I can't believe this thread has slumped from pictures of half naked girls to an r22 technical debate in just 3 pages

MPR: much as I appreciate the time and effort that has gone into compiling your database, it does appear to be lacking - er - data. You cannot expect your figures to be taken seriously when you are clearly infering that the Robinson helicopter is dangerous. You provide no reasons for the destroyed helicopters.
A simple request to the CAA would find you the UK data you are missing - and I believe you will then find that the vast majority of R accidents are caused by:

(a) training with an instructor on board - and the Robinson is by far the most popular training machine so is therefore likely to have more accidents.

(b) pilot error.

My own craft is one of the "destroyed" machines and I know that the accident had nothing to do with the machine or its design.

Going to a scrapyard and counting the wrecks does not give any indication of how safe a vehicle might be to drive.

This is a public forum and not all viewers can be expected to apply statistical thinking when figures like your are published.

If you have a real database with accidents per 100,000 hrs and causes determined, then please publish it here. We'd all love to see it.

RE: If you think the R22 is safe, I'll make a bet with you. You fly alongside me in my Bell 47 in your R22 and we will chop the throttle together. I bet you drop the collective first by a long, long way! We'll do it in the climb to make it more interesting if you like.

By betting me "Who drops the collective first" proves what?

There is no question that the loading in B47 is greater than a R22, in the event of an engine failure, you'll be going the same way as me & it ain't up regardless of what type of helicopter you fly alongside me!

RE: Good luck to you if you like the R22, that is your choice.

My choice is my B206, however the Robinson helicopters have been good to me and 1000's more around the World...

I think the bottom line is here, it's all about choice!

Stirring the pot. Once again.
 

In determining the relative safety of the R-22 as compared to say the Hughes 300 series you should concentrate on one thing and one thing only and that is loss of control. I have my theory as to what the root cause is and Frank Robinson has his theory. My theory deals with the rotorhead design and Frank’s theories deal with pilot error. In either case it is the rotorhead design and its’ tendency to flap excessively no matter what induced the flapping.

In order to not get into this excessive flapping scenario the pilot is highly restricted in what he can do. I know that many Robbie drivers will say that the so-called (“Recommendations”) are just that and that with care you can ignore them. However if something happens and the pilot gets caught between a rock and a hard spot (read Earth) it will always be labeled pilot error.

:E :E

but whats happened to posting pictures of helicopters and sexy women?

Jed A1

Here's a helicopter photo of a nude woman wearing only a hat.

` . ' . ' . ' . http://www.unicopter.com/Temporary/beanie-a.gif
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Nude woman cut from photo because her pose was tooo ...:mad:... . ~ Modelrator


;) .

In a word,......
 

To: charlie s charlie

Yes. However the restrictions now in force did not exist on the R-22 when the design was approved nor was the SFAR nor, was the safety course. These restrictions were put in force after many loss of control accidents and some "Recommendations" were put in place as a result of an engineering study conducted by Georgia Tech relative to what caused the flapping extremes that resulted in rotor loss or rotor incursion.

All of the above could be avoided if Robinson designed a three-blade rotor system. With this design change the R-22 would be unbeatable.

:E :E

Some facts:

Between 1990 & 2001 there have been 39 fatal accidents to UK registered helicopters (CAP701 & CAP735). These accidents have occurred to 12 different types of machine.

Fifteen of these fatal accidents (38%) have been attributed to technical problems / failure. These 15 accidents have occurred to six types:
R22
B206
Rotorway Exec
H369 Series
H269 Series
AS350

The R22 fleet suffered 11 fatal accidents, 38% of all fatal accidents. Seven of these accidents (18% of all fatal accidents) have been attributed to technical problems / failure. Four were due to the engine stopping, two because of the tailboom being struck by Main Rotor and one sprag clutch failure.

The B206 fleet suffered 10 fatal accidents, 26% of all fatal accidents. Three of these accidents (8% of all fatal accidents) have been attributed to technical problems / failure. One due to TR drive disconnecting, one MR striking fuselage and one engine problems.

The Rotorway Exec fleet suffered 2 fatal accidents, 5% of all fatal accidents. One of these accidents (3% of all fatal accidents) has been attributed to technical problems / failure due to MR disbonding.

The H369 Series suffered 2 fatal accidents, 5% of all fatal accidents. Both of these accidents have been attributed to technical problems / failure. One of these was due to reported loss of control and the other due to engine run down.

The H269 Series suffered 2 fatal accidents, 5% of all fatal accidents. One of these accidents (3% of all fatal accidents) has been attributed to technical problems / failure – in flight breakup.

The AS350 series suffered 3 fatal accidents, 8% of all fatal accidents. One of these accidents (3% of all fatal accidents) was due to loss of control.

An estimated 1,970,000 were flown by helicopters less than 5,700kg MTWA.

Fatal Accident (all accidents) Rate per million flight hours (all helicopters <5,700kg flown):

R22 5.6
B206 5.1
R44 1.5
AS350 1.5
H369 1.0
RW Exec 1.0
H269 1.0
AS355 1.0
A109 0.5
S76 0.5
S61 0.3 inc hours for >5,700kg
AS332 0.3 inc hours for >5,700kg

Fatal Accident Rate due to technical problems / failure per million flight hours (all helicopters flown):

R22 3.6
B206 1.5
H369 1.0
RW Exec 0.5
H269 0.5
AS350 0.5

If you want the rate per type specific hours flown then we need to get hold of the number of hours flown per type in the period.

What can you conclude from the above figures, well as with all statistics it’s entirely up to you really. What I can conclude is that nobody died from an Enstrom failing mechanically!

but whats happened to posting pictures of helicopters and sexy women?

Jed A1
E&OE

Jed A1,

Very interesting information, thanks for that. I don't see my favourite Bell 47 there. I hope that means they are as safe as I think they are rather than we don't know!

Regards,

Chopperpilot47

Jed: Thanks for the stats - and I know how difficult it can be to get what you want in the UK.
Couple of points:

These stats are based on 39 fatal accidents in 11 yrs. What we should really look at is ALL accidents. But the authorities are only interested in fatals.....so they only ever concentrate on these.

And we really do need to see stats for per 100,000 or 1,000,000 hrs flown by type. Otherwise we have to make assumptions.

And as we've all been told : never assume anything!

Charlie
3 blades means big hanger or else aircraft lives outside (as does my Enstrom - with an excellent Cambrai cover.) If you want to see how good a 3 blade R22 could be, try a well sorted, non turbo Enstrom - lovely.

One from column A and one from column B
 

To: charlie s charlie
What Gaseous said is probably true since Frank Robinson designed the R-22 as a personal helicopter that could be taken from home and return on a trailer or that it could be sheltered in a hangar taking up less space and costing less for that space.

However I personally feel that there were other things that influenced the design.

1) Frank Robinson worked for several helicopter manufacturers prior to making his own design. He couldn't copy the design of his employers so he adapted the basic design (Bell) and in order to keep the weight down he incorporated cone hinges.

2) His patented design was much simpler and the parts count was lower than that of a three-blade design and less costly to build.


:E :E