Experimentals

[Guest pokey]

Wait...what?

 

 

 

Dude, God is trying to tell you something.

 

And you're not listening very well.

 

Please, switch careers. Now!

 

Before it's too late for you.

 

It might be already.

I had advised him a while back not to piss off his mechanic,,, OH WAIT !! he IS the mechanic

[yzchopper]

Wow,

So that's what the little red button is used for... There was an electrical foreman that I worked with that told his crew that a pilot pushes this little red button all the time when he flies, cause the turbine engine in helicopters quit at least 3-4 times during flight... I'm still shaking my head in disbelief that he said something that he knew nothing about!!!

[Nearly Retired]

Pokey about Avbug:

I had advised him a while back not to piss off his mechanic,,, OH WAIT !! he IS the mechanic

 

 

...Which might explain why he's always so pissed off all the time :-/

[Guest pokey]

Pokey about Avbug:

 

 

...Which might explain why he's always so pissed off all the time :-/

I don't think he is pissed off all the time, just when he thinks he knows everything---OK,, I stand corrected

 

edited for this additional thought: I am waiting for him to tell me that engine failure is never the fault of the mechanic

Edited December 13, 2013 by pokey

[WolftalonID]

Damn.... My flight school has been in operation for decades with students and low time CFI's trying to kill helicopters the whole time......and only one engine failure in flight that landed safely with an auto from 45 ft.

 

50 engine failures........I wouldnt trust my mechanic any more....unless someone has been cowboying the sh*t out of the helicopters flown.

[adam32]

 

I've had over 50 engine failures to date.

 

 

Maybe you oughta can those "certified" engines and start using an APU or Honda Accord engine...

[iChris]

 

I've had over 50 engine failures to date.

 

Some flight test pilot types could count all failures to include: failures during ground run-ups, maintenance/test runs on the ground and in a hover. Engine failures during their experience with experimental engines, fuel control units, and aircraft during controlled hovering and controlled flight over a testing area were engine problems were expected.

 

Maybe the number could run that high. However, I would guess not all were general inflight engine failures between point A and B.

 

Numbers that high would prompt further explanation.

 

I’ve never had an engine failure in a single engine aircraft. However, I’ve had four (OEI) single engine failures in twin-engine helicopters.

 

So you can also count in all your twin-engine, OEIs

Edited December 13, 2013 by iChris

[pilot#476398]

 

I've had over 50 engine failures to date.

 

 

How many forced landings have you had?

[avbug]

50 engine failures........I wouldnt trust my mechanic any more....unless someone has been cowboying the sh*t out of the helicopters flown.

 

 

Those have been in a variety of aircraft. Of over 80 different aircraft types I've flown, more than half of those engine failures were in large radial engines on multi engine aircraft.

 

I've seen more than a few shutdowns on APU powerplants, however.

 

How many forced landings have you had?

 

 

 

A few.

[superstallion6113]

The Solar T62 is used in the CH-53 as an APU. It's a weak, finicky 110hp fixed shaft engine designed to spin a sandwich generator. Rpm limit on it in the 53 was 110% and 621 deg C exhaust gas temp limit. The solid shaft turbine was prone to failure under high loads, like running the engine start system for longer periods of time, like during engine compressor cleanings. I had the shaft on a t62 break and send the compressor wheel through the housing and the APU fairing more than once. It's super finicky. The parts on it are cheap and failure prone, but our stuff was old. But still I can't imagine flying anything that's powered primarily by that engine more than a few inches off the ground.

[aeroscout]

Human powered helicopters have never had an engine failure.

 

 

 

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2009/09/yuri_i_01.jpg

[MLH]

"The Solar T62 is used in the CH-53 as an APU."

 

That would be the T-63T-27 which was designed for short duty cycle. Don't let the similar model number fool you, it's a completely different design than it's more reliable cousin the T-62T-32 which is used in the Helicycle.

 

Do an NTSB accident search on the Helicycle. In thousands of hours of fleet time, there's not a single instance of compressor, turbine wheel or shaft failure.

[turbo]

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m537/turboeddie/3772289af4190f01207d4c9a193db66a.jpg

 

Ok I think I'll buy one.

[WolftalonID]

After reading this thread, and looking into these....I just realized these guys are only a few miles from my house! I am going to go check em out! This has got to be fun!

[MLH]

"OK I think I'll buy one"

 

These guy did: http://www.scionuas.com/ They upped the gross weight from 850 to 1200lbs. without any drive train modifications and redesigned the tail rotor to meet the spec. of 40 knot sideways flight into a 15 knot headwind.

 

 

Here's one you can buy ready to fly: http://www.juanr.com/FOR%20SALE/For%20Sale.html

[Jaybee]

haha..

 

You should really know the meaning of words before using them...

"divest"

It really lowers the intelligence of your post

 

heh, so...

 

"rid oneself of something that one no longer wants or requires..."

 

or in this example rid oneself of only a primary level of education.

 

[superstallion6113]

"The Solar T62 is used in the CH-53 as an APU."

 

That would be the T-63T-27 which was designed for short duty cycle. Don't let the similar model number fool you, it's a completely different design than it's more reliable cousin the T-62T-32 which is used in the Helicycle.

 

Do an NTSB accident search on the Helicycle. In thousands of hours of fleet time, there's not a single instance of compressor, turbine wheel or shaft failure.

The t-62t-27 is what I remember being in the 53e and everything I'm looking up verifies that. Another version if the t-62t, the -11 is what is in the ch-46e helos in currently working on. Marginally reliable as an APU, surprised to see it used as a primary engine.

[tradford]

WolftalonID, if you do visit them, please report back what you find. I've been looking for an objective comparison of the Mosquito and Helicycle and I haven't had much luck. Interestingly, I don't see much in the way of bad press on either one - at least not from folks who have flown one. The closer I get to the end of my PPL journey, the more important the issue becomes.

[tradford]

Here is a somewhat dated, though detailed comment from a Helicycle owner. I imagine the machine has only evolved since this was posted. If this gentleman is still flying and unscathed, I would count that as a positive sign. I'm guessing that landing a turbine helicopter would raise some eyebrows and getting it close to pump might be a challenge!

 

I have only put 5 hours on mine. With that said, I have not flown a helicopter in 10 years other than 2 hours of taining in a R22 recently. I have 80 hours TT in helicopters and found the Helicycle pretty easy to fly.

The startup and engine operation in flight are dirt simple and it performs exceptionally. I am 185 lbs and with full fuel I hover with very little power. In a normal descent I just about have to bury the collective to come down. It has more power than you will ever need.

My first flight was a 3.2 hour X-country to fly it home. 1 hour and 10 minutes of flying time burns about 16 gallons leaving you with legal VFR reserve. I don't like flying more than an hour anyway, so that is fine, but if fuel is scare along your route you may have to land at a gas station that has kerosene.

My biggest gripe is the visibility. You have a HUGE blind spot at 10 & 2 that is very annoying. I am re-padding my seat to make it lower which will help a little to look out the side, but I really want to chop the top off and build an arcrylic top instead. The only other real problem is the fact that the fuel tank filler hole is sized for a standard fuel nozzle and will not accept a JetA nozzle - even with a cheater nozzle attached. If you are on the road you need to carry a funnel or you will have a problem if the FBO does not have one. One other thing - If you are accustomed to flying a 22 you will find that it has much better tail rotor authority than the Helicycle. The Helicycle is similar to a Brantly in tail rotor performance.

Other than that, it is hard to fault this machine, especially since it is a turbine for less than $50k and has real world maintenance that is as good - if not better - than a certified machine. The fuel burn at 13-14 GPH is a non issue IMO. Kerosense is about $3.80 per gallon anywhere and 100LL is about your only reasonable choice in a piston machine. 100LL will be at least 25-30% more than Kerosense and JetA is almost always $1 cheaper per gallon the 100LL at most FBOs. So, a piston machine would have to burn less than 10 GPH to be as efficient from a $ standpoint and then you still have to deal with mixing oil in a 2-stroke and dealing with possibly EGT limitations, needle settings, jetting, spark plugs.etc. The only 4-stroke I am aware of flying in numbers is the Rotorway and I have not heard a whole bunch of good things to say about reliability there with valve problems, cooling systems, secondary failures, etc. To me, the turbine seems to be the best answer at this time.

With that said, Doug S has been working on a Yamaha 4-stroke replacemnt for the Helicycle. It flew, but it just does not make enough power. I think he is working on a turbo solution to help. I would be curious to see the total weight. I know fuel burn will be considerably less, so maybe some of the additional weight could be traded for fuel.

[tradford]

Here's one from the Mosquito XET perspective.

 

Replying to this thread a little late but I thought I would reply as I don't see anything else from an XET owner prespective. I agree 100% with most of the other guys in that you really can't go wrong with both ships, they both have there advantages and disadvantages. I looked at and sat in a helicycle although I have not had the oppourtunity to fly one. I have flown all the mosquito models except the air and I also have flown the safari and rotorway kit helicopters.

 

The mosquito is BY far the best flying helo out of the ones I have flown and quite accurate in comparing it to the Schweizer 269, in its very stable and predictable. The XET is even better, the tail rotor authority is awsome, the thing auto's like a mapleleaf. I looked at a super nice helicycle for sale about 3 years ago, and almost bought it. One reason I went with the XET over the helicycle is even thought the XET is a bit smaller in my opinion its a bit more comfortable and eaiser to see out of. The XET comes stock with MGL EFIS and even though the smaller T62 2A1's we use are harder to find than the -32's the helicycle uses, there not as hard to find as people make it out to be. I would say both helicopters fuel burn estimates are a bit on the lean side, from what I know about the XET and talking to helicycle owners, but as you know there is a lot of variation with turbines with altitude and how you fly, I'm personally seeing 9-10 per hour than the advertised 8-9 but hey what's one gallon, still a cheap great running turbine.

 

The auto rotation characteristics were important to me and no one at helicycle at the time had any data or proof of what it would do while mosquito's are routinely videoed over and over doing auto's to the ground. NOW, that being said, I found a very recent video of a guy doing auto's in the Memphis Area in a helicycle and he seems to have it dialed in and doing a fantastic job, so YES a helicycle will AUTO too, LOL. Since I decided to build the XET is an easier build, but the 300 hours you see on the mosquito estimates is for the 2 stroke XE's, the XET is atleast twice that if not a bit more due to more complex engine installation and more involved 24v wiring. As more and more XET's get built the time will go down as more and more parts are being built on the factory's CNC machine. While there are more total mosquito's, helicycle has more turbine's than XET's as the XET is still only 3 or so years old. there are currently 5 flying, mine being XET#4 but there are atleast 8 that I know of being built and 2-3 that should be flying in the next few months so the XET community is growing.

 

Good thing is airframe and and most running gear parts are the same as on the 2 stroke models so part's availability is excellent, as the factory in trenton FL is averaging about one helicopter a week, most being the XEL ultralight legal 2 stroke models.

[WolftalonID]

I can report what I find, however, I am an infant comparatively speaking to helicopters. I can not really compare them to much of anything, but I could offer my thoughts to my opinion of them as they are.

I will try and take photos of them if they are available to see.

[yzchopper]

When I trained at Silverhawk I got to meet BJ the owner of the Helicycle, when he came into have breakfast at the cafe. He was a great guy and from what I can remember the whole helicopter was a very simple and light weight design. The turbine startup seemed to be very simple as well. It was very stable in a hover. When he took off, that helicopter had tons of power (by this I mean I did not hear any sound from the turbine like it was under a large load) and it had lots of lift. One of my instructors did a video flight in the R22 following BJ while he flew the Helicycle the day he died. It was a sad day for all when we had found out he had passed away. If I had to choose a kit I would more than likely choose the Helicycle. I do not know nor have I seen a Mosquito up close or even seen one fly in person like I have the Helicycle. Having said that, it does not mean I would not count out the Mosquito helicopter.

[tradford]

Thanks YZ - can you elaborate a bit on "the day he died" part? The timeline suggests that perhaps the R22 came back alone.

[yzchopper]

The two helicopters went out and did the filming of BJ flying and came back to Caldwell airport. BJ left after fueling and went back out to do some of his own fliming while he was flying. He never returned. A search for BJ found his helicopter upside down in about 4feet of water and the only visible sign was of a skid sticking up out of the water. The thought was he got to low to the water while filming himself flying and he hit the water and immediately went upside down. In-conclusion he was presumed knocked out and unconscious and therefore drowned.

[tradford]

Man, that's tragic! Guess it's hard to blame that one on the helicopter.