of expertise in adhesion bonding, and yes, I will take the time to read your link thank you.
But I think your support to someone who has demonstrated a lot of ignorance and borderline disrespect is a bit misguided blakmax.
there are very real limitations in the 2-blade, teetering-head rotor system but the alternatives are hugely more expensive.
When I read trash like this, he has treaded into territory I very much take exception to from someone with no aviation background and experience. You seem to want to defend someone speaking of something, they know nothing about...I mean really, his commenting on rotor head design that has been the forefront of many successful rotary wing manufacturers.
His smug and condescending attitude referring to pilots as "sky gods"....yeah, I get more than a bit agitated by that kind of attitude. Flying at the contols of a toy, that he thinks would be humbling and perhaps cause some humility...give me a break.
And as for in my long winded prior rant, I stated "flight crews", not specifically pilots.
That encompasses pilots, engineers, cabin crews, and ground support people...you know, ones that actually work in aviation.
That is what I consider, as the mod put it ...."helicopter professionals"!!!
I no doubt that you have an area of expertise in adhesion bonding, and yes, I will take the time to read your link thank you.
But I think your support to someone who has demonstrated a lot of ignorance and borderline disrespect is a bit misguided blakmax.
Helilog56
Actually mate you are now starting to be the same as Cockney Steve but on the other side.
Quite frankly the manufacturers take the piss all over the place, Robinson probably more than most although that may be due to their shear numbers.
Name me one manufacturer whose product actually makes the distance i.e. gets to the life stated without major issues. How many recalls does aviation put out compared to the car manufacturers ? Toyota recalled millions of vehicles over a potential throttle problem , no one killed but they did it. Robinson have had issues with frames blades and fuel tanks, guess what it is the punter who has to pay. Yes the other manufacturers are the same, just spent $24k on a RR gearbox due to it making metal 6 years old with 1800 hours on it, that is left than life !
Even the newer machines are no different, I refused to buy 2 Cabri G2's as they would not provide a labour warranty !!!
I might not have your experience but been in the industry for 28 years but have seen enough !
Actually mate you are now starting to be the same as Cockney Steve but on the other side.
Quite frankly the manufacturers take the piss all over the place, Robinson probably more than most although that may be due to their shear numbers.
Name me one manufacturer whose product actually makes the distance i.e. gets to the life stated without major issues. How many recalls does aviation put out compared to the car manufacturers ? Toyota recalled millions of vehicles over a potential throttle problem , no one killed but they did it. Robinson have had issues with frames blades and fuel tanks, guess what it is the punter who has to pay. Yes the other manufacturers are the same, just spent $24k on a RR gearbox due to it making metal 6 years old with 1800 hours on it, that is left than life !
Even the newer machines are no different, I refused to buy 2 Cabri G2's as they would not provide a labour warranty !!!
I might not have your experience but been in the industry for 28 years but have seen enough !
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hughes 500,
Please, one cannot compare a helicopter part recall to an auto manufacturer recall. You said it yourself: Toyota recalled "millions" of cars...
That's right, they recalled millions because they've sold tens of millions.
The sheer scale of the auto industry leaves it not even remotely similar to helicopter manufacturers,
I don't have a problem with ADs. What bothers me is a company like Robbie not admitting their ineptitude in main rotor blade manufacturing and their customers paying for not once, not twice, but three different times or more.
Cockney Steve,
You've posted some really dumb and incorrect statements about Robby. (I cannot believe I'm defending them?!)
You're just digging yourself a deeper hole every time you post. Take my advice and give it a rest for awhile.
You've made yourself look very, very silly, imo.
Please, one cannot compare a helicopter part recall to an auto manufacturer recall. You said it yourself: Toyota recalled "millions" of cars...
That's right, they recalled millions because they've sold tens of millions.
The sheer scale of the auto industry leaves it not even remotely similar to helicopter manufacturers,
I don't have a problem with ADs. What bothers me is a company like Robbie not admitting their ineptitude in main rotor blade manufacturing and their customers paying for not once, not twice, but three different times or more.
Cockney Steve,
You've posted some really dumb and incorrect statements about Robby. (I cannot believe I'm defending them?!)
You're just digging yourself a deeper hole every time you post. Take my advice and give it a rest for awhile.
You've made yourself look very, very silly, imo.
13
No you are wrong Toyota care about their consumers safety, do our manufacturers ? EG Super Puma gearbox's in The North Sea, manufacturer said that will be ok and guess what !!!
Lets be honest the automotive industry is years ahead in safety, customers service, quality of product. Aviation has a lot to learn !
We only put up with it as there is no where else to go and they have us by the bollocks !
As an owner of a company, where over the years we have owned 7 Hu 300's, 9 MD 500's, 2 x 206's, SA341's and 342's. Have run for customers R44's and 355's
I can assure you that a manufacturer is crap at just about everything whether it is customer support, parts supply, warranty etc etc
Another example for you, rod end bearing list price $ 195 took it to my local bearing shop, same thing from same manufacturer $ 25 but no aviation paperwork, now if that is not taking the piss I don't what is.
Sikorsky have just put up the price of tr pitch links from $375 to $1275 where is the justification in that.
To be honest the manufactures are driving themselves out of business ! One of my customers owns a construction company plus a helicopter and as he says
if my plant is as unreliable and takes weeks to fix I would be out of business !
I could accept it if we were dealing with the space shuttle but even an R44 has been about for 20 years
No you are wrong Toyota care about their consumers safety, do our manufacturers ? EG Super Puma gearbox's in The North Sea, manufacturer said that will be ok and guess what !!!
Lets be honest the automotive industry is years ahead in safety, customers service, quality of product. Aviation has a lot to learn !
We only put up with it as there is no where else to go and they have us by the bollocks !
As an owner of a company, where over the years we have owned 7 Hu 300's, 9 MD 500's, 2 x 206's, SA341's and 342's. Have run for customers R44's and 355's
I can assure you that a manufacturer is crap at just about everything whether it is customer support, parts supply, warranty etc etc
Another example for you, rod end bearing list price $ 195 took it to my local bearing shop, same thing from same manufacturer $ 25 but no aviation paperwork, now if that is not taking the piss I don't what is.
Sikorsky have just put up the price of tr pitch links from $375 to $1275 where is the justification in that.
To be honest the manufactures are driving themselves out of business ! One of my customers owns a construction company plus a helicopter and as he says
if my plant is as unreliable and takes weeks to fix I would be out of business !
I could accept it if we were dealing with the space shuttle but even an R44 has been about for 20 years