cherminator Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 My two choices for flight training are: 1) Training in an R44 (which I intend to eventually own and fly) in another town which would be about a 2.5 hour daily round trip to the facilities.http://www.okhelicopters.com/index.html or 2) Training in a Bell 206 right here in town. The school is quite renowned apparently (especially for mountain flight training) and they have six instructors.http://www.canadianhelicopters.ca/frame/co.../penticton.html I'm, not too concerned about the cost difference, but I guess my question is, would training in a Bell 206 be a good thing or a bad thing if I intend to eventually only fly my own R44 for pleasure use? I look forward to your wise words... Quote
AdamSTL Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 (edited) Note: I am not a professional Pilot. I would think it's fair to say that the in-type experience would be preferable. I would want as much exposure -- in a controlled environment -- to the idiosyncrasies of the aircraft as possible. If you are only shooting for a PPL Maybe consider taking a week or two off (*EDIT: Get a Hotel room in the area.) and get most of the Flight portion done in the R44. You could do lots of the Studying in the interim (http://www.sportys.com/faatest/ makes for an excellent pass-time at work) and get your sign-off to take the Written while you are there. Plus, you could use the money you save to fund my r22 based training! Talk about a Mitzvah! Edited September 4, 2007 by AdamSTL Quote
Copterpilot213 Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 I've heard it's easy to transition from a Robby to a turbine, but I'm not so sure if that works both ways. I'm also not sure if that referred to my situation where I started in an R22, moved up to an R44 and after I get my CFI then I'll do my turbine transition. In short I've never heard of anybody training in a turbine then going back to a Robby. I did talk to a Blackhawk pilot that had only flew turbines and he tried our R22 sim and couldn't fly it at all lol. Quote
nsdqjr Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 My two choices for flight training are: 1) Training in an R44 (which I intend to eventually own and fly) in another town which would be about a 2.5 hour daily round trip to the facilities.http://www.okhelicopters.com/index.html or 2) Training in a Bell 206 right here in town. The school is quite renowned apparently (especially for mountain flight training) and they have six instructors.http://www.canadianhelicopters.ca/frame/co.../penticton.html I'm, not too concerned about the cost difference, but I guess my question is, would training in a Bell 206 be a good thing or a bad thing if I intend to eventually only fly my own R44 for pleasure use? I look forward to your wise words... I think the biggest issue here is the SFAR 73 thing and insurance requirements. You'll need to get 10 hours dual instruction in the R44 before you can PIC even if you already have you Private Pilot License, so just to save yourself the extra 10 hours (at the very least) it would be easier and cheaper to do all of your instruction in the R44. You'll need to speak with the insurance company that you decide to go with beforehand and find out if they have any special requirements for the R44, many of them do. I went from the turbines to Robbies and back a couple times and the transition is easy, I wouldn't consider this a deciding factor. Be safe! Quote
500pilot Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 If cost is not much of a factor fly the 206. Much better helicopter and from the sounds of it you will have an easier time with not much of a commute. You might find it hard to learn if you had to drive 1.5 hours and are now tired when you go up. To the people who say that its tough to go from a turbine to an R22, i say BS. I doubt many of these people have ever flown a turbine or have much experience in them. A guy I work with right now flew in the army with the 206, moved to blackhawks and got out with around 400 hours. He had no problem transitioning into the 22. I have known other pilots that have done the same. Dont go around sipping that coolaid the Frank Robinson says that the R22 is only for a select few pilots. Fact is a helicopter is a helicopter and any pilot with any sense can fly one be it a turbine or a piston. Yeah, you might have a little problem at first but it shouldnt take more than an hour to learn the transition. The same can be said going from the Robbie to a turbine so its pretty much a wash. Besides, from my limited experience in a 44 it flies very similar to the 206. You still will have to meet other requirement according to insurance. However if you can afford to train in either this shouldnt be much of a worry for you. Just go and take a lesson in both. See what you like. I think the 206 feels like an actual helicopter. I dont know much about the 44 but from what I remember about the 22 it was a toy. It sounds like the rep at the place with the 206 is great you might benifit better with that instruction especially since its so close to your home. Good luck. BTW, I did learn in the robbie as well many years ago. I just think the 206 is a better machine. Quote
Paisley Posted September 4, 2007 Posted September 4, 2007 The 206 and R-44 are both good aircraft and as 500pilot said they share a lot similarities. If you want to buy a R-44, train in the R-44. Personally I would take a R-44 II over a Jet Ranger but I would take a Jet Ranger over a Raven or Astro. Quote
Optigirl Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 (edited) The 206 and R-44 are both good aircraft and as 500pilot said they share a lot similarities. If you want to buy a R-44, train in the R-44. Personally I would take a R-44 II over a Jet Ranger but I would take a Jet Ranger over a Raven or Astro. and the R-44 doesnt look as cool armed with a few of these Edited September 5, 2007 by Optigirl Quote
delorean Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 If anyone has any info on the helicopter in the above picture, I'd like to hear it. Never seen an L model converted for military use. I think that's THE first LongRanger. I searched the N-number (N206L) and it came up as s/n 45001 dated Sept. of 74. I think the first straight L-model came out in 1975. The one in the picture has been upgraded to at least and L1 by the looks of the engine & cowlings. And according to the FAA this airframe was destroyed (but doesn't so up on the NTSB.) Just curious. Quote
Optigirl Posted September 5, 2007 Posted September 5, 2007 (edited) If anyone has any info on the helicopter in the above picture, I'd like to hear it. Never seen an L model converted for military use. I think that's THE first LongRanger. I searched the N-number (N206L) and it came up as s/n 45001 dated Sept. of 74. I think the first straight L-model came out in 1975. The one in the picture has been upgraded to at least and L1 by the looks of the engine & cowlings. And according to the FAA this airframe was destroyed (but doesn't so up on the NTSB.) Just curious. TexasRanger-N206L.jpg link proposed export military version, only a demonstrator was built in 1981. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_2063rd heli picture down make that 4th picture down. sorry Edited September 5, 2007 by Optigirl Quote
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.