My daughter is in an aerolab for her summer enrichment program. She gets a couple flights, I thought they were mostly Cessna with a few glider flights and maybe a balloon.

But the coordinator told us that one of the flights is is a helitour at Royal Gorge. I looked into it and the tour company uses Robinson R66's

I've only flown in Army rotary (Blackhawks and Chinooks). I've flown and jumped alot in the military. My dad flew HH-53s.

But I'm not sure about the Robinsons, I just know what I read on GD and the news.

Would you go up in one with your family?

I rode in a R44 with my wife in Hawaii with no doors.

I don't think we died.

Robinson, no way.

No…

There fallin out of the skies like flies! Government knows all about it, right Mack.

Fuck, no.

For a little over a year I flew on an R44 once a month for work from a remote, uninhabited island to Maui.

Now it is pretty much MD500s which I like better.

Pacific Helicopters on Maui?

All depends on the pilot.

Not together for certain unless its a rescue

My wife and I have spent a lot of hours in a R44
Our cousin has one

Robinsons are perfectly fine tour aircraft.  If I was going to take a helicopter tour I would not have any concerns about it being in a Robinson.

The Yugo of helicopters?

NFW!

This, and the maintenance schedule/mechanic. Though a good pilot won't fly something with bad maintenance.

You can die in the safest AC in the world if the pilot is an idiot.

Now if the thread was about the Mini-500 or the BD-5...

If you think Osprey's fall out of the sky too often, you do not want to be in a R22/44/66...

NO FUCKING WAY.....

NO ROBINSON.....

Any further context such as fatality/flight hour? Those numbers are pretty abysmal.

R22 is pretty much the budget training/first owner heli in the US so you can expect a lot of accidents in the low hours newbs.  Same to some extent in the R44 and less so with the R66.

A Google of costs shows (don't hold me to these):

R22 ~$300k
R44 ~$475k
R66 ~$900k

Compared to a MD 500 at $1.9m

These are new costs.

Budget birds for budget people.

The last time I did a precautionary landing (passenger) it was in an R44 but I'd still fly in them.

@rainmaker9

Anyone who says they won't fly in a Robinson helicopter of any type, R66 or otherwise, has no fucking clue what they are talking about and I wouldn't fly with them if they were a pilot as their judgement is suspect.

I say this as a Robinson R44 owner and commercial operator for almost 5 years now, flying primarily tours but also some survey.

I would, and regularly do, fly family and friends, as well as many hundreds of strangers, in Robinson helicopters. Take your family on the tour. You will be as safe as in any other type of helicopter.

Let's look at the best stat's we've got, which come from the NTSB accident database:

- The current NTSB database starts with 2008 data, and that is a good thing because there were many design changes to Robinson helicopters made over the years and thus this data will capture the performance of modern day Robinson configurations. Plus the R66 did not start flying until 2010.

- This is US-only data, which is good because airmanship gets spotty in other parts of the world (some places are good, some not so much).

- 2008-today, there have been a total of 244 helicopter commercial sightseeing accidents, or approx. 17 per year.

- 210 of those accidents have been in non-Robinson helicopters, with 46 involving fatalities, fatality rate approx. 22%. These accidents are nearly all in turbine helicopters.

- 34 of those accidents have been in a Robinson helicopter, with 6 involving fatalities, fatality rate approx. 18%. Nearly all of these are in Robinson R44 piston helicopters.

- Only 1 commercial sightseeing accident in that time period in an R66, no fatalities, but I think that represents the very small number of R66's in use for commercial sightseeing, the vast majority are R44. Since the R66 and R44 are essentially the same helicopter except for the engine, I think it's fair to use all the Robinson stat's as an indication of R66 safety.

- Thus large, non-Robinson, turbine-powered tour helicopters are involved in 6 times the number of accidents Robinson helicopters of all types are.

- We don't know how many hours are flown per type of helicopter. However, per the FAA General Aviation Survey we know approx. how many total hours are in turbine helicopters (incl. the R66) and piston helicopters (incl. the R44). If we use that as a guide, we find that total Part 91 and 135 hours for piston and turbine are roughly 500K and 1400K, respectively, or about a 3:1 ratio.

- Not all of those hours will be air tours, however a study of the Survey shows that, very roughly, the "business with paid crew" hours category, which includes air tours, also shows about a 3:1 ratio, non-Robinson vs. Robinson.

If these stat's are in any way reasonable, this means that you are half as likely to suffer an air tour accident in a Robinson than in a non-Robinson helicopter.

However, to be totally fair, without better stat's for total air tour hours by helicopter type, personally, and admittedly subjectively, I believe the air tour accident rates are more likely to be nearly identical by helicopter type. So whether you step into a Eurocopter, Airbus, Bell, or Robinson, your chances are about the same. But remember that leaving the ground in any sort of conveyance is not as safe as staying on the ground.

BREAK

Historical background, TL/DR warning...

The undeservedly bad reputation of Robinson helicopters comes from a number of factors. None of these factors apply to modern day tour operators.

1. Some less than stellar engineering choices by Robinson in the early days of both the R22 and R44 helicopters. This includes things like lack of governor in a very low rotor inertia machine, some rather serious main rotor blade airworthiness directives (ADs), and a few other odds and ends. These have all been fixed and the designs are very mature and reliable now. ALL helicopter types have been subject to various ADs, by the way, not just Robinson. And all types have their own foibles (Jetranger tail rotor authority, Squirrel non-bladder tanks, the list goes on...)

2. The superior economics and reliability of the designs have lead to Robinson essentially owning the civilian helicopter training market, but the designs (R22 and R44) are nevertheless ill-suited to training. This factor, combined with the normal risks associated with training, causes a high number of accidents in training. The FAA created a special regulation to mitigate this issue, SFAR73, and that has helped a lot, but the training situation is still not perfect.

3. Again, the superior economics and reliability of the designs have lead to a new class of moderately wealthy, private helicopter owners. I.e. helicopters are now available to the merely wealthy, not restricted to the super-rich anymore. Such pilots get minimal experience and training, typically flying under 50 hours per year. As one might expect, this is not a good situation for low accident rates. Combine this with the fact that most of these helicopters are used for off-field landings and the level of operational complexity goes well beyond flying a Cessna from paved runway to paved runway. There are also other characteristics of this demographic including "You can't tell me what to do" and "I don't care if I ball the thing up, I'll just buy another".

4. The incredibly poor airmanship demonstrated in certain non-US countries, most notably Brazil, New Zealand, and to a lesser extent, Australia. Those countries just have a stupid number of Robinson accidents per year, all pilot error. Pilot error includes flying in weather not suitable for the smallest, lightest commercial helicopters on the market, and flying with poor technique when at the wind and turbulence limits of the design.

eta: typo

Hell nope

Absolutely safe, reliable helicopter.  

Don't believe all the GD wannabe's that say no.  They have zero experience other than having some buddy (who has zero experience as well) that says they're a POS.  They also don't know how to read stats, because of course they're going to have more accidents and fatalities since they sell at least 3-4x more of them every year than any other make/model.  All the other <4 pax helicopters are pretty non-existent in the market.  Robinson filled the gap 40 years ago and no one has yet to match the cost and performance.  If they were dangerous, the feds would have shut them down years ago, you wouldn't be able to get insurance on them, and they wouldn't be the worlds' top selling helicopters by a wide margin.

I've flown Robinsons since 1993, back when the R44 was still in development and SFAR 73 didn't exist.  I have 2000 hrs in them as a commercial pilot, CFI/CFII and A&P/IA.  Can't say anything bad things about them other than a R22 will eat your lunch if you're not a good pilot.  When they came out, there was no other underslung rotor system as light as it in the market.....it required additional training.  They build the R44 and R66 on the same system and it flies very similarly to a Bell 206 with those heavier blades and hydraulic controls.

I've lost friends in all kinds of other makes and models over the last 30 yrs, and it has nothing to do with the manufacturer......almost all were pilot error.  One was a medical event, one was a catastrophic mechanical failure.  I'd let any of my four children ride in a Robinson provided I knew the pilot--but that goes for any helicopter or light airplane.

You should be asking about the pilot, not the aircraft, and definitely not on AR15.com

Can you elaborate on this?  I'm curious what makes the R22 more difficult to fly, even for an experienced pilot.

Wow, you go way back with the brand!

This is as good a place as any. No matter where you bring this subject online up you get a very predictable response. Anyone who has never flown a Robinson immediately shits all over it: MIL types, ex-MIL types who went straight into civilian turbine ships, rich kids who learned in G2's and then started flying daddy's EC130, and the odd duck who managed to come up the civilian track in a B47 or Enstrom or something. Anyone who's actually flown a Robinson more than twice will almost immediately defend it.

The R44 holds a singularly unique niche in the helicopter aviation world. There is nothing that can touch its economics that also has 4 seats. Wholesale price to operate is $300ish an hour if you are flying 500 hours a year in commercial service (read that as "commercial insurance"), $400ish an hour if you are flying it privately say around 150 hours a year. Literally just double those numbers for the cheapest turbine machines: R66, Bell 505, an old claptrap MD500/369, an old claptrap Jetranger. More than that for any Eurocopter/Airbus product.

And performance is excellent. It does what the book says it will do if it's healthy. At max. gross weight it's not a mountain machine. With half tanks (typical for tours) it has reasonable margins. With two people and luggage (personal flying machine) the performance is stellar. It handles like a sports car, not a bus. And it has one of the best tail rotors in the business. And the R66 is just more, more, more of that. The R66 can outperform the 505 and EC120 in many ways.

What you can't do in an R44/R66: handle it like a sports car in turbulence, that will kill you. Fly it in winds gusting past 30KN, that might not kill you but it makes it easier to be killed--get a bigger helicopter. Do negative G pushovers, that will kill you. None of those things are necessary or desirable for tours. Fly it like a bus. Keep it on the ground when the weather will have your passengers hurling their guts out. Your autorotations also need to be timely and competent. These are not forgiving helicopters where auto's are concerned. I train auto's four times a year (call me paranoid or safe, either works for me).

If you are willing to spend the dough, these are also extremely modern and well equipped helicopters. Full Garmin glass. Autopilot. Air conditioning. Leather. Bubble windows. Pop-out floats. All available from the factory. A typical tour machine will have AC, leather, bubble windows and floats.

I fly in them all the time with my kid. He's the pilot.

R22, R44 and R66. No qualms whatsoever.

There's an air tour company in Orlando that does air tours in R66's; 3 minute flights around the clock for 10 or so hours every day. I have yet to hear of an accident.

Anyone who says a modern, well-maintained Robinson is a death machine is ignorant or doing the aviation version of REEEEE.

Thanks to the last 3.

That's why I made the post in Aviation. I wanted the gospel from pilots, mechanics and professionals that work with them.

I reapply appreciate it.

Mrs. Notary and I in Myrtle Beach. R44 FTW

Attached File

No. I know guys who have hundreds of hours in them. But, not my family. Haven’t found anything worth the risk, but I haven’t run into a zombie apocalypse, yet.

Yes.

I earned my A&P at a Robbie service center. Generally the people that kill themselves in those helicopters earned it through gross stupidity.

EDIT: Frank wanted the SFAR because it gave him a steady stream of pilots coming to his school for the sign off.

What do you mean? Nobody has to go to Robinson in Torrance for an SFAR73 endorsement. You get it from a CFI at the school you choose to attend. It's not making Robinson any money that way.

It's also worth noting that most insurance underwriters do not require attendance at the Robinson Safety Course. Robinson's tame underwriter, Pathfinder Indemnity, does. Even so, you get what you pay for with Pathfinder and I wouldn't be (and am not) insured by them.

Robinson was a huge proponent of the SFAR because it helped solve huge legal and sales problems. Since it was effective in substantially reducing the accident rate, and the lawsuit rate, machines could continue to ship and Robinson could much more easily point the finger: "The pilot was taught to the standard, violated the standard, and died because he was stupid."

The MU-2 community ultimately wound up doing the same thing with SFAR108, although it had less of a legal and economic effect since it arrived nearly 20 years after the last MU-2 was built.

This was from 2006-2016 (only relative crash info I could find quickly).  R44 data translates to 1.6 deadly accidents per 100,000 hours flown.

Quoting accident studies per aircraft type is worse than useless.

Aircraft that are commonly used in flight training, personal use and other applications where the pilots are typically time building are going to have more incidents.

No Robinson is perfect.  No other aircraft is perfect.  But the R44 fills the tour, light personal use, niche perfectly.

If you are concerned about SAFETY when hiring a ride, worry about the company, the fact the the pilot is likely relatively low time and is building time to get a “better” job and the fact that they have to turn as much meat as quickly and often as possible to make money NOT the aircraft type.

*** I am NOT shitting on anyone working as a CFI, tours, etc… so please don’t go there.****

I have to admit, the first time I flew in an R44 (after numerous flights in turbine helis) I busted out laughing when they started it up since it sounded just like an old VW van I used to own.

Looking at raw numbers without context is deceiving. You’d have to know the cause of each one. Then you can determine whether it’s the aircraft or the pilot responsible.

I fly in Robinson helicopters regularly. Never had a single issue with them. Mind you I fly with a former military pilot in aircraft that are properly maintained.

I suspect that if the aircraft themselves had issues they’d be grounded.  Could be wrong of course. Maybe I’m just lucky.

Initially, you did have to go to Torrence, then you had to go to an authorized instructor, and eventually you just needed to go to an appropriately endorsed instructor.  The FAA almost dropped the SFAR until Frank protested.

Started flying Robinsons in 2007.  No complaints, and yes I took my wife up in one.  I'll be taking my boys as soon as they're old enough to remember it, cause that shit aint cheap.

See post #19 above for MUCH better stat's. The Robinson's look very good in the tour role in comparison to other machines.

Even as an owner/operator/pilot it makes me want to laugh, or cringe, or both. All piston powered machines sound like farm equipment starting up. Especially Hillers And then when the clutch belts start to engage man that really is cringeworthy.

I literally brief my passengers "It'll sound like a tractor starting up, then it'll be all squeaky but that's normal. After that it will start to sound like a helicopter."

Of course as soon as you lift they forget all about that. And the only thing they remember is the landing, so you are on your best behavior setting it down. Unless you are doing the 12 loads an hour ride concession. Then it's just wham-unload-load-go! I've really come to dislike the ride concessions, but they will make you a very efficient pilot and you will learn to fly it at max. gross/max. performance all the time.

A lot has been said about good pilots and good maintenance, and that is critical, of course. But if you ever find yourself looking at doing the $35 for 5 minutes thing pay attention to the loaders and see if they are safe, too. They are a key part of the ride concession machinery, as important as any pilot.

I (obviously) didn't know that. Way before my time, man. I only went over to the Dark Side 10 years ago. I love it so much I've touched the controls of a Cessna exactly once since then.

Worry more about the pilot and maintenance than the aircraft choice.

I learned and soloed in a HP model.  Low tail, O-320, no aux tank, but at least had the tip weights.  Then got my private in a Beta, finally got some Beta II's to fly......all before they went to the new blades.

I've seen negative G pushovers and 30 kt winds before at the factory.  The helicopter will handle it, you just have to be on your toes and know how to recover.  They used to show you some wild stuff out there--because you got to fly with the original test pilots for the 44.




The R22 is a like a go-kart or a sport bike.  It's super responsive and kind of skittish.  You don't move the controls around, you can fly it with two fingers or just pressure.  It's a very lightweight rotor system, so while responsive, it doesn't have a lot of energy stored in it.....so it the RPM drops, it can drop fast.  Now, at the same time you can get it back fast, but there's not time to think about it.  So someone coming from a much larger helicopter with hydraulic controls, a governed turbine engine, SAS, tons of power, etc. is going to have to get used to flying it.  Everything happens a lot faster.  Again, not a bad thing, just takes getting used to, and then they are damn fun.






The first safety school was in 1983......SFAR 73 didn't come out until 1995 and I didn't go out to the factory school until 2000.  No one ever *had* to go to the school......any SFAR 73 endorsed instructor could sign you off for solo/PIC.  The hard part was find an authorized instructor / DPE to give you the sign off for a CFI for the R22 (and the R44 when it came out.)  Sometimes it was easier to go to the factory school than find one of those.  The kicker was the insurance and the ferry requirements.  If you wanted to pick one up from the factory, you had to have been to school.  And if you wanted to instruct with Pathfinder Insurance (which used to be one of the few companies that offered AFFORDABLE Robinson insurance), you had to have been to the school within the last 7 or 10 years?  Fun fact, Pathfinder is owed, or was owned, by Frank's brother-in-law.

Robinson was a big proponent of SFAR 73.  It wasn't a strike against them as much as people try to make it sound like it was.  Frank wanted the requirements to be MUCH higher......he never wanted people using the R22 to instruct in the first place.  The Pathfinder Insurance requirements used to be STUPID high.  When the R44 came out, you had to have something like 200 hrs of PIC in it before you could instruct or take three passengers in it.  I think you could take one passenger after you had 100 hrs PIC.  Either way, we had a guy buy a R22 just to get his time up while he had a R44 on order.  He had the R44 for 6 months or so before he could ever take his kids on a ride together.  It was stupid because the the R44 was so much easier to fly.  They eventually dropped that requirement, but I got the logic initially.....3 passengers was 3x the liability they incurred on the R22.



Well said.....and that's true for just about anything.  There was nothing unsafe about the "v-tailed doctor killer", the Cirrus when it came out (it didn't "need" the chute), and 737-800MAX, etc, all just required some additional training and understanding on the idiosyncrasies of the a/c.

I'm just that dang old!

No.

I would never allow anyone I care about to fly in a Robbi.

I have thousands of hours flying multiple helicopters so, it's just my opinion.

And how many of those hours are in Robinson helicopters?

I don't mean to insult you. You might very well be an excellent and safe Robinson pilot. The problem is that people who take a joy ride while on vacation don't know that.

I personally would not flying a Robinson because I see no need to. I might reconsider if I personally knew the pilot, but at the is point in my life, there is no payoff for me to take chances in small aircraft like the Robinson.

I have done everything possible in a helicopter, and I took many chances in combat, in stateside search and rescue, and fire fighting work. Some of the people in the back of my aircraft didn't live.

You didn't insult me. And how does that have anything to do with your statement "I would never allow anyone I care about to fly in a Robbi."

Are you impugning the design, those who pilot it, or both?

Those who take a scenic tour, or "joy ride" as you call it, in any helicopter have zero knowledge about the skills of their pilot. And if you bothered to read the entire thread, and saw my post about accident stat's, you would know that since 2008, 210 of the 244 commercial sightseeing helicopter accidents occurred in helicopters that were not Robinsons.

So is the entire tour industry too dangerous? Is no helicopter or pilot good enough? Should we all just stay in bed and live vicariously through Youtube videos?

You asked me, and I told you.

The OP asked peoples' opinions. I gave mine. If you don't like, fair enough.

There have been many Robinson accidents.

No freaking way. Wouldn't fly in the new fangled military twin rotor flying brick either

coc 6

He’s allowed to have an opinion and we’re allowed to disagree with it, even make fun of it.

If you put him in a light 44 or a 66 he’d come back and sing a different tune.