Brantlys... do you like them?

[Wannabe1]

I am getting more and more interested in a Brantly. Anyone on here have experiences with Brantly? The current company or flying a Brantly? I know, they take a little getting used to, but durned if I'm not starting to like the looks of the thing. AND I'm told they are pretty hard to beat as far as being smooth. Slow, but smooth.

Regards,
Tom

[DennisFetters]

I had one, great little helicopter. Ahead of it's time, but even that has passed. Sold it to a guy in Australia.

Heavy, and if you have someone hover it, and you climb back on the skid and open the fuel tank and look in, it will be swirling like your toilet when you flush it. Not a good thing these days.

But, the mechanicals of the design are great, smooth to fly and will not ground resonate. I flew one from Dallas TX to Liberty MO once. Like driving a Model-A Ford.

[Wannabe1]

What would cause the fuel to swirl? A general oscillation of the pendulum? Driving a Model A Ford? I've done that. Not as busy as the Model T, but still, the comparison to the Brantly makes me pause.

[tyc]

Learned to fly in them.

The B2 series had two different hull types, the B2, followed by the B2A and then the B2B. The only difference between the B2A and the B2B was that the latter was fuel injected and accordingly much more responsive to the throttle and less susceptable to carborator icing. If I'm not mistaken the B2B series had/has a Vne of 110 MPH, which by todays standards is nothing to be ashamed of.

I'm guessing here it's not the Brantly 305 you're talking about, another outstanding design, a five seater and a darn nice flyer, save for the design flaw regarding the main rotor hook-up, was a larger version of the proven B2 series.

If it's one of the B2 series you're talking about or thinking about, keep in mind, it's what is known as a "close coupled" aircraft, in that it does NOT at take much input from the cyclic to cause a reaction, which is to say, if you have time in the Bell 47, the Hughes 269 or the Enstroms, you might want to think twice about the Brantly B2 - they're "touchy." One simply does not grab hold of the cyclic and "jerk it around" as you might with a Bell or a Huges or for that matter an Enstrom. Taking the cyclic with your first two fingers and your thumb, you'll have to learn to keep your wrist on your right knee at all times. As for the anti-tourqes, get used to wearing thin-soled shoes, going barefoot and if it's cold, socks. The slightest touch from the balls of your feet and/or your toes will be sufficient.

Aside from the above they're nice machines, and like the Hughes 269 series, the Brantly B2 aircraft are a marvel of aeronautical engineering. Why that double flapping hinge hasn't been incorparated into other like rotorwinged aircraft is a mystery to me - if you haven't seen one of them rise to a hover and/or engaged in "ground work" it'd be worth your while to take the time and watch it perform in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing with it.

As the other individual noted, the Brantly design is now somewhat dated but then so is the Bell 47 and the Huges 269 series, not that I'd refuse a chance to get some "stick time" in an old Bell 47 if offered the chance but just one look at that NEO will give you an idea of what I'm talking about - past vs. the present in the rotorwing world.

If you're thinking of purchasing a Brantly B2 model, it'd be worth your while to take the time and get a minimum of ten or so hours of DUAL flilght time in one of them - and do it with an individual who has considerable experience with these; i.e., a good bit of flight time in them.

Buy a Brantly today? I for one still have a "soft spot" in my heart for them and although I came close to purchasing a couple over the years, I wouldn't buy one now, as the man said, technology wise, they're a bit out-dated, which is one of the reasons I'm looking at that basic Butterfly and eventually one of those Sport gyrocopters which it seems to have almost the same overall performance (except for the hover ability) when going from "point A" to "point B" and the costs, fixed and variable, are considerably less than what the Brantly B2 series will be in this day and age.

Something to think about anyway.

tyc

.

[DennisFetters]

[QUOTE=Wannabe1;227253]What would cause the fuel to swirl?[QUOTE]

Sorry, it was a joke. It means fuel runs through it as fast as a toilet flushes, so it seemed to my wallet.

[Wannabe1]

Okay, you got me there! I thought this swirl thing was helicopter design talk. I'm reading that and trying to understand how something like that could have gotten by Mr. Brantly! I am used to the R22 and with it we figure 9 gph. The Brantly would be much worse?


[QUOTE=Wannabe1;227253]What would cause the fuel to swirl?[QUOTE]

Sorry, it was a joke. It means fuel runs through it as fast as a toilet flushes, so it seemed to my wallet.

[Wannabe1]

Thanks for the feedback Tyc...

It is a B2B and is a 2000 model year with <100 hours. The price would be very right so I could afford to put some gas in it. My bigger concerns are getting parts if the company changes hands again (or goes under) and maintenance issues. When you talk to the folks at Brantly, thery are nice enough, but they don't seem to see any urgency to selling machines. As an example, their web site showed new machines at $150,000 in January. Nope, what they meant was the three 8 year old machines still available were at $150,000 through Jan. They sold two and the last one is now priced at $180,000. I couldn't get a price on a new one. Guys like you and Dennis seem to have nice things to say about how it flys. But the Brantly forum mentions various problems that seem to keep cropping up. As to the gyro, I can't fault you for your logic. I was up in a Sparrowhawk and it was a nice ride. A better ride than the Safari actually. But the flying the gyro just didn't have the same magic as a helicopter.


Buy a Brantly today? I for one still have a "soft spot" in my heart for them and although I came close to purchasing a couple over the years, I wouldn't buy one now, as the man said, technology wise, they're a bit out-dated, which is one of the reasons I'm looking at that basic Butterfly and eventually one of those Sport gyrocopters which it seems to have almost the same overall performance (except for the hover ability) when going from "point A" to "point B" and the costs, fixed and variable, are considerably less than what the Brantly B2 series will be in this day and age.

tyc

.

[Harry_S.]

I still consider myself a neophyte when it comes to helos but, I trained in a B2B and had about 25 hrs. total solo and dual and a couple hrs, in the 305, with pontoons.

I really liked that B2B, 'course this was an older one back in the late 60's. I almost got a B2B just before I bought the RAF kit. I still would like to fly one.

I understand Gary Goldsberry has a nice B2B.


Cheers :)

[tyc]

Thanks for the feedback Tyc...
... My bigger concerns are getting parts if the company changes hands again (or goes under) and maintenance issues.
... the Brantly forum mentions various problems that seem to keep cropping up.
As to the gyro, I can't fault you for your logic. I was up in a Sparrowhawk ...But not a helicopter.


Getting parts was an issue when I was flying them to. In fact, so much so that I refused to make an offer on a B2A which came up for sale in Conneticut, one which had a main rotor which was so defective that the spar, the leading edge was actually starting to splinter. One did not have to use non-distructive testing such as a UV penatrating dye to check for pending fractures - you could see it with the naked eye from three or so feet away - and those people were still flying that thing!

Shortly after that serious consideration was given to purchasing the rights to the type certificate and/or manufacturing new blades, main and tail. Work began to the point where timed-out blades were cut up and closely examined; reverse engineering. It was a hell of an education to say the least! If I'm not mistaken, at the time the newest Brantly blades were good for 2,200 or 2,500 hours, while the Bell 47 metal blades were good for 5,000 hours; Hillers I think were already at 6,600 hours!

But if you just HAVE TO HAVE a helicopter, take a good look at the NEO. There just may be something worth a closer inspection but at this juncture I for one just don't have all the facts and figures in yet but instinct is telling me - look slowly, look again, look closer.

Either way, best of luck which ever way you elect to go.

tyc

[Wannabe1]

Jtravis1

It appears to have become academic. The price ended up higher than I was willing to go. I'm at 860' here with no plans to leave anytime soon and generally in Wisconsin, we don't see the heat some get. Oh well. The Brantly was looking better and better. I read somewhere (unverified) that there have been only 2 deaths in a Brantly in the last 40 years (wife likes that part of the deal). BTW, the fuel burn is to be in the 11-13 gallon range in the Brantly.

Is your 500 flying yet?

Best Regards,
Tom

[Scary Gary]

Back in the late 70's early 80's I flew with Tom Milton to the PRA national's that was held in Frederick OK. And this is were the Brantly and I thought Hines , as in " Brantly Hines " had a factory , dealership , and flight school . And this was a long time ago but as I can recall they made new helicopters out of old wrecked helicopters . And the flight school had as students mostly , how can I put this with out offending anyone ????????
" Peace loving middle easterners with lots and lots of money " going there to learn how to fly . Dick Wunderlich had even tasked me with keeping his daughter away from them seeing that she had gained their devoted attention . Hell to this day I can't figure out why he did that . Her and I are the same age and she had my devoted attention .
Tom and I got to sleep on the floor of their hanger the first night and look up at the dead rattlesnakes that they had put in the rafters to keep the birds out .
It was a realy cool place and as I can recall the Brantly operation was the only thing there .

[Joe Pires]

Hey Gary,

Heron was kind enought to ask me what a Pilto was in my profile so I am passing along the favor.

Your profile says your a privet pilot...this is a privet let me see you fly it.

[Scary Gary]

Hell I can fly anything .
Go ahead and make fun of my spelling . AGAIN .
And you should have told Heron that it was none of his business what a pilto is .
If he needed to know he would know .

[Scary Gary]

Thanks Joe now after all these years I'm finally a " private " pilot .

[Wannabe1]

Man that aircraft is B E A U T I F U L !! Don't get me wrong, I'm still proud and happy to fly in the R22, but I do get asked a lot about where is the passenger suppose to sit etc etc... Someday you are going to have to tell us how you managed convince the social director that you needed to upgrade from the Rotorway (I think you had a turbine Rotorway?) and R22 to this bird.

Tom

[StanFoster]

Justin- VERY IMPRESSIVE! I enjoy seeing someone enjoying something they deserve. It doesnt matter what type of machine, if it gets you all lathered up, then thats the right level of excitement. Whats fun is being ecstatic with whatever we are doing and enjoy others doing the same. Looking forward to seeing you and your exquisite piece of machinery at Homer Bells in July! Stan

[Mayfield]

I had a B2 for several years. It was a neat little aircraft. Cooling was not as good as the B2B; but careful operation could usually keep temps in the green.

In an era when the 269 series could fly at ~75 MPH the B2 series at 100+ was pretty nice.

For you Brantly trivia guys out there: I gave a gyroplane instructor practical test this morning in an A&S 18A. The applicant (he did very well) was Mike Hynes.

Jim Mayfield

[Wannabe1]

As in:

http://www.aviastar.org/helicopters_eng/airspace_18.php

Where did you find one of these?




For you Brantly trivia guys out there: I gave a gyroplane instructor practical test this morning in an A&S 18A. The applicant (he did very well) was Mike Hynes.

Jim Mayfield

[Mayfield]

Groen Brothers now owns the one I operated for several years.

Jim

[Scary Gary]

I think I got to fly in one of them at the Fly-in in Frederick Ok.

[flylow]

Most parts are not too bad to get, either from the factory or used. The Brantlys fly very nice, as others have said here. Very smooth, great visibility. They are not nearly as "twitchy" as the R22, but not as docile as the B47 either. Somewhere in between, but certainly not an issue after a few hours in them. If you're going to get one I would recommend going with the B2B over the B2. Increased power and better cooling (the B2B has cooling fans, the earlier models do not). Fuel consumption will vary depending on how fast you're flying, your weight, and if you've leaned out the mixture. I usually average about 12-13gph in cruise at about 85mph. The Vne on all 3 B2 models is 100 mph. I also concur that you should get some dual time with someone in one to see how you like it before making a purchase decision. There are not a lot of them out there, but enough. The factory is very helpful but doesn't seem too interested in selling ships, for whatever reason. I've never understood this. I rarely find them underpowered, but fly within its limits and conditions. I'm frequently at a DA of over 2000' and still fly with 2 people and normally full fuel, depending on the passenger weight. I also fly an Enstrom 280C and I think with 2 people and full fuel it struggles as much or more than the B2B. Could be just that Enstrom and maybe the engine is getting tired, but that's what I see. I don't really understand the comment about going bare feet, socks or thin soled shoes. The pedals are smooth and don't take much pressure to push them. Not that much different than many other models. Just push as much as needed to get the nose pointed where you want it to be. I wear insulated work boots in the winter to keep the feet warm and it doesn't really make any difference.

Flylow