Which is the best helicopter for training?
 

Gidday,
I am about to start my Rotary CPL training and have a choice to fly Robbies or the 300.Could you guys give me some advice which one sets you up better for conversions on to other types after training?

Thanks

How many turbine-powered helicopters use a t-bar for cyclic control?

Question asked, question answered.

Thanks News,
Thats what I like short and to the point!

[This message has been edited by Kiwi Skiv (edited 17 April 2001).]

I've only flown the R22, with a quick half hour in a 300 to see what it was like. My observations :

R22 pros - cheapest, most numerous training heli, agile, easy to fly, "if you can fly a Robbie you can fly anything", governed ERPM.

R22 cons - can bite the unwary / stupid if allowed but the same's true of all helicopters ( low G, low rotor inertia ), low MAUW restricting options, slow(ish), cyclic position/design for tall people like me can cause extra nause getting accurate flying.

H300 pros - not an R22, proper cyclic with working ( after a fashion ) trim, rigid head, more useful load ( I think ), bigger inside.

H300 cons - slower than an R22, more expensive, manual throttle control ( this depends on your point of view ), P1 sits on left which means swapping hands on cyclic to change radios, altimeter settings and the like.

Really it's a suck it and see job. Speak to local instructors on both types, if possible fly a few hours in both looking to see which you feel more comfortable in, and go from there - check first that the hours you do in one will count to your licence should you decide to fly the other type full time.

Is that a tad more helpful ?

No competition here the 300. Nr Fairy is right in a lot of his obsevations. However it is not that much slower than an R 22. 2 pax 49g of fuel 23.5 inchs a good one will cruise comfortably at 80 knts. Can get 85 without much difficulty.

Try and get your hands on a 269B slower than a C but cheaper to hire than even a Robbie , probably find a CB is cheaper too.

Other advantages of a 300 are : They are used all over the world for other purposes other than training. Eg load lifting ( empty weight 1100 lbs maw 2050lbs - so quite useful ) spraying, mustering, aerial photography, law enforcement, survey work etc etc.

An employer would be more interested in hours on type. Having said that you really want to get turbine time to be attractive.

Best of luck.

The 300CB is a very good training aircraft.The fact that it doesn't have a governor is a good thing as the new training pilot will pick up the correlation between rotor pitch and rotor rpm.Hover autos and full touch down autos are far more forgiving and theres more room in the cockpit than an R22.
I'm not knocking the R22 its a great aircraft to fly fantastic tr authourity and positively sporty in comparison but better to fly it after you've got around 50 hrs helicopter time under your belt.As for cost the 300 CB is competitive with the R22,(at least it was when I was teaching/training)as it doesn't have the 2000hr overhaul cost.
Hope this is of some help.

The key is probably getting time on the a/c you are likely to fly commercially - in NZ maybe more likely to be 300.
Secondly cost - if the type is not important then fly the cheapest.

to Newschopper - I am sure Kiwi is flexible enough to get his head around the T-bar. If not maybe he should fly the actual type he will be using for work.
"how many turbine-powered helicopters use a t-bar for cyclic control?"
(how many piston engines have turbine engines?)

I taught students on both types and I always found people progressed faster on the 300CB.

Even if the R22 is a little cheaper you'll find you will hover and solo sooner on the 300CB. If you plan to train in the US then you'll also not have to fly 20 hours before going solo in the R22 due to SFAR 73.

As you said you're aiming for a CPL then Arm The Floats has some good advice, get the PPL on the 300CB and then transfer onto the R22 with a bit of experience.

Which school were you looking at?

Hi KS,
R22's remind me a little, of the Great Muhamed Ali ( or Cassius Clay if your old enough) when he said, " Float like a butterfly, and Sting like a BEE", well that sums up the R22 for moi! although it will not help you to choose, I learnt on the R22 and apart from a few hairy moments, I would agree with the poster who said " If you can fly a 22 you can fly anything" the transition from "T" bar, to floor mounted cyclic took about 10 mins to get used to, good luck to you, whatever you choose. However remember " The Butterfly".

I trained on the robbie but have a little time in the 300,and as mentioned it is a very manouverable aircraft and I found that the 300 was really quite slow given a hot day, and the "throttle work" was limited because we were on full throttle the whole time and regulating the RRPM with collective/air speed so the "no govenor" issue didn't really make much difference. I was told (and 1 agree)that transition to the 206 was easier if you were used to the R22 and as that was where I was heading, it made sense. As for the T bar. I once asked this pro with WAY more hours than me what he thought of the T bar after his first robbie flight. he said "didn't really notice till you said"

Fly the R22. Out of my experience, if you can fly the "robbie" you are able to fly any other chopper. You can do a transition afterwards. Good Luck

Try them both!

I started on the 300C (it was all that was available in the area). I got to the point of soloing (~9 hrs) and after getting half an hour solo time in the 300, I had to go back to school where Robbies were the only option. I've been flying R-22s since and enjoy them much more than 300s. Cruise in a 300 is slow in my opinion, and feels strange because you're staring at the ground with your neck craned up to look forward. The stick forces on the Robbie are lighter, partially negating the need for any trim anyway. The Robbie is tight for a big person, but can be more comfortable to some (like me).

The time to solo a 300 will be less than that to be ready to solo an R-22, and if that time is less than 20 hrs, maybe doing it in the 300 or at least starting in one is better. If you're going to do your training where both are available, why not try each? You'll likely feel more in control with the 300 at first, but maybe later you'll have more fun with the Robbie.

As you can see from the posts above, everyone has their favorite. You'll have to try it out to know yours. Good luck! :)

Arm the Floats is correct about the 300 in auto hovers and auto landings. If you want to practice autorotative landings and you feel this is important to your overall flight skills development, then the 300 is the only way to go, as the Robbie is very unforgiving in this area. The 300 gives you the opportunity to perfect this skill, while the R22 does not.

------------------
Safe flying to you...

Skiv me old mate, what have you done!! Lu will be on your back soon about Robbies I'm sure.... :)

Good to see you on the forum.

Sona si Latine loqueris.

Hughes 500, I've got lots of turbine time now and it hasn't made me any more attractive at all, in fact I'm still downright plain.

Oh...you were talking about flying. Well, that's a different story...

hey there kiwi skiv. don't worry about those light wieght whirlybirds, first get to grips with the mighty tobago TB10 weapon, we'll convert you yet.

------------------
with wings as eagles

GET YOUR PPL IN ONE OR THE OTHER BUT FLY BOTH TO BUILD HOURS.THE ROBBY WILL MAKE TRANSITION TO A JETRANGER EASIER AND LIKEWISE A 300 TRANSITION TO A 500.

FLY SAFE AND KEEP IT DIRTY SIDE DOWN.

They both have merits as mentioned, 300 teaches you throttle control and R22 makes you FLY a lot more. The T bar is immaterial after a time, it is just a cyclic grip held in roughly the same way.

Fly both of them and gain overall.

Thanks to all for the Wealth of Info.Much appreciated.Working on a decision now.

Training Helicopters
 

OK Rotorheads, What helicopter did you learn to fly in? What did you like or dislike about that ship?

For Me I leaned in a Bell 47-G2A1. I feel it's a streight forward, forgiving helicopter but can require a bit maintainance.

Military BH06BIII

lots of fun

R22. Liked it so much I bought one. Now teach on it. A magical machine that has introduced thousands of people who are neither rich nor enlisted to rotary wing flying.

R22, liked it so much I progressed onto bigger things, but the R22 is a good little machine, just a little wary however about all those 6 and 8mm bolts, the R22 could also do with a little more space inside, and if Frank is listening a bigger engine and three blade's, apart from that its OK, as long as you treat it with care! :)

Westland Whirlwind. Seemed ideal to me - you could do all the basic stuff (engine-off landings solo, "Spanish Fuel" (ie Manuel Throttle, with the huge grip on the cyclic for disengaging the mechanical fuel governor so's you could play tunes on the rotorhead via the twistgrip..) sloping ground nose-up with no brakes on the front wheels, etc), yet the same aircraft was also ideal for teaching multi-crew tasks like underslung loads, trooping and SAR.

Or perhaps it was just the top teachers we had at the time. OK, Oldbeefer? :)

Been in all sort of mil birds prior to getting into the R22.

Fun bird, and I look forward to flying it more often. But I also want to vary my time into the 300 and others if the chance arises.

Heck, I'd go up to Vero Beach in a heartbeat if Nick could arrainge a Commanche ride :) :) :)

Hughes TH-55, 269 (Schwietzer 300), Class 65-10, US Army
Have flown and instructed in most all Army stuff thru 1969; Bell47, Hiller UH-12, Hueys, Sikorsky's, etc
After 1969, full time airline pilot, part time continued to fly/instruct most all small civilian stuff
Bottom line..IMHO...the R-22 is the best trainer ever built. It has the economy of operation for the school, and it has flying characteristics most conducive to student transition to all larger machines.
Oh Yeah... I think I have read every word Lu has posted on this and all other forums for the past year. I just wish he would simply attend a RHC Safety Course.

R22. Haven't flown anything else yet. <img src="frown.gif" border="0"> Had no intention of being a helicopter pilot anyway; went for a trial lesson because it was free, and got instantly hooked. So I guess I must have liked it. I do know that compared to fixed wing flying it's great, and also compared to most other things I've done. But no idea how it compares to other helicopters. If anyone would like to help me remedy that (help = £££), I'll happily do some research for you. :)

R22
It doesn't fly itself, but a trainer shouldn't be too easy. It's not a 'forgiving' aircraft, and can be tricky to fly well but, if you learn the basics in an R22, it makes conversion onto bigger machines much easier.
And, it's the most economical way to learn to fly helicopters. The sales figures speak volumes about the popularity of the machine.
If it wasn't for Frank Robinson, many people wouldn't be flying helicopters at all. Arguably, he's made the biggest contribution to the rotary world since the great Igor.

[ 01 January 2002: Message edited by: Heliport ]</p>

Now I can say I learned to fly on the R-22, having just passed the checkride on saturday. I love flying it, I have passenger time in a 206bIII and a UH1-b, no stick time though. I am hoping to fly jayhawks for the coast guard in a couple years. But first I have to get through college.

R22. Like Whirly, I never intended to be a helicopter pilot but after the trial lesson I was hooked. There was no way I could have justified learning on anything more expensive anyway. The only reason I ever tried in the first place was that the field at the back of my house is too small for an airstrip.

Gazelle in the RN. Like learning on a sports car.
Got to instruct on it myself for Westlands in the mid 80's.

topilot or to pprune
<img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0"> <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

yx,

I also started out on the Bell 47G2 many years ago. Excellent machine and the visibility! - that was the original glass cockpit!

OH-23D Hiller (UH-12). Very Forgiving specially when a clod such as myself is behind the stick.......Instruments in an OH-13T Bell (B47) Had to learn the "Touch" all over again....
(ORWAC 70-28)

Westland Scout AH1. Bit more stable than a R22.

Learned to fly on Sycamores, not a great type as strange manual control system and badly co-ordinated throttle. Instructed on Whirlwinds, probably the best training helicopter ever, but only one left flying now. also instructed on B47 - easy but slow reactions to control inputs actually require quite a lot of anticipation from student. Hiller 12 - again strange control system - feels like you are connected to the controls by a bungee. Bell 206 - too easy. You can always tell someone who has done their training on a 206, likewise the R44 now that it has powered controls
. R22 - always contentious but here is my view. Students don't have any greater difficulty learning on it than anything else because it instantly shows errors of handling technique, unlike the B47. Unfortunately, the instructor can never relax in an R22, as things can go wrong so quickly close to the ground, and for this reason it is not an ideal trainer (nothing is, as none of the current types were designed as such).
I think the manual control system on the Enstrom demands too much trimming for comfort. Perhaps the best of the bunch from most aspects apart from cost is the Schweizer 300, the CB model preferably. The only aspect I'm not fond of is the marked nosedown attitude in forward flight, which is uncomfortable if you don't have your feet on the pedals as you tend to slide forwards.

Live long and prosper!

The confidence and belief in the R22/44 is interesting, considering the number of posts it gets in an official capacity on the AAIB website!. I have to keep away from helos as If I spend too much time near them I know I'll end up sinking a wad of cash into them. However, I think I'd rather learn in something more substantial, not withstanding the near double cost per hour of a 206 or similar

STANDTO
"The confidence and belief in the R22/44 is interesting, considering the number of posts it gets in an official capacity on the AAIB website!."
Interesting indeed.
But it's not difficult to work out the reason if you take into account the number of Robinsons relative to other types, that they are the most common/popular training helicopter, and that they are usually flown by newly qualified low-hours pilots.

The B206 is a wonderful helicopter, but most of us could't afford it for training. It's much easier to fly than an R22, but whether that's a good or bad thing is a matter of opinion.

A number of people have mentioned the Gazelle. Now that's a different matter. Fantastic machine - not only for training, but for most other things a PPL (like me) would ever want to do.
Treat yourself to a trial lesson with Al Gwilt at MW Helicopters (Stapleford) and you'll see what I mean! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

[ 13 January 2002: Message edited by: Flying Lawyer ]</p>

Standto,

I think you will find it you roll a 206 over or crash into something hard, how substantial the aircraft seems is somewhat irrelevant.It will still break and if you hit hard it will break big time.

It would seem to me, from reading numerous AAIB reports, that survivability depends the circumstances of your crash rather than the aircraft you are in.

Gazelle for me (thank you your Majesty). Spoilt for life <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

EFT on the Hiller 12E, then the Whirlwind HAS7. Hiller, still remember that first lift into the hover, then away over the Cornish countryside. After trundling up and down runways in a Chippie to get airborne, a wonderful revelation :)

Not enough baggage space for 2 weeks to Nuremberg and back, but a small price to pay for a "Navex" courtesy of HM taxpayer.

Still recall the sound of the Leonides starting in the Whirlie, each cylinder joining in it's own sweet time. Steely stuff for a callow Midshipman, out with a crewman learning winching and the like. And sitting alongside Malarky Jim hovering for a wheel change after blowing a tyre, running on at Predannack (sp?). Where is Dave Mallock these days?