What is this???
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is this???
I work in the Oil and Gas industry and fly in a Bell 212 often, my co-workers and I have been having a debate on what the big red lever above the pilot is in aircraft? Can someone tell me what it is for?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's the rotor brake.
Almost identical to the one in the S61.
(this one has got some pipe insulation over it to stop scratches/chips.)
Almost identical to the one in the S61.
(this one has got some pipe insulation over it to stop scratches/chips.)
Last edited by Wirbelsturm; 7th Dec 2015 at 11:01.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think he may have left the 'l' from 'lever' out
Which, ironically, means my reply looks silly and childish as well!
I'll leave it just for the irony!
Chief Bottle Washer
Yes, it is the rotor brake. The dense foam padding is not to prevent chips and scratches on the handle, but to provide a modicum of protection to the pilot's head. Most of us don't wear bone domes when flying offshore
You can often see the same dense foam on the wiper motors, just in front of each pilot, at the top of the windscreen
You can often see the same dense foam on the wiper motors, just in front of each pilot, at the top of the windscreen
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The dense foam padding is not to prevent chips and scratches on the handle,
Mind you nothing a couple of tie wraps wouldn't fix I suppose.
Chief Bottle Washer
The factory glue isn't the best: you can see the excess on the left of the photo that you posted. Quite a few 212/412s I've flown have the tie wrap solution, S61s they hadn't invented tie wraps and used stronger glue
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S61s they hadn't invented tie wraps and used stronger glue
Great fun to fly though!
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: North Yorkshire UK
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering how often the Rotor Brake is actually applied. I recall in the mid nineties seeing a Jet Ranger parked on a platform helideck. A severe squall sprang up and in no time at all the rotor started turning, the aircraft began to bounce about on it's floats (it was the only one in our fleet which operated with floats) until it tipped over the side, demolished the safety netting and plunged into the sea.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike Tee,
It pretty much depends upon the machine and the conditions. Bell recommend the application of the rotor brake below 38-39%Nr down to an almost stop and then to release it.
The idea being to stop/prevent excessive blade sail as the rotors slow down. The correct action would then be to install a blade cuff and tie down to prevent the windmilling you describe. A touch of laziness crept in perhaps? Occasionally, if the weather was benign there are some who would roll to ground idle and let the blades windmill without chopping the engine or applying the rotor brake. This has led to a few dynamic instability roll overs that I know of!
On the bigger machines the rotor brake is applied whenever the rotors are stopped and not cuffed. This is especially important on machines with fully articulated heads as the flapping/dragging/feathering hinges allow for quite a bit of movement in windy conditions.
The idea would be to stop the blades clear of the tail boom in order to prevent a tail strike. I have seen the S61 composite blades hit the ground during a squall on deck!
It pretty much depends upon the machine and the conditions. Bell recommend the application of the rotor brake below 38-39%Nr down to an almost stop and then to release it.
The idea being to stop/prevent excessive blade sail as the rotors slow down. The correct action would then be to install a blade cuff and tie down to prevent the windmilling you describe. A touch of laziness crept in perhaps? Occasionally, if the weather was benign there are some who would roll to ground idle and let the blades windmill without chopping the engine or applying the rotor brake. This has led to a few dynamic instability roll overs that I know of!
On the bigger machines the rotor brake is applied whenever the rotors are stopped and not cuffed. This is especially important on machines with fully articulated heads as the flapping/dragging/feathering hinges allow for quite a bit of movement in windy conditions.
The idea would be to stop the blades clear of the tail boom in order to prevent a tail strike. I have seen the S61 composite blades hit the ground during a squall on deck!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Sounds like it committed suicide, Mike!
Not all aircraft are fitted with a rotor brake and on some types the pressure bleeds off after a while, rendering it ineffective. In those cases, it's usual to fit some sort of blade tie to prevent the blades rotating.
Not all aircraft are fitted with a rotor brake and on some types the pressure bleeds off after a while, rendering it ineffective. In those cases, it's usual to fit some sort of blade tie to prevent the blades rotating.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: North Yorkshire UK
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's interesting, having, on other occasions seen the Rotor Brake engaged I assumed that it was a "mechanical" brake but apparently not. I do seem to recall that the unfortunate pilot who's aircraft committed suicide was in fact dismissed. A shame as he was a really nice chap. The aircraft in question drifted away inverted with landing lights blazing under the surface, all very errie and was eventually "captured" by a supply boat then lifted onto a work barge. I believe that it was eventually it was scrapped.
Last edited by Mike Tee; 17th Dec 2015 at 16:22. Reason: typo
Hmmm, now that would make sense. There was me thinking it was like being answered by my 17 year old daughter!!
Which, ironically, means my reply looks silly and childish as well!
I'll leave it just for the irony!
Which, ironically, means my reply looks silly and childish as well!
I'll leave it just for the irony!