Raf rotor blade cracks!!!!!!!!!!

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Ben :

A couple of comments regaeding your post.

First , have you ever wondered why there so many of us who do not hold Jim in very high regard?

Could it be that there are only two gyro instructors left in the RAF organazation that still back up the company claim that the RAF2000 is stable and safe?

By the way I do not hold him in high regard because I do not believe that a professional flight instructor should teach people that they can be taught to overcome the physics of a high thrustline gyro to bunt.

Heaven knows there are enough of RAF's former customers in their graves that did not have the skills to prevent their RAF2000 from bunting.

Chuck E.

 

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

i am also a student of jim logan i find him to be a honest man and a very good teacher.and i am not going to sit back any longer and let you guys bad mouth him any longer. you know when i asked his why he doesnt post on this forum. he didnt say a bad word about any of ya, and yet you all do nothing but talk shit about him its a shame he has 2800 hours on his raf and you guys say its luck.
__________________

Ben :

Once again let me try and explain why I personally hold Jim Logan in low regard " as a flight instructor ".

I own a Cessna Aerobat Texas Taildragger that I use to re-teach commercial pilots how to fly.

We all should know that the Aerobat will recover from a spin as long as the Cof G is within the proper range and you use the proper control inputs to recover from the spin.

But lets say that I did not fully explain the C of G issue to a new pilot who had no understanding of aerodynamics and that student decided to put the battery in the tail thereby bringing the C of G way aft of its designed range.

Now lets assume that I knowing this said nothing and the student said he / she was going to do spins with the battery in the tail and died because the C of G was way out of the envelope.

Would I not be morally responsible for that students death by neglecting to warn the student of the danger of flying an aircraft with the C of G in a range that recovery from a spin would be impossible?

Furthermore if I owned an aircraft that was way out of C of G would it not be morally irresponsible of me teaching in it?

Chuck E.

 

[Vance]

Chuck, I flew with Jim Logan and I liked him very much as a person. He was paitent with my dificulty with PIO and my only challange with his teaching had to do with not being clear who had control of the aircraft. I was used to a more formal hand off of control. Steave Mcgowan had a similar style. I prefer Jim Mayfield or Terry as instructors because of this.

Chuck, that is a very thoughtfull post. I had not thought of it in those terms. We had some people die locally because they did not secure their cargo and did not properly calculate their cg. It was slightly aft and as the aircraft piched up they ran out of control, the cargo slid rearward, making things worse. They stalled and droped in on the right wing, killing them both. This made your example expecialy meaningful to me and I could feel your passion.

Jim did not in any way discouraghe the use of a horizantal stabilizer and he was the first to bring it up. He was aware of my experance with other autogyros so we did not focus on aerodynamics. I beleive that until I muffed the landing he thought I knew more than I did. The first time I flaired too high because I was used to a taller ship and the second time I overcompensated and flew it into the runway. He did a very good job of saving us.

Please here me when I say I am not disigreeing with you. Thank You, Vance

 

[KenSandyEggo]

Ben, no one has bashed Jim Logan the man. What is being bashed are his teaching methods, the information he passes on to students, and from my point of view, plagiarizing and readjusting sentences and paragraphs in the Rotorcraft Handbook to make a dangerous maneuver appear safe. I'm sure Jim never beat his wife or dog, probably goes to church and leads an exemplary life. This has nothing to do with propogating unsafe designs and maneuvers.

 

[ben]

Ben :

A couple of comments regaeding your post.

(First , have you ever wondered why there so many of us who do not hold Jim in very high regard? )Chuck E.

1)chuck, it seems to me that the so many of of ya turns out to really be 2 maybe 3 guys

(By the way I do not hold him in high regard because I do not believe that a professional flight instructor should teach people that they can be taught to overcome the physics of a high thrustline gyro to bunt.)Chuck E.[/QUOTE]

2) let me get this straight, just because you believe differently on how a gyro cfi teaches that gives you the right to trash his good name? it must be nice to be holy-er then thou.

3)and chuck will you please tell ken to level off a gyro or a plane #1 attitude #2 power #3 trim tought to me by jim logon

 

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Ben :

You can't explain why Only Logan and Hunn are defending and training on the RAF2000 which is a very, unstable design due to having a excessive high thrust line and no H.S.

Ken is correct with regard to leveling off in an RAF2000, sure you can level off using the same proceedure as any stable in pitch aircraft...but you are leaving your self even less pitch authority at full power due to the added push over of the propeller thrust line .

Maybe some day the light will come on and you will grasp the simple fact that there is no reason to Fly, train on or defend an unstable machine when there you can easily find stable machines.

One more time Ben, I see no reason why Logan and Hunn cannot teach and fly in stable machines, but just wait awhile and sooner or later someone else will bunt to their death for no good reason, anyone that does not see the moral issue surounding this subject is an easy victim of unorthodox instructors such as Logan and Hunn .

Chuck E.

 

[Jerseywing]

I just need one thing cleared up...Is RAF the only manufacturer that has ever made a gyro with a poor design? I look at the early air commands and they seem to have the same design flaw unless you modify them too. Barnett sems to have the prop pretty high as well. Whats the diff?

 

[ben]

chuck, what i dont understand is steve mcgowen up until this summer. was training in what you would call and overpowered high thurstline machine in witch you would by your own definition say to be unstable yet i never heard you or ken go after steve like you go at jim. i just think you have a hard-on for raf .

 

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

No.

The difference is the other manufacturers have changed their design, and for sure do not "force " their company instructors to teach unorthodox stability voo doo.

Chuck E.

 

[Jerseywing]

OK just curious thanks

 

[LARRYEBOYER]

I got a call from Mark Thorton at RAF yesterday. He said some one called him about a post I made concerning RAF hubbars. He wanted to remind me that there was another notice that came out since stating the rotor blades and bar should be disassembled every 100 hours to look for scratches and cracks. Just thought I would pass that along for those that have not inspected their hubbar.

 

[Aussie_Paul]

Geeeez, why won't they fix the problems instead of just lowering the hours!!!!!!!

If you abide by the Raf time change parts/inspection sheet, it would almost be costing more than a heli to operate, and you would have no time to fly as you would be forever having your Raf in the "shop"!!!!!!!! LOL.

Aussie Paul.

 

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

If it dosen't kill you first.

 

[Aussie_Paul]

So true Chuck.

Aussie Paul.

 

[Cobra Doc]

I'm glad I've made my decisions. Now it's time to finish the report and see what the higher-ups say. Too bad I didn't get better data from the insurance poll.
Cody

 

[Kolibri]

hub bar on my RAF

hub bar on my RAF

Paul's photo in the first post was horrifying. That bird was just seconds away from plummeting. Rather a miracle that it didn't fail just moments earlier.

_________

For the RAF situation;
Is anybody able to sum up:
number of have-flown RAF:
number of crash or semi-crash:
number of killed:
number of injured:
since the begining (and with time if possible...):
thanks in advance!.

https://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=36746&postcount=206

The below table I composed deals only with fatal RAF accidents in the USA. (When I've time, I'll look into creating a table of all RAF accidents.)

Note: Only 4 fatalities of rated gyro pilots, and none of any RAF pilots with >180 hours in type.
7 fatalities of high-time (3100+ hours) FW pilots, only 1 of whom was gyro rated.

Lessons: Training, rating, and 75+ hours in the RAF are key to survival.
Don't be impatient to fly your own machine, especially with pax.
Consider a CFI with <40% of the deceased students.
Don't fly foolishly (zoom climbing, excessive winds, low RRPM, etc.).
Install an effective horizontal stabilizer, especially with the EJ2.5 motor.
Take maintenance seriously, particularly the control system.

_________
While I've never met Duane Hunn or Jim Logan, I do have experience with the 3rd remaining RAF authorized USA CFI: Dofin Fritts (who brokered an RAF in his hangar, and provided 15 hours of dual instruction in 2014). Not only did he vigorously try to dissuade me from any H-stab, he "corrected" my FAA Gyroplane Handbook on the pivot point of PPOs (changing it from center of gravity to "center of drag"). His demonstration of hands-off flying was intended to convince me that the RAF without H-stab is inherently stable.

All of this was not only factually wrong, but wholly improper conduct as a CFI. (I very quickly wised up and added a Boyer HS -- highly recommended.) On that point, I concur with the below posts:

To fly and teach in an extremely unstable gyro without at least a horizontal stab, after all the information on the folly of it has been made known, is indefensible in my opinion.
https://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=36929&postcount=229

When any flight instructor fails to fully explain very important issues such as the dangers of unstable aircraft and justifies their failure to fully teach these issues by claiming that you will be a better pilot learning to fly an unstable aircraft is unacceptable in the aviation world that I have lived in and still teach in.
https://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=36854&postcount=218

I was trying to point out that there seems to be a lack of passing information to students during training probably because until just recently none of us realized the signifigance of the high thrustline in pusher gyros.
Bottom line is now that this problem has been identified it should be part of every gyro instructors teaching.
https://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=36899&postcount=221

_________
Regarding the original topic of this thread -- a cracked hub bar -- something very similar was likely due to happen to me. Dofin Fritts trailered my gyro out to me, and while either he or another before him transported it, the hub bar and a tension strap were scratched and gouged (see photo). Fritts did not catch such important damage either at Brewton or while assembling my gyro at my homebase for our last 3 hours of dual.

The hub bar arm gash was deepest and the most dire. I did not notice it until after Fritts had departed. A closer look with a flashlight showed a previous buffing attempt (and in the wrong direction, longitudinally, which will tend to scallop the area). Furthermore, the gash was already there upon delivery (see inset photo with red circle, as Fritts was installing the rotors). I did not notice that gash when training in Brewton weeks earlier, but I could have missed it as our pre-flights were (in retrospect with more experience) pretty skimpy.

The central hub bar gouges under the teeter tower I did not see until my A&P and I removed the rotor for the first time. (These gouges could not have occurred with rotors attached.) My A&P very nicely polished out the gouged and gashed hub bar to our great relief.

I have been guilty of not inspecting the rotor system because we were using the ladder for something else or it wasn't handy. I have done inspections when the light wasn't really good enough in the hanger to see this kind of crack. I am not going to make that mistake again.

I would like to point that these kinds of cracks are very hard to see in the early stages. From the time you can see the crack to a seperation of the part is generaly quite short.
https://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=35232&postcount=10

Hear, hear! Suffice to say that I now very carefully inspect my hub bar every pre-/post-flight with flashlight and magnifying lens.

_________
Very early on I began to prop up my rotors in the hangar -- can't hurt, and Product Notice 31 insists on it, as well as:

Add to the 100 hour inspection the following: Remove the rotor blades from the hub bar winglets and check for scratches, stress risers, or elongation of the holes in the winglets every 100 hours of operation. Repair or replace the winglets as required.

Although my RAF hub bar and rotors had been swapped out in 2005 per the factory's offer in Product Notice 39, I'm considering going with a SC or DW replacement long before having to routinely replace them or even the two big AN12 bolts.

Is the hub bar/rotors 500 hour time change order of RAF Product Notice 33 still in effect with these 2005 parts?

Safe flying, Kolibri

 

[Kolibri]

Kolibri going to full Sport Copter RAF conversion

Kolibri going to full Sport Copter RAF conversion

An RAF product notice number 33 was issued on June 18, 2001, placing a 500 hour time change factor on RAF rotor blades and hub bar "until further notice". Since RAF has never announced otherwise, this Notice 33 apparently also embraces the improved rotor system of Notices 35 and 39. A mere 500 hours betokens to me an unacceptably low factory confidence in the RAF rotor system.

In part due to my lack of faith in the 2005-era RAF hub bar design (which is their least-worst of the design continuum), and the August 2015 failure in South Africa of ZU-RHO's winglet AN12 bolt (for yet unexplained cause), I have decided to ground my RAF pending a thorough upgrade.

I'd initially considered going only to the Sport Copter 30' rotors and hub bar (within the RAF rotor head), but after speaking with Jim Vanek I decided to totally upgrade my RAF with the SC complete rotor head and mast plates. (I haven't sufficient confidence in my 2005 RAF rotorhead to continue flying it. On the torque tube there is only ~½" of metal between the AN8 spindle bolt hole and the AN6 pitch bolt hole. One torque tube has broken at that point.) . . .

https://www.rotaryforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=618947&postcount=63

I'll post in Kolibri's Korner thread my experience with this.

_____
btw, if you think you may have the older hub bar system (or are not sure), please look into this at once.

Below is the pre-Product Notice 39 winglet.

Circled in red is the old stress-concentrating scalloping.
Notice the straight end of the older winglet.

Post-Notice 39 winglets look quite different.
A contured change of thickness, and wider ends by the rotor bolts.

I've an anonymous poll about which rotors folks have on their RAF.

Regards, Kolibri