On 1 Jun 2003 11:37:50 -0700, (HeliPilot) wrote:

I REALLY dislike the R22, its got some nasty design characteristics,
and more importantly, it develops some really bad habits in pilots,
ask any Bell instructor who are the most difficult pilots to
transition into the 206, you guessed it the guys who come from R22's,
for starters its nearly impossible to keep them from stirring the
cyclic like crazy, you just don't fly turbines like that. and then I
could go on and on but its useless, the statistics speak for
themselves.


Man, with as much respect as can possibly muster here, I couldn't
disagree more.

If you "stir the cyclic" in the R22, it'll be all over the place. You
barely even move the cyclic in the thing! If they're stirring the
stick in the JetRanger after flying the Robbie, they're just not used
to having to put in that much more cyclic input to get a result.

The reality is that being a proficient R22 pilot will make you better
at EVERYTHING ELSE, since the R22 is the most difficult to master.

I used to be a jittery mess flying the AS350 (as a non-rated
ride-along pilot). Then I went out and trained in the R22. Now I get
in the AS350, and I'm sitting there thinking, "This thing is a piece
of cake! What the heck was I doing before?" But that is the reason I
went with the R22. My CFI friends in town are right - if you can
master the R22, the Astar will be much more managable early on.

Hey, the 300 is a wonderful ship as well. I originally planned on
learning in the 300, but for economic reasons, I opted into the R22
instead. Man, am I glad. Every other helicopter I fly now feels a
million times easier since I mastered the R22. I'll confess that it
took a while before I "found" the R22's feel. (My good friend who
flies ENG called it, "Turning on the PILOT switch." One day, you just
get it, and everything is terrific from then on.) Now I'm so glad I
did it this way. Hey, makes sense, right? If you can master the
squirrelist of them, everything else will be a walk in the park.

So, where are the friends of the R22 in this discussion? Oh yeah, I
know. They're tired of defending a perfectly good aircraft that gets
loads of criticism from people who "will never fly in one."

Too bad. It's really a great little aircraft.

Here's the comparison I get from people who don't have a
pre-disposition AGAINST the Robbie.

The R22 is less expensive, the 300 is more expensive.

You will learn to hover faster in the 300 because it is more stable.

Some counter that, even though it takes longer to learn to hover the
R22, once you do, since it's cheaper, it ends up costing the same to
train because you're paying less for it hourly.

The 300 is definitely roomier, so go with the 300 if you're big or...
errr... bigger!

The R22 is more nimble and fast, so if you like performance, the R22
is more fun to play in.

My experience in So Cal is that the R22 is definitely LESS costly in
maintenance. Of course, operators here have a nice advantage of
sending their helicopter in to the factory LOCALLY to have the 2200
hour overhall done. Florida operators may have different viewpoints!
(What do they do overseas?)

Some 300's do not have a governor (to keep RPM's at the right level),
the R22 does. Countering viewpoint here would be that flying without
a governor will make you a more proficient pilot. ("Hey, who told the
Governor he could fly with me today?")

You may not be insured to fly some R22's unless you take the Factory
Safety Course. This is a cost to consider.

You have some extra training required under the SFAR's by law. This
is very little and should not factor into anything.

And as people have mentioned, the reactions times are much less for
corrective action in the R22. In some flight regimes, you have one
second to get the collective down. If this reality makes you
uncomfortable, you will want to opt for another aircraft.





Interesting conversation at the airport the other day about power
failures. One of our well-known pilot examiners was telling a CFI
friend of mine that apparently the number of engine failures in the
R22 (barring carb ice and no-fuel situations) is basically negligable.
Anybody else have any stats to back this? It came up when somebody
made the traditional, "Give me a turbine over a piston any day..."
comment. I guess if you stack up turbine power losses over pistons
(specifically the R22), the Robbie actually shines...

Anyway, just felt like putting in some more "balanced" info.

By the way, Bart is right. Sign up for Heli-Props. It's free, mailed
to your address of choice. A great little safety newsletter by Jim
Szymanski. Good stuff. Get it!


Hey, to-be students out there... Remember, flight schools offer
"demo flights" for a discounted price... I say, go do a demo flight
in an R22 at one school, and another demo flight in a 300 at a
different school! Try out each one and see what you like...


Hey, I checked out that NASA link but couldn't find any 300 vs. R22
comparison data... I'd actually like to see that myself... Anybody
got any links?

Either way, everybody have fun out there.

Alex
Helispot
http://www.helispot.com