First time in a piston heli.

[IHL]

Just went for a ride in a piston helicopter for the first time in 25 years.

It was a new R44; the last piston I flew was a Bell 47 G2 in 1982.

Wow, things have really changed. I was really impressed with the governor; I was watching the pilot and he used the collective as if a turbine powered the aircraft. My memories of the old 47 are, rolling the throttle up and down with collective changes.

I currently fly an old Bell 206B II that is extremely heavy. There were 3 of us on the R44 with a little over ½ tanks (tank?) and it performed as well as my clapped out Jet-ranger, it was even faster.

I’m impressed! Though with piston engine failure rates at apprx. 1/10,000 hrs and turbines doing better than 1/100,000 hrs I would sooner fly a turbine.

[Rotorbee]

Frank will be happy to hear that. BTW The engine failure rate of the R44 is far better, then 1:10'000 due to the derating of the engine. If I remember right there are less then 10 engine failures due to mecanical problems in the whole R44 fleet.
An now open the curtain for a new round of Robinson bashing.
I am allready bored.
Probably we get some new arguments, when I deliever some of the stuff right now.
Not true: Robinsons have the highest accident rate then any other helicopter.
Not true: Robinsons are the only helicopters with mast bumping
what else?

[puntosaurus]

They are good machines, despite the considerable snobbery that exists. However it's not really fair to compare the Jetbox and the R44, although Frank himself loves to. The Jetbox can carry four people and luggage (although with restricted fuel) whereas the 44, you have to give up a seat to carry luggage. Two up, the 44 will really shine against the Jetbox, you really struggle to keep an unfloated raven II below 120kts, they really want to fly. It all depends on the mission profile.

I'm only working from anecdotal evidence, but I think those engine failure stats have turned round with the 44/22. Frank's approach of putting a way overspecced engine in then derating it has made piston engine failures vanishingly rare in these types, especially with fuel injection in the 44s removing the carb icing problem. At the same time there is still the worrying cloud hanging over the robinson rotor system and blades (http://www.ntsb.gov/publictn/1996/SIR9603.pdf).

[HillerBee]

I personally like the R44 better than the Jetranger. Way more comfortable and the speed is much better.

[Hiro Protagonist]

I'm not a robbie basher (too much time in 'em)...also not any good at statistics, but my gut feeling is that the robbie stats for engine life are skewed because too many of them meet their demise before the engine has much time on it.

Hard to wear out the engine when you've already worn out the other parts by rubbing them on the ground.

(ok, I'm a bit of an r22 basher...It should not be used for training IMHO.)

[lightontheskids]

Here's an example of the practical difference between a Jetbanger and an R44: Just planning a climbing trip with three friends, carrying about 40lbs of gear each to a destination 25 minutes away. Weight-wise the R44 can do it, but I doubt I can get all the gear in the aircraft (not safely, anyway). I'm going to have to do two flights, which will mean nearly two hours flying instead of one. In a B206 I'm sure we'd get the pax and baggage in no problem and have a good fuel margin.

On a more subjective note, having just done my B206 rating after the R22 to R44 route, I really enjoyed the space in the cabin, the whine of the turbine (much more pleasant than a piston) and the notion that the my passengers would be much more comfortable. Maybe it's not as fast and doesn't have the tail rotor authority of an R44, but the old Jetbanger has much more gravitas.

My plan is to fly both depending on the 'mission', or at least I would if if the place that trained me on the B206 actually had a machine I could rent...

[HillerBee]

I wonder where you put the luggage in the 206 then, the baggage compartment is very small to say the least. You also would be talking a BIII.

[Chukkablade]

I'm looking at doing the Jetty type rating later on this year, and my old instructor (who has a lot of time in them) keeps telling me I'm going to be very disapointed - I'm expecting the same sort of jump in power/stability I felt when I went from the R22 to the R44. He shook his head and laughed when I voiced that thought. Just me in the R44, it always feels like a bit of a fun machine, whereas the '22 only just feels acceptable for power when 1 up.

Is he right? Would the 20 hour block on the Jetty be better spent on getting more R44 time in? Reason for doing the Jet Ranger type is so that when I do the CPL course, I come out the other end with more than just the Robbo on my list of Helo's flown.

All opinions very welcome:ok:

(And apologies to the O.P. for the thread drift)

[HillerBee]

R44 is valuable, there are a lot of R44 jobs for private owners. You won't find a job flying a Jetranger with only 200 hours. Then if you have the hours and you proved yourself, your employer will pay for any typerating.

Why don't you just fly 1 hour in the Jetranger, just for the experience?

[Chukkablade]

Thanks Hillerbee; I'm going to do the CPL course on the R44, so your right in the sense that all time in one is valuable. The reason for doing a 20 block on the Jetty was that I'm going to Canada to do it. I have relatives near a school over there, so the wife and junior can do the tourist thing while dad goes of and turns money into noise. Also, I keep being told by CPL pilots that as the Jetty is the most common helicopter in the commercial world, thats the very reason why I should be looking to get aquainted with it.

You mention that there are a lot of R44 jobs for private owners, care to elaborate a little on that, as I'm unsure what context you mean.

[HillerBee]

There are a lot of R44 owners that don't bother flying themselfs and are willing to employ low-timers freelance.

[Chukkablade]

Thanks Hiller, I've only ever came across the pilot/owner crowd, so didn't know there was a market for that. Sounds like a plan, as I know I'd need a fair amount of turbine hours to get insured on Jetranger.:sad: