
The Winnebago Heli-Home Was a Real Flying RV - cpncrunch
https://www.thedrive.com/news/34753/the-winnebago-heli-home-was-a-real-flying-rv-that-needs-to-make-a-comeback-in-2020
======
Wistar
"The thing is, helicopters are different from planes. An airplane by its very
nature wants to fly and, if not interfered with too strongly by unusual events
or by a deliberately incompetent pilot, it will fly. A helicopter does not
want to fly. It is maintained in the air by a variety of forces and controls
working in opposition to each other and, if there is any disturbance in this
delicate balance, the helicopter stops flying; immediately and disastrously.
There is no such thing as a gliding helicopter."*

"This is why being a helicopter pilot is so different from being an airplane
pilot, and why in generality, airplane pilots are open, clear-eyed, buoyant
extroverts, and helicopter pilots are brooding introspective anticipators of
trouble. They know if something bad has not happened it is about to."

Harry Reasoner

February 16, 1971

* Helicopters do autorotate which is a glide, sort of, at least with sufficient translational lift and rotor speed.

~~~
kogus
This is a fun quote, but I don't think it's accurate. Source:
[http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2012/05/helicopters-...](http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2012/05/helicopters-
wont-just-fall-like-a-rock-if-the-engine-dies-they-usually-can-be-landed-
safely-this-way/)

~~~
Wistar
It is not accurate, hence my footnote. If one has sufficient skill, altitude
and/or forward speed an autorotation can be made to a forced landing, and
arguably more safely than a fixed-wing forced landing. Of course, this depends
on the main rotor and flight controls still working well enough to perform an
autorotation.

~~~
davidjade
Years ago I spent a lot of time in helicopters in remote Alaskan mountain
ranges with pretty high-end helicopter pilots and got to know some them pretty
well. I think the "brooding introspective anticipators of trouble" is a good
description.

I know that many of them practiced autorotation nearly every time they left a
mountain peak to descend back down to the glacier floor.

I also once got to fly a 400+ mile trip over rugged wilderness and the pilot
was always thinking about the next possible emergency landing spot. The flight
altitude was often adjusted for this as well if over terrain where options
would be limited (such as water). Well maintained helicopters - nothing wrong
with them - just always being aware of your options when in the middle of
nowhere.

------
yummypaint
In the few helicopters ive flown in, the flight crew meticulously accounts for
the mass and location of every person and large item on board before taking
off. It seems like it would be really inconvenient to do that on the scale of
an rv, especially if there are water and sewage tanks etc to think about.

~~~
FabHK
> flight crew meticulously accounts for the mass

Exactly. I've toyed with the idea of living on a plane or a boat, and the boat
is obviously practical and (relatively) cheap, while the plane (or heli, in
this case) is enormously hobbled by the mass constraint.

You can find an RV for the road to live in, you can find a boat to live on,
but there's no solution at all really in the aviation space unless you go
quite big and thus super expensive [1].

Quite some people live on a land or water vehicle, but I don't think anyone
realistically lives on an aircraft for an extended time, do they? The 21st
century just doesn't deliver... ;-)

[1] The price of of boats and planes tends to grow super cubically with length
(exponent of maybe 3.5 or so), so twice as long will be 10x expensive (very
rough rule of thumb, obviously).

~~~
muttled
I've always associated even small boats with great expense. Does living in
them reduce the cost since you're not just storing it somewhere, paying for it
to float empty in a harbor?

~~~
munificent
I'm interested in boating, but haven't gotten into it. I have read a lot, for
what that's worth. My impression is that people have the wrong mental model
for boat economics and get screwed over because of it.

The core problem is that the total cost of ownership for a boat is a small
fraction of its purchase price. Also, the incremental cost of owning one _even
when not using it_ is relatively high.

Think of cars. Let's say you get a little extra cash and you feel like having
something fun to drive. You've got some extra space on your driveway. You get,
I don't know, a used sports car or a camper van or something. Once you've
gotten it, most of the expenditure is done. The insurance is cheap since it's
not a daily drive. You've got space for it already.

In other words, if you can afford to _buy_ a car, you can probably afford to
_own_ a car.

Any boat larger than a fishing boat that you can trailer yourself and store in
your yard is the polar opposite of that.

Boats are actually pretty cheap to _buy_. There is a huge used market for
boats driving prices down. There are many many people looking to _not_ own a
boat (which should probably be causing alarm bells to ring in your head). You
can often find sailboats for _free_.

The reason is that the cost to _own_ them is quite high. If you keep the boat
in the water, you're paying rent at a marina slip. That's expensive in
desireable areas. Populated coastal areas are obviously almost always
desirable areas. Also, the water and its contents are constantly doing a
number on the boat. Barnacles grow on it. The salt corrodes any exposed metal.
Sunlight and UV light break down anything plastic. Every day of the boat's
life is burning money _regardless of whether or not you use the boat._

You can store it out of the water, and that helps. But that makes it even
harder to take the boat out, so maybe you're not burning as much money every
month, but you're also using it even less.

This does _not_ mean that boating sucks or is unaffordable. It just means you
need to have the right mindset for it. Don't think of a boat as a toy. And
object that you can buy and put away when not in use. Think of it more like a
pet, like a horse.

If you're rich, you can be a horse owner if you want and treat it like a toy.
Throw many at it, pay stablehands to take care of the horse when you aren't
around, and don't care about the money you're burning even when you aren't
riding.

If you're not rich, you can also be a happy horse owner. But it has to be
_your thing_. It will be a major part of your life, and occupy a very large
slice of your free time. You'll move to the country to make it more
affordable. You'll spend time every day taking care of your horse and enjoy
the satisfaction of doing the work yourself. You may not have much time for
other pursuits, but it will be _your horse_ through and through.

I look at boats the same way. You be happy using it a few times a year if
you're rich and don't mind throwing money at it. Or you can make it your thing
and use it so frequently that the monthly expenses are amortized across a
large volume of joyful use. But what you can't do is be a happy casual boat
user if you aren't wealthy.

~~~
ableal
> Every day of the boat's life is burning money

Yep, "a hole in the water you throw money into" is the definition I heard ;-)

~~~
davidjade
Another good one is sailboat racing: standing in a cold shower, fully dressed,
while ripping up thousand dollar bills.

------
ForHackernews
See also, the seaplane-yacht:
[http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/art...](http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/424/language/fr-
FR/Sweet-Dreams-and-Nightmares.aspx)

~~~
satori99
This reminds me of another interesting flying boat story;

[https://medium.com/s/story/the-long-way-round-the-plane-
that...](https://medium.com/s/story/the-long-way-round-the-plane-that-
accidentally-circumnavigated-the-world-c04ca734c6bb)

~~~
coverband
Another great story, thanks for sharing!

------
adingus
It's funny that they thought a $10,000 a week rental made it any more
affordable than the $800,000 price tag. The Venn diagram of people who can
afford those is a circle.

~~~
Jestar342
$10k to rent for one week in a novelty once-in-a-lifetime Heli-Home? I've seen
people spend more on their bachelor party weekends in vegas and they can't
even remember what they did.

Those same people don't even spend $800k on their house.

~~~
yodon
Those are 1975 dollars they are talking about so roughly $50,000/week or $4M
purchase price today.

~~~
stronglikedan
> Even a base model would run you around $880,000 _in today 's money_, and a
> top of the line version was $1.4 million _when adjusted for inflation_.

------
rob74
I see the submitter omitted the end of the original title: "...That Needs to
Make a Comeback in 2020". I guess they agree with my sentiment that no, it
does not. Even if you ignore the most obvious environmental aspects (the fuel
consumption and noise pollution), there is still one other I can think of:
even if somebody invented a noiseless anti-gravity drive and the "Mr. Fusion"
required to power it, it still wouldn't be a good idea for everyone to be able
to simply fly and land anywhere they want...

> _All in all, the company would go on to sell only 8 Heli-Homes to customers,
> none of which survive today._

This, on the other hand, is regrettable from a curiosity perspective...

~~~
cpncrunch
No, I did actually submit the full title, but it was truncated to "that needs
to make a comeback" (I just omitted "in 2020" as it wouldn't fit). I see one
of the admins has changed the title to remove the "needs to make a comeback"
bit entirely.

------
secfirstmd
This reminds me of Spaceballs: The Movie :)

[https://www.syfy.com/sites/syfy/files/styles/1400xauto/publi...](https://www.syfy.com/sites/syfy/files/styles/1400xauto/public/wire/legacy/Screen_Shot_2017-06-09_at_7.19.18_PM.png)

------
mothsonasloth
I wonder if you could buy something big like an ex-Military Chinook or a
Russian Mi-26, then kit it out and customize it like the van converters do?

~~~
dfxm12
I don't see why not, as that's pretty much what Winnebago did:

 _Instead, beginning in 1975 [Winnebago] worked with a company called Orlando
Helicopter Airways to acquire a fleet of ex-military Siksorky S-55 transport
helicopters (also known as the H-19) and convert these surplus machines into
something a little more homey._

------
gmueckl
This was likely a conversion of Sikorski S-55 helicopters that were retired
from the US military around 1969/1970.

The look of this helicopter reminds me of the outwardly similar Sikorski S-58
that was used in the TV series "Riptide". I saw a few episodes of that as a
child and I guess I'll never be able to forget that particular association.

------
mips_avatar
I wish personal aviation was a little more accessible. The only innovation I
can think of that would really change the math on flying would be very high
density batteries, and electric planes. Otherwise flying costs are going to
continue to be dominated by expensive engine maintenance.

~~~
cpncrunch
Light sport aircraft (in USA) or advanced ultralights (Canada) are a lot more
affordable than certified aircraft.

~~~
mips_avatar
The hope with light sport aircraft was that prices would drop. But it’s minor,
a Cessna 172 is still cheaper than what you can get in light sport

~~~
cpncrunch
Well, a 1970s 172 is cheaper than a new light sport aircraft, so it's not
really a fair comparison.

I was hoping with the part 23 rewrite we might get cheaper new aircraft, but
that hasn't happened.

------
spaetzleesser
For wildlife watching in places like Siberia or Alaska this would be pretty
cool. Fly to the middle of nowhere and camp in comfort. I wonder how often
such a thing needs maintenance.

------
simonh
I showed the magazine cover to my daughter.

“I want a boat helicopter... er.. house!”

------
stelliosk
Lonestarrrr

(From Spaceballs the movie)

