Silver State Helicopters

[adam32]

What do you guys think? Now that SSH is closed do you think the r22 market will go down?

 

Of course they were the biggest r22 operator, do you think thats the reason they are so popular. Then all the other schools had to go to the r22 to stay competitive.

[klmmarine]

WTF? over...

 

The R-22 has been the most popular training helicopter since long before Silver State was around... It will continue to be as popular until someone designs and manufactures another aircraft that is as economical to fly.

[rick1128]

WTF? over...

 

The R-22 has been the most popular training helicopter since long before Silver State was around... It will continue to be as popular until someone designs and manufactures another aircraft that is as economical to fly.

 

Actually, it has more to do with the purchase price than the cost of operation. Based on the figures from Robinson and Schweizer, the 300CBi cost less per hour to operate than the R22 when fuel and maintenance cost rates are adjusted to the same amounts. The R22 costs considerably less to purchase. Until Robinson stops producing the R22 or insurance gets way too expensive, flight schools will continue to flock to the R22.

Edited April 11, 2008 by rick1128

[Goldy]

Actually, it has more to do with the purchase price than the cost of operation. Based on the figures from Robinson and Schweizer, the 300CBi cost less per hour to operate than the R22 when fuel and maintenance cost rates are adjusted

 

(sneezes) ( Bull*****)...hmm. OK , I just don't believe the R22 and the 300cbi are even close when you calculate costs over the next 2200 hours. Yes, the R22 is cheaper so interest is less as well...But, that's my opinion.

 

In answer to the original post, if anyone cares, yes, the R22 will hold its own. In fact I would want to own as many as I can over the next two years. Yes, there will be a slight dip in resale prices when you put 125 of them on the market at the same time......

Edited April 12, 2008 by Goldy

[mechanic]

Why wouldn't a R44 Astro be a good deal on a basic trainer? I know many are not fond of them because they don't have hydrualics, but I would think the operating costs would be lower do to that. As I understand it, the collective gets heavy after long flights or doing auto's, is this right? You can find good deals on Astro's sometimes. I have even seen one with a glass IFR panel or a regular 9 hole IFR panel. Seems those setups would work good, looking from the outside......

[rick1128]

(sneezes) ( Bull*****)...hmm. OK , I just don't believe the R22 and the 300cbi are even close when you calculate costs over the next 2200 hours. Yes, the R22 is cheaper so interest is less as well...But, that's my opinion.

 

In answer to the original post, if anyone cares, yes, the R22 will hold its own. In fact I would want to own as many as I can over the next two years. Yes, there will be a slight dip in resale prices when you put 125 of them on the market at the same time......

 

If you breakdown the component times and replacement/overhaul costs, it comes out less expensive. Most of the components on the CBi have equal or better life limits than the 22. Sorry. Plus these figures are based on The manufacturers own figures. What can be more fair?

[Helihead]

I have no Idea, but, I have heard the 300 is cheaper to operate in the long run as well, anyone now the ratio of 300's built to how many are still actually flying..... compared to how many robbies were built and actually flying. are there any other companies that requie a SFAR to fly there machine?

[Galadrium]

The reason the R22 is used as a trainer is that it is cheap to operate... period. It wasn't designed to be a trainer, and doesn't perform that mission as effectively or safely as other trainers.

[rick1128]

I have no Idea, but, I have heard the 300 is cheaper to operate in the long run as well, anyone now the ratio of 300's built to how many are still actually flying..... compared to how many robbies were built and actually flying. are there any other companies that requie a SFAR to fly there machine?

 

NOPE

[Rogue]

SunHelo used to have a page, its not up right now, that outlined the purchase and operating costs of various models of helicopters. Per their figures the 300 was cheaper though the injected model was higher but still lower than a 22. Like has been said the 22 was cheaper only on initial purchase. Again this is based on a chart that SunHelo had on their website.

[Pogue]

SunHelo used to have a page, its not up right now, that outlined the purchase and operating costs of various models of helicopters. Per their figures the 300 was cheaper though the injected model was higher but still lower than a 22. Like has been said the 22 was cheaper only on initial purchase. Again this is based on a chart that SunHelo had on their website.

I'll bet you guys believe the mileage estimates the car manufacturers state as well..

 

While I have heard occasional rumors of 300's being competitive in cost with R22's I've never actually seen one that could be had for the same hourly cost. It seems like they're all $40 to $50 dollars an hour more expensive. As tough as the flight school business is, I don't think the real operating costs are cheaper or it would be reflected in training costs.

 

The 269 series are great birds - If you want to fly them, great. Personally I don't have problems with Robbies.

 

And by the way, the TH-13, TH-23, UH-1 and TH-67 weren't designed as trainers, either.

[Galadrium]

I'll bet you guys believe the mileage estimates the car manufacturers state as well..

 

While I have heard occasional rumors of 300's being competitive in cost with R22's I've never actually seen one that could be had for the same hourly cost. It seems like they're all $40 to $50 dollars an hour more expensive. As tough as the flight school business is, I don't think the real operating costs are cheaper or it would be reflected in training costs.

 

The 269 series are great birds - If you want to fly them, great. Personally I don't have problems with Robbies.

 

And by the way, the TH-13, TH-23, UH-1 and TH-67 weren't designed as trainers, either.

 

The 300s might be close to the R22 in advertised operating costs, but in reality the 300 burns more fuel and has a much higher acquisition cost. I think you're pretty dead on about $40-$50 higher actual operating cost than the R22.

 

Robinsons work for short skinny guys, but if you look at how the aircraft is designed, it sure doesn't say flight trainer. Add also the fact that Frank doesn't even recommend using as a trainer.

 

And who did flight training in a UH-1? Lucky.

[Pogue]

And who did flight training in a UH-1? Lucky.

Those were all primary Army trainers, as was the TH-55 (269)

[Rogue]

I'll bet you guys believe the mileage estimates the car manufacturers state as well..

 

While I have heard occasional rumors of 300's being competitive in cost with R22's I've never actually seen one that could be had for the same hourly cost. It seems like they're all $40 to $50 dollars an hour more expensive. As tough as the flight school business is, I don't think the real operating costs are cheaper or it would be reflected in training costs.

 

The 269 series are great birds - If you want to fly them, great. Personally I don't have problems with Robbies.

 

And by the way, the TH-13, TH-23, UH-1 and TH-67 weren't designed as trainers, either.

 

As an ASE certified Master Auto Repair technician with 16 years of experience not only do I believe it but I can prove it though I'm sure a skeptic like you would find some insignificant flaw with some minute detail about the test data and turn a mountain into a molehill to "trump up the charges". Since SunHelo was a school that used the Brantly they had zero to gain by promoting the 300's cost over the 22's. So you say flight schools prices well then....

 

Bristow a 300 heavy school can get you trained as little as $43,687.50 for their professional pilot program "Option A" or "Option B" $53,512.50 - http://www.heli.com/prospective-student/2-...nd-fees-FAA.php

 

Aquila provides a professional pilot course with a 22 for $61,600 - http://www.866flyrite.com/About.asp?page_id=19&n=3

 

Hillsboro comes close at $49,921.05 or $57,486.05 - http://216.119.84.129/images/uploads/Helic...2015%202008.pdf

 

but... no two flight schools are going to give exactly the same course so its all subjective. Comparing a car maintained to the factories standards it will provide the services as adverstised as I know first hand, so no I do not doubt the Helicopter Corporations claims if maintained and operated to factory specification but alas I did forget to wear my tinfoil hat today.....

Edited April 13, 2008 by Rogue

[Pogue]

As an ASE certified Master Auto Repair technician with 16 years of experience not only do I believe it but I can prove it though I'm sure a skeptic like you would find some insignificant flaw with some minute detail about the test data and turn a mountain into a molehill to "trump up the charges". Since SunHelo was a school that used the Brantly they had zero to gain by promoting the 300's cost over the 22's. So you say flight schools prices well then....

 

Bristow a 300 heavy school can get you trained as little as $43,687.50 for their professional pilot program "Option A" or "Option B" $53,512.50 - http://www.heli.com/prospective-student/2-...nd-fees-FAA.php

 

Aquila provides a professional pilot course with a 22 for $61,600 - http://www.866flyrite.com/About.asp?page_id=19&n=3

 

Hillsboro comes close at $49,921.05 or $57,486.05 - http://216.119.84.129/images/uploads/Helic...2015%202008.pdf

 

but... no two flight schools are going to give exactly the same course so its all subjective. Comparing a car maintained to the factories standards it will provide the services as adverstised as I know first hand, so no I do not doubt the Helicopter Corporations claims if maintained and operated to factory specification but alas I did forget to wear my tinfoil hat today.....

 

And Quantum's Professional Pilot course is quoted at $45,645.00.

 

My, touched a nerve, did I? Sorry, the point was to take a vested interests advertising with a grain of salt, since the whole point of advertising is to convince someone that your product is better. I wasn't looking a flight school costs because you're right, they're all offering different programs so the costs can misleading. I'm just talking about what it costs me to rent a helicopter. I'm in the south west and there are not many 300's in the area, and they do cost more on an hourly basis. When I was researching schools I compared costs on the hourly basis because that's how I paid for them.

[relyon]

... Add also the fact that Frank doesn't even recommend using as a trainer.

I wrote the following in this post and still maintain:

 

"Before anyone takes the time to point out that Frank Robinson himself states that he never intended the R-22 to be used as a trainer, I'll note that any small, low cost helicopter is going to be used as a trainer whether than was it's intended use or not. If he truly didn't want it used that way he could have made purchasers sign a binding use agreement like the R-44 or prohibited it's use in the POH/RFM. I'll guess that would have severely limited it's marketability."

 

Bob

[Galadrium]

Those were all primary Army trainers, as was the TH-55 (269)

 

 

Yeah, all the UH-1 pilots that I ever talked to flew TH-55s for their primary training. Never talked to any one who learned in a Huey... have you?

[Galadrium]

I wrote the following in this post and still maintain:

 

"Before anyone takes the time to point out that Frank Robinson himself states that he never intended the R-22 to be used as a trainer, I'll note that any small, low cost helicopter is going to be used as a trainer whether than was it's intended use or not. If he truly didn't want it used that way he could have made purchasers sign a binding use agreement like the R-44 or prohibited it's use in the POH/RFM. I'll guess that would have severely limited it's marketability."

 

Bob

 

My point isn't that training in an R22 is a deathwish... don't think that. It just isn't an ideal training helicopter, and Frank agrees. Flight training just wasn't the intended mission of this helicopter, thats all.

[Pogue]

Yeah, all the UH-1 pilots that I ever talked to flew TH-55s for their primary training. Never talked to any one who learned in a Huey... have you?

Yeah, when the Army retired the TH-55's (I think that was as much to quit dealing with AVGAS and JP as anything else) the used UH-1's for a few years as primary trainers before the got the TH-67's. This was from around 1988 to 1993 or 4 as I recall.

[Galadrium]

Learning to fly in a Huey would be strange. That would be like learning to drive in a dump truck. lol.

[BOATFIXERGUY]

I just wish SSH would have used the Enstrom 280fx... There would be a couple hundred on the used market instead of 5.

 

We need to start a thread on the greatest piston helicopter...the Enstrom!

[adam32]

I just wish SSH would have used the Enstrom 280fx... There would be a couple hundred on the used market instead of 5.

 

We need to start a thread on the greatest piston helicopter...the Enstrom!

 

 

Find me a good one for under 80k with at least 300hrs left on all components. I'm open to anything that flies good...

[Galadrium]

I just wish SSH would have used the Enstrom 280fx... There would be a couple hundred on the used market instead of 5.

 

We need to start a thread on the greatest piston helicopter...the Enstrom!

 

Yes we do... I love Enstrom, its my favorite piston helicopter. Boatfixerguy, start the thread... I'm ready for an Enstrom love fest.... lol.

[relyon]

My point isn't that training in an R22 is a deathwish... don't think that. It just isn't an ideal training helicopter, and Frank agrees. Flight training just wasn't the intended mission of this helicopter, thats all.

I totally agree and have many hours in the R-22, both receiving and giving instruction. It's a great machine when properly applied; right tool for the job, so to speak. What I have a hard time resolving is how one could design a light, economical, 2-place piston helicopter not intended for training and either not realize it would be used for training or realize it would be used for training and take no steps to prevent that use.

 

Bob

[adam32]

I totally agree and have many hours in the R-22, both receiving and giving instruction. It's a great machine when properly applied; right tool for the job, so to speak. What I have a hard time resolving is how one could design a light, economical, 2-place piston helicopter not intended for training and either not realize it would be used for training or realize it would be used for training and take no steps to prevent that use.

 

Bob

 

 

$$$$ is the only reason.

 

If something smaller/cheaper comes out it will start to take over the training sector.