Enstrom Helicopters 2022
Thread Starter
Enstrom Helicopters 2022
I saw this posted on Enstrom Helicopters FB group page and not sure what to make of it if it’s even true.
I hope it is not going to happen.
cheers
I hope it is not going to happen.
cheers
Its Never happy to see that, a good safe product, some good jobs, and probably good value for many customers.
It makes you wonder what has lead to that, lack of capital, lack of inovation, or lack of new products?
It makes you wonder what has lead to that, lack of capital, lack of inovation, or lack of new products?
Surprised they lasted this long. There couldn’t be a less “cool” aircraft to own, Robbie killed their market and it was a standing joke that they spent more time in maintenance than the air.
Next one hanging on by its fingernails is MD.
Next one hanging on by its fingernails is MD.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a shame. My experience of Enstrom products has been very good - the current EN480B is an excellent entry-level turbine and trainer, with lots of qualities that I would rate above the R66 and B505.
The problem is that, in today's world, it has been run as a small company - almost a cottage industry - and the product was worthy of much better and more dynamic management progression.
Hopefully, 'Chapter 7' makes it more attractive for potential purchasers to acquire the business, and any new parentage takes Rudi Enstrom's clever innovation onwards and upwards.
The problem is that, in today's world, it has been run as a small company - almost a cottage industry - and the product was worthy of much better and more dynamic management progression.
Hopefully, 'Chapter 7' makes it more attractive for potential purchasers to acquire the business, and any new parentage takes Rudi Enstrom's clever innovation onwards and upwards.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: somerset
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots kill helicopters. Helicopters don't kill pilots (except in very rare instances).
Enstrom has produced 1,300 helicopters in it's entire history. Robinson over 12,000. Say what you want about Robinson, but they must be doing something right. While I would like nothing more than to be flying around in an AS350B3, or a 407GXi, I am extraordinarily pleased with the performance, comfort and economics of the R44. There is an Enstrom 28F that is kept in the same hangar as my R44. The Enstrom is always in maintenance, rarely flies, and obtaining MX is an ordeal compared to the plethora of Robinson MX shops. Putting three in it is another kind of ordeal, four is, of course, not possible.
While there is much to like about the Enstrom rotorhead and control system, that is probably the only good thing about it. Swinging those three blades around is asking a lot for a small Lycoming. Even with the complexity of turbocharging, performance suffers dramatically at max. gross weight compared to the R22. We see some of that same issue in the Cabri G2, but of course the Cabri employs much more modern technology and is only a little less powerful than the R22. In either case, how can the Enstrom design compete?
Poor design and management also kill helicopters. The company was always a hobby time affair, passing through the hands of so many owners, none of whom were ever successful in motivating a marketable design. Dean Kamen came close with the 480, but a cabin perfect for low cost training became a bizarre aberration in an attempt to sell it commercially when the military didn't want it. Perhaps he was too distracted by his other failure, the Segway, which was occurring at the same time, to really take the 480 where it needed to be. Again, market share tells a story. 250 480's total since 2000. 1000 R66 since 2007. And 505 production is banging right along at 200+ since 2015, perhaps it will ultimately overtake the R66. I don't have the data, but it is easy to suspect that 480B production fell into the low single digits per year when the R66 was released. With both the R66 and 505 available the 480 was and is as doomed as the 28 and 280.
Perhaps the company will change hands again and the new owners will be more visionary. But the new vision would have to be very compelling in some way given Robinson and Bell's lock on the low end market.
Enstrom has produced 1,300 helicopters in it's entire history. Robinson over 12,000. Say what you want about Robinson, but they must be doing something right. While I would like nothing more than to be flying around in an AS350B3, or a 407GXi, I am extraordinarily pleased with the performance, comfort and economics of the R44. There is an Enstrom 28F that is kept in the same hangar as my R44. The Enstrom is always in maintenance, rarely flies, and obtaining MX is an ordeal compared to the plethora of Robinson MX shops. Putting three in it is another kind of ordeal, four is, of course, not possible.
While there is much to like about the Enstrom rotorhead and control system, that is probably the only good thing about it. Swinging those three blades around is asking a lot for a small Lycoming. Even with the complexity of turbocharging, performance suffers dramatically at max. gross weight compared to the R22. We see some of that same issue in the Cabri G2, but of course the Cabri employs much more modern technology and is only a little less powerful than the R22. In either case, how can the Enstrom design compete?
Poor design and management also kill helicopters. The company was always a hobby time affair, passing through the hands of so many owners, none of whom were ever successful in motivating a marketable design. Dean Kamen came close with the 480, but a cabin perfect for low cost training became a bizarre aberration in an attempt to sell it commercially when the military didn't want it. Perhaps he was too distracted by his other failure, the Segway, which was occurring at the same time, to really take the 480 where it needed to be. Again, market share tells a story. 250 480's total since 2000. 1000 R66 since 2007. And 505 production is banging right along at 200+ since 2015, perhaps it will ultimately overtake the R66. I don't have the data, but it is easy to suspect that 480B production fell into the low single digits per year when the R66 was released. With both the R66 and 505 available the 480 was and is as doomed as the 28 and 280.
Perhaps the company will change hands again and the new owners will be more visionary. But the new vision would have to be very compelling in some way given Robinson and Bell's lock on the low end market.
All I know is that when I flew a 280 a couple years ago, the collective felt like trying to lift a 50 lbs dumbell.
As with the Cabri and Schweizer though,... Why would I pay more money to fly what is is essentially just another two-seat piston, when I can simply fly an R22 instead?
As with the Cabri and Schweizer though,... Why would I pay more money to fly what is is essentially just another two-seat piston, when I can simply fly an R22 instead?
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: somerset
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All I know is that when I flew a 280 a couple years ago, the collective felt like trying to lift a 50 lbs dumbell.
As with the Cabri and Schweizer though,... Why would I pay more money to fly what is is essentially just another two-seat piston, when I can simply fly an R22 instead?
As with the Cabri and Schweizer though,... Why would I pay more money to fly what is is essentially just another two-seat piston, when I can simply fly an R22 instead?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Manitoba Canada
Age: 71
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hopefully a young ... (Dennis Kenyon type person) ... can take over Enstrom support ... similar to Scotts-Bell-47 .... but on a smaller scale.
.
I would assume that the Enstom PISTON F-28F & 280FX and the TURBINE 480B are not part of that vision you are calling for.
1st: because indeed more modern tech is needed; (aka: composite, modern avionics as part of the design, and yes engine modernization). I am not talking all the way to Hills helicopters but more like a Cabri.
2nd: because they tried to design sucessfull off-child so many times in the course the ownership transitions, 280 Shark, 280L Hawk ... its not working.
3rd: look at the people who acquired the schweizer type certificate "Schweizer RSG" well it does not feel like a blockbuster operation.
Assume that you had the few millions to acquire the Enstrom organization, I would have to sit and think quite a bit to figure out the new business course.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latterly, whilst I'm sure Enstrom employed some well meaning, dedicated personnel, it appeared more like a small family business than a forward pressing brand. Still think that the 480B is the 'diamond in the rough,' with the most potential, as a safe, easy, turbine trainer (for which it was designed), or private owner use.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Intresting points you mentioned in your post, it ilustrates the reason this is such a distressed asset.
I would assume that the Enstom PISTON F-28F & 280FX and the TURBINE 480B are not part of that vision you are calling for.
1st: because indeed more modern tech is needed; (aka: composite, modern avionics as part of the design, and yes engine modernization). I am not talking all the way to Hills helicopters but more like a Cabri.
...
Assume that you had the few millions to acquire the Enstrom organization, I would have to sit and think quite a bit to figure out the new business course.
I would assume that the Enstom PISTON F-28F & 280FX and the TURBINE 480B are not part of that vision you are calling for.
1st: because indeed more modern tech is needed; (aka: composite, modern avionics as part of the design, and yes engine modernization). I am not talking all the way to Hills helicopters but more like a Cabri.
...
Assume that you had the few millions to acquire the Enstrom organization, I would have to sit and think quite a bit to figure out the new business course.
Nevertheless, it would take a clean sheet of paper to make them competitive. Dump the pistons, concentrate on a successor to the 480B. Lose the grease gun and nitrogen bottle, add some real luggage space and 4 conventional seating positions, and add hydraulics. Keep the rotorhead and blade system, obviously, since that's the crown jewel of their engineering portfolio. Add a pilot operable blade fold kit so it can fit in the same space as the competition. Keep the flat floor of the 505, the high level of standard interior finish of the R66, and the superior full fuel payload and range of the R66. Avoid anything inelegant like the 505 tail weights.
