If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
I agree with you about watching the tip path, being careful, approaching from
the right place,etc. however to untrained passengers I could see where this could be a problem, thats all. Dave davdirect |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Some questions about the Brantly: 1) Does it hover OGE with a full load? The web site conspicuously omits this common specification. 2) The pilot who owned the one that crashed said that the factory reccommended running takeoffs when heavily loaded. Why is this? (I said "dragging the skids down the runway" before, but on that day it would be better described as "hopping.") 3) What type of engine is in your B2B? The B2B that crashed was listed as a 1962 model Lycoming IO360. Maybe your engine is bigger. 4) I find it interesting that you claim that your B2B can outperform the factory specs. Has your B2B had any special modifications wuch as Fuel Injection, Supercharger, etc.? Dennis H. (helopilot) wrote: I've owned both the Exec 162F and the B2B. There were many times when the RW had two adults and 3/4 fuel that it didn't have enough power to maintain a hover. The RW does not out perform the Brantly in anything. I liked the RW a lot and put 110 hours on mine. I've flown many times in the Brantly with 400+ lbs in the cabin and full fuel with no problems. There is no comparison really. I've also taken the Brantly to 7100' and still had power to spare. The B2B doesn't struggle at all to stay in the air. It flies beautifully. wrote in message ... I can't say that I have ever flown a Brantly, but here are some specs from both Rotorway and Brantly's web site: Helicopter Exec 162F Brantly B2B ===================== ================= ================== Max level Speed 115 mph 100 mph Cruise Speed 95 mph 90 mph Rate of Climb 1000 fpm 1400 fpm Service Ceiling 10000 feet 6000 feet Hover IGE 7000 feet 3525 feet Hover OGE 5000 feet n/a Useful Load Capacity* 423 lbs 414 lbs Fuel Burn ** 8.5 gph 13.8 gph Max Range 180 miles 200 miles Fuel Capacity 17 gal 31 gal (30.6 usable) * With Full Tank of AvGas ** Calculated ((Cruise_Speed X Fuel_Capacity) / Range) So at least according to the specs, the Exec outperforms the B2B in everything execpt Rate of Climb and Max Range. Given the fuel burn is nearly double in the B2B, it looks like it has to struggle to stay in the air despite having a more powerful engine than the Exec. Comparing to the R22: The R22 outperforms both with the exception of max carrying load. Dennis H. ojunkm (Stevenatherton) wrote: sorry denis ive flown a brantly its got the same power as a hiller / enstrom a model or about twice the power of a rotorway no problems at all to keep the rotor in the green if a rororway can fly a brantly certainly can steve Dennis Hawkins n4mwd AT amsat DOT org (humans know what to do) "A RECESSION is when you know somebody who is out of work. A DEPRESSION is when YOU are out of work. A RECOVERY is when all the H-1B's are out of work." To find out what an H-1B is and how Congress is using them to put Americans out of work, visit the following web site and click on the "Exporting America" CNN news video: http://zazona.com/ShameH1B/MediaClips.htm Dennis Hawkins n4mwd AT amsat DOT org (humans know what to do) "A RECESSION is when you know somebody who is out of work. A DEPRESSION is when YOU are out of work. A RECOVERY is when all the H-1B's are out of work." To find out what an H-1B is and how Congress is using them to put Americans out of work, visit the following web site and click on the "Exporting America" CNN news video: http://zazona.com/ShameH1B/MediaClips.htm |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
One thing I noticed in the Brantly was that the rotor positioned so close to
the bubble could and did cause a very annoying flicker with the sun at the right angle. A hat with a bill would be a must. I agree with on poster the Brantly I flew was relatively smooth. I don't think that they made the prettiest helo tho..More like a horizontal ice cream cone. I remember a story Ken Brock told me about running out of power with a passenger at a density altitude of about 3,500 but he was on a pinnacle and didn't have all the ground effect he would have liked.. For my money, if I was located at a place where the density altitude rarely got above 4,000, I would consider the Brantly because it was so easy to fly. Stu Fields Safari Driver. "Murphy's law" wrote in message om... (Davdirect) wrote in message ... I agree with you about watching the tip path, being careful, approaching from the right place,etc. however to untrained passengers I could see where this could be a problem, thats all. Dave davdirect The PIC is always responsible for the safety of passengers & the safe operation of the rotorcraft. Placard in Brantly : ROTOR MUST BE STOPPED WHILE LOADING AND UNLOADING PASSENGERS Even so tip path plane is over 6 feet high, that's all folks |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
1. Yes, depending on conditions (DA, wind, etc.)
2. Only reason I know of to do running takeoffs, besides practice, is when you're loaded too heavy to maintain a hover. Many times I've been fully loaded in the B2B and as long as the RRPM and wind is carefully watched, I had no problems. Only once have I had to touch the skids down a couple times until ETL was reached, at which point there was ample power. It was a real hot summer day last year, 90%+ humidity, fuel topped off, 430 lbs in the cabin, and probably 5 lbs in the storage. I have no power complaints with the B2B at all. 3. The 360 fuel injected (Don't remember if that is the -A1A or -B1A). The B2 and B2A ('62-'63 or so) had the carburator engine which I understand does not have as much power as the fuel injected one used now. 4. All standard B2B's have fuel injection. Mine has no mods to increase power wrote in message ... Some questions about the Brantly: 1) Does it hover OGE with a full load? The web site conspicuously omits this common specification. 2) The pilot who owned the one that crashed said that the factory reccommended running takeoffs when heavily loaded. Why is this? (I said "dragging the skids down the runway" before, but on that day it would be better described as "hopping.") 3) What type of engine is in your B2B? The B2B that crashed was listed as a 1962 model Lycoming IO360. Maybe your engine is bigger. 4) I find it interesting that you claim that your B2B can outperform the factory specs. Has your B2B had any special modifications wuch as Fuel Injection, Supercharger, etc.? Dennis H. (helopilot) wrote: I've owned both the Exec 162F and the B2B. There were many times when the RW had two adults and 3/4 fuel that it didn't have enough power to maintain a hover. The RW does not out perform the Brantly in anything. I liked the RW a lot and put 110 hours on mine. I've flown many times in the Brantly with 400+ lbs in the cabin and full fuel with no problems. There is no comparison really. I've also taken the Brantly to 7100' and still had power to spare. The B2B doesn't struggle at all to stay in the air. It flies beautifully. wrote in message ... I can't say that I have ever flown a Brantly, but here are some specs from both Rotorway and Brantly's web site: Helicopter Exec 162F Brantly B2B ===================== ================= ================== Max level Speed 115 mph 100 mph Cruise Speed 95 mph 90 mph Rate of Climb 1000 fpm 1400 fpm Service Ceiling 10000 feet 6000 feet Hover IGE 7000 feet 3525 feet Hover OGE 5000 feet n/a Useful Load Capacity* 423 lbs 414 lbs Fuel Burn ** 8.5 gph 13.8 gph Max Range 180 miles 200 miles Fuel Capacity 17 gal 31 gal (30.6 usable) * With Full Tank of AvGas ** Calculated ((Cruise_Speed X Fuel_Capacity) / Range) So at least according to the specs, the Exec outperforms the B2B in everything execpt Rate of Climb and Max Range. Given the fuel burn is nearly double in the B2B, it looks like it has to struggle to stay in the air despite having a more powerful engine than the Exec. Comparing to the R22: The R22 outperforms both with the exception of max carrying load. Dennis H. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Stu, I reccommend that you keep your Safari. I agree with you completely about the Brantly looking like a flying Ice Cream Cone. It definitely takes a lot of the fun out of flying when you know the people on the ground are laughing at you, wondering if you have any Strawberry-Pecan for sale. The only thing worse would be to fly in that hot-air balloon that is shaped like Mickey Mouse. I was stunned when I discovered that the B2B uses a vertically running engine *despite* having at least three gearboxes. The Exec uses a vertically running engine because it does not have a gearbox. I have to say that I never realized that Lycoming even made a vertical version of the O-360. I couldn't see well enough into the wreckage to tell, but there was at least three gearboxes in the B2B. There were two gearboxes on the tail boom. One was at the apex where it makes a 45 degree turn upward. The other was at the tail rotor. This extra 45 degree gearbox seems to be a waste. It adds a lot of extra weight and doesn't buy you anything. I will have to admit that I was fascinated by the gearboxes themselves. They appeared to be made out of 2" galvanized pipe elbows. I'm not sure if they really were, but that's what they looked like. I read the NTSB report about the crash and learned something. I learned that the NTSB leaves out a lot of detail. We (myself and other folks at the airport) were thinking maybe there was something wrong with the engine which would explain the pilot not having enough power to maintain a hover. The passenger weighed 190# which shouldn't have been that excessive. Apparently, the NTSB never bothered to test the engine and fuel systems as we had expected them to do. According to the NTSB report, the pilot/owner said that the passenger was flying the helicopter which caused it to crash. However, this is not what I heard the passenger say. The passenger told me that he never took the controls. The pilot was an airline transport pilot with 28,000 flight hours and over 100 hours in this particular B2B. I find it difficult to believe that a pilot with this many hours would carelessly neglect to maintain rotor RPM if he had a choice. Even if he did turn the controls over to the passenger, a PIC with 28K hours would not allow the RPM to decay like that. The tach is in plain sight. Not to contradict myself, but I am truly interested in the facts that surround this particular crash regardless of whether my opinion is right or wrong. As such, I will have point out that the helicopter crashed shortly after being refueled and that other people have had trouble after refueling. On 12/30/2003, a Cessna 441 crashed shortly after refueling at this same airport. Then, a month later on 1/22/2004, another plane, this time a Piper PA-23-160, also crashed after refueling. Both of these accidents were fatal and had engine failure before hitting the ground. Although, there was speculation about the fuel being bad, it was tested and nothing was found. Not only that, but there were a lot of other planes that used the same fuel and didn't crash. Nevertheless, it still seems like there is more to it than a coincidence. On another note, I would be curious as to how B2B's handle the weight shift when a passenger is added. On an Exec, you have to move a ballast weight depending on whether you have a passenger or not. On the R22, it uses a high rotor level and geometry solves the problem. On the B2B, you have a low rotor level and AFAIK no ballast weight. How does the B2B do it? It this something inherrant to the 3 bladed hub or does it simply have a large amount of cyclic? Dennis H. "Stu & Kathy Fields" wrote: One thing I noticed in the Brantly was that the rotor positioned so close to the bubble could and did cause a very annoying flicker with the sun at the right angle. A hat with a bill would be a must. I agree with on poster the Brantly I flew was relatively smooth. I don't think that they made the prettiest helo tho..More like a horizontal ice cream cone. I remember a story Ken Brock told me about running out of power with a passenger at a density altitude of about 3,500 but he was on a pinnacle and didn't have all the ground effect he would have liked.. For my money, if I was located at a place where the density altitude rarely got above 4,000, I would consider the Brantly because it was so easy to fly. Stu Fields Safari Driver. "Murphy's law" wrote in message Dennis Hawkins n4mwd AT amsat DOT org (humans know what to do) "A RECESSION is when you know somebody who is out of work. A DEPRESSION is when YOU are out of work. A RECOVERY is when all the H-1B's are out of work." To find out what an H-1B is and how Congress is using them to put Americans out of work, visit the following web site and click on the "Exporting America" CNN news video: http://zazona.com/ShameH1B/MediaClips.htm |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"Stu & Kathy Fields" wrote in message ...
One thing I noticed in the Brantly was that the rotor positioned so close to the bubble could and did cause a very annoying flicker with the sun at the right angle. A hat with a bill would be a must. I agree with on poster the Brantly I flew was relatively smooth. I don't think that they made the prettiest helo tho..More like a horizontal ice cream cone. I remember a story Ken Brock told me about running out of power with a passenger at a density altitude of about 3,500 but he was on a pinnacle and didn't have all the ground effect he would have liked.. For my money, if I was located at a place where the density altitude rarely got above 4,000, I would consider the Brantly because it was so easy to fly. In any bubble type plexi cabin a some kind of sunvisor is a must to block sunglare I had a Rotorway Exec 90, a Safari, have an R22, a Brantly B2, so I know the difference The Brantly is kid'a funny looking, but the beauty is in the eye of the beholder As the matter of fact, the cone shaped fuselage is an airstream stabilizer The flying characteristics must be the main concern in any aircraft Stu Fields Safari Driver. "Murphy's law" wrote in message om... (Davdirect) wrote in message ... I agree with you about watching the tip path, being careful, approaching from the right place,etc. however to untrained passengers I could see where this could be a problem, thats all. Dave davdirect The PIC is always responsible for the safety of passengers & the safe operation of the rotorcraft. Placard in Brantly : ROTOR MUST BE STOPPED WHILE LOADING AND UNLOADING PASSENGERS Even so tip path plane is over 6 feet high, that's all folks |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Gary Knutson wrote:
wrote: I was stunned when I discovered that the B2B uses a vertically running engine *despite* having at least three gearboxes. The Exec uses a vertically running engine because it does not have a gearbox. So, you're telling us that the Exec rotor runs at engine speed? No, I didn't say that at all. The exec has no gearboxes at all. Not even a tail rotor gearbox. I have to say that I never realized that Lycoming even made a vertical version of the O-360. And, you are also telling us you've never seen a Bell 47 (not the ones with the Franklin)? I am saying that I have never seen under the covers of a Bell 47 so I don't have a clue what's under there. Apparently helicopters with vertical engines are more common than I thought. However, it still seems kind of silly when there is a gearbox being used that could easily convert the direction. Dennis H. Dennis Hawkins n4mwd AT amsat DOT org (humans know what to do) "A RECESSION is when you know somebody who is out of work. A DEPRESSION is when YOU are out of work. A RECOVERY is when all the H-1B's are out of work." To find out what an H-1B is and how Congress is using them to put Americans out of work, visit the following web site and click on the "Exporting America" CNN news video: http://zazona.com/ShameH1B/MediaClips.htm |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|