"Why Robinson helicopters seem to have a bad habit of crashing"
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In the fast lane...MOVE OVER!!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AA
I may have confused my point a little bit. I was saying that IF there was any kind of "program" or fund in place with an aircraft, then it would keep its fund up. But all too often, what you see is, people paying a years premium re insurance....paying their hangarage or WHY per month and the Mx bill as and when and just sloshing fuel in it. This means, the depreciation is never covered, if you use it personally and then you sell it, that hours flown have gone into the wind. I mean, your hourly cost isn't factored in "per hour" per se (!), you just lose the money when you sell....if that makes sense? The only people getting that back PLUS some, are schools and commercial operators.
The interesting thing for me as a lowly, 5000 hour "newbie" fling wing pilot, is that actually, I can almost rent one, wet, per hour, for the same as a Cabri....! There was a group near London that had non equity shares available and equity shares, that seemed to offer a decent hourly rate and were clearly building in a charge to pay for the overhaul. However, it seems to have dies a death and I cant figure out why? Maybe it was bought at too high a cost....so the utilisation didn't cover it....maybe the majority shareholder naffed off with the cash...or, who knows, but it seems that group ownership wasn't working....and I would love to know why? Lots of "possible" reasons....but nobody can tell me anything definitive?
I may have confused my point a little bit. I was saying that IF there was any kind of "program" or fund in place with an aircraft, then it would keep its fund up. But all too often, what you see is, people paying a years premium re insurance....paying their hangarage or WHY per month and the Mx bill as and when and just sloshing fuel in it. This means, the depreciation is never covered, if you use it personally and then you sell it, that hours flown have gone into the wind. I mean, your hourly cost isn't factored in "per hour" per se (!), you just lose the money when you sell....if that makes sense? The only people getting that back PLUS some, are schools and commercial operators.
The interesting thing for me as a lowly, 5000 hour "newbie" fling wing pilot, is that actually, I can almost rent one, wet, per hour, for the same as a Cabri....! There was a group near London that had non equity shares available and equity shares, that seemed to offer a decent hourly rate and were clearly building in a charge to pay for the overhaul. However, it seems to have dies a death and I cant figure out why? Maybe it was bought at too high a cost....so the utilisation didn't cover it....maybe the majority shareholder naffed off with the cash...or, who knows, but it seems that group ownership wasn't working....and I would love to know why? Lots of "possible" reasons....but nobody can tell me anything definitive?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In the fast lane...MOVE OVER!!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hot and Hi
Sure...I understand this, probably better than most. I'm new to actually flying heli's, but been flying in little machines (including heli's) since I was a little boy and had a pilot licence for 23 years. I couldn't agree more with you actually....my reservation I think, comes from doing a "quick" TR and then taking them flying. My plan is to go and help positioning for maintenance and do a couple of trips with my instructor on board (and a mate of mine on occasion, who has flown more heli's than I have had hot dinners, in the military and in civvy street) and be really picky on the days i fly until I know more and feel more at ease with my own ability and more confident in the machine itself. I'm comfortable in my decision making and won't be hurrying into weather and situations, that I dont think i or the helicopter in question, can handle. I'm not proud and I have nothing to prove.
Sure...I understand this, probably better than most. I'm new to actually flying heli's, but been flying in little machines (including heli's) since I was a little boy and had a pilot licence for 23 years. I couldn't agree more with you actually....my reservation I think, comes from doing a "quick" TR and then taking them flying. My plan is to go and help positioning for maintenance and do a couple of trips with my instructor on board (and a mate of mine on occasion, who has flown more heli's than I have had hot dinners, in the military and in civvy street) and be really picky on the days i fly until I know more and feel more at ease with my own ability and more confident in the machine itself. I'm comfortable in my decision making and won't be hurrying into weather and situations, that I dont think i or the helicopter in question, can handle. I'm not proud and I have nothing to prove.
If you do all that.....you will live to be old as well as wise!
Mast bumping only occurs as a result of two things, both of which must happen: First you must enter low G, typically by being stupid and shoving the cyclic forward very suddenly, although it can also happen when flying fast through severe turbulence. When in low G, the nose will drop and the helicopter will roll to the right (with a counter-clockwise rotor). If, and only if, you respond to the roll with left cyclic while still in low G, then mast bumping may occur in which case you die.
However that only happens if you apply left cyclic while in low G. If you either avoid low G (the correct thing to do) or you apply gentle aft cyclic to recover from low G without trying to correct the roll first, then everything will be fine. But keep in mind that when the uncommanded roll to the right occurs, the nose will be down, because if it is not then you won't roll at all.
And besides, just look at statistics. There are over 6000 R-44s, compared to a bit over 7000 206s. They are extremely popular and flown all the time all over the world. It is not a death trap!
But I did fly the G2 once and it has a much more upscale interior; everything seems much more modern and refined. Controls are heavier although it has a good electric trim, and it's not as fast.
However that only happens if you apply left cyclic while in low G. If you either avoid low G (the correct thing to do) or you apply gentle aft cyclic to recover from low G without trying to correct the roll first, then everything will be fine. But keep in mind that when the uncommanded roll to the right occurs, the nose will be down, because if it is not then you won't roll at all.
And besides, just look at statistics. There are over 6000 R-44s, compared to a bit over 7000 206s. They are extremely popular and flown all the time all over the world. It is not a death trap!
But I did fly the G2 once and it has a much more upscale interior; everything seems much more modern and refined. Controls are heavier although it has a good electric trim, and it's not as fast.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In the fast lane...MOVE OVER!!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, thats the plan!! I fly for a living and have thousands of hours....but just not in Heli's. It does mean though, as I say, I don't have anything to prove and I don't suffer from "Get-home-itis" and am not susceptible to operational pressures from outside influences. I've done plenty of daft sh** in aircraft over the years....when I was younger and did have something to prove. I look back on it and think "Wow...just....wow!". DOnt feel any need to do silly things anymore. When it comes to Helicopters, I recognise that 'm a beginner....my only real advantage is that I am used to being in the air and have decent situational awareness. Add a sparkling of good weather and a healthy dose of recognising my inexperience and I am hoping I can build my experience at a steady pace and not get overconfident. Thanks for the reply
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In the fast lane...MOVE OVER!!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mast bumping only occurs as a result of two things, both of which must happen: First you must enter low G, typically by being stupid and shoving the cyclic forward very suddenly, although it can also happen when flying fast through severe turbulence. When in low G, the nose will drop and the helicopter will roll to the right (with a counter-clockwise rotor). If, and only if, you respond to the roll with left cyclic while still in low G, then mast bumping may occur in which case you die.
However that only happens if you apply left cyclic while in low G. If you either avoid low G (the correct thing to do) or you apply gentle aft cyclic to recover from low G without trying to correct the roll first, then everything will be fine. But keep in mind that when the uncommanded roll to the right occurs, the nose will be down, because if it is not then you won't roll at all.
And besides, just look at statistics. There are over 6000 R-44s, compared to a bit over 7000 206s. They are extremely popular and flown all the time all over the world. It is not a death trap!
But I did fly the G2 once and it has a much more upscale interior; everything seems much more modern and refined. Controls are heavier although it has a good electric trim, and it's not as fast.
However that only happens if you apply left cyclic while in low G. If you either avoid low G (the correct thing to do) or you apply gentle aft cyclic to recover from low G without trying to correct the roll first, then everything will be fine. But keep in mind that when the uncommanded roll to the right occurs, the nose will be down, because if it is not then you won't roll at all.
And besides, just look at statistics. There are over 6000 R-44s, compared to a bit over 7000 206s. They are extremely popular and flown all the time all over the world. It is not a death trap!
But I did fly the G2 once and it has a much more upscale interior; everything seems much more modern and refined. Controls are heavier although it has a good electric trim, and it's not as fast.
I think that you have effectively, highlighted my biggest concern. Not 'mast bumping" so much as how I react to it. I think my concern is that in those situations, I might roll left and BANG! End. However, I do soak up training and focus on the type I am in (at one point, I was rated in 3 aircraft and flew all 3 in a day that resulted in a rejected take off on the last flight, after my co jo read an item off the checklist and didn't actually carry out the item....a story for another time). The thing was, there was a striking similarity between 2 alerting systems....and it caught us out. After that, I absolutely got my head into each type, each time and didn't get caught out by any differences again, until the one of the 2 similar types was sold. I'm saying, that if I'm in an R44 or B206, I will consciously make a note of it in my own mind and will always have it in the back of my mind, with the hope that if I'm expecting a Low G uncommanded roll right, that I will already have programmed myself to gently apply aft cyclic/correctly recover.
Again, I don't think I will fly in conditions or areas, that are likely to be overly turbulent and, I know full well to slow down in turbulence (unlike a lot of Plank Wing pilots!). I think I may end up, over cautious and actually, not fly on days that are probably, perfectly safe to fly....as I think it will be difficult to gauge where the limit is. Would experienced R44 pilots fly happily on a day with 15 knot winds, Gusting 20 for example....or more....or less?? Some days, the weather is beautiful, but convective/thermal activity can make it a bit bumpy in places....again, is this a go or no go? Very difficult to judge for people in my shoes....
Thanks again for the reply
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,144
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
If it helps, I think it's worth pointing out that the only force for sideways movement in a teetering head (or, more technically, zero offset) is the horizontal component of TRT, meaning that if you have no thrust/lift or whatever you want to call it, you cannot move the helicopter anyway. That's the inherent danger mentioned above. Hence, keep the disc loaded.
Phil
Phil
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In the fast lane...MOVE OVER!!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it helps, I think it's worth pointing out that the only force for sideways movement in a teetering head (or, more technically, zero offset) is the horizontal component of TRT, meaning that if you have no thrust/lift or whatever you want to call it, you cannot move the helicopter anyway. That's the inherent danger mentioned above. Hence, keep the disc loaded.
Phil
Phil
..as I think it will be difficult to gauge where the limit is. Would experienced R44 pilots fly happily on a day with 15 knot winds, Gusting 20 for example....or more....or less?? Some days, the weather is beautiful, but convective/thermal activity can make it a bit bumpy in places....again, is this a go or no go? Very difficult to judge for people in my shoes....
You however, until you have 200 hours in helicopters, 50 in the 44, you will be limited to surface winds of 25kts and a surface to gust spread not to exceed 15kts. Plus continued flight in even moderate turbulace will be prohibited, as per the poh,...if that is, they still put that page in?
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: usa
Age: 65
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TN8, I think I am pretty close to your prototypical private flyer. I learned to fly 7 yrs ago in a 22, switched to a 44 10 hrs before I got PPL. I've got 300 hrs now. I fly my family, I fly my buddies and dogs on bird hunting trips, I fly for business, and I fly to ski tournaments. I have some time in a 206, and some time in an Astar. From my vantage point, the 206 is a slower, mushier, more expensive version of the 44 that costs me twice as much to lease, and carries one more guy. Its easier to fly than the 44 if you get used to the mushiness, which I did in about 15 minutes. The Astar is a bullet proof rocketship that a) would be 3 times the cost to lease, b) is not available to lease, and c) is a different animal altogether to fly. If I had the money, I'd never be in anything but the Astar. But I don't and I love to fly. So. 44 is it. I wouldn't get back in a 22 unless I was a cattle musterer in OZ. Need 4 seats.
I didn't intend to, but I once got into turbulence at the limit of the 44's capability. I flew it from Spokane to Calgary, and back. On the way home, I hit a front on the eastern slope of the mountains. We were getting tossed around so bad I had to wedge myself against the door to avoid unintentional control inputs. I slowed down to 60, and every time my butt got light I nudged the cyclic back. Tried to land in a clearing, but it was gusting so bad once I slowed through 20 I couldn't convince myself I could hover it, and didn't want to try a run on in the woods. Going back or continuing seemed about the same, so I just kept flying at 60, and kept trying to keep my butt heavy in the seat. After about 10 minutes of that, we were through and it calmed down.
After that experience, I don't really understand how people mast bump the thing and die. I guess if I were flying along in smooth air, and some massive down draft appeared out of nowhere I might freak out and try to roll back level. I hope not. Seems like the accidents I've researched all have crap weather with some warning, not a rogue downdraft.
I do think its possible, and pretty easy, to get the cyclic knocked out of your hand by a passenger waving his hands around, or taking photos. BIG difference in the odds of that based on the stupid center stick ungarded by your knees. I have had a close call with that, and think the POH and instructors should stress the odds of that happening.
I didn't intend to, but I once got into turbulence at the limit of the 44's capability. I flew it from Spokane to Calgary, and back. On the way home, I hit a front on the eastern slope of the mountains. We were getting tossed around so bad I had to wedge myself against the door to avoid unintentional control inputs. I slowed down to 60, and every time my butt got light I nudged the cyclic back. Tried to land in a clearing, but it was gusting so bad once I slowed through 20 I couldn't convince myself I could hover it, and didn't want to try a run on in the woods. Going back or continuing seemed about the same, so I just kept flying at 60, and kept trying to keep my butt heavy in the seat. After about 10 minutes of that, we were through and it calmed down.
After that experience, I don't really understand how people mast bump the thing and die. I guess if I were flying along in smooth air, and some massive down draft appeared out of nowhere I might freak out and try to roll back level. I hope not. Seems like the accidents I've researched all have crap weather with some warning, not a rogue downdraft.
I do think its possible, and pretty easy, to get the cyclic knocked out of your hand by a passenger waving his hands around, or taking photos. BIG difference in the odds of that based on the stupid center stick ungarded by your knees. I have had a close call with that, and think the POH and instructors should stress the odds of that happening.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In the fast lane...MOVE OVER!!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TN8, I think I am pretty close to your prototypical private flyer. I learned to fly 7 yrs ago in a 22, switched to a 44 10 hrs before I got PPL. I've got 300 hrs now. I fly my family, I fly my buddies and dogs on bird hunting trips, I fly for business, and I fly to ski tournaments. I have some time in a 206, and some time in an Astar. From my vantage point, the 206 is a slower, mushier, more expensive version of the 44 that costs me twice as much to lease, and carries one more guy. Its easier to fly than the 44 if you get used to the mushiness, which I did in about 15 minutes. The Astar is a bullet proof rocketship that a) would be 3 times the cost to lease, b) is not available to lease, and c) is a different animal altogether to fly. If I had the money, I'd never be in anything but the Astar. But I don't and I love to fly. So. 44 is it. I wouldn't get back in a 22 unless I was a cattle musterer in OZ. Need 4 seats.
I didn't intend to, but I once got into turbulence at the limit of the 44's capability. I flew it from Spokane to Calgary, and back. On the way home, I hit a front on the eastern slope of the mountains. We were getting tossed around so bad I had to wedge myself against the door to avoid unintentional control inputs. I slowed down to 60, and every time my butt got light I nudged the cyclic back. Tried to land in a clearing, but it was gusting so bad once I slowed through 20 I couldn't convince myself I could hover it, and didn't want to try a run on in the woods. Going back or continuing seemed about the same, so I just kept flying at 60, and kept trying to keep my butt heavy in the seat. After about 10 minutes of that, we were through and it calmed down.
After that experience, I don't really understand how people mast bump the thing and die. I guess if I were flying along in smooth air, and some massive down draft appeared out of nowhere I might freak out and try to roll back level. I hope not. Seems like the accidents I've researched all have crap weather with some warning, not a rogue downdraft.
I do think its possible, and pretty easy, to get the cyclic knocked out of your hand by a passenger waving his hands around, or taking photos. BIG difference in the odds of that based on the stupid center stick ungarded by your knees. I have had a close call with that, and think the POH and instructors should stress the odds of that happening.
I didn't intend to, but I once got into turbulence at the limit of the 44's capability. I flew it from Spokane to Calgary, and back. On the way home, I hit a front on the eastern slope of the mountains. We were getting tossed around so bad I had to wedge myself against the door to avoid unintentional control inputs. I slowed down to 60, and every time my butt got light I nudged the cyclic back. Tried to land in a clearing, but it was gusting so bad once I slowed through 20 I couldn't convince myself I could hover it, and didn't want to try a run on in the woods. Going back or continuing seemed about the same, so I just kept flying at 60, and kept trying to keep my butt heavy in the seat. After about 10 minutes of that, we were through and it calmed down.
After that experience, I don't really understand how people mast bump the thing and die. I guess if I were flying along in smooth air, and some massive down draft appeared out of nowhere I might freak out and try to roll back level. I hope not. Seems like the accidents I've researched all have crap weather with some warning, not a rogue downdraft.
I do think its possible, and pretty easy, to get the cyclic knocked out of your hand by a passenger waving his hands around, or taking photos. BIG difference in the odds of that based on the stupid center stick ungarded by your knees. I have had a close call with that, and think the POH and instructors should stress the odds of that happening.
The centre stick (effectively), does pose an interesting threat to flight safety if you ask me. I appreciate the honesty of your story and especially how you handle going light in your seat.....seems like decent enough advice to me.
The A Star (Squirrel in Europe) is a great machine. Done a few hours in these myself and also, the underpowered EC130 (the original variant) and think they are brilliant....but for me, a non starter unless I have some REALLY fortunate business dealings come my way.
I'm feeling better about the 44....it's nice to hear some more positive things said of it.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In the fast lane...MOVE OVER!!
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robbie can handle 15 gusting 20 no problem.
You however, until you have 200 hours in helicopters, 50 in the 44, you will be limited to surface winds of 25kts and a surface to gust spread not to exceed 15kts. Plus continued flight in even moderate turbulace will be prohibited, as per the poh,...if that is, they still put that page in?
You however, until you have 200 hours in helicopters, 50 in the 44, you will be limited to surface winds of 25kts and a surface to gust spread not to exceed 15kts. Plus continued flight in even moderate turbulace will be prohibited, as per the poh,...if that is, they still put that page in?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, I would encourage you to get some time in a 44 and make your own assessment. That is what is most important. And make certain to get up with an instructor when it is a little gusty and turbulent (as if those conditions are hard to find in the UK
), so as to make your own assessment under more challenging (or normal for UK!) conditions as well. Ha ha, I remember when I was visiting your neck of the woods and it was exactly that as I tried to make friends for the first time with a G2 fenestron 
Flying around in 15 gust 25 winds are a piece of cake with a bit of practice and training
https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...200104092.aspx
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk
Age: 84
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We acquired R22’s for a commercial school back when there was no prohibition on demonstration of the low G’ roll of phenomenon. It was apparent that you had to push over for a significant time before the roll off occurred. It is not a instant occurrence. Thereafter the instructors demonstrated the low ‘G’ problem, the correct recovery and the students practised it, dual only of course. I think that this was a better policy than the build up of the myth and legend since the prohibition.
I always thought that a more likely scenario for unexplained R22 accidents was lack of attention to correct carb heating technique. Unfortunately carb heat assist doesn’t guarantee no carb icing as you need carb heat BEFORE power is reduced. Carb icing is disguised by the governor until the engine stops. Then you have to lower the lever damned quick, If you don’t, the rotor rpm decay is very rapid, followed by rotor stall and blow back. I think that this is more of a hazard than low ‘G’ mast bumping.
Roll off occurs even slower in the R44 and slower still in the B206, but it can happen as it can to all gimbal head helicoprers
I always thought that a more likely scenario for unexplained R22 accidents was lack of attention to correct carb heating technique. Unfortunately carb heat assist doesn’t guarantee no carb icing as you need carb heat BEFORE power is reduced. Carb icing is disguised by the governor until the engine stops. Then you have to lower the lever damned quick, If you don’t, the rotor rpm decay is very rapid, followed by rotor stall and blow back. I think that this is more of a hazard than low ‘G’ mast bumping.
Roll off occurs even slower in the R44 and slower still in the B206, but it can happen as it can to all gimbal head helicoprers
Robbie can handle 15 gusting 20 no problem.
You however, until you have 200 hours in helicopters, 50 in the 44, you will be limited to surface winds of 25kts and a surface to gust spread not to exceed 15kts. Plus continued flight in even moderate turbulace will be prohibited, as per the poh,...if that is, they still put that page in?
You however, until you have 200 hours in helicopters, 50 in the 44, you will be limited to surface winds of 25kts and a surface to gust spread not to exceed 15kts. Plus continued flight in even moderate turbulace will be prohibited, as per the poh,...if that is, they still put that page in?
Didn't know this would be in the handbook. I look forward to getting my hands on a copy
You can access the POH's for all models online on Robinson's homepage. Good luck!
I found this at the Robinson Web Site and found the List of Contents rather interesting.
[/QUOTE]
The following Safety Notices have been issued by Robinson Helicopter Company as a result of various accidents and incidents. Studying the mistakes made by other pilots will help you avoid making the same errors. Safety Notices are available on the RHC website: www.robinsonheli.com.
SAFETY
NOTICE TITLE
SN-1 Inadvertent Actuation of Mixture Control in Flight
SAFETY
NOTICE TITLE
SN-1 Inadvertent Actuation of Mixture Control in Flight
- SN-9 Many Accidents Involve Dynamic Rollover
- SN-10 Fatal Accidents Caused by Low RPM Rotor Stall
- SN-11 Low-G Pushovers - Extremely Dangerous
- SN-15 Fuel Exhaustion Can Be Fatal
- SN-16 Power Lines Are Deadly
- SN-17 Never Exit Helicopter with Engine Running
Hold Controls When Boarding Passengers
Never Land in Tall Dry Grass - SN-18 Loss of Visibility Can Be Fatal
Overconfidence Prevails in Accidents - SN-19 Flying Low Over Water is Very Hazardous
- SN-20 Beware of Demonstration or Initial Training Flights
- SN-22 Vortex Ring State Catches Many Pilots By Surprise
- SN-23 Walking into Tail Rotor Can Be Fatal
- SN-24 Low RPM Rotor Stall Can Be Fatal
- SN-25 Carburetor Ice
- SN-26 Night Flight Plus Bad Weather Can Be Deadly
- SN-27 Surprise Throttle Chops Can Be Deadly
- SN-28 Listen for Impending Bearing Failure
Clutch Light Warning - SN-29 Airplane Pilots High Risk When Flying Helicopters
- SN-30 Loose Objects Can Be Fatal
- SN-31 Governor Can Mask Carb Ice
- SN-32 High Winds or Turbulence
- SN-33 Drive Belt Slack
- SN-34 Aerial Survey and Photo Flights - Very High Risk
- SN-35 Flying Near Broadcast Towers
- SN-36 Overspeeds During Liftoff
- SN-37 Exceeding Approved Limitations Can Be Fatal
- SN-38 Practice Autorotations Cause Many Training Accidents
- SN-39 Unusual Vibration Can Indicate a Main Rotor Blade Crack
- SN-40 Post-Crash Fires
- SN-41 Pilot Distractions
- SN-42 Unanticipated Yaw
- SN-43 Use Extra Caution During Post-Maintenance Flights
- SN-44 Carrying Passengers
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robbie can handle 15 gusting 20 no problem.
You however, until you have 200 hours in helicopters, 50 in the 44, you will be limited to surface winds of 25kts and a surface to gust spread not to exceed 15kts. Plus continued flight in even moderate turbulace will be prohibited, as per the poh,...if that is, they still put that page in?
You however, until you have 200 hours in helicopters, 50 in the 44, you will be limited to surface winds of 25kts and a surface to gust spread not to exceed 15kts. Plus continued flight in even moderate turbulace will be prohibited, as per the poh,...if that is, they still put that page in?
That said, when winds get above 25, and the gust spread gets above 15, it does get a little sporty in the 44, and one should try to use common sense and an appropriate set of personal limits. My own personal limits in both the 22 and 44 don't exceed those numbers by very much
That is incorrect with respect to the 44. The 44 POH contains no such limitation. It is, however, in the 22 POH as a limitation, the very last page of Section 2.
That said, when winds get above 25, and the gust spread gets above 15, it does get a little sporty in the 44, and one should try to use common sense and an appropriate set of personal limits. My own personal limits in both the 22 and 44 don't exceed those numbers by very much
That said, when winds get above 25, and the gust spread gets above 15, it does get a little sporty in the 44, and one should try to use common sense and an appropriate set of personal limits. My own personal limits in both the 22 and 44 don't exceed those numbers by very much
There is also a note at the end of my Normal Proceedures section regarding Main Rotor Stall and Mast Bumping, that I've heard is no longer there?
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That information is correct and in my R44 poh, on the last page of the Limitations section (I'm looking at it right now). If it is not in yours then its as I already said, maybe they don't put it in anymore?
There is also a note at the end of my Normal Proceedures section regarding Main Rotor Stall and Mast Bumping, that I've heard is no longer there?
There is also a note at the end of my Normal Proceedures section regarding Main Rotor Stall and Mast Bumping, that I've heard is no longer there?
Having an up to date POH can be important. Keeping up to date on one's knowledge of POH changes can be important. You may want to order up the latest from Robinson.
