Helicopter license after PPL?

B

Billnye

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
16
Location
SoCal
Display Name
Display name:
Bill Nye
Hi all,
So I was talking with a pilot friend of mine and we were talking about how he just got his helicopter license. He has flown fixed wings for some time now and decided to jump into something different.

I'm just about done with my PPL and want to entertain the idea of maybe getting a helicopter license as well. Do any of you have experience with this? I've been reading around a little bit but figured you all might be able to offer advice from personal experience.

One thing I've read is that the basic training (navigation, communication, etc.) is cheaper in a Cessna than a helicopter (?).

Any input is appreciated!
 
it can be done ,but i tried and failed . the less hours you have fixed the easier it might be for you. always exceptions for the young and or brilliant who do well. go for it . you will know .and best to you ,be safe
 
If you don't mind me asking, why did you fail or why do you think you failed? I understand that it's a completely different beast but is it that different?
 
I'm terrified of helicopters. When something happens you fall out of the sky. At least in a plane you can sometimes glide to the landing. Probably another reason why one day I'll try to go for my helicopter license. I love doing things that challenge me more than I'm terrified of helicopters I guess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
mulligan said:
I'm terrified of helicopters. When something happens you fall out of the sky. At least in a plane you can sometimes glide to the landing. Probably another reason why one day I'll try to go for my helicopter license. I love doing things that challenge me more than I'm terrified of helicopters I guess


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Negative ghostrider, you do not fall out of the sky. You do though actually glide in an autorotative state. It doesn't have the glide ratio of a cessna but in a little trainer Robbie or Bell 47, its not too bad (now the Schweizer 300, that glides like a brick). In fact, it could be argued that it is actually safer as I can autorotate into a spot as big as a helicopter but for an airplane you need some kind of field to roll out on dead stick.

fer the records... two helicopter engine failures here, both without damage to person property or machine.
 
hotprops said:
it can be done ,but i tried and failed . the less hours you have fixed the easier it might be for you. always exceptions for the young and or brilliant who do well. go for it . you will know .and best to you ,be safe
Click to expand...

I have 275hrs fixed wing over the past year and a half, hopped into an R22 and within an hour was able to fly it just fine, hover, etc.

I think the most important thing is that when you hop into a helicopter you have to be very cognizant of the fact you have to be very smooth and have excellent situational awareness. I've been flying aerobatic planes in the past thirty hours or so which has helped immensely with flying using very small and smooth control inputs.

My first lesson...


Third flight...

 
I was a long time thousands hours fixed wing power pilot (with a lot of single pilot IFR) before I transitioned to helicopters. I found that experience nothing short of amazing. I learned on R-22, then transitioned to R-44. Both are great machines, extremely fun to fly, and safe when flown properly. I also took a lesson in the Schweizer/Sikorski 300CBi, which was also a lot of fun, and excellent for teaching Robbie pilots good manual throttle control. I took the Robinson factory safety course in Torrance, which was another highlight, and feel it's a must for any Robbie pilot that cares about safety.
All in all, it's been an incredibly fun ride, but...
If your main goal in your flying life is getting yourself and passengers safely from A to B, and are looking to expand your envelope, I think your money is vastly better spent on:
1. your instrument rating (if you don't have one), and good instruments (like big screen color WAAS GPS, weather, traffic, etc.); and
2. your glider add-on rating.

I can't recommend the latter enough. It will make you a much safer pilot (who needs engines?!), while giving you an incomparable amount of pleasure, all at a very reasonable price. Nothing comes close (and after helicopters, that's a very significant statement).
 
I was the opposite so I can't really tell you how your transition would be for you. I was a 1500 hour helicopter guy before I hauled off and bought an airplane without a fixed wing license. You are right that a lot of the basics will be similar. Nav, radios, and reading the basic instruments. There will be a lot of little things you have to learn, but a good CFI will walk you through those. Good luck, it's the most fun I've ever had!
 
I concur on pursuing instrument and glider first. Then the helicopter add-on later for fun.
 
I thought about it, but 2 things always came to mind:

1) there isn't really a place nearby to rent a helicopter once I got my license, and I don't see myself buying my own.
2) it seems to be a much more expensive option than flying fixed wing.

I'd really like to learn, but I just don't see it happening for me in the foreseeable future.
 
As an engineer that helped design several kit built helicopters... I will never step foot in a helicopter. With a gear reduction(turbine), transmission, and separate gearbox for the tail rotor, they are just so complex it's a wonder they don't crash more often... waaay too many intricate parts to be reliable or cheap. Vs a GA plane that is direct drive, very little to go wrong. Or a turboprop plane, and some piston planes, with a single gearbox, they're still far simpler than helicopters.

At the local helicopter school each instructor has had to auto-rotate atleast once. I only know of one CFI between several flight schools that has had an engine failure.

Also helicopters are stupid expensive to rent and I heard you can't rent them out without a CFI not sure if true or not.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
As an engineer that helped design several kit built helicopters... I will never step foot in a helicopter.
<snip>
At the local helicopter school each instructor has had to auto-rotate atleast once. I only know of one CFI between several flight schools that has had an engine failure.
<snip>
Click to expand...

Every helicopter student pilot has to autorotate dozens of time before getting rated. Commercial and CFI have to do it many many more times.
Autorotation is great fun, one of the main reasons helicopter flying is so much fun.
I recall doing it 36 times in a row during one of my lessons (all on video :)). Still can't get over that high...
Doing it with precision and accurately hitting the chosen landing spot at near-zero airspeed and vertical speed is a challenge that is very rewarding when done properly.
In my opinion, having flown more categories of aircraft than most people, helicopters are very safe, arguably safer than airplanes, when flown and maintained properly. The main reason they are so safe is their ability to autorotate and land on a dime, literally.
 
Some years back I had a student who completed his Private Pilot in a Cessna 206 in 45 hours. The day after his checkride he started his helicopter training and knocked that out quickly. But to be fair, he was very sharp, learned everything the first time I showed him.
 
RotorDude said:
Every helicopter student pilot has to autorotate dozens of time before getting rated. Commercial and CFI have to do it many many more times.
Autorotation is great fun, one of the main reasons helicopter flying is so much fun.
I recall doing it 36 times in a row during one of my lessons (all on video :)). Still can't get over that high...
Doing it with precision and accurately hitting the chosen landing spot at near-zero airspeed and vertical speed is a challenge that is very rewarding when done properly.
In my opinion, having flown more categories of aircraft than most people, helicopters are very safe, arguably safer than airplanes, when flown and maintained properly. The main reason they are so safe is their ability to autorotate and land on a dime, literally.
Click to expand...
Autorotate out of necessity*
 
Mtns2Skies said:
Autorotate out of necessity*
Click to expand...

Sure, you may autorotate to get yourself out of binds (not only mechanical issues), such as high-level vortex ring state (VRS), or even inadvertent IMC (with no gyros). You may also do it to lose altitude quickly. One of the instructors at our school needed to autorotate from 10,000' or so, many times over, over several days, as part of a scientific measurement program. So having had to do it "out of necessity" is not a big deal. The helicopter loves to autorotate, as do most pilots who fly it. :)
 
Can't speak for piston but with almost 5,000 hrs in turbines, never had either an engine hiccup or any problems with transmissions failing. Our 407 is incredibly reliable. While expensive, if the maintenance manual is adhered to, shouldn't be any problems with reliability. I think a lot of these mechanical type crashes are old, high time helos where maintenance was lacking. Same can go for FW for that matter. Skimp on maintenance and it'll bite you in the a**.

Most accidents are pilot error. While flying a helo from a runway to another runway is fairly easy, helos are unstable and very unforgiving to an inattentive pilot. If you're flying in demanding conditions such as high DA or tail / X winds, you could find yourself in settling with power or loss of tail rotor effectiveness for the later. Performance planning is just as critical for a helo vs FW. The environment and the types of missions performed are generally more demanding than FW; confined areas, pinnacles, dust landings, slings, power line maint, water bucket, etc. You're usually flying in close proximity to things that can snag you out of the sky in a heartbeat.

So, personally I don't worry about mechanical any more than I do flying FW. Probably even less because I much rather be in a helo losing 2,000 fpm and touching down between 0-10 kts than an airplane going through the trees around 50 kts...unless it's a Cirrus.
 
op i am glad to see that there many positive posts and you should give it a go. to try to answer your question as to why i gave it up.i did not see myself geting any better after over ten hours and my instructor was a friend and was concerned with hurting his baby a hughes 500.not a good mix to learn .also i do not like heights and that feeling is exacerbated in a rotor-wing aircraft because of lack of forward movement in many phases of flight ,unlike a fixed wing best of luck and keep us posted .eta i like the glider idea posted above:)
 
Velocity173 said:
The environment and the types of missions performed are generally more demanding than FW; confined areas, pinnacles, dust landings, slings, power line maint, water bucket, etc.

School = dead man's curve ; work = money curve

So, personally I don't worry about mechanical any more than I do flying FW. Probably even less because I much rather be in a helo losing 2,000 fpm and touching down between 0-10 kts than an airplane going through the trees around 50 kts...unless it's a Cirrus.
Click to expand...

AMEN to that
 
I do one helicopter lesson per year. That keeps it in my budget! :)

I did this year's lesson yesterday. It's a completely unnatural act to fly one, but it's sorta addicting. I may have to up it to two per year.
 
I would like to take a discovery flight in one. At one time I was very heavy into RC helicopters so I'm at least aware of the basic controls and what they do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top