So.....

[HowlinMadMurdoc]

In Tulsa OK - $190/hr


still interested?

Dang, that's a lot for a 47 but nowhere near what WW Helos in East Troy, WI charges for their 47. Last time I checked, WW was getting $275/hr WITHOUT instructor for a 47G3. Yikes.

I remember 47D-1's with wood blades going for $100/hr with instructor. Of course, that was years ago.

HMM

 

[mattpilot]

I remember 47D-1's with wood blades going for $100/hr with instructor. Of course, that was years ago.

HMM

afaik, all 47's have wood blades. Sure hope none of them chip during flight

The 47G4 goes for $210/hr here.

They also had a cheap 206 - only $550/hr. But they sold it a few weeks ago

 

[HowlinMadMurdoc]

afaik, all 47's have wood blades. Sure hope none of them chip during flight

The 47G4 goes for $210/hr here.

They also had a cheap 206 - only $550/hr. But they sold it a few weeks ago

Don't quote me but I believe later 47 models had metal blades (ie G3 and later).

HMM

 

[helimech]

How would you simulate (on purpose) a loss-of-thrust tailrotor failure? Put in full right pedal and hope for the best? And maybe it's just me, but I don't think I'd be flying a helicopter that had me doing tail rotor failure emergency procedures, "all of the time (...not on purpose)."



Let me see if I understand you correctly, you are maintaining that the Robinson R22 is somehow better than other helicopters, particularly turbine helicopters, because it is difficult to fly?

GV

\

To simulate a tail rotor failure, yes you take out the tail rotor and hold it. on most domestic helo's along with some eurocopters, you stick the pedal to the right and hold it. What i was saying about doing it on purpose and not on purpose is that during training you HAVE to simulate loss of tail rotor and also what is called stuck pedal. and i also have lost tail rotor authority completely when i had a t/r driveshaft shear.
Now about the R22, no it is not a better helicopter than most, but you do have to watch everything a little more closely and be right on top of it if you ever lose anything, because it is so squirly. This is why a lot of operators like to see a lot of R22 time, because they know that you can probably recognize emergency's a little faster. No, R22 pilots are not better than other helicopter pilots, everyone that can hover, takeoff, and land a helicopter, without destroying the aircraft or scratching it, in my book is a good helo pilot.

 

[helimech]

afaik, all 47's have wood blades. Sure hope none of them chip during flight

The 47G4 goes for $210/hr here.

They also had a cheap 206 - only $550/hr. But they sold it a few weeks ago

Hey Matt, No, not all 47's have wood blades. The G3 on up and some late model G2's, the Soloy conversion, or any that have the new rotor head without the stibilizer bar, more than likely have metal blades. Wood blades are getting harder and harder to find, so everyone that is getting high time rotor heads will probably have metal blades installed with their new head. That is probably why your 47's are so cheap to purchase, because they haven't had the metal blades installed. I tell all my customers that ever look for a 47, make sure they have the metal blades or you will be spending a ton when it comes time to pull them, the only nice thing about wood blades is that they are not time life, they are on condition, which is a good thing and a bad thing.

 

[mattpilot]

or any that have the new rotor head without the stibilizer bar

Question about that...

whats the purpose of the stabilizer bar? I see that some helo's have it and some don't. Why would a helicopter designer put a bar on one but not on another helicopter?

As i understand it, a stabilizer bar is something Mr. Bell came up with to keep the plane of rotation more horizontal during crosswind operations. Correct? Whats the negative side effect? Only weight? Why don't all helo's have it if it improves stability?

 

[GVFlyer]

Question about that...

whats the purpose of the stabilizer bar? I see that some helo's have it and some don't. Why would a helicopter designer put a bar on one but not on another helicopter?

As i understand it, a stabilizer bar is something Mr. Bell came up with to keep the plane of rotation more horizontal during crosswind operations. Correct? Whats the negative side effect? Only weight? Why don't all helo's have it if it improves stability?

The stabilizer bar and the Bell 47 were developed by Arthur M. Young, a mathematician and philosopher who spent the last half of his life investigating the nature of consciousness.

In the late 1930s, he [size=-1]began a series of experiments with model helicopters that ultimately led to the design of the Bell-47[/size][size=-1] helicopter. After a lot of research Young invented a teetering rotor with a stabilizer bar. The bar had bob weights attached to each end and was directly linked to the rotor blades through the pitch control linkages. The idea was that if the rotor was disturbed in pitch or roll, the gyroscopic inertia of the bar could be used to introduce cyclic pitch into the main rotor system, increasing the effective stability.[/size]

Other manufacturers use other rotor designs to achieve stability.

The other enemy of helicopter design is vibration - a problem that the AH-56 Cheyenne could never solve. During UTTAS development both the Boeing and Sikorsky entrants to become the UH-60 encountered severe rotor vibrations. Although the Boeing was generally a better helicopter and employed more cutting edge technology, Sikorsky solved the problem first through use of a mast extension and was selected to build their version of the Blackhawk.

GV







~