I wonder if you have autorotated either model. I have an intimate
acquaintance with the autorotational characteristics of both series. The
206 series is much more forgiving, and requires far less skill to execute a
successful autorotation. In other words, you are less likely to crash in a
forced landing ina 206 than in a Hughes/McD/Boeing 500. On the other hand,
there a few types of crashes -- by no means all -- in which the structure of
the 500 series comes in handy. Trust me, you don't want to be in either
series aircraft in that kind of crash.

"Shaber CJ" wrote in message
...
This is a popular legend, based partly on the A-frame behind the pilot
and
partly on the ability of the rounded fuselage to roll down a hill after
the
skids and rotor system get knocked off, but the key factor is the risk of
serious injury, and the RSI in the 206 is about half that of the 500.
This
is in large part, of course, because the 206 is less likely to hit the
ground hard enough to kill the occupants.


I think the gravitational constant is the same for the 206 as for the 500,
32.2
ft/s/s. There has never been a case of the transmission coming into the
cockpit of the 500. If I am going to crash please God make it a 500 I am
in.