PPL (H) at Redhill, Surrey, UK - Help please!

[Sliding Doors]

Rattle,

You can open the debate. It's another point for SC to possibly consider.

The very rough estimates I gave were for 50 hrs that were based on Datcons.
Some schools will add a 0.1 charge during training to any R44 flying. The explanation that will be offered is that the FI is paid per flying hour (usually Datcon based) in which case a 1hr lesson thats recorded as 0.9 flying will see the FI paid 0.9 only. That and the FTO's logic that even lever down the R44 is still burning fuel that has to be paid for.

So it may not quite save as much as you'd like/hope

FB,
I was merely teasing you. Sorry Couldn't resist

The advantage I found in the 300 is learning throttle control and trimming.

But on your logic those are skills you'd not need as much in an R44, and price must have played a part in your H300 decision too??

once you've got your PPL you probably want to fly something bigger, faster and with a better range

And that was my point. R22 to R44 with their similarities would be a simpler jump than an H300 to R44. SC is yet to finally decide what type he'll SFH in.

Any potential savings re Datcons or any other figure crunching could easily be outweighed by the time it may take getting used to Hyds failures and a shifting CoG - factors that aren't that relevant to an R22, and that are easier to handle IMHO once the basics are mastered.

No harm in trying both R22 and R44 for 30 mins and then making a choice though

For me cost was always an option

[Pandalet]

When considering datcon charging, consider what you'll be logging. Different schools do this differently, but what seems to happen is that what you write down in your logbook (and the instructor signs off on) is what you pay for. So if you fly 1hr in an R44, and pay for 0.9, you log 0.9. I'm not saying anything about whether this is legal or good, just that this is what happens (in my limited experience); I'm happy to be corrected by a flood of schools pointing out that they don't do this.

What this means is that the datacon vs engine thing isn't actually very relevant, except that R44 dual will involve you sitting in the aircraft for slightly longer for the same logged hours than R22 dual will. Or, alternately, all the time you've logged in R44s is actual flying time, whereas your actual R22 flying time will be a bit less than your logged time.

Sloane, are you saying that most people who do PPLs with you in an R22 take 60 hours? How many hours does the average R44 PPL student take? Learning on an R44 has many benefits over learning on an R22, but cost just isn't one of them.

Another possibly relevant point is that if you're planning to buy your own, the insurance will probably be substantially more if you have under 100 hours. Thus doing your PPL in an R22 and converting to an R44 later will get you closer to cheaper insurance for the same money. Just a thought.

[R44-pilot]

If you fly 1.0 on the datcon of a R44 you log 1.1 the extra for start up and shut down.

Schools vary on what they do with that point one, but schools usually charge the extra point one. So fly 0.9, pay for 1.0 and log 1.0

I have found some private owners who SFH there R44's out dont charge the 0.1, The couple I get my hours off dont. If I fly 0.9 I pay them for 0.9 but I log 1.0

So you may well start seeing the savings once you have you licence and are self fly hiring out 44's but unless your hour building that 0.1 you gain (if not paying for it) is irrelevant anyway. i.e. you dont need the hours etc...

[puntosaurus]

Now this is sad to admit, but I've timed students starting up and shutting down. The majority of them take at least 0.2 between engine start to skids up plus skids down to engine stop, and a good number take 0.3.

We do the add 0.1 thing on the 44 as is common practice, but that still means that the 44 student is saving between 0.1 and 0.2 per flight. Our average training flight is about an hour, so that's a 15% saving on average.

I disagree that the 44 is easier to learn on. It is undoubtedly more stable in the hover so there are savings there, but it is MUCH more sensitive in pitch so good attitude control is harder to learn IMHO. All in all it's six and two threes, and our students typically complete in 55-60 hours in either type.

So from my perspective the cost difference between learning on the 44 vs 22 is the marginal cost plus VAT, times the number of hours to complete minus five (for the type rating), with 15% off for the datcon arbitrage. Using some typical numbers that gives you (£150*1.15)*(55-5)*0.85 or around £7,500.

Looking at raw numbers for a 22 course coming in at around £15,000, that's a 50% premium for the 44. Now there are many other considerations, but if cost is your overriding concern it's a no brainer.

One of the most significant other considerations is what you intend to do after you qualify, and if it's sightseeing in the 44 with friends and family then IMHO that swings the extra cost. Do you really want to be poling around the sky with your loved ones with less than 100hrs in total and single digits on type ? I doubt it. So in that case the premium is an insurance policy to get you safer on type by the time you qualify. If you're qualifying on a budget then off to hour build for commercial then IMHO the 22 makes more sense.

[helipaul]

Go R44

Take into consideration the average student take 55 to 65 hours on a R22 plus the 5 hours type conversion and two flight tests there is probably only about 2K difference in price,, always a better and safer aircraft and always best to learn on the aircraft you will fly afterwards. Think in all the students I have taught the longest took 53 Hours on a R44 and that was because he did it over to long a period,, only had 3 students complete PPL on a 22 in 45 hours, SO GO R44 ,, but do it at goodwood so i can do it for you