Jump to content

R44 Autopilot


Astro
 Share

Recommended Posts

Both the R66 and the R44 utilize similar autopilots..............so that's even more pilots out of work!

 

Remember, Eric, the R44 can now take 2 couples up at a time, really maximizing profits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard the R44 has autopilot now. Anyone know what types of operations it will be used for?

Seriously, ever try to open a chart or operate an Ipad? Sure could use a second hand now and then and I would trust the autopilot for that. Wonder if it's good enough that when you realize your spinning around in disorientation that you could flip on the switch and make all things right again.....similar to the wings level feature of many fixed wing autopilots.

 

Anything well designed is prob safer than nothing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wonder if it's good enough that when you realize your spinning around in disorientation that you could flip on the switch and make all things right again.....similar to the wings level feature of many fixed wing autopilots.

 

Anything well designed is prob safer than nothing.

 

Highly unlikely. If Sikorsky can't make an autopilot that will do that in the UH-60 Frank probably can't either. Any autopilot in a helicopter will only work when engaged within specified parameters. If a pilot waits until they are in an unusual attitude outside those basic parameters, probably not going to work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A uh-60 is not the end all be all of cutting edge automation. No, the two axis autopilot in the 44/66 is probably not going to take you from inverted and 0 airspeed to straight and level 90kts. If you put the helicopter into that much of an usual attitude before engaging the autopilot you should probably be flying a desk, not a helicopter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A uh-60 is not the end all be all of cutting edge automation.

 

Nobody said it was. And actually, the M-Model is quite close in terms of cutting edge automation in helicopters. I've taken off, been vectored, entered a hold, intercepted a localizer, and flown an ILS without ever touching the controls. I'd say that's pretty cutting edge automation.

 

As a UH-60M instructor and graduate of the Robinson factory course, I'm going to go ahead and say that the UH-60M is light years beyond anything Frank will ever offer, so my assertion is indeed fact. If Sikorsky can't build an autopilot that will recover from a true unusual attitude resulting from fully developed spatial disorientation, Frank can't either.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh-60 m ip, I'm glad you love your airframe. I thought they were pretty cool when I flew them too. In some ways it's advanced, in many ways its outdated. Lots of other airframes do what you described, those features are not new. Frank is not making the autopilot by the way, nor is his company. It is designed to be a lightweight inexpensive upgrade to enhance safety and like all other autopilots it doesn't fix stupid.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uh-60 m ip, I'm glad you love your airframe. I thought they were pretty cool when I flew them too. In some ways it's advanced, in many ways its outdated. Lots of other airframes do what you described, those features are not new. Frank is not making the autopilot by the way, nor is his company. It is designed to be a lightweight inexpensive upgrade to enhance safety and like all other autopilots it doesn't fix stupid.

I'm confused. What part of my comments do you find in error? What exactly are you arguing? Or do you just like commenting?

 

Are you saying that Robinson is making/will make an autopilot that can recover from a spatial disorientation induced unusual attitude? Are you saying that the autopilot of a Robbie tops that of a UH-60M? Are you saying that the UH-60M is not an advanced helicopter?

 

I was initially responding to Goldy's valid question about an ability of the autopilot and why the capability was highly unlikely, contrasting the systems of a half million dollar piston with a multi-million dollar, two pilot, IFR, glass cockpit twin, finding that if the latter can't do it (as proven in testing and a recent real world incident) the former probably can't either.

 

Kinda seems like you're just commenting without any attempt at an actual point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was arguing your point about the blackhawk and poking a little fun at your reverence of it. As far as recovering from unusual attitudes, my point was that even a simple system will recover if you allow it to before reaching an unsafe attitude. Godly did not specify how extreme a situation the autopilot would need to recover, and obviously all systems have limits. I do not know what the limits of the system installed in the 66 and 44 are, but it will recover the pitch and roll to a degree when the cyclic is released. Much more advanced than a trim system, but not on par with single pilot ifr helos. look it up, its a great little system that I think will increase safety. No, its not as good as your beloved 60. Having a glass cockpit dual pilot ifr "cutting edge" helicopter is great, but you can still make bad decisions that it can't fix. Relax.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was arguing your point about the blackhawk and poking a little fun at your reverence of it. As far as recovering from unusual attitudes, my point was that even a simple system will recover if you allow it to before reaching an unsafe attitude. Godly did not specify how extreme a situation the autopilot would need to recover, and obviously all systems have limits. I do not know what the limits of the system installed in the 66 and 44 are, but it will recover the pitch and roll to a degree when the cyclic is released. Much more advanced than a trim system, but not on par with single pilot ifr helos. look it up, its a great little system that I think will increase safety. No, its not as good as your beloved 60. Having a glass cockpit dual pilot ifr "cutting edge" helicopter is great, but you can still make bad decisions that it can't fix. Relax.

 

Relax? I should probably say that to you. You have not yet made an actual statement that counters anything I have said or provided insight to any reader of this thread that may actually look to glean some wisdom from it.

 

Goldy actually did specify how extreme of a situation to consider. He said exactly, "spinning around in disorientation that you could flip on the switch and make all things right again." That doesn't just imply, but in fact is, the definition of fully developed spatial disorientation with the accompanying unusual attitude. After the UH-60M incident in the gulf, it is not difficult to discern the foundation of this entire thread.

 

As for your description of the R44/R66 autopilot, "it will recover the pitch and roll to a degree when the cyclic is released," well I would hope so but that's a pretty low threshold to meet considering a basic trim system will do that, much less an autopilot.

 

My making accurate statements about an aircraft does not entitle you to attempt to demean or mischaracterize my statements by saying "your beloved 60." The abilities of and even facts concerning an aircraft have little to do with one's affection for it. Indeed, I have only posted facts to lend understanding to the reader and not Blackhawk selfies. I think my very first assertion was in fact one stating that the UH-60M could NOT recover from such a situation, yet is still by any reasonable definition an advanced helicopter.

 

That is what the reader should take from this. You cannot allow a situation to develop to the point beyond which control may be physically regained by you, because the aircraft is unlikely to be able to help you out either. While the traditional "delaying of intuitive reactions" is still sound advice, it is within this window where spatial disorientation is recognized but control not yet lost that the flight systems are to be utilized, not once you have exhausted all your personal mental and physical capabilities.

 

I must ask once again, do you have an actual point or are you just commenting for the sake of commenting? What portion or portions of any of my statements do you find invalid? Your only actual statement concerning the parameters thus far began with, " I do not know what the limits of the system installed in the 66 and 44 are....."

 

I agree, you do not know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've made my points, and did so without getting in a tizzy. Relax.

 

Disagreed. I think you were very underhanded, yet obvious, about your tizzy.

 

Still interested if you actually have anything that might be of benefit to someone though. And that's being serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't the Agusta A109 have one of those "save me" buttons on its auto-pilot? It'll bring you to a level attitude and steady airspeed...?

 

Sitting next to my buddy who just came from a company where he flew the A109. His short answer was that it does but that it is still within certain parameters.

 

I would be interested to know of any autopilot that could truly recover from something similiar to what the UH-60M was subjected to in the gulf. Based upon the perhaps limited knowledge I have of accelerometers, gyros, AHRS type units, etc., that such a system would depend on I would be very surprised if there were. I know that even in many of the large aircraft (Airbus, Boeing) the flight director/autopilot will disengage at certain attitudes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...