R22 vs. S300

[Pietrantonio]

I've been hearing that it's more beneficial to train in the R22 because if you want to get into the S300, then it's only about a 5hr transition, whereas if you trained in the S300, and wanted to get into R22's, the transition requirement is more indepth. Is this valid?

 

[scottyboy75]

Very ture. The SFAR73 to part 61 makes the hour requirements for the 22 cut and dry. Also there are a lot more 22 operators out there then 300CBi.
Shane

 

[MFT1Air]

I've been hearing that it's more beneficial to train in the R22 because if you want to get into the S300, then it's only about a 5hr transition, whereas if you trained in the S300, and wanted to get into R22's, the transition requirement is more indepth. Is this valid?

Your statement I believe is only partially correct. It's more beneficial to train in the R22 because there are more R22 out there in which to fly/train. Should you wish to transition from flying the S300 to the R22/R44, it's definitely going to be more time/money because of the SFAR.

Comparatively speaking, I much prefer the S300, but then fixed wing speaking. . .it's like comparing high wing/low wing. It's rather subjective.

 

[Blackhawk]

I also prefer the 300- but I'm a little biased as the first aircraft I flew was the TH-55 variant. It also has a much better safety record, and is statistically the safest training helicopter ever built. At one time the 296/300 fleet went something like 100,000 hours without a fatal accident. I think this was in the mid 1990s; it was unheard of for this to happen and made AOPA magazine, R&W or some other magazine like that.
What people have said about training in the R-22 is true, however. Train in the Schweizer/Hughes and you will still need to meet the special FAR rules.