Pistons/Turbines
 

I don't know about anyone else but aren't turbines easier to fly than pistons? I think so..so why the discrimination? :confused:

Sorry this was meant to be a reply to "Piston Pilots Need Not Apply"

Clicked the wrong button :O

For your information, you can remove this entire thread, by pressing delet next to your message. (You can only do this as you are the thread starter.)

In brief answer to your question, I guess it comes down to the 'potential' cost should you stuff things up.

Also with the Jet Ranger and other turbine engines, the possiblity of a cooking the engine (hot start) makes the insurers jittery. This is becoming less of a problem with 'automated' starts and engine control units taking more responsibility...but old habits die hard, and aviation is the biggest 'boys' club around.

cl12pv2s

Only flown piston fixed wing, however; all my helo flying has been turbine and i prefer it that way. Ok so there is a risk of a hot start but unless your on another planet you can tell when its more likely to occur (hot day, hung start eng temp rockets up!). Also your never shy of power with a turbine, (max load of fuel, 3 pax plus bagage and still had enough power for a normal transition!) oh and they are VERY reliable!

Hope this helps

Never shy of power with a turbine...if only mate!

Try Central Australia in summer: 2000ft elevation, 47 degrees...
The R44 used to perform better than the Jetranger in these conditions.

I am concidering a H500 conversion.
Does anybody have any recommendations (or otherwise!) of a suitable establishment in the south-east ?

PM if you don't want to post

Thanks

Big Mike

It rarely gets into double figures in the UK and unless your in Scotland its not that high. So low airfields + cold air = S:mad: t loads of power! :D

YEAH BABY!!

As my old instructor used to say "With modern helicopters you should never be in a situation where you need to do anything but a normal transition"

Modern Eurocopter Squirrel

Instructor was an Ex RN display pilot.

The comment about low ground, cold air was light hearted humour. I suggest you get a sense of humour mate as you clearly are wound too tight!

Just coz you lot lost the Ashes. Oh, and the Rugby world cup.

Lighten up, will you? Otherwise we poms might get make sweeping generalisations about all Australians.

I refuse to get into a slagging match so I will end with this comment, just because in the UK you have stacks of power with a turbine doesn't mean you have no idea of the limitations/capability of your ac. Chill out a little man you will live longer!

:ok:

Who says this clown is from Australia?

"Strop", your last remark says everything about you. The comments in this thread, and Prune in general, are taken light-heartedly. Your last reply was simply offensive and shows your intelligence.

BM

To answer your original question,
they are not easier to fly, just a lot more expensive, with minimum hour requirements driven by the insurance companies, and or customers.

Just recently did a turbine rating in Kiwiland.
Whilst the FH1100 was no more difficult to handle than any of the (only 3) piston types I have trained on, I found the power management part to be easier.
BTW the FH1100 has pretty impressive hige and hoge figures compared to most comparable a/c, and at one stage I was autorotating at 80% RRPM (as instructed) which I found interesting, especially remembering the initial 20 hrs training in a robbie and other less forgiving ("ROTOR RPM!!!, ROTOR RPM!!!) helicopters.
If you visit www.fh1100.com
There's some good stats and some really interesting history on the FH1100, and the other two contenders for the [light observation helicopter platform] contract in the mid- sixties which also bought us the original military prototypes of the B206 and H500.http://www.fh1100.com