mountain flying

[DS_HMMR]

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/AGUSTA-A109K-II/1996-AGUSTA-A109K-II/1281227.htm

 

Or get this for a few hundred more and then sell off all the unneeded equipment to recoup some costs while lightening it up...then you'd have a real nice machine that's also real real fast...

 

Yeah that 109 looks nice. I wonder what the rest of its sheet looks like. Might actually be a good deal, who knows?

 

Since the OP has not come back to the thread to add any further details, I'd still seek out a turbine that cost half, or as close to half of the $600k figure as possible, leaving 150-300k for fuel, insurance, and repairs. (lets assume that the helo's lowest timed part is 1000 or greater).

From there, narrow down your selection to the birds that will meet your passenger, cargo, and mission parameters.

 

If this is a bird that is for personal use, then keep in mind your going to spend anywhere from 5-10k a year on a 1 mil smooth liability policy, and consider rounding up your fuel costs to $5 a gallon if you plan on traveling anywhere outside your AO and into areas where you might not be able to predict the fuel pricing (advertised rates are often erroneous). then use that to calculate your burn rate x 1000 hours. Set THAT amount aside for your first year with the new bird (unless you anticipate flying less.....but DO give yourself a healthy cushion because new helicopters will call you out of your sleep to come fly them).

 

There are lots of other considerations, but It's 8am and I've got preflight. so...... "out".

[Rupert]

Anyone who considers a 105 a mountain machine does so only because they have a 105.

 

Helicopters correspond to tools that perform specific tasks.

 

What job do you want to do at high DA's?

 

If you just want to take yourself and two average people to 13,000 feet and land, nothing compares to a Bell 47 G3B1. Nothing. King of the mountains.

 

Unhappily, it burns gasoline, requires a highly-skilled pilot, has no parts availability (Scott notwithstanding), and won't do much of anything else.

 

An Aerospatiale Lama? Hot stuff. No parts. Forget it.

 

For $600,000, consider a high-time 206 B3 or a 500 D or E, stripped down to the zinc chromate. I've operated these helicopters at altitudes that require (or should require) supplemental oxygen, and they'll do it with very small one-trip fuel loads and hot-refueling.

 

The Soloy 47 and 12E will operate at high DA's, but have parts problems.

 

Let's see what Scott's proposed turbine 47 will do. It only has two passenger seats, but it WILL have parts support and will run on safe and available jet fuel.

[DS_HMMR]

Anyone who considers a 105 a mountain machine does so only because they have a 105.

 

Helicopters correspond to tools that perform specific tasks.

 

What job do you want to do at high DA's?

 

If you just want to take yourself and two average people to 13,000 feet and land, nothing compares to a Bell 47 G3B1. Nothing. King of the mountains.

 

Unhappily, it burns gasoline, requires a highly-skilled pilot, has no parts availability (Scott notwithstanding), and won't do much of anything else.

 

An Aerospatiale Lama? Hot stuff. No parts. Forget it.

 

For $600,000, consider a high-time 206 B3 or a 500 D or E, stripped down to the zinc chromate. I've operated these helicopters at altitudes that require (or should require) supplemental oxygen, and they'll do it with very small one-trip fuel loads and hot-refueling.

 

The Soloy 47 and 12E will operate at high DA's, but have parts problems.

 

Let's see what Scott's proposed turbine 47 will do. It only has two passenger seats, but it WILL have parts support and will run on safe and available jet fuel.

 

 

Rupert, What Helicopters have you owned? I'm just curious.

[helipilotm]

 

 

Rupert, What Helicopters have you owned? I'm just curious.

I will ask you... What do you do with your 105? I've heard the exact opposite of what you say. 105's are pigs. In fact I can't think of a twin that does good in the mountains besides the Agusta 109K2's which are nonexistent. I do not agree with the above poster about a 47 being a mountain machine but a 105 really?!? Last I checked most places were dumping them fast!

[DS_HMMR]

I've heard the exact opposite of what you say. 105's are pigs. In fact I can't think of a twin that does good in the mountains besides the Agusta 109K2's which are nonexistent.

Please tell me what else you've heard.........I'm riveted. I love reading about stuff people have written about on the internet.....always fun.

 

As it relates to the $600k price tag.....not sure how a 109 relates, but also...........still riveted!.

 

And, all I"ve ever done with a 105 is taken pictures beside one and tried to look like a badass for match.com........... but.....what has a 105 done?

 

gee......i dunno...... check youtube or redbull or try searching for other helicopters operating in antarctica, or being prepared for circulating the globe. So far as I know...... you can only tick the boxes on 1 helo: the BO105.

 

 

but still, I think some are not reading the OP's question, are skipping to the end, and then telling us about the Helicopter they hope to fly someday......

 

and thanks for that.

Edited July 1, 2013 by DS_HMMR

[helipilotm]

Please tell me what else you've heard.........I'm riveted. I love reading about stuff people have written about on the internet.....always fun.

 

As it relates to the $600k price tag.....not sure how a 109 relates, but also...........still riveted!.

 

And, all I"ve ever done with a 105 is taken pictures beside one and tried to look like a badass for match.com........... but.....what has a 105 done?

 

gee......i dunno...... check youtube or redbull or try searching for other helicopters operating in antarctica, or being prepared for circulating the globe. So far as I know...... you can only tick the boxes on 1 helo: the BO105.

 

 

but still, I think some are not reading the OP's question, are skipping to the end, and then telling us about the Helicopter they hope to fly someday......

 

and thanks for that.

 

A little defensive are we? First off again what have "you" done?!? Becuase if you havent done it then you read about it on the net I haven't read anything on the Internet! I'm not one too spew rumors. This is coming from my 500 hours in one. And one of my old instructors 1500 hours in one. its a big love/hate relationship the hate part came from no power aka PIG!

 

Your right the K2 has nothing to do with this post...neither does a 105! And about your comment of "what has a 105 done" yeah there are some great videos of 105's doing badass flying... Haven't seen one in the mountains actually "working" though? I'm not knocking you and what you do or have done with yours I'm actually happy for you and a little jealous!

 

And I'm not skipping ahead and putting down what I want to fly. No desire to fly a 109 I'm actually very happy where I'm at flying utility in 407's and Astars. Thanks though...,

Edited July 1, 2013 by helipilotm

[Cineron]

Well, we did a jeep commercial in a B3 at 10k feet and with all the camera gear and people we felt like we were on the edge of it's capability. Now we have a 105 and can out perform any camera ship at any altitude with the added benefit of two engines. I'm sure it's true that some 105's are pigs, they were made for 4 decades with lots of versions, but some 105's are the highest performing helicopters in the world. Even fully loaded at a 12k foot OGE hover we are only pulling 45% in our 105LS.

 

Next time a B3 does a rescue at 25k we want to film it from above in a hover

[DS_HMMR]

its a big love/hate relationship the hate part came from no power aka PIG!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Helicopters are just like musical instruments. Blaming the instrument for the failings of pilot only prove one thing. IMHO.

[helipilotm]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Helicopters are just like musical instruments. Blaming the instrument for the failings of pilot only prove one thing. IMHO.

Hahaha your pretty funny!

 

Nice picture but how does that relate to the topic?

I'm not sure how the aerobatic capabilities of the 105 help it in the mountains?!? Your obviously overly defensive because you have one. Which is understandable, but since you really haven't worked one in the mountains you don't really have much to add.

 

From your post it seems as if you fly for fun unlike me,I fly for my paycheck. When you actually work a helicopter it's a lot different then just joy riding around in one and opinions can change in a heart beat. Perfect example my all time favorite helicopter is the 407, super stable, fast, great visibility when slinging and nimble. When i sling out of the 407 i feel like i could thread a needle if i needed to. When I get in a 407 I strap it on and wear it. The downside is it falls on it's face fast above 6,000 and 25 degrees. I still love to fly it but when I'm up above 6000 give me a B3 anyday. As much as I hate to say it it's true. A B3 is unstable as hell has allot of quirks, is a bitch to sling out of and feels big and clunky compared to the 407! So again when you work a machine you learn its downfalls which obviously you havent. Sorry to the op for derailing I won't comment anymore

[DS_HMMR]

Man, the chip on

 

Hahaha your pretty funny!

Nice picture but how does that relate to the topic?
I'm not sure how the aerobatic capabilities of the 105 help it in the mountains?!? Your obviously overly defensive because you have one. Which is understandable, but since you really haven't worked one in the mountains you don't really have much to add.

From your post it seems as if you fly for fun unlike me,I fly for my paycheck. When you actually work a helicopter it's a lot different then just joy riding around in one and opinions can change in a heart beat. Perfect example my all time favorite helicopter is the 407, super stable, fast, great visibility when slinging and nimble. When i sling out of the 407 i feel like i could thread a needle if i needed to. When I get in a 407 I strap it on and wear it. The downside is it falls on it's face fast above 6,000 and 25 degrees. I still love to fly it but when I'm up above 6000 give me a B3 anyday. As much as I hate to say it it's true. A B3 is unstable as hell has allot of quirks, is a bitch to sling out of and feels big and clunky compared to the 407! So again when you work a machine you learn its downfalls which obviously you havent. Sorry to the op for derailing I won't comment anymore

 

 

 

No defensiveness here. Clearly I like what I own, hence choosing a 105.

 

I'm happy for you, and every pilot who flies for a paycheck, but you're going to try and shame me because I've been successful enough in my life to not need to fly for a paycheck any more?

 

Wow.......

[helipilotm]

Man, the chip on

 

 

 

 

No defensiveness here. Clearly I like what I own, hence choosing a 105.

 

I'm happy for you, and every pilot who flies for a paycheck, but you're going to try and shame me because I've been successful enough in my life to not need to fly for a paycheck any more?

 

Wow.......

Wow right back at you!

 

I'm not shaming you for anything. All I'm saying is there is a difference in owning/flying a machine compared to flying for money. If you go back and look at one of my previous posts I actually said I'm jealous of you.

[DS_HMMR]

actually said I'm jealous of you.

 

 

Laughing at this now:

 

Dont be jealous. Black Helo + 40 celsius + black HGH56P & Nomex flight suit = URRRFFFFFFFFF

 

 

 

Standing-by between flights. on a piece of Tarmac near one of the dip sites. laying on the ground under the Helo.

[Black Bear]

Can anyone provide info about a 206B3 with a C20R upgrade? Opinions, performance, reliability, costs associated with operation and reputation would be appreciated.

[adam32]

 

 

Laughing at this now:

 

Dont be jealous. Black Helo + 40 celsius + black HGH56P & Nomex flight suit = URRRFFFFFFFFF

 

 

 

Standing-by between flights. on a piece of Tarmac near one of the dip sites. laying on the ground under the Helo.

 

 

Why you selling it?

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/EUROCOPTER-BO-105CBS-5/1986-EUROCOPTER-BO-105CBS-5/1288607.htm

[DS_HMMR]

upgrading.

[adam32]

upgrading.

 

To a Lama?

[DS_HMMR]

 

To a Lama?

 

nope: UH-1H.

[helipilotm]

upgrading.

 

Hahahaha you don't say! I thought your 105 was the be all end all nothing better. I hope you know I'm just giving you a hard time because you were so adamant.

 

But in all seriousness make sure you do your homework and have a mechanic that knows what there doing. Too many Huey's have been ruined by mech's that thought they were experts. Also if it was me I would make sure it has or you get the bigger engine, composite blades, fast fin and strakes. Just my 2 cents good luck

[Hobie]

Can't wait to hear the signature thump, thump thump over CBAD! Take off fast and low!!

[Rupert]

105. Heavy, underpowered. It has no commendable qualities. Sorry.

 

Bell 47G3B-1. Turbocharged engine normalized for 13,500'; meaning, the engine develops full sea level horsepower at 13,500'. Challenging for a low time or untalented pilot to manage the engine. Gasoline (bad). No parts.

 

You have to go to a Lama or B3 to beat that kind of altitude capability. No parts for Lamas. None. Nada. No got. No one making them.

 

B3? Very cost effective but way over the $600,000 figure posted by the OP.

 

Best bet, very high time 206B3 or 500D. Most of these high time machines do not have good engines, meaning, they don't give good power checks, but you might find one. Expect a stripped utility airframe with no avionics.

 

I flew a 206B3 for Rocky Mountain in the late 70's, when Rocky Mountain ruled the mountains.

 

My RMH 206B3 had one radio and a wet compass and nothing else.

 

In that machine, I put a radio tech on a radio repeater at 13,200'. I had to move my fuel truck close, and I made one trip from truck to 13,200' and back down to my truck. Twelve gallons of fuel and my full attention.

 

I remember the ship. N4704R. Serial number 50. The last 206 built by Agusta for Bell. It started out as a straight 206 (no with boosted pedals. It still had the boosted pedals, which surprisingly made it harder to fly (no feedback through the pedals).

 

Beautiful helicopter. Very light, despite the boosted pedals. I mean, VERY light. Unupholstered seats and no plastic fascia in the cockpit or cabin; all zinc chromate. I flew it later, in the Gulf, when an offshore operator bought it. It belonged in a museum. Anyway, very light, very high time, good engine when I flew it.

 

Some outfits down in the Gulf rebuild extraordinarily high time 206's. Whew. Very high time airframes. By the time you put an engine in them and other components, they go way over $600,000.

 

IMHO, pound for pound, a 206B will out lift a 500D, or, I should say, out altitude a 500D. That said, 500's sometimes weigh significantly less than even the lightest 206's. Also, 500's have a reputation for making a pilot look good. Easy to fly well. I've seen some very beat up 500's with reasonable engines go cheap. Hard to maintain if you haven't done it before. Easy if you have experience with them.

 

I'd look for a 206B selling at the right time from someone who wants a fast sale. I wouldn't look at this horse's mouth too closely. It will look ratty and have bad component times. If it has a good engine, it'll take you up in the mountains.

 

You gotta do your part, though.

 

Find Larry Doll and beg him to instruct you.

[Black Bear]

Talking about high times, what is the magic number that makes a high time machine? Is it generally the same for most/all A/c ie. 15000 hours, or is it dependent on the type of A/c such as a 206 vs a 350? As a potential buyer, at what number should you back away and start looking at something else?