PPL(A) Vs PPL(H)

[fishtits]

Hi,

Thinking about starting a PPL but haven't made up my mind which one yet. I've done a trial lesson in both aeroplane and helicopter and can't really decide which one I like better!

The PPL(A) is cheaper and probably allows a bit more freedom with regards inter-country touring (or does it?) but the buzz of flying a chopper is difficult to beat.

Are there any other factors I should consider before making my decision? I really am stuck between a rock and a hard place at the moment!

All replies gratefully received.

Thanks

Fishtits

[rustle]

Well, if I wanted to fly helicopters I'd do the PPL(H), but if I wanted to fly fixed-wing I guess it would have to be a PPL(A) or the NPPL.

HTH :p

[AerBabe]

Have you considered microlights, gliders, hot air balloons, and airships too? ;)

It depends on what you want out of flying, and how you realistically see yourself using your licence. ALso how much you want to fly, compared to how much you can afford! Availability of good training is also worth taking into consideration, as is availabilty of aircraft to rent afterwards...

[tacpot]

As Aerbabe says it depends on what you want out of flying. Once you have figured out what you want to do, the next stop is PPRuNe to ask whether it is possible to what you want to do with either PPL. The people on this forum will give you a good idea of which PPL will get you closest you your goal, but we need to know what that goal is first.

Other factors:
Cost - you can do a lot more fixed wing flying than rotary wing due to the difference in operating costs of the two classes.
Kudos - arriving by Helicopter is better than arriving by aeroplane as most people know that it is more expensive! But beware, Kudos closely linked to Ego!
Safety - Helicopters tend to have different kinds of accidents to fixed wing aircraft, you will find many opinions and maybe even some statistics on which is the safer mode of transport.

HTH

Let us know how your decision making goes.

tacpot.

[nonradio]

My dear chap - do both! if you can afford helicopter training then adding a F/W ticket afterwards will hardly break the bank:)

[28thJuly2001]

I would love to learn to fly a heli-chopper, but my selfish wife insists we waste our money on food, heating and paying the mortgage, mustn't grumble though because she did let me dig into the nest egg to fly titchy planes.

Walt,,

[formationfoto]

Should you buy a saloon car or a two seats sports version? or maybe a motorbike?. This really is an impossible question to answer withoyut understanding, motivation, financial standing, likely uses, etc... etc....
Rotary is expensive to learn and even more expensive to operate. Keeping the licence current is more time and cost consuming, you will need a rating for each type you want to fly. Self ownership is v. expensive - insurance on an R22 can be as expansive as buying a fixed wing aircraft!. Rotary is not great for regular lengthy business trips single handed - a well equipped twin would be a better bet. R22s don't like being turned upside down so aeros are pretty much out of the question (at least repeat aeros - you will achieve it once but never again).
The range of fixed wing is extensive from slow and cheap two (or even single) seaters to eight or ten seat bizjets.

Personally - just because it is the way I did it I would go for fixed wing first which gives you a relatively stable platform to learn navigation and instruments as well as basic flight, then add rotary at a later stage.

S you don't get to take off and land in your own garden and can't turn up for business meetings and land in the car park but you do get a good grounding in private aviation.

Bad to generalise but I have seen a number of well off helo pilots be so keen on flying their status machines that they have no idea at all about airmanship and basic aviation. This happens in other streams of aviation of course (and used to happen in the microlight world) but most fixed wing types seem more keen to learn the important stuff rather than looking for a quick pose. I repeat an over generalisation and there are a large number of excellent rotary only pilots out there.

Whichever you chose make sure you add in other types and ratings. choice and variety is the best kick.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Worth mentioning that in this brave new NPPL world you can do one license and add SEP, microlight, SLMG (and glider?) ratings fairly inexpensively - probably clocking all of them up for the cost of a single PPL(H).

Microlights have a single major advantage over the rest, you've a fighting chance of affording one all to yourself. SEP will always get there faster than anything else, Rotary will allow you the ability to land in pub gardens (but only the pax can drink anyway !) but you'll get less hours to the pound than anything else. Gliding will cost similar to microlights but also absorb you in spending all day "mucking in" with dozens of other aviators.

At the end of the day, they're all superb fun - the decision is a combination of aesthetic and financial, and nobody but you knows how you stand there.

So long as you can afford it, I doubt you'll make a bad decision.

G

[fishtits]

Thanks for all the replys. I feel that the PPL(A) is more than likely the route that I will follow initially as its the most economical route to getting and staying airbourne...

I know it sounds like a simple dilemma.... If you want to fly planes do PPL(A) or ditto with heli's but I'm finding it a difficult choice to make so early in my aviation affliction!

Just out of interest, what woud be the additional requirements of adding a heli ticket to a fixed wing one? Are the basic exams the same ie you would just have to rack up hours and do a check ride or do you have to sit completely different exams?

I would be really interested to hear from someone who was in a similar situation and what route they finally took.

Thanks again for the time.... apologies if I come across like a whining pre-pubescent skygazer.... I'm really not ;)

Fishtits

[Whirlybird]

Well, I wasn't quite in your position, but close. I got myself a PPL(A), flew for a year, then decided to get a trial helicopter lesson just for something different. I got hooked almost instantly - well, as soon as I attempted to hover anyway. I just HAD to do it! So I went for a full day to get it out of my system, then decided I'd got to learn to hover properly, then figured I might as well get a PPL(H), then realised I'd never be able to afford it much so why not get a CPL(H) and get paid to fly, only there wasn't any work so...I need another 12 hours to do an instructors course, and maybe, finally, get paid to fly helicopters, before I run out of money. And I struggle to do enough hours to keep my PPL(A) too. So yes, I understand your dilemma. But I can't solve it for you. But unless JAR has changed things, the ground exams are almost the same, though you'll have to do most if not all of the flying, if (when?) you decide to do both. Which of course is the way to go if you can afford it. Let us know how you get on.

[distaff_beancounter]

fishtits I think that your original question is a bit like the person who goes into a restaurant & can't decide whether to order the chicken or the beef, 'cos they both look delicious. She then asks her companion, "which should I chose?" He will definitely be wrong, whichever one he suggests. :D

His only safe answer, if he can afford it, is "well darling, have one today, & we can come here again tomorrow, for the other."

So the answer to your question is:- DO BOTH :)

[formationfoto]

FT
When I added rotary to fixed (and I think it is still the same) the only dispensation you get fro having a fixed wing PPL is a reduction in the navigation hours. So pretty much full course I am afraid and given the huge differences you will probably need most of the hours anyway to feel confortable. I had about three hours of fun at the end of my course having completed everything but you might get there ahead of me.

[LPL]

Fixed wing wins , hands down

Rotary maybe ( for some people ) more glamorous. BUT downside are as follows :

1. Prohibitive cost, you may be able to afford it now, but a few years down the line , who knows ?

2. Lack of flight organisations who rent out helicopters.

3. Limited choice of types

4. No IMC flying

5. Lack of range/endurance

6. Smaller flying community to share experience with.

Oh, and remember, when you have 200hrs rotary in your log book, you could of had 500hrs F/w !!

LPL

[Flyin'Dutch']

There are not a lot of places from which you can hire a useful helicopter, so unless you have the readies to own and operate one I think you will find that your options are going to be limited.

Depending on your circumstances you may want to consider what you can hire for what sort of money.

Consider that for the least expensive helicopter (R22) you would still have to fork out £150 per hour and compare that to what F/W machine you can drive for that same £150. It is clear that the only person that can determine what is best for you is..........................you.

Even if you just wish to transport yourself and some attachments (family/friends/kids) to a nice place you are talking multiples of this amount.

An average load of 4 adults/kids would have to go in a JetRanger @£400-500 per hour.

For the same money you can haul them into a KingAir and go a lot further.

However these considerations only have any validity if you are interested in practicalities.

Bit like argueing whether a Roadster is a practical proposition.

Who cares?:p

Frank

[formationfoto]

LPL
Only point to correct on you list (and it may be a semantic point) Rotary is able to fly in IMC but it adds somewhat to the cost. The bog standard R22 won't hack it - which is probably your point.

[Whirlybird]

On the other hand.....

1) Cost - while you f/w guys are taxi-ing and lining up and burning money and fuel, wishing you were up there, we whirly-people are hovering and having great fun. We may have gone too; I once jumped a whole queue at a fly-in, by asking if I could do a towering takeoff and leave from where I was parked; they were all green with envy...and I was probably halfway home.

2) Flight organisations- yes, there are less. But do you need more than one or two?

3) Types...do you need that many? How many can you fly at once?

4) IMC - who needs it when you have a helicopter? If the weather closes in, fly low if you can, or land in a field and have a cup of tea till it improves.

5) Endurance - well, an R22 with full tanks has over three hours. Does your bladder have more?

6) The community - yes, it's smaller, but it's big enough. We have our own forum on PPRuNe, and I seem to get to a fair number of rotary social occasions. We even talk to plank flyers...if we have to. :D

7) Hours - I think you'd have more fun in 200 rotary hours than 400 f/w hours (500 was an exaggeration; it's about double the cost).

Right, now you have both sides. So I'll confess - I really really really enjoy flying both. They are very different, and fun in different ways. Once you get over the initial stages they seem to complement each other so that your overall flying improves. For example, I took out a C152 today, the first time I've done any f/w flying for several months. I insisted on taking an experienced pilot with me, for safety, although everyone said with the amount of flying I do I'd be fine. We did stalls, steep turns, then some circuits. I wasn't perfect, and it was a nice day, but certainly no-one would have thought I was that much out of practice - I surprised myself actually. So in the long run, if you can possibly afford it, join us total aviation addicts and fly both.

Now that I've really confused you I'll shut up. :D