Robinson Helicopters has launched its first new design in 15 years and the R88 is the biggest Robinson ever. The new $3.3 million aircraft was unveiled Sunday ahead of Verticon, formerly Heli-Expo which is being held in Dallas this week. The R88 will carry up to 10 people (eight in the back, two in the pilot seats) but its configuration can be quickly changed to take a variety of different loads. "The highly configurable R88 is designed for a variety of missions, including aerial firefighting, air medical transport, utility work, passenger transport and more," a company news release said. "Its adaptable interior design allows for quick reconfiguration, supporting various mission needs."
Still has the 2-blade teetering rotor system (according to the Robinson picture). Its a liability surely? whether it is effective or not, it has such a bad reputation, why wouldn’t you avoid it on a new design?
Im a taildragger pilot. My point is not whether it works or not, or whether its safe. Im not in a position to judge. That feature however has been extremely controversial over the years and many people wouldnt go near a Robbie because of it. Here in New Zealand, government agencies are banned from chartering them. I’m a product designer by trade. When you are designing a product to compete with well established market players, why would you specifically include a controversial feature that will alienate a large percentage of potential customers?
There really isn’t anything “controversial” over a 2-bladed teetering rotor system. The Bell 206 is one of the most popular helicopters and uses a 2-bladed rotor.
As with anything in aviation, and in particular, helicopter rotor designs, there are advantages and disadvantages to everything. The main disadvantage everything thinks about with a 2-bladed rotor system is mast bumping, but if flown correctly, it’s not really a problem. And one big advantage to a 2-bladed rotor is that it takes up a lot less hangar space than a 3-or-more-bladed rotor system does (unless you add in a complicated and heavy blade-folding system), and it’s less expensive to produce.
Where Robinson got their “dangerous reputation” from was a lot of low-time helicopter instructors teaching new helicopter pilots in a helicopter (the R22) that was not built as a training aircraft. The “problem” was that the R22 (and the R44 too, though to a lesser extent) uses a comparatively light-weight rotor system (compared to, say, a Huey or 206), so when flown incorrectly you can find yourself in a bad situation more quickly. So just as the FAA did for the MU-2, they created a special SFAR to ensure that instructors and pilots are aware of the characteristics of the Robinson rotor systems and fly the aircraft correctly.
But 2-bladed rotor systems aren’t the only ones with disadvantages. All other rotor designs also have their own advantages and disadvantages, and variations in implementation.
Obviously, when one wants to own the market, one goes with the value proposition, the two-blade teeter.
And guess who owns that market?
(The only two helicopters that I’ve been in were a Bell 47 with no doors, and a JetRanger. I seem to have forgotten how dangerous they were, perhaps I shouldn’t have gotten in. Though the 206 had many thousands of hours …)
Would you elaborate what you mean with IMC level contrast? The article found on GNW is likely a 1:1 copy and paste or aggregated content and as submitted.
“Axis”, as in another servo is involved, not axis as in a mathematical grid sense. But I didn’t make up the terminology the autopilot manufacterers use.
I guess Russ hyperlinked it to refer to the source.
It opens and displays normally. In unedited form its a mile and a half too long and reads more like a avertorial, rather than a news-bit.
