Rotorway Purchase Analysis
DISCLAIMER - READ THIS FIRST!
Below is a compilation of my thoughts while making my decision whether to
buy a Robinson R-22 or a Rotorway Exec162. The information contained in this document must
not be used to make decisions concerning the safety of these products or as a guide or
recommendation to purchase these products. This document may contain errors. No claim or
judgment as to the safety
merits of these products is implied or should be assumed. The data does not
comprehend the actual flying time for either aircraft fleet which is an important factor
in determining the safety of any aircraft.
Update - Read this next...
Cost was not the primary decision factor for me. I'm experienced at and enjoy building
projects like this. I was a builder of road race and off-road racing motorcycles for more
than a few years as well as maintain my own fixed wing aircraft. Therefore, my decision
really was whether I wanted to just fly helicopters only or build a large complex project,
and maintain and customize the helicopter myself, in addition to flying. My final decision
was to purchase the Exec162F new from the factory because I thought it would be a lot of
fun to build it. In the meantime I'll rent 300CB's and R22's until my Exec is
completed.
FINAL Update - January, 2005
After nearly 6 years of building and flying my Rotorway I
have had a lot of fun but also experienced frustration
and disappointment due to some of the design issues inherent with the Rotorway Exec162F.
The aircraft has great potential however it's chief issues lay in the transmission system. Counter to
expectations, the chain drive transmission and the belt drive tail rotor
are actually not the issue. Rather it's the fact that the
secondary drive shaft uses the airframe as an integral part of the
the transmission rather than a separate and isolated transmission as most helicopters. This design
decision resulted in a tremendous cost savings but it also the Achille's heel of the helicopter and
has resulted in more than a few inflight breakages and related
crashes. The liquid cooled powerplant is somewhat underpowered and has relatively short overhaul times.
However, maintained properly, it's reasonably reliable.
The Rotorway162F is a real helicopter and has quite a few positive attributes but, with the exception of
the rotor head, the design and the parts it is built from are not anywhere near the standards of
a certified aircraft and one should consider that carefully along with the type of missions one plans
to fly. For a dedicated owner, willing to become and expert on the construction and maintenance of the ship
as well as carefully checking, maintaining, and double checking before each flight, the Rotorway162F
can be a good flyer. .
I spent approximately $90,000 completing my Rotorway to get it as close
to accepted aviation standards as one could get and never had a significant problem in close to 100
hours of flying but.... I was always looking over my shoulder anticipating that
moment when the transmission problems would rear their ugly head. That's something potential
buyers need to consider. If you are confident the solution to this issue is resolved then it's all good.
I ended up selling my Exec162F for $95,000 to a very motivated buyer. Unfortunately, the buyer
believed he could teach himself how to fly a helicopter and went on to crash and destroy it. It was a shame,
I put a lot of myself into building that ship!
The emotional and learning experience of building my own helicopter and the wonderful people I've met
as part of the process was awesome and amazing and a once-in-a-lifetime experience and I have no regrets for those reasons alone.
Best of luck on your search,
Ron Curry
Reprint of my August'98 rec.aviation.rotorcraft post...
I'm a SEL, instrument rated private pilot with a fresh rotorcraft rating and in the
market for a personal helicopter. I have owned two previous airplanes over the last 20
years and currently own a Piper Turbo Arrow.
I've been doing a lot of research on Robinson R-22's and Rotorway as an alternative to
the R-22. I thought I would share what I have found and some of my own opinions with the
group. The information I was looking for fell into several areas:
- Cost to purchase an R-22 vs. Exec
- Handling characteristics of R-22 vs. Exec
- Resale value of Exec
- True cost of building and completion an Exec
- True effort and time to build vs. claimed 300 hrs
- Real maintenance cost of the Exec
- Maintenance time vs. flying time
- Engine reliability/TBO
- Airframe, rotor, rotor head, drive train, and tail rotor reliability/TBO's
- Crash history
- Real performance vs. claimed
- Insurance costs
I've been pulling data from many sources:
- Trade-a-plane plus other aircraft for sale sources
- Owners Web sites about Rotorway Execs
- Dejanews searches of old newsgroup posts
- Discussions with 6 Current Exec owners several of which have >200 hrs on their
machines
- Approx. 10 owner/builders who are currently selling their Execs
- Owners/former owners of R-22's
- Discussions with R-22 A&P's
- NTSB records back through 1989 (I'm only interested in Execs and mostly in 162f's so
didn't bother with Scorpions)
- A visit to the Rotorway factory and a test flight
- A visit to the Robinson factory plus about 10 hrs in an R-22
So here's what I've found:
- Cost to purchase a used R-22 vs. a new kit or used Exec.
R-22's basically range from around $40k-$50 for a late '80's/early 90' run out
aircraft
to around $115k for a freshly overhauled one. There are also lots of low time older R-22's
that are close to the 10yr TBO that are priced way to high considering that a 5-6 year old
aircraft with 300 hours on it is probably worth less then a 3 year old one with 1300 hours
on.
A few used Exec 90's and a few used 162F's seem to be around and in the $35k-$60k price
range and most of these have less than 100 hours. The new kit is $62.3k. Every one of the
Execs I've looked at are absolutely cherry. Virtually all of the really low time
aircraft (like 0-10 hrs) are builders who don't have their rotorcraft rating. Most of
ships I've found with more than 100 hrs are owned guys who had their rating prior to
building the Exec.
- Handling characteristics of R-22 vs. Exec
Having flown both (but much more time in the R-22) I'd have to say the Exec is much
more stable than the R-22. It hovers much easier and autos are extremely docile. The R-22
is very responsive (some might say twitchy) and seems to react almost instantly to the
slightest cyclic input while the Exec 162F is far less sensitive and has more delay from
cyclic input to aircraft reaction. The T-bar cyclic on the R-22 is very cheesy but, at the
same time, you rap your knuckles lowering the collective all the way on the Exec. A key
safety consideration is that Rotorway helicopter rotors spin clockwise like the Europeans
- remember it's LEFT pedal on those autorotation entries! I could say a lot more here but
I think they are both solid aircraft from a handling standpoint although I prefer the Exec
a tad just because it's a little less twitchy. I could be a bit biased since I got my
rating in the Schweizer 300CB which is really slow handling and has a similar control
configuration to the Exec.
- Resale value of Exec
This is somewhat of a concern to me since the Exec is not certificated. My observation
is it will be a lot harder to sell an Exec than an R-22 if for no other reason then the
fact it is a homebuilt experimental. I expect Exec 90's and 162F's to hold their value
better than other kit helicopters simply because they are a bit closer to a certificated
helicopter in construction and there seems to be a reasonable support network. If I buy an
Exec though, I'm going to assume I won't get my investment back though even if I sell it
with low time.
UPDATE: The Exec is nowhere close to a certified helicopter and most sell for
about half of the original kit price on the used market.
- True cost of building and completing an Exec
All indicators are that Rotorway has put together a very complete kit. Virtually every
builder I talked to said it didn't cost much more than the cost of the kit + avionics
except for new parts they had to order due to their own building mistakes. Seems as though
you should count on $65k-$70k when done.
UPDATE: Count on about $70k just to get it flying then $10k to $20k to make
it nice.
- True effort and time to build vs. claimed 300 hrs
Consensus seems to be this is more like 400-600hrs for the very mechanically
experienced and inclined. Longer if you "are just a pilot". It is not "bolt
together". A lot of precision holes to be drilled, there is sheet metal fabrication,
machining of parts, fiberglass work, and bunch of finishing on the cockpit are
necessary. Rigging the aircraft so it will fly safely and reliably is complex enough that
most builders I've talked have someone experienced help them.
UPDATE: You can build one in about 400 hours with several people and at least
one experienced builder but it will be low quality. Plan on 900-1500 hours
depending on the quality you desire.
- Real maintenance cost of the Exec
I poked and prodded on this one real hard especially with the guys who had more than
100 hrs on their machines. Seems the Rotorway guys are real conservative on component life
limits so they recommend changing a number of components on a frequent basis. They
recommend changing the rotor drive chain ( a triple wide #65 roller chain in an enclosed
oil bath) every 100 hrs although several owners told me they believe this should be
changed to at least 200hrs and maybe more. These are about $200 and supposedly easy to
change.
I haven't quite tracked down all the details here but have some data on other major
items. For the Exec162F: rotor blades/head 1500hrs (new blades, rotor head parts ~$3500),
engine 1000hrs (factory OH ~$6000). There are some other relatively low cost life limited
components in the drive train as well: main drive chain 100hrs (as above), tail rotor
drive belts 200hrs (don't recall exact price - relatively cheap).
On the other hand the entire R-22 aircraft has a life limit of 2000hrs which could mean
a lot of relatively low maintenance hours. I don't have enough data on this to comment on
how many components really reach this. R-22 2000hr OH is $66k minimum as quoted from
Robinson. Several owners I've talked to say this is typically in the $75k range. You will
have to pay about $1800/year for annual inspections.
(Update: See the Exec162F
Operating Cost web page. The Exec162F effectively has a life limit of 2000hrs as well.
Most of the aircraft structural components are recommended by Rotorway for change out at
2000hrs. In fact, many major components get replaced or overhauled at 1000 and 1500hrs.
The cumulative cost of Exec162F replacement components seems to be about a wash with the
cumulative cost of R-22 annuals however, assuming your own labor is free)
UPDATE: Cost of flying a Rotorway can be very low if you don't fly it much
(less than 20 hours
per year). More than that and maintenance becomes high. Parts costs are not cheap
from Rotorway and they wear out much faster than on a certified ship like the
R-22. Also, If you must pay an A&P to work on your Rotorway it will be
much MORE expensive than a certified helicopter to maintain due to the inferior and
low lifespan parts.
- Maintenance time vs. flying time
I heard a horror story from a post I found in Dejanews about "fly 1 hour, fix 3
hours" for the Exec90. Owners I've talked to say it's just like any other helicopter
but it's more like the other way around - the difference is you can't be "just a
pilot". You must do it yourself after getting trained by Rotorway and having done the
construction. The high time Rotorway owners ("high-time" for Rotorway pilots
seems to be in the 250-500 hour range) told me they typically go 20 hours with no other
maintenance necessary than thorough preflight.
(Update: The maintenance schedule for the Exec162F is very aggressive. You will
spend a lot of time working on your Rotorway if you follow the schedule but no one I can
find agrees with the "fly 1, fix 3" claim.)
UPDATE: Actually, now I've found many now that believe in the fly 1, fix 3
claim. It may not actually be "fix 3" but it is certainly "maintain/inspect/fix 3".
Having paid my $2000+ to go to the
Rotorway maintenance training I can honestly say
it is a joke. You won't learn much there. It's a couple of hours of basic stuff
like adjusting the valves and doing an oil change - 1/100th of what you need to
know.
- Engine reliability
The NTSB data I found shows only one 162F crash due to real engine failure (not fuel
starvation stupidity) unless I missed some. Even that one was due to a guy installing the
wrong size hose in the coolant system which subsequently came off in flight. On the other
hand in the early 90's there were a number of Exec 90's forced landings due to stuck
valves. Apparently this was fixed by Rotorway in later Exec 90's and all 162Fs with
different valves/valve guides or the like. It's unclear however, what percentage of
Rotorway incidents don't get reported to the NTSB given the nature of
homebuilders/homebuilt aircraft.
It seems a number of R-22BII's have valve sticking problems. Apparently, the IO-360
runs pretty hot in the R-22 configuration and you have to be real careful to follow the
shutdown procedure exactly. Also, we had a Schweizer drop a valve in flight the other day
at the school I get commercial instruction at. It uses an IO-320. Seems certificated
engines have their share of problems as well.
(Update: Exec162F engine reliability seems to be largely dependent on the quality
of the construction - routing of hoses, drive train alignment, etc. Sources indicate the
new engine in the 162F is quite good.)
UPDATE: I never had problems with my engine but the valve train is 1930's
technology and requires constant re-adjustment. Top-end overhaul is required at
500 hours and most other components do not last that long. There seems to be a
high incidence of electrical problems and sudden engine stoppages in flight. The
Exec162F ignition and fuel injection are fully electronic and if a fuse blows
the engine stops!
- Airframe, rotor, rotor head, drive train, and tail rotor reliability
I've asked MANY questions here about airframe cracks, rotor blade failures, rotor head
failures, drive train and tail rotor failures. From owners and NTSB reports it appears
there are no failures of the airframe or rotor blades or heads in the US. I did learn of a
rotor blade delamination in Sri-Lanka on a Exec90 which caused a non-fatal crash. This was
apparently due to the owner using some sort of solvent to strip paint from the blade which
got under the lamination and dissolved the adhesive. The guy then tried to glue the blade
with superglue and it delaminated in the initial hover! I've been told there are others
but these are not documented anywhere.
I do have some reservations about the tail rotor drive however. It is a belt drive and
when I first heard this I concluded I wouldn't even consider buying this aircraft for that
reason. Later, after inspecting the mechanism in detail on several machines at the
airport I'm based at I changed my mind. I'm told that if you follow the book on
assembly and maintenance there are few problems however. I would still rather have a
shaft. Apparently, there has been at least one in-flight tail rotor failure on an
early Exec90 due to improper belt tension. Rotorway has since gone to a different kind of
belt and has made a tension check part of the pre-flight checklist. There was also another
tail rotor failure on a 162f due to the owner over torquing the tail rotor shaft attach
bolts (NTSB report) but this is clearly "operator error"
(Update: After talking to a lot of other owners I quite convinced now that the
belt driven tail rotor is quite good - despite the negative comments it receives.)
WRT the R-22, it seems these are pretty bullet proof except for main transmission seals
leaking which require the whole rotor assembly to be removed. I have to tell you though
there are more than a few components on the R-22 that look pretty weak though. Those flex
couplings on the tail rotor shaft are the wimpiest things I have ever seen - take a look
some time before you fly. You'll see what I mean.
UPDATE: The airframe is ok, the rotor/rotorhead are great but the drive train
is totally inadequate and prone to shaft breakages. The Tail Rotor works very
reliably if maintained properly.
- Real performance vs. claimed
My experience with the R-22 is it delivers claimed performance (not true on the 300CB
however). Feedback from Exec owners says mostly the same. The magazine articles and my own
test flight at Rotorway confirm that at least in Phoenix Arizona the Rotorway delivers the
book performance.
- Insurance costs
Haven't received all the details yet here but I expect the Rotorway to be significantly
cheaper for the following reason: If I purchase an R-22 I'll probably have to get a loan
and the lender will require full hull coverage in addition to liability. I estimate this
to be between $6k and $10k. If I purchase an Exec162F I'll pay cash and just get liability
and self insure the hull which should be at least half of what the R-22 requires. This is
a personal choice. Otherwise I would expect the R-22 to be cheaper due to it's
certification status.
Initial conclusions:
- The R-22 is a neat little helicopter with good performance. Although you have to
admit it's construction is similar to the Exec in some ways (in some cases better and in
others not as good), it's certificated and that feels good but it's more expensive to own
and maintain because it requires an A&P for maintenance, Robinson/Lycoming parts are
expensive and, probably the most damning issue is it becomes run out after 10 years even
if the Hobbs time is low. It has its share of mechanical reliability problems but they
seem to be few and the statistics show it's very reliable if maintained properly. It is
held in high esteem by many and holds a predictable resale value based on age and Hobbs
time.
- The Exec162F is also a neat little helicopter with good performance. My personal opinion
is it looks much better than the R-22. In some areas it's construction is a bit more
hi-tech than the R-22 in others it is not and it is not certificated. Although the data
seems to say it CAN be very reliable it has a somewhat unconventional drive train which
makes some folks nervous and, of course, this is greatly influenced by the quality of the
assembly so the results vary greatly depending on the skill and diligence of the builder.
It doesn't have a built-in 10 year depreciation like the R-22 but does have a number of
expensive life limited components less than 2000hrs and since it's not certificated and
there aren't many A&P's who will work on them it will probably be difficult to sell.
On the upside you can replace the whole helicopter for less than the price of the R-22
overhaul.
(Update: I've found that in general, Rotorways are used
as personal aircraft meaning they seldom get more than 25-50 hours/year. I've heard of
a couple of Rotorways with more
than 500 hours on them but they are few and far between and have had extensive
maintenance on them. R-22's, on the other hand,
are frequently used for commercial purposes and get a lot of time on them. I've personally
flown an R-22 with more than 5000 hours on it - it's been overhauled twice.)
- On a cost basis the Exec162F could be less expensive way to fly helicopters and that
it is at least as good as the R-22 in terms of usability and handling. But you
have to be willing to work on it - a lot!
- Safety, the overriding consideration for me is safety. If you want to just fly
helicopters and don't mind the maintenance cost and depreciation there is no doubt, the
R-22 could be the best choice if you can find an A&P you can trust. Your A&P will
keep it safe and you just need to pre-flight and remember to take it into the shop. There
seem to be lots of dealers who can work on them. On the other hand, if you like to work on
your own aircraft and are reasonably skilled, disciplined, and patient and you conform to
the Rotorway maintenance recommendations it seems the Exec162F can be safe and reliable as
well. The issue is there is a wide variation of the above skills in owners since anybody
with $60k can buy and build an Exec162f in his barn, and then try to fly it around the
pasture and the NTSB reports bear this out.
Finally, I have an observation of why you see a number of Execs up for sale prior to being
completed shortly after they are built.
#1. These are complex machines to build and it seems that more than a few of the owners of
the unfinished machines under-estimated the time and commitment required to complete the
aircraft and want to salvage part of their initial investment. Frequently, the process
takes so long that their interests or financial situation changes as well.
#2. I found that with many of <20hr Exec's for sale I inquired about the owner was not
a certificated helicopter pilot. Most of them seemed to be the kind of guys who liked to
build things like R/C planes, construction projects, auto restoration etc. and decided to
try their hand at helicopters. The general thread was "I always wanted a helicopter
so I bought a Rotorway. I just completed it and did some test hovering but now I think I
want to get an airplane now". The impression I got was that these guys where
convinced how great it would be to have their own helicopter but grossly underestimated
how challenging it is to maintain them and learn fly them. Make sure you go in with
your eyes wide open!
So what am I going to do?
Two weeks ago there was no doubt in my mind I was going to get an R-22 but I'm having
stomach pains about spending $85k-$115k and the insurance and the fun of building the
Rotorway is attractive. I flew and researched the Exec162F and now I'm on the fence. It's
a build or buy decision. I plan to make the decision in the next week or so.
(Update: Ultimately, I determined that there wasn't that much cost difference
(both initial cost and operating costs) between a used, mid-time R-22 and a new Exec162F
to make it the deciding fact (yes there is a difference). The Exec162F is a dream or a
nightmare, depending on whether you have the skills and enjoy the maintenance aspect or
not. I decided to go with the Exec162F.)
LAST UPDATE: My position has changed. The used mid-time
R-22 would be a MUCH better investment regardless of skills - whether you enjoy maintenance or not.
This is due to the poor engineering of the many of the Rotorway components and
the low resale value. It's a shame, the Exec162F has so much potential to be a
serious helicopter - it's got all the basics - but it's just got too many
components that are "crafted" rather than "designed" and too many aspects that
soon become clear that it was designed for lowest possible cost - not serious
flying.
--
Ron Curry
rec@curry.org
|