Talk:Robinson R66

Improper page move

First, this page was moved improperly via cut-and-paste rather than through the "Move" function tab. Such a move breaks the article edit history, causing it to be on two separate pages.

Second, I have only found references to "R66 Goat" on fan forums, and not in any verifiable published sources. Until such sources are produced, preferably something from Robinson itself, the name should be left out of the article.

Third, assuming the name is proven to be official, both the R22 and R44 have had multiple names and designations. The R22 has been named the Alpha, Beta, and Beta II, while the R44 has been named the Raven, Raven II, Astro, and Clipper, among others. Given that pattern, it's probably best to leave this page at Robinson R66.

Fourth, this page should only be moved to Robinson R66 Goat if there is a consensus to do so, which no one has even attempted to do at this point.

Fifth, even if the move achieves consensus, an admin will have to do the move because the new name was created outside of the Move-tab process, and non admin moves cannot be made in such cases. - BillCJ 23:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

As a helicopter pilot myself, I can indeed confirm that "Goat" is just a derogatory name used to reference the R66. In no way is it official by any means. Blackoutjr (talk) 22:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The terms "Alpha" and "Beta" aren't names or nicknames for the R22. The series started out as just plain R22. Subsequent modifications to the landing skids resulted in the "R22 Alpha", and further modifications became the "R22 Beta", such as addition of an auxiliary fuel tank and main rotor brake. This is no different than putting an "A" and "B" suffix after the model number. There are special purpose variants of the R22, such as the Mariner, which is fitted with floats. As far as I know, such names are just used for marketing purposes and not official model numbers recognized in government records. Given the history of marketing names chosen for Robinson Helicopter Company products, it sounds doubtful that they would choose "Goat". As of this writing the Robinson sales brochure just calls it the "R66 TURBINE". — Quicksilver^{T @} 07:35, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

R66 Image

I am willing to contribute this image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/owengpz/5489431545/in/photostream/ It is my own image, but do not know how to upload it.

The image also clearly shows the name "TURBINE" under the model designation R66 which shows that the "Goat" rumour is just that - a rumour. — Djapa Owen 12:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djapa84 (talk • contribs)

Accidents & Crashes

An R66 helicopter crash that killed both the pilot and passenger in Girardot, Colombia on July 12, 2011, has resulted in the first lawsuit filed against Robinson Helicopter for their R66. The legal complaint specifies an issue between the Honeywell systems and the Rolls-Royce engine on landings. see http://www.planecrashes.org/r66-robinson-crash-aviation-lawsuit.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.40.253 (talk) 02:43, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

That is an odd website, no indication of who publishes it, whether it has editorial oversight or anything. It looks like an anonymous blog with a lot of advertising, specifically to funnel people to www.airplanecrash-lawyer.com. I am not sure at all that it meets WP:RS. - Ahunt (talk) 12:29, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree that website seems strange. I did a bit of a search and came across several better written pages on the incident including http://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/aviation-press-releases/robinson-helicopter-colombia-crash.php, http://www.robinsonhelicopters.org/index.php?option=com_jfusion&Itemid=53&topic=1277.0 (which is a forum, but includes a number of links), and http://helihub.com/2011/07/12/12-jul-11-n810ag-robinson-r66-girardot-airport-colombia-2f/ (again including more links). Helihub also lists two other R66 fatals, http://helihub.com/2013/03/09/09-mar-13-zk-ihu-robinson-r66-oamaru-valley-new-zealand-1f/ and http://helihub.com/2011/10/24/ntsb-issues-prelim-report-for-fatal-r66-crash-n266cy/.

None of these reports include conclusive findings on the causes of the crashes, nor any blame of the design or manufacturer apart from that by the lawyers. I am not sure it makes sense to list every incident in the article unless final findings are made against Robinson. Aviation is a hazardous business. Imaging how big the list would be if we listed every crash of a Cessna 172 - there would be thousands of cases to list and yet it would still have little meaning as the type is considered safe and reliable and most of those cases were most likely due to factors such as maintenance problems, weather or errors. Djapa Owen (talk) 06:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Which is why we have the consensus inclusion criteria at WP:AIRCRASH. This basically says for light aircraft we only include crashes that result in substantial changes in the aircraft design or in procedures. These days just about every crash of any vehicle results in a lawsuit, so that in itself is not significant. The official NTSB report seems to indicate a tail boom strike in flight. Unless something more substantial can be added I suggest that this be removed from the article as "non-notable". - Ahunt (talk) 11:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

That clarifies things. Removed accordingly. Djapa Owen (talk) 11:54, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I just removed another report. There should not be an A&C/A&I section for every crash of a type, only if it illustrates an notable feature of the type. Here is the entry I removed: ! ==Accidents and incidents== On Saturday 27th July 2013, a Robinson R66 helicopter crashed in a rugged wooded area of Pennsylvania, killing all five people on board.

Djapa Owen (talk) 13:20, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Good call - it is not notable. The car type articles don't list every time a car has an accident.- Ahunt (talk) 15:37, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

References

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Robinson R66/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Automatic stub, as the aircraft was just recently announced. I expect the article will grow similar to the UH-72 Lakota and Bell ARH-70 articles as the development progresses. --Born2flie 21:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 21:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 04:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)