jimbo2181 Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 The purchase price of a comporably equipped (compared to r22) is around 65 grand after everything is finally completed. Figure this and the fact that many rotorways only get 500 maybe hours on them then why dont you just buy a r22 alpha or beta for around 65 grand which would have around 500 hrs on it. Wouldnt be a maintanence hog, would have resell value, wouldnt have to spend 500 hrs building it, would know that it was built properly. From what I understand and from everyone I talked to the people that buy that product by it mainly to build it forever and then fly it a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzchopper Posted March 10, 2004 Report Share Posted March 10, 2004 I went to the Robinson factory for the safety course and on their tour you do get to see the building process of the main blades. They are very cautious about this section of the tour. The guide is the first in to the room, you are not allowed to touch anything and you are not allowed to stray or wander from the group, then after all said and done you leave the room and the guide is the last one out. I have also been to the Rotorway factory and got a tour. It is high tech to some degree but not even close to Robinson. They build a great product (Rotorway) that is proven to be really reliable if the pilot/owner/builder builds the helicopter properly. I would instruct in the Rotorway but only if it was my helicopter and I built the kit. Then the student would only need to take what he learned from me and put it to use in his own kit helicopter. Like being trained in one Robbie and then buying your own to fly. If you have the money for the Rotorway that is a good chunk to put down on a new or possibly to pay in full for a used Robinson. Just my two cents. Steve rotorheadsmiley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderllama Posted July 6, 2004 Report Share Posted July 6, 2004 Anyone have any experience flying a Rotorway or other ultra-light personal helo? I saw the photos of the Hiller Rotorcycle on blave's Vertical Challenge photo album and it got me to thinking about this class of helo... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flingwing206 Posted July 6, 2004 Report Share Posted July 6, 2004 The Rotorway 162 is actually slightly larger and heavier than the R22. Rotorway specifications I don't have any experience with the others you mentioned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzchopper Posted July 7, 2004 Report Share Posted July 7, 2004 I have not flown one but the salesman at the factory told me if you can fly the R22 this helicopter would be a piece of cake for you to fly. The characteristics and performance may be a little bit different but the control and responsiveness is the same as the R22. Steve rotorheadsmiley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderllama Posted July 8, 2004 Report Share Posted July 8, 2004 Wow. I didn't realize the kits were that substantial. The idea of flying around in a home-built helo would take some getting used to, though... Thanks, guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FAQ Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 Hi everyone. Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the Mini 500. I would prefer the R22/R44, 300 etc. But I thought for a good low cost (i'm going to pay for those words i'm sure) helicopter to build hours in, and "play" in that might be an option. I've seen them from $20k - $9k. I know there are a lot of veriable that go into the price, just looking for some guidence. Thanks guys. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gummy Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 The Mini 500 is just an expensive way to commit suicide.Even a cursory glance over the NTSB data base will reveal that. Get onto some of the homebuilt forums, and youll quickly see all of the problems they have. On the plus side if you survive you will be very good at emergency proceedures.Unfortunately the words cheap and helicopter dont go together very often.Personally the only experimental I would consider is the helicycle, or the rotormouse. The former will run about 80k, the latter about 150k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fulldownauto Posted July 10, 2004 Report Share Posted July 10, 2004 From the NTSB "The pilot said this helicopter had a history of mechanical problems" "Failure of the main transmission." "A misalignment of the rotor system drive belt, which resulted in belt chaffing, its subsequent separation" "The loss of engine power for undetermined reasons" "The fracture and separation of a control rod in the cyclic flight control system. " "the improper repair of the engine following a previous engine seizure" "A loss of engine power due to cold seizure of the power-takeoff cylinder." "which resulted in the failure of the main drive belt" "which resulted in main rotor to tailboom contact and main rotor separation. " "The NTSB database revealed 23 Mini-500 accidents in 1997 and 1998. Twelve of those involved a loss of engine power. The Rotax operator's manual stated, '...This engine by design is subject to sudden stoppage...Never fly the aircraft equipped with this engine at locations, airspeeds, altitudes...from which a successful no-power landing cannot be made...'" Nuff' Said. James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmsemel Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 You really don't want to go there. The Mini 500 was a very hiped home built aircraft, that nobody was able to fly with out some sort of Mechanical failure. The ones you see for sale may have never even flown. I would not buy it, helicopters are really to expensive to just own with out some sort of work for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzchopper Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 The Mini 500 is not a toy by any means. It's a flying death sentence. Out of the 500 plus sold, 350 have been built and somewhat flown (10-50 hours). I have heard of at least 200 plus accidents due to engine failure and transmission failure. All of which Dave Fetters ( the owner/designer) said due to pilot error. Several of these accidents had pilots with more than 5000 plus helicopter hours, not low time or no time in helicopters as Dave would like you to beleive. The cause of the engine failures was due to sudden stoppage. The Rotax 582 Two-Stroke engine was not a good choice. I have read the manufacture manual on this engine from the excerpt from the NTSB website. It states in the manual WARNING: NOT RECOMMENDED FOR AIRCRAFT USE DUE TO SUDDEN ENGINE STOPPAGE. Dave had several employees quit due to his choice of this engine, they did not want to be affiliated with a company know for using a product that is not recommended for what is going to be used for (aircraft). If you are to buy any kit helicopter I would go in this order of selection: Rotoway Exec 162F, Safari (formerly the Baby Bell) both of these just mentioned are two seaters, or the CH-7 Angel (one seater). Just thought I would give a little info on what I have researched on the Mini 500. I have also talked to a guy who was building one and he told me he would finish building his but doubts he will actually fly it. He was just putting on the paint when I saw it. Anyway that was 6 years ago, he was and still is flying the EMS EC-135 for Medstar based out of Spokane. WA Anyway just my two cents worth. rotorheadsmiley Steve rotorheadsmiley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FAQ Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 WOW. Thanks for the advise. I've done somemore reacherch in them and I can't belive people get into them. Thanks everyone. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hampson Posted July 11, 2004 Report Share Posted July 11, 2004 Yes I haven't heard any good comments on the mini 500 other than the way it looks! I have been looking at home builds quite a bit and have found that the 'Helicycle' looks quality. Here is a link to see some pics. It is powered by a gas turbine, Tons of power. www.helicycle.com/news/FHF.htm :cheers: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzchopper Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 The Helicycle appears to be a good helicopter. I live in Nampa, Id where the kit is manufactured and have seen it up close. The R22 is a lot bigger helicopter if you want to know the size comparison. It has the T-62 gas turbine, and is a single seater. The sad part about this helicopter is it lost its' owner/designer back in late May. Bj Schram. He was one of the designers and test pilots for the Rotorway kit helicopter company. Lots of power for its size and the power plant used. I would purchase one if I had the money readily available to me. Steve rotorheadsmiley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FAQ Posted July 13, 2004 Report Share Posted July 13, 2004 what about the rotorway aircraft. (exec) I've thought about looking @ them but didn't know if it was any good?Your Thoughts?Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH55 Posted July 18, 2004 Report Share Posted July 18, 2004 I have about 100hrs in the 162F. It flys fine but is maintance intensive. Mine is down right now because of a problem with the secondary driveshaft. Once I get it fxed it may be for sale. I much prefer flying my Hughes, more power, larger cabin, easier to pre & post flight. But don't get me wrong, the RotorWay is fun to fly and a sexy little helicopter. It is also what got me into flying helicopters. I went to the RW flight school for my initial flight training but didn't finish my private with them. Found a school much closer with a 269A and finished my private in the Hughes and fell in love with it. If you want more specifics on flight characteristics of the RotorWay let me know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Posted July 21, 2004 Report Share Posted July 21, 2004 I actually was just out in AZ for a wedding and my father and I stopped by the Rotorway factory in Chandler. After going to the Robbie Factory i was also impressed w/ Rotorway. They seem like an OK helicopter and are supposedly very stable. There are a few photos around of guys flying in a hover with hands off cyclic and collective. Dad really wants to get one and build but the fact that all of the liability is in the builder scares me. I'm sure I'd forget to tighten a few bolts here and there. I would like to fly one and see how it compares to other helos I've flow. For those owners out there, what do you think of the fact that the blades are hollow? ... as in no honeycomb, just a spar and skin covering... just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDRickster Posted July 21, 2004 Report Share Posted July 21, 2004 There were a bunch at Homer Bell's Fly-In last week. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The Rotorway is a great HOBBY, and you should have that mind set. Accidents and problems happen when you have expectations that don't meet reality. There are some REAL safety issues with the Exec 162, mostly relating to the secondary drive train. There have been many fixes (increase from 30 to 35 mm, third-party 35 mm, etc). However, the link below is the BEST fix I've seen for these critters... http://www.epi-eng.com/RW-FailCauseSummry.htm You need plan on 500 - 1000 hours of construction and a budget of about $80,000 if you want to outfit this ship properly with add-ons and safety equipment. This is NOT a time-building aircraft... this is NOT a helicopter you can fly over populated areas... this is NOT a helicopter you can train others in or use for commercial purposes. It lacks power and has less storage than an R22 (no storage or crumple zones beneath the seats). However, if you have time and additional disposable income... this is a great HOBBY for the rotorcraft enthusiast and it should be lots of fun. Keep safe and view this kit helicopter for what it is and you should be happy. There aren't many Rotorways with more than 200 hours on them, so that should tell you something. I don't have that kind of mechanical /engineering background, so my $80K is probably better spent on a used Brantly or R22 that is fully certificated. For ME, that is the best option. Just try to look at the bigger picture and realize what you are getting in to... for many folks, the Exec 162 is the perfect ticket (I'm just not one of them). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoverman1 Posted August 17, 2004 Report Share Posted August 17, 2004 Hey everyone, Rotorway's 162F Exec. seems to be one of the better ones out there (as far as homebuilts are concerned), but they even have their share of problems. As RD pointed out, you'll find an abundance of info on their forum site. There are some pretty talented engineers who purchase and build them for people who devise all kinds of monitoring systems for various parts......for example, the secondary drive system that Rotorway uses is said to require temperature sending units on their bearings. If the bearings heat up too much, they will fail, and you'll lose the main rotor. These engineers also have created a multi-function display for the various parameters....i.e., a low-rotor rpm horn system, an overspeed horn, etc....kinda cool, if I can find the pictures of them, I'll post the link. Another problem with the secondary drive system stemmed from a belt conversion you can purchase. if memory serves, the Pro-Cog belt conversion has a higher failure rate than the stock chain drive system. Something to think about. And yet another issue I had with them is the single V-belt system used to drive the tail rotor.....actually, there are two belts, one that stretches from the secondary drive and goes halfway down the tailboom to a pulley, then another one from that pulley to the tail rotor pulley. Granted the belts are made of some really good material (aramid fiber), but there is no redundancy if one of the two belts fails.........and a failure in either one will cause you to lose tail rotor authority. Anyway, I was looking into them at one point as well, but opted not to get one. There was just too many occurances of mechanical failure to really be comfortable with them. The concenses that I got was that at some point while flying one, you'll definitely use your emergency procedures to save your life....period. Not good enough for my money. I say, go for a production bird. Hope this helps. Take care, Hoverman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heliport Posted October 9, 2004 Report Share Posted October 9, 2004 Multiple "Kit" or "Homebuilt" topics moved and merged into this thread for discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2005 Report Share Posted January 24, 2005 Does anyone know if experimental time is viewed differently then certified aircraft time. Flew a Helicycle w/turbine power, a serious kick in the butt for less than 50g's.Happy Flying! ::rotorhead:: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDRickster Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 I have mixed feelings as to the benefits of time building in an experimental, but I suppose it wouldn't hurt. Out of morbid curiosity, please tell us more about the Helicycle... I've always wondered what that beastie was like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffk Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 This is what happens when I get bored, but if I had a helicycle I would want it to look like this. I think thats a grenade launcher I put on the left side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 I only got to fly it for about 20 minutes, however I think it flies a lot like a r22 with just pilot and light fuel load. It does top out at about 100 knots, but it gets there quickly. Visibility is not as good; all in all I liked it. They are not for the beginner in my mind. The turbine engine operated perfectly and was quite a change from the piston helicopters that I have flown before. The Cool Helicycle picture posted is an excellent idea for them countries that need a cost effective butt kicker. However I see you left the strap on to stop the skids from spreading when you set the thing down. They look flimsy, but seem to function well enough. Does anyone know of an employer saying no to any experimental time? Especially turbine time.ThanksCranman ::rotorhead:: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaVinci Posted January 25, 2005 Report Share Posted January 25, 2005 Cranman, I can't talk for any employers, but I think I would be hesitant to count those hours simply for the fact I think they would laugh at me when I told them about flying an "Experimental" Turbine. I was wondering the same thing a few years ago when I was contemplating on buying one myself... I decided to spend my $$ getting my license first.. BTW, did you fly at Homers or a local ship by you? I met BJ in 02... What a Great Person (and knowledgable) he was!! I believe if you search this site, there have been a few discussions about Turbine experimental Time counting towards hrs... Fly safe! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.