Guimbal Cabri G2
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,756
Received 2,740 Likes
on
1,166 Posts
tl;dr: not impressed with the G2.
I finally decided to get back into shape with helicopters, after a long pause due to my move from California to France. I had about 150 hours of R44 (and 2000 total including FW), and exactly 1 hour of G2. Here at Cannes we have a big heli school (Azur Helicoptere) which has R22, R44 and G2, and plenty of bigger stuff too.
The G2 is substantially cheaper than the R44, and also safer. So I figured, let's go with that.
I've now done two ~1 hour flights in the G2. I haven't enjoyed a single minute of it. Despite its small size, it's like flying a tractor. The controls are heavy, and it's underpowered: when below ETL speed you have to watch the power constantly since it takes 98% power just to stay in the air - and you must not go beyond 100% even for a second or two. And that's at sea level!
It's a bit like driving a 1960s truck, with no power-assisted anything - brakes, steering, no synchromesh...
The collective is particularly unpleasant. You have to maintain a constant heavy pull, or it slowly but surely drops to the floor. It's like flying an R44 with a sack of potatoes hanging from the collective. After an hour, my arm aches.
For sure I'm pretty rusty - I hadn't flown a heli in over a year. So it's hard to say how much is due to my rustiness and how much is due to the G2. But I've flown the R44 after similar pauses and got back into the groove within an hour.
I'll be going back to the R44, despite the extra cost. If my rustiness is terminal, so be it, but I'd prefer to give myself a decent chance.
I finally decided to get back into shape with helicopters, after a long pause due to my move from California to France. I had about 150 hours of R44 (and 2000 total including FW), and exactly 1 hour of G2. Here at Cannes we have a big heli school (Azur Helicoptere) which has R22, R44 and G2, and plenty of bigger stuff too.
The G2 is substantially cheaper than the R44, and also safer. So I figured, let's go with that.
I've now done two ~1 hour flights in the G2. I haven't enjoyed a single minute of it. Despite its small size, it's like flying a tractor. The controls are heavy, and it's underpowered: when below ETL speed you have to watch the power constantly since it takes 98% power just to stay in the air - and you must not go beyond 100% even for a second or two. And that's at sea level!
It's a bit like driving a 1960s truck, with no power-assisted anything - brakes, steering, no synchromesh...
The collective is particularly unpleasant. You have to maintain a constant heavy pull, or it slowly but surely drops to the floor. It's like flying an R44 with a sack of potatoes hanging from the collective. After an hour, my arm aches.
For sure I'm pretty rusty - I hadn't flown a heli in over a year. So it's hard to say how much is due to my rustiness and how much is due to the G2. But I've flown the R44 after similar pauses and got back into the groove within an hour.
I'll be going back to the R44, despite the extra cost. If my rustiness is terminal, so be it, but I'd prefer to give myself a decent chance.
Compared to the flippy floppy Robinson, the G2 cyclic does initially feel as you describe. It shouldn't take too long to get passed that stage and I don't even think about it being heavy now. Yes, compared to an R44 with pilot only, the G2 will feel underpowered. Having said that, I've done vertical departures in the G2 (to tree top level) from confined areas with a passenger and 2hrs fuel without it running out of steam. No drama. How close were you to MTOW with G2? As for the collective, I've not found that with any of the G2's I've used. I'm no body builder, but happy to keep the collective in hand for a couple of hours if needed or just apply a little friction.
Each to their own at the end of the day.
Each to their own at the end of the day.
There is a gas spring that pushes up on the collective to assist the pilot and relieve the weight of it. There's a balance to be found between having too much assistance (the collective may risk creeping up or be difficult to dump in the event of an engine failure) or having too little assistance (which leads to a heavy collective, and fatigue / discomfort as you describe). I would report that to the operator / maintenance so that an engineer can adjust the gas spring pressure / force and rectify the issue. I assure you it's not supposed to feel constantly heavy, I've flown Cabris with the same feeling and given the feedback to the engineer to rectify the issue - the gas spring force can be sorted and adjusted for each machine.
The 'heavy cyclic' could be due to incorrectly set trim (adjustable on the coolie hat on the cyclic) - for pilots not used to flying with these, it can be a bit of an afterthought to constantly trim out control forces, but once you get the hang of it it is a great assistance and increases the comfort of flying. In comparison to a hydraulically assisted flight controls like the R44, the Cabri's cyclic is definitely 'heavier' but that is simply part of the design, not a fault or issue.
As Mutley says, to each their own - the Cabri is plenty good enough for many operators, just as the R22 is good for others. Best of luck with getting back into flying!
The 'heavy cyclic' could be due to incorrectly set trim (adjustable on the coolie hat on the cyclic) - for pilots not used to flying with these, it can be a bit of an afterthought to constantly trim out control forces, but once you get the hang of it it is a great assistance and increases the comfort of flying. In comparison to a hydraulically assisted flight controls like the R44, the Cabri's cyclic is definitely 'heavier' but that is simply part of the design, not a fault or issue.
As Mutley says, to each their own - the Cabri is plenty good enough for many operators, just as the R22 is good for others. Best of luck with getting back into flying!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@n5296s those observations match previous ones that are occasionally posted in this thread (example), although perhaps not quite as strongly.
While primarily an R44 pilot, I've got a tiny bit of time in an EC130 and, if I had to guess, it may have been Bruno's intention to give the G2 the feel of a larger helicopter like an EC120, 130 or the like. It might not have been entirely successful, but certainly the G2 felt to me more similar to the 130 than the R44 did. I understand that in places that might have used lower friction mechanisms higher frictions mechanisms were used intentionally (and no doubt those mechanisms were simpler, cheaper and lighter, too). So perhaps there is some advantage there for those who are going to transition directly to Eurocopter/Airbus equipment. Nevertheless, as fun as it was to trim out the ship for a hands-off demo, I particularly did not like that the friction was so high one could not feel the effects of the trim system in real-time. It was trim-test-retrim as required (for those that are wondering, yes, all the control frictions were completely off when I flew the G2).
And it really does make one appreciate the greater power reserves of the R22, much less the much greater reserves of the R44 with only two on board.
Can't speak to your local market conditions, but in the US G2 operators have still not found a way to create a competitive pricing structure for it. It remains approx. 50% more expensive than the R22 and only 20% less expensive than the R44, which makes it a very odd niche player. It seems to appeal to the older/wealthier demographic who are attracted to its sporty looks and fine interior finish (particularly compared to the typical ratty school R22) rather than for any perceived safety difference. That sort mostly winds up buying an R44 or R66 anyway in the end.
While primarily an R44 pilot, I've got a tiny bit of time in an EC130 and, if I had to guess, it may have been Bruno's intention to give the G2 the feel of a larger helicopter like an EC120, 130 or the like. It might not have been entirely successful, but certainly the G2 felt to me more similar to the 130 than the R44 did. I understand that in places that might have used lower friction mechanisms higher frictions mechanisms were used intentionally (and no doubt those mechanisms were simpler, cheaper and lighter, too). So perhaps there is some advantage there for those who are going to transition directly to Eurocopter/Airbus equipment. Nevertheless, as fun as it was to trim out the ship for a hands-off demo, I particularly did not like that the friction was so high one could not feel the effects of the trim system in real-time. It was trim-test-retrim as required (for those that are wondering, yes, all the control frictions were completely off when I flew the G2).
And it really does make one appreciate the greater power reserves of the R22, much less the much greater reserves of the R44 with only two on board.
Can't speak to your local market conditions, but in the US G2 operators have still not found a way to create a competitive pricing structure for it. It remains approx. 50% more expensive than the R22 and only 20% less expensive than the R44, which makes it a very odd niche player. It seems to appeal to the older/wealthier demographic who are attracted to its sporty looks and fine interior finish (particularly compared to the typical ratty school R22) rather than for any perceived safety difference. That sort mostly winds up buying an R44 or R66 anyway in the end.
Compared to the flippy floppy Robinson, the G2 cyclic does initially feel as you describe. It shouldn't take too long to get passed that stage and I don't even think about it being heavy now. Yes, compared to an R44 with pilot only, the G2 will feel underpowered. Having said that, I've done vertical departures in the G2 (to tree top level) from confined areas with a passenger and 2hrs fuel without it running out of steam. No drama. How close were you to MTOW with G2? As for the collective, I've not found that with any of the G2's I've used. I'm no body builder, but happy to keep the collective in hand for a couple of hours if needed or just apply a little friction.
Each to their own at the end of the day.
Each to their own at the end of the day.
"Flippy floppy Robinson",...?
Aw,...dude.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Midlands
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definitely a maintenance issue. They are spot on when they leave the factory but will need adjustment over the the next 250-300 hours as everything beds in.
it's not a difficult job to adjust the but it's not a 15 minute job either. Flight schools are often reluctant to take what they see as a serviceable machine out of service.
The cyclic trim does take a little time to master. It does vary with speed and power and also needs quite a bit of re trimming in the first 10 minutes of flight until all the elastomeric bearings warm up. After a while you do it automatically.
it's not a difficult job to adjust the but it's not a 15 minute job either. Flight schools are often reluctant to take what they see as a serviceable machine out of service.
The cyclic trim does take a little time to master. It does vary with speed and power and also needs quite a bit of re trimming in the first 10 minutes of flight until all the elastomeric bearings warm up. After a while you do it automatically.
Thanks all for the feedback and comments. Glad I'm not the only one to feel his way.
For the record, we were on half tanks and about 100 lbs under gross. Given it takes 98% power for a 5 foot hover, I don't see that this machine is capable of HOGE - kind of unfortunate for a helicopter.
I've flown an R44 close to gross (three biggish guys and 3/4 tanks) and everything is fine. It was at the limit for HOGE but nothing terrible happens if you over-pull a little for a second or two. And that was a machine that was definitely weaker than the others, for some reason.
For the record, we were on half tanks and about 100 lbs under gross. Given it takes 98% power for a 5 foot hover, I don't see that this machine is capable of HOGE - kind of unfortunate for a helicopter.
I've flown an R44 close to gross (three biggish guys and 3/4 tanks) and everything is fine. It was at the limit for HOGE but nothing terrible happens if you over-pull a little for a second or two. And that was a machine that was definitely weaker than the others, for some reason.
Never flown the Cabri, learned on an R22 ('cause it was the cheapest route to a license, I was paying for it myself, and the piece of paper at the end looks the same and has the same value (maybe more) in the real world. Always liked the look and tech of the Cabri, but most schools can't make the numbers work even compared to the more expensive R44. Appreciate the comments on this forum of the flying comparisons,
Local school has 6 B47 flying every day, plus 4-5 R44, plus a couple 206. Don't see anyone buying a Cabri privately. Only another school that loves Cabri will want to buy one. R44 market is huge, lots of private, commercial, schools always looking for one. Better lead-in to the commercial world for students. Instructor won't make the student walk home out of a misjudged confined area. HOGE in training? Now that's a luxury.
Local school has 6 B47 flying every day, plus 4-5 R44, plus a couple 206. Don't see anyone buying a Cabri privately. Only another school that loves Cabri will want to buy one. R44 market is huge, lots of private, commercial, schools always looking for one. Better lead-in to the commercial world for students. Instructor won't make the student walk home out of a misjudged confined area. HOGE in training? Now that's a luxury.
Never flown the Cabri, learned on an R22 ('cause it was the cheapest route to a license, I was paying for it myself, and the piece of paper at the end looks the same and has the same value (maybe more) in the real world. Always liked the look and tech of the Cabri, but most schools can't make the numbers work even compared to the more expensive R44. Appreciate the comments on this forum of the flying comparisons,
Local school has 6 B47 flying every day, plus 4-5 R44, plus a couple 206. Don't see anyone buying a Cabri privately. Only another school that loves Cabri will want to buy one. R44 market is huge, lots of private, commercial, schools always looking for one. Better lead-in to the commercial world for students. Instructor won't make the student walk home out of a misjudged confined area. HOGE in training? Now that's a luxury.
Local school has 6 B47 flying every day, plus 4-5 R44, plus a couple 206. Don't see anyone buying a Cabri privately. Only another school that loves Cabri will want to buy one. R44 market is huge, lots of private, commercial, schools always looking for one. Better lead-in to the commercial world for students. Instructor won't make the student walk home out of a misjudged confined area. HOGE in training? Now that's a luxury.
Given the opportunity though, I'd take one of those over a Cabri any day. Gotta support my fellow 2-bladers after all.
With respect to the G2 being under powered, I think this is partly a function of the rotor system,
Somewhere in prouty's book he mentioned the innate efficency advantage of a 2 blade long aspect rotor as in the R22/R44.
It effectively means that for the same power input you will better net thrust with such rotor configuration.
To make my point: I have found the hugues/schweizer 300 to be limited in the same way as the Cabri.
The 300 is easy to overpitch in low hover (especially if you let the RRPM a tiny bit low), risky to HOGE when it gets hot, risky to perform high performance TO, and slow (well that another problem)
I think the same point can be made between the EC120 and Bell 505 sharing the same engine but the 505 can lift 200Kg more.
Somewhere in prouty's book he mentioned the innate efficency advantage of a 2 blade long aspect rotor as in the R22/R44.
It effectively means that for the same power input you will better net thrust with such rotor configuration.
To make my point: I have found the hugues/schweizer 300 to be limited in the same way as the Cabri.
The 300 is easy to overpitch in low hover (especially if you let the RRPM a tiny bit low), risky to HOGE when it gets hot, risky to perform high performance TO, and slow (well that another problem)
I think the same point can be made between the EC120 and Bell 505 sharing the same engine but the 505 can lift 200Kg more.
Agile
Not sure what you are saying about a 300. I can quite happily let the rrpm out of the green arc pull the lever and it will happily hover, well a 300C will at least. Hovering yesterday with 3 hours of fuel 2 pax one 102 kgs the other 120 kgs the demo was loss of rrpm in hover wind the throttle back to 2800 rpm yes pull the lever up she still hovers, all you have to do is open the throttle and she recovers her RPM no problem. Much prefer the 3 bladed system to that of an R22
Not sure what you are saying about a 300. I can quite happily let the rrpm out of the green arc pull the lever and it will happily hover, well a 300C will at least. Hovering yesterday with 3 hours of fuel 2 pax one 102 kgs the other 120 kgs the demo was loss of rrpm in hover wind the throttle back to 2800 rpm yes pull the lever up she still hovers, all you have to do is open the throttle and she recovers her RPM no problem. Much prefer the 3 bladed system to that of an R22
Agile
Not sure what you are saying about a 300. I can quite happily let the rrpm out of the green arc pull the lever and it will happily hover, well a 300C will at least. Hovering yesterday with 3 hours of fuel 2 pax one 102 kgs the other 120 kgs the demo was loss of rrpm in hover wind the throttle back to 2800 rpm yes pull the lever up she still hovers, all you have to do is open the throttle and she recovers her RPM no problem. Much prefer the 3 bladed system to that of an R22
Not sure what you are saying about a 300. I can quite happily let the rrpm out of the green arc pull the lever and it will happily hover, well a 300C will at least. Hovering yesterday with 3 hours of fuel 2 pax one 102 kgs the other 120 kgs the demo was loss of rrpm in hover wind the throttle back to 2800 rpm yes pull the lever up she still hovers, all you have to do is open the throttle and she recovers her RPM no problem. Much prefer the 3 bladed system to that of an R22
MichiScholz
no we are not
Max take off weight for a 300C is 2050lbs
Ac weighs 1160 lbs
Pax are total 488 lbs
Fuel 35 gal 210
Total weight 1858 lbs so 192 under MAUW
Apology at any time or were you thinking of a CBi
no we are not
Max take off weight for a 300C is 2050lbs
Ac weighs 1160 lbs
Pax are total 488 lbs
Fuel 35 gal 210
Total weight 1858 lbs so 192 under MAUW
Apology at any time or were you thinking of a CBi
The Cabri costs nearly as much as an R44 Raven I, but is slower with much less storage and half the seats. However it has a much more luxurious and upscale cockpit, every switch feels high-quality, and the visibility is better - not due to the lack of center pillar but because the instrument panel is lower, especially with glass panel, and its full-fuel range is even greater than the R44. And of course fully articulated rotor has some advantages. But the cost is very hard to justify.
For me the abrevation pax does not include pic - so I argee with two persons on board one 265lbs and the other 225 lbs with 35 gal you are within margins and below the MTOW of 2050 lbs in a 300C.
The Cabri costs nearly as much as an R44 Raven I, but is slower with much less storage and half the seats. However it has a much more luxurious and upscale cockpit, every switch feels high-quality, and the visibility is better - not due to the lack of center pillar but because the instrument panel is lower, especially with glass panel, and its full-fuel range is even greater than the R44. And of course fully articulated rotor has some advantages. But the cost is very hard to justify.