Bell 206 Long Ranger vs AS350 b2?

[Soave_Pilot]

My boss asked that question for me the other day...

Anybody here has flown both could weight in some toughts plz?

Operation is: corporate flying, hot climate, low elevation.

[Earl of Rochester]

- Soave Pilot

As much as I enjoy the 206 series - I doubt if I would buy one over a B2.

While the LIII and LIV have typical Bell reliability and a slightly lower operating cost than the B2, the Squirrel's performance and passenger comfort (in my view) wins out.

From a piloting perspective I prefer 'crusing' in the Squirrel than I do a two-bladed Bell.

There are many factors to consider though. Some people prefers Bells because of the reduced space required to construct a 'mini hangar'. The blade alignment does make the parking quite compact.

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/9/1/2/1758219.jpg (http://www.pprune.org/photo/Prestige-Helicopters/Bell-206L-3-LongRanger/1758219/L/&sid=a45c8a103fa599806a43db5d4eee2c76)

The Bell 206L III: Wonderfully reliable, great Bell support and slightly lower operating costs

http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/middle/7/9/1/1766197.jpg (http://www.pprune.org/photo/Eurocopter-AS-350B-2-Ecureuil/1766197/L/&sid=8f603d8a3092c411e7c62ec42d3550b4)

The AS350B2: (This one with a port side command seat to enable a wider two place front bench arrangement). Spacious cabin, good performance and a great ride (smoothness) are guaranteed in the Squirrel

Happy flying!

[DWH]

i have very little flying experience(only 40hrs into pplh..but all on a longranger)...but have sat in the back of both on many occasions ...despite there being more space in the back of the 206l i would agree that from a passenger point of view the overall experience is better in the squirrel..but obviously a purely personal observation

[Gordy]

Have thousands of hours in each.

I would suggest the Astar---tis smoother, faster and more comfortable for corporate. Only downside would be the lack of luggage space which is corrected by installing the cheeks.

[nigelh]

I agree with all of above but if it was me i would go for the LTS101 engine and keep well clear of Turbomeca as they will bend you over and **** you.

[Jack Carson]

I take the opposing view. I operated both a 206L-4 and the AS-250B2 in Phoenix, AZ. Both aircraft had their pluses and minuses. I preferred the 206. It had better payload range numbers (EMS Config.) and was very comfortable to fly and ride in. One of our longer flights required a round trip from Phoenix to White River (Elev 6000ft. and Temp 25º C). The B2 was short on payload and HOGE capability for this trip.

[rick1128]

I have had experience dealing with both Bell and Eurocopter. My biggest issue with Eurocopter is support. Or more correctly lack of. Eurocopter expects owners to purchase at least 10% of the helicopter value in spares and they will give you a list of the suggested spares. Eurocopter (EADS) are really oriented toward selling to government organizations. They do not keep an extensive stock of spares and they will not take one off the production line. While normal replacement items are readily available other items can become a long wait time. I worked for one operator that had a starflex fail, it took almost 9 months before they got the replacement. While passengers might be more comfortable in the back of an Astar, they would much rather be in the back of a helicopter that is flying.

[klaus_a_e]

I flew both for a couple hundred hours now (not the normal B2 but one with the LTS 101) and I would go for a AStar for sure!!
Not only the smoothness of the AStar but also the speed, the room and the quietness makes the AStar from my point of view a much more comfortable helicopter for passengers. Also the room for the luggage always was enough.
Not just for corporate flying also for all other kinds of missions. I do fly in the Alps and I can’t really attest Jacks reply (Probably because I only flew the L1).
The only thing I can’t comment is the price of operation as I always was just the driver and never the one who paid the checks! (Which is probably a good thing).

[EN48]

Bell 206 Long Ranger vs AS350 b2?


Suggest that you compare the B407 to the AStar as well. Might be a more meaningful comparison.

[Gordy]

Suggest that you compare the B407 to the AStar as well. Might be a more meaningful comparison.

I fly the L4 with TRACS...can do more than the 407 in the hot and high environment. The OP is at low level.

[Soave_Pilot]

Thanks for the help guys...

And the price of both to buy it in the US are near the same amount? Or am I mistaken? :confused:

[The Sultan]

Soave

Fly both models boost off and then make a decision.

The Sultan

[GeorgeMandes]

I fly the L4 with TRACS...can do more than the 407 in the hot and high environment.

I would be curious if you can elaborate on this statement. I have flown the 407 and L4 with the high altitude tail rotor in the CO mountains, based at an 8,000 foot airport with 14,000 foot mountains just a stone's throw away. While the L4 will be torque, rather than temp limited up pretty high, even a temp limited 407 seems to have gobs more power than the L4.

If you are talking about solely the performance charts, although I haven't had an opportunity to study it, I have sitting on my desk the new supplement from Bell with the 407 improved hover performance with above minimum specification power.

The 407 is just so much more capable in the mountains -- the FADEC keeps rotor RPM rock steady where the L4 rotor RPM is always climbing in descent, the boosted pedals of the 407 make yaw control much easier, the response of the 407 rotor system makes hovering so much more precise than the same day response of the L4, the 407 landing gear makes off airport stuff and especially slopes so much more comfortable, and the 407 has better range, climbs better and cruises faster than the L4.

[R.OCKAPE]

normal people fly with boost on

[Earl of Rochester]

And the price of both to buy it in the US are near the same amount? Or am I mistaken?


- Soave Pilot

As you know, there are numerous factors which need to be accurately assessed prior to making an aircraft acquisition and, a reliable pre-purchase inspection in particular, is essential to making an informed decision. The aircraft's former history and work type are also of significance.

However, here is a brief summary of comparitive prices ex-US:

Bell 206L IV
Year: 2009 Hours: 235 Price: $2.45m
Year: 2006 Hours: 490 Price: $1.88m
Year: 1994 Hours: 6,300 Price: $1.4m

AS 350 B2
Year: 2009 Hours: 95 Price: $2.2m
Year: 2002 Hours: 1312 Price: $1.35m
Year: 1995 Hours: 5,395 Price: $1.1m

In essence, the acquisition costs are within the same price range but .. only a professional assessment of the aircraft's condition will determine its practical value. The practical value takes into account the following:

- Assessment of all remaining component times
- Assessment of fabric and condition of aircraft
- Type of work/environment in which aircraft has worked
- Comprehensive systems and flight test
- Comprehensive mechanical examination
- Complete paperwork trail and accurate logs
- Accurate history of damage and non-scheduled maitnenance

Good luck!

Earl

http://www.clker.com/cliparts/e/0/3/7/11971228763200152FunDraw_dot_com_Pipe_Smoking_Man.svg.thumb. png

[Soave_Pilot]

Thanks Rochestah Man!:ok:

It was helpful.

[SuperF]

how big is the budget, and the reliability you need? If you want a machine that you can buy parts for, get a Bell.

Also how many do you want to carry, and how big are they. While you can get 6 pax into a 350, 2 on the front seat is really weight limited for full sized adults, whereas you can load the LR pretty much up to it weight limits on the seats.

[The Sultan]

OCK

Looks like your training is a little lacking. Bell trains full autos and hydraulics failures. Somethings you probably have not bothered with.

The Sultan