Approval for R22 training in UK

[R44-pilot]

Can anyone shed some light on exactly what is needed for approval by the CAA to allow a R22 to be used for training please?

I've had a look at the website, but as usual its just a minefield :ugh:

He's the secenario.....

A friends buying an R22, previously been used for some trainnig. I would like to use it for cpl(h) course and FI course. And he would need to obtain a type rating on it.

Can anyone just clarify what bits need to be in place for the CAA etc before I contact them. i.e someone out there who's operating 22's for the same thing.

The school said something about a check or part**.... something or other that it needs to have. Can anyone expand on that please? i.e what it is and what might need to be done to get it.

It will only go to the school for the duration of my training then used for private use. (I shouldnt think that would make more difference anyway)

Also does it need anything on the ship itself that differs from one being used for private flights. (obviously a DI AH ect... someone also said Fred Cross I believe it was insists on a VOR) and I know if you dont have a night rating its included in you training so would need a night kit or use another one for 5 hours...

Many thanks in advance. :)

R44

[TiPwEiGhT]

As for a VOR, if you have a Skymap IIIC GPS with the VOR/CDI on it that will do for training. If Fred is now insisting a real VOR is to be used, then you will be cheaper hiring another aircraft (or tell him he can pay for it!). Your school will most likely have one kicking around.

Again, you'll be cheaper hiring another machine for night training then getting a night kit installed.

Enjoy.

TiP

[R44-pilot]

Thanks Tip,

Yeah think it will be cheaper to do the 5 hours night training in one of there 22's, I know a couple have the night kits on and a couple have the 'traditional' VOR.

Didnt know about the skymap III but i'm sure it is a III but will check.

Thanks Mate

[TiPwEiGhT]

No bother. I also would go for a Beta over a Beta 2, fuel burn is less!!

TiP

[Rotorhead412]

Don't think i'd agree with you there TIP?

I know the Beta consumes less fuel, but what about the power loss!?

Unless you've a large area to play with/ or even hard ground for running take-off, you could be very limited into what you could lift!?

Fill a Beta 2 with 3 hours endurance and 2 regular fellas, you'll be able to hover at 23" and take-off comfortably, but try that in a Beta, and you'll have problems!

Didn't think there was much difference, but i once had 2 of us on board, 2 an a half endurance, and couldn't lift over a 5ft boundary wall, just little snippets like that could be easily avoided with the little extra power don't you think???? :confused:

[R44-pilot]

See what your saying Tip, but have to agree with rotorhead, a bit of extra power for a couple of quid an hour can make all the difference.

I would imagine theres alot of varied training in the cpl(h) anf FI course, and one ting I did think about was confined areas, which I would imagine you do most of on the FI course.

I remember when I did my ppl we used a beta 1 for some confined area's and it was always a bit of a challenge getting out of them, plus my cpl instructor is a little bigger than my ppl instructor was....

The R22 is a Beta 2 model anyway but I would have little choice about it if it wasnt to be honest.

Anybody know what the CAA want to see in place with the helicopter for training etc...

[helimutt]

When you say regular fellas, what weights were they? Also, did you have fuel for 2.5hrs and 5gal in reserve? That would equate to about 25 gallons wouldn't it? Now it's a long time since i flew a 22 but did you do a weight and balance and mtow calc?
say 150lb for fuel, weights of guys at 180lb each? 510lb + a/c = puts it very close to the mtow. If the guys are heavier than that, then you'd prob be over. Not much surprise performance was down a bit!:eek:

[R44-pilot]

"puts it very close to the mtow. If the guys are heavier than that, then you'd prob be over. Not much surprise performance was down a bit!http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/eek.gif"

To be honest Helimutt imo, its always close to mtow in a 22. Beta 1 or 2, theres not that much difference.

Probably not if your just doing stuff around the aerodrome, but any time we use to go out on my ppl I think we were 24" on take off most of the time. Only sort of at the end of the flight when we got back to the airfield for precision transitions, quick stops etc... did we have plenty of power to play with. :bored:

Its probably kind of a good thing to train on a helicopter with relativly low power, you have to really do things "properly" if that makes sence. i.e. learn to use to wind, translational lift etc... (ppl training i mean)

Could do with and extra inch to pull you out of trouble I guess, but then every guy always wants that extra inch.... :oh:

Then when you suddenly in a 206, 2 up you'll have plenty of power to play with. But learn to fly with little power has to be a good thing to some extent..... just my opinion dont all come and slate me......:rolleyes:

[TiPwEiGhT]

Been a while since I flew the 22, but the B2 generally sits an inch or so less then the Beta, but look at the MCP and take-off rating, they too are also lower in the B2, by about an inch. Also B2's are generally heavier in BEM, less useful load compared to the Beta.

Correct me if I am wrong please chaps.

TiP

[R44-pilot]

Would imagine you know more than me about them mate, a simple look through the POH would tell if anyones got one to hand......

[TiPwEiGhT]

Well providing you fly it according to the published limitations either the Beta or Beta 2 is a good machine, 9 years flying them and only some minor problems... I like them.

TiP

[jemax]

You'll need to amend the insurance to include training, also Fred will need to see the aircraft is covered for engine off's to the ground, although he may not choose to do one on the day.

[R44-pilot]

Its insured for any pilot and training as long as its not ppl(h) training, i.e no new comers. Approved for auto's with qualified instructor.

Would imagine Fred Cross falls under "qualified" lol.

Either way, the cover will be ammended to as much cover as they will do during the weeks of training etc...

Although it states it not covered for nuclear war..... :ooh:

Does anyone know what bit or part etc has to be in place with the CAA?

[ThomasTheTankEngine]

I've been out of the training market for a few years but as far as I can remember the aircraft needs the following;

Public transport or aerial work COA.

It needs to be insured for instruction.

You don't need to contact the CAA to tell them you want to train on this machine, the FTO where you are going to do your training needs to inform the CAA that they are using this aircraft for flight training.

Also bare in mind the extra cost of the insurance for flight training, if your only going to fly about 50 -60 hours training on this machine you might not be any better off than just using a machine from the FTO.

[R44-pilot]

Thanks TTTE

Thats the info I needed, right its the school who have to contact the CAA! great, knew someone did.....

As for the price of hiring the schools machine, I know what your saying but I'm getting this Beta 2 at cost so it's a MASSIVE saving over them hours.

If it was just hiring one privatly then taking it, yeah to much messing about but stands to save me alot of money!

[tony 1969]

Last I heard Fred WAS insisting on a VOR for the CPL test, using a GPS apparently was not acceptable !!!!
You can always just use a schools machine for the test

[misbourne]

You need a VOR for the test. You will not get tested unless you have a clockwork VOR installed in your test aircraft, the skymap is not sufficient. As for the training you need to speak to Policy regarding this It is my opinion that the skymap is not acceptable for this

Please Please seek advice from the CAA before starting trainnig. If the aircraft has not been used for training by the FTO they will also need to fill in a form to ensure that it meets the minimum equipment levels to teach on approved courses, this form needs to be sent to their training inspector before the start of your course :)

[rotorfossil]

The maximum power of the Beta & Beta 2 is the same (131 hp) if you stick to the MAP limitations. The Beta 2's empty weights are marginally heavier with the bigger engine. BUT the real difference is the extra approximately 1 gph that they use. The only benefit of the Beta 2 is that the max power can be maintained to a greater density altitude

[Rotorhead412]

Thats a true, but aside from all the pro's/ con's, frank robinson wouldn't of designed it and put it (B2) into production unless it had better characteristics than the B1 would he!?

In the episode above, we were both under 180lbs (just about), and fuel was total of 24/25 gallons...!

From my views, in a beta 2, i can takeoff with 23/24" with no sweats, but as i said above, the exact same scenario in the Beta, she doesn't want to go up, full stop!!!

But sure, who knows, all helis operate differently don't they!!