Rotorway Exec 162F Good?

[DEMO]

I was wondering how this personal aircraft is viewed here. All reviews I could find were one sided, with only praise, or from Rotorway themselves. Does anyone have any personal experience with these? If so, are they worth purchasing for personal use?

 

Thank You

[67november]

it's classified as exparamentel for a reason, primary component fail at the right/wrong time.

Edited February 23, 2006 by 67november

[AndrewT]

it's classified as exparamentel fpr a reason, primary component fail at the right/wrong time.

 

yup, and you'll get the same type of response from most of the people on these boards regarding experimental/homebuild helicopters. There is one kit that I think is pretty decent since its basically a sikorsky design with real helicopter parts that you can build yourself, but the name is escaping me right now. It also seats 4 people, which is nice.

[cptcoma]

...the 4-seat kit helicopter is called "Hummingbird". Kit sells for about 130K.

[DEMO]

Thanks, I really appreciate the info. Tthe manufacture of the Hummingbird is only about 45 minutes from me. I like the design. I’m going to pay them a visit.

 

Thanks again.

[67november]

you can get ahold of a 300c, cb, cbi for the same price and it legle

[DEMO]

I was thinking along those lines also, however, I'm really intrested in the ability to seat 3 additional people.

[Guest pokey]

i am NOT a fan of homebuilt aircraft----especially helicopters ! However, a guy here has a glassair that i have flown with him a few times & he built it about 15 years ago,,,,still flies fine after all that time & prolly close to 2 thousand hours, & it will & does consistantly go over 300 mph (in a dive, not cruise). My point? try that with your cessna ! The EAA & homebuilts Do contribute to the aviation community, weather we like to believe it or not. Rotorway has made its mark on the homebuilt helicopter industry, BJ Schram was a remarkable individual. I will buy my first homebuit helicopter tho, when it has accumulated a safety record equal to the hours flown/accidents/mechanical failures as the 206,,, as many full-on autos as the military has done in the TH-55, and when they quit changing stuff to "new & improved" BTW? i have often wondered why so many homebuilt helicopters are for sale w/ less than 50 hours on them? alot hover time only too.

[AndrewT]

i have often wondered why so many homebuilt helicopters are for sale w/ less than 50 hours on them? alot hover time only too.

 

 

I always wondered that myself. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that many people don't want to have to build them, so a select few purchase the kits, build them, and sell them at a mark up?

 

67November, I haven't seen too many 300s in the 60k range

[67november]

got me there Andrew, 160K then

[Wesp]

Is the Rotorway 162F good? NO

 

The Humminbird is a real helicopter, it's as said before a Sikorsky design, now available in kit form (or prebuilt) This one is very good and basically the only decent kit around.

[67november]

the hummingbird is a replica of a real helicopter, it is classified as amature built (experimental) not usable for commerical use.

for $123+K I'll stick with a used 300 or 22

 

see web site, www.vertical-aviation.com

Edited February 24, 2006 by 67november

[jtravis1]

I have to chime in here. I built a Rotorway with a turbine conversion. I flew it for about 100 hrs and sold it recently. I now have a 22. I have friends that have the standard 162f. Two of them I see often. Both have close to 200 hrs on them.

 

My one buddy is an airline pilot. He actually did his private and commercial helo rating in it.

 

It all depends on what you are looking for.

 

If you like to work on things and you are the kind of guy that gets satisfaction out building, then it might be for you.

 

After it's built you fly it for the cost of fuel. (93 octane 8 gph) You cant get any cheaper then that.

 

It is by all means a "Real Helicopter". BUT when I did fly it, I was much more cautious about the H/V curve then I am in a 22 or 44.

 

They have had some issues but all in all, it is a solid design that has been around for 25+years. There are several aftermarket solutions to some of these issues that make the ship better, but the stock setup does work just fine. It is a little underpowered but , if you fly the ship within it's limits you should be OK.

 

 

 

The reason you see so many for sale with low time I believe is.....

 

Rotorway sells people a dream that they will be able to build and fly their own helicopter. They have pictures in their ads of flying to that hidden fishing hole with a buddy. Most of the people who buy the kits, have no prior aviation experience.

 

THey spend 70k and 500-1000 hrs of their time building their dream.

Then they finish and try to get in and hover with only a hover endorsement from the factory (about 8hrs of dual)

 

 

They get the crap scared out of them and are happy to just get the thing on the ground in one piece and realize that flying helos is alot harder then they thought. They sell it before it is rolled in a ball and worth nothing.

 

If you are really interested in the good bad and the ugly, look at

 

rotorwayownersgroup.com

 

You will find out everything you ever wanted to know. Be warned that people have a tendency to write more about the bad.

 

Also, once a year, a guy named Homer Bell has a fly-in in central Ohio. You will see a minimum of 40 to 50 ships there and will learn countless info.

 

All in all, as a personal ship, when built well and flown with caution it is a solid option for a guy who likes working on things AND flying.

 

Building mine was one of the best experiences that I have ever had. I also now know more about helos then you could ever learn without having built one.

 

 

Here is also an address to pictures of my ship that I recently sold. It is not my website but the guy asked permission to post my pictures and description.

 

http://members.aol.com/airkrft/justin_jetexec.htm

 

http://members.aol.com/airkrft/justin_jetexec.htm

[paul]

Thanks, I really appreciate the info. Tthe manufacture of the Hummingbird is only about 45 minutes from me. I like the design. I’m going to pay them a visit.

 

Thanks again.

 

I would be most interested in your impressions on this machine, especially if you get a chance to get 'hands on'

 

Impressed that this kit has certified Lycoming engine, certified solid Sikorsky drive train, T/R gearbox and M/R head assy and certified Bell 206 nose & windscreen.

 

Seen a video of it - The transmission system is very impressive (don't know how to attach photos I have here, though)

Edited February 26, 2006 by paul

[67november]

It still boils down to the fact that you can only use it for personal use.

After spending 50k+ on flight lessons and then a substantial amount more to build hours why spend that much money on something that you cannot make any money on???

There being able to fly and being able to at least make some money while flying.

[500E]

Just my impresions The Rotoway in standard form appears to have numerous issues!.

The Humingbird at least appears to be constructed from MOSTLY certified parts by people who know the Sikorsky ships well and I have seen no adverse comments in any forums + it is multi seat .

jtravis I am sure you would agree that your ship is quite likley the best Rotaway out there, I heard there a few people still chasing turbine conversions ? is it factory approved or sponsored ? as a project I think your finish and attention to detail is a thing even manifacturers could would be proud of.

[Flybull]

67november....

 

You seem to think that everyone has to make a buck while flying helicopters. That is not true. Some of us just love flying. I fly fixed and rotor wing, and none of it to make a living at. Although I would love to do it professionally, I know several heavy iron captains that make less than I do in a different line of work. Putting down experimentals either fixed or rotor for no other reason than "you can't make any money at it" is ridiculous.

 

Because my dream is to build my own helicopter, I've looked at them all....extensively. The RW 162F was my first choice. I took the factory tour, flew the machine and have spent years reading builder websites and forums. For me, I've decided the RW is not the machine. Now, I was impressed with flying the thing, but there seems to be waaaay too many issues to have to overcome with the "stock" machine to make me happy. The least of which is a liquid cooled motor having to turn 4200 rpm to make 150 horse at std. temps and pressures.

 

Next was the Safari (formerly the Baby Bell). It's got a certificated lycoming power plant (at least until you modify the oil pick-up situation for vertical mounting), and seems to be a well thought out design. The only problem is it's not the most exciting thing to look at. But for me, it replaced the RW on my list.

 

But after reading every build site and forum on the Safari, I've found that it still has its 'issues', and is still limited to 2.

 

Enter the Hummingbird. It's twice the cost of the RW and Safari, but well worth it in my opinion. It really is a certificated design, but in a kit form. It's the former Sikorsky S-52 with basically a Jetranger nose and front glass. That and it'll carry 3 180# pax, and enough fuel for 4 hrs. plus reserves. There's an option for a doghouse to cover up the MR shaft and supports, and with a snazzy paint job (I've been messing around with photoshop), the thing can really look good. Even the wheels instead of skids idea is growing on me.

 

For me, being able to build it and maintain it is the big thing. Buy that R22 and then you have to pay A&P's to maintain it. And for me, the build is 75% of the draw. It's the journey, not the destination! And I guarantee you, that once finished, my Hummingbird will meet or exceed certificated building standards. Although not an A&P, I work on and totally rebuild aircraft one day a week (volunteer for Wings of Hope) under A&P IA supervision. I know a well built machine when I see one, and without having been able to crawl through a H-bird yet, It seems this thing is definitely up to snuff.

 

Now, I'm gonna fly the Hummingbird at Sun'N Fun, and I'll give a PIREP, but from what I've gathered, I won't be disappointed.

 

Bottom line.... all of the experimentals have their niche. You might want to consider that before you make over-generalized statements just because it doesn't happen to fit your pre-conceived notions of what a "real" helocopter is, or what a "real" helicopter pilot should fly.

 

Mike

[paul]

Flybull -- I have to agree with everything you have said, not all of us fly for money alone, some of us do it for the enjoyment factor alone.

I will be most definately interested in seeing your PIREP

 

As for kits, there are kits and there are kits. Some you would not consider at all (mini 500 etc)

Some have problems (drive train, belts etc) and some definately worth investigating further.

 

The Safari seems to be okay and I don't mind the B47 look to it at all.

The Hummingbird, to me is definately worth it, it can haul 4 bums, has decent duration and a significant number of certified components. Even the rotor blades are made by VAT (incidentally an authorized M/R blade repair facility for Sikorsky)

 

I've studied the POH and Assembly Manual + Drawings in great depth and am impressed.

A friend has forwarded to me here (Oz) lots of close up photos off all the major components, and its definately built solid.

 

It's got my mark for 1st on the list.

As for buying a used R22 or R44, well that's another topic .....

 

Regards to all

 

 

some photo's

 

http://au.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/paul_j_20...scd.jpg&.src=ph

Edited February 28, 2006 by paul

[Eric Schober]

Flybull -- I have to agree with everything you have said, not all of us fly for money alone, some of us do it for the enjoyment factor alone.

I will be most definately interested in seeing your PIREP

 

As for kits, there are kits and there are kits. Some you would not consider at all (mini 500 etc)

Some have problems (drive train, belts etc) and some definately worth investigating further.

 

The Safari seems to be okay and I don't mind the B47 look to it at all.

The Hummingbird, to me is definately worth it, it can haul 4 bums, has decent duration and a significant number of certified components. Even the rotor blades are made by VAT (incidentally an authorized M/R blade repair facility for Sikorsky)

 

I've studied the POH and Assembly Manual + Drawings in great depth and am impressed.

A friend has forwarded to me here (Oz) lots of close up photos off all the major components, and its definately built solid.

 

It's got my mark for 1st on the list.

As for buying a used R22 or R44, well that's another topic .....

 

Regards to all

[paul]

Thanks, I really appreciate the info. Tthe manufacture of the Hummingbird is only about 45 minutes from me. I like the design. I’m going to pay them a visit.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

DEMO

Just curious to find out if you got to visit Brad Clarke and the team at VAT yet ?

 

 

.

[Guest pokey]

Another of my thoughts on homebuilt helicopters, triggered by an Exec i saw for sale somewhere. The seller/builder stated that the data plate was not going to be sold with the ship (because he was the manufacterer & didnt want any liability) Reminds me of what Archie Bunker said to Gloria's opinion about gun control when she said "but daddy, guns kill people" Archie's reply: "would ya feel any better little goil if they was pushed out a window?" I think homebuilt/personal helicopters are fine--as long as they stay that way,,, you built it?--YOU own it,,, dont want it anymore?---get out the gasoline, hot dogs & marshmallows.

 

Reminds me of that TH-55 i saw for sale too, no logs & had a mazda engine installed, that one was on ebay. Guy claimed you could buy it (not cheap either) get the FAA to put it in experimental catagory & you'de be all set ! Any one who knows about life limited parts knows that if you have no records?--the part is considered timed out & scrap. AND? even IF you could convince the FAA for an experimental certificate? would you feel safe flying around in a bunch of timed out parts?

[67november]

compare the death ratio between home built and factory built, home builts are definite widow makers.

[DEMO]

Paul,

 

No I have not had a chance to get out there yet. I plan to in the next week or so.

[paul]

Added some more pictures of Hummingbird to photo album -

 

will add some more tonight

 

 

 

 

------------------------------------------

 

http://au.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/paul_j_20...scd.jpg&.src=ph

[Flybull]

Careful, 67, you're showing your ignorance........