Researching private ownership...

[Nrgy]

Hi all, a new poster here trying to gather information on helicopter ownership. At this point I am simply trying to figure out if this is something worth pursing, and/or if a helicopter would even fulfill the needs of my family. Depending on what I am able to find out, we may end saying to ourselves "what were we thinking", or at least what was "I" thinking :O I received my helicopter PPL in a R22 nearly 3 years ago but failed to stick with it after that. My brother recently received his fixed wing PPL, and now we are both undecided whether to pursue additional training (ie. IFR, multi engine) in helicopters or fixed wing. Naturally as a helicopter fan, I am trying to convince my family that a helicopter can accomplish our goals, but the truth is I'm not so sure?

Here is the situation. My family is looking for alternative transportation for traveling roughly 400nm as the crow flies. My parents own several ranches in Montana in close proximity to each other (50-100 nm), however we all permanently reside in a different state, as I stated earlier roughly 400nm away. Not only are we looking to travel to Montana, but being able to hop between the different properties is a big plus as well. A fixed wing obviously has the advantage in speed and range, however the short range flexibility of a helicopter to land nearly anywhere would also have its advantages.

I guess my first question would be, is it common and/or practical to use a helicopter for medium range transport such as this? Or is this typically not done in helicopters? Obviously it depends a lot on the helicopter, but we've considered an EC120, MD600n, or even a twin like the Agusta A109c. The latter seems like the best (and costliest) choice to me, as it is IFR capable and twin engine, which would be very beneficial in the climate/terrarin we have here in the Pacific NW. Not to mention that it is faster and has greater range.

Another question is, how realistic would it be for a PPL or even a CPL w/ an IFR rating, 200 hours, and the necessary type rating fly one of the above mentioned machines? I know that as a profession, anything less than 500hrs is considered low time, and most companies won't hire you for turbine with less than 1,000, let alone twin engine? Is it ridiculous to think that my brother and I could, or even should fly privately, a light single turbine, or a A109c? Would we even be able to get insurance with a IFR and type rating, and 200 hours, or would no one want to touch us?

I have many other questions, but wanted to first get the opinions of professionals before going into other details if a) a helicopter can do the job we need timely and effectivley, and b) how much experience would we realisticly need to pilot the machines listed above?

Thanks for any and all advice, and I apologize if my questions may seem a bit out there :\

[FH1100 Pilot]

Nrgy, I've got some good news and some bad news. Actually, you might like it all.

Gotta think outside the box here.

First of all, 400 miles is no trip for a helicopter. You're going to spend well over two hours in even the fastest helicopter. And you're going to need a pretty big helicopter if it's you, your brother, your parents and baggage. So the EC120 is out right there. MD600 can probably take four+bags and full fuel (where *do* you put the bags?), but even so it only goes...what...120 knots? VFR? How much torture do you want to subject your parents to?? Plus, with weather and terrain considerations in that part of the country, you absolutely positively do not want to do this trip while being limited to VFR. The 109 could probably do it IFR and pretty fast (for a helicopter), but you might still have to stop for fuel because I'm not sure it has the endurance for a 400 mile flight with IFR reserves (could be wrong there though).

Here's a better idea. The initial cross-country is an airplane trip, plain and simple. So buy a Beech Bonanza with the RR/Allison B-17 turbine. Somewhere around $800-900k. You and your brother can fly it, and you're both probably insurable in it. Two hours in the Bonanza.

Or, go up a notch to the Socata TBM 700/850. These start around $1.5M. No way will any insurance company touch you guys in a twin-anything, and anyway the only twin I'd recommend would be the baby King Air 90. I mean, don't even bother with piston twins. Or singles for that matter, but that goes without saying.

At the Montana end, buy a $600k Bell 206B or EC120 and stick it a hangar there for the times you need it when you're there. (Hangar rent might be cheaper for the Bell.) Shouldn't be a problem with insurance if you factor in $10k for Bell school.

Your total aircraft purchase will be under $2.0 million. Operating cost of the turbine Bonanza will be a WHOLE LOT LESS on a 400 mile trip than a helicopter. And you still get to fly a helicopter around Montana if the weather's nice (which is the only time you want to be flying a helicopter, trust me).

Best of both worlds!

[JimBall]

Don't you love that. A post from Florida stating that you only want to be flying a helicopter in good weather.

Hmmmm Pensecola ? Hmmmmmm taxpayer-funded doughnut eating when it gets a bit windy & grey ?

Great answer though.

[Barndweller]

Welcome Nrgy.

In terms of what kit to buy - theres a lot of sense in what FH1100 says.

In terms of experience - There is no reason why a low timer can not safely fly machines such as you describe - as long as you go about it the correct way. I would however build some experience on a vfr single before going onto an IFR twin

1)Get proper training - not just at a school - once you've finished the basics get a good instructor to come to the area you plan to operate in and show you how to do it in the real environment.
2)Stay current and get refresher training regularly on the type - sounds like cost is not too much of a concern. Get a really good instructor on side that you can phone up and ask for advice if you need it - Take that advice when it's given.
3) SET SAFE LIMITS AND STICK TO THEM, particularly with regard to weather - write them down and carry them in the aircraft.

People only tend to get killed when they go outside their areas of ability.

Good luck and safe flying / learning.
Barny

[scooter boy]

Nrgy,
I agree with the second post that 400nm is a heck of a way in any helicopter. I would also agree that both fixed wing and helicopter ownership provides the very best of both worlds.

I own and operate the following two aircraft which I bought new :

A 2005 Mooney Ovation 2 - deiced, G1000, IFR which is perfect for trips of this length. It cruises at around 180Kts so I would plan for 2.5 hrs for your 400nm trip. I have 130usg long range tanks which will take you further than 2000nm if your bladder can stand it. Nothing else comes close in the single-engine piston market in terms of economy and utility. The plastic fixed-gear stuff out there (Cirrus/Columbia) is non-FIKI approvable and far less economical.

I also own a 2004 R44 Clipper II which I use for shorter stuff. I fly this most days (every day for the last few weeks in fact). The Robinson product (as you know from the R22) is unbeatable in terms of value for money and is perfectly safe when used for day/VFR trips. It is much more tiring to fly than the fixed wing though since it has no autopilot but it is far more tolerant of windy conditions and has the added benefit that you can keep it at home.

My total budget was approx USD $800K.

I would love an A109 and a PC-12 (and could afford to step up) but I couldn't justify ownership and running costs of such expensive depreciating capital assets unless I rented the aircraft out and that would be too much inconvenience and hassle for me. Plus (more importantly) the Mrs would kill me!

Decisions, decisions...
SB

[rick1128]

Nrgy,

First of all you will be operating in areas that can be quite unforgiving to the unprepared. I have operated SE aircraft in those areas, but only day VFR/VMC. A turbine SE may be a viable option. However, you can find good older King Air E-90's and B100's for the same money or less. Plus they can operate off unimproved landing strips. So they can be used to fly between your properties. As for a helicopter, personally in your situation I would look at a BH206B or an Enstrom 28C or 280C or better. Both have high inertia rotors and have good safety records. But it would also depend on what altitudes you would be operating at.

[delta3]

Nrgy

400 NM is feasible with the heli only. Taking the math above: 2.5Hrs versus 3.6+0.4=4.0hrs, boils down to how long will you spend going up and down to the airports (times two), unless you can land the plane at the location.
One draw back of the heli is that you need to refill, which could create planning problems.

Also figure that with the plane option you will need more than 1 heli, or an extra pilot that flies the heli.

d3

[ShyTorque]

The 109 could probably do it IFR and pretty fast (for a helicopter), but you might still have to stop for fuel because I'm not sure it has the endurance for a 400 mile flight with IFR reserves (could be wrong there though).


I'm pretty certain that 4 plus bags, plus 400nm single hop with IFR reserves is well beyond a 109C and also beyond the later marks (I fly a later model single pilot IFR).

[EN48]

Be sure to get some insurance quotes before you buy anything. Be sure to be sitting down when you read the quotes. Figure around 4% to 7% of hull value for helicopter hull coverage, depending on experience (unless you self insure) and helo make/model. The bad news for a newer 109: this might be in the range of $200,000 to $400,000 per year just for hull coverage; the good news: you probably wont be able to buy coverage at any price (on a 109) without a more experienced pilot as PIC.

You might want to consider a Cessna Caravan as a "do it all" option. Turbine reliability, roomy, easy to fly, IFR capable, and much more reasonable insurance (although with 200 hours, you will need to fly with a mentor pilot for quite awhile, IMO, to get insured).

[Nrgy]

Thank you everyone very informative posts, as they have been very helpful. I figured a 400nm jaunt was a bit of a stretch for a helicopter (although I tried to convince myself otherwise), but it is good to hear it from the experienced members on this forum. I did figure that a fuel stop would pretty much be mandatory with almost any helicopter, even for the 109. By the way, the ground level in Montana where we would be operating at is around 4,500ft, and that is in the valleys.

We have tossed around the idea of a plane for the cross country portion as well, and it does seem this really is the best way to go. I will certainly suggest we look further into this, but ultimately I'm not the one to be making the final decision :\ In anycase, your suggestions and comments have given me something to think about, and it seems there are many possibilities available (although it looks like I can stop dreaming about the 109). Even fractional ownership in a fixed wing might be another option.

If nothing else, I think I will continue to build hours in a helicopter and perhaps go for my CPL and/or IFR rating, while my brother continue to build fixed wing time and additional ratings. That will leave us better prepared for the future and open to more options.

Thanks again everyone...I've been searching for an online forum of knowledgeable aviators and it looks like I've found it!

[krypton_john]

Why not an AW119 instead of A109? Cheaper to own, cheaper to fly, simpler to fly, less maintenance, same range, same payload? Still has the same number of seats and same huge baggage compartment.