There is a R22 Mariner (name?) based at Helicentre Blackpool that matches that description. You may even be able to hire it, then you could have a go on water!!!

SEL - exactly, it is G-YMBO and is not exactly what wfrpilotpb was describing as "shiny new" as it is a 1992 model. Checking the CAA site, I note that at the last CofA issue (21 Sep 01) it still only had 707 hours on it, so I guess Helicentre at Blackpool have bought it to whack 1493 hours on it before it time expires in 2004. Given that it was registered to them in Jan 03, I would venture that they could offer hours on this quite cheaply.

Mind you, if you wanted your own, I noticed that Sloane had a couple of newer (yellow) ones for sale, and there's a silver one which Tiger are leasing that is for sale too.

G-YMBO is currently based at Cranfield (?) Or was a few Months ago.
The owner used it for fishing trips off the Blackpool coast!

He would sit it down in the sea, assemble his fishing rod and stick it out the door!

You should have a close up inspection of it.....
Never seen so much rust!

Not sure if its true, but I remember hearing that upon starting a H500 on the water, it will rotate through 540 degrees before tail rotor takes effect on the torque. Funny if pirates are approaching!:p :E

R22 blades?
 

A question posed on another site.
In this day and age of advanced materials, why havn't RHC got some Composite blades happening? surely they would be a better option than the current ones in the reliability stakes. I would have thought they would wear better and be stronger and have a much longer TBO.
Does any one know if they have looked into this?
If they have looked into it, why was the Idea rejected?

Just curious.

Um. less helicopters falling from the sky due to blade problems maybe????, product liability problems???, selling a product that will be usable after its TBO after inspection????, Inreased profit from a desirable product that cost less to produce????
I don't know actually, thats why I asked. :rolleyes:

(less helicopters falling from the sky due to blade problems maybe????, )

Maybe if the R22 was flown within its limits then there wouldnt be as many accidents due to blades giving up.

However im not against the idea of composite blade technology.

cheers

Thanx Belly tank, maybe theres another advantage, Increasing the limits of the aicraft, enabeling them to be used in other roles.???

Still just curious. ;)







Damn these phat phinga's

Well if your gonna put composite blades on it why not just make it a rigid rotorhead and get rid of the thing everyone complains about? Probably because that goes against the whole R22 philosophy, cheap, light, efficient. Your 180 grand helicopter would probably become 280...probably a gross overestimation but...

The answers quite easy - its because Frank wouldnt make as much money out of selling you blades every couple of thousand hours.

Autorotate.

I think A/spat has the patent on the way composite blades are manufactured (the way they are wound etc).

Might cost Frank a pretty penny to manufacture and set up.

Although I consider the R22 an ideal recreational vehicle, I believe that in the role of training and working it's caperbilities are stretched to close to the limits.
Flown within it's limits and in fine weather the construction is adequate. Metal blades should cope as designed.
The 300 still has metal blades.
So could the problem be that Franks rotor head isn't suitable with the metal blades and Hughes design of fully articulated is OK?

I'm sure it's been discussed and researched at RHC, but then look at the enormous in-house assembly line and custom manufacturing machines. To make a change from metal to composites would require prototypes, testing, certification, new machines, validations, new quality control measures, new procedures, and retraining their entire staff... all read as big $$$ with little ROI. Frank isn't going to do that on an old ship that is already proven... he won't even retrofit blade caps (the ones put on the R44) to the R22.

There is some composite in the R44 blade. This is also a SS skinned item - and the R22 will have similar soon.

New AD on R22
 

A new AD has Just been issued relating to the fatal accident in WA.

The AD requires owners to remove the MR yoke A907 and MR clutch shaft joint A166, and inspect the joint for wear.

The apparent failure of this part has been put forward as the cause of the accident.

It is being said that an incorrect coating was used in the assembly of the componet on this machine.

The correct coating is meant to be straight zinc chromate,
whereas the machine in question (and many others) was assembled using what is commonly referred to as cocky !!!!, a thicker version of the paint that does not dry out.

The two bolts that hold the yoke onto the clutch shaft have sheered off. the theory is that the thicker paint stopped the bolts from reaching the proper torque and over time, allowed the bolts to become loose in the yoke.

The AD requires the shaft and yoke to be disassembled and inspected whithin ten hours active from November 12th.

Cocky Shit??????
 

Here is something to consider. The statement was made that the “Cocky !!!!” version of the Zinc Chromate paint does not dry out. There is a possibility that the paint served as a lubricant on the threads of the bolts in question and instead of the bolts coming loose they were instead overtorqued due to the slippery threads and the bolts sheared due to tensile overstress.

But then again who listens to an old man

:E :E

here it is:

http://www.casa.gov.au/avreg/aircraf...22/R22-051.pdf

[/B]deeper[/B]

Where do you get "broken bolts" out of that?

R22 BETA II Power loss
 

Dear experienced R22-pilots,

together with a student, during a slowly hover-turn to the left, we had an hard landing following a sudden power loss (rpm-drop) in a R22 BETA II. The engine didn't stop.

Conditions:
ALT: 6400ft (pressure altitude)
TEMP: OAT at 47°F/8°C (at 6400ft); dew point about 32°F/0°C.
QNH: 1025hPa
Wind: calm
Weight (TOW): 1316lbs/597kg
Height: 1ft/0.3m above ground

What the Flight Manual says:
In the performance graphic (AFM) it is possible to hover up to 10'000ft/msl (PA) with the conditions (weight, temperature, pressure) we had that day.

What do you think about the power avaible from the engine?
Is this normal?
Should we check the engine?

Thanks for your help.

Question:

Did the low rotor rpm horn sound/warning light illuminate?

Also, you give due point as 'about 0degC.' Suggest you get an aftercast and be more sure of the figure. If the dew point was closer to your OAT - 8degC - and even if it is not, you may have experienced carb-ice.

Ask yourself...was the governor switched on? The governor can mask the build-up of carb-ice in Robinsons by gradually opening the throttle to compensate for the reduced airflow through the carb. You only know you have a problem when it reaches full throttle and the power starts to drop fast.

Carb-ice is also likely if you had recently started the machine from cold?

Having said all that, you were close to max TOW, 1370lb from memory, so the throttle setting in nil wind conditions would already have been near the max, reducing the likelihood of carb-ice. In any case, any power drop, perceived or real, should be checked out thouroughly. Suggest you start with the mags, then the compression. You might have valve trouble or all manner of things. Get it checked by a Lycoming man, and if he's happy get the rest of the machine checked over by a Robo mechanic!

Dan

I don't think carb icing would be a problem in those conditions but without doing the sums I think you just ran out of power.

I've seen a similar thing happen to someone attemping a downwind T/O over a cornfield :rolleyes: Just dropped into the corn.

Did you notice the manifold pressure?