Bell 206 or EC120?

[cpt hobbs]

i am looking at both a 206 and the ec120 to buy for a business man to travel around ireland. Please express pros and cons for comparisson and your final choice. $1 mil budget. thanks.

[SMOUFW]

For 1 mil Aus dollars you could get two pretty good second hand Jetrangers-not to sure about the price of a used ec-120- would imagine though a little bit more.

To compare them operationally-if you looked up the word reliable in the dictionary you would find a photo of a jetranger-they just keep going. Ofcousre you'll always find the knockers but over a ten year period we operated up to 4 206's and other than the routine maintenance I can remember a couple of t/r chip lights, 1 eng chip and a couple of gauge failures.And i'm talking about 600-800 hrs per year per machine. The other consideration is support and parts....do your homework there....again I don't know what eurocopter/Bell have in Ireland.

I was fortunate to operate a EC-120 on trial for around 3 months and in that time had great feedback from pilots and passengers. Someone with a lot more time on the ec would give you a better appreciation however I loved flying the machine and the pax loved it. Bigger windows and a lot more comfortable.If your planning to have a full ship expect a lot of negative comments about the back middle seat in the jetranger...it's a F#$%^. Every day people would complain about having to sit there. We called it the TFC,(Thanks for coming) seat. Atleast in the EC everyone gets a great seat and no arguements.

The luggage compartment on the ec is little more generous than the jetranger however as all 206 drivers know it's amazing what you can fit in a jetranger boot.

Thats my 3 cents worth-to answer your question if it's just you and/or your pilot criusing around Ireland with regards to price take the jetranger option-maybe a few ec operators could add some pointers to even the debate.......Have you considered a R44?

SMO

[blade771]

This could start quite a debate!!

Would probably go for 206 myself, however do agree that the 120 has better alround visibility for the pax however have heard some stories of problems with the 120 i.e. c of g - this may have been corrected now.

Otherwise both lovely machines.

[KikoLobo]

i fown both of them, both as a pass and as a pilot, 206 its a work horse. True ec is more confortable for the pass, but 206 its so reliable and its so a noble machine and a joy to fly. Its slower though but its a very safe 'the safest single engine aircraft in the world' and it keeps its record for a long time. Maintainance its not hard and well documented, your mechanic can do a lot more to it than on the EC to fix it on the field.

More technology on the EC, quiter for sure, but the penalty for it its power. Although jet rangers are not a loader heli, it can carry more weight and be more forgiving in altitude and hot wx.

Its just my POV.
I flown both of them to see what i would buy, and got a 206. Ohh, operation cost is also lower. (at least in mx)

[headsethair]

The budget is $1m - US I assume ? That won't get much of a 120......

[rotornut]

Do a search on EC-120. There have been a few threads on their maintenance and reliability problems.

[Thomas coupling]

It's not just about operating costs etc, is it.
We are living in the 21st century now and things such as duty of care/risk assessments etc have to be considered.
I would seriously also look at crashworthiness issues.
The 206 has that woefully inferior tail rotor authority issue hanging over it too.

On a separate note: bear in mind the spares and servicing scene.

A helo sat on the deck waiting 4 days for a replacement part for instance, is just scrap metal:ooh:

[and Tompkins]

A few other things to consider:

Autorotation - ever seen an EC120 auto from about 10-15' AGL? Talk about slamming you into the ground! You'll find the 206 offers much more margin than the EC120 due to the nature of the rotor system. Much more inertia in the 206.

Useful Load - Don't get hung up in EC telling you that the 120 has a greater AUW. Once you load it with the necessary equipment and fuel to fly it away, you'll have more UL in a JetRanger with the same equipment. This is especially easy to see when comparing Bell and EC's HOGE and HIGE charts from their technical specs. You'll find a tight race, but I suspect EC would tell you differently.

Having flown in both, I would not take an EC120 above 110-kts. It seemed like everything was about to shake loose in the cabin.

I'd take the JetRanger. :ok:

[belly tank]

Thomas Coupling wrote:
"The 206 has that woefully inferior tail rotor authority issue hanging over it too."

Thomas...in my limited experience in helicopters to date which includes 1000+ hours in jetrangers ive never had any problem with tail rotor authority..and ive done most hovering ops that require alot of pedal....treat it right and think about what your doing and you should never have any tail rotor authority / lte or whatever they call it tommorow problem :ok:

[Aesir]

The 206 has that woefully inferior tail rotor authority issue hanging over it too

Belly Tank..

That is exactly what I was going to say, you just beat me to it!

This LTE "Problem" on B206 is a non issue.

[IHL]

Belly Tank & Aesir:

I disagree. I know several pilots that have experienced it. It is real and it is out there but it can be managed.

When I fly a Jet Ranger I am always very cognizant of wind direction and the conditions that can lead to LTE.

[belly tank]

IHL,

I didnt say that it its not an issue, maybe my wording was a bit obscure, however as you say with proper management and decision making it is overcome.

and i think this applies to most if not all aspect of flying.

cheers!

[leemind]

headsethair - US$1m ~ £570k

You'll easily get an EC120 for that money. Quick search of the 'net or look in Helimart found several. e.g. 2002 with 1,000 hrs for EUR870k (£558k)

[Thomas coupling]

Belly Tank / Aesir:

Ignorance is bliss....I suggest you get to know your a/c a little more:

NickLappos said:


posted 3rd October 2005 11:03
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

rotorboy,

In an LTE study I did about 7 years ago, based on worldwide accidents of all helos, using four different data bases, this is what it showed:

95% of all LTE accidents involve Bell 206 models.

Virtually 100% of all LTE accidents involve Bell helicopters (one Robbie in UK was reported as LTE, but was probably over pitching).

My conclusion was that the inadequate size of the Bell 206 tail rotor was the principal cause of its LTE woes.
A second finding is that all tail rotor authority events were being called LTE because the marketing campaign conducted by Bell was effective on removing the heat from their design.

LTE really does not exist, it is a label used to blame the pilot when a marginal helicopter loses yaw control within its approved envelope. That does not mean that a 206 can be milked by an experienced pilot to not lose tail authority.

LTE cannot be experienced by any helo built to modern standards (larger tail rotor). It is impossible to get LTE in a Black Hawk, Apache, S76, H-500, EH-101, Lynx, etc because they have adequate tail rotors.

[John Eacott]

TC,

Beg to differ: maybe with the small tail rotor, but the 206 with the later tail rotor is quite manageable, and we operate frequently hot and high.

I'd be making more of an issue of the EC120's low inertia main rotor system, and the R22-like autorotation characteristics :eek: I'd have grave reservations using an EC120 for low level operations that wouldn't cause any concern in a 206, because I'm not sure that I'd get away with a survivable auto. Apparently the factory pilots prefer to run on around 40-50kts in the 120, maybe for a good reason!

[belly tank]

Thomas Coupling wrote,

"Ignorance is bliss....I suggest you get to know your a/c a little more:"

I think i have reasonable knowledge of My aircraft the 206 in this case, ive done most ops that require the use of alot of pedal mainly OGE hover work etc etc hot and as high as you can get here in australia!. and as i said in my limited experience on Jetrangers 1000 + hrs on type to date ive never had a problem or accident, and as i mentioned before its managable if you treat your aircraft with respect it deserves.

so your statement above is totally ignorant about the fact you should give a bit more credit to your peers before you make assumptions on their ability :8

[B Sousa]

IF you have a Million to play with and look around just a bit I think you can get a pretty nice B206L4 and have some spare change for cockpit toys.
Give it some thought.

[Aesir]

NickLappos said:

Thomas coupling..

Ohhohh.. If Nick said it then it MUST be true :rolleyes:


The original question was:

Please express pros and cons for comparisson and your final choice. $1 mil budget. thanks.

In my opinion the perceived LTE "Problem" of the 206 is not an issue in choosing which aircraft to buy! If properly flown it´s not a problem!!

Like was said for $1 mil you can get a nice 206L4 which is certainly a much superior aircraft to the EC-120.

I have a friend who operates EC-120 and from talking to him he seems to have unusual problems with parts availability and cost :{ Don´t get me started there..few months ago he had to replace the flashing beacon at a cost of $9.000.- The whole thing had to be replaced as a unit, not possible to change the bulb!

He fly´s his EC-120 about 350 to 400 hrs a year. I fly my AB206B a 1971 model with.. yes you guessed it, the small diameter tail rotor.. I fly about 150 hrs a year and guess who takes more money to the bank after all costs have been figured in? I do.

Needless to say his EC-120 is for sale.

When comparing the two EC-120 & B206 one should consider the autorotative characteristics as well of both aircraft. Since they are single engine I would much rather be in a B206 following engine failure, both aircraft do have engine failures like any motor vehicles and the outcome of such a failure will be more likely to be succesful in the B-206.

Unfortunately it´s difficult to do a "Study" of succesful outcomes of engine failure landings comparing aircraft since many countries do not require any reports to be made if the landing was succesful with no damage.

Here is my suggestion for the original poster:

"Be Smart, Fly Bell"

[Thomas coupling]

Belly up: I wouldnt brag about a 1000hrs on type if I were you. There are people on here who have flown that on type in only 18 months, that is not a lot of experience:8
And you are not my peer...you can't even spell Chief Pilot in your profile never mind act like one:uhoh:


Aesir et al:

Join the real world eh? You can't keep flying a 40 yr old design forever....one has to move on and invest in technology with all its merits. Safety is the industry mantra now.

Aviation news comments (http://www.aviationtoday.com/cgi/rw/show_mag.cgi?pub=rw&mon=0203&file=0203ec120.htm)

Just another view..................................

Aesir: interesting web site.

[Dynamic Component]

I have a few hours on the EC120 and 206.Each has its own role.For pax work I would choose the 120.For anything else I would choose the 206.I would prefer a 206L4. Just keep in mind that you cant load 4 adults and pilot and use all the baggage space in the 120.

TC- who pis*ed in your porridge? SO what if belly tank can't spell. And they are entitled to their own opinions.(I can't spell either:} )

[belly tank]

Thanks DC!

See TC i do have a peer!..your words were the last straw i have now enrolled in spelling classes, ill let you know how my progress goes:8

As for the thread...you will like this TC i also have limited experience in the 120 and have found it to be a nice aircraft for pax work as DC has stated, nice open cabin etc etc, its horses for courses what are you planning on doing with the machine you choose CPT Hobbs, is it mainly going to be used for the business man alone or will most of your loads be with a full compliment of passengers.

as DC has stated have you looked at a L4!

[Aesir]

Thank you for your view Thomas..

You said:

Join the real world eh? You can't keep flying a 40 yr old design forever....one has to move on and invest in technology with all its merits. Safety is the industry mantra now.

That is exactly why I fly B-206..SAFETY! Get it?

I want to be in something that can land safely if I have engine failure which we all know can happen in all helicopters anytime and if I don´t have two engines then for sure I´m going to be in a helicopter that can autorotate safely.

I know why LTE happens and some other things that could happen to B-206 in flight and I know how to avoid those situations..! An engine failure I have no control over, it could happen when I least expect it.

New helicopter designs do not necessarily mean that they are safer in all aspects. Manufacturers do try to make them more economical to operate than the competition so customers will buy them. And boy did EC get the DOC´s wrong on the EC-120, they can say whatever they will about how economical it is but ask any operator in the field who will give you a straight answer and then find out how much it costs to run. There are loads of 120´s for sale now, I wonder why?

But don´t get me wrong, like someone said if you don´t worry to much about engine reliability and perhaps fly all the time over land and non-hostile terrain then the EC-120 is fine for passenger transport for someone who has the funds to run it. There is lot´s of people who don´t really care if it cost´s $300 or $500 pr/hr to run.

I like the B206 because it cheap to run which means I make more cash and it´s safer to fly in my area of operations.

I´m guessing that the original poster has probably gotten tired of reading the bull that´s been posted but please keep us informed what you end up buying whichever way you decide!

[blade771]

I guess $1m is about £700K, you could of course go for a twin (AS355) wouldn't be brand new of course probably F1 / F2 but you could probably get something reasonable for that kind of money.

[B Sousa]

You can't keep flying a 40 yr old design forever....one has to move on and invest in technology with all its merits

If I was a Playa........I would have bought a 407 when it first came out. Since I have a saying etched in my brain. "Never buy an A model of anything" I waited to see how many of the "Rollers" paid for the ADs that would surely come out, and they did.
Now its a bit better, someone else suffered the problems and its a great purchase......
Same thing flys with the EC-120. Let someone else do the testing and since I see a few more buying the farm recently it is not over yet. Then maybe.
As to purchasing "new" only a proven aircraft and only then if I cannot find a clean machine that someone else has eaten the initial depreciation.

If I had the ability to purchase anyway...........

[BigMike]

Horses for courses I guess. Jetranger if want to do a wide range of work, 120 if you mainly fly pax. 40 year old design vs new one? Who cares. Which one makes the most commercial sense, thats the bottom line. Second-hand L-4 would be much better than either.

TC, I think you will find that the tail-rotor is not an issue in the B III Jet-ranger.
I would consider someone with 1000 hours on type to have a bit of an idea. What do you consider experienced on type? Just remeber its not always total hours on type, but what you did in those hours...

[B Sousa]

tail-rotor is not an issue in the B III Jet-ranger.

Are we talking an LTE issue here?? I have heard this song before. Personal opinion is Pilots are the problem. If any aircraft is prone to doing something out of the ordinary it should be addressed in the intial training and etched in the pilots gray matter. If done correctly problems should not occur OR if Murphy is flying then the pilot will be able to correct things before a disaster occurs based on his awareness in the seat.

Im Still voting for an L-4

[BigMike]

As it was when I first flew a 206 a long while ago. I was warned to be carefull with pre-BIII Jet-rangers. Something to simply be aware of.

[B Sousa]

Something to simply be aware of.

And it appears you have not forgotten, good.. Another good example, if I can drift a bit, was the Huey. Many variations of it but as there are also different UH-60s, the one big difference was that the Huey used two airframes.
UH-1B, C, M etc. had the B204 airframe, wheras the D,H,V etc. had the B205 airframe.
When I transitioned from the H to the M, the first thing the IP did was take me way up in the mountains and do a 360 turn at a 50'OGE hover on a hot day (in a big LZ) Dam thing ran out of pedal. Lesson there was although it was a Huey with an L-13 etc. The tailboom was still smaller and the tail rotor cannot handle things, Hot, Heavy, High........

Back to reality, Im still voting for the L-4.........

[P2bleed]

Hello,

I believe there was a thread on the comparison of the EC120B and Bell206B in regards to training both operationally and engineering.

Anyone point us in the right direction.
Thanks

[Heli_Sticktime]

I fly both and would also be interested to see that thread

[Heliport]

It was a very short thread a long time ago when not many people had much experience of the EC120.

I suggest we start a new discussion here.



Heli_Sticktime

Sounds like you're in a good position to start the ball rolling.





Heliport

[Copterfan]

I would be interested in this too, especially as these two helis are the different ways I was thinking of going after gaining my ppl(h). I Thought the EC120 was an amazing quality product after reading the magazine tests, but then I read a thread on here some months ago that was slating the EC120 battery positioning and switches, and also probs with the VEMD along with other probs.

Made me think that yes the EC120 is modern and pretty (and expensive), but maybe the 'good old' 206 might be the better bet? I would really be interested in the honest professional opinion of somebody that has flown both? Especially as I'd never get this kind of response from the sales people...."EC120 not powerful enough...? I've seen one lift a Chinook!" :eek: You know the kind of thing.

[rotormatic]

08/00

NEWS
From the County of San Bernardino

The Board of Supervisors today authorized the sheriff to purchase two EC-120 patrol helicopters as part of a phased-in replacement of the county's aging fleet of law enforcement aircraft.

The Patrol Helicopter Replacement Program is designed to replenish the Sheriff's Department’s aging fleet of patrol helicopters over a five-year period. The EC-120 was selected after an extensive evaluation by Sheriff’s law enforcement aviation experts based upon the aircraft’s operating capabilities, maximum payload and lower operating cost. The EC-120 also costs approximately $250,000 less that the department’s other style of patrol helicopter, the McDonnell Douglas/Boeing MDH-600N.

The purchase will cost $2.28 million and will be funded from the Sheriff’s Department Special Revenue Fund Budget

01/05

SAN BERNARDINO — The Sheriff's Department is working on a plan to have a more advanced eye in the High Desert sky.

The department wants to replace its aging fleet of seven helicopters with six new models from American Eurocopter which can better handle the county's diverse geography and perform more tasks, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.

The sheriff's current primary helicopters, American Eurocopter EC120s, are not able to adequately handle the tasks required of them in San Bernardino County, officials said.

"We've been operating (the EC120s), but we've found them lacking in power," said Lt. Tom Hornsby, of the Sheriff's Aviation Division.

The Sheriff's Department's plan for replacing the fleet calls for purchasing three Eurocopter AS350 B3 helicopters, at a cost of $2.6 million per helicopter, during the 2004-05 fiscal year and another three helicopters during 2005-06, according to county reports.

The Board of Supervisors already approved the purchase of two helicopters with contingencies and with the cost of the third helicopter to be covered by revenue from the sale of the current fleet, according to county reports. However, a recommendation before the board to authorize the purchase at Tuesday's meeting was postponed until Feb. 1.

Hot summer air can steal power from the engines of the EC120s, and they are limited at performing rescues in rough terrain and mountainous areas, Hornsby said. They are also unable to carry extra passengers beyond the helicopter's crew, he said.

In addition to the four EC120s, the Sheriff's Department's Aviation Division also operates a Sikorsky H3, a McDonnell Douglas 500 and a McDonnell Douglas 600N. All seven will be sold to help cover the costs of the purchase, according to county reports.

The AS350s that the Sheriff's Department wants are common in Europe's Alpine areas. They have the extra power needed in mountainous areas and during high temperatures, Hornsby said. They can also carry three to four rescue personnel with their supplies in addition to the on-board crew.

The AS350s are also equipped with fire buckets for an initial attack during fire season and have an external hoist for dropping rescue and fire personnel in inaccessible areas, Hornsby said.

"Those are a couple of missions that we can't even think about doing with the EC120s," Hornsby said.

[Copterfan]

Thanks for that Rotormatic,

It illustrates just what I was asking about. I know that I am a low-hours spode compared to many on this site, but that doesn't mean that I don't care about helis the same as all of you.
There aren't as many types of helis as there are planes, but real information about them is harder to come by. As mentioned before, the mags only get to test helis when distributors give them a few hours, or an affiliated owner gives them a flight, so where's the truth?
The best (and most honest) comment I have read recently was by Dennis Kenyon in Loop, where he is talking about whether to recommend somebody to buy an Enstrom 280 or not. Brilliant and insightful because it was honest and based on professional and personal experience.
So why can't we see that on here; what about a league table, a ratings guide? Similar to the 'Good, the Bad and the Ugly' ratings that you get in some car magazines. Why won't people cough up and say what they feel about helis and types?

Is it because I is a Spode?

[SHortshaft]

Excerpt from Jane’s Defence Weekly dated 24 Jan 06

“Singapore to receive EC 120 helicopters for pilot training

Singapore Technologies Aerospace (ST Aerospace) is due late in 2006 to take delivery of six EC 120 Colibri light utility helicopters, five of which will be used to provide flight training for the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) under a SGD120 million (USD74.5 million) programme finalised in November 2005.

The public-private-partnership will see the company own and maintain the aircraft, with pilot training performed by the RSAF. Known as the Rotary Wing Course (RWC), the contract covers a period of 20 years.”

The EC 120 replaces a fleet of AS 550 Fennec’s, the military version of the AS 350B2 and is to be equipped with a Chelton EFIS cockpit.

After a very thorough evaluation the EC 120 beat the Bell 206.

[P2bleed]

Thanks for that.

The 206 is very forgiving in regards to mishandling in EOL training. Has anyone experience on both that can comment

[Heli_Sticktime]

From my limited experience in both I can say the following

The EC120 doesn't have as much power as the 206,VEMD on the EC is good. One thing I find a help is the recording of a "gong" if you pull too much power for too long, at least you know when someone has done something bad, whereas in the 206 you wouldn't have a clue. If you're the only person flying the A/C then it's ok, but if you're at an operator that has many pilots of varying levels I would prefer to know if someone has wound the machine.

Aircon as standard in the EC is nice, specially in Africa and it seems to work well, does drip every now and then, the door ejectors are also cool if you're autorotating with an engine failure into water without floats(I know that should never happen but it just did in Cape Town a month ago and a student died):sad:

What I don't like is that the rotors turn the other way, nothing major but as you enter an auto and you instinctivly push in the pedal/which one was it again:\ you sometimes get a surprise when it yaws the wrong way.

EC is also like the Squirrel, comes off one one skid first whereas the 206 comes up straight normally, you also have to give a good bit of right pedal when you're pulling power for the lift off so that you don't cause a problem (something to do with the Fenesrton effect).

Shutdown in the EC is way faster than the 206, that two mins at idle in the 206 is 30 secs in the EC, if you're doing short hops it all adds up.

Seats in the EC also have some kind of loading structure that if you come in hard in an auto they collapse a certain way to protect you, someone with more knowlege can ellaborate.

Auto's in the EC are FAST compared to the 206, the fall out the sky, the 206 seems to glide more

If I had to choose I suppose it would be the EC for me, but that's because the EC I fly only has 200hrs on it and the 206 has 3500hrs. If I really had the choice it would be an AS350.

My 5 cents:ok:

[paco]

Heli Sticktime - could you define "not as much power as the 206"? And did the police helicopter mentioned above have the usual accessories attached to it to make it heavier?

Phil

[rotornut]

The 206 has the "bathtub" - the lower part of the fuselage - to absorb shock in a crash. I know from experience that it works. It once saved me from a broken back or worse...

[rotormatic]

Here is a press release from EC listing the equipment in the 120's, and another example of how things change in a short time...

Date 1/24/2000
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department Adds EC120s To Fleet

Las Vegas, Nev. - San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department will take possession of the first two EC120s to be used in Law Enforcement in the United States. These aircraft are being featured at this year's HAI convention. Two more are scheduled for delivery in mid-2000.

San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department obtained its first helicopter in 1970. Over the course of the last 30 years, it has increased its fleet to 13 aircraft, including 11 civil and military surplus helicopters, and 2 fixed wing aircraft.

San Bernardino County is the largest county in the continental United States, with more than 20,000 square miles. In fact, it could hold 5 New England states within its boundaries. "We needed an aircraft that is extremely quiet, and can stay airborne for an exceptionally long time. It also had to perform well at high altitudes, as our terrain ranges all the way up to 12,500 feet," said the Department's Commander, Capt. Don Belter. "We found that the EC120 is capable in all conditions, and can stay in the air for up to 4 hours. We were impressed at how well it performed in 110-degree weather."

The department is replacing part of its fleet with the EC120, thanks to the aircraft's superior capabilities. "We checked out several aircraft in the same class, and found that nothing compares with the EC120," said Sheriff Gary Penrod.

All 14 of the pilots have already attended the training for the EC120, and everyone is excited about it. "Another reason we are especially pleased with Eurocopter is because of the professional treatment we received by everyone, from the exemplary sales staff, all the way up to American Eurocopter's President Christian Gras. "

The EC120 is the perfect multi-mission, light single-engine helicopter. Its design and performance characteristics lend itself to be well suited for a wide range of law enforcement functions, such as Patrol Support, Fire-Fighting, EMS, and SAR. These functions are all part of San Bernardino's duties in their Airborne Law Enforcement Air Support mission.

San Bernardino County's custom configuration includes a PA system installation, dual sensor (video/thermal imagery) manufactured by FLIR, as well as an Airborne Data Terminal. The FLIR system can track moving targets, while a moving map system assists the crew in navigating to any street address in Southern California.

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 2005 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
Amended and Updated 02-28-2005

REPLACEMENT OF AIRCRAFT Funding Request: $7,744,689
The EC-120 does not have enough power for safely conducting missions at high altitude. The EC-120 is not capable of being used as a firefighting helicopter.

During the hot summer months (peak fire season) the EC-120 is often unable to land off-site to pick-up fire command personnel for airborne assessments.

The EC-120 is also incapable of rescuing victims who are caught mid-stream in flash flood environments. Yucca Valley and Morongo Basin “monsoons” routinely result in victims being caught in flash floods and public safety personnel are required to engage in extremely dangerous ground based “swift-water” rescue efforts.

[B Sousa]

NTSB Identification: LAX05GA231
14 CFR Public Use
Accident occurred Wednesday, July 13, 2005 in Fair Oaks, CA
Aircraft: Eurocopter France EC120B, registration: N266SD
Injuries: 2 Fatal, 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 July 13, 2005, about 1910 Pacific daylight time, an Eurocopter EC120B, N266SD, experienced a loss of engine power and collided with terrain near Fair Oaks, California. The Sacramento County Sheriff's Department was operating the public-use helicopter under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91. The commercial pilot and the student pilot rated observer sustained fatal injuries, and the observer trainee sustained serious injuries. The helicopter sustained substantial damage. The local flight departed Mather, California. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed. The approximate global positioning system (GPS) coordinates of the primary wreckage were 38 degrees 38 minutes north latitude and 121 degrees 13 minutes west longitude.

About 1910, the pilot transmitted "Mayday, mayday, mayday, we're going down." Within minutes of the mayday call, several people reported that they had just witnessed a possible helicopter crash. Witnesses reported hearing a "popping" noise and observed flames and smoke emitting from the exhaust of the helicopter just prior to impact. A grass fire consumed the hillside just above the accident site.

The helicopter was reported to be flying over steep, hilly, terrain. It impacted near the bottom of a 60-degree sloped hillside and rolled on its side after coming to rest at the base of the hill.

Post accident examination revealed a total loss of the free turbine blades. The main rotor blades revealed low rotational energy at the time of impact.

[widgeon]

Having been in a past life involved in customizing police helicopters . I can tell you that the people who select the mission equipment often have little real appreciation of the weight they are adding. I must say the salesmen , who should know better do not always advise the customer well.
To compare apples to apples you should see how much useful mass ( above basic weight of minimum equipped aircraft plus pilot and fuel ) each helicopter can lift on a 20 deg day. Even though the 206B3 does not have crash attenuating seats ( that add about 200 Lbs to basic weight ) . That said the 120 has useful load 97 kg greater than 206 with c20B hover OGE at 2000 meters and isa +10 but 18 kg less at 2000 meters ISA +20 according to manufacturers charts ( in the marketing info ). The 206 manual does not list weight of crash attenuating seats , though I think they are fittted to the TH57 .

[chopperdr]

the san bernardino ships had a full load
- sx-16 and associated mount, jbox etc
- flir 7500, mount, dovetail,
- full radios pkg
- loud speakers
- crew kits
- mp-5

in other words, for 120, they were loaded.

[heliduck]

While we are on the subject I would appreciate some info from any operators which have experience based figures on the difference in operating costs betwen the EC120/B206. I'm more interested in the time-life components costs reduced to "per hour" rather than fuel etc. Thanks in advance.

[HorizonH]

I'm curous how the EC120 measures up against the B206? How is the EC120 in the utility market? Can you longline out of it?

Thanks

[bayou06]

Speed: EC
Support: Bell (by a big margin)
Baggage: EC (but you sacrifice BIG on payload)
Reliabilty: Bell (by a big margin)
PAX comfort: EC

Our company (offshore operator) has grounded and getting rid of our EC 120s. Just too many problems for the pay off and are replacing them with B206Ls.

[gwelo shamwari]

I work a job where they used to fly the EC. The guys say that they loved the speed and the seats but hated the door handels falling off, or the fancy screens going blank, etc, then the aircraft being grounded for days as EC USA support was not quite up to it.

Ummmm, me thinks we work at the same shop... as where I work. EC120's are parked making fine birds nests and being replaced with sometimes nice and shiny new L4's.

TGZ

[RVDT]

I'll take the lot at 5 bucks each!

[WALLEY2]

Seeking advise on a purchase of a chopper for boat charter (need emergency floats)in the Kimberley Western Australia.

Main criteria
safety
initial cost
running costs
availibility of spares
Pax comfort
hovering capability
re-sale loss after 4 years

Particularly on safety I am unable to get a comprision. The rest is subjective so I would hope I can get advise from pilots who have flown both.

Cheers Mike

[eivissa]

I guess pax comfort isnt a subjective thing in this comparison. The EC120 is way more comfortable, roomier and quieter, but the initial costs will be higher, thats for sure and I am pretty sure the 206 is cheaper to run aswell.
From a pilots view I cant give you more advice, since I have only flown the 120 myself, but from the pax view I'd take the 120 anytime!
Havent heard much good stuff on eurocopter customer support, but afaik that depends mainly on the country you are operating in. Here in germany its great http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

cheers.

[Plakstift]

Hi Mike.

I have flown both for many years (206 more so) and here's my 2 cents.

Safety: Both are extremely safe aircraft.

Initial cost: The EC120 is much more expensive. (Current market)

Running costs: The EC 120 is more expensive

Availability of spares: Bell has an excellent support program worldwide and
Many third party vendors also carry parts. Eurocopter have also been good for me but could be more spotty depending where you are just for the fact that there is a lot less 120s around...

Pax comfort: The EC 120, no questions. It does not even compare.

Hovering capability: depends on so many variables but all things being equal then it's the EC120.

Re-sale loss after 4 years: Again depends what you are comparing. There are so many 206s on the used market and also available for lease that I only flew older 206s. All the EC120 I have ever flown (3) were brand new as there are very few used one.

You can lease an older 206s for a song when compared to an EC120 and for many operators the 206 does a fine job for them. Like many newer helicopter, the EC120 does not make sense financially unless the client's operation procedures requires new equipment and are willing to pay for it.

Many times the will to upgrade to new equipments is there but when the operator shows the customer the numbers then the old stuff is suddenly much more attractive. That's why the Bell's, the Sikorsky 61 and all the other museum pieces are still flying.

If you can afford it or you have client willing to pay for it (make sure it is in writing) then the EC120 is the way to go, for anything else the 206 will do just fine.

[Bergboy]

We have had both here in the mountains, the 120 is just scary. At altitude the tail rotor has very low efficiancy. Yes the 120 has more power, but the tail just sucks it all up.
But yes at sea level, if I could afford it; give me a 120.

[ReverseFlight]

The EC120 is sweet to fly and has good autorotation characteristics but if there's one thing that drives me towards the Bell 206 and that's cracking plastic doors - almost every EC120 I have come into contact with has this problem.

The EC makes a hot girlfriend but the JR is like a trusted wife (or granny).

[Heliringer]

I've heard that the EC120 is a bit of a dog when in a Hot and Humid environment and the 206 will out perform it, is this true?

I really like the look of them but I have not ever had the chance to fly one

[FLY 7]

The EC120 is pretty, but I've also heard negative comments about the tail rotor being ineffective.

[Capt SFB]

G'day Mike,

As your operation will see some pretty high DA's, I reckon the 206 may be the go. In my experience the 120, although a very nice, comfortable aircraft, doesn't like it hot !! You will see the yellow line under the Ng a lot if you try to load it up with either pax or fuel, you wont get off the ground with both if it's over 35 degrees out. It's a typical European design, fine in temperate climes. Ask about a bit about EC's (and Turbomeca's) service, parts availability and general attitude about remote area operators too.......

Cheers,
Capt

[HillerBee]

The Fenestron on the EC120 is very effective, when you fly the aircraft within it's limits (W&B). I fly it regularly in up to 45 knots of wind and have no problems even with hovering downwind or cross wind.

LTE with a Jetranger is a much bigger problem.

[Mr snakey]

can some one tell me were to look for ajet ranger or eurocopter 120b i have looked on av buyer please help or if some one is selling .thanks

[BlenderPilot]

LTE with a Jetranger is a much bigger problem. I would disagree very much, the Long Ranger's III and IV might have problem with lack of tail rotor authority for the power their engines provide, especially at altitude. They do run out of pedal, fancy name "LTE". Those last two under certain circumstances will start spinning while taking off to a hover with the silghtest wind from the wrong side if you are not thinking about Weight, Temp, Altitude and of course, wind.

But the Jet Ranger with the less powerful engine that it has, I would say that it has adequate tail rotor authority. Unless you are not smart, careful or are inexperienced, then you can get yourself into a tight spot by not watching where the wind is coming from. But I wouldn't say it has less pedal authority than most helicopters considering the Power vs. Tail Rotor authority. I know it's just a 17 knot Tail Rotor, but it has also not too much power.

If you fly a Jet Ranger and run out of pedal, it's not really LTE, it's that you are not thinking about the way you are doing things and you are getting sloppy.

Even the Agusta 109E Power runs out of pedal under certain circumstances if you are not careful, the only helicopters that I have flown that seems to have tremendous TR authority are the Bell 407 and the B3, they are almost foolproof, and, in most cases hold the nose where you want it.

Now as for the 120 vs. 206 dillema, just a fact, the 206 will out perform the 120 at Hot and High conditions any day, it will also be cheaper to purchase and operate, and probably give you a bigger operational safety margin as far as single engines go.

The 120 will be much quieter, and more confortable, prettier too.

I fly for the Mexico City police and on hot days, like today, the EC120 will not even attempt to take off with more than 30 mins fuel and two on board from a flat area, then we in a 30 year old 206 can take 3 on board from a confined area with a almost 50 mins worth of fuel. DA today was at times above 10K

[TangoMikeYankee]

Mike,

Have you looked at a Eurocopter AS350BA?
I know the running cost is more than the 206, but you have one to two extra seats.
Australian Aerospace(Eurocopter) backup is good in Aus. Lots of spare parts around for Squirrels.

Are you operating a 206 now?

Cheers
Tim

[Heli-phile]

Interesting to try and compare 2 such different machines.
Its like saying shall I buy a old E type Jag or a E class Mercedes

Both are great machines, both are representative of their era (60's v 90's)

The obvious difference is the cost!! However if I won a competition and had a choice between a New B206 and a new EC120 I would go for the EC120

Higher cruise speed, better/smoother turbulence capability, Baggage space, open cabin, energy absorbing airframe/seats, - all better in the 120, Only real benefit of running a B206 would be cheaper running costs and you need less hangar space for the 2 blade format.
Either way you are a lucky man to have the choice, Do a rating in both and see what you think, with the sums involved its a minor cost.

-Enjoy