R22 for commercial after R44 for private or stay with R44?

[TXSoccerRef]

I just got my rotorcraft add on rating and have 65 hours, all in the R44. I'm trying to decide if I should stick with the R44 to get my commercial or if I should do my 25 hours PIC in the R22 so that I'm qualified on both. Also, no one seems to ever rent an R44 solo, but they do the R22, with limitations and the R22 is less expensive.

 

I did all my flying with a leased aircraft and freelance CFI and the R44 we've used may go back in February and therefore not available to me. The only local school (Conroe, TX) has both available for training, but doesn't generally rent the R44 solo without extensive experience, if at all.

 

Is it worth it to "downgrade" and learn the "squirly" R22 to get 20+ hours in it or is it too much of a change and it would take me too many hours to get comfortable to make my commercial training worthwhile?

 

All advice is appreciated.

 

Thanks,

 

Tripp

[iChris]

I just got my rotorcraft add on rating and have 65 hours, all in the R44.

 

I'm trying to decide if I should stick with the R44 to get my commercial or if I should do my 25 hours PIC in the R22 so that I'm qualified on both.

 

Also, no one seems to ever rent an R44 solo, but they do the R22, with limitations and the R22 is less expensive.

 

Is it worth it to "downgrade" and learn the "squirly" R22 to get 20+ hours in it or is it too much of a change and it would take me too many hours to get comfortable to make my commercial training worthwhile?

 

You’ve already answered your own question in the most logical fashion:

 

“I should do my required hours in the R22 so that I'm qualified on both.”

 

It’s always worthwhile to be competent in more than one aircraft, if you’ve received 65 hours of “quality training” in the R-44, you should have no problem transitioning to the R-22.

 

Think about it, you say "squirly" and “downgrade,” that shouldn’t be a problem or take that many hours for a person who wants to be a commercial pilot to get comfortable with. That’s all part of the learning process.

 

It’s all that in your mind, downgrade, squirly, and uncomfortable due to your lack of experience (Only 65 hours). Again, it’s part of the process, which takes time.

 

Experience - knowledge or skill acquired by experience over a period of time.

Edited January 5, 2017 by iChris

[r22butters]

You have it backwards my friend. Its 25 hours in the 44 that you need, the other 175 hours should be in the "squirly" 22!

 

If "career pilot" is your goal that is?

[helonorth]

A helicopter is a helicopter. I don't think you will have any trouble going from a 44 to a 22. I would just fly the 44 unless you are looking to start a career. If you are flying for fun and don't mind the extra cost, I would stick with the 44 until it's no longer available. The R-22 will always be there. No sense in getting qualified in an aircraft you may never fly, especially the dreaded R-22.

 

 

edit for spelling

Edited January 5, 2017 by helonorth

[r22butters]

...the dreaded R-22.

 

Man, you guys always have to throw that in!

 

Well for what its worth as a guy who has been renting for the last fourteen years (and has over 100 hrs in the 44), if the 22 and 44 were offered to me for the same price, I'd still pick the 22!

 

I love flying the R22!...and I don't make too many positive remarks on here!

[ARM_Coder]

...the dreaded R-22.

 

I've flown both the 22 and the 44, and although the 44 is more capable, the 22 was more fun IMO. The only "fun factor" where the 44 surely beats the 22 is the cruise speed (100~110KT vs 80~90KT), IMO again.

 

The 44 is comfier with A/C, hydraulics, no trim, no carb icing issues, but OTOH that Lycoming 540 makes a hell of a noise.

 

If I had the money to afford a 44, I'd go 22 instead. If I was to get a second, pricier machine (being a very rich man, of course), maybe I would skip the 44 and go turbine with a 66.

 

To dream costs nothing...

 

Cheers!

[LionHeart]

If you ever plan to instruct, it would be wise to get time in both.

[helonorth]

I'm just bitter because my stout, slow, and beloved 300, due to some unfortunate circumstances, seems to be dying a slow death (insert crying emoji here). I'm not sure if I would have gotten into helicopters if the R-22 was all that was available. It never inspired much confidence in me.

[ARM_Coder]

I'm just bitter because my stout, slow, and beloved 300, due to some unfortunate circumstances, seems to be dying a slow death (insert crying emoji here). I'm not sure if I would have gotten into helicopters if the R-22 was all that was available. It never inspired much confidence in me.

 

The S300 is a fine machine - and I can attest it first hand. The few hours I logged in the 300 weren't enough to make me used to fly without governor, though.

 

I don't think the 22 is especially unreliable. It's unforgiving, of course. You have to take care of the MAP much more carefully than in the 300. You have carb icing issues. You have a low-inertia rotor that can stall in a couple seconds should you lose power and don't enter autorotation fast enough. Low-g conditions can lead to mast bumping (this one applies to virtually every 2-bladed bird).

 

The 22's different design, from the T-bar, the tachs and the seat belts, is also not well received by all pilots.

 

But in the end, it's all in the wrists, not in the machine IMO.

 

Cheers!

[r22butters]

Yes the 300 is a fine machine, just not a fun one to fly! In my handful of hours in them I didn't find the throttle work to be all that challenging. No governor though, did force me to keep one eye on the tach at all times and reaching full throttle at just over 70kts was an unexpected surprise!

 

As for its inertia, it definitely does not feel any higher than the 22, and still autos like a brick, although the 22 seems to glide further. You can stall and die in a 300 just as easily as any low inertia ship! You want high inertia and no governor fly an Enstrom!

 

If its the chopper that got you your wings, I can see why you'd be sentimental (and bitter over is inevitable extintion).

 

If Robinson has their way that frickin' fat guy's R22 (also known as the R44 Cadet) will eventually burry the 22 (if the Cabri doesn't) and if I live long enough to see that happen, I will be just as distrot and bitter myself!

 

R.I.P. Bell 47 by the way.

[ARM_Coder]

If Robinson has their way that frickin' fat guy's R22 (also known as the R44 Cadet) will eventually burry the 22 (if the Cabri doesn't) and if I live long enough to see that happen, I will be just as distrot and bitter myself!

 

R.I.P. Bell 47 by the way.

 

I'm not sure the 44 Cadet will kill the 22 anytime soon because of one factor: fuel consumption. Although it's a stripped down version, the Cadet burns about 60 liters/h, virtually the same as the Raven II. The 22 burns about 35 liters/h, little over half that.

 

The Cabri G2 is another animal, I didn't look at the specs, but seems interesting. It looks like a mini B4, the MR even spins clockwise! Looks perfect for those who want to transition to an Airbus helicopter later.

[TXSoccerRef]

Thanks for all the advice. Everything helps.

 

I just found out the 44 I've been flying goes back Feb.1, so I'm going up in the 22 at the local airport to get a feel for how I like it. I already have a full time airline job, so this is for fun and future without going bankrupt.

[wbrady755]

I just want to double-tap what butters said for emphasis...

 

25 hours can be taken from R22 time to obtain your 50 hours PIC requirement for the R44.

 

BUT!!

 

You need 50 Hours in the R22 to get the R22 endorsement itself. No R44 time can count. It might be a significant cost difference while taking this into consideration. All performance debates aside, the cost alone might prohibit you.

 

--I dont have my FAR right in front of me, feel free to correct--

Edited January 9, 2017 by wbrady755