Bell 407 Type Rating

[allanon1980]

Hi guys,

Might have the option of doing a 407 type rating in the near future.

I am currently have my PPL with 155 hours and rated on R22 & R44.

How do ye think I will find the 407 rating, with my low hours? Will I manage it in the minimum or might I need extra hours, given the differences in Turbine V's Piston etc etc....

Cheers & Merry Christmas......

[birrddog]

Al, I was not too different to you went I went for my 407 rating (in terms of hours)...

I did my 206 rating before my 407, with about 25hrs on 206, and R44->206 was straight forward from a flight handling characteristics, you just had to learn about operating, starting and limitations of the turbine...

206->407 was straightforward from a turbine perspective, as 407 has push button start and more power, though the flight handling characteristics were very different.

You could get away with large control movements in a 206 and 44, though with the (smaller?) 4 blade rotor of the 407 you needed to make much more precise, smaller inputs... it can dance around a nickel in the hands of a skilled pilot.

That being said, the R44-407 should be an memorable conversion...

I would be interested to hear from more experienced pilots out here with 206 and 407 time, if you would think it better to get some time on a 206 before doing 407, or not, and why?

[EN48]

I recently did a 407 Initial training course (equivalent of a type rating) at Bell Academy in TX. Had about 100 hours of helo time then and while I was intimidated by the experience and professionalism of my fellow students and instructors (this was my fault, not theirs - they could not have been more accomodating), I was the only member of the class to score 100% on the written. ( I mention this not to brag, but to illustrate that the course is newbie firendly!:)) I did have some turbine helo time (Enstrom 480/B407) and a fair amount of plank time. So, I'd say "go for it!" If there is any way for you to do this at Bell Academy, I highly recommend that you do it this way. World class in every respect! However, this was a very intense week of training - dont do it this way if you are not ready to pay close attention for 6 days. I'd also recommend getting the books ahead of time, and if possible, doing a couple of hours of dual in a 407 just to begin to get a handle on generic turbine issues and the 407 FADEC (possibly the most challenging part of the course if you can already fly decently). The Bell course includes 5-6 hours of flight time. Getting it done in 5-6 hours with no prior turbine time may be a challenge, but because of the concentrated nature of the training, you can probably do it in fewer hours at Bell than at a more leisurely pace elsewhere. Bell 407 time in the US is priced at about $2000/hr, probably more in other countries. The Bell Academy 407 course is priced at $12,500, includes a comprehensive ground school, 2hrs of sim time and 5-6 hours of flight time (possibly more as their policy is "train to proficiency.") so while expensive, probably not a bad value given what one might pay elsewhere.

[GoodGrief]

morning.
A turbine is no witchcraft.
If it has a rotor, you can fly it.

The hydraulics of the 407 is VERY good.
Together with the rotor system you get an immediate response to your inputs. So, just fly it with a little pressure from your thumb.
My instructor used to say: "If you don't move the cyclic, the helicopter doesn't move."

Make sure you have your collective/throttle correlation down perfect, since you have to fly the 407 in manual mode as well.
Get some practice flying an R22 without the governor.

It is a great machine.
Have fun.

[BlenderPilot]

The 407 will be easier to fly than the pistons . . . . you have, power, control, FADEC, what else do you want? It's ALMOST foolproof.

Just don't overcontrol, The Bell 407 is not unstable, on the contrary, but controls are very precise and if you overcontrol you will know because the aircraft will respond immediately, and you will be all over the place, not like in the pistons.

Just get a copy of the sofware FADEC simulator that Bell gives pilots, go thru all the procedures, study the manual, and other than that is just a helicopter like any other.

Enjoy it.

[rotorspin]

allan - I haven't got a 407 rating but have 1 hour left of my 206 rating having had a similar number of rotor hours as you on R44. The turbine starts were the main focus of training for the first 2 hours (and continues to be!)

Flying is very similar - in fact I still look to pull the carb heat on final!

As the 407 bypasses a lot of the potential hotstart issues I would say go for it and enjoy every second. Having seen a number of 407's in action since getting my 206 I am VERY jealous! :O (isn't the grass always greener?!)

[TheVelvetGlove]

206 / 407 - completely different animals.

Most of us flew the 206 first, but that is not a valid reason to do it that way- not much of anything translates from the 206 to the 407.

If you are coming from a piston helicopter, just remember one thing: Watch your torque gauge on EVERY take-off....you can continue to raise collective in the 407 beyond 100% and massively over-torque the sucker (lots and lots of $$$) without ever getting an rpm decrease/rotor droop- the aircraft gives you no kinesthetic indication whatsoever that you are destroying its guts (other than a little blinking light on the panel). Have fun :ok:

[IHL]

The 407 is a rocket ship, it has a rate of climb limit of 2000 FPM which can easily be exceeded.

You have to really understand the FADEC auto-manual; if not it will cost someone alot of money.

All in all it is very impressive.

[DoinTime]

Yes the 407.... what a great machine.

I went from having well over a 1000hrs in the 206 B/L into a 407 and glad I did it that way. Not saying that the 407 is harder.... on the contrary. With the extra power and greater instant response from the controls, it is allot easier. Now days I can be flying a 407 in the morning then finish the day on a 206.

When going from the 407 to a 206 it is very easy to over torque. As you will run out of power quickly in the 206 if you are used to the 407. Also the collective position in the 407 sits higher than the 206 at the same percent value. So when you jump into the 407 you will be reluctant to pull the collective higher thinking you are pulling to much, just to look at the gauge and see it sitting at 60%.

Naarr you will love the 407 especially going from a 44 to that..... it will blow you away. FADEC failure.... here is a tip...... react with the collective first not the throttle..... you should move the throttle very little.

I could go on...... You will have no problems going into the 407 but from the 407 to a 206 you will have to be very careful especially if you have a lot of hours in the 407 as over torquing the 206 is easy to do.:ok:

enjoy

[docstone]

Just flown my 407 this morning, a wonderful ship - stable, powerful, fun. Really can't fault her - converted straight off pistons wihtout too much problem; as the previous posts say, the FADEC really makes life a lot simpler than a 206. If you want to do your TR with us, drop me a PM.

[BlenderPilot]

After extensively reading the thread . . . . . now I know why when people in a position of hiring pilots are always looking for pilots with plenty of experience on type an plenty of helicopter turbine time.

Be safe and take it one step at a time.

[EN48]

now I know why when people in a position of hiring pilots are always looking for pilots with plenty of experience on type an plenty of helicopter turbine time.



Need to keep in mind that we all start at zero hours!;)

[GeorgeMandes]

Is that 150 in helicopters and thousands of hours in fixed wing aircraft, ideally much of that turbine or 150 hours total time as a pilot?

[BlenderPilot]

All this got me thinking . . . . . . last week as part of my normal routine I flew 5 diffrent aircraft, from 3 makes, Agusta 109E Power, AS350B3, AS355, Bell 206L4 & JetRanger, and a Bell 407, just last Monday I flew all of them except the Jet Ranger in one day. Never had to think much about the diffrerences amongst them.

Although there are some important differences, it just all clicks in after you fly them all for a little while. I just kinda mentally brief myself on the highlights of each aircraft while strapping in and looking at the cockpit.

For example . . . .

- Agusta 109E Power, just don't forget the landing gear!!! On the ones with the newer tail rotor watch the wind as you can run out of pedal.

- AS350B3, check hydraulics well, don't forget the ACCU after the flight, low tail.

- AS355, very limited power around here (10K FT DA usual), don't forget to match engines, ACCU after the flight, low tail, and those damn ignitions.

- Bell 206L4, easy to hotstart if you don't modulate carefully, very careful with tail rotor pedal as you will hit the stop with about 85% torque and any wind coming from the wrong direction will put you in trouble.

- Bell 206, is a delight to fly, easy to do everything, just manage your power/energy well.

- Bell 407, my very favorite, just make sure you understand the FADEC well.

[GoodGrief]

A pilot in his right mind starting out on a new type is usually careful and checks everything twice.

It is the hero attitude that gets you in trouble...

[helonorth]

Blenderpilot, why, from reading this thread "extensively", do you come to this conclusion?

[Spunk]

@helonorth

I think Blenderpilot was trying to avoid the expression "overconfidence".

Yes, I`m pretty sure you can fly a Bell407 as a low timer (don't get me wrong: a ppl pilot with 155 hours in my eyes is a low timer) as long as all the systems are running smooth.
But what if... if the FADEC decides to turn on some of those little colorful lights (FADEC FAIL, FADAC FAULT, FADEC DEGRADED). There is a good reason why even Bell Flight Academy teaches those manoeuvres in a sim first.

Like I said before, yes a ppl pilot can fly a Bell 407 but make sure (s)he`s got an experienced safety pilot with her/him. Otherwise it might be an expensive gain in experience.

@BlenderPilot

I know what you are talking about. The biggest problem is to calm down when you are jumping from one aircraft into the other. Before hitting the starter button make sure you know which aircraft you`re in: Bendix or CECO, 206L, L I or L III, 407 or BO105 DB vs CBS etc... I always had a hard time to get into that EC120 after flying 206s for the entire day.

[EN48]

yes a ppl pilot can fly a Bell 407 but make sure (s)he`s got an experienced safety pilot with her/him


This almost certainly going to be the case unless one self-insures. Most insurance companies are going to require substantial SOE plus frequent recurrent training before turning a less experienced pilot loose solo in a 407. OTOH, a compelling case can be made that the R22 is a more challenging/demanding acft to fly than a 407. Broadly speaking a turbine engine makes life easier for the pilot, even the low time pilot. IMHO, too much is made of the transition from piston helicopters to turbines.

[GeorgeMandes]

I don't think the issue is the turbine but rather the appropriateness of going to a 407 directly. I learned to fly helicopters in a Jet Ranger, at Bell, and after about a week, I was flying their Jet Ranger solo across the Texas country side accumulating the hours required for my rating.

I haven't heard of Bell doing the same thing in a 407, and they know a bit about helicopters and teching folks to fly them. I have also heard of someone telling FlightSafety they wanted to go from a 182 directly to a Citation X, and even though that is a two crew aircraft (so the person would be more or less "supervised"), Flightsafety wouldn't do it.

Unless the 407 initial is just an exposure to the aircraft, it would make a lot more sense to move to a Jet Ranger, build hours, do recurrent training, and get comfortable in the sky before adding the performance and complexity (overall check list, fadec and hydraulics off) of the 407. That would make the insurance company happy and make sense to anyone evaluating your development as a helicopter pilot.

[BlenderPilot]

I have also heard of someone telling FlightSafety they wanted to go from a 182 directly to a Citation X, and even though that is a two crew aircraft (so the person would be more or less "supervised"), Flightsafety wouldn't do it.I had 196 hours in Piper Tomahawk, Seminole, Archer, and Cessna 172, 196 hours total in airplanes, when I did my Hawker 450 training at Flightsafety in Wichita, the guy attended with from my same company had 182 hours total time, and 2 years later he was flying PIC in a G4. I do remember they couldn't give us the PIC checkride in the simulator because you only could do it if you had more than 1500 hours to do it in the level D sim, but you could do it in the actual aircraft, in any case we both got our Pilot Inital Diplomas and the rating regardless of our flight time. The Citation X is of course heavier and faster, buy I don't see why there would be a diffrence in criteria from FSI.

Blenderpilot, why, from reading this thread "extensively", do you come to this conclusion?Well in the aviation world I know there are no minimum hour limits to fly this or that aircraft, we have 24 year old 757 captains, helicopter pilots fresh out of school around here start out in medium twins, and after a year they are usually PIC's, I didn't see anything wrong with that, if the pilot had the right skills and knowledge. There are pilots with 10,000 hours that scare me, and 1,000 hour pilots I would fly with any day.

But if I rethink the situation, I realize that there are a lot of things that can you wrong when you have little time, for instance a new pilot might spend a lot of time looking at the gauges to avoid overtorque, when a more experienced pilot can pretty much by the power required to hover know where the power is going to be at when he's over the obstacle, older guys know how much power they are pulling just by the sound of the aircraft, and only a brief glance of the gauge would confirm.

I guess from an operators point of view, experience can save some money.