Father and Son Learning to Fly: EC-120 too much start with?

[DiscoNomad]

Hello everyone,

 

I have enjoyed reading the content on this forum greatly for the last few months but never posted. My father and I have recently enrolled together in a helicopter training program with Golden Gate Helicopters. We are just about to begin our private flight training. As a family we have owned several Lear Jets over the years and have always been interested in aviation ourselves but were never able to dedicate the massive amount of time and attention until now. Our chief pilot was a very accredited helicopter pilot since Vietnam and we fell in love with idea of owning and piloting a helicopter quickly years ago flying with him.

 

Of course as I'm sure all students do, we have a dream helicopter in mind that we hope to one day pilot our selves. Our family supports this new direction as long as what we purchase is safest/best/etc. Expense is not a concern when it comes to this. I know that safetly is completely relative to millions of things and with a pilot of few hours which we will be, that becomes likely the weekst link. However we are prepared to spend the next 2 year training and building flight hours for this before purchasing our first aircraft but we do want to buy something that is going to last and be able to make the missions we desire. My question begins with is it okay, per se, to begin your helicopter flight career in a more advanced turbine helicopter such as an EC-120 or even EC-135? Obviously huge difference in componentry there but what I am trying to understand is can we start off safely and intelligently with a full dual turbine IFR ready aircraft or are we better off thinking that the first rotorcraft we buy is going to be a trainer similar to what we are training in such as a Robinson. My instructors advise us that if we give the time and are properly proficient they can train us to fly anything anything we had in mind.

 

I appreciate your honest opinions.

 

Thanks

[clay]

Helicopter's a Helicopter.. Fly whatever you want. they all have a collective, cyclic, and pedals. If you can afford to fly a EC135, have at it. You may as well get comfortable in what you are going to fly.

[Goldy]

Yepp, no reason to learn in a smaller ship if (a)you can afford something else, and ( you have no intention of teaching others to fly in one at some point.

 

As far as buying your ideal ship, figure out the extremes of where you are going to want to fly it. A 120 is great, (best looking ship out there!)but may not be the best ship if you want to be flying around at 8000 feet. A B3 would probably be a better choice at that altitude.

 

Sounds like you have a very experienced pilot willing to teach you, so have fun and fly safe!

[nosettlingwpower]

I fly the F model Chinook in the the U.S. Army but I started in an R-22 years ago. I can say as far as gadgetry goes the more you can afford the safer you are up there. In the Chinook, if you get disoriented in IFR conditions you can push two buttons and let go of the controls and just watch it and make sure it doesn't flip but 99.9% of the time it will level wings and climb 500 fpm. I am not sure if any civilian aircraft can do that but it is very nice knowing I have that option in the air. As far as the avionics package with moving maps and loadable flight plans just gives you a tremendous amount for situational awareness. Plus with the turbine engines you will have more power (considering your weight of course) to get out of bad situations and if you have two engines you have one left over if one craps out on you. I am no business man and it sounds like you have made plenty of money so you are obviously good with cost/benefit analysis but I'd say go with what you can afford and get all you can in the aircraft to help out with situational awareness, stability and power and you'll be just fine. In the military we go from a Bell 206 Jet Ranger for 100 hours to a Chinook/Apache/Blackhawk/Kiowa (of course not as pilot in command) and do just fine so there is no rule out there that says you need to fly a trainer for 1000 hours to be a good safe pilot. Good luck and be safe!

[nosettlingwpower]

I fly the F model Chinook in the the U.S. Army but I started in an R-22 years ago. I can say as far as gadgetry goes the more you can afford the safer you are up there. In the Chinook, if you get disoriented in IFR conditions you can push two buttons and let go of the controls and just watch it and make sure it doesn't flip but 99.9% of the time it will level wings and climb 500 fpm. I am not sure if any civilian aircraft can do that but it is very nice knowing I have that option in the air. As far as the avionics package with moving maps and loadable flight plans just gives you a tremendous amount for situational awareness. Plus with the turbine engines you will have more power (considering your weight of course) to get out of bad situations and if you have two engines you have one left over if one craps out on you. I am no business man and it sounds like you have made plenty of money so you are obviously good with cost/benefit analysis but I'd say go with what you can afford and get all you can in the aircraft to help out with situational awareness, stability and power and you'll be just fine. In the military we go from a Bell 206 Jet Ranger for 100 hours to a Chinook/Apache/Blackhawk/Kiowa (of course not as pilot in command) and do just fine so there is no rule out there that says you need to fly a trainer for 1000 hours to be a good safe pilot. Good luck and be safe!

[nosettlingwpower]

I fly the F model Chinook in the the U.S. Army but I started in an R-22 years ago. I can say as far as gadgetry goes the more you can afford the safer you are up there. In the Chinook, if you get disoriented in IFR conditions you can push two buttons and let go of the controls and just watch it and make sure it doesn't flip but 99.9% of the time it will level wings and climb 500 fpm. I am not sure if any civilian aircraft can do that but it is very nice knowing I have that option in the air. As far as the avionics package with moving maps and loadable flight plans just gives you a tremendous amount for situational awareness. Plus with the turbine engines you will have more power (considering your weight of course) to get out of bad situations and if you have two engines you have one left over if one craps out on you. I am no business man and it sounds like you have made plenty of money so you are obviously good with cost/benefit analysis but I'd say go with what you can afford and get all you can in the aircraft to help out with situational awareness, stability and power and you'll be just fine. In the military we go from a Bell 206 Jet Ranger for 100 hours to a Chinook/Apache/Blackhawk/Kiowa (of course not as pilot in command) and do just fine so there is no rule out there that says you need to fly a trainer for 1000 hours to be a good safe pilot. Good luck and be safe! I should add that and say you should have an experienced high time pilot flying next to you for a few years before you fly alone if you ever fly alone. It's always better to fly with two pilots rather than one.

[nosettlingwpower]

Sorry everyone, this is only my 3rd post. When I posted this the website told me it couldn't do it and I had to wait and try again so I did and it posted it 3 times. I apologize.

[Tarantula]

I'd definitely keep an eye on the R-66 and watch at how it does while you progress through your flight training. Looks like a great bird that will give you the power of a turbine while keeping the costs rather low.

[Goldy]

I'd definitely keep an eye on the R-66 and watch at how it does while you progress through your flight training. Looks like a great bird that will give you the power of a turbine while keeping the costs rather low.

 

I think so too. I'm one of a privileged few right now that have taken it for a spin. It's fun to fly, easy to fire up and has a ton of payload and power and auto's like a dream. If Robinson was a public company I'd be buying shares right now.

Edited December 27, 2010 by Goldy

[clay]

blah..If your looking at EC135's and the likes of such, your into a totally different market than the R66.

[Eric Hunt]

You can learn on anything, if you can afford it.

I learned on a Huey, you can learn on an EC-120.

 

Probably better to start on a single and then move to the twin, but if you got the cash and a suitable instructor, go for it.

[DieselBoy]

I don't have any experience in those aircraft but I think it mainly depends on what you want the helicopter for. From what I've heard the EC120 is a bit underpowered, so you may want to look at the EC130/AStar instead. Also neither of them would be as comfortable as an EC135 on a cross country flight for vacation with luggage etc. Another option may be the Bell 407. If it was me and money wasn't an issue, I'd go EC135. Whatever you decide, I recommend attending their Factory Training course sometime.

[clay]

I'll go fly w/ you if you get a 135 If you come pick me up

[DiscoNomad]

Excellent information here from all of you! Thank you. I feel better looking at a larger helicopter that will take us on trips we ultimately want to take. Who knows what I will think after completing the private course and maybe some manufacturer training but right now I'm attracted to the EC-120. It seems just capable enough to take my family up to Tahoe from Napa Ca with some luggage. I can see us maybe wanting something bigger but right now it seems that a well equipped new to newish EC-120 fits within our 3-4 million price expectancy. I know it's only single engine but has anyone here know if the EC-120 can be fully IFR ready? Is it a good idea to try and fly it IFR or should I save that for something like an EC-135.

 

Cheers!

[Spike]

Interesting replies…

 

I’d suggest sticking with whatever the school has on the line and learn in their machines. Being you’re a neighbor, I know GG has an R44 so that would be your best bet. Being you you’re familiar with the fixed wing side of things, using a turbine to learn the basics is attune to learning the airplane basics in a Lear. Doesn’t make much scene. Plus the overall liability/risk exposure with a high price turbine machine wouldn’t be worth it either. Get your ratings and gain some experience in the 44 and when you’re ready to purchase a turbine machine, attend a factory transition course and you’ll be good to go. And what I mean by good to go is safest/best/etc as you stated…..

PM me if you want further details and like I said, you’re right across the 28’s………….

[BOATFIXERGUY]

blah..If your looking at EC135's and the likes of such, your into a totally different market than the R66.

 

 

I was thinking the same thing! The insurance on a EC-135 is more than the purchase cost of a R66.

 

And if you never have to sit in a robbie, that's like winning the lottery!

 

On the topic, EVERYONE ON THIS FORUM wished they could start off training in the ship(s) they would fly later in life/career. If you've got the time and money, do it. And as Goldy said, get with someone that knows helicopters before you buy one. Your CFI might think the ___ is the best friggin ship ever, but it would be totally unacceptable for what you need.

 

Enjoy the training!

[Spike]

EVERYONE ON THIS FORUM wished they could start off training in the ship(s) they would fly later in life/career.

 

 

That’s a negative.

 

Approaching the end of my career, I can say without a doubt, initially flying a piston machine has made me a better pilot. Maybe I’m the only one who’ll admit this….

 

From my experience, teaching folks who have money to burn to fly in a turbine machine, RARELY works out.

 

I suggest the OP talk (preferably face to face) with a professional pilot who can give an accurate assessment of what his options are…

[BOATFIXERGUY]

That’s a negative.

 

Approaching the end of my career, I can say without a doubt, initially flying a piston machine has made me a better pilot. Maybe I’m the only one who’ll admit this….

 

From my experience, teaching folks who have money to burn to fly in a turbine machine, RARELY works out.

 

I suggest the OP talk (preferably face to face) with a professional pilot who can give an accurate assessment of what his options are…

 

 

Spike,

 

What made you a better pilot has/had nothing to do with what kind of engine was behind/over you. It is all attitude, ability to learn, experience, and god given skill. The engine just converts fossil fuel to horsepower. Some burn gasoline, some kerosene.

 

Your argument would mean that current military pilots are lacking since they have no piston time?

 

I see all kinds of pilots come through and what they trained in or whether civilian or military trained didn't have anything to do with what kind of pilot they became or are.

 

I enjoyed my hours in enstroms, but will probably never fly a piston again. Not that there is a problem with them, I just enjoy the smell of jet fuel.

 

As far as a person getting their training in a turbine only and not making it as a pilot, you could raise that argument for any privately owned aircraft where the person just doesn't get the experience except for going from airport to airport.

[Spike]

Spike,

 

What made you a better pilot has/had nothing to do with what kind of engine was behind/over you. It is all attitude, ability to learn, experience, and god given skill. The engine just converts fossil fuel to horsepower. Some burn gasoline, some kerosene.

 

Your argument would mean that current military pilots are lacking since they have no piston time?

 

I see all kinds of pilots come through and what they trained in or whether civilian or military trained didn't have anything to do with what kind of pilot they became or are.

 

I enjoyed my hours in enstroms, but will probably never fly a piston again. Not that there is a problem with them, I just enjoy the smell of jet fuel.

 

As far as a person getting their training in a turbine only and not making it as a pilot, you could raise that argument for any privately owned aircraft where the person just doesn't get the experience except for going from airport to airport.

 

 

Thank you for the reply but I believe I would be the only person who would know what made ME a better pilot. As I said, “flying a piston made ME a better pilot” with absolutely no comparison to anyone else, military or civilian.

 

In MY experience, the liability associated with teaching someone to fly in a turbine helicopter far exceeds then that of a piston. I don’t care how much money you have, a minor mistake in a turbine can cost a small fortune compared to that of a piston. Plus, statistically speaking, the odds of actually making a mistake are much higher in the training environment. That’s what training is about, right? So why expose the student to the higher level of financial risk? It just doesn’t make good business sense. Furthermore, the OP needs to understand, most flight instructors will want to teach in a turbine in order to build turbine time and this is not necessarily in the best interest of the owner. Shoot, if he buys a turbine he’ll have CFI’s lining up a mile long offering to teach in it for free. Let’s get real here…..

[gary-mike]

Am I wrong? I read the original post as DiscoNomad and his father planned on training in the schools birds, then buy their own ship. Sounds to me like he just want's to know if it would be too huge of a leap going from a Robbie to a large turbine ship having low rotor time. And maybe get some insight/opinions on what heli would be the best choice.

[IFLY]

"However we are prepared to spend the next 2 year training and building flight hours for this before purchasing our first aircraft"

 

When you have about 50 hours helicopter time you might want to ask the question again so you will have a better frame of reference for the answers.

 

IMHO full IFR is the safest way to go (autopilot) and the fenestron tail is quietest.

 

Jerry

(of course I'll fly anything...fixed-spinning-rag)

Edited December 28, 2010 by IFLY

[Spike]

Am I wrong? I read the original post as DiscoNomad and his father planned on training in the schools birds, then buy their own ship. Sounds to me like he just want's to know if it would be too huge of a leap going from a Robbie to a large turbine ship having low rotor time. And maybe get some insight/opinions on what heli would be the best choice.

 

I'm not 100% sure either. I had to re-read the post a couple of times to formulate the appropriate advice. To me, it read as if he was asking about training in a turbine then purchasing one down the road. I could be wrong.

[DiscoNomad]

Thank you guys. Sorry I was trying to reply earlier but for some reason it got moderated and wasn't posting. Yes we are not going to buy a helicopter to train in. We are going to train first and build hours first in the R22s and R44s they have at Golden Gate Helicopter School. I'm sure once we build even the first 25-50 hours we are going to have a far better idea for what we want. I just wanted to get a feel from you, after we do complete our training would it be too much to jump into a full IFR ready dual turbine helicopter or are we better off with a stepping stone. It seems that most of you all are saying what I anticipated, which is that a helicopter is a helicopter and given the right training and time you can learn to fly anything safely. I also gather that some of you go as far to say that yes if you got the money go for the more redundant helicopter even if it is your first bird.

 

One questions which was brought up which may limit us is insurance. Owning a Lear 55 and a Lear 24 over the years we have an idea as to what it may cost to insure but since we are going to be the pilots with low hours, should we fear not being able to find reasonable insurance for such an expensive helicopter such as the EC-120 or EC-135, period? Also am I dreaming to think that I will be able to find for under $4-5 million a newish, perfect condition, EC-135 in executive/comfortable people transport trim that is well equipped for full IFR? Prices online seem to be all over the place. If the case starts to build against the EC-135 we may have no choice but to start looking at something smaller like a EC-120 as our first. Either way we sure are having fun and can't wait to get started building some serious hours.

 

Cheers everyone,

Christian

[iChris]

I just wanted to get a feel from you, after we do complete our training would it be too much to jump into a full IFR ready dual turbine helicopter or are we better off with a stepping stone.

 

If the case starts to build against the EC-135 we may have no choice but to start looking at something smaller like a EC-120 as our first. Either way we sure are having fun and can't wait to get started building some serious hours.

 

Cheers everyone,

Christian

 

It's a hard road because you have little if any prospective into what is reasonable to meet your mission. I assume your mission is more recreational and/or personal transportation.

 

I would worry more about your training right now and just keep the buying part in the back of your mind as you "look-see-and-feel" your way around helicopters. One year from now you'll look back and say to yourself, what the hell was I thinking about?

 

Expense is always a concern. It may not seem so right now. Don't let the dream cloud reality. Remain financially astute in all business dealings.

 

The EC-135 is something you can step-up into after you've completed training. The EC-135 is a 6-7 passenger light twin, normal category helicopter with a gross weight of 6,415 pounds. It's not a part 29 transport category aircraft like the Bell 212, Bell 412, EC-145, or S-76; therefore, the transition should not be a problem for any new and well-trained commercial pilot.

 

Golden Gate Helicopters has available a Bell 206L. Before you complete training buy some time in that Bell Long Ranger. At that point you've trained from the R22 at 1,370 lbs. gross, the R44 at 2,500 lbs., and the Bell 206L at 4,450 lbs. Follow that up with the Eurocpter factory course and you'll feel right at home in the EC-135.

 

Also, if you decide to step-down to a lighter ship consider the Bell 407 over that EC-120.

Edited December 30, 2010 by iChris

[gary-mike]

Thank you guys. Sorry I was trying to reply earlier but for some reason it got moderated and wasn't posting. Yes we are not going to buy a helicopter to train in. We are going to train first and build hours first in the R22s and R44s they have at Golden Gate Helicopter School. I'm sure once we build even the first 25-50 hours we are going to have a far better idea for what we want. I just wanted to get a feel from you, after we do complete our training would it be too much to jump into a full IFR ready dual turbine helicopter or are we better off with a stepping stone.

 

I got it the first time, I was just trying to politely set your post back on it's original track.

 

You are in a position that many of us can only dream of. Don't forget your friends you make here, there are plenty that would love to help you break in the new bird. Have fun and stay safe.