Oh Nigel, if you could refrain from the
ad hominem attacks for just a moment, maybe we could discuss the 505 objectively?
It's true that I thought Bell would never produce the 505, especially when they gave the finger to the Lafayette, Louisiana City Council, abandoned the plant there and moved production to Canada. I guess I was wrong about that. Oh well, nobody is right 100% of the time. I still think that, like other star-crossed aircraft that either failed or were stillborn (e.g. Beech Starship, Cessna 162, the Piperjet, the Eclipse 500, etc. etc.), Bell will cancel 505 production and move on, much like they did with the 206LT. Oh, and the 427. And the 230. And the 609.
And let's not forget the 214ST! Iran wanted 350 of those babies. Bell eventually built under 100 of them.
The fact that the 505 does not yet have endplates on the horizontal stab is moot. It *will* get them, trust me on that. Seriously.
And I don't know about any "rave reviews" of the 505's speed. The claims of a 125 knot cruise are far from "proven." So far, no pilot report I've read states that anybody cruises the thing that fast. The most comprehensive pilot report (by Philip Greenspun) notes that the vibration became "dramatically worse" above 110 knots. Dramatically worse, eh? Poetic license, Mr. Greenspun?
Greenspun then referenced a review of the 505 that was written by Guy Maher and published VERTICAL Magazine. Maher says:
What I also noticed was as the speed increased from 110 to 120 knots, so did a two-per-revolution vibration. Knowing how smooth the 206L-4 rotor system could be, I was somewhat surprised.
So far, NOBODY has published any realistic "torque vs. airspeed chart vs. fuel burn" figures. I mean, how hard could that be? All they talk about is how rough it gets above 110 knots. So...sure...it may fly up at 125 knots, but at what comfort level and what fuel burn? Heck, a 206B-III on low skids will do "nearly" 110 knots (admittedly at MCP). I've flown some that would actually do 120-125 mph with a light load.
(I knew a Bolkow pilot at PHI who swore...*SWORE* that his ship would do an "honest" 125 knots all day when EVERY OTHER BOLKOW in PHi's fleet only did 120. And yeah, I flew a ton of them. Turns out that "his" 105 - which I eventually flew too - didn't get from Point A to Point B any quicker than any other 105. The GPS doesn't lie. "His" ship just had an inaccurate ASI. But pilots are optimists, eh?)
Even Bell admits that their "LIVE" transmission mount ain't doing the job, and so they're adding a FRAM damper to the cabin. Now there's a big engineering "oopsie!" for you. (My question is if the engineers really thought they could push the L-4 rotor system to 130 knots and keep it smooth without the Nodamatic trans mount? That's just crazy. They must've been smoking some real primo LSD when they came up with that bit of fantasy.)
So Nigel, unwad those panties! Maybe someday we'll have an objective pilot-report on the 505 which will have some hard numbers. Greenspun's was pretty good but he left out the fuel burn and cruise speed figures. Other than those *two* pilot-reports (and maybe one other story that it was written by a non-pilot), all we get are breathless reports which are full of unrestrained fangirl giggling over the dual FADEC.
By the way, Nige...since you seem so close to this project and are so deeply and personally invested in it...has Bell been able to remove or extend the hilarious 500-landing life-limit on the landing gear?