JohnO: I think it was an exposure kind of thing. When he took a look at
engine reliabilty in turbines compared to his experience with experimental
piston engines and coupled that with being able to pick your weather days
flying experimentals vs take-it-as it comes as well as night flights over
really nasty terrain and having a strong need to get there because of life
saving situations; the flying would, I think, get a lot more hazardous than
just flying an experimental helo. Hell, I really didn't like the night
cross country I had to do for my helo add-on and that was good weather over
the LA basin. Great horizon reference available. I can't imagine flying at
night, into unknown weather, over whatever with trees, power lines etc. I
would hear every bearing in the engine and transmission just hollering.

--
Stuart 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


"JohnO" wrote in message
oups.com...

Stuart & Kathryn Fields wrote:
JohnO This doesn't directly address your question but does relate. We
know
a guy who just finished a year of MedEvac flying in a 206L and had
previous
experience flying and instructin in homebuilt helicopters. He has
returned
to flying the homebuilt variety feeling that it is safer. This is one
man's
experience.

Why did he feel it was safer? Was it because he did his own maintenance?