ppl

[Alan]

i am torn between learning fixed wing or helicopter,
any comments would be helpfull, i realise that helicopter is a lot more
expensive but i thought it would be more flexible regarding landing
locations

[Peter]

Post by Alan
i am torn between learning fixed wing or helicopter,
any comments would be helpfull, i realise that helicopter is a lot more
expensive but i thought it would be more flexible regarding landing
locations

It depends on what you want to do with it.

For utility within the UK, a heli is good for trip radius of up to say
200nm. They fly slowly, averaging say 70kt, (unless you spend millions
on a turbine one) and all the "cheap" ones (Robinsons, etc) shake and
rattle so bad they make you think they will fall apart any moment (my
opinion; obviously people who fly them would disagree). There is no
autopilot, which makes flying them extra tiring. They are good if you
have a big house with a big garden and you can park it there, and fly
it under the 28-day no-planning-required rule, to other similar
locations, to your place of work, to customers, etc. There are lots of
public helipads around, and far more private ones.

For going places, especially abroad, a fixed wing aircraft is much
better. A half decent one will be twice as fast as a heli of similar
cost (say £200k), and the right one will be fine for trips of up to
700nm in one leg. But airfields are scarce in much of the UK, there
are constant problems with stuff like hangarage, and finding your own
strip is the holy grail (never achieved) for most private pilots. I am
fixed wing myself, with a 1200nm-range airplane, and it's clear that
for utility value and going to places abroad a heli would never do
that - not unless I upped the operating cost by a factor of ten.

So yes you are right but the two uses are quite different. Of course I
can't suggest which one will give *you* more enjoyment.

The planning/flying strategy between the two also differs. With a heli
you fly low, below the cloud, and if the weather is too bad to
continue, or you want a pee, you land somewhere. With fixed wing, you
have to plan much more carefully, and being able to fly on
instruments, high up, etc, is a great advantage, and diversions are
avoided at nearly all costs because they are a hassle.

If I was learning to fly a heli, I would purchase one of the ex-MOD
Gazelles and hire an ex military instructor to teach me to fly it.
Then one skips the entire "Robinson shake rattle and roll sewing
machine" stage :) and ends up with a fast machine capable of going to
France, etc.

[Alan]

Post by Peter

Post by Alan
i am torn between learning fixed wing or helicopter,
any comments would be helpfull, i realise that helicopter is a lot more
expensive but i thought it would be more flexible regarding landing
locations

It depends on what you want to do with it.
For utility within the UK, a heli is good for trip radius of up to say
200nm. They fly slowly, averaging say 70kt, (unless you spend millions
on a turbine one) and all the "cheap" ones (Robinsons, etc) shake and
rattle so bad they make you think they will fall apart any moment (my
opinion; obviously people who fly them would disagree). There is no
autopilot, which makes flying them extra tiring. They are good if you
have a big house with a big garden and you can park it there, and fly
it under the 28-day no-planning-required rule, to other similar
locations, to your place of work, to customers, etc. There are lots of
public helipads around, and far more private ones.
For going places, especially abroad, a fixed wing aircraft is much
better. A half decent one will be twice as fast as a heli of similar
cost (say £200k), and the right one will be fine for trips of up to
700nm in one leg. But airfields are scarce in much of the UK, there
are constant problems with stuff like hangarage, and finding your own
strip is the holy grail (never achieved) for most private pilots. I am
fixed wing myself, with a 1200nm-range airplane, and it's clear that
for utility value and going to places abroad a heli would never do
that - not unless I upped the operating cost by a factor of ten.
So yes you are right but the two uses are quite different. Of course I
can't suggest which one will give *you* more enjoyment.
The planning/flying strategy between the two also differs. With a heli
you fly low, below the cloud, and if the weather is too bad to
continue, or you want a pee, you land somewhere. With fixed wing, you
have to plan much more carefully, and being able to fly on
instruments, high up, etc, is a great advantage, and diversions are
avoided at nearly all costs because they are a hassle.
If I was learning to fly a heli, I would purchase one of the ex-MOD
Gazelles and hire an ex military instructor to teach me to fly it.
Then one skips the entire "Robinson shake rattle and roll sewing
machine" stage :) and ends up with a fast machine capable of going to
France, etc.
do you have any idea where an ex MOD gazelle could be found and what sort
of cost, i am not sure but i think that i could solve the problem of a
military instructor as i live reasonably close to an MOD base that flies
them so i am thinking that i could hire one of the pilots privately to
instruct (maybe) lol

[Peter]

Post by Peter
do you have any idea where an ex MOD gazelle could be found and what sort
of cost, i am not sure but i think that i could solve the problem of a
military instructor as i live reasonably close to an MOD base that flies
them so i am thinking that i could hire one of the pilots privately to
instruct (maybe) lol

The MOD sells them off, via some company they use for that purpose.

The Permit ones have been going for around £100k, but they cannot
carry passengers (officially). So your wife has to wear a sexy boiler
suit and pretend to be the navigator :)

The CofA ones are about £250k. Same machine basically but with all the
CAA paperwork.

Direct operating cost (fuel and amortisation of hourly based
maintenance) is a few hundred quid an hour, I am told.

The place to ask is on pprune.org; I believe there is a helicopter
forum. There is a lot more specialist expertise over there.

Do expect to get a lot of flak for suggesting you want to learn in a
Gazelle though :) I am suggesting this because I learnt to fly fixed
wing, through the usual route of learning in beaten up old junk with
an inch of water on the floor after a rainy night, another litre or so
in the fuel tank, and had I bought something decent to start with and
learnt in that, I would have saved myself thousands of pounds, huge
amounts of aggravation, and gained many hours of useful currency on
type.

[Andrew Crane]

Post by Peter
For utility within the UK, a heli is good for trip radius of up to say
200nm. They fly slowly, averaging say 70kt, (unless you spend millions
on a turbine one)

Do they? I was flying an R44 (Piston) the other day and was cruising at 115
without any problem at all.

Post by Peter
and all the "cheap" ones (Robinsons, etc) shake and
rattle so bad they make you think they will fall apart any moment (my
opinion; obviously people who fly them would disagree).

I don't think shake and rattle is subjective. A well-maintained robinson
does neither. I have flown in a 300 before that was a crate, and I'm sure
the same goes for fixed wings -- if you don't maintain them they will
rattle.

Post by Peter
There is no
autopilot, which makes flying them extra tiring.

How many GA aircraft that are cheaper to fly than a small helicopter have an
autopilot?

Post by Peter
They are good if you
have a big house with a big garden and you can park it there, and fly
it under the 28-day no-planning-required rule, to other similar
locations, to your place of work, to customers, etc. There are lots of
public helipads around, and far more private ones.

Not to mention beaches, fields, common land, pubs, restaurants, etc, etc..

Post by Peter
For going places, especially abroad, a fixed wing aircraft is much
better.
A half decent one will be twice as fast as a heli of similar
cost (say £200k), and the right one will be fine for trips of up to
700nm in one leg. But airfields are scarce in much of the UK, there
are constant problems with stuff like hangarage, and finding your own
strip is the holy grail (never achieved) for most private pilots. I am
fixed wing myself, with a 1200nm-range airplane, and it's clear that
for utility value and going to places abroad a heli would never do
that - not unless I upped the operating cost by a factor of ten.

Sure, but the only reason people seem to take their fixed wing abroad is to
go to Le Touquet for lunch. I guess it all comes down to what you want it
for, but being alergic to airfields, I would personally go for the chopper
every time.

Post by Peter
So yes you are right but the two uses are quite different. Of course I
can't suggest which one will give *you* more enjoyment.

Exactly. I prefer being able to see, land pretty much where I like, put it
down somewhere if the weather isn't any good, and another huge advantage is
if the engine fails you can put it down on a sixpence. Oh, did I mention you
can see stuff from a chopper too (I mean other than wings, bonnet and prop).

Post by Peter
If I was learning to fly a heli, I would purchase one of the ex-MOD
Gazelles and hire an ex military instructor to teach me to fly it.

Why?

Post by Peter
Then one skips the entire "Robinson shake rattle and roll sewing
machine" stage :) and ends up with a fast machine capable of going to
France, etc.

...but not allowed to do the heliroutes or fly in controlled airspace. A
complete no-go for me as I live within the london zone on one of the
heliroutes.

Of course YMMV, but really you've painted a very one-sided view here.

BTW, have you flown in a modern robbie?

Regards
Andrew

[Tim Ward]

Post by Andrew Crane
How many GA aircraft that are cheaper to fly than a small helicopter have an
autopilot?

Less need for it. You can fly with no hands for seconds at a time, and with
one hand for hours at a time.

[Peter]

Post by Andrew Crane

Post by Peter
There is no
autopilot, which makes flying them extra tiring.

How many GA aircraft that are cheaper to fly than a small helicopter have an
autopilot?

Lots. An AP isn't that expensive, maybe £10k for a basic one and £20k
for one that does all 3 including an ILS. Helicopters are pricey per
hour, due to the maintenance requirements, and they are not very
economical on fuel. I get (TB20) over 18MPG (UK miles, UK gallons) at
a 155kt TAS cruise.

Post by Andrew Crane
Sure, but the only reason people seem to take their fixed wing abroad is to
go to Le Touquet for lunch.

Well that's very true; that's the UK GA scene for ya, but that doesn't
mean everybody has to follow the crowd and waste their hard paid for
training on doing just trivial flights. Personally, I fly 700nm legs
across Europe.

Post by Andrew Crane

Post by Peter
If I was learning to fly a heli, I would purchase one of the ex-MOD
Gazelles and hire an ex military instructor to teach me to fly it.

Why?

Because I have had a number of flights in helis, including an R44, and
really dislike them (don't tell me, you can't tell :) ). They are
noisy, shake around, are unstable, no autopilot so you end up
knackered after an hour.

Can't argue with the super versatility of course, and for journeys of
say 100nm or less the speed difference hardly comes into it (due to
conventional travel issues at the ends, etc).

I would go straight to the turbine level. Then you get 140kt and a
solid machine. Obviously a lot more expensive to run than a Robinson
but as with everything you pay the money and you choose.

Post by Andrew Crane
BTW, have you flown in a modern robbie?

I flew in one a few years old. But even a brand new Eurocopter, twin
turbine (which I have also flown in) shakes around far more than a
decent fixed wing tourer.

I did paint a one sided picture, and I agree that helis have specific
uses for which they are great. They probably have more *utility* than
fixed wing, in Europe where there are so few airfields. It is no
suprise to me that so much new money is spent on helis, especially
turbines, while the FW market just sinks ever deeper into the dust -
the average UK spamcan is 25-30 years old now.

They also enable one to be a lot more "imaginative" with weather; bad
weather means you can land, and people seem to routinely scud run at
200ft under just about any weather (and get killed often enough doing
that, but one would get killed a lot sooner doing that in a fixed
wing).

However, unless you can park one in your home, you are still facing
the same old problem which most UK private fixed wing pilots face:
somewhere to park it where it can be covered and won't be interfered
with.

[Clive]

Post by Alan
i am torn between learning fixed wing or helicopter,
any comments would be helpfull, i realise that helicopter is a lot more
expensive but i thought it would be more flexible regarding landing
locations

I'll assume for now that you are not mega rich??

So, unless you plan to 'potter' around in a R22 at 80kts over short
distances and have to fly the thing 100% of the time (controls that is) - I
would stick to fixed wing.

More options for touring with a Fixed wing, better payload and options for
auto pilot and of course cheaper.

Clive

[Alan]

Post by Clive

Post by Alan
i am torn between learning fixed wing or helicopter,
any comments would be helpfull, i realise that helicopter is a lot more
expensive but i thought it would be more flexible regarding landing
locations

I'll assume for now that you are not mega rich??
So, unless you plan to 'potter' around in a R22 at 80kts over short
distances and have to fly the thing 100% of the time (controls that is) -
I would stick to fixed wing.
More options for touring with a Fixed wing, better payload and options for
auto pilot and of course cheaper.
Clive
no not any sort of rich LOL