Originally Posted by
NickLappos
Time to weigh in on this:
3) All commercial helicopters should be IFR equipped, and able to file and fly their missions on helicopter airways and down helicopter approaches.
Nick,
I strongly agree. Part of the problem is the FAA. I recently read a good article about why a bunch of single engine helicopters were certified for IFR (like the SPIFR B206L3 I fly) back in the 80's, but not now. The gist of the article was that the FAA upped the requirements for instrumentation and mechanical failure robustness in an attempt to make things safer, and instead halted the production of IFR singles.
There is no question in my mind that if the FAA relaxed some regs so that the aircraft didn't need to be triple redundant (or whatever), and instead would allow a simple digital autopilot equipped single like the R44, B206, B505 to be certified IFR we would be much safer than we are now. And yes, some IFR routes and procedures and LZs like you described in your article would be nice too! (and at least we're finally, with WAAS, in a position to have privately certified IFR approaches - I know of at least one guy who has one to his house).
One could make an argument that with a couple AHRS on board, a G500H style panel, and a couple iPads running ForeFlight with synthetic vision, an R44 with an autopilot could be as safe as any other single engine IFR helicopter and would be a hell of a lot safer than flying VFR in marginal conditions.
Now and again there are rumors that Bell might certify the 407GX, and maybe the 505. I hope they do! Robinson, in my opinion, will never try for IFR certification of any of their helicopters. I hope I get proved wrong someday :-(