ARCH inc - Revolution
American RCH Inc Revolution 40 (1976)
 |
Specification:
|
||||||||||||||
| Documents: | |||||||||||||||
 Revolution 40 - Instruction Manual Revolution_40_inst |
 Revolution II review - Bill Burkinshaw on building and flying the Flybarless Revolution II from Sep 09 RCM&E. |
||||||||||||||
| Reports | |||||||||||||||
Original 1976 advert 
The Revolution 40 was a Schlüter look-a-like though the canopy gave it a different and also distinctive look. Available with either red or blue anodised finish though as an historic note it would appear that the red was more popular as I have only found one record of a blue one. As stated it was for 40 size 'aero' engines and four function control without gyro with the usual belt start for the engine. The canopy was a different shape so as to change the look however as the woodwork was 'Heli-Baby' and a Schlüter canopy would also fit. Whilst no matter what argument is put forward it definitely was a copy (modern term 'clone') however, it did incorporated a number of design improvements. The side frames whilst looking the same were not actually interchangeable as the clutch shaft on the revolution had a top bearing for extra support. The head assembly had a shorter flybar with plastic paddles unlike the metal types on the Heli-Baby. The mounting of the swashplate was also different being of the captive ball type instead of being located vertically by the tapered spring arrangement on the Heli-Baby. mounting of the motor was also more substantial providing better support to the whole assembly however the tail drive pulley angles did not match the belts used and they used to wear quite quickly. Tail boom attachment of the revolution was by a pressed block with tapped holes whilst the Heli-Baby incorporated split castings and had tail rotor control effected by an angled slot in the arm bracket whilst the revolution used a 90 degree bell crank. The Revolution also had a titanium hollow main shaft (1/4" diameter) which used to bend at the slightest provocation and it was considered the 'norm' to have a 'handful' of these as spares in order to complete a days flying. Finally the Heli-Baby used European metric fastening and as usual for American models of the time the revolution had SAE fittings.
The revolution was more 'sprightly' than the Heli-baby due in the main to the larger lighter paddles however, comment of the day reckoned that the longer Heli-Baby flybar coupled with the larger Revolution 'stunt' paddles was the most effective set-up especially for circuit flying and straight line stability.
Revolution 40 - Build review June 1976
There is a big 'however' concerning its flyability with many records of both successful flight and others of totally unsuccessful attempts to even get it to effectively hover. One documented fact is that many people saw John Simone loop and roll a fixed pitch revolution 40 in 1977 though the specifications of 'that' machine is not known and it could very well have been highly modified. I suspect that the true facts are that like all helicopters of the time; set up well and it will fly but set up incorrectly and no chance at all of success. I personally know that the Schlüter Heli-Baby it was based on (even with floats) flew very well but others even consider the Heli-Baby as poor........???
Engine 'of the day' seems to have been the K&B 40 as most references to personal versions refer to this engine.
After its initial introduction the model was upgraded for collective pitch with what looks like a cross between a Schlüter main blade holder assembly and a Kavan flybar layout.
American RCH Inc Revolution II (1978)
Basically a 60 sized collective pitch revolution 40 with different canopy and came in red, blue or green anodised colours; also available with a Flybarless head conversion; comment of the day was that it worked fine in forward flight but was a bit of a 'pig' in the hover; main shaft diameter was increased to 5/8".
Revolution Flybarless
