Dumb Q re R22

[JohnO]

How come Robinson never brought out an EFi upgrade? I understand the
development, testing and certification would cost a lot but surely the
equipment is already available, not THAT expensive, and the safety and
performance benefit (no carb heat or mixture controls!) would make it
worthwhile?

Just curious.

[JohnO]

The OTHER Kevin in San Diego wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2005 12:52:22 -0800, "JohnO" > wrote:
>
> >How come Robinson never brought out an EFi upgrade? I understand the
> >development, testing and certification would cost a lot but surely the
> >equipment is already available, not THAT expensive, and the safety and
> >performance benefit (no carb heat or mixture controls!) would make it
> >worthwhile?
>
> Dunno. I'll ask Frank when I see him at the factory safety course...

Heh! Don;t forget to report back!

> EFI aircraft engines can be finicky to start when hot. As far as
> mixture goes, I don't know anyone who touches the mixture control in a
> robby other than to push it down to full rich at engine start and idle
> cutoff when shutting down.
>
> I do know a couple people who tweak mixture in the C300's but it's got
> a vernier mixture control on it so it's a lot easier to make precise
> changes..
>

I'm from a fixed wing background and in cruise we do lean out the
mixture until just before power drops. I'm put off by all the things
that make an R22 fall down, and I'd heard that there had been problems
with leaning out the mixture too much in flight? I guess with the low
intertia rotors leaning out too much and not correcting quickly could
lead to a crash.

> I'd like to see an R44 based turbine powered ship from Robinson myself

But why? Isn't the R44 is about as fast as a light turbine anyway? What
would happen to the operating costs with a turbine?

Do R44 Raven II pilots find that the EFi makes flight much better/safer
than the non EFi R44?

Cheers,
JohnO

[Andrew Crane]

"JohnO" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> I guess with the low
> intertia rotors leaning out too much and not correcting quickly could
> lead to a crash.

Out of curiosity, how does the low inertia come into play here?

> > I'd like to see an R44 based turbine powered ship from Robinson myself
>
> But why? Isn't the R44 is about as fast as a light turbine anyway? What
> would happen to the operating costs with a turbine?

Well I wouldn't imagine they'd come down :-)

> Do R44 Raven II pilots find that the EFi makes flight much better/safer
> than the non EFi R44?

The two machines are poles apart, but I don't know how much that is down to
the fuel injection. Certainly not having to mess with carb heat is a plus,
as is having bags more power available.

Regards
Andrew

--
Inweb Networks. Quality internet and telecoms services
Sales: 08000 612222 Support: 08704322222. http://www.inweb.co.uk
E1 call share. 0800, 0845 and 0870 numbers - best rates. Resellers welcome

[JohnO]

Andrew Crane wrote:
> "JohnO" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> >
> > I guess with the low
> > intertia rotors leaning out too much and not correcting quickly could
> > lead to a crash.
>
> Out of curiosity, how does the low inertia come into play here?

I meant low inertia in the rotors means less time to correct rotor RPM
decay before it becomes fatal, right?

>
> > > I'd like to see an R44 based turbine powered ship from Robinson myself
> >
> > But why? Isn't the R44 is about as fast as a light turbine anyway? What
> > would happen to the operating costs with a turbine?
>
> Well I wouldn't imagine they'd come down :-)
>
> > Do R44 Raven II pilots find that the EFi makes flight much better/safer
> > than the non EFi R44?
>
> The two machines are poles apart, but I don't know how much that is down to
> the fuel injection. Certainly not having to mess with carb heat is a plus,
> as is having bags more power available.
>

Yeah, nice!

[[email protected]]

JohnO wrote:
> The OTHER Kevin in San Diego wrote:
> > On 23 Nov 2005 12:52:22 -0800, "JohnO" > wrote:
> >> > Dunno. I'll ask Frank when I see him at the factory safety course...
>
> Heh! Don;t forget to report back!
>
> > EFI aircraft engines can be finicky to start when hot. As far as
> > mixture goes, I don't know anyone who touches the mixture control in a
> > robby other than to push it down to full rich at engine start and idle
> > cutoff when shutting down.
> >>
> > I'd like to see an R44 based turbine powered ship from Robinson myself
>
> But why? Isn't the R44 is about as fast as a light turbine anyway? What
> would happen to the operating costs with a turbine?
> > Cheers,
> JohnO


I recently attended the Robinson safety course. No plans for a turbine
R-44, but
Frank spoke about a larger turbine helicopter, a 5 or six seater in the
planning
stages. Apparently they have spent (in Frank's words) an exorbitant
amount of
money researching aviation diesel, to no avail. They were also unable
to find a
compatible piston engine for their new larger helicopter idea. So it
was back to
the drawing board, with turbine in mind this time. I can't wait to
see what Frank
and his engineers come up with!

[Simon Robbins]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Apparently they have spent (in Frank's words) an exorbitant
> amount of money researching aviation diesel, to no avail.

Isn't there an experimental diesel S300 around somewhere with a Volkswagen
engine? (Would that make it a 300 TDi!?)

Si