advice pls R66 or 480B or 206Biii
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,151
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
Be careful with the L1 - even with the yoke mod you can't really use the extra seats with full fuel. Been there, done that.
The L3 with the C30P engine would be the minimum to go for.
Phil
The L3 with the C30P engine would be the minimum to go for.
Phil
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Age: 56
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
All things 'considered' you're choice firstly depends on your budget! If it's reasonably 'unlimited' then it's either a 206 III, the EC120 or a single squirrel. You're going to get big bills with any helicopter so keep that in mind.
Whilst I love the 480 and used to own a share in one, it's not and never will be, a 5 place machine. The Hughes 500 isn't either and its not a 'passenger' aircraft in the way I think you need it to be. No luggage space either. I think the R66 is a great machine but at the moment you can't get one on the UK register and if I was going to be spending upwards of £600k on a helicopter it wouldn't be a Robbo.
My pal Toptobottom has recently purchased the EC120 and that machine is undoubtedly awesome, but if you're new to heli's, and turbines in particular , you've got a machine with zero tolerance for error with the 120. It's also got some weight and balance considerations too.
If I had to recommend one of those machines, taking into account your specific requirements, it would have to be a 206 Jet Ranger.
Joel
All things 'considered' you're choice firstly depends on your budget! If it's reasonably 'unlimited' then it's either a 206 III, the EC120 or a single squirrel. You're going to get big bills with any helicopter so keep that in mind.
Whilst I love the 480 and used to own a share in one, it's not and never will be, a 5 place machine. The Hughes 500 isn't either and its not a 'passenger' aircraft in the way I think you need it to be. No luggage space either. I think the R66 is a great machine but at the moment you can't get one on the UK register and if I was going to be spending upwards of £600k on a helicopter it wouldn't be a Robbo.
My pal Toptobottom has recently purchased the EC120 and that machine is undoubtedly awesome, but if you're new to heli's, and turbines in particular , you've got a machine with zero tolerance for error with the 120. It's also got some weight and balance considerations too.
If I had to recommend one of those machines, taking into account your specific requirements, it would have to be a 206 Jet Ranger.
Joel
As a mechanic who works on 480B, R66, and Jet Rangers, Id recommend the 206. The enstrom I maintain is 4 years old and has a little over 1200 hours. We've changed the main gearbox twice in that time due to their low 600 hour overhaul limit...which is being worked on by the factory to double it...time will tell. but thats still low even at 1200 hours. We have been thru 4 tail rotor gear boxes due to chip light recurrences and have done 2 sets of TT straps due to calendar retirement and one set of tail rotor feathering bearings. Track and balance can be very touchy on both main rotor and tail rotor if you don't have a good mech with experience tracking enstroms...using the kit enstrom recommends..they are unlike anything Ive ever dealt with. Also at 1200 hours you will be spending money on retirement items and the labor to change them like lower pulley bearings and seals (2), two cyclic vibration absorber weights and arms and a few others I cant think of at the present time. Also a problem is corrosion with the enstrom. We fight blade and body corrosion because the lack of primer in certain areas. Also an enstrom will need quite a few special tools most shops wont have unless they are enstrom familiar so that could add to the cost. My dealings with Enstrom customer support has been very good, so that is a plus on their. So if you live somewhere that has a corrosive environment, you might want to think about it. Not that the Bell doesnt have its problems, or the R66 but Id go with proven tech over the other two.
A new R66 runs out at 850,000USD++ so for my money I would prefer a AS350B or BA. For private use both can fit in all the average guy needs to carry, and can be bought for the same money as a new R66. They have more room, fly better, have a solid feel, and I think time will show a better resale value. Parts are more expensive so you need to be carefull when you buy, but there are some great deals out there at the moment. Still remains to be seen what a R66 is going to be worth in a few years time. The 206 is too slow and the LR costs the same as the as350b. The EC120 is nice but not that easy to sell, due most commercial guys shy away from them unless they have a specific (low fuel/wt) use for them.
So disappointed to read Helofixer's post (above) regarding the 480 after all the positive press I've been reading in recent years on the type. Was told the craft handles 'like a dream' 
Regarding AS350Nut's comments .. if you are to throw the Ecureuil into the mix then (for me) there is no contest. She is the 'better' all-round personal transport if one is with family - the obvious issue is cost.
Regarding AS350Nut's comments .. if you are to throw the Ecureuil into the mix then (for me) there is no contest. She is the 'better' all-round personal transport if one is with family - the obvious issue is cost.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: kent
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As350 B3
Agree as350 wins hands down on almost every count, several about for £400k up. Flew in one and was planning to get one, almost bought one. My concern is stories of getting whopping unpredictable (other than that they will be large) bills and poor service as a small operator (I am told that if you have a fleet they are responsive, if not, go to the back of the queue) due to need to send off to eurocopter. From what I hear, I would guess I'd need to budget £50k a year with a contingency of double that, and whatever I saved in the first year or two thinking smugly I'd had a bargain would probably vanish in the third while it sat on the ground for a summer. But if you think I could sensibly operate one for less than I think or with less concern, do say.
Am leaning heavily towards 206B3, its vices seem more benign - I can look at it as each 2 hr trip I take gives me 20 minutes extra flying experience thrown in almost free! The capital saving will probably pay the maintenance for the next 5 years.
Plus, on a very minor note, if I get a 206 I will save about £20k on the cost of the hangar door!
Am leaning heavily towards 206B3, its vices seem more benign - I can look at it as each 2 hr trip I take gives me 20 minutes extra flying experience thrown in almost free! The capital saving will probably pay the maintenance for the next 5 years.
Plus, on a very minor note, if I get a 206 I will save about £20k on the cost of the hangar door!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: London
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots tend to love what they fly, and I think the responses to your questions may have a numerical relationship to the number of aircraft on the register. Looking at G-INFO, there are 118 'Bell 206's' registered in the UK, compared to only 12 'Enstrom 480's' (there are also N-reg variations of both). The numbers are a function of production longevity and factory capacity.
So logically, there will be more responses in favour of the 206 than the 480 (perhaps up to 10:1, based on the numbers).
Interestingly, I was in exactly the same position as you this time last year - part way through my PPL(H), (already having a PPL(A)), and in the lucky financial position of being able to afford a light turbine.
I bought an Enstrom 480B, and have no reason to regret it for all the reasons mentioned by FLY 7 in post #14 above. For me it was a no-brainer - I couldn't see myself shelling out up to $500,000 for a 20 year old machine with thousands of hours, when the same money could buy a much younger machine with a 3-bladed fully articulated head and the benign handling that suited my relative inexperience.
Those who knock the Enstrom have likely never flown one. My advice is not to dismiss it until you fly it
So logically, there will be more responses in favour of the 206 than the 480 (perhaps up to 10:1, based on the numbers).
Interestingly, I was in exactly the same position as you this time last year - part way through my PPL(H), (already having a PPL(A)), and in the lucky financial position of being able to afford a light turbine.
I bought an Enstrom 480B, and have no reason to regret it for all the reasons mentioned by FLY 7 in post #14 above. For me it was a no-brainer - I couldn't see myself shelling out up to $500,000 for a 20 year old machine with thousands of hours, when the same money could buy a much younger machine with a 3-bladed fully articulated head and the benign handling that suited my relative inexperience.
Those who knock the Enstrom have likely never flown one. My advice is not to dismiss it until you fly it
M1900
Absolutely agree that we all tend to love what we fly. However, we can all also appreciate the others for what they do best. The Enstrom is a fine piece of kit, arguably it would be better for me than a 206 as I fly two or three up most of the time. However, it won't fit in my hangar and I know the 206 animal now (through painful, bitter experience!). Ditto the 500 and the Gazelle and the R66 - they are great but not for me, for a variety of reasons.
One factor that leads me to the concluion that the 206 is the right machine for Ika, is that he clearly wants to charter it out to recoup some of the costs. It's what I do (though let's not kid ourselves it will ever 'make money') and the JetBanger finds a ready market in the commercial world. The EC120 (and ultimately the R66) will erode this situation - I shied away from calling it an advantage - but the 206 and the R22 are the current machines that will find homes relatively easily with commercial operators.
Oh and ika, be aware that when turbine engineers 'estimate' a cost, they are always being optimistic. Whenever I have had a component that required overhaul, the bill has come in higher. Every time
Absolutely agree that we all tend to love what we fly. However, we can all also appreciate the others for what they do best. The Enstrom is a fine piece of kit, arguably it would be better for me than a 206 as I fly two or three up most of the time. However, it won't fit in my hangar and I know the 206 animal now (through painful, bitter experience!). Ditto the 500 and the Gazelle and the R66 - they are great but not for me, for a variety of reasons.
One factor that leads me to the concluion that the 206 is the right machine for Ika, is that he clearly wants to charter it out to recoup some of the costs. It's what I do (though let's not kid ourselves it will ever 'make money') and the JetBanger finds a ready market in the commercial world. The EC120 (and ultimately the R66) will erode this situation - I shied away from calling it an advantage - but the 206 and the R22 are the current machines that will find homes relatively easily with commercial operators.
Oh and ika, be aware that when turbine engineers 'estimate' a cost, they are always being optimistic. Whenever I have had a component that required overhaul, the bill has come in higher. Every time
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: kent
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Costs
I work on the basis that when someone estimates a cost and downtime you should double them both and then add an arbitrary amount and then make no plans at all to need the thing back anyway, and then you might be pleasantly surprised.
Similarly when someone says they can definitely use 100 hours, I assume something will happen and I'll be lucky to get 50. Having said that, it looks like enough people who sound credible are happy to say they'll use a 206 (and no-one an Enstrom) that there is a fighting chance I will at least get close to absorbing a chunk of my fixed costs (yes that is deliberately vague!). Hell, I might even make money if engineers and prospective hirers are to be believed, perhaps I should buy two. Don't worry, the heat hasn't got to me, not serious.
Will fly the enstrom and am open minded to be converted but on a cost basis I think it would have to be close to being as much fun as an MD500 to justify itself. Similarly the R66 might be so much fun to fly, as some have said, that the fact that what is statistically a substantial proportion of the production so far have spontaneously fallen out of the sky can be dismissed as due to pilot error, something that would never happen to someone with my experience, and the fact it will never be Easa certified becomes a mere badge of exclusivity.
Someone said an MD500 can fit a 5th seat, I think that is theory only and not in UK due to front belt restrictions, could put an under slung stretcher for extra passengers but suspect it would cause objection.
Unfortunately I think there are too many AS350s around (near London) and operating costs too large and unpredictable for me to gamble on offsetting some of the fixed costs by charter. If someone can persuade me otherwise, please do.
The L1 5000 hr 1978 long ranger with good times does have a certain appeal though, even if more expensive for a number of reasons, capital, less return and more cost.
All comments have been very helpful and are appreciated, keep them coming.
Most importantly of all the great thing about this input and buying a 206 is I can now buy myself a helicopter as a toy and tell myself/others with an entirely straight face that I considered carefully, took advice and went for the sensible, family, financially prudent option, in much the same way that I bought a 4 seat Ferrari as a sensible family car which was financially prudent as it won't depreciate much further. ;-)
Similarly when someone says they can definitely use 100 hours, I assume something will happen and I'll be lucky to get 50. Having said that, it looks like enough people who sound credible are happy to say they'll use a 206 (and no-one an Enstrom) that there is a fighting chance I will at least get close to absorbing a chunk of my fixed costs (yes that is deliberately vague!). Hell, I might even make money if engineers and prospective hirers are to be believed, perhaps I should buy two. Don't worry, the heat hasn't got to me, not serious.
Will fly the enstrom and am open minded to be converted but on a cost basis I think it would have to be close to being as much fun as an MD500 to justify itself. Similarly the R66 might be so much fun to fly, as some have said, that the fact that what is statistically a substantial proportion of the production so far have spontaneously fallen out of the sky can be dismissed as due to pilot error, something that would never happen to someone with my experience, and the fact it will never be Easa certified becomes a mere badge of exclusivity.
Someone said an MD500 can fit a 5th seat, I think that is theory only and not in UK due to front belt restrictions, could put an under slung stretcher for extra passengers but suspect it would cause objection.
Unfortunately I think there are too many AS350s around (near London) and operating costs too large and unpredictable for me to gamble on offsetting some of the fixed costs by charter. If someone can persuade me otherwise, please do.
The L1 5000 hr 1978 long ranger with good times does have a certain appeal though, even if more expensive for a number of reasons, capital, less return and more cost.
All comments have been very helpful and are appreciated, keep them coming.
Most importantly of all the great thing about this input and buying a 206 is I can now buy myself a helicopter as a toy and tell myself/others with an entirely straight face that I considered carefully, took advice and went for the sensible, family, financially prudent option, in much the same way that I bought a 4 seat Ferrari as a sensible family car which was financially prudent as it won't depreciate much further. ;-)
Ika
Cam put a 5th person in, there are NO Uk restictions, we do it all the time. It is a squeeze. had 5 in the heli the other day. Myself 210lbs 2 front pax 175lbs and 170lbs plus 2 in the back at 175 lbs each with over 2 hours of fuel on board and did a vertical take off !
PM me for more info
Cam put a 5th person in, there are NO Uk restictions, we do it all the time. It is a squeeze. had 5 in the heli the other day. Myself 210lbs 2 front pax 175lbs and 170lbs plus 2 in the back at 175 lbs each with over 2 hours of fuel on board and did a vertical take off !
PM me for more info
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: around and about
Age: 71
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Ika
I'm not a pilot, BUT..... I'd be VERY wary of the L1. The C28 engine was not a good one, it's out of production and spares (even questionable ones) are, in my experience, difficult to come by. And expensive. The C30 retrofit is a great idea but $$$$$$$$$.
That's my 10 cents' worth I'm afraid - VFR
I'm not a pilot, BUT..... I'd be VERY wary of the L1. The C28 engine was not a good one, it's out of production and spares (even questionable ones) are, in my experience, difficult to come by. And expensive. The C30 retrofit is a great idea but $$$$$$$$$.
That's my 10 cents' worth I'm afraid - VFR
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ika - you are correct to be weary of parts problems. I have seen lead times of over 2 years for certain bits. Not sure how larger companies get on, but certainly in my experience, the smaller companies get overlooked. Finding someone who can speak fluent french would work wonders though!
Savoia - The Enstrom can be very very nice once perfectly tracked and balanced. I'd contemplate flying one for a year then getting rid shortly before the first annual, as it would appear only Enstrom employees can make those blades behave (although I've heard that might have more to do with the fact that they have racks upon racks of new blades to pick from at build). What a shame - technical support and part lead times are among the very best.
M9100 - I dont own/fly either types, but with the greatest respect, I'd still pick a 206 over a 480 even if the UK statistics were reversed in the Enstroms favour. My opinions are based on my experience of parts availability, costs, and most importantly the products themselves.
Savoia - The Enstrom can be very very nice once perfectly tracked and balanced. I'd contemplate flying one for a year then getting rid shortly before the first annual, as it would appear only Enstrom employees can make those blades behave (although I've heard that might have more to do with the fact that they have racks upon racks of new blades to pick from at build). What a shame - technical support and part lead times are among the very best.
M9100 - I dont own/fly either types, but with the greatest respect, I'd still pick a 206 over a 480 even if the UK statistics were reversed in the Enstroms favour. My opinions are based on my experience of parts availability, costs, and most importantly the products themselves.
Last edited by RotarySpanner; 29th May 2012 at 20:09.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That doesn't correspond with my experience. I flew in a 480B about five years ago and was very impressed - so impressed that, a couple of years later I bought one. It's always flown very smoothly. T&B'd at each annual.
Never had any problems with parts and always found the factory very helpful. Mine shares a hangar with several other 480s and 480Bs and they don't seem to have any more issues than any other makes of helicopter.
The 480B may not meet the OP's criteria, but it's perfect for many private pilots looking for safe, comfortable, predictable handling - no vices and relatively affordable at an average 100 - 200 hrs pa.
Never had any problems with parts and always found the factory very helpful. Mine shares a hangar with several other 480s and 480Bs and they don't seem to have any more issues than any other makes of helicopter.
The 480B may not meet the OP's criteria, but it's perfect for many private pilots looking for safe, comfortable, predictable handling - no vices and relatively affordable at an average 100 - 200 hrs pa.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Toledo, OH
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arrrj, My biggest concern about the R66 is the fact that there have been 2 inflight breakups of R66's within the first year. At this point there has been no reasonable explanation of what happened. Until that happens there will be a question hanging over the R66. My other big concern is that based on Robinson's past record, if Robinson finally comes out with a required fix, that as the owner I will have to fix it totally on my nickel. Even though the problem was most likely caused by Robinson's inadequate engineering.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rick,
The two crashes have been well explained (so far) by numerous experts. I am no expert, but I have read the reports. "Over controlling" is the knowledgable reason. Interesting that there have been no problems since then...makes one think - and with a whole lot more machines flying around. There are quite a few flying in AUS now and I have not met anyone WITH ONE that has anything bad to say.
Of course, on Pprune there are plenty of experts on subjects that they actually have no experience of...
I am not a salesman for Robbie, I just have flown one a lot (my own 44), and I have never had a problem. My mate just got his 66 and has been raving about how good it is. I am jealous ! 130 knot cruise at 75%.
Given the fact that numerous 206, 44, 350s (etc) have had accidents since the 2 x 66, I do not think this is a concern. But each to their own.
I do know that the approval process for the 66 was extreme (not a variation to an existing approval like many models receive), and for that reason alone I expect that it will be a really good machine for the future.
Arrrj
The two crashes have been well explained (so far) by numerous experts. I am no expert, but I have read the reports. "Over controlling" is the knowledgable reason. Interesting that there have been no problems since then...makes one think - and with a whole lot more machines flying around. There are quite a few flying in AUS now and I have not met anyone WITH ONE that has anything bad to say.
Of course, on Pprune there are plenty of experts on subjects that they actually have no experience of...
I am not a salesman for Robbie, I just have flown one a lot (my own 44), and I have never had a problem. My mate just got his 66 and has been raving about how good it is. I am jealous ! 130 knot cruise at 75%.
Given the fact that numerous 206, 44, 350s (etc) have had accidents since the 2 x 66, I do not think this is a concern. But each to their own.
I do know that the approval process for the 66 was extreme (not a variation to an existing approval like many models receive), and for that reason alone I expect that it will be a really good machine for the future.
Arrrj
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: West Wales and Zug, Switzerland
Age: 63
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ika, not sure where you are in Kent or who to have spoken to. If you intend to lease back then the 206 is the better bet. People have said the 120 is sensitive to W&B, so is the 206.
I'll be honest and the only turbines I have flown are the 206 & 206L.
Always get a good survey done, will save you money what ever you buy.
I'll be honest and the only turbines I have flown are the 206 & 206L.
Always get a good survey done, will save you money what ever you buy.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the 66 now approved for G- registration?
I would not be so sure that there is no market for leaseback. True tat until recently a PPL wanting turbin etime / hire would most likely end up with a 206 or MD500. That's what it was like when I decided that I could get more hire time with a 120 - there were no 120's in the south of England, no competition but no market. It took a couple of years to build a base, and even over winter I have been getting 20 hrs / month average.
A lot of my hires are public transport work and I suspect the R66 is a less attractive option - to rich punters the look of arriving in a 120, 206, 350 is way above a Robinson.
I do think there could be a "big" market for PPLs who have trained 22/44 - less of a shock to go 66 than another route.
Worth doing the homework before writing-off the rental angle, including checking the insurance restrictions (if hayward want 150hrs / 100 turbine / 50 on type before allowing someon to rent the machine bang goes your PPL hire market!
I would not be so sure that there is no market for leaseback. True tat until recently a PPL wanting turbin etime / hire would most likely end up with a 206 or MD500. That's what it was like when I decided that I could get more hire time with a 120 - there were no 120's in the south of England, no competition but no market. It took a couple of years to build a base, and even over winter I have been getting 20 hrs / month average.
A lot of my hires are public transport work and I suspect the R66 is a less attractive option - to rich punters the look of arriving in a 120, 206, 350 is way above a Robinson.
I do think there could be a "big" market for PPLs who have trained 22/44 - less of a shock to go 66 than another route.
Worth doing the homework before writing-off the rental angle, including checking the insurance restrictions (if hayward want 150hrs / 100 turbine / 50 on type before allowing someon to rent the machine bang goes your PPL hire market!
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please don't forget that at the present time, and possibly for the foreseeable future, the R66 isn't EASA registered so you wont be able to get your PPL in one even if you buy it.
I have flown all of these machines and I would say from my experience if you want to have a quick comfortable ride from A to B with or without passengers a B206 is the best choice (STEER CLEAR OF ALL AGUSTA BELL 206's - they are a wallet melt down waiting to happen) but if you want the aircraft more for fun and the pleasure of flying get an MD500E.
I have flown all of these machines and I would say from my experience if you want to have a quick comfortable ride from A to B with or without passengers a B206 is the best choice (STEER CLEAR OF ALL AGUSTA BELL 206's - they are a wallet melt down waiting to happen) but if you want the aircraft more for fun and the pleasure of flying get an MD500E.
Flying any Robinson product = Russian Roulete
AS350B or BA or BB or B1 would do the job nicely as would the good ole trusty B206BIII Jetbox. But if you value Your life don't play Russian Roulete with 3 bullets in the chamber - too dangerous, far too risky - hence stay away from the Crapinson Flimsicopter 