Bell 505 Jet Ranger X [Archive] - Page 2

FH1100 Pilot

9th Mar 2016, 13:40

Nigel, I'm sure you have a lot invested in the 505...financially maybe but emotionally for certain. But I'm not sure why you have to attack me personally for my views. Have I ever said anything nasty to or about you? I find your obsession with hurting me puzzling, and probably unhealthy. Then again, you are just another brave internet warrior hiding behind a keyboard. Hey, can you even hear your mother calling you for supper from down there in that basement?

Ah but seriously, Nigel, I'm sure you're probably the best R-22 or R-44 pilot in all of Europe...maybe Russia and Asia too. But your general knowledge of helicopters is lacking.

I know this is a rumor network and all, but taking somebody's word from somebody else that the 505 cruised all the way from Canada to Kentucky at an implied constant airspeed of 135 knots is naively foolish and silly. Son, have you ever flown a two-blade, underslung 206 rotor system at 135 knots? I'd guess knot, to make a bad pun.

First of all, you know why Bell put that cambered horizontal stabilizer on the tailboom of the 206? It's to keep the tail down in cruise. Otherwise the ship would have an extremely nose-down attitude. You think that little flat-plate horizontal stab on the 505 is going to do the trick? Nope. So what must the ride have been like at 135 knots? Pretty uncomfortable, I'd guess...pretty nose-low. Passengers don't want to fly like that. Trust me, I'm a Bo-105 pilot, I know ;) At at paltry 120 knots, the '105 assumed a 10-12 degree nose-down cabin attitude. Why? Well because the mast was not tilted forward and always had to stay perpendicular to the tip-path plane.

Flying long distances at 120 knots in a 105 is not fun. It's squirrelly up there. But keep it down to 105-110 knots and life is much better - *and* - added bonus, your fuel consumption is lower too! (100 knots was even better but no self-respecting pilot wants to fly that slow.) I do notice that the seats in the 505 are reclined at a pretty good angle - probably to try to make up for the nose-low cabin attitude in forward flight.

And then, Nigel, if you do manage to pull the 505 tail down far enough for a decent cabin attitude at high-speed cruise, you are getting REALLY close to the flapping limits of the rotor hub. A little turbulence thrown into the mix and a jiggity pilot who likes to fly with a no-friction, wet-noodle cyclic? Hoo-man, I don't even want to think about it. Neither does Bell, I'd imagine.

Okay, so now let's talk about engine failures at high speed. You know how fast the rotor rpm is going to bleed off? It's why the LongRangers have such problems with engine failures in high-speed cruise. You've *got* to get the nose up before getting the pitch down...or the rotor rpm will go away, a high rate of descent will build up and you'll get into "Nodamatic bounce" like you wouldn't believe. Just ask PHI what they teach in LongRangers.

But wait, the 505 doesn't even have a Nodamatic transmission mount! Sooooooo....hmm, this begs the question: What is the ride quality like at 135 knots? How are they dealing with the "one-per" that invariably comes with high cruise? Again, have you, Nigel ever flown a two-blade, underslung system that fast? It gets...interesting, Nigel.

135 knots in a 505 is beyond the VNE of the 206 with...wait for it...the same exact rotor system! It may very well *go* 135 knots (in a dive), but it's not going to cruise up there. ...Without endplates/fins on the horizontal stab? No way. No friggin' way. There's a lot of things Bell *can* do, but they cannot rewrite the laws of aerodynamics. You can expect that the tail configuration will change yet again before certification, probably to something that looks more like a 206L does now. And yes, that will slow it down. Expect a VNE of 130 knots just like now. Keep this in mind: Flying-wise, IT'S A LONGRANGER. Errr, a LongRanger without the Nodamatic trans mount.

Will Bell be able to bring the thing to market for around US$1.0 million? Sure...if you consider $1.3 or $1.4 million to be "around" $1.0 million. Frankie Robinson is probably laughing his ass off out there in California at the thought of Bell trying to compete with his R-66, price-wise. Because it's not going to happen. And the Bell fanboys like you, Nigel will say, "Well, $1.5 or $1.6 million with paint, radios, openable crew windows, a heater, a rotor brake and an interior is just fine by us!" And maybe it is.

Nigel, do you know what marketing hype is? Bell is laying it on pretty thick with this 505. And gullible people like you are just eating it up. Then there are those of us with some experience - not only in the cockpit but in this industry - who know better than to be wowed by a fancy, uncertified, experimental "flight test vehicle"...basically a mockup and some glossy brochures. We've seen it all before.

Bell ain't reinventing the wheel here. But they're trying to make you think they are.

widgeon

9th Mar 2016, 15:58

That is about 1 mill USD now , possibly the engine is extra :<)

the seats look awful familiar .

bellblade2014

10th Mar 2016, 02:38

That is such an interesting comment. You should do a little bit of research on the reasons why the long ranger is the way it is. It's limits for speed are only driven by drag and power. The long ranger and all jet ranger and 407 aircraft are draggy . This can be overpowered with more thrust. The 505 also reduces drag from the rotor that comes from advancing blade Mach effects at high speeds... The 505 NR is 3% slower than the L4. If you look at speed vs power curves on an L4, this 3% change would drive major improvements in speed capability.

I have sought out knowledge of the 505 flight testing and know for certain that the rotor has gone beyond 152kts TAS in a dive and has seen more than 130kts MCP in steady level. The engineers and sales folk at the shows will tell you a lot if you just ask them.

There was no flight attitude issue related to the Horizontal stabilizer... Your comment makes no sense. The old design had a much longer moment arm and would have been even better for nose down angle... Do the math. Talking to the Bell engineers directly, the stabilizer moved to increase stability in low speeds and transittions from high speed to low and vice versa.

looking forward to hearing people speak who have flown it. I met one guy who doesn't work for Bell who flew it. The guy loved it and has 2 on order and is working on a 3rd.

Agile

10th Mar 2016, 09:02

Bell or airbus helicopter do not make the seats
They are third party components like this one by "zodiac aerospace"

http://www.zodiacaerospace.com/sites/default/files/styles/product-node/public/content-images/product/hydros.jpg?itok=FcsnI9ln (http://www.zodiacaerospace.com/sites/default/files/content-images/product/hydros.jpg)

certified:
FAA 14 CFR Part27: Airworthiness Standards. Transport Category Aircraft
EASA CS-27 : Certification Specifications and Acceptable Means of Compliance for Large Rotorcraft
ETSO/TSO-C127a : Technical Standard Order – Rotorcraft, transport airplane, and normal and utility airplane seating system,
ETSO/TSO-C114 : Technical Standard Order – Torso Restraint system
SAE AS8049 : Performance standard for seat in civil rotorcraft, transport aircraft, and general aviation aircraft
SAE AS8043 : Aircraft Torso Restraint system
DO-160G : Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment

As an OEM would make sense not to bother with all that certification process, and buy it all made.

FH1100 Pilot

10th Mar 2016, 14:13

bellblade2014 sez:

There was no flight attitude issue related to the Horizontal stabilizer... Your comment makes no sense. The old design had a much longer moment arm and would have been even better for nose down angle... Do the math..

What? No, it's *your* comment that makes no sense, bub.

To achieve 135 knots in forward flight the rotor disk is going to have to be tilted forward at a pretty good angle. This is true of any helicopter. The fuselage is going to naturally want to follow along at that angle - we know this; it's not rocket science. It's why Bell put the cambered horizontal stabilizer on the 206: to pull the tail down in forward flight. To say that's not the case is just silly. A drastic nose-down attitude in cruise is uncomfortable (e.g. Bo-105, FH1100). You can ameliorate this to a degree by tilting the mast forward (206), reclining the seats, or both (505). But as Star Trek's Mr. Scott always used to admonish Captain Kirk, ya canna change the laws of physics! When I used to weigh 170 (thirty pounds ago, ugh), if I was in an L-3 and was empty and wanted to cruise at 80% torque I'd usually be right at the forward cyclic stop. Straight-arm the bitch!

To say that the 505 is "less draggy" than a 206 or 407 and therefore will scream along at 135 knots is, again, just silly. Bell *might* have cleaned up the nose, but there's a whole lot of...you know...helicopter aft of the bubble. All those sticking-out bits create drag. Bell probably couldn't get it to do a steady 135kts if they retracted the landing gear - no matter what the marketing geeks say. How much drag do we have to take away for every extra knot of airspeed increase? There's gotta be an aerodynamic formula for that...

Another thing: If slowing the L-4 rotor system down 3% did such great things, why didn't Bell just tell us to beep our L-4's down to 97% for cruise? Seems to me I could've been really hauling ass at 130+ knots instead of dogging along at 106 knots, no?

Oh, and anyone who thinks that the 505 won't spout winglets/endplates on the horizontal stab is just dreaming. Dreaming. Repeat after me: It. Will. Have. Them. Why? Simple, really. Moving the mast behind the cabin did a bad thing: It upset the proportions. It put more cabin area ahead of the mast. Not good, aerodynamically. Look at *every* helicopter that goes faster than 100 knots. See something in common? What's that you say? A huge fin (fenestron ships) or lots of fin area (conventional tail rotor ships)? Yup.

Okay, let's talk about that horizontal stab. Bell first put the 505 stabilizer back on the vertical fin, opposite of the t/r gearbox. Bad choice. That didn't work, so they moved it forward, under the rotor again where it's going to affect autorotation behavior just as it did with the 206. We shall see how this all works in flight testing. I suspect we'll eventually see a regular ol' 206-type cambered horizontal stab (with endplates!) before the thing gets certified. (Unless they install a helipilot with yaw damper as standard equipment.)

Speaking of certification... Do we remember Bell's initial projections...about how the 505 would be certified in early 2016? They probably wanted to piggyback it on 206's original TC, #H2SW like they did with the LongRanger...and 407. But at some point the FAA ACO must've said, "No friggin' way - get a new TC!" ...Which is why that particular detail didn't surface until, what, June of 2015? I'm sure that's why the certification date has...what term did Bell use?..."slightly slipped." Yeahhhhh, we're not going to see certification in 2016.

Look, I don't hate Bell. I've got six or seven-THOUSAND hours in 206's. It's my favorite aircraft of all time. A friend of mine just got on with a 206 operator after a stint flying big Sikorskys. When I admitted that I was envious he said, "Come on over! We still have room for a PIC with 206 experience." And I'm tempted, honestly. It'd be great flying the old girl again. But my days of flying full-time are over, thank you.

I'm just not impressed with this 505. I'm not awestruck by Bell's slick marketing scheme. Some of you fawn over this thing like teenage girls at a Justin Bieber concert. If Bell does produce the 505 (and I still think that's a big "if"), I don't see it doing the kind of things the 206 became famous for. It'll probably be a good personal helicopter to rival the R-66, but it doesn't seem like it'll be a good replacement for a 206B or 206L. Maybe LEA, or ENG (good God, does every TV station *need* a 407 or Astar??). And maybe those segments alone can justify certifying it and putting it in production. Then again...

The Bell fanboys on this site keep talking about how many *orders* Bell has for the 505. Yet all I ever see from Bell are numbers of "Letters of Intent"...which number about 240(?) at last press release. Letters of Intent are not orders, gang. A LOI is not binding. Maybe Bell will tell us how many actual orders-with-non-refundable deposits they've gotten? I doubt they'd release that info. I wouldn't.

As I've said before, Cessna was so sure that their 162 (the 150 replacement) would set the world on fire. It didn't. Beech was sure that the Starship was the wave of the future! It wasn't. Throughout history so many manufacturers have tried to re-invent the wheel with disastrous results. Will Bell succeed with the 505? We shall see. So far they've been hyping it up pretty good. Don't be fooled by the hype. The 505 probably has a long way to go before it gets certified, and a lot can and probably will change before then. And the final numbers will *not* be as impressive as the sales/marketing guys would like you to think now. Like I said, we've seen this all before.

Oh, and one last thing? Engineers don't go to trade shows to answer questions from the great unwashed. They stay home where they're busy doing engineer stuff and figuring out how they're going to get some more speed out of the pig since the sales guys are making promises that are hard to keep. Sales and marketing guys go to the shows. Keep it in perspective, folks.

bellblade2014

10th Mar 2016, 15:49

Google Transport Canada Bell 505... To my knowledge always was the plan. Bell never could've got away with existing TC. New engine, avionics and fuselage triggers all the major change stuff in the rules.

At last two HAI's I've met a couple of engineers at both the 505 and 525 exhibits. From this year, Chief engineer is what the 505 Guy's business card says and supervisor of IPT engineering on the 525 guy. Seemed to know his stuff... The lead pilot they had for each program was very sharp as well and has lots of little details to share.

Probably best thing is to seek out non-Bell folks that have flown it... There's got to be more than just the guy I talked to.

nigelh

11th Mar 2016, 12:19

FH.....you really do " lead with your chin " !!!
You have made so many speculations on a helicopter you seem to know very little about ...and pass them off as fact . Just because you shout loudest doesn't make you correct . Also you have picked on so many aspects I can assume that by law of averages you will get lucky on one of them ..( a blind squirrel will still find the odd nut ...!!)
You are not only wrong on your speed , you also quote me incorrectly .... I said 125kn NOT 135kn which I think very unlikely . The seats are all wrong as well aren't they ? Now you are also an expert seat maker to boot !!!
Just chill out and accept that Bell possibly , their engineers , their test pilots ....possibly know more about this than you and I ....!!! And don't forget that IF it gets certified , and IF it can cruise at 125kn , if it is delivered for $1.075m .....then you WILL eat your hat !!
Ps ....I'm not an armchair warrior and certainly don't hide behind anything ....I think I would be easy to find ......!!!

Aesir

12th Mar 2016, 07:52

From Vertical mag in july 2014:

"The project will take concurrent critical paths to certification, with the first type certificate coming from Transport Canada"

Bell gives 505 JetRanger X update| Vertical Magazine - The Pulse of the Helicopter Industry (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/Bellgives505JetRangerXupdate)

nigelh

12th Mar 2016, 11:40

Isn't that nearly two years old ??!!

Aesir

13th Mar 2016, 20:15

Yes Nigel. 2 years old.

Just sayin it was always the plan to get a new type certificate on the 505. Also speed has been quoted as around 125kts since I have been following the development.

nigelh

14th Mar 2016, 17:59

agreed ..and i see no reason why the speed is not achieved !

FH1100 Pilot

19th May 2016, 23:55

BAAAAHAHAHA, here's the first nail in the coffin of the 505. Gee, who didn't see *this* coming?
http://www.theadvertiser.com/story/news/2016/05/19/bell-helicopter-pulling-its-ranger-x-facility-out-lafayette/84603984/

nigelh

20th May 2016, 08:12

Fh1100 ....
I don't remember your prediction that they would move production of the 505 ....
I do however remember all of your other predictions and at present you don't seem to
be correct on any ! In this climate moving your production to the cheapest place seems common sense . Everything I hear so far is that the 505 is going to deliver More than expected ... Not less . But we shall see . And if it does get built , if it does fly at 125 knots ...you get to eat your hat !!!

Nige321

20th May 2016, 08:19

Gee, who didn't see *this* coming?

For a start, you didn't...:yuk:

Ian Corrigible

20th May 2016, 18:45

The decision seems to have been based on three drivers: i) Bell hit a regulatory hurdle with the original plan to certify the aircraft in Canada but manufacture it in the USA; ii) Bell was under pressure from the Canadian government to demonstrate its commitment to Mirabel (and thus justify its continued receipt of Industry Canada financial assistance) after reducing the workforce there by 50% over five years; iii) Weak market conditions. Per AIN (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2016-05-19/bell-moving-505-jet-ranger-x-production-canada):

“Our Lafayette facility was a new operation and therefore required a more extensive review by the FAA to receive its production certification,” the [Bell] spokeswoman said. “We anticipate that adding the 505 to our existing production certification in Mirabel will be less complex. Once we have completed the certification process, we can begin production and deliveries from Mirabel. The decision to move the 505 assembly and delivery center from Lafayette was driven by market conditions and the imperative to maintain our expertise and skills in Mirabel.”

Re: the weak market conditions, sales of the R66 have tailed off noticeably:

http://i.imgur.com/yj63nBG.png
(Data from GAMA and Ascend)

I/C

nigelh

20th May 2016, 22:37

Well , would you buy a new Robinson R66 even with just the "possibility" of the 505 getting built and certified within the next year ??!! I think everyone would agree that IF it lives up to the claims from Bell , including PBH with known costs per hour , the proven L4 blades and rugged and reliable drive train , full glass cockpit inc synthetic vision , autopilot , new crashworthy seats ........ The list goes on ...
All for $1.15m , which is not a lot more than the R66 which is old school tech .
One thing is for sure ( if it does get built and sold ) and that is that the 505 will rise in value quickly or the R66 will drop quickly . That's almost certain especially as the L4 price new is over $2m and with the 505 you are effectively getting one with new cockpit but 2 less seats ...

Finnrotor.com

20th May 2016, 23:12

even with just the "possibility" of the 505 getting built and certified within the next year ??!!

( if it does get built and sold )

Without reading all 14 pages of this topic, why wouldn't it be built / produced/ sold??? Can't see any single reason, especially in this economic climate, for Bell to build a show off, even partly from re-circulated parts... Doesn't make much sense to produce 3 prototypes, fly them more than 700hrs (seemingly successfully) up to date and then say: "Naah, f*** it".

Darn ugly it is tough. But I guess with the planned pricetag you can't have it all...

nigelh

21st May 2016, 11:18

I agree , I think it will be built and be very successful ! The point is that it should be at least 50% more than the R66 and its only 10-20% more at current prices . That's why it will either go up to $1.5m or the R66 will go down ( or stop selling ) . That's market economics !!

FH1100 Pilot

22nd May 2016, 21:45

Nigel, you certainly are a dreamer, I'll give you that. But man, if you think that old L-4 rotor system is going to go 125 knots, well, you've crossed over from merely dreaming to actual hallucinating.

Moreover, you really can't be seriously suggesting that production of the R-66 might cease upon the introduction to the market of the 505, can you? You must not know much about things like brand-loyalty. Or helicopters, evidently.

No, I did not predict that Bell would move the 505 production to Canada. But it is no surprise. But then, you'd think they'd have some of those details worked out beforehand... before committing such a large sum of money to building that big plant next to PHI.

No, I'm quite sure that Bell will at some time in the near future quietly announce the demise of the 505. They'll blame it on "market conditions" or some such nonsense. The reality will be that they got fewer Letters of Intent than they wanted, and not enough firm orders. Just like Cessna with their "all-new" model 162, which wasn't all-new at all.

nigelh

22nd May 2016, 22:16

FH1100 ..... You just don't know when your beaten and are becoming a bit of a joke !! How many helicopters have you owned ?? ( just interested about your view on brand loyalty ) . I have owned 5 different makes ...Bell , EC , Enstrom, MD and Agusta . I bought the right helicopter for me at that time and if I could get it at the right price and I would say most people are the same .
You will not by helicopter A if helicopter B is better and cheaper !!
So you may be able to fly one ..... But I don't believe you are anywhere near the expert you obviously think you are !!!!
So here we are now , lots of predictions by you saying Bell have got it all wrong ...they will have to redesign it , it will be slow and uncomfortable ... Blah blah .
Well the biggest news comes about moving and you make out that you had predicted it ... And you hadn't !!!!!
I know you will ne thrilled when deliveries start and you have digested your hat.

SansAnhedral

23rd May 2016, 15:21

No, I'm quite sure that Bell will at some time in the near future quietly announce the demise of the 505. They'll blame it on "market conditions" or some such nonsense. The reality will be that they got fewer Letters of Intent than they wanted, and not enough firm orders.

http://i.imgur.com/eYBlyNq.gif

FH1100 Pilot

23rd May 2016, 21:04

Soooo, an L-4 is $2 million(?) and you geniuses think Bell can bring the 505 to market for "around" a million? That's hilarious. Furthermore, you geniuses think it'll go 125 knots? Stop, you're killing me. Seriously.

nigelh

23rd May 2016, 22:10

Latest News .....
A village near Pensacola , Florida , has reported that they are missing their idiot . It is thought he may be lurking around the rotorheads forum of Pprune ,
Pretending to be a helicopter expert . The public have been advised not to try to reason with him .

krypton_john

24th May 2016, 04:21

206L4 max cruise is 125kt/VNE 130kt ...

John Eacott

24th May 2016, 07:02

VH-LIN was a B206L on low skids, polished everything and I used to cruise at 120kts on a C20B at 80%Tq.

Quite why someone is so down on Bell as to deny anything and everything is beyond me.

EESDL

24th May 2016, 08:25

pulling-up a comfy chair and opening a bottle....

"Bell is the Dogs' proverbials - discuss"

Whilst the 505 is looking like a substantial leap in the market - wary of who is pushing the PR/marketing - especially after what came out recently describing the 525 as the 225 replacement - harsh and has a long way to go.......
that said, it has got a lot of knowledgeable pilots/engineers quite excited and dusting-off their goat leather flying gloves.

just hope they are not embarrassed like EC when they lauded the arrival of the 155B - then had to quickly bring out the B1.........

nellycopter

24th May 2016, 19:49

I think people are deluded with the TM engine SBH.....
You have to experience TM at their best to understand, to really understand that is......
Find a single person .... That pays the bills that has been happy with the service provided when needed by TM......
Pays your money, takes your chance ....
You will see ..... .

The worse move bell could have ever made ..... I. Would have a tenner bet now that there are engine options within a few years of launch ....

Happy days
Nelly ...

nigelh

25th May 2016, 13:24

I tend to agree with you re TM . I would have much preferred the LTS engine or RR but I assume Bell have TM sorted as I am told the engine is a set price with no extra fees for AD,s etc . We shall see but an engine choice is a real possibility in the future if TM act as normal !!

Ian Corrigible

25th May 2016, 19:28

Well, the good news for nellycopter is that you won't have to deal with Turbomeca anymore.

Now you'll be dealing with Safran Helicopter Engines (http://www.safran-group.com/media/20160519_safran-groups-companies-under-single-brand)...

I don't have $1.077 Mil down on a 505, so it's easy for me to say, but I can't see Bell allowing Turbo...Safran Helicopter Engines to drop the ball on 505 support. Bell will have already read them the riot act in terms of the importance of not damaging BHT's customer service reputation, and will I'm sure be monitoring customer service levels (and operator squawks) closely.

Given the heavy price discount that Safran must have agreed to to get onto the 505, they'll doubtless be keen to secure additional business with Bell to make it worth their while, and will therefore understand what's at stake. And as I said 3 years ago (http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/517185-bell-505-jet-ranger-x-3.html#post7923133), I can't see Bell leaving customers hung out to dry when it comes to engine support.

I/C

nigelh

25th May 2016, 21:02

Ian ..I quite agree and would have loved to be a fly on the wall at the ,no doubt ,long and tough negotiations between them !! Hopefully some Bell service ethic will filter down into TM or Safran :D

krypton_john

25th May 2016, 21:12

Um, TM and Safran are just the same thing... it's only a name change, right?

nigelh

26th May 2016, 09:36

maybe culture change as well with Bell sitting on their shoulders ...

FlimsyFan

26th May 2016, 11:17

Well , would you buy a new Robinson R66 even with just the "possibility" of the 505 getting built and certified within the next year ??!!

Hello to you all. Go easy on me as I'm a new member. I fully anticipate a lot of guffawing coming my way, but by way of introduction, thought I'd own up to the fact I had a new R66 delivered a couple of months ago, and just wanted to drop a different perspective into the discussion.

I spoke to the Bell importers, who were unable to tell me a) how much a 505 would actually cost, b) when it would be certified, and c) how long after certification deliveries to the UK, and more specifically to me would occur.

My issue was that I need a helicopter now, and not at an indeterminate point in the future. I'm a new PPL, and will use the machine almost exclusively for business transport. The majority of flights will be 3 or 4 up, and as I'm weighing in at 18st and 6'4", needed something with a bit of poke.

I had a trial flight in an EC120 with a well known Instructor from the Wycombe area, who said given the 90% fuel situation at the time would only be able to take him, me and one other. In spite of the to-die-for looks, it ruled it out for me.

A lot of folks suggested buying a 206BIII, but I'm not comfortable having something with so many years service behind it, no warranty at all, and more importantly, something where my head was sandwiched in the ceiling glass recess.

Having trained and passed in an R44, the flight characteristics were very similar and the conversion very straightforward. The running costs are low, and whilst I accept fully the arguments about the 2000hr / 12 year element, I still think the EC120 for example, with its 12 year airframe and 15 year engine overhauls is, broadly speaking, just as painful. People I've spoken to don't speak in glowing terms about either Airbus or TM on the maintenance front either, but acknowledge that some of you may have more positive experiences.

Our machine does have crashworthy seats (albeit not of the same design and construction, and not as sexy as those of 505 /H120 ), glass, autopilot, air conditioning, traffic and synthetic vision, so I feel its a bit unfair to describe it all as old tech - RHC is getting more up to speed.

Whether the 505 will cruise at 125kts at 80% is completely moot for me right now, as I can't have one. Our R66 with all the added weight of the options limps along at about 108-112kts at max continuous and 4 POB, which is good enough for us, but might not please everyone.

I'm well aware of the concerns over handling characteristics of RHC machines, and have done everything I can to be aware of them, to understand how to avoid them, and what to do in the event of the incipient stage. I'd be the first to admit that this is a definite weakness by comparison with the competition.

The reality is that I don't know how much use our machine will get. I reckon 150-180hrs per annum is a realistic target, but I guess a lot down to the UK weather. If 4 years in, I'm able to spec and buy a 505, and it does fly faster, smoother and with a higher specification, I might well buy one, and I may well lose my shirt on the R66, but so be it.

I'm sorry for the essay, but just wanted to explain the rationale. I think any heli purchase is a compromise over a number of factors, and the final decision is an extremely subjective one. My main point being that if you need a helicopter right now, no matter how good it ends up being, you can't have a 505. And for the time being, I'm in the minority of really enjoying the R66.

HeliHenri

26th May 2016, 11:26

.
maybe culture change as well with Bell sitting on their shoulders ...
Yes but if they improve on this matter, what will be left to the competitors ? :}
.

Kiwi500

26th May 2016, 12:16

Flimsyfan.....a very reasoned post by an actual owner. And helihenri, I enjoy your posts but language differences aside, that question made no sense at all?

HeliHenri

26th May 2016, 12:29

Hello Kiwi500,
My post was referring to Nigelh comment about the support improvement of Turbomecca. does it make sense now ? (I delate it if not)

When I posted my comment, the post from FlimsyFan was not visible (it takes more time to appear as a new member)

Kiwi500

26th May 2016, 20:25

Ah yes, makes perfect sense now thanks

Finnrotor.com

26th May 2016, 22:57

Anyone with a good guess of the real world lifting capacity (external) of the 505? I've never lifted anything with a Jetranger/ Longranger. Years with 350 (except an ancient B), some with 500D/E and a bit with a 205...

I guess 350 is still gonna be hard to beat in terms of price vs. capacity. But there's jobs you don't need to lift a ton. Many times loads can be adjusted to the capacity of the helicopter if the price is right. Bell only says in their brochures payload is 680kg+. Is that internal, external or both?

Just generally interested if 505 could be usable as an external load machine, that's all.

Ian Corrigible

26th May 2016, 23:06

The optional accessories list includes a 2,000 lb cargo hook. That's the same capability as the 206L-4 LongRanger, and compares to 1,500 lb for the 206B-3 JetRanger.

I/C

Finnrotor.com

26th May 2016, 23:30

The optional accessories list includes a 2,000 lb cargo hook. That's the same capability as the 206L-4 LongRanger, and compares to 1,500 lb for the 206B-3 JetRanger.

I/C
Yes I've seen that. Doesn't tell much of what it could do in the real world. There's also a bit conflicting information from Bell about hook's limitations, in a downloadable "data brochure" they say 1500lbs hook but "product specification" pdf says 2000lbs... I'd say even 1500 lbs on a normal day, even at sea level, with some fuel, staying within aircraft weight limits would be pretty good. Actually very good.

Soave_Pilot

27th May 2016, 02:02

Can anyone list wich helicopters carry those engines? Can't think of any...

krypton_john

27th May 2016, 02:04

Sure you can, SP... Safran = Turbomeca

whoknows idont

27th May 2016, 08:09

Can anyone list wich helicopters carry those engines? Can't think of any...

Agusta A109 Power (2 x Arrius 2K1/2K2)
Bell 505 Jet Ranger X (1 x Arrius 2R)
Eurocopter AS355 N Ecureuil 2 (2 x Arrius 1A)
Eurocopter AS355 NP Ecureuil 2 (2 x Arrius 1A1)
Eurocopter AS555 Fennec (2 x Arrius 1M)
Eurocopter EC135 T1 (2 x Arrius 2B1/2B1A)
Eurocopter EC135 T2 (2 x Arrius 2B2)
Eurocopter EC635 T1 (2 x Arrius 2B1/2B1A)
Eurocopter EC635 T2 (2 x Arrius 2B2)
Eurocopter EC120B Colibri (1 x Arrius 2F)
Kamov Ka-226T (2 x Arrius 2G1)
Mil Mi-34S2 (1 x Arrius 2F)

So it seems like the 505 is the first helicopter to carry the Arrius 2R.

John Eacott

31st May 2016, 22:40

Professional Helicopter Services signs letter of intent for 3 Bell 505 helicopters (http://investor.textron.com/news/news-releases/press-release-details/2016/Professional-Helicopter-Services-signs-letter-of-intent-for-three-Bell-505-Jet-Ranger-X-Helicopters/default.aspx)

http://s1.q4cdn.com/535492436/files/images/bell_news/2016/may/5272016.jpg

ersa

1st Jun 2016, 06:00

Well done to PHS...

krypton_john

1st Jun 2016, 07:11

Maybe they should have checked with FH1100 first!

FH1100 Pilot

1st Jun 2016, 20:42

A Letter Of Intent? What's that? Is that like an order... "like" an order... but not? How much money exchanges hands? How binding is it? Another LOI for three. Big deal.

toptobottom

1st Jun 2016, 21:03

I think it's a wind up... Why would Mr. Bean be in the picture otherwise?

whoknows idont

1st Jun 2016, 21:05

I sat in an exhibit mock-up for the first time today and I liked it more than I would have thought. I have a gut feeling this will be a great aircraft.
If it didn't look like something a four-year-old drew on his bedroom wallpaper, I bet they could have sold twice as many by now.

nigelh

1st Jun 2016, 21:18

FH1100 ........you are like a big old trout that comes up for any big old fly !!!!
The LOI is , if the same as mine , a $75,000 deposit .... So no big deal .

Helomaniac

17th Dec 2016, 02:56

Great queries Flimsyfan. 6 months ago I would have bet the 505 would fill your needs perfectly. Unfortunately people who have actually flown a demo say Bell has missed the mark. In a misguided effort to target the R66 as their competition they have dropped the amazing nodal beam suspension of the legendary smooth riding Longranger in order to keep the price a little lower. Now what could have been a perfectly performing helicopter is doomed to rival the EC120 in unpopularity and it's a damn shame. Rumor is that at 80 plus knots the ride is comparable to that of a buckboard wagon. It's too bad, I'm sure EVERYONE would have been willing to pay a little more to get the perfect small helicopter. If you can afford it my advice would be go with a 407GX, if that is a bit out of your range then take a look at the amazing Enstrom 480. Good luck.

The Sultan

18th Dec 2016, 20:59

Helo

Your info is out of date. The production 505's have a LIVE system which does the same as a nodal beam to minimize vibration.

The Sultan

nigelh

18th Dec 2016, 21:29

I can guarantee it will fly as smooth as silk . Bell are not stupid and I , along with every other buyer , will not pay or take delivery of anything less than great !! Then we can wait for F1100 to eat his words !!

krypton_john

18th Dec 2016, 23:58

Yep - that post bent the needle of the BS meter.

Why for example would the 505 fly worse than the 206B3? And you can't compare it in any sensible way to a 407 or 480B. 407 has 7 seats and 3 times the price, 480B barely has 5 seats (and nothing like the baggage space).

bellblade2014

19th Dec 2016, 03:09

505 also flies a lot faster that the 206B3 and L4. 125kts cruise at MGW vs 114kts for the old 206's. vibe typically goes up with rotor thrust and that goes up with speed, so I'd expect ride to be similar to a L4 or B3, but at would be fine if it's a bit tougher at the higher speed... if it's better for vibe with the LIVE system that's a bonus, but not really expected. Physics is physics. if I had 3x the money, I'd love to get a 407GXP, but not that lucky.

nigelh

19th Dec 2016, 11:28

I think 407 is a great machine but I have never been a fan of the broom cupboard on all the LR variants . One of the big charms of the 505 is the open cockpit like the 350 series . Much easier to see what's going on and less claustrophobic for pax . Does anyone know when we are likely to get first deliveries in UK ?

HeliHenri

19th Dec 2016, 14:14

Does anyone know when we are likely to get first deliveries in UK ?

The good question is : Does anyone know when the 505 will be certified ?

"The approval for the craft was set to be done by November by Transport Canada, reports Flight Global, but Bell declined to give an exact date."

From Helihub : HeliHub.com Bell closer to 505 Jet Ranger X Certification (http://helihub.com/2016/10/07/bell-closer-to-505-jet-ranger-x-certification/)
.

The Sultan

19th Dec 2016, 15:38

Cert is imminent.

The Sultan

claudia

19th Dec 2016, 21:52

Textron representative called with me the other day and left the latest brochure
and accessory options for the new 505. All good but pricing structure is very
different to what i have read on here and indeed been told at shows.
The Garmin 1000 is standard yes, but everything else is an extra, even the duals,
second radio, carpets, paint, ,rotor brake, rad alt, barrier filter, sliding windows
etc. etc. All adds up to 220k usd plus base of 1.135m usd for a modest spec.
aircraft (auto-pilot not even listed) ie 1.350m usd.
Now throw in the bad sterling rate and cost will be say £1,090,000 plus
carriage delivery and of course vat.
I am wondering does it still represnt good value, your thoughts would be
appreciated.

FLY 7

20th Dec 2016, 08:32

I hope the 505 is as good as people are wanting it to be - we should find out in the coming months.

But, at current exchange rates in the UK (US$ = £0.80), I can't see a huge rush to buy over here at c.£1.1m +.

Last time I bought a helicopter from the US (2008) I was getting 2 dollars to the pound. That would have put the 505 at a much more palatable £675k!

whoknows idont

20th Dec 2016, 19:55

Last time I bought a helicopter from the US (2008) I was getting 2 dollars to the pound. That would have put the 505 at a much more palatable £675k!

Just give the Donald a little time to make America great again. If all goes according to plan, we will see 2008 rates not too long from now. And hopefully that happens before the Brexit demolishes the £. :ok:

SansAnhedral

21st Dec 2016, 16:19

Transport Canada certified the 505 this morning

FH1100 Pilot

21st Dec 2016, 16:35

Congratulations to Bell! Let's hope that U.S. certification follows shortly.

But if they actually produce and sell that thing I'll eat my hat.

http://www.heliweb.com/bell-505-jrx-type-cert/

Lonewolf_50

21st Dec 2016, 18:00

But if they actually produce and sell that thing I'll eat my hat. I'd recommend salsa, medium or hot, as the dip for that snack. :}:cool:

bellblade2014

21st Dec 2016, 22:12

I'd recommend salsa, medium or hot, as the dip for that snack. :}:cool:

I hear deliveries in 2017 early... FH is going to need a new hat sometime in the winter/spring. Maybe a hat-eating ceremony could be held at HAI!

Helomaniac

22nd Dec 2016, 01:31

Helo

Your info is out of date. The production 505's have a LIVE system which does the same as a nodal beam to minimize vibration.

The Sultan
I sure hope you are correct Sultan I would love nothing more than to see Bell hit the mark with what looks like it could be the perfect 206B replacement.

Pilot Netherlands

31st Jan 2017, 08:31

We have canceled the LOI of the 505 due to other specs than promised.
Endurance 3,5+ hour, not possible with 318 litre fuel and a burn rate of 125 litre an hour.
No weight and balance calculations available, we think forward cg issues.
We fly the 505 and it start very easy no much vibrations but no 125kt cruise speed at mtow.
For the money (2017 price 1.2M) not that big difference over the r66 of ec120.

Soave_Pilot

31st Jan 2017, 11:04

For the money (2017 price 1.2M) not that big difference over the r66 of ec120.

Not sure what you are looking for, but you won't find those numbers in the R66 or Ec120, you may find the endurance in the Ec120 but you will have to let go some passengers. Forget the 125 knots cruise as well if you are near the mtow on both.

No weight and balance calculations available, we think forward cg issues

that's an easy fix for Bell, I doubt they will ignore that.

Bell_ringer

6th Feb 2017, 04:45

What's a realistic speed for a 407? 120-130kts?
What are you expecting from a heavily modded L4 with same drive gear and a "lessor" motor?

BR

Spunk

6th Feb 2017, 16:30

Our old one was more or less around 125 kts. The GXP we operate now is faster than hell, easily good for 130-135 KIAS. Both with low skids and no ugly fairings.👍

nigelh

6th Feb 2017, 17:57

Bell_ringer

6th Feb 2017, 18:48

Our old one was more or less around 125 kts. The GXP we operate now is faster than hell, easily good for 130-135 KIAS. Both with low skids and no ugly fairings.👍

VIP compressor kit gives some horses, the G1000 does tend to nanny speed a bit though - apologies for the thread drift.

FH1100 Pilot

7th Feb 2017, 16:10

I notice FH is nowhere to be seen . He guaranteed this would not be certified . Would not even be built . Would not do 125 knots . Would be uncomfortable, with huge vibration and needing end plates due to the attitude .
I would have more respect for him if he just put his hands up and said " I was wrong on almost every point "!!

Anyway I hear from people that have flown it that it is a great machine and for private owners the package will provide comfort that whatever happens their costs stay the same !!!! Can't wait for mine !!!

Oh, dear Nigel, that’s quite a mouthful! And by that I mean, “even for you” considering the things that have come out of…and gone into…your mouth over the years. I'm still here.

But it seems that in your blind, irrational zeal to love all things 505 you are putting the cart waaaaaaay before the horse, mate. I've checked and then checked again, but it seems that the Bell 505 has not yet achieved FAA certification in the U.S. And also as far as I can see, no 505's have yet been registered by the FAA, not even in the "Experimental" category. Hmm. Is Bell *not* going for FAA certification of this model?

Every time I see a profile view of the 505, I am deeply disturbed by how far the mast is behind the cabin. Yes, it troubles me emotionally. This does not bode well for the c.g., something Pilot Netherlands, who’s flown it, mentioned. You see, it’s difficult to strike the right balance between being in c.g. with an empty cabin and a light pilot and *also* be in c.g. with a full cabin. And trust me, this will not be something that Bell can “easily” solve (as Soave Pilot erroneously guessed) because the laws of physics and aerodynamics are just that: LAWS, not mere suggestions and Bell cannot change these laws. So we shall see.

I don’t know if you’re aware of this, Nigel, but a light pilot in a lightly loaded 206L will find himself on the forward cyclic stop in cruise. I know this, as I used to be a light pilot once upon a time, and I used to fly light LongRangers…with the cyclic on the forward stop at 106 knots in cruise at the most-aft fuel c.g. Some pilots would carry lead bars to add to the cockpit seat weight to keep things in c.g. I just ate a lot of junk food and handily solved that particular problem.

You're also probably too young to remember when the 206L first appeared. It did not have the ubiquitous winglets on the end of the horizontal stabilizer that we've come to know and love. But at cruise speed, which was only slightly higher than that of a 206B, there was an uncomfortable "waggle," a strange yaw/roll coupling. So Bell added the winglets, finlets, endplates or whatever you want to call them. And that solved the problem but slowed the ship down since they were set at an angle of attack *opposite* than that of the vertical fin.

The 505 has the same tail boom and vertical fin as the 206. Mark my words...(hold a hand up with your index finger extended) MARK MY WORDS! The 505 will sprout winglets.

Okay, about that mythical “125+ knot cruise.” How do we get a helicopter to go fast? You tilt the disk forward, right? Right. But if you tilt the disk forward, the fuselage wants to tilt forward too. This is why the BO-105 and the FH1100 have such an uncomfortable nose-down attitude in cruise. At 127 mph, the FH1100 assumes a 10-degree *down* nose attitude. Very uncomfortable on a long flight.

To keep a half-way level cabin attitude in fast cruise, you have both tilt the mast forward *and* aerodynamically pull the tail down. The mast in the FH1100 is vertical like the 12E and Bell 47, not tilted forward at all (it wasn't designed to go fast). Nor is the FH1100’s horizontal stabilizer cambered. The 206 has a large, cambered horizontal stabilizer to help keep a level cabin attitude in cruise. But it can only do so much, so Bell tilted the mast forward as well.

Again, Bell isn't inventing any new aerodynamic theories here. The 505's flat-plate horizontal stabilizer will, in this boy's very humble opinion, prove unacceptable for comfortable "125+ knots" flight...unless they've tilted the mast forward by about 10 degrees, which they haven’t. In fact, Bell says the mast is only tilted forward 3.5 degrees. What?! (And those straight-up rear seatbacks don’t look all that comfortable, either.)

I think we'll see average 505 cruise speeds of maybe around 110 knots, as also alluded to by Pilot Netherlands. (By the way, the Bell 505 brochure (file:///C:/Users/Valued%20Customer/Downloads/Bell%20505%20Product%20Specifications.pdf)optimistically lists the long range cruise speed as 113 knots. Long-range cruise does not substantially differ from any other cruise speed in a helicopter. I just don’t see the 505 scooting along at 115-120 knots no matter how aerodynamically slick that ugly fuselage is.)

We now know the fuel capacity of the 505! And it’s not good. I'm still curious as to how Bell is going to get their advertised 3.5 hours of endurance out of 85 gallons of fuel? French engines aren't known for being miserly. I’m thinking that Arrius is going to burn 30-35 gph, giving us a no-reserve endurance of 2.8 to dry tanks. Bell’s brochure says the range is 306 miles but I don’t see how that’s possible. With reserve, say 2.3 hours, or a max range of about 275 miles *IF* you can get 120 knots GS out of the POS (hah!).

Finally, let’s talk about weight. We also now know the projected weight of the 505. Bell says the base aircraft weighs 2,210 pounds. Maybe that’ll hold for the production ships as well (hah!) But remember, that’s for the stripper version. Let’s add up some optional extras, shall we? Hmm… Let’s see, dual controls add 8.2 pounds and a rotor brake adds 13.2. Carpet and leather seats (you don’t want vinyl seats and a rubber floor mats, do you?) add 34 pounds. Air conditioning (gotta have it!) adds 72.5 more. Let’s add sliding windows for the front doors too at 1.2 pounds. A second VHF comm would be nice, and that adds 5.4 pounds. An ELT adds 4.7.

Sooooo…what’s that add up to? Let’s see, add the…carry the…and we come up with a “real” empty weight of 2,350 pounds give or take (sorry Brits, we speak American here). Max Gross is 3,680 leaving us with a real-world useful load of 1,330. Not bad, but remember you’ll be carrying more fuel around than your rusty-trusty 206B.

Oh, and the 505 is already up to US$1.2 million, did anybody catch that? “Around $1 million,” eh? Hah. It’s $1.2m and…”Oh yeah, you want a rotor brake with that? Well that’ll be another $50,000.”

I still say that Bell will find a way of delaying production of the 505 and ultimately killing the project – like they did with the 427…like Cessna did with the 162…like Beech did with the Starship…like Piper did with the Piperjet and the Piper light-sport…like Lear did with the model 80…like Beech (again!) did with the Premier... But if I’m wrong about any of the above, I will gladly publically prostrate myself in front of all of you, and sobbingly admit my failure as a human being. Hey, I’ve been wrong before!

Hallucinate all you want…hell, fantasize your life away for all I care. Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see. But there are some serious aerodynamic and economic realities that Bell is facing that won’t be “easily” solved by dropping tabs of LDS in your coffee and hoping to write “Strawberry Fields.”

ascj

7th Feb 2017, 19:14

How does the squirrel and enstrom go for c of g issues. They look to be the most similar to the 505 in layout. With the mast behind the cabin

albatross

7th Feb 2017, 19:19

Does the aircraft have a gross for internal and another for external loads?

Nige321

7th Feb 2017, 20:57

I was bored, so I took a side view of the 505 and AS350 and dropped one over the other. The scales might be a smidgen out, but any assertion that the 505 has its mast in the wrong place in comparison to the AS350 is wrong...

I shall now go back to sleep...

http://www.modeltek.com/Bell.jpg

500guy

7th Feb 2017, 22:06

I tend to agree with FH1100. The Astar does have forward CG issues, thats why a lot of people move the battery to the tailboom. Also, if your image is correct the tail on the Astar goes back a bit farther, which would make a big difference. It may not be a deal breaker, but it will be an issue.

ascj

8th Feb 2017, 00:06

The tail does go back futher but it also carries a hell of a lot more. Does an a star have c of g issues at 505 loads?

FH1100 Pilot

8th Feb 2017, 05:36

ascj asks about the Enstrom. If any of you have seen the configuration for the five-seat 480 you would clearly see the c.g. issues Enstrom faced when designing the cabin for the turbine version. It's horrible for five people. You wonder why they didn't just make the cabin longer and then you go, "Oh...right, they would have if they could have."

The other issue is that articulated rotor systems generally have a wider c.g. range than underslung teetering systems. This is why I say the 505 will have problems. That, and years and years of experience flying LongRangers in which at least the transmission/mast was *over* the back seats, not behind them.

albatross asked about the internal vs. external MGW on the 505. And the answer is, "Yep!" The internal MGW is 3,680 pounds and the limit for external loads is 4,475 pounds with a 1,500 limit on the hook.

EDIT: Oh yeah! I forgot to add... I got to thinking about the profile view of the 505, and all that area ahead of the mast. From a yaw stability standpoint it's just...I mean...wow. I don't even want to think about trying to fly that thing with a complete loss of thrust tail rotor failure (i.e. tail rotor stops spinning). The aerodynamic forces acting on the area ahead of the mast might overpower that skinny tailboom and vertical fin.

So *WHEN* Bell adds the winglets to the horizontal stab it will improve the c.g. issues somewhat. But! The way the stab is mounted to the tailboom will undoubtedly have to be beefed up; those cheesy brackets probably won't be stout enough. More added weight along with more added drag.

This is going to be interesting!

Nige321

8th Feb 2017, 08:48

John Eacott

8th Feb 2017, 16:00

Getting away from the angst building here, a short video of the 505 panel & avionics :cool:

TzSSBnRBbWI

bellblade2014

9th Feb 2017, 00:03

I did the diagram again, but scaled accurately using both manufacturers data. I wasn't far out the first time.
A quick calculation shows that the side area in front and behind the mast is proportionaly similar for both. The AS has mre side are infront but a bigger boom to match. There really isn't much in it...

http://www.modeltek.com/Bell505.jpg

All this was worked out on the 505 during design. Bell puts a ton of effort into stability and ease of flight after emergencies like hydraulic failure, engine failure or control failure... (that's kind of Bell's thing in design). Failures like this almost never happen, but in Bell's test program, they spent time working out basic aircraft stability to make the aircraft easy to fly across the full CG range after any emergency. It's just the way they do it. from the info I have, the aircraft is cruising at MCP at 126-128 at max gross weight during the warmer seasons... 5-10kts lower in the summer. the fuel flow numbers from Netherlands is wrong on capacity and fuel flow... if you want to hover on station in the 50-60kts range, you will go over 4 hrs easy. If distance is what you want, and can comfortably go 325nm at 6K feet on a standard day at MGW... speed is simple on the 505... they pushed MCP torque up from 75% on L4 to 90% on the same TOP... that's 20% more torque than the L4 at MCP... should be good for more thrust at whatever angle the "disk is tilted".... looking forward to seeing FH1100 performing more self humiliation.

FH1100 Pilot

9th Feb 2017, 01:00

bellblade2014

9th Feb 2017, 02:18

And you may get to see that, if it will really give you pleasure. But Bell's own brochure puts the fuel capacity at 85 gallons. Not sure what sort of magic Bell is conjuring up to get 3.5 hours of endurance out of a French engine.

I don't think they ever intended it to be 3.5 hrs at MGW or at MCP cruise. Nominal GW-CG and lower torque setting/speed and you get much better numbers. To get 3.5 hours of endurance you need fuel flow of around 150 pph and a short startup and takeoff way below TOP. I've seen those kinds of numbers in other light Heli's at low power settings. But who cares... 3.5 hours is too long for most bladders anyway.

Soave_Pilot

9th Feb 2017, 09:46

We've seen helicopters with C of G problems before, and they were solved by simply putting the battery on the tail boom (EC130). Maybe I'm just too naive, but how can a consolidaded manufacture, with money and brains available build a helicopter with a CG problem that cannot be fixed? C'mom, We are talking about millions of dollars at stake here.
And if we look deep into the problem, almost every light helicopter has a bit of CG problem, some when flying at max weight others when flying lightly loaded.
I agree that some advertised numbers may not be delivered, but for the price tag and category of the helicopter, it will be enough. And also an option for who is considering buying an R66.

Hot and Hi

9th Feb 2017, 10:13

But who cares... 3.5 hours is too long for most bladders anyway.I do! You can't get fuel anywhere you can land. You want to get to a place, and then back to base, without making detours on the way for refueling.

bellblade2014

9th Feb 2017, 13:10

I do! You can't get fuel anywhere you can land. You want to get to a place, and then back to base, without making detours on the way for refueling.

So you want speed and range... why spend 3.5 hours in the bird when you can do the same mission in 2.5.

chopper2004

9th Feb 2017, 17:06

Bell delivers 505 to their Bell Helicopter Training Academy yesterday,

cheers

First-Production 505 Lands at Bell Academy to Start Customer Training - Rotor & Wing (http://www.rotorandwing.com/2017/02/08/505-lands-bell-academy-start-customer-training/)

heli1

10th Feb 2017, 16:57

As the aircraft delivered to Hurst is serial 11 off the line and the one shown as the first production is serial 12, can anyone explain what happened to serials 4-10 ? I assume serials 1-3 are the prototypes .

500 Fan

12th Feb 2017, 09:45

Could 4 - 10 be ground-test vehicles for various segments of the test programme that will help achieve certification? One is probably a fully-completed static test vehicle for ground-running only, destined never to fly. A few other vehicles might comprise a completed fuselage and interior and be used for destructive testing, examining the landing gear and seats in a hard landing/crash scenario. Even so, seven seems like a high number of airframes for use solely in the ground-testing portion of the certification process. It is doubtful that any mock-ups for the likes of Heli-Expo are assigned a production number.

Does anyone know how many airframes, flying and static, are required to get an aircraft like the 505 certificated?

500 Fan.

krypton_john

12th Feb 2017, 20:37

According to Bell they have 1000 flight hours in the 505 prior to certification. I'd be very surprised if after all that they haven't got their balance sorted along with the performance numbers.

Whimlew

11th Mar 2017, 02:15

First I'm looking at photo's of the Bell 505; beautiful Helicopter!

Bell 505 Jet Ranger X - Bell Helicopter (http://www.bellhelicopter.com/commercial/bell-505)

belly tank

11th Mar 2017, 10:23

Im convinced Whimlew its not beautiful to the point i don't even want to look at a 505 in any press release or otherwise.

Im an old 206 guy from many years ago as are so many on Pprune...and we have at best, memories of a venerable workhorse, trustworthy, and most importantly reliable to all of us.

I also remember awhile back Bell came out with the 351 StarRanger which was part of their proposed M.A.P.L (modular affordable product line) and the replacement B206 at the time. The 429 was the first machine built using these principles, but they never went on with it….pity as it looked pretty S..T hot.

Bell even named it the "Squirrel buster!"

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-Hi4dBKLYx-M/U24RfN11AOI/AAAAAAAACfo/Aq9jHyNwUhA/w805-h429-no/StarRanger.png

PANews

11th Mar 2017, 12:54

Yes the 429 never looked much like the MAPL did it!

The Heli-Expo talking point concept airframe looks a bit like one of the MAPL drawings though. The fan in tail in the concept mock-up was also in one of the MAPL drawings and of course may simply be a NOTAR.

The problem with the illustration is that it has a rotor in shroud and we all know that every other manufactureris shying away from anything looking like a Fenestron. Bell have flown t/r in ring, AW flew a 109 with what was 80% a Fenestron but in the end they seem scared of having another 'skid gate' .... a day in court...

The moral of this story is that it may be simple to draw a concept airframe but the engineering has both copyright and other issues.

The Sultan

11th Mar 2017, 18:19

The 505 was intended to be a R44/66 buster, the 407 is a capable counter to the 350.

PANews

11th Mar 2017, 19:00

The 407 retains the same narrow fuselage as the 206 and is way more cramped and cluttered than the H125.

What the 505 brings to the party is an open cabin and more width - the aspects of the 206/407 family that the AStar has always had.

Saint Jack

12th Mar 2017, 01:33

"The 407 retains the same narrow fuselage as the 206" Really? I suggest you get up close and personal with a 407 and take a good look at the fuselage structure at the fuel filler area - notice how it widens significantly moving forward resulting in a much wider cabin. Headroom in the cabin is also increased. Now, if possible, sit in the cabin and compare it to the 206 family - big difference eh! Finally, try to get a flight in a 407 and you'll come away with a very different opinion on the "cramped and cluttered" thoughts. I've never really understood why some people place so much emphasis on the "open cabin" or "flat floor" concept.

Fun Police

12th Mar 2017, 19:10

If you try to put a stretcher patient in either you'll instantly be able to tell why people feel this way.

PhlyingGuy

13th Mar 2017, 13:14

As stated before in this thread and many others, the problem with the 351 concept is that the price of it would be significantly higher than the market is willing to pay now.

There have been over 720 R66's delivered since 2010, so the target market is near-ish to $1M. Not nearer to $2M where ~10 H120's have been delivered a year since then.

Ian Corrigible

13th Mar 2017, 22:23

There have been over 720 R66's delivered since 2010, so the target market is near-ish to $1M. Not nearer to $2M where ~10 H120's have been delivered a year since then.
Over 1,110 AS350/H125s delivered in the same timescale, so maybe $3M is a better price bracket to aim for. :p

Given Airbus's disinterest in promoting the H120 (due to the various commercial issues discussed previously on PPRuNe), it's not the best benchmark to use.

Meanwhile, it's interesting to see the R44 stretch its sales lead over the R66 back above 2:1 (152 R44s delivered in 2016, vs. 63), after four years of sub-2:1 R44:R66 sales ratios.

I/C

Tickle

14th Mar 2017, 01:16

The 351 StarRanger is a thing of beauty. I can understand about the fenestron issue but it otherwise it looks modern, sleek and blows other stuff away. Best of all, it also has a strong heritage to the 206 in appearance. I remember there was also an issue with another manufacturer copying EC120-style skids.

Agile

14th Mar 2017, 02:06

look at the engine housing of the 505 and the 351, is there such a big difference in cost, with composite material is shape always related to cost, in other words is elegance always related to cost. In the case of the 505 there seem to be a deliberate attempt to make sure everybody knows its cheap.

Evil Twin

14th Mar 2017, 02:36

I remember there was also an issue with another manufacturer copying EC120-style skids.

Wasn't that Bell as well with the 429?

FH1100 Pilot

14th Mar 2017, 04:01

PANewz sez:What the 505 brings to the party is an open cabin and more width...
Really? Doesn't look like it to me. In fact, the pictures I've seen make the back seats look very JetRanger-ish in width. But I've never seen one in person and, Googling my little fingers off, I cannot seem to find on the internet a figure for the interior width of the 505. I guess Bell doesn't want us to compare things.

Bell is positioning the 505 in a curious place. It cannot eat into 407 or even 206L-4 sales - that's a given. It will not compete against the H120 (at nearly double the price with the same engine). And at US$1.2 million, it's quite a bit more expensive than the $900k R-66. Maybe $300,000 is nothing for buyers? And anyway, with its L-4 drivetrain and 504 horsepower engine, the 505 is a class above the 300 h.p. R-66. Or not? Will the 505 and R-66 compete in the same market segment?

I'm really struggling to understand why Bell is reinventing the wheel here (and making it bigger). People talk about that marvelous flat floor(!) as if that's the way Igor decreed they ought to be. In fact, Fun Police says:
If you try to put a stretcher patient in either you'll instantly be able to tell why people feel this way.

Here is one thing I will GUARANTEE: No 505's will be used in EMS. In fact, you won't see forklifts easing up to 505's with pallets of cargo to load. So the flat floor is...well...meh. It's probably not going to matter to the people who'll buy a 505 versus an R-66.

I just look at that big 505 bubble and imagine a seagull coming through at the "135 knots" everyone says the 505 will cruise at. Yikes! I don't even like pushing Bell 47's above 60 knots for that very reason, and the 505 is just as bad! Let us hope and pray it's not nearly as fast as Bell is fake-promising.

Praet

14th Mar 2017, 10:11

PANewz sez:Here is one thing I will GUARANTEE: No 505's will be used in EMS. In fact, you won't see forklifts easing up to 505's with pallets of cargo to load. So the flat floor is...well...meh. It's probably not going to matter to the people who'll buy a 505 versus an R-66.
He was referring to the 206/407 with "either" I think.

PhlyingGuy

14th Mar 2017, 19:54

Here is one thing I will GUARANTEE: No 505's will be used in EMS. :D

I'm pretty sure you already promised to eat your hat as it is.... the market for these ships isn't so much US or EU HEMS operations, but more MEDEVAC for Africa/China/Emerging helicopter markets.

I cannot seem to find on the internet a figure for the interior width of the 505 It doesn't look like it has the interior width, but assuming a few inches less on the inside, it looks like 5 ft/1.2M across
http://www.bellhelicopter.com/~/media/bell/documents/bell%20505/bell%20505%20product%20specifications.ashx?sc_lang=en

Ian Corrigible

14th Mar 2017, 20:36

I cannot seem to find on the internet a figure for the interior width of the 505

4.7 ft / 1.4 m: Bell 505 Product Specifications (https://www.nac.co.za/files/Bell%20505%20Product%20Specifications%20Summary.pdf#page=13)

I/C

Fun Police

14th Mar 2017, 20:38

If that machine is sold to a commercial operator and placed on a work site (an exploration program for example) you can rest assured that you'd be expected to load a stretcher if the need arose. I was not talking about dedicated HEMS, for obvious reasons ie, it makes no sense.

ascj

15th Mar 2017, 04:51

Well your not going to fit a strecher in the 66 either. Hpw long is the floor space front to back. Enstrom make a stretcher kit for the 480

Gregg

15th Mar 2017, 10:37

Old article, but this shows one concept for 505 in EMS configuration:

https://www.verticalmag.com/news/united-rotorcraft-unveils-ems-interior-for-bell-505-jet-ranger-x/

EN48

15th Mar 2017, 17:43

And anyway, with its L-4 drivetrain and 504 horsepower engine,

L4 drive train? Really? According to Bell reps at Heli Expo, Bell ditched the L4 nodal beam transmission mount for a less costly approach. I am hearing persistent rumors that the ride in the 505 is not exactly "smooth" as a result. When I questioned Bell about this, they said if one doesnt like the ride of the base 505, they offer a Frahm damper option which mounts between the front seats and weighs "about 25 pounds."

Bell rep also quoted a delivery date for an order placed now as "2019."

Did I misunderstand what you meant by "L4 drive train"?

My first close up look at the 505 was at Heli Expo this year and, overall, I was quite impressed. Lots of value for the money IMHO. Cant help but wonder how long initial pricing will hold.

The Sultan

15th Mar 2017, 18:05

EN48

Yes you did not understand. The nodal beam is not part of the drivetrain. It is the pylon support or basically part of the airframe.

As to vibration suppression Bell's attempt to have no nodal beam to reduce cost resulted in unacceptable vibration. To correct this Bell installed a liquid vibration reduction system on production models which is similar to a nodal beam in purpose. The Frahm is a standard device to reduce vibration further if desired and can be found along with active hammers on 429's, 350s, 76's, 92's etc.

EN48

15th Mar 2017, 18:15

The nodal beam is not part of the drivetrain

Got it. I was interpreting "L4 drivetrain" in the broadest sense. I am familiar with the Frahm damper as a result of flying the B407 for awhile. Smooth, fast, quiet (relatively speaking)! My standard of reference for a light single helo. If the 505 comes anywhere close in terms of ride quality, likely to be a big winner for Bell.

OFBSLF

20th Mar 2017, 21:06

Aviation Week published a pilot's report: Flying Bell?s 505 Jet Ranger X Light Helicopter | Business Aviation content from Aviation Week (http://aviationweek.com/business-aviation/flying-bell-s-505-jet-ranger-x-light-helicopter)

RVDT

20th Mar 2017, 21:45

The 505 probably has more in common with a 47J than an L4.

Had a look at one at HAI in Dallas and in all honesty it looks crude.

So much for an elegant and simple solution.

I think the cab section is made in Spain.

It looked to be about as elegant as an R22. Lots of screws everywhere.

Tubular frame - cables to the TR control.

I doubt that it will be as durable as a 206.

Time will tell.

https://50skyshades.com/images/o/bell-helicopter-announces-program-relocations-to-optimize-manufacturing-capabilities-8375-tp37Ryhan7tN2jCVY0bvtjUPO.jpg

Helilife100

21st Mar 2017, 06:51

The fuel line looks horrible. I would re-route that straight away.

bellblade2014

21st Mar 2017, 12:00

The fuel line looks horrible. I would re-route that straight away.

You guys are looking at the marketing mockup. Production bird looks completely diffferent back there, notice that the transmission mounting system doesn't look like the fluid damper version in the production design

SansAnhedral

21st Mar 2017, 18:01

I think the cab section is made in Spain.

Aernnova Mexico - Aernnova Web (http://www.aernnova.com/en/global-presence/aernnova-mexico/)

bellblade2014

13th Apr 2017, 14:37

Appears to have pretty solid feedback form initial press pilot Eval's

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2017-04-12/bell-505-delivers-smooth-ride-test-flight

https://assets.verticalmag.com/digital/2017/V16I2/html5/index.html?page=1&noflash

Soave_Pilot

26th Apr 2017, 11:05

here is a direct link to the article regarding the 505.
https://www.verticalmag.com/features/back-in-the-game/?utm_source=vertical-daily-news-top-story&utm_campaign=vertical-daily-news&utm_medium=email&utm_term=top-story&utm_content=V1

Looks like a lot of the issues brought up here were answered.

nigelh

26th Apr 2017, 14:15

So , how many of you are getting a pan out to start cooking your hats ...ready to EAT !!! All of the doomsters said it wouldnt be certified , wouldnt be able to cruise with level cabin , wouldnt lift etc etc Well it certainly seems to do everything pretty damn well from what i have heard . And it is still , even with our currency , incredible value for money . Personally i think i will pay half in $ and borrow the other half in £ to cover some more currency risk . The warranty also seems too good to be true ...just fuel and standard maintenance for first 1,000 hrs i think ? A very cost effective and easy to fly turbine to suit all owners , including the relatively inexperienced with all the qualities of an L4 ...............:D

krypton_john

26th Apr 2017, 21:55

nigelh

26th Apr 2017, 23:09

I agree . I think the more you can make a helicopter simple the less likely us pilots are to mess it up !! I notice that FH1100 is remaining very quiet as he slagged it off right from the start .... Everything was wrong , poorly designed and it would never even come into production!! It certainly sets a new bar for a 5 place , 2 bladed helicopter with all the bells & whistles re avionics and massive interior and luggage space . External load of 2,000kg and 1500kg on hook !!

krypton_john

27th Apr 2017, 01:04

... and as it is using an existing proven transmission, blade and rotor head with a gazillion hours it hopefully won't fold up in flight or require endless mandatory AD's ...

vaqueroaero

27th Apr 2017, 02:41

External load of 2,000kg and 1500kg on hook !!

Blimey! Sign me up then!!

Now I'm in no way a nay-sayer, nor indeed do I have any intention of eating a hat, but as I understand it right now the landing gear has to be changed after 500 landings (a "hover auto" counts for 25) and the two beams in the floor have to be changed every 500 hours. The endurance is not fantastic and the word on the street is that there are some CG issues depending on how the thing is ballasted empty. For a private operator it might be fine, but for use in commercial operations as of right now, I'm not so sure.

On top of that with regards to overhauling gearboxes and other components there are only a very select few places that are authorized to do it, which conveniently, are now owned by.........Bell.

Trust me, I'm a Bell fan, but it would appear that there are some things that have to be straightened out before we can say that it is a wonderful replacement for the trusty old 206.

Tickle

27th Apr 2017, 03:53

Glad they are extending those skids:

The pilot sits ahead of skids on the 505, which are about six inches shorter than the 206B’s, and over two feet shorter than the 206L-4’s. Bell is planning an eight-inch extension to the tail of the skids.

Wonder if a new stretched/LongRanger version is also being planned.

Hughes500

27th Apr 2017, 07:19

It is going to pick up 2 tonnes, yeah right, can't see it picking up 1 tonne on a hook. :*
If it does i will buy one tomorrow and get rid of the 500's we use for a particular job, especially as it can be flown from left seat !

nigelh

27th Apr 2017, 09:33

Hughes .....and you would be right !!! Sorry my mistake , those figures are obviously wrong ! Just over 2000kg external gross weight and about 700kg on hook sounds more likely .....so not really competition to your 500,s !

SuperF

29th Apr 2017, 01:17

700kg on the hook will beat any 500 out there.

bellblade2014

29th Apr 2017, 02:47

I've heard several times from Bell engineers and sales folks at various shows they are working on a 900kg release for the hook... will be awesome if that's true. That would compete well against even the best of the MD lifters and may compete soundly with the AS350B2's...

Paul Cantrell

5th May 2017, 22:23

FH1100 Pilot says:

Really? Doesn't look like it to me. In fact, the pictures I've seen make the back seats look very JetRanger-ish in width. But I've never seen one in person and, Googling my little fingers off, I cannot seem to find on the internet a figure for the interior width of the 505. I guess Bell doesn't want us to compare things.

I recently flew the 505 - I got to sit in the back seat as well. The aircraft only had two seats in the back, but they are separate seats, so I think the third (middle) seat would be exactly the same size, and they were very comfortable. The cabin (and seats) felt a lot like an EC120 to me.

Bell is positioning the 505 in a curious place. It cannot eat into 407 or even 206L-4 sales - that's a given. It will not compete against the H120 (at nearly double the price with the same engine). And at US$1.2 million, it's quite a bit more expensive than the $900k R-66. Maybe $300,000 is nothing for buyers? And anyway, with its L-4 drivetrain and 504 horsepower engine, the 505 is a class above the 300 h.p. R-66. Or not? Will the 505 and R-66 compete in the same market segment?

I think capability wise, it does compete with the EC120 (although it has more power). It just goes to show that the EC120 is wildly overpriced and I'm glad I don't own one because I'm guessing the used price of EC120s is going to take a beating.

As to whether it competes with the R66 is a more interesting question. The R66 is certainly less expensive, I would say is as fast, has a comparable baggage compartment. The price difference is enough to buy a nice R44 to keep next to your R66, but the 505 feels like a much more substantial aircraft. If I was a wealthy person who wanted a personal aircraft, there is no question I would prefer the 505 over the R66. I found the G1000 very nice, and heads and shoulders above the avionics in the R66 (Frank really wasn't a glass panel fan).

Which one looks better is totally in the eye of the beholder, but I really like the idea of the L4 drivetrain (even if I miss having a throttle on the collective). It's certainly a tried and true rotor system (I fly an L3).

The startup, shutdown, and "fly" versus "land" stuff is much simpler than the R66 due to the FADEC (and some very clearly labeled and well thought out switches/knobs in the 505). I think there will be far fewer engines smoked by the less experienced of the pilot crowd.

Certainly if I was a wealthy person and part of the reason for owning the aircraft was to impress my friends, the 505 is a much more impressive aircraft to ride in than the R66.

Paul Cantrell

5th May 2017, 22:30

RVDT says:

Had a look at one at HAI in Dallas and in all honesty it looks crude.

I think the cab section is made in Spain.

Tubular frame - cables to the TR control.

I didn't think it looked crude at all. I actually liked the tubular frame. They told us at the factory that the cabin was made in Mexico and trucked to Canada.

I agree about the TR cables - I much prefer a push/pull tube, but if I survived an Enstrom with TR cables I guess I can live with it in the 505...

bellblade2014

8th Jun 2017, 22:38

Certified by the FAA finally... looking forward to seeing them in the sky...

John Eacott

9th Jun 2017, 05:26

Bell 505 JetRanger X Achieves FAA Certification (http://www.bellhelicopter.com/news/press-release/2017/6/505-receives-faa-certification)

Dallas, Texas (June 8, 2017) Bell Helicopter, a Textron Inc. (NYSE: TXT) company, is pleased to announce that its Bell 505 Jet Ranger X (http://www.bellhelicopter.com/Commercial/bell-505) has been certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
The Bell 505 continues to surpass significant milestones – achieving type certification in December 2016 from Transport Canada Civil Aviation, then gaining production certification, and recently celebrating the first customer delivery.
“This is another significant milestone in our journey to market entry for the Bell 505,” said Mitch Snyder, Bell Helicopter’s president and CEO. “This aircraft incorporates the latest advancements in safety and aviation technology and we are extremely proud of our return to the short light single class of helicopters.”
Bell Helicopter will continue to work with other certification authorities around the globe. Through the flight test program, the Bell 505 underwent rigorous certification activities and achieved more than 1,000 flight test hours. The Bell Helicopter Training Academy is also prepared for entry into service with customer training, and the flight training device and coursework are all on track.
“Customer response for the Bell 505 has been outstanding, and we look forward to seeing the aircraft perform all the various missions it’s equipped for around the world,” added Snyder.
The Bell 505 offers operators many advantages including the Safran Helicopter Engines (HE) Arrius 2R engine that incorporates the dual channel Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) that delivers exceptional performance and reduces pilot workload. A first-in-class fully integrated Garmin G1000H flight deck features dual 10.4-inch (26.4 cm) displays, which provide critical flight information for crews at a glance. Through Bell Helicopter’s high inertia rotor system, Bell Helicopter has demonstrated throughout the flight test program exceptional autorotation capability that is part of the Jet Ranger legacy.
With a speed of 125 knots (232 km/h) and useful load of 1,500 pounds (680 kg), the Bell 505 is designed to be safe and easy to fly while providing significant value to the operator. The customer-driven design of the aircraft places safety, performance and affordability at the forefront, blending proven systems with advanced technology and a sleek, modern design.

jeffg

19th Jun 2017, 20:17

Isn't someone supposed to be eating their hat now?

FH1100 Pilot

19th Jun 2017, 22:29

Ahh, that would be me!

And wasn't it also jeffg who said:And don't forget that IF it gets certified , and IF it can cruise at 125kn , if it is delivered for $1.075m .....then you WILL eat your hat !!

Well, let's see. It did get its FAA certification...supposedly. But is it actually certified? I can't seem to find anything on the faa.gov website about it, and there is certainly no new TCDS in their database. So I'm not sure why Bell made the Big Announcement. Did they jump the gun?

But okay, if it did actually get US certification then I am truly surprised. As I've said, I didn't think they'd do it considering that they bailed on Louisiana as a manufacturing base for it.

Still, certification by itself doesn't mean much. Just ask Beechcraft (Starship) or Cessna (162) or any of the other manufacturers who've pushed a design through to certification only to see the thing fail in one way or the other. But it appears that I might have to concede to jeffg on the first point.

But...! Does it cruise at 125 knots? Knot hardly. Objective pilot reports that have been published put the cruise speed around 110-115 knots, which is right in line with an L-4 on low-skids. The reporters report ride-quality issues above that point, which is just what one would expect with an L-model rotor system. But hey, what's ten or fifteen knots among friends, right? So all the dreamers were off by *only* ten or fifteen knots, so what? Well, a lot of the fanboys really hung their hat on that "125 knot" cruise speed. Oh well.

#3. $1.075 million? Hah. What are they saying now, $1.2? Is it possible to actually get one in fly-away condition for $1.075?

I'm still waiting for some other real real numbers. What are the actual basic operating empty weights? What is the actual fuel burn and endurance with that paltry 88 gallon capacity?

As I predicted, the horizontal stab did move. You just wait: Endplates/winglets are next.

So without backtracking or crawfishing, I'll hold off on the hat-eating for just a bit. I'll still do it...but let's not get ahead of ourselves here.

Curiously, I had a guy...I'm not sure exactly what he does or who he works for, but he must read forums such as these, and he seems to be pretty high up in one of the major manufacturers (won't say which). He offered to buy me lunch! He said that if I were to go to the last Heli-Something that he would provide a hat which I could munch on for photo-op and publicity purposes. He also told me some proprietary things about the 505, and some things about the 525 fatal that haven't yet been disclosed to the public. Which is odd - I must have a face that people like telling things to (I wish they wouldn't). Maybe he made the the stuff up, or maybe it will all come out anyway, I don't know. (I should have asked him something about the 609 crash. He'd probably pretend to know something about that one too.)

In any event, I don't like this man - never have, actually. He and I go back a long way. He's not an honorable man by any stretch of the imagination. (There's more I could say but I won't.) And so I politely declined his kind invitation to...um..."lunch."

We shall see how well the 505 does in the market. If it's a success, then hooray for Bell! I remain skeptical.

jeffg

20th Jun 2017, 22:39

Wow! You predicted that they would move the h-stab! You must be a genius! I mean obviously this is the first aircraft in the history of aviation that had to have a design change during flight test. That FH project you worked on was a success right off the drawing board wasn't it? Oh wait... it never got certified... or produced. Bob, were you really talking about yourself all this time?
Hanging that hat on some very low fruit aren't we Bob?
Oh goodness! Now you're predicting it will grow end plates! An idiot savant could make that guess.

Doesn't cruise at 125? Take a look at post #87. Bell never said it would, you did. Bell advertised a 'max speed' of 125 kts. Certainly a seasoned aviator and flight tester like yourself knows the difference between the two...right?
From what I've heard they've attained that goal.
Did they miss the price? Yes but who hasn't? Was that really a surprise? Or a daring prediction?

What else did you say?
If *ANYBODY* thinks that nose configuration will make it through to production they are high. Not gonna happen. (In fact, if anyone thinks that helicopter itself will make it into production they are also high.)

Maybe you were high when you wrote that?

Well, let's see. It did get its FAA certification...supposedly. But is it actually certified? I can't seem to find anything on the faa.gov website about it, and there is certainly no new TCDS in their database. So I'm not sure why Bell made the Big Announcement. Did they jump the gun?

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/431f2b0c090a9337862581450067d102/$FILE/R00008RD_Rev_0.pdf

Its been there. Maybe you're not as knowledgeable about the FAA as you think?

... I had a guy...I'm not sure exactly what he does or who he works for...and he seems to be pretty high up in one of the major manufacturers (won't say which)....He also told me some proprietary things about the 505, and some things about the 525 fatal that haven't yet been disclosed to the public...(I should have asked him something about the 609 crash. He'd probably pretend to know something about that one too.)... He's not an honorable man by any stretch of the imagination.

So someone whom you consider less than honorable who 'pretends' to know stuff and you think may work for an OEM told you something that you think is proprietary? Maybe he was PT Barnum?

bellblade2014

21st Jun 2017, 01:18

The 505 definitely cruises MCP over 125kts in good CG and ambient conditions. The demo pilots showed it at HAI. The ride is better down around 119kts, but there's lots of torque margin at 119kts.

They said it changes a few kts if you are on the forward CG limit.

John Eacott

21st Jun 2017, 01:47

But...! Does it cruise at 125 knots? Knot hardly. Objective pilot reports that have been published put the cruise speed around 110-115 knots, which is right in line with an L-4 on low-skids. The reporters report ride-quality issues above that point, which is just what one would expect with an L-model rotor system. But hey, what's ten or fifteen knots among friends, right? So all the dreamers were off by *only* ten or fifteen knots, so what? Well, a lot of the fanboys really hung their hat on that "125 knot" cruise speed. Oh well.

My 206L (the underpowered PoS with the C20B and water-meth injection) cruised at a genuine 118kts on low skids with fairings with full fuel and 4 pob. I'd have no issue with Bell claiming similar cruise for a modern iteration and note that the claim was for max speed, not cruise speed, of 125+ kts.

Maff

21st Jun 2017, 11:21

I've been quoted via the authorised dealer $1.5m USD + TAX for a 505 with a reasonable spec, i.e rotor brake, bose headsets, carpet, dual controls.

FH1100 Pilot

21st Jun 2017, 23:35

I've been quoted via the authorised dealer $1.5m USD + TAX for a 505 with a reasonable spec, i.e rotor brake, bose headsets, carpet, dual controls.

$1.5 million?? Holy friggin' cow! I guess Bell missed their "around $1.0million" mark by a bit.

Before getting into the 505, let me say something about jeffg for a moment. Jeffy, why do you have to go after me personally? I've never done anything to you, and attacking me personally makes you look so...I don't know...immature, like a little piece of sh*t.

And what's your hard-on for the FH1100? We weren't trying to certify it - IT WAS ALREADY CERTIFIED by Hiller back in the 1960's. Fairchild-Hiller produced over 250 of them before pulling the plug. We were merely trying to *sell* it. (We also were trying to get the 12E rotor blades approved for the 1100 but that was not a deal-breaker. It was a fine ship even with the original blades.)

As far back as 2001 we knew we were in a race with Frank Robinson. We'd brought the 1100 to a convention, and Frank was there. He came to our booth and spent a lot of time poring over the 1100. It didn't take a rocket scientist, genius or fortune-teller to make us realize that he was (logically) going to come out with a turbine version of the R-44. And although Robinson didn't officially announce the R-66 until 2007, you have to know that they were working on it long before then.

So we knew we were in a case of Beat The Clock, or more appropriately, "Beat The Frank." All we needed was a launch customer for five ships and we could have started production. Building 20 ships per year would've made us very happy. But we never got that far. As good a ship as the 1100 was, nobody really wanted a "brand-new 30 year-old helicopter." In the end, the owner of the company simply ran out of time and money. And when the R-66 hit the market it was, naturally, game-over.

Which brings us to the 505. Yes, it is certified. By the way, thank you jeffy for the link to the TCDS. I notice though that it's dated June 20th, and my previous post on the matter was on June 19th. So the TCDS wasn't yet published when I wrote it. So thanks for being a dick! As usual.

Okay, Bell has come out with a 5-seat helicopter with an over-powered French engine and an L-4 drivetrain. It's got a nice, big, unobstructed cabin and modern avionics. It will likely lift and climb away with anything you can put in it. But with only 85 gallons of fuel, *nobody* is going to be cruising that Arrius around at MCP as the fuel burn would assuredly be more than 30 gph.

By the way, I didn't dream up that "125+ knots" cruise speed thing. Bell did in their initial promo material for the 505. So while the Arrius could maybe pull a lightly-loaded 505 along at that speed, pilot-reports are that the ride-quality is "not the best" up there and its realistic cruise speed will be around 110-115 knots. John Eacott reports (and I can attest) that L-models could go that fast. I've flown the "straight" L-model and they were pretty zippy (faster than the later L-1 and L-3).

Plus, NOBODY is going to be flying that Arrius around at MCP, which will probably push the fuel consumption up above 30 gph. And with only 85 gallons of jet fuel onboard, that won't get you far.

I am really, really surprised that the nose of the prototype made it into production. The first guy who takes a bird through the windshield of a 505 (at any speed!) is going to have a very bad day. A friend of mine told me that their 505's will have an extra-thick windscreen on the pilot's side. (Heh, I guess the pax aren't that important.) Extra-thick, maybe, but will it be bird-proof? Sheesh, it would have to be glass, right? Maybe all 505 pilots ought to wear helmets with the visor down!

Oh, and the 505 *will* get winglets. Trust me. Why did Enstrom put them on the 280FX? Simply because the ride quality of the 280C in yaw could make you sick. Why does the Bo-105 have them...the BK117? The 222? Because virtually every helicopter that does better than 110 knots has winglets to help with the yaw. (The Astar is the curious exception.) Do we think Bell has performed some magic on the 505 that will allow it to not have winglets? Remember, the original L-model came out without winglets...briefly. The 505 will get them.

The 505 will probably have c.g. issues. It will *definitely* have LTE issues with that same huge vertical fin that every 206 has. (Didn't Bell learn ANYTHING??) And, at 3680 pounds MGW and a 37 foot rotor diameter, this is one BIG, light, entry-level helicopter.

And now it's up to $1.5million. Hmm, I wonder how long it'll be before we're saying, "Well yeah, it may cost $2million, but it's twice as good-looking as that R-66 isn't it? Oh...wait..."

Ascend Charlie

22nd Jun 2017, 06:26

nobody really wanted a "brand-new 30 year-old helicopter."

So, stop being so bitter about other products, open a can of Cooden Givastuff and chill out, man...

jeffg

22nd Jun 2017, 12:47

Bob,

You're exact quote post #315 was:
Congratulations to Bell! Let's hope that U.S. certification follows shortly.

But if they actually produce and sell that thing I'll eat my hat.

Bell 505 JRX Achieves Type Certificate - Heliweb Magazine (http://www.heliweb.com/bell-505-jrx-type-cert/)
The requirements you set for the eating of a hat were pretty specific.

Bell now has both a Canadian and US TC.
Bell has sold and delivered at least 5 to date which means they are producing it.
Bell states they will deliver 75 this year (if you have evidence otherwise please post. Your conspiracy theories aren't acceptable)

It would seem that all the requirements for the eating of hat have been met. So stop with your never ending scope creep in an attempt to weasel your way out of it.

Are you an 'honorable man' who will you keep his word Bobby?

If you are I found this to help you out
HowTo:Eat Your Hat | Uncyclopedia | Fandom powered by Wikia (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/HowTo:Eat_Your_Hat)

Jeffy, why do you have to go after me personally?
Loook in the mirror Bob. Why do you?

givdrvr

22nd Jun 2017, 15:56

Any speculations on how dramatically the B505 rollout will effect the B206 resale market?

SuperF

22nd Jun 2017, 20:52

Any speculations on how dramatically the B505 rollout will effect the B206 resale market?

I don't think that the 505 will effect the B206 market very much at all. They are in two totally different price brackets. Maybe there are a few people out there that have hung onto a 206 wanting to upgrade to new, not wanting a 66 or Airbus, but there wont be many.

The 206 still does what it says it will do, yes the 505 may be faster bigger and can lift more, but at 3-4 times the price of a good second hand 206...

bellblade2014

23rd Jun 2017, 12:04

Far more likely to wreck the value of used AS350 B2's based on the feedback I've heard from brokers who've flown both and know the B2 market really well.

whoknows idont

23rd Jun 2017, 14:04

It would seem that all the requirements for the eating of hat have been met. So stop with your never ending scope creep in an attempt to weasel your way out of it.

Come on, Jeff. Everybody knew that was an empty promise never to be kept! :rolleyes:

nigelh

29th Jun 2017, 14:08

F1100 or whatever.....
You are a bad loser ! You were wrong on almost every statement you made ! And you are also wrong on the price ..... It was $1.075 at the start when I ordered it and there was a built in 3% price increase pa in the contract .
And guess what ? It is exactly that price !!
Keep some credibility here and just admit you were
...... WRONG !!!!! So easy !

md 600 driver

29th Jun 2017, 19:04

givdrvr

30th Jun 2017, 00:39

I don't think that the 505 will effect the B206 market very much at all. They are in two totally different price brackets. Maybe there are a few people out there that have hung onto a 206 wanting to upgrade to new, not wanting a 66 or Airbus, but there wont be many.

The 206 still does what it says it will do, yes the 505 may be faster bigger and can lift more, but at 3-4 times the price of a good second hand 206...

Interesting...I think it would likely affect the market once it starts delivering in numbers. A brand new B505X turbine helicopter at 1.1M USD versus a 20 year old Bell 206-III with 50% component times asking 700K+ as I often see. Plus, new a/c tax depreciation benefits in the US.
I would think used inventory would start to build and depress used prices somewhat.

nigelh

30th Jun 2017, 13:10

I am probably going to put on the N as the less i have to do with the CAA the better and i cant see any benefits , just extra costs , by having it on the G .
I notice someone is keeping quiet about the price ......

bellblade2014

1st Jul 2017, 04:20

FH1100 Pilot

1st Jul 2017, 06:48

Hmm, a "pilot report" written and based evidently on the experience of an unrated pilot and a 14 year-old boy. The story is big on "Ooooh! Ahhhh!" fluff but short on hard numbers. I mean...long cross-country flight like that, you'd *THINK* that they might have come up with some accurate fuel consumption figures, no? I guess they were too busy playing with the G-1000. 14 year-old boys do like their toys.

Journalism: It ain't what it used to be :-/

nigelh

1st Jul 2017, 10:17

F1100 . You may have been a failure in your previous life as a helicopter designer/ engineer but don't let that turn you into one of those sad old grumpy men who hate others success. You are now , quite frankly , embarrassing so get a grip man !!! Maybe , just maybe , it is a good helicopter... Which would be nice !!

southerncanuck

1st Jul 2017, 21:54

This is the aircraft mentioned in the article, owned by the father of the 16yr old. Scott has a boat load of hours on all types, sold more helicopters than almost anyone i know, highly respected check pilot. We are working on the design of large long lens camera mounts. We are already getting a pretty steady stream of requests for a camera mount on the 505. Having had a very good look at the airframe up close, its solid.

Hot and Hi

2nd Jul 2017, 07:43

Very favorable article on the 505. Apparently this writer got to take one cross country into mountains in the hottest part of the year. The aircraft performed great. From the article;

"Is it all it's cracked up to be? The short answer to that is yes."

Heliweb Magazine : Heliweb Magazine June 2017, Page 1 (http://heliweb.realviewdigital.com/?iid=154096#folio=45)
A glowing review indeed! But when I read sections like this, I not only deplore the absence of editorial scrutiny but also find that the author demolishes his credibility (page 52):
One of the comment during the Doing a max performance take-off in smaller helicopters, before you progress to the extra power offered by the second engine of a twin, requires paying close attention to the gauges as you climb out to ensure you keep your RPM's out of the red.

nigelh

2nd Jul 2017, 11:33

Hot and High ...... That is very typical I'm afraid and good luck ever having any authority over the finished article !! I think it's a tad unfair to blame the pilot ! I do agree tho that it is important to keep the rpms out of the red !!!!

Hot and Hi

4th Jul 2017, 20:48

No, I am not blaming the author for the lack of editorial scrutiny.

But if Mr Mason thinks that once he graduates to twins, the second engine will give him extra power, he will be surprised to see that - pound for pound of engine weight and fueled carried - he got not twice the power, but half the power available.

And no, power management in a typical turbine is *not* about preventing RRPM from dropping, but about avoiding to exceed TRQ and TEMP limits.

I just don't see that he has the credibility to inform my opinion about Bell's new baby.

muermel

10th Jul 2017, 13:17

Has anyone received an update from Bell about EASA certification? Didn't get an answer from our customer rep last time I asked by eMail. We were told that "EASA certification is expected in July/ August this" year but that was 2 months ago. No news yet.

muermel

21st Jul 2017, 10:10

Got a response from bell a couple days ago. EASA certification is delayed so we won't get our 505 until January 2018 (Bell is EXPECTING to have the aircraft ready for delivery by January 2018). Original delivery date was July/ August 2017.

Hot and Hi

22nd Jul 2017, 11:04

Ask Kurt Robinson how long this can take. :ouch:

muermel

23rd Jul 2017, 12:50

Ask Kurt Robinson how long this can take. :ouch:

Oh I'm no rush to trade our EC 120 for the 505. Probably won't be happening in January 2018 I would guess....

helihub

10th Aug 2017, 08:37

Ask Kurt Robinson how long this can take.

Not just "how long" but also "how much" - see this article (http://helihub.com/2014/01/30/r66-european-certification-delayed-by-huge-easa-charges/) from the time Kurt Robinson was tearing his hair out

nigelh

10th Aug 2017, 21:56

Just paid my second instalment on my 505 and done the spec . Very excited and am told it will arrive in June next year . I am also very pleased to see that the warranty has been changed to 3 years or 1,000 hours ..... Parts and labour !!! Have you noticed FH1100 has been very quiet for him ...... Maybe the lack of winglets which he guaranteed it would have .... And hasn't ... Pushed him over the edge or maybe he is still digesting his hat !!!!!!
I also hear that it has been performing amazingly on the training at Bell . Not going for synthetic vision etc as I see no need , especially at $46,000 !!! But I did go for the Frahms vibration kit which I am told makes high speed cruise silky smooth .

Palma

13th Aug 2017, 22:31

Bell Helicopter announced, on 21st December 2016, that the Bell 505 Jet Ranger X had been certified by the Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) and that they had received more than 400 Letters of Intent since the initial launch in 2014. On 8th June 2017, Bell Helicopter announced that the Bell 505 Jet Ranger X had been certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Does anyone know how many Bell 505 Jet Ranger Xs have now been delivered to customers?

Self loading bear

13th Aug 2017, 23:59

From Bell website
1 in March at Heli expo to Americain client (probably still on C reg.)
3 in June to 3 first Canadian customers

and perhaps 2 to Bell training acedemy for which Safran announced pbh service contract

Not to much, should pace up a bit by now?

Cheers SLB

helihub

14th Aug 2017, 22:39

SLB, Wouldn't you have thought that 8 months after local Canadian certification, Bell would have likely delivered more than just this? It's kinda suggesting that there's a problem - I hope not, but need to see evidence to be persuaded.

At least the first one to the engineering academy was the orange prototype (oh, sorry, FTV) and thus not a production example. I guess one or two to the training school at Hurst?

Ian Corrigible

17th Aug 2017, 22:44

Bell reports a total of five aircraft delivered through June 30th: two in the first quarter of 2017 and three more in the second quarter.

I/C

Palma

20th Aug 2017, 14:37

Thank you I/C. I saw Bell's announcement of the delivery of the first Bell 505 to Pylon Aviation, Chandler, Arizona at HAI in Dallas on 7th March 2017 - to whom was the second delivery made in Q1?

Bell announced the delivery of three Bell 505s to three anonymous Canadian customers on 15th June 2017 but of the eleven production aircraft produced to date (S/Ns 65011 through 65021) ten are still registered to Bell - the exception being S/N 65018 which is now TG-JFV. Maybe the Guatamalans enjoy "Shake, Rattle and Roll"?

FH1100 Pilot

9th Nov 2017, 12:57

Big and good news for the 505! I thought that maybe some of you lot might have noticed this announcement by now and would want to mention it. Guess I was wrong.

Bell Helicopter signs deal to sell 50 aircraft to Reignwood International | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/trump-asia-china-commerce/bell-helicopter-signs-deal-to-sell-50-aircraft-to-reignwood-international-idUSS6N1MZ025)

And not just 50 aircraft (since Reignwood already deals with Bell in the 407), but 50 model 505's.

HeliHenri

9th Nov 2017, 13:26

Well, Few months ago, this dealer (the sole in China for the 505) has ordered 60 aircrafts so the total reaches now 110.

KiwiNedNZ

9th Nov 2017, 18:20

Probably find that some of the ones sitting there with C reg are waiting to go to Europe. I know of six operators personally who are awaiting EASA cert for the 505 and then they will take delivery. Two operators I spoke to told me their aircraft are built and sitting at the factory awaiting the certification.

Aesir

12th Nov 2017, 08:23

(EASA) GRANTS BELL 505 JET RANGER X CERTIFICATION (http://www.heliopsmag.com/news/easa-grants-bell-505-jet-ranger-x-certification)

EASA certification

formerlongbox

12th Nov 2017, 16:52

This is great news for all customers who placed an order for the 505, you can expect the first UK arrival late January 2018

nigelh

14th Nov 2017, 21:37

FH1100 .....when you say you were wrong . Do you mean wrong about it being built at all ? Or wrong about it having end plates on horizontal stab ? Or wrong about it having 125kn max cruise speed ? Or wrong about it being plagued with vibration ? So many wrongs ..I misted wondered which one you were referring to !!
By the way how did your hat taste ? Was it tough ??!!!
Good to see you admit you were wrong anyway and let's hope the 505 is as great a ship as the venerable old 206
👍

Washeduprotorgypsy

15th Nov 2017, 02:05

FH1100 Never surrender!

Without your golden opposition this thread has the taste of soggy old porridge. Beyond spicing it up it also makes people actually think about design elements.

Someone a couple of posts up alluded to "shake rattle and roll"
Could be the Dutch roll creeping in. Endplates anyone?

New torque and speed limits, new transmission mount dampeners.......?

It certainly will be interesting to see if space age design can bridge the gap to empirical perfection.??? Have your trumpet ready:ok:

Good to have you back:D

RVDT

15th Nov 2017, 08:00

space age design

Sounds about right - products of the 60's. Whats not to like? It's the more "modern" bits that concern me.

chopper2004

2nd Dec 2017, 02:06

It is no secret Bell has been pushing the 505 for the mil trainer role - they exhibited one at Korean Aerospace show / forum, and believe they did the same at a Japanese MoD show ?

Anyhow a fortnight ago I was @DAS2017

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/defence-helicopter/dubai-airshow-2017-bell-505-military-trainer-ready/

Here are my photos of their chalet /Bell 505 mock up painted in the colors of local Horizon Flight Academy which as everyone knows provides IERW for Gulf Co Operation states mil RW students.

Cheers

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4570/24902786668_d82954b374_k.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4580/37889289605_4962af4963_k.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4539/24902785228_840d3e874a_k.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4556/37889288485_05aa690548_k.jpg

Frying Pan

2nd Dec 2017, 03:52

Military training mock up? Ahhh..bless their cottons. Young Gulf Princes learning in the comfort of leather seats, glass screens and air conditioning. Not surprised many of the 'students' don't go front line...

...when I were a lad we used to dream of seats :)

FLY 7

2nd Dec 2017, 08:04

Why are the skids so small ?

nigelh

2nd Dec 2017, 13:43

The skids aren't small ...the helicopter is BIG !!
Agree about FH1100 ....as a fighter i would have to describe his style as
...leading with his Chin !! Having said that, it is good that people question things and it does make the discussion a bit more interesting if everyone is not in agreement !!
Anyone want a really nice cheap 109 Mk2 straight out of annual ??!!!!

FlimsyFan

2nd Dec 2017, 15:31

As a 66 owner/operator looking for the next step up, I’m quite disappointed by the real world performance of the 505. Payload not great, especially when you add a few choice options to it, and a range that falls well short of what is on offer from the R66.

It seems that wth the impending demise of the H120, there is a massive gulf in the single turbine market between R66/505 and B407/H130/Squirrel.

For me it’s very hard to justify the increased expense to buy and run between these two groupings. I would have loved it if AH could have brought out an updated 120 with a bit more poke with a price remaining in the middle ground.

What are the chances, if any, the 505 will receive any performance increase in the same way thto Cabri has?

nigelh

2nd Dec 2017, 16:01

Well we know everything on top can take considerably more ( think L4 figures ) ....so we must have the French
engine as the weak link . Funny that !!

Never in Balance

3rd Dec 2017, 03:26

Typical Bell doors. Don't seal over properly. :}

nigelh

3rd Dec 2017, 07:38

I think doors sealing would be part of the signing off / acceptance of the Helicoper . If my doors don't seal it goes back !!!!

GrayHorizonsHeli

3rd Dec 2017, 14:23

is that actually a piece of door seal hanging out the bottom on that pic? :/

Also, I note the angle of the foot step on the skid, who thought that was a good idea?

Bell_ringer

3rd Dec 2017, 14:41

It's a mockup. Wouldn't expect it to be perfect.

GrayHorizonsHeli

3rd Dec 2017, 19:30

It's a mockup. Wouldn't expect it to be perfect.

actually I would...sorry.
if it's the product you're showcasing it better be very tight on the fit and finish.

nigelh

3rd Dec 2017, 22:00

But who makes the mock up ? Maybe it's not Bell .... anyway I don't care about it and expect my 505 to be really well finished and if it's not ....I ain't payin'!!!!

Tickle

4th Dec 2017, 01:17

Maybe it got damaged by someone who sat in it during the display and caught something, pulled it off the trim with their long robes.

ascj

4th Dec 2017, 12:01

Are there helicopters out there that are waterproof?

OttoRotate

6th Dec 2017, 16:48

BAAAAHAHAHA, here's the first nail in the coffin of the 505. Gee, who didn't see *this* coming?
theadvertiser.XOM/story/news/2016/05/19/bell-helicopter-pulling-its-ranger-x-facility-out-lafayette/84603984/

""The 505 Jet Ranger X manufacturing facility in Lafayette, Louisiana, will relocate to our Maribel manufacturing and distribution facility in Canada, "Snyder said. "We remain committed to our Lafayette employees in the state of Louisiana. Therefore the Lafayette facility will receive the Bell 525 Relentless cabin sub-assembly, relocating from Amarillo."
Published 3:25 p.m. CT May 19, 2016

Over 18 months later and the Lafayette facility remains a ghost town. A skeleton crew of less than 20 employees are still waiting for the first 525 parts to arrive and be loaded into the new tooling fixtures. How long will it remain feasible to keep the doors unlocked?

chopper2004

8th Feb 2018, 21:03

Bell makes its European debut for 2 x a/c delivered to UK customers

https://www.heliukexpo.com/news/the-bell-505-jet-ranger-x-has-made-its-european-debut/

cheers

chopper2004

8th Feb 2018, 21:30

Australia
BELL DELIVERS FIRST 505 JET RANGER X HELICOPTERS INTO ASIA PACIFIC - Bell Helicopter (news) (http://news.bellhelicopter.com/en-US/163715-bell-delivers-first-505-jet-ranger-x-helicopters-into-asia-pacific)

Japan
BELL DELIVERS FIRST 505 JET RANGER X HELICOPTERS TO JAPAN - Bell Helicopter (news) (http://news.bellhelicopter.com/en-US/163720-bell-delivers-first-505-jet-ranger-x-helicopters-to-japan)

Vietnam
BELL HELICOPTER SELLS FIRST TWO 505 JET RANGER X HELICOPTERS TO VIETNAM - Bell Helicopter (news) (http://news.bellhelicopter.com/en-US/163765-bell-helicopter-sells-first-two-505-jet-ranger-x-helicopters-to-vietnam)

Cambodia
BELL 505 TO ASSIST IN RECOVERY OF MISSING US MILITARY PERSONNEL IN SOUTHEAST ASIA - Bell Helicopter (news) (http://news.bellhelicopter.com/en-US/163817-bell-505-to-assist-in-recovery-of-missing-us-military-personnel-in-southeast-asia)

ethicalconundrum

8th Feb 2018, 22:21

OK, not afraid to show my ignorance. Does anyone know what that club sticking out of the top of the mast is for?

Bell 505 Jet Ranger X - Bell Helicopter (http://www.bellhelicopter.com/commercial/bell-505)

I go back a few years to the OH-6, or Hughes 500. Was super glad back then for the triangle support structure in that little dude. Was also a real fan of the ability to kickout easy with rudder and not worry about gyroscopic issues.

The Sultan

8th Feb 2018, 22:43

Eth,

That is the slip ring used flight test instrumentation.

beebo

9th Feb 2018, 09:43

Cambodia
BELL 505 TO ASSIST IN RECOVERY OF MISSING US MILITARY PERSONNEL IN SOUTHEAST ASIA - Bell Helicopter (news) (http://news.bellhelicopter.com/en-US/163817-bell-505-to-assist-in-recovery-of-missing-us-military-personnel-in-southeast-asia)

Lol

Progress in Cambodia > Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency > Article View (http://www.dpaa.mil/Resources/Fact-Sheets/Article-View/Article/569614/progress-in-cambodia/)

That ain't happening any time soon...

rotorrookie

9th Feb 2018, 16:37

https://d21buns5ku92am.cloudfront.net/67992/images/271773-cambodia-b5c5aa-large-1518069375.jpg

notice the sandbags on both skids, cant they build ground handling wheels

John Eacott

9th Feb 2018, 18:54

https://d21buns5ku92am.cloudfront.net/67992/images/271773-cambodia-b5c5aa-large-1518069375.jpg

notice the sandbags on both skids, cant they build ground handling wheels

They look like blade tie-downs to me?

nigelh

9th Feb 2018, 22:10

I wasn't sure about the looks of the 505 but it has really grown on me . When they fit the longer skids I think it will be a real looker ! Can't wait for delivery of mine in June/July .....
Ps . Does anyone know much about wrapping helicopters in this country ??

Agile

10th Feb 2018, 08:39

Saw the 505 at the Singapore air show this week.

Nice stuff.
cockpit instrument panel, well positioned, nice screens
good downward view through the front windows at your feet
roomy well positioned baggage compartment
durable looking 206 components (tail rotor for example)
roomy inside with nice crash resistant seats
power promised to be good enough
only one button on the collective to go to FLY mode

Disappointing stuff.
some inside component look like they could have been borrowed for the R44 (collective lever...)
the front of the landing gear is so far behind the pilot

I know people will buy it for the operational value but if only they could have made it a bit more sexy looking...!

toptobottom

10th Feb 2018, 09:06

When they fit the longer skids I think it will be a real looker !

Lol! It’s one of the ugliest helicopters I’ve ever seen! Longer skids will make no difference. The only good thing about the 505 is that the Arrius2F now has a much nicer maintenance regime (for EC120 owners - a very pretty aircraft).

nigelh

10th Feb 2018, 09:56

I have seen a picture with the longer skids and trust me it really makes a huge difference to the look ....having said that , I am buying mine to fly and not to pose in ..so the looks are not really a problem !! At least it looks like a proper helicopter with proper controls which is more than can be said about Robbos . It is really just an L4 with new cockpit and engine but half the price !!

chopjock

10th Feb 2018, 09:58

only one button on the collective to go to FLY mode

Is there a twist grip or a switch for throttle control?

Agile

10th Feb 2018, 11:45

There is no twist grip, just big red switch to move from "idle" to "fly"

Flying the AS350 without twist grip, I know I would have to reach to the fuel lever and find some compromise switching my left hand between collective and fuel lever in case of regulator failure.

How does it works now in the 505? Is it because of the dual FADEC that there is no need for a throttle control? somebody else will have to help me understand how this works.

bellblade2014

10th Feb 2018, 13:02

How does it works now in the 505? Is it because of the dual FADEC that there is no need for a throttle control? somebody else will have to help me understand how this works.

Very simple on the 505. If the pilot and copilot switches are set to idle, the aircraft will startup to idle or reduce to idle if infight (For a Training autorotation). If either collective switch is set to “FLY”, the RPM goes to 104%. The rpm increase is quick coming up and tightly governed at the top.... slowish to decay at flat pitch due to heavy 206L rotor. Couldn’t be much simpler or safer....

chopjock

10th Feb 2018, 13:14

Couldn’t be much simpler or safer....

Don't know if it's safer, I like the idea of being able to control throttle a little if approaching with a tail rotor failure / loss of control etc.

bellblade2014

10th Feb 2018, 16:22

Don't know if it's safer, I like the idea of being able to control throttle a little if approaching with a tail rotor failure / loss of control etc.

Safer= lower workload and less potential catastrophic failures. For professional pilots it’s not as big a deal perhaps, but for owner operators, there’s no risk of over or under speeding due to throttle and no hot start risk.

The Robbie’s have lots of hot starts from 44 owners moving to 66’s and getting the throttle confused with the R44 setup.

twinstar_ca

10th Feb 2018, 23:18

I know there are some 505s in canada but haven't seen any here in alberta.... are they coming??

Stab Bar

11th Feb 2018, 09:04

I like the idea of being able to control throttle a little if approaching with a tail rotor failure / loss of control etc.

It's true you can't do 'throttle steering' with it, but at least it's a big switch right under your thumb so unlike an AS350 you don't have to take your hand off the collective to activate it. I reckon you could probably get a semblance of 'between' throttle by blipping it, but I don't know if Bell have played around with that idea yet.

newfieboy

12th Feb 2018, 02:02

Twinstar

I heard a flight of two 505’s on 126.7 going into Chapleau for fuel early this last week while I was heading up North. Think they were heading to Mirabel from Baker Lake.Cold weather trials up there I think.

I’m in Thompson MB bird towing at the moment and there is a Bell 525 up here doing cold WX stuff at the airport -40c today!! That is one sweet aircraft. It’s flying off the same ramp as us.

nigelh

12th Feb 2018, 08:54

Newfie... yes , I have just heard from Bell this morning about their cold weather trials @-40deg !!! Apparently the 505 had no problems at all and started multiple times just off battery. Also hear that all of them now being delivered have longer skids which must be better for off airfield landings let alone aesthetics.
I hear there will be autopilot and aux tanks next year as well which I will retrofit .

chopper2004

12th Feb 2018, 15:39

Japan Coast Gaurd just taken delivery of Bell 505 ,

cheers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-6Zo9kHg-U

nigelh

12th Feb 2018, 17:00

Well maybe i am the only one ...but that looks a really nice helicopter for under £1m brand new ( and that is with a load of extras such as Rotor Break , Synthetic Vision , Collision Avoidance , Exec seats etc etc ) :D

twinstar_ca

12th Feb 2018, 23:56

md 600 driver

13th Feb 2018, 09:13

nigelh

13th Feb 2018, 11:20

FLY 7

13th Feb 2018, 22:36

Japan Coast Gaurd just taken delivery of Bell 505 ,

cheers

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-6Zo9kHg-U

No 2 min cool down ;)

Still think the skids are too small.

FH1100 Pilot

15th Feb 2018, 02:39

I wonder how those Japanese Coast Guard guys like flying around in a single-engine helicopter without floats? Baaaaah, modern turbine engines never quit! Right? Bell better come out with some popout floats for that thing quick!

Nigelh:I hear there will be autopilot and aux tanks next year as well which I will retrofit.
Aux tank? Probably a good idea, Nige old bean. I mean, what idiot designed that thing with a thirsty French engine and only 85 gallons of fuel?? Jeez-Louise, 85 gallons, LOL. Even a 206B-III had more fuel than that and they only burn 26 gph.

Bell claims that at sea level the 505 has a no-reserve range of 299 miles at a "long range cruise" of 112 knots. This implies that they believe the fuel consumption of the Arrius to be...(drumroll)...31.5 gph. Damn, that's a lot of gas being sucked through at "long-range cruise." Hate to have to pull it up to MCP! (Something tells me Bell wasn't originally planning on using the Arrius but was forced into it for some reason.)

Okay, what if we want to land *with* some reserve...say a half-hour? 15 gallons. That leaves us with only 70 gallons to play with, which is a little over two hours at 112 knots. Granted, most light helicopter trips are less than 125 miles. But man, this 505 does not carry a whole lot of fuel!

So...where are they going to put the aux tank...in the baggage compartment? Hey, why not, LOL. Or maybe they can stick little sponsons on the sides...like a miniature 222! HAHAHAHAH. Whatever, just gimme another 30 gallons, please? Pretty please?

I'll tell you, man, those Bell engineers have to really be scratching their heads and sharpening their pencils...err, styluses. An autopilot will add weight, an aux fuel tank will add weight. Beefing up the underbelly structure and landing gear is going to add weight! I'll bet they'll be applying for a MGW increase pretty soon. Or...maybe not. That would probably mean beefing up the fuselage structure and landing gear even more. 'Round and 'round we go!

If they don't already, Bell will eventually rue the day they brought this turkey of a helicopter to the market. Good thing it's a strikingly good-looking bird! Well...maybe it will be when they get those damn landing gear skids extended.

FlimsyFan

15th Feb 2018, 06:26

I think it will be easier on the N but I may decide to put on G for some charter . I will check how Red Bull do theirs . My idea was to have a fun wrap scheme just for a few years and then sell it with effectively new paintwork....

Nigel. We do vehicle wrapping as part of our day job. Whilst we didn’t do a wrap on our heli we have applied some graphics and clear vinyl as protection for the paint in many areas.

If you want to PM me, I’d be happy to chat with you about what we have done. If nothing else, would be great to have a look at your new toy when it arrives.

FF

nigelh

15th Feb 2018, 07:05

Will do Flimsy ... thanks .
FH1100 .... you really do lead with your chin don’t you 🙈. You have been proved wrong on everything you have predicted .... does that stop you continuing with your drivel ? No of course not !!! I can only guess that you are a failed designer who was ( probably correctly) sacked by Bell !!
( and you still haven’t eaten your hat from your last predictions ...)
As for a Turkey , I bet most manufacturers would love a turkey that is selling as well as this one !!

GrayHorizonsHeli

15th Feb 2018, 10:44

If FH1100 got fired from Bell...perhaps they should hire him back.

SansAnhedral

15th Feb 2018, 14:19

If FH1100 got fired from Bell...perhaps they should hire him back.

http://cdn2-www.afterellen.com/assets/uploads/2014/09/new-here.jpg

nigelh

15th Feb 2018, 15:28

Ha ha !!! I think FH1100 is a dinosaur just like his name 🤔
He has slagged off the 505 from the start saying it would do 115 knots max , would need winglets and finished by pronouncing it would definitely never ever be built !!!
Here we are now with deliveries and a proven 125-128! knots and rave reviews ! I agree that the skids look too short but the ones coming out now have longer ones . I agree an aux tank would be nice but one will be available very soon ..... the MD500 has aux tanks but does FH make a fuss about that ??? He is a very disgruntled old man .....and still has not accepted he was wrong and eaten his hat as promised!!

GrayHorizonsHeli

15th Feb 2018, 16:27

http://cdn2-www.afterellen.com/assets/uploads/2014/09/new-here.jpg

I apologize if there was an opening spot in an open forum when some old codger died and got buried in the helicopter heavens. I hope you understand the dynamics of forums and realise people come and people go and not every tidbit of information is first hand knowledge to everyone.

chopper2004

15th Feb 2018, 17:55

I wonder how those Japanese Coast Guard guys like flying around in a single-engine helicopter without floats? Baaaaah, modern turbine engines never quit! Right? Bell better come out with some popout floats for that thing quick!

Nigelh:
Aux tank? Probably a good idea, Nige old bean. I mean, what idiot designed that thing with a thirsty French engine and only 85 gallons of fuel?? Jeez-Louise, 85 gallons, LOL. Even a 206B-III had more fuel than that and they only burn 26 gph.

Bell claims that at sea level the 505 has a no-reserve range of 299 miles at a "long range cruise" of 112 knots. This implies that they believe the fuel consumption of the Arrius to be...(drumroll)...31.5 gph. Damn, that's a lot of gas being sucked through at "long-range cruise." Hate to have to pull it up to MCP! (Something tells me Bell wasn't originally planning on using the Arrius but was forced into it for some reason.)

Okay, what if we want to land *with* some reserve...say a half-hour? 15 gallons. That leaves us with only 70 gallons to play with, which is a little over two hours at 112 knots. Granted, most light helicopter trips are less than 125 miles. But man, this 505 does not carry a whole lot of fuel!

So...where are they going to put the aux tank...in the baggage compartment? Hey, why not, LOL. Or maybe they can stick little sponsons on the sides...like a miniature 222! HAHAHAHAH. Whatever, just gimme another 30 gallons, please? Pretty please?

I'll tell you, man, those Bell engineers have to really be scratching their heads and sharpening their pencils...err, styluses. An autopilot will add weight, an aux fuel tank will add weight. Beefing up the underbelly structure and landing gear is going to add weight! I'll bet they'll be applying for a MGW increase pretty soon. Or...maybe not. That would probably mean beefing up the fuselage structure and landing gear even more. 'Round and 'round we go!

If they don't already, Bell will eventually rue the day they brought this turkey of a helicopter to the market. Good thing it's a strikingly good-looking bird! Well...maybe it will be when they get those damn landing gear skids extended.

Think you find they may be replacing the Bell 206 in the training role for their pilots not deployed on ships/cutters.

cheers

FH1100 Pilot

15th Feb 2018, 18:05

Oh Nigel, if you could refrain from the ad hominem attacks for just a moment, maybe we could discuss the 505 objectively?

It's true that I thought Bell would never produce the 505, especially when they gave the finger to the Lafayette, Louisiana City Council, abandoned the plant there and moved production to Canada. I guess I was wrong about that. Oh well, nobody is right 100% of the time. I still think that, like other star-crossed aircraft that either failed or were stillborn (e.g. Beech Starship, Cessna 162, the Piperjet, the Eclipse 500, etc. etc.), Bell will cancel 505 production and move on, much like they did with the 206LT. Oh, and the 427. And the 230. And the 609.

And let's not forget the 214ST! Iran wanted 350 of those babies. Bell eventually built under 100 of them.

The fact that the 505 does not yet have endplates on the horizontal stab is moot. It *will* get them, trust me on that. Seriously.

And I don't know about any "rave reviews" of the 505's speed. The claims of a 125 knot cruise are far from "proven." So far, no pilot report I've read states that anybody cruises the thing that fast. The most comprehensive pilot report (by Philip Greenspun) notes that the vibration became "dramatically worse" above 110 knots. Dramatically worse, eh? Poetic license, Mr. Greenspun?

Greenspun then referenced a review of the 505 that was written by Guy Maher and published VERTICAL Magazine. Maher says:What I also noticed was as the speed increased from 110 to 120 knots, so did a two-per-revolution vibration. Knowing how smooth the 206L-4 rotor system could be, I was somewhat surprised.

So far, NOBODY has published any realistic "torque vs. airspeed chart vs. fuel burn" figures. I mean, how hard could that be? All they talk about is how rough it gets above 110 knots. So...sure...it may fly up at 125 knots, but at what comfort level and what fuel burn? Heck, a 206B-III on low skids will do "nearly" 110 knots (admittedly at MCP). I've flown some that would actually do 120-125 mph with a light load.

(I knew a Bolkow pilot at PHI who swore...*SWORE* that his ship would do an "honest" 125 knots all day when EVERY OTHER BOLKOW in PHi's fleet only did 120. And yeah, I flew a ton of them. Turns out that "his" 105 - which I eventually flew too - didn't get from Point A to Point B any quicker than any other 105. The GPS doesn't lie. "His" ship just had an inaccurate ASI. But pilots are optimists, eh?)

Even Bell admits that their "LIVE" transmission mount ain't doing the job, and so they're adding a FRAM damper to the cabin. Now there's a big engineering "oopsie!" for you. (My question is if the engineers really thought they could push the L-4 rotor system to 130 knots and keep it smooth without the Nodamatic trans mount? That's just crazy. They must've been smoking some real primo LSD when they came up with that bit of fantasy.)

So Nigel, unwad those panties! Maybe someday we'll have an objective pilot-report on the 505 which will have some hard numbers. Greenspun's was pretty good but he left out the fuel burn and cruise speed figures. Other than those *two* pilot-reports (and maybe one other story that it was written by a non-pilot), all we get are breathless reports which are full of unrestrained fangirl giggling over the dual FADEC.

By the way, Nige...since you seem so close to this project and are so deeply and personally invested in it...has Bell been able to remove or extend the hilarious 500-landing life-limit on the landing gear?

krypton_john

15th Feb 2018, 18:18

When are you going to eat your hat, FH1100?

FH1100 Pilot

15th Feb 2018, 18:32

I wrote:I wonder how those Japanese Coast Guard guys like flying around in a single-engine helicopter without floats? Baaaaah, modern turbine engines never quit! Right? Bell better come out with some popout floats for that thing quick!

chopper2004 replied: Think you find they may be replacing the Bell 206 in the training role for their pilots not deployed on ships/cutters.

cheers

Yes, I'm sure you're right, chopper. What was I thinking!

Oh. Maybe this.

http://www.j-hangarspace.jp/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/JCGBell206rs.jpg

helonorth

15th Feb 2018, 21:16

Seems like the 505 has the same range as the 407, maybe a little better. Nobody seems to complain about that. I really don't want to fly a helicopter with more than a two and a half hour range, TBH.

fijdor

15th Feb 2018, 21:30

Actually, the 407 IS short on range up here in Canada. Fuel can be far apart in a lot of places here.

JD

nigelh

16th Feb 2018, 13:16

Ok FH1100 ..... you are a determined old bugger aren’t you !!!!
A friend is taking delivery of his in a couple of weeks and I will fly it and get you all the figures ... I will photograph the panel for you to see the speed as well !!
I personally don’t care if it sprouts end plates ( I think they look good so would be quite happy ) ....what bothers me is that you are going to make yourself ill with all your anti Bell venom !!! Just chill ... none of it really matters to you as I am sure you will not be buying one ..are you ?
The new owner has opted against the Frahms vibration kit as he said his was silky smooth right up to around 125 Knots so didn’t feel it worth the money . As for the skid gear I am afraid I haven’t heard anything about that . Maybe there is an inspection to be done but no big deal .... it’s ALL under warranty for 1,000 hours / 3 years !!

FH1100 Pilot

16th Feb 2018, 15:13

Nigelh:....what bothers me is that you are going to make yourself ill with all your anti Bell venom !!! Just chill ...

Oh Nigel...simple, caring Nigel. Please do not concern yourself with my health for it is quite good. I do not have any anti-Bell venom in my blood; I've flown Bell products all my life and am quite fond of them! ...Most of them. ...Not this particular turkey called the 505 though, which seems to be trying for the "Not Ready For Prime Time" award.

You wrote of your friend:The new owner has opted against the Frahms vibration kit as he said his was silky smooth right up to around 125 Knots so didn’t feel it worth the money.

People often are so impressed and overwhelmed upon flying a new aircraft for the first time that their senses are fooled. It's not until we spend some time with a new bird that we become objective about their qualities and traits. Your friend/new owner may indeed have felt that it was "silky smooth" but unfortunately that is not what other, more experienced pilots have reported.

I'm not sure what your experience level is, Nigel, but those of us who have some time flying two-blade, underslung rotors around know...KNOW!...that they get rough as the airspeed increases. And not just two-blades! Hell, an experienced pilot/friend of mine flew in an EC120 and was definitely *not* impressed with the ride-quality at 110 knots in cruise (not to mention the fuel burn!). Bell didn't change the laws of physics with the 505. I believe that your new owner-friend will regret not getting the new, additional damper. It is pure fantasy to think that people are going to be zooming around at 125 knots in their 505, drag-racing 407's.

As for the skid gear I am afraid I haven’t heard anything about that . Maybe there is an inspection to be done but no big deal .... it’s ALL under warranty for 1,000 hours / 3 years !!

You're kidding me, right? Are you saying that you're *not* aware of the life-limit on the landing gear of 500-LANDINGS?? I thought everyone knew about this! 500 *landings* and then you have to change the gear. Each hovering-auto counts for 25 landings. It's not "no big deal." It's a huge deal.

The only other aircraft that I know of with a restriction like that is the AT-802 Air Tractor spray plane. The landing gear has a 3,000 landing limit before it has to be replaced. That's kind of crazy, but at least 3,000 landings is better than 500.

It will be interesting to see how the 505 works out in the field as flight-time on the fleet increases. I suspect that many 505 owners are going to face-palm themselves and go, "Shoulda bought an R-66!"

We shall see...

albatross

16th Feb 2018, 16:19

500 Landings? Is this a true number?
I used to do an job on 206/206L called inertial nav survey when we did a landing every 3-4 minutes for 10 hours a day including hot refueling so call it 12 landings an hour or 120 landings a day. ( one start per day ) LOL Then there were the guys doing gravity survey in the desert using 500C and D who did a landing every 2 minutes. Flew a lot of inertial nav survey but one project we logged 110hrs in 10 days. This would be a problem keeping up with gear changes in the 505.

nigelh

16th Feb 2018, 17:09

Don’t worry our old codger FH hasn’t actually flown it himself either and is an expert !! He is saying that people will “ wish” they had bought an R66 .......🙈🙈🙈. Well , not the ones who have mast bumped in the cruise due to low weight I would guess .
Anyway , each to his own .... either our own geriatric expert FH1100 is correct or Bell are . Take your choice ...!!!

Looks like 250

16th Feb 2018, 18:42

Pretty much rules out its use as an Ag machine if true. Those spray boys would need two gear changes per 100 hrs. Or is this new longer gear I hear of a fix? Rumour has it someone is building spray gear for their 505 , I have to wonder why.

FH1100 Pilot

17th Feb 2018, 05:54

Apparently, the drop tests under FAR Part 27 that manufacturers have to comply with for US FAA certification now are more rigorous than back in the "good old days" when the 206/407 was certified.

So yes, the 500-*landing* life-limit on the 505 gear is a real thing. (Unless Bell has quietly fixed it by now, of course.) It's probably why Bell didn't hustle to find a tour operator here in the U.S. to put on a 505 to build time quickly. And it's not just the skids; I understand that the structure around attach points for the landing gear needs beefing-up as well. So it's not as simple as building the gear crosstubes out of thicker material or whatever. The solution will be complex. (And did you notice that the #1 505 Fanboy Nigelh didn't deny or even comment on the landing gear issue at all? He merely resorted to his childish name-calling. And I thought we were getting on so well...)

I suppose the "SLS" (short light single) that Bell originally envisioned was supposed to be a much lighter helicopter. I mean, a replacement for a 206B shouldn't weigh as much as a 206L...should it? But that's what happened. Bell went with the L-model drivetrain (main trans, main rotor, tailboom and tail rotor), which are admittedly "a bit" heavier than their B-model counterparts. Then of course Bell opted for the Arrius engine, which is heavier than a comparable RR-250. Bell also said sayonara to the composites in the cabin/fuselage and went back to...well, basically the same way they built the 47J-model all those years ago: a tube frame with a sheet metal cover. "Clean sheet of paper," my ass.

So instead of a 3200 pound helicopter we now have a 3800 pound helicopter. A 3800-pound, five-seat single.

Now, you know...I mean, you KNOW that Bell is working feverishly to come up with a solution to this gear debacle. Otherwise this ship is dead in the water. No commercial operator will touch it if they have to replace the landing gear every 500 *LANDINGS*. (Lengthening the skid tubes is a separate issue not related to the weak landing gear. There were some balance issues on the ground, evidently.) The 505 fanboys don't like to talk about the landing gear issue. They keep that on the deep down-low. For obvious reasons, I mean, come on.

And now look, I don't enjoy being critical of things. Although I may come off as a grumpy old man, I don't actually like being critical for the sake of being critical. I just like to be objective. And I think that the compromises Bell made to rush this turkey into production are just silly. It's like they're saying, "Aw, screw the customers! As long as it has 'BELL' stenciled on the side, people will eat it up! We'll put dual-FADECs and a Garmin 1000 in the thing and them dumb pilots will be so impressed that they'll overlook what an overall crappy design it is. Hopefully they won't even ask how much it'll cost to replace one of those huge windscreens if they accidentally crack one and it's a non-warranty item."

Really Bob, crappy design? Yeah, really. How's about how they buried the fuel gauge and hid it in one little corner of the MFD where you really have to look for it and it's not obvious at a glance like it is on...ohhh, JUST ABOUT EVERY OTHER HELICOPTER EVER DESIGNED!

Progress!

But hey, it's got FADEC! And those are cool. But we can't practice stuck-pedal emergencies in it because of the little toggle-switch "throttle." But come on...when was the last time you heard of a stuck pedal? Get real.

Hot and Hi

17th Feb 2018, 10:34

Seems like the 505 has the same range as the 407, maybe a little better. Nobody seems to complain about that. I really don't want to fly a helicopter with more than a two and a half hour range, TBH.
Why not? 5 hrs (=R66 with auxtank) would be just fine. Think typical mission distance 1.5 to 2 hrs. Flying around a bit a destination, and then back the same day. Now there is typically no fuel at destination. If you need to refuel, that means another 2 x 45 min or so to and from fuel station. Fuel planning and arrangements will take up your whole day.

Spunk

17th Feb 2018, 11:19

But we can't practice stuck-pedal emergencies in it because of the little toggle-switch "throttle."

Why not? If executed precisely, you don’t have to touch that throttle. Ever seen a BO105 pilot reaching up to get his hands on the lever and in exchange dropping the collective?

nigelh

17th Feb 2018, 13:25

Don’t worry .. I think the old boy is getting confused again !! He really is in quite a state ... and all about a helicopter he will never own and probably never fly !!!! It’s like me getting my knickers in a twist about Robinson R22,s .....I’m not that interested in their range or where the fuel gauge is as I am never going to own or fly one !!!
For the interested here I have heard
fuel burn at max speed is 230lb/hr
and capacity is 585 lb . You can do 2hr 30 min until fuel low @ 125knots
The owner has accepted his new one and it’s on its way here and he doesn’t know anything about the 500 landings which seems strange 🤔
Personally I think 2.5 hrs is fine for most people / jobs and is fairly normal for a single ( 300 nm + range ) but I will still go for the aux tank when they get it . Just like the MD500 has an aux .... but the grumpy ex Bell helicopter designer hasn’t mentioned that !
Maybe it will turn out to be a turkey and maybe it won’t but I have one on order and it will be my first ever new Helicoper after owning about a dozen geriatrics over the last 30+ years ...so I intend to enjoy it FH1100 !!!!

Nige321

17th Feb 2018, 14:10

Form the Bell spec sheet. Where does it say 500 landing life for the landing gear?

FH1100 Pilot

17th Feb 2018, 14:34

Spunk, it's funny that you mention the BO105. When I was doing my Bolkow transition at PHI, one of the things we practiced was stuck-pedal. Doing a stuck-right, I had - as usual - royally screwed it up. We ended up skimming along, just above the runway with the nose cocked way off to the right, no chance for pulling power and going around.

My instructor, the great Jerry Loviglio goes, "Drag a skid."
And I said something like, "WHAT???????" Me, having spent my entire career up to that point flying two-blade, teetering systems, and thinking about how we were going to get dynamic rollover and roll that 105 up into a big, German ball.

And he goes, "Watch." He takes the controls, lowers the upwind (left) skid and drags it along the ground. Sure enough the nose comes around and we slide to a stop.

"Rigid rotor," he smiled. You know that smile - the one IP's use when they show you a trick that they knew and you didn't.

Heh. I was impressed!

Try *that* in your 505.

Now admittedly, the chances of getting a stuck pedal in a 206 would be like the chances of getting a stuck-cyclic. It's all pushrods and bellcranks going back to the tail rotor, same as the main. It's aircraft that have cable-actuated t/r pitch-change mechanisms that are "more" prone to stuck-pedal situations. (And come on, I put the word "more" in quotes because let's be fair, they just don't happen all that often.)

Oh wait...does the 505 have the same tail rotor control linkage as the 206? Hmm...somehow I think not...

Nige321 - thank you for posting that chart! It's always good to have the straight scoop and not hearsay or innuendo.

I had been told that Bell was working "feverishly" on improving that 500-landing limit, and I'm happy to see that they did. It didn't take long. It's now 3,000 hours (but curiously they seem to have deleted the limitation on the number of landings). I also see that the mid fuselage/floor is also up to 3,000 hours.