advice pls R66 or 480B or 206Biii
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: kent
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
advice pls R66 or 480B or 206Biii
I'm new to helis, have 500+hrs fixed wing mep/imc flying a twin, half way through ppl(h).
Looking at getting a single turbine, ideally to do 2nd half of ppl(h) in (instead of repeating navigation etc, would make sense to get time and instruction in what I'm going to fly rather than just doing conversion after). Find flying around at 70 kts frustrating when used to 150kts.
Flew an MD500e (and a d and a c), they were great, fast and responsive, sadly no 5th seat else others are no contest and I would buy one. Plan to put kids in so weight not so much a problem but no of seats is.
Tried a Jetranger, perfectly good, supposed to be solid and safe and components go to time, and old ones are cheap, maintenance questionable cost but reckon say £20k pa plus any big things coming up. 120mph/105kts seems realistic.
Being persuaded to try a 480b or an R66 before I commit.
480B on paper a little faster than 206, is it in practice (comfortable, reasonable mid weight - I find that in helis people tend to quote max cruise but in reality don't fly at that as it's uncomfortable if light/heavy/bumpy/at engine limits), going to try one.
Saw an R66 the other day and am impressed by cabin layout and speed (on paper) and predictability of maintenance if I get a new one, capital cost at reasonable finance and predictable depreciation may be offset by lower running costs in next few years at say 100-200hrs a year (assuming I do 50-100 and find someone to buy about 100hrs to make the hole burnt in my pocket by fixed/periodic costs slightly smaller). I'm expecting that on a new aircraft a 100hr will be for once just an inspection, rather than having components to replace. However am slightly concerned by two unconcluded accidents (negative G? seems to be something a fixed wing pilot with low heli hours (i.e. me, might be prone to do, on the assumption others who have done thought they wouldn't do something silly either, or worse spontaneous in-flight breakup) and whether the apparent politics behind EASA refusal to certify will impact on resale or use in the UK (can't put out for training at present, is a slight pain that I will have to complete my training in something else and then convert, and get an FAA licence).
Assume I was planning to spend £200-300k if I could, am happy to pay little now for something a bit tired looking but sound but I could finance an R66, want something fun to fly, fast as can be, resellable without a large loss/wait in a few years from now - one plan is to expect to get smitten by helis, get a couple of hundred hours, my A109 rating/multi/ifr, get an old A109, ditch the twin fixed wing, and then forever be shuddering at running costs and harking back to the halcyon days of a £20k annual and being able to fly non-stop to Corsica.
Any advice (on what heli to get, why/realistic speeds and maintenance costs/experience and at what sort of price is the best value/likely resale exit rather than to get psychiatric help), gratefully received.
Have rejected EC120 and AS350 (which I'd love) on running/ownership costs, also SA341, which would be lovely, for same reason.
If there is something else I should be considering, open to information.
Appreciate there are some threads and comments on related subjects, have read some, tried to distil nuggets from evangelical outpourings, hoping that asking the question again may elicit fresh insights as I haven't yet made the decision!
Looking at getting a single turbine, ideally to do 2nd half of ppl(h) in (instead of repeating navigation etc, would make sense to get time and instruction in what I'm going to fly rather than just doing conversion after). Find flying around at 70 kts frustrating when used to 150kts.
Flew an MD500e (and a d and a c), they were great, fast and responsive, sadly no 5th seat else others are no contest and I would buy one. Plan to put kids in so weight not so much a problem but no of seats is.
Tried a Jetranger, perfectly good, supposed to be solid and safe and components go to time, and old ones are cheap, maintenance questionable cost but reckon say £20k pa plus any big things coming up. 120mph/105kts seems realistic.
Being persuaded to try a 480b or an R66 before I commit.
480B on paper a little faster than 206, is it in practice (comfortable, reasonable mid weight - I find that in helis people tend to quote max cruise but in reality don't fly at that as it's uncomfortable if light/heavy/bumpy/at engine limits), going to try one.
Saw an R66 the other day and am impressed by cabin layout and speed (on paper) and predictability of maintenance if I get a new one, capital cost at reasonable finance and predictable depreciation may be offset by lower running costs in next few years at say 100-200hrs a year (assuming I do 50-100 and find someone to buy about 100hrs to make the hole burnt in my pocket by fixed/periodic costs slightly smaller). I'm expecting that on a new aircraft a 100hr will be for once just an inspection, rather than having components to replace. However am slightly concerned by two unconcluded accidents (negative G? seems to be something a fixed wing pilot with low heli hours (i.e. me, might be prone to do, on the assumption others who have done thought they wouldn't do something silly either, or worse spontaneous in-flight breakup) and whether the apparent politics behind EASA refusal to certify will impact on resale or use in the UK (can't put out for training at present, is a slight pain that I will have to complete my training in something else and then convert, and get an FAA licence).
Assume I was planning to spend £200-300k if I could, am happy to pay little now for something a bit tired looking but sound but I could finance an R66, want something fun to fly, fast as can be, resellable without a large loss/wait in a few years from now - one plan is to expect to get smitten by helis, get a couple of hundred hours, my A109 rating/multi/ifr, get an old A109, ditch the twin fixed wing, and then forever be shuddering at running costs and harking back to the halcyon days of a £20k annual and being able to fly non-stop to Corsica.
Any advice (on what heli to get, why/realistic speeds and maintenance costs/experience and at what sort of price is the best value/likely resale exit rather than to get psychiatric help), gratefully received.
Have rejected EC120 and AS350 (which I'd love) on running/ownership costs, also SA341, which would be lovely, for same reason.
If there is something else I should be considering, open to information.
Appreciate there are some threads and comments on related subjects, have read some, tried to distil nuggets from evangelical outpourings, hoping that asking the question again may elicit fresh insights as I haven't yet made the decision!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Toledo, OH
Posts: 409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few years ago I was talking with my chief pilot about light turbine helicopters. What he told me stuck. When you are choosing between a 206 or a 500, the you buy depends on where the person who is paying for the machine. If they are sitting up front you get a 500. If they sit in back you get a 206. I have to agree with you on the R66. Until they properly explain how the two fatal accidents happened, I would not consider an R66. Based on Robinson's past record anyone that owns an R66 that needs any fixes or mods, will be left holding the bag on that. If you get a chance to fly an EN480, try it. I have flown the 28 and 280 models and have enjoyed the experience. Plus there are very few life limited parts. If you get a chance talk with Dennis Kenyon.
If you decide on the 206, get a Bell made 206, not an Agusta made 206. From what I have been told, there is a big difference between the two.
If you decide on the 206, get a Bell made 206, not an Agusta made 206. From what I have been told, there is a big difference between the two.
Last edited by rick1128; 28th May 2012 at 01:40.
Ika: The questions you are asking, if one were to respond in full, would require forwarding a considerable amount of information.
With your budget one should only expect to be able to acquire an early model 206 with a good number of hours on the clock. If it were my choice I would finance the purchase of a 480B which, compared with the 206, would give you a newer craft with reasonable operating costs and better handing qualities.
The differences between Bell and Agusta built 206's have been discussed on the Nostalgia Thread and are miniscule. Across Europe all of the initial 206 deliveries were made by Agusta. To give you an example; in the UK of the first 24 models delivered only two were Bell-built.
It was widely recognised that Agusta manufactured versions of the 206 were of slightly better build quality and incorporated a number of refinements absent on their American counterparts. However, as part of Agusta's licencing terms restrictions were placed on the sale of Agusta-built models in the Americas and which is where the "don't buy Agusta" mantra originates. Outside of the Americas Agusta-built Bells will serve you just fine.
There is no more nostalgic aircraft for me (rotary wing) than the 206 and I have accumulated many varied and wonderful experiences in this type but .. today I honestly can't say that I enjoy flying her. Sloppy controls, uncomfortable seating and a bit slow and bumpy. The Ecureuil is far more pleasant as a personal transport.
The 206 is as reliable as they get however but .. when buying the older (high time) models don't think that they will retain their economy. Old creaky 206's can become expensive if you fail to conduct a thorough pre-buy.
With your budget one should only expect to be able to acquire an early model 206 with a good number of hours on the clock. If it were my choice I would finance the purchase of a 480B which, compared with the 206, would give you a newer craft with reasonable operating costs and better handing qualities.
If you decide on the 206, get a Bell made 206, not an Agusta made 206. From what I have been told, there is a big difference between the two.
It was widely recognised that Agusta manufactured versions of the 206 were of slightly better build quality and incorporated a number of refinements absent on their American counterparts. However, as part of Agusta's licencing terms restrictions were placed on the sale of Agusta-built models in the Americas and which is where the "don't buy Agusta" mantra originates. Outside of the Americas Agusta-built Bells will serve you just fine.
Bell 206 B3 every time-get a good low time machine you won't regret it.
The 206 is as reliable as they get however but .. when buying the older (high time) models don't think that they will retain their economy. Old creaky 206's can become expensive if you fail to conduct a thorough pre-buy.
If 5 seats is a must, I don't think the 480B is the answer. The 5-up arrangement is odd. Really, it's a 3 seater that they managed to squeeze 2 more into. And don't forget, kids grow up.
For your budget, if you have rejected the EC120, you should reject the R66. The Robbo is still too new in the marketplace to be at sensible money whereas the EC product can be bought for not terrifying cash.
As for 206's, they do what they say on the tin. However as someone who has bought both, I would say a) do NOT buy an Agusta (I had one): the issue is not the quality, but availability of parts which will get worse as time goes on and b) buy the best one you can afford, then wait for incoming. I was once told that you have to have pockets deep enough so that when an unexpected bill arrives in the post for £35k for some part or other, it doesn't put you off your breakfast!
£300k will get you a 1980's machine with good component times - get a machine post 35xx serial no and it's all the latest design points (91gallon tank, later door locks etc). Mine is 1982 built, has done nearly 14k TT, looks and flies well with good times. If you ask people, they say it's a couple of years old!
For your budget, if you have rejected the EC120, you should reject the R66. The Robbo is still too new in the marketplace to be at sensible money whereas the EC product can be bought for not terrifying cash.
As for 206's, they do what they say on the tin. However as someone who has bought both, I would say a) do NOT buy an Agusta (I had one): the issue is not the quality, but availability of parts which will get worse as time goes on and b) buy the best one you can afford, then wait for incoming. I was once told that you have to have pockets deep enough so that when an unexpected bill arrives in the post for £35k for some part or other, it doesn't put you off your breakfast!
£300k will get you a 1980's machine with good component times - get a machine post 35xx serial no and it's all the latest design points (91gallon tank, later door locks etc). Mine is 1982 built, has done nearly 14k TT, looks and flies well with good times. If you ask people, they say it's a couple of years old!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that you rejected the EC120 on grounds of maintenance cost. I have run one for three years now and when comparing my machines with a 206 I would have concluded the exact opposite.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,149
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
These days, when engines simply don't come out at the drop of a hat, I would expect the maintenance bills to be cheaper with a 120.
Savoia mentioned a pre-buy inspection - well worth the investment if the engineer knows what he is doing and is given the time to do it. The first Alton Towers helicopter suffered from the latter. Luckily it was basically a good ship.
Back then it cost £80K per year to run.
phil
Savoia mentioned a pre-buy inspection - well worth the investment if the engineer knows what he is doing and is given the time to do it. The first Alton Towers helicopter suffered from the latter. Luckily it was basically a good ship.
Back then it cost £80K per year to run.
phil
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R66 for sure
Amusing responses. Two R66 crashes (a while ago and very early in the delivery cycle) and the forum writes off the R66. Well written up advice indicates "over controlling" (in short) as the cause. Google it chaps.
Sister ship to the biggest selling heli in production. R44. Sure, people crash those too. Same with 206 and EC120B (Even John's (R81) machine - ps...you always write something measured, if you are ever in Sydney, PM me and we will go flying !).
Ok, maybe I am biased because I have actually flown the R66. Easy to fly, safe, comfortable and good value. One of my mates just got one, it is a very nice machine. Smooth, heaps (!) of power and really nice to fly.
206 = designed in 1950s, R66 designed this century.
OK, let the debate rage !
(VF ?)
Enjoy flying whatever you are.
Arrrj
PS - I would have 66 tomorrow if not for the GFC.
Sister ship to the biggest selling heli in production. R44. Sure, people crash those too. Same with 206 and EC120B (Even John's (R81) machine - ps...you always write something measured, if you are ever in Sydney, PM me and we will go flying !).
Ok, maybe I am biased because I have actually flown the R66. Easy to fly, safe, comfortable and good value. One of my mates just got one, it is a very nice machine. Smooth, heaps (!) of power and really nice to fly.
206 = designed in 1950s, R66 designed this century.
OK, let the debate rage !
(VF ?)
Enjoy flying whatever you are.
Arrrj
PS - I would have 66 tomorrow if not for the GFC.
Ika
I agree with John R81 and Paco - you shouldn't rule out the EC120 on cost grounds, particularly if you're relying on "predictability of maintenance" costs as published by Robinson. I did that with a Raven II but then came the stream of non-scheduled maintenance, SBs and ADs: a bare-metal respray (because of corrosion problems that the factory refuse to accept - £12k), 3 x auxilliary fuel pumps (3 x £1k), landing light bulbs every 20 hours, the latest requirement for bladder tanks (£9k), plus the constant battle with blade problems... I like the 44, but don't believe the marketing guff on running costs for this or the R66.
IMO the R66 isn't good value. Sure, it has plenty of power and maybe there won't be as many surprises as the far more established R44 (although I doubt it very much), but if I was looking at spending c. £650k (as I was a few months ago) on a 5 seat turbine, the R66 is the last machine I'd consider. You can live with paper doors and meccano construction on £250k robbie, but not a £650k robbie - you can get a lot more for your money elsewhere.
As others have said, it depends on exactly what you're looking for. I went for the EC120 and so far for my purposes, it's proved to be the best compromise for performance, running costs, reliability and comfort.
I agree with John R81 and Paco - you shouldn't rule out the EC120 on cost grounds, particularly if you're relying on "predictability of maintenance" costs as published by Robinson. I did that with a Raven II but then came the stream of non-scheduled maintenance, SBs and ADs: a bare-metal respray (because of corrosion problems that the factory refuse to accept - £12k), 3 x auxilliary fuel pumps (3 x £1k), landing light bulbs every 20 hours, the latest requirement for bladder tanks (£9k), plus the constant battle with blade problems... I like the 44, but don't believe the marketing guff on running costs for this or the R66.
IMO the R66 isn't good value. Sure, it has plenty of power and maybe there won't be as many surprises as the far more established R44 (although I doubt it very much), but if I was looking at spending c. £650k (as I was a few months ago) on a 5 seat turbine, the R66 is the last machine I'd consider. You can live with paper doors and meccano construction on £250k robbie, but not a £650k robbie - you can get a lot more for your money elsewhere.
As others have said, it depends on exactly what you're looking for. I went for the EC120 and so far for my purposes, it's proved to be the best compromise for performance, running costs, reliability and comfort.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
120B
TBT,
A serious question - not just a wind up.
Can a 120B take 5 x "normal" 85-95kg people and 3/4 (+) fuel and fly ?
I have a fair bit of time on the 120B, without doubt the best made machine of the list (above). But (as I have said before), I have concerns about the legitimate performance of the machine. And when I say that I don't mean to insult any owners, it is a real comment.
Give me a 120B with a B2 or B3 performance, and HELLO that would be the pick for this discussion and many others. Sadly, despite my requests to EC, that does not and will not exist.
Arrrj
A serious question - not just a wind up.
Can a 120B take 5 x "normal" 85-95kg people and 3/4 (+) fuel and fly ?
I have a fair bit of time on the 120B, without doubt the best made machine of the list (above). But (as I have said before), I have concerns about the legitimate performance of the machine. And when I say that I don't mean to insult any owners, it is a real comment.
Give me a 120B with a B2 or B3 performance, and HELLO that would be the pick for this discussion and many others. Sadly, despite my requests to EC, that does not and will not exist.
Arrrj
Dont write a 500 off, they do have 5 seats (centre collective comes out). Can put 5 people in (yes it is a squeeze, but if they are your kids so what) with full fuel and get off the ground. Average 500d = 1650lbs, 550 lbs of fuel (330nm) 800lbs of people. Will lift just, another 550 lbs if on a hook so a good power margin.
Cheaper maintenance as the thing flies less hours to cover the same distance. hold their value very well, in fact sought after machines.
Down side lack of luggage space (pod underneath looks hideous) need bigger hangar to accommodate 5 blades.
Have owned them for years along with 206's and 341's they are more reliable and the cheapest of the 3 to run when you look at nm flown not just hours. Buy an e model for £350k upwards.
Pm me for any more
Cheaper maintenance as the thing flies less hours to cover the same distance. hold their value very well, in fact sought after machines.
Down side lack of luggage space (pod underneath looks hideous) need bigger hangar to accommodate 5 blades.
Have owned them for years along with 206's and 341's they are more reliable and the cheapest of the 3 to run when you look at nm flown not just hours. Buy an e model for £350k upwards.
Pm me for any more
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a big fan of the EN.480B, which is IMO the best value entry level turbine. (A used 480 is even better value, but the later 'B' has useful improvements).
Advantages:
- You'll get a late, low hour example for relatively modest money.
- It's a new(ish) model based on an established proven design
- It was designed as a Turbine trainer for the US military and is used as such by various military around the world
- It has an excellent safety and reliability record and tough build integrity
- It has a sophisticated 3-blade fully articulated rotor head
- It has conventional cyclic controls
- It has a flexible spacious cabin set up with various configurations - although best as a 3 seat or 2+2
- It is very comfortable, especially in windy or turbulent conditions
- The handling is safe and benign
Disadvantages:
- Although the cabin can be configured as a 5-seater, it's a bit of a compromise and not for 5 adults (bear in mind that any of these helis with 5 adults will have restricted range)
- Although running costs are reasonable, it needs three new TT straps every two years (c.£6,000)
- Not as fast as a 500 or, probably, R66
Turbine 480B « Enstrom Helicopter Corporation
Advantages:
- You'll get a late, low hour example for relatively modest money.
- It's a new(ish) model based on an established proven design
- It was designed as a Turbine trainer for the US military and is used as such by various military around the world
- It has an excellent safety and reliability record and tough build integrity
- It has a sophisticated 3-blade fully articulated rotor head
- It has conventional cyclic controls
- It has a flexible spacious cabin set up with various configurations - although best as a 3 seat or 2+2
- It is very comfortable, especially in windy or turbulent conditions
- The handling is safe and benign
Disadvantages:
- Although the cabin can be configured as a 5-seater, it's a bit of a compromise and not for 5 adults (bear in mind that any of these helis with 5 adults will have restricted range)
- Although running costs are reasonable, it needs three new TT straps every two years (c.£6,000)
- Not as fast as a 500 or, probably, R66
Turbine 480B « Enstrom Helicopter Corporation
Arrj
The 120 will physically seat 5 people far more comfortably than an R66, that's for sure. From a performance perspective though, you're right. The 120 is sensitive to W&B when it's fully loaded, especially if it's hot 'n' high. For me, living in the cold UK valleys, I rarely need to take 5 'above average weight' pax AND full fuel and that's why I said 'for my purposes'.
Not every machine will provide everything a prospective buyer is looking for and ika's decision will be based on his own priorities, budget and general circumstances. I looked at all the same aircraft he did and selected the 120 because it ticked the most boxes for me. No regrets so far
TTB
The 120 will physically seat 5 people far more comfortably than an R66, that's for sure. From a performance perspective though, you're right. The 120 is sensitive to W&B when it's fully loaded, especially if it's hot 'n' high. For me, living in the cold UK valleys, I rarely need to take 5 'above average weight' pax AND full fuel and that's why I said 'for my purposes'.
Not every machine will provide everything a prospective buyer is looking for and ika's decision will be based on his own priorities, budget and general circumstances. I looked at all the same aircraft he did and selected the 120 because it ticked the most boxes for me. No regrets so far
TTB
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
get the 480B and if you are heading to hot weather get the hot kit for not much more.
people tell me the 206BIII does not quite do what it says on the tin, a lot extra loot for something that wont lift much more than its predecessers. and lots more running costs.
so for leisure an cool climes an 206A might be OK but I'll bet its running cost will line up with or be more than the 480B. Go for a fly in one, they are magic and easy. You will be amazed at the fuel economy when you wind back the airspeed a bit as the three bladed rotor just seems so efficient and smooth as others have said, be sitting down when you read the retirement life on the blades.
480B autos, well was there one?
never seen a 66 and not looking to see one anytime soon.
people tell me the 206BIII does not quite do what it says on the tin, a lot extra loot for something that wont lift much more than its predecessers. and lots more running costs.
so for leisure an cool climes an 206A might be OK but I'll bet its running cost will line up with or be more than the 480B. Go for a fly in one, they are magic and easy. You will be amazed at the fuel economy when you wind back the airspeed a bit as the three bladed rotor just seems so efficient and smooth as others have said, be sitting down when you read the retirement life on the blades.
480B autos, well was there one?
never seen a 66 and not looking to see one anytime soon.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: kent
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update and thanks
First, thx to all who have commented, all very helpful and time appreciated.
Where I am today is still thinking an EC120 expensive, £500k buys one close to 12 years old.
No one says a Bell is a bad, unsafe or unreliable buy, or that I'll get badly burnt on cost, many say it's boring and it is a bit but it does look more like a "proper" Heli than an R66 or a 480 and I thought exactly as someone said I need to be prepared for £40k not to put me off breakfast, and as long as it doesn't happen too often, fair enough - 150 paying hours will absorb that.
I think if I get a decent Bell I'll be able to sell and use it and get some paying usage without so much hassle. Speed difference over R66 or 480 is probably 15 mins most on a 2 hr flight.
Looking at a post 35xx post 1980 cheap £200k bell with basic utility spec, high 16k tt but good component times except mini turbine (est £40k) due in 300 hrs and maintenance history reputed to be first rate, a slightly newer lower time one for about £250k and also toying with idea of $650k for a late 70s L1 with 5000 hrs, extra speed and space tempting, being able to carry 6 would be a big plus and it may in future put me off the idea of getting a 109, which can only be good for my finances!
Will still try out an R66 and EN480 as I think I should fly before I decide not to buy.
Where I am today is still thinking an EC120 expensive, £500k buys one close to 12 years old.
No one says a Bell is a bad, unsafe or unreliable buy, or that I'll get badly burnt on cost, many say it's boring and it is a bit but it does look more like a "proper" Heli than an R66 or a 480 and I thought exactly as someone said I need to be prepared for £40k not to put me off breakfast, and as long as it doesn't happen too often, fair enough - 150 paying hours will absorb that.
I think if I get a decent Bell I'll be able to sell and use it and get some paying usage without so much hassle. Speed difference over R66 or 480 is probably 15 mins most on a 2 hr flight.
Looking at a post 35xx post 1980 cheap £200k bell with basic utility spec, high 16k tt but good component times except mini turbine (est £40k) due in 300 hrs and maintenance history reputed to be first rate, a slightly newer lower time one for about £250k and also toying with idea of $650k for a late 70s L1 with 5000 hrs, extra speed and space tempting, being able to carry 6 would be a big plus and it may in future put me off the idea of getting a 109, which can only be good for my finances!
Will still try out an R66 and EN480 as I think I should fly before I decide not to buy.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arrj
I agree = the 120D (same machine with engine and transmission from the EC130) is the machine of my dreams!!!
I like the R66 (just one short flight) but I prefer the 120. If I had to pick from that and the B206 it would be the 206 only because early in life of any ship we are part of the beta testing. The 206 costs are more predictable.
If I can get to Aus I will definately call you up. Same goes if you are ever in UK.
John
I agree = the 120D (same machine with engine and transmission from the EC130) is the machine of my dreams!!!
I like the R66 (just one short flight) but I prefer the 120. If I had to pick from that and the B206 it would be the 206 only because early in life of any ship we are part of the beta testing. The 206 costs are more predictable.
If I can get to Aus I will definately call you up. Same goes if you are ever in UK.
John
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was me, I'd get an early lightweight 206 converted A, with good component times, run it a few hundred hours a year, then move on to a Longranger as and when I need a bit more room/better ride.
I'd steer clear of the 480, and maybe have another look at the R66 in another year or two once they've notched up a few more hours and the real operational data is coming in.
I'd steer clear of the 480, and maybe have another look at the R66 in another year or two once they've notched up a few more hours and the real operational data is coming in.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R66 cruise
My mate flew his new 66 up the coast (NSW) yesterday. 125 kts cruise. 130-135 kts fastest. Fuel burn was below published. He is excited about the performance, smoothness and build quality. "You have to get one mate !" was his message last night.
My 44 cruises at 110 kts. That's a big difference in speed and time, particularly in Aus where we have long distances to cover (and can't afford a A109 !).
Longranger IV, superb machine, but it does not cover the ground like that.
Cheers
Arrrj
My 44 cruises at 110 kts. That's a big difference in speed and time, particularly in Aus where we have long distances to cover (and can't afford a A109 !).
Longranger IV, superb machine, but it does not cover the ground like that.
Cheers
Arrrj