-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
[Possible] result of going low G in a R44 helo
- Thread starter TurboTrout
- Start date
I flew Buz out to Fullerton to pickup his, we flew it around for a while. Helicopters are unforgiving beasts, piston engine versions even more so. I never got a rotary wing cert, saw more than a few make some smoking holes though.
Helicopter: Def. A bunch of parts flying in loose formation. If they have any excuse to kill you, they will.
Helicopter: Def. A bunch of parts flying in loose formation. If they have any excuse to kill you, they will.
The robbie more so than other RWs, take it outside of its envelope it doesn’t have teeth, it has fangs
But great little ships, R22 is probably one of the most fun little burger run options
Dumb media cunt, it’s the vertical fin! It was trailing the aircraft in the video! Probably T/R failure? The fin broke off? But it wasn’t a M/R blade they were on until impact.
My money is on low G, rotor cut the tail off, not the first time that happened
Yeah, tail rotor was definitely off doing it's own thing. The Robinsons have a semi-rigid rotor system (think see-saw) like older model Hueys or AH-1s. You HAVE to maintain positive Gs in them....UH and AH-1s needed a min of +0.5. Articulated systems on 3 or more bladed rotors can go as far down as -0.5g or less before getting into trouble.
Years ago, in the eighties we were given one of the first AS350 from production. It was how we evaluated aircraft for purchase, it was a demo. So we took it and ferried parts to our field bases here along the gulf. So on a Saturday we took it out to do a float bottle inspection at a field base. Dropped of some parts on the way, strange, one the pilots at the base mention high vibration in the pedals. ?? Jumped in took off, went performed the inspection on the other A/C. Went back home. A week later i walked into the hangar on a Monday morning and there was the AS350 all FUBAR! The tail rotor un-assed the gearbox and the pilot performed a run on landing in a soybean field. He walked away, all I could think about was flying around the week before! 
Hi freq in the pedals and he still flew it???Years ago, in the eighties we were given one of the first AS350 from production. It was how we evaluated aircraft for purchase, it was a demo. So we took it and ferried parts to our field bases here along the gulf. So on a Saturday we took it out to do a float bottle inspection at a field base. Dropped of some parts on the way, strange, one the pilots at the base mention high vibration in the pedals. ?? Jumped in took off, went performed the inspection on the other A/C. Went back home. A week later i walked into the hangar on a Monday morning and there was the AS350 all FUBAR! The tail rotor un-assed the gearbox and the pilot performed a run on landing in a soybean field. He walked away, all I could think about was flying around the week before!
The pilot I was with said he didn’t notice anything?
It was the other pilot that flew it before that said something. I mentioned it and the guy I was with said it was good to go. Who knows, if i remember the gearbox was intact, the tailrotor just came off. That particular T/R used an elastomer inside the blade to the hub.
Saw this posted in several FB groups I’m in, and it’s gut wrenching to watch. Possibly low-G for sure, folks had the FlightRadar24 data which seemed to show a few practice VRS recoveries prior to the tail departing. Maybe the student was excessively aggressive when applying forward cyclic during the recovery and hit low-G somehow, but that’s a lot of ham-fisted and incorrect cyclic movement to slip past a CFI, I’d think (hard forward to hit low-G, likely followed by hard left to (incorrectly) counter the right roll that would have developed). But if you slow the video down, the tailboom length is about right at the end of the rotor blade, so that’s a likely cause.
It could also be that the T/R and gearbox departed somehow prior to the vertical fin getting cut. That much weight on that long an arm could cause a sudden nose drop, leading to the aft portion of the boom getting cut off. Hard to tell in the video if the T/R and gearbox are still on the part that broke off. We had a UH-1/B205 go down back in AZ a few years back when the T/R and gearbox sheared off. It’s a significant CG shift, especially on a larger ship.
Whatever happened though, I feel awful for them and their families. Just awful.
It could also be that the T/R and gearbox departed somehow prior to the vertical fin getting cut. That much weight on that long an arm could cause a sudden nose drop, leading to the aft portion of the boom getting cut off. Hard to tell in the video if the T/R and gearbox are still on the part that broke off. We had a UH-1/B205 go down back in AZ a few years back when the T/R and gearbox sheared off. It’s a significant CG shift, especially on a larger ship.
Whatever happened though, I feel awful for them and their families. Just awful.
If you google R44 images a few pop up that look to be M/R strikes because aft tailboom is lopped off. I guessing auto rotation practice hard flair with hard impact. The aircraft in the search were still intact.Saw this posted in several FB groups I’m in, and it’s gut wrenching to watch. Possibly low-G for sure, folks had the FlightRadar24 data which seemed to show a few practice VRS recoveries prior to the tail departing. Maybe the student was excessively aggressive when applying forward cyclic during the recovery and hit low-G somehow, but that’s a lot of ham-fisted and incorrect cyclic movement to slip past a CFI, I’d think (hard forward to hit low-G, likely followed by hard left to (incorrectly) counter the right roll that would have developed). But if you slow the video down, the tailboom length is about right at the end of the rotor blade, so that’s a likely cause.
It could also be that the T/R and gearbox departed somehow prior to the vertical fin getting cut. That much weight on that long an arm could cause a sudden nose drop, leading to the aft portion of the boom getting cut off. Hard to tell in the video if the T/R and gearbox are still on the part that broke off. We had a UH-1/B205 go down back in AZ a few years back when the T/R and gearbox sheared off. It’s a significant CG shift, especially on a larger ship.
Whatever happened though, I feel awful for them and their families. Just awful.
Yep horrible way to go.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,643
- 20,071
Had the unfortunate task of helping secure a UH60 crash back in the late 90s. Bird full of pathfinders, the tail rotor clipped a tree during a nap of the earth flight. Working a crash sight is something, nobody should ever have to do.
C141, full crew. Fortunately, only one pax.
I once read someone describe a Robinson as a flying snowmobile.
I think he was talking about the engine, but still, I made the mental note that they were best avoided.
I think he was talking about the engine, but still, I made the mental note that they were best avoided.
This is hogwash. They have some design quirks, but every ship does. And these kinds of remarks often come from the rich and wealthy who can afford to avoid them, or crusty old guys who had the luxury of learning in a much larger aircraft.
I have about 270hrs in the R22, and it’s a fine aircraft if you respect it and fly it within its limitations. You see a significant number of crashes in them purely because they’re the most widely used training helicopter in the world, so sheer numbers means most accidents will be in them. Hundreds and hundreds of schools wouldn’t be using them worldwide if they were as unsafe as the news makes them out to be.
Now, are they as robust as many other aircraft? No, and that was by design to make them light, efficient, and “inexpensive” to operate. Are there airframes that I feel make a better trainer? Yes. But I went from 0-270ish hours in the R22 and never once felt the aircraft wasn’t up to the task. They’re not an unsafe airframe. If the tail comes off any helicopter, whether from mechanical failure or pilot error, they’ll react much the same way we see here. Any semi-rigid rotor system is susceptible to low-g pushovers and the resultant mast-bumping or tail strike if not reacted to appropriately.
Last edited:
My buddy is a R-22 pilot, when we traveled to Ushuaia to board a vessel to cross the Southern Ocean and SCUBA Antartica, we took a R-44 up the mountain to what is left of the glacier above Ushuaia. It was cold as fuck, R-44 did well, very fun trip, airframe was very stable after she spun-up, yes we checked the aircraft over before getting in, considering the old DC-3 and other ancient aircraft in the boneyard around the civilian airport, pilot flew it by the book, no problem.
Last edited:
Engine wise it’s a lycoming io540, it’s a flat six and has VERY little in common with a snow mobile, it’s a standard piston aviation engine.
The Robbie did end up resulting in a SFAR to even touch the controls, due to it being unforgiving of being mishandled, but when flown in its envelope it’s a great ship, as seen in how common they are with everything from training to news to tours etc
SFAR73
They do have the SFAR, yes (well, the R22 and R44 do, but the R66 does not). Frank Robinson actually pushed for the SFAR to be adopted in the FAR, not the FAA, FYI. However, the FAA has elected to keep it in the FAR to this point. I have a few SFAR endorsements in my own logbook.
The SFAR primarily relates to one of the “design quirks” I was referencing, which is the low inertia rotor system they have. The low inertia rotor system is pretty unforgiving if you get sloppy or lazy with it. In fact, early models had an even lower inertia than later ones, which now have tip weights to increase the inertia a little bit. The R22 especially loses RPM FAST, so energy management is a big part of your initial training in them. The upside is that while they lose RPM very quickly, they also regain it very quickly, so there’s that. But yes, if mismanaged, rotor stall occurs and then it’s game over as you can’t recover from that.
As you and I have both stated though, they’re a good ship when flown within their envelope, just like many other airframes. I’ll be interested to see what the NTSB finds with this one, and hopefully the rotorcraft community can learn something from it…
Similar threads
