Have you tried G-Info online?

Helicentre Aviation in Leicester look like the largest user of Cabri aircraft in the UK

EGB at Redhill train with Cabri (amongst other things

Northumbria Helicopters at Newcastle have a Cabri G2

They did....it's at Bournemouth now. Was replaced for an R44. Going to miss flying it!

Not any more.

A Cabri can also be seen ( but hardly heard!) in Beccles, further South East.... Train and hire at Virage Helicopter Academy, Ellough Airfield.
Our Fleet

The Cabri must be a Southern thing............strange that no one can make it work ‘up North’.

Do Arcus at Nottingham still have their Cabri?

G2 for cruise
 

Hello everybody, I think I've read everything that is actually on the internet but I still have some doubt about the performance of this aircraft.

Because I can maybe only manage to operate an helicopter of this size and due to the fact that the r22 scares me for some reasons, I would like to understand if this ship is ok for some vfr trips around italy. And because of this I'm mostly interested in cruise performance. Until now I cannot have a clear picture regarding this aspect of the aircraft. From what I can read on the website they say it cruise at 100kts, and that could be very good for me. But, are those 100kts achievable every time at for example 1500ft, isa+10, 2 light pax, some luggage and let's say 130liters in the tank? even the flight manual seems to have different reviews I think. Is it correct that the max cruise is at the yellow threshold and the economy is 10% less than the yellow threshold? What will the performance be in the load scenario above? Is it realistic to fly most of the time at for example 1-2% less than the yellow threshold without wear components? Is the aircraft seem to fly nicely at this setting or it screams and vibrate or something else?

Another point: with enough practice can I fly with 30kts of wind on the ground? is It safe to operate? start and stop the rotor an so on?

thanks if you are so kind to answer me, it's very appreciated.

best regards

Andrea

Ha! From what I've read the Cabri was designed specifically for people who are afraid of the R22. :p

Its built for safety not performance, so I doubt you'd be able to get 100kts fully loaded,...but then I've never flown one. As for picking up in 30kts of wind (from what I've read about its tail rotor) your feet definitely need to be awake for that. I've hovered a 22 in that much wind and my feet were doing the Charleston! :}

Cruise performance with 2 POB and 130 litres of fuel: I would say 90KIAS is possible, but 100KIAS is pushing it with two people and plenty of fuel. You are correct that the 'bottom of the yellow' is max continuous power (145shp). 100KIAS is certainly possible alone, but with two POB I wouldn't plan on it. Bear in mind the fuel burn is higher at MCP (a conservative figure would be closer to 45 L/hr rather than the normal 38-40 L/hr). Vibrations entirely depends on how nicely track & balanced the aircraft is - maybe go for a test flight in one and see for yourself the difference between 'economy cruise' and MCP.

Operating with 30kts of wind: I wouldn't recommend it, but it's possible. The 'maximum demonstrated' start-up / shut-down limits are 40kts wind according to the RFM. The issue however would be with a heavy helicopter, hovering out of wind will be very tricky. It's best to keep the nose into wind and avoid taxiing crosswind / downwind if possible. Also bear in mind it is a small helicopter, and at 30kts wind, even with small hills / terrain you will experience a lot of turbulence, so best to leave the flight for another day (in my opinion).

Regarding component wear if cruise power is consistently set close to MCP, I don't know, as that is rarely how the aircraft is flown by most operators. Maybe contact a large operator such as Swiss Helicopter in Switzerland and ask them for advice (or contact Guimbal directly, their customer service seems to be quite good according to surveys).

Finally, you might want to ask Mona Seeberger on her thoughts of the Cabri G2 in italy - she flew one around Italy a few years ago

I'd plan for 80 KIAS on cross country flights. Yes, 90 is doable with two people but your fuel burn will increase (80 KIAS is best range speed) and the vibrations/wind noise will increase as well. With the cyclic trimmed well the G2 is a very comfortable and easy aircraft to fly cross country. Not sure what the passenger/luggage weight is going to be for you but 2.5 hours of flight time shouldn't be much of a problem. A full tank would give you a little over 4 hours.
30 kts of winds I wouldn't recommend either. Especially at the private level and flying for pleasure, there is really no need to push the limits. It is definitely doable but requires very proactive pedal work, as well as some snug seatbelts as you will get kicked around quite a bit.
With component wear, I don't see an issue as long as you stay out of the yellow range in cruise. If you pull into the yellow in cruise the component that will start to wear is the TGB. But again, we don't usually push our G2s to 90 KIAS for extended periods of time because of ride comfort and fuel burn.

I am rated on both Cabri and R22. I can confirm what Verticalspin reports. 80, not 90 KT.

i wouldn’t worry about the wind too much. Unless it results in significant turbulence. And in that case, in the Cabri you are in a very good place!

Thanks to all!!

So I pretty much understood that yes, it will cruise at 100kts only empty and alone and yes I can cruise at 90 with two light pax (well two on) and 3/4-half tank but it seem to push a little.

at 11:20 min of the Mona's video in fact I can see 90kts (which is 93 of tas) at 1500ft and 92% on the MLI and later 73kts at 100% at 7500, so around 85 tas. I think that they were pushing to reach Venice before the night. Of course I can't see if they were flying leveled or in a light climb or descent, so mine are only assumptions.

So the typical mission which is for me 220 nm can be done but it will take around 2h30'-2h40' where an r44 will do that in 2 hours. But al least it can be done talking about fuel and reasonable real life wind.

can be said 80% 80kts, 90% 90kts, low and half loaded and 2 onboard?

An other question come in my mind: If you have to fly over water for 20/30 min during this mission, do you necessarily wear floats? I know that would be better for sure but I don't know how helicopter world thinks about that. I'm in the fixed wing world as you can imagine (+3000hours, but around 3hrs in heli) and with a light plane like a cirrus, for example, I would certainly have no problem to do that flight with an emergency dinghy (and sometimes without). But since there's no space in a cabri for a dinghy and since it's an helicopter I would like to have your opinion.

By the way all the 3hrs are In a r22, so it scares me a little, not when flying to be true (it's really nice to fly) but more when reading... And I think I will enjoy more, in a long term, the no mast bumping option of the cabri and the newer design.

thanks again

Andrea

Just to note,
that D-HAVE was the worst than average G2 example in the stable,
during the times when Mona filmed that trip.

Flying over water depends on how close you are to the shore. Here in The States if you are beyond power-off glide distance from the shore you need some kind of flotation and pyrotechnic signaling device (I used to wear a pouch style life vest around my waist with a flare gun in my pocket).

Though, to be frank, flying over water as regularly as I did, I really with my R22 had floats.

3 HRS TTRW, nil on type?

May I suggest you defer your tour d’Italie until you got a few hundred hours in helicopters.

You'll be a lot more comfortable, have gobs more power margin, go faster, and easily fit 2 plus bags in an R44, and for not that much more an hour compared to a G2. Having flown all three machines including the R22, I'd venture the transition into the R44 from the G2 is likely to be relatively easy, although you will miss the very nice engine instrumentation of the G2. If an R44 Clipper is available to you then you will also have pop-out floats for the over-water leg. An R44 has plenty of tail rotor authority for 20-gust-30, but operations in that sort of wind must be very cautious in all phases of flight. You will most likely not be allowed to train in those winds initially.

I fly an R44 Clipper 2 and for any trip with significant over water operations I use inflatable life vests even with the pop-out floats.

The best advice on the thread so far.

Don't warry! I will follow every step of the training with no rush at all. The goal will be those vfr trips but it's just an idea for the future. But this idea could maybe drive better the training from the start; if I will ever be convinced enough about the cabri there's no reason to train in a r22. Otherwise thinking in long terms about an r44 will make the r22 better for sure. In the end I managed to fly single pilot a light jet, aerobatics, gliders and parachutes so I know what you mean by having experience that now isn't there for sure.

What you think about this: "Lycoming, who had required the O-360 engines to be run rich (from concern about cooling the shrouded engine) have now reduced that requirement, for a saving close to 10 liters per hour of fuel burn, and of course a subsequent increase in available power."
There's no mention in the Poh about running the engine lean. Is this a normal procedure?

Of course the 44 will be more capable, but the 12 year overhaul and the operating cost seems to be much higher.

Re the 12 year overhaul, read

https://www.lycoming.com/sites/defau...20Schedule.pdf

Nutloose, for the rest of us, could you please interpret this document, in particular how it applies to the topic of this threat?

tl;dr: not impressed with the G2.

I finally decided to get back into shape with helicopters, after a long pause due to my move from California to France. I had about 150 hours of R44 (and 2000 total including FW), and exactly 1 hour of G2. Here at Cannes we have a big heli school (Azur Helicoptere) which has R22, R44 and G2, and plenty of bigger stuff too.

The G2 is substantially cheaper than the R44, and also safer. So I figured, let's go with that.

I've now done two ~1 hour flights in the G2. I haven't enjoyed a single minute of it. Despite its small size, it's like flying a tractor. The controls are heavy, and it's underpowered: when below ETL speed you have to watch the power constantly since it takes 98% power just to stay in the air - and you must not go beyond 100% even for a second or two. And that's at sea level!

It's a bit like driving a 1960s truck, with no power-assisted anything - brakes, steering, no synchromesh...

The collective is particularly unpleasant. You have to maintain a constant heavy pull, or it slowly but surely drops to the floor. It's like flying an R44 with a sack of potatoes hanging from the collective. After an hour, my arm aches.

For sure I'm pretty rusty - I hadn't flown a heli in over a year. So it's hard to say how much is due to my rustiness and how much is due to the G2. But I've flown the R44 after similar pauses and got back into the groove within an hour.

I'll be going back to the R44, despite the extra cost. If my rustiness is terminal, so be it, but I'd prefer to give myself a decent chance.

Compared to the flippy floppy Robinson, the G2 cyclic does initially feel as you describe. It shouldn't take too long to get passed that stage and I don't even think about it being heavy now. Yes, compared to an R44 with pilot only, the G2 will feel underpowered. Having said that, I've done vertical departures in the G2 (to tree top level) from confined areas with a passenger and 2hrs fuel without it running out of steam. No drama. How close were you to MTOW with G2? As for the collective, I've not found that with any of the G2's I've used. I'm no body builder, but happy to keep the collective in hand for a couple of hours if needed or just apply a little friction.

Each to their own at the end of the day.

There is a gas spring that pushes up on the collective to assist the pilot and relieve the weight of it. There's a balance to be found between having too much assistance (the collective may risk creeping up or be difficult to dump in the event of an engine failure) or having too little assistance (which leads to a heavy collective, and fatigue / discomfort as you describe). I would report that to the operator / maintenance so that an engineer can adjust the gas spring pressure / force and rectify the issue. I assure you it's not supposed to feel constantly heavy, I've flown Cabris with the same feeling and given the feedback to the engineer to rectify the issue - the gas spring force can be sorted and adjusted for each machine.

The 'heavy cyclic' could be due to incorrectly set trim (adjustable on the coolie hat on the cyclic) - for pilots not used to flying with these, it can be a bit of an afterthought to constantly trim out control forces, but once you get the hang of it it is a great assistance and increases the comfort of flying. In comparison to a hydraulically assisted flight controls like the R44, the Cabri's cyclic is definitely 'heavier' but that is simply part of the design, not a fault or issue.

As Mutley says, to each their own - the Cabri is plenty good enough for many operators, just as the R22 is good for others. Best of luck with getting back into flying!

@n5296s those observations match previous ones that are occasionally posted in this thread (example), although perhaps not quite as strongly.

While primarily an R44 pilot, I've got a tiny bit of time in an EC130 and, if I had to guess, it may have been Bruno's intention to give the G2 the feel of a larger helicopter like an EC120, 130 or the like. It might not have been entirely successful, but certainly the G2 felt to me more similar to the 130 than the R44 did. I understand that in places that might have used lower friction mechanisms higher frictions mechanisms were used intentionally (and no doubt those mechanisms were simpler, cheaper and lighter, too). So perhaps there is some advantage there for those who are going to transition directly to Eurocopter/Airbus equipment. Nevertheless, as fun as it was to trim out the ship for a hands-off demo, I particularly did not like that the friction was so high one could not feel the effects of the trim system in real-time. It was trim-test-retrim as required (for those that are wondering, yes, all the control frictions were completely off when I flew the G2).

And it really does make one appreciate the greater power reserves of the R22, much less the much greater reserves of the R44 with only two on board.

Can't speak to your local market conditions, but in the US G2 operators have still not found a way to create a competitive pricing structure for it. It remains approx. 50% more expensive than the R22 and only 20% less expensive than the R44, which makes it a very odd niche player. It seems to appeal to the older/wealthier demographic who are attracted to its sporty looks and fine interior finish (particularly compared to the typical ratty school R22) rather than for any perceived safety difference. That sort mostly winds up buying an R44 or R66 anyway in the end.

"Flippy floppy Robinson",...?

Aw,...dude. :hmm: :sad: :eek:

Definitely a maintenance issue. They are spot on when they leave the factory but will need adjustment over the the next 250-300 hours as everything beds in.

it's not a difficult job to adjust the but it's not a 15 minute job either. Flight schools are often reluctant to take what they see as a serviceable machine out of service.

The cyclic trim does take a little time to master. It does vary with speed and power and also needs quite a bit of re trimming in the first 10 minutes of flight until all the elastomeric bearings warm up. After a while you do it automatically.

😂, no offence intended; I’m a big fan of the R22 from my PPL to hour building. The look on new passenger faces when they see the flippy floppy in question always a laugh.

Thanks all for the feedback and comments. Glad I'm not the only one to feel his way.

For the record, we were on half tanks and about 100 lbs under gross. Given it takes 98% power for a 5 foot hover, I don't see that this machine is capable of HOGE - kind of unfortunate for a helicopter.

I've flown an R44 close to gross (three biggish guys and 3/4 tanks) and everything is fine. It was at the limit for HOGE but nothing terrible happens if you over-pull a little for a second or two. And that was a machine that was definitely weaker than the others, for some reason.

Never flown the Cabri, learned on an R22 ('cause it was the cheapest route to a license, I was paying for it myself, and the piece of paper at the end looks the same and has the same value (maybe more) in the real world. Always liked the look and tech of the Cabri, but most schools can't make the numbers work even compared to the more expensive R44. Appreciate the comments on this forum of the flying comparisons,

Local school has 6 B47 flying every day, plus 4-5 R44, plus a couple 206. Don't see anyone buying a Cabri privately. Only another school that loves Cabri will want to buy one. R44 market is huge, lots of private, commercial, schools always looking for one. Better lead-in to the commercial world for students. Instructor won't make the student walk home out of a misjudged confined area. HOGE in training? Now that's a luxury.

Six Bell 47's flying every day!? I didn't know that many even still existed (let alone were being used at a school)? Hell, in the last twenty years I've only come across one (outside of a museum or Heliexpo) and it was privately owned and rarely ever flew.

Given the opportunity though, I'd take one of those over a Cabri any day. Gotta support my fellow 2-bladers after all. :8

With respect to the G2 being under powered, I think this is partly a function of the rotor system,

Somewhere in prouty's book he mentioned the innate efficency advantage of a 2 blade long aspect rotor as in the R22/R44.
It effectively means that for the same power input you will better net thrust with such rotor configuration.

To make my point: I have found the hugues/schweizer 300 to be limited in the same way as the Cabri.
The 300 is easy to overpitch in low hover (especially if you let the RRPM a tiny bit low), risky to HOGE when it gets hot, risky to perform high performance TO, and slow (well that another problem)

I think the same point can be made between the EC120 and Bell 505 sharing the same engine but the 505 can lift 200Kg more.

Agile
Not sure what you are saying about a 300. I can quite happily let the rrpm out of the green arc pull the lever and it will happily hover, well a 300C will at least. Hovering yesterday with 3 hours of fuel 2 pax one 102 kgs the other 120 kgs the demo was loss of rrpm in hover wind the throttle back to 2800 rpm yes pull the lever up she still hovers, all you have to do is open the throttle and she recovers her RPM no problem. Much prefer the 3 bladed system to that of an R22

1 PIC and two PAX ? in an 300c - w&B with 36 GAL - you are overloaded.

MichiScholz
no we are not
Max take off weight for a 300C is 2050lbs
Ac weighs 1160 lbs
Pax are total 488 lbs
Fuel 35 gal 210
Total weight 1858 lbs so 192 under MAUW

Apology at any time or were you thinking of a CBi

The Cabri costs nearly as much as an R44 Raven I, but is slower with much less storage and half the seats. However it has a much more luxurious and upscale cockpit, every switch feels high-quality, and the visibility is better - not due to the lack of center pillar but because the instrument panel is lower, especially with glass panel, and its full-fuel range is even greater than the R44. And of course fully articulated rotor has some advantages. But the cost is very hard to justify.

For me the abrevation pax does not include pic - so I argee with two persons on board one 265lbs and the other 225 lbs with 35 gal you are within margins and below the MTOW of 2050 lbs in a 300C.

Comparing the Cabri to the 44 is almost apples to oranges. The Cabri's real competition is the 22, 300, and Enstrom. The question is, why pay more for just another two seat piston?

Probably for a similar reason as to why some people want to spend £/$10,000 on a 2 seater car whilst others are happy to spend £/$100,000.