Finally got to fly the 333

RkyMtnHI · May 18, 2008

Hi Folks,

Well, I finally got to fly the 333 this week. There were three firsts for me on this flight; first turbine flight where I was on the controls the whole flight (I’ve flown right seat in 500D and a 500E, but that was before I had any real RW training), first flight into light rain (really cool and a non issue), first cart landing (no problem what so ever).

I flew 1.3 hours in the left seat and then 1.5 as a passenger in the middle seat.. it was a blast. My first impression of the ship is very good. I was surprised at how easy the transition was for me, and how quick the turbine was up and running (also how simple and straight forward the start-up was). I pretty much had flying it down with-in the first 30 minutes… it does seem to pendulum slightly more than the 300 (or the 44), but only slightly. Except for the turbine there are just minor differences in the two ships (300 vs 333). It is rather slippery, and takes more of an effort to slow it down, but I had this down pat on my second approach… not an issue as far as I’m concerned. The cyclic seemed a bit heavier, especially compared to the 44, but that may have been my lack of trimming right away. Something else that I noticed, the 333 has a throttle governor, as does the R44, but the 333 twist grip does not turn in flight automatically when the gov kicks in.. an issue on the 44 that took me a while to get used to.

I missed the LSI that the 120 has, although I have yet to fly the 120, I’ve watched it run up a few times and now see the value of having only one gauge to watch instead of three, and having alarms on the delta limits as well.

The views from the cockpit are really great and I tried to show that in some of the photos; forward is awesome even tho the panel is larger than the 300. Down is better than the 300 due to the windows on the bottom of the front; side-to-side is about the same, maybe a little better. It’s true that you can’t see directly out the back, but there are windows on the upper left and right that set back a bit and you can actually see better out of those than in the 300… I like that for clearing turns as I’ve been in a 300 that was overtaken by a Cessna (the pilot had a map in front of his face and never saw us, I’d say he missed us by about 100 yards or less).

The cabin is really wide and comfortable; in the middle seat I was stretched out completely and couldn’t reach the windscreen with my feet. The wide part may be somewhat of an issue for the instructor in the right seat, the panel is off center to the left of the ship so the person in the right seat has to lean a little to get a clearer view of the instruments. But flying from the left would be super in a tour situation as it would give the three other occupants a great view from the middle and right seat, and they all would be sitting together (you can put two people in the middle seat, four total in the helo).

While flying is always the best, I loved the middle seat flight, as you can see by the photos, the view is amazing from that perch, you look right over the panel. It was very nice to sit and watch two experienced pilots do confined and pinnacle work and just relax (I have a tendency to try and rip the collective out of the helicopter at times of stress still, so it’s nice to just watch and relax sometimes). ☺ We did one auto with me on the controls, and four or five with Ed flying on the second flight… The flying part is almost identical to the 300, but the engine and throttle is more complicated and I’ve asked him to give a more detailed explanation of the event.

Speaking of the middle seat; notice on the panel shot, the trim switch has three positions; left, center & right (bottom row, between the fuel shut-off and the GPS). The 333 can have three flight control set ups, allowing the ship to be used to train two students at the same time. I believe the instructor would sit mid seat with a great perspective on the two students and the instruments. This one is not completely set up for that, but it may be in the future for instrument flights. The tubes above the panel are the window demisters.

There are two low rotor alarms, one in the head set and one on the panel.. the one in the headset screams at you on run-up until it’s past the limit.. a little annoying. But I like the redundancy.

Weight/Balance and conditions:

TOW: 2480 (empty weight 1377, surprisingly almost the same as the 300). ~600 lbs of passengers, 503 lbs of fuel (75 gals).

Winds; 15 kts gusting to 20+, a little windy, but the 333 didn’t seem to even notice. Temp 11C, 30.30, altitude at Metro is 5670.

Performance:

Compared to the 300, much better, maybe 30% more power but that’s just a guess IMHLTO (in my humble low time opinion), keep in mind that we had ~600 lbs of people, and much more fuel than the 300 and the 44 and still had tons of power. Our climb-outs averaged from 1200fpm to 1400fpm and we were just under the yellow the whole time (no stress at all).

I think our Vne was 105 kts but I’m not sure on that.. I do know that, like the 44, it’s a lot faster than the 300. I flew the 44 last week to DIA and back, on the return flight we had three guys (about the same weight) and the 44 had almost the same performance… there were temp differences and less fuel weight in the 44, but it was still pretty darn close. (more on that subject as i get more time in both ships).

I understand that the engine in the 333 is the same as the one in the 206.. to get some detailed information on that I went to our resident “Mr. Google” Kris… here’s what he had to say on the subject:

“That would be true to say in a broad sense, yes. The 333 has the Allison 250-C20W and the 206 B3 has the Allison 250-C20J. Our 355 actually has the 250-C20F.

The letter at the end has all sorts of meanings, it could literally be a change of one component or it could be a change in horsepower due to manipulation of the fuel controls or similar. The core unit is the same throughout the C20 series though, so it's correct to say that.

The huge change between the C20W and the C20J is power output though. The C20 family normally puts out 420hp maximum, 370hp continuous. Because the transmission in most helicopters can't handle that, the engine is derated for different helicopter applications. The C20W in the 333 is derated to 250hp maximum, 230hp continuous. The C20J in the 206B3 is derated to 317/270.”

The bottom line is that the 206 has more power than the 333, so even tho the 333 is over 300lbs lighter, their performance (as related to the engine) is similar.

I will do my instrument cert in the 333, I see it as a no brainer to incorporate this turbine transition with this part of my training. I listed the cost differences below so you can come to your own opinions on this subject. The extra cost is not that much more, roughly 12% over the cost to CFII, and when I get there I don’t have to find a place to do a turbine add on… (I feel very fortunate to be at a school like Rotors and to have this opportunity). At this point I plan to do my commercial in the 44, but as I get more time in the 333 that just might change! ☺

Cost comparison:

Schweizer 333 $595.00 wet dual

Robinson R44 $494.00 wet dual

Schweizer 300c $330.00 wet dual

Instrument rating/transition costs:

Schweizer 333 $23,800.00

Robinson R44 $19,800.00

Schweizer 300 $13,200.00

Costs above instrument training in the 300:

333 (with turbine transition) $10,600.00

R44 $ 6,600.00

Keep in mind that at Rotors you are also getting altitude training and could easily do a mountain course at the same time. Also know that the above prices are by the hour and like most schools you can get better deals by buying bulk time…and as I said in my Rotors review here on VR, you can get better prices on flight time, but at the other schools that I visited the AC were older ships. I like the fact that I’m flying newer helicopters… I believe you get what you pay for.

Also remember that I don’t work for Rotors and these prices are estimates from information I’ve gotten while researching my own training.

There are more, larger photos here:

http://s298.photobucket.com/albums/mm243/RkyMtnHI2/?start=0

(click on “grid” in the upper right corner for easier navigation).

Thanks to Garin for taking some of the photos, and to Ed & Kris for technical help.

Edited May 18, 2008 by RkyMtnHI

helicodger pilot · May 26, 2008

The C20W in the 333 is derated to 250hp maximum, 230hp continuous.

from the TCDS-

Late serial #s (-0045-A and up) are rated at 280 hp 5 minute rating, 232 hp continuous. The C20W engine installation is "upside-down and backwards" compared to the B206 installation- the gearbox is on the top of the engine, exhaust out the bottom, and the air intake is on the aft side. Necessary to make the engine fit below the transmission and turn it in the correct direction.

Pretty clever the way the Schweizer engineers got around the constraints of the existing design when adding the turbine engine.