just wonndering why we dont used helicopters in CAP ? i think be good
Quote from: stkgc on January 22, 2010, 05:27:49 PM
just wonndering why we dont used helicopters in CAP ? i think be good
Why would they be good?
First, they're too expensive when compared to GA aircraft. Second, there's a lack of rated pilots and instructors. Third, they're a lot more dangerous for low hour pilots compared to GA birds.
that make sense thankyou
Plus helicopters don't fly. They just the beat the air into submission.
We actually had a big discussion on this. To expensive to operate and maintain. In oder to get anything useful, we would need turbines. An MD500E or Bell 206 at least. Your looking at about 1.7 million for one.
Operating costs are outrageous. Figure about $500 per hr. Just to do a Form 5 in one would probably run you about $1000.
Training for a helicopter on a funded Form 91 would cripple CAP in costs and time. You would probably need anywhere between 700-1000 hrs before you could really head up to the mountains in a helicopter and use it for SAR. In my agency, we fly the MD500E. We are required to have 1500hr total time with 1000hrs turbine helicopter to perform SAR ops in the mountains. For maintenance. Wheeeeewww.. Costs are through the roof. If a pilot were to hot start an engine, $245,000. Main rotor blades are about $55,000 for an MD500. Igniter, $15,000. Main Rotor hub, $130,000. Get the picture? And these are all time parts. Once they his their tim limits, they MUST be replaced. Aside from the frame and the skin. Most everything else on a helicopter has a time use limit.
As far as not having helicopter pilots. Oh believe me, if CAP got helicopters, CAP would get pilots. Probably more so than people who join to fly airplanes. However, low time R-22 pilots need not apply. Piston helicopters would be useless for SAR unless you were searching low MSL and didn't need to pick anything or anyone up. Trust me. Id love it. But CAP would be bankrupt.
Quote from: Flint on January 22, 2010, 05:58:03 PM
Plus helicopters don't fly. They just the beat the air into submission.
Helicopters are the purest form of flight my friend. Forwards, backwards, sideways, hover. Pull off the ramp and go straight up. MMMMMM.....Love it.
Quote from: Flint on January 22, 2010, 05:58:03 PM
Plus helicopters don't fly. They just the beat the air into submission.
No...they are so ugly the ground repels them!
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 22, 2010, 06:30:23 PM
Quote from: Flint on January 22, 2010, 05:58:03 PM
Plus helicopters don't fly. They just the beat the air into submission.
Helicopters are the purest form of flight my friend.
If riding in an aircraft is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.
To really experience flight, try skydiving! ::)
Quote from: MSgt Van on January 22, 2010, 06:41:07 PM
If riding in an aircraft is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.
To really experience flight, try skydiving! ::)
Heh - that's just "falling"...
Someone correct if I am wrong...but I think if a member owns a rotor they can use it on missions. At least that was case at one time. I new a menber that had a Bell 206 for his personal and business use. He flew it on a few missions. But he was an ex Army pilot with about 6000 hours. The fuel and safety are main concerns.
Quote from: stkgc on January 22, 2010, 05:27:49 PM
just wonndering why we dont used helicopters in CAP ? i think be good
We do use helicopters. We just don't
operate helicopters. :)
Quote from: Eclipse on January 22, 2010, 06:43:03 PM
Quote from: MSgt Van on January 22, 2010, 06:41:07 PM
If riding in an aircraft is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.
To really experience flight, try skydiving! ::)
Heh - that's just "falling"...
With Style! ;D
Quote from: Eclipse on January 22, 2010, 06:43:03 PM
Quote from: MSgt Van on January 22, 2010, 06:41:07 PM
If riding in an aircraft is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.
To really experience flight, try skydiving! ::)
Heh - that's just "falling"...
There's only two things in freefall I can't do that an airplane can: go up, and land (with style). Everything else is a go!
If fixed wings are fun, then rotorcraft are pure sex.. That's why it's so darn expensive.. I think the old Bell 47 would suffice quite nicely on a mission, thank you.. Pull pitch and away we go..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AgustaWestland_EH101
Back in the Cadet days we built a "gyrocopter" from plans ordered from the back of popular mechanics. It cost nearly $400.00, and 1 lawnmower engine. We all took turns flying it, until it slammed into the side of a hangar at the County Airport. Years later we found out it was not only illegal in CAP, but should a person have gotten seriously hurt the Senior Member assisting us could have been sued.
Wow.....great memories from a CAP that accepted idiots and screwups (1990-1999)
Quote from: C-150 on January 22, 2010, 06:54:28 PM
Someone correct if I am wrong...but I think if a member owns a rotor they can use it on missions. At least that was case at one time. I new a menber that had a Bell 206 for his personal and business use. He flew it on a few missions. But he was an ex Army pilot with about 6000 hours. The fuel and safety are main concerns.
I believe that was back in the good old days. I remember seeing info in the regs about rotorcraft in the 1990s, but I think that's all been removed now and they are not approved at all.
No helicopters now. CAPR 60-1 para. 2-4(a) Ultralight, aerolight, hang glider and similar aircraft, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air, experimental, primary category, and home-built aircraft are not authorized for use on any CAP flight activity.
But in the good old days CAPM 55-1 was "CAP Member-Operated Helicopter Operations." This got rolled into CAPR 55-1 "CAP Emergency Services Mission Procedures." Helo ops disappeared from CAPR 55-1 in the October 1998 revision. Just about the time Spike was having fun.
Two other threads that start out - why aren't there helos in CAP?
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=6167
http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=8931
Mike
Quote from: lordmonar on January 22, 2010, 07:17:15 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on January 22, 2010, 06:43:03 PM
Quote from: MSgt Van on January 22, 2010, 06:41:07 PM
If riding in an aircraft is flying, then riding in a boat is swimming.
To really experience flight, try skydiving! ::)
Heh - that's just "falling"...
With Style! ;D
I'll buy the "Style" part.
But "falling?"
(http://hphotos-snc3.fbcdn.net/hs099.snc3/16652_233949594408_521899408_4170596_5523121_n.jpg)
That photo was taken at a horizontal speed of about 105mph and a vertical speed of about 73mph.
Unfortunately thats still about a 6400 foot per minute descent rate. Not exactly your average landable sink rate. :) And a glide ratio of 1.5:1 is only just a tad better than your average brick with a little bit of a shove.
But then, its still a ton of fun.
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 22, 2010, 06:30:23 PM
Quote from: Flint on January 22, 2010, 05:58:03 PM
Plus helicopters don't fly. They just the beat the air into submission.
Helicopters are the purest form of flight my friend. Forwards, backwards, sideways, hover. Pull off the ramp and go straight up. MMMMMM.....Love it.
Well, I wouldnt say theyare the purest form of flying. I would gliding is the purest form of flying. No engine. You are actually "flying" the aircraft the entire time from take off to landing.
Quote from: flyguy06 on January 23, 2010, 06:54:51 AM
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 22, 2010, 06:30:23 PM
Quote from: Flint on January 22, 2010, 05:58:03 PM
Plus helicopters don't fly. They just the beat the air into submission.
Helicopters are the purest form of flight my friend. Forwards, backwards, sideways, hover. Pull off the ramp and go straight up. MMMMMM.....Love it.
Well, I wouldnt say theyare the purest form of flying. I would gliding is the purest form of flying. No engine. You are actually "flying" the aircraft the entire time from take off to landing.
Please tell us what the guy in the left seat is doing in a powered airplane if he isn't "flying" it.
As an aside - to fly is heavenly; to hover is divine.
Being a glider pilot, helicopter pilot and fixed wing pilot, I would have to disagree.
Disagree with whom? Me, or flyguy?
Just asking. No biggie either way.
flyguy. Sailplanes are subject to the lift. When the wind says your done, your done. A helicopter, I can go ANYWHERE I want in any direction. I can even fly backwards to get there.
I am sure this will seem blasphemy to both fixed wing and rotor wing diehards, but there is another option; The AutoGyro. Low acquisition cost, low operational cost, low fixed wing training transition costs, low and slow flight, short take off roll from unimproved strips, and if the engine quits, unpowered autogyroing ( is that a word?) is still better than just falling out of the sky....
There was a company awhile back trying to market an approved airframe ( most are experimentals) for police use. I am not sure if they ever sold anyone on the concept.
I think we can rule out blimps, hangliders and jetpacks for CAP use.
Major Lord
Since we're thinking out of the box how about balloons or blimps for low and slow observation? We see lots of blimps advertising at sporting events and there is a company offering rides in the San Francisco area. No CAP doesn't have blimps but at one wing owns a hot air balloon. Of course the balloon can only go where the wing allows and only when it is light so the blimp would be the better choice. That would mean we'd be the Civil HOT AIR Patrol!
Seems to me that there is no shortage of "hot air" on this blog.
Quote from: sparks on January 23, 2010, 05:24:56 PM
Since we're thinking out of the box how about balloons or blimps for low and slow observation? We see lots of blimps advertising at sporting events and there is a company offering rides in the San Francisco area. No CAP doesn't have blimps but at one wing owns a hot air balloon. Of course the balloon can only go where the wing allows and only when it is light so the blimp would be the better choice. That would mean we'd be the Civil HOT AIR Patrol!
The AF is starting a blimp program according to AF times. Primarily for comm relay.
Just a question.
If 60-1 says we don't do lighter then air craft......how is it that CAP owns hot air balloons and has a balloon pilot rating?
Correct, 60-1 paragraph 2-4a excludes flight activity in numerous air vehicles including hot air balloons. I can only speculate how a hot air balloon could operate. My guess is a waiver for a particular activity would be involved and it would be tethered.
Where's Christie when we need her?
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 23, 2010, 08:42:14 AM
flyguy. Sailplanes are subject to the lift. When the wind says your done, your done. A helicopter, I can go ANYWHERE I want in any direction. I can even fly backwards to get there.
..and land when you arrive, without the benefit of an airport.
I have nothing to contribute other than to say that SimCopter was one of my favorite games ever.
Quote from: raivo on January 27, 2010, 02:56:50 AM
I have nothing to contribute other than to say that SimCopter was one of my favorite games ever.
Hey, I loved that game!
I always flew the Hughes 500 when I played it.
Quote from: Major Lord on January 23, 2010, 05:08:42 PM
There was a company awhile back trying to market an approved airframe ( most are experimentals) for police use.
I think you are referring to the Groen Brothers Hawk 4 gyroplane which played an integral part in [flying] security during the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, UT.
I believe Groen Brothers Aviation is still operating from Buckeye airport about an hour west of Phoenix, AZ.
http://www.historicaviation.com/product_info.po?ID=10927&product=Apparel&category=military&subcategory=Military%20Helicopters
This is relevant to some of our interests. And I got told by one guy a work that it was "offensive" (he was a glider guy and a really good aerodynamicist. I really wish we still had some in our hangar.
Quote from: ascorbate on January 28, 2010, 01:48:51 AM
Quote from: Major Lord on January 23, 2010, 05:08:42 PM
There was a company awhile back trying to market an approved airframe ( most are experimentals) for police use.
I think you are referring to the Groen Brothers Hawk 4 gyroplane which played an integral part in [flying] security during the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, UT.
I believe Groen Brothers Aviation is still operating from Buckeye airport about an hour west of Phoenix, AZ.
Doc,
Thanks, that's the one I had in mind. Very nice concept. http://www.groenbros.com/hawk5.php
Major Lord
I see an advantage over airplanes because it cant stall and has a slower airspeed. 46mph. However, it cant hover. Which keeps it from competing with helicopters.
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 28, 2010, 05:12:17 PM
I see an advantage over airplanes because it cant stall and has a slower airspeed. 46mph. However, it cant hover. Which keeps it from competing with helicopters.
It can in a 46 mph headwind! ;D
Quote from: Flint on January 22, 2010, 05:58:03 PM
Plus helicopters don't fly. They just the beat the air into submission.
LOL!
Quote from: Gunner C on January 28, 2010, 06:53:25 PM
Quote from: Flying Pig on January 28, 2010, 05:12:17 PM
I see an advantage over airplanes because it cant stall and has a slower airspeed. 46mph. However, it cant hover. Which keeps it from competing with helicopters.
It can in a 46 mph headwind! ;D
So can a 172 with full flaps...
I would like to see CAP get into the helo side, however, in order to get a helicopter that is worth while, your looking at $500K plus minimum for something very used. You could go cheaper, R-22, R-44, or a 300C, but you wont have power to do much more than a slow flying 172. Is there a place? Yes, we could use them. Its just to unrealistic unfortunately.