Bell 505 Jet Ranger X
Bell delivers 505 to their Bell Helicopter Training Academy yesterday,
cheers
First-Production 505 Lands at Bell Academy to Start Customer Training - Rotor & Wing
cheers
First-Production 505 Lands at Bell Academy to Start Customer Training - Rotor & Wing
As the aircraft delivered to Hurst is serial 11 off the line and the one shown as the first production is serial 12, can anyone explain what happened to serials 4-10 ? I assume serials 1-3 are the prototypes .
Could 4 - 10 be ground-test vehicles for various segments of the test programme that will help achieve certification? One is probably a fully-completed static test vehicle for ground-running only, destined never to fly. A few other vehicles might comprise a completed fuselage and interior and be used for destructive testing, examining the landing gear and seats in a hard landing/crash scenario. Even so, seven seems like a high number of airframes for use solely in the ground-testing portion of the certification process. It is doubtful that any mock-ups for the likes of Heli-Expo are assigned a production number.
Does anyone know how many airframes, flying and static, are required to get an aircraft like the 505 certificated?
500 Fan.
Does anyone know how many airframes, flying and static, are required to get an aircraft like the 505 certificated?
500 Fan.
Last edited by 500 Fan; 12th Feb 2017 at 11:07.
According to Bell they have 1000 flight hours in the 505 prior to certification. I'd be very surprised if after all that they haven't got their balance sorted along with the performance numbers.
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Ocean City, NJ
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bell 505
First I'm looking at photo's of the Bell 505; beautiful Helicopter!
Bell 505 Jet Ranger X - Bell Helicopter
Bell 505 Jet Ranger X - Bell Helicopter
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Australia
Age: 47
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im convinced Whimlew its not beautiful to the point i don't even want to look at a 505 in any press release or otherwise.
Im an old 206 guy from many years ago as are so many on Pprune...and we have at best, memories of a venerable workhorse, trustworthy, and most importantly reliable to all of us.
I also remember awhile back Bell came out with the 351 StarRanger which was part of their proposed M.A.P.L (modular affordable product line) and the replacement B206 at the time. The 429 was the first machine built using these principles, but they never went on with it….pity as it looked pretty S..T hot.
Bell even named it the "Squirrel buster!"
Im an old 206 guy from many years ago as are so many on Pprune...and we have at best, memories of a venerable workhorse, trustworthy, and most importantly reliable to all of us.
I also remember awhile back Bell came out with the 351 StarRanger which was part of their proposed M.A.P.L (modular affordable product line) and the replacement B206 at the time. The 429 was the first machine built using these principles, but they never went on with it….pity as it looked pretty S..T hot.
Bell even named it the "Squirrel buster!"
Yes the 429 never looked much like the MAPL did it!
The Heli-Expo talking point concept airframe looks a bit like one of the MAPL drawings though. The fan in tail in the concept mock-up was also in one of the MAPL drawings and of course may simply be a NOTAR.
The problem with the illustration is that it has a rotor in shroud and we all know that every other manufactureris shying away from anything looking like a Fenestron. Bell have flown t/r in ring, AW flew a 109 with what was 80% a Fenestron but in the end they seem scared of having another 'skid gate' .... a day in court...
The moral of this story is that it may be simple to draw a concept airframe but the engineering has both copyright and other issues.
The Heli-Expo talking point concept airframe looks a bit like one of the MAPL drawings though. The fan in tail in the concept mock-up was also in one of the MAPL drawings and of course may simply be a NOTAR.
The problem with the illustration is that it has a rotor in shroud and we all know that every other manufactureris shying away from anything looking like a Fenestron. Bell have flown t/r in ring, AW flew a 109 with what was 80% a Fenestron but in the end they seem scared of having another 'skid gate' .... a day in court...
The moral of this story is that it may be simple to draw a concept airframe but the engineering has both copyright and other issues.
The 407 retains the same narrow fuselage as the 206 and is way more cramped and cluttered than the H125.
What the 505 brings to the party is an open cabin and more width - the aspects of the 206/407 family that the AStar has always had.
What the 505 brings to the party is an open cabin and more width - the aspects of the 206/407 family that the AStar has always had.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South East Asia
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The 407 retains the same narrow fuselage as the 206" Really? I suggest you get up close and personal with a 407 and take a good look at the fuselage structure at the fuel filler area - notice how it widens significantly moving forward resulting in a much wider cabin. Headroom in the cabin is also increased. Now, if possible, sit in the cabin and compare it to the 206 family - big difference eh! Finally, try to get a flight in a 407 and you'll come away with a very different opinion on the "cramped and cluttered" thoughts. I've never really understood why some people place so much emphasis on the "open cabin" or "flat floor" concept.
As stated before in this thread and many others, the problem with the 351 concept is that the price of it would be significantly higher than the market is willing to pay now.
There have been over 720 R66's delivered since 2010, so the target market is near-ish to $1M. Not nearer to $2M where ~10 H120's have been delivered a year since then.
There have been over 720 R66's delivered since 2010, so the target market is near-ish to $1M. Not nearer to $2M where ~10 H120's have been delivered a year since then.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by PhlyingGuy
There have been over 720 R66's delivered since 2010, so the target market is near-ish to $1M. Not nearer to $2M where ~10 H120's have been delivered a year since then.
Given Airbus's disinterest in promoting the H120 (due to the various commercial issues discussed previously on PPRuNe), it's not the best benchmark to use.
Meanwhile, it's interesting to see the R44 stretch its sales lead over the R66 back above 2:1 (152 R44s delivered in 2016, vs. 63), after four years of sub-2:1 R44:R66 sales ratios.
I/C
The 351 StarRanger is a thing of beauty. I can understand about the fenestron issue but it otherwise it looks modern, sleek and blows other stuff away. Best of all, it also has a strong heritage to the 206 in appearance. I remember there was also an issue with another manufacturer copying EC120-style skids.
look at the engine housing of the 505 and the 351, is there such a big difference in cost, with composite material is shape always related to cost, in other words is elegance always related to cost. In the case of the 505 there seem to be a deliberate attempt to make sure everybody knows its cheap.
PANewz sez:
Really? Doesn't look like it to me. In fact, the pictures I've seen make the back seats look very JetRanger-ish in width. But I've never seen one in person and, Googling my little fingers off, I cannot seem to find on the internet a figure for the interior width of the 505. I guess Bell doesn't want us to compare things.
Bell is positioning the 505 in a curious place. It cannot eat into 407 or even 206L-4 sales - that's a given. It will not compete against the H120 (at nearly double the price with the same engine). And at US$1.2 million, it's quite a bit more expensive than the $900k R-66. Maybe $300,000 is nothing for buyers? And anyway, with its L-4 drivetrain and 504 horsepower engine, the 505 is a class above the 300 h.p. R-66. Or not? Will the 505 and R-66 compete in the same market segment?
I'm really struggling to understand why Bell is reinventing the wheel here (and making it bigger). People talk about that marvelous flat floor(!) as if that's the way Igor decreed they ought to be. In fact, Fun Police says:
Here is one thing I will GUARANTEE: No 505's will be used in EMS. In fact, you won't see forklifts easing up to 505's with pallets of cargo to load. So the flat floor is...well...meh. It's probably not going to matter to the people who'll buy a 505 versus an R-66.
I just look at that big 505 bubble and imagine a seagull coming through at the "135 knots" everyone says the 505 will cruise at. Yikes! I don't even like pushing Bell 47's above 60 knots for that very reason, and the 505 is just as bad! Let us hope and pray it's not nearly as fast as Bell is fake-promising.
What the 505 brings to the party is an open cabin and more width...
Bell is positioning the 505 in a curious place. It cannot eat into 407 or even 206L-4 sales - that's a given. It will not compete against the H120 (at nearly double the price with the same engine). And at US$1.2 million, it's quite a bit more expensive than the $900k R-66. Maybe $300,000 is nothing for buyers? And anyway, with its L-4 drivetrain and 504 horsepower engine, the 505 is a class above the 300 h.p. R-66. Or not? Will the 505 and R-66 compete in the same market segment?
I'm really struggling to understand why Bell is reinventing the wheel here (and making it bigger). People talk about that marvelous flat floor(!) as if that's the way Igor decreed they ought to be. In fact, Fun Police says:
If you try to put a stretcher patient in either you'll instantly be able to tell why people feel this way.
I just look at that big 505 bubble and imagine a seagull coming through at the "135 knots" everyone says the 505 will cruise at. Yikes! I don't even like pushing Bell 47's above 60 knots for that very reason, and the 505 is just as bad! Let us hope and pray it's not nearly as fast as Bell is fake-promising.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 41
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PANewz sez:Here is one thing I will GUARANTEE: No 505's will be used in EMS. In fact, you won't see forklifts easing up to 505's with pallets of cargo to load. So the flat floor is...well...meh. It's probably not going to matter to the people who'll buy a 505 versus an R-66.
Here is one thing I will GUARANTEE: No 505's will be used in EMS.
I'm pretty sure you already promised to eat your hat as it is.... the market for these ships isn't so much US or EU HEMS operations, but more MEDEVAC for Africa/China/Emerging helicopter markets.
I cannot seem to find on the internet a figure for the interior width of the 505
http://www.bellhelicopter.com/~/medi...shx?sc_lang=en
