carlmeek wrote:
I think the right seat is preferable. With your right hand on the stick, you can use your left hand to operate radio and other stuff that’s in the centre.
You can use the same argument for fixed-wing, still virtually all fixed-wing aircraft are (primarily) flown from the left seat.
Airborne_Again wrote:
You can use the same argument for fixed-wing, still virtually all fixed-wing aircraft are (primarily) flown from the left seat.
Most fixed wing airplanes tough have an inherent stability which allows them to be flown “hands off” for at least a short time or at least you won’t feel too much if you fiddle with something else. Helos don’t do that, at least not the light ones, which is why their controls usually have a load of buttons and switches on them so you don’t have to take off the hand ever.
Nevertheless, there also are some fixed wing airplanes which are flown from the right, I recall seeing some Italian acrobatic plane (possibly a Siai Machetti) which had all primary flight instruments on the right.
AdamFrisch wrote:
Never understood why the others are flown from the right.
It might well be an urban myth, but legend has it that as all original helo pilots were trained by Mr. Sikorsky himself (who would sit on the left), they got to fly from the right. And of course trained the next generation the same way.
@Mooney: yes, the Siai-Marchetti 260. The idea here is/was to train fighter pilots who fly with the right hand on the stick.
Finally, 82 days after paying for the Helicopter and paying insurance at roughly €20 a day, over the weekend Matthew and I got a solid full day of training each to start our PPL (H) conversions. The minor complications in the meantime revolved around getting our instructor revalidated on type, sorting out paperwork and buying full outdoor covers for keeping it out between sessions if needs be. After Day 1 what we hoped to achieve was if we were stranded on an island and this helicopter was the only way out, would we make it. The instructor maybe had a different plan for the day but that was my learning objective. What’s different to an aeroplane:
Starting – Any helicopter with a clutch is like starting a fixed-wing aeroplane with no propeller on it. If it over speeds it will do fiscal harm to your bank account. You take great care not to screw up the priming sequence and be certain of the throttle position. If you exceed 2000rpm without the clutch engaged it calls for a driveshaft inspection.
Taxiing – The art of moving a fixed-wing from point to point on the airfield is usually a benign experience. If you see a helicopter hover taxiing to the fuel pumps, the sheer number of factors that the pilot has considered, and is dealing with on a seemingly simple mission must be considered. As the helicopter lifts it needs left pedal, right cyclic and a subtle twist of the throttle. From that moment on all 4 controls are being manipulated with each input having secondary reactions.
Banked Turns – Die hard Piper Cub habits of leading turns with rudder had to be stamped out of me. You bank with the cyclic and don’t lead with your feet.
Engine Management – In the Cessna 177 I’m flying we are looking at the engine monitor fine-tuning the power/prop/mixture. With the same 360 Lycoming engine in the helicopter, it’s full rich and full RPM (3100-3200) all the time. You look at the gauges and if they are in the green you look away. It’s burning 43 Litres an hour and holds enough for 4hrs and a reserve at realistically 75kts.
Losing 100ft in the cruise – In a fixed-wing if you creep up 100ft you tend to trim it down, rather than tweak the power setting, and catch your planned altitude. In the helicopter, you really need to lose 1" of MP to drop down keeping the datum cruise attitude constant.
Trimming it – In this helicopter the trim moves the centre position of the stick. This is a feature a Robinson doesn’t have, but it also doesn’t have a governor. The H269C in experienced hands can be trimmed in the hover to sit hands-off. I am not such hands at the moment.
They were the main differences. The hard part for fixed-wing pilots like me is the transition to the hover. En route flying is fine and hovering itself is fine in short 1-minute doses. Slowing down through what should be the stall speed so close to the ground and making a large power/pedal input to transition to the hover as transitional lift fades away, is the most challenging part for me. It felt fantastic to set up an approach to clearing in a tillage field and descend all the way down to a few feet.
Coming away from Day 1 the closing thoughts were it – it would be great to get really good at this.
@WilliamF immaculate looking Hughes 269C, keep us posted on progress.
Have 26hrs on the H269 and although slow in cruise and perhaps looking a bit like only its mother could love it, it is a sturdy, simple machine that flies really well. Honest little machine. I’d like to own one myself whenever I finish that rotor rating…
WilliamF wrote:
It’s burning 43 Litres an hour and holds enough for 4hrs and a reserve at realistically 75kts.
Ouch. And I thought my Auster was slow and draggy!
alioth wrote:
Ouch. And I thought my Auster was slow and draggy!
Yes, it’s a bit like a V8 Petrol Land Rover Defender… or a 180hp Piper Super Cub on Bushwheels. Totally impractical for most, thirsty, slow, and expensive but somehow compelling for its utilitarian appeal.
Day 2
7 hours in now, and what seemed impossible a week ago is now doable with concentration. If you want your ego topped up just hover into a stiff breeze, it is quite straightforward. Now apply the left pedal and turn through crosswind, downwind, crosswind and back into wind again while keeping over the same spot 
To focus here only on the differences between the helicopter and fixed-wing, the big thing that stuck out for me this second day was that straight and level in a fixed wing is zero degrees of pitch. Straight and level flight in the 300C is 18.5 degrees nose down. Straight and level in the hover is left skid low. When you get tired your fixed-wing habits come back to mess with you, as you subconsciously pitch up for straight and level flight. It took a lot of mental effort to make a given power setting (3100rpm/21" MP) equal 70kts at a constant altitude holding it accurately. Then add 3" to climb up 500ft and level off accurately, or lose 3" and descend 500ft accurately. It felt a bit like flying in marginal VMC having to reference both the gauges and the picture outside to keep it right.
Simulated engine failures were introduced, in an orderly fashion. Firstly collective full down without rolling off the engine, to get used to the right pedal input, holding the autorotation speed and picking a field. A field near a road, and ideally near a pub is what you want. The outcome is similar to a fixed-wing, you are going down into the best available space below you. Contrary to popular belief this is not the field directly under you just because it is a helicopter. Finally, rolling off the engine for the autorotation is now less daunting having been introduced to the shape of the manoeuvre keeping the engine rpm and not splitting the needles as they call it.
Having a bit of time sitting in Lycoming 360 fixed-wing aircraft now our Cardinal seems benign, efficient, fast, relaxing and tolerant. The 300C is busy, demanding of technique, hugely capable in small spaces and thrilling. The journey from not knowing how to start the helicopter – to being told to hover taxi crosswind down the field, left 180 pedal turn, land on the pad between the building and the parked Robinson has been a riveting learning experience so far.
Great report! Thanks a.lot. keep it coming!
