www.brantly.info

Seems I've seen relatively a lot of complaints about lack of tail rotor authority on the Brantlys. How big an issue is that for some of you experienced Brantly guys?

Where or from whom have you seen these lots of complaints? I've heard of very few. I know there are a few mentions of it on the forum here, but anywhere else?

I know there are others on here with more experience in Brantly than me, but I have never run out of T/R authority. However, I also do not put myself into positions I know could cause a problem either. I'm always aware of where the wind is coming from, especially when doing ground work, and don't put the tail into where LTE is likely to happen. Know the conditions you're flying in, your aircraft's and your own limitations and don't exceed them. The T/R authority on the Brantly may not be quit as good as the Robinsons, but I have no complaints about it either. I've flown worse.

Ron

It's been a while since I've been in a Brantly but I've got a little over 300 hours in these things and have never had one issue with tail rotor effectiveness.

Ron hit the nail on the head when he mentioned what I consider to be "situational awareness."

The only other consideration I can think of with the Brantly tail rotor is having it rigged properly.

jwgood wrote: The only other consideration I can think of with the Brantly tail rotor is having it rigged properly.

Bingo!

I got most of the hits on the Brantly lack of tail rotor authority when I was reviewing LTE in various threads around the internet. I also personally felt comparing it to the Enstrom it didn't have much authority. I'm glad to hear that some of the most experienced Brantly guys on here don't think it's a major problem-but still when you design in a lot of "pilot error" problems you get a lot of "pilot error" crashes. Some helicopters are almost immune to LTE(actually the R22 is pretty close despite it's shortcomings in other areas). Just got to stay sharp lol.

To me it seems to compare to the Hughes 269A-1 (not the 300C.) I have most of my time in them and never had a real problem with T/R authority. We used to fly in all kinds of blustery winds and do downwind landings and quick stops all the time. It might keep your feet busy but it was never incapable of keeping the helicopter under control. My experience in the Brantly tells me they are almost identical in authority.

Now from what I gather on a lot of these accidents RPM plays a role in a lot of them. Lose some rotor rpm manuevering close to the ground and you start pulling in collective which increases torque reaction requiring more pedal, all of a sudden you run out of pedal and ruin a perfectly good day It's a trap lots of low time pilots get into.

Harold tells me he's found quite a few machines with mis-rigged T/R's. Also the factory has a mod to further increase the T/R pitch range. Sounds like a good thing to me. The Brantly will probably never match the Robinson's T/R authority with that long tailboom. I think Frank designed it to have an overabundance of authority. It doesn't mean however the Brantly is inadequate.

I believe I just read in the maintenance manual that machines after s/n 462 had the larger angle tail rotor(17-18 degrees left I think and 31 total). Those before that were only about 15 degrees left. Some have probably been modified to the higher tail rotor authority setup. All from memory didn't want to go read it again right now lol.