Helio Courier

[cstolaircraft]

How does a courier at gross compare to a stock super cub at gross in performance?

[Kat]

IMHO, the cub beats the courier.

[aktango58]

The Helio will go in and out the same spots with the same load from the ones I have been in. (talking wheels)

Loaded they are slightly better than a tricked out 180 with a good pilot.

Cubs are easier to push by hand, but what a load you can carry in the Helio!!!!

[Kat]

If nothing else, the density altitude will get the Helio compared with the Cub, but of course, I'm only talking about my own flying experience in them. :wink:



http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/2513/1036906978034992374s425.jpg

[bob turner]

Special purpose aircraft suitable only for special purposes. It is true they will carry a pretty good load, but I am not so sure they can do it legally. For sheer economical fun, the Cub is the better airplane.

[cstolaircraft]

what is the chance of the helio getting broken in the bush and be able to fix good enough to fly to where you could have a parts and the equipment to fix it properly??

[Kat]

That depends pretty much on the extent of the damage done to the aircraft and the experience of the pilot(both flying and mechanical) ferrying the plane out.

I know some pretty badly wounded birds flown out of the bush for the repair stations, but I'm not sure if any of those Helio pilots are around anymore, who were knowledgeable and skillful enough to do it.

[gander]

A helio with the 2 blade prop will fly at 28mph stock legal airplane. How many legal cubs will do that?? Apples and oranges.

[Talkeetnaairtaxi]

I have owned a few Helio's over the years.

for 8 years In my guiding operation I worked a light H-295 Helio and 2 PA/18 cubs at the same time.

There were places on both wheels and floats that I would take my PA/18's that I would not take my H-295 Helio.

I love the Helio and it is a fantastic plane that will get in and out of places that I could never think of taking my Cessna C-180 or C-185. The Helio will carry a C-206 load and only needs a little more room than a PA/18.

Ron Sutphin taught me to fly the Helio and was the best Helio pilot that I have ever met. Ron owned PA/18's and Helio's. He told me yaers ago that the Helio would not replace my PA/18 for the very short places I had to go.

Jerry Jacques
Alaska Master Guide #110

[cstolaircraft]

if you where hauling big loads out of small strips what would you prefer helio or cub? and does anybody know what a turbine courier vs cub would be like?

[Speedo]

if you where hauling big loads out of small strips what would you prefer helio or cub? and does anybody know what a turbine courier vs cub would be like?

Why not a Kodiak? 3,100 lb useful load, 760 ft ground roll! Pretty cool plane. funseventy on this site was one of their test pilots.

Eric

[bob turner]

Still not much experience at the Helio, although triple the amount I had in my last post.

Here's one - in very general terms: Suppose you pull the gear off a Helio (140lbs or so) and add a set of amphibs (say, 750 lbs). You have lost the equivalent of being able to haul three big passengers. How much load carrying capabilty would you guess you have left?

And what happens when you do the same thing to a Cessna 206?

Not a test - I am still working on the answer.

[cstolaircraft]

if you where hauling big loads out of small strips what would you prefer helio or cub? and does anybody know what a turbine courier vs cub would be like?

Why not a Kodiak? 3,100 lb useful load, 760 ft ground roll! Pretty cool plane. funseventy on this site was one of their test pilots.

EricWell to much $$$. If I had that choice, it would be a sherpa k650t with 3000 lb useful load and ( I think) about 400 ft ground roll!! Kodiak is still neat plane though

[cstolaircraft]

Still not much experience at the Helio, although triple the amount I had in my last post.

Here's one - in very general terms: Suppose you pull the gear off a Helio (140lbs or so) and add a set of amphibs (say, 750 lbs). You have lost the equivalent of being able to haul three big passengers. How much load carrying capabilty would you guess you have left?

And what happens when you do the same thing to a Cessna 206?

Not a test - I am still working on the answer.

What is anther good site for posting things like this??

[flyboy]

You might try asking someone at www.flyhelio.com/ or the helio courier on Facebook.

Here was another recent helio discussion from last week
http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=20775&highlight=helio

[cstolaircraft]

You might try asking someone at www.flyhelio.com/ or the helio courier on Facebook.

Here was another recent helio discussion from last week
http://www.supercub.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=20775&highlight=helio

THanks I'll try that

[bob turner]

Then come back here and report. I have found that this site is the most definitive source for STOL and taildragger info. I have a Super Decathlon, and if I needed info I would ask here first.

I am in the process of memorizing the JAARS manual. They seem to be a highly professional outfit. I am actually surprised at how much I am learning on my third time through the manual, after maybe ten hours in the pattern.

[cstolaircraft]

I tried flyhelio.com today and have not got anything. Just posted this morning though and with only 15 members it'll take awhile probably.

Bob, good luck with your Manuel project. tell me how long it takes I might try it.

[poweroflift]

We have posted a response @ www.flyhelio.com

As someone else said you are comparing Apples to Oranges here..

The Helio was developed for off-airport use from it's conception, and Dr. Otto Koppen designed it as an "experiment" developed from a Piper Vagabond PA-17. So, with that being said my first experience with the Helio came about in 1965 being introduced to the model H-250 MK II (Lycoming O-540-A1A5 250 HP) these were developed for export to South America in early 1965 burning 80 octane avgas. They are light, and use short-fields unprepared and that's about it. Cruise is 108 KTS at any given time, 3400 pounds gross. Above 7500 feet they are dogs, especially if heavy!! Now comes the H-295 Super Courier (Lycoming GO-480-G1D6 295 HP) used in T-Bones and Aero Commander 560's if you know about geared Lyc. operations you are good to go. The 295 is on par with the 206 load-wise, but far more rugged. If you were to convert the 295 to the RR/Allison 250 (420 HP) you have a very solid machine with incredible performance at a cost!!.. The Kodiak is no where near a STOL airplane, load it up and you'll see what we mean. The Super Cub is far less expensive and quite capable. The bottom line here is that what you need can be valued in your requirements!!

[poweroflift]

The second part to your inquiry would be the Helio Stallion and there are only two flying world-wide, the remaining fleet (AU-24A) is in India or China somewhere. The Stallion is a "hot rod" for STOL airplanes, get it slow, and it's like trying to fly a football from the top, very unsuspecting, high angle of attack values make it quite unstable with the airspeed around 38 KTS. The AOA deck angle is somewhere around 30 degrees, don't go there!!

We are not sure of the status for factory support anymore, it seems for now that this is non-existent. In any case, should use choose to make the Helio a part of your fleet, do your research and by all means know what you are getting into, they can be workhorses but at an expense..

[cstolaircraft]

I've gotten good info on flyhelio.com. I'am finding what I what. Thanks flyboy for the lead.

[poweroflift]

Helio H-800 with the RR/Allison B-17F (420 HP) with air conditioning and glass panel

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/flightday006.jpg

[Cub junkie]

Sorry, Helio's with tri-gear are just wrong.

[poweroflift]

That was the decision of his supervisors. I concur, but when you have 5 pilots to train @ $150.00 an hour for a sum of 100 hours each the costs add up quickly, so that is why you have the Tri-Gear!!

[poweroflift]

Sorry, Helio's with tri-gear are just wrong.

Well, this may better suit you, and I could not agree more, but that's the way it goes for some operators and this just happens to be Pima County Sheriff's Helio one of two tri-gears..

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/crimefightinhelio.jpg

[StewartB]

On firm surfaces a tricycle has some advantages. It's about getting the job done, isn't it?

SB

[Cub junkie]

Yes the trike has some advantages in some cases. Just an unsolicited opinion. I grew up about 50 miles from the Helio factory in the '60's and saw them all the time being tested. The tri gear picture makes that thing look like a giant Zenith CH 701.

[poweroflift]

Alcor Engineering did the original mod to a 1200 series 295 in 1968 with the mains from a C-185 and the nose-wheel from a 310. Helio started building them in the 70's as 1700 series at Pittsburgh, KS. They thought it would cater to the non-tailwheel, pavement type pilot wanting a specialty STOL airplane..

The Helio is far better looking than the CH 701

[StewartB]

With the removal of the tailwheel allowing the tail to drop lower, the mains being back moving the fulcrum back, (now we have a higher AOA at take-off), and the more efficient initial thrustline from the tricycle's stance, I'd imagine the trike Helio would operate shorter than the conventional model, particularly when light and using pavement for the demonstration. It looks like fun. Push the throttle in and pull the yoke to your chest. Wallow off in ground effect. I kinda miss trikes sometimes.

Stewart

[poweroflift]

Stewart, here we have the 1700 series in the same configuration. The H-295 has ten degrees more travel than the H800/700 airplanes, this was done to increase gross weight as well as CG moment..The factory left the belly pan in for tri-gear versions but never built them from 1983-84, hence the high empty weight. Some U-10D's have the 3600 pound gross weight while most are stuck at 3400 pounds, the factory it seems never drop tested the airplane.. This photo clearly shows the increased AOA numbers, note the departure area!!!

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/gotcha.jpg

[bob turner]

So at 3400, what was their useful load, legally speaking? Two pilots and gas?

[StewartB]

poweroflift,

Great picture! Thanks for the participation here. Your contributions are very interesting.

Stewart

[poweroflift]

@ Bob, their gross is up to 4200 lbs. They can operate here because of special circumstances in the "experimental" category and also being used in Public Service (law enforcement)

Stewart, many thanks for your comment, we obviously like Helio's

[cstolaircraft]

Sorry, Helio's with tri-gear are just wrong.

Helio did make the HT-295 which was a tri-gear. It was If I'm right just a factory built h-295 with tri gear. But I think they look MUCH better with tailwheel. And the tail wheel is better for off airport operations.

[cstolaircraft]

Hey guys, thinks for all the info. I'am learning a lot.

I've gotten good info on flyhelio.com. The guys there know what their talking about with Helios. For the helio owners here if you got a question about a Helio go there. You'll get the answer you're looking for.

[poweroflift]

The HT-295 was built at Pittsburgh, KS from 1970-74 as the 1700 series models as you say. But the CAP used U-10's acquired from the Air Force and they were converted to tri-gear, and those are the H295 1200 series with the manual flaps. I know many Alaskan operators who have these back to conventional with cross-wind gear. Some operators have installed H-250 wings using the 60 gallon fuel for better load capacity in charter ops..Clarence Brent was the man behind a lot of STC work at the factory. Dean Tremain also was their chief DER ( designated engineer rep) for the FAA. There are many on here who know far more than I do as to what mods and operations require. As of now I think there are about 220 Helios flying between Alaska, Canada and the lower 48. The current site of Helio in Prescott, AZ may be almost non-existent. Parts and product support has never reached the level operators had hoped. A new Helio with the turbine, glass panel could realistically go out the door for $550,000.00 compare this with the Soloy 206/207 and performance wise it is on par with these. The old school Helio clan has all but disappeared.. I could go on for hours here, but hope this gives you some insight to the rarity of these endangered species!!

Cheers,
Stephen

[poweroflift]

Just so you know who you are talking with here. I'm a certified Helio nut and have about 1500 hours in the Helio. We were, at one point, going to purchase the type certificates in 1987 when the stock market crashed in October of that year. Had that happened, you would have plenty of new Helio's and a substantial parts inventory. All we can do now is find a way to get that portion going, through the Helio community!!

I'm on the left, by the way in Helio #2514 that was converted to GO-480 in June of 1965 at the factory, it's serial number reflects that of the H250..!!

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/meand77tr.jpg

[poweroflift]

@ Bob, typically a Helio HT-295 has a empty weight of 2300 pounds, that gives about 1200 useful, figure with 120 gallons you can carry four with some baggage. For the tail wheels all loading is done behind the mains, the attachment points are ahead of the firewall. The more weight the more take off roll.. Never try to force the airplane up on the mains in this condition, just wait for it to fly, when you do this, expect the airplane to get away from you in a heartbeat...!! For the tri-gear, it is pull and go.. I never use 40 degrees of flaps, no need to, that is way too much drag out there for this condition, but if you want to "demo" the airplane solo I'll use it for the Helio "hover" after the high speed low pass where the airspeed reads zero and rotate the airplane 180 degrees with use of full rudder, but the airplane is extremely light!!

[Dave Calkins]

Helio's are cool. I have seen some pretty short operations, but never near what a Cub will do, not even close, empty Helio or not.

Having spent a bit of time in slatted-winged Cubs, I can appreciate the slow-flight charachteristics of the Helio, and not just for landing.

The latest Cessna 180 I've been flying has 1310 pounds useful.....was purchased for less than 30K USD, and I've got one going together now, a 1953, that should be in the ballpark of 1420 lbs. useful.

It isn't apples to apples, but is an unfair comparison of a light, high-powered, utility/useful, parts-available and cheap, relatively-inexpensive, early C-180 to a Helio worth discussing?

PS, I have ZERO Helio time, but plenty of my Cub-time, 180/185-time, and Husky time is "behind the power curve" on short final. ......I'm not sure if that is worth mentioning.

Please educate me. Thanks, DAVE

[cstolaircraft]

Just so you know who you are talking with here. I'm a certified Helio nut and have about 1500 hours in the Helio. We were, at one point, going to purchase the type certificates in 1987 when the stock market crashed in October of that year. Had that happened, you would have plenty of new Helio's and a substantial parts inventory. All we can do now is find a way to get that portion going, through the Helio community!!

I'm on the left, by the way in Helio #2514 that was converted to GO-480 in June of 1965 at the factory, it's serial number reflects that of the H250..!!

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/meand77tr.jpgPoweroflift, sorry if I offended you. I did not attend to. I have learned a lot from your post, and enjoyed them very much. The guys at flyhelio had most of the info I wanted about the helio turbine courier and have been with the aircraft since 1965. So I made the commit that it's good place to go for helio info. I like this site (supercub.org) a lot.

Helio pilot, with 1500 hrs. in type, cool How many years have you been flying the helio? Do you know where would be closest to MO. that I could be trained by a helio pilot? And is the helio a type rated aircraft? I'am 14 no time in the air worth talking about, would it be best to start with the helio or other aircraft? Again sorry if I offended you.

[poweroflift]

Hi Dave,

A grossed out Super Cub is what the Helio in most cases is empty, and with the brakes locked I got off with no forward roll and that was @ 3000 RPM, throttle not all the way forward. The Cub won't do that. The 295/395 are for the most part extreme short-field airplanes that can operate from 500' strips @ 11,000 feet AGL, the Cub won't do that, this why the CIA operated them in S.E. Asia from as early as 1959-74. The major component of Helio is safety, you can get killed in anything, but very hard in the Helio. I've had 1600 pounds in the airplane and flew off just fine. Comparison of the two is well, unfair I guess, but for the expense and what you do in Alaska is a horse-a-piece!! The Helio was always expensive, even when first new they were $24,500 F.A.F 1956 H-391B. A late model 295 1200/1400 series with 120 gal. fuel gives me 8.5 hours of range @ 2200 RPM add Rajay "turbo's" and I'm up there at 15,000 feet with 75% power showing 148 KTAS, not in a Cub!!... Break the Helio and it's expensive, break the Cub and you have resources to fix it...Just my humble opinion!!

[poweroflift]

cstol,

No offense taken, hey, I can handle a little constructive criticism. Helio check pilot would be Sam Stainton in Erie, CO, he owns N68857 and teaches all mountain flying and cross-wind gear techniques. I know him personally and he does a thorough job showing you what you can and cannot do in a Helio. You will spend at least 5-10 hours just learning the technique for cross-wind gear. You will need at least 50 hours to get insurance. The Helio flies different than any other GA airplane, when you get that in your head you are ready for the Helio!!

[poweroflift]

For all of those here, we love Super Cubs, no doubt about it, C-180/185's, and all those STOL things with tail-wheels or we would not be here. I greatly appreciate the opportunity to be able to discuss the Helio because that is my passion...Great site here here with lots of info on everything for the back country pilot!!

Cheers
Stephen

[poweroflift]

Lookie here, the Helioplane Four in it's military guise YL-24, that the U.S. Army evaluated for possible use in Korea...Note the fabric covered fuselage behind the rear door and the location of the stabilator...Lycoming GO-435 (260 HP)

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/heliocour.jpg

[cstolaircraft]

cstol,

No offense taken, hey, I can handle a little constructive criticism. Helio check pilot would be Sam Stainton in Erie, CO, he owns N68857 and teaches all mountain flying and cross-wind gear techniques. I know him personally and he does a thorough job showing you what you can and cannot do in a Helio. You will spend at least 5-10 hours just learning the technique for cross-wind gear. You will need at least 50 hours to get insurance. The Helio flies different than any other GA airplane, when you get that in your head you are ready for the Helio!!
OK. I have one for my flight sim X-plane 9.45. It took lots of practice to get it to approach speed much less land on the runway ( which I haven't done yet).

How many hours did it take you to master the helio?

[cstolaircraft]

I have always wanted to see a helioplane!! look like the courier but smaller. How many place is helioplane four?

[Dave Calkins]

Hi Dave,

A grossed out Super Cub is what the Helio in most cases is empty, and with the brakes locked I got off with no forward roll !

I don't understand this.

could you word it differently, please.

Also, "...no forward roll.." ??

Please clarify. Thanks for you input. DAVE

PS I have Mr. Rajay in my pocket, as well.

[pzinck]

Hi Dave,

A grossed out Super Cub is what the Helio in most cases is empty, and with the brakes locked I got off with no forward roll !

I don't understand this.

could you word it differently, please.

Also, "...no forward roll.." ??

Please clarify. Thanks for you input. DAVE

PS I have Mr. Rajay in my pocket, as well. I was wondering about the " no forward roll " statement too. I have gotten a few hours in a light h-295 the past few years, and with a high time pilot demoing we had lot's of forward roll. Maybe a 35 mph head wind?.

[poweroflift]

I meant the max weight of a Super Cub is what the Helio is empty at least for the 295 2200 pounds or so..

I was ferrying a 295 from Washington to SC and encountered bad weather in November of 1985. I elected to stay over in Johnson City, KS and the next morning we had surface winds gusting to 35 mph. I went out to the run-up area and ran it up to 3000 rpm for a check and with the brakes locked the bird "levitated" off the pad in a two point attitude. It can be done, it has been done. I fought with the airplane that day, it did not want to behave on the ground too well..

[Dave Calkins]

Thanks for your clarification, Poweroflift. I figured that must have been in strong wind.

There are a few turbo'ed SuperCubs.

I have a RAJAY set for the o-470 (C-180 motor, the STC hits on many of the 470 models). It has been said that they can boost a 470 to 350 horsepower. For normal ops., it's a turbo-normalizing system, happens to have a manual wastegate and be able to push 50 inches.

I laugh in the general direction of p-ponked 180's with 260hp, and even the empty-light 185's, although there is a Robertson 185 that I have been flying that is an absolute rocket, and yet a sweetheart as well........that thing with 350HP?...that would be a big "wow"!. When I checked out the owner, a Cub driver, in that thing, it was necessary to "re-learn" him to maintain a constant descent profile on final all the way to the ground. The airplane is capable of hanging on the prop on short final when light, and the owner had been operating it like that, like a Cub pulling the nose up when he was 40 feet high. Anyway, great airplane.

I want a Robertson on my airplane.

I have heard it said, "...don't fly the Helio like a Cessna..." , and I don't fly a Cessna like a Cessna. If this is true for the Helio, what do you fly it like? Is it an angle of attack/behind the power curve thing, or what?

Thanks again for your input. DAVE

[poweroflift]

I fly the Helio with power all the way to flare, you don't pull power to idle on downwind, that's a no-no!! I never use more than 30 degrees flaps because of the drag co-efficient. If conditions exist I use the flatter approach and 55-60 the slats will pop out, in most cases. The Helio can be best flown like an approach to a carrier, if you want to kill altitude bring the nose up, this is where you will get into trouble if flown like other type airplanes. The wing is @ 3 degrees angle of incidence, and the nose 5 degrees down. The Helio has big control surfaces at the back end, the "stab" is 15 feet span, lighter in pitch, heavier in roll. The friese ailerons do the work with proverse yaw, meaning little if any rudder application is needed. The rudder has a small area with a big fin. I try to stay ahead of the power curve, getting behind it the airplane "mushes" and that is not a good situation!! The H391B has the best take-off performance, it is light and get's off now!! with the 101" two-blade Hartzell, it is not too fast and runs out of power above 7500 feet on hot days. The GO-435-C2B2-6 can be bumped up to 10:1 compression with Lycon rockers and valves..

You don't fly a Helio like any other airplane period!!

[cstolaircraft]

I have heard that in ground operations you use the spoilers to turn the plane as the rudder, and not to use the rudder at all on the ground. And the approach speeds are very low 35 to 40 mph ( I think) and nose high , so if you are used to the cessna it is a very different plane to fly. I should let the pros answer your question. Please correct me if I am wrong poweroflift.

[poweroflift]

This may give you a better idea of what we are talking about here. This video was shot well after 1954, if you look at the model line-up it is more on line with 1957-58, but some footage was shot during certification which is July 1954

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8090875474584011710#

[Dave Calkins]

You don't fly a Helio like any other airplane period!!

I built a highly-modified PA-12-like a/c:

Slats
Droop ailerons
Lift interrupters like a helio
Wing Angle of incidence at 4 degrees
Extended chord rudder and elevators
Lotsof Power with 90" prop

It is flown like the Helio, I guess.

You didn't mention the lift interruptors on the Helio. Is that the cause of the proverse yaw? I am aware that on the water on floats in the wind they are weak on the rudder and want to weathervane.

This PA-12-ish a/c does not deploy the lift-interrupters unless the ailerons are drooped and flaps deploved. I changed the aileron belcrank differential to give lots of up and not as much down so when the ailerons are drooped with the flaps there is very little adverse yaw. I have not had it in a flight regime where I noticed proverse yaw from the up ailerons. That proverse yaw must be something wild.

The PA-12 is EASY to fly slow. I was very cautious with it at first, but ANYONE can fly it well slow, even Cub guys. :D and also Cessna guys. :D

[poweroflift]

The interceptors on the Helio wing are activated with use of aileron, there are two per wing and located at the 15.5% chord, they are connected to the bellcrank, typically they pop out when near full travel is used. The leading edge of the friese aileron is what produces the proverse yaw as the leading-edge interrupts the airflow on the bottom surface of the wing. The effect of the automatic leading edge slats inhibits this, when air is forced over the top of the wing. To further explain this, I have a diagram that shows the effect of this during slow-flight that will appear when I make a scan and post it, until now, here is something of interest..

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/airfoils/q0041.shtml

[poweroflift]

I am thoroughly convinced that if Helio Aircraft pursued this retrofit and began production with the STC, you would have a serious STOL machine. Build 5 pre-production airplanes and put them on the "demo" circuit and market them to public service agencies, such as law enforcement, you'd have an airplane with great capabilities. This particular Helio rivals any current turbine helicopter in service now for reliability and near vertical performance, such as it is, we have to wait to see the outcome..For the tail wheel enthusiast that could come after production was initiated. It is a rocket in disguise!!

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/helioturbinestol.jpg

[Talkeetnaairtaxi]

There are a lot of myths out there regarding the Helio Courier, Some from old factory sales pitches with over optimistic performance stats and some from people that did not like the Helio and loved to bad mouth it. As is often the case fact is some where in the middle.
.
At the moment I am flying in Afghanistan and do not have my old Log books with me to look up my exact times. If my memory is correct I have around 2.000 hours in Helio's. most of it working off airport
I also have around the same amount of time in C-180/185's and over 5,000 hrs in P'18's

My personal opinions based on flying Helio's, PA/18's and C-180/185"s.

The Helio Courier can land very short. It will land as short as a PA/18.

The Helio WILL NOT GET OFF THE GROUND AS SHORT AS A PA/18. Under the same conditions A PA/18 will always get off the ground shorter than a Helio

My last Helio Courier had 250 lb more legal useful load than my C-185F

At 2,200 elevation with my H295 Helio on 550' strip I could pick up 2 people each with a full backpack, . I could not take my C-185 into that same strip.

The Helio cost a lot more per hr to operate than a C-185 and is 20 mph slower.

It takes far more time to learn to fly a Helio than it does to learn to fly a Cub or C-180/185

I love Helio's my only complaint is the lack of parts availability for the airframe and for the GO-480

Jerry

[poweroflift]

Jerry,

I would argue about the take-off roll in a light Helio H-391B with the big slow turning 101" two-blade on a cool day, they are the lightest Helio's built, but suffer in cruise and high altitude performance, and certainly, lack of parts for the GO-435, long gone!!

The merits for all the airplanes mentioned are rightfully so in their own right.

The H250 is light too, but lacks power..and don't put the 120 gallon fuel or 3800 pound mod to it!!

I doubt that anyone here will ever see the day when Helio is produced again, it's a darn shame..

But while this thread exists, I will try to get as much info on here to satisfy the curious indeed...

Thanks for the feedback!!

[Talkeetnaairtaxi]

I hope you keep the Helio thread going as they are fantastic planes and deserve to have more people know them.

I have no personal experience with a H-391. and have never seen one perform. My old friend and Helio Guru Jim Danish is building a hotrod H391 that should be the ultimate performing Helio courier when he finishes it.
I will make the 9 hr flight in my C185 just to see Jim fly his hotrod H391 when he gets it done. Jim if you read this hurry up and get that project done as we are not getting any younger.

I have owned a H-250, a H395 with the Go480 and a H295, also flown a H800.
I never considered the H391 as it did not have the legal useful load that I needed for my guiding business..
My planes were the primary working tools of my business and had to pay their way. The old saying "performance cost" is true.
So for me a plane that would legally haul more weight than a C-185 and work almost as short of strips as a PA/18 was what I needed.
The H395 with the 3800 LBS GW was the perfect plane for my guiding operation in Alaska and was worth the higher operating cost than a C-185.

The only reason I ever sold my H-395 was the parts availability issue. I had a 130 day operating season and just could not afford
to have down time because of lack of parts availably..

For people not trying to make a living in a short season the Helio is still a good choice.

Jerry Jacques

[cstolaircraft]

I hope you keep the Helio thread going as they are fantastic planes and deserve to have more people know them.

I have no personal experience with a H-391. and have never seen one perform. My old friend and Helio Guru Jim Danish is building a hotrod H391 that should be the ultimate performing Helio courier when he finishes it.
I will make the 9 hr flight in my C185 just to see Jim fly his hotrod H391 when he gets it done. Jim if you read this hurry up and get that project done as we are not getting any younger.

I have owned a H-250, a H395 with the Go480 and a H295, also flown a H800.
I never considered the H391 as it did not have the legal useful load that I needed for my guiding business..
My planes were the primary working tools of my business and had to pay their way. The old saying "performance cost" is true.
So for me a plane that would legally haul more weight than a C-185 and work almost as short of strips as a PA/18 was what I needed.
The H395 with the 3800 LBS GW was the perfect plane for my guiding operation in Alaska and was worth the higher operating cost than a C-185.

The only reason I ever sold my H-395 was the parts availability issue. I had a 130 day operating season and just could not afford
to have down time because of lack of parts availably..

For people not trying to make a living in a short season the Helio is still a good choice.

Jerry JacquesWhat is your friend doing to the h-391 to make it a "hotrod"?

Which of your helios did you like the best?

[poweroflift]

I have spoken With Jim many times, he is probably putting the Allison up front, this engine only weighs 205 LBS. and up to 420 SHP, that would make the gal go into orbit, but the fuel concerns may not justify the expense, since GW is only 3000 pounds. Clarence Brent was going to modify the H391B with thicker tubing from .040 to .050 to allow GW increase but found the trouble not worth investigating. All H395's with serial numbers higher than #556 can be upgraded to 3800 #.. Larmont Aviation received the STC in 1980, but Larry Montgomery is no longer with us, but the STC is still there.

The anti-balance trim system requires a sliding bracket that returns the surface to the trim position mounted on the left side..

[poweroflift]

Here's an oldie, but a "goody" during flight testing we have here the pre-production H-391 Helioplane Four as it was called, showing it's stuff. This airplane later crashed in bad weather on the way to Canada

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/heliofour.jpg

[cstolaircraft]

OK will be neat to see the short field performance on it when it is done!! It should go were the legal cubs won't go light.

[Dave Calkins]

Poweroflift, thanks for all the Helio stuff, photos, opinions, and history. Great stuff!


OK will be neat to see the short field performance on it when it is done!! It should go were the legal cubs won't go light. cstol........don't bet your airplane money on it. :D

[poweroflift]

Dave,

My pleasure. There are things the Helio does well, there are things all others do well, so like I said earlier not everyone is going to go out and jump on the Helio bandwagon due to the lack of support (parts) and the long gone "geared" Lycoming's, although Central Cylinder has all the Lycoming needs for this. I just happen to be a Helio nut, and you already know that, so someone has to keep the ball rolling to get something going. Maybe that will never happen, but I'm not giving up just quite yet.. The last Helio built was 26 years ago, and those were not the best models produced and far too heavy!!

[Talkeetnaairtaxi]

I liked the 395 with the GO480 the best also like the 1200 H295's

Jim is keeping it light, 40" tires and a TSIGO480 that puts out over 340 HP

Jerry

[poweroflift]

They (Lycoming) actually never built the TSIGO-480, unless the rajay turbo system was added after, but why do that?

IGSO-480 would be the choice with the mechanical driven "supercharger" and that engine was used in some versions of the "T-Bone" and develops 340 HP @ 3400 RPM, you will get 320 HP all the way to 20,000 feet. Turbo-supercharging is a lot of moving metal in there and I would think TBO is less than 1200 hours, a tear down is mandatory @ 700 hours for these provided the nose case is tight!!.. There is also the weight factor, you are close to 500 pounds up front, the IGSO-540-B1A develops 380 HP and was used in the Commander 680F/FP/FLP and Queen Air 80/88, wow 40" tires!!

I would have gone turbine (Allison) B-17F with 96" three-blade, full reverse!!

[poweroflift]

The Helio "Strato" Courier was the H391B with the GSO-480-A1A5 (340 HP) and set an altitude record in Oct. 1957 over Mexico City. According to Jane's of that year the cruise was 184 mph, and top speed was 192. Helio never went into production with this airplane, and I'll bet it was because of only 60 gallons of fuel which gave it not much range. This installation was borrowed from the 680 Commander. Better have a lot of air going through there to keep it cool. I have a picture of it somewhere so you can look at the cowling set-up and augmenter exhaust pipes!! Quite the airplane. JAARS had a hand in this for use at high altitudes but the decision never materialized!!

[Talkeetnaairtaxi]

I am flying out of a Forward Operating Base in Afghanistan and will have no use of a phone for a long time.

Give Jim a Call and get the info from him. It has been 2 years since I last was at his shop and looked at his 391B project. He had the tires and they were a lot larger than the old 36' Good Year I had on my last Helio. I think he got them from Byron Rood and they had been used on the Sherpa. 40" is what I remember and they looked COOL

My memory is not be good on the details?????? and I think you are corect on the IGSO-480.

Please let us know the details of what he is doing and status of his 391.

[cstolaircraft]

Sounds neat!!

What do you guys think about the sherpa K650t?

[cstolaircraft]

Poweroflift, thanks for all the Helio stuff, photos, opinions, and history. Great stuff!


OK will be neat to see the short field performance on it when it is done!! It should go were the legal cubs won't go light. cstol........don't bet your airplane money on it. :D
I wouldn't think of it!! And with the 480 up there the cubs will still have it beat.

[poweroflift]

Sounds neat!!

What do you guys think about the sherpa K650t?

Why not give me this, same useful load, but much faster (180 KTS.)

Just tame the minimum control speed and handling, and you have it man!!

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/alphaalpha.jpg

[cstolaircraft]

Sure I'd take the stallion any time too !!!!But with only two flying try to get parts for it any where. The Sherpa would be hard to get parts for, but you could get them, and new too, would just take awhile.

[cstolaircraft]

That's serial #001. Nice plane!!!

[poweroflift]

It sure is and with near 3000 fpm rate of climb, I doubt there is any serious competitor. There is however some parts facility for the Stallion, but how much remains to be seen!!

[WWhunter]

powerlift,

Just curious.....are you in South Carolina? I have looked at a nice turbine Helio that is hangared there. He lives near Seneca.
There's a sweet Just Highlander there also.

WW

[poweroflift]

Not in S.C. but Wisconsin!! Oshkosh to be exact!!

[WWhunter]

Okay, thanks. If you are ever up in North Central Mn you are welcome to stop in.
WW

[cstolaircraft]

How do you post pics ???

[Cub junkie]

How do you post pics ???
On the opening page click on the big red "Help Me" box.

[cstolaircraft]

thanks I'll try it.

[poweroflift]

You can always do this for grins!! Helio H700 extremely modified to include, Garrett TPE-331-6 (840 shp) (MU-2) with water injection, super swamper tires 38" on the mains, F-101 Voodoo nose wheel assembly, freight train horns rated @ 140 decibels, log-splitter, malaython sprayer (for bugs). Extended wing span to include 175 gallons of Jet-A....Empty weight 3400 pounds, fuel economy? about what you would expect. At 25,000 feet TAS was 190 KTS (not indicated, of course)...So here we have have the Helio SUV!!!

http://i496.photobucket.com/albums/rr321/litburner/heliobigfoot.jpg

[Dave Calkins]

No Brains, No pain.

[Cub junkie]

Looks like it was built by the same guys that build monster trucks.

[poweroflift]

Check out those axles on the mains, it's no wonder the thing can fly!!..On Thursday he ran it up to do a Helio showcase fly-by and blew the guy's tent down behind him who happened to be a Super Cub owner...He was none to happy!!!

[Dave Calkins]

I remeber reading about this and seeing photos.

My point about no brains is proved out by his damaging someone else's property with his "monster". :(

[poweroflift]

I remeber reading about this and seeing photos.

My point about no brains is proved out by his damaging someone else's property with his "monster". :(

That really wasn't his fault, the EAA folks should have parked him elsewhere. The prop is 106" diameter, you are going to blow stuff around with that..put the blame where it belongs!!

[Dave Calkins]

..guy at the throttle. Just like a boat wake.

[cstolaircraft]

A little to much POWER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is the ground roll?? And the gross weight??? What does he use it for??? logging :D :D :lol:

[cstolaircraft]

Here is a helio stallion!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Sorry I messed up first time though. pic is on next page!!!!!

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data//515/medium/HelioStallion.jpg[/img]

[cstolaircraft]

Practicing uploading pic

http://www.supercub.org/photopost/data/515/HelioStallion.jpg

[poweroflift]

Maytag's Stallion in urban camo, it too has the PT6-34 (750 SHP)

[cstolaircraft]

What is the best tailwheel trainer??

[WWhunter]

Oh boy!!! On this site I'm sure you'll get a lot of "Cub" for an answer. I would think a Champ, Cub, or any of the old trainers is fine. Lots of Citabria's out there that can be had for a decent price.
I never thought of a Champ until I bought one from a memeber of this site. Having flown in both the J-3 and the Champ I much prefer the Champ. An auto accident makes it hard for me to get in and out of the J-3, I love the way they fly and would really like to own one but I would not be able to sit in one nearly as long as I can sit in my Champ. Champ has more room, solo from the front, and it'll teach you to use those rudder pedal. Either way it is a personal choice. Just enjoy whatever you can afford to fly and don't let the "brand specific" guys get to you.
WW

[cstolaircraft]

If I go for the champ, wouldn't it have to have a full instrument plane to check out as a private pilot? I got a friend that got two champs!!

[Kat]

What is the best tailwheel trainer??

Any tailwheel with a low horsepower. 8)

[Dough Head]

Does anybody know how to get a hold of anybody in the Brent family that is mentioned above? Does anybody know if Clarence or Sharon Brent are still around. What about Brentwing Engineering?
A friend of mine owns an H-800 and we are trying to aquire their STC for the metal gear legs for this plane. I have tried to call them, but the number is disconnected, and I sent them a letter and it came back undeliverable.

Thanks

[louisC]

I don't think that Brent Engineering was the STC holder for the metal landing gear of the 800-700 series. I have bought them from another person. Sure it was not from M. Clarence.

How will you manufacture them since the gentleman is no more around ? He was the STC holder AND the manufacturer of the legs. They are easy to cut, but you have to find the right material. He was cutting them from some kind of aluminium that is very expensive. No laser, just plain saw with a lot of fluid. But still, i don't remember the exact kind of aluminium. Something that was used in landing gear of Boeings. The gentleman was working at a factory where they were making some parts for Boeing, so he had easy access to the stuff. And to the tools to cut it, and drill it.

Buy the way, the fiberglass landing gear is not as bad as the accident reports tells. It is not them finally that are a problem. It is the welding of the bottom part. Just by looking at it, you will see that they were weld on the outside of the angle without any penetration. So the scenario is more: The welding fail, the wheels becomes horizonta to the ground, the bottom of the legs dig into the ground, the fiberglass legs delaminate. It the weld of the metal angle that hold the shaft is redone, you won't go to delamination.

Been there once. Some kind of AD note were issued for that explaining all about the weld. Not sure if the AD was from my experience or another one in the tundra in the west. So my advice is first to correct the metal bottom part. Then you can try to find some metal legs. But just putting the metal legs with the badly weld fitting will not help. And i would not go offstrip before checking the weld.

The landing gear is more solid than the frame where it is attached. I broke two of those 800, both time the landing gear hold but broke the fuselage.

http://www.simonac.com/2crash/

http://www.simonac.com/800/


Louis

[Dough Head]

Here is the AD. It talks about the fiberglass gear, not the metal at the bottom.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
Amendment 39-5533; AD 87-04-09

Airworthiness Directives; Helio Model H-700 and H-800 Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT

DATES: Effective March 9, 1987.
87-04-09 HELIO: Amendment 39-5533. Applies to Models H-700 and H-800 airplanes (all serial numbers) certificated in any category.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless already accomplished.

To assure airworthiness of the composite main landing gear legs, accomplish the following:

(a) Within the next 100 hours TIS after the effective date of this AD and each 100 hours TIS thereafter, remove landing gear fairings, if installed, and visually inspect the edges of the composite main landing gear legs for evidence of delamination. Delamination is evidenced by longitudinal splitting between the fiberglass plies. This could occur anywhere along the span of the landing gear leg. If any delamination is found, prior to further flight, install FAA-approved right and left metallic landing gear legs. NOTE: On the effective date of this AD, the only known FAA-approved replacement landing gear is per STC SA2171CE.

(b) If, in between the inspections required in paragraph (a) above, it is observed that the wings do not appear level, or one side of the airplane appears to be drooping, prior to further flight, conduct the inspections and replacement, If necessary, required in paragraph (a) of this AD.

(c) The inspection required in paragraphs (a) and (b) are no longer required when FAA-approved metallic landing gear legs have been installed.

(d) Ferry permits issued in accordance with FAR 21.197 and equivalent methods of compliance with this AD may be used if approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, Federal Aviation Administration, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; Telephone (316) 946-4400.

All persons affected by this directive may obtain copies of the documents referred to herein upon request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of the Regional Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106.

This amendment becomes effective on March 9, 1987.

The STC is owned by Sharon K. Brent. When I talked to the FAA, they said that there has been no change of ownership.

STC Number:
SA2171CE

This certificate issued to:
Brent Sharon K

STC Holder's Address:
10 Evergreen Lane
Pittsburg KS 66763
United States

Description of the Type Design Change:
Replacement of fiberglass main landing gear legs with aluminum parts.

Application Date:
08/12/1985

Status:
Reissued, 12/05/2006

Responsible Office:
ACE-115W Wichita Aircraft Certification Office Tel: (316) 946-4100

TC Number -- Make -- Model:
1A8 -- Helio Aircraft LLC -- H-700
1A8 -- Helio Aircraft LLC -- H-800

[louisC]

I will check in my logbook for the airport ( Georgia ? ) where the metal leg gentleman was operating. It is at that airport that he made the FAA drop test for his new metal legs for the 700-800. May be the local mechanic could remember something more. If he still work there.

This guy ( not the metal leg gentleman, but the local mechanic) was putting his nose on anything that was going on 'his" airport. He even denounce me to the FBI for ... for ... for whatever he suspected. It took around 5 years before a Custom officer who was knowing me a little, laugh at the screen computer and remove, or fix, the note about me. He just laughed but never volunteer to tell me what was written about my "case".

I am sure Mr. 1-800-STOOL will remember everything about the gentleman who was making the 700-800 legs.

By the way, there is a 800 there that is brand new in a hangar. Own by a friend who has never pilot it. I would have bought it if it was not the fact that this is the 800 that was used for the drop test. Nothing broke, but seeing how hard is the experience, it did remove the desire from me. I prefer to broke them myself.

This 800 was also tweak for speed: some change in the fearing, removed the terrible and ugly wing tip of the 800-700, remove the useless elbrow over the windshield. He was supposed to do 150 k. or more. I did tried it once but can't remember the speed, since i am always more interrested in how slow they go instead of how fast. Anyway, going that fast with the same wing is asking for trouble even in small turbulence.

Louis

[louisC]

Here is the AD. It talks about the fiberglass gear, not the metal at the bottom.


I strongly suggest you do check the welding. Been there twice.

By looking around on canadian site, i am sure you will be able to find the note about the welding. I did saw it around fifteen years ago, a year after i broke the first.

Louis

[louisC]

The STC is owned by Sharon K. Brent. When I talked to the FAA, they said that there has been no change of ownership.

Then you won't have any luck. Mr. Brent passed away a long time ago, and if he did own this STC, he had no involment in it. Since he was the chief engeneer of Helio, he probably "signed" these metal legs, but he was not around when they were FAA tested so i doubt you will be able to find in his paper what kind of aluminium it was, or what was the manufacturing approved process. 700-800 series are not documented. A strange story about the loss of the documentation of the 800 was told to me a long time ago. I would be delighted to know if it is true.

I still have some parts of the 800. Unhurt fiberglass legs, maybe a motor mount, those adjustable screw that replace the schock absorber of the 295. The pin that holds the landing gear to the frame ( that are NOT the same as the others (391 to 295), even if your mechanic will tell you they are the same )

Louis

http://simonac.com/xohmorceaux.jpg

Waiting for low tide and transportation on a island in Iceland. Aircraft ready for transportation.

[cliff johnsen]

Dave,

My pleasure. There are things the Helio does well, there are things all others do well, so like I said earlier not everyone is going to go out and jump on the Helio bandwagon due to the lack of support (parts) and the long gone "geared" Lycoming's, although Central Cylinder has all the Lycoming needs for this. I just happen to be a Helio nut, and you already know that, so someone has to keep the ball rolling to get something going. Maybe that will never happen, but I'm not giving up just quite yet.. The last Helio built was 26 years ago, and those were not the best models produced and far too heavy!!

I owned a 391B. When I sold it a few years back, a pilot from AK came down to look. This pilot had 6000 hours in a super cub. After the demo flight, I noticed that he finally let go of the bottom of the seat. Shaking his head, he said that if he didnt see it him self, he never would have believed ANY airplane could do what we just did. His friend in the back seat was quiet and still shaking a bit as his face regained some color.

We took off on my dirt strip between the almond orchards (about 400 feet between). With about a 200' take off roll I waited a few seconds to get a little speed and made a u turn within the orchard. This was all within the first 500' of the runway. He was sure we were going to die. We did some slow flight over the river sand bars so I could show him how much better you can evaluate the sand at 30mph instead of 45 or so. When we got back, I came in at right angles to the strip right at the threshold. There, I made a 90 deg turn and landed- we stopped about 500' from the end.