fixed wing or rotary wing?

[Craig Campbell]

I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been told
that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do it
right first time.

Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
Thanks
Craig Campbell

[601XL Builder]

Craig Campbell wrote:
> I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been told
> that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
> I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do it
> right first time.
>
> Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
> Thanks
> Craig Campbell
>
>

If you plan on getting both get the fixed wing first. It will be cheaper.

[Craig Campbell]

I never really thought much about doing fixed wing, would that be worth
doing just to have or really only if I really wanted to use it?
"601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
...
> Craig Campbell wrote:
>> I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been told
>> that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
>> I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do
>> it right first time.
>>
>> Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
>> Thanks
>> Craig Campbell
>
> If you plan on getting both get the fixed wing first. It will be cheaper.

[Stuart & Kathryn Fields]

Craig: I found that I had some Unlearning to do going from the "Stuck Wing"
to the helicopter. I haven't flown a " Stuck Wing" since I got my helo
add-on. The Stuck Wing license did help eliminate some cross country
navigation training that would have been more expensive in the helo.

--
Kathy Fields
Experimental Helo magazine
P. O. Box 1585
Inyokern, CA 93527
(760) 377-4478
(760) 408-9747 general and layout cell
(760) 608-1299 technical and advertising cell

www.vkss.com
www.experimentalhelo.com


"Craig Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> I never really thought much about doing fixed wing, would that be worth
> doing just to have or really only if I really wanted to use it?
> "601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
> ...
> > Craig Campbell wrote:
> >> I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been
told
> >> that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
> >> I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do
> >> it right first time.
> >>
> >> Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
> >> Thanks
> >> Craig Campbell
> >
> > If you plan on getting both get the fixed wing first. It will be
cheaper.
>
>

[Don W]

Craig Campbell wrote:

> I never really thought much about doing fixed wing, would that be worth
> doing just to have or really only if I really wanted to use it?
> "601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Craig Campbell wrote:
>>
>>>I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been told
>>>that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
>>>I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do
>>>it right first time.
>>>
>>>Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
>>>Thanks
>>>Craig Campbell
>>
>>If you plan on getting both get the fixed wing first. It will be cheaper.

If you don't plan on flying fixed wing, I'm not
sure it would be cheaper to get the fixed wing
license first. It's true that you can learn to
fly, navigate, and work the radios in $75/hr
airplanes instead of $200-$250/hr helicopters, but
you will still have to do the transition to
rotorcraft for your helicopter license.

The way I read Part 61.109 (copied below), the
minimum number hours you would have to have in a
helicopter for the transition would be:

3 hours (Combined Dual Night/Cross country)
2 hours (10 Dual takeoffs and landings to stop)
3 hours (Dual training prep for check ride)
10 hours (solo)
=====
18 hours helicopter minimum

If you could learn everything you needed to learn
on the helicopter in that time, it would be
incredible. A more likely transition scenario
would be something like 30 hours.

So in that case, you would save ten or so hours of
helicopter time, by spending 40 hours of fixed
wing time.

Doing the math with the following assumptions:

Fixed Wing = C150 @ $75/hr wet
Fixed Wing Instructor = $30/hr
Helicopter = R22 @ $225/hr wet
Heli Instructor = $30/hr
Heli Transition = 15 Dual, 10 Solo

Fixed wing plus Rotary route:

Fixed Wing (20*$105)+(20*$75)
Helicopter (15*$255)+(10*$225)
==============================
Total = $9,675 + Ground Instruction
and you would have a Fixed and Rotary Wing Rating

Heli only route:

Helicopter (20*$255)+(20*225)
=============================
Total = $9600 + Ground Instruction
and you would have Rotary Wing only rating

So it would probably be slightly more expensive to
start in fixed wing and transition to helicopter.

As far as the easy part, I found it relatively
easy to transition from fixed wing to the R22.

Regards,
Don W.

Part 61.109 (c)

c) For a helicopter rating. Except as provided in
paragraph (k) of this section, a person who
applies for a private pilot certificate with
rotorcraft category and helicopter class rating
must log at least 40 hours of flight time that
includes at least 20 hours of flight training from
an authorized instructor and 10 hours of solo
flight training in the areas of operation listed
in §61.107(b)(3) of this part, and the training
must include at least—

(1) 3 hours of cross-country flight training in a
helicopter;

(2) Except as provided in §61.110 of this part, 3
hours of night flight training in a helicopter
that includes—

(i) One cross-country flight of over 50 nautical
miles total distance; and

(ii) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full stop
(with each landing involving a flight in the
traffic pattern) at an airport.

(3) 3 hours of flight training in preparation for
the practical test in a helicopter, which must
have been performed within 60 days preceding the
date of the test; and

(4) 10 hours of solo flight time in a helicopter,
consisting of at least—

(i) 3 hours cross-country time;

(ii) One solo cross-country flight of at least 75
nautical miles total distance, with landings at a
minimum of three points, and one segment of the
flight being a straight-line distance of at least
25 nautical miles between the takeoff and landing
locations; and

(iii) Three takeoffs and three landings to a full
stop (with each landing involving a flight in the
traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating
control tower.

[Craig Campbell]

Thanks for the break down of $'s Don. Okay so I suppose my next question
is.... Would it be of any benefit to me trying to get a helicopter pilot
job having also become rated in fixed wing? Am I a more attractive
applicant? Or are the two mutually exclusive?
Craig Campbell
"Don W" > wrote in message
t...
> Craig Campbell wrote:
>
>> I never really thought much about doing fixed wing, would that be worth
>> doing just to have or really only if I really wanted to use it?
>> "601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiacona@suddenlinkDOTnet> wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>Craig Campbell wrote:
>>>
>>>>I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been
>>>>told that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
>>>>I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do
>>>>it right first time.
>>>>
>>>>Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
>>>>Thanks
>>>>Craig Campbell
>>>
>>>If you plan on getting both get the fixed wing first. It will be cheaper.
>
> If you don't plan on flying fixed wing, I'm not sure it would be cheaper
> to get the fixed wing license first. It's true that you can learn to fly,
> navigate, and work the radios in $75/hr airplanes instead of $200-$250/hr
> helicopters, but you will still have to do the transition to rotorcraft
> for your helicopter license.
>
> The way I read Part 61.109 (copied below), the minimum number hours you
> would have to have in a helicopter for the transition would be:
>
> 3 hours (Combined Dual Night/Cross country)
> 2 hours (10 Dual takeoffs and landings to stop)
> 3 hours (Dual training prep for check ride)
> 10 hours (solo)
> =====
> 18 hours helicopter minimum
>
> If you could learn everything you needed to learn on the helicopter in
> that time, it would be incredible. A more likely transition scenario
> would be something like 30 hours.
>
> So in that case, you would save ten or so hours of helicopter time, by
> spending 40 hours of fixed wing time.
>
> Doing the math with the following assumptions:
>
> Fixed Wing = C150 @ $75/hr wet
> Fixed Wing Instructor = $30/hr
> Helicopter = R22 @ $225/hr wet
> Heli Instructor = $30/hr
> Heli Transition = 15 Dual, 10 Solo
>
> Fixed wing plus Rotary route:
>
> Fixed Wing (20*$105)+(20*$75)
> Helicopter (15*$255)+(10*$225)
> ==============================
> Total = $9,675 + Ground Instruction
> and you would have a Fixed and Rotary Wing Rating
>
> Heli only route:
>
> Helicopter (20*$255)+(20*225)
> =============================
> Total = $9600 + Ground Instruction
> and you would have Rotary Wing only rating
>
> So it would probably be slightly more expensive to start in fixed wing and
> transition to helicopter.
>
> As far as the easy part, I found it relatively easy to transition from
> fixed wing to the R22.
>
> Regards,
> Don W.
>
> Part 61.109 (c)
>
> c) For a helicopter rating. Except as provided in paragraph (k) of this
> section, a person who applies for a private pilot certificate with
> rotorcraft category and helicopter class rating must log at least 40 hours
> of flight time that includes at least 20 hours of flight training from an
> authorized instructor and 10 hours of solo flight training in the areas of
> operation listed in §61.107(b)(3) of this part, and the training must
> include at least—
>
> (1) 3 hours of cross-country flight training in a helicopter;
>
> (2) Except as provided in §61.110 of this part, 3 hours of night flight
> training in a helicopter that includes—
>
> (i) One cross-country flight of over 50 nautical miles total distance; and
>
> (ii) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full stop (with each landing
> involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport.
>
> (3) 3 hours of flight training in preparation for the practical test in a
> helicopter, which must have been performed within 60 days preceding the
> date of the test; and
>
> (4) 10 hours of solo flight time in a helicopter, consisting of at least—
>
> (i) 3 hours cross-country time;
>
> (ii) One solo cross-country flight of at least 75 nautical miles total
> distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, and one segment of
> the flight being a straight-line distance of at least 25 nautical miles
> between the takeoff and landing locations; and
>
> (iii) Three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop (with each landing
> involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating
> control tower.
>
>

[Steve L.[_3_]]

>is.... Would it be of any benefit to me trying to get a helicopter pilot
>job having also become rated in fixed wing? Am I a more attractive
>applicant? Or are the two mutually exclusive?

Pretty much the latter. And if you go back to the costs, then there is
no doubt that exclusively helicopter time will be "cheaper".
To get a helo job, you need helo hours. That's what insurance asks for -
usually nobody is interested in your fixed wing hours.

Of course you could get your helicopter commercial with only 50 hours in
helicopters and the remaining 100 in something else. But first you
probably won't be good enough to pass the checkride and second you need
200 hours in helicopters anyway to get your first job which is going to
be instructing. Maybe even 300 hours (common insurance requirement).

So, if you are not interested in fixed wing, go with helicopter hours
wherever possible. Don't even use flight simulators - you need the real
hours. Save your money for the real hours, don't waste it for simulator,
fixed wing... IF you are serious about it. But try fixed wing also
(intro flight)!

[B4RT]

Craig,

I'm dual rated and own both a turbine helicopter and a plane. I did
helicopter first, and am firmly convinced it was the right thing to do.

Airplanes and helicopters only have 3 things in common from a learning
perspective: rules n regs, radios, and cruise flight. The rest of the stuff
is different enough that extrapolating one to the other can lead to
problems. Even some the regs are different enough to give you a headache in
an exam.

I had logged a lot of time in rotorcraft before I did the transition to
fixed wing. It was a breeze and only took a week. I can't imagine the
inverse being true. The most difficult part for me was switching hands and
flying with the stick in my left hand and power on the right. Still today I
love flying military and aerobatic planes because I have a lot more finesse
with my right hand on the stick.

The biggest time eaters in rotorcraft training are IGE hovering,
autorotations, and approach to hover, and very little translates from
airplanes to choppers with these. I've talked to a few people who are dual
rated and have never run across anyone who did fixed->rotorcraft in the
minimum time prescribed by the FAA, so the money savings thing is a probably
a practical myth.

The best way to save money is to NOT do any training until you've saved
enough to do all of the fight time in a concentrated block of time. Pass
your written exam first while youre saving up the money. Having the exam out
of the way will relieve you of a lot of pressure so you can focus on the
expensive flght time. If you only take one or two lessons a week it will
probably take you at least 30% more flight hours to complete.

Bart



"Craig Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been told
>that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
> I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do it
> right first time.
>
> Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
> Thanks
> Craig Campbell
>

[Don W]

B4RT wrote:
> I'm dual rated and own both a turbine helicopter and a plane. I did
> helicopter first, and am firmly convinced it was the right thing to do.
>
> Airplanes and helicopters only have 3 things in common from a learning
> perspective: rules n regs, radios, and cruise flight. The rest of the stuff
> is different enough that extrapolating one to the other can lead to
> problems. Even some the regs are different enough to give you a headache in
> an exam.
>
> I had logged a lot of time in rotorcraft before I did the transition to
> fixed wing. It was a breeze and only took a week. I can't imagine the
> inverse being true.

We are pretty much in agreement. I've been
licensed in fixed wing since 1977, and recently
started flying helicopters for fun. I was able to
fly the helicopter in cruise flight right away,
and was able to basically hover IGE after 1 hour
of instruction. Basically means it wasn't the
prettiest hover, but pretty much stayed in one
place ;-)

At the end of the second hour of instruction, I
could lift up, taxi to the pad, and take off
without the instructor touching anything, and was
also starting to be able to transition from
approach to hover.

Somewhere around 5 hours, things were pretty well
clicking, and we were doing high speed taxis,
autos with power recovery, etc. I was flying the
R22 all the time except when the instructor went
to demonstrate something new. I was bringing the
R22 back from the pad to its parking spot among 6
other helis, and doing the necessary tail spin to
put it properly in its spot At that point, my
instructor told me that he felt I was ready to
solo, but the schools policy required 15 hours of
dual because of insurance. That was back in '04.

> The biggest time eaters in rotorcraft training are IGE hovering,
> autorotations, and approach to hover, and very little translates from
> airplanes to choppers with these. I've talked to a few people who are dual
> rated and have never run across anyone who did fixed->rotorcraft in the
> minimum time prescribed by the FAA, so the money savings thing is a probably
> a practical myth.

Agreed. The best you can hope for is fixed and
rotorcraft at basically the same price as
rotorcraft only. Also, I think for a student who
was new to flying, doing both would confuse the
issue. In my case, I'd been flying fixed so long
that I could concentrate on the differences with
the Heli.

> The best way to save money is to NOT do any training until you've saved
> enough to do all of the fight time in a concentrated block of time. Pass
> your written exam first while youre saving up the money. Having the exam out
> of the way will relieve you of a lot of pressure so you can focus on the
> expensive flght time. If you only take one or two lessons a week it will
> probably take you at least 30% more flight hours to complete.

This is good advice.

>
> Bart

Don W.

[Steve R]

"B4RT" > wrote in message
...
> Craig,
>
> The best way to save money is to NOT do any training until you've saved
> enough to do all of the fight time in a concentrated block of time. Pass
> your written exam first while youre saving up the money. Having the exam
> out of the way will relieve you of a lot of pressure so you can focus on
> the expensive flght time. If you only take one or two lessons a week it
> will probably take you at least 30% more flight hours to complete.
>
> Bart
>

This is, as far as I'm concerned, the best advise of all. I can't comment
on the rest because I don't have enough overall experience to but I've seen
too many folks through the years start the process, run out of money, save
up more, and then start again. The problem is, you loose proficiency while
saving up more money and have to redo part of what you'd learned before when
you do get back into it. Every time you do that it's adding unnecessary
cost to an already expensive process.

Also, having that darned written test under your belt "before" you start
flight training is priceless. You've got the book learning done and can
concentrate 100% on the fun stuff, the flight training. Much of the book
learning didn't fully click in for me anyway until I was putting it to
practice in the aircraft. Oh, I could answer the questions on the test just
fine but it wasn't until I was in the aircraft that it "really" made sense.
I can't imagine how it would have been trying to get the concepts down in my
head from the book and trying to put them into practice in the aircraft at
the same time. Maybe it wouldn't have been any big deal but I'm "very"
happy with how it worked out getting the written done before I started
flying.

Good luck & Fly Safe,
Steve R.

[Stefan L.]

>put it properly in its spot At that point, my
>instructor told me that he felt I was ready to
>solo, but the schools policy required 15 hours of
>dual because of insurance. That was back in '04.

Were you training in the US?
I wonder how a flight school can do this! The SFAR 73 requires
non-rotorcraft rated pilots to get 20h of dual instruction prior to solo
a R22.

So the least amount of hours for a rotorcraft helicopter add on would be
30 hours!

[Don W]

Stefan L. wrote:
>>put it properly in its spot At that point, my
>>instructor told me that he felt I was ready to
>>solo, but the schools policy required 15 hours of
>>dual because of insurance. That was back in '04.
>
>
> Were you training in the US?
> I wonder how a flight school can do this! The SFAR 73 requires
> non-rotorcraft rated pilots to get 20h of dual instruction prior to solo
> a R22.
>
> So the least amount of hours for a rotorcraft helicopter add on would be
> 30 hours!

I just checked into this and you are correct. My
instructor must have been confused about the
reason he couldn't sign me off for solo, or
perhaps I misunderstood him.

That would change the calculations in my earlier
post to make the helicopter only rating less
expensive.

Don W.

[Steve R]

"Don W" > wrote in message
...
> Stefan L. wrote:
>>>put it properly in its spot At that point, my instructor told me that he
>>>felt I was ready to solo, but the schools policy required 15 hours of
>>>dual because of insurance. That was back in '04.
>>
>>
>> Were you training in the US?
>> I wonder how a flight school can do this! The SFAR 73 requires
>> non-rotorcraft rated pilots to get 20h of dual instruction prior to solo
>> a R22.
>>
>> So the least amount of hours for a rotorcraft helicopter add on would be
>> 30 hours!
>
> I just checked into this and you are correct. My instructor must have
> been confused about the reason he couldn't sign me off for solo, or
> perhaps I misunderstood him.
>
> That would change the calculations in my earlier post to make the
> helicopter only rating less expensive.
>
> Don W.
>

Doesn't SFAR 73 apply "only" to the R22?

[Don W]

Steve R wrote:
> "Don W" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Stefan L. wrote:
>>
>>>>put it properly in its spot At that point, my instructor told me that he
>>>>felt I was ready to solo, but the schools policy required 15 hours of
>>>>dual because of insurance. That was back in '04.
>>>
>>>
>>>Were you training in the US?
>>>I wonder how a flight school can do this! The SFAR 73 requires
>>>non-rotorcraft rated pilots to get 20h of dual instruction prior to solo
>>>a R22.
>>>
>>>So the least amount of hours for a rotorcraft helicopter add on would be
>>>30 hours!
>>
>>I just checked into this and you are correct. My instructor must have
>>been confused about the reason he couldn't sign me off for solo, or
>>perhaps I misunderstood him.
>>
>>That would change the calculations in my earlier post to make the
>>helicopter only rating less expensive.
>>
>>Don W.
>>
>
>
> Doesn't SFAR 73 apply "only" to the R22?

In scanning it, it appeared to apply to the R22
and the R44.

Don W.

[Steve R]

"Don W" > wrote in message
t...
> Steve R wrote:
>> "Don W" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>Stefan L. wrote:
>>>
>>>>>put it properly in its spot At that point, my instructor told me that
>>>>>he felt I was ready to solo, but the schools policy required 15 hours
>>>>>of dual because of insurance. That was back in '04.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Were you training in the US?
>>>>I wonder how a flight school can do this! The SFAR 73 requires
>>>>non-rotorcraft rated pilots to get 20h of dual instruction prior to solo
>>>>a R22.
>>>>
>>>>So the least amount of hours for a rotorcraft helicopter add on would be
>>>>30 hours!
>>>
>>>I just checked into this and you are correct. My instructor must have
>>>been confused about the reason he couldn't sign me off for solo, or
>>>perhaps I misunderstood him.
>>>
>>>That would change the calculations in my earlier post to make the
>>>helicopter only rating less expensive.
>>>
>>>Don W.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Doesn't SFAR 73 apply "only" to the R22?
>
> In scanning it, it appeared to apply to the R22 and the R44.
>
> Don W.
>

So does that mean if a student is training in something other than a
Robinson, then the numbers originally quoted are possible by regulation?

I've never heard that the R22 has any significant control issues when
compared to other makes and models that are likely to be used for primary
training other than they've got a relatively light rotor system which makes
collective management more critical than most if power is lost. I've not
heard much about the R44 in that regard. I've never flown either one
although I've ridden in a couple of R22's and they seemed to fly as well as
any helicopter I've been in.

It just seems strange, without knowing the specifics, that the FAA would
feel it necessary to issue a set of FAR's targeting one specific
manufacturer. That might explain why I've occasionally met individuals that
were outspokenly against flying in one.

Fly Safe,
Steve R.

[Don W]

Steve R wrote:

>>>Doesn't SFAR 73 apply "only" to the R22?
>>
>>In scanning it, it appeared to apply to the R22 and the R44.
>>
>>Don W.
>>
>
>
> So does that mean if a student is training in something other than a
> Robinson, then the numbers originally quoted are possible by regulation?

The way I read the reg, the minimum hours for a
conversion to rotorcraft from fixed wing is 9 dual
+ 10 solo in a helicopter. Someone please correct
me if I'm reading this incorrectly. SFAR 73
essentially says you cannot do this in a R22 or
R44 because you have to have minimum of 20 hours
of dual before solo in these two birds.

>
> I've never heard that the R22 has any significant control issues when
> compared to other makes and models that are likely to be used for primary
> training other than they've got a relatively light rotor system which makes
> collective management more critical than most if power is lost. I've not
> heard much about the R44 in that regard. I've never flown either one
> although I've ridden in a couple of R22's and they seemed to fly as well as
> any helicopter I've been in.

The R22 apparently has a couple of issues. One is
that it is a "low inertia" rotor system, which
means that the rotor slows down very quickly in a
power loss situation. That means you have to
recognize a power loss and enter autorotation
quickly compared to other helicopters.

The other issue is that the rotor can contact the
tail boom under the right combination of low-G and
cyclic inputs.

Whatever the reasons, there were a lot of fatal
"lawn dart" or "smoking hole" accidents with R22s
in the early days. Check the NTSB accident
reports and search for R22 -- "loss of rotor
control". The reports are sobering (and sad).
Several of these accidents were students flying
with CFIs. The large number of accidents led to
SFAR 73, and a marked tendency for R22 CFI's to
keep their hands close to the controls at all times.

> It just seems strange, without knowing the specifics, that the FAA would
> feel it necessary to issue a set of FAR's targeting one specific
> manufacturer. That might explain why I've occasionally met individuals that
> were outspokenly against flying in one.

The problem with a R22 accidents caused by "loss
of rotor control" is that all the people who know
exactly what they were doing before things went
wrong are dead. The factory engineers and the FAA
have lots of theories--all unproveable as far as I
know.

Here is a link to an example of what I'm talking
about.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20060228X00255&key=1

There are more examples in the database.

Don W.

[Steve R]

"Don W" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Here is a link to an example of what I'm talking about.
>
> http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20060228X00255&key=1
>
> There are more examples in the database.
>
> Don W.
>
>

Thanks Don, I appreciate the input.

Fly Safe,
Steve R.

[B4RT]

"Steve R" > wrote in message
...
> So does that mean if a student is training in something other than a
> Robinson, then the numbers originally quoted are possible by regulation?
>

Yes, but it hardly really matters. The Robinson SFAR is not a practical
limitation because you're not likely to be a safe enough pilot to solo in
less time/training than the SFAR prescribes.

> I've never heard that the R22 has any significant control issues when
> compared to other makes and models that are likely to be used for primary
> training other than they've got a relatively light rotor system which
> makes collective management more critical than most if power is lost.
> I've not heard much about the R44 in that regard. I've never flown either
> one although I've ridden in a couple of R22's and they seemed to fly as
> well as any helicopter I've been in.
>

The 22 and early 44's have very low rotor inertia. There were quite a few
accidents early on because of this. IMO the 22 totally unsuitable for flight
training especially when the CFI is a 200 hour pilot. Early 44's have a
similar issue, but the higher inertia later model 44's appear to be much
better. I've never flown in either model, so what do i know? I watched some
people doing "autos" in a 22 and resolved to never get in one.

> It just seems strange, without knowing the specifics, that the FAA would
> feel it necessary to issue a set of FAR's targeting one specific
> manufacturer. That might explain why I've occasionally met individuals
> that were outspokenly against flying in one.

Aside from its hideous looks I don't think fear of the latter model 44's is
really justified. The FAA probably saved Robinson from extiction by making
that SFAR tho. They might have been sued out of biz otherwise.

Regarding the time to transition, I think a former poster was wrong about 18
hours. Depending on how you interpret the FAR it could be as much as 30.
When I transitioned from rotorcraft to fixed, I flew about 30 hours over a 1
week interval to get all the stuff out of the way.

Sec. 61.109
(c) For a helicopter rating. Except as provided in paragraph (k) of this
section, a person who applies for a private pilot certificate with
rotorcraft category and helicopter class rating must log at least 40 hours
of flight time that includes at least 20 hours of flight training from an
authorized instructor and 10 hours of solo flight training in the areas of
operation listed in Sec. 61.107(b)(3) of this part, and the training must
include at least--
(1) 3 hours of cross-country flight training in a helicopter;
(2) Except as provided in Sec. 61.110 of this part, 3 hours of night flight
training in a helicopter that includes--
(i) One cross-country flight of over 50 nautical miles total distance; and
(ii) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full stop (with each landing involving
a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport.
(3) 3 hours of flight training in preparation for the practical test in a
helicopter, which must have been performed within 60 days preceding the date
of the test; and
(4) 10 hours of solo flight time in a helicopter, consisting of at least--
(i) 3 hours cross-country time;
(ii) One solo cross-country flight of at least 75 nautical miles total
distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, and one segment of the
flight being a straight-line distance of at least 25 nautical miles between
the takeoff and landing locations; and
(iii) Three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop (with each landing
involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating
control tower.

[Don W]

B4RT wrote:

> Regarding the time to transition, I think a former poster was wrong about 18
> hours. Depending on how you interpret the FAR it could be as much as 30.
> When I transitioned from rotorcraft to fixed, I flew about 30 hours over a 1
> week interval to get all the stuff out of the way.

I'm the previous poster, and I could for sure be
wrong. Have been before, will be again ;-) but:

> Sec. 61.109
> (c) For a helicopter rating. Except as provided in paragraph (k) of this
> section, a person who applies for a private pilot certificate with
> rotorcraft category and helicopter class rating must log at least 40 hours
> of flight time that includes at least 20 hours of flight training from an
> authorized instructor and 10 hours of solo flight training in the areas of
> operation listed in Sec. 61.107(b)(3) of this part, and the training must
> include at least--

Nowhere above does it say the 40 total, 20 dual,
or 10 solo must be flown in a helicopter. If you
look up 61.107b (3), and compare it to 61.107b (1)
you'll find that they are close to identical,
except with a few helicopter specific things added.

The next section specifies helicopter.

> (1) 3 hours of cross-country flight training in a helicopter;
> (2) Except as provided in Sec. 61.110 of this part, 3 hours of night flight
> training in a helicopter that includes--
> (i) One cross-country flight of over 50 nautical miles total distance; and

So if you did a 3 hour dual cross country at night
with one leg at least 50NM, you would fulfill all
of the above. (3 hours dual)

> (ii) 10 takeoffs and 10 landings to a full stop (with each landing involving
> a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport.

Based on my experiences I think that 10 takeoffs
and landings to full stop and go would take about
2 hours (2 hours dual)

> (3) 3 hours of flight training in preparation for the practical test in a
> helicopter, which must have been performed within 60 days preceding the date
> of the test; and

(3 more hours dual)

> (4) 10 hours of solo flight time in a helicopter, consisting of at least--
> (i) 3 hours cross-country time;
> (ii) One solo cross-country flight of at least 75 nautical miles total
> distance, with landings at a minimum of three points, and one segment of the
> flight being a straight-line distance of at least 25 nautical miles between
> the takeoff and landing locations; and
> (iii) Three takeoffs and three landings to a full stop (with each landing
> involving a flight in the traffic pattern) at an airport with an operating
> control tower.

(10 hours solo)

So the way I read this you could meet the
requirements of 61.109 with 40 hours tt, 20 dual,
with at least ~8 hours dual and 10 hours solo in
helicopters. We both agree that in this very
litigious age, it would be a very unusual student
that would convince a CFI to sign them off for
solo with only 5 hours of dual.

To put it in perspective, however, my first CFI
signed me off for solo on my sixteenth birthday
with 4.7 hours of dual logged. Looking back, it
seems hard to fathom, but the logbook doesn't lie.
Also, I grew up from about age 4 flying with my
dad and granddad, so had already taken off and
landed a plane before my first "lesson". We
almost never landed on concrete or asphalt either ;-)

Rotorcraft CFI's feel free to chip in here if I'm
reading Part 61 wrong, or if the FAA has changed
the interpretation with a ruling that I don't know
about.

Don W.

[Steve R]

Thanks B4RT, I appeciate the input. The rotor inertia issue Robinson's has
always bothered me a little but more and more folks are earning their
tickets in them so who knows.

"B4RT" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Steve R" > wrote in message
> ...
>> So does that mean if a student is training in something other than a
>> Robinson, then the numbers originally quoted are possible by regulation?
>>
>
> Yes, but it hardly really matters. The Robinson SFAR is not a practical
> limitation because you're not likely to be a safe enough pilot to solo in
> less time/training than the SFAR prescribes.
>

That being the case, I don't see why the FAA doesn't just apply the regs to
everybody as apposed so singleing out one manufacturer.

As for the FAA saving Robinson's tail from litigation, is seems to me that
putting a reg out there that's targets them specifically would have made
them even more of a target for litigation hungry lawyers. They'd say,
"SEE...these birds are so unsafe that even the government had to enact
special regulations against them!!!"

It's hard to tell sometimes.

Fly Safe,
Steve R.

[Don W]

Steve R wrote:
>>>So does that mean if a student is training in something other than a
>>>Robinson, then the numbers originally quoted are possible by regulation?
>>>
>>
>>Yes, but it hardly really matters. The Robinson SFAR is not a practical
>>limitation because you're not likely to be a safe enough pilot to solo in
>>less time/training than the SFAR prescribes.
>>
> That being the case, I don't see why the FAA doesn't just apply the regs to
> everybody as apposed so singleing out one manufacturer.

Just because someone is "not likely to be..." does
not mean that someone else will not be. The R22's
were having an unusual number of accidents, so the
FAA acted to address that problem.

Don W.

[[email protected]]

Hi,

I am interested to have a helicopter course, but since 1991 no
aviation school here open in Indonesia a helicopter course. May i know
the name of your flight school ?

cheers,
Anggoro

Craig Campbell wrote:
> I am about to start my private pilot helicopter course. I have been told
> that learning fixed wing first makes it much easier.
> I am not sure what to do as my heart was set on rotary but I want to do it
> right first time.
>
> Can anyone please give me feedback on this?
> Thanks
> Craig Campbell