FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

                             ROBINSON R-22

                     FLIGHT STANDARDIZATION BOARD

                                REPORT

                           February 15, 1995

                     Bryan W. Carpenter - Chairman

                                MEMBERS

                            William Wallace

                             Gilbert Riley

                            Robert O'Haver

                       Aircraft Evaluation Group

                           Fort Worth, Texas

                            (817) 222-5270


                     Flight Standardization Board

                             Robinson R-22

                                Part 1

                               Original

APPROVED:

         CHAIRMAN _______________________      Date:  02/09/95

                     Bryan W. Carpenter

REVIEWED:

                  ________________________     Date:  02/15/95

                      Louis C. Cusimano

       Manager, General Aviation and Commercial Division

                           AFS-800

                                   2


CONTENTS

SECTION

1.    Purpose and Applicability ....................................5

2.    Pilot "Type Rating" Requirements .............................6

3.    "Master Common Requirements" (MCRs) ..........................6

4.    "Master Difference Requirements" (MCDs) ......................6

5.    Acceptable "Operator Difference Requirements" Tables .........6

6.    FSB Specifications for Training ..............................7

7.    FSB Specifications for Checking .............................10

8.    FSB Specifications for Currency .............................10

9.    Aircraft Regulatory Compliance Checklist ....................11

10.   FSB Specifications for Devices and Simulators ...............11

11.   Application of FSB Report ...................................11

12    Alternate Means of Compliance ...............................11

13.   Miscellaneous ...............................................11

                                   3


REVISION RECORD

REVISION No.            SECTION           PAGE #s           DATE

Original                  ALL               ALL            02/15/95

                                   4


1.    PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY

1.1   The purpose of this report is to specify FAA master training,

checking, and currency requirements applicable to airmen operating

the Robinson R-22 helicopter under FAR Part 91.  One of its primary

purposes is to aid Part 61 and Part 141 Air Agencies and FAA

Principal Operations Inspectors in the use of applicable training

programs.

1.2   Applicability of a Flight Standardization Board is limited due

to the fact that the aircraft (R-22) is not designed for scheduled

Air Carrier operations.

1.3   The Robinson R-22 is listed in FAA Type certificate Data Sheet

H10WE and is hereafter referred to as the "R-22".

1.4   The FSB conducted numerous evaluations of the R-22 in accordance

with special detailed information guidelines and the reference

material from Advisory Circular 120-53 as applicable, to develop this

report.  Certain instrument proficiency and training requirements and

systems were not evaluated by the FSB because of inapplicability to

the training profile or operational use for which the aircraft was

intended.  The FSB is responsible for evaluating R-22 derivative

aircraft and all future changes to the R-22 (such as design

modifications or systems changes) when they are made to the aircraft.

The FSB then determines the associated impact on training and amends

this report accordingly.

1.5   This report also addresses certain issues regarding the

operation of the Robinson R-22 other than under FAR Parts 61 and 141.

Provisions of the report include:

      1.5.1  Describing training program special emphasis items.

      1.5.2  Endorsement requirements

1.6   The R-22 is certificated for VFR,  day and night operations

with a minimum crew of one pilot.  It may be used in on-demand

operations under FAR Part 135, student training and additional rating

instruction, and corporate and private transportation under FAR

Part 91.  Other possible uses include agricultural operations under

Part 137 and external load operations under Part 133.

1.7   The Robinson R-22 Flight Standardization Board met in Torrance,

California, on January 8 through 20, 1995.  Inspectors Bryan W.

Carpenter, William Wallace, Gilbert Riley, and Robert O'Haver were

members of the Flight Standardization Board.

                                   5


1.8   This is the original FSB report relative to the Robinson R-22.

Provisions of this report are effective until amended, superseded, or

withdrawn by subsequent FSB determinations.

1.9   Terminology

The term "must" is used in this report even though it is recognized

that this report and the Advisory Circular AC 120-53 on which it is

based, provides one acceptable means, but not necessarily the only

means, of compliance with FAR Part 61 Subparts C, D, E, G, and

Appendix B requirements.  The term "must" acknowledges the need for

operators to fully comply with the FSB report provisions of AC 120-53

and is to be used by the operator as its means of complying with the

appropriate parts of FAR 61 and 141.

2     PILOT "TYPE RATING" REQUIREMENTS

2.1   The Robinson R-22 has characteristics which makes awareness of

certain aerodynamic factors mandatory.  The awareness of low "G"

operations, rotor blade stall potential, energy management, and low

rotor RPM recovery techniques are critical.

2.2   The Robinson R-22 is certificated under Part 27 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations with a gross weight less than 12,500 pounds.  A

type rating is not required to operate this aircraft for purposes for

which an Airline Transport Pilot Certificate is not required. The

type rating for this aircraft is "R-22" and is listed in Order

8700.1, Volume 2, Chapter 9, Fig 9-3.

3     "MASTER COMMON REQUIREMENTS" (MCRs)

3.1   This section does not apply.

4     "MASTER DIFFERENCE REQUIREMENTS" (MDRs)

4.1   This section does not apply.

5     ACCEPTABLE "OPERATOR DIFFERENCE REQUIREMENTS" (ODRs) TABLES

5.1   This section does not apply.

                                   6


6     FSB SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRAINING

6.1   General:

      6.1.1     The provisions of this section of the report apply to

programs for all airmen, experienced or otherwise.  This includes

airmen beginning initial training, airmen who already hold rotorcraft

category and helicopter class ratings on their airman certificates.

and flight instructors certificated in rotorcraft-helicopters.

Certificated flight schools under FAR Part 141 and operators

conducting training under FAR Part 61 are affected.  Additional

requirements may be necessary for other airmen and will be determined

by the operator's POI, the FSB, and AFS-800 as necessary.

      6.1.2     There is no manufacturer-provided training program

which could be credited toward any FAR Part 135 requirements.

Nothing in this version (original) contains requirements for training

beyond that which is required by FAR Part 61 for pilot certification.

6.2   Applicability:

      6.2.1     Any person wishing to operate a Robinson R-22 should

complete a training  program designed to enhance awareness of the

hazards associated with certain characteristics of light helicopters.

Flight conducted in normal operating conditions may cause an

encounter with such hazards.

6.3   Awareness Training:

      6.3.1     Awareness training can be provided through a ground

training program consisting of general subject areas in helicopter

operational procedures and aerodynamics.  The subject matter should

include the development of information in the following areas:

                6.3.1.1     Discussion of energy management relative

to principles of aerodynamics with references to available energy

stored as a result of altitude (potential energy) and reference to

available energy developed as a result of rotor RPM and airspeed

attained (kinetic energy).

                6.3.1.2     Discussions involving the causes and

results of "mast bumping" in rotorcraft, and in particular, the R-22.

Gyroscopic principles leading to the initiation of mast bumping and

the effects of such occurrences are to be discussed.

                6.3.1.3     Low rotor RPM (blade stall) discussions

to provide additional information regarding the aspect of the actual

"stall" condition developed by the blade at low rotor RPM (as opposed

to "retreating blade stall").  Aspects of recovery techniques to be

used in the event of encountering low rotor RPM, the recognition of

                                   7


such circumstances, and the corrective actions to be taken to recover

RPM should be fully discussed.

                6.3.1.4     Discussion of the effects on rotor RPM

due to engine failure at high manifold pressure settings, high

airspeed operations, or other critical areas of flight including the

takeoff profile.  The discussion should relate to the enhanced and

rapid decay of rotor RPM due to the high drag situation developed as

a result of high angles of attack of the blade at the point of engine

failure.  Where the normal reaction time available to the pilot would

meet minimum certification requirements under normal power settings,

operating with high angle of attack of the main rotor blades, may

leave less time available for recovery and correction of a low rotor

RPM condition.  Such available time may be of sufficiently short

duration as to exceed the pilot's capability to respond.

                6.3.1.5     The effects of reduced "G": operations on

light helicopters such as the Robinson R-22 in light of the

particular characteristics of the teetering rotor system rotor blade

system and high tail rotor configuration.  When a low "G" situation

is encountered, such as an abrupt "pitchover" induced by abrupt

forward cyclic motion, or by turbulence, the main rotor disc may

become unloaded.  A rolling tendency will be encountered which could

only be aggravated by the application of controls in any direction

other than that which would "load" the disk.  The pilots natural

tendency to fly the aircraft back to level flight by application of

lateral cyclic or anti-torque pedal could lead to mast bumping and

subsequent rotor separation without adequate knowledge of the cause

of the roll and proper recovery actions necessary for safe

continuation of flight.

6.4   Flight Training: Abnormal and Emergency Procedures Flight

Training

      6.4.1     Emphasis should be placed on the ABNORMAL AND

EMERGENCY PROCEDURES FLIGHT TRAINING identified by this FSB report

and enhanced flight training should be given in the appropriate

subject areas.

      6.4.2     All pilots:

                6.4.2.1     Pilots should receive enhanced training

in autorotation procedures and be able to demonstrate proficiency in

autorotations from controlled flight in cruise and approach

configurations.  As the pilots proficiency level increases, he should

be able to demonstrate autorotations from all ranges of normal

operational speeds.

                6.4.2.2     The pilot must be entirely proficient in

the control of engine/rotor RPM without the use of the governor,

prior to conducting solo flight operations. Pilot training should

                                   8


include manual manipulation of the throttle control so as to

eliminate complacency and undue reliance on the use of the RPM

governor.

                6.4.2.3.    Additional training is required for

pilots in the areas of low rotor RPM recognition and recovery techniques.

Low rotor RPM recovery will be initiated from all aspects of the

normal flight envelope including hover and cruise flight.

                6.4.2.4     Pilots should receive training in

recovery from RPM "droop" or low rotor RPM situations during high

power settings or high altitude operations.  Recognition of the

requirement for the immediate application of recovery technique is

essential because of the increased drag prevalent on the rotor system

during such operations and the reduced RPM decay time available for

recovery.

                6.4.2.5     Pilots must receive training in the

effect of low "G" and the proper use of the controls to effect a safe

recovery.  The demonstration of such effects will be given by

instructors who have demonstrated proficiency in such maneuvers

within the limits of the normal envelope of operation.  Induced roll

maneuvers shall not be permitted and recovery must be initiated at

the first sign of unintended divergence from the normal flight path.

      6.4.3.    Flight Instructors:

                6.4.3.1     Instructors should note that

autorotation training should not be limited to hover autorotations or

autorotations from approach configurations at fixed power settings or

pre-established airspeeds.  As the student's proficiency level

increases, he should be able to demonstrate autorotations from all

ranges of normal operational speeds.

                6.4.3.2 Instructors providing low rotor RPM recovery

training must be proficient in and familiar with the proper

techniques for the conduct of demonstrations of such maneuvers.

Recovery techniques should not allow the student to continue with the

maneuver to the point of making additional mistakes.  At the

initiation of the maneuver, if the student makes an improper recovery

or displays inadequate recovery or control technique, the instructor

should take control of the aircraft and abort the demonstration.  A

second attempt at the maneuver may be made after regaining stable

flight.  Any attempt to continue the maneuver after improper control

input during training or checking is unwise.  Instructors will be

required to demonstrate proficiency in recovery from low rotor RPM

situations during high power settings or high altitude operations.

Recognition of the requirement for immediate application of recovery

techniques is essential due to the increased drag prevalent on the

rotor system during such operations and the reduced RPM decay time

available for recovery.

                                   9


                6.4.3.3     Instructors should be able to

demonstrate the effects of low "G" and must have demonstrated

proficiency in the initiation of the maneuver within the limits of

the normal envelope of operation.  Instructors must be able to

demonstrate proficiency at initiating the proper recovery techniques

at the first sign of unintended divergence from the normal flight

path.

7     FSB SPECIFICATIONS FOR CHECKING

7.1   Applicability:

      7.1.1     FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors (ASI) and Designated

Pilot Examiners (DPE) should complete the AWARENESS TRAINING, as

outlined above.  Following completion of training, DPE's may receive

a statement of satisfactory completion of the AWARENESS TRAINING

which would include a recommendation for the issuance of a Letter of

Authorization.  The Flight Standards District Office having

geographical responsibility for the DPE may, on the basis of the

recommendation, issue a Letter Of Authorization specifically for the

Robinson R-22 helicopter to authorize the DPE to conduct pilot

certification testing in Robinson aircraft.

      7.1.2     Each Certificated Flight Instructor must have an

endorsement from a DPE or ASI that the AWARENESS training and

ABNORMAL AND EMERGENCY PROCEDURES FLIGHT TRAINING required by this

FSB has been successfully completed.  The AWARENESS TRAINING should

be completed successfully before the CFI will be authorized to act as

pilot in command of the aircraft.  The ABNORMAL AND EMERGENCY

PROCEDURES FLIGHT TRAINING must be completed and proficiency in the

maneuvers and procedures must be demonstrated to either an FAA ASI or

DPE prior to obtaining an endorsement for authorization to give

flight instruction in the Robinson R-22.

7.2   The successful completion of the AWARENESS TRAINING should be

determined by means of a written or oral examination with a passing

grade of at least 70 percent corrected to 100 percent by oral review.

7.3   The successful completion of the ABNORMAL AND EMERGENCY

PROCEDURES FLIGHT TRAINING shall be determined by the standards

established in the practical test standards appropriate to the grade

of certificate held.

8  FSB SPECIFICATIONS FOR CURRENCY

8.1   All pilots who wish to act as pilot in command of a Robinson

R-22 aircraft should complete a flight review as required by FAR Part

61.56 in a Robinson R-22 Model helicopter.

                                    10


8.2   To meet the currency requirements of FAR Part  61.57, to act as

pilot in command of an R-22, the currency requirement must have been

accomplished in an R-22 helicopter.

9  AIRCRAFT REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST

With the exception of continued airworthiness, there is no operating

rule with which the manufacturer is obligated to show compliance.

10    FSB SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEVICES AND SIMULATORS

This section does not apply.

11    APPLICATION OF FSB REPORT

All relevant parts of this report are applicable to operators on the

effective date of this report.

12    ALTERNATE MEANS OF COMPLIANCE

12.1  Approval Level and Criteria:

Alternate means of compliance, other than that specified in this

report, must be approved by AFS-800.  If an alternate means of

compliance is sought, operators will be required to submit a proposed

alternate means of approval that provides an equivalent level of

safety to the provisions of this FSB report.  Analysis,

demonstrations, proof of concept testing, differences documentation

and/or evidence may be required.

12.2  Interim Programs

In the event of unforeseen circumstances which would not allow an

operator to comply with the provisions of this FSB report, the

operator may seek an interim program, rather than a permanent

alternate means of compliance.  Financial arrangements, schedule

adjustments, and other similar reasons are not considered "unforeseen

circumstances" for the purposes of this provision.

13.   MISCELLANEOUS

13.1  The following recommendations of the FSB pertain to the

certification of the aircraft and suggested design changes to certain

systems as improvements deemed necessary for ensuring safe operations

of the R-22.

      13.1.1      Carburetor air temperature system should

incorporate a relocated probe for accuracy of readings of real time

carburetor air temperatures.  Application of carburetor heat should

be initiated at all low power settings (approaches and autorotations)

regardless of atmospheric conditions to preclude engine stoppage due

to carburetor ice and reinforce pilot training.

                                   11


      13.1.2      Improved rotor speed governor system for the R-22

to reduce the possibility of rotor speed decay due to pilot

inattention.

      13.1.3      Longitudinal and lateral dampers in parallel with

the R-22 cyclic controls to impede abrupt movement of the cyclic.

      13.1.4      Low rotor RPM warning system horn should be made

more audible. Wiring through the headphone (ICS) system or audio

panel may increase pilot awareness.

      13.1.5      Redesign of cyclic system to include incorporation of

dual cyclic controls as opposed to single teetering control system so

as to increase pilot accessibility at each station.

      13.1.6      Modification of Rotor/Engine RPM monitoring system

(tachometer) to increase visible marking range for usable rotor RPM

range (e.g.; 50% to 116%)

      13.1.7    Increase inertia of main rotor system

      13.1.8    Revise FAR Part 27 to consider main rotor system

inertia in single engine helicopters.

                                   12