Compromises
Talk about compromises! Bell was really backed into a corner with this one.
The First Directive was, "Get rid of the broom closet!" I think that's clear. Secondly, they wanted to make the cabin "bigger than a 206B." That back seat looks huge by comparison. (Happy coincidence: Lots more room up front as well.) Third Directive: "Keep it under $1million 2014 dollars." (Yeah, right.)
To get rid of the "broom closet" Bell had to put the transmission behind the cabin. Not a good idea. The brilliance of the 206B was that you really couldn't get it out of c.g. Operators of the 505 will have to be diligent in keeping it balanced - guaranteed.
But then Bell really messed up. Bell claims that the 206 fuselage is horribly expensive to build. So for the 505 they reverted back to...basically...a 47J with a turbine engine: A sheet metal cabin shell with a steel-tube centerframe. What a giant leap backward! Of course, the venerable J-model at least had a baggage compartment in the tail to help keep the c.g. in range. The 505 has no such thing; its baggage compartment is right under the mast.
It is a certainty that there will be no "stretched" 505. There is no room for growth in this design. (Plus, Bell already has a perfectly good 407 they want to sell you.)
Using the 206L-4 dynamic components is interesting. This more or less guarantees that the 505 will be heavier than a 206B. (And let's face it, from here on out everyone will be comparing the 505 to the 206B.) How much does that "500 horsepower" Arrius engine weigh? Let's say 230 pounds...50 pounds or so heavier than a C20B.
Can a 505 be faster than a 206B? Bell is claiming 125 knots for the thing, which is astonishing and...uhhhhh..."optimistic" to say the least, I think. I sure wouldn't want to have an engine failure in a two-blade system at 125 knots, no way! Especially with that Nodamatic trans mount. Not to drag up an old, controversial thread, but simply bottoming the pitch without a healthy tug on the cyclic to load the rotor will make things get "interesting" fast, as others have found out when they experienced "Nodamatic bounce" in their LongRangers. But I digress...
Then there's the bird-strike issue. I mean, all that glass! I know that a bird-strike isn't fun in any helicopter, but geez-louise the pilots of the 505 look exceptionally vulnerable.
So in the end, people are going to be looking at the 505 and comparing it to a 206B. It probably won't lift any more than a B-model...and probably won't be all that much faster (B-models on low-skids are pretty speedy - 120 - 125 mph). It probably will burn more fuel (which means it'll have to carry more). And finally (and maybe more importantly), the DOC's are undoubtedly going to be higher than a 206B's.
The first flight of the 505 isn't even penciled-in until the end of 2014?? Bell sure went to a lot of work to give us three mockups for HAI. But that's all they were: mockups - something they're hoping will work.
On another forum, someone speculated that the 505 is such an abortion that Bell ultimately might not even produce it. I pondered that thought for a while. And in a way, I wonder if he's right? The market for 5-place singles will undoutedly change between now and whevever Bell can get 505 production up and running.
Perhaps Bell will say, "You know, we really had a good thing going with that dang ol' JetRanger B. Maybe if we pooch the cabin out like we did with the 407 and let them non-union Coonasses over in Louisiana build the thing we can keep the cost down to $1million or so, whaddyathink? I mean, Christ, the tooling is paid-for a thousand times over! And that JetRanger is STILL a sexy beast, you know?"
It'll be interesting to see how the 505 develops...