Red Bull B0-105
 

Excuse my ignorance, but are all BO-105 helicopters capable of doing the kind of aerobatics that you can see the Red Bull B0-105 doing on the uTube videos?

Obviously the pilot is highly skilled and you wouldn't catch me doing anything like that anytime soon.

I have only flown Robbies and clearly you would kill yourself even trying the things the pilot does in these videos, it looks like a masterpiece of engineering in the hands of a very skilled pilot to me.

I thought perhaps there is some special modification done to the machine.

Are there any other types capable of such manouvers?

As I recall, the UK register flight manual states that aerobatic manoeuvres are prohibited. The aircraft is very agile, but flying upside down in a helicopter is not on my to-do list!

More about this Red Bull BO 105 on their website:

http://www.redbullusa.com/en/Article...204-62961151.0

Click Button THE LOWDOWN

These aerobatics are fully certified for Red Bull in cooperation with Eurocopter. Generally all BOs could do these maneuvers, but not all pilots.....;)
Therefore the FM forbids these aerobatics. ( And it was no part in the certification process )
As I know, these BOs were also slightly modified with some parts of the military version to cope with the higher G-Forces ( certified for + 3.1 G ).
Naturally a more intensive as usual inspection after these flights is done...

skadi

Thanks for the details on the Red Bull helicopter, I don't know why I did not think of going to their website first.

I can't imagine that 'Chuck' is the first guy to do this. I suspect the Germans showed him a think or two. Does anyone know of any other types that may be able to do this, including military types? I am sure there are some stories out there :)!!

Indeed, the pilot is highly skilled. Rainer Wilke has logged over 7500 hours in the BO-105 ...

The BO105 rotorhead is certified to +3.5g but more interesting is that it is certified down to -1g! Really capable and strong rotor system.

As far as I remember the helicopters we fly are certified in the "mormal" category which is up to +3.3G.

Mind you already have +2G in a 60deg bank.
Isn't a barrel roll just a 1G manoeuvre ?

GG

"Isn't a barrel roll just a 1G manoeuvre ?"

This has always struck me as one of those urban myths: if anyone can explain to me how it is possible to recover from a diving manoeuvre (1st and 4th quarters of the roll) to climbing and level flight (respectively), without experiencing more than 1 g, I'd be grateful to hear it. Gentle it can be, 1g I don't see how (and I've done one or two.)

I would like to know how it was possible to mix military parts with the approved civil ship and parts??? The mil parts not having a BO105 civ partnumber and no civ ticket. Over the last 20 years it was impossible to use one single screw from the mil ships on civ registered. Germany phased out so many BOs from mil service. To get very cheap. But EC prohibited strictly the use of ex-mil ships and any parts. Very strictly!

And if it was no part in the certification process aerobatics couldn`t be approved on my sight for a civil registered helicopter according to the present rules. But with the power and money of REDBULL...

At least both of the US-registered BOs are registered as "Experimental" Aircraft, so they could go beyond the certified flight envelope.
Additional, the pilot C. Wilke is certified as FI for helicopter aerobatics, I think, at the time the only one in the world..

http://www.flyingbulls.at

Shows that they have two German registered B0-105 which also do aerobatics so this would make their fleet 3.

For the US it seems ok with "experimental". But in Europe the BO is german registered.

Never heard about a "FI helicopter aerobatics" in the JAA rules.

But thats only theoretical questions. The show is superb. Good for aviation!

Anyone in Vienna this weekend can see the Red Bull BO-105 and Rainer Wilke performing at the Donauinselfest on Saturday at 15.00 above the Wien-Energie stage.

dp

The US Red Bull, flown by Chuck Aaron, performed at Hiller Museum's Vertical Challenge airshow this last weekend. Even after you see it done, it's hard to believe you saw it correctly.

I remember an instructor at AEC (Larry) who said the M/R head was the only thing that was intact after some of the retaining bolts sheared off and caused a crash somewhere in South America. I have also seen what is left of one after an aircraft caught fire and was destroyed. Again, it was still intact! Truly amazing!:D

When I was at school at AEC I asked what the price tag was on the rotor head (I figured it would be pretty spendy being made out of a big block of titanium). The reply was something like...who cares? if you do something bad enough to hurt the head the rest of the aircraft will surely be destroyed and you'll get a new head with the new aircraft!

Max

Interesting article here....

Web Exclusives: Beyond the Thrill Ride, by Brent Bergen

Enjoy! :ok:

Old question. But better late than never.

Nick Lappos could provide some answers about details, 9 years ago at rec.aviation.rotorcraft newsgroup, he wrote some good stuff on that subject (helicopter A-A combat, and aerobatics - especially loops). Apparently what you need is strong, rigid machine, with lots of spare power and good speed. Although Nick wrote that even the S-51 was capable of performing a loop - low-G maneuvers would probably be a problem though.

First helicopter to perform full aerobatic display was CH-53, therefore many helicopters since the 60's can perform full aerobatics, although its not that simple as on the planks. For example a loop in a plank is fairly easy, all you need is enough speed to be above stall in the highest point. With helicopter, you need to hit a sweet spot: to little - and you wont make it to the top, to much - and you overspeed and stall main rotor on the recovery.

Helicopters that will do those maneuvers for fact are Bo-105, Bell 407, MD500, Lynx, Apache, NH-90 - those shown that capability already, look on youtube, and you may find videos. As far as others - probably most western machines can, and its mostly a question of pilot skill - seen S-58T do some nice maneuvers, AS365 also can achieve some insane roll and pitch rates... But probably non of the Russian helicopters can do that kind of flying, except the Mil Mi-28, they are just to fragile and one may say that they fall off the sky above bank angle of 45deg. Numerous Mi-8, Mi-24, and Mi-2 were lost because some pilots got to cocky.

As for the European pilots goes - Rainer Wilke is pretty much one of the best known helicopter stunt pilots, ex-military, Eurocopter test pilot instructor, was doing the aerial work for German "Clown" TV series, he (and Sigi Schwarz) fly the Red Bull '105 in Europe, and he was the one who shown Chuck Aaron, what Bo-105 is capable of.

Have you ever seen this?

Perfect 1G Barrel Roll in Airplane - Truveo Video Search

Also here is an explanation off a site I copied:

Early Aerobatics
 

Actually the following clip is a copy of a movie that was made at Sikorsky long before my time, but which is still shown there every now and then:



Mr. Thompson visited the factory in Stratford in the early 1990's and for all of his memorable exploits, was a very quiet, self-effacing gentleman. Also very, very intelligent and technically curious about all of the technology in the newer machines.

Thanks,
John Dixson

The BO-105 having a rigid rotor head made from a titanium forging can take high stress loads, hence aerobatic manoeuvers.

there is an article about Chuck Aarons Red Bull 105 in the newest issue of vertical mag (read it online for free at verticalmag.com, need to sign up though).

Apparently his machine is modified quite a bit. According to the article, it has stiffer blades, running at "very high RPM", a pressurized fuel system for negative G maneuvers, and a far forward CG, to make it easier to recover from unusual attitudes.

Sorry for the thread jack but.....
 

This clip talks about some info your looking for.

The G's pulled are not all that crazy in fact less G's than a very steep bank.
27000lbs,
Entry 1150 ft & 158 knots.
Top of loop, 1865 ft 81 kts. 1.1 g
Leveling out max of 2.65 G's 920 ft 130 knots

Rigid systems only???

Its an awesome clip all the same demonstrating the helicopters ability.

The interesting part is it was for studies of rotor system dynamics & maneuverability characteristics for safety, survivability & for getting in & out of confined areas!!

I want to see someone do a confined area with this sort of entry.
"Now the trick Johnson is clearing the tail in the flare and not spilling my coffee"

I know pilots that were being shot at had to be a little inventive in approaches and departures to hot LZ's but I am sure this isn't what was meant LOL.



HF

As long as the maneuver gives positive Gs on the machine, the type of rotor don't really matter. It matters when the Gs drop near, or below zero - doing Push Over, or Tail Slide in Robbies would result in loosing some parts (tail or main rotor), with fully articulated rotors - it would depend on the centrifugal force on the rotor - conning, or extensive flap, can result in blades colliding with tail, or other blades (co-axial in Kamovs). For example CH-53 should do fine in negative G, while Mi-8 will probably chop his tail off. At least that's what math say ;)

CH-53A Aerobatics
 

Helofan, you wrote:

"The interesting part is it was for studies of rotor system dynamics & maneuverability characteristics for safety, survivability & for getting in & out of confined areas!!"

That was, err..... well at least one way to put it. The USMC pilot in the photos was a Major Robert Guay, and he was the NAVAIR class desk officer for the 53A program. Bob was absolutely convinced that the USMC should employ the 53A in the combat assault role, which at the time had transitioned from the UH-34D to the CH-46. Bob had run up against seniors within the USMC who opined that the CH-46 was much more manueverable, and thus safer and more effective, as the combat assault vehicle. Bob's answer was to showcase the superior manueverability of the 53A, so that, having put aside that objection, the tactical advantage of the 53A in getting a lot more troops quickly into the LZ would win the argument. But it didn't happen, for a number of other reasons.

Byron Graham, the Sikorsky pilot( our Chief Experimental Pilot at the time ) told me that they had flown a number of other manuevers, for example cuban eights, but they had trouble making them look standardized, so they were not filmed.

Thanks,
John Dixson

Hi John.

Actually I was just quoting the narration given in the film. I would like to have seen the whole thing but regardless I figured it was what they wanted to explain to civvies.
I liked how the gent was saying what it was for.
An average civvie wouldnt know what a confined area was all about.

A little tongue in cheek dig at the 60's style narration.

The fully artic comment was aimed at someone who earlier stated that those types of maneuvers were only able to be performed in a heli that had a rigid type.....I chuckled then posted.

You wouldnt happen to know where the full film is available?

HF

I'm not familiar with the history of CH-46 and CH-53 in the 60's, I know only that the Knight was prone to disintegrate mid flight, and there were severe casualties related to on board fires, when fired upon on approach to LZs. Could you tell me what were the other reasons for Stalion not to take over the role of USMC main troop transport at that time?

I chatted with Chuck Aaron briefly at Oshkosh this past summer, where he was performing. I rarely watch the airshow while I'm there, just because there isn't much novel in airshows anymore. But, I stopped and watched slack-jawed with everyone else when the BO was up. :eek:

rf

CH-53A Aerobatics
 

Helofan, the film that you saw is about all that I have ever seen while I was working.

There is another, really terrific film of Frank Tefft putting on an aerobatic and tactical demo ( including a lift of 125 Japanese infantry ) in a CH-53D, which includes cockpit coverage. I have that on tape somewhere, if I haven't sent it to my grandson.

Lt. Fubar, I never heard the behind the scenes story of why the 53A wasn't employed in the assault role. My personal guess is that they didn't want to risk that many Marines to a single shoot-down. As I recall the history of the CH-46 problems, it was one of those issues where the actual combat usage of the machine resulted in structural loads in the rear of the fuselage that were not included in the original fatigue damage spectrum*. Maybe someone closer to the CH-46 program can amplify on that subject. I "heard" that is was a GAG ( ground-air-ground cycle ) issue associated with landing loads, but cannot confirm that conclusion. I do recall from having flown the CH-47A early on that one could "plant the rear wheels on a tandem, without it feeling too bad up front. The cockpit doesn't get all of the vertical "G", because the fuselage rotates nose down when the rear wheels make contact.

* At the introduction of a new model, the US Gov't service and the manufacturer assess and agree upon a usage spectrum for the machine. A flight loads survey is then flown to obtain all of the load data associated with that spectrum. The data is good for that spectrum, period.

An small example of what can happen: After the Desert One disaster in Iran, the Army hurriedly formed up the forerunner of the TF-160 group at Ft. Campbell, Ky.
A few months thereafter I got a phone call from a highly concerned GE representative to that unit. ( He had been the GE Rep to Sikorsky during the Blackhawk development and was the best in the business ). He reported that he had sat in the back of a hawk that had just been flown from Nellis AFB ( Las Vegas ) back to Ft Campbell, Ky and the pilots flew it at the TIT limiter, that is at the 30 minute power rating, every minute of the way.

All of this confirms the validity of applying the technolgy now available to installing onboard fatigue damage measurement systems, with bar coded or similar technology applied to each fatigue loaded part/assembly.

Thanks,
John Dixson

For a discussion of the problems with the CH-46 Phrog where the aft pylon, aft transmission, and aft rotorhead and blades departed the aircraft in flight....and the subsequent fix with questions about the actual cause of the problem...hit this link.

CH-46As Breaking up in Flight!!! - NOTAM Board

On the CH-47A in Vietnam, we had two significant problems....one being an "incidence bolt" on the rotor blades failing....with catastrophic results, and flight control push-pull tubes coming apart at the riveted ends also resulting in the loss of the aircraft. The CH-47C model went through a phase where Power Turbines shattered and tried to cut the aircraft in half...always causing a hell of an inflight fire and loss of the aircraft.

Red Bull Helicopter
 

Can somebody tell me what model of BO-105 is used by Chuck Aaron for the Red Bull Helicopter?

Mmmm ...

I think it is a Bo105CBS 4 .....

...... of course you could consult the Red Bull web page ... perhaps that would be too easy!


:bored:

It's a short version a BO 105 S.
The CBS versions are not so good for aerobatics.

Spencer17, thats not correct. Its the longer version ( additional small window, BO 105 CBS , S for "streched" ). look at the pictures:

Red Bull Energy Drink - USA - Red Bull Bo-105 CBS Helicopter - Schedule

Skadi

Mmmm ....

The American team have gone with the CBS version .... the Swiss with the CB the standard airframe.

Which is best .... I have no idea! (and I'm not sure I care).


:confused:

@spinwing
They are from Austria... ;)

skadi

Mmmmm ...


..... They are from Austria...


Skadi .... could be ... I know that the Red Bull team originate from Austria ... BUT when I got close to their 105s at Abu Dhabi airport a year or so ago the a/c were on the "HB-" register which I think is SWISS!

Perhaps that has changed.
:E

Red Bull in Salzburg/Austria have two BO 105 CB ( ex German Police S/N 126 and S/N 140 ). They are on a german registration: D-HDTM and D-HSDM and are flown by a german pilot ( Mr. Wilke ) and a austrian pilot ( Mr. Schwarz ).

skadi

Hey Spin, you might have seen this Red Bull Air Race 105, operated by Swiss company Skymedia and flown on the RBAR circuit by Jurg Fleischmann. HB-ZHS.

Jurg Fleischmann flying the BO-105, HB-ZHS photo - Luis Rosa photos at pbase.com

Mmmm ...

... Hey Spin, you might have seen this Red Bull Air Race 105, operated by Swiss company Skymedia and flown on the RBAR circuit by Jurg Fleischmann. HB-ZHS.


Yeah Mike .... that's the Camera ship that I saw ... started to think that the "Old Age" memory thing had got to me!

Thanks for the pic.

Cheers