Got the go ahead to buy a helicopter

ScottM

ScottM

Taxi to Parking
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
42,530
Location
Variable, but somewhere on earth
Display Name
Display name:
iBazinga!
NOT AN APRIL FOOLS JOKE!!

Not even sure what I would want or why I would want it!!!

Thoughts?

Mostly single pilot, some local to 250NM range travel. Cheap to operate, must be able to carry more than an R22!!!!
 
Of course you want one, every pilot wants a helicopter most of them will deny it though. Hiller, Enstrom, B-47? Hughes/Scheitzer 300(super slow.)?
Where are you going to fly it? Cause if you live in an urban area and it is all airport to airport stuff just buy a cub or biplane, sad I say that as a helicopter pilot.
 
April fools! I already did it, Scott. ;)
 
R44?

come on, that was funny.

I think I read a few weeks ago that the Cabri was finally in production. That's Europe's version of the R22, only better in almost every way.

As for the go-ahead....man, I'm envious. Once the R22 hit $200K my wife told me she should have given me the green light back when they were only $150K. Now even $200K is appealing.
 
Last edited:
Ted DuPuis said:
April fools! I already did it, Scott. ;)
Click to expand...

Did you read the first line of the OP??? Obviously not. :nono:

Seriously, I got the go ahead. But honestly I am not sure I want one. They are fun as heck to fly, but the utility is not all that great and for the missions I fly a single is a far better tool. Besides I have been thinking of selling my plane because I do not fly it enough!!! What would I do with two aircraft? :idea:

So I was just gathering some info to mull it over.
 
Last edited:
ScottM said:
NOT AN APRIL FOOLS JOKE!!

Cheap to operate, must be able to carry more than an R22!!!!
Click to expand...

Okay, I'm just now reading this post more in-depth.

The first sentence doesn't correlate to the last one. You'll never find a cheap-to-operate helicopter. They're expensive for a reason.

As for the part about you not being sure you want one....man, fly one for a while and you'll really be sure. It hurts airplane pilots feelings when I say this, but it's true. Flying helos makes airplanes seem boring by comparison. They are THAT much fun.
 
Gerhardt said:
Flying helos makes airplanes seem boring by comparison. They are THAT much fun.
Click to expand...
I use my plane to commute to my helo training. You're right!! The flight home is always boring.

One of my friends had a jet ranger. SO THE CHEAP TO OPERATE FLIES OUT THE WINDOW. He loved it and was looking for a partner, but he sold it before I was ready to buy in. I am thinking that if I go this route that I may look into a partnership situation. I outright own my airplane right now. I like that a lot. But with a helo I think it may be far more practical to share the burden. I still have to wrap my head around the financials before I would even consider anything seriously. In the mean time I am just doing some day dreaming.
 
I was watching some old guy and probably his grandson start up and fly away in their Eurocopter at HAF a few months ago.

I swear to god the fumes of the turbine smelled like burning currency.
 
ScottM said:
One of my friends had a jet ranger. SO THE CHEAP TO OPERATE FLIES OUT THE WINDOW. He loved it and was looking for a partner, but he sold it before I was ready to buy in. I am thinking that if I go this route that I may look into a partnership situation.
Click to expand...

That's absolutely the route to go.
 
ScottM said:
I use my plane to commute to my helo training. You're right!! The flight home is always boring.

One of my friends had a jet ranger. SO THE CHEAP TO OPERATE FLIES OUT THE WINDOW. He loved it and was looking for a partner, but he sold it before I was ready to buy in. I am thinking that if I go this route that I may look into a partnership situation. I outright own my airplane right now. I like that a lot. But with a helo I think it may be far more practical to share the burden. I still have to wrap my head around the financials before I would even consider anything seriously. In the mean time I am just doing some day dreaming.
Click to expand...

Once you fly a Jet Ranger...... the R44 will be a disappointment. A Eurocopter is a close second.

It is great fun riding a JR between DEN and EGE. Or chasing mountain lion on Farnsworth outside SLC.
 
wsuffa said:
There's always something like this, Scott:

http://armyjeeps.net/mcleanhuey/UH1eHuey.htm

Load her up, and no more rush hour traffic woes!
Click to expand...
I have some UH-1A time. It really is a great helo to fly!!! But you need a defense budget to fly it!!!

BTW lots of old Hueys on the ramp at Ton Son Nhut airport. I saw them recently. So they are still flying in someone's military!
 
ScottM said:
I have some UH-1A time. It really is a great helo to fly!!! But you need a defense budget to fly it!!!

BTW lots of old Hueys on the ramp at Ton Son Nhut airport. I saw them recently. So they are still flying in someone's military!
Click to expand...

Yeah most of them have been cannibalized to keep the the few flyable ones flying. It's the only non Russian aircraft they currently use.
 
I looked into this briefly a long time ago. It was a partner deal on a Bell 47 with the wooden blades. If you think keeping a plane in the air is costly, you have no idea on a helo. It even outstrips the cost of an amphib and I thought that was crazy high mx cost.

I have a buddy over in rural TX with Two of the Rotorway helos. They are somewhat cheaper to own, but don't carry much. The newer one is real easy to fly. I think if I were doing it again, I'd get something newer made by Rotorway.

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_882332_Exec-162F,+2-seat+helicopter.html
 
docmirror said:
I looked into this briefly a long time ago. It was a partner deal on a Bell 47 with the wooden blades. If you think keeping a plane in the air is costly, you have no idea on a helo. It even outstrips the cost of an amphib and I thought that was crazy high mx cost.

I have a buddy over in rural TX with Two of the Rotorway helos. They are somewhat cheaper to own, but don't carry much. The newer one is real easy to fly. I think if I were doing it again, I'd get something newer made by Rotorway.

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_882332_Exec-162F,+2-seat+helicopter.html
Click to expand...

I know I said no to an R22 or R22 like helo. But part of me thinks that perhaps get one of those and then it just becomes a fun local flier.
 
docmirror said:
I looked into this briefly a long time ago. It was a partner deal on a Bell 47 with the wooden blades. If you think keeping a plane in the air is costly, you have no idea on a helo. It even outstrips the cost of an amphib and I thought that was crazy high mx cost.

I have a buddy over in rural TX with Two of the Rotorway helos. They are somewhat cheaper to own, but don't carry much. The newer one is real easy to fly. I think if I were doing it again, I'd get something newer made by Rotorway.

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_882332_Exec-162F,+2-seat+helicopter.html
Click to expand...

Hell no. Look at the hours you need mx wise compared to flight time. I'd prefer to spend my time flying.
 
wsuffa said:
Is there still a heliport at Meigs?
Click to expand...
Nope.


The heliport was moved to be close to Cal-harbor and is there for the fire department. Before Duh-Mayor left office he tried to get one at a nearby hospital that he is affiliated with. It does look like one might be going in near Stroger (former Cook Co hospital) for the hospital and public access. There actually is a state of Illinois program to add public access heliports. I used the one in Schaumburg.

The police showed up pretty quick to see what was going on. But as we just touched down and the went back into hover I do not know why they were watching. Was it curiosity or I suspect someone called in that a helicopter crashed.
 
R44 or an Enstrom is probably your best bet. The R44 has two models that you might want to look at, the Raven and the Raven II. For your mission, a Raven (one) might fit the bill just fine, and will be a little bit cheaper.

I don't share the sentiment that a Jet Ranger will make the 44 a disappointment. It's twice the cost, but not twice the helicopter. To each their own, though.

I don't believe the performance of that new Cabri can match that of even the R22, so that's not an option. Same with the Schweizer/Sikorsky 300.

If you decide to look at turbines, your options open up some. But, if you're staying in the piston world, it's hard to beat a 44 or Enstrom.
 
Last edited:
Why exactly is a helicopter so expensive regarding maintenance? Are the inspection intervals that much more frequent? Do parts break down more?

The way people talk, helos are like an order of magnitude more expensive than planes, but why? I can understand fuel and insurance being more, but why maintenance?
 
LoneAspen said:
Why exactly is a helicopter so expensive regarding maintenance? Are the inspection intervals that much more frequent? Do parts break down more?

The way people talk, helos are like an order of magnitude more expensive than planes, but why? I can understand fuel and insurance being more, but why maintenance?
Click to expand...

Yes to pretty much all of those. Take an R-22 for example. While it doesn't have the continuous life limited scheduled maintenance like other helos, it has a 2,200 hr / 12 yr. That means you take it to the factory for a complete overhaul. you'll be looking at over 100 grand for that. Still, an R22 is pretty economical as helicopters go.

The scheduled maintenance on our 407 is extensive. Plenty of life limited parts (except the rotors), visual checks, lubrication etc. We get a new battery every year at $3,600 a piece. Hourly costs around $400. Then of course insurance is crazy high as well. I think an R22 would be looking at 3 times the amount compared to a comparable SE FW.

Fun? Yes, but I'd never buy one personally. I like to travel (fast) and a homebuilt FW can't be beat for the price.
 
Well with a thousand plus hours of military helicopter time in my logbook the only one that looks remotely "cheap" would be the Safari kit helicopter. Build it yourself and get the repairmans certificate for the upkeep. The thing about the Robby-Copters I don't like is that they're basically throw-away helicopters. You have to send them back to the factory and basically buy them back again.
 
I wonder if the cost of purchasing and maintaining an R44 is less than the combined cost of buying the acreage, cutting trees, prepping and maintaining a 2500 ft turf, lit runway and concurrently buying and maintaining a 172.

I would love to fly helicopters but most of my destinations are served pretty well by airports with runways.
 
Last edited:
Art VanDelay said:
The thing about the Robby-Copters I don't like is that they're basically throw-away helicopters. You have to send them back to the factory and basically buy them back again.
Click to expand...

I've heard this before, but I don't understand the concern. If it costs the same, why do you care whether you're returning old parts to new condition or simply replacing them? It's a trivial concern.

You don't necessarily have to send them back to the factory. Several repair facilities outside of the factor can do the overhauls.

LoneAspen said:
Why exactly is a helicopter so expensive regarding maintenance? Are the inspection intervals that much more frequent? Do parts break down more?
Click to expand...

In helicopters, aircraft control and the powerplant/drivetrain are highly integrated. This results in a large number of parts being absolutely critical for controlled, powered flight. Even a simple helicopter has a lot of moving, spinning, and highly stressed parts.

Light airplanes, compared to light helicopters, are vastly simpler in comparison. Engine in front of the firewall, glider behind the firewall.
 
Last edited:
If I had limitless funds I'd get a Sikorsky S-76 and not bother with airplanes. This sucker goes 150kts, twin safety and is a total design classic. Still looks good after almost 40 year in service.
 

Attachments

  • sikorsky-s-76-over-english-bay.jpg
    sikorsky-s-76-over-english-bay.jpg
    847.1 KB · Views: 31
bqmassey said:
I've heard this before, but I don't understand the concern. If it costs the same, why do you care whether you're returning old parts to new condition or simply replacing them? It's a trivial concern.

You don't necessarily have to send them back to the factory. Several repair facilities outside of the factor can do the overhauls.



In helicopters, aircraft control and the powerplant/drivetrain are highly integrated. This results in a large number of parts being absolutely critical for controlled, powered flight. Even a simple helicopter has a lot of moving, spinning, and highly stressed parts.

Light airplanes, compared to light helicopters, are vastly simpler in comparison. Engine in front of the firewall, glider behind the firewall.
Click to expand...

It's a concern if you're the guy buying the R22 at 2,199 hrs or 11.9 years. :D Outside of that, you've got yourself a relatively easy to maintain aircraft that won't cost much more to maintain than a C-182 or a Mooney. Insurance on the other hand...not so much.
 
Velocity173 said:
It's a concern if you're the guy buying the R22 at 2,199 hrs or 11.9 years. :D Outside of that, you've got yourself a relatively easy to maintain aircraft that won't cost much more to maintain than a C-182 or a Mooney. Insurance on the other hand...not so much.
Click to expand...

Robinsons seem to be priced accordingly, everyone knows the overhaul limits and costs, so it seems easy to budget for it. $100K divided by 2000 hours is $200.00 per hour, right? easy math to do. :D
Airplanes are completely different, we don't have to rebuild at 2000 hours, we do it a little at a time.:rolleyes:
 
I like the Bell 47 variants. Seats three, and has M.A.S.H. retro appeal.
 
I think this qualifies as a first world problem.

--
Scott - This is like someone else winning the lottery. It's a set of worries I'll never have!

Has your commute out to these parts changed?
 
stratobee said:
If I had limitless funds I'd get a Sikorsky S-76 and not bother with airplanes. This sucker goes 150kts, twin safety and is a total design classic. Still looks good after almost 40 year in service.
Click to expand...

Pfft. S-92. The 76 is cute.
 
I've owned several helicopters in my life:

3 Hughes (Schweizer) 269C's (300C)
1 Hughes 269A (TH-55A)
1 Hughes 369A (OH-6A)
1 Brantly B2B
1 Enstrom 280C
1 Enstrom F28A

First and foremost, helicopters are expensive to own and operate no matter what you buy.

Maintenance: Parts are expensive and helicopters are full of "life limited" parts. For example, the rotor blades on the Hughes 269 series are life limited to 5500 hours. The last set of blades I bought from Schweizer were $13,000 each (my cost), so a new set ran $39,000.

Helicopters are full of bearings and they need replacing. I installed a few sets of grip bearings for the 269's, plan on spending $1200 per grip ($3600) when those come due.

MR transmission overhaul? TR transmission overhaul? Get ready to shell out the bucks.

Fact is the best buys I got on helicopters came after major maintenance when the owner was shell shocked at the bill and wanted it gone.

Another helicopter maintenance item to remember. Your local A&P (fixed wing) may not have the training or tools and manuals to fix your helicopter. A set of manuals will set you back over $1500 and the tooling can set you back $10,000+. For my Hughes helicopters I had invested over $20,000+ in tooling alone (specific hughes tools, not my personal box)

Here is my suggestion for someone wanting a personal helicopter: Buy a Robinson R-44 Raven. Go with a later model hydraulic one. These can be bought with an air conditioner that works quite well (if that's important to you)

The Robinsons are maintenance friendly usually only requiring a 50 hour oil change and a 100 hour inspection. Parts are plentiful and somewhat reasonable, dealers and maintenance providers are easy to find and Robinson has their own insurance program to keep cost down. Come time for resale and the R44 will be an easy resale.

The R44 has very nice flying characteristics and is fast enough to go places.
 
Brad Z said:
I like the Bell 47 variants. Seats three, and has M.A.S.H. retro appeal.
Click to expand...

The '47's are maintenance hogs, better have a good 47 mechanic around and have access to parts. The 47's were plagued with counterfeit parts so it pays to know where those parts come from.
 
bqmassey said:
Might you be partial to the S92? :D
Click to expand...

I might be slightly biased. :D

True story: I was at Morristown, NJ (KMMU) and a few state police pilots came in flying a 76. Very obviously the sort who thought they were special.

Pilot was standing next to me at the counter waiting to pay. I say (as I'm getting my credit card back) "You flying that 76?" He nods. "It's cute. Too bad y'all don't have a 92, that's a real helicopter."

His ego was visibly bruised as I walked off.
 
wsuffa said:
Once you fly a Jet Ranger...... the R44 will be a disappointment. A Eurocopter is a close second.

.
Click to expand...

I've flown both the 206 and the R44. Each has it's own attributes.

For a personal fun to own helicopter the R44 is superior. If money is no object the 206 is a nice personal ship.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top