Oh, I plan to! Just making sure I at least understand the landscape somewhat before jumping in.

I know I wouldn't fly it enough to justify the capital sink, so I'm working a deal to lease it to a small flight school (which will likely help with the insurance issue as well). So, the hour limits on the components become a bigger issue when we're flying her 100-200 hours a year.

Robert

The TT-strap situation has gotten better. The latest straps are good for 48 months or 1200 hours. That's still pretty short for someone like me, but it's a lot better than the initial calendar limit of 24 months.

The TT-strap situation has gotten better. The latest straps are good for 48 months or 1200 hours. That's still pretty short for someone like me, but it's a lot better than the initial calendar limit of 24 months.

Originally the TT-straps were on-condition. There were a couple of accidents in the early 70s that lead to the 1200hr life-limit. The calendar life limit was added in the 80s after a hand full of failures on Bell 212s.

steel-wound. this was really interesting.

Straps have gotten better... Now 48 months instead of 36.

--paul

Robert, I have had helicopters off and on for the last 20 years. I always wanted a 206, just a cool looking helicopter. I just did not want to deal with all the component times along with my other planes, work and family. Bought R44. Not nearly as cool looking but mine is all black so that helps. Also with the helicopter at first it’s all just flying to cool spots to land etc. But you really need a purpose for it after that wears off or you will get the 2 year burn out on it. I have a use for mine so it gets me flying it a lot more but I’m still only about 30-50 hours a year and that’s with a need for it.

Good luck in your search and I do still pinch my self while flying thinking how lucky I am to have a personal jet pack.

steel-wound. this was really interesting.

If I’m not mistaken, the calendar limit was meant to worst-case aircraft that spend a lot of time in highly corrosive environments like the gulf (of America) coast.

At least that’s what they told us at Rucker. Instead of muddying things up with “where has it been” they just said “worst possible scenario: everyone do this”

Which I guess is pretty much how any of these limits happen…

As to the AC: the ones I flew in IERW had it and it was good (enough). We weren’t allowed to fly doors-off, but that may have been good enough if it was an option.

If I made better career or investment choices I’d love a 206. It was more fun than the UH-60 (to me, anyway).

I think almost all heli mfrs use TT straps in the rotor head. The exception would be the Airbus A-Star/Twinstar, but that is still a flexible composite contruction without a thrust bearing that allows for pitch change.

I'm not sure which other modern helicopters do not use TT straps. Any other examples?

Lots. The Robbies use a stack of matched angular contact bearings (Think big wheel bearings precision ground to be the exact same height). The Schweizers are the same I think. The MD500/600 use a big flex pack. (Think a stack of stainless steel wafers.) A number of bigger helicopters use flex beams. The old Enstroms used a lamiflex bearing (I think the Rotorways still do) which was a stack of alternating copper and rubber washers. Enstroms now use TT straps though.

I’ll just park here…

I too recently caught the helicopter bug and obtained my commercial rating a couple years ago. I flew the R44 and eventually bought a brand new R66 direct from the factory. The R66 will out perform the 206 but in my short ownership experience (13 months) I have come to LOATHE the company. I had a failure of the torque sensor and a subsequent fuel injector failure leading to a partial power loss. I have been fighting Robinson for over a year now to reimburse me for the clear warranty claim, $10K! Horrible company!

I now fly the Bell 505. It is a fun machine to fly and I actually put more hours on the helicopter this past year then I did flying fixed wing. As noted previously, the Kaflex driveshaft is nice and its what is used on the "upgraded" Long Ranger 206, aka the 505. Otherwise, the drivetrain of the 505 is the Long Ranger with a more powerful FADEC control SAFRAN turbine. In fact, the tail rotor gear box is stamped Long Ranger.

The training I received at the Bell training center in Forth Worth was really good, but expensive. My interactions to date with the Bell technical rep has been exceptional.

I would do some research on the Van Horn composite blades. I don't know much but the whispering is they have issues and may be the root cause of the recent NYC tour crash.

Robinson definitely has a unique way of doing business. That had a lot to do with me moving on from my R44. I've heard that Airbus Helicopters, Leonardo, etc can also be difficult to work with (especially as a private owner of a single ship instead of a "big" customer with a fleet of aircraft). So far, I've been really happy with my experiences the few times I've had to call Bell or order parts from them.

Congrats!