PPRuNe Forums

Go Back   PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Forgotten your Username/Password?

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 6th Mar 2011, 22:37   #1 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Where I'm pointing...
Posts: 564
Cool Bell 407GX

Talk about a sterile cockpit! I got a tour of the 407GX today, a lot of thoughts come to mind, the first one "about bloody time".

I was impressed by the simplicity; they appear to have done a good job though I'll wait for those who get to fly it this week to comment.

The cockpit felt so naked.

At least youngsters like SASless can watch their Nickleoden in between flights
birrddog is offline   Reply
Old 6th Mar 2011, 23:50   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: FBO
Posts: 17
Bell 407GX

I shot this short video of the unveiling of the Bell 407GX today at Heli-Expo.

Rotor George is offline   Reply
Old 6th Mar 2011, 23:55   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 918
Heli Expo 2011: Bell 407GX and 407AH

T'was most impressed with the unveiling of the 407GX and the 407AH today, cool music and so forth. WIll post up pics and video when back from Orlando.

Looks like Bell is fighting its way back then I guess however the cynics would say it was like the Bell 417 and ARH-70A ghost coming out of the cupboard albeit in a different form but the same nontheless.
chopper2004 is offline   Reply
Old 8th Mar 2011, 17:47   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 596
Quote:
I understand Bell has their 407 at HAI,
Just back from HeliExpo. Did a demo flight in the 407GX and talked to various Bell personnel. What I thought I heard:

> Base price of GX with G1000H about $2.8mm, said to be about $150K more than analog version, but includes much more. Must add to this other desired kits. Estimated (by me) delivery price of a completed helicopter in the $3.2-$3.3mm zone for "corporate" configuration. Both versions to be available for some period of time.
> First available delivery position end of 2011 (some orders already taken).

IMHO this transforms the helicopter. While the G1000H includes substantial "whytech" (features that are easy and cheap to do given that the platform overhead is already paid for but are irrelevant on a VFR light helicopter so why bother) it is overall stunning and the whytech portions are highly addictive irrespective of utility. I want one!

Also talked with Roger Hoh, developer of the Cobham/Chelton HeliSAS. He stated that the STC for the 206/407 has been approved by the FAA and installations should begin soon. The Bell 407GX demo ship had a HeliSAS installed.
EN48 is offline   Reply
Old 8th Mar 2011, 18:36   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Where I'm pointing...
Posts: 564
EN48, could you describe the demo flight? I'm curious as to the length and what they would have been able to demonstrate on what I imagine must have been a short flight....

Did they mention anything about IFR certification? The Bell pilot I spoke to said it was possible and he could not see why they would not do it, I guess with the G1000H all they need should be another power source as the G1000 already has redundancy built in (two displays and 2 computers*)

IFR in VMC (marginal VFR or night) would be great, including IFR flight plans.

* I assume 2 computers based on typical G1000 spec.
birrddog is offline   Reply
Old 8th Mar 2011, 19:15   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 596
Quote:
could you describe the demo flight?
Bell and Eurocopter were conducting demo flights of several types of helicopters from a field behind the convention center. Flight lasted about 30 min with route in vicinity of convention center. Pilot was well versed on G1000H features but not so much on some of the technical details. In order to get a demo flight, one had to do a short (10 minutes) briefing on using the G1000H at the G1000H demonstrator in the Bell exhibit area. If one knows the G500, the G1000 basics are pretty simple.

The issue for IFR is not so much the avionics as it is airframe related features. I am told that the FAA requires redundant hydraulic and electrical systems and a sophisticated autopilot among other things for SPIFR, and that the cost of designing and certifying the FAA required capability would be cost prohibitive in the B407. AFAIK, for these and possibly other reasons there are no light single engine helicopters currently in production which are certified for IFR in the U.S. In the past a handful of 206's and I think 3 407's have been certified possibly through the STC route, but I am told that the FAA would not allow this again. There are others here who will know more about the certification requirements.
EN48 is offline   Reply
Old 9th Mar 2011, 09:46   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 761
To see the certification requirements, look to Appendix B of Part 27. These are the same for any Part 27 helicopter - whether single or twin.

ICAO Annex 6 Part III also has standards for flying in IMC in Performance Class 3. These are contained in Section II Chapter 3.4, Appendix 2 and Attachment H. These SARPs are for CAT but give some indication of what might be required.

Unlike some views expressed in this and other threads, this is not a trivial issue.

Jim
JimL is offline   Reply
Old 5th Feb 2012, 01:58   #8 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 170
Spent ten hours flying a 407GX Monday, three in the dark. The G1000 installation is incredible -- Bell has hit a home run with this.
GeorgeMandes is offline   Reply
Old 16th Sep 2012, 07:36   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Montreal, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 16
Cool 407 versus 407GX

Has anyone had the pleasure of flying the new GX yet,

How would you compare the experience between the 407 vs the 407GX?

I took it on two test flights and it handled like a dream, the only draw back was that it was a local flight which on lasted 45minutes, we did some hovering, circuit, a few autorotation into the Textron Mirabel plant (my Bell test pilot Bruce was someone you can learn from inside and outside ahy helicopter. The other flight was left seat at heli expo 2012, very short flight straight and level (but then again beggars can't be choosers)

If you can share any of your experiences or stories would love to hear them.
Hopin one day that will be my next sled...:
olymbec is offline   Reply
Old 16th Sep 2012, 19:29   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Kent
Age: 45
Posts: 67
I have just completed a demo your of the UK in a GX, the 407 has really been reborn with the GX, the G1000 screens are very easy to use with easy of use and pilot friendly layout, sadly all analogue dashes look very old after, pm me if you would like more info or pictures
longbox is offline   Reply
Old 16th Sep 2012, 21:36   #11 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 170
I have been flying a GX since late January -- the one word that comes to mind is "fantastic!" Previously I flew a legacy 407.

Faster to get launched as flight plan info is entered prior to start, much simplified power management with the single limit display, fantastic SA info flying in the mountains. The HITS boxes are wonderful flying under a low ceiling over the water.

We have had zero issues with the G1000 installation, and we were one of the first few GX ships delivered - Bell and Garmin really did their homework.
GeorgeMandes is offline   Reply
Old 17th Sep 2012, 01:12   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 15
Olymbec question for you?

Since you use the G500 system in BDT what is your comments compare to the G1000 in the 407

Guy

Last edited by 47guy's; 17th Sep 2012 at 01:13.
47guy's is offline   Reply
Old 17th Sep 2012, 03:03   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Montreal, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 16
I love flying with the G500. So simple to use once you have had a little practice.Truth is I ever imagine flying without a glass cockpit in the future. Have only flown the 407GX on a test flight. Will be getting the GX next month. Will keep you posted then but from what little I experienced during my two separate test flights the G1000 seems to reduce a lot of the pilot work load. Will check back and give a better report once I have logged more hours. 47Guy's where are you located in Canada?

Last edited by olymbec; 17th Sep 2012 at 03:04.
olymbec is offline   Reply
Old 17th Sep 2012, 03:06   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 170
I am not him, but I have a few years of G500/600 fixed wing experience. G500H is an improvement on the navigation side, but loses all the benefits of the engine/airframe integration of G1000. Things like the single limit power display, big instrument page, FADEC information, tail camera, elimination of the old engine gauges, the clean-up of the panel, plus HITS boxes, larger displays, etc.

Here is the GX panel:


Last edited by GeorgeMandes; 17th Sep 2012 at 03:26. Reason: diction
GeorgeMandes is offline   Reply
Old 17th Sep 2012, 13:56   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Montreal, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 16
George Mandes what was the reason for adding the Garmin 696 in the centre console?
What extra information to you get from it? now that you have it would you do it again? if you have the choice would you have chosen the new Aera 796??

Thanks in advance for your reply since I will be adding some other avionics and want to know what would be the best combination and solution for me.

Also why do you have the right side fixed cargo mirror on the helicopter? are you using the machine with a cargo hook?

Last edited by olymbec; 17th Sep 2012 at 14:00.
olymbec is offline   Reply
Old 17th Sep 2012, 14:55   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 170
We are able to download detailed topo information, like river and lake names, and display it on the the 696 for use in Alaska. Also, since we had a wx weather antenna, it was a cost effective way to get XM weather when in lower 48. We prefer the 696 because it works with flight gloves, unlike the 796, and also like the dedicated buttons on the 696. The GX install is so clean, that area was wide open to easily add the 696. Couldn't beat the price, since we already had a 696 from our last 407, and it provides a back-up in case of any major G1000 and/or electrical problem.

The fixed mirrors are for off airport landing use.

Depending upon how and where you fly, I would consider adding a back-up attitude indicator with a skid ball, as we did above the GX install.

Last edited by GeorgeMandes; 17th Sep 2012 at 15:00.
GeorgeMandes is offline   Reply
Old 17th Sep 2012, 15:10   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 170
Here is a photo showing the HITS boxes in use over the ocean on one of those murky days where the water and horizon blend together. The displays are in the reversion mode, allowing the pilot in the left seat to fly with a PFD on the center screen.

GeorgeMandes is offline   Reply
Old 3rd Nov 2012, 15:06   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Montreal, Canada
Age: 47
Posts: 16
407GX checklist

I recently purchased a 407GX and I am looking to print up a checklist to keep with me in the machine. Can any one direct me to where I can find one on the internet? I looked around and couldn't find one.
Thanks in advance for your help.
olymbec is offline   Reply
Old 3rd Nov 2012, 15:31   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Louisiana, USA
Age: 44
Posts: 48
There is a checklist in the Pilots Operating Handbook that I could email or fax to you but you should have one( a POH) or( Flight Manual) in the aircraft.

Last edited by helofixer; 3rd Nov 2012 at 15:33.
helofixer is offline   Reply
Old 3rd Nov 2012, 15:43   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Center of the Universe
Posts: 596
I have one for a standard 407 I have been refining for several years ( around a million dollars of my time in it so far!) as part of a personal safety management system. In MS Word form and fairly easy to adapt to GX. PM me with email address if interested. Over several decades of owning and flying airplanes and helicopters I have found the the RFM/AFM checklists rarely are adequate for in-flight use as the format is not suited to quick reference and optional equipment and personal preferences not considered.

Last edited by EN48; 3rd Nov 2012 at 15:46.
EN48 is offline   Reply
Reply
 
 
 


Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:11.


vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network