Bell 206: JetRanger and LongRanger [Archive] - Page 4

BlenderPilot

16th Dec 2005, 17:59

Hola Kiko,

If you want to mount a hand held camera to a 206, and what you need is just a mount to hold the and isolate vibration there are a couple of options, you can purchase or rent a Tyler mount, they are not to expensive. I knew a guy who was selling a side mounted used one for $ 3,000.00 dollars.

They come in two basic flavors, side mounted and nose mounted, for the nose mount you need high skids. The side mounted ones can also have an option to use gyros to stabilze which work pretty nice. The nose mounted ones are remotely controlled by the cameraman.

But both of these options are for occasional use, like shooting a comercial or doing a movie, if you want a contract with a TV station or similar where you need all weather and time you will need a full ENG installation with a ball gyrostabilized camara which under no circumstances will be cheap. There are a couple of vendors in the US but be really careful who you deal with as some of them are real crooks, they sell stolen technology, and not give you the adecuate support which you will need. I know this experience, as I have flown both systems for years.

There are also two companies here in Mexico that you can rent Tyler mounts for a day or two, nose mount and side mount, gyros or not, if you need phone numbers let me know, PM me your email and I will send you contacts.

In any case you have to take into accout that the gyrostabilized ball mounted cameras used in ENG are not in most cases something you can quickly put on and take out of the helicopter, it takes a long time to configure a helicopter for ENG.

Please let me know if I can be of further assitance.

Saludos

Here are two pictures of me while flying with side mounted Tyler mount, gyrostabilized. It's a movie camera but you can mount anything on it.

http://homepage.mac.com/helipilot/PPRuNe/TakeoffSCW.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/helipilot/PPRuNe/TylerSideMount.jpg

KikoLobo

18th Dec 2005, 22:03

Blender, PM me with more info about the used side tyler mount... If there is a nose one i am interested too.

This will be for temporary one project, but since i am the owner of the project, i might as well benefit from renting this stuff..

Let me know!!

Thank you very much for you help!

Aesir

18th Dec 2005, 22:40

Ohh how I envy you guys getting to fly with doors off :cool:

This is my METAR and it´s pretty good compared to the last few day´s:

BIRK 18-dec-2005 23:00:00 18-dec-2005 22:56:00 METAR 26021G31KT 9999 VCSH SCT036CB BKN043 02/M05 Q0991 SHSN

KikoLobo

19th Dec 2005, 02:34

What's VCSH ??? SH=Showers right? But VC?

And is 9999 the visibility?

Rotor Droop 2

19th Dec 2005, 04:23

Yes, Tyler has a nose mount but it is not stablised. It goes on in about 5 minutes. The middle mount is nice because it does have three gyros you can bolt on.

www.tylermount.com (http://www.tylermount.com)

In North America I believe Panavision is the rental house for Tyler.

Another option is Poly Tech. They make a stabilsed ball camera system similar to the old FLIR systems. It works quite well using a Sony PD170 camera. I recently upgraded ours to a HD camera... They also rent systems but I do not know the price.

Poly Tech (http://www.polytech-us.com/)

If you need any more information let me know... We operate a full time ENG machine as well as I bolt on at least two other camera mounts a month.

KikoLobo

19th Dec 2005, 06:32

Looks good to me... Do you know the price for a basic system for a B206 without camera? (I want to put a sony FX1 HDDV cam here).

Aesir

19th Dec 2005, 06:38

I knew a guy who was selling a side mounted used one for $ 3,000.00 dollars.

If KikoLobo doesn´t want to buy it then I´m interested. PM me if that mount is still avaialable?

VCSH. I think they mean ´vicinity´ showers and yes 9999 is 10km or better visibilty.

alouette

19th Dec 2005, 14:12

Hi,

I look for a 206L4.xls spreadsheet for CG calculations.

Thanks!!!

Alouette:ok:

Jack Carson

19th Dec 2005, 16:23

If you provide an e mail address I will forward the excel spread sheet that we use. You can substitute actual mass and moment info for you aircraft.
Have a Great Day
mail to: [email protected]

paco

20th Dec 2005, 01:18

There's a 206L one at www.electrocution.com/aviation that you can modify - don't think it needs much, though

Phil

Spunk

20th Dec 2005, 03:51

I knew a guy who was selling a side mounted used one for $ 3,000.00 dollars

A Tylermount for $ 3000??? I take it for $ 3500. :D

Spunk (being on vacation on the Maledives)

Arm out the window

20th Dec 2005, 06:24

Thanks, paco - great site.

:ok:

Aesir

20th Dec 2005, 18:58

It´s sold.

Do they still ban helicopter´s on the Maldives? Heard they did that after B-212 crash. Is all flying still done on those old Dash-6-100 & 200 Twinotters?

alouette

21st Dec 2005, 04:11

Thanks for the info:ok:

Alouette

sarboy w****r

23rd Dec 2005, 14:17

Hi,

I am trying to find a copy of a B206 transition manual. I understand that Bell do not sell it on its own, and the link that was published on this thread some years ago no longer works. Specifically, I am looking for one that will cover a B206 II, with Seco Fuel Control. Can anyone help?

Thanks,

SBW

sarboy w****r

23rd Dec 2005, 14:22

Hi,

I am trying to find a copy of a B206 transition manual. I understand that Bell do not sell it on its own. Specifically, I am looking for one that will cover a B206 II, with Seco Fuel Control. Can anyone help?

Thanks,

SBW

Aesir

23rd Dec 2005, 18:56

This is pretty good information.

http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/aircraft/commercial/pdf/206B3_PDB_low.pdf (http://)

Fly smart, fly Bell :ok:

- I´m aiming for the customer of the year award from Bell :p hehe.

Spunk

24th Dec 2005, 12:56

Hi Aesir,

yep, haven't seen a single helicopter down there. All the shuttling is either done by boat or by those Twin Otters.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v424/Captain407/RIMG0018.jpg

From what I've heard it was more than just one helicopter that crashed and thus resulting in ban of helicopters.

As far as I remember they were all MI 8s operated by a Hungrian operator.

McHover

24th Dec 2005, 15:02

Yep, that's right.

I spent a long hot noisy day filming from one operated by Hummingbird about 12 years ago. I remember our downdraft broke the top mast of the unfortunate Maldivean dhoni that we had positioned artistically off the island that we were shooting! Ooops, sorry about that....

I think we also blew a lot of sand into the cocktails.

No memory of the crew speaking any English. There were a lot of hand signals.

McH

Spunk

25th Dec 2005, 06:07

Google brought up the following:

http://ebushpilot.com/images/mil8-1.jpg

When I arrived in Male in February of 1997 there were about 82 resorts of various sizes and grades and most of them were serviced by boat. About 8 resorts were serviced by helicopter off 5 active helipads, and Maldivian Air Taxi’s fleet of Twin Otters serviced about 20.Hummingbird had no exclusive floatplane transfer contracts for tourists, but shared several resort transfers with the helicopters. This was the way they intended to get their feet wet in the transition from exclusively helicopter to exclusively day time sea plane transfers. The helicopter contract was going to be continued, however, for the nighttime transfers. Several of the largest airlines, specifically Singapore Airlines, and Malaysian Airlines arrived too late in the evening for using the seaplanes. The helicopters had special DCA permission to carry out night special-VFR transfers as long as they met certain criteria.

Note from the Editor. Hummingbird Helicopters became Hummingbird Island Airways, and Hummingbird Island Airways no longer exists. It has been sold out, and reincarnated as Trans Maldivian Airways.

http://ebushpilot.com/images/cv-hid_5.jpg

Source: www.ebushpilot.com

At some place there is a second helicopter operator being mentioned: Seagull Airways
A picture of one of their helicopters shows another Mi helicopter with a Russian registration.

chopperdr

25th Dec 2005, 15:43

kiko lobo: we have a nose mount, faa stc'd for the bell single series, as well as nightsun mount and door kits. check out
www.meekeraviation.com
pm if you have any questions
thanks
dr

Aesir

25th Dec 2005, 16:14

Your site is saved in favorites ; )

Liked the "lift blocks" didn´t know about that. I may get the pin kit for the doors though I would prefer to get a sliding door kit for my aft L/H side.

If anyone knows of a kit for sale used then I´m interested.

chopperdr

25th Dec 2005, 16:25

aesir: will keep my eyes open for the sliding door. couple other items that slid across my desk this week are
- wescam 16ds
- 4 ec-120's ex-san berandino county sheriff

as for the lift blocks, a very low cost method of getting addtional ground clearance. intially done for LAPD when they had bell 407's.

merry christmas to all
dr

Aesir

25th Dec 2005, 16:54

Hmm looks like I could mount your nosemount with the wire cutters installed?

Do you know if that´s possible on the 206B? I don´t want to take my wire cutters off.

http://rath.smugmug.com/photos/49497710-M.jpg

chopperdr

25th Dec 2005, 17:16

aesir:
- yes you can install with wire strike on your 206. most important on the JR is your weight and balance, whats the payload / camera weight?

- also how did you the picture to show up. telstar walked me through the process, copied and pasted exactly the way he sent back the image, no joy. any advice

dr

try this one more time, could be the rum balls with the \"no smoking\" sign on the tin. hey its christmas day
dr

http://rath.smugmug.com/photos/49497700-M.jpg

http://rath.smugmug.com/photos/49497704-M.jpg

http://rath.smugmug.com/photos/49497710-M.jpg

http://rath.smugmug.com/photos/49497715-M.jpg

Simon853

17th Jan 2006, 21:32

Anyone know where I can get a Bell 206 (B3 ideally) Pilot Operating Handbook? I just want one for study reference and simulator practice.

Cheers,

Si

Vfrpilotpb

18th Jan 2006, 15:25

Simon,

Some where in my Island of files and cabinets I am certain I have a copy albeit they were photcopied from an original a few years ago, I'll look for them and if found will Pm you for your address, fingers crossed

Regards PetetR-B
Vfr

Choppersquad

18th Jan 2006, 17:03

gents
is there a safety course outside of the bell factory that is as good.i understand you would not see the factory .but based on the rest of the course .

thanks
cs

Ian Corrigible

26th Jan 2006, 19:59

On checking my Big Book of Egg Beaters, I see that the 206 is 40 years young this month (first flight Jan 10th 1966). Did Bell hold any kind of fly-in to celebrate this milestone ?

I/C

gadgetguru

27th Jan 2006, 05:13

perhaps they are too busy producing the 'all gold version' for the not too distant 50th anniversary celebrations ;)

Head Turner

27th Jan 2006, 08:07

It's my 40th aniversary of helicopter flying and that passed without any celebration. I am just happy to still be flying.

B Sousa

27th Jan 2006, 10:20

Head Turner, you are old. My 35th year of helicopters this month, and what am I doing?? In the Florida Everglades on one of the older Jet rangers (#1045) with Fixed Floats landing in the Swamps............

Wunper

27th Jan 2006, 11:10

Here are some pictures of the late great Joe Mashman :cool: demonstrating Jetranger Numero Uno N8590F at Middle Wallop UK date around '67.
Note the narrow instrument binnacle & the certification category appears to be "Provisional Experimental"
The machine looks pretty, I wonder where it is now? It deserves a place in the Smithsonian IMHO.
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d107/wunper/N8590F_Number1.jpg
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d107/wunper/JoeMashman_UK.jpg
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d107/wunper/N8590FMashman_Dad.jpg
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d107/wunper/Jetranger1.jpg
PS I hope this doesn't degenerate into an LTE bunfight;)

Flying Lawyer

27th Jan 2006, 14:38

Wunper

Is that you standing by the Jetranger in the 3rd picture?

FL

SASless

27th Jan 2006, 15:39

If Bristow bought it...it is still flying in Nigeria. They had one there that had been in Abu Dhabi then Iran then Nigeria...it was advertised as being an Executive Transport in Nigeria....but still had the gouges in the upholstry from the shovels and picks the geologists carried along while doing bush work in Iran in the mid-70's.

I wonder how many pilot's backs the Jetranger ruined in its history?

Makila

27th Jan 2006, 16:34

Bristow has no Jetrangers in Nigeria at this time. Sister company
Pan African operates 407/206L/412 out of Escravos for Chevron.

Bristow operating S76C+/A++, 212/412, AS332l/EC155.
New C+'s/412EP's awaiting customs clearance to replace A++/212.

Jetranger pilot seats are certainly uncomfortable!!!! - ouch....

Wunper

27th Jan 2006, 16:36

FL
That would place my age at over 90! Its Daddy Wunper.
Back in those days I looked a lot like the chap on the left in this AB206 phot taken at Blackbushe during Farnborough week 1968.
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d107/wunper/JetrangerBlackbushe1968.jpg
PM me if you want more info
Cheers!
W

CyclicRick

27th Jan 2006, 20:48

I used to regularly fly a 1967 (nearly as old as me but not quite) 206 when I was working out in Germany, apparently it was bought from the UK and was also one of the first in Europe, I can't remember the serial number but I could get it. It's now registered as D-HAFA.

Hang on while I get me spotters anorak off...:sad:

Hilico

27th Jan 2006, 21:30

Proof if proof were needed that, along with Catherine Deneuve, you can still be sexy over 40...(sigh...my first!)

vaqueroaero

28th Jan 2006, 01:25

I fly a very nicely restored 1969 model with the owner. 206A with hydraulic pedals. Serial no. 437. Flies great, but that C18.................

PPRUNE FAN#1

28th Jan 2006, 02:41

A...what's that?...windshield wiper?! On a 206A?? And rain gutters too, but then it is Britain...
People who were not around back then simply cannot appreciate the effect that the 206 had on the scene. There was nothing like it. It was gorgeous when helicopters were anything but gorgeous. It was sleek and sexy whereas its non-"Jet" namesake (the 47J Ranger) was bulbous and frumpy.
Look at how clean the ship in the black and white photos is...nose poking up in the air like that on those low skids. How jaunty! Clean, smooth intakes, no sliding rear windows and no fresh air vents in the nose! Just beautiful. You *know* Mashman had to be proud of that bird. It is odd that the 206 fuselage with its peculiar combination of curves and angles still looks so good, even now. But it does. Every time I see one it turns me on in a way no jellybean EC-120 ever could.
The maroon machine in the colour photo has the second-series wide panel, which I always liked because it put the power gauges (torque and temp) right in front of you instead of over on the copilot's side.
The picture in my hand says "Aug 4, 1969." It is of the back of my father's head and the windshield frame of 206A N4726R with the south shore of Long Island, New York beyond. Had to be an early one (but it had the wide panel). Funny to think back at how good a pilot my father was...very smooth and confident even though it was his first time in a 206 as well. There is even the requisite picture of a scrawny 13 year-old Pprune Fan sitting in the pilot's seat after we shut down, controls in hand, pretending, dreaming. Little did I know back then how very many hours I would spend in just such a pose, doing it for money with the skids off the ground.
Wow, I hadn't thought about those pictures in a long, long time. Thanks for the memories, Wunper. And happy birthday JetRanger!

heliRoto

28th Jan 2006, 04:21

I flew the OH 58 A for the US Army. C18 engine and small tail rotor. It became my first wife. A few years back I flew N60PH for a sumer in Southeast Alaska. I think an old PHI machine. It is s/n 304 built 1969. It had been updated to a BIII but still had the boosted tailrotor. I flew it from Ketchikan along the Gulf of Alaska to Kenai and back. It is in Astoria Oregon last I knew. I saw it as I was driving through and stopped to meet the new owner and give it a hug. I was at Bell in Texas and asked one of the reps why they didn't do something about the seat. The reply was "When they built it they had no idea anyone would fly it that much." I said "Well I do so fix it." I found the Oregon Aero 206 seat is a good investment. I mostly fly a Bell 430 these days. The company still has a couple of BIIIs and two 205A++s that I get to fly now and again. When I get in the BIII I still get a tingle. On another story. At Bells new plant in Aliance Texas they have a huge hangar. On Monday they have customer night and invite everyone for drinks etc. They give out awards for lots of hours in Bell product etc. In the hangar was the company jet, a 609 tiltrotor and 429 mockups and a real AB139. Back in the corner was a cherry Bell 47. Every single person in the place was gathered around the 47 telling stories of back in the day. Everyone puts a card in a fish bowl and they draw a name for a ride in the 47. I did not get it but offered the winner $100 US for his seat. Thats right he went for a ride. Thanks for that!

Jack Carson

28th Jan 2006, 09:59

How many Bell 206's including L's and Agusta built machiines have been manufactured since 1967? Were any manufactured at other than the US, Canadian and Italian facilities?

Heliport

28th Jan 2006, 10:05

How to post pictures. (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=145070)

H.

Heliport

28th Jan 2006, 10:21

I can't vouch for accuracy, but I found this history of the Jetranger series on the net.

206 OH-4A : light observation helicopter (1962 US Army)
206A JetRanger : multi-purpose light helicopter (1966)
206A TH-57A SeaRanger : basic training helicopter(1968 US Navy)
206A OH-58A Kiowa : light observation helicopter (1968 US Army)
206A OH-58B Kiowa : light observation helicopter (1976 Austria)
206B JetRanger II : multi-purpose light helicopter (1971)
206B-1 OH-58A Kiowa : light observation helicopter (1971 Australia) 44 of 56 built by CAC
206B-3 JetRanger III : multi-purpose light helicopter (1977)
206B-3 TH-67A Creek : basic training helicopter (19?? US Army)
206L LongRanger : multi-purpose light helicopter (1973)
206L-1 LongRanger II : multi-purpose light helicopter (1978)
206L-1 TexasRanger : multi-role military helicopter (1980)
206L-3 LongRanger III : multi-purpose light helicopter (1982)
206L-4 LongRanger IV : multi-purpose light helicopter (19??)
206LT TwinRanger : multi-purpose light helicopter, production version of Tridair Gemini ST(19??)
400 TwinRanger : multi-purpose light helicopter (1984)
406 OH-58D Kiowa Warrior : light attack and scout helicopter (1983 US Army)
406CS Combat Scout : light attack and multi-role helicopter (1983 private venture)
406CS MH-58D : light attack and multi-role helicopter (1990 Saudi Arabia)
407 : multi-purpose light helicopter (1994)

Agusta AB 206A-1 JetRanger : multi-purpose light helicopter (1967)
Agusta AB 206B JetRanger II : multi-purpose light helicopter (1972)
Agusta AB 206B JetRanger III : multi-purpose light helicopter (197?)
Agusta AB 206L LongRanger : multi-purpose light helicopter (197?)

Tridair Gemini ST : conversion of LongRanger with two 450 shp Allison 250-C20R turbine engines

H.

rotornut

28th Jan 2006, 11:10

The original 206 OH-4A was not quite as pretty...

http://tri.army.mil/LC/CS/csa/oh4a001.jpg

http://tri.army.mil/LC/CS/csa/oh4a001.jpg

MPR

28th Jan 2006, 12:21

Right, on with the anorak..... we do have our uses sometimes.....

CyclicRick - D-HAFA was previously G-HELO, G-BAZN, 9J-RIN but started life as ZS-HCJ. c/n 124, a 1967 machine.

First registered in UK as G-BAZN on 01-06-1973 to Autair Ltd.
Then on 08-08-1973 to Somerton-Rayner Helicopters Ltd.
Then on 17-08-1983 to Blue Star Ship Management Ltd.
Then finally on 07-08-1987 to Closeautos Ltd.

It then changed reg to G-HELO on 09-11-1987 to Surrey Helicopter Hire Ltd. (I think that Closeauto Ltd. & Surrey Helicopter Hire Ltd. are one & the same company), they then sold the aircraft to Germany on 27-08-1992.

Oldest flying JetRanger (Agusta-Bell) in UK currently is G-AVII that has been with Bristow from new since 10-03-1967.

G-AVII on G-INFO (http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodules/ginfo/ginfo_photo.aspx?regmark=G-AVII&imgname=G-AVII001&imgtype=jpg)
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/GImages/G-AVII001.jpg

Oldest flying Bell JetRanger is G-GAND which is ex Bristow (G-AWMK) a 1968 machine.
My shot of G-GAND on G-INFO (http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodules/ginfo/ginfo_photo.aspx?regmark=G-GAND&imgname=G-GAND002&imgtype=jpg)

Highest time 206 in UK is G-BXKL with more than 23,000 hours. It looks as fresh as new.
My shot of G-BXKL taken in 2004 (http://www.pbase.com/mikerice/image/40413338)

Aesir

28th Jan 2006, 14:03

How many Bell 206's including L's and Agusta built machiines have been manufactured since 1967? Were any manufactured at other than the US, Canadian and Italian facilities?

Bell´s webpage say´s that 7300 JetRanger´s have been built.

I fly and operate a 1970 Agusta Bell 206B (an A model converted to BII), SN 8190 registration TF-HHK, ex D-HAUF, ex OE-BXN.

Great aircraft and like someone said it´s still proof that someone can look sexy at 40. As a matter of fact I myself turned 40 on jan 2. :D

Happy birthday JetRanger.

http://iserit.greennet.gl/waltere/DSC00458_resize_resize.JPG

Aesir

29th Jan 2006, 03:53

I used to take great delight in hurtling up behind Army or Marine Bell 47's in SW England and overtaking them whilst in the flare.

Hehe..

My JetRanger would cruise at 117 to 118 knots on the low skids at 80-81% Q, now with the high skids 110 kts is the norm.

That´s a pretty good speed for this old helicopter.

Creaser

29th Jan 2006, 04:08

Read recently that San Deigo police had clocked 26000 hrs on one of their Jet Rangers.

Creaser

heliRoto

29th Jan 2006, 05:29

I flew s/n 1095 a 1973 BIII in the late 90's. It was a tour machine in Hawaii. The first flight I took in it was a checkout with the owner and at the time it was over 18,000 hours. All of them flown by one man, the owner. He bought it new. I thought it a great privilege. It was a great ride. It had over 22,000 when they put it out to pasture. Actually into a barn. Does anyone know the highest time Jet Ranger, flying or not?

heliRoto

29th Jan 2006, 05:47

Just a correction as I thought about it s/n1095 was actually a 206 BII but had the C20B.

albatross

29th Jan 2006, 06:26

We once had C-FRBR a 206 which was the 7th jetranger built.
Anyone remember the old 206 A converted to B.?
Great A/C low APSW - you could sling 1000 Lbs+ easy.
The A with the C-18 were very " Limited " in the summer.
Best of times! You learned to be as smooth as possible on the controls.

Aesir

29th Jan 2006, 17:03

Heliroto.

I believe that Edwards & Associates´s B-206B, SN 220, Reg N206BH has over 40000 hrs on it.

Wunper

29th Jan 2006, 19:15

PPRune fan#1
I totally agree with your sentiments on the machine it was "where it was at" in the latter part of the 60s and they still look good today.
Doublecheck the handwriting on the back of that photo of the 206A your Dad flew I think it was this machine N4706R s/n 256. This pic was taken the same time as the other colour one I posted, Blackbushe UK Sept '68. I detect a whiff of marketing spin on the declared figures on the billboard!
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d107/wunper/BellJetrangerBlackbushe1968.jpg
Sadly it's listed as written off from the Belgian register
OO-WTC Bell 206A Jet Ranger > 206B Jet Ranger II 256 N4706R,OO-WTC,F-BSTQ,HB-XNO . . . . » [w/o]
Cheers
W

inthegreen

29th Jan 2006, 19:43

Papillon in the Grand Canyon had jetranger s/n 006 when I was there 10 years ago. I don't know who originally owned it. It's probably still there. Good ole copter 3. It was an "A" converted to a BIII, with the updated panel and all. The only thing it retained was the boosted pedals.
It made for an excellent sling aircraft, because it was very light and had great tail rotor authority.

John Eacott

1st Feb 2006, 02:52

We thought our s/n 528 was going well, but s/n 048 is still operating in Queensland as VH-BRQ :cool: The older airframes certainly seem better to handle, lighter and more responsive, as long as they're BIII upgrades :ok:

As with most Bristow drivers, AVII was the first that I flew, with horror and trepidation as we went real IMC out of Redhill, in the middle of winter :eek:

Head Turner

1st Feb 2006, 11:36

That Bell and Agusta between them have produced 7300 of all 206 models is a fantastic achievment and many happy pilots (if there are 10 pilots per helicopter over the period of the life of each one then there is/has been 73,000 happy JetRanger pilots)

P2bleed

11th Feb 2006, 08:46

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

11th Feb 2006, 09:30

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

Heliport

11th Feb 2006, 09:43

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

11th Feb 2006, 11:39

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

11th Feb 2006, 12:33

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

11th Feb 2006, 23:50

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

12th Feb 2006, 04:27

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

12th Feb 2006, 08:53

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

12th Feb 2006, 09:50

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

12th Feb 2006, 10:11

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

12th Feb 2006, 11:57

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

12th Feb 2006, 13:24

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

12th Feb 2006, 13:44

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

12th Feb 2006, 14:21

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

12th Feb 2006, 15:45

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

13th Feb 2006, 08:30

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.

Choppersquad

13th Feb 2006, 22:41

gents

can you tell me the difference between an agusta/bell 206 and a bell 206
i have noticed a differene in second hand prices as the bell 206 seems to cost more,also is there a build difference in the machines .

your thoughts.

choppersquad.

GoodGrief

13th Feb 2006, 22:50

The Augustas are not allowed to be imported to the USA, so if you want to sell yours you cut yourself out of the biggest market...
So nobody wants them, hence the lower price.

407 too

13th Feb 2006, 22:57

i stand to be corrected, but i beleive the 206a had the c18 alison

used to fly one, but it had been upgraded to the c20b

was lighter than the 206b by about 350 lbs after mods. that virtually made it a 206b, but with the agusta airframe

Choppersquad

13th Feb 2006, 22:58

good point but what is the build quality difference or is there any.

407 too

13th Feb 2006, 23:00

will have to defer that to the tin-bashers out there:D

Aesir

14th Feb 2006, 09:50

206A is not necessarily a Agusta!

The designation for Agusta Bell is AB206 (A or B & II or III).

I have a AB206B and it´s right they will not receive support by Bell in the America however they receive excellent support by Bell in Europe and the rest of the world.

It can very well be that they are cheaper in some places but some prefer them over the Bell´s mostly due to better workmanship, corrosion protection all hard points and camera floor door are standard and they are usually much lighter. Mine is 1760 Lbs on high skid.

In Scandinavian and most European countries they are certainly preferred over the Bell´s helicopters if you can get them in similar condition.

Hidden Agenda

14th Feb 2006, 10:28

What is the difference? Ground School courses are in Italy rather than Texas! Enough said?

Hope the new Bell canteen is better than the last one…but I doubt that Texan wine has improved any!

Unless you want to sell in the US (and probably one or two other countries) the Agusta built machine is well worth considering.

It gets my vote!!

Choppersquad

14th Feb 2006, 15:26

aesir
i have a agusta bell 111 machine.we must have a e mail based on parts/prices etc.

choppersquad

206 jock

14th Feb 2006, 15:27

My machine is an AB206A/B!
A 1970 Agusta Bell 206A, converted to a B with a C20 engine (being upgraded to a C20B in 5 hours time, when the turbine needs a new #2 wheel and the explosion ring AD doing:{. Hope my wife doesn't read this. If she does, Happy Valentines Day)
It's light, fast (a good 10 knots faster than my friend's 206BIII on high skids). and although it has the older 'T' panel, I prefer the fact that the key engine instruments (TOT, N1, N2 etc) are bang in front of you, not way off left.
Yes, it can't be sold in the USA, but can anyone honestly ever forsee a time when it will be worth sending machines from Europe back to the States?

Choppersquad

14th Feb 2006, 15:34

can you honestly say why you would sell in the first place.
the wife or the ab206 do you have to even think about the answer.

choppersquad

206 jock

14th Feb 2006, 15:40

I think it's the size of the bill that I don't want her to know about! The parts should be about $20k (wheel and explosion rings), plus labour.

But as anyone who has ever sent their turbine away.......when they open her up, it will be BAAAAAAD news. There will be nozzles and other wheels that are showing signs of cracking etc etc.

Anyone out there got good recommendations about JAA-approved turbine shops to send it to? USA or UK?

Heli_Sticktime

14th Feb 2006, 18:59

Aesir

14th Feb 2006, 19:11

206 jock.. what is the serial no on your machine, mine is also a AB206A/B s/n 8190!

Choppersquad.. Parts..?? what parts! ohh you mean time liimited parts because nothing ever breaks on the darn thing, unscheduled maintenance is unknown to me after we fixed the Janitrol heater ; )

My machine had just had an engine overhaul when I bought it and it was done through a German JAR-145 shop. I´ll PM you with the name and you could ask for quote. My experience for shops is to stay clear of maintenance facility´s from a certain country, they stick it to you, I´ll PM what I mean.

Luckily I just dodged the bullet on the containment ring AD, now it´s due at next engine repair or 2011 whichever is first.

Mine would do 117 kts on low skids and now about 110 kts on high skids @ 80% Q. What speeds are you seeing on your machine 206 jock?

206 jock

14th Feb 2006, 19:58

Mine's s/n 8242. Does about 115knots @80%Tq, down a bit since I've had a Nightscanner fitted.

Lucky you on the containment ring. Boy does that hurt! But I've heard that it's really affecting resale values.

Thanks for the PM - have replied

strickers

14th Feb 2006, 23:07

Choppersquad,

Not sure from reading this thread whether you actually got an answer to your question

Having done my endoresement 5 years ago in an Augusta/Bell and done a few ferries in the Bell 206 the panel is definately preferable in Bell. I do remember way back my instructor babbling on about the differences and remember that they were quite important but that is as much as I remember, if you want to email me I can pass his details on to you.

Graviman

15th Feb 2006, 02:47

Haven't seen the article, but it makes sense. Many accidents seem to happen near the ground (microbursts, engine failure etc), so the airbag would give more options. Are they doppler radar deploying it?

I suggested in another thread the idea of a servo in the collective to reduce auto entry response time to zero. The normal HV curve assumes about two seconds for the pilot to register the problem and respond. Servo could be nothing more than a solonoid released spring, that came in using same circuit as triggers buzzer in R22. Pilot could easilly override spring for landing flare.

Mart

Aesir

15th Feb 2006, 07:31

Bell 206 the panel is definately preferable in Bell.

The type of panel is dependent of year of manufacture is it not! I have flown two different AB206B built in 1973-4 and they had new style panel.

I prefer the old style, better visibility.

Aesir

15th Feb 2006, 07:35

Yes I saw the article. I understood that it was not 206 specific but rather they used a 206 as a testbed for the idea.

I don´t know if it will sell, if the airbags doubled as emergency floatation gear and didn´t cost much or weight more than floats yes, then I would consider it for my 206.

strickers

16th Feb 2006, 00:09

I can be corrected on this one but I thought the difference was between the manufacturers as the two machines I have flown are fairly similar in age. But when a machine is over 30 years old I know that that can be irrelevant also.

I will attempt to contact the man who knows all and get a definitive answer. I may even have photos of the 2 panels storred deep in the bowels of my pc.

SiClick

16th Feb 2006, 08:55

I was involved in a school that operated both types the AB206 and the B206, both were B3's. The engines were identical, but there were some small differences in the instrumentation, and the radio fit. The main difference was we could fit Bell parts to any aircraft, but we were not supposed to fit Augusta parts to the Bell aircraft. Other than for reason's of litigation in the event of an accident no-one could give me a satisfactory reason why.
Bell parts were easy to obtain and cheap, wheras Augusta were unreliable, slow and expensive.
Hope that helps

Aser

16th Feb 2006, 18:04

http://www.rafael.co.il/web/rafnew/news/news-141205.htm

http://www.rafael.co.il/web/rafnew/images/reaps-pre.jpg

Regards.
Aser

Heli_Sticktime

16th Feb 2006, 18:44

Thanks Aser
HS:ok:

Colonal Mustard

16th Feb 2006, 19:03

Anyone have any comments or first hand gen on the testing that's been going on regarding the fitment of airbags below the fuselage of the 206 to take up the brunt of impact in a crash, see page 12 of the Feb Rotor & Wing mag

Oh great......survive the impact only for the blades to kill you...discharge those first me thinks:ouch:

albatross

16th Feb 2006, 20:21

"So Capt, can you explain what happened after the engine quit?":E

"Well things were going great up until that first big bounce! It got a little weird after that!":confused:

nigelh

16th Feb 2006, 23:04

I am not aware of any reason not to fit Agusta parts to a Bell outside USA , certainly they can be sourced at far lower prices. Eastern Atlantic at Shoreham have got a hangar full of 206 parts including c18 and C20 engines. My old 206 was an AB very reliable and a third of the price of running an AS350, thats for sure !

McGowan

8th Mar 2006, 00:25

Anybody out there going to the Bell Customer Training Acadamy at Alliance Airfield the week of the 20th to 24th of March06?
I'm doing the 407 pilots course.
Be great to catch up with like minded people for a couple of thousand beers...........

canterbury crusader

11th Mar 2006, 06:28

Has anybody ever known the cyclic in the B206 to stiffen up, not a hydraulics problem but to do with the teflon uni ball?
any help would be appreciated

Arm out the window

11th Mar 2006, 07:15

If it was the uniball, wouldn't the hydraulics isolate you from it? Maybe it's just something in the control runs from the stick itself up to the servos, or in the cyclic friction.

canterbury crusader

11th Mar 2006, 08:05

I am 100% positive it is in the uni ball but unsure why. It developed rather quickly, you can just feel it starting to grab (ever so slighty, not silky smooth as is normal with 206) with the hyraulics on.
PS. Not flying it until I have had a chat to the engineer just seeing if it has happened to anyone else

munchkins

11th Mar 2006, 08:06

Normal wear and tear requires the uniball to be checked for "breakaway" and the shims adjusted accordingly. If this procedure has been done recently, you could experience a stiff cyclic with the hydraulics off, but highly unlikely with the hydraulics on. If you have had an engineer/mechanic make an adjustment on the mixing bellcrank, you will definately experience feedback through the cyclic. Ask me how I know. To the best of my knowledge the mixing bellcrank rarely requires any maintenance,

canterbury crusader

11th Mar 2006, 08:14

the reason im not to keen to fly it is because i can barely move the cyclic with the hydraulics off. there would be almost no chance of keeping it upright if the hyd fails. with hyd on it is almost normal, almost.
thanks for the help

HeliEng

11th Mar 2006, 08:24

I would like to say that your swashplate needs re-shimming, but usually they go slack not tight.

How quickly has this come on? Do you fly this particular machine a lot???

sprocket

11th Mar 2006, 08:25

The uniball can stiffen up if the friction has been set on the 'high' side of the limit, particularly with the newer type matarial used in later balls (going back a few years though).

While you are flying the ball heats up normally with use causing the friction to increase markedly (I believe up to 80lbs breakaway). If the friction has been adjusted recently (300hrly) it may need rechecking.

... and yes, noticable even with hydraulics on.

CC When do you notice the stiff cyclic? Is it after flying? Or during start? Do you have the normal few millimetres of loosness in the stick before you start?

munchkins

11th Mar 2006, 08:27

I have seen the teflon on the uniball worn to the point of bear metal. This was due to incorrect adjustments to the shim pack. The shims are "pealable" and it's very easy to peal more from one side than the other, thus ending up with more friction on one half of the uniball. When your engineer checks the shim pack on both sides make sure he has his micrometer handy. This is critical!

beetlenut

11th Mar 2006, 08:36

Had something happen like this on a 206b3. First thought I was imagining things as the effect was of such a short duration. Especially on transition to the hover and heavy the hydraulics would become "transparent" and loads on the cyclic and collective made things exciting. You could pick up fly a circuit or to another airport and nil probs, all hyd checks would be without issue. Make a faster than normal app or be heavy and the fun would start.
Engineers traced to a dirty hyd filter that would intimitantly block/unblock meaning the bypass would open/close and the hydraulics would work/not. One of those wonderful faults that our engineers had never seen before.

cheers

canterbury crusader

11th Mar 2006, 08:42

munchkins

11th Mar 2006, 08:48

relatively new to this machine but not to the B206, Im not moving the cyclic enough to heat anything up but its probably worth looking into. unsure of machines history. the cyclic isnt stiff at any stage with hydraulics on but you can just feel little jolts as it catches and releases as it is moved. I have noticed the problem worsen in about 40 min flight time.
Now you have confused me. You say the cyclic isn't stiff at any stage with the hydrauilcs on and then mention the problem is worse after about 40 minutes of flight time??

canterbury crusader

11th Mar 2006, 08:59

My appologies,

I should have said the problem developed in about 40min flight time, and yes it is not stiff with the hyd on, It feels like the cyclic is binding (although not stiffening or affecting control in any way). After turning the machine off i moved the cyclic around and you can hear rubbing noises coming from the uni ball,

Im trying to descride this as best i can, just feel sorry for the engineer

munchkins

11th Mar 2006, 09:13

First thing is not to feel sorry for your engineer. His job is to ensure that the 206 strapped to your a$$ is 100% airworthy. If you can hear noises coming from the swashplate/uniball, get your engineer to pull the unit apart and check it out thoroughly before your next flight. Please let us know what you find.

canterbury crusader

11th Mar 2006, 09:21

will do,
I feel sorry for him trying to work out what im saying, the noise is the same noise i have heard after a new uni ball has been put in on another machine and described as "tight but will loosen up" which is what has got me concerned.

thanks for the advice

GLSNightPilot

11th Mar 2006, 14:52

The uniball is on the pilot side of the hydraulics, so it can cause stiffness problem unrelated to the hydraulics. I've seen this problem several times, almost always related to buildup of dirt and crud in the joint. The teflon may be in good shape, but the crud in there can cause stiffness in the cyclic. It shouldn't be dangerous, because you can overcome it, but maintenance should be able to clean the joint easily enough.

BlenderPilot

11th Mar 2006, 15:11

If the tightness is even in all the range of movement disregard this, but if the bumps into something moving the control sideways and then it gets stiff, but the rest is kind of normal, then it's the mixer at the bottom of the "broom closet" behind you, one of the bolts is too tight.

Either way, don't fly until you figure out what is going on, even if the problem might not be critical, you will be distracted by it an it will get your thought process thinking of something else.

up and go

11th Mar 2006, 16:00

[QUOTE=GLSNightPilot],The uniball is on the pilot side of the hydraulics

Is it on the pilots side???? of the hydraulics..I thought the controls come up through the Broom closet to the hydraulics then to the swashplate.

sprocket

11th Mar 2006, 20:47

up and go: GLS might be referring to the 'ball' at the base of the cyclic stick where the friction mechanism works.

Although only speculation I'd still be saying there is a high friction setting in the s/plate uniball, especially if it occurs after a certain period of flight .... but as beetles has added, a clogging hyd. filter may be a possibility.

John Eacott

20th Mar 2006, 06:58

Does anyone know where I can find a ski basket to fit a Bell JetRanger? Looking for one for the Australian ski season, only a few months away: how time flies when you're having fun :)

PM or e mail [email protected] , please. Or post here, of course........:ok:

Heliport

20th Mar 2006, 07:28

With 84°F/29°C forecast for the end of the week, it must seem odd planning for the skiing season, John. :)

Heliport

BigMike

20th Mar 2006, 11:41

Hi John. Give the guys at the Helicopter Line in NZ a call. While they don't use 206's anymore, they used to have quite a few, and used them for heli-skiing in the old days before the Squirrel came along. They should be able to point you in the right direction.
There phone number in Queenstown is: +64 3 442 3034
Keith Miles? is the CP I think.

John Eacott

21st Mar 2006, 04:28

BM,

Thanks, no luck there unfortunately: any other leads, anyone?

rotorboy

21st Mar 2006, 18:23

John,
There is always Dart.. but the baskets are heavy and have a reduced vne. I dont know what it is like in OZ but in the states you can get a flight approval 337. Check this out, it is a fabricated ski rack for the 206. it is alum. welded and mounted across the skid tubes like a basket , , real light, skis secured by bungees. Classic helicopters in SLC UT uses them. Firepilot, may have better pic's than this , it is the only one I could find on the web.

Its a pretty slick setup.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/jfkak/skirack.jpg

The other option would be a fiberglass pod like the one on the Astar I flew last summer. It weighs 65 pounds and has no vne, it is a 337 too..
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v298/jfkak/montucky052.jpg

RB:ok:

R22DRIVER

21st Mar 2006, 19:01

Any more room in that pod! :D

topendtorque

21st Mar 2006, 19:30

verrry neat,---pop-up-boobs!
and in the other--ice cold bud????

such delights-- day-ops only
night gropers---- off limits

R22DRIVER

22nd Mar 2006, 05:10

I suspect to get the popouts you have to press the button in a special way!:eek:

CYHeli

28th Mar 2006, 11:20

John, try this link
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1644240#post1644240

There is a great picture posted there by 407 Driver. He may be able to help.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/dsmctighe/ALX2.jpg

CYHeli.

407 Driver

28th Mar 2006, 12:56

John, your recently retired buddy (DSW) may be able to help you, as most of the 206's are now gone ( only 4 remaining ). In theory, there should be a pile of used baskets somewhere....

John Eacott

28th Mar 2006, 22:25

Thanks for all the help: I'm still trying around the world, but a lot of very useful pointers. 407, Dave didn't want to sell any a couple of years ago, but I'll see if the new management have changed their mind. Do you have a contact there, please?

Firepilot

29th Mar 2006, 05:19

I'll see if I can get some pictures of our ski racks up if I can. I don't know if they will be of any use to you or not. They were designed by the guys at Wasatch Powderbird Guides years ago. I know if you tried to get a 337 on them now you're out of luck. The process might be easier down there. The ones we use on the L-3/L-4 weigh 15lbs (around 7kg). It doesn't really affect the speed of the ship the way a basket does, which is a bonus as far as the 206 series goes. Let me know.

TiPwEiGhT

20th Apr 2006, 17:51

Quick question guys, why is it more prefferable to have low skids on 206's, have heard alot of people moaning about high skid ones. Is there something to do with touchdown autos? Also have noticed the tail sits very low with the low skids, does this cause any problems?

TiP:confused:

rotorfossil

20th Apr 2006, 18:33

Low skids better for training as the ground attitude is good for touchdown autos and close to the hover attitude, also they have less drag. However they can't be fitted with pop out floats. The older type of high skids with pop outs are not supposed to be used for any type of run-on landing.

rotornut

20th Apr 2006, 19:18

Flying Bull

20th Apr 2006, 19:26

Hi Tip,

with the low skids it´s easier to land, because you have more ground cushion and its cooler, to do low flying, only three feet of the ground ;-)

With the high skids, you have less danger while doing rotorrunning passengers changes - and more possibilities to do outside landings without endangering the belly.

Unfortunately the C/G is higher with high skids - so you have to be careful doing autorotations.

Greetings
Flying Bull

Darren999

20th Apr 2006, 20:20

A friend of mine had high skids on his 206 and had a dynamic rollover incident, he was pretty new to the 206. I was informed that lower skids are better to start with due to C&G etc.
Just an osbservation.....

remote hook

20th Apr 2006, 20:40

In Canada you would be hard pressed to find a low skid 206. That's because most 206s are used in bush work with all sorts of stuff on the ground like rocks and debris that can damage the "bathtub" - underbelly.

Not sure where in Canada you're flying RN, but in the mountains you'd be hard pressed to find a 206 on high gear. The low country tends to see high gear for swamps and areas with tall grass and bushes, but up in the mountians the main requirement is stability as there are seldom any level landings. In deep snow low gear is better too as you can rest the machine directly on the belly. Different gear for different applications.

RH

rotornut

21st Apr 2006, 21:35

Ok, thanks for that, remote. I've only experienced helicopter flying in the east where you never see low skids on a 206.

206 jock

5th May 2006, 11:03

My 206 has just come back online, after annual, T/T straps, battery etc etc..

Oh yeah, and new #2 turbine wheel, P/T and G/P supports, explosion ring A/D...so now I'm very poor.

The thing is: it's done 9.4 hours since and it's smoking a bit too much for my liking. After shutdown, there are wisps of blue smoke coming out of the exhausts. More worryingly, yesterday - after the third start of the day - ground observers at my office rang me to say that after first wind-up to 100%, there was a fog of blueish smoke hanging round the back of the cabin.

I've had some 'advice', which varies from don't fly it until they've taken the turbine out again (please lord ...no!) to leave it a few more hours to see if the carbon builds up the labyrinth seals better.

BTW in flight all T's and P's are fine - if anything, temps are down on how it was previously.

Any thoughts?

Hughes500

5th May 2006, 13:04

Without a doubt it is the carbon seal. When this goes it dumps oil in the collector which turns to smoke after shut down ! Looks like you are unlucky as the work you have had done on the turbine would be nowhere near the carbon seal. From memory last one I had go cost about £ 1500 to sort

rotaryman

5th May 2006, 14:47

Sounds like the Bellows seal to me...:}

or is the carbon seal and bellows seal one and the same?:O

diethelm

5th May 2006, 15:26

After a rebuild, while running the engine on a test cell, one of the things they look for is smoke on shut down. There is a simple adjustment of which I forget what it is that will allow this to go away. If it is the carbon seal, it was out when they either re-worked or exchanged your GP and PT support. I would think this would be under the warranty from your engine shop. Call the field support poeople from whichever AMC did your engine work.

206 jock

5th May 2006, 16:50

The shop who did the work (thank goodness I didn't send it to the USA) are saying that it looks like the no5 seal (I'm guessing that's the same as the carbon/bellows seal). My maintenance outfit also warned me about a little oil seepage from the bottom of the collector, but did say it 'should' cure itself after a few hours.

Thanks for the feedback.

Received wisdom is run it for 5 more hours: if it's still smoking, out comes the turbine. Woud you, if it were your machine? At the mo, oil level loss is negligible.

Bleedin' helicopters:{

rotaryman

5th May 2006, 23:24

I have had it happen were you couldn't see the Helicopter for the Smoke!!

Firies in attendance etc..LOL:) My advise is Keep a close eye on your Oil levels while it settles down..Or gets worse.:eek:

Rusty Bifilar

6th May 2006, 01:37

Have a look at the power turbine oil check valve first.

Moet04

6th May 2006, 10:14

Have had the same on a B206 Turbine after wheels work. It ended up being an incorrect pressure differential either side of the labyrinth seal and was re ctified by changing a screw on the top of the turbine. The screw had a hole running through it and the size of hole can be adjusted!! TRY THIS!!

:O GOOD LUCK

Steve76

7th May 2006, 21:47

If you were working this machine in the field, would it be overhauled for this again?
= NO
The oil burn is probably so miniscule that it would be far cheaper to top up the oil than pay the repair bill.
Just drive it for another 100hrs and then consider if it bothers you enough or whether the oil consumption warrants it. You might find it settles down after a time to a constant oil consumption or diminishes completely.

A couple of points that you can start to apply to remedy this in the future.

1) do a 3 minute cooldown instead of the suggested 2 minutes.
2) after shutdown (obviously) before tying the rotor system down, run it backwards for a couple of revolutions.

Hughes500

8th May 2006, 06:47

Steve 76

If you are using Mobil254 dont need to turn the rotor backwards ! You must be using old technology oils !

CYHeli

8th May 2006, 07:09

Does this wonder oil work on other helicopters powered by Allison? Eg. the H500 and therefore remove the need to 'wind-back' the blades to remove carbon build up?

that chinese fella

8th May 2006, 08:36

Steve 76,

I have seen a graph showing the Turbine 'soak' temperature-v-time and the temperature has fairly well stabilized after 1:45 minutes (from memory) and remains linear after this point in time. I guess this is where Bell round out the cool down time to 2:00 minutes. From this graph it would appear any additional idle time is not warranted.

I will attempt to chase the graph down for all to see.

Cheers

TCF

vaqueroaero

8th May 2006, 12:19

For the C20 B/J Rolls Royce recommends using MIL-L-23699 oils, such as Mobile Jet 254 or Aeroshell 560 in the engine. These have much better anti-coking qualities and better lubrication at higher temperatures

For the gearboxes Bell recommends using DOD-L-85734 (Triple Nickel) oils. Much better penetrating qualities. It does not do so well in the engine where it can lead to coking. Long term use may also lead to seal leakage in the accessory gearbox.

What it boils down to though is how many types of oil do you want to use in the aircraft? Both types are approved for use in the engine and gearboxes.

As for the 2 minute cool down - that's to allow the 6/7th bearing to cool as much as possible and to drain the oil out of it to prevent coking.

bellsux

8th May 2006, 13:32

Oils aint oils Sol... Jet Oil II is made to MIL-PRF(L)-23699F-STD and has been in use for years but it can suffer from coking so others have used Mobil 254 which is MIL-PRF(L)-23699F-HTS, a third generation synthetic oil. Basicly the same stuff but with the newer additives they changed the spec to HTS, High Thermal Stability so hopefully no coking. 254 is more expensive and can cause slight seal leakage in transmission gearboxes so for that reason I prefer to use Jet Oil II in them. Also if you have any misting of 254 oil from the engine it will peel any danger or rego stickers off the tail boom (reacts with the glue) over time.

Now I have a preference for the BP products I think that the 2380 turbo oil is far superior to Jet Oil II and they also have the 2197 turbo oil which is MIL-PRF-23699F-HTS standard (same as 254) but haven't used that as the 2380 does the same trick but cheaper than 254.

trackdirect

12th May 2006, 03:15

I am trying to track down a range extender for a 206L, They are a bit hard to come by these days, anyone have one in the shed spare that they want to sell??

Thanks

TRACKDIRECT

206 jock

17th May 2006, 13:29

Looks like it was the no5 seal. Turbine came out again last Friday, overnighted to shop, seal replaced Monday, turbine refitted Tuesday, flying again today. No smoke or anythign untoward.

And best of all, done under warranty, even though the shop had to replace the seal (cheap) and the fitting (not so cheap) to guarantee the repair.

So if anyone needs an RR250 turbine shop, these guys are first class. Anyone who sticks by their product is worth supporting in my books

Hughes500

17th May 2006, 19:52

206 Jock, nice to hear Arrow Aviation looked after you well. They have done lots of work for me and have always been first class. Which is more than you can say for some AMC's - no names no pack drill

KikoLobo

19th May 2006, 06:06

Looking for a kit to change my nav lights to LED lights on the Bell 206b....
(Anti col would be great too)

Any clues on where to find it???

bellsux

19th May 2006, 07:33

www.whelen.com

TukTuk BoomBoom

19th May 2006, 21:06

Ive had turbines come back from overhauls smoking really badly and had the shop say "oh we only replace the lab seal not the abradable surface it runs on"...dumb-ass!
It is common practice to replace both as they run against each other.

As for Mobil 254 vs Jet 2.
Every 206 operator should turn the blades backwards even with 254. Although jet 2 cokes more than 254 the new generation oil hasnt eliminated this problem. Since you have to spin the blades to tie them down anyway why not go backwards and turn the power turbine lab seals as they cool.
Mobil 254 practically eliminated rear bearing coking in Arriels.
At the end of the day its up to whatever is most convienient, if you have a bell medium fleet as well youre probably going to run Jet 2 in everything else

Turbine cool-down times are set by the manufacturer because the rear bearings actually get hotter with longer rundowns due to reduced scavenging, especially on 60'c ramps.

Im not sure 555 oils should be used in the 206 gearbox, you can have oil transfer into the engine and no one recommends 555 oils in engines anymore. Ask Pratt and Whitney.
Just use whatevers in your engine in your gearbox in a 206, they arent delicate like 500 gearboxes

Anyone operating 250s 2 or 4 series, just get used to pulling the turbines out, they should come with camlocks.

TukTuk BoomBoom

19th May 2006, 21:26

I went up to one of our northern bases to work on a 206 straight L and was told by the departing engineer, "oh yeah the fuel low lights coming on early but at least its working"
So when the machine came back from its long flight over the tundra i looked at the gauge, 120lbs and low light on, i drained the fuel and found 11 litres remaining. Good for a few minutes at least.
I had never worked on an L before but its all first principals with fuel systems

In the long ranger the low light indicates actual fuel remaining at all times!
The fact that early s/n Jetrangers dont have low fuel lights is almost criminal.

paco

20th May 2006, 02:52

"In the long ranger the low light indicates actual fuel remaining at all times!"

Wrong!

IF THE LOW FUEL LIGHT COMES ON IN THE L IT MAY BE BECAUSE THE FUEL IS NOT BEING TRANSFERRED FROM THE FRONT TANKS.

DO NOT P*SS AROUND WITH IT!!!

Sorry for shouting, but the low fuel light can come on even if you have stacks of fuel, but it won't be in the rear tanks where the pumps are. The Flight Manual says "Plan Your Landing" when it comes on. It is not kidding.

Phil

TukTuk BoomBoom

20th May 2006, 04:21

Yeah Phil i think thats what i said.
Like i said you can have 120lbs indicated but if it isnt transfering you can still run out of gas.
Low fuel lite means actual low fuel condition at all times.
We're saying the same thing.

paco

20th May 2006, 08:36

Well, OK, nearly. :) I'm just concerned that nobody should start off with full tanks, then get a fuel low light in a very short time and ignore it. In the L, it is not a spurious warning!

Phil

Aesir

20th May 2006, 09:40

The fact that early s/n Jetrangers dont have low fuel lights is almost criminal.

Just to set the record straight if someone´s reading this who does not know the JetRanger.

There is no fwd fuel tank in JetRanger so a "low fuel light" warning is not AS important as in the L model.

However I agree that it would be nice to have low fuel warning light but one can not count on those anyway but still nice to have as additional warning just not as critical as in the LongRanger.

I fly a AB206BII 1971 model.

KikoLobo

20th May 2006, 19:32

Just to set the record straight if someone´s reading this who does not know the JetRanger.
There is no fwd fuel tank in JetRanger so a "low fuel light" warning is not AS important as in the L model.
I fly a AB206BII 1971 model.

Well... The "Low Fuel Light" in a Jet ranger is AS serious as in any other aircraft that you get a 'Low Fuel Light".

Since there are separate sensors.. one is float that goes to the fuel indicator and the other is a float switch that will trigger the low fuel light, having a low fuel light is a land as soon as possible light, unless you are getting consistent readings from the indicator and the low fuel light, in which case you can device a plan with your fuel remaining (axample: 17 gallons, or 20 gallons depending on the model of your helicopter).

BUT if you have a full tank indication and get a light, you have to believe the worst case scenario.... in which case is the light... Which is a backup indicator from the other.....

If you are getting consistent burn times of fuels and then you get a light, how do you know that your float is propperly calibrated?

If you are getting a very low fuel indication and you don't get a light, which one would you believe??? I thought so... You will believe your indicator, or the worst case scenario... how serious do you treat the problem depends on the circumstances.... You get a low fuel indication minutes after you got full tank indication and you are not getting a warning light, then its probably the indicator, but you have to land soon to make sure... At least it would be a smart decision..... i would not land in a jungle with crocodriles, etc.. but i would land soon.

But you have to take action allways...

Do you have a leak?

What about calibration problems?

The point is its allways dependant on how you get this light, but IT allways means BAD NEWS, and it allways demand a plan of action. SO ITS SERIOUS ENOUGH in my opinion......

Again this is only my opinion...

Patrick_Waugh

22nd Jun 2006, 06:38

Hi,

I have the manual and checklists, but just want to confirm something as I'm modeling it.

First, starting cold & dark, when you get to the point of throwing on the Battery switch (assuming a Battery start), and both the Low RRPM and Engine out annunciators light up (along with with others per manual), and the audio warnings go off. Correct?

So, you press the warning horn mute, and continue with the caution light test button and verify working lights, and test the TOT light if equiped.

Then you check the Low RRPM by pulling collective, but it says that this does not apply if the warning horn mute is installed. Is this because if you have pushed the mute, pulling the collective will not currently activate the warning horn?

I am wondering, if you are doing a battery cart start, are they going to come on as soon as you plug in the cart?

Is once you push the starter, and begin the start are any of the warning horns going to come back on during the start (assuming no abnormal conditions like going above 55% N1, and then losing the engine).

And my last pesky question is when you initiate shutdown, and close the throtle, which of the warning horns come on and when if any.

Thanks =)

Patrick

Gomer Pylot

22nd Jun 2006, 20:49

From (perhaps faulty, from the distant past) memory:

First, starting cold & dark, when you get to the point of throwing on the Battery switch (assuming a Battery start), and both the Low RRPM and Engine out annunciators light up (along with with others per manual), and the audio warnings go off. Correct?

Correct.

So, you press the warning horn mute, and continue with the caution light test button and verify working lights, and test the TOT light if equiped.

Then you check the Low RRPM by pulling collective, but it says that this does not apply if the warning horn mute is installed. Is this because if you have pushed the mute, pulling the collective will not currently activate the warning horn?

Yes. Once you mute the horn, it stays muted, until you activate it by increasing RPM.

I am wondering, if you are doing a battery cart start, are they going to come on as soon as you plug in the cart?

Yes, the cart and the battery are the same, as far as a BIII knows.

Is once you push the starter, and begin the start are any of the warning horns going to come back on during the start (assuming no abnormal conditions like going above 55% N1, and then losing the engine).

Not that I recall.

And my last pesky question is when you initiate shutdown, and close the throtle, which of the warning horns come on and when if any.

None. The low rotor horn shouldn't come on here.

If my memory is faulty, someone will surely correct me. It has been many years since I flew a 206, and I don't claim total recall. The ones I flew didn't have the mute button in any case, and the low rpm horn didn't come on on the ground.

IHL

22nd Jun 2006, 22:58

I fly an old 206 BII.
On shutdown when the throttle is rolled back to idle the low rotor horn comes on.

It has been +15 years since I have flown a BIII, and I think they had an engine out horn which came on during shut down.

Dis-Mystery of Lift

23rd Jun 2006, 00:41

Pesky Warning Horns!!!We pop the Caution Circuit breaker on Start up and shut down.Makes punters jump when they come on.Push circuit breaker in after start up Check Test Button and low rotor RPM horn and away you go.

John Eacott

23rd Jun 2006, 23:20

Bell have a mod which allows the engine out horn to be disconnected (placarded on the panel): my 206's are modified, which allows the caution CB to remain in during start/shut down. Quite handy, and a better option (IMO) than the more common practice of pulling the Caution CB, thus having no warning panel lights until after start.

The mod means that you won't have an aural warning of an engine failure, but I suspect that wouldn't be a major issue with a few other clues along the way ;)

Patrick_Waugh

25th Jun 2006, 08:50

First, while I appreciate all the help I can get, it's important I get this right, so don't answer unless you are sure.

You are tooling along in your B206 BIII, which is equiped with a warning horn mute button.

Suddenly, your engine goes out (thankfully at plenty of altitude and airspeed for a safe auto), and of course the annoying horns go off.

After having lowered collective the Low RRPM goes off, and after taking care of more immediate concerns, you push the warning horn mute button to turn off the remaining engine out annunciator.

Now, as you approach a lovely little emergency landing zone and begin to pull collective is the Low RRPM warning horn going to go off again as it reset?

----

The above is to help me answer the question of once muted, under what conditons will they become active again.

Thanks for your help.

Patrick

tomstheword

25th Jun 2006, 13:01

Patrick_Waugh

25th Jun 2006, 15:35

In the 206 I fly, after landing and winding down the throttle the horn will go off, so I mute it. Then as I roll the throttle off the throttle the horn will sometimes go off again but not always, dont know why. It is a modern B3 and doesnt have a seperate audible low rotor horn. Some I have come across have two separate tones that you can test by raising the collective at ground idle. This one is on if the rpm is below 90, hence the mute. Most older (early 80's) B3s dont have mutes so you use the circuit breaker until started/once stopped. This probably wont help!

When you said "the horn" above, I'm assuming an engine out warning horn as you later said you don' t have a low RRPM horn.

While this helps a little, you are right, I'm looking for details. Every little bit helps though.

I think I get now that if you have both horns installed, when you turn the battery on, if the collective is full down, only the engine out horn will sound (if installed & circuit breaker is in). You have to pull collective to get the low RRPM to go off I'm thinking. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

At this point, if a mute is equiped, you can silence it, and proceed with start. I believe that the manual indicates if so silenced that you skip the pull on the collective as the low RRPM will not sound at this point.

As N1 comes above 55%, the engine out horn will be reset and enabled, and as RRPM passes 90%, the low RRPM horn resets and will sound if you droop.

This is my best guess so far, and I'm hoping someone knows.

Arm out the window

25th Jun 2006, 21:11

That sounds right.
In our Jet Rangers, the engine out horn (intermittent beeping) sounds with the battery on and circuit breaker in, and when you pull the collective, the low rotor horn (continuous tone) joins it. Having proven they work, we pull the circuit breaker for start and reset it when the engine's running so it's not beeping in our ear during start.
In our Long Ranger with the audio cancel button installed, the continuous tone sounds with engine off, collective down on the ground, and you can silence it by pushing the button. It also comes on if you've landed and wound the throttle back to idle. This tallies up with Tom's post - there's only the continuous tone, no change when the collective is up - however, I haven't tested it in flight with low engine / low rotor rpm to check; not planning to any time soon either, I hope.

John Eacott

25th Jun 2006, 22:03

Now, as you approach a lovely little emergency landing zone and begin to pull collective is the Low RRPM warning horn going to go off again as it reset?

Why do you anticipate that your auto is going to be so inept that you will droop the Nr down low enough to set off the horn :rolleyes: I'm sure that you wouldn't do that, would you := ;)

Patrick_Waugh

26th Jun 2006, 00:28

That sounds right.
In our Jet Rangers, the engine out horn (intermittent beeping) sounds with the battery on and circuit breaker in, and when you pull the collective, the low rotor horn (continuous tone) joins it.

Wow, I'm back to drawing board then, as an instructor from Bell Helicopter sent me videos, and I asked him which was which (continuous vs. intermittent) and he indicated the reverse!

Funny though, as based on the videos I had assumed the above, given that the Low RRPM wouldn't come on till you pulled some collective.

Patrick

Arm out the window

26th Jun 2006, 05:33

Patrick_Waugh

26th Jun 2006, 06:16

Sorry, Patrick, hope I haven't given you a bum steer there.
However, as the continous beep is the one linked to the collective, I've always thought it to be the low rotor rpm warning telling me to get the collective down quick.

You know, I thought that was the case after I initially viewed the videos. One of the videos starts with dark annunciators and the click of a switch (which must be the battery or the circuit breaker), and the big three light up with the intermintent horn. (Which clearly then must be the engine out horn).

The second video starts with same lights, and both horns (ie the continuous over the top of the intermittent).

So, just before the video was started collective was pulled.

This clears this up. I had them backwards!

Thanks so much.

Patrick_Waugh

2nd Jul 2006, 12:15

Hi,

I'm developing a sim of the B206 BIII, and want to make sure that I have the exterior lights right.

Tell me if this is correct, as I have no access to the real helicopter to check it out.

1 Anti-Collision Beacon (red) located on the top of the vertical stab. switch - overhead

3 Navigation/Position lights, red (port) and green (starboard) on the end of the horizontal stab, and a steady white on the end of the tail boom.
switch - overhead

1 White strobe light on top of the engine compartment. switch - where?

1 Landing light - switch on collective

Where is the switch for the white strobe, or is this activated by the anti-collision or position light switch.

Thanks

Patrick

Colonal Mustard

2nd Jul 2006, 12:32

Im my experience the "strobe" marked "HISL" High- intensity- strobe- light is located as a seperate switch on the overhead panel, thus can be switched off when on short finals but keeping the nav lights on, i`ve looked to see if i had an old photo but they dont show the overhead, apart from that all of the above appear correct to me

paco

2nd Jul 2006, 12:35

We had our switch on the overhead panel - bloody great silver thing. Then we dropped the HISL and had to pick up all those candles..... :)

Phil

Aesir

2nd Jul 2006, 13:53

1 Landing light - switch on collective

There are two landing lights! and yes the switch is on the collective. aft-off, next fwd - one light, full fwd - two lights.

Im not familiar with the white strobe light you mention? Could be local requirement!

Patrick_Waugh

2nd Jul 2006, 14:08

Ok, in this photo (below), I do see the strobe switch where I had previously seen a 'heater' switch with off(center) heat (aft), and vent(fwd).

Now in this pic of the strobe switch we have:
strobe (aft) - I assume turns on the strobe
off (center) - Turns it off
lights (fwd) - Wonder what this does?

Also, is that black spot next to it marked "HTR" and "START" a none existent switch or is it a light?

Here's the photo of an overhead: http://picasaweb.google.com/patrick.waugh/PanelPhotos

Thanks for the bit on the landing lights. Any idea which one turns on first? I always thought the light was behind a windscreen right under the battery compartment. Perhaps you had one equiped with lights on the skids or something.

Thanks for all the help guys.

This is my progress so far: http://home.comcast.net/~pwaugh/video/B206.Start.zip

Patrick

Practice Auto 3,2,1

2nd Jul 2006, 14:42

Also, is that black spot next to it marked "HTR" and "START" a none existent switch or is it a light?

I think thats just a 'Blank' a plastic plug fitted when a switch or a CB is removed. More can be seen on the CB pannel at the forward end of the photo

About the strobe light switch. I think that the sticker that id's the switch has been cut in half to make it fit. The 'OFF' thats on the pannel probabily related to the switch that was previously there (the heater as you say Vent|Off|Aft). For the new switch thats there or the strobes, OFF would be forward and ON would be aft.

Hope thats clear :ooh:

Patrick_Waugh

2nd Jul 2006, 14:52

I think thats just a 'Blank' a plastic plug fitted when a switch or a CB is removed. More can be seen on the CB pannel at the forward end of the photo

About the strobe light switch. I think that the sticker that id's the switch has been cut in half to make it fit. The 'OFF' thats on the pannel probabily related to the switch that was previously there (the heater as you say Vent|Off|Aft). For the new switch thats there or the strobes, OFF would be forward and ON would be aft.

Hope thats clear :ooh:

Yes, I believe you are right. The 'tape' was put there, and the OFF was for the heater switch that is not there.

I believe that they probably intend on ON being forward as the rest of the switches are on the panel.

So, this clears up where I can put the strobe switch, and since I don't really need to sim a heater, I guess I can do the same.

Thanks.

The Rotordog

2nd Jul 2006, 17:16

Ah, leave it to an old fart to answer the questions...

Patrick, one of the endearing things about aviation is that there is precious little standardization. It can be quite confusing.

Bell 206's come with one red anti-collision light on top of the vertical fin. Over the years, many operators replaced the dim red lens with a more modern (and brighter) clear lens from Whelen, but one day in the 1990's the FAA had a cow and made us change them all back to red since that is what the ship was originally certified with. Lots of common sense at work there, right.

The switch for the anti-collision/strobe and position lights are just adjacent to the instrument light rheostate on the overhead. Many, many 206's have those two switches and only those two.

However, some operators added additional strobe lights that were not required by the FAA. These lights were either in the form of "wingtip" strobes on the end of the horizontal stab, or a single white strobe on the engine or oil cooler cowlings, or perhaps in the area under the baggage compartment. These additional strobes required a separate switch, which was usually put...somewhere up there on the overhead...most often in a blank or unused hole. (Often the same situation when avionics master switches were added.)

But again, there is no rhyme or reason for the placement of all switches in most helicopters. The conscientious pilot will suss out their locations and uses prior to takeoff on the first flight in the new machine, or shortly afterward in any case.

As for the heater...in the bad old days, Jetbangers used to come with a device known as The Dreaded Janitrol Heater. This was a combustion heater designed to run on avgas. It was a cantakerous beasty, and did not like running on pure jet fuel. Ergo, we often mixed up to 1/3 avgas per tankful. The heater switch was a three-position deal. Aft was "Vent", center was "Off", and forward was "Run" (or "On", I forget). There was a little pushbutton right next to the switch that fired a spark plug to ignite the fuel and get the thing producing heat. This spark plug would routinely foul (jet fuel being extremely oily, you know).

The procedure was that as you made your descent for landing and while you still had good airflow through the heater, you would throw the switch to the "Vent" position to allow it to cool properly. If you forgot, and left the heater on all the way down to landing and then switched to "Vent", the igniter plug would invariably foul and you'd never get the heater lit again that day. The mechys loved cleaning Janitrol plugs that dumbass pilots allowed to get fouled. I seem to recall that running the temperature control down to "Min" helped a bit too, but who even thinks about that when you're freezing your tootsies off? (No heater ever made puts enough hot air up into the footwell of a 206, thank you very much. Bell might as well have mounted those pedals out in the airstream.)

It is suspected that a Janitrol heater was the source of the fire that brought down the DC-3 that was carrying 1950/60's popstar Ricky Nelson and his band. How that heater ever got certified for use in aircraft, I'll never know.

Patrick_Waugh

2nd Jul 2006, 20:41

Ok, hope I'm not annoying. :cool:

On the B206 Overhead there is a switch labeled:

Dir Gyro & Att Ind

And I just want to confirm what this does. My guess is that it applies power to the gyros in those instruments, and those gyros are electric vs. vacuum driven.

Patrick

Aesir

2nd Jul 2006, 22:16

Yep, that is correct :ok:

Aesir

2nd Jul 2006, 22:23

Patrick. I see one problem with your panel!

It looks too clean and neat.. I have never seen it like that in real JetRangers ; )

But I guess it´s difficult to imitate that worn look in computer simualtions hehe..

Heliringer

5th Oct 2006, 10:29

I dont have a flight manual and I need to know the following CofG problem.
4 pax, 60gallons, front left door off, both rear doors off.
weights are Front Pilot/pax 160kg
Rear pax 200kg
No baggage
empty weight of b206 817kg.
Is this machine in balance? I cant remember the doors off stuff of the top of my head and dont have access to a manual due to bush location. No I am not operating the machine its a question a mate asked me for a practise exam.:eek:
Thanks for any replies

John Eacott

5th Oct 2006, 10:49

Tell your mate that unless you have a start position, ie the W&B datum, there's no way that you can work out a final solution ;)

the coyote

5th Oct 2006, 10:57

Agree with John, but if that machine as described isn't within C of G when you do the numbers, then I'll root my boot on a public monument. Sing out if I'm wrong and you want me to post the pictures...:E

paco

5th Oct 2006, 13:20

Long CG is 108.48, assuming a start of 116 ins, which is about average (left front door off makes a slight difference as I only calculated the weight, not the arm)
Zero Fuel Wt is 2568.2, arm 107.45
Gross wt is 2962

There's a spreadsheet that calculates doors off etc at www.electrocution.com/aviation

Phil

TIMTS

22nd Nov 2006, 14:01

Hi.

I am new on the 206, and I have noticed something on one of our machines.
Sometimes the torquemeter fluctuates between 90-92ish up to 100 in the hover, and with every fluctuation the machines yaws a little. The N1 is stable, whilst N2?NR fluctuates at the same rate, but only about 2% or so.
Informed maintenace about it, and they had took it in for inspection, I flew it some time later and the same thing happened again.

Any ideas what this is?

perfrej

22nd Nov 2006, 15:34

Well, the torquemeter is just an oil pressure guage and can definately fluctuate. I once flew a Jetranger that had a very fluctuating torque, and that machine had two tubes in the hot section lubrication mixed up... In that case, both the torque and the oil pressure went wild. We discovered it during first test hover after service, so there was no real danger.

Anyway, anything that makes the Nr wobble just has to be the governor (I'm not qualified to answer your question, but that's what it sounds like to me). What happens if you beep it up and down? Does it follow nicely? Can you beep it over 100% in a 3 ft hover?

If it has a CECO fuel system, which I beleive is air driven, it could be more prone to fluctuations, and will have tendencies to over RPM when lowering the collective, for instance when you make a close to autorotation approach. I have found the Bendix fuel system to be more stable.

TIMTS

22nd Nov 2006, 16:54

Thanks for the answer, but I fear I didn't explain the indications well enough.

The torque will fluctuate, but in a very rythmic way, from about 92ish up to 100 and down again, the frequency not changing for the duration. And every time it increases there is an audible change in the noise from engine/gearbox and associated yaw..so it is not just the gauge. The frequency is about 2 per second. While this is going on the N1 is stable, but N2/NR fluctuates about 2% with the torque..same frequency. Then after a while it settles down again and both indications are back to normal and steady (as steady as they get).
Also happened once in a climb, 80% TQ and 60mph, steady climb. Torque was 80-90, same frequency and sound, yaw being less because of the tail being effective, but still noticable.

Total duration is around 10sec+ before it goes away.

Ken

AN4-6

22nd Nov 2006, 17:05

I would say its a problem with the govenor. if its hunting or ocilating it will cause very similar problems as you have said. just my thoughts though its been two or three years since i have turned a spanner on one.

Helinut

22nd Nov 2006, 17:22

You can get a variation in the torque gauge indication if the oil system to the gauge has air in it. The remedy is simply to get the system bled.

However, it sounds like what you describe is a real variation in torque which is different and certainly worthy of investigation. With a change in torque indication coincident with a change in Nr/N2, the most likely thing is a real change in torque - not just a torque indicaton.

What have your engineers said? - You should get them involved pdq IMHO

NickLappos

22nd Nov 2006, 18:23

Bad governor, or fuel control. Torque variations without tail wiggles and without Nr variations are just bubbly oil inside torque meter. This is a real engine issue, could be air in fuel (pressure lite might be too slow) or it could be a sticky rod in the fuel control that is getting jumpy.
One diagnostic is to stabilize in hover, not torque wiggles, roll back throttle to capture control and see if this damps the wiggles. If so, the problem is in the governor, if not, the problem is fuel/fuel control. BE CAREFUL, if this procedure worries you, have a real maint pilot do it, of just don't do it.

long box

22nd Nov 2006, 18:50

Hi, the fluctuations that you are having on your 206 are most likely to be the double check valves, assuming that you have a bendix fuel system, these are the two round barrells on the port side of the engine. A simple way of proving is to ask your maintenance provider to try a pair from another engine, it is a vey simple operation. Another more sinister problem has been found on other 206's (206@s) that I know where the engine mounts were loose and the engine was moving whilst under flight conditions causing fluctuations on the torque. That was discovered after several thousands of pounds had already been spent.:ok:

kissmysquirrel

22nd Nov 2006, 18:59

Once flew a 206 to maintenance with a similar problem. Anything over 85% caused torque/power fluctuations. Reducing it to 80% in the cruise and the problem went away. Above 85% in the cruise and it fishtailed.
I believe a Power Turbine Governor was exchanged with another and no more problem. Hopefully when the problem is sorted, you'll come back and tell us what they found.:ok:

TIMTS

23rd Nov 2006, 04:13

Thanks guys.

I will run these answers by the maintenance department here. They looked at it when first reported, and checked all the fuel lines and oil lines. They found one fuel line to be a little loose, so changed that. But the indications are still the same.

Will definitely tell you about what they find.
Ken

Devil 49

23rd Nov 2006, 13:19

Years ago, I encountered an engine surging issue at cruise power settings, fine at climb or reduced power and sudden onset. I'm only a pilot, but my recollection is that it turned out to be a starter generator issue. Once replaced, no problems.

perfrej

23rd Nov 2006, 17:01

I got my type rating on the 206B/L in August 2005 after nine years of private flying in the H300, S330 and the MD500. I had a few ideas about the type long before I got a rating on it, and I also had some non-official stick time in a military AB206 (friend in the Swedish Army). My experience also includes a few hours in the AS350B2 (with a North Pole landing), three hours of Bell 412 simulator along with an hour in the real thing, a test flight in the MD900 Explorer, a couple of hours of Bell 204, an hour of 205 and a test drive of the EC120.

When I got my initial helicopter traing, way back then, my teacher was a very experienced 100% MD500 kind of guy. He called the Jetranger "Jet Danger" because of a few opinions he had about it. Naturally, my hero indoctrinated me. That all boiled down to a few points, some very true and some less so:

1. It's great for flying straight ahead and level. Not for "bending around" in the sky.

2. You don't want to be in the left seat when things go wrong - decapitation is a sure outcome.

3. Don't land it on slopes!

4. Lift off carefully, if you are entangled in something on the ground it's gonna flip.

5. Don't throw it down after clearing an obstacle. Blade will meet tail boom and you'll go down.

6. Fly with a pendulum in your mouth and make sure it points to your d*ck at all times. Failing to do so results in loose parts above roof level.

7. It's not a powerful machine - don't bring too many people on your trips.

8. Autorotations are supposed to be spectacular.

So, how do I feel after roughly a year and 70 hrs in type? Great! Here's why:

1. It's great for flying straight an level. Pilot workload is very low, and if you want to make a tight turn, just do it with said pendulum pointing to said location. The thing actually has better "bite" in the turns than does the MD500E! I can make an extremely tight pattern on a small, narrow field and never end up outside the field's limits.

2. No, I really don't want to be in the left seat, say when making a hard landing. On the other hand, you have to be somewhat irresponsible to even get close to a hard landing. I know of a military guy who lost his head in the left seat of a 206 when the blade came his way as the right skid got caught under a tree-root - the blade does hit the left seat head...

3. Slopes... Well, it's not like the 500. On my type rating course on the 500 I was instructed to land on a tree-stub. Cyclic met collective as I lifted my left knee to allow them to... I'm definately careful with the 206 when it comes to slopes...

4. I always lift off carefully, so that is not a problem for me. The difference to the 500 is the lack of feedback, so "sensing around" carefully with the cyclic before letting it leave the ground is now a standard procedure for me, and it should make me realize that I am stuck before it's too late. Don't want that dynamic rollover...

5. Even though I can't dive back down after clearing an obstacle, I have sort of gotten used to flying differently in the 206, so it's not a problem, and the flying experience is just DIFFERENT to the 500, not better or worse.

6. Well, your ass needs to be in your seat in the 206, that's for sure. Sideslips, crazy G-manouveres et al - no, no! This actually sharpens the pilot, and once the technique to fly absolutely "clean" is mastered, it should be both rewarding and safe, right? Yes!

7. This is the sad part with the 206 - kind of weak (Jet, that is, not long). On the other hand, I have never experienced translational lift at 5 kts in another type. Not only does it happen early - it's also like hitting a high curb with a car. Wiggle around with five people, full fuel with range extender, 100% TQ (C20 - no B) and barely able to hover at one foot. Once you slide your five knots - it "bumps" off into the air. Amazing!

8. Autos are spectacular! And fun! Full touch down every one during my type rating. I even got a friend who has instructor rating to take me for some extra autorotations because it was so great! I even tried the 90/90-version - that is 90% Nr and 90 kts. Boy, does it go far in that flight regime! After that type rating and the extra stuff, I now feel very comfortable autorotating all my rated types. Even the 500 feels nice. I must have passed a magic threashold or something - it's just plain fun! BUT! If I was to have the "ideal accident" I would autorotate down with a Bell 206, and - if a roll was to happen - I would roll in an MD500.

So. having been an avid backtalker of the Bell 206 line of helicopters, I now creep up to the cross on my knees, say my praise and admit: It's a GREAT machine! There are still things I rather do in a 500, but what the heck, they're different machines and should be used for different purposes.

All you professionals out there; I had to get this off my chest after reading ALL post in this thread (god you quarrel too much!).

All the best from a private flyer with access to a fully IFR/VMC equipped 206BII (and some others too).

TIMTS

26th Nov 2006, 14:11

The machine went in for some tlc, and this is what the engineers found:
(sorry for the lack of the exact terms, hope it is good enough to be understood)

The "arm" or lever or what it is called connecting the linear actuator to the governor was too tight. It was not moveable by hand. I am talking about the "arm\lever" that has the bent piece of nail pointing at the scale.
This apparently was the cause of the torque fluctuations.
Linear actuator and governor changed and machine is back online, and so far so good.

I hope this is of value, and also that you guys understood it.

outofwhack

26th Nov 2006, 15:57

I'm a CPL(A) and CPL(H) that up till now has been looking to buy a Bell47 for hour-building (I have 100 hours in 47 and 1 hour in 206).

QUESTION: Given that parts for a Bell 47 are getting so expensive and hard to get hold of is it likely that it would make more economical sence to buy a Jetranger rather than a Bell47???

I know it burns more juice and will be a higher purchase price but these 2 points aside - would it be any more expensive in maintenance and part replacement than a 47 ?

If someone can give me a rough guide like 10% more expensive or 100% more that would help me make a decision.

Any advice appreciated.

OOW

206 jock

1st Feb 2007, 18:33

Up until S/N 1251, Bell fitted a three part fairing set on Bell 206's (and similar on Agusta units).

Now, these mounted underneath onto the old fabricated T/R gearbox supports with no problem. However, these supports were superceded after 1251 with a cast unit and the manufacturers changed the fairing to a two-part metal design that mounted in a completely different way (they also slightly modded the vert fin and the T/R driveshaft cover).

Now, I've had to replace my support (in compliance with CAA LTO 2897) with a later cast one....but there's no advice from Bell or Agusta on how to mount the older three part fairings as you obviously can't drill into the casting - lots of people have checked and there's nothing. And you can't swap to the two part fairings, as you also need to change the fin etc etc.

So I'm faced with a £20k bill to design a modification to convert my unit. Has anybody else come across this problem and if so how did they solve it? Or is there anyone else out there having the same prob who wants to split the cost of the mod?:}

Salusa

1st Feb 2007, 22:57

I am presuming that your ship is Agusta and on UK register, therefore you are not able to install a later series Bell Fin?

I.E. CAA dictae you have to install a Fin supplied from Agusta, which I imagine there are not many about?

Otherwise, Bell SV fins are quite easy to come by. Certainly less than $20k of the price of modification.

206 jock

2nd Feb 2007, 07:58

You're right: it's an Agusta. $30k for the fin alone. And now we cannot fit Bell parts to Agusta machines in EASA land, it's a real problem.

To make matters worse, it's not just the fin: the T/R driveshaft cover is bigger on the later machines, so I'd have to change the fin, the cover and the rear engine cowling, as well as the two parts of the fairing! $lots!

nigelh

3rd Feb 2007, 00:57

contact airandground they are somewhere near stafford and have a big inventory of Agusta parts, they may be able to help. They advertise in helidata. Out of interest why do you believe you cannot interchange Bell with Agusta ? I know of many aoc Bell 206,s that are littered with Agusta parts. I know of one that has just been half rebuilt using Agusta parts and is doing public Transport very happily !! As far as i am aware it is only a letter and only enforceable in US and Canada but not here . No doubt the pen pushers will get their way even tho things have been fine for what...37 years or more ??????:ugh:

quichemech

3rd Feb 2007, 05:27

Nigel, you can't use the parts, as mad as it may seem, you just can't. As for the validity of the "letter" ask your regional office, I know what mine say:=

206 jock

3rd Feb 2007, 06:23

Tried Airandground: none that would help!

The Agusta/Bell situation is a mess. No other word for it. But you're right, bueraucracy wins again!

VeeAny

3rd Feb 2007, 06:59

You are quite right you're not the only one so there must be a fair number of people in a similar situation.

This may sound daft, but why not intially have this as a thread for owners with Bell Bits on an agusta or Agusta Bits on a Bell who need to swap them (subject to Mods / Dannys permission , no commercial value just a cost saver)

Or is there a once its been fitted you can't fit it back on an original manufacturers aircraft kind of proviso.

I am sure someone will come up with a page for people to swap their bell / agusta parts on which has some elegance and a search facility (given the time i'd do it).

V.

nigelh

4th Feb 2007, 10:11

Find it hard to believe airandground cannot help, i know they have just completely rebuilt 2 machines and have a vast warehouse full of parts...maybe they are saving them ? How have we allowed this to happen ? Are we certain that it is legal for Bell to do this after so many years? Grandfather rights? There must be a whole lot of grounded 206,s out there now......or not...

206 jock

4th Feb 2007, 20:25

My take on it is that it's not too much of an issue for Bell parts on Agusta machines: apparently, Agusta will 'adopt' any parts fitted before a certain date (prob 6 months ago). My machine is riddled with Bell bits: transmission, R/Head, mast, tailboom etc etc all Bell bits.

But - and here's the rub - in future, I need to get my xmsn overhauled by an Agusta approved shop, and that in reality means sending it back to Agusta.And they don't give a toss about the 206.

It's not Bell: it's EASA we should be grumpy with.

nigelh

5th Feb 2007, 00:08

but i thought this was due to a letter from Bell. If it has been ok in the past can it be made illegal now and effectively backdated? What if you have just bought a 206 with mixed parts? Do Bell really need to kill off the Agusta Bell 206 ? Technically i would have thought that as the authorities are aware that a huge no of aircraft are flying with mixed parts and have been for decades then there should be some firm directive. What happens if some parts are not available from Agusta ? People will find a way around this problem i am sure.

tvpilot

19th Apr 2007, 22:25

Just a quick question i have been thinking about :confused:

The B206 manual states that a min crew weight of 170lbs is required in the cockpit.

So what do light weight pilots do while flying solo. I ammume weights must be carried but what type & where are the stored?

helimutt

19th Apr 2007, 22:59

Just take your girlfriend along with you for extra ballast. Or, If you're married, just take your girlfriend along with you. :ok:

You could use a sandbag on floor at other side if duals are removed and kept clear of cyclic attachment point etc.

lead plates?

rotorfossil

20th Apr 2007, 07:12

We used flat steel plates, 10 pounds each with loops welded onto them to pass the harness through. Problem is much greater if the range extender is fitted when the minimum front seat weight goes up substantially. 200 lb rings a bell.

ericferret

20th Apr 2007, 10:03

I believe the americans always had an issue with Agusta parts.

I remember about 15 years ago a Bell built 206 was refused a US c of a until the Agusta made main rotor blades were replaced.

EASA really haven't much of a clue, years of actual experience has been thrown out of the window by the Clowns of Cologne.

Heliringer

9th Jul 2007, 13:30

I've really only got 150 on the B111 and was wondering does everyone use the beep switch when flying? I ask because the instructor I had during my endorsement told me not to mess with it. I ignored this and use it to beep down on approach and beep up again before I pull power to finish the approach.What do you experienced Jet Ranger pilots do?
I just want to get this right!.
Cheers:confused:

Bravo73

9th Jul 2007, 13:58

Heliringer,

Why would you want to adjust the rrpm in the manner that you've outlined? Surely in the event of an engine failure on approach, you would want more rrpm rather than less? (ie beep it up rather than down?) As you pull power at the end of the approach, beeping the rrpm up would tend towards a torque peak, no? (Something else that you might want to avoid!)

I'm guessing that most of your previous experience is with pistons. Treat the rrpm beep like the throttle. In a SEP, would you wind the throttle/rrpm down slightly on a approach then wind it open on approach? I certainly wouldn't. (And, no, I'm not referring to any throttle movement that might be needed to keep the rrpm in the green band whilst lowering or raising the lever).

The only time that I can see that you might want to beep the rrpm down to the lower end of the green band would be to save a little bit of fuel in the cruise. But, in the event of an engine failure, you are also robbing yourself of a few percent of rrpm which might turn out to be critical.

So, like your instructor said, set it to 100% rrpm and leave it well alone!

PS. I've only got a few hundred, rather than thousands, of hours in the Jetbanger but all of the above makes sense to me. I, of course, stand to be corrected. :ok:

PPS What's a 'B111'?

rotorfossil

9th Jul 2007, 16:54

Set 100 % before lift and leave it alone. As above ,if you really need to stretch the range, beepdown in the cruise but the difference is marginal. If the rrpm has altered when you reach the cruise condition after setting 100% on the ground, tell the engineer as this can be adjusted.

somepitch

9th Jul 2007, 19:53

maybe heliringer is talking about beeping down on approach to control the transient overspeeds that are normal on the 206 when you lower the collective...if so heliringer, you have to remember that you have up to 15 seconds of overspeed (depending on your tq/n2) which is a pretty long time. it also doesn't take much of a collective pull to get it back in the green.

using the beeper excessively will risk burning out the linear actuator.

Heliringer

10th Jul 2007, 01:35

Yeah I only beep it down to avoid an overspeed. The other day I left it alone and it was getting a bit high so that is why I asked this question. mmm we've just installed a new Linear actuator to it, Hope is wasnt me that killed it:\

Bravo73

10th Jul 2007, 07:53

Yeah I only beep it down to avoid an overspeed.

Lowering the lever should have a slightly more positive effect than the beep.

Oh (again), what's a 'B111'? :confused:

Jarvy

10th Jul 2007, 08:07

I guess he means a 206 B3

Heliringer

10th Jul 2007, 08:28

Bravo Are saying lower the lever to avoid an overspeed! The situation is as I lower the collective the rrpm increases so I beep it down to control it. If i was to lower the lever more as you sugest the overspeed would increase. You mean raise the collective slightly dont you?
I was flying today and just kept it 100% all the time, on decent the rrpm rose but not for long enough to worry about, I suppose I am just getting used to the machine.
OH yeah B111 was my way of saying B3
Thanks for the replies.
Bye for now.

Twiddle

10th Jul 2007, 08:41

He meant raise the lever, lower it to avoid an overtorque.

rotarycat

10th Jul 2007, 08:43

Heliringer

IMHO it really depends on the fuel system on the B206.
If it has a Bendix it will generally maintain Nr fairly well unless very large collective changes are made. Usually not much adjustment with the beep switch is required.
If a Ceco is fitted then they are generally not as responsive as the Bendix system.
In this case I usually beep down when lowering the collective for a descent and beep up again as I re-introduce power to terminate in the hover. This will also depend on Aircraft weight and the DA at the time.
Not much different from a lot of 212s I have flown really.

'Lowering the lever should have a slightly more positive effect than the beep.'

B73
Can you clarify what you mean here?
Obviously when the collective is lowered RPM tends to increase and vice versa but that is why it sometimes needs beeped down or up??

Cheers

John Eacott

10th Jul 2007, 11:39

Other than to adjust a slight Nr variation, I don't touch the beep trim from one month to the next! I have, however, used a low Nr IAW Bell criteria to reduce noise footprint when getting a helipad approved, during noise tests. From memory, a 97%Nr approach cuts the EpndB by about 2-3dB.

I'm sure that someone here knows that he meant BIII, not B111 :p

Bravo73

10th Jul 2007, 18:15

He meant raise the lever, lower it to avoid an overtorque.

I did. Thanks, Twiddle.

Saber 09

3rd Aug 2007, 02:52

I fly both the TH-67A/A+ (206B3) and the OH-58C on a regular basis. The hydraulic systems are a bit different. For instance, the OH-58 has a T-valve to help with pressure differentials and there is filtration on both the pressure and return sides. The TH-67 does not have SCAS. Only the instrument version has force trim. :hmm:

I have noticed several NTSB reports over the past decade where the cause was undetermined, yet part of the accident sequence included a sharp, uncommanded roll to either the left or right. Some of these have resulted in fatalities. They appear to have occurred in all modes of flight from flat pitch, hover, slow flight, to cruise. Has anyone experienced one of these episodes, or have detailed knowledge of one occurring? I am curious, even if it did not result in an accident. I have not heard of any incidents like this with the OH-58A/C models. :confused:

On that note, does anyone have knowledge of an STC that would slightly modify the 206B3 hydraulics to make them more like the OH-58. This is a serious inquiry that may help save one of us one day. :8

Saber 09