Why don’t you fly rotor wing?

From my perspective, there's nothing inspiring about helicopter flight. I just don't see the beauty in it. Neither do I see the utility for the type of flying I do or want to do.
 
jrhillma said:
I know I don't need to go through the helo parts of the ground school (ASA, in my case) material, but I figured it would be good to know. Flapping, feathering, lead/lag, that whole section gave me a certain appreciation for helos.
Click to expand...
If you're interested in more reading the FAA has a couple free Helicopter Flying Handbooks and if that doesn't put you to sleep then look for books by Shawn Coyle and Phil Croucher. Now if you want to jump down the aerodynamics rabbit hole then Ray Prouty's books are the standard.
jrhillma said:
I do think it'd be cool to be able to zip around in a BK-117
Click to expand...
If you want real fun then get a ride in a BO-105.
 
Bell206 said:
Around 100 in the US alone (55/58/61). Most still working. Plus there's over 500 Bell 47s still flying for a living also.
Click to expand...

Honestly I have no personal issues against helos, but with the exception of the Bell 47, the rest are all 60s and later helicopters.

All the early Sikorsky and Boeing helicopters left are all in museums. And the reason is the same reason that helicopters today aren’t as popular for GA as fixed wing: it costs so bloody much to operate and maintain. So unless you can find a genuine paying use for them, no one is able to afford to keep them in the air.

I briefly considered a helicopter add-on rating, but the only reason I didn’t pursue it was cost.
 
BladeSlap said:
These excuses, meh

How many have at least have a intro flight in a helicopter?
Click to expand...
Hopefully getting one next month while visiting Oregon if their schedule and my schedule align
 
Also, the R22 has some pretty restrictive pax weight restrictions, both in total weight for both seats, and total weight per seat. I'd be just barely below the per seat restriction, and I'd have to have a really skinny CFI if I wanted train in one.
 
For personal use? Because they’re expensive, slow and ugly. My Velocity can fly 1,000 miles at 160 KTAS burning only 10 gal / hr. A comparable helicopter (R44) will only do 110 KTAS, 300 miles an 15 gal / hr.

For work? Well, unless you're former military and do PMC or overseas contract (Dubai, Saudi, etc), you won’t come close to what you could make with the airlines. There’s a reason why they have a rotor to airline program for the former military guys. I have friends that make twice as much as me in the majors.
 
Charlie was the best and when I knew him he was Hauptmann Zimmerman of the Bundeswehr…had the weekend job as the factory demo pilot and even maintained his factory provided BO-105…my last flight in an AH-1 in Germany about 20 days before the wall fell was to take Charlie an Igloo Cooler from the PX. The cooler fit perfectly once the 20mm Ammo Box was removed…a very humble guy…we took a flight of three guns to make the delivery…
 
Also just way to expensive…to fly civilian for fun…
 
Fearless Tower said:
but with the exception of the Bell 47, the rest are all 60s and later helicopters.
Click to expand...
True but you have to put the helicopter industry into perspective and context of the airplane side... there was no "industry" until 1950. So when comparing the 40s-50s with airplanes that actually equates to the 50s-60s with helicopters. So in that relevant context most of those aircraft I listed are still working and in a few instances I have worked on them. Also there were no privately owned helicopters until around 1948 so it makes for a hard comparison to airplanes from the 40s.
Fearless Tower said:
And the reason is the same reason that helicopters today aren’t as popular for GA as fixed wing:
Click to expand...
Depends on viewpoint. You can't compare helicopters to your average Cessna weekend warrior. But if you compare helicopters to the costs and numbers of cabin class twins, some turbine airplanes, and other high performance aircraft in private hands and flown recreationally, you'll find the numbers and costs are more equal. And a private helicopter owner is more apt to come from this group of owners than a Cessna 172 owner with money. Regardless there is no apple to apple comparison of the airplane side to the helicopter side. I've done enough cost/support comparisons to see the differences.
 
I love rotors. Got my SP a couple of years ago for gyroplanes. Hoping to place an order in the next couple of months.
 
Bell206 said:
Depends on viewpoint. You can't compare helicopters to your average Cessna weekend warrior. But if you compare helicopters to the costs and numbers of cabin class twins, some turbine airplanes, and other high performance aircraft in private hands and flown recreationally, you'll find the numbers and costs are more equal. And a private helicopter owner is more apt to come from this group of owners than a Cessna 172 owner with money. Regardless there is no apple to apple comparison of the airplane side to the helicopter side. I've done enough cost/support comparisons to see the differences.
Click to expand...

The challenge is "What do you *do* with a helicopter?". With a far less expensive airplane, you can carry 4 people 500 miles to the beach in 3 hours. With an equally expensive airplane, you can do more. I just don't see the sales pitch that lures me into a helicopter.
 
Velocity173 said:
For personal use? Because they’re expensive, slow and ugly. My Velocity can fly 1,000 miles at 160 KTAS burning only 10 gal / hr. A comparable helicopter (R44) will only do 110 KTAS, 300 miles an 15 gal / hr.

For work? Well, unless you're former military and do PMC or overseas contract (Dubai, Saudi, etc), you won’t come close to what you could make with the airlines. There’s a reason why they have a rotor to airline program for the former military guys. I have friends that make twice as much as me in the majors.
Click to expand...

True and also puzzling, I never understood sacrificing the enjoyment of flying for money, for how much flight school cost, one could have gone to a state law school, or become a CPA, or something of that sort, if one just wanted to always be home and make the most money possible.

I think if I ended up around 100k, with a good schedule and rewarding flying, I could do about everything I want to do.
 
I wanted to learn to fly helicopters.

3 times I was interested enough to start looking for training. Not long after each search for training someone I knew was killed in a helicopter crash.

I am not superstitious or anything like that, but I understood that I needed to stay away from helicopters.

I refused to let the hospital fly me out in a helicopter when I had the heart attack. I didn't feel much better going in a Krap Air 90 as well.....
 
steingar said:
Actually, I’ve lots of experience with the fairer sex. I also posses the good judgement from having my experience turn into ruination.
Click to expand...

Getting married these days has little benefit for men and lots of risk
 
BladeSlap said:
True and also puzzling, I never understood sacrificing the enjoyment of flying for money, for how much flight school cost, one could have gone to a state law school, or become a CPA, or something of that sort, if one just wanted to always be home and make the most money possible.

I think if I ended up around 100k, with a good schedule and rewarding flying, I could do about everything I want to do.
Click to expand...

Well those that fly for the majors would probably argue they still get enjoyment out of flying. I have a friend who flys for SWA who’s constantly posting on FB pics of cloud formations, sunrise /sunset, mountains, cities, etc. I’m sure he’s got one of those cake schedules where he only works like 10-15 days a month as well. Seems pretty enjoyable to me.

There are pros and cons to both types of flying for a living. For me personally, it’s about single pilot, utility (fun), time off and no travel. In that regard, rotor wing meets my objectives. However I can also understand the reasons for those that want to pursue flying heavy iron. To each his own.
 
kyleb said:
The challenge is "What do you *do* with a helicopter?". With a far less expensive airplane, you can carry 4 people 500 miles to the beach in 3 hours. With an equally expensive airplane, you can do more. I just don't see the sales pitch that lures me into a helicopter.
Click to expand...
It depends on a number of variables that are very subjective to the individual. But if I had to point to one item that was repeated by some of my customers/friends it was the flexibility or convenience of a helicopter. In your example above, can you land on the beach? Even with a more expensive helicopter, you can still land on the beach. You may laugh but that is why a person will buy a helicopter.

Same reason in urban areas—point to point capability. Had one doctor who bought a Hughes 300 to simply visit his 3 offices in one day vs 3 days. Once he determined this would work he opened 2 more offices. So, in general, helicopter ops tend to be more destination orientated than simply travel orientated.

And just as it works well as a commuter, a helicopter provides flexibility when someone owns multiple properties which were the bulk of my side work customers. Park in the backyard at the main house, fly direct to the duck camp, or land on the beach in front of the beach house. But keep in mind these aren’t your average 172 owners looking for a change. Most own a larger twin and, in some cases, keep both aircraft or lease the helicopter when the weather is good. Definitely no one size fits all.
 
Bell206 said:
It depends on a number of variables that are very subjective to the individual.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It is a tiny, tiny, subset of private users who can put a helicopter's utility to beneficial use. I'm not one of 'em.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Honestly I have no personal issues against helos, but with the exception of the Bell 47, the rest are all 60s and later helicopters.

All the early Sikorsky and Boeing helicopters left are all in museums. And the reason is the same reason that helicopters today aren’t as popular for GA as fixed wing: it costs so bloody much to operate and maintain. So unless you can find a genuine paying use for them, no one is able to afford to keep them in the air.

I briefly considered a helicopter add-on rating, but the only reason I didn’t pursue it was cost.
Click to expand...
Same here. Started working on the helicopter add on in ‘99. Soloed and quit: $$$

Had an opportunity to actually work a helicopter job in ‘14 so I finally finished the commercial add on and got me some turbine helicopter time. The add on cost me about 15k. Wasn’t worth it just for fun.
When it comes to owning a helicopter it pretty much needs to be for a commercial operation unless you’re just ready to set money on fire. Small GA airplanes cost about the same as a boat habit. Helicopters are quite a bit more expensive. Especially if you get a turbine. The bell I had for a couple years cost about 2.5k an hour. It did not get flown for joy rides.
 
I think for the casual aircraft owner who doesn't own the property that he/she is planning to land at, helicopters have many limitations compared to their utility. It takes a fair amount of effort to work out landing at places that are not airports. For a specific use case, it's great, but for the typical GA mission, it's slower, magnitudes more expensive, with only limited benefits.

From a career perspective, I like the blue collar, low and slow aspect of rotorcraft work. Even the upper escutcheons of the industry you're low and slow, and for the exception of 135 passenger charter work, not too much shirt & tie non-sense. That said, salaries do seems to top out much sooner than fixed wing jobs, with less job security.

The other problem is Uncle Sam produces more helicopter pilots than the civilian rotorcraft industry will ever need. At the FAA it seems we have tons of former military helicopter pilots in all sorts of varying jobs.I guess a nice government job with credit for prior military service is pretty enticing over flying rig workers in the Gulf.
 
Brad Z said:
The other problem is Uncle Sam produces more helicopter pilots than the civilian rotorcraft industry will ever need. At the FAA it seems we have tons of former military helicopter pilots in all sorts of varying jobs.I guess a nice government job with credit for prior military service is pretty enticing over flying rig workers in the Gulf.
Click to expand...
It's not so much the numbers pilots (which are actually lower than 10 years ago) but the fact these pilots leave the service with not enough flight time to meet the minimum flight time requirements for a number of civilian flying jobs. That's more likely the reason you see them in other job fields. And while the offshore market has taken a hard hit in the past 5 years, prior to that there weren't enough qualified pilots to fill the seats.
Tarheelpilot said:
he bell I had for a couple years cost about 2.5k an hour. It did not get flown for joy rides.
Click to expand...
That $2500 must have been your rental rate. The current TVCs which include fuel, oils, mx OH reserve, mx labor, and mx inspection for the Bell family and most single turbine helicopters is $500-$800 per flight hour. This is the same cost range most single turbine airplanes also operate at.
 
I like to go fast, that's the primary reason. But choppers are cool, especially SeaKing and the Soviet Mi series

The steampunk brutalist side of me has always loved the Kamov helicopters. They are relatively common in Hungary for skydiving and agricultural reasons

Some good flying shots from inside the cockpit if you skipped around on this one


PS @BladeSlap is your handle some kind of helicopter reference that us fixed wing plebes are too poor to understand?
 
Brad Z said:
I think for the casual aircraft owner who doesn't own the property that he/she is planning to land at, helicopters have many limitations compared to their utility. It takes a fair amount of effort to work out landing at places that are not airports. For a specific use case, it's great, but for the typical GA mission, it's slower, magnitudes more expensive, with only limited benefits.

From a career perspective, I like the blue collar, low and slow aspect of rotorcraft work. Even the upper escutcheons of the industry you're low and slow, and for the exception of 135 passenger charter work, not too much shirt & tie non-sense. That said, salaries do seems to top out much sooner than fixed wing jobs, with less job security.

The other problem is Uncle Sam produces more helicopter pilots than the civilian rotorcraft industry will ever need. At the FAA it seems we have tons of former military helicopter pilots in all sorts of varying jobs.I guess a nice government job with credit for prior military service is pretty enticing over flying rig workers in the Gulf.
Click to expand...
The military retired pilots create a lot of downward pressure on salaries. I really enjoyed my helicopter time. Don’t plan on retirement from that income stream…
 
I will say this: some of the best pilots in the world are Coast Guard helo pilots.

Fixed wing Naval Aviators got nothing on the Coast Guard rotary wing.
 
Tantalum said:
I like to go fast, that's the primary reason. But choppers are cool, especially SeaKing and the Soviet Mi series

The steampunk brutalist side of me has always loved the Kamov helicopters. They are relatively common in Hungary for skydiving and agricultural reasons

Some good flying shots from inside the cockpit if you skipped around on this one


PS @BladeSlap is your handle some kind of helicopter reference that us fixed wing plebes are too poor to understand?
Click to expand...

Blade Slap can occur for a few reasons.
FD53457A-7C17-4832-A7D6-6C60C5508EA7.jpeg
 
Tantalum said:
But what are they slapping?
Click to expand...

The air. Slap probably isn’t the best word to describe it but it’s simply the rapid changes in pressure that can occur in the 3 examples above.

The older Hueys are probably the most common or well known example. The popping you hear at a hover is the blades cutting the preceding vortex called blade vortex interaction (example 1). In some flight regimes the descending blade on the retreating side stalls during what’s called retreating blade stall (example 2). The loud crack you hear from approaching Hueys from a distance is from the shockwave that forms on the advancing blade during transonic speeds. (example 3).

Some of your more modern helicopters have minimized (swept tips) the blade slap noise problems. You can still get a pretty good slap in say a Black Hawk but you’d have to be maneuvering pretty aggressive to do so…or descending rapidly and blow through Vne. ;)
 
Fearless Tower said:
If your talking about H-1s, maybe.

But how many early Sikorskys from the 40s and 50s do you see flying today?
Click to expand...
Well the Marine VH-3's that fly the President were procured in the 60's.
 
Velocity173 said:
The air. Slap probably isn’t the best word to describe it but it’s simply the rapid changes in pressure that can occur in the 3 examples above.

The older Hueys are probably the most common or well known example. The popping you hear at a hover is the blades cutting the preceding vortex called blade vortex interaction (example 1). In some flight regimes the descending blade on the retreating side stalls during what’s called retreating blade stall (example 2). The loud crack you hear from approaching Hueys from a distance is from the shockwave that forms on the advancing blade during transonic speeds. (example 3).

Some of your more modern helicopters have minimized (swept tips) the blade slap noise problems. You can still get a pretty good slap in say a Black Hawk but you’d have to be maneuvering pretty aggressive to do so…or descending rapidly and blow through Vne. ;)
Click to expand...
Cool! Thanks, never knew what that sound was called; learn something knew at PoA every day
 
Velocity173 said:
The air. Slap probably isn’t the best word to describe it but it’s simply the rapid changes in pressure that can occur in the 3 examples above.

The older Hueys are probably the most common or well known example. ;)
Click to expand...
The old Bell H-1's have a main rotor that has a washout of 13 degrees from root out to the tip. That's a lot to ask of air to follow that airfoil. The slap seems to focus ahead. You can sure hear a Huey coming.
 
There's more to rotary wing flight than helis

1577276.jpg


5576609.jpg


1227820-large.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top