Up Front - I'm new to really paying attention to what's going on in aviation. While an on and off aviation enthusiast, I just got my PPL this year. And now fly a Cherokee. I'm low end. But at my home field - the local A&P/IA does part time work with us locals. Doing some owner assist as we speak. But his main job is maintaining the local rescue choppers for a national firm (plus whatever added choppers they dump on him).

Leaving names out - but this guy has never hesitated to show me the details of the choppers he works on. Ask a simple question and you'll get a 20 minute dissertation. With examples if your in the chopper hanger. Mainly Eurocopter / Airbus EC135's. And I have to admit - those birds seem to have waaaayyyyy more tech in their airframes and power trains than pretty much any fixed wing I've seen this side of a SR71. Yeah, PC12's and TBM's are nice (an understatement) but outside of avionics, what's new? those choppers seem to have airframes that in no way resemble what was the norm 20 or so years ago.

Me a gearhead - love this kind of stuff.

I'm thinking I'll need a R66 sometime down the road.

I know nothing about flying helicopters.

How safe is something like a R66 compared to fixed wing?

How stable are they in super hot weather with gusting winds?

How tough is it to get the hang of both hands and both feet working to control flight path?

Erwin,

I did my fixed wing to helicopter conversion just over a year ago. It does take a bit to figure out the hand/feet co-ordination. Once in a while it just seemed to have a mind of its own and it was a number of hours before I felt I was fully in control at all times. However it was, by a large margin, the most fun I have ever had with my clothes on

Can't comment specifically on the R66 but IMHO helicopters handle turbulence better than fixed wing. I think they handle gusts better but only on a relative basis. You have to consider the size of the gust to the lower speeds at which a helicopter operates.

I think that density altitude (and therefore high temps) have a greater influence on helicopters performance than fixed wing. However, that may be because I fly a normally aspirated piston helicopter, with a turbine R66, YMMV.

Glenn

Turbine helo performance is affected by DA to a much greater degree than fixed wing.

Partially due to increased wing loading, also do to the fact that helicopters are usually operating far closer to the absolute performance limit.

I have about 300hrs in the R66. It's a very nice helicopter. Nothing that comes out of the robinson factory is very complex. Robinsons get fun in crosswinds, but nothing crazy. ive done a left petal turn in an OGE hover at 10,000ft with two people and full fuel. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

Gary, I agree that helos have made some advancements in the last 20yrs, but really in the utility field whether it be a light, medium or heavy not really many advancements have been made. Now some of the fast light/medium twin, EMS, corporate, people packer helos seem quite stealthy. FADEC starts, glass panels, fenstrons, NOTAR, SAS, Strakes, Composites, so on... The industry cannot replace some of the old reliables for all the other jobs that helos do. Fires, Powerlines, Gulf, Seismic, Spraying, etc, are usually done with models that have been around for close to 40 yrs or more. S61's, 64;s, Bell 205's, 212's,UH-1Hs, AS355, 350s, 315's, 206L...,B's, Now the new ECs are common place for tours and they are of newer designs. The Donald Trumps like to fly the new 76D models and the fancy Agusta Westlands but that is a small percentage of helos. I agree some models are state of the Art and have some Wow factor..., Bells trying to move the broomcloset and offer more visibility on the new 505X yet to come out. The R66 will probably be a great light helo for some time to come. But my roots would steer me to a good ol' trustly reliable 206L3 if I were to move up in the world. I'll quit rambling for now....
Edited: I'll hold back on the DA subject, Turbines, Pistons, Fixed vs Rotor ...

Edited again to add a couple photos:

Take a Bell 47, wrap aluminum foil on it and some paint. The rest is just fluff. Ok, the Bell 47 Soloy is much more than fluff, especially when viewed from 100' below and 500' above the ground at 13,700'.

A mountain pilot and a cargo hook are what make the difference. You start hanging other %#$@ on the helicopters and problems exponentially expand.

I'm not saying a EC135 is better at being a chopper than a Bell 47 or R66. But they sure seem to have a lot of more modern tech. esp airframe and tail rotor tech.

Then again - IA says the if they are started more than 3 times, somethings gonna break. good job security I guess. Typically holiday weekends are busy for these guys. which is unfortunate.

Again - kinda cool. I know I chopper pilot is not an option for me.

I would hope so The technology in a Bell 47 is, in relative terms, ancient having been certified originally in 1946. Mine is a 1964 but still a very honest helicopter in spite of the older technology.

Glenn

I hope your IA friend is joking because that statement is just not true. Not sure what his experience is with helicopters. I've never experienced nor do I know of any helicopter that breaks down that much. If that statement was true, the F.A.A. would have found this new step-child long before now. They do require 100 hour inspections. I've been a professional helicopter pilot for over 17 years. I've acquired over 5,000 hours and an A.T.P. No piston time; all turbine time in Bell and Eurocopter products. I love flying them. They won't cruise at 170 kts like a Bonanza will but they're able to fly to and land just about anywhere. Most I've flown can carry a load of 4 and stay in the air for about 2.5 before needing fuel. If you're truly interested in getting your rotorcraft/helicopter rating then you oughtta get to know someone that flies them and has some appreciable experience. They'll guide you in the right direction.

Best of luck!

I understood this to be a tongue in cheek comment on the relatively high per flight hour maintenance requirements of helicopters.

I understood this to be a tongue in cheek comment on the relatively high per flight hour maintenance requirements of helicopters.

I completed my helicopter add on rating after flying about 2,500 hrs of fixed wing. I have flown R22, R44, Enstrom and Scweizer models. PM if you would like to hear more.

Helicopters are magical to pilot.

Ive been flying helicopters 25 years now. With 90% of my time in military aircraft. The newest helicopters on the market have all the same avionics capabilities that any jet/turboprop has and then all the other technology in the airframes. Case in point the Sikorsky S-76D a truly remarkable helicopter. There are now helicopters coming off production lines with Garmin G5000 suites.

On the military side the Apache Longbow AH-64D and Apache Guardian AH-64E have as much tech as current fighters, in some areas more.

I love flying my Bonanza, but to me, I truly feel I am orchestrating flight when at the controls of a helicopter.

Please keep telling that to anyone that'll listen. I need a TAT system for the Bonanza.

The SAR system certification flying with FAA happened this week.