David
It is all well and good saying your product is better and cheaper ( why wouldnt you ) but like all manufacturers you ll talk a load of bolls--cks when it comes to running helicopters. Over 35 year I have owned and operated everything from Hu 269B through to AS 350 B3 and I can assure you that not one manufacturer including yourselves has come anywhere near what they say they cost to run ! If the guy in the video says they are cheaper to run in his operation I would tend to believe the man who writes the cheques not the manufacturer. As to more capable I would choose a fully articulated rotor head every time over a teetering one, let a lone the Robinson teetering head design. You are welcome to shoot me down but I am happy to challenge you with an average UK instructor to do EOL to the ground in zero wind with your R 22 compared to a S300 that my school uses. Dont get me wrong the R22 auto's but there is little margin for error.

Katherine appears to be a few hundred feet amsl, so not exactly taxing altitude wise, would presume 1 up and not full tanks for the role as well.
Doesn't tend to behave quite the same at 5000ft and 37C.
It is a pretty thing, modern design and I'd take the composite body design in an oopsie any day, but hot and high, the 22 will kick its backside (auto performance notwithstanding).

H500, not sure if you've operated a G2 and a R22 in your company but it's no secret that the operational/running cost of a G2 is a lot higher than a R22. I might even dare to say it sits closer to the running cost of a R44.
Unless you don't count insurance, depreciation etc and purely look at the service interval costs, then I'm not sure since I don't have all the data for that. But counting everything from purchase, depreciation, insurance, maintenance, fuel, oil etc, then the G2 will empty your bank account quicker than the R22....

1,600 posts and 82 pages later,...

I heard yesterday (on YouTube) that an Australian mustering company has recently sold its fleet of 14 R22s and replaced them (albeit a smaller number) with Cabris.

Sad day for the R22, but I guess someone thinks their higher cost isn't a big deal.

https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/66...r22-fleet.html

,...which ties into my first complaint.

Lumping posts into one created TWENTY !!!!!!! YEARS AGO just because its about the same model! What is with this place and its obsession with Godzilla sized threads? Am I really supposed to hunt through 1,600 comments to find the beginning of a new conversation?!

You could have just read the dedicated topic in rotorheads, instead of adding even more to a long-running topic that no one forced you to read :ugh:

Well, I'll wipe the egg off my face and admit I didn't see that one, lol.

,...but still, this thing's twenty years old. Can't we just give it its gold watch and let it move down to Florida already?

Well last time I looked they dont do mustering at 10000ft. Maybe compare apples and apples. Each to his own.

I am only going on what the man in the video says. You dont suddenly buy another type and then tell everyone it is cheaper ( the accountant say so ) . My point has always been, never ever believe what an OEM tells you, his job is to sell you his product. Go ask the guys and gals signing the cheques, they will tell you what one actually costs to run. I have owned and run over 30 different machines over the years as i said from 269B's to As 350B3's so i know what they cost as the money has come out of my bank account ! So if the man says they are cheaper he must have a good reason to say so !

Last I checked, a new Cabri costs almost as much to purchase as a new R44 Cadet. I did love the cabin layout though; it felt very modern, with everything very low down for maximum visibility, premium-feeling switches, electronic ignition (plus magneto for redundancy), etc. Also a bizarrely long range for a little two-seater, far more than even the R44. But expensive. Also the R22 derates the engine for longevity, while the Cabri uses the same engine but not derated.

Is there an English translation somewhere?

Nice aircraft but seriously lacking power, porpoises in straight and level flight, and just as expensive as an R44, but with two fewer seats. Plus seems to require more niggy maintenance than R22/R44

It's funny i've found it to be better performing than the R22 with a similar payload. I've got over a thousand R22 hours and around 50 in the G2, regularly in and out of both on the same day etc. Close to sea level.

Also it's very stable in level flight but you do have to correct the small attitude deviations from turbulence compared to the R22 where you ideally don't correct them and just allow it to swing around under the rotor disc etc. It porpoises around if its out of balance (trim etc).

Have noticed the string seems to tell lies in the cabri... when its aligned with the mark it feels out of balance, 1-2cm to the right of the mark feels flat in the seat makes me wonder if the air hitting the screen is being influenced by the rotor wash?