Experimental Helicopters

[Burner308]

is that helicopter the helicycle with rockets and a 50 cal machine gun?

[Guest]

I never got to meet BJ. Although I have been to there facility in Nampa, ID. The helicycle I flew was for sale in Grand Junction, CO. I believe the guys name was Spinner, his helicycle was for sale on controller.com. I was going to buy it until I learned I would need an A&P to work on it so the deal was off.

 

As far as spending money I have spent over $50,000 so far flying robbies, 300's and R44. Yet I still have less then 200 hours. Try taking that hour number to a prospective employer. I was only looking for a way to get to the magic hour number so I can get a job. The lowest hours I have found are with the offshore insurance company that Robinson recommends (300 hours Min.) If you are flying a cb300 then you need a min of 500 hours. If an employer uses an American insurance company then the min. I have found is 1000 hours.

 

And because falsifying an insurance form, by stating more time then you have is a felony here. I would guess that insurance fraud is bad everywhere.

[Jeffk]

is that helicopter the helicycle with rockets and a 50 cal machine gun?

Yeah... I tried to photoshop a grenade launcher and rockets onto it, there is a 20mm on the nose too but its hard to see. This is the result of boredom and no photoshop training.

[TH55]

Why wouldn't experimental time count? You got the skids off the ground and back down with out getting hurt, why couldn't you count these hours? The weather, radios, nav, airspace are all the same when flying experimentals or certified ships.

I have many hours in experimentals and those hours were looked at the same as any others in my log book by the FAA Examiner during all my check rides, PPL, CPL, CFI RW.

I personally know one pilot that has thousands of hours in experimentals, has his ATP RW, and just took a job as a tour pilot. The only thing of concern when flying an experimental is your personal safety. If you built it and you maintain it, it's not hard to see where ALL of the responsibilities lie. I think there was also a question about who can do the maintenance. If I built the helicopter, I'm the only one that can do the annual besides an IA. You, the buyer can do all the maintenance your comfortable with, you just can't do the annuals. The other option when buying an experimental that has already flown and been registered with the FAA is to disassemble it and rebuild it yourself and recertify it. You are now the builder of record and qualified to do the maintenance and the annuals. If you buy an experimental that has been only partly completed it is much easier to call your own because it has not been inspected by the FAA.

I hope this helps to clear up some of the misconceptions concerning experimentals.

TH55

PS: I still own the experimental helicopter but the best thing I ever did was buy a certified ship. If your a new PP and want to build hours, why give all your money to someone else for helicopter rental. Put that money towards your own machine and fly when you want. Fly Safe

[Guest]

While for many years I had my own 47 to build time in, I also dabbled in experimentals. Built 2 with the help of an ex Army Crew Chief who happend to be the Crew Chief for my Cobra at Ft. Drum. He got his A&P when he got out.

 

He and I built a incomplete Scorpion II and a Exec 90. Both had been stored nicely in a hanger for many years and only 20% complete. I had both certified, but logged all of my experimental time in a separate log book and don't use it on my resume. Suppose I should though.

 

My Air Command gyro and powered parachute were both registered with USUA.

 

I have to agree with TH-55. Don't give the money to someone else if you need to build the hours. Get a certified ship and fly the blades off it. Just my opinion.

 

I do have a question...............Should I include the hours in certified experimentals as time for the purpose of job hunting? I have not, but sure could use the extra 480 + hours.

 

Thoughts?

 

::potty::

[flingwing206]

If your time in experimentals is loggable PIC time in a helicopter, then it can most certainly be logged. It's up to the employer whether they like that time or not, but I can't imagine that a logbook with 200 R22 and 800 Helicycle would look worse than a logbook with just 200 R22.

 

In my limited chats with operators, they seem much more interested in what you were doing than what you were flying. So 800 hours in a Helicycle looks like 800 hours spent "just flying around", wheras 800 R22 plus a resume describing your job as a CFI says that (hopefully) the time has been spent focused on procedures, aerodynamics, regulations, and so on.

 

This doesn't mean that the CFI is a better pilot, but to use a quote from a GOM tour operator, "I like hiring 1,000 CFIs because I know exactly what I'm getting".

 

Bottom line - I can't see any negative results stemming from having experimental time in your logbook.

[Guest]

Bottom line - I can't see any negative results stemming from having experimental time in your logbook.

Thanks for your feedback. I agree that most would look at it as "just flying around", which for the most part is true. Although I view it as additional experience in different type aircraft to maintain proficiency. I think it's best to log what you did and some CC work to small airports would not be a bad idea if you're trying to build time.

 

If it were me and I needed to build more time, and could afford to do it, I'd go with a certified Hiller or 47. **my 2 cents**

 

I guess it depends on the employer, but for now I'll leave it as is and hope it's enough.

 

::thanks::

[waupo]

This is a good subject to touch base on. As a 14 year pilot myself, I've been a slave to renting helicopters to fly. R22s, 300s, 47s, they're all good ships to fly, but the problem with me lies in the owner/operators that own them, they go out of buisness. I already made the decision to stick with my day job, and I am thinking of buying an expirimental ship. I did fly with a CFI that had a Rotoway, and he told me it was a great ship to own. 8 gallons of auto fuel an hour, and low maitainence to boot.

[flingwing206]

How many hours does his Rotorway have?

[nbit]

How many hours does his Rotorway have?

I was thinking of asking the same question.  I never personally seen a Rotorway that had hit the 300 hour mark, which is something worth considering when looking to them for "hour building".  Look through the for sale ads for them and you see a pattern forming.  I'm not trying to cut down Rotorways, but that is what I have noticed.  If someone with experience thinks that is not the norm, please feel free to make a correction in that thinking.  ...I would like to see evidence otherwise, cause they look like neat machines.

It isn't an Exec, but a friend of mine inherited one of their Scorpions.  I never saw it get into fast forward flight or more than 20' up.  I don't think I ever saw it over walking speed.  The tail rotor drive belts, 3 in series, would always start slipping and need manual retensioning, which steered me away from any desire to try it out.

[Guest]

How many hours does his Rotorway have?

I was thinking of asking the same question.  I never personally seen a Rotorway that had hit the 300 hour mark, which is something worth considering when looking to them for "hour building".  Look through the for sale ads for them and you see a pattern forming.  I'm not trying to cut down Rotorways, but that is what I have noticed.  If someone with experience thinks that is not the norm, please feel free to make a correction in that thinking.  ...I would like to see evidence otherwise, cause they look like neat machines.

It isn't an Exec, but a friend of mine inherited one of their Scorpions.  I never saw it get into fast forward flight or more than 20' up.  I don't think I ever saw it over walking speed.  The tail rotor drive belts, 3 in series, would always start slipping and need manual retensioning, which steered me away from any desire to try it out.

This question kind of makes me wonder if a new hobbs meter might not come into play when people are trying to sell the Rotorway's?

 

The one I built years ago is still out there and being flown on occasion. I think the last time I saw it personally it had 700 plus hours on it. The Scorpion was a pain, have to agree with that. We engineered a self tensioning device for the belts that helped a lot, but I don't think I ever flew it much above 50 kts and 300' agl. I guess I was asking for trouble, but my buddy was a great mechanic and I had faith in the added safety designs that we engineered on both ships.

[nbit]

Sandman,

   That is great that that Rotorway hit 700TT, and it would be cool to see them hit 1000's of hours.  It seems like it would be fun to have one just because they look like a blast.  I just did a search on Trade-A-Plane and there are 4 Execs for sale that came up in the search with TT's of 9, 42, 100, and 200.  The average of the sampling of TT of these four is 87.75TT, and the standard deviation is 83.76TT.  Even if we add a bird with 700TT to the mix, the average is 210.2TT, and the standard deviation is 283.25TT, both less than 300TT.  The average time of ownership of the four Execs listed was 1, 9, 6, and 17 years respectively.  Their average per year usage for the four ships is 10.64TT/year.  I can't factor the ship mentioned with 700TT into that, but it probably wouldn't significantly affect the result much.  Even if it got the 700TT in one year, the average per year usage of the five ships would be  30.91TT/year.  Doesn't seem advantageous to own a machine that averages 10-35 hours of usage a year, or even 50.  Some guys who own one might find it high enough on the fun meter for ownership, but just not myself, and that's the line between facts and opinions.  They do look like a blast to fly though.  I'd like to try one that a guy near me has.  It has 210TT, is 7 years old, with many updates including the FADEC, excellent workmanship, and the original Hobbs meter.  It is a beautifully built machine.

[Heliport]

The topic of Homebuilt and Experimental helicopters have been moved and merged into this one thread.  Since there seems to be a great deal of information on this topic, users may want to go back and view this thread from the beginning.  Thank you!

[Guest]

nbit,

 

I bet the averages are pretty close to right on. There may be a few exceptions. This one that I had has now been owned for years by a Comm pilot with an A&P. He's been retired for 10 years so I suppose that helps with the tinkering.

 

I bet a lot of people just run out of time and money, like the one you mentioned with just 9 hours. Probably built it and flew it just enough to get into a financial pinch. Speculation of course, but it takes a lot of time to keep them in the air. Some people may decide after building that they don't want to invest in a rating. There is a guy here close to me building a 162F, no rating, never flown and looking for a school close by for his private, which is not easy to find.

 

my 2 cents

[nbit]

Sandman,

   Yeah, I have to agree with you on all counts.  If you're a meticulous tinkerer with a lot of time on your hands, it would probably be safe and fun.  Seems I had read about some guy in Canada that did have more than 1000TT on one of his, and I think I remember he had 2000+TT in Execs between owning three of them...  ..But I think that is the exception more than the rule.

   I found this link with a former owner's trails, successes, tribulation, and woes.  I'm sure it isn't the same for everyone, but it makes for interesting reading.

 

Regards

[RDRickster]

John Rahn is the new editor of "Rotorheads Newsletter," which is dedicated to the Rotorway series of aircraft.  He also has his own website, which is extremely detailed...

 

http://www.homestead.com/johnrahn/exec162f.html

 

When I retire or have too much time on my hands, I would consider one of the Safari (aka Baby Bell) helicopters as a hobby.  It uses the same engine as the R22 and the same bubble as the B47.  For now, I'm sticking with certificated aircraft, but here is the Safari site...

 

http://www.acehelicopter.com/

[Guest]

Thanks for the link nbit, it is very interesting reading.

 

Rick, Have to go with you on the Safari. Seems like a great ship. Someday maybe  ::pray::

 

::rotorhead::

[TH55]

I understand the Safari is more difficult to build than the RotorWay but you get a great Lycoming engine. I own a RW162F and it is a hanger queen. Pre- flights are a pain in the a$$. The engine requires alot of maintenance, adjust valves every 25 hours, and is anemic. The drive system sucks, but you can buy aftermarket fixes, more thousands of dollars. I could go on for hours but will finish with saying, go buy a good used certified helicopter. It will be cheaper in the long run and you won't have the expermental limitations.

TH55

[Guest]

I understand the Safari is more difficult to build than the RotorWay but you get a great Lycoming engine. I own a RW162F and it is a hanger queen. Pre- flights are a pain in the a$$. The engine requires alot of maintenance, adjust valves every 25 hours, and is anemic. The drive system sucks, but you can buy aftermarket fixes, more thousands of dollars. I could go on for hours but will finish with saying, go buy a good used certified helicopter. It will be cheaper in the long run and you won't have the expermental limitations.

TH55

I agree, a good used certified ship is your best bet. The problems with the RW's can be fixed, but at a high cost like you said. We added upgrades to the tune of several thousand and that's probably why it is still flying.

[pulsar110]

Hi guys,

Just chiming in with a few things.  I dont own one yet but am getting things together.  The end result will be a Jet Exec with the T62 in it.  By doing this conversion you can get away from alot of the maintenance that is required on the stock engine.  There are a nimber of these out there flying now and though not perfect are getting better.  I appreciate the posts about how many hours are getting on Execs although it seems that alot of them are being purchased for recreational flying which tends to be slow at building time.  There are quite a few that I have looked at that were for sale with less than 20 hours on them.  Seems that there is direction to check and adjust the tail belt tension at about 10 hours however some guys are forgetting.  The resulting slippage scares them to death and they sell the machine before they kill themselves.  Now about instructors.  There are 2 that come to my mind that will instruct in the Exec.  The main one is really good.  He comes to your hanger does a very deep and detailed inspection on your machine and helps you fix and then teaches you to fly it.  Its not cheap to hire him but he is the best and a super nice fellow.  When I get mine together I plan to hire him to teach me to fly it.  Anyway just a few thoughts.  Hope they help inform you all a little in some way.