What would you choose, R22 or 300CBi if a similar price?

[Pigeon-dodger]

This is not really a question about which helicopter is a better training helicopter as I know there are loads of posts about this but just after some feedback.

If someone in the UK, say near London, could offer a new, or nearly new, 300CBi at the same or similar price to an R22 per hour, what do you think the interest would be?

My thoughts are

1) If you are heavier, you only really have a choice of the R44 for training and hire.....much more per hour.

2) Possibly less time to learn on the 300CBi? (any ideas how much less)

3) Nicer, bigger place to sit in? Could even carry three for self fly hire?

4) Higher Rota inertia, fully articulated head, fuel injected engine...

On the downside,

1) Bit slower?

Would really appreciate peoples feedback.

Fly safe....:ok:

[Hughes500]

1) If you are heavier, you only really have a choice of the R44 for training and hire.....much more per hour.

No have taught 3 people who were over 125kgs in one of my 300C's ( C is a load more powerful than a cbi)

2) Possibly less time to learn on the 300CBi? (any ideas how much less)
When I freelanced at a school that used both 300 was about 10 to 15% quicker

3) Nicer, bigger place to sit in? Could even carry three for self fly hire?
Wouldnt try 3 in a cbi, c no problem

4) Higher Rota inertia, fully articulated head, fuel injected engine...
You have answered your own question

Other good side no 12 year 2200 hour rebuild

On the downside,

1) Bit slower?
300c comfortable at 75 kts will do 85 but you know you are doing it !!!

[FLY 7]

I've just been looking at the 'light' helicopter market and flew most of the options and listened to a lot of advice.

There's actually no definitive answer, as there are many different issues to consider. And some 'advice' will be tainted by personal prejudices and self interest.

But the 300s (particularly the C) did get a lot of praise. And the Enstrom 280fx shouldn't be dismissed. I had hoped the R44 would have fitted the bill, but despite its merits, I was a little disappointed.

In the end I went for a well equipped 2005 300C. Not cheap (same price as Raven II), but it met my criteria and was highly recommended by the people I trust.

[Whirlygig]

3) Nicer, bigger place to sit in? Could even carry three for self fly hire?
Wouldnt try 3 in a cbi, c no problem
Not so much a case of "wouldn't try it" but more a case of, "it can't be done!"

The 300C is flown from the left seat which means that with dual controls taken out, you can get two passengers alongside (if they don't weigh too much!). However, the CBi is flown from the right seat and with the collective in the middle, three across is no longer an option and there is no third seat.

Hughes500 is spot on - if you're heavier, the R22 is out and, with the R44 being much more expensive, the 300 is an excellent option.

Cheers

Whirls

[Flashover999]

If you can supply a 300 for the same price or very close to the price of a R22 and i dont have to travel too far to fly it then i would fly the 300 any day. I know VEE-ANY loves them, has loads of time in them and would train people in them hands down. Maybe it would be worth getting his input on whats the best model to have and what his students thought of the experience?

Flash:ok:

[manfromuncle]

Mmmm.. having flown, and taught extensively in both...

The 300 is easier to fly, but crap for going anywhere as it's SLOW and you can't carry anything, and it burns more fuel. And they always seem to break more often, not major stuff, just niggly things that keep them on ground much more often than the R22. If you want a career as an instructor, then opt for the R22, as Schweizer FI jobs are few and far between.

If you learn to fly on the 300, then when/if you transfer onto a Robinson, you will struggle to fly it as well. Most people I have taught need about 10 hours conversion, and even then, they aren't too comfortable with it, because of the teetering head 'feel', t-bar cyclic position, and RRPM control.

[Pigeon-dodger]

Hi guys,

Thanks for feedback, I was really asking if it would be a real success (or really wanted / needed) to try and have one for hire or training, especailly if the same or similar price tot eh R22.

The answer is definetly 'yes'. As much as anything, all the R22 boys can add another type or if you are just starting, may well prefer to learn on it for the reasons above if a similar price.

Anyone know what how many hours an average school / self fly hire R22 would work a year?

thanks

:ok:

[manfromuncle]

Hardly any schools in the UK do much self-fly hiring. The occasional one at weekends in the summer for a buzz around the local area, that's it. See this previous thread about why people give up flying after getting their PPL.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=322852

[AB139engineer]

your question is not realistic, it costs a lot more money to purchase the 300 than the R-22 and the 300 has higher routine maintenance & overhaul costs.

[Vaaljapie]

Not so much a case of "wouldn't try it" but more a case of, "it can't be done!"

The 300C is flown from the left seat which means that with dual controls taken out, you can get two passengers alongside (if they don't weigh too much!). However, the CBi is flown from the right seat and with the collective in the middle, three across is no longer an option and there is no third seat.


Sorry to say but you are wrong mate. I have done commercial work in the 300c and 300cbi and they are both flown from the left seat. Both of them have the extra seat in the middle when you take out the collective. It is also possible to carry three people in the cbi if they are not to heavy, you are limited with the amount of fuel you can take, but it is not impossible.

[Heli-phile]

If You could operate a 300c for the same price as a R22 There would be very few people bothering with the R22.

Its a fact of life that the machine which can generate the most money will be the machine ordered, and even when the cheaper/more profitable machine is much less forgiving and proven to have a much higher accident rate this still applies.

I have flown lots of hours in both 300c's and R22's (in all conditions) and there is no question as to which one is the better/safer machine. Put both machines on the flightline at the same price and just see what happens.

Dont worry about flying slower in the 300c, at least you wont have to "overload it" to have enough fuel to actually fly a reasonable distance.

Finally- No doubt there will be Robinson zealots already looking for the reply button to fire off abuse, but before you do this please do a quick W+B for me.

With a 20 minute reserve, what is your fuel endurance with:
ISA day, along the coast, cloud restricts you to 1500' cruise height.
Aircraft zero fuel weight 890Lbs (R22beta)
Pilot weighs 220 LBS
Instructor weighs 170LBS
baggage/charts/water bottle 10LBS

So how far can you get (legally) like that? and still have your 20 minute reserve sloshing around?:cool:

[Whirlygig]

Sorry to say but you are wrong mate. I have done commercial work in the 300c and 300cbi and they are both flown from the left seat.

Very interesting mate. Every CBi I have come across, has been PIC right hand seat. Yes, the C, the CB etc are left seat PIC; maybe some early CBi were left seat but I am pretty sure they are all right seat now.

Cheers

Whirls

[EC135CAPTAIN]

Hughes 300 was military trainer for many years Robbies aren´t used in any country for this purpose.

[FLY 7]

I was told the US Army did 3,000,000 hours training in the 300, qualifying over 30,000 pilots, with an exemplorary safety record.

[CarryOnCopter]

Used to instruct in the 300cb, mass briefing for all students on the course in the morning, then each instructor would take there four students away, two students back to back in the morning and two after lunch. There was also a 300c used for basic instrument training.

Took less time to send some one solo in the 300cb but the actual get to ppl standard took no longer than a R22, just longer to solo in the R22 because a bit more flighty and had to be sure they would lower the lever without thinking if it all went quiet, tiny bit more time in the 300cb.

The 300cb is a great training a/c but is more expensive to run and has more niggles per hour than a R22, it is a training machine, two people, solo from the right, not as powerfull as you think, three people and more power is the 300c.

Can't tell you about the 300cbi but I guess it's just like the 300cb with fuel injection, so

300cb = training a/c, two larger people only, bit more fuel per hour, bit more maintance, bit slower, bit safer for a ham fisted student/ pilot.

R22 = private owner, training a/c, two smaller people only, bit less fuel, bit less maintance, bit faster, not as safe in same conditions as above, throw away or put money aside for big rebuild at end of life.

Both good stuff but R22 will get more people through the door because it is cheaper, you can beast it day after day, it's got it's well documented problems so just learn and avoid, did I mention it will be cheaper? just look around.

[Pigeon-dodger]

your question is not realistic, it costs a lot more money to purchase the 300 than the R-22 and the 300 has higher routine maintenance & overhaul costs.


I agree it costs more to buy but in theory it could, or should, cost less per hour if you got good utilisation as the parts last a lot longer (4000 hrs for the expensive bits). The other big annual costs are insurance and finance but what i am not telling you here is I have solution to reduce these costs. If I could get 250 hours a year usage i think I could make it the same price as an R22 (maybe £10 or £15 more an hour). Is 250 hours a realistic figure????:confused:

Sorry to say but you are wrong mate. I have done commercial work in the 300c and 300cbi and they are both flown from the left seat.

Its an option, they come standard right PIC but you buy option for left PIC and third seat. Nearly all get the option. :ok:


One minor point that not many people bring up is this: the hobbs on an R22 starts when the engine is started (when the oil pressure gauge is in the green), the hobbs on the 300's start when you lift off the ground. At least they used to, are the newer models the same??


You have both on the 300CBi I think. Student is charged engine stop to engine start (it is also what they log and what all other schools do) so to be comparative to the R22 you have to do the same. Don't think you will be ripping the student off if it takes them 10 - 15 hours less to get their licence as you are competing with R22 and they dont exactly advertise it could take you a lot longer......


Heli-phile
If You could operate a 300c for the same price as a R22 There would be very few people bothering with the R22......


This is what I agree with the most..:D..before I part with my hard earned cash just want to get some feedback that 'in principle' it's a good idea if I can get the finances to work. I want to offer a great helicopter at a great price. I am not niave to think it will make lots of money, it won't...but if it 'washes its face' and is wanted...I will probably go ahead. Will buy new or nearly new...:)

[VeeAny]

I wouldn’t go as far to say I’ve got loads of hours on the 300 but it is upwards of 1000 on type. There is at least one poster on this thread who has if memory serves me rightly at least three times that in 300s and operates at least two of them in the UK.

Downsides
There are some downsides to the 300 from an ownership perspective when compared to the R22 which I see as follows

They are more expensive to buy.
The 269s are more maintenance intensive than the R22
There are fewer type experienced engineers around in the UK.

Purchase Options
There are at least two ways to look at the new and used options (regardless of the type)


New
Some things that break will be under warranty (not all of them) so maintenance bills are more controllable, at least initially.
Bigger initial outlay (and higher monthly repayments) and higher insurance due to the higher hull value.
Used
Cheaper initial outlay and lower insurance due to lower hull value.
You are effectively buying an unknown quantity, you don’t know who has done what to it beforehand.
Maintenance bills are less controlled, and parts tend to require replacement just because they are older. If you buy used make sure it gets surveyed.


Things Not To Do
If you are going to buy, a new one, don’t get talked into to the two tank option on the CBi unless all you want to do is fly solo until your bladder explodes. It just increases the empty weight and is almost unusable if flying two up (like when its being used for instruction). Remember the CBi MAUW is 300lbs less than most Cs.

Techie Stuff
The 300 internal (charging) Hour Meter is driven by MRGB oil pressure. The external one is operated by a microswitch on the FWD left undercarriage leg, and so is an accurate record of how long you have been off the ground (when it works). You need to monitor it closely as they do stick and flight time can go unrecorded.

The life limited components are on the Schweizer website in a pdf document which can be found here (http://www.sacusa.com/products/pdfs/300CBi_overhaul.pdf).
Remember also that whilst these are the recommnended figures for component replacement, not everything will make its scheduled life (apllies just as much to R22s), but somethings you cannot foresee.

The replacement cost of a lot of (if not all) the components can be found in the pricebook which can be downloaded here (http://www.sacusa.com/support/2008pricebook.pdf).

Summary
The 300 vs R22 debate has been to done to death on Pprune and the outside world may times over, and like you say that’s not what you are interested in.

Flashover is right, I love training in the 300 it is what it was built for. If I could afford to run a school I’d choose 300s every day. However I would certainly advocate anyone who wants to progress in the industry to get R22 type rated (because you will end up working somewhere that has them at some point, so why cut yourself out of the race for jobs at the first hurdle), and if they are not R22 rated by the time they are due to start an instructor course then I would suggest they complete their entire course on one. Teaching in an R22 with 280hrs and 15 on type, 10 of which you did solo (assuming JAA rules) is not the best starting point to be in as an instructor IMHO (doesn't mean it can't be done).

If you can make it available for a similar price I believe you will have a market, there a quite a few 300 rated pilots around the London area with little to fly (not nothing) after the demise of BHH.

[Pigeon-dodger]

VeeAny...thank you very much for all your input. I do not think an older machine would be worth the risk of an expensive bit going wrong...just don't know its history.

Maintenance has turned out to be a pain, nearest I can find to London are Worldwide at Bournemouth. I might be able to do 50 hours at the field but if it does go tech, it will cost more to fix i guess as there are fewer maintenace people about :suspect:. Think Worldwide bought all/some CSE's tooling when they went and seem the best bet.

I think it will work (or I may not lose too much). At the end of the day I just like the 300 and they have a great following. Basic market will be PPL(H), trial lessons and some self fly hire... I honestly think that many people will start flying on a certain machine for a range of factors...helicopter, club, instructor, PRICE and location. I think i have found the 'nice helicopter' and 'nice price' now need to work on the other bits.....:{

Anyone know what an average club machine will fly a year? I am guessing 200 to 300 a year?

[Heli-phile]

Organisations who are allowed to be discerning, and are allowed to act on best option, not cheapest (the Military) Have not ever selectected the R22 for basic training!!

Nuf said!!

[KrisRamJ]

I've flown maybe 25 different CB/CBi airframes and every single one of them was right seat PIC. I've flown 9 different C's and they were all left seat PIC. For this reason all the CB/CBi's I've flown could not carry more than 2 people.

My 6penth worth: I've flown 900hrs in the 300, 70hrs in R22, I'd choose the 300 every time. Main reasons: weight limitations, cockpit size, rotor inertia, 'twitchiness' and cyclic control. R22 is alright if you have a long way to go and/or you own the aircraft...

[Pigeon-dodger]

I think usefull load in the CBI is 662lbs less the fuel at 192lbs leaves about 460lbs in round figures, enough room for two fat blokes or two normal people with lots in reserve. Left hand PIC is an option but i do not think it is feasable to try 3 up even if possible.

How effective is the STAR system? What sort of things go wrong with them? Lots of comments about 'niggles' and the aircraft going tech more than the R22's.

thanks:ok:

[leemind]

If you can make it available for a similar price I believe you will have a market, there a quite a few 300 rated pilots around the London area with little to fly (not nothing) after the demise of BHH.

There are also quite a few 500 pilots floating around for the same reason -- forget the 22/300 debate, buy a nice 500D or E for us to SFH :)

[Although most of us won't be able to afford it for the same reason that they went bust with all our hours :*]

[Pigeon-dodger]

forget the 22/300 debate, buy a nice 500D or E for us to SFH :)

Would love too....how many hours do you want to fly a year...will you pay in advance...:}...being serious for a second...how many hours a year did the 500 get for SFH or commercial work etc?

[VeeAny]

The average weight of the CBis in my database is 1184lbs (does include some two tankers). I'll seperate them out later, and update the figures but for the moment.

Leaves an average of 1750-1184 = 566lbs
Full Useable Fuel (32.5 us gals) = 195lbs.

371lbs for two people (or cargo !!!!!!)

Two 185lb guys and full fuel.

or two 220lb guys and 21 gals of fuel, plenty for a 1.5 hour training sortie and still be within the weight limits.

GS

[leemind]

Would love too....how many hours do you want to fly a year...will you pay in advance...:}...being serious for a second...how many hours a year did the 500 get for SFH or commercial work etc?

1) 50
2) Tried that one once... see above!
3) Honestly - not many. VNE may know better, but I think the 500 is a bit of a no-goer for commercial work (cramped and noisy in the back) aside maybe for long lining??? (The pros can chip in here)

[Pigeon-dodger]

Think the 206 or 206L is the only option for turbine still....but thats another story....I am very happy with the feedabck for the 300CBi, think they are great! hope i do not lose a fortune :{. I would get great pleasure in putting a decent machine out there at a decent price. Just hope the 'niggles' stay away if there are any!!

[whitus1]

Hello guys,

I am thinking of starting my helicopter PPL. Although people keep recomending the R22 and Schweizer 300. Which type do people would be the best for me to train on??

Adz

[FLY 7]

The S.300 - especially the 300/269 'C' is in another league to the R22.

When I first considered learning to fly helicopters I asked the same question. I tried all the various options, inc turbines, but it was the 300'C' that I most enjoyed, backed up by lots of professional advice

In fact, liked it so much that I eventually bought one to learn on. Later went Turbine but kept the 300'C' for another year. Regretted selling it, so bought another :bored:.

It's a proper helicopter, designed and engineered for purpose with proper controls, rotorhead, lots of power and safety and fantastic fun to fly. Not fast and not much luggage space (although I bought cargo racks) but spacious inside.

They are expensive though - a new S.300'C' is much the same as a new R44 and they are quite rare in the UK. More popular in hotter/higher climates where they need the power.

Originally designed by Hughes for the US Army (30,000 pilots were trained on the TH-55s) then taken over by Schweizer who are owned by Sikorsky.

Definitely recommended:ok:

[Whirlygig]

Although one has a soft spot for a Schweizer very local to you, I would recommend you learn on the type which you intend to fly after you have your PPL.

So, if you plan to buy an R22, learn on one; similarly for Schweizer, R44 etc. If you plan to self fly hire after, which types are nearest to where you live; for Norwich, I would guess your nearest schools, at the moment, are Aeromega in Cambridge or Helicentre at Leicester.

Cheers

Whirls

[whitus1]

Thanks guys! well my aim is to go commercial as I may of had an offer in the works, the nearest to me is sterling helicopters, but im sure you know as well as I do they could may not be an option but will have to see how that pans out :bored:

[solo2]

Looking for a helicopter flight school in southern Calif. Any advice from past students? And S-300 or R-22 for training? Looking for a private add on.

[nigelh]

If you value your life i would go for the S300 ...an excellent machine with no neg G death sentence ..
ps i have flown a 22 once and was scared . I have instructed in the S300.

[chester2005]

personally i would recommend LA Helicopters based at Long Beach airport, good airport for training with a good group of guys and well maintained aircraft.
R22 would be my choice but i think that LAH have both to choose from.

Chester:ok:

[Hot_LZ]

Solo,

Both aircraft have their advantages and disadvantages.

Having flown both i would personally go for the S300 for training. I find it to be a more stable aircraft which is handy for training and is ultimately more forgiving. I trained in a 22 and respect the little guy and am by no means a member of the '22 bashing club'.

Differences:
R22 advantages - Faster cruise speed, governed.
R22 disadvantages - Twitchy, mast bumping, rotor inertia, cramped.

S300 advantages - More responsive, more stable, cabin room, skid dampers.
S300 disadvantages - Cruise speed, non governed, ground resonance.

Have fun!

LZ

[GoodGrief]

I see the 300 not having a governor as an advantage because the student learns the motor skills necessary to completely control the machine. Comes in handy once you have to manually fly a turbine without cooking it.

[nigelh]

To be fair ground resonance is not a fault of the helicopter .....thats like saying a car with a flat tyre handles badly :eek: GR only occurs when the oleos have not been checked and are low . Otherwise a good assessment of their qualities ......for me 3 blades is 50% better than 2 .!!

[GoodGrief]

Groundresonance can be induced into a perfectly healthy machine.

[206Fan]

Like you LZ I completed the Private on the R22 and loved every minute of it. Now flying the CBi when money allows, excellent machine. I prefer to manually control the Throttle than have the Governor do it like the 22 as I have complete Control of the machine. I believe all the folks on here who started out in Bell 47s and the older Hughes Models had to manually work the Throttle during the training.

Solo, If your just going for the Private License I would pick the Schweizer.

[nigelh]

Good Grief ....therefore any 3 bladed system has this fault . It can occur if on rough ground but i still reckon v unlikely if well maintained . Same with Gazelle / 350 etc etc

[GoodGrief]

nigelh....there are incorrect statements here:
GR only occurs when the oleos have not been checked and are low
Hence my previous post.
It can occur if on rough ground...
It can occur on any ground. I show it to you on a grass runway as well as an asphalt or concrete runway.

I like the 300 much better than the R22. In my opinion the 300 makes the better pilot, technique wise.

[Anthony Supplebottom]

What would you choose, R22 or 300CBi if a similar price

The Robsinson should have been classified as an ultra-light or an overgrown model perhaps. It is not a real helicopter.

[RMK]

Before starting my PPL training, I did a trial flight in both the 300 & R22. My feedback: I hate the 300 and only ever flew in it twice. Granted the Robinson design does not summon images of Italian designers showing their craftwork, but the 300 is the ugliest helicopter made. I would be embarrassed to offer someone their first helicopter flight and they arrive to see the seemingly unfinished "bubble & sticks"contraption that is the 300.

After my PPL, I near solely fly a R44 RavenII or ClipperII, but still get in the odd R22 flight. Fly in something that will make you a better pilot (I’d even say learn in a R22 in preference to a R44 to build your skills).

After receiving your license, there are many more R22/R44 available for SFH globally.

On a side note, before my first intro lesson and not knowing anything about either helicopter, I’m on the phone with the school and he says you can fly the R22 or300 today - your choice. I ask “what’s your preference?” He replied “they’re both good; however if you were to crash one, you’d prefer to be in the 300; don’t crash and you’ll have more fun flying the R22”

[Hughes500]

RMK

So what do you hate about a 300, just its looks ?( Beauty is in the eye of the beholder granted ) Would suggest you be a bit more worldly wise before criticising a machine when you obviously know f all about them.
Please do the following experiment in your wonderfull 22, trim the cylic up in the hover and let go of it( for 10 seconds) see what happens,then try in a 300. Let me know the result :ok:

[FLY 7]

RMK,

I definitely don't find the 269/300s 'ugly'.

On the contrary, like the Bell 47, there's a pure, functional, design quality that's really quite attractive, IMO.

Everything is there for a puropse, with just the right blend of design sophistication, engineering integrity, lightness and accessibility. The 'C' models are the best though for performance and handling.

http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/130/130133_800.jpg

It's a 'classic'.

[griffothefog]

Supplebottom,
I like the cut of your jib sir...:ok:

[krypton_john]

Hughes500 - recommend he attempt that experiment with the 300 first, then the R22 second, for obvious reasons!

[RMK]

I could take the bonnet, quarter panels and boot lid off of my car and say it’s functional beauty – but it just looks better if I leave the bodywork in place.

To its owner this dog is surely handsome, a fine example of the breed & a loyal companion

http://i1271.photobucket.com/albums/jj628/romopilot/UglyDog.jpg
handsome chap!

Just winding you guys up; you do it all the time with the R44/R22. I’ll be back tomorrow to say derogatory things about the Wessex.

[RVDT]

It was even uglier before they cut it in half!

http://images2.jetphotos.net/img/2/8/0/9/73838_1296406908.jpg

[206Fan]

I could take the bonnet, quarter panels and boot lid off of my car and say it’s functional beauty – but it just looks better if I leave the bodywork in place.Yes obviously. On a car all the Driver / Mechanic has to do is lift the Bonnet to see the Engine. On the Schweizer from a Student / Pilot / Engineer point of view the open Engine / Mast area leaves for a better learning experience and understanding of how the Aircraft runs and operates when your up in the air and also allows for a good thorough Pre-Flight Inspection especially when testing the Clutch.

[Hughes500]

Krypton

Good point there, or perhaps I was being serious for obvious reasons !;)

[topendtorque]

RVDT,

that is an excellent photograph. Never seen one of those with its clothes off, interesting to see the complexity of the flight controls and simplicity of construction. Also the structural panel over the donk to keep everything on the level I suppose. six pots? what sort?

A very interesting photo for the background even though a file photo; do you have any idea where? a private collection or public museum, looks like a canadian version of the F86, big stuipid guess there to the left and a bigger more stupid guess perhaps to the right is that an F80 or Mig17.

cheers tet

[Savoia]

TET, RVDT's image was taken at Chino in California, the craft is a McCulloch MC4 (can't confirm the craft in the background unfortunately) but you can read more about the MC4 here (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/465664-project-q.html).