Story going around the Paris Air Show when the Mi 12 was there.

US and Russian pilots talking about it and the question was raised on how its certification was going. The reply was that one thing that was remaining was the landing without engines.
The Boeing pilots were amazed. "You've got four engines and you're going to dead stick it?"
"Yes, our government has got stupid rules as well."

Whether this ever happened is uncertain but the vibration harmonics was the problem that killed it off.

Overheard just before we started the engines every single time I flew with a certain fellow in Nigeria as he bowed his head and held his two hands pressed together in supplication: "Lord! Please don't me die in this Bristow maintained piece of **** today!"

I laughed at him for a long while....then saw the Light!

Back in 1985....teaching students in an R22 A model. The A models had NO tip weights. Talk about low inertia rotors. Touchdown autos were NOT fun.

Dangeroos (not the zoo kind)
 

Please gents ... as a long time supporter of the Menominee product can I offer two pennorth.

Yes the Enstrom can be a mongrel to start. Put that down to the 'shower of sparks' system which heralded the cold & hot start problems circa 1978 plus poor maintenance of the ignition and mixture systems.

Yes, the Enstrom can give a 'bouncy ride.' Put that down to the legion of engineers who don't have type experience or don't understand type RB tracking.

Yes, a ridiculous clutch engagement system. Put that down to a poor design. Hughes and Robinson use an almost identical system but with multiple drive belts that give few problems. Fragrant 'French Chalk' will solve the noise aspect!

Yes, a poor hover performance that can require max permitted power just to hold a hover at 15 degrees OAT. Mainly due to poor maintenance again in getting the operating mixture correct. The PFM requires pilots to lean the mixture to 1550 degrees for maximum power* (not over 29 map) ... something that I've found few pilots will practice. (*or if fuel flow exceeds 130 pph)

And an item not mentioned is the rpm correlation. OK once a pilot has been instructed well and a proficient RPM aware pilot should be able to cope ... but the factory could sure do with something better. Like copying the Hughes/Schweizer/Sikorsky 300 system for a start.

BUT. BUT ... In forty years operations in the UK, there has never been a single fatal accident.

With some 6.500 type hours I've never had an engine failure and my log book tells me while instructing I've completed around 5000 full engine-off landings to the ground without a hint of difficulty.

The 225 BHP version has a ROC of 1475 fpm at max gross standard ISA. Please nominate another piston type that matches that.

The Enstrom has a seven cubic feet luggage locker. (100lbs weight capacity on 28F or FX) Please nominate another three-seat design that can beat that.

The Enstrom can be trimmed to fly 'hands & feet off' for as long as one wishes. Please nominate another type that can better that.

Properly electronically tracked, the Enstrom can be brought down to .1 IPS in the hover. With forward flight vibration level dittoed, the type can be as smooth as any type, piston or turbine, I've flown in 14,000 hours.

VNE is 117 on the 280 version. If leaned to 1650 degrees in the cruise the Enstrom turbo versions will give an 85 pph (11.75 gph) fuel-flow giving an average 240 sm still-air safe range.

The type has won a WHC 'freestyle' event three times. Nominate another type that has done that.

In fact, like owning a classic Ferrari, if one can accept the shortcomings or get them put right, Enstrom ownership can be a total delight and one might be forgiven for wondering why anyone would buy any other type in the price range! I've sold exactly 148 of the blighters. Well someone had to speak up!

Dennis K (head down again!)

Any shares in Enstrom Dennis?

Yes - but apart from all that, what has Enstrom done to prove itself? :E

Cracking post - best in years.:D

Hey Den

"a proficient RPM aware pilot"

Something in that sentence rings a bell, but I can't put my finger on it ;)

Of course, you are the UK's Enstrom sage, as is well known :ok:------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A rotorway on the other hand?!?"

And I see someone's had a pop, most likely without substance...fancy defending the type too ?

From 1m 06s

I'm not a qualified helicopter pilot, just fixed wing, but I've scrounged rides in many types.
The first one I flew in (passenger only) hasn't been mentioned yet, the Brantly B2B. On startup, I could feel the engine pounding at my back, and it seemed grossly underpowered.

Who tried inventing this contraption
 

Looks to me like a scary situation,
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c64_1279412306

Piasecki invented it with US Navy money for the US Forrest Service Piasecki PA-97 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paul Ludwig Hans Anton von Beneckendorff und von Hindenburg :ok:

Oh the huge manatee ....

Unanticipated vibration! Struth, I'd say blind Freddie could have anticipated a vibe problem with that setup.

I'm speechless! In my years of being a heli pilot and engineer, I'm astonished that the designers, engineers, pilots all thought that that could work. Perhaps that was in the era of risk taking and throwing caution into the wind.
I think I saw pilots in each of those cockpits. How could they even coordinate their flight inputs? RIP to the fallen.

Yes, I think there was a pilot per machine, with the designated lead guy calling the power settings (remember reading something about this years ago; didn't realise they'd flown it and people had died).

Good grief they built it, I remember seeing the idea as a concept drawing many yrs ago.
RIP the pilot, I wonder exactly how much testing was done before it went for a manned flight?

Brantly (any model) Roberson (same but especially R22)

The Piasecki Helistat crashed due to structural failure of the low grade pipe work used to connect the H-34 fuselages to the blimp.The idea was to prove the concept before building a definitive version.Moral....don't do things on the cheap ( I still have a piece of the fabric saved from when I met the chief pilot quite a few years ago).
P.S. The Brantly was a lovely helicopter to fly,with a good safety record and a popular trainer in its day.

John Dixon posted in
Post 24 of this thread re Piasecki Helistat

Dennis, you may find the following story of interest. Friend was flying an Enstrom doing survey work in outback Oz. Heavy vibration set in so pilot, wanting to get on the ground as rapidly as possible, basically did a power recovery auto. Having put it on the ground the passenger made a comment to the effect "look, someone's been here before us, there's a tail rotor over there". The pilot was somewhat confused as the landing had been nothing out of the ordinary, despite the vibration. Hopping out everything looked normal, save for the obvious fact that the tail rotor had been chopped off by the main rotor. No other damage was evident, however investigation found the forward main transmission mounting bolts had let go (cause of the initial vibration) and at some point during the landing with the pitch pull the gearbox rotated aft and chopped the tail off. With pitch reduced the gearbox fell back into place.

For me, being just a humble fixed wing pilot, this construction looks pretty hmmm let's say interesting. Looking at the amount of fuel this guy takes with him, he is not only brave but very optimistic I think....
Skip to 5:00 for the take off if you're not interested in the extensive ground testing...

I'm surprised that the Bristol Belvedere hasn't been mentioned up until now.

A bit before my time, but I have talked with those who flew it, and feared it. The engines were started with Avpin (an explosive, and deadly corrosive liquid), and start fires were common.

They told me that they would not strap in until the engines were started. The concept was to stand in the jump seat position, lean forward to press the engine start switch, and be prepared to run!

In addition, the sync shaft between the two rotors was none too sturdy, and a failure of that in flight was fatal.

Enstrom Probs
 

Hallo Brian ... what a fantastic story. My first thought was that we all know a series of snags/errors etc, can build up and lead to the accident. Here's a situation where a series of problems happening in the right order, lead to a safe landing!!! Wonderful industry is ours. Thanks. Dennis Kenyon.

Scary Heli In Transit
 

For the record I would also prefer to be in an Enstrom than an R22

Every time I see an R-22....I eat a couple more Double Cheeseburgers and Fries....along with a huge Chocolate Milk Shake.....and ensure i never get within the Payload limit of the dastardly things!

I am not a rotary pilot, although I have flown a few times in RAF helicopters over the years, even a bit of stick time too, but on the basis of everything I have read, nothing would induce me to even climb into an R-anything

This thread wouldn't be complete without mention of the Mini-500.

Re: the Helistat, its spiritual successor the Skyhook International JHL-40 -- which was to have used four complete CH-47 drivetrains -- appears to have gone the way of every other heavylift airship concept, with the original 2012 EIS date long forgotten and with the program now on indefinite hold pending the availability of $100M of public funding...

I/C

KG86
Some slight exaggeration of the Belvedere problems, the starter system did use Avpin, but this was also used on the Hunter, and other aircraft with no problems, as an engine fitter on both aircraft, I was well used to handling the stuff, and there was no problem. (unless you accidently drank it, as one of our guys did with no lasting results). The problem was that unlike the Plessey system on the Hunter, the BTH system on the Belvedere , and Wessex 1 was cartridge initiated, ie, the cartridge operated on a piston, to pump the Avpin.
Sometimes the seals leaked, allowing the Avpin into the breach, resulting in an explosion, I don't believe anyone was hurt by this, it happened to me once, as I was sat in the co pilots seat, but it was the rear engine.
There was no jump seat as such, there was a bulkhead behind the pilots seats, then the front engine, then the crew mans seat facing aft, by the door, there was a walkway to the left of the front engine, behind the co pilots seat, alongside the engine. You had to be sat in the seat to operate the controls, as the rotor brake had to be off to operate the starter, and the rotors started turning immediately.
The yaw cables were always a source of worry, as unlike a conventional tail rotor aircraft, where a breakage would only lose you the tail control, on the Belvedere, a cable breakage would lose you all azimuth control of both rotors. This did happen at least once to my knowledge, to a pilot in Aden who was decorated for getting the aircraft safely onto the ground, unfortunately he was killed shortly after when an aircraft disintegrated in the air, the reason for which I don't think an answer was ever found.
People did talk about sync shaft failure, but I don't think there was ever a recorded case of this.
One of the biggest problems was Bristols illogical engine numbering system, the engines were number one at the front, and number Two at the back, but the controls and instruments were lateral, and for some reason, Bristol made number One on the right, and number Two on the left, because the Captain sat on the right. This of course was totally at odds with convention, and was possibly considered the cause of the first fatal accident in Germany, when it was thought that one of the pilots shut down a good engine after a failure of one.
Whatever ones thoughts of the Belvedere, tribute must be given to the work they did in Borneo, during the confrontation with Indonesia, when the poor old indons came across the border, in what they thought was thick jungle hundreds of miles from anywhere, and suddenly came under 105mm artillery fire from a hilltop where a Belvedere had dumped a gun.


For all its faults
What other aircraft in 1959 could cruise at 129 knots , sometimes going up to 140, had an all up weight of 22000 lbs, and could maintain altitude, AUW on one engine.

After 3500 hours on Lynx I had to gain a type rating for licence issue, 6.5 hours of terror in an R22 later and I escaped back to the relative safety of turbine twins in AS355 and EC135. Hats off to all Robbo drivers!

Dave,

I had many a great evening at the Lakers Pub listening to Jack Trigg recount his experiences flying the Belvedere. What a grand Character he was to listen to while telling his stories.:ok::ok:

Dave B, concur with everything you said; unfortunately the `Bevelgear` was designed to carry torpedoes for the Navy, hence the `mantis` like u/c and attitude on the ground. So, it was given to the AirForce to operate in the tropics and the sandy places of the ME, with all the problems of dust, erosion, torrential rain, etc, and as said this led to a lot of problems, which in the fullness of time and tireless `enthusiasm` from the engineers, built up experience and serviceability, so in its latter days 66 Sqdn had a whole Sqdn flypast (somewhere on tube). One aircraft was lost in Borneo in `63 or 64, due, I think to the cables coming off the runners in the fuselage, and it went sideways. The PFCUs were all at the front, so cables/pushrods from there to the front/rear gearbox/rotors.

One aircraft had a synch shaft failure, possibly on airiest at Seletar in about `67, but landed ok. The rotors didn't have the same overlap as a Chinny, also had more vertical separation, and each engine drove each rotor, as long as the throttles were matched. A great aircraft, once it was `going`, like a train, but slowing down was best done in a turn (my experience of a few trips as an itinerant co-pilot..), and you also had to be careful to keep the yaw to a minimum as shown by the `OMD`(OLD MAID`S Delight) ..the bit that sticks out the front..

SAS, didn`t know Grandad had gone to Bevs? (JT, anyone over 30 was `old`, anyone over 40 was ancient to anyone who was 20 or so...)

This AvPIN malarkey sounds like loads of fun:

About Avpin, used to start the Hunter on No 1 Squadron, The Rhodesian Air Force

Senior Pilot,many thanks for the memory..

SAS
I seem to remember that Jack Trigg was in charge of pilot admin when I was at Redhill. Great video senior pilot, brings back a lot of memories.

Indeed Jack was....or at least substituted for George Puddy and Ken Smith.

He was very much the epitome of what a "Real Helicopter Pilot" was all about.

His tale of flying to Normandy one day early in June.....in a Tiger Moth was hard to beat!

All three of the fellows were real Gentlemen and always a pleasure to deal with.

If I recall rightly the issue with the Belvedere avpin was that on a mis start the fuel could gather in a u-bend ,resulting in a double dose on the second attempt and an explosion. At least one aircraft lost it's back end in the subsequent fire and another lost the front end so both were cannibalised to make one good one. Westland then made up a spare nose section out of of another crash, caused by a double engine close down in error , but it was never needed.

The one that I was involved with was the first start of the day, when I was flying with our squadron commander who was in the captains seat.
As well as avpin getting where it should not have been, the other little trick was instead of one of the Three cartridges in the breech firing as it should have (it gave you Three starts before you had to reload), all Three would go off together, and blow the breech apart.


If any one comes across a Belvedere in a museum, take a look at the panel fit, door and window operation, and standard of the riveting and general structure, it makes messrs Westland and Sikorsky products of that era look like they were built by amateurs.

There's so much nonsense written about so many things on this site these days. I never found a scary helicopter in quite a few years and more than a few hours. Yes, when I was a (very average, inept) student, they all seemed difficult, but later on I realised they were all just helicopters with their own individual quirks and problems. I was only ever scared twice, and each of those was by people, not helicopters. I realised after not too many years that the most unpredictable, unreliable part in any helicopter (or flying machine) was the MMI (man, machine interface) :rolleyes:

Soggs.......seems you done something right....you are still with us!:ok:

Sadly no longer flying SAS, though at least I'm still working and still in Africa and may be going to visit Mogadishu soon, so life's still an interesting adventure :}

You are so right about the quality of the Belvedere. The one at the Helicopter Museum is unpainted at present and the finish is first class. .......almost a shame to paint it!
Sending you a pm too.