Rotary Flight vs Powered Fixed Wing Flight

[Jonathan Bailey]

Private Aircraft

 

1. turbo-shaft helicopter (such as from Bell and Sikorsky)

advantages

hovers, flies very slow, flies very low, flies vertical, flies sideways, flies in reverse, lands in a tight spot, maneuvers in tight spots, great for sightseeing things over land closely, though smaller models have no lavatories, they can land in many places quickly and handily for that purpose, can land in fairly tight spots in power-out autorotation emergencies, twin engines provide more safety but single-engine turbo-shaft engines rarely fail

 

disadvantages

flies too slow for long distances, except for very expensive, large models, choppers usually don't have on-board lavatories, less forgiving of mechanical faults than airplanes, short fuel range compared with even twin-turboprop planes

 

2. twin-turboprop airplane (ideally, the venerable Beechcraft King Air series)

advantages

generally has a lavatory, can land and take-off on relatively short fields, can fly slower and closer to land than a jet, more maneuverable in tighter spaces than a jet, second-best aircraft to a helicopter for sightseeing things over land, much less expensive than a jet, can fly in places jets are prohibited by local regulations, roomier and more comfortable than most piston-engine light planes, safer than piston-engine planes, has good climbing ability even on one engine

 

disadvantages

much slower for very long travels than jets, does not have the global fuel range of some business jets, will require more fuel stops over North America than business jets, considerably more expensive than piston-engine planes, may not handle extremely short fields well because of its relatively-high stall speed, not quite as smooth and quiet as jets

 

3. twin-engine business jet (such as made by Gulfstream)

advantages

can fly anywhere in the world depending upon model, very quiet and comfortable cabin, fastest private aircraft, best plane to travel long in a hurry

 

disadvantages

very expensive, except for larger panoramic views, not much good for sightseeing over land closely, prohibited in some airports, limited to fields with long runways, not able to fly very slow and low and maneuver in tight places well

[cburg]

My neighbor, a retired Police heli pilot, just got a flying job for a Texas billionaire...who owns at least one of each...must be nice.

[JohnLeePettimore]

Tell me about it. Hell, I'd settle for being able to afford just one.

[palmfish]

My neighbor, a retired Police heli pilot, just got a flying job for a Texas billionaire...who owns at least one of each...must be nice.

Yes, but does it have a lavatory?

[Jonathan Bailey]

Yes, but does it have a lavatory?

 

My neighbor, a retired Police heli pilot, just got a flying job for a Texas billionaire...who owns at least one of each...must be nice.

Yes, it must be nice to be the rich guy who owns all those flying toys and not merely his hired pilot.

 

 

"Never feel sorry for a man who owns a plane." - Anthony Hopkins, The Edge, 1997

[aeroscout]

My neighbor, a retired Police heli pilot, just got a flying job for a Texas billionaire...who owns at least one of each...must be nice.

Can I be your neighbor ?

[cburg]

Can I be your neighbor ?

Statistically not a great idea…tragically, we’ve had seven people in our airpark killed in 4 crashes…all airplanes (one ultralight). Little commonality to the crashes. Two hit wires (off airport), two stalled (one may have lost consciousness). Most were over 60 years old.

[cburg]

Statistically not a great idea…tragically, we’ve had seven people in our airpark killed in 4 crashes…all airplanes (one ultralight). Little commonality to the crashes. Two hit wires (off airport), two stalled (one may have lost consciousness). Most were over 60 years old.

Over my 40 years of flying I’ve often thought and read about the safest number of hours to fly per year (not a good way to measure it really).

 

Clearly zero is the safest, but the next safest is simple a math problem I guess. X hours to attain proficiency (knocking the dust off…more dangerous during this stage), then maintaining proficiency (each hour afterwards just increases the odds). So even though the proficiency curve may be kept flat by X number of hours, it’s cancelled out by exposure and frequency.

 

I try to fly at least a couple times per week and feel a little rusty when I do. If I fly every other day or two I feel sharper…but of course have more exposure.

 

Basically, if I think I’ll have fun I’ll fly and if I don’t…I won’t. I think this is similar for many “flying for fun” pilots. I have seen many guys who got so rusty they lacked the courage to regain proficiency and finally withered away and stopped flying altogether.

 

Cost in terms of money and time (maintenance) assessments change over time (pain tolerance). The risk/reward equation changes as “hassle factor” increases.

 

I often ask myself...should I retire...quit while I'm ahead? And the answer...at least so far is…not yet.

 

There’s a saying “There are one of two bad things will happen to every pilot. Either you will get into the aircraft knowing it will be your last flight, or you will get into the aircraft not knowing it will be your last flight”.

[Pohi]

I'm not sure which one of those bad things is worse. One is certainly more depressing than the other.