Why did Bell sell its stake in the AW139?

[Jackonicko]

Wasn't it an obvious replacement for the Huey IV (sorry, sorry, Bell 412) in the company's product line?

What were they thinking?

What are they thinking today? What next for Bell, to sit above the Model 206L, 407 and 429?

[BlenderPilot]

I heard Bell wanted to use enlarged UH1 fuselage with the 139 powertrain and dynamics, or put a two bladed tethering rotor head on the 139 fuselage :cool: HaHa!

But seriously . . .

I don't think Bell sold it's stake, it was more like the Italians realized it was going to be a big success, they did most of the R&D, manufacturing, and incorporated the technology, and they didn't need Bell to market the aircraft in the U.S. so they simply let them go.

Think about it, with or without Bell the aircraft was certified, and operational close to the specified dates, and what has happened with "new" Bell aircraft in the recent years, they are always delayed, and when they do come out, they are not what was advertised (427), or like the 407 which although now is a great aircraft, at the beginning it had millon expensive ASB's.

[EN48]

or put a two bladed tethering rotor head


Dont you mean "teetering"

[Tango and Cash]

$$$$$$$$$$

Bell is owned by Textron, which being an American publicly-traded company, is focused primarily on short term (i.e. this quarter's) profits. Selling their share of AW139 program allowed Bell to keep their numbers up, and that helped Textron keep their numbers up. For a while at least!

Would be interesting to know what Bell's executive row thinks of the idea, now that the AW139 is selling as fast as Agusta can crank them off the line. And how would the 139 have sold in the US with Bell's name and product support behind it?

Meanwhile, Bell is left with the 412 :ugh:

[Mediahawk]

I vaguely remember something from the press release back then, about Bell wanting to funnel cash and R&D effort into the 609 project...?

[Ian Corrigible]

The ability to give TXT a quick financial boost was rumored to be big consideration at the time; others probably included:


Agusta's 'snub' of Bell by choosing L-3 as its partner for the AB139 offering for LUH;
Bell's long-standing aspiration of doing a twin of its own (such as the 442) in partnership with Korea, something that was finally killed-off when Korea selected a European partner for KHP (formally announced in Dec '05, and thus probably known to Bell at the time of the AB139 divorce);
Agusta's pressure on Bell to commit to investment in AB139 growth variants, including the A149;
And, perhaps most importantly, pressure from the Italians for Bell to finally kill-off the 412 as a competitor to the AB139, and to establish a U.S. production line for the type. At the time, AB139 deliveries were only ~15/year, and the eventual success of the AW139 was probably at the upper end of projections, so Red had to choose between taking a gamble on his 25% share in the AB139, or sticking with the nice margins associated with 35-40 412s annually.


I/C

[tottigol]

Ian, let's not forget Bell's shenanigans with regards to the LUH competition, the Army General's briefcase, the 210 and how they thought they were going to beat everybody with yet another under performing product.
Then the Army said they wanted an IFR capable aircraft and Bell came out with the now notorious "It only takes a new paint job" (or something along those lines) and the 412, again.
Tango, Bell and thinking do not belong in the same sentence lately (the last ten years).

[Jackonicko]

The Bell 442, eh?

I can find nothing about that, and it had passed me by.

Can anyone tell me any more?

"In design definition stage from spring 1993; same weight class as Bell 412; four-blade main rotor; powered by two HTEC CTS800 or MTU/Turbomeca/Rolls-Royce MTR 390 turboshafts; hydraulically retractable tricycle landing gear. Was intended as Bell412 successor, but now succeeded by upgrade Model 412+ programme."

Was it another bloomin' Huey, or something genuinely new?

[BlenderPilot]

EN48 wrote . . .
Dont you mean "teetering"

Yes I did, sorry about that, English not my native language, didn't speak any English until I turned about 12 years old, and then it was just a little, I still mess up every now and then.

[Buitenzorg]

Any cabal behind the scenes notwithstanding, the official reason given at the time was as follows:

Bell entered the LUH competition in collaboration with Agusta, offering the (then) AB139, and then also entered their own bid, offering the B412EP. This was a clear conflict of interest, and either the GAO, the Pentagon or both told Bell to remove themselves from either bid or both bids would be eliminated. Bell responded by ending their collaboration with Agusta on the 139.

In the end, neither bid was successful with the EC145 winning the competition, and civilian helicopter operators can now look forward to what appears to be a terrific aircraft but without the sublime customer support that Bell have always been renowned for. Eurocopter would appear to have been the only winners in this spat.

[EN48]

English not my native language, ... I still mess up every now and then.


English IS my native language and I still mess up often! ;)

[Thai Pom]

I have heard this rumour, anybody else. Textron is also trying to dump Cessna....

[tottigol]

Buiten..., Bell originally offered the 210 for the LUH competition. When the requirements changed to include IFR capability (for which the Chelton displays were not certificated in helicopters at the time), Bell offered the 412.:ugh:
And from there all therest you said seems plausible.