As I understand it, it is not a complete rebuild but rather an overhaul of those things whose life expires at 2200hrs or 12 years, whichever comes soonest. Some private owners choose to have resprays and upgrades that are not strictly required.
The designer has focussed on getting the time life of as many parts as possible to 2200hr/12yrs. If an aircraft has been left unaltered, then lots of fatigue-affected parts need replacing at the same time.
There seem to be various ways of looking at the "best" way of running a Robbo. Probably the worst is to get to 12 years with a significant number of the 2200 hrs NOT flown. My Robbo experience is from a few years ago (and in the UK), but many machines seem to spend their lives with a period in private ownership and a period being used at a flying school. That more or less balances out the flight time/calendar time to expire at more or less the same time.
A "time-expired" Robbo has a modest residual value. Deciding what that is depends upon looking at the expiry of all the time-lifed components like any other helicopter, as well as the general market. It is just that it is likely to be rather simpler to do than say an Enstrom.
I get the impression that R22s are used less for PPL training these days with everyone, except the person who pays the bill, preferring the R44 or another basic type. Is that correct?
My experience of R22 ownership was that the "unscheduled" replacement items were a much larger element than expected and that the salesman suggested
