Bell 222 & 230

[cloudchaser5]

HI Flying a Bell 222 IFR on regular basis in the UK , have not encountered icing yet , but may do in the future ! has anyone any advice on how the B222 handels on encountering inadverent icing conditions

[Helipolarbear]

Picked up some 'Trace' ice once. It starts at elbow of the wipers.
Noticed slight decrease in A/S, slight vertical vib. Exited as fast as I could. Not Nice, Ice!:p

[rotordk]

Going way WAY North ? Watch out for the famous ice fog up there !!

[sycamore]

CC5, if you look in the "gallery", p20, you will see what can happen if you go into icing, under controlled conditions. The ice can build rapidly on the rotor, and I suspect a-222 has an improved blade section than we had, so it will probably affect it more. A rise in Tq. for a steady state( level, constant speed) means you are picking it up.I don`t know how well a Bell rotor will self-shed the ice, so I suggest you don`t try to find out either. Ice can also be accumulating on the fin and stabiliser, depending also on exhaust immersion/speed. This can also lead to a stability problem if you have an autopilot,ie the a/c will become "wallowy", and run out of authority.
The engine intakes, if you have grills fitted can also become coated and choked, unless they are heated, and finally, if you get iced up , beware when you come out of it as when it warms and breaks off, it could damage the t/r, or go down an intake.

As I don`t know the -222, all/any/ none of the above may apply as there are so many combinations of temperature/ droplet size/ concentration, that what may be safe in one helo , may be dangerous in a different type, in the same cloud environment,
particularly if it is of a cumulo-form cloud..

Hope that puts your mind at rest for the winter....!:ok:

[Kalif]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I didn’t think that the Bell 222 was cleared for flight in icing conditions.
Day and night VMC, non-icing conditions or IMC non-icing with the Single/Dual Pilot IMC configuration.

Not teaching to suck eggs but if you fly in icing conditions when the aircraft is not cleared to do so expect some or all of the following:

1. Very rapid build up of ice.
2. The ability to vacate icing conditions may not exist due to terrain etc. so you’re stuck there.
3. Loss of lift on the blades due to ice build up.
4. Increase in torque as lift decreases.
5. Decrease in endurance to increased power required.
6. Vibrations as the rotors may shed ice.
7. Airframe damage as the shedding ice hits the airframe (and tail rotor?).
8. Build up of ice on engine intakes, the Particle Separator may not cope with any shed ice.
9. Possible engine failure due to ice build up on intakes.
10. Decrease in single engine performance.
11. Autorotational characteristics almost certainly affected.
12. Increase in aircraft weight and vibration due to ice will alter handling – IMC?

On top of that lot the aircraft insurance will probably be invalid due to operating outside of the AFM limitations.
It ain’t clever and believe me you won’t find it funny.
As I said I stand to be corrected.

[oldgit]

Kalif, suggest you re-read CC5's original post, he mentioned'inadvertent' icing conditions. We should all know what can happen if you ice up, but what I think he was after was incipient and initial characteristics of Bell 222 as ice starts to accrue. Most IFR operators have been there at one time or other and it is nice to have an early heads up that things may be going down a path that you don't neccesarily what to go down!!

[oxi]

Can anyone add further to icing, particulary pilots in oz, as Im am fairly new to IFR, most of my flying is around NSW and have encountered ice when least expected and at altituides well below the suggested freezing level, the worst some times directily over Sydney and close to summer! I wonder how the BK 117 handels it.

Does anyone have any thunderstorm, lightening and sever turbulance stories (in IMC).

Sorry to steal the thread!!!

[Aesir]

I have encountered some unexpected icing in B-222, enough to cover the front window with rime ice (no windshield de-ice in that one!) and the nose and wings (wing stubs!) had 2cm (almost 1 inch) rime ice covering the leading edge.

This happened at about 2000´ca 10Nm from destination and the ice accumulation was over about a 5 min period.

I never noticed any unusual vibration or decrase in airspeed and upon landing at destination there was NO ice at all on the blades or tail section.

So I´m pretty happy about flying the B-222 in ice prone areas, although I try to avoid it at all costs.

[Kalif]

oldgit, as I said I stand to be corrected.
CC5. You can still expect all or some of what was listed.
Best bet is have a damn good look at the weather, forecast, route, alternates etc. before you launch. As we all know in the UK, the weather at this time of the year can close in behind you very rapidly and leave you with no option but to continue to destination or alternate.

[cloudchaser5]

Firstly may I thank you to all who contributed , the information supplied was helpful and informative .when I have been flying in conditions that I think may lead to icing I have switched off the de ice on the windowns so as to give me a clear visual warning that icing is in effect happening , although all the other signs that have been mentioned I also check for.
Thank you for you help CC5

[Aesir]

Hi CC5

You will see any indication of ice accumulation immediately start to build up on the windshield wiper arms and above/below the deiced area of the window.

The problem is if you fly much at night like I do then you will not see the ice building up so I shine my flashlight (torch for Brits) every 5 mins or so at the wiper arms and the wings to check.

In temperatures below -18°c the windshield heat should be turned on if so equipped for birdstrike integrity of the front windshield. The front window is designed to withstand a 2 lbs birdstrike @ Vne 150 kts.

Hope you like flying the B-222? It sure is a nice helicopter to fly.

[Helipolarbear]

CC5- Like I mentioned in my previous post...ice begins to accrue
at the wipers elbow. If you have windshield Anti-ice......leave it on in the operating temp range. Do Not turn the system off.
That will only add to a potential bad situation if and when you encounter the cold stuff!
I flew UH-60's back in the old days, and we had a very complex
Blade De-ice system that allowed for symetrical shedding into known or forecasted moderate iceing. The ice was measured by a sensor wire that was out side the number two engine. So moderate was moderate to the Hawk! Even with the system working, it was very scary flying in 'moderate iceing', terrible whistleing sounds, heavy lateral vibes every few seconds caused by the shedding, and the power/airspeed ratio increasing!
The biggest fear we had was what the flight manual warned concerning heavy and severe iceing: The potential to lose autorotation capability. Having said that, with all the Blade De-ice, Engine Anti-ice/ Inlet Anti-ice and Windshield Anti-ice systems,
IMC was a regular occurance at +4 degrees or less in cloud......but still very scary. Most civil heli's cannot afford the weight penalty, let alone the cost for such systems. I think the
person that comes up with a viable system for light/medium IFR
heli's, will have reached a hero status on the same level as
Igor S!;)

[Bladestrike]

I'd hate to encourage you but the large blades of the 222 handle ice much, much better than a 76 or a 61. Having flown in the Canadian north for two decades, I've had a few encounters with ice, and the worst was in the 222.

We flew into unforecast freezing rain on a black night in the far north and in the time it took us to do an immediate 180, we built up a solid 1/2 inch of clear ice on the windows. We made an immediate landing at a nearby runway, even running it on as we weren't sure about our performance (although everything seemed normal). On shutdown, the 1/2 inch was everywhere, including the main and tail rotors....smooth and clear.

A buddy though, was coming down at 2000 fpm at 100% Q at Vbroc in the same aircraft and was lucky to shed it coming though 1000' agl. That was rime icing he picked up in cloud, hoping to climb through a layer to get on top. Imagine the indigestion!

Although I avoid ice or any risk of it like the plague, and wouldn't recommend anyone go near it, answering your question, the 222 does handle it better than aircraft with smaller blades.

[oxi]

What altituides do you guys get around at ?

In OZ i usually aim for 10 000 feet and hope to be on top, most of the time this can get me above the weather, especialy the nasty CB's we get in the summer, and hopefully ,,,,at least,,, Im not in cloud and still trying to get around embedded charile bravos.

[Aesir]

Usually 1000 to 2500´ sometimes up to 6000´ but its not really practical to climb high for 15 to 30 min legs.

[Bladestrike]

I've got a dent in a tail rotor on a 222 from landing in a confined area on a clear day at -40C and idling for twenty minutes waiting to load our patient. When we lifted out of the hole, I was suprised to see all the fog that had formed around us (I couldn't see it while in the hole), flying out the machine gave quite a shudder and on landing we had a nice ding in the tail from shedding ice.

At 9000 feet at -29 C in a S76 we picked up so much ice the pitot heats couldn't keep up. Watch out for the tops, they are the worse.

So I've picked it up from the surface to 9000 feet, from 0 C to -40 C, and pretty much everywhere in between. I'd recommend avoiding cloud below zero, or at the very least, seriously limiting your exposure, as I've been caught a few times.

[helmet fire]

Always wanted to fly the B 222, but I dont dig the ice flying!

I IFR climbed through to 6000 (which was LSALT) at 2 degrees indicated in a UH60 when the ice detector suddenly went straight to "severe". And severe it was - I looked outside on to the leading edges of the external fuel tank support wing and fuel jug to see a layer of ice building rapidly. The ice continued to build until about 2 inches had accumulated. There was lots of vibrations as expected, and torque changes required between the anti ice and de ice systems shedding, but the stabilator kept failing due to severe ice build up and had to operated manually. This experience has given me a very healthy respect for the rapidity with which ice can build up, and the severity of the consequences of accumulation.

Now that I fly machines without anti or de ice capability, I tread very carefully. My IFR climb checks include a temperature check going through each 1000 ft. At plus 4 deg I would stop my climb where at all possible, get the copilot/crewman to begin a scan for ice build up, and we use the torch at night. Below 2 degrees, there has to be a very good reason for me to continue the flight (ie medical) and I use other routes to lower my LSALT if possible, and as a last resort now that GPS is all kosher, I will calculate my LSALT based on present position rather than over the entire route so that I only have to fly at higher alts over very short distances.

oxi: I seem to have a different philosophy than you, but I am suprised that you can get over Cumulo Bastages at only 10,000! I am assuming that you have WX Radar - thats what I will use to avoid embedded CB (apart from trying not to get airborne in the first place!!).

[donut king]

Hey Bladestrike!!!

Last I checked, the 76A/A+/A++/C/C+...... IS NOT certified for icing conditions.

Reference..." timing your exposure".

Be it ten seconds or ten minutes, it's contradicting the RFM.

D.K

[Bladestrike]

I'm well aware of the limitations in the RFM, DK, flying in cloud at those temps wasn't intentional, and I'm not endorsing it, rather to educate through my misfortunate experience.

The question is "Does all flight in cloud below 0 C constitute icing conditions?"

I've always said yes, and avoided it, at least to the best of my ability as forecasts aren't always accurate in my neck of the woods, but it seems I run into more and more guys who claim icing conditions are only those in which you actually pick up ice. in which case, you turn around or take whatever steps neccessary to leave said icing conditions. In my experience the potential for icing is too high.

My post was to answer the question of where can you pick it up, and I've picked it up in a variety of conditions, some unexpected.

[oxi]

Helmut fire, yes we have weather radar fitted, and I guess probably 70% of the time I can get on top at 10, most of my lowest safes are around 6 so its not tooo much further and much smooooother.

[Steve76]

Hey DK, perhaps next time you get into inadvertant icing you can set fire to your RFM to thaw things out.
Please don't do the preaching thing at Bladestrike...its so CHC management. Very uncool.
Do some research into BS's (no offence intended :O ) history on this forum and you will see your comments are unjustified.

[Helipolarbear]

BS......Strong post with great advice. Despite everything printed, every Warning, Caution and Note printed for us guys to adhere to, we still have to do the job based on judgement and what info is made available...never mind the actual validity! Hell, none of us would ever get off the ground if we had perfect Met and Forecasters! Icing is probably one of the most serious met conditions to concern ones self over for pre-planning, but it also helps if you understand all there is to know that will directly effect your heli should one inadvertantly encounter such conditions! So the semantics of intentionally flying in to Known Icing is exactly that...semantical!;)
DK, and all the Weenies who are getting hot under the collar over ice....read and be fluid....don't get iced up about it....chill and be cool, be a sponge and soak up all the knowledge and evident experiance thats coming over on some of these threads!!:p
Ya'll have a nice day and Happy New Year with lots of Safe Flying and Fun!

[donut king]

Hi Steve76!

Sorry, not in the loop about "CHC management " thing!! Please explain?

For Helipolarbear... I've got stories too about icing up but am not going into detail. Bladestike and I seem to have the same outlook on icing but why would Steve76 and yourself make this a personal attack.?

Us "weenies " are just too slow witted to understand!

D.K

[Bladestrike]

Thanks for the support guys.

I'd really like some input on my earlier question, what constitutes icing conditions? (to satisfy the RFM and lawyers)

Besides the obvious freezing precip, is it any cloud below zero or when icing is forecast or only when you actually pick up ice?

I know from experience two guys flying a few minutes apart, same altitude, same route, one can pick up ice and one won't. It's incidious stuff and waiting till you pick it up to turn around may be abit late in the game as it may have moved in behind you. Personally, I'd prefer to avoid tempting fate.

I've heard in the North Sea that its accepted as long as there is a solid "out", like 1000 foot ceilings and above freezing temps below???

If you are flying in cloud below zero, and you pick up ice, is it still considered "inadvertent"?

[Helipolarbear]

DK, the 'RFM' doesn't take into account every possible scenario, including inadvertant conditions. Ice in any form is a pain in the a**! It can have catastrophic results when encountered, in a very short period of time. If there are known Iceing conditions, at a profile route you wish to fly.......don't, unless you have the equipment. However, when the temp is +4 degrees, visable moisture present.......no reported iceing......it is still possible to pick up. Worse than ice is freezing rain that is rarely forecasted, but can still materialize at your flight level. The RFM is not specific about it. Just good old commom sense by the pilot!
Don't mind the term 'Weenies'......just getting a rise from you!
Nothing personal..........Have a Happy Xmas!:p

[Taylor Durden]

cloudchaser5, my own experiance, and those of my coleages, is that the b222 takes the ice really well. Flying in the artic, we pick it up from time to time(not intensionaly, offcourse), never experianced any trouble with vibrations and such, even when it's on the hub and blades, but as Aesir points out it get's anoying when you windshield is covered with ice..

[birdman]

Working for a company that needs LONG range and LOTS of payload...the eternal wish! :rolleyes:

Can any 222UT pilots pass on available payload when full with gas? If you could include the average fuel burn and usual TAS that would be much appreciated!

Anyone know if a B230 would be even better than a 222UT?

Many thanx for the help guys...:ok:

[Helipolarbear]

1980 B222 and cannibalized B222 for sale $500K (US)
4,600 Hours Airframe
Independant survey completed Dec 03
With Aux tank range 350nm + 20 minute res
130 to 145 KIAS
25 thru 600 inspections due. C of A due
Recent paint and New interior. SPIFR Wx radar

Not a 222UT or 230, but great price!:cool:

[Aesir]

Hi Birdman.

I fly the 222U model regularly.

Operating weight including pilot is 5.900 Lbs (No fuel)
Fuel is 1670 Lbs.
AUW (Max gross) is 8250 Lbs.

This gives you about 680 Lbs (309 kg) payload with full standard tanks which give you about 3 hrs endurance or 360 Nm range with no reserve at 540 lbs fuel burn pr/hr and 120 kts IAS respectively!

Please note that our helicopters are very heavy equipped with floats, cargo hook, arctic survival gear etc etc...

I always calculate 600 Lbs fuel burn pr/hr, it gives a little extra safety margin and makes it easier to calculate.

Its a nice helicopter to fly and will handle max load with no problem (w/ LTS 101-750 engines).

[BlenderPilot]

I have flown lots of both the 230 and 222 and I could give you precise information but I need more precise info, like altitude and temps to be operated, and the area where you will be taking off and landing, do you need hover OGE performance? When taking off from a misson can you make a running takeoff (not saying drag the skids, just gain speed while in hover)

For example, either machines are real pigs at altitude and you can carry much more/longer in a B407. At 7,500FT, 20ºC the B230 can Take off OGE 7,750 LBS and the heli itself weighs almost 6,000 LBS, then to make matters worse every 1ºC above this temperature is 50LBS less than you can carry! But we need this performance because of the elevated rooftop helipads, maybe you have a flat surface to gain speed.

Then there is the 222SP which has B230 engines, it has slightly better performance. B230's are really hard to get, there were only 36 built, and EMS outfits are constantly searching for them.

[birdman]

Thanks guys! Much appreciated...we're kind of working blind here on the B222 so any info is gonna help! ;)

Blenderpilot:

We operate from sea level (with a nice long take off area) and cruise for 1hr @ 120kts at 5000' then descend to a confined pad for landing (no run on but normal appr angle). Return is at 6000'. We need to take four POB (380kg) and have floats on it too! We can strip the interior down to nothing if required and it needs to be SPIFR.

I guess we're looking for a machine that can give us 3.5hrs endurance (including reserve) and can lift close to 400kg...are we dreaming?

Hope you can find the time to send some details...once again it's really much appreciated!

Birdman.

[John Eacott]

Birdman,

Just curious, but why do you need 3.5 hours endurance given your quoted mission requirements?

[birdman]

Hey John,

We fly two, one hour sorties = 2.0 (No fuel at destination)
Need IFR reserves = 0.5
Fuel for a TEMPO(if reqd) = 1.0
Total fuel requirement = 3.5!

By the way, how do you think the A109E would do for this kind of mission? I've heard it's a bit thirsty, however as you have flown it, could you pass on any opinion?

Thanks!

Birdman.

[John Eacott]

Birdman,

109E: nice fast cruise, comfortable, but little payload at the moment. Possibility of Agusta upping the MAUW to 3000kg on the cards, but with floats & SPIFR I'd doubt that you'd get the 400kg payload. Normal cruise about 145kias, burn at 6000ft would be around 205kg/hr, max fuel about 650kg (IIRC; I'm at home away from the books!).

Aircraft weight in VIP/aircon/knobs & whistles mode gives 160kg payload with full fuel. Allowing another 150kg when/if Agusta ups the MAUW will give you 310kg, plus you may save 100+kg if the aircraft were configured in utility. So, a possibility for your operation, especially since the faster cruise would reduce your trip time to c. 50 minutes, thus reducing fuel requirement to 3.2 hours. You'd have to check on the weight of the float configuration, though.

[birdman]

Thanks John,

Yeah I had an idea the 109E might be tight on payload at full fuel...thanks for confirming that!

:(

FYI, 109 floats weigh in at 56kg fitted.

Birdman.

[Aesir]

Installing the aux fuel tank will give you about 308 Lbs extra fuel if I remember correctly, thats just over 30 min so it will satisfy your requirements of 3:30 fuel.

Your payload will only be around 170 Kgs on the first leg but on the 2nd leg after 1 hr flying you´ll have a 450kg payload!

Depends on your mission requirements.

Now I dont really know the B-230/B222SP but I thought it had the R-R Allison C-30 engiens, excellent engines but I have never heard of them bigger than 650 Hp !!!

The -750 engines in the U model have a 735 Hp 2.5 min limit. Is it really possible to pull more power out of the C-30 engine or is the Lycoming perhaps the more powerful option?

In terms of reliability there is absolutely no problem operating the Lycoming LTS 101, my company has 6 ea B222U models which fly thousands of hour every year for many years with no problems whatsoever, they are excellent engines after all SB´s and inspections have been complied with.
But expensive to operate, I´m sure the C-30 is cheaper to run.

[John Eacott]

Birdman,

Now back near the books, and full Usable fuel for a 109E with both supplementary tanks is 688kg/860lt. This is for the standard 109E, the Elite has slightly less fuel available due to the re shaped rear bulkhead.

[birdman]

Thanks Aesir,

However we need the 380kg payload on departure from base...so can't take advantage of the fuel burn off!

Thanks John,

The A109E sounds possible if the MAUW is increased by Agusta...not holding my breath on that one tho!

:rolleyes:

If anyone has any ideas as to which machine will do the job, please feel free to offer assistance!

Birdman.

[John Eacott]

If you can get external or internal overload tanks for a 117, it's an option. MAUW is 3350kg, expect about 2000 - 2100kg empty for a float equipped machine. Fuel burn is 220kg/hr at altitude, cruise speed about 125kias, but may drag back a bit with floats and external tanks.

So, disposable load will be about 1300kg, less 4 p.o.b. 400kg, leaves 900kg for fuel, 4hrs. Standard internal fuel is only 568kg useable, you'd need to find an extra 250kg or so of overload tank to make your 3.5hr requirement. Not difficult, there are a number of 117's around now with external tanks, and with only a few pax inside, there would be heaps of cabin or boot space to install an internal tank.

Or even an S76, for a few more dollar$ ;)

[birdman]

John,

Thanks again for the advice...

Any timings on the upping of the A109E's MTOW?

B222 is out due no SPIFR (says so in the flight manual) :(

Birdman.

[Aesir]

??? Where in the world does it say that the B222U is not certified for SPIFR in the RFM :confused:

This is suprising to me and I´m sure everyone else that operates the B222U single pilot IFR.
In the RFM page 1-3 it says its certified for day-night VFR/IFR & minimum crew is one pilot seated at the right hand crew seat.

The B222 was even the first and perhaps the only helicopter certifed for IFR without AFCS! Although I would not recommend trying to fly it to much in IMC without the help from an autopilot.

[birdman]

Aesir,

The word about the B222 as a non-SPIFR helicopter was from our Aviation Authority here in Australia.

Apparently they did not approve it for SPIFR when there were several units operating here in Oz...and wont approve it now!

I was informed that the flight manual stated that any IFR must be two crew.

Don't understand how it can be legal in one country and not in another...

I'll chase it up again after your information...many thanks!

Birdman.

[Aesir]

Yeahh... I figured it must be some local restrictions.. perhaps requiring 2 pilots if there is no A/P?

With a A/P the B222 is great to fly single pilot IMC. But then again I dont have much radio work or map reading where I am.

[Av8r]

G’day Birdman,

Nearly caught up with you in Sept with Mark, didn’t quite make it…next time. ;)

As you’ve probably figured out, your request is a tall order for light twins.
You’ll probably need to go up a level…you’ve got the dough, I know, I’ve drunk some of it.

S76a+ According to my figures, and dont quote me, IFR with 60 hold (at a reduced holding rate) you need 206 mins END / 1915lbs (including 5 min stuffing around time)… short about 85lb’s

412 Classic you need 222 mins END (as above) / 2504 lbs. Including 2 X 90 gals aux tanks, still around 100 lbs short.

412 EP as above with 1 X 90 gal aux tank, around 2636lbs of fuel. Do it easy.

Now your pencil may be sharper than mine….or possibly your ops manual has some fuel ‘concession’ for the use of fixed reserve and holding time together?

Of course we're only talking about the fuel issue, dont forget about the twin engine IFR OEI performace requirements.....now in QLD, that might make for some intertesting reading....



Hope this helps.
:ok:

[birdman]

Hey Av8r,

Thanks for the info...I'm not sure about the unlimited funds you mention - my wage appraisal is due next month! :E

May have problems with the size of the B412EP...I'll look into the rotor diameter as anything larger (in disc area) than a B206L can be tricky...I'm guessing it will be fairly similar.

Does anyone have thoughts on the AS365N? From the company specs it seems to have the payload...not sure about SPIFR though.

Anyone from VICPOL out there that can offer some advice re payload/range at max gas?

Cheers,

Birdman.

[Brilliant Stuff]

Birdman

Maybe this helps you.

We operate the N and N2 and ours are offshore rigged, so not many luxuries.

If you take our N for example which travels 135 - 140kts at %80 which is supposedly uses the least fuel for speed.

Now our aircraft have two 10 man dinghies in the roof and of course floats, sfim coupler and ancient weather radar.

The N's are SPIFR !

Now APS is 2741kg if you were to take the three coats of paint off you would save another 10-20kg

add to that a pilot @ 90kg

MTOW is 4000kg which leaves you with 1170kg payload take 915kg fuel off that which is 3hrs 20 min worth of fuel at 270Kg/hr.

Now you have 255kg for your pax, now if you remove the unused seats and dinghies you should get close to your required payload especialy if you reduce the fuel since the N flies 15kts faster then your requirement.
Did I mention we also have Ihums and an E.L.T.

Now as I said if you take the three coats of paint off as well that will give you even more payload.

The N2 will give you another 250kg to your pax payload, because the MTOW is 4250kg.

The N2 is also sweeter to fly.

I do not have any knowledge about the N3.


I hope this gives you an Idea.


regards Brilliant Stuff :D

[birdman]

Brilliant Stuff....

Thanks mate! Much appreciated. The N2 sounds like a terrific device....hope to see that online!

Birdman.

[John Eacott]

BM,

You say that anything larger than a 206L rotor diameter could be tricky:

206L 11.28m rd, 12.96m overall
117 11.00m rd, 13.00m overall
430 12.8m rd, 15.3m overall
412 14.0m rd, 17.1m overall
365N 11.94m rd, 13.73m overall

I couldn't find anything on the 222, but didn't look too hard
;)

[birdman]

Awww Shucks John,

You're the best! Thanks for taking the time mate...

The good news is that you were right about the increased MGW of the A109E...via a STC on new build aircraft with a slight Vne reduction when above 2850kg.

If it's not too much to ask, could you please supply your BEW on the machine you use (without the a/c if possible!) ;)

That way i can do some numbers.

Also, if you have flown it on a hot day, how would you say she goes OEI at MGW?

Thanks mate!

Birdman.

[Aesir]

The B222U rotor diameter is: 12,8 m and the overall length is 15,4 m.

[whatsarunway]

Ok , i have read the books and spoke the folks 'in the know'

What i am trying to find out from the fellas who fly these machines is what will they lift ( isa) full fuel (1400lbs) plus how many people from a confied area / big runway
and in the case of the A model , do the engines keep blowing up or causing problems as i have been told ,

the 222a is half the price of the 222b but is it only half the helicopter? Or perhaps less than half the helicopter.

Any thoughts very welcome at this stage.

Cheers.

[Bladestrike]

I don't know about LTS101 engines "blowing up" but I know they had a pretty dismal reputation when they first came out, and the equipped AStars became known as "Falling Stars". The US Coast Guard made a stink when they put them in the Dauphins (American content) and had alot of trouble, numerous hot end inspections were a pain, but they've got the bugs worked out and its actually a pretty reliable engine. The problem with the deuce (222) wasn't the engines as much as the very limited transmission. You have pretty much the same horse power as an S76a with a 3000 pound reduction in max gross, so it should kick a**, but the engines never work much over 60% of what they are capable of with the transmission rated as it is. I don't remember the numbers, its been a long time, but with an A model, full IFR/Sperry kit, full ambulance kit, two pilots, a medic and a patient, our range was down to about 1.5 hours, and thats including your reserve fuel. It depends more on the altitude and temps you are flying in whether the B is the way to go or not. In the cold climates we flew in, the difference in payload with the B wasn't worth the cost. It was a very nice aircraft to fly though, I have over 2200 hours in the deuce and the only problem I had was one engine go back to idle for a cracked P3 line.

[whatsarunway]

Ok , say you have an a model , empty weight of 4920lbs ,

the usefull load is about 2900lbs according to the books

if we want 2.5 hours endurance , how many 190lb people will get off the ground?

now i know what the book says , but what did you find?

Sea level and around 10-20degrees C.

Cheers

[StevieTerrier]

Whatsarunway..

Wouldnt the easiest plan be to pop in and see / ring up Westair, who ran an "A" in your neck of the woods for years?

We run a quite heavy (IFR and ECS-equipped) A in the UK. It will happily fly at MAUW (7850lbs) but we only have 2334 lbs of payload. Put 2.5 hrs fuel in @550 lbs / hr, and you can carry theoretically carry 5 x 180 -pounders.

As I said, it will fly fine. The problem is getting all that weight safely airborne in the first place! However, the machine is fitted with a nice set of wheels, so find yourself a runway and you're laughing.

Engine-wise we have had no problems at all in 3+ years (touch wood). In fact, I read recently that some Astar owners were considering retro-fitting them into their ships, as Turbomeca rebuild prices were getting out of hand. Now wouldnt that be a turn-around!

The 222 is a great ship - smooth, comfortable, a joy to fly and a lot of aircraft for the money. Just remember that the first A models are nearly 25 years old now, so dont expect them to perform up to modern standards. And Bell wont want to support them for ever, so spares prices will inevitably rise as they attempt to move customers into their newer models.

The 230 has an extra 450 lbs payload (I think). And for that you will pay another $1.25m plus. Its a no-brainer. Buy3 "A" models, and you will never have to buy a spare part again!

[spinningwings]

Mmmm... Only ever flew the 222UT so don't really know what the perf. figures for nthe A/B models were .....

Most of the engine problems on the early LTS 101 engines were to do with it being a new engine that nobody knew much about and were not familier with. Having said that the engine is now reasonably mature and has worked really well in the Bk117 series for many years. It was thought at one stage that some of the problems the engine suffered in the 222 installation may have been to do with the higher gearbox output section speeds required on the 222 vs the Bk (9000 RPM Vs 6000 RPM) and the harmonics if any with vibration etc . Don't know about the USCG probs with their HH65 but I think they push them to the limits with that installation as well ....

[Taylor Durden]

We operate the 222U model, before fueling we have about 2400lbs of payload, the b model should be about the same I imagine. When it comes to the 222 it seems like the ones who haven't flown it keep bad talking it, while those who actually fly it can't stop praising it..

[catseye]

Taylor,

could you assit with a payload for isa +20 @ msl 5000 and 7000 ft. the question is part of a dinner discussion.

the eye

[IHL]

I haven't flown a 222 in a long time but what I remember is:

1) At gross weight you didn't vertical out of anywhere.
2) Twitchy
3) As mentioned early,because of the Xsm limit it had a high power to weight ratio so the actual OEI performance was good.
4) Think they got the engine problems sorted out, there are even some operators converting their A-Stars back to LTS 101 power.

[faded one side]

Evening Ladies and Gents

I am hopefully getting on with a company that is using a bell 230 in the next few weeks, if all goes as advertised.

I would like to get a jump on the training and get some of the numbers and procedures into my some what limited mind. So if there is a startup check list, or emergency procedures list out there, or anything of interest, please could I get a look. Really too poor / mean to spring for buying a full POH from my own funds.

Thanks people:ok:

[rotorpol]

Hello everybody
I´d appreciate anybody could give some info about bell 230
I´ve sort of been offered a job flying one of of these , and know nothing about it, the bell web page doesn´t include this model either, so any data related to this choppper would helpful.

thanks a lot.

[DOL]

Ive been flying the B222 for the past 4 years. Its a real pilots aircraft and a joy to fly.

It feels really solid and rugged, yet its quite agile for a 2 bladed helicopter.

Just watch the low tailrotor when doing terrain landings.

[TripleDeuce]

Is there any 222 or 230 pilots that could tell me how a 222 flys?

Is it angile? fast?

How does it handle in Pitch Roll and yaw?

What Torgue percentage would you need at take off with full fuel load and max passangers at sea level?

What Torgue percentage would you need at take off with half fuel and only the pilot at sea level?

Is there much difference (as regards how it handles) between the 222 and 230?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers

[BlenderPilot]

Neither is Agile, they are underslung rotors, much like a big 206, no major difference in handling 222/230.

Making turns abruptly can reslult in big torque spikes.

The 222 hovers better due to SAS the 230 doesn't have SAS.

The 222 is very underpowered, the 230 is just underpowered. You can carry more people further in a 407 at almost the same speed.

Both are fast and smooth.

Only 36 230's were made. Some 222's have an engine conversion from LTS101's to A250's, slightly better performance and much better reliability.

[Aesir]

I know nothing about the 230 except they have the 250C30.

I have however 1000 hrs in the 222U model. In the temperatures where we did operate them we had plenty of power in ISA conditions both with twin engine and OEI (training).

The LTS 750 is a good engine, very reliable now and cheap to operate and uses about 270 lbs/hr pr/engine in the B-222.

The 750 engine is 735 hp at 2.5 min rating which means you loose only about 26% of available engine power in case of OEI.

We always had trouble doing engine topping test in it because we had to load it so heavy to keep her from hovering on one engine.

I was once told that the C30 in the B-230 is actually a smaller engine than the LTS101-750!

The B-222A model only has the Lycoming LTS101-650 engine which was too small for the aircraft.

The Sperry 4 axis autopilot in the B-222 is very good except in autohover since it does not have standard a doppler radar but uses accelerometers.

[delaminator.]

The 222U is very powerfull. But the one I flew had no SAS and no helipilots. Flying it IFR was challenging to say the least. No point in having two sets of jepps as the pilot flying could not take his eyes off the panel long enough to look at one.

The 222A was underpowered but with full helipilots and flight director. Once you got it going it was great.

Both seemed to get 130 to 140 knots in cruise.

[Aesir]

Yes usually the U model does not have AP, but we had two of them with the Sperry 4 axis.

Regarding the questions you had:

1. Is it agile/fast?

Depends, I guess for it´s size (8.250 lbs) it´s fairly responsive and fun to fly and like mentioned before with plenty of power. Cruise airspeed on the U model about 125 kts to 130 kts depending on weight. Company procedure was to cruise on 80% torque but max continious power was 95% torque and when very light in -25°c she would go right up to Vne 150 kts at 95% Q and you would have to start a slight 200´ FPM climb to avoid busting the Vne!

2. How does it handle?

We´ll its not that stable. If that´s what you mean. She´s a handful to fly IFR without AP like any other helicopter.

3. What torque do you need with heavy aircraft on take-off?

My experience was that all was pretty much done at 80% Q! Hover, climb, cruise and maybe a little less on decent. But we would still do our decends at pretty high power and about 140 to 150 kts.

4. Torque for take-off when light?

50 to 60%.

5. How do the 230 compare with 222.

I don´t know much about the 230. But you can get a nice 222U or B model for about 800 to 1.2 million dollars. Don´t think you can find a 230 for less than 2 mill. In my opinion the 230 can´t be that much better.

All in all the B-222B & U models are pretty good helicopters that still suffer from bad reputation due to engine problems in its early years. Now the engine is very good and is operating in such aircraft as the BK-117, AS-350D & Bell 407. The 407 will have the bigger -750 engine which will make it a AS-350B3 "killer" :E

[BlenderPilot]

Aesir,

You are cheating, you are saying that the 222 has plenty of power, but you are in Iceland! Put the 222/230 at anything above sea level and a ISA+10 and its a real dog, I remember the 230 I used to fly, for every degree C that the temperature rose, I would have to deduct 50 pounds of gross weight, to a point where I could only take one or two passengers!

Then in a hover the 222 with SAS was decently stable, but the 230 was not really stable. It hovers so crooked to the side, I hate it. Agile? Don't think so, except if you compare it to a Mi26. Remember those torque spikes when turning? There is even a warning in the FM in regards to this. And the way the torque rises suddenly when operating hot, high and heavy when you use your pedals?

Lastly, if you read the Article in Flying Magazine where the 230 was reviewed, they call the 230 "the most stable Bell ever" and they meant once it was flying, like IFR, I almost thought it was almost like flying an airplane being so stable once you got airspeed.

Lastly FSI's B222/230 simulator is not working right now, not that the old one with mirrors was much good, but I was going to attend the course last month to be able to ferry a 222SP down to SA and they told me it was going to be a while until they had training available.

[Taylor Durden]

TripleDeuce,

I think the B222 is the best bell product, it's cheap to buy, it's as easy to fly as a 206, but with a vne at 150 and IFR capable. A smooth ride and surprisingly manoueverable for a underslung system. Some the mechanics wheren't crazy about it, and getting parts is getting harder and harder. But that goes for any old aircraft I guess..

[inthegreen]

I've been in the 222B & U models for the past couple of years, flying EMS in California.

If someone were asking whether or not they should buy a 222, I would answer, "That depends."

I guess I would have to know your mission, and where you would want to go with it. IFR transport - yes; Mountain rescue - no.

If your mission is transport from airport to airport, IFR, then I would say that, yes, the 222 is a good aircraft for you. I have found the 222 a very comfortable IFR aircraft. We have both types of autopilots in our fleet. Even without an autopilot, though, the basic aircraft has force trim, which if used properly, keeps the aircraft very stable. If your mission were going to be IFR, however, I would suggest the B model. It has the older SHZ-222 autopilot, which is analog and only 3-axis. It is very reliable and stable, provided you anticipate the flight director with your power commands. The B is an easy ten knots faster than the U also and a good deal smoother, having lost all of that skid-gear bounce. If all that was available was the U with the SPZ-7000 autopilot, I would still take it over the unaided U, but it's a cranky aircraft. You would think being a newer, digital, autopilot in 4-axis that it would be better, but that's just not the case. It relies heavily on the Radalt and accelerometers for inputs and these have constant problems. It manifests in much porpoising and hunting while on the localizer and can be a really uncomfortable ride. We've found that using it in 3-axis instead of 4 makes for a more stable approach.

Anyway, enough about IFR. I saw that you were posting from Ireland. I've never been there, but your latitude probably keeps you on the cooler side, I would guess. That's a good thing for the 222. We operate anywhere from ISA to ISA+30 with terrain around us to 3,500m or so. From May until October, any type of mountain landing is out. It simply does not have the power. If we go to the mountains it better be to a runway with a favorable wind. Because of all the gear we carry our takeoff weight is usually around 8,000 lbs, though (MGW=8,250). Most operators outside of EMS would operate with less.

You asked about pitch, roll and yaw. If you've flown any other Bell, it's similar. It flies like a longranger, only slightly more sluggish and with slower m/r rpm response due to the extremely heavy rotor system.

There are only minor differences between the 222B/U and the 230. The main difference is the C30 engine instead of the Lycoming LTS101. The were also slight changes to the tail rotor, etc. It's the same aircraft.

You asked about torque percentage with full fuel and pax. I can only comment on the 222B/U with the -750 engine, never having flown the 222 with the -650's. In this aircraft full fuel and pax would require high nineties on your mast torque, even where you are. Half fuel and just you would take low eighties, I would guess. I don't suspect that you would even be able to load the 222 with the 650's quite that heavy.

If you're putting alot of hours on the aircraft maintenance costs will eat you up. Parts are becoming harder and harder to get; Main rotor blades are almost impossible. Our aircraft are worked pretty hard and not given much TLC, so we are suffering quite a bit of down time. Operating near max gross for years on end is taking it's toll in the many vibration damping systems onboard and in subsequent airframe cracks.

If you plan to fly only occasionally, and at moderate weight, the aircraft will probably be fine for you. The fact that it is becoming too expensive for daily line use, may make it reasonably priced on the market in a short period of time.

A lower time aircraft that is well-tracked will fly like a dream.

Hope this helps
ITG

[WSPS]

Hello chaps,
just wanted to know wether there were any 222-drivers out there who tried the lady under hot/high conditions?
While flying underslung loads maybe?
I am quite far out and internet access is a rare treat so might take a while for me to get back to you :\ .
But please keep 'em coming regardless :ok: .
Cheers

[Minty Fresh]

Not a 222 driver but tried ladies in hot/high conditions - package holiday to Marbella seventh story of Hotel Don Miguel.

And she was far too petite to require an underslung load. :}

[Simon853]

You need to try and stay well clear of the ladies with the underslung loads. Though from what I hear they can often be hard to spot.

Si

[Deneb]

A colleague used to operate a 222 in Brunei, (special buy for the Sultan I think if I remeber rightly, though flown in mil colours) and did underslung work with it.
Not especially high over there, but I understand it was a fast and highly capable machine - several steps better than our 212s!
I can get more info if it would help.
Best wishes
J

[BlenderPilot]

Your question really made me laugh, I'm sorry!

There could be no worse aircraft at hot and high, well actually maybe the early S76 could be worse. But anyway, the 222 is a real flying anvil at hot and high, so much that you could probably carry more, farther in a Jet Ranger, definately carry more in a 206 L3,L4, and carry about twice the payload in a Bell 407.

There are some 222 SP conversions which are operated around here, they have newer more powerful Allison engines and they operate around here with the same load of a 206, say about 2 passengers with about 01+00 hrs fuel, owners like the room and the fact that its a twin, which is really a joke because in case of engine failure when heavy, you are still going down unless you are very light.

Base airport is MMMX and MMTO

[WSPS]

Hi there,
thanks for all your answers. Good to see that humor is not lost on you :}
@ Blender:
so you are confirming what I suspected already. We did operate 222 in EMS config. but never ever hot/high. So the old lady is no good at this stuff then. I guessed as much. Shame really because the 222 are resonably fast and cheap to buy as well. But at the end of the day it always a different story between calculating from a manual and having to pull pitch on a hot day at 5000 ft DA. What is your bet for a twin in hot/high with loads up to a ton then?.
@ J
the helicopter would be used in a multi role capability (when are helicopters not :rolleyes: ). Could you find out more from your friend wether they had any probems with sand/salt/dust?

[WSPS]

@ Blender:
since you were/are operating out of Mexico City I suppose you have taken the 222 up higher than we are planning to do. If I am not mistaken your elevation can easily lead to 10000 ft DA or more. Would you not think that to operate at half that altitude would be more convenient? We sold the last 222 in the early nineties so that was before my time. I have no personal experience with the aircraft. I mainly fly the BO105 so am used to pi**-poor single engine performance. Would be great if you could tell me a bit more about operating the 222 in general.
Cheers

[BlenderPilot]

WSPS,

I have flown the 230 for a considerable amount of time, the 222 around here will barely lift itself off the ground, I am not exagerating, with 20C all takeoffs would have to be running in a 222. I have ferried a couple of 222 on long flights from Mexico to the U.S. once airborne its comfortable, fast, quiet, smooth, stable. The only drawback I see with the 222 is the power, most 222 have the had the latest AD's on the LTS101's which were at the beginning a nightmare, make sure if you buy a 222 to do an excellent pre-purchase inspection, check all the required stuff has been performed, last 2, 222SP's have given its new customers expensive surprises.

Yes our density altitudes vary between 8000 and 12,000 usually, but my opinion is a straight 222 will require careful planning for every mission above 4 or 5 thousand feet

[octavo]

An excellent choice for arctic regions then:rolleyes:

[malabo]

The 222A was a dog at high temps and altitude, though I know operators that put a bubble door and hook on it and used it for fire-fighting. Vancouver Island Helicopters also used their A for setting power poles out of Prince Rupert. If it was all you had, I guess it could work, but certainly not a first choice. Visibility is poor for external work, then again the AStar is used a lot with that goofy window in the floor and the pilots don't seem to mind. On a fairly cold winter day I ran out of N1 at about 14,000' and had to start dropping the torque to the 60-70 range.

Moving up to the 222UT with the 750hp engines made a world of difference. They ran cooler and had reserve power to spare. Used them for mountain EMS and it seemed quite good.

Never flew the 230 Allisons enough to make a call, my guess is that they were a PR fix for a problem (650 lycomings) that no longer existed. The factory demonstration pilot kept pointing out how cool they ran, so likely they should have been OK at altitude.

[MBJ]

[QUOTE=WSPS]But at the end of the day it always a different story between calculating from a manual and having to pull pitch on a hot day at 5000 ft DA.

Like the Bell 212 "Rate of Climb" figures at 11,000+ AUW. The numbers were all negative!

[inthegreen]

I've been flying an EMS 222 in California for the past few years. It has some nice features, such as speed, relative comfort and great for IFR, but performance cannot be included in that list, even with the -750 engines.

Due to the weights of myself and my crews and all the junk we carry, I can hardly conceive a mission where we would be much less than 8,000 lbs, and at that weight, we are limited to about 7 or 8,000 ft da. Right now in the winter, that's fine. Some of our mountain airports/helipads are at 6,500 ft. With summer temps, it is not uncommon to reach 9 or 10,000 ft da. Not as high as blender, but still too high. There's no getting in or out of a tight spot with that. Scene responses on the mountain are definately out. It's a shallow approach to a runway with ground effect or nothing at all.

Did I mention IFR ?, it's a great IFR aircraft.

[Aesir]

I´m surprised that the aircraft would be so much different at hot & high as everyone here say´s?

I have no experience in the B-222 in hot environments, but in the colder climates where I fly it certainly has plenty of power. I have done sling loads at max weight day in and day out with no problem whatsoever, I was actually impressed with all the spare power the aircraft has, I would rarely pull more than 80% Q and 90% was absolutely the most required if the aircraft was not overloaded. (remember max continious is 95%!).

Actually 80% Q was the figure used all day for normal work. You would lift off in hover and have 80%, the climb was at 80% / 80 Kts, cruise at 80% / 125 kts and descend at about 80% (65-70 maybe) / 150 kts Vne.

Now I have newer flown the -650 engines but I can imagine that there is a big difference between them and the bigger engines on the U & B models.

Ohh did someone mention IFR... Great IFR machine ; )

[WSPS]

OK, so the 222UT seems to be the one to use - if at all. We did have the B and the UT but, as I said, never in H&H conditions. They all found their way into the Arctic.
Could anyone provide the relevant (HOGE) manual page ? :confused:
Cheers :O

[malabo]

I've got the HOGE graph in pdf or jpg, but can't recall how to post it here. Looking at it, HOGE at 10,000' and 10 degrees C (ISA+15), is 6900 lbs. At 10,000 and 0 deg (ISA+5) HOGE is 7300. GW external for a 222 UT is 8400lbs.

[Aesir]

I read in some maintenance magazine yesterday that Lycoming is providing a conversion to -850 engines!

I don´t know if that´s available for the 222, but if it is it would be something for you hot weather operators.

From what I read in the article the LTS101´s are pretty cheap to run.

[rotorboy]

May be worth talking with the Airmeathods program at AIRCARE in Farmington NM. Thye have been using a 222ut EMS for many years. Farmington is 600+pa with da's of 10k in the sumer. They operate in Southern Colorado and N NM in some very high (14k pa) and hot country. I know they recently looked at the 407, and 902 and it coulndt do what they wanted in the summer.
They have a long track record of operating that machine in that enviorment.

rb

[WSPS]

Thanks for all the answers chaps!
It did help me a lot. I am now searching for the relevant flight manual page.
I really would appreciate any further input you might have.
Cheers

[stircrazy]

Hello boys and girls,
Just wondering if anyone would know of any part life 222 mainrotor blades are for sale. Part #222-015-600-105/107/111. TT4000-5000 preferred but beggers cant be choosers.

[helisteve]

Hi,
Try emailing [email protected] He may have some.

[helmet fire]

Done a search for this already, and there is lots of good info out there, but I was wondering if any Bell 222/430 gurus could give me a quick heads up on the various models.

First there was the Bell 222 A.

What did they change to make the 222 B?

Then what did they change to make the 222 UT?

Then the 222 SP?

Then the 230?

Then the 430?

Is this the right progression? Can any 222, 230, 430 be retro fitted with skids as an STC or did it have to come from the factory like that?
Can the 222 A be made into a B or UT?
Can the 222 B or UT be made into an SP?
Does the SP and 230 really outperform the 222B and UT?
Can a 222 be made into a 230?

For interest only! Sexy jets, and I have always wanted to fly one.

[Ian Corrigible]

Okay, I'll bite:

222 – Introduced in 1980, Lycoming LTS101-650C-2/C-3 donks. Later referred to unofficially as the 222A
222B – Introduced in 1980, uprated LTS101-750C-1 donks, M/R diameter increased by 2¼ ft
222UT – Introduced in 1983, variant of 222B with skid-gear and increased fuel capacity (~60 gal, as a result of the elimination of the retractable gear, a benefit shared with the 230UT and 430UT)
222SP – Introduced in 1988, a handful of Allison 250-C30G conversions undertaken by Heli-Air
230 – Introduced in 1992, development of 230 with 250-C30Gs, liquid inertia vibration elimination (LIVE) system, new high-inertia rotor blades, optional EAPS, simplified electronic systems, and dual hydraulic/electrical/fuel systems; offered with retractable gear or skids (230UT)
430 – Introduced in 1996, featured the four-blade model 680 rotor system, stretched fuselage and Allison 250-C40s; offered with retractable gear or skids (430UT)

The 222SP and 230 were reported to be 5 kts quicker than the 222B in the cruise, with the skid-equipped UT models losing 5-10 kts.

Though most of the 222SP conversions were the underpowered A models, AFAIK at least one EMS aircraft still flying was a 222B conversion.

I believe that the skid conversions were factory-options only, but can’t give you a definitive answer on that.

I/C

[chuckolamofola]

I've put what I know in your text below:
First there was the Bell 222 A.
What did they change to make the 222 B?
The difference between the A and B is the engine and electrical. The B model has the LTS-101-750 vice the A's -650 engine. There was also some changes to the electrical bus.
Then what did they change to make the 222 UT?
The 222UT removes the wheeled landing gear and replaces it with skids. There is also changes made to the electrical system and I also believe this model can fly SPIFR without a SAS system. It also comes standard with the utility interior.
Then the 222 SP?
The 222SP is an A model that has the LST-101 engine removed and replaced with an RR/Allison 250-C30 engine installed. This was done by a third party outside of Bell under an STC
Then the 230?
The 230 is Bell's answer to replacing the LTS-101 with the RR/Allison C30
Then the 430?
Bell added the 4 bladed rotor and more electrical improvements and I think the cabin has a slight stretch.
Is this the right progression? Can any 222, 230, 430 be retro fitted with skids
as an STC or did it have to come from the factory like that?
There may be a way to change from wheeled to skids but most come from the facory that way. I think the cost to do so would be too high though.
Can the 222 A be made into a B or UT?
No, why would you?
Can the 222 B or UT be made into an SP?
Yes, reference STC SH7853SW
Does the SP and 230 really outperform the 222B and UT?
Can a 222 be made into a 230?
No, but you can put the 230's engine in the 222

[trackdirect]

The 222UT has a totally DC electrical system wheras the A/B have AC and DC systems, makes the UT a much simpler system.
UTs have more fuel load, bigger wing tanks due to no landing gear in there.
The 430 is a stretched 222, has a plug of about 18 inches, not a great deal has changed in the airframe department, mainly electrics and avionics.
430 has IIDS and EFIS and autopilot as standard so lots of telly screens to look at, but there are 3x 430s that came out with standard flight instruments, no autopilot in these ones only scas and basic attitude hold.
(autopilot interfaces with the EFIS).
222 seats pilot and 9 Pax, 430 seats the same but with a tiny bit more room or there is an option for 10 pax config on the 430.
The 222 flies very much like a big longranger but the 430 is something totally different, No vibration at all from take off and even through translation amazingly smooth (due to the LIVE mounts on the transmission). Feels more like a jet than a helicopter.

Hope that helps a bit Helmet fire.
:ok:

[helmet fire]

Thanks heaps guys, thats fantastic.

Three last ones: Does the SP and 230 really outperform the 222B and UT?
and
Is the LIVE system fitted to both the 230 and the 430?
and
How many 230 UT were there? I have only ever seen wheeled 230s.

[Jed A1]

At present there appears to be the following numbers of 222/230's on the worldwide civil registers;

222 - 46
222A - 7
222B - 23
222U - 3
222UT - 50
230 - 24
430 - 82

Therefore no 230UT's

So, I ask what is 222U?

[widgeon]

Why was the 430 not that succesful ? , is it a competitor to the S76 , EC155 .
What is the range of a std 430 ?.

I guess the fuselage jigs all left Fleet last year bound for China.

Closest is the 365N3 as far as I can see

[Ian Corrigible]

You're quite right, we overlooked the 222UT.

Some skid-equipped examples:

222
http://www.saintalphonsus.org/images/bell222_b.jpg
Saint Alphonsus Life Flight

http://alecbuck.com/airambulance/mediagallery/mediaobjects/disp/e/e0e8efbcf752162a943d5659dd4496ef.jpg
Methodist Hospital CareFlite


222SP
http://www.helispot.com/images/00900.jpg
Mercy Air


230
http://alecbuck.com/airambulance/mediagallery/mediaobjects/disp/8/8ecae2caf4dd3436afb5a5f370efda34.jpg
Life Flight Network

http://alecbuck.com/airambulance/mediagallery/mediaobjects/disp/c/c1700c052417a58dcd0f62cb9175c622.jpg
Palmetto Health Richland

I/C

[trackdirect]

http://www.avta.com.au/images/Gallery/Whitsundays/HellicopterHeartReef.jpg

http://www.avta.com.au/images/Gallery/Whitsundays/avta067.jpg

[bellfest]

THAT'S THE SHOT!

[SMOUC]

That is the shot ol' fella!!!

[helmet fire]

Thanks for the info guys, and the great shots.

Does anyone know if it is possible to convert a wheeled 230 into a UT?

Widgeon: I think the 430 was somewhere between the EC145 and 155. Dont know why it wasn't so successful.

[mack44]

I am interested in the older model 222's for charter/utility. I would appreciate some feed back on what to look out for if purchasing one. ie skids vs wheels, power plant,hidden problems,noise etc.purchase would be for use in Australia highest feature 2000' AMSL.
Thanks in advance Mack

[Te_Kahu]

You might want to talk to Grant Bremner, Waikato-Westpac Air Ambulance, Hamilton, NZ. Their B model is grounded again - this time it needs a new mast. It had a lengthy period on the ground a year or two ago with cracking issues.

TK

[VeeAny]

Does anyone have an actual weight to hand for an EMS equipped Bell 230 ?

I am interested in real world figures not those from sales brochures or samples in the flight manual.

Also any comments on operating the type in that role would be appreciated.

Thanks

Gary

[430EMSpilot]

I currently fly one in North Carolina and it weighs about 6500 pounds with all medical equipment installed including a 42 lb full lox orb. That leaves you 1900 lbs of gas and people for a max gwt of 8400. In the summer 8400 is a bit optimistic but when it's cool you'll be fine.

You must plan ahead as there is not a lot of power to spare and parts are scarce as hens teeth as well as expensive.

That said, I like it and have flown it since 2001 with no trouble, good IFR ship too.

Fly Safe!

[Torquetalk]

Hi

Does anyone have a digital copy of the Manufacturer´s Data Manual for a Bell 230 BHT-230-MD-1 or it´s equivalent? It´s the section with the weight and balance data, systems description etc.

Thanks

TT

[Encyclo]

If you are a Bell 230 operator (technician or pilot) you can get access to the Bell pubs website for free. You just need to give them the serial number and company and that's it, you have access to all the model's manual :ok:

Just go to bellhelicopter.net

[Torquetalk]

Thanks for the tip. Don´t qualify at the mo, hence the request.

[Bell 222]

I was just wondering if Bell 222, with reg N222WX, is still operating in the Uk and if not, where is it now based?

Thanks in advance,
Bell 222

[CVR]

N222WX is in a hanger at Galway Airport, i think its up for sale. It has been in storage for nearly 2 years. PM me if you need more details.

[Helipolarbear]

Hey there CVR, glad to see some heli's remaining on the emerald Isle!:ok:

[Hedski]

And how's the health with you HPB?
Word on the street is you had a scare of late!
All the best for speedy recovery, still waiting for you to teach me to fly a 222/430 or even a UH60 for that matter. :cool:
L8R,
H

[euroastar350]

With this helicopter getting rare nowadays, I figured I start a thread to highlight the B222 and its advanced cousins.

I'll bite and post this one shot:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6057/6285796414_5a631e14a6_o.jpg
Bell 222UT fitted with an experimental ducted tail rotor and trialed in 1993. Date is a guess and this is the only image of this testbed to be found anywhere. Anyone with info on the airframe, I would gladly appreciate it...will help me with my Bell 222 flight simulator project;)

[TOMMY1954]

CS-HDS, still in good shape, photo taken the 16th of last month of October
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/Thomas_Ferreira/IMG9668.jpg
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/Thomas_Ferreira/IMG9839.jpg
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/Thomas_Ferreira/IMG9680.jpg

[Flatdog]

We are interested in purchasing a good B222UT. Please PM should you know of any available UTs in the market.

Thanks,

Flatdog

[spitfiremk9]

Hi


Airgreenland has 4 ships. B 222 ut models.

One is with full 4 axis autopilot.

They are stored in denmark, Esbjerg.

Best reg

[Turkeyslapper]

gday there, PM sent.

[longbox]

Hi guys

We have a 222, we have just finished painting our 222 into Airwolfs colours, she will be on the airshow circuit for a fee years to come, I will post pics soon