A bit recondite but hopefully on BCP there are pilots with experience of both types.

I sometimes feel that the lift augmentation devices and the resulting EW came from the same philosophy that put boundary layer control on the Blackburn Buccaneer - the weight of the cutting edge technology may have defeated the original purpose.

In any event would these two types, in practical every day terms, outperform a simple similar vintage C-185?

I think of the Helio as a 185 that got stuck with super cub performance.

Check this thread out. http://www.supercub.org/forum/showthrea ... io-Courier

I have a Dornier DO-28 B1 (twin version of the DO-27. I have not flown 27, but I know quite a bit about it. I have flown 180/185 enough to have an opinion. In my estimation the 27 will outperform a 185. The slats help a lot!

27 vs. Helio - don't know enough about the Helio.

Cstol I liked the thread, especially every other post saying ...good, but a Super Cub better ... us SuperCubbers are a tad over loyal to type

L18C-95 wrote:A bit recondite but hopefully on BCP there are pilots with experience of both types.

I sometimes feel that the lift augmentation devices and the resulting EW came from the same philosophy that put boundary layer control on the Blackburn Buccaneer - the weight of the cutting edge technology may have defeated the original purpose.

In any event would these two types, in practical every day terms, outperform a simple similar vintage C-185?

I have time in the Helio H-250 Courier and the 185. The O-540 in the H-250 isn't up to the task of dragging the beast up out of a really shortfield loaded up, but does pretty well half loaded. The geared engines swinging the giant prop are an entirely different story. Those pull really hard out of the hole. I think that these engines are very expensive, if not impossible to overhaul, while the IO-520s are pretty ubiquitous. I consistently land my 1967 180 in 450 feet and takeoff about the same with a load at my home field and standard temp. The 185 takes off a little shorter. I can easily land the Helio in 200 and takeoff in 300, so the short field performance is much better. The 180/185 are MUCH more fun to fly IMHO, but if utility is your main objective a Helio H-295 is really hard to beat. The main gear on the Helio is awesome. The tailwheel on the Helio is carrying a really high load because of how far forward the mains are. I wouldn't want to drag it around through soft or rough stuff. The mains and the tailwheel on the 180/185 are awesome! People who say that the 185s are truckish have never flown a Courier. The Ailerons are extremely heavy, and I believe that there are springs in the system for centering, which make them feel really sluggish, though roll rate is decent. The Helio is a puprose built aircraft, and the 185 is a very versatile plane.

Here is about my fourth landing in the H-250, at about 250 feet. I have since shaved 75 feet off of that.

L18C-95 wrote:Cstol I liked the thread, especially every other post saying ...good, but a Super Cub better ... us SuperCubbers are a tad over loyal to type

you'll convince me when your cubs are taking off at 3400 lbs and get that kind of performance. ok ok I know Cubs are always best.

Scolopax,

Lycoming still supports and overhauls the geared six cylinder engines, as found in the Helio. Bring $$.

One issue with those engines that can be a pain is the pressure carburetors. They are difficult to set up properly, and can be expensive maintenance hogs. Wright Air Service in Fairbanks has substituted fuel injection systems on their 295s, and love them. I believe they hold the STC.

Try to find a mechanic who knows anything about the Helio.....

Hard to beat a Helio when it comes to short field work, and those strut less wings and big doors make them really nice to load with bulky stuff.

On the other hand, there are a gazillion 185 s out there, everybody knows how to maintain them, and they are easy planes to fly with a minimum of familiarization.

So, the question is, just how short do you NEED to land?

MTV

Ever heard of the wings falling off a 185? Just saying

I just found this for the Do 27. looks like the 185 will beat it. http://www.do27.com/do27_en/

mtv wrote:
So, the question is, just how short do you NEED to land?

MTV

Rather, is it 1974, are you in Laos, and how much drugs do you need to deliver to a mountainside airstrip in the jungle?

Zzz wrote:

mtv wrote:
So, the question is, just how short do you NEED to land?

MTV

Rather, is it 1974, are you in Laos, and how much drugs do you need to deliver to a mountainside airstrip in the jungle?

Guns & Ammo in, Drugs out!!

Zzz wrote:

mtv wrote:
So, the question is, just how short do you NEED to land?

MTV

Rather, is it 1974, are you in Laos, and how much drugs do you need to deliver to a mountainside airstrip in the jungle?

Wright Air Service in Fairbanks is still operating three Helio 295s last I heard. If you want to do a float trip on the north slope, they are the folks to call. It happens that the current owner is a serious fan of the type, and one the best pilots around in them.

They are a hell of an airplane, and they were NOT designed and built for the military or the CIA, though they did see some use in warmer climates....

MTV

Here's a couple Helio Courier Sales Demo Vids circa 1983

Part One


Part Two


Really makes me not miss VHS tapes...