Which is the best helicopter for training?
M67
Cheapest would be a permit to fly gazelle, about £ 150k
Non permit about £ 250k
MD 500 depending upon model £ 175k for a c to £300k for an E ( starting prices)
B206 as for a 500 depnding upon model
Mind you its a buyers market at the moment
Cheapest would be a permit to fly gazelle, about £ 150k
Non permit about £ 250k
MD 500 depending upon model £ 175k for a c to £300k for an E ( starting prices)
B206 as for a 500 depnding upon model
Mind you its a buyers market at the moment
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a day like today (following the Colin McRae report and a tragic training accident) the mood may be sombre, and there may be some truth in some of what you say.
But the weakness in your statement lies in the comment, "I've never even set foot in a helicopter".
But the weakness in your statement lies in the comment, "I've never even set foot in a helicopter".
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't worry, all are welcome here, and if some posters checked the profiles and previous posts of others, then it would be clear why they are on a forum.
However mateyboy, there some inaccuracies in your thought process. Helicopter safety is very stringent but, as with many things, it is dependent upon the soft, squidgy thing sitting at the controls. And quite often, it's the attitude of the soft, squidgy thing that determines the safety of the flight.
As regards helmets, maybe they should be used more often but not because of turbulence which does not affect helicopters in the same was fixed wing.
Have a trial lesson, have another few lessons and then see how you feel.
Cheers
Whirls
However mateyboy, there some inaccuracies in your thought process. Helicopter safety is very stringent but, as with many things, it is dependent upon the soft, squidgy thing sitting at the controls. And quite often, it's the attitude of the soft, squidgy thing that determines the safety of the flight.
As regards helmets, maybe they should be used more often but not because of turbulence which does not affect helicopters in the same was fixed wing.
Have a trial lesson, have another few lessons and then see how you feel.
Cheers
Whirls
Flingwingingit .......firstly it makes no difference how fast the heli flies into or out of the wind ref settling with power !! In any event you will not be getting into settling just skirting the edges of it i dare say . Are you saying it is better that the 22 gets into easier than the 300 ??
The best heli for training i would say is the 47 first due to its incredible forgiveness and inertia but the 300 is the best all rounder by far . I was asked to test a 22 back in 1982 if i remember , i was asked to evaluate it as a trainer . Flew it once ....thought it was lethal and never ever flew one again. Re blade rpm there is no forgiveness . Very sad news .
The best heli for training i would say is the 47 first due to its incredible forgiveness and inertia but the 300 is the best all rounder by far . I was asked to test a 22 back in 1982 if i remember , i was asked to evaluate it as a trainer . Flew it once ....thought it was lethal and never ever flew one again. Re blade rpm there is no forgiveness . Very sad news .
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South of the border
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mateyboy
Apologies, like I said I didn't mean to be rude but when I read "I've never even set foot in a helicopter" I did wonder...
I too conducted a fair amount of research before parting with my hard earned cash and having concluded that the R22 seemed to be involved in the greatest number of incidents, I also discovered that Robinson helicopters make up a significant proportion of all helicopters flying in the UK. I ended up training on the R22 anyway and I have to say that I didn't have any problems.
If your local airfield operates R22/R44/300 etc why not take a trial flight in a couple of different models and see which machine you're happiest with?
PR
Apologies, like I said I didn't mean to be rude but when I read "I've never even set foot in a helicopter" I did wonder...
I too conducted a fair amount of research before parting with my hard earned cash and having concluded that the R22 seemed to be involved in the greatest number of incidents, I also discovered that Robinson helicopters make up a significant proportion of all helicopters flying in the UK. I ended up training on the R22 anyway and I have to say that I didn't have any problems.
If your local airfield operates R22/R44/300 etc why not take a trial flight in a couple of different models and see which machine you're happiest with?
PR
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA (PA)
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"R22 best training aircraft" my a**! 
Have around 40 hours in it and am glad to be alive! I lost a good friend who "had 1000's of hours in type" (quote a reply in the Sandtoft crash thread, as if that would mean something). This accident changed my mind from "not a good training aircraft - rather a personal rotorcraft" to "death trap".
What struck me is, that in both cases, my buddies and the latest victims, that the main rotor was still attached - at least no mast bumping you'd think, but obviously the aircraft did not beat itself to death after a f***d up autorotation or the like, it rather seems likely that on impact the rotor wasn't even turning anymore...
I'm not saying the 300 has superb rotor inertia, but it is way more forgiving than the dreaded R22. Mind you, I'm talking about the R22 not the R44, which I feel has a bit more substance to it.
I guess my point is, just because it is the cheapest helicopter out there, doesn't make it a good one, or by any stretch a good trainer.
You can quote all statistics how many 300's or 47's have crashed versus the R22 - that doesn't make it safer. Everybody has to fly the R22 like walking on eggs and some are still not fast enough to lower the stick, or have the main rotor departing in flight.
Oh and one last word on the SFAR requirement and safety course: I've attended it and have to say its more a marketing and brainwash event than anything else... ok, that wasn't fair, but what other manufacturer requires a course how to survive in its products?
(I know, I know, there are others like the MU-2 - but they have only one situation that needs to be trained - not a bunch of flight regimes resulting in a fatal outcome)
Please don't tell me Mr. Robinsson voluntarily instated that course! Good PR idea, because otherwise the authorities would have withdrawn the type certificate a little later after the first batch of accidents.
Have around 40 hours in it and am glad to be alive! I lost a good friend who "had 1000's of hours in type" (quote a reply in the Sandtoft crash thread, as if that would mean something). This accident changed my mind from "not a good training aircraft - rather a personal rotorcraft" to "death trap".
What struck me is, that in both cases, my buddies and the latest victims, that the main rotor was still attached - at least no mast bumping you'd think, but obviously the aircraft did not beat itself to death after a f***d up autorotation or the like, it rather seems likely that on impact the rotor wasn't even turning anymore...
I'm not saying the 300 has superb rotor inertia, but it is way more forgiving than the dreaded R22. Mind you, I'm talking about the R22 not the R44, which I feel has a bit more substance to it.
I guess my point is, just because it is the cheapest helicopter out there, doesn't make it a good one, or by any stretch a good trainer.
You can quote all statistics how many 300's or 47's have crashed versus the R22 - that doesn't make it safer. Everybody has to fly the R22 like walking on eggs and some are still not fast enough to lower the stick, or have the main rotor departing in flight.
Oh and one last word on the SFAR requirement and safety course: I've attended it and have to say its more a marketing and brainwash event than anything else... ok, that wasn't fair, but what other manufacturer requires a course how to survive in its products?
(I know, I know, there are others like the MU-2 - but they have only one situation that needs to be trained - not a bunch of flight regimes resulting in a fatal outcome)
Please don't tell me Mr. Robinsson voluntarily instated that course! Good PR idea, because otherwise the authorities would have withdrawn the type certificate a little later after the first batch of accidents.
Last edited by Phil77; 15th Feb 2009 at 17:01.
I beleve a good trainer is something that will allow all abilities to fly . The enstom is probably the easiest one to fly , with superb stability . I would reckon you would have a good chance getting it on the deck in one peice even if the cyclic came off in your hands .....excellent safety record . The 300 is a "proper " helicopter and feels like one . I felt very safe instructing and being instructed in one , so a great trainer . I am sorry but the R22 just had me sitting on the edge of my seat and i did not feel safe . I believe it may be safe in experienced hands but again some of the most experienced pilots have come a cropper for no good reason ...just flying along ...a very experienced friend flew one ( without the robbo "extra" training admittedly ) and in moderate turbulence it just decided to roll almost inverted 
He has many thousands of hrs but will never do another in a 22 .
I would pay a bit more and learn on a proper chopper .
He has many thousands of hrs but will never do another in a 22 . I would pay a bit more and learn on a proper chopper .
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Belgium
Age: 60
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FAA wanted to pull the type certificate back in the 90's because of the large number of accidents, Frank Robinson came up with the idea of the SFAR73, another problem for the FAA was that they might be held liable in a way for the past accidents and decided to go with the extra training.
The fact there are more aircraft of the type and so there are more accidents doesn't cut it for me, every accident is one too much, in the case of the R22 most are deadly as well. It should simply not be on the market.
The fact there are more aircraft of the type and so there are more accidents doesn't cut it for me, every accident is one too much, in the case of the R22 most are deadly as well. It should simply not be on the market.
I disagree ....the rotorway is on the market !! The question is ...is it a good trainer ? We know it is highly unforgiving ....things that would make little difference to a 47 could kill you in a 22 . When are you most likely to make a mistake and panic ....it is quite obvious that an inexperienced pilot should have the most forgiving aircraft . It is all down to cash . I cant wait for the day that someone produces a machine that is both cheap AND safe and we can scrap the lot of them 
Maybe Guimbal ? ( spelling ? ) At least it looks like a proper heli....
Maybe Guimbal ? ( spelling ? ) At least it looks like a proper heli....
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: England
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta say everyones views on the R22 un-nerve me a tad.... I'm rated on the 22 and 44 and plan on doing cpl on a 22.
I would LOVE to do it in a 300 but cant afford the price difference. And to be honest I havent even had a sit in a 300!
But my thoughts are...(for cpl training not ppl) wannabee newbie cpl's like me need to keep the cost down to a minimum right? so that puts one mark in the 22 box.
Most new cpl's have to go the FI route..... then I look at the schools around the UK to see what there training on in the hope I may get a few free lance hours instructing with the odd company one day, and nearly all operate the R22's! So do you do both and just hope there's enough work out there to tick by instructing on 300's and avoid the R22 schools? I dont think it can be done.
I know theres the whole low inertia problem but it can be done. a certain instructor I know and many of you will know had an engine out on a R22 the other week up north..... got it down fine by the way.
I learnt at Sandtoft and the crash at the weekend did get me thinking a tad and puts doubts in my mind, it's a lot closer to home when its a airfield you use i think.
Again I would love to do it in a 300 but if its done in a 300, do FI,get offered that all important first insructing job to find BUT your insructing on R22's...... how can you say no?
P.s I have no doubts at all about the R44, completely different machine.
I would LOVE to do it in a 300 but cant afford the price difference. And to be honest I havent even had a sit in a 300!
But my thoughts are...(for cpl training not ppl) wannabee newbie cpl's like me need to keep the cost down to a minimum right? so that puts one mark in the 22 box.
Most new cpl's have to go the FI route..... then I look at the schools around the UK to see what there training on in the hope I may get a few free lance hours instructing with the odd company one day, and nearly all operate the R22's! So do you do both and just hope there's enough work out there to tick by instructing on 300's and avoid the R22 schools? I dont think it can be done.
I know theres the whole low inertia problem but it can be done. a certain instructor I know and many of you will know had an engine out on a R22 the other week up north..... got it down fine by the way.
I learnt at Sandtoft and the crash at the weekend did get me thinking a tad and puts doubts in my mind, it's a lot closer to home when its a airfield you use i think.
Again I would love to do it in a 300 but if its done in a 300, do FI,get offered that all important first insructing job to find BUT your insructing on R22's...... how can you say no?
P.s I have no doubts at all about the R44, completely different machine.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately the best training aircraft aren't available to the civilian market due to cost. I trained in the UH-1, an option that simply isn't even a choice to the civilians of the world. But, the Huey has huge rotor inertia, massive amounts of power reserve and is a turbine. The instructor can dictate the flight profile to simulate a power limited situation, but there is plenty of forgiveness that allows the instructor to have a very large comfort buffer. I'm not saying that something as large as a Huey is required, but a training aircraft should be easy to fly and very forgiving. Let the instructor dictate the level of difficulty, not reality. Do you really want to sit next to a ppl student while he attempts an approach with only hover power available?
I don't believe there is a huge difference in which aircraft you should train in, they all have their pro's and cons. for mine i chose the bell 47 and have never looked back. i believe it is more important to choose the better instructor rather than the better machine (which no one agrees on anyway). Sorry to all the junior instructors out there but i would never advise anyone to learn with an intructor with less than 1000 hrs at least. When i learnt i was much more comfortable in the knowledge that i was the only one up there being surprised by what happend.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Belgium
Age: 60
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrong conclusion. Schweizer 300, Enstrom 280, Bell 47 are the best trainers.
"I like the idea of the instructor having hrs1000+, I definitely want to be the only one surprised when something cracks or creaks at 600ft."
How many pilots/instructors had actual engine failures? Even guys with 10.000 hours might not have had one.
"I like the idea of the instructor having hrs1000+, I definitely want to be the only one surprised when something cracks or creaks at 600ft."
How many pilots/instructors had actual engine failures? Even guys with 10.000 hours might not have had one.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA (PA)
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R44-Pilot:
I've tried to research the price difference per lesson in a R22 vs. S300. Granted, there are not many schools using a Schweizer in the UK (I only found one in a quick search on Google), but the one I found was price wise in the ballpark of other R22 schools - even cheaper than some.
So no argument there.
Think you can't find an instructing job in a 300? Or feel the pressure to be working in the R22? I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt (literally)... that's why I have 40 hours in it and decided for myself not to go down that route. OK, I did my training in the US and here are certainly more Schweizer schools than in europe... but than there is almost no other way to get hours and therefore a career over here other than instructing, meanwhile you could at least drive a bus in the north sea.
As far as experienced instructors are concerned, its definitely an issue that probably will never be solved. There are not many high time pilots out there who would like others to try to kill them for 15 bucks an hour - and that applies to all small pistons.
As an instructor you even have to rely on the fairness of your boss to eat the bill, should you ever f*** up, because insurance is mostly outrageous and not affordable on a instructor salary.
Turbines are not the answer, but there are other products from Schweizer, Bell (or even Enstrom - although I have no time in 'em) that are better suited for the job - even intended to be a training aircraft (!) - and give the student (and instructor) a fighting chance of survival.
It is almost comical, if you factor in the mandatory rebuild and difference in live limited parts, the R22 is only a few bucks cheaper! For the operator that is.
I've tried to research the price difference per lesson in a R22 vs. S300. Granted, there are not many schools using a Schweizer in the UK (I only found one in a quick search on Google), but the one I found was price wise in the ballpark of other R22 schools - even cheaper than some.
So no argument there.
Think you can't find an instructing job in a 300? Or feel the pressure to be working in the R22? I've been there, done that, got the t-shirt (literally)... that's why I have 40 hours in it and decided for myself not to go down that route. OK, I did my training in the US and here are certainly more Schweizer schools than in europe... but than there is almost no other way to get hours and therefore a career over here other than instructing, meanwhile you could at least drive a bus in the north sea.
As far as experienced instructors are concerned, its definitely an issue that probably will never be solved. There are not many high time pilots out there who would like others to try to kill them for 15 bucks an hour - and that applies to all small pistons.
As an instructor you even have to rely on the fairness of your boss to eat the bill, should you ever f*** up, because insurance is mostly outrageous and not affordable on a instructor salary.
Turbines are not the answer, but there are other products from Schweizer, Bell (or even Enstrom - although I have no time in 'em) that are better suited for the job - even intended to be a training aircraft (!) - and give the student (and instructor) a fighting chance of survival.
It is almost comical, if you factor in the mandatory rebuild and difference in live limited parts, the R22 is only a few bucks cheaper! For the operator that is.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I like the idea of the instructor having hrs1000+, I definitely want to be the only one surprised when something cracks or creaks at 600ft
Also did a bit of training in the R22 and R44 with instructors who had only a few hundred hours (described as "students teaching students" by one of my sr. instructors). While competent and safe, neither had ever encountered any real emergenies.
Experience counts
BTW, The Enstrom 480B was originally designed as the TH28, a contender to be the next US Army training helicopter in the early 90's. Enstrom lost the bid to Bell, but from what I understand many of the TH28 spec's were carried over to the civilian 480.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Belgium
Age: 60
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had 4 engine failures (all in Hillers) in my first 1000 hours, all of them without damage to helicopter, pilot or passengers. You cannot just judge an instructor by hours.
Furthermore we where talking about the best training helicopter not best instructor.
Furthermore we where talking about the best training helicopter not best instructor.
Other than the long delay between cyclic input and a/c movement which can leed to chasing ( due to flying the stab bar ) that is a very forgiving and stable machine .
Hard to f**k up an auto in one of those
Hard to f**k up an auto in one of those