Whenever people ask about learning to fly helicopters, there is always someone who advises them that it will be less expensive to fly airplanes first, then complete an add-on rating. What do you guys think?
Let us assume that helicopters cost about double, and that the student just wants to be a commercial helicopter pilot, with an instrument rating. They have no particular desire to fly airplanes other than as a less expensive means to that end. Can anyone show by calculation how it will be cheaper to fly airplanes first?
I am hoping to resolve the matter for the purpose of advising future student pilots on the best path to take. From a strictly financial perspective, is it better to train in Airplanes first? or Helicopters first?
Naturally a new pilot may have to build time to be employable, above and beyond the initial training. But, this will be true either way, so I’m mostly curious about the cost of earning the certificate itself.
Joe, doesn’t a commercial helicopter license require only 150 hours, instead of the 250 for airplanes?
150 x $150 = $22,500?
61.129(c)?
Is 50 hours really sufficient for a helo Commercial add-on?
Learn to hover: ~10 hours
Learn maneuvers, especially autorotation, proficient to solo: 10-20 hours
35 hours PIC (i.e. solo): 61.129(c)(2)(1)
Practice until ready for checkride: ~10 hours
Instrument Add-on: 15 hours 61.65(d)(2)(i)
And this would be if everything went perfectly. What do you guys think?
With regard to just the license itself, even a 50 hour add-on plus 250 airplane time will be more expensive than 150 helicopter time.
As for the 50 hour add-on, how could it be possible? 35 hours PIC time "in helicopters" is the requirement, and they would have to do it solo since they can’t log dual as PIC. That would leave only 15 hours of training to learn the basics and master all of the maneuvers for a checkride. 3 hour hover? It’s possible, but I am not talking about the fastest student, nor the slowest.
With regard to employment, how many operators look at Total Time, and how many look at Helicopter Time? And are you assuming that they rent the aircraft to get their 1000-1500 hours, rather than instructing?
I’m don’t mean to prolong the debate, I just want to reach a clear outcome for future pilots that want to fly helicopters for a living. I really appreciate the discussion and all those who have answered. Thanks!!!
If you are going to fly primarily helicopters, then start with them. It’s easier to transition from rotary to fixed wing than the other way around. And if you are going to try and get hired as a copter pilot, i think you’ll find they look at time in the copter as a factor for hiring. I realize its more expensive, but it’s just better to train in what you are going to fly, imho…
#1 by John B on October 25th, 2009
Quote
I learned to fly helicopters before airplanes in the army. Didn’t have to pay for either so I doubt that I could help with your calculations. I would think though, that if you wanted a commercial helicopter ticket with an instrument rating, you’d be better off beginning in the airplane but only if you wanted to make use of the airplane ratings too. The reason is that all of the instrument and cross country hours that you’d need to build would be cheaper in the airplane. You’d still have to repeat some of it in a helicopter to prepare for the check ride but not as much.
But if you have no interest in ever flying airplanes, I’d have to believe that doing it all in a helicopter would be the way to go. It should be easy enough to work through though. Talk to the helicopter school about how much it costs to do the whole thing in their helicopter and how much it would cost to add a helicopter category rating to a commercial, instrument airplane certificate. Then call the airplane folks and ask them how much to take you through the commercial and instrument check rides. Add that number to the helicopter add on number and if it’s less than the helicopter completely training, you’ll have your answer.
References :
#2 by Tom B on October 25th, 2009
Quote
I live in CA. and theres a radio commercial out there beggin for helicopter pilots, ya know, will train,financial assistance guaranteed placement ,never herd one for airplanes though.but as far is it cheeper to get a license for airplanes first? oh I dont know. would it be cheeper to go to poditiary school first if you were planning on becoming a dentist
References :
#3 by Thom on October 25th, 2009
Quote
If you are going to fly primarily helicopters, then start with them. It’s easier to transition from rotary to fixed wing than the other way around. And if you are going to try and get hired as a copter pilot, i think you’ll find they look at time in the copter as a factor for hiring. I realize its more expensive, but it’s just better to train in what you are going to fly, imho…
References :
I’m a pilot, 3 years, My CFI was helicopter pilot for 25 years…
#4 by Joe D on October 25th, 2009
Quote
average cost of Helicopter rental $150/hour
average cost of airplane rental $90/hour
Time needed for commercial license 250 hours
250 x 150 = 37,500
250 x 90 = 22,500
Even if you took 50 hours to make the transisiton to rotary wing after you had a fixed wing license that would be another $7,500
22,500 + 7,500 = 30,000
That is still $7,500 less that doing the whole thing rotary. None of this includes any other expenses except the aircraft needed for training. Add in the CFI. Rotary wing CFI’s cost more that Fixed wing CFIs. It is a simple matter of supply and demand. there are lots more fixed wing CFIs than there are rotary wing CFIs so they can charge more.
In addition, add in the extra hours needed to be employable as a commercial pilot. Most angencies require a minimum of 1500 hours total time before they’ll hire a helicopter pilot. How do you get those hours? Teaching is the answer, so is renting. Well, 1500 minus the 250 leaves 1250 hours. It will take an awful long time to build those hours if you only have a rotary certificate in your hands. How much does that cost in lost income…
ok, I stand corrected on the aeronautical experience for commercial helicopter but the TT requirement for employment doesn’t change so now add the other 100 hours to the time you have to take after certification to be able to get a job other than flight instructing and the money still doesn’t change much. As for the 50 hours, I can say from personal experience that if you already hold a Commercial certificate fixed wing, 50 hours of instruction for transition should be adequate for most people. I have seen people learn to hover in as little as 3 hours. Not to mention, not everything has to be learned independently, some of those training tasks can be combined. Also, how can 50 hours not be sufficient? That is one third of the total time required by the FARs. By your own estimate then there is no way that a person could possibly learn everything in 150 hours when starting from the beginning.
References :
#5 by Obelix on October 25th, 2009
Quote
I don’t think it would be cheaper, but it probably wouldn’t be that much more expensive and you’d end up with both licenses rather just one. If someone wanted to get both licenses I would definetly recommend getting their airplane license first and then adding on the helicopter license rather than the other way around.
References :