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 |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Flyingmonk wrote:
Matt, just FYI only, many of us actually lost good friends in that machine (mini500). In my case Gil Armbruster, so for some of us it hits close to home. I guess you wouldn't understand unless you were in our shoes. This is what happened to Gil, show me where we were at fault; RHCI INVESTIGATIVE FINDINGS The pilot had installed his Mini-500 “Power Enhancement Package” (PEP), and against RHCI’s severe warnings, chose not to use the provided jet package containing a 2.76 needle jet. Instead he installed a 2.78 needle jet which meant that he needed a 155 main jet to achieve the proper EGT in hover. RHCI informed the pilot that the engine would seize with this small main jet, when at high-power settings it could not supply sufficient fuel to the engine, causing it to heat and seize. The main jet should have been a 165 or 170. Also, he had erroneously set the needle in the third position on the cylinder that seized; the other was correct in the fourth position. He was flying over a forest when the engine seized, and autorotated into a 50-foot tall tree. The impact broke the mast and the aircraft fell and landed upside down on the ground. NTSB Identification: IAD99FA023 Accident occurred Nov-29-98 At Midland, VA Aircraft: Armbruster Mini-500, registration: N500GH Injuries: 1 Fatal This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On November 29, 1998, about 1515 eastern standard time, a homebuilt Mini 500, N500GH, was destroyed during a collision with trees near Midland, Virginia. The certificated private pilot/owner/builder was fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local flight that originated from the Manassas Airport (HEF), Manassas, Virginia. No flight plan was filed for the personal flight conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. A family member reported the pilot missing after not returning from his normal 40 to 45 minute flight. The pilot's vehicle remained parked outside his hangar the next morning, and the Federal Aviation Administration issued an Alert Notice. The Civil Air Patrol's search discovered that tower personnel at HEF recorded the helicopter taking off at 1400. Witnesses stated that they saw the helicopter near Leesburg Airport, Leesburg, Virginia, about 1430, and near Nokesville, Virginia, about 1500, on November 29th. The helicopter was located on December 2, 1998, about 1530, in a wooded area approximately 1/4 mile north/northeast of the Warrenton-Fauquier Airport, Warrenton, Virginia. A survey of the debris field discovered that the initial impact point was the top of a 50-foot tall tree. Tree limbs, measuring 4 to 6 inches in diameter, were cut horizontally and found near the base of the tree. One of the helicopter's rotors was lying on the ground near the tree; the other was snagged on a fracture tree limb about 30 feet above the ground. The main wreckage was lying on its left side between two trees 5 feet apart, and about 35 feet south of the initial impact point. All major components of the helicopter were found at the accident scene. Examination of the flight controls revealed continuity at the time of impact. The engine logbook indicated that in August 1998, at 200.4 hours on the Hobbs meter, the owner replaced both pistons, rings, wrist pins, rod bearings, thermostat, and head o-rings. The Hobbs meter in the wreckage read 218.7 hours. Inspection of the engine revealed two different types of spark plugs were utilized, one of each type in the two cylinders. The spark plugs were wired such that one magneto fired one type of spark plug. Rotation of the crank shaft revealed 4 point scuffing on the cylinder and the Power Take-Off (PTO) piston. |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Matt Whiting wrote:
Same engine, same design, MUCH better manufacture MUCH better performance. The mini500 is a copy of this design (Mr. Cicarre' CH7) w/ a miniature MD500 body on it and different skids, but everything else was the same with exception that the Mini was manufactured and overseen BY Fetters. Where Mr. Cicarre actually knew what he was doing. If you look at the above picture, you can see that the chopper is capable with that engine. This makes no sense at all. Exactly what did the mini-500 design do to hobble the engine? If the designs are essentially the same, then the engine isn't going to know the difference. If the performance really was dramatically different, then SOMETHING had to be dramatically different between the designs. And saying that one was overseen by one person and one by a different person, isn't a design difference. Matt As you can see, it simply makes no difference how much I post, prove or answer, these few people that keep spewing the same things over and over again will never change their minds, no matter how compelling the facts are, if contrary to what they want to believe. We can all see that, so there is no need to try and change their minds. If I say it's day, they will argue it's night somewhere in the world. I have already answered each and every question or false allegation put forth here, so no need to keep answering the same thing over and over, I have work to do and these few people posting to this thread are lost causes anyway. But, you asked the difference between the CH7 and the Mini-500, so please allow me to explain. Engorging the history behind the politics, here is the main deference. 1. There has only been around 60 CH7 helicopters manufactured. There was over 500 Mini-500 kits manufactured. 2. Almost all of the CH7 helicopters were built, test flown and made flight worthy by the factory. Only 4 Mini-500 helicopters were built by the factory, the rest by the customers. 3. The CH7 helicopter had problems too, but with the small amount of customers they had, meant fewer people when there was a problem to take care of. 30 Mini-500's could get out the door before we could hear about a repeat problem, so it was more costly to fix and affected more people. Not an excuse, just a fact. 4. Nearly 100% of CH7 pilots were proficient and experienced in helicopters and maintenance. 72% of Mini-500 owners were new helicopter pilots, with less than 50 hours flight time and having their first experience with a helicopter. Simply put, the CH7 greatly benefited from being assembled and flown by the factory and was sold at a much higher price that only allowed more hightime helicopter pilots to buy it, and properly fly and maintain it. The Mini-500 was built by customers that in 72% of the cases were building a helicopter and flying one for the first time, after only minimum flight training. You guys add it up. Another thing, I only post under my own name. Dennis Fetters Designer of; Air Command 1/plcs Gyroplanes Air Command 2/plcs Gyroplanes Mini-500 1/Plcs Helicopter Voyager-500 2/Plcs Helicopter Excalibur 5/Plcs Turbine Helicopter Star-Lite-A VTUAV Helicopter Star-Lite-B VTUAV Helicopter |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Morgans wrote:
:Mr. Cicarre and the later Ch-7 Angel's manufacturer's had better :quality manufacturing facility and personnel than Fetters did. Fetters :had problems with blades that bowed like a banana, rfames that cracked, :bearings that gave out...etc. And these problems killed engines? A vibrating rotating system takes a lot more power to achieve a RPM than the same system without vibration. The common thread in the saga of the mini 500, is that there were many poorly manufactured and machined parts, and that the vibrations were nearly impossible to eliminate. So you take the same design without vibrations; without vibrations because parts are machined to higher tolerances, an perhaps some key parts are "stouter" but of the same basic design. Now the engine does not have to run overstressed (because of the lack of vibrations), it will continue to run reliably. Parts don't fail because they are not shaken to failure. Accepting this premise is contingent on accepting that a non vibrating system will run more RPM's with the same power compared to a vibrating system. It is true, but I don't have time to look up cites, right now. I guess that could be an argument, except for fact that Mini-500 owners say that after they properly balanced it, it was one of the smoothest helicopters they ever flown. Also backed up by Kin Armstrong of KitPlanes magazine when he did a complete flight review at Sun & Sun air show. Dennis Fetters Designer of; Air Command 1/plcs Gyroplanes Air Command 2/plcs Gyroplanes Mini-500 1/Plcs Helicopter Voyager-500 2/Plcs Helicopter Excalibur 5/Plcs Turbine Helicopter Star-Lite-A VTUAV Helicopter Star-Lite-B VTUAV Helicopter |
#154
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Montblack wrote:
How does one do this ...remove old posts and erase evidence? Curious. You could send out a *kill request* but not all servers honor it and typically it only works on your own if you catch the message before it propagates. Groups.Google.Com will remove your posts if requested to do so from its archives. They won't remove the replies to your posts however. If you don't want your posts archived put the following at the beginning of each message: "X-No-Archive" without the quotes of course. Keep in mind that replies to your X-NO posts will get archived however... This is a holdover from Deja News who Google bought... |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
C.D.Damron wrote:
"Richard Riley" wrote in message ... On 5 Dec 2005 23:31:28 -0800, "Flyingmonk" wrote: If the two are really the same except for the body, Don't you think that enclosing the engine has consequences? Also, IIRC, the CH-7 uses a pair of Fiat radiators and electric fans. |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Darrel Toepfer wrote:
Crosspost to brasil.unix deleted. RKey wrote: The Helicycle looks like a pretty good mini Jetranger to me. Designer crashed demoing it Flew into wires. and then later died in another crash... Crashed while already dying, heart attack or something. |
#157
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Fetters wrote:
Another thing, I only post under my own name. __________________________ From: "planeman" Newsgroups: rec.aviation.rotorcraft Subject: Mini-500 Accident Analysis Date: 26 Jul 2005 11:59:38 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 13 Message-ID: . com References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.235.147.233 __________________________ From: Dennis Fetters User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: rec.aviation.rotorcraft Subject: Mini-500 Accident Analysis Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 2305 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.235.147.233 __________________________ As you can see, both: "planeman" and Dennis Fetters both originate from: NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.235.147.233 , where this number '69.235.147.233' is unigue to each compunter, although he used two different email addresses. He computer's finger print is there for all to see... Dennis is not very bright. He's not even bright enough to know that he could be traced. He's not even bright enough to go back and remove his posts. He calls his critics idiots, but what an idiot he is. Too stupid to even go back and erase evidence. |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Montblack, If you use Google, just click on "show options" and click
remove. That's it. Idiot Fetters still claims that he didn't use different names. That computer "finger print" is as good as DNA. |
#159
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
The CH-7's blades were better, they didn't bow like a banana. The were
bowing forward as you go farther from the root of the blades. This changed the pivot point for the baldes, imagine taking a straight bladed sword and rotating it, the tip and the rest of the sword stays at the pivot point. Now imagine taking a curved sword and rotating it the same way, you'll notice that the tip stays at the pivot point, but the remainder of the sword will rise or fall due to the curve. The CH-7's blades were fabricated better, they were more uniform or should I say more consistent than what Denise was able to produce. Being more uniform, and of the shape that they were designed, they were easier to track and balance. This resulted in a smoother flying ship. Denise couldn't get the blades to come out as designed. They were not consistent they bowed where they shouldn't have and all this resulted in problems when trying to track and balance the blades. I remember that Gill had a hard time getting the baldes to fly smoothly. I think this fact alone(bad blades) resulted in inefficient rotor system, Unlike propellers, the blades of a helicopter changes pitch continously, this resulted in "shaking" or unsmooth helicopter. The shaking caused the frames to crack! Again, instead of addressing the problem (bad blades), Denise added more metal to the frame in an attempt to beef up the area prone to cracking. Since the blades were not as efficient as the CH-7's blades, the engine had to work much harder to get the same lift. That's where Denise came up with the bandaid fix again, the PEP kit. Instead of tackling the blade problem, he overworked the engine by PEPing it up. CH-7s didn't need to be PEPed up. That's my two cents worth. |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
(Mini-500)I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!!
Dennis Fetters wrote:
Flyingmonk wrote: Matt, just FYI only, many of us actually lost good friends in that machine (mini500). In my case Gil Armbruster, so for some of us it hits close to home. I guess you wouldn't understand unless you were in our shoes. This is what happened to Gil, show me where we were at fault; I never claimed anyone was at fault. RHCI INVESTIGATIVE FINDINGS The pilot had installed his Mini-500 “Power Enhancement Package” (PEP), and against RHCI’s severe warnings, chose not to use the provided jet package containing a 2.76 needle jet. Instead he installed a 2.78 needle jet which meant that he needed a 155 main jet to achieve the proper EGT in hover. RHCI informed the pilot that the engine would seize with this small main jet, when at high-power settings it could not supply sufficient fuel to the engine, causing it to heat and seize. The main jet should have been a 165 or 170. Also, he had erroneously set the needle in the third position on the cylinder that seized; the other was correct in the fourth position. He was flying over a forest when the engine seized, and autorotated into a 50-foot tall tree. The impact broke the mast and the aircraft fell and landed upside down on the ground. Is the above correct? Was the carburetor jetting not what was recommended? Was one needle not in the proper position? I'm not familiar with Rotax engines and their carbs, but the Mikuni's on the Kawasaki's that I have owned over the years, especially the two two-strokes I owned, were VERY sensitive to jetting. One size off of clipping the needle valve one position off made a huge difference. NTSB Identification: IAD99FA023 Accident occurred Nov-29-98 At Midland, VA Aircraft: Armbruster Mini-500, registration: N500GH Injuries: 1 Fatal This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. On November 29, 1998, about 1515 eastern standard time, a homebuilt Mini 500, N500GH, was destroyed during a collision with trees near Midland, Virginia. The certificated private pilot/owner/builder was fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local flight that originated from the Manassas Airport (HEF), Manassas, Virginia. No flight plan was filed for the personal flight conducted under 14 CFR Part 91. A family member reported the pilot missing after not returning from his normal 40 to 45 minute flight. The pilot's vehicle remained parked outside his hangar the next morning, and the Federal Aviation Administration issued an Alert Notice. The Civil Air Patrol's search discovered that tower personnel at HEF recorded the helicopter taking off at 1400. Witnesses stated that they saw the helicopter near Leesburg Airport, Leesburg, Virginia, about 1430, and near Nokesville, Virginia, about 1500, on November 29th. The helicopter was located on December 2, 1998, about 1530, in a wooded area approximately 1/4 mile north/northeast of the Warrenton-Fauquier Airport, Warrenton, Virginia. A survey of the debris field discovered that the initial impact point was the top of a 50-foot tall tree. Tree limbs, measuring 4 to 6 inches in diameter, were cut horizontally and found near the base of the tree. One of the helicopter's rotors was lying on the ground near the tree; the other was snagged on a fracture tree limb about 30 feet above the ground. The main wreckage was lying on its left side between two trees 5 feet apart, and about 35 feet south of the initial impact point. All major components of the helicopter were found at the accident scene. Examination of the flight controls revealed continuity at the time of impact. The engine logbook indicated that in August 1998, at 200.4 hours on the Hobbs meter, the owner replaced both pistons, rings, wrist pins, rod bearings, thermostat, and head o-rings. The Hobbs meter in the wreckage read 218.7 hours. Inspection of the engine revealed two different types of spark plugs were utilized, one of each type in the two cylinders. The spark plugs were wired such that one magneto fired one type of spark plug. Rotation of the crank shaft revealed 4 point scuffing on the cylinder and the Power Take-Off (PTO) piston. Was the NTSB wrong about the spark plugs? It doesn't say what the difference in "type" of plug was. Again, the Kawasaki's I've owned were very sensitive to having the right heat range of spark plug, especially the two-strokes. Change from one heat range to another made a big deal with these engines. Matt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
American nazi pond scum, version two | bushite kills bushite | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 21st 04 10:46 PM |
Hey! What fun!! Let's let them kill ourselves!!! | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 2 | December 17th 04 09:45 PM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | November 1st 03 06:27 AM |
Conspiracy Theorists (amusing) | Grantland | Military Aviation | 1 | October 2nd 03 12:17 AM |
rec.aviation.aerobatics FAQ | Dr. Guenther Eichhorn | Aerobatics | 0 | October 1st 03 07:27 AM |