Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Well, not really.

 

I was looking for the fuel consumption rate for the R-22, but can't seem to find the info.

 

Might someone know the fuel consumption rate fer the Robbie?

 

Later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't find it. What page?

 

Later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, not there.

 

Later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, guess what? I found it.

 

AT THE ROBINSON WEBSITE !!!

 

7-10 gph.

 

Source:

The Beta II is generously equipped and offers a wide selection of options. Standard features include a precision-engineered RPM governor, a durable rotor brake, an auxiliary fuel system for added versatility and increased range, plus a high-quality voice-activated intercom. The Beta II's clean aerodynamic design allows a high cruise speed up to 110 mph and an average fuel consumption of only 7 to 10 gallons per hour. The cabin provides comfortable seating for two with removable dual controls on the passenger side.

 

I am a Super Genius!

 

Later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For both that made the smart azz comments about the fuel burn being in the POH......It's not, and you won't find any reference for it in the POH. It's not in there, because it's not required. And because of liability, RHC it's surely NOT going to give any accurate reference of what it is. It's like only demonstrating the x-wing component to 17 knots--it's all that's required.

 

So in answer to your question, figure an average of 6.5-8.5 for a HP, A, or B; then 7-9.5 for a BII......and that's from low to high power settings respectfully. And 53 knots will keep you airborne for the longest amount of TIME, 83 knots will get you the furthest DISTANCE on a tank of gas.

 

Rough example:

 

53 knots

~7 GPH = 4 hrs

212 nm

 

83 knots

~9 GPH = 3 hrs

252 nm

 

So the first example is good for photographers, video'rs, patrol'rs, etc; and the second for x/c'rs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That pretty well matches my experience in our R22 Beta II. Actual burns are around 7.5 gph at 70 KIAS with 2 on board, and about the same at 80-85 if I'm by myself. I use 10 for flight planning cause I'm a big chicken...

 

Edited: that's at 1,000-1,500 MSL and 19" MP with 2 on board, maybe 18" if solo.

 

So in answer to your question, figure an average of 6.5-8.5 for a HP, A, or B; then 7-9.5 for a BII......and that's from low to high power settings respectfully. And 53 knots will keep you airborne for the longest amount of TIME, 83 knots will get you the furthest DISTANCE on a tank of gas.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All,

 

I must admit, I was slighty amused at people referring me to the POH to find this data! :)

 

For both that made the smart azz comments about the fuel burn being in the POH......It's not
Of course, my original question (what is his data source) was rhetorical, knowing that this data is not provided in the POH.

 

For this reason, 'experience' and inflight testing in every aircraft are the only ways to get reliable data for this aircraft.

 

Witch, good job finding that reference from the Robinson website, but I wouldn't trust a 'manufacturers sales pitch' when planning my flights! No, the only reliable data is dipstick testing and old fashioned calculations over a period of time.

 

Delorean's figures are pretty much what we all expect. He makes an important distinction between the different types of flying and their different fuel burn rates.

 

That being said however....

 

What are you going to do if you fly an aircraft you have never flown before (and have no 'self-tested' data for)? Remember Witch's figure of 7-10 gallons is remarked by RHC as being an AVERAGE figure. This would suggest that they (Robinson) have found results either side of this range. I would hate to go on a cross-country flight thinking I was on the 'good' end of the norm, only to find that I was on the 'Gas Hog' end!

 

Well, there is actally one reference to fuel burn in the POH. This is what I use as my 'unknown aircraft' figure. Its very conservative, but that's fine by me! What page?...well, that's a secret!

 

Joker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now wait a minute!

 

SN-15 (4) (b ) just tells you not to go below a quarter tank. It says nothing about fuel consumption.

 

I figure that if I factor a rate of 10gph, then long distance flights would be a bit safer because I could plan on going so far on so much fuel. This info might also be useful for say, a ferry flight?

 

When I flew the Cherokee, I had to plan for landing with at least 45 minutes of fuel remaining. This fuel consumption rate information was helpful in deciding to re-fuel in Reno. Otherwise I figure I'd have gone dry at about Placerville.

 

Gas good!

 

Later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The beta 2 I have flown pretty consistently burned about 8 unless we were doing a lot of hovering or confined lz's

 

I also plan with 10. I would rather end up refeuling in podunk city than emergency landing in a field just outside of the big city i was heading for. Re-feuling doesn't seem like a hassle to me when i consider the other options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 gallons is a good safe number to plan by, but it doesn't burn that much.

 

The longest I've flown is 3.2 on a full tank of gas, and we still had about a 1/4 tank left when we landed. This was with a light student, but we were still at max gross taking off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hey guys,

 

You will find a referance to fuel burn in the emergency section (I think, I do not have the aircraft hand book in front of me) The part with the low fuel light says five minuets of fuel or one gallon. lets see E6B says twelve gallons per hour. I think that is padded a little which is why I use ten GPH.

 

Best regards,

 

Boomer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a little less than a BH412, but also a little slower. The 412 burns 800 pounds/hour, pretty much regardless of what you do. For the arithmetically challenged, that's roughly 120 gallons/hour. You can reduce that a little by going high and reducing power, but when you do you reduce range more than you reduce fuel burn. I've never seen one burn less than 750 lb/hr in flight, and I've had reason to check the burn very closely on a number of occasions. Of course, you can't carry 10 or so hogbodies in an R22, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The little pink Lycoming owners manual (for the ho-360 series engines) is a pretty cool little reference guide and has charts for just about everything, including fuel burn during different pwr settings and so on. It's worth a thumb through if you can find one, thats really the only published place you can get burn times from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This old thread!

 

OK, I didn't persue this thread because I don't have access to the right documents. I did ask someone to check the information for me, before I went public but I got no reply. So I will go public now. Maybe someone can share the information.

 

I am sure that there are consumption charts for the R22 (rather Lycoming engine) in the Lycoming Engine Operators Handbook pg. 3-50A. Can someone who has access to one look it up?

 

I think this is the same book that Heliboy refers to in the previous post.

 

Let me know if that's the right page. Your nearest maintenance facility should have that book.

 

As for the POH reference to fuel flow, the secret lies in part 27.1305(l). I think that's the right one...don't have my FAR here. This in conjucntion with the POH will give you a very conservative fuel flow figure. Nothing wrong with being conservative though, and in the absence of any other figures (at the moment) is a bottom line rule of thumb to work with.

 

In fact, Rotor212 has sussed it in his previous post. If I am ferrying an aircraft I know no history of, then I will use this very conservative value, at least for the first flight. (See my previous post).

 

Joker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the POH reference to fuel flow, the secret lies in part 27.1305(l). I think that's the right one...don't have my FAR here. This in conjucntion with the POH will give you a very conservative fuel flow figure. Nothing wrong with being conservative though, and in the absence of any other figures (at the moment) is a bottom line rule of thumb to work with.

 

 

 

Hmmm Joker- Why not just fill the tanks and cruise to an airport one hour away- dip the tanks and get a accurate idea of what THAT particular helicopter burns. Then you can re-fill and off you go, with a solid number rather than what someone calculated once in a different bird.....just a thought. Goldy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....For this reason, 'experience' and inflight testing in every aircraft are the only ways to get reliable data for this aircraft......the only reliable data is dipstick testing and old fashioned calculations over a period of time.....

 

If I am ferrying an aircraft I know no history of, then I will use this very conservative value, at least for the first flight.

 

Goldy,

 

Exactly right! The quote above is extracted from my own post (#12) and my last post.

 

I think it says the same thing as you!

 

My conservative value is for an aircraft which I have never flown before.

 

What if you don't have an airport 1 hr away. Instead you have two aiports. Airport A (closest) you can make if the fuel flow was up to 12 gph, and the other (Airport B) you could only make if the fuel flow was 7-10 gph (or less). Which airport would you fly to on your first ferry flight? That's my point!

 

Joker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...