Fixed Wing then Helicopter Add on?

[Aaron7236]

I never even thought about this till today when a buddy of mine who flys Leer Jet Charters to the Bahamas. He was basically telling me instead of getting all my flight time in a Heli, I should get my fixed wing license and then get the heli add ons. He said it would save me thousands. I am not to worried about the money more of the time in the heli. Helicopters is something I have always wanted to do.

 

If you can post your opinion about this I would appreciate it.

 

Thanks,

 

Aaron

[67november]

Hey Aaron, welcome to the board, there are current discussions going on this very topic.

use the search function to find them there are many pros and cons listed

[fast03cobra]

I never even thought about this till today when a buddy of mine who flys Leer Jet Charters to the Bahamas. He was basically telling me instead of getting all my flight time in a Heli, I should get my fixed wing license and then get the heli add ons. He said it would save me thousands. I am not to worried about the money more of the time in the heli. Helicopters is something I have always wanted to do.

 

If you can post your opinion about this I would appreciate it.

 

Thanks,

 

Aaron

 

IMO, your friend is correct. There are a lot of good reasons to do your fixed wing training first. If you pursue a career in Aviation, the fixed wing and rotorcraft ratings will allow you to be more marketable. The down side to it is the time that it will take you to get your rotorcraft rating, that is of course if you're on a time constraint. There are certain careers in the aviation industry that can utilize both.

[Gerhardt]

That's the way I did it, so I'm biased. The biggest advantage that I can think of isn't with cost, but with learning to fly by pilotage and dead reckoning. It's tough enough to learn this in a plane, where the controls are stable. I found it much more difficult trying to fly a helicopter as a student pilot while looking down at the sectional for even a few seconds at a time.

 

My hat is off to student helicopter pilots who do it this way. But if you have a choice...make it easier and safer on yourself and do fixed-wing first.

[Kelly N.]

My hat is off to student helicopter pilots who do it this way. But if you have a choice...make it easier and safer on yourself and do fixed-wing first.

 

How much of a concern is the idea of f/w pilots learned reflexes in some emg scenarios being opposite of the correct response in helo (I'm specifically thinking of the stall condition in helo vs. f/w). I was scanning the POH for the R22 and there was a safety notice specifically cautioning about this sort of thing where the concern is that a f/w pilot's first reaction would be fore cyclic and pull coll. instead of the opposite.

 

Have any of you f/w rated guys/gals who transitioned to helicopter had any firsthand experience or opinions on the subject? Was is something that seemed foreign to you when first learning the helicopter procedures or was it really not that big of an adjustment?

 

Just curious and it seems we've got some pilots on the forum who would have some first-hand experience in the area.

 

Thanks,

Kelly

[Helo-Pilot]

I was a fixed wing pilot first.

 

So far my biggest problem is that the insurance requirements ask about total HELICOPTER time, not total time.

[relyon]

I was a F/W pilot first and also instructed several F/W pilots as well. Like most, I was cautioned about the possible negative transfer but never observed or had it myself. The biggest misconception I found while instructing was an implicit assumption that because they could controls other things well (airplanes, cranes, backhoes, frontloaders, etc) that a helicopter was likely to be relatively easy. By far the most frequent comment following a low timer's early hover sessions was "That's waaaaay harder than I ever imagined." I'd point out that standing upright seems relatively simple until one watches an 18 month old toddler doing it for the first time.

 

Bob

[FlyNHighNFast]

I'd point out that standing upright seems relatively simple until one watches an 18 month old toddler doing it for the first time.

 

Bob

 

Bob, was that 18 months a typo?

[Goldy]

Lets see, to get on most insurance policies you need 300 hours helo time, by getting your fixed wing first, you will have 300 hours helo time exactly 300 hours after you start flying helo's. While I dont dismiss FW time, its FW time. I have some glider hours, how much does that help me get helo insurance?

 

See my point. If you want to fly both, great. fly both. If however you want to fly helicopters then go fly helo's and forget about everything else. Besides, hovering is more fun than a 25 knot x-wind landing in a Cessna 152.

 

Goldy

[Helihead]

This is my opinion..... I always wanted to fly helicopters and nothing else. I started fixed wing and transitioned to helicopter.( I just recently started training in helicopters.) The reason I did fixed wing first was because I was "told" I could save thousands like your friend told you. but like some one said most insurance companies want anywhere between 150 and more like 300 in a helicopter.

 

I wish I would have put the money I paid fixed wing right into learning how to fly a helicopter. Hovering is a challenge, fixed wing does nothing for you there. even though some negative transfers from fixed wing to helicopter can be corrected after doing it only one time. like wanting to put in forward cyclic along with down collective to lose altitude, I guess that might be just me, use to seeing the nose dip to lose altitude from my fixed wing, but then you realize that increses your airspeed as well its an easy fix. but anyway.

 

If I had to do it again I would go straight to helicopter, and if your not worried about money. and you always wanted to fly helis, go to helicopters.

Getting a fixed wing and then helicopter would never hurt, but if you want to fly helicopters, fly helicopters no sense in getting 50-100 fixed wing first if you have no desire to fly f/w. and if you were planning on getting more than 50-100 f/w then it probly cost just as much as a helicopter..... if you think about it. You need more hours for your commercial in a fixed wing than helicopter, you need additional ratings, complex, high performance, maybe you want multi in there. it adds up.

 

I also think hovering was way harder than I ever really imagined.

 

I do not see any advantage to going fixed wing first.

 

That is my opinion, and helicopters are much more fun.

[Goldy]

I also think hovering was way harder than I ever really imagined.

 

Heli- just wait until you hit about 100 hours helo time, you'll hover for ten minutes without effort and never move 1 foot...the power of the brain, it starts thinking faster than you can ( if that makes any sense !)...and you just sit there. I did it the other day in the 44, a car was parked on my pad, and I just sat there on the taxiway at 4 feet and waited for the guy to come over and move it. After I landed, I thought..geez, I remember when that was a bitch to do !!

 

 

Not to hijack the thread, but bottom line...dont learn to drive a big rig if your goal is to be an Indy car driver. Enough said. Goldy

[Aaron7236]

Not to hijack the thread, but bottom line...dont learn to drive a big rig if your goal is to be an Indy car driver. Enough said. Goldy

 

 

Lol thats for the info It really is a big help reading all the information on these forums.

[RockyMountainPilot]

The cheapest way to obtain your certificates is to do glider, airplane, then helicopter. You can get all these rating and more total hours than you would if you just went straight helicopters. The more experience you have in different aircraft, the better pilot you will be. If you have a career in mind and meeting insurance requirements are important, then you might want to focus on just one category.

 

Some companies are forcing insurance companies to change their requirements to include time in other categories. The reason for this is that a 5,000 hour pilot with 1,000 hours in helicopters still has more flying experience than a 2,000 helicopter only pilot.

[Helihead]

I do not see any advantage to going fixed wing first.

 

I do not see an advantage of doing f/w first if all you want is to fly helicopters, I think that would be a better statement. than the one above.

 

That is just my opinion, I do think there are benifits to it if you want to fly both. so i am not saying anyway is right or wrong.

Edited February 13, 2008 by Helihead

[RockyMountainPilot]

Being an airplane pilot will make you a better helicopter pilot. The more you know and understand about flying, the better pilot you will be.

[Helihead]

Being an airplane pilot will make you a better helicopter pilot. The more you know and understand about flying, the better pilot you will be.

 

I do not disagree, but

 

i should have said why couldnt one be just as good of a helicopter pilot, as another helicopter pilot who has fixed wing time? It would make you a better pilot yes maybe, a better helicopter pilot? maybe, maybe not. Better fixed wing pilot maybe maybe not.

 

I think a good pilot is a good pilot, not Necessary to fly both to be a good pilot/better than the other person.

 

Does that mean I am a better pilot than some one with no fixed wing time starting out in helicopters like myself, no not at all.

yes i would already know about x-country, radio calls, emergency procedures....

 

if we look at it like this.

a helicopter pilot who has the same amount of time in helicopter as I do in fixed wing (total time) should be just as good of pilot as I am reagurdless of what we have flown....

 

back to what i said before,(my opinion) IF all you want to fly is helicopters, then fly helicopters. You can be just as good of a pilot and never touch a fixed wing. ... about saving you money... I am not this far along, but how can it save you money if you need the hours in a helicopter anyway to meet the insurance requirements to get a job.