http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/m...h_DSCN2878.jpg

Looking at the picture, I don't see what the fuss is about. For sure it's cozy for 3, but no worse than 3 in the back of a car. Many years ago I was a frequent passenger in the back of a Jetranger (the DEC helicopter fleet if anyone here remembers that) and with three people it was VERY cozy... this doesn't look any worse.

The controls look exactly like an R44. I notice they haven't taken the opportunity to put an Ident button on the stick, even.

n5296s

Almost everything looks exactly like an R44 - "economical" to phrase it in delicate terms. Cant tell from the pix the design of the rotor drive system - belts or gears or ?

One thing that puzzles me... how come it has a mixture control knob? I suppose you COULD do the Fuel Condition this way but it seems unusual, to say the least. On the other hand I guess it really is a turbine since it doesn't have the mag test positions on the key.

As for the drive, if it ISN'T either belt or gears then it will be jolly interesting to find out what it is! Photonic drive? Electric transmission like on railway locomotives? Chains? Hydrostatic?

Actually there's a pic I saw somewhere which seems to show the engine angled upwards (from the rear), presumably it can just drive the gearbox directly, no need for a "clutch" (quotes because it's the most un-clutch-like clutch I've ever come across).

n5296s

I knew the second after I pressed the Submit key that someone would jump on me for my lack of precision. Does it use belts & gears (similar to the 22/44), or just gears?

The RR300 free turbine design almost certainly eliminates the need for a clutch such as found on the 22/44, but even so belts may be used for additional engine speed reduction and/or getting power where it needs to be. OTOH, these functions could be integral with the MR transmission.

My guess is that this is the emergency fuel shutoff, and that there is no "condition lever" per se, just the twist grip throttle.

And furthermore! Because of no tunnel and no "broom closet" and no engine pan intruding into the headroom, the center passenger in the R-66 has it pretty good...at least compared to a 206 or 500 that is...

The "mixture control" is most certainly the link to a mechanical fuel shutoff valve. Interesting carryover. Let's hope no one attempts to "lean this one out" to get the fuel burn down a little...

With the RR300 mounted on an angle like that, we can assume that Frank is using a driveshaft connection to the trans (wrong angle for a belt?). How and where he reduces the 6600 (or so) output shaft rpm will remain to be seen...as well as where he puts the freewheeling unit - on the engine like the 206 or on the trans.

Probably make an okay sightseeing ship - for short rides. In Japan. I wonder how much of a useful load it will have with floats and air-conditioning?

That's a tall climb to check the rotor head.

Maybe it is because Vne has not been established yet.
If you put a red line on that indicator it becomes a law and you cannot go faster.
Nick would know more about that.

Robinson R66
 

Howzit guys,

Anyone heard anything further on the new and upcoming Robinson R66. I read that it is slightly bigger than the R44 and is a turbine. Also is will be cheaper than the Jetty but more expensive than the R44. I think it's getting released in around November this year.

Any new information from anyone, some pictures would be nice.

Thanks

Not just a picture, but a video of the first lift off.

YouTube - Robinson R66 N466R liftoff at factory

KW:ok:

CaptainKing - AIN ran this feature on the program last month, in which Frank R. tempers his expectations of the R66 ("fuel consumption is too…high and parts costs are too high"). The article also suggests deliveries are more likely to commence in 2010 rather than '09. Given the depth of the current recession (which may well stretch into 2011) it's not a great time to launch a new GA-targeted project, so later may be better.

I/C

If it was my money, I'd much rather put it in the already proven, similarly priced, Enstrom 480B.

I take no pleasure in making this statement but it looks like you spoke too soon; http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/375...-republic.html

I'm no Robbie fanboy, but with the amount of them out there versus Enstroms it should go without saying that there are going to be more accidents in Robbies and therefor more fatalities. Just a thought.

EN48:

Certainly seems like you get more bang for the buck with the venerable Enstrom!

One thing I've always wondered, especially since the other posters have discussed seating in the R66 model: how flexible is the seating arrangement in your Enstrom?

That is, do you buy a certain configuration from the factory, and that is what you are stuck with outside of a major modification, or are the seats easily reconfigured depending upon the role?

I would imagine that one good thing with the R66 (and the Jetranger, etc.) is the relative mission flexibility...that is, you can train (slap in some duals), or carry 4 pax (if weight allows, etc.).

With the Enstrom, it seems that if you bought the "executive" seating version, you'd not be able to fly duals, etc. Right or wrong?

Enstrom Seating Chart

EN48:

Clear, thanks. Sure seems like a very capable machine.

But why has a turbine got a mixture control?

What's the latest on the R66 ?
 

Does anyone have an update on the R66 ?

Seems there are a huge number of people waiting to buy one .....:cool:

I heard rumor has it they are still having trouble with the crash worthiness of the middle seat. Don't know if that's the truth or not.

Matari ...you probably have the answer by now but all of those seating configs can be changed by the pilot by just moving seats , so yes you can have duals and 4 people . Great machine and best value on the market by a mile and v v cheap to run 10 /10