Bell 212

[Cyclic Hotline]

From the FAA accident summary for 31 Jan 2000.
B. Reg.No.: 212HQ M/M: BH12 Desc: 1974 BELL 212 HELICOPTER
Activity: Business Phase: Other GA-A/C: General Aviation
Descr: 1974 BELL 212 HELICOPTER WAS INVOLVED IN A SLING LOG LOADING OPERATION AND WAS LIFTING LOGS 150 FEET OFF THE GROUND WHEN THE MAIN ROTOR MAST BROKE, THE ACFT FELL 150 FEET TO THE GROUND AND SUSTAINED SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE, OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES ARE UNKNOWN, MT. PLEASANT, UT.

WX: UNKN Damage: Substantial
C2. Injury Data: # Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 1 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 0 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 UNK:
D. Location City: MT. PLEASANT State: UT
E. Occ Date: 01/29/2000 Time: 20:30
F. Invest Coverage. IIC: MALMBORG Reg/DO: NM07 DO CTY: SALT LAKE CITY
DO State: UT Others: NTSB
G. Flt Handling. Dep Pt: MT. PLEASANT, UT Dep Date: 01/29/2000 Time:
Dest: UNKN Last Radio Cont: NONE Flt Plan: NONE
Last Clearance: NONE

[212man]

Ooops!

remind me to stay below 150'

[Cyclic Hotline]

From the NTSB preliminary accident report.

NTSB Identification: DEN00LA045

Accident occurred JAN-29-00 at MT PLEASANT, UT
Aircraft: Bell 212, registration: N212HQ
Injuries: 1 Serious.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.

On January 29, 2000, at 1330 mountain standard time, a Bell 212 helicopter, N212HQ sustained substantial damage when it impacted the ground after the main rotor system separated from the aircraft during logging operations near Mount Pleasant, Utah. The commercial pilot and sole occupant received serious injuries. The flight was operating under Title 14 CFR Part 91 and no flight plan was filed. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for this local area flight which departed Mount Pleasant earlier in the day. According to preliminary information, the original owner of the helicopter was the Peruvian Air Force, who listed the helicopter as being destroyed in 1976. It reappeared under the livery of Houston Helicopters and was listed by them as having been destroyed in 1981, It was listed by Heliqwest, the present operator, as having sustained damage when the main rotor contacted trees in 1997.

[Luft Hansit]

Just popped over from the Mil Forum, to see if any one can help me out.

Just been posted somewhere hot to fly 212's, and wondered if anyone knew where on the net I can get any info/Tech data/Flight reference cards/Etc.

Just like to be bit ahead of the game on the conversion.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers
Luft

[HOGE]

Get a back support cushion and some earplugs!

------------------
If it was that good, everyone would be doing it.

[army427]

A seat cushion will help too. I used a piece of sheepskin. I'm sure you can dye it green! I have loads of info on the 212 if you get stuck.

[Jed A1]

From the Bell Textron Website you can download the 212 technical brochure.

http://www.belltextron.com/products/commercialHelicopters/212/

[Luft Hansit]

Thanks so far.

Jed A1 - Tryed that site, Great......if you want to know what colours they come in, but thanks anyhow.

Army 427 - Will be in touch shortly by E mail, not only to find out what I can scrounge, but to work out who you are, sure I know you!?!?!?!

Anyone else who thinks they could help would also be welcome

Cheers
Luft

[212man]

Give me an e-mail if you like, I may be able to send some groundschool notes and give general info (I'm a B212 TRE/IRE).

------------------
Another day in paradise

[CAT MAN]

ANYONE OUT THERE CURRENT ON BELL 212 WHO WOULD GIVE ME SOME TECH INFO????

[212man]

What would uou like to know?

[CAT MAN]

1. What is beeper trim??

[212man]

TR3,
there are two beeper trim mod states.

The standard Bell one is a single rocker swith on the collective which adjusts the N2 datum within a nominal 4% range (+/-2%). It energises a linear actuator which is connected in series with the droop compensation mechanism, so directly changing the settings on the N2 governors by the same degree.

Normally, the single engine beep range is 95-99%, and the twin beep from 97-101.5%. Normal power on range is 97-100%.

However, there is a high power mod state (TB138/145)which allows an increased take- off torque rating of 104.3% for 5 minutes. At this power the torque matching/sharing side of the torque control unit is not stable enough for it to be properly used. This is why the TCU normally limits torque to 102-104%; it improves stability. So, Bell isolate the torque sharing part of the TCU and add a separate N2 actuator for the number 2 engine and the rocker switch has a lateral movement added to it as well.

The pilot can then set a twin N2 datum and use the No2 engine beep to keep the torques matched at high settings.

Make sense? I hope that helps.

(Not sure what your background is, but you will find all turbine helicopters with a simple hydro-mechanical governing system use beepers)

[ 09 July 2001: Message edited by: 212man ]

[CAT MAN]

Many thanx 212MAN much appreciated

[CAT MAN]

2.Does the eng starter cut out automatically or is this done by the pilot? If so at what Ng or Nf does this occur?? 3. When do eng driven gens come on line???

[Taff Missed]

The starter is taken out by the pilot at 55% Ng if my memory serves me and the gens are selected on at 80%.

----------

If it ain't broke........

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Taff,

Your memory's pretty good on the 55% N1 figure for deselecting 'start'. We take the first engine up to 85% N2 (approx 83% N1) before selecting its gennie online; second engine is taken up to 71% before its generator goes on.

[212man]

Same figures as us, the reason for the high Ng before generator selection is to reduce the torque shock loading and possibility of quill failure.

[CAT MAN]

EXCELLENT STUFF FELLAS AND MUCH APPRECIATED...MANY THANX By the way...What is "quill failure"??

[ 10 July 2001: Message edited by: TR3 ]

[Taff Missed]

What is it?? Noisy and potentially terminal.

There are a number of 'quills' on the Main Xmsn. The input quill which drives onto the Main bevel gear and the No.2 Hyd quill which is driven by it. Also the rotor brake quill if you have one fitted.

Then there's the T/R quill which comes off the sump case. The No.1 Hyd pump is driven from a quill of sorts on the RH side of the sump case and the Nr tacho gen is chain driven from that so it doesn't really qualify as a quill.

They are the only quills I can think of (unless you write with a feather that is).

--------

If it ain't broke..........

[CAT MAN]

Much appreciated... TAFF MISSED.

[212man]

A quill is a narrowed neck to a drive shaft which is designed to fail before a more catastrophic point. So in the case of a generator it is merely the input drive shaft having a narrowed neck.

[diesel76]

I'm reading a book at the moment called "Hunting Warbirds" by Carl Hoffman

In it they are recovering a B17 with a 212...
After lifting a section and flying it out it starts to spin on the strop.
Anyway the book goes on to say that he had to rush back to pick up the salvors as one of the controls/linkages was severed to one engine....

How can something spinning on the hook severe engine linkages???

And has anyone seen Charlies Angels where they get under the Uh1 and pull out the "primary flight controls" (a bunch of wires) and the dude flying then has no cyclic control.. bizzare! :confused:

[helmet fire]

Wern't they flying in the "fly by wire" Huey? :D

Did any one see that Silvester Stallone movie (one of the Rambo ones I think) where he is shot down in the Huey he is flying by a Puma dressed up as a Hind? Sly (sitting in the front) pulls out an RPG-7, punches a hole in the windscreen, aims it , and to the encouragement of the two guys SITTING IN THE BACK BEHIND THE LAUNCHER :eek: :eek: :D :D , pulls the trigger and shoots the PumaHind down!!

Boys in the back climb out (unburnt, hair not smoking, eyebrows in tact of course) and worship Sly. :) :)

[Taff Missed]

Literary licence. Wilbur Smith had one of his characters standing between the pilots watching Cape Town come into view. All fine and good but they were in an S58T! Painful or what?

Some other silly bu**er, the one that wrote 'Whirlwind', loosely based on Bristow exploits in Iran and whose name escapes me, had his crew chief find a bullet mark on the crankcase of his helicopter. That's fine, but it was a Jetranger! He, the crew chief, then went on to repair a leaking oil pipe with chewing gum. I stopped reading at that point.

Taff

[Mark Six]

Don't remember the name of the movie, but the hero pilot was in the water swimming towards his floating Jetranger, giant crocodile close behind and gaining fast. Our hero's love interest was inside the helicopter urging him on. As he splashed towards the helicopter he yelled out, "Start it up-it's got automatic ignition"!

[helmet fire]

One of my all time favourites was a newspaper reporting on flood relief. They printed that if the helicopter's engine failerd, the pilot put on the rotor brake and used the blades as small wings to glide safely back to earth!!

But what about dissymetry of lift??? :D :D

[The Nr Fairy]

Watched a film called "Rat Race" on the flight over to LA on Tuesday.

Spirited bit of flying in a Squirrel spoilt when after a simulated engine failure the attempts at restart were indicated by the soundtrack of a car ignition !

[diesel76]

Yes there are some winners out there but no one has answered my question, or is it just bollocks.
It was probably another problem not caused by the spinning load.

[sprocket]

deathranger: Is that book fictional, or a true account?

[heedm]

"...the book goes on to say that he had to rush back to pick up the salvors as one of the controls/linkages was severed to one engine..."

Maybe it was one of the linkages (sling) to an engine from the B17. :D

[Taff Missed]

OK. Serious now.

The 212 'throttle' controls do run across the floor of the hell-hole (where the cargo hook is suspended)and up the rear bulkhead although its difficult to see how anything on the hook would get in and damage them without also doing some fairly serious damage to the surrounding area.

Taff

[ 07 December 2001: Message edited by: Taff Missed ]

[helmet fire]

I do seem to remember an incident in the USA last year on the fires. A 212 was bucketing and on the lift off out of the tank, his bucket got snagged on something and actualy bent large parts of the airframe around the hell hole (cargo hook area) resulting in an engine failure, and subsequent landing. I cannot put my finger on the report at the moment, but I remember it contained the phrase "single engine autorotation" !! :D And this was on an accident report! :eek: As you say Taff, there was some serious airframe damage before the engine shutdown. If some one can search the NTSB, or I can next week.

I must admit though, I was confused as to which engine had been severed - the B17 or B212? Also, excuse my ignorance but what itis the salvors?

[slgrossman]

Taff Missed,

The book to which you referred, "Whirlwind" was written by James Clavell. You may recall a couple of his other popular novels, "Shogun" and "Tai Pan."

[diesel76]

Ok, the book is a true account of hunting for warbirds, this B17 is being recovered for Erickson (Air Crane)
"THe b17 section started spinning wildly. Just as he was banking to drop the load, it cut the throttle linkage to one of the engines.He set the fuselage down gently and came back to get us. But for now, the four million dollar helicopter was shot."

Salvors are salvage team.
People who recover stuff!! :eek:

[helmet fire]

deathranger, I lie humbly at your feet for your amazing knowledge of "salvors" and appologise profusely for having never heard of them.

I would love to see a B212 "gentley" putting ANY external load on the ground after a single engine failure!! But then with all that airframe damage, he went back on a single engine and picked up passengers? :eek: :eek:
Old mate is lucky to be able to write the "true" account of it.
:D

[sprocket]

helmet fire: I suspect the throttle linkage (guessing here) would have been severed in the full open position. He would have been still able to use the engine affected, as long as he did not need manual control.

[Taff Missed]

Aah yes! James Clavell was the one. I quite enjoyed Tai Pan & Shogun. One has to wonder if people with a knowledge of the time/location around which the books were based had as much fun picking holes in them as I did with 'Whirlwind'?

sprocket: Unlikely the engine controls would be ripped out without affecting their position. Metal tubes throughout and the only friction is on the twistgrip end.

Literary licence methinks.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good story :-)

Taff

[Nick Lappos]

Taff Missed,The basic story behind Clavel's Whirlwind is true, and was performed by Bristow crews.

(I am quite sure all Brits know this, as it is so ballsy, I'd make sure it was repeated frequently if I were involved!). Alistair Gordon (Bristow #2 for many years) spun the tale for me about 20 tears ago at a dinner, and I have never forgotten.

[helmet fire]

Here is the accident summary from the B212 I referred to earlier. Sorry, but I don’t know how to set up a link.
Data Source: SB AVIATION ACCIDENT/INCIDENT DATABASE
Report Number: SEA98GA159
Local Date: 08/08/1998
Local Time: 15:05 MDT
State: OR
City: JUNTURA

Operations Information
Category of Operation: GENERAL AVIATION
Aircraft Damage: SUBSTANTIAL
Aircraft Make/Model: BELL BHT-212-XXX
Owner Name: AIR ONE HELICOPTERS, INC.

Narrative
THE PILOT-IN-COMMAND (PIC) HAD JUST MANEUVERED THE BELL 212 HELICOPTER INTO A 100 FOOT HOVER ABOVE A SMALL RESERVOIR TO FILL A "BAMBI" BUCKET FOR FIRE-FIGHTING OPERATIONS. THE ROTORCRAFT BEGAN TO SETTLE. THE PIC, PERCEIVING THAT HE HAD ENCOUNTERED ROTOR VORTEX CONDITIONS, SLIPPED THE HELICOPTER TO THE RIGHT WITH THE BUCKET STILL IN THE RESERVOIR. THIS, IN TURN, INCREASED THE ANGLE OF THE LONG LINE FROM THE VERTI CAL OR ZERO DEGREE REFERENCE. IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER, THE PIC NOTED A LOSS OF POWER IN THE #1 ENGINE. HE THEN EXECUTED A
SINGLE-ENGINE AUTOROTATION, DURING WHICH A ROTOR BLADE IMPACTED A DEAD TREE. POST-CRASH EXAMINATION REVEALED THAT THE LONG LINE HAD PULLED AFT AND LEFT FROM ITS VERTICAL REFERENCE INTO THE AIRFRAME STRUCTURE (THE 7:30 POSITION OF THE HELL HOLE IN THE BELLY OF THE HELICOPTER) RESULTING IN 1) THE SEPARATION OF ONE OF THE #1 ENGINE PUSH/PULL RODS,
AND 2) THE DEFORMATION OF ENGINE CONTROL RODS ASSOCIATED WITH THE #1 ENGINE FLIGHT IDLE STOP (SOLENOID) WHICH THEN SHEARED. THE SHEARING OF THE FLIGHT IDLE STOP RESULTED IN A RESTRICTION/CESSATION OF FUEL FLOW TO THE #1 ENGINE FUEL CON TROL UNIT, AND SUBSEQUENT ENGINE SHUTDOWN.

Probable Cause
THE PILOT-IN-COMMAND'S FAILURE TO MAINTAIN PROPER CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE LONG LINE CABLE AND HELL HOLE STRUCTURE RESULTING IN AIRFRAME CONTACT AND BINDING OF THE CABLE. THIS RESULTED IN SEPARATION/DISABLING OF THE FUEL CONTROL SOLENOID AND A SUBSEQUENT RESTRICTION/CESSATION OF FUEL FLOWTO THE #1 ENGINE. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE SEPARATION OF THE #1 ENGINE PUSH/PULL ROD AND A TREE.

I do love the "single engine autorotation" bit - but I cannot believe it made it into a NTSB accident report. :eek: Does this mean all single engine helicopters are in autorotation?? :D

Looks as though the book may have been sort of true, but I think perhaps the problem was discovered at the end of the flight when he tried to shut the engine down? Otherwise, I still think it is a big call to go and get passengers with a known throttle linkage problem and airframe damage. Maybe it was just lucky that he did not have to do a "single engine autorotation" as well!! :D :D

[helix47]

I would appreciate some inputs, from pilots with experience on them, on the benefit(s) of these strakes, with regard to Stability & Performance improvements, both HIGE & HOGE

[Lama Bear]

They help on the UH-1H. It's difficult to quantify but I don't run out of pedal near as much as before the strake.

[[email protected]]

Helix, I don't know about the 212 but the Sea King had a strake welded to the port side of the tail boom to stop the rotor downwash producing lift on that side in a right crosswind. The strake slows down the air by breaking up the boundary layer and equalising the speed of the rotor downwash on both side of the tail boom. Running out of left pedal in a right crosswind was a regular occurence before the strake was added but now it's good for a 30 kt crosswind.

[widgeon]

showing my ignorance of aerodynamics here . Does the strake have the effect to change the coriolis effect of the downwash over the tailboom ?. On Eurocopter models the B2 has them on the same side as the tail rotor but not the BA and B3 . On the 212 is the strake on the opposite side as well ? I recall an old article in r and w need to dig it out.

http://techreports.larc.nasa.gov/ltrs/PDF/NASA-93-tp3278.pdf

Link added , in nasa test strakes were at 2 o clock and 4 o clock position , on 350 strake at 3 o clock position

[CyclicRick]

We have the strakes fitted to all our 205's. The effect is great, you really do need 50% less pedal input. You will probably notice it on the approach to hover when you suddenly realize that you've hardly moved your feet at all throughout the manoever.

I think the B3 is the only one fitted with strakes, I've flown B, BA and B" and they didn't have them.

Apparantly they are working on strakes for the 206 aswell, now that should really make a difference:)

[BlenderPilot]

Agusta K2 is fitted with strakes from the factory.

[[email protected]]

Widgeon, I think you mean Coanda effect not Coriolis. Coanda is the effect utilised by Notar technology where an injection of air onto one side of a structure (wing, tailboom etc) delays separation of the airflow and increases lift. Coriolis was a French physicist (i'm almost certain) who explained the apparent deflection to the right of an object moving in the Northern Hemipshere.

[widgeon]

Thanks Crab me knowledge of Physics is nearly as great as that of aerodynamics . It was Coanda I was thinking of where air flowing over a tube causes lift.
Next question is the effect greater on a circular section boom ( 105 , 117 ,350) or a more square section ( UH1 , Dauphin etc ).

[handyandyuk]

Ok... low timer input here...

I'm assuming any 'lift' effect would increase proportionately with the size of the lift surface (or boom)?

And would this effect even be noticeable on the tiddly 22's I get to fly (whenever the bank account can take it)?

Andy

[tone-uncage-fire]

Crabbo,

The NASA designed tail boom strake on UH-1 and now 212 series is almost identical to that in the Wastelands SK4.

Never flew the SK4 before the strake (assuming it wasnt a design fit?) but have flown the Huey before and after. The effect is significant esp at high DA....ie: tropics/mountains.
Also important is that in auto-rotation (with relative wind from 10-11 o'clock) there is an increased chance of encountering full right pedal.

I know this is obvious, just info for interested parties.


"Fear God Honour the King"

[[email protected]]

Handyandy, I think it is the amount of air energizing the boundary layer on the Notar-type blown slot that determines the lift created. I believe there was an experimental rotor with round blades and a blown slot that produced lift coefficients of nearly 4 (That is a lot Widgeon(tongue in cheek)). The downwash effect alone on a tail boom as spindly as a robbo(are you sure you wouldn't rather save harder and fly a 206?) would be negligible IMO.

Tone - a good point about the autos - when you airtest a Sea King you have to be able to yaw the ac right through 90 degrees in a 70 kt auto to prove the rigging of the TR.

[widgeon]

Crab , I have 2 formulas I never forget 1/2 roh v squared S and M/I = F/Y = E/R . Just wish I could remember how to use em LOL.

[helmet fire]

Just wondering if any Ppruners have experience with B212 Autopilots. I am particularly intrested in any "single pilot IFR" certified systems (usually three axis).

I am told that Bristows used to fly a three axis autopilot in thier 212s, and may have even been involved in the design/certification.
Does any one have any experience with these?
Are they reliable, or are there lots of black box problems?
Are they "one offs" or are they likely to be supportable in terms of parts, actuators, etc?
Do they get in the way of lifting jobs (like the SCAS system does)?
Are they a heavy system?

Any technical or anecdotal info welcome.

Thanks, hf

[SASless]

Bristow did in fact have three axis autopilots....Bell Scas...Sperry Helipilots....and that wonderful French piece of crap SFENA. Helipilots by far the better of the three....although when the Bell SCAS was tuned and working right...it was very handy. On the North Sea, the machines had the coupled Flight Director for the Sperry which makes for a very nice setup. Upon being dispatched to Nigeria and other parts of the world....the Coupled Flight Director modules were removed (afterall who is going to pay for them old chap?).

You might seek "212man's" input.....although he is now the EC-155 TRE for Bristow....he might help you out a bit. The best source of info would be Peter Barnes, who was exiled to Scatsta upon falling from grace with the BHL management. He was the Senior Type training captain on the 212 for years and is a very professional pilot. Bob Jones, ex-BHL, now with the CAA would be another good source of information.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

The Royal Brunei Air Force certainly found the Sperry system to be superb. Unfortunately they (the Sperry systems...) are now obsolete. 3-axis and generally very reliable in the hot/humid Borneo conditions, they were better than the Chinook 4-axis system in use at the time. However, you wouldn't want the a/c in AP mode when doing any hover or lifting work (I think the min IAS was 40 kts anyway...).

[helmet fire]

Thanks heaps so far. I am away for a few days now, so forgive the lack of prompt replies.

2 quick extras:

What is the problem with the SFENA?
Were any of the systems certified for SPIFR?

[John Eacott]

We had the SFENA (I thought it was SFIM?) machine in the Brent Field for a short period. IIRC, it was G-BARJ, but the enduring problem was the system tripping off line in the slightest bit of turbulence. With rig shuttles, and a landing every 5 minutes or so, we eventually put a 2nd pilot in, to reset the SFENA when it tripped, usually on approach :rolleyes:

The French finally sent over a team to look at the problem, but, surprisingly, it "was not our fault. Your engineers have set the aircraft up so that our magnificent system cannot possibly manage".

About a month after we foisted the 212 onto another operation, the French provided a fix for the problem, which wasn't their fault, either.........;)

FWIW, this was the aircraft that was trumpeted, with much publicity, as the first SPIFR 212 to be developed.

[SASless]

As I heard it John.....the SFENA or SFIM as you will, was originally designed for the Mirage or some sort of fixed wing. It did have an altitude hold feature...which neither of the other two systems did. My recollection of the useless piece of kit was the unpleasant thrill one got when engaging the altitude hold mode.....at some point the aircraft either tried to pitch up and over onto its back or nose over and stick the nose into the dirt....which in a Bell can sometimes become very interesting. I dare say the quality of greenie support in Nigeria did add to the situation as did the lack of spare parts. I usually just left the SFENA in the "OFF" mode....and hand wrestled the bird. At least my blood pressure and heart rate remained somewhat more regular that way.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

SASless,

Brunei B212s with Sperry most definitlely did have altitude hold (pitch function, as were RoC/D hold and glidepath/go-around modes).

[Aesir]

Anyone out there that knows where I can get the best deal for a B-212 type rating (JAR) or type checkout (FAA).

I may be changing jobs soon and to avoid beiing bonded for 3 years, I´m looking into paying for the check myself.

Any information on cost and time required would be greatly appreciated.

I´m not to sure what the flighthour requirements are in the USA, but I would need 8 hrs in Europe (JAR) if no simulator is used and the skill check is an additional 1 to 1.5 hours x many $$, which will mean that the check is to expensive for an individual to pay here in JAR country.


..

[SASless]

Yes Thud....and only because the Mob required it.....not when left to the Weasels in Redhill....trust me ....heard it from the Horse's Mouth....(really the mouth). From a former Regional Flying Superintendent now retired.

[Rotorbike]

FlightSafety can do 212 FAA type training in their simulator.

They are also able to offer JAA type ratings (all in simulator) for S76 and B430 simulator but the 212 is/was not currently CAA/JAA approved.

SAS Flight Academy (http://www.sasfa.net/) have the only 212 simulator in Europe so you could try them.

The only company in the UK who own and operate 212 is Bristow.

I'd take the bonding......... 3 years will pass real quick and save you a pile of money paying for your own type training.

Hope that helps

[Robbo Jock]

Can't you buy yourself out of the bond, if necessary ? Save you finding the money up front immediately. Get the training, go in for the three years and if you absolutely hate the place, buy yourself out - worry about finding the money then.

[gulliBell]

Why pay for the type rating, unless it's a pre-requisite for the job? Cross the bond bridge if and when you get to it! Even if you stay in the job for a short period chances are they'll only slug you a pro-rata bond amount and not the full cost. And as for an FAA B212 type rating, I thought the rotorcraft helicopter type rating covered all small and medium size helicopters (twin and single)??

[Phoinix]

I can't seem to get the true explanation for this one. Its about AB-212's front vertical fin (fwd of main rotor mast). What is its function. I picked up some theorys that it's a stabilizer, others say it's a de-stabilizer. What is it for?

[MOSTAFA]

Its always been an antennae on the 212's I've flown I think!!

[Phoinix]

We have one 212 on overhaul, and there are no wires on it or any kind of connections what so ever, so it has to be some kind of a (de)stabilizer.

[NickLappos]

Yes, that fin would destabilize yaw somewhat, but most helos have lots of yaw stability (because the tail rotor behaves like a piece of fin. It produces thrust when yawed that restores the trim. In fact, the tail rotor produces about 4 to 8 times the thrust of an equivilent vertical fin!

More importantly that big forward fin would add dihedral, which is the roll you get when you yaw. IFR handling requirements state that when you put in some pedal to yaw, you must have to put in some opposite roll cyclic to counter the roll that the aircraft naturally has. In other words, some right pedal to produce a few degrees of yaw must produce some right rolling attitude change. This right roll must therefore require the pilot to put in some left cyclic to trim the aircraft level.

That big fin above the roll center would create a roll force above the roll centerline that would create a right roll when a right yaw is put in.

The reason it is there is probably to allow the minimum IFR speed to be reduced somewhat, since the natural dihedral stability of most helicopters vanishes at about 60 to 70 knots. What is Vmin IFR in that 412's flight manual?

[Attila]

We used to have a Bell 212 with Bristows on the North Sea with one of those fins, registration number was G-BIGB, Big B. The fin was there, I believe, because it had originally been registered in the USA, and had been an FAA requirement for IFR. It was subsequently removed, although I do recall seeing other American-registered 212's without the fin.

Vmin IMC for the 212 is 40 kts

[Phoinix]

That is it, thanks Nick. That explanes a lot.

So, in general it counteracts that "nose left", when applying right pedal and so, making a heli more stable around the longitudinal axis during turns at lower speeds.

But doesn't the downwash of main rotor somewhat disable the flow around the fin - especialy at lower speeds?

I'm not sure about Vmin IFR on 412, but i will check.

Our AB-212 was built in Italy, and it came with that fin from the factory.

[NickLappos]

Phoinix, I wasn't clear enough. It counteracts the roll left with right pedal, which is unstable, and not allowed for IFR flight. It does reduce yaw stability, but my guess is there is lots of yaw stability from the basic aircraft layout, so they can give some away to get some dihedral stability.

The rotor downwash is a factor, but might actually help, because the velocity of the combined free stream air and the rotor wash could be even more forceful than the free stream alone.

I'll bet this thing was hung there by trial and error, probably in desparation during the flight test program when the data came out that said the aircraft won't meet the regs. Most of those little fins and fences on wings, tails, tail cones and the like get pasted on as the aircraft is tested, and they are put there by flight test guys who then laugh at the designer's mistakes.

the interplay between testers and designers is fun to watch!

Here is a nice discussion of why dihedral works:
http://members.rogers.com/maxf/ftaf3.pdf

[Phoinix]

Yes, of course. My bad. I undesrtood it the first time, but had problems expressing that :O

BTW: thanks for that refreshing article on dihedral.

[Tiger_mate]

I'm not sure about Vmin IFR on 412, but i will check.

IFR VMin on British Military Bell 412EP is 60kts.

[PPRUNE FAN#1]

Sez Nick:Here is a nice discussion of why dihedral works:
http://members.rogers.com/maxf/ftaf3.pdfYes, very interesting discussion of fixed-wing dihedral effects.

An airplane with zero dihedral would exhibit very little yaw/roll coupling. Also, airplanes do not have a hinge where the wings and fuselage meet, as the 212 does.

So how does a discussion of dihedral relate to helicopters? Or I guess my question is "how much dihedral does a helicopter rotor have?":confused:

[NickLappos]

Pprunefan,

Actually, we use the term dihedral to describe the effect (when a yaw makes a roll) and can be measured on airplanes, helicopters and even ships! the paper describes wings but the effect is the same.

For helicopters, lost of stuff happens in the rotor, as you describe, like flaping and stuff. The rotor dsk is also coned just like an airplane's wing, so there is a contribution there as well.

But, helicopters generally have strong dihedral due to the way the rotor behaves when we impose a new wind direction on it. If you can, picture the rotor having been trimmed with the cyclic forward at high speed, so that the disk is level and the nose is down to trim at that speed. Then simply rotate that helicopter a bit to the right, like a right yaw would do. If you look at the rotor from the wind's perspective, where the air meets the disk as the new forward, you can see that the cyclic is now trimmed to the right relative to the airflow, so it has a small roll input. this makes the aircraft roll in the direction of yaw, so-called positive dihedral.

the problem with helicopters is that they fly at very low speeds. By the time you slow to 50 or 40 knots, the small effect I describe above is lost in the mud, and there is little dihedral for small angles of yaw. This is often the problem that sets the low speed Vmimi limit for helicopters. that big fin on the rook probably helps get some traction at low speed to add some roll, and perhaps gets the dihedral effect back at 40 or 50 knots, allowing Vmimi to be set lower. VFR aircraft don't need it, of course, since that dihedral requirement is an instrument thing.

[SASless]

In my alcohol ravaged brain...remains the thought that the Bell Scas system (FAA rules) required the Dihedral Sail (or Fin) for the IMC kit. The Sperry system and the Sfena system (a real piece of fecal matter) did not require that device. The CAA in its infinite wisdom did not require the installation of the fin. Having flown all the variants...with my usual boxing glove control touch....I could not see any difference in the way the machines handled....unless you had the collective/yaw pedal interconnect that the Bell SCAS system offered. That allowed one's feet to get very idle in that collective movement was linked to the pedals thus TRE's could then keep the aircraft somewhat in trim. The interesting part came during hydraulic's off flight....when the pedals moved opposite of what you expected due to the interconnecting linkage.:ok:

[PPRUNE FAN#1]

Well now Ah'm just totally corn-fused. Maybe Ah'll never understand these helicopter thingees. See, Ah'm jus' a simple ol' country-boy pilot, but Ah takes some eck-sepp-see-ohn to the following statement.

Nick sez:But, helicopters generally have strong dihedral due to the way the rotor behaves when we impose a new wind direction on it. If you can, picture the rotor having been trimmed with the cyclic forward at high speed, so that the disk is level and the nose is down to trim at that speed. Then simply rotate that helicopter a bit to the right, like a right yaw would do. If you look at the rotor from the wind's perspective, where the air meets the disk as the new forward, you can see that the cyclic is now trimmed to the right relative to the airflow, so it has a small roll input. this makes the aircraft roll in the direction of yaw, so-called positive dihedral.An airplane wing has a hard and very well defined leading edge over which the air flows. Helicopters have no such device. Once a helicopter rotor is in forward flight it doesn't have any clue as to where "straight ahead" is. Nor does it care. You simply *cannot* fly a rotor "out of trim" like you can a fixed wing. You can fly the fuselage out of trim, but this has absolutely no effect on the wind that the rotor is seeing.

In my aeroplane, if I'm scooting along in cruise and I push on the right rudder, the plane will most assuredly bank immediately and turn to the right. In my helicopter, if I do the same thing the fuselage will merely slew off to the right, the trim ball will slide out to the left, but the helicopter's track across the ground will remain fairly unchanged (banking the rotor is the only way to change direction). In fact, if I persist in pushing the right pedal, the helicopter will perhaps take on a bank to the left, which is how the ship normally behaves when the trim ball is displaced thataway, which is also the opposite of my airplane.

Maybe larger helos with articulated rotor systems behave differently than the small ships I fly. But I have demonstrated this time and time again to the non-believers. They freak out when I do this, fearful as they are (and legitimately so) of mast-bumping as we reduce the hub clearance in the 206. Perhaps they remember all those Cobra accidents that occurred until we learned the importance of diligent attention to yaw-trim in high-speed helicopters with teetering rotors.

If helicopters did indeed have "positive dihedral effect," then pushing on a pedal would cause a bank in that direction. But this does not happen.

What this tells me is that so-called "dihedral effect" in small helicopters is either non-existant or opposite to fixed-wing. Nick evidently agrees with me. In clarifying a previous post where he was talking about the behavior of the "shark fin" attached to the fuselage roof of the Bell 212, he writes:Phoinix, I wasn't clear enough. It counteracts the roll left with right pedal, which is unstable, and not allowed for IFR flight. Roll left with right pedal? Yeah, that's exactly what I've been saying all along. We do not need to be test pilots to witness this. Merely go up in cruise, and perfectly trim the aircraft. Now slightly press on a pedal (your choice- but not too much!), just enough to get the aircraft out of trim. DO NOT MOVE THE CYCLIC. Come back and tell me which way the helicopter banks.

[NickLappos]

PPRUNE Fan,

Don't get hung up on the word trim. That word to me means the place where the stick is put to make the helo stay right where you want it. If you are flying at 80 knots, the cyclic is forward of where it is in a hover, and a bit to the right, in most western helos. If you then push full right pedal so the aircraft flips around in yaw and goes backwards at 80 knots, do you think the aircraft will just stay level in pitch and roll? Of course not. Because the cyclic is in the "wrong" place for the new position, it will cause the aircraft to roll and pitch a lot.

For small angles of yaw, this misplaced cyclic will tend to cause positive dihedral. The effect at very low speeds like 60 knots and below, is small, and easily over shadowed by the effects of the fuselage, horizontal tail and even that fin on the roof. That might be why your experiment in your helo shows no positive dihedral. What helo? What speed? In an S76 at 140 knots, yaw is more powerful that lateral cyclic in creating a bank! In an S-76 at 40 knots, it will not bank, just swap ends.

I don't have the time to answer each of your points, but you are basically incorrect if you think that pushing pedal does not cause a turn, if the wings are level. (This is not the basic subject here, as I contend some bank will happen, and you have to supress it with cyclic). If the ball is out and the wings are level, you are turning, that's why the ball is out! I won't go thru a tome here. If you disgree, then tell us why the ball is not centered.

[NickLappos]

Silberfuchs,
Thanks!

If you are really at China Beach, tell that red headed nurse that I said hello!!

[Rich Lee]

BHT-212 IFR

Limitations

1-7. AIRSPEED
VMIN (IFR) - 40 KIAS.

NOTE
Due to control authorities
required for flight at airspeeds
below 40 KIAS, AFCS ATTD mode
should not be utilized except for
ground checks.

VNE (IFR or VFR) - 120 KIAS from sea
level up to and including 3000 feet HD at
8800 pounds (3991.6 kilograms) or less
GW decreasing linearly to VNE of 100 KIAS
at 11,200 pounds (5080.3 kilograms) GW, CG of 132.0 to 142.5.
Refer to OPERATING LIMITATIONS decal figure 1-2 V
decreases 3 KIAS per 1000 feet above 3000
feet HD.

VNE (VFR only)(CG 142.5 to 144.0) - 110
KIAS from sea level up to and Including
3000 feet HD at 10,000 pounds (4536
kilograms) or less GW decreasing linearly
to VNE of 100 KIAS at 11,200 pounds
(5080.3 kilograms) GW, CG of 142.5 to 144.0.
Refer to OPERATING LIMITATIONS
decal, figure 1-2.
VNE decreases 3 KIAS
per 1000 feet above 3000 feet H
VNE (VFR only) doors open or removed -
100 KIAS for any GW. Refer to Type of
Operation.

Maximum airspeed when above maximum
continuous torque (87.5%) is 80 KIAS.

Rev.2 1-5

[PPRUNE FAN#1]

Well whaddya know, something we *do* agree on! That is, the definition of "trim."

Okay, first things first, Nick:I don't have the time to answer each of your points, but you are basically incorrect if you think that pushing pedal does not cause a turn, if the wings are level. (This is not the basic subject here, as I contend some bank will happen, and you have to supress it with cyclic). If the ball is out and the wings are level, you are turning, that's why the ball is out! I won't go thru a tome here. If you disgree, then tell us why the ball is not centered.I do disgree. Nick, it must be a long time since you flew anything smaller than an S-76. (Say, how does the S-76 fly at 140 knots with all the SCAS stuff turned off? Do you even remember?) Not all helos fly alike. General statements like "helicopters exhibit positive dihedral effect" are just misleading. I do not wish to be mean, but maybe we need Shawn to weigh-in here on how small helicopters fly, because he seems to have more "street cred" than a lowly line pilot who's spent a lifetime at the controls wondering how to make the machine do the things I need it to.

Small helos. Those are the ones I fly. They do not have artificial rotor or yaw stability added. And they are perfectly capable of flying along on a straight track with the rotor unbanked and the trim ball slammed hard against one or the other side of the race, especially on approach. Don't believe me? Ask any of my early instructors. Fly sideways? That's what helicopters do!

If the ball is out and the wings are level, you are turning, that's why the ball is out!Contrary to your contention that if the ball is not centered then the aircraft must be turning, in the helicopters I fly (206's and the like at 105 - 110 kts), the turn needle is the primary indicator of a rate of turn, not the yaw trim ball. In fact, a 206 flies a little better with the ball displaced slightly out to the left (ask Prouty, he'll explain it). This does not mean that the rotor is banked. In fact, it is level and it is the fuselage that is slightly banked. But you know that. You even know that we don't even have any way of knowing the actual pitch or bank angle of the rotor; only that of the fuselage. And in a helicopter with a teetering rotor, those angles can be very different. Yes, an airplane can skid it's way around a turn with the wings level. The rudder, firmly connected to the fuselage and hence to the wings will see to that. A helicopter won't. In fact, I'd love to see a helicopter that could turn with the rotor unbanked. That'd be a neat trick!

If you contend that helicopters exhibit a positive yaw/roll coupling, why did you say that bit about the 212 shark fin? And I quote:Phoinix, I wasn't clear enough. It counteracts the roll left with right pedal, which is unstable, and not allowed for IFR flight.If I were silly enough to climb into my 206, start out from a hover and translate into protracted left sideward flight, I would find that the helicopter would tend to bank more to the left as the speed increased, even though I was holding (probably full) right pedal. It's not hard to see why (the drag of the fuselage). At some point, the flapping limit of the hub would be reached.

If what you said was true, the helicopter would quickly tend to roll back to the right, in the direction of the pedal I was pushing. In reality, this simply does not happen. In fact, it would not happen with even as little as a 45 degree out-of-yaw-trim condition, or even a small out-of-yaw-trim condition in cruise flight. This is very easy to demonstrate. Most pilots do unconsciously tend to counteract the small rolling moments, but if they held the cyclic extremely steady (through friction in the 206) they would see what I mean. Anyone can go up and do it for themselves. I'd love to be proven wrong.

(Good idea, chaps. Post your results here on this forum...who's going to be the first to make a fool of PPRUNE FAN#1! -Ed.)

What I have observed in 11,000 hours of driving these little buggers around is that many helicopters exhibit little or no positive dihedral effect at all. You seem to disagree, although your various thoughts on the subject are confusing at best. Oh well.

[NickLappos]

PPRUNE Fan #1,

The ball goes out in level flight because of the Centrifugal force in the skidding turn, and the lack of a bank to make that force point downward relative to the helicopter. Sorry! Aircraft can and do turn without banking, that's why we have the turn needle and ball, to prevent this from confusing us.

One of the Wright Bros many inventions is the banked turn, prior to them, all turns were skidding. The below explanation is fairly simple, don't take offense, I know with 11,000 hours you are way beyond it, but sometimes it helps to get back to basics.

Let me explain - the sideslip of a helicopter which has too much pedal applied (either more or less than that needed for anti-torque) creates an side angle for the relative wind against the body. This angle is called sideslip, and it creates a side force that points left or right, and is a turning force. No bank, but a lateral force makes the helo turn. In such a turn, the ball slides outward because there is no bank, so you are 'skidding". A car turns this way, because the wheels make this side force when they are turned.

Try this next time: keep the wings dead level at 100 knot cruise while you kick the ball out 1 ball, either direction. Spot the gyro heading. Hold it for several seconds. Note the heading drift away from the ball as you skid in a turn.

As far as remembering how an unstabilized helo flys, I flew the S-76 for almost 2 years with no stability (we hadn't invented the sas yet) during all its structural shakedown and certification, including all the handling qualities flights, full autos and everything. I have a sas built into my right hand that would stop minor earth quakes! ;-)

Regarding the direction of roll with yaw, when you do the skid turn maneuver from above, note which way you have to move the cyclic to maintain wings level with the ball out. It will be opposite the pedal (toward the ball) because the helo has positive dihedral. Unless you are flying on the Planet Mongo, where the AFF regulates all helos to fly opposite to how they do on the Earth.

[Dave_Jackson]

Prouty discuses this subject in the chapter 'Spiral Dives and Dutch Rolls' in his book "Even More Helicopter Aerodynamics'. The following is a partial excerpt from this chapter.

"The U.S. military allows the airplanes it purchases to have slightly unstable spiral-stability characteristics. The military is satisfied if a fighter does not double its bank angle in more than 12 seconds or a transport in more than 20 seconds.

The FAA requires helicopters that are certified for instrument flight rules (IFR) to not be subjected to spiral dives. You can see the result of this policy on the Bell 212. Before it could be certified for instrument flight, it had to be modified to decrease its directional stability by the addition of a vertical 'destabilizer' ahead of the rotor."

[helmet fire]

Well Pfan, you did say:
I'd love to be proven wrong.
so I am only helping you out here.....:}

Your side ways flight example does not occur the way you have stated. In summary, you basically said that:
from the hover, translate left. Hold very steady cyclic. The helicopter would not roll back to the right, it would tend to bank more to the left as the speed increased

I hope that summarises your thoughts.

I think, however, that you will find the opposite. As you translate left, you have to continually feed in more left cyclic to keep translating left, and this occurs for two reasons. Flapback is the main culprit at these speeds (but we are not going to go into that) and the di-hedral effect as a result of the right yaw you have created (but this is insignificant at such low speeds (hence the 212 fin addition). When you try to fly this tomorrow, please do not friction the cyclic because I think you will need to feed in significant LEFT cyclic to maintain left drift (right yaw). Your comment that:
I would find that the helicopter would tend to bank more to the left as the speed increased
is ar5e about. You will only increase speed as a result of increasing the bank. The bank does not increase because of the speed increase.

Unfortunatley in the next two weeks I will only have access to a SCAS stabilised machine, thus I wont be able to convince you of a flught test result. So, I am awaiting your experiments.
:ok:

[Shawn Coyle]

The fin on the Bell 212 was put on because one FAA test pilot considered that the machine had too much directional stability.
Hard to understand how anything could have too much directional stability, but there was some method to the thought process.
First of all, the FARs do not require much for helicopters in terms of directional stability or spiral stability.
Secondly, remember that the requirements have to be shown for all combinations of weight and CG.
So, at some combination of weight and CG, the directional stability was determined to be sufficiently strong that the helicopter exhibited a negative spiral mode (i.e. in a steady turn, the stick would have to held out of the turn to stop it rolling further into the turn).
The cause was thought to be the overly-strong tendency of the helicopter to line up with the relative airflow (i.e too much directional stability). The solution was the fin.
It was an interesting interpretation of the FARs.
Interesting to note that after the gentleman retired from the FAA, the fin was quietly removed...
At least that's the story as I heard it.

[NickLappos]

pprune fan #1 and helmetfire,

You can see the natural behavior of the rotor even on a stabilized helo if you wantch the sas actuator behavior on the little window most systems have. Select the axis you want to examine, and note what the sas has to do to keep things normal. After all, those little sas actuators are just small pilot input devices for the autopilot.

In pprune fan's sideward flight experiment (which helmetfire has diagnosed correctly) just see what direction the inner loop must input to keep the bank.

Most rotors try to "back flap"when a speed or wind increase is imposed on them. That is due to the fact that the blade that sweeps into the increasing wind gets more lift (from its increased speed) so it flaps upward. The full effect is felt approximately 90 degrees later, so the rotor disk tends to flap away from the speed increase. That is one of the contributers to the dihedral I mentioned for the last two posts.

[Gregg]

For PPrune Fan #1:

It doesn't matter what size helicopter we are discussing here. (Size never matters... right?)

Even small helicopters possess positive dihedral effect.

Part 27 reguires no perceptible negative dihedral stability for IFR certification.
So does Part 29.

The US Navy and Army specifications require positive effective dihedral, even with stabiity augmentation off.

The good news for those designing a helicopter is that (for all the reasons Nick has stated above) most helicopters will naturally exhibit the positive dihedral effect. However, major changes to the shape of the aircraft, such as the addition of floats, may affect this issue.

[Flight Safety]

Just curious how the fin works.

When the airframe is yawed, does the fin create a lift force (sideways) that causes the fin to act like a lever arm around the roll axis, to roll the airframe the opposite way? Is this how the tendency to roll a little too postively into the turn is countered?

[Dave_Jackson]

Flight Safety,

I believe, Prouty's explanation is that in IFR conditions a slight roll, say to the right, and the subsequent sideslip to the right will cause the helicopter to start yawing to the right and pitching down. If it is gradual enough, the pilot may never notice the change in attitude until the spiral dive has become serious. The destabilizer is intended to resist the right yaw and subsequent downward pitch.

What the hell do I know. :rolleyes: My flight instructor said that rolling up the window in the driver's door did the same thing. :O Mind you, he was in the back seat with the receptionist at the time.

The worst part was that the receptionist's first name was 'Bruce'. We'd be flying along when the instructor would start yelling 'Bruce!, Bruce! Oh Bruce!'. Here I was trying to fly the helicopter while looking up in the manual what a 'Bruce' was.

[sebrof]

Simple answer : to enhance Roll with yaw characteristics in early model IFR B212

[Shawn Coyle]

If you want to see negative dihedral, try a Jet Ranger with fixed floats in autorotation. The huge area under the CG (the vertical position of the CG) will give you negative dihedral - apply left pedal, and you'd expect to roll left in most helicopters. In the 206 with fixed floats in autorotation, adding left pedal will cause the helicopter to yaw left, and after pausing for two marching paces (as my drill instructors used to say), it will roll right. Negative dihedral.
Seen one other time in a very light (i.e nothing in the machine expect a slave radio, brand new off the production line) Bell 206L3 with high skid gear and fairings on the crosstubes. Fairings are not used on the crosstubes any longer if I remember correctly.

[Buitenzorg]

My company is considering getting a B212 for external load work in order to carry more per trip than we presently do, using an AS350. We’d use the aircraft in a warm, low-altitude environment (35ºC, below 2,000 ft MSL); our loads are heavy and compact, and stable when carried on a line. Other than a hook limit of 5,000 lbs. and a max gross weight of 11,900 lbs., I don’t know any weights/performance limits on this type of aircraft. If any of you have used or are using the B212 in external load operations, please help me with the following questions:

- What is a typical empty weight for a B212 in VFR, external load configuration (no autopilot or co-pilot instruments, seats removed or web seats only)?
- What is the max gross weight of the B212 with external load, in other words, is there a difference with the internal load-only MGW?
- What’s the average fuel burn per hour doing external load work?
- What is the published VNE with door(s) removed, bubble door for the pilot, and/or with a load on the hook?
- In the environment I’ve described (ISA + 20-25ºC, 0-2,000 ft MSL), does the B212’s performance (hover OGE) limit it to less than its structural limits?
- How would a B205-A1 rate in comparison to a B212 on these points and also price?

Any help with these questions will be highly appreciated.

[SASless]

The 205 will outperform the 212 due to its lighter weight...burns less fuel....but will not perform nearly as well following an engine failure as the 212....but only marginally worse when heavy.

[helmet fire]

Depend on a whole lot of variables. But they are essentially the same aircraft and have very similar figures, and all your questions will be effected by which engine you have fitted to each.

The 205 A1 is essentially a 205 fitted with the 212 running gear, therefore they have the same speed limitations: normal cruise at 100 kias, vne at 120. Fuel burn depends on donk fitted as does lifting performance. Both can be fitted with the same range extenders, etc.

205 A1 (MAUW 10,500lbs) is often fitted with a -13 or -17 donk. Both will allow MAUW hover IGE at the figures you quote, but the -13 struggles OGE and is obviously outperformed at HDA. The -17 is good to quite high DAs. Fuel burn is 600lbs/hr (as low as 580 in the cruise) for the -13. I cannot recall the -17 burn.

212 (MAUW 11,200 lbs) has the PT6 in two versions, -3, and -3B. Same story as above, both will do IGE at MAUW at the DAs you mention. Same as OGE, the -3 will start to strugggle OGE, and the -3B begins to out perform at higher DAs. Fuel burn for the -3s is 640lbs/hr, but can be up to 700 - 740 for the -3Bs and has a noticeable affect on range.

for lifting, the body weight differences actually gives the A1 the advantage, generally by about 100 to 200kg despite a lower MAUW. But generally, they are pretty similar unless you compare say the -17 A1 at altidude to the -3 212, or vice versa.

Our old chief engineer used to say that due to the expense of the Lycomings, the 212 was only about 10-15% higher costs even though it is a twin. But I believe that with the increase in ex mil UH-1s, the Lycoming costs may be getting better.

My prefernce is always for the twin, especially doing ext load ops, because once the load is gone, the 212 will not come down and mess with your ground crews - or your pilot's next of kin.

[SASless]

Be aware of the proposed AD that will affect a lot of Lycoming engines....to the tune of about 150,000 USD per engine....do some research to see if the engine you are considering falls within the AD.

[WLM]

Contact Erickson Malaysia, as they use 205's for most of the long lining, in the same conditions u described.

[B Sousa]

Since we are on the subject. I have always been curious why companies prefer the 212 over the 205. If all things being the same or close and expense for the 212 being more. In the states I always see more 212s on firework than 205s. Is it contract requirements or as someone above states in regards to engine failures.

[DSpice]

You might look on the Bell web site for the specs; on the B H210 It is an updated BH205.

[SASless]

Bert,

Imagine yourself at 6000 feet msl, temp about 90F, at the end of a longline hovering OGE trying to dump water on a snag or someother point drop....and you have an engine failure or low side governor failure in your trusty 212...does it really matter the other engine is running? The cost of operation for a 212 exceeds that of a 205....but how many of the things got retired from Offshore Flying by competition from newer faster machines thus are now available for fires or other utility work.

[Buitenzorg]

Thanks very much for all replies, your info has been quite valuable. There is an embarrassing story behind this, but it's a bit too embarrassing...

[helmet fire]

SASless,
You are right, but if you have a -3B fitted 212 and you get rid of the load, your body weight (if you have optimised it for lifting) will be at it's minimum, and whilst it may not give you a 200ft hover OEI, at 6000ft 90F, it is still pretty good at most reasonable DAs, especially if you can move it to a IGE situation, and it ALWAYS gives you a bit of cushion at the bottom that I wouldn't ever swap the A1's extra 100kg for.

You cannot leave it at that Buitenzorg: spill the beans.......

[B Sousa]

Yes Buitenzorg, you opened the container, lets hear your confession................On PPrune you can expect nothing but sympathy....ha ha

[offshoreigor]

Hi All,

Having flown both types, I prefer the "Non Torque Limited" BH05!

Nothing worse than climing into a 3B 212 with the torque limiter set to droop at 99%! Believe me, it happens.

Cheers, :eek: OffshoreIgor :eek:

[407 Driver]

So what are you saying? Do you WANT to overtorque, or are your engineers just not able to adjust the Q limiter?

I can't enter the conversation, as I have no 205 time, but I certainly like the thought of those 2 -3B's purring away behind me, and having some small chance of flying away in an engine failure situation, given favorable temps, alt's, loads, and airspeed.

[L'WAAPAM]

Hi All

I'm after some advice. Im a UK military pilot just about to leave and am jumping through the (many) JAA hoops to get my licence.

Im currently flying 212's which are civilian owned and military operated.

Current CAA/Mod agreements state that to get a miliary type rating endorsed on the licence you have to have 500hrs on type AND a current check ride in the last 12 months.

I currently have 420hrs on 212's and it looks like I will not be able to get a type rating unless I go and do a civllian type rating course. Lots of money me thinks!!!.

I did my initial conversion with a Bristows instructor(they suppy the contract) but my final check ride on the conversion was with a non CAA military QHI.

Has anyone one been in this situation before or knows a way round it?

Thanks.

[SilsoeSid]

I had a similar situation a couple of years ago. 2700 hrs gazelle, no check ride/currency, 485hrs Lynx current. Unfortunately, as you pointed out;

"Current CAA/Mod agreements state that to get a miliary type rating endorsed on the licence you have to have 500hrs on type AND a current check ride in the last 12 months."

"I currently have 420hrs on 212's ...."

The non military QHI issue isn't the problem as it would be an official 'check ride", however the hours would be.

If you have 500hrs Gazelle or Lynx, I believe you'd just need to speak to your friendly standards chap and arrange a 'check ride'.

Fortunately for me, linkup paid for my rating, perhaps that is a route if you have FRI or suchlike.
Then again, 212s = posting with lots of LOA! :suspect:

ATB
SS

[Winnie]

Hi chaps

I have a Bell 212 Manual, but I'd like the supplement that comes with it, not the FMS, but the "Technical Description" that is in the back end of the book. Does anybody know where I can get that (Most desireable in PDF or other computer based) WITHOUT having to fork out several hundreds of dollars in cash for the papercopy.

It is for personal enjoyment, NOT work related, so it does not need to be Current.

Sooo, anybody able to help please??

Cheers
Winnie

[Winnie]

And just figgured out it is called the "Manufacturers Data"

Is it available in PDF?

[ConwayB]

I bought a 412 flight manual on CD ROM from a mob in Canada on EBAY of all places. He was based in Toronto (I Think) and it was the latest revision. I gleaned from his site that he supplied manuals of various aircraft in that format.

Do a search on EBAY for flight manuals or do a google search.

Good luck

CB

[goaround7]

Hi guys,

I've got the manufacturer's and 'blue book' type costs but can a couple of you give me some real world gen on operating costs for 212/412 in harsh(ish) desert environment but with hangar and daily maintenance available doing pax and equipment transfer with one to two hour flights, 100 hours a month - minimal sling, no high cycles, nothing unusual ?

Eg. real maintenance, unplanned spares, fuel, oil, blades etc.

Thanks,

G7

[BlenderPilot]

Go with Conklin and D's estimates and you will do more than well, the 412/212 has no surprises.

The desert should not pose any problem for the 212/412 its one of the most dependable aircraft this world and its surroundings have available for you to make money with it.

[goaround7]

Thanks, we got those.

Recent newsletter reckons US$ 606 per hour for 412 then ?

[Thilo]

Hi Group

I am looking for a Bell 212 training manual in electronic format.

Is there such a thing?

Thilo

[Aesir]

Yesyes, there is such a thing. I received one when I received B212 initial training at Flight Safety in Dallas last year.

However the CD is at my home 1154 NM away and besides I think it´s copyright´d. I´m sure FSI would like to sell its training course with the CD.

Sorry I can´t help.

[outhouse]

HI.
Yes I have both the 412 and the 212, however I did send a CD copy to a chap in Australia but never herd if he received it!??. I am travelling at the moment and away from base, however if you send details I may be able to help in about three weeks. I am happy to help you chaps but get a little p**t off sometimes with the non response after my responding to calls for help.
outhouse

[Skitso]

hows it going thilo...mate im the aussie fella that recieved a copy from outie...and im willing to dispatch a copy to you if your still interested seeming that outie is a bit busy for a few weeks, I would be more than honored to do that for outie......crawl crawl...lol...

But i must say there some great guys out here on the prune that like helping others out, ie: Outie....should be more of em.....:ok:

[outhouse]

Hi Skitso,
Thanks mate and sorry, Rather a duff week no offence inferred. It’s great if one can help out you chaps and this web is an ideal way of doing that and keeping in with what going on in the industry. I only wish that it had been available when I was starting off, back in those days the internet was unknown and even a intercontinental call was a major drama. Thanks for the PM and I will be replying soonest.
Outhouse.

[CAT MAN]

Does anyone know if there are any UK based Bell 212 helis in service?

[Rotorbike]

None in service.

But Bristows do have some on the UK Register.

No 412's either.

[SASless]

Noisy things, 212's. Is there not one at Shrewsbury as a trainer for the MOD program that uses them in Belize?

[Rotorbike]

Shrewsbury.... isn't that FBS, which is just Bristow by another name!!!

[JNo]

It goes up there every now and again - but I beleive it's based at Wallop.

[Nigerian Expat Outlaw]

Sas,

Its called Shawbury. Not sure if they have any 212's but they do have a lot of 412's and 350's. The army use 212's in Brunei as well I suspect, but of course I may be wrong..........

Cheers,

NEO.

[SASless]

NEO,

My apologies....must have been thinking about the ex-girlfriend that hailed from there.;)

[L'WAAPAM]

The British Army has a 212 at either Netheravon or Middle Wallop. It is supplied by FBH/Bristows to train the guys going out to Brunei and Belize. (there are 3 212's at each base leased from FBH)

As I understand it they are only contracted to supply a limited number of hours a year for the training, I dont think it is operated full time.

Cheers L'

[Thilo]

Hi Group

I posted this query late last year already...

I am still looking for a 212 training manual in electronic format.

A copy was sent to me..., but seems to have gone missing in the Xmas post.

I would appreciate any help regarding this.

Thanks

Thilo

[212man]

I'm simple enough to operate without a training manual!;)

[flyer43]

212man - That's not what I heard!!

[Upland Goose]

"Simple enough to operate" maybe, but sometimes it is good to know a little bit more?

Answer the question!:p

UG

[flyer43]

UG

Now that wouldn't really be in the spirit of Ppruning would it? Although judging by comments on some of the threads I've seen lately ...........

PS: Chicken Fricash*t rules.......

[Oogle]

I have electronic copy of a B412 Classic flight manual. :E

[flyer43]

Oogle

So that means Thilo just has to subtract 200 from everything in it and he will be there.........

Having said that, I would imagine that there is a lot of similarity between the 212 & 412 manuals.

[Thilo]

Be serious a second...

Outhouse sent me a copy of the 212/412 in October last year, but it seems the post got hijacked by the Elves.

Can anyone help me out. Thanks.

Thilo

OK... the second is over...

[Oogle]

Flyer

Pretty close:


MTOW of 212 = 11200lb (11900lb for the 412)
3 inverters on the 212 as opposed to 2 for the 412
2 blades v's 4 blades
May have AFCS differences


Other than that - fairly identical.

C'mon you guys, give me all the others!!:}

[flyer43]

- Both made by Bell
- Both have 2 crew seats and max of 12 pax seats
- Both have p*ss poor baggage hold space
- Both are great fun to fly - particularly the 212 with its familiar blade slap - unless of course you "fly neighbourly"

etc


Thilo - wish I could be of more help, but I'm sure that somebody out there will fire up a brain cell soon and help out......

[outhouse]

OK
Someone has fired up a brain cell least some of the few still working!
Send us a PM with the address and I will see if the next copy reaches you, this time little elves permitting.
outhouse

[MGT727]

Anbody have any leads on Bell 212s for sale they like hens teeth at the moment need 2 for contract in RSA?:confused: :confused:

[chopperdr]

try eaglecopters in calgary, talk to mike oreilly
dr

[170']

MGT727

Rotor International (Toussus le noble- Paris region) have a 212 for sale right now; I just ferried it up from South of Spain..00 33 1 39 56 70 90 Ask for Yves...He speaks perfect English. PM me if you need more info...170.......

[Salusa]

Yes there are some winners out there but no one has answered my question, or is it just bollocks.
It was probably another problem not caused by the spinning load.

It can happen..

http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief2.asp?ev_id=20030127X00113&ntsbno=ANC03GA023&akey=1

[paco]

You can get the 412 manual from http://64.34.169.161/cgi-bin/ifolio/imageFolio.cgi?direct=File--Downloads/Manuals - working on an electronic copy of the 212 - watch this space....

Phil

[canookpilot]

By the way if anyone is interested, I'm the pilot that had the mast separation in flight back in 2000. I wouldn't say that I was seriously injured, but was beaten up better good. The final results were that bell screwed up when they made the mast, but would not take the blame for what had happened.
I'm back flying again, a 205 for a american company and still loving it. I actually was back flying two mouth to the day, but took me a little longer to get back to my old self.

Cheers:ok: :D :p

[mark_]

Pilots in Canada often refer to the 212 as the 'steam chicken' but nobody ever seems to know where the nickname originated...any thoughts?

Mark

[paco]

Well, it's steam driven :) I heard that the term originally referred to Hueys in Vietnam, and one possibility is:

"Bell originally was in the business of building Steam Locomotives. Helicopters came at a later date. In SEA some of the Heuys had amour plating on the lower section, also referred to as "Chicken Plates". Hence the name Steam Chicken. That and the fact that there was "steam" vapour (vapor for TQN) coming out the breather."

But this is from a senior Canadian pilot:

"UH-1 = Huey = cartoon Character "Baby Huey" ( Was a large, tubby chicken ) + 205 kinda sounds like a steam engine from far away and breather pumps puffs of smoke outa the exhaust = "Steam Chicken."


And another:

"Steam chicken refers to the civilan 212 and comes from the engineering fraternity."

Take your pick!

Phil

[HELISeo]

Hello everybody,:}
I'm new on this forum.
I am fliyng vertical reference in the Switzerland and I am looking to find anybody which could give me informations about the B 212HP.:ugh:
How it does perform in external load operations?
How much does it lift?

[forget]

The Royal Brunei Air Force certainly found the Sperry system to be superb. Unfortunately they (the Sperry systems...) are now obsolete.

Now that rang a very pleasant Bell. I hope I’m not speaking out of turn here … just a short story …. and it was over twenty years go. The Air Wing of the Royal Brunei Malay Regiment (RBMR) had very close ties with the RAF and seconded officers would come though for a two year tour. For the first time in their service lives they could decide the kit to be fitted to the Bell fleet. Then they left; someone else would take over and start changing things. The result – no two machines were remotely the same.

I was the avionics tech boss at a ‘well known’ Singapore based Bell Agent. The RBMR would use us for various work and they were frequent visitors. They must have got a little tired of me beating their heads on aircraft ‘standardisation’, and fitting some decent (non Brit Military!) kit. One morning I got a call from the engineering boss (RAF) asking if he could come over to Singapore and meet the next day - he wanted to talk avionics.

He arrived as planned and, over a coffee, he asked me one question. ‘If we were to give you a blank cheque - how would you equip half a dozen new 212’s’.

Wow! Dream Time.:eek: But a simple answer - ‘You pop across to the Flying Club for lunch and I’ll see you there in half an hour – with a list’. I went through the whole package with the latest and greatest from the US military, FM/VHF/UHF Comms, HF Comms, DME, RadAlt, Transponder (Brit Mil I have to say) - the works. I finished the list and sat back and thought about it. Let’s go for broke - how about the ‘new’ Sperry Autopilot. Why not - and in it went.

Two days later I get another call. Everything was accepted! …….. with one proviso. They needed to fly the autopilot before buying. The only place to do that, or next best thing, was Fort Worth with a 412 – and then to Phoenix to meet Sperry with their Aerospat demonstrator. Within three weeks we’d done both – and it was a done deal.

A Sperry autopilot fit had never been done outside of the US - but what the hell – it can’t be that difficult. And so I thought - until I saw the wiring harnesses laid out on plastic sheet on the hangar floor! But the job was done, and on time. The day came for the first test flight, with the Sperry test pilot, and off we went. The whole nine yards - including fully coupled ILS approaches to Changi. Zero defects …….:ok:

What a peach of a system that was – beautiful. No doubt one or two of that era will recognise the world famous Sperry TP, below. Happy Days! By gum we ‘ad some fun. ( Maybe this should be in Aviation History & Nostalgia.):)


http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/HO.jpg

[TrT]

Hi all,

Just wondering i heard of a job flying 212's, I havent been able to get much gen on the machine, but just in general how well maintained(also age wise) are they, how many civilian machines are available for purchase, are they worth while to buy and so on?

Thanks:ok:

[jetbox]

I wonder if anyone out there can suggest where I can find out information regarding operating costs for a bell 212 .I am looking for a 212 in a utility configuration to use for aerial work both here in the UK and possibly for some contract work in Spain .Any info on the 212 would be helpfull ,many thanks.

[andTompkins]

According to Conklin & deDecker, Fall 2006 edition, using $2.75/Gallon fuel cost and $70/hour maintenance labor, the 212 costs $902.69/hour (USD) to operate.

Breaking that out ...
Fuel $272.25
Lubricants $8.17
Maintenance Labor $144.90
Parts Airframe / Engine / Avionics $135.83
Engine Restoration $204.97
Dynamic Components / Life Limited Parts $136.57

Tompkins

[Taff Missed]

jetbox,

AFAIK the only Bell 212 in the UK is operated by FB Heliservices out of Middle Wallop.

Try www.FBHeliservices.com

Taff

[jetbox]

I wonder if anyone can suggest a training school or helicopter company who carry out Bell 212 type training.I have a Canadian and a FAA licence and am looking to do the training either in Canada or the US,and any idea as to cost?:eek:

[rick1128]

Jetbox,

The only school I know of that holds itself out to the public is Flight Safety in Hurst, TX. I am not totally sure of their certifications, but it has been my experience they are generally accepted by most authorities. You will need to communicate with them on their certifications and requirements.

[Flying Bull]

Hi jetbox,

why don´t visit good old germany, make a vacation and do a little bit of flying?
http://www.agrarflug-helilift.com/
They have a flight school and a big fleet, including 205, 212 and 412.

Greetings Flying Bull

[outhouse]

The FSI course is a sim based course around $23.000 with 9 hrs simulator and good, technical ok and notes not as good as the new stuff coming through. However as we know AC hours are best. If you want a type rating and build hours on the series B212/412 then maybe a lost two years in the ME and I expect around 1,200 hrs on type (normal bond period) may be worth thinking about and could be an option. Costs per hr for the series AC in the commercial market with no revenue well, name your price. I guess $2,500 per hr minimum and UP.I have experience of up to $5,500 per hr.
Outhouse.


Outhouse.

[jetbox]

:DThanks for all the suggestions regarding 212 training .I think the school in Germany sounds well worth a try.At the moment the Canadian companies I have spoken to range from £1200 to £2200 per hour.I will also like to look into working in the ME as suggested by outhouse.

[PolarisPilot]

Hi All,
I am new to the Bell 212 and I must say she is a wonderful bird to fly. New to this forum too, so hope I'm not committing any syntax error or one of etiquettes on this post.
I have some flying in the Military, and we had all been used to a wonderful graph that told us what would be the hover collective pitch required (or hover torque depending on the type) for a given set of conditions (WAT). You guessed it right, I was flying the Alouette first and also have some experience on the Euro oriented machines.
The Bell 212 Manual, somehow doesn't seem to have this type of graph. I recently had a case where the folks on the platform measured the load in Kg and passed it to me without specifying it wasn't in Lbs. Fortunately the wind was about 25 kts offshore, so it wasn't an issue, but I did feel the torque required to hover on deck was a wee bit more than I was used to for a similar load. The actual load of course was weighed in my presence on landing, which is :mad:
The question is, here, that I do not have a ready reference to tell me in the cockpit what is my AUW for that particular torque (and vice versa). Temperatures here ordinarily range in the mid 30s so it really is an issue. In the trusty old Alouette, one could work backwards from the hover power, temp and also the wind, what exactly the weight of the helicopter was. :ugh: No luck in any document I looked into for the 212. Would be grateful for any information, and also any logic why this has not been included in the basic RFM please.
I also read in a post by Rotorbike on 23 May 02, that the allowable load reduces to just 10280 at 38 degrees. Now, is that IGE or OGE, TOP or MCP, Cat A or not, and is it for offshore or onshore? Can anyone help
Also interesting was the discussion on OEI while coming in to land. I survive to tell the tale and so does the whirlybird. That would be a topic for another post, of course

[hueyracer]

When i started in the 212, i had the same problem....

Flying the 204 or 205 normally, i have always used the graphs in the checklist to recheck the calculated weight against hoverpower..

Unfortunately, there is no such graph for the 212.....if you will find one, let me know....

We came out to write down different weights and OAT´s for each ship-just to have one value to check..

But normally it is not necessary-i have spoken to some of the Bell engineers, and they told me that you just have to check your hover power-and if there is 10-15% left, you can fly....

For the OEI-question-i am used to fly single engine ships, so i don´t really care...
But i had a TRE who took this serious....so i always had to stay in the OEI limits...


Where did you fly in the army (just send me a pm...)?

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Feeling very guilty that I haven't checked this thread more often; have only just read 'forget's story about the avionics refit in Singapore.

Very grateful to you for all the work you did - Brunei wasn't a brilliant tour, mainly because of the local's approach to work (and I'm a fine one to talk...), but the aircraft more than made up for that. You did us a big favour, 'forget' - thanks.

[Chilliwack]

Hey Luft, I got about 4000 hours on 212s, lots in very hot climes. Send me an email and I will send you a bag full of stuff.
Cheers, Joe
[email protected]

[Shawn Coyle]

It's actually a problem with civilian performance charts. They really don't tell you what you need to know.
I have some old Canadian Air Force CH-135 (UH-1N) performance charts that go up to 10,500 lb as well as a nifty whiz-wheel that showed power required to hover. I'd be happy to send them along next week when I get home. Send me a PM.

[forget]

Thanks for the kind words T & B – I often thought of my job in Singapore - if they didn’t want to pay me - I’d do it for free. I had more fun out of 212s than anyone deserved. The best (most fun) contract we had was with the Royal Thai Navy and their purchase of 8 X 212s. A delegation of RTN officers came down to Singapore for three months while the aircraft were kitted out. A certain RTN Commander was the boss. He was smart; one course to the US Navy College, Corpus Christi, had seen him top of the class from 144 students, most of them US. At graduation they raised the Thai Flag at the same rate as the Stars and Stripes – which pleased him. On the one hand – bordering on genius; on the other - a world class, priceless nutter who turned out to be one of my favourite people of all time.

One example: after delivery he was accepting the last of the aircraft at U-Tapao Navy base, only he and I on board. The last check was an auto-rotation. We were 5-6,000 feet over the base and he killed both engines – cold. Some time later we slid to a very short stop on the airfield, out jumps the Commander and, through the still rotating blades, emptied his M16 skywards. As he was grinning at me all the while I don’t know to this day whether, on the one hand - his genius had worked out that he could do this without hitting a blade or, on the other – a world class, priceless nutter had just got lucky. Anyway, it seemed to indicate that the acceptance had been a success so who was I to complain. :hmm:

Here's one of the eight aircraft at U-Tapao, in VIP colours and clearly having just been blessed by a Buddhist priest. 'forget' with his favourite Commander.:ok:

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/PREECHA.jpg

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Enjoyed reading that, 'forget', and also enjoyed studying the picture. Am I right in thinking that a bunch of Thai matelots are hiding in the shade of a 212 with its floats deployed over to the right of the frame? Wonder what the story was there...

...with appropriate apologies to all those who're trying to use this thread to actually get some work done. Boy, could I have made good use of Shawn Coyle's charts and whizz-wheel in Brunei; I'm convinced that over 10% of the lifts made out of the ulu there were overweight. Er, obviously not with the Loan Service drivers on board - oh, perish the thought. :cool:

[albatross]

I do believe, that under closer observation, that 212 in the upper right side of the photo is on fixed floats so I don't think there is much of a "story" there.:ok:

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Ah, right - thanks Albatros. Another gap (and there are many) in my education is filled!

[the delaminator]

I do believe, that under closer observation, that 212 in the upper right side of the photo is on fixed floats so I don't think there is much of a "story" there.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Ye know toooooo much!!!

[forget]

Not something you see every day. ;)

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/154.jpg

[stacey_s]

Not common I agree but early seventies Bell 212/205's were often seen in the ME on fixed floats.
I think there are some photo's from the old Skyweaver site now on Photobucket particularly one of 'EE' outside the Bristow hangar in Dubai, also Gulf Helicopters used to operate a couple of 205's on Fixed floats out of Doha circa 1977, was bit of a bugger checking the T/R!!

S

[PolarisPilot]

We came out to write down different weights and OAT´s for each ship-just to have one value to check.. Thanks for the suggestion huey. Looks like we'll have to try that out too; in fact we've already started off on that account by noting down the WAT plus torque at hover. Also hope to get some info from Shawn Coyle.
It is very nice to be on the forum, and being new here, end up spending most of my waking hours in the last few days (when I'm not actually flying) checking out the forum. It is so educative, and I've been just soaking up stuff. Right now, I'm following the thread on Offshore flying, as also the one on Autopilots / SAS
Cee you

[southerncanuck]

does anyone know or can direct me to the manual that states the max allowable load limit for nose avionics bay ballast and or avionics weights
thanks in advance
dr

[stacey_s]

Yes, the maintenance manual does

[Salusa]

forget (NC) check your PM's.
Cheers

[dammikadias]

Hi all
I cannot find any chart to find the hover tq with corrosponding MAUW figures. Bell 212 FMS for Cat A ops gives figures only upto 10000lbs as it's the limit AUW for cat A ops. Has anyone got the idea on how to find the tq value from 10000lbs to 11200lbs?:confused:

[Shell Management]

Bell issue an ASB after the fatal accident in Mexico last month.

http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/Storage/ASB_212-10-141.pdf

Another reason to get rid of these old aircraft.

[TomBola]

Another reason to get rid of these old aircraft.

Bell Helicopter has determined that a main rotor hub inboard strap fitting may have not been manufactured in accordance with the Engineering design requirements and may fracture as a result of the non-conformance.

So what on earth has that got to do with the age of the aircraft? I'd rather get rid of an annoying little twerp like you who seems to have hours to spend every day adding your trite and meaningless comments to so many threads....
SM/anything he writes = 0

[Encyclo]

Quality issues are one of the most problematic issues in our industry today. Typically you will get a bad part that doesn’t fit you new design Bell 429, EC225 or S-92 and that is it, you order a new one and hope it fits.

What is more insidious is when a process is missed, whatever the FAR revision your aircraft was certified under, the helicopter is at risk. All OEMs work extremely hard to have robust QA processes to prevent this from happening, but in this case good people died and I find it appalling that someone would use this to push a totally unrelated agenda.

Sad, really sad :ugh: :yuk:

[Shawn Coyle]

Getting rid of these old aircraft is not a realistic response - this sort of thing happens all the time to newer designs as well.
There is a curve of problems vs. time (commonly known as the bathtub) and I'd wager that the 212 is still well along the level part of that curve.

[paco]

"Another reason to get rid of these old aircraft"

Old technology is proven technology. There's life in the old girl yet. :)

Phil

[rick1128]

Several of the folks I talked with that were doing long line, stated that they preferred the 212 over the 412 for long line work. Mostly due to the rotor system having more inertia.

[paco]

Shell Management - nobody at Aerogulf has forgotten that accident - read the thread about it in this forum properly to get more insight into it. That could have happened to almost any modern aircraft, and the fact that their aircraft were newer (or had 2 engines, for that matter) didn't help the boys from Cougar or from Bond.

Taking your points - the aircraft may be old, but each Aerogulf machine is stripped down and rebuilt every year. They are like well-loved classic cars! Low spec? All of those used at night are fully IFR equipped, with radalts, radar etc., plus 2 crew and associated equipment. Low performance? The loads were adjusted to cope.

In principle, there is no problem flying at night if the proper procedures are taken. In fact, I don't find it demanding at all. The air is just a different colour!

Are you really from Shell Management? If so, you will know that Shell will use a 212 when it suits them.

Phil
Registered Aviation Consultant

[sox6]

Paco said
you will know that Shell will use a 212 when it suits them.


Shell management may be deluded but I really can't believe Shell still fly the 212 (or perhaps you mean 2/1=2!).

[paco]

I believe they used one in Canada a few years ago to take people off a ship somewhere cold. So my sources tell me, at least!

phil

[Shell Management]

I'm sure you are wrong their.

This is the reason the 212 was dropped.

http://i197.photobucket.com/albums/aa266/thridleopdes/Bell212BladeGrip3.jpg

[Shawn Coyle]

That sort of failure has happened to other helicopter types as well. Should they all be grounded?

[Encyclo]

Agree Shawn,

From the 'beach' marks on that fracture surface, that crack had been growing for some time and somebody was not looking :8

Regardless SM, I guess from your picture the aircraft landed OK. Would this qualify as a "redundant component" :D

[SuperF]

shows how good they really are if it gets back while looking like that.:eek:

I don't give a rats what it looks like after i'v shut down, means i've walked away from it alive, and any bit can be replaced....

i bet it had a bit of a shake.

[212man]

From the 'beach' marks on that fracture surface, that crack had been growing for some time and somebody was not looking

I think you'll see on closer inspection that the crack originates internally, and would not have been visible.

I guess from your picture the aircraft landed OK

It happened about 100 ft on final to a grass field. By the time it landed, the upper tang was bending upwards and the aircraft was jumping around uncontrollably. The only thing keeping the outer portion of the tang attached was the friction from the washer.

[squib66]

The FAA finally managed an AD 3 years later that mandated a regular ultrasonic inspection on the bore of the grip:-
Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. Model 204B, 205A, (http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/0/3F3CFA40AB9D2ADC86256CAF006B1C44?OpenDocument)

This amendment is prompted by the discovery of 13 grips that cracked in the lower tang, three of which cracked in flight. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent failure of a grip, separation of a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
I believe the PH accident was the third time a failure had occured.

Its amazing how readily some people blame their own QA or maintenance inspectors without mastering the subject first.:mad:

[212man]

If you are referring to my mention of QA - I was referring to the QA process of the hub manufacturer (that allowed this fault to be introduced.)

[Foggy Bottom]

Didn't Al Major have a similar failure while setting poles in Oman with ADA?

[Helicopter doctor]

A third Emergency AD has just been released (FAA AD 2010-25-51) together with ASB212-10-142, related to the inboard fittings in the 212 MR hub.

The directives mention a previous accident with fatalities which is related to the fitting failures. Anyone have any information about that accident? Google comes up blank.

For those who think this is "age" related, the part has a retirement life and changed out at hub overhaul.

The OEM has to constantly use different vendors to make their new parts, as the original vendor may be too busy, gone broke or no longer handling this type of work.

This incident appears to be from a recently manufactured batch of fittings. The risk of a defect being introduced during manufacture could happen to any OEM, and on any model, and has nothing to do with how long that model has been around.

Doc

[The Sultan]

Shellmanagement

This report indicates that the Puma/Super Puma should be disallowed.

The SultanAir Accidents Investigation: 7/2010 G-PUMI (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/formal_reports/7_2010_g_pumi.cfm)

[squib66]

The Shell replacement plan, as of mid 2007, is here on slide 26 from this IHST presentation
http://www.ihst.org/Portals/54/Partners/Brazil/palestras/0406/Bob/Sheffield.ppt

The 212 (and S-61) can carry on in service with Shell until 2011, while the 332 has 2 years more it seems.

Those time limits, if set in 2004/2005 seem unagressive if Shell really does believe that newer is safer and 'ALARP'.

[zalt]

Especially irresponsible if the 'Shell Management' postion really is that the rotor grip failure in 2000 in Nigeria was a catalyst for change.

The S-61 drops off the Shell list 49.5 years after the first flight. Not really in line with their own enthusiasm for new certification standards (it is the aged certification standards not the airframe age that Shell Management was inexpertly referencing).

[212man]

Especially irresponsible if the 'Shell Management' postion really is that the rotor grip failure in 2000 in Nigeria was a catalyst for change

I assume you are just 'stirring' by quoting that garbage? The decision to upgrade was made long before the blade grip failure, and the EC-155 order placed before it too. But I'm guessing you knew that !

[Heli-News]

FAA-2010-0564

This AD is effective September 10, 2013.

Adoption of procedures based on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on July 8, 2010 wherein helicopters with certain blade grips installed require creating a component history card or equivalent record for each grip; determining and recording the total hours TIS for each grip; visually inspecting the upper and lower tangs of the grip for a crack; inspecting the grip buffer pads for delamination and if delamination is present, inspecting the grip surface for corrosion or other damage; inspecting the grip for a crack using UT and fluorescent penetrant inspection methods; and establishing a retirement life for certain grips.

The NPRM was prompted by reports of three in-flight failures of grips, P/N 204-011-121-009 and 204-011-121-121, installed on Bell Model 212 helicopters. The failures resulted from cracks originating in the lower blade bolt lug. The cracking was attributed to subsurface fatigue, corrosion and mechanical damage. Grips with these same P/Ns are eligible for installation on certain restricted category helicopters. Grips, P/N 204-3 044-121-005 and 204-044-121-113, are also affected if they were ever installed on a Model 205B or UH-1N helicopter. The proposed requirements were intended to prevent failure of the grip, separation of a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

http://www.rotor.com/rotornews/Aug13/2013-13-06.pdf

[sarbee]

212man - would you happen to have BHT-212-FMS-19??? Or know how I could get my hands on it? Looking for info on SCAS unserviceability in an IFR machine operating VFR on fire suppression... is SCAS MEL'able or is SCAS failure a grounding? AFCS is in MEL, but cannot find SCAS...... any help gratefully appreciated!

[gulliBell]

AFCS not required for VFR. It says so in the BHT-212IFR-FM-1.

[212man]

SCAS is the AFCS that the MMEL refers to. Other AFCS’s are available from Sperry (Helipilot) and SFENA but standard AFCS is SCAS.

[Cyclic Hotline]

If it is a non Bell installation, check the maintenance and operation certification paperwork for the system you have installed. If eligible, it will be included in the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness. Whether you can MEL it, will depend upon the regulatory approval of your MEL and the inclusion of the system installed - check very closely.

[212man]

If it is a non Bell installation, check the maintenance and operation certification paperwork for the system you have installed. If eligible, it will be included in the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness. Whether you can MEL it, will depend upon the regulatory approval of your MEL and the inclusion of the system installed - check very closely.
surely if it is SCAS it will be ‘standard Bell’?

[gulliBell]

Bell 212 SCAS spares are becoming rare and eye-wateringly expensive. But if you're fire bombing (VFR) in an IFR Bell 212 with a dicky SCAS, turn off the SCAS and continue on with the mission in wobbly mode. Fix it when the parts arrive.

[Gabriel Moreira]

Hi everybody, i am looking for the Bell 212 Pilot Training Manual. It will help me a lot. Thank you.

[Jimmy.]

After a C-Box replacement, we noted a little oil pressure oscillation (less than 5 psi above and under 70 psi) when lifting external cargo loads above 90% toque and at level flight with the load, even at low power. Without external cargo loads the oscillation isn't noticeable.
The indicator and transmitter were also replaced, but the oscillation remains.
Does anyone have noticed something like this before? The other 212 of the fleet have no oscillations at all and the manual doesn't mention this condition (as a malfunction or not).

[Haligali]

Hi everybody, i am looking for the Bell 212 Pilot Training Manual. It will help me a lot. Thank you.
send me message in pm

[malabo]

In your fortunate circumstances to have a fleet, why not swap gauge first (easy) and pressure sender later (harder) to see if the fault follows?

Thin ice for a pilot to make maintenance suggestion, engineers just want symptoms.

[Jimmy.]

In your fortunate circumstances to have a fleet, why not swap gauge first (easy) and pressure sender later (harder) to see if the fault follows?

Thin ice for a pilot to make maintenance suggestion, engineers just want symptoms.

The indicator and transmitter mentioned replacements were swaps actually, sorry for the lack of detail. The fault persists...