Long Line work in an R44

[fleman202]

I am just curious if anyone out there has done much long line work in the R44 and would be able share advice or experiences about doing it.

 

I work for an Ag company and we are looking at getting into aerial seeding and it seems like the only way to do that with an R44 is with a slung bucket from Isolair.

 

I would love any comments or advice about going down this road.

 

[Trans Lift]

I have around 500 of sling work in a 44. It was a 20-25ft line and we used a mirror on the nose to see beneath. Picks up a decent load, up to 800lbs. The company I worked for now have a tank in the back that feeds two spreaders underneath. They use it for fertilizer but I'm sure it work for seeding too. They have it STC'd as far as I know.

[Whistlerpilot]

Hi fleman202, I have around 200 hours longline experience in the R44 and can share my experience. The R44 has good visibility for longline work, but is somewhat limited in operational payload. The onboard hook is rated for 800 lbs max. You can't put 800 lbs on the hook and be under max gross unless your pilot weight is under 100 lbs! A realistic load is 500 to 600 lbs. If you are pretty light and can refuel every 20 minutes you may be able to work with 700 lb loads.

 

Most importantly: Check the performance charts for HOGE and work out the temp and altitude you will be working at. This will determine your max hook load. If you can't hover out of ground effect the R44 will lose rotor rpm easily doing longline work. Also many R44's have been "worked hard" and the HOGE chart may be overly optimistic. Use extreme caution when working at the max performance limits for this helicopter. If I remember right I wouldn't pick up a load if it took over 25 inches manifold pressure. Your weight, altitude, and temperature will constantly vary so this is a good rule of thumb.

 

I don't know how much the isolair system weighs, but probably around 250 lbs. So you don't have much left over for fuel, your heavy A$$, and the customers product you are trying to spread. Crunch the numbers and see if it's even economical. We had a few longline jobs that the R44 was more economical than the AS350 B2 even with all the extra trips, but others where it's a losing proposition.

[fleman202]

I have around 500 of sling work in a 44. It was a 20-25ft line and we used a mirror on the nose to see beneath. Picks up a decent load, up to 800lbs. The company I worked for now have a tank in the back that feeds two spreaders underneath. They use it for fertilizer but I'm sure it work for seeding too. They have it STC'd as far as I know.

 

What system were you using to spread fertilizer? What kind of work were you doing with the long line?

 

Hi fleman202, I have around 200 hours longline experience in the R44 and can share my experience. The R44 has good visibility for longline work, but is somewhat limited in operational payload. The onboard hook is rated for 800 lbs max. You can't put 800 lbs on the hook and be under max gross unless your pilot weight is under 100 lbs! A realistic load is 500 to 600 lbs. If you are pretty light and can refuel every 20 minutes you may be able to work with 700 lb loads.

 

Most importantly: Check the performance charts for HOGE and work out the temp and altitude you will be working at. This will determine your max hook load. If you can't hover out of ground effect the R44 will lose rotor rpm easily doing longline work. Also many R44's have been "worked hard" and the HOGE chart may be overly optimistic. Use extreme caution when working at the max performance limits for this helicopter. If I remember right I wouldn't pick up a load if it took over 25 inches manifold pressure. Your weight, altitude, and temperature will constantly vary so this is a good rule of thumb.

 

I don't know how much the isolair system weighs, but probably around 250 lbs. So you don't have much left over for fuel, your heavy A$$, and the customers product you are trying to spread. Crunch the numbers and see if it's even economical. We had a few longline jobs that the R44 was more economical than the AS350 B2 even with all the extra trips, but others where it's a losing proposition.

 

I appreciate the info about checking the HOGE charts thoroughly. What kind of jobs were better for the 44?

[Whistlerpilot]

We did propane refueling contracts around Prince William Sound. Pickle barrels of propane from a landing craft, barge, or sometimes road access. The R44 is the cheapest way to do this work. It would be about 50 to 100 turns per job, full tanks up, empty ones down, and ground crew would pump it into the large holding tanks. Fun work, used a 50 or 100 foot line. Production work because the boss bid on the job by the gallon delivered so we had to be fast! The Astar couldn't compete with this work.

[Trans Lift]

The fertlizer system was custom made for an STC. I worked on the cranberry bogs in MA lifting mud and berries.

[fleman202]

Any chance I could get the contact info for the company who made the fertilizer system? Would they consider making another one?

[PitchLink]

The R44 is a great machine for long line operations. Even though the cargo hook STC states the maximum external load is 800 lbs, you will not be able to achieve that. Anything more than 600 lbs pulls the aircraft out of longitudinal CG. It's unfortunate because with 600 lbs you still have more payload available as stated above. I have heard of a few operators with an approved RLCFM with a maximum hook weight of 800 lbs. I guess their inspectors never asked to see a weight and balance?

[fleman202]

This has all been really helpful info to someone who has no long line experience. Those of you with long line time, how did you get your training? Courses? On the job training?

 

 

The R44 is a great machine for long line operations. Even though the cargo hook STC states the maximum external load is 800 lbs, you will not be able to achieve that. Anything more than 600 lbs pulls the aircraft out of longitudinal CG. It's unfortunate because with 600 lbs you still have more payload available as stated above. I have heard of a few operators with an approved RLCFM with a maximum hook weight of 800 lbs. I guess their inspectors never asked to see a weight and balance?

 

I should probably know this but how would a load more than 600 pounds pull the helicopter out of long. CG?

[iChris]

I should probably know this but how would a load more than 600 pounds pull the helicopter out of long. CG?

 

The STC will include any pertinent limitations and operation procedures in a document referred to as the Flight Manual Supplement. This document is an official extension to your RFM. That supplement is the starting point to answer your question. Then you workout your W&B numbers (180 pound pilot 20 gal fuel) and find with a 600 pound external load you’ll have an aft CG near gross weight (2500lbs).

 

Example:

FAA APPROVED ROTORCRAFT FLIGHT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT for the Onboard Systems Cargo Hook Suspension System with Keeperless Cargo Hook. See REF

 

The supplement says the basic Flight Manual remains applicable and the maximum weight and CG of the combined helicopter and external load remains the same as the basic manual. The cargo hook station is given at 93.9” and Lateral -4.1”

 

Edited January 12, 2014 by iChris

[iChris]

The R44 is a great machine for long line operations. Even though the cargo hook STC states the maximum external load is 800 lbs, you will not be able to achieve that. Anything more than 600 lbs pulls the aircraft out of longitudinal CG. It's unfortunate because with 600 lbs you still have more payload available as stated above.

 

I have heard of a few operators with an approved RLCFM with a maximum hook weight of 800 lbs. I guess their inspectors never asked to see a weight and balance?

 

That’s within regulatory requirements as long as it references the not to exceed overall gross weight. You need to evaluate the actual manual first hand, it maybe in compliance.

 

Example:

Make and model: Robinson R44 II

N-Number: 107XXS

Class B load max weight 800 Lbs. not to exceed maximum gross weight 2,500 Lbs.

 

Example:

Placards MD500E/F - MD520N

Placard stating, ``External Load Limit 2000 Pounds'' installed on or next to cargo hook. (This weight is the attaching means’ maximum weight capacity that is greater than the aircraft’s actual lifting capacity).

 

8900.1

B. Determine Authorized Weights. Use the following methods to assess how

maximum authorized weights are determined:

 

1) Determine the maximum external-load weight for each load class for which the operator requested approval. Record the maximum weight in the “weight authorized” column on the reverse of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 8710-4, Rotorcraft External-Load Operator Certificate Application. This weight is the attaching means’ maximum weight capacity.

 

8900.1 REF: Paragraph 3-4129 - Evaluating a Rotorcraft-Load Combination Flight Manual

Edited January 12, 2014 by iChris

[PitchLink]

 

That’s within regulatory requirements as long as it references the not to exceed overall gross weight. You need to evacuate the actual manual first hand, it maybe in compliance.

 

Example:

Make and model: Robinson R44 II

N-Number: 107XXS

Class B load max weight 800 Lbs. not to exceed maximum gross weight 2,500 Lbs.

 

Example:

Placards MD500E/F - MD520N

Placard stating, ``External Load Limit 2000 Pounds'' installed on or next to cargo hook. (This weight is the attaching means’ maximum weight capacity that is greater than the aircraft’s actual lifting capacity).

 

8900.1

B. Determine Authorized Weights. Use the following methods to assess how

maximum authorized weights are determined:

 

1) Determine the maximum external-load weight for each load class for which the operator requested approval. Record the maximum weight in the “weight authorized” column on the reverse of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 8710-4, Rotorcraft External-Load Operator Certificate Application. This weight is the attaching means’ maximum weight capacity.

 

8900.1 REF: Paragraph 3-4129 - Evaluating a Rotorcraft-Load Combination Flight Manual

Chris, thanks for taking the time to address some of these items. I agree with you completely on how maximum authorized weights are determined and that you could in fact arrive at a weight that is greater than 600 lbs, however under 3-4129 C. (2) Center of Gravity considerations it states the RLCFM must contain a list of maximum airspeeds and weights for each load class demonstrated during operational flight checks.

 

It would be impossible to demonstrate a weight greater than 600 lbs, so why wouldn't the operator or inspector require the manual state a maximum external load weight of 600 lbs? A weight listed higher than that will only give the wrong impression that it would be possible as indicated by one of the pilots comments above, that he picked up 800 lbs.

 

I'm not being argumentative and would appreciate your insight. Thanks for your time.

[Nearly Retired]

And yet again we come up on the issue of what the book says versus what happens in the real world of Utility flying.

 

Question: Can an R-44 physically lift an 800 pound load on the hook?

 

Answer: I did a simple spreadsheet based on iChris's numbers and found that with a 180# pilot and 20 gallons of gas, the GW of the R-44 with an 800# load would be 2610 and the c.g. would be 98.7. Can a R-44 hover OGE at 2610? You tell me - I've never flown one. But I'd guess that it could, especially on a cool day at low altitude, based on my knowlege of every other helicopter I've flown.

 

Question: Would an R-44 with an 800# external load be "out of c.g." at 98.7 (which is pretty darn close to the mast, by the way).

 

Answer: Technically, yes. But hey, if it can hover at 2100# GW at a c.g. of 102.5 inches, it can probably hover at 2500# (or 2610#) at a c.g. of 102.5 inches. You might not want to fly forward at that c.g., but it would probably hover just fine.

 

Out in the dreaded Real World, helicopters don't always have little gauges that tell you how much load you're pulling on the cargo hook. Customers don't always have bathroom scales on-site so they can weigh the thing you're about to lift for them. Out in the real world, things are kind of...you know...gooey. Is that load really 600 pounds? Well...

 

I was talking with a friend of mine who does a lot of VR work. He told me of a particularly dicey and nerve-racking job he did recently. I can't say where or what he flies or what he was lifting this day. All he knew was that the customer estimated how much the load weighed, and he used those numbers when he took his external load plan to the FAA (it was in a city). Needless to say, two FAA guys from the FSDO were on-site for the lift. All went well, but my friend really had no idea of how much the item actually weighed. He was able to get the load into the air, but it took *every* bit of power and skill to get the job done. He said that if the wind had been even slightly from another direction it would not have worked. (Hey- I don't judge. It's why I don't do that type of work.)

 

Point being, 600 pounds is not a whole lot of weight. We can easily imagine a customer who has a "thing" that weighs 800 pounds that he needs lifted by helicopter. He contracts with an operator with an R-44 who tells him, "You know I can only lift 600 pounds. How much does your 'thing' weigh again?" And the customer goes, "It weighs...uhhh...600 pounds! Yeah, that's it, 600 pounds!" And the operator, as hard-up for money as every other helicopter operator on the planet goes, "Be right there!"

 

On the day of the lift the pilot skips breakfast, puts on his lightest sneakers, and takes a big poop just before takeoff. He arrives on-site with just 15 gallons of gas onboard, plus his wife brought along four 5-gallon jugs in the pickup so he can get back to base. The job gets done, but the customer and the operator both know (wink-wink) that the "thing" most likely weighed "slightly" more than 600 pounds. The operator goes away with enough money to make the payment to the bank on the little R-44 that he now refers to as "The Beast."

 

You guys still want a career in this business?

[iChris]

it states the RLCFM must contain a list of maximum airspeeds and weights for each load class demonstrated during operational flight checks.

 

That’s correct, those numbers are obtained from the FAA approved RFM Supplement. In the case of this example it states as follows:

 

I.1 - Max airspeed with external cargo 85 KIAS

 

I.2 – Type of operations: non-human cargo class B

 

I.3 – Max Cargo Hook Load 800 Lbs.

 

The maximum cargo hook capacity refers to the attaching means maximum weight capacity as demonstrated during certification of the cargo hook under Part 27 (See §27.865). The engineering and testing was submitted and an STC was issued approving the installation of the R44 cargo hook.

 

§1.1 - External-load attaching means: Means the structural components used to attach an external load to an aircraft, including external-load containers, the backup structure at the attachment points, and any quick-release device used to jettison the external load.

 

The 800 Lbs. determined in certification is required to be placard next to the cargo hook under §27.865[e]. However, the lifting capacity of the aircraft should never exceed the maximum gross weight.

 

Also note from §27.865[a] that an 800# hook rating could require the STC applicant to show that the External-load attaching means and airframe attachment points withstand a static load up to 2.5 times (2,000 Lbs.). Which also helps cover for shock loading.

 

It would be impossible to demonstrate a weight greater than 600 lbs, so why wouldn't the operator or inspector require the manual state a maximum external load weight of 600 lbs?

 

The inspector is looking for the attaching means maximum weight capacity as stated in the FAA approved RFM supplement. The STC is the official verification of the 800 Lbs. capacity.

 

8900.1) "Determine the maximum external-load weight for each load class for which the operator requested approval. Record the maximum weight in the “weight authorized” column on the reverse of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 8710-4, Rotorcraft External-Load Operator Certificate Application. This weight is the attaching means maximum weight capacity."

 

A weight listed higher than that will only give the wrong impression that it would be possible as indicated by one of the pilots comments above, that he picked up 800 lbs.

 

There should be no wrong impression. You should never exceed maximum gross weight. The actual maximum load weights must be computed prior to each operation. However, without a load cell that displays the external load weight or means of verifying the actual weight of the load, you may exceed the limits. That's just the way it is.

 

As quoted by Nearly Retired, it’s common for some helicopter models to easily lift loads above their gross weight, under certain conditions, while engine and other limits are within acceptable range.

 

Therefore, If you’re making a living in the external load sector, you should think about installing load cells in all your aircraft.

 

REF: Cargo Hook RFM Supplement

 

REF: Cargo Hook Supplemental Type Certificate

 

Why Load Cells:

LINK: CARGO HOOKS, SCALES & LIMITATIONS By Shawn Coyle

 

'>http://youtu.be/KHFfqn2lp5Y

Edited January 12, 2014 by iChris

[PitchLink]

Chris, thank you very much for the detailed information. I have a better understanding of the definition of attaching means now and where the 800 lbs came from. Using the the weight calculation example in 8900.1, table 3-122 I propose the following scenario for continued discussion:

 

Max gross weight - 2500 lbs

minus

Basic Empty Weight - 1510 lbs

minus

Fuel Required for Operation - 51 lbs (30 min @ 17 GPH)

minus

Pilot Weight - 150 lbs (minimum per POH)

equals

Maximum Authorized Weight - 789 lbs (Not attainable per Weight & Balance)

 

I understand 8900.1 requests the maximum external load capacity be the same as the attaching means weight capacity (800 lbs). This is the part I am failing to understand though. The cargo hook supplement states the CG of the aircraft with an external load attached must remain within the W&B limitations set by the manufacturer, regardless of the 800 lb limit. As shown in your W&B calculation above, we know it's impossible to lift more than 600 lbs with the hook. I understand the helicopter can lift more and sometimes we are unaware of the actual weight of the load we are trying to pick up, that is not what I'm debating.

 

When I had our RLCFM approved I had to demonstrate in flight what the maximum external load weight proposed in the RLCFM was. This is where I'm scratching my head, 800 is not an achievable external load weight because of CG, so why have a manual that says it is? Just because the instructions in 8900.1 say to do so?

 

I'm splitting hairs here I know, I just don't think pilots are being set up for success with a manual that allows for something that exceeds another limitation (CG). I know, do a weight and balance and it's all good, but we all know that doesn't always happen.

 

I am very appreciative of your time and information, glad I had you to bounce this off of. I'll let this one rest. Thanks again.

[aeroscout]

Excellent thread. I eagerly await each new post. Kudos to all the posts up to now.

[iChris]

I understand 8900.1 requests the maximum external load capacity be the same as the attaching means weight capacity (800 lbs). This is the part I am failing to understand though.

 

That's correct, you don't want your external load to be heavier than the holding capacity of the attachment point you're hooking up to.

 

In other words, if an attaching point could only hold 50 lbs., then its maximum load capacity is the same, 50 Lbs.

When I had our RLCFM approved I had to demonstrate in flight what the maximum external load weight proposed in the RLCFM was. This is where I'm scratching my head, 800 is not an achievable external load weight because of CG, so why have a manual that says it is? Just because the instructions in 8900.1 say to do so?

 

Again, the maximum cargo hook capacity refers to the attaching means maximum weight capacity. The R44 attaching means is in fact rated, and can handle, 800 pounds. Basically we’re talking about a structural limitation.

 

By analysis, test, or both that’s the FAA approved weight. The R44 rotorcraft external load attaching means and its data are already approved under an STC. You have an FAA approved RFM supplement that is as valid as any other FAA approved part of your RFM. It states as follows:

 

I.3 Cargo Hook Load

Maximum Cargo Hook loading is 800 lbs (363 kgs).

 

It also states that the following placard will be mounted on the belly of the R44 adjacent to the cargo hook attachment point in clear view of the ground support personnel:

 

EXTERNAL LOAD LIMIT = 800 LBS (363 KGS)

 

You’ll run into the same (hook limits vs. lifting) on other models like the MD500 @ 2,000#, Bell 206BIII @ 1,500#, etc.…

 

The FAA went beyond what was required in your case. Maybe because your company was new to the external load sector, they loaded you up to see if you were up to the task. The knowledge and test of skills outline under §133.23 and [c] is all that is normally required and in some cases even that is not required per §133.23[d].

 

The maximum airspeed and weights were demonstrated or determined during the Part 27 certification test by the cargo hook manufacturer.

 

3-4129 ISSUES AND GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING THE RLCFM.

A. An Acceptable Level of Report. An RLCFM is complete and acceptable if it reports all of the items enumerated in subparagraph 3-4133C, fulfills the requirements of part 27 subpart G or part 29 subpart G, and contains complete and accurate figures.

 

3-4133C

4) The RLCFM must have a list of the maximum airspeeds and weights demonstrated while performing operational flight checks conducted by the manufacturer or the operator.

Edited January 12, 2014 by iChris

[PitchLink]

 

The STC will include any pertinent limitations and operation procedures in a document referred to as the Flight Manual Supplement. This document is an official extension to your RFM. That supplement is the starting point to answer your question. Then you workout your W&B numbers (180 pound pilot 20 gal fuel) and find with a 600 pound external load you’ll have an aft CG near gross weight (2500lbs).

 

Example:

FAA APPROVED ROTORCRAFT FLIGHT MANUAL SUPPLEMENT for the Onboard Systems Cargo Hook Suspension System with Keeperless Cargo Hook. See REF

 

The supplement says the basic Flight Manual remains applicable and the maximum weight and CG of the combined helicopter and external load remains the same as the basic manual. The cargo hook station is given at 93.9” and Lateral -4.1”

 

Hi Chris, I'm still having a disconnect with this. As stated above -The supplement says the basic Flight Manual remains applicable and the maximum weight and CG of the combined helicopter and external load remains the same as the basic manual. The cargo hook station is given at 93.9” and Lateral -4.1”.

 

I have attached a weight & balance document outlining a scenario with a 150 lb pilot, 800 lb external load, and 40 lbs of fuel. Please see the attached file. 800 lbs is not attainable, no matter how creative you want to get with ballast.

 

 

That's correct, you don't want your external load to be heavier than the holding capacity of the attachment point you're hooking up to.

 

In other words, if an attaching point could only hold 50 lbs., then its maximum load capacity is the same, 50 Lbs.

 

Again, the maximum cargo hook capacity refers to the attaching means maximum weight capacity. The R44 attaching means is in fact rated, and can handle, 800 pounds. Basically we’re talking about a structural limitation.

 

By analysis, test, or both that’s the FAA approved weight. The R44 rotorcraft external load attaching means and its data are already approved under an STC. You have an FAA approved RFM supplement that is as valid as any other FAA approved part of your RFM. It states as follows:

 

I.3 Cargo Hook Load

Maximum Cargo Hook loading is 800 lbs (363 kgs).

 

It also states that the following placard will be mounted on the belly of the R44 adjacent to the cargo hook attachment point in clear view of the ground support personnel:

 

EXTERNAL LOAD LIMIT = 800 LBS (363 KGS)

 

You’ll run into the same (hook limits vs. lifting) on other models like the MD500 @ 2,000#, Bell 206BIII @ 1,500#, etc.…

 

The FAA went beyond what was required in your case. Maybe because your company was new to the external load sector, they loaded you up to see if you were up to the task. The knowledge and test of skills outline under §133.23 and [c] is all that is normally required and in some cases even that is not required per §133.23[d].

 

The maximum airspeed and weights were demonstrated or determined during the Part 27 certification test by the cargo hook manufacturer.

 

3-4129 ISSUES AND GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING THE RLCFM.

A. An Acceptable Level of Report. An RLCFM is complete and acceptable if it reports all of the items enumerated in subparagraph 3-4133C, fulfills the requirements of part 27 subpart G or part 29 subpart G, and contains complete and accurate figures.

 

3-4133C

4) The RLCFM must have a list of the maximum airspeeds and weights demonstrated while performing operational flight checks conducted by the manufacturer or the operator.

4) The RLCFM must have a list of the maximum airspeeds and weights demonstrated while performing operational flight checks conducted by the manufacturer or the operator.

 

How can an operator demonstrate a weight (800 lbs) that exceeds the weight and balance?

weight_balanceR22_R44 R44 II.pdf

[iChris]

Hi Chris, I'm still having a disconnect with this. As stated above -The supplement says the basic Flight Manual remains applicable and the maximum weight and CG of the combined helicopter and external load remains the same as the basic manual. The cargo hook station is given at 93.9” and Lateral -4.1”.

 

I have attached a weight & balance document outlining a scenario with a 150 lb pilot, 800 lb external load, and 40 lbs of fuel. Please see the attached file. 800 lbs is not attainable, no matter how creative you want to get with ballast.

 

4) The RLCFM must have a list of the maximum airspeeds and weights demonstrated while performing operational flight checks conducted by the manufacturer or the operator.

 

How can an operator demonstrate a weight (800 lbs) that exceeds the weight and balance?

 

Fortunately, you don’t have to do the analysis or testing. The cargo hook manufacturer has already done that and the number is officially 800 pounds. That weight can be determined by analysis or test. Again, basically we’re talking about a structural limitation.

 

However, if you wish to recreate a similar effort, you can place an R44 in the *Experimental Category and demonstrate that, in fact the R44 external load attaching means can structurally support 800#. Moreover, per §27.865 it must structurally support a static load 2.5 times that or some lower load factor approved under §§27.337 through 27.341. Don’t forget the load factor, if you’re in to rock climbing and you weighed in at 200 Lbs. would you climb on a rope with a maximum static load of 200 Lbs.?

 

§27.865 External loads.

 

(a) It must be shown by analysis, test, or both, that the rotorcraft external load attaching means for rotorcraft-load combinations to be used for nonhuman external cargo applications can withstand a limit static load equal to 2.5, or some lower load factor approved under §§27.337 through 27.341, multiplied by the maximum external load for which authorization is requested.

 

AC 27.865. § 27.865 (Amendment 27-11) EXTERNAL LOAD ATTACHING MEANS.

 

a. Explanation.

 

(1) If certification for external load operations is requested, the rule requires that the external load attaching means be substantiated by test or analysis for a limit static load equal to or greater than 2.5 times the maximum external load for which certification is requested. The factor of 2.5 times the maximum external load was established as a minimum strength requirement by Part 133 operations to account for loading effects of sling-load angles up to 30° from the vertical. Allowance for reducing the 30° angle is provided if substantiated.

 

REF: AC 27-1B

 

 

*Link Experimental Category: Research and development & Showing compliance with regulations

Edited January 12, 2014 by iChris

[Dragbrace]

To start with I agree with aeroscout, this has been one of the better threads in recent weeks. Another example is placing a multi-category machine into Restricted Category as per Part 137.

 

Most spray systems are placarded with weight limits that meet or exceed the capability of the aircraft they are installed on. Again, this is the limit of the system ( tanks, attach points etc.) as per the STC, not the capability of the aircraft. To complete the installation two log book entries must be made, !. That the installation has been made per the STC and Form 337. 2. A pilot must enter in the log book that the aircraft was test flown and found to be safe and airworthy in all maneuvers with XXX amount of Lbs. or Gallons in the system.

 

Just wanted to convey to our younger pilots that just because a piece of equipment installed on a helicopter is placarded with a weight limit it doesn't mean that the aircraft is capable of handling that limit.

[pilot#476398]

 

 

Just wanted to convey to our younger pilots that just because a piece of equipment installed on a helicopter is placarded with a weight limit it doesn't mean that the aircraft is capable of handling that limit.

 

 

 

Kinda like how each seat can take 300lbs, but that doesn't mean that the aircraft will fly with four 300lbs people in it.

[apiaguy]

I was agreeing with the direction ichris was going on this one... Now I'm not so sure.

I believe they meant you to be able to hook 800 lbs on it (under certain circumstances of course). The weight and balance conundrum is particularly interesting. I don't have a specific answer to help. But I do believe in the stc certification that 800 lb limit was more than just what the hook and attach structure could handle.

 

I fly the 300... The hook on it is good for 850 and you CAN do that.. You have to have a light ship to begin with (think utility configuration) 30 min fuel (30 lbs) a 170 lb pilot... Restricted category ops in the 300 allows max gross 2150.

There was no requirement by the FAA during 133 or 137 certification to demonstrate that hook weight... Only to calculate max for the day we flew the tests (temp/altitude)

Also no requirement in the logs to flight test with the max weight or gallons on the spray system. I have seen some old forms where operators did that but not required by my fsdo. Everything would depend on pilot weight and fuel and temp altitude...

The poh supplements and sometimes your operating certificate supplement will give you a max load number but my fsdo allowed me to make that up ..... It just couldn't exceed that 850 number placarded on the hook

I even put a hook on a 269b and made up a hook weight and placard based on experience (the 269b doesn't have a hook option or stc)

Lastly.... In older days the FAA used to authorize restricted category over gross operations ... That has now gone away.

[PitchLink]

As everyone is identifying in the information presented, the attaching means is structurally capable of handling 800 lbs. Chris did an excellent job presenting the information to support that. The limitations presented in the hook supplement state the helicopter must remain within the CG limits listed in the POH during external load operations. It has been identified by weight and balance that the largest external load an R44 could "lift" is approximately 600 lbs. That is not debatable.

 

This is the point I was trying to make and thank Chris again for discussing the issue with me.

[CropDusterMan]

I am just curious if anyone out there has done much long line work in the R44 and would be able share advice or experiences about doing it.

I work for an Ag company and we are looking at getting into aerial seeding and it seems like the only way to do that with an R44 is with a slung bucket from Isolair.

I would love any comments or advice about going down this road.

First off, does the company own an R44 or are they considering this as a platform? I am an aerial applicator in CA and we use the Bell 206-I think you will find that the R44 is very limited in this application when it comes to payload and performance, especially in issues of high DA...

Not sure about the 44, but Isolair make a dry system for the 206 that is hard mounted to the airframe and you operate under Part 137, not part 133, such as you would with a sling. I'd be looking in the direction of a 206 for that kind of work...does the company operate normal ag (wet applications) ops in Part 137? Are there plans to? If so, the 206 is the best ship for such, as you'll get the payload capacity and a decent usable boom length of 26-28feet...

cost per hour is higher than the 44, but it'll be more robust in the long run.

[fleman202]

All this info has really educated me on long line ops. I appreciate everyone's comments.

 

What is the best way to go about gaining long line experience? Anyone know of any long line operators that would give instruction in the Midwest?