mechanic Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 No way! Re-fueling an R22 with AVGas is waaaaaay more dangerous than the hot refueling seen in turbine or military ops. I wouldnt get within 100 feet of an R22 begin hot refueled...but you do what you want ! Spencer- yeah, your statements got lost on this one !! Goldy Really! We do it all the time. I guess there is always a potential for a fire being the engine is under the fuel tanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldy Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 Really! We do it all the time. I guess there is always a potential for a fire being the engine is under the fuel tanks. Yepp, the fumes and volatility of avgas, the hot engine, sparks, moving rotors cause static electricity...working under a spinning main rotor...sounds like fun stuff ! We always shut them down...but like I said, to each his own ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superman Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 Any of you know anything about this product? Approved by Robinson http://www.airwolfaerospace.com/RotorBlade.htm ThanksClark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldy Posted January 12, 2008 Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 Any of you know anything about this product? Approved by Robinson http://www.airwolfaerospace.com/RotorBlade.htm ThanksClark I dont know anything about them, but I just got new blades on last week so I am definitely taking a look. Students practice in a riverbed, so the blades get sand blasted regularly. I'll let you know the cost when I find out. Thanks for the link...I saw it a few months ago, but lost it. Goldy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spencer Posted January 12, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 12, 2008 I dont know anything about them, but I just got new blades on last week so I am definitely taking a look. Students practice in a riverbed, so the blades get sand blasted regularly. I'll let you know the cost when I find out. Thanks for the link...I saw it a few months ago, but lost it. Goldy Cost is $2500.00, And they are working for a AMOC for the AD. I want to know if this so called tape draws any extra power because of increased drag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelliBoy Posted January 14, 2008 Report Share Posted January 14, 2008 The AMOC STC has been awarded. News story Link. Someone should produce an STC blade for Robinson products, their blade woes are rediculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarab Posted January 14, 2008 Report Share Posted January 14, 2008 Airwolf’s STC is a one-time repair, and retails at $1299 for the R22 (both blades) to $2499 for the R44 two-blade kit. Maybe this should be standard from the factory. Get brand new blades that need really expensive band aids on them so they hold together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mechanic Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 Maybe this should be standard from the factory. Get brand new blades that need really expensive band aids on them so they hold together. I worked with a guy who was the AP for the local EMS bird, BO105 and EC130's, those ships had blade tape, too. I remember him having to call and to talk to someone about what he needed to do to repair the tape. I don't remember if they were factory installed or STC'd. At the time I thought, what a piece of crap, needs tape to hold the blades together! He never told me it was abrasion tape, lol.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChopperPop Posted January 15, 2008 Report Share Posted January 15, 2008 The recurring inspection as set-forth in Paragraph © of AD 2007-26-12 is unworkable. In the first instance there is an allowance of 10 hours before "any" inspection and then the timetable becomes "before each flight"! Why provide a 10 hour window and then close it? This is illogical. It would seem more appropriate to reverse the order and make AD 2007-26-12 applicable prior to the next flight and then place the inspection required by Paragraph © as 10 hours or 20 hours or some increment other than every flight. The blade inspection is already a pre-flight item and no pilot (assumed) is going to operate the helicopter without looking at the blades prior to flight. It also assumes a pilot (I'm an ATP Rotorcraft:Helicopter pilot) has the experience and knowledge to ascertain debonding. I'm not sure I know what to look for -- I've never seen it and there's no picture in the AD to tell me what to look for. This may be occuring within the blade tips and not be apparent from a visual inspection. In other words, the damage and danger could be exacerbated by waiting for some visual clue to the untrained eye rather than making the inspection required by an experienced A&P every 25 or 50 hours. This would make much more sense and remove the possiblity that the blades may not be inspected because of a missed pre-flight inspection when a pilot may be under circumstances which make it difficult to inspect -- no ladder, weather -- this should not be a cursory inspection but rather a resolved inspection by an expert. Further, if a pilot has no ladder the visual inspection will be from several feet rather than the close-in visual inspection to determine debonding!! Be sure and send comments to the FAA and Robinson. I think this is mostly Robinson and their lawyers who seem almost psychotic with liability concerns -- after all they're the ones manufacturing the blades and now they want to shift the burden to the pilot (who may not know what they're looking for)! In Robinson's book the pilot is on a course to inspecting every component of the helicopter prior to flight and if anything fails it's the pilot's fault for not knowing and seeing the malfunctioning part prior to flight!! The part can fail "in flight"!! To begin shifting this so Robinson is not held to the fire for making parts with potential failure will lead to a dangerous product!! What's next?!?! If the main swash-plate rotor-bearings start to fail will we have an AD that requires the pilot to inspect and rotate the blades prior to each flight and enter it in the log book?!?! This could go on and on with Robinson building lesser quality because they only have to put the burden on the pilot to know there is a potential failure and they better catch it!! Robinson has been successful but they need to understand customer service and quality of workmanship!! In my opinion they are going down hill. I have two R44IIs. One is a Clipper. Both have had corrossion problems even with the 3k extra rust-proofing I bought on the R44II. They wouldn't do anything and I ended up having to repaint several large areas of the helicopter. I've had the swash-plate main bearing go out!! I caught this on a pre-flight thank-goodness. I've had the starter go on both. I've had broken brackets and covers on both! I had a Clipper I and it was a better ship -- more reliable and they were better at that time. Later and good flying to all!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aclark79 Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 I know that it is possible to apply for an exemption, in our case we are looking for a one a day inspection... however, without any comment period before the AD went into effect, no exemptions will be granted before the AD goes into effect.... So for the time being, no Student solos when they have to refuel. I agree that there aren't a lot of times where we would have a planed student solo refuel... but NW weather is always unpredictable this time of year. I agree with ChopperPop, this seems like a really bad precendent of shifting the responsibility for working parts to the pilot. Frankly I don't think 95 percent of pilots are qualified to make a visual inspection for blade debonding... in the 7 inflight cases (I think it was seven, its in the AD correct me if thats wrong) of blade debonding, do we really believe all those pilots did an inferior preflight, or rather they didn't know what to look for...? Oh well, I've added my comment to the FAA, we'll see if anything changes, maybe the STC'd tape will negate the nessesity of this AD and be counted as compliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mechanic Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 I don't know if anyone else here reads Robinson Helicopters.org, but here is a quote about the blade tape, taken from their site. Robinson Helicopters .org Re: AD 2007-26-12 Robinson Helicopter Company « Reply #13 on: 01/09/08 - 18:38 »I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I doubt very much that you all can change the current AD as it is currently written. Call me a pessamist but we deal with Aircraft Certification on a daily basis. We are very good at knowing how the system works from the inside. In your wildest dreams you would believe the kind of hoops we have to jump through and the bureacratic maze we have to negotiate to get anything done and or certified. I know for a fact that the current AD sat in FAA legal for months while the wording of it was massaged to its current form. For those of you that have not seen it on the wire services , Airwolf Aerospace recently STC'd our Rotor Blade Protective Tape that prevents blade delaminination on R22 & R44s. We spent months and months working the FAA maze to get it approved and our STC SR02491CH was granted 10/25/07. Thus STC gives us the right to install it onto the helicopter. We spent the last two months, getting our PMA which is our approval to manufacture the tape in the first place. This PMA was receive about two weeks ago and we started shipping kits today. Our Tape covers the last 36" -38" of the rotor blade far in excess of the 24" where delamination has been found. We also cover the bond line of the skin to the front spar by one half inch in both the top and the bottom of the blade, so there is no possibility of removing paint in this area, allowing dirt to work through this joint and attach the blade adhesive. This tape was specially designed by us and has a very, very strong adhesive that prevents it from flinging off. Once it's installed, it is not coming off. Also, at the bottom of the AD you all probably noticed the mention of a "Previously Approved Alternate Method of Compliance" [AMOC]. The AMOC referred to is Airwolf Aerospace. We had to wait for the formal AD to be released before we could apply for our AMOC. We have done so and expect to have it shortly. In a nutshell, our AMOC will eliminate the daily preflight/signoff requirement. There will be no need to check the blades unless the pilot flies into a rainstorm or sandstorm. In that case, a check of the blade will be required. This will remove the huge restriction and allow student pilots to preflight the helicopter, go fly, shut the helicopter down at an airport, start it back up and fly home again. You can see our rotor blade protective tape solution at www.airwolfaerospace.com. We are very old Robinson operators. We own S/N 012 of that tells you anything. We have been working with and or around RHC since the beginning. We came up with this STC as a way of minimizing the possibility of blade delamination on our helicopters and figured the flying public would like what we did. We could either put up with the problem or do something about it. We chose the latter. That's all for now.. I will try to check back in with this site from time to time to expound on the above. However, I head up tech support for Airwolf and am very, very busy right now fielding calls and emails from around the world. You are welcome to email me directly at Jonny@airwolf.com However, be patient for a reply... Jonny Quest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChopperPop Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 I don't know if anyone else here reads Robinson Helicopters.org, but here is a quote about the blade tape, taken from their site. Great work!! You're to be commended! If only Robinson would show this kind of effort I would fly their equipment with greater confidence! There is an instance of an R44 Clipper I here in Florida which was being returned to the owner by an A&P who had just serviced the helicopter. The blades delaminated in flight and created a severe vibration. They got it down OK into a field. So much for the "blade inspection prior to flight"! I vote that Robinson should make arrangements with you to buy your kit for all their helicopters and issue it to the owners for installation. But I think Frank is busy counting his money! The big question I have for you is performance. Is there any performance hit, albeit slight, in installing your tape fix? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mechanic Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Hey ChopperPop,I just quoted Jonny Quest from Airwolf on his response to the blade AD and his companies STC. I am a mechanic in a different field. No one here seemed to know much about the blade tape so, I just wanted to pass the info on. Later Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChopperPop Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Hey ChopperPop,I just quoted Jonny Quest from Airwolf on his response to the blade AD and his companies STC. I am a mechanic in a different field. No one here seemed to know much about the blade tape so, I just wanted to pass the info on. Later Thanks. I'm looking real seriously at the Airwolf. My R44II SN11080 is still under warranty and it will be interesting to see what Robinson does. I'm wondering if Robinson didn't respond to the FAA sufficiently or possibly ruffled some feathers that the delamination problem was not as severe as the FAA deemed it to be. I suspect this because it seems odd this AD was issued without much input as I see on other ADs that would have this kind of impact. I remember the Cessna wing spar and others of similar ilk. With the Cessna wing spar AOPA was involved early along with the Cessna Owner's Association, etc. and a lot of work was done to get a good resolve. And remember, this was with airplanes that were out of production. In other words, if Robie is just going to sit and let this AD exist they need new leadership!! But my gut tells me they are scrambling to find some resolution that will eliminate the problems this AD causes -- and more importantly the bigger problem of a blade delaminating in flight. As aclark79 pointed out it's highly improbable the 7 or 11 or whatever delaminations were under circumstances where the pilot did not pre-flight the blades. You can inspect all you want but if she decides to let loose while your over a dense forest that's the way the cards get dealt. I would be much more confident if Robie (like Airwolf) acknowledges the problem and takes substantative steps to correct it. But, again, if Robie is just going to sit on its ass with this AD then it's time to look elsewhere!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChopperPop Posted January 17, 2008 Report Share Posted January 17, 2008 Does anyone have information on the new ships coming from Robinson regarding this AD? It affects the R44II through SN11570. I looked at the FAA Registry and SN11570 had a Certificate Issue Date of 02/21/2007. SN11575 has a Certificate Issue Date of 09/13/2007. What changed after SN11570? Did the blade construction change? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HelliBoy Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 Your Comments to the FAA and AOPA matter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amphibpilot Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 (edited) AD 2007-26-12 Alternative Method of Compliance further clarified and approved by FAA January 23, 2008. See link in left-side column at http://www.robinsonheli.com/support.htm Edited January 28, 2008 by amphibpilot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLH Posted January 18, 2008 Report Share Posted January 18, 2008 Does anyone have information on the new ships coming from Robinson regarding this AD? It affects the R44II through SN11570. I looked at the FAA Registry and SN11570 had a Certificate Issue Date of 02/21/2007. SN11575 has a Certificate Issue Date of 09/13/2007. What changed after SN11570? Did the blade construction change? The explaination I was given by the FAA Aviation Safety Engineer as to why the cutoff at SN 11570 is because Robinson decided to more closely control the bond line tolerance. To reduce the scrap rate of blades in production, they were accepting a wider range of variation within their published specs. Apparently more attention is now being paid to the amount of skin to spar overlap, too much overlap tends to present more of a lip for the ingress of moisture and particles when there is no protective paint coating. Still, it wouldn't suprised me if the AD was expanded to include all SN's at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FUSE Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 AD 2007-26-12 Alternate Method of Compliance approved by FAA today. Copy attached. Now this seems much more reasonable. Thank you for posting this. How do we get this AMOC officially. I don't want to put my certificate in jeopardy by blindly accepting anything I get from an Internet forum as factual. I believe you but want to get it from an official source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyNHighNFast Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 Now this seems much more reasonable. Thank you for posting this. How do we get this AMOC officially. I don't want to put my certificate in jeopardy by blindly accepting anything I get from an Internet forum as factual. I believe you but want to get it from an official source. You can call the phone numbers listed for the contacts. Take a look at paragraph (d) in the compliance section of the AD (d) To request a different method of compliance or a different compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19. Contact the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, ATTN: (For R22) Eric Schrieber, Aviation Safety Engineer, Aircraft Certification Office, Airframe Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712, telephone (562) 627-5348, fax (562) 627- 5210, or (for R44) Fred Guerin, Aviation Safety Engineer, Airframe Branch, 3960 Paramount Blvd., Lakewood, California 90712, telephone (562) 627-5232, fax (562) 627-5210, for information about previously approved alternative methods of compliance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jswift1999 Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 AD never asked the pilot to determine if there is debonding. It only asked if paint has been eroded so the bond line is visible. No special training is required determine that. If you can see the joint between spar and skin the helo is grounded and qualified mechanic must inspect blades. If debonding is not found then blade gets repainted and returned to service. If owner does not allow the paint to erode too far and repaints blades than there will never be a need to ground the aircraft and inspect for debonding. AD was changed on Friday so the "before every flight" inspection and log entry no longer applies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amphibpilot Posted January 19, 2008 Report Share Posted January 19, 2008 Now this seems much more reasonable. Thank you for posting this. How do we get this AMOC officially. I don't want to put my certificate in jeopardy by blindly accepting anything I get from an Internet forum as factual. I believe you but want to get it from an official source. Also on RHC's website, specifically the left-hand column of the Customer Support page:http://www.robinsonheli.com/support.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldy Posted January 25, 2008 Report Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) Also on RHC's website, specifically the left-hand column of the Customer Support page:http://www.robinsonheli.com/support.htm Bumped this back up. You can get a better solution here. http://www.verticalmag.com/control/news/te...?a=6510&z=6 Edited January 25, 2008 by Goldy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChopperJ Posted January 26, 2008 Report Share Posted January 26, 2008 AD was changed on Friday so the "before every flight" inspection and log entry no longer applies. I've been trying to find this, where does it say this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
67november Posted January 26, 2008 Report Share Posted January 26, 2008 right here http://helicopterforum.verticalreference.com/helicopterfor...?showtopic=8784 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.