Experimental Helicopters

[Dragonfly]

Curious to know if there are any Rotorway 162F owners out there willing to offer there testimonials?

 

Or non owners willing to 'bag' them!

[yzchopper]

I'm not an owner but would like to be someday. I would definitely buy the 162F before I bought any other kit helicopter. Although I have looked at the Helicycle with the T62 turbine in it. Lots of power.It's only a one seater and the size is small. I live in the town where this kit is made and I have seen it up close and let me just say that with the R22 next to it the R22 is a lot bigger helicopter. I have not heard a lot of negative remarks on the 162F. I've heard more negative remarks on the R22 than on this kit. From what I was told by one owner is that this kit flys just like the R22. Very sensitive and very responsive, not very forgiving when you make mistakes. I have gone to the factory and the 162F looks to be a very well built helicopter (I say this because of my mechanical background). If you would like to check out the Helicycle you can go to www.helicycle.com Good luck

 

 Steve  rotorheadsmiley

[flingwing206]

Hi Dragonfly,

 

The 162 is a nice design, but the kit as it comes from the factory has some deficiencies (the most notable one being the main drive system). They are fixable by using "aftermarket" parts.

 

The engine is a great design, and should prove to be reliable. The tail-rotor drive is controversial - a long V-belt, which if all pulleys and tensioners are meticulously maintained should be reliable, but in the real world has had a high failure rate.

 

Like all kits, it is only as good as whoever builds it. For a skilled craftsman, expect at least 600 hours of work. For a handyman, double that.

 

Do a search on Rotorway 162 - you'll find a ton of info out there!

[RDRickster]

See this thread...

 

http://www.verticalreference.com/VRForum....;hl=162

 

After researching your options, you will probably realize it will be cheaper and more beneficial to purchase a used helicopter.

[yzchopper]

It may be of benefit to purchase a used kit helicopter but the down side to that is if the helicopter is more than 50% complete you can not legally work on the helicopter. If you purchase the kit less than 50% complete than you can work on it to do your own maintenance. You get a certificate from the Rotorway factory when the helicopter is completed stating you are the builder and have completed the maintenance phase during the building and you are certified to do you own maintenance. Good luck

 

 Steve rotorheadsmiley

[Dragonfly]

Thanks to all those of you who have replied, I appreciate your thoughts and comments.

 

The Rotorway 162F does not have large numbers here in Aus, with about 50 purchased and 30 completed.  From those 30 there has been no incidents or accidents, so that in itself is not anything to be assured by, however it is a positive thing.

 

Many of those I have spoken to believe that no matter which way you go you will always find those negatives and positives, so at the end of the day it boils down to the almighty dollar and the time you have.  And here in Australia that dollar is always compared to the US Dollar - so at 77cents per dollar, things are looking up from last year where it has been as low as 52 cents per dollar.

 

Dragonfly

[AeronauticallyInclined]

Homebuilt What do ya'll think of it? This is the first time I have seen it, pretty sharp looking though. My only complaint is that its kinda pricey for a homebuilt when compared to Rotorway.

 

:cheers:

[Lu Zuckerman]

To: AeronauticallyInclined

 

The Hummingbird in its’ original guise was the Sikorsky S-52 or HO5-S.  We had them in the Coast Guard back in the 1950s and I found them to be under powered mainly because of the extra equipment specified by the Navy which was the purchasing agent for the type and which was used by the Coast Guard, the Navy, and the Marine Corps.  Sikorsky wanted to put a bigger engine in it to compensate for the weight increase but the Navy said no because they had a lot of engines in their inventory and they were used in Bell Helicopters.  There were so many mission-related problems that the Navy and Marine Corps turned them over to the Coast Guard and we put them into long-term storage in CGAS Traverse City, Michigan

 

:unclesam:  :down: This is Pierre.  He just found out that his busty former student was half way through a sex change operation.

[iflytandemrotor]

 I would buy it but it doesn't come with a 6 disk in dash changer and sunroof.  :laugh:

[Jesse James]

Back in the early 70's I flew a (I believe) an S-52-3, it had a 245 hp franklin engine. I think it's the same thing Lu is talking about. I never flew it much, but never did care for it. Jesse

[warpig]

i dont know if it was that homebuilt but i have heard of a few others being deathtraps.

[Lu Zuckerman]

I was in an HO5-S that just came out of maintenance.  The RFI filter was installed backwards in one of the magnetos.  This device was a formed sheet of plastic with one surface covered in an aluminized material.  The RFI filter was to be installed with the plastic surface towards the points.  In installing it backwards the aluminized coating was dangerously near the points.

 

We were about 200 feet AGL when the aluminized surface contacted the points on the magneto and shorted the magneto out.  The engine was incapable of maintaining powered flight with one magneto and lucky for us we were aligned with a very long taxiway.  We made a run on landing at about fifty miles per hour.  The blades were very light and had little inertia so autos had to be done just like a Robbie.  Very quick response by the pilot.

 

 

:unclesam:  :down: This is Pierre. He is despondent after learning that his female student with the large breasts was half way through a sex change.  He has decided to train only men.

[Heli-Ops]

Lu - Isnt this looking very close to the old Skeeter or Roe Skeeter, or whatever they used to call it.

 

Heli Ops

[georden]

i know it probobly isn't possible to receive dual insturction in a homebuilt helo (eg exec 162) but is it possible to complete the required solo hours for a commercial licence in a homebuilt? just asking because from the information i've read that a helicopter such as an exec would cost about half as much per hour as a R22 and since ultimately i'd like to own my own helicopter it seems like a way to save money on training and put it towards that dream.

[deadstick]

Sure you can receive dual in an experimental.  You just can't use an experimental to provide flight instruction for hire.

[georden]

i was thinking more along the lines of most instructors probobly wouldn't want to fly in an experimental, but i don't know anything about it really.

[Robbie Driver]

You coudnlt pay me to get in a homebuilt/kit.

 

RD

[Retread]

While it would be legal to recieve instruction in your homebuilt, as you summize it would be difficult to flind a flight instructor to fly with you.  I know I certainly won't instruct in a homebuilt and I don't know any CFI's who would.  As far as your solo work is concerned, you see, your CFI must certify in their endorsement that they have given instruction to you and you are competent to fly specific models of aircraft.  If you find a CFI who will sign you off to fly an aircraft he\she has not given you instruction in then run.

[jimbo2181]

Rotorway actually trains people all the way up to their private in the 162.  I don't konw the specifics but Ive done 3 students in the R22 who needed their night hours.  (rotorway isnt night certified)  So you can definately do instruction in the rotorway, I would talk to the guys their and see if they would also do your commercial.

[CJ Eliassen]

Right after I got my CFI a guy I knew became a Mini-500 dealer.  He has an R-22 and wanted to start a school for buyers.  He wanted me to become familiar with the mini-500 so I could sign people off to solo in their helicopter.  I said no way.  They need to get their private in the R-22, then I will give them pointers for the mini-500.  After I saw the first run-up of the mini-500 in person, I said no way I am getting in that thing.  

 

Also, after talking with Frank Robinson and him telling me all the requirements that his blades must go through to be certified, and the number of changes they had to make because of a part failure during testing, I don't want to fly anything that is sold as a kit because someone somewhere flew one once.

[georden]

kinda off topic but execs have been around for long enough to sort out the bugs and have flown more than once by more than one person. after reading through some of the NTSB reports about exec crashes only 1 aircraft that i read about crashed due to a construction defect (blade delaminated in flight), the rest were all pilot error.

 

some homebuilts advertised in the back of magazines are a bit sketchy and a smart person would steer clear of these until they have proven to be properly designed.

 

the only reason why i could see a homebuilt being less safe would be incompetance of the builder/owner in contruction and maintennance. if both are done properly and a proven design are chosen i don't see why there would be a noticable difference in safety.

[CJ Eliassen]

Georden,

 

When there is a change in blade design on an R-22, the process involved is quite lengthy.  When rotorway changes a blade design, they can do so at a whim.  So, the second they change something, the design is no longer proven.  An exec owner can drill a hole in their blades and hang tinsel from it and be perfectly legal.  This is why I will never fly, nor instruct in a homebuilt.  

 

C.J.

[jimbo2181]

they may only have one crash due to mechanical on the NTSB but there are several others that have been made in the phoenix area.  there was a tail rotor failure at A39 and because the helicopter did not have a detent position there was no way to eliminate the torque.  they had an engine failure while flying from kchd to p18 which was landed safely, then the next day the same helicopter had another failure and had to be towed back to stellar.

 

If you ever hear one go by and check out how it is put together you would prolly crap your pants.  The engine is running at 7800 rpm i believe, they have a three belt system running the tail rotor, and their are no pushrods, everything is cables.

 

my two cents, dont be fooled by the ntsb reports

[georden]

true i haven't seen an exec up close. i was kinda caught up in the idea of owning my own helicopter and i can afford an exec, but not an R22 or other certified machine.

 

i still believe that a well designed homebuilt should be just as safe as a certified helicopter, whether the designs currently on the market are well designed i guess is the issue.

[fulldownauto]

I was also considering the Rotorway because of it's attractive price and the ability to do my own maint work.

 

I had heard many opinions about the product, many were of the 'Friends don't let friends fly Rotorway' type. Though these seemed to remind me of those anti-Robinson people out there.

So I considered the facts through searches of the NTSB database. I've read every Robinson accident report since its begining, include those 13 rotorsystem failures that promted the FAA investigation.

Now the Rotorway only flys mabey (exact numbers unknown) 1% percent or fewer of the hours the Robinson does, so that has to be considered.

Robinson fatal accidents: 122 (many with two-four people on board)

Rotorway fatal accidents: 7 (only 1 person on board in all cases)

Only one of the Rotorway accidents is attributed to the builder building the helicopter incorrectly, and none of them due to the manufacuring processes.

There are quite a few non-fatal accidents that have been attributed to builder error, however.

Having watched 'A Helicopter Is Born' I was able to learn much about the building of the helicopter. It also included a factory tour, which very much resembeled the Robinson factory, with all the CNC machines, crystal measuring machines and such. The blade assemblly area was shown, unlike Robinson, which I understand is either secret or too sensitive to be open. It appears as though the quality control processes are the same, but I would be interested to see detailed builder logs to see what kind of quality departs the factory.

So it seems that overall saftey concerns should be in the building of the helicopter, not the quality of the product. I believe if the Rotorway is built by an experienced builder, properly inspected, maintained and flown, it can be a safe machine.

As with the Robinson and it's issues, it's the same thing, IF-THEN.

Robinson: "IF flown within established parameters (no low G, excessive imputs etc.) THEN can be flown saftely"

Rotorway [above also applies] "IF built within established parameters THEN can be flown safely"

 

I'll add in a disclaimer, I've only flown certified helicopters, including Robinson products, and never flown Rotorway, but simply trying to provide my view of them.

 

Thanks,

 

James