Well that picture does not give me enough info to learn. My read of the N# takes me to a Kodiak fixed wing...Plenty of room. Only does a little over 80 kts on a good day but is still a blast to fly NOE with doors off.
View attachment 123141
If you can find one, a Bell 47 would fit the bill. Not too many left in flight training these days, however.
Well that picture does not give me enough info to learn. My read of the N# takes me to a Kodiak fixed wing...
Bart Kelly at Bell Helicopter was a very tall guy. He directed the cockpit design of the 47 and as a result the cyclic control was higher than normal. For big pilots it’s ideal.The best course of action would be to buy one. In my opinion the Bell 47 is a great helicopter to learn in and would be pretty gentle on the pocketbook for low use personal ownership. Parts a are getting harder to come by however, so I would want to work with an experienced mechanic to care for it. Hence my original suggestion to find a local guy to help influence a decision.
The only problem I see with learning to fly in a B47 is that it'll likely spoil you.
Schweitzer 300. Army used them (TH-55) with guys 6’4” so it’s doable. Might have to tilt your head slightly forward. Don’t know how much 300 lbs would affect W&B though.Well that picture does not give me enough info to learn. My read of the N# takes me to a Kodiak fixed wing...
the helicopter market is pretty small and I've never seen much online.
What's NOE?Plenty of room. Only does a little over 80 kts on a good day but is still a blast to fly NOE with doors off.
View attachment 123141
Depends how deep you want to go down that rabbit hole. But I usually recommend looking for a local ops that offers helicopter discovery flights.Where do I go to obsess over helicopters?
It depends which part of the industry. For training, yes.I feel like R44’s have become the industry’s gold standard for multipurpose rotorcraft operations.
pprune.org has a helicopter section.
Rotorheads - PPRuNe Forums
Rotorheads - A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect themwww.pprune.org
Don't worry too much about the "professional" tags. In the heli section all aviators and prospects seem welcome. Just don't post photos of your first solo in the main "Rumours and News" forum.
Bit of a UK lean I guess however there is plenty US and other international inputs. Maybe try posting your question there.
But what is the acronym?Mostly contour here with a small taste of NOE.
You probably have never served in the military. Each service has a huge list of acronyms unique to itself. I left my first joint service meeting not having a clue about half of what was said. My supervisor said not to worry as I would eventually learn. I was once tasked to go through a briefing and write down every acronym and spell out what each stood for. I was told to stop after I had twenty pages (I wasn't finished) --it was a very long briefing to general officers of every service.I understand why pilots like and use acronyms (writing down clearances, taxi instructions etc.), and why so many acronyms are just made up on the spot by creative aviators; however, some acronyms are a bit of a puzzle to sort out into any meaningful communications.
My acronym googling turned up American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), then finally Airplane Single Engine Sea. Getting old I guess. First sign is AF (acronym fade).Ranks up there with ASES...
You probably have never served in the military. Each service has a huge list of acronyms unique to itself.
Thank you for your service. My point is that all the services have unique acronyms and what's understood in one is greek to another. Until you get deal closely with the other services you don't realize it's like learning a new language.I served four years three months and three days in "Uncle's Airplane"(USAF) and had my enlistment extended to go over seas.
Reminds me of the boatload of Army Air Force B-25s on the USS Hornet. Historians tell us that the Navy guys were kind of discouraged when they thought it was just a transport mission. I don't know if they had any difficulties with service-specific acronyms, but the cheer that went up when the commanding officer announced "This force is bound for Tokyo" suggests that everyone understood what THAT meant.I was part of DAST’s (Dedicated At Sea Test) to write a DOD manual on utilizing Army Aircraft on Navy ships…part of the exercise was trying to capture Navy vs Army speak…the manual was never published. My prior experience with Navel ops made me a center point. We flew a lot but in general it’s hard to understand why why this would ever be a good idea in practice…on paper it was a good but AH-64’s and CH-47’s just have so many issues operating off a LHA’s, even worse on smaller 2 spot ships. We went to sea seven times during this testing.