Tim Archer Answers Questions

Items of interest regarding Brantly helicopters.

Moderator: Ron Spiker

Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby Ron Spiker » Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:44 pm

I sent Tim Archer several questions and was pleased that he took the time to answer them. See them below.

Dear Mr. Spiker,

I will try to address each of your questions below as specifically as possible. However, in general let me say that Brantly has surrendered its PC to the FAA and the Brantly office in the US is administrative only with one clerical employee. The operation in China is focusing on the V750 UAV which is a conversion of a B2B into an unmanned ship.

The decision to close Brantly in the US and put the focus on UAV’s is purely a business decision made by the Board of Directors and Company Management. The business plan does include a US Brantly International in the future (approximately 24-36 months). A stand alone company dedicated to B2B support cannot sustain itself, but together with UAV production and the revenue generated there, the resources would then be available to build and sustain a US facility along with new upgrades desperately needed for the B2B.

I realize this is not necessarily the response you are looking for but it is the current status of Brantly International. Please see my response below to your individual questions.

[RS] What is the status of Brantly in China? Are they still getting setup to build new ships and/or parts?
[TTA] Qingdao Haili Helicopter in China is focused entirely on converting existing B2B’s to the V750 and putting a new V750 into production.

[RS] Will this happen at all in the next few years, where helicopters and/or parts will be made again?
[TTA] It is the goal of the Board to have a US Brantly International Production Facility in the next 2-3 years focused on the V750 production, support of the B2B and possible upgraded versions of the B2B for production.

[RS] What about parts availability for us here in the States? We know Gary and Harold have some, but this is increasingly becoming a problem to find needed parts. Blades, shafts, bearings, dampers, clutches, etc.
[TTA] Without a Production Certificate Brantly cannot supply parts or components.

[RS] Will there be a solution for the Formsprag clutch overhauls? Either allowing an A&P to inspect and/or overhaul, or getting Formsprag to start doing them again.
[TTA] I will discuss this with engineering in China.

[RS] We heard talk a few years ago about the possibility of a new Superior engine for the Brantly, possibly up around 205 HP. Is there any truth to this? What a huge difference another 20-25 HP would make.
[TTA] Certification cost in todays economic climate does not make this a viable program today.

[RS] Is the Brantly helicopter going to go by the wayside, leaving all of us owners with orphan, unsupported helicopters?
[TTA] It is the goals of the Board to re-start Brantly International when it would be possible for the company to profitably sustain itself. Again, additional products such as the V750 will help this happen.

[RS] Can you tell us if the latest service bulletin (SB 111) will be turned into an AD by the FAA?
[TTA] I have not been informed by the FAA if this will take place or not.

User avatar
Ron Spiker
Site Admin
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2003 5:33 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby bryancobb » Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:00 pm

I'm sad for you guys!
It will take a lot of creativity to keep the 150 or 200 flying Brantlys in the air much longer.

Reminds me of the Tracy Lawrence song Time Marches On.
YHO-3BR Pilots International
User avatar
bryancobb
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Cartersville, Georgia

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby Hillberg » Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:38 pm

Pardon my French-By sellin & surendering the PC,I think Brantley is screwed.
Hillberg
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:51 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby seneca2e » Tue Dec 27, 2011 3:04 pm

What BS. They took every ship they could along with every available part and left us high and dry. I never will forget calling the factory and being told they'd taken everything and shipped it to China-l was told what was left was a few small rubber parts that would fit in a card board box. Yet they continued to put out complete double speak. The SB on the blades was just unbelievable. What a parting shot coupled with saying the old maintenance manual was no longer valid as pertains to the blade inspection procedures that had endured for 50 plus years. Makes me mad just to think about it. Truly would have been better off had it been just abandoned. Not too mention there would still be a few more helicopters and parts in the USA instead of drones in China.
Last edited by seneca2e on Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
seneca2e
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:35 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby Hillberg » Tue Dec 27, 2011 7:54 pm

The FAA has provisions in the FAR for owner produced parts and PMA processes dealing with aircraft with expired/surendered Type certificates and Production certificates. Aero metals did it with the 500 line, Who can get the brantly a face lift?
Hillberg
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:51 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby 9121u » Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:35 pm

WHERE do you get this kinda info.I Am interested what web site or how can some one look into this.....thanks..I tried to look stuff up before on matters like that. couldn't find any thing.. do you have to be a A and P or IA to do this.....thanks tom
9121u
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:20 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby Hillberg » Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:11 pm

Just talked to Riverside FSDO AFS-300 and PT 43 has the details and the "hard part" is getting copies of the drawings & test data from someone to have a vender (machine shop)produce the part, The person will show the part & drawing/test data to the local ACO/FSDO in his/her area .Documentation is the key and Take aim to produce the parts that wear out. The Form sprag is off the shelf and the applacation of a manufactures mark for the Quality & trace is required, It's all about the Inspection process either with a 337 or PMA. When Brantly surendered its production certificate it removes the propritary protection and is fair game for a PMA / STC parts manufacture. Will dig deeper on the subject .
Hillberg
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:51 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby 9121u » Fri Dec 30, 2011 1:36 pm

THANKS for digging into this. I tried to look some of this up on FARS. there's a lot to understand the way they word things. and I think I can get access to drawings if this person is willing to do so... this is verry good news.keep up the good work.thanks tom
9121u
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:20 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby scrapper » Sun Jan 01, 2012 6:22 pm

My guess, those with part supplies and machines have arranged to sell the balance to the Chinese
which they will just blend in with what they took earlier

thoughts?
Scrapper
scrapper
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 7:25 am

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby 9121u » Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:31 pm

GOOD question I don't think the parts vendors that brantly had would give up the tooling's or rights to produce parts. or not does any one no of this or no abought it.
9121u
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:20 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby Hillberg » Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:41 pm

The venders have no say, It's the production certificate holders protection under the certificate not the venders, AC 23-27 will outline what's needed for parts to be produced.The venders can not make parts without the QC of the PCH.(Could the old venders be contracted? under a PMA. ?. .)
With modern materal control & CNC production It can be done-The drawings and test data is a start, the copied piece has to match the fit & function of the original part /then the ACOs inspection and the New "manufactures" number affixed after the inspection, Call Doyal, Jenkens or others from the old Brantly manufacture. In some cases all it takes is buying the part off the shelf, applying the QC steps and parts marking and it's good to go. It's the documentation that is outlined in the ACs & FARs (AeroMetals does PMA parts for the 500,)
And I'm sure the B-2B qualifys for a vintage aircraft.
Hillberg
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:51 pm

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby bryancobb » Mon Jan 02, 2012 5:48 am

Hi guys,

My A.I. in Cartersville, GA is an FAA Repair Center LGRR381X. Southland Aviation. Lance McAfee. If I understand his answers correctly, his Repair Center has the authority to design/fabricate/certify/install parts that are no longer available.

He gave me as an example, a landing gear component for a PBY Catalina that he was repairing a couple of years ago.

I have discussed with him, the possibility of having autorotation clutches rebuilt by Formsprag/Dana/Bendix and inspected and certified by him. He indicated that he had an interest in doing that.

I know where a factory drawing of a 202 blade assembly is. It doesn't have the details of the spar, hingeblock, tip rib, weight, or skin, but it's an assembly drawing. Maybe this drawing will be coming into the posession of a member of this forum soon.
YHO-3BR Pilots International
User avatar
bryancobb
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Cartersville, Georgia

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby HELISCAN » Mon Jan 02, 2012 12:27 pm

Bryan;

Would that be to reskin the old blades or make new ones? Could stand to improve on the problem area of the outer blades. Bet we could find an old blade to play with.

Dave
HELISCAN
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 8:42 pm
Location: CHATTANOOGA

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby bryancobb » Mon Jan 02, 2012 1:32 pm

Hey Dave,
Hope the new year deals you and Patsy a Royal Flush! Good luck and happy new year.

I honestly don't have enough knowledge about what direction is possible on the blade availability situation. I just know the drawing that Doyle sent me has a LOTTTT of valuable info on it. I would think enough info would be on the drawing to have a Repair Center do a re-skin?

I never had a problem at all with the leading edge/spar, or the tip weight/tip rib. In my opinion, the root rip/hinge block's thinly tapered aft third was where all the skin cracking problems originated. Right where the damper attached. If I remember right, the drawing shows an 0.018" skin. If I still had my ship, and I had a blade to experiment with, I'd probably try to strengthen the root rib/hinge block in the 90 degree "Vee." Lance might even entertain the idea of certifying blades that Harold re-skins?
YHO-3BR Pilots International
User avatar
bryancobb
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Cartersville, Georgia

Re: Tim Archer Answers Questions

Postby 9121u » Mon Jan 02, 2012 3:27 pm

THIS is how people get into trouble and get service bulletins and ADS started. trying something they do not have experience with or authorized to do so. as I said before these are not experimental aircraft.. so things need to be processed in the right manner....so let it be if you do not no.. or can not help in that way. plus I do not no any one that needs any blades up this way where we have 5 helicopters they all have very good blades on them
9121u
 
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 6:20 pm

Next

Return to News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron