"R22 best training aircraft" my a**!
Have around 40 hours in it and am glad to be alive! I lost a good friend who "had 1000's of hours in type" (quote a reply in the Sandtoft crash thread, as if that would mean something). This accident changed my mind from "not a good training aircraft - rather a personal rotorcraft" to "death trap".
What struck me is, that in both cases, my buddies and the latest victims, that the main rotor was still attached - at least no mast bumping you'd think, but obviously the aircraft did not beat itself to death after a f***d up autorotation or the like, it rather seems likely that on impact the rotor wasn't even turning anymore...
I'm not saying the 300 has superb rotor inertia, but it is way more forgiving than the dreaded R22. Mind you, I'm talking about the R22 not the R44, which I feel has a bit more substance to it.
I guess my point is, just because it is the cheapest helicopter out there, doesn't make it a good one, or by any stretch a good trainer.
You can quote all statistics how many 300's or 47's have crashed versus the R22 - that doesn't make it safer. Everybody has to fly the R22 like walking on eggs and some are still not fast enough to lower the stick, or have the main rotor departing in flight.
Oh and one last word on the SFAR requirement and safety course: I've attended it and have to say its more a marketing and brainwash event than anything else... ok, that wasn't fair, but what other manufacturer
requires a course how to survive in its products?
(I know, I know, there are others like the MU-2 - but they have only one situation that needs to be trained - not a bunch of flight regimes resulting in a fatal outcome)
Please don't tell me Mr. Robinsson voluntarily instated that course! Good
PR idea, because otherwise the authorities would have withdrawn the type certificate a little later after the first batch of accidents.