There is a large shortage of R22's in the north west. (or a shortage of people willing to let them to the flying schools to wreck them)

If you are prepared to let a school use them i know schools that will pay £115.00 + vat wet per hour

In the south there's a shortage of R22s for training - I keep being asked to buy one to put on the fleet for my operator. But the leaseback rate won't go above £90/hr. Sure - the machine will work 200-400 hrs pa but I can only see £15/hr profit in my figures. (And I would have to pre-book private use by some notice because of the workload.)
Better rates for R44 (£150/hr) - but less demand.

R22 Governor improvements
 

I have just finished putting together an improved governor for an R22, it works in much the same way as the original governor but it is load sensitive, i.e. it monitors the position of the collective and changes the PID values in the primary feed back loop as required.
The result is a governor that responds a lot faster and is more accurate, This system is yet to be flown but I have done some extensive bench testing using data collected during ground runs and routine flights.
The platform which this is based on uses a dedicated micro processor and has nothing to do with Mr. Gates (probably going to be reliable), it has a great deal of additional capacity and there is no reason, with the addition of a few extra sensors, (technically) why additional features can not be written into the software i.e. engine monitoring (fadec) and power checking.

What I am really looking for is some advice.

1. Is there anyone who may be interested in pursuing this?
2. Is there a market for this type of technology?
3. What does the certification process involve?


Regards
Jiff

As long as it can stop overspeeds, I'm all for improvements !

Jiff,

A couple of things.
__________________________

1/
You may be interested in the following posting from rec.aviation.rotorcraft, dated September 25, 2002

"I am building a Safari (Baby Belle) helicopter here in New Zealand.
Also, I have written a detailed document on how to convert the Robinson R22 Governor for use in the Safari helicopter. This MS-Word document, including detailed pics of the control board and modifications, can be downloaded at: http://www.bart.gen.nz/safari/governor.doc

And last, you can reach me personally by email on:
safari (at) bart.gen.nz (To stop spam.. Please replace (at) with @ :)"
___________________________

2/
In response to your questions, I am definitely interested in your governor controller. My two helicopter projects entail the use of a governor; preferably a rotor governor, or a combination rotor/engine governor. A couple of pages on my web site, which may be of interest, are; http://www.synchrolite.com/Governor.html and the more esoteric http://www.unicopter.com/0575.html.

The UniCopter is being designed for a small 4-cylinder Lycoming, similar to those used in the Robinson R-22.

The SynchroLite is the basis for looking at the possibility of producing certified blades and a certified collective device. These two components can then be used by others to build twin-rotor helicopters. These twin-rotor helicopters could be coaxial, intermeshing, interleaving or side-by-side. The symmetrical configuration combined with a governor (for automatic entry into autorotation etc.) should greatly increase the safety of very light helicopters.

The very light helicopter consideration is to produce RH & LH asymmetrical blades where four of them can support gross weights between 500 and 700 pounds. This will allow them to be directed at the US Ultralight (no license required), the US Experimental, and perhaps eventually at the US Sport Plilot/Aircraft and the European JAR-VLR categories.


Dave J.
[email protected]

jiff
 

i think it would be handy on mustering machines, the govenors always overridden on them, although i cant see anybody spending money to upgrade when its probably not as fast as the trained wrist.;)

R22 power drain
 

I've been thinking about the neoprene tailrotor delta hing bush that is an up grade on the R22 helicopter, it seems to hinder flapping of the delta hing.
I recon that in forward flight, flapback of the tail rotor would be reduced, therefore increasing the amount of power used for antitorque and fuel consumption.
any thoughts?
:eek:

Theoretically your concerns are correct, but don't worry about it the resistance offered by the bearing is negligable in comparison to the aerodynamic moments generated. Therefore, there will be virtually no difference in the flapping characteristics of the orginal metal bearing and the new elastomeric device. Correspondingly, the power differences will also be negliable.

CRAN

Related trivia
 

One of the Bells had an elastomeric or spring on its main rotor teetering axis. The objective was to reduce out-of-plane motions when the disk was unloaded, and/or, to give the craft a slightly faster response to cyclic inputs.

Additional information on this can be found at Rotor - Hub - Hub Spring

Dave J.

To significantly reduce the power drain, eliminate the whole tail rotor. :eek: :D

Jiff:
An interesting project, but a couple of pointers.
You will need to do some pretty detailed testing of the system, from hardware to software to get this approved by the necessary authority as an STC.
Also, you'll need to show some sort of benefit to the end user in order to convince them to purchase it.
Not going to be cheap or easy to do either of those.
Have you done a business case on this?

Some other thoughts- how about for homebuilt helicopters? Can you modify this for any other engine? Might be more of a market than for R-22?
The real issue I think for the R-22 market is that of insurance. Can you still get Robinson to issue insurance for a modified machine like this?
Have you checked with Robinson to see what they say? They might be interested in taking it on.
Not wishing to rain on your parade, but the hard realities sometime need to be faced.

R22 Overspeed II - "The Bill Arrives"
 

Some of you may recall my minor contre-temps in June or July where I oversped an R22 before getting airborne from Popham ( incidentally in a machine not long back from being repaired after a previous overspeed ). The previous thread is here.

All the votes are in, and the matter is now resolved and behind me. For those who are interested or those who care, here's the final tally.

Total engineering bill : £12,000

Insurance excess : £2,000

My bit of that : £1,000

Extent of damage : None at all

I CHIRP'ed the occurrence, and had useful feedback. It appears RHC's thought is that engaging the governor at 80% means the whole range of governor operation is checked. The UK CAA have asked them to consider changing the procedure to increase RPM to 100% then engage the governor.

As an aside, now I've formally started the CPL(H) modular course, I have started using the club-supplied checklist which modifies the RFM procedure in this regard. I've also started pulling pitch to lift, pausing at about 18" to check everything is ok including RPM stable ( i.e. the governor is working ), then continuing the pull to come to the hover.

Overall, it was an expensive lesson in distraction.

And in best marketing tradition, keep your eyes peeled for the bigger-budget sequels, "B206 The Hot Start" and "Turbine Engine OverTorque" coming to a helicopter near you sometime in the ( hopefully distant ) future.

Glad that you have sorted it out, and it sounds as though you are fairly comfortable with the result despite a £1,000 bill. A lesson to all of us, and top marks for being honest.

One question; no damage, yet £12,000 overall bill. How on earth did they get there?

Time and NDT I guess.

CRAN

I read your published CHIRP report, well reported.

G

I have just glanced back through the previous thread. What is going on here? Is the governor part of the control system of the aircraft or is it "optional" like an autopilot?

If you learn to fly an R22 with a governor will you be able to fly a piston helicopter without one? Endorsement "piston only with governor".

Can you fly around in a turboshaft helicopter with the governor off as an option? Would appear to me that it's like in some countries where you do your driving test in an automatic that's all you are allowed to drive.

I know how the R22 had all the problems and the lawn dart results in the early days - just looked - over 20 years ago when I first flew one. Not naming any particular place but the incidents of radio transmission reporting accompanied by the tones of a Low RRPM in the background were alarming.

Can't help thinking that this governor is an unfortunate fix to a problem that can't really be blamed on the manufacturer. This has been statistically proven without doubt.

In experienced hands the R22 is a safe helicopter - the opposite is exactly the opposite.

I still have serious doubts about anyone actually learning anything whatsoever about helicopter flight in an R22 that can be meaningfully carried through to other types currently in production. In my opinion the aircraft was built to a design standard and that is all - nothing more - and that is what you pay for - simple. Don't complain. Mr Robinson cannot be held up for what he has done - more power to him - just don't expect anything more than you have paid for.

Remember a lot of other earlier types were built to the same standards but nobody really knew what they could safely get away with so there was plenty in there just in case. With the R22 we have evolved to a point of - now we know. We don't have to put in that excessive stuff - we just have to meet a standard - and that's what you get. Plain and simple.

It is of concern that current trainees are not able to experience some of the margins that were inherent in earlier aircraft.

2 Bob's worth and unfortunately a sign of the times!

Draco :

Apparently the book says the engine has to come out and the blades have to come off for NDT if the exceedence is over 116%. I guess off the top of the scale is that . . .

John :

In the R22, the governor was originally non-existent ( I think ) then added as an option then standard kit and retrofitted to all aircraft when they went back for rebuilds ( I seem to remember, someone correct me if I'm wrong ). Certainly in the UK, with only the R22 on my licence a 5 hour conversion course to other piston types w/o governor would suffice. I have about 6 hours in a H300, and the RPM control using the throttle was starting to get much easier so it's not difficult.

John,

There is indeed a problem if people learn to fly a helicopter with a governor, and never practise flying without one. Having had an expensive overspeed incident myself, I then did several hours training in the R22 with the governor switched off, and I now monitor the RPM constantly - just as well, last time I flew I switched the damn thing off with my sleeve three times!!!!:eek: They should do something about that switch - but that's another story. Anyway, I think everyone should do a fair amount of governor-off training.

However, your doubts about learning anything in an R22 that can be carried through to other types??? What exactly do you mean? I learned on the R22; I've flown other types, though not a huge amount yet. But if there were any major problems, neither I nor any of the instructors have noticed them.

I've read your post several times, and I'm really not sure exactly what you're getting at.

Whirly,

Thats a noted problem by RHC and all new build R22's and R44's have a 'stiffer' switch than was originally fitted.

CRAN

In my humble opinion I think that it is the position of the switch and the type of switch that is the problem. A toggle switch (regardless of its stiffness within reason) on the end of the collective is just too easy to inadvertently operate when the pilot moves his hand from the collective to somewhere else. Considering that unless it malfunctions the governor will be switched on at the beginning of the flight and not switched off until you have landed I can't understand why it isn’t a guarded switch.

Not a dig at what you said Cran just my opinion:

I think that fitting a stiffer switch is a very poor solution to this issue.

Maybe just maybe if it is switched off, or fails in flight there should be an audible warning that you could cancel if you wanted, or had to continue the flight without it on. Just a thought.

This isn't to disagree with anyone nor to be interpreted as a Robbie supporter... just for info. Most of the (10+) R22's I've flown have been fitted with the optional Governor-off light, I can only remember the Alpha not having it. I know it doesn't help in overspeeds but it may help with the accidental switching.

3D,

Thats fine, I'm more than happy to hear your opinion. Your right about guarding the switches though - they should be! I'm actually an advocate of puting more switches on the collective - but on a propper thumb pad to allow pilot to minimise hands-off time.

Given the ristrictions within the R22 for space etc and more importantly cost considerations stiffening the switch is a pretty sensible approach to inadvertent actuation I feel.

Also, with regards the fact that the R22 has a tail rotor drive shaft whirl resonnance at about 134% RRPM that can and has destroyed tail booms I wouldn't like to be the one that had to take my hand of the throttle in the event of a governor runaway failure in flight!!!

Just a thought.

CRAN
:D

Yes - all the 22s and 44s that I've flown recently have the warning light. Both warning lights and RPM should be part of one's normal scans so in normal circumstances this should be enough.

Whirly has a valid point though - I trained in the days before governors, and she has quite rightly done some governor-off flying - but some people may never have done so. Given that we have to do hydraulics-off and other fault conditions, regular governor-off refresher training sounds like a very good idea, and perhaps should be part of the annual LPC.

Oh - and having had a governor switch almost fall off on me one time - yes, a better, shrouded, switch seems only common sense.

A malfunctioning governor is a no-fly item on an R22.
When the governor was first introduced, it was retro-fitted to existing machines. For a while we were in the odd situation where it was perfectly OK to fly an R22 that had no governor fitted, but if the following day it had a governor installed, it was thereafter illegal to fly if the governor didn't work.

Not sure about the rules here in the UK but when I did my training in the US I had to do governor off training including most maneouvres both for the PPL and CPL.

During my CPL checkride the examiner failed both tachs and the governor during an approach to land - hard work as I d never done all 3 at the same time during training but very satisfying to be congratualted on it after touchdown.

Whats the UK training view/postion on governor off training?

pilotwolf,

When I did my PPL(H), governor-off training wasn't included. That might have changed with the introduction of JAR I suppose; I don't know. Some schools/instructors did it with their students, but by no means all. I distinctly remember asking my instructor about it, and being reassured that it wasn't necessary; I asked what would happen if it failed, and was told: "Don't worry; they don't fail". :confused: :eek: :eek: In the light of my own and others' overspeed incidents and my knowledge now, I'm....well, let's be polite and say I'm distinctly unimpressed. However, it is very definitely a part of the R22 Safety Course, which most PPLs are encouraged to go on, and in some places it's necessary if you want to hire an R22. But that course only includes an hour's flying altogether, which means you can't really do a lot of governor-off training.

I did a couple of hours two years ago, and it was well worth it. I too was given governor failure on my CPL skills test. As the last thing after a long and stressful half-day the examiner switched off the governor and said: "Fly me back to the airfield". I was almost too tired to think, but I didn't need to; I'd practised it enough that it wasn't a problem. And that, in my opinion, is how it should be.

pilotwolf

Depedant upon which flying school you choose, as part of the Australian CPL you do at least 10 hours governor off. Most of those 10 hours include complete lessons of practice forced landings, power recovered autos and touchdown autos.

In regard to your check flight with both tachos disabled and governor off, I am intrigued to know what you (and the instructor) used to ensure you did not over rev the engine?

Surely engine noise and throttle/hand position is not possible with a low time pilot?

If you are a low time pilot, you deserve a lot of credit for landing the chopper with all 3 out of action.

I had about 160 hrs when I did the cpl checkride. From what I remember I just left everything pretty much as it was and did a run on landing rolling off the throttle as I lowered the collective, it was only from about 150ft, he failed eng tach, then rotor tach and then govenor.

My examiner was one of the R22 initial test pilots during its design and I believe the first ever owner of an R22. What he doesn't know about the robbos isn't worth knowning!

Think I ve probably only done 2 or 3 hrs in total with it off though - a lot of extra work compared with normal.

The R22/R44 governors are usually very reliable, but you want definately to check them for proper operation during runup. I always correct a student who just flips the switch at 80% and then right away jumps to other items in the check list. You got to wait - with hand on the throttle - until RPM is established at the appropriate percentage.

I think the RHC Safety Notice (SN) 35 about governor malfunction when flying near broadcast towers (issued April '99) should also be mentioned on this thread.

In the US SFAR 73 definately require Gov off training. I don't know any instructor who doesn't comply with it. It doesn't cost the student anything more because you can combine it with just about every other manouver. I recommend a good briefing on the ground before doing this in flight.


pilotwolf,
do you happen to know HOW your examiner failed the tachs? I think the examiner you mention is Tim Tucker. He is the manager of the RHC safety training.


John Bicker,
maybe you could elaborate a little more what you actually mean with the statement that one can't learn anything about "real" helicopters in an R22.
I had students who switched into all kinds of choppers after their privat (even clockwise spinning EC120) and called me back to tell me how easy that was after training in the R22. I myself didn't start out in Robinson products, but have tought ca 2000 hrs in them. They seem to do the job as trainers perfectly fine.

sp

S-P.

I think he (TT) must have pulled the tach circuit breaker, and just turned off the gov stating "governor failure".

On thinking about this I can't recall if he failed the gov first to see that I could fly using manual control and then failed the tachs... it was quite a stressful flight - one to be erased form memory for ever!!!

;)

Never flown w/governor
 

Back in 1993 when I flew an R22 there were no governors in R22, and I used to be so freaked out by RPM I would stare at the tach alll the time, then my instructor got a block of large post it notes, covered the tach, and took me out flying for about and hour without looking at the tach, he would say "listen for the RPM" that got my attention off the thing.

Now someone said in a previous post,

"I still have serious doubts about anyone actually learning anything whatsoever about helicopter flight in an R22 that can be meaningfully carried through to other types"

This is partially true, I only have 36.5 piston/R22 hours and one of my first flights after the 22, was with a Bell instructor, I remember that one of first things he said to me as I started the 206 and picked it up into a hover was "I can tell you come from an R22 and the first thing we need to do before starting training is get rid of all those nasty R22 habits"

He was mainly talking about overcontrolling, turbine helis should be flown by barely noticable movements of cycilc in precise amounts, giving the exact amount of control pressure to stop any movement, and leaving it in that position until its needed again, most R22 pilots shake the cyclic like crazy over controlling all the time, it seems like they are trying to vigorously stir a pot of fondue! This is a hard habit to break and I hate it. Copilots that go from the R22 to the 212 absolutely can never make and approach without waving the tail boom all over the place, and it takes a long time to get rid of that habit.

Blenderpilot,

in defense of all the people doing their initial training in Robinson products: It is not the fault of the R22/R44 AIRCRAFT if the overcontroling issue isn't taken care of. One rather has to blame the instructor for not correcting this.

When I did my first turbine transition (to a TwinStar) we had two guys in the class who had a lot of Robibson time and the Factory instructor kept coming with stupid remarks to the "two Robinson guys". Just as if we didn't know s*** about flying anything. When we all started on the flying part of the course, everybody got the chance to twice sit in the back on somebody elses flight. I couldn't believe my eyes (and ears). They were mostly Bell drivers (JetRanger). They peformed as good asthey could, but you should have heard those high and low RPM horns in their autorotations. Plus they had plenty problem to get used to this new machine. At the last meeting the Instructor had everybody together and said that he had greatly underestimated the Robinson as a trainer, because the "two Robinson guys" really were the ones who caught on best with the new machine. I must give him credit for standing up and say that.

So once again: If somebody has learned how to fly a Robinson WELL - he can learn to fly any other helicopter!! If the R22 wasn't such a good trainer as it is, why would 95% of all civilian training be conduted in it???
sp

sierra-papa (" mountain-potato" translated to spanish)
 

I haven't said that flying R22 for training was a waste of time, I just said the machine has a tendency to develop nasty habits in pilots, (I guess like flying any other helicopter good habits too) If you ask me the reason why soo many people fly the "thing", its because its cheap, and easy to mantain, I think the Hughes is a far better trainer it just hasn't been properly marketed, big schools like HAI are switching and that is no coincidence, I think its because a lot of their students go straight to Pro Pilot Jobs in turbine helicopters and their transition was more difficult coming from the R22.

You say its up to the instructor to correct things like overcontrolling, most R22 instructors have a couple hundred more hours than the student, they think stirring the cyclic is normal!

As for the transition course anecdote, that might have been the case there, but its usually not like that.

Makes me wonder if basic training is the same why doesn't the US Army, (and other armed forces of the world) do their basic training in R22's or similar types? Its just not the same.

The Bristow Flying Training School (alas since closed down) used to carry out sponsored CPL(H) training for many of its pilots. It purchased 6 Robinson R22s in December 1987 and they replaced their fleet of Bell 47s in early 1988. There were no Robinsons fitted with governors then and I don't believe there were any instances of rotor overspeeds either. The fact that the Robinson has one of the best throttle correlators of any piston helicopter probably had something to do with it. At the time I think that it was the biggest commercial helicopter training school in Europe and all of the students went straight on to fly either AS332, S76, S61 or Bell 212. I don't recall any of them having any more problems in converting to larger types than those previously trained in Bell 47s, so maybe it has more to do with the quality of the training than the machine in which it was done. All of the Bristow instructors had at least 3000 hours P1 time before instructing on the school.

Licuadora piloto, normally I agree with most of your opinions, but not this time. I personally have trained in other helicopters then Robinson, and therefor got a good chance to compare them against other products. I am not a sales agent for Robinson or anything like it. I just hate seeing people who have no or little time in a particular aircraft throwing mud at it, thus creating a sense of insecurity in many students who train in it. To give you credit you have at least flown the R22 (a very early version of it). So you have a certain opinion about it and you tell us. Nothing wrong with that. The guys who make the most (anti) noise about the R22 are the ones who have never flown one.

Now a few points, not so much for Blender but more for newcomers to the helicopter world:

1. Learning in the R22 makes perfect sense because it prepares a student for the R44 - and the R44 has become the stepping stone into the commercial world for non military trainees (there are more R44 sold per year then all other manufactorers combined). That's why most schools switch to the R22 more that any other aircraft.

2. HAI uses the CB 300 because both companies made a deal. Schweizer (the Helicopter division) would probably be gone by now without HAI. And HAI get better prices on buying them then others. By the way HAI also have about 15 R22's. All other bigger schools with predominantly Schweizer aircraft have also Robinsons on the line. There is no way around it.

3. Why has the US army discontinued their use of the H269 (CB 300) if it was such a great trainer?

4. Again, "nasty habits" hae nothing to do with the type aircraft but rather with the human being at the controls. Habits of human beings can be corrected - no problem. Learning to fly the R22 is a little more difficult then other small helos. Once you have achieved a solid skill level in it you can switch with no trouble into any other helicopter.

Greetings from the mountain potato :)

From the mouth (keyboard, actually) of BlenderPilot:


Hoooo boy. Only "turbine helis" require such cyclic technique? Now there's a misconception for you. No wonder the Robbo gave you such bad habits, old boy. Hate to break this to you, but ALL helicopters need a deft touch on the stick. Yes, even Robbies. Especially Robbies.

You cannot blame the machine. A lot depends on the quality of instruction. But I've seen enough pilots now to make some generalizations. Most R-22 pilots who I've transitioned into bigger equipment do very well. On the other hand, I recently had a high-time fixed-wing pilot come to me fresh from getting his rating in the 300. Whilst hovering, he wagged the 206 cyclic around so horribly that I finally grabbed the stick and "froze" it for him. After showing him that all this wiggle-waggle was unnecessary, he started to calm down. Adding a little cyclic friction helped too, although he was opposed to the idea at first.

I'm only talking from what my economy brain has seen
 

sierra-papa

"piloto-licuadora" that really made me laugh!

You have some solid points there, I'm sorry I just don't like Robinsons, I don't like pistons, but I'm sure it could be a good trainer. I don't want to discuourage anyone flying the machine.

Maybe my experiences w/the machine haven't been good, but its been 10 years since I've been on one, and there are none around here, (the only way one could fly around here is by droping it from the belly of a C130) so I guess I'm not really qualified to talk about 22's much, I only have 36.5 R22/Piston hrs.

Good luck to all flying R22's out there, have fun. Adios

PF#1

In my personal opinion you don't always seem to have a very clear idea of what you are talking about, but today . . .

You are right, all helicopters should be flown this way, but for some reason I remember 22's not having precise handling qualities, the controls seemed sloppy to me and this led to over controlling, but I guess it was inexperience.

Dzeroplus

Method for preventing overspeed with both tachs and governor off, that I was taught anyway, was to very slowly back off the throttle until you get the low RPM horn and light and then just tweek the throttle back open slightly again to stop the warning.

Theory is RPM should be at 98-100%. This needs to be repeated every now and again to retain a reasonable rpm as the correlator can't cope by itself.

This was taught to me by a very experienced R22 instructor, who when I told him that the governor had failed, while I was on a check flight, sadistically said "even better, we can do practise autos with the governor off"...... B%^&$^d

... I ve always done all my pratice auto with the govenor switched off.

Indeed Section 4.9 and 4.10 of R22 POH states:

PRACTISCE AUTOROTATION - POWER RECOVERY

Switch govenor off and ....

PRACTICE AUTOROTATION - GROUND CONTACT

......perform in same manner as power recovery autorotations....


Or is it another UK specific training method/idea/regulation to leave the govenor switched on?

Pilotwolf

Haven't got a clue what the instructor does with the governor switch, just assumed it was slightly harder to recover afterwards with no governor on.
Far too busy kicking rudder pedal, flaring, looking for field with no cows, checking wind direction and undies for skiddies, to worry what the instructor was doing with a poxy little toggler.

:confused:

Autos.....bloody hate em!!!!

? Practise autos with the governor off :confused:

Not such a big deal surely - once the needles are split the gov. is out of the loop anyway. RPM control whilst in auto is done with a little touch of collective to prevent overspeeds and developing a feel for disk loading.

If you're going all the way to the ground then you'll have the throttle rolled off into the detent anyway - for a power recovery I always preferred the "governor off" approach that we used to do - that way YOU are in control of rematching the needles, rather than have the governor kick in with a surge just when you want to be in control of it.