Bell 407

[EN48]

an Enstrom 480 is a rich boys toy

Thanks for adding so much value to this thread! As it turns out, about as many 407's are owned by rich boys, and the 480 is increasingly being used in law enforcement and similar applications. Neither helicopter knows the financial status of the pilot/owner at the time of a malfunction.

[DoinTime]

It seems to me reading your user name, I am wondering if you are on a crusade for the Enstrom 480......

Maybe you should have looked at all mechanical failures in the helicopter industry, I am sure if you looked at that you might of taken up cycling instead (although, I am sure there are plenty of mechanical failures there too, ask the guy trying to break the land speed record).

When you are talking about engine failures I think you should look more at the engine itself, as far as manufacturer of the engine not aircraft.

The 407 is definitely a work horse. Usauly operated at high gross weights and in all types of environments, not just a toy or running around doing law enforcement, usually carrying two people, gear/equipment and fuel.... full gross weight??? (No offense to all you deputy dogs.)

I am not saying the 407 is a better machine but I find statistics can be made to say what ever the person making a case wants. There are so many variables.

My suggestion to you is get checked out on the bicycle, less fatilties..... or is there No one said flying helicopters was safe.

DT

[helonorth]

I really don't think you can draw any conclusions from the information. There really isn't much there. Have you flown the 407 yet? You'll probably forget all
about trying to split hairs with statistics when you do.

[EN48]

I am wondering if you are on a crusade for the Enstrom 480

I'm not on a crusade for anything except safe, professional grade flying. I have trained in the 407, R44, R22, and 480, and currently own a 480 as a time builder to get to "reasonable" insurance rates in a 407. My experience in all of these machines had been generally positive, with no malfunctions in any of them while I have been flying. Every helicopter is a bundle of compromises, including the 480, and each has its strengths and weaknesses. I am trying to get a better handle on the tradeoffs involved with the 407.

I think you should look more at the engine itself,

Agreed. And while the 407 engine is a 250 series, it is quite different from the C20. I am wondering if the the C47B has a siginificantly different pattern of failures?

Maybe you should have looked at all mechanical failures in the helicopter industry, I am sure if you looked at that you might of taken up cycling instead

Been flying airplanes for more than 40 years and am quite familiar with the data there. All airplanes are definitely not created equal when it comes to safety and reliability. I am relatively new to helicopters, but I suspect that the same is true for RW but to a different degree.

[EN48]

Have you flown the 407 yet? You'll probably forget all
about trying to split hairs with statistics when you do.

Yes - did the Bell Academy Initial Pilot/Ground course about a year ago, some additional flying in the meantime, and am back at Bell soon for recurrent. The 407 is a fantastic machine IMHO, with only a few relatively minor things to complain about - the biggest one being the cramped cockpit relative to an A-Star or a 119 (both of which have other more significant issues).

If 46% of accidents are due to mechanical malfunctions, this doesnt seem like splitting hairs if an accurate reflection of real world experience.

[alouette3]

What ,in your opinion, are the 'significant issues' with the Astar? I would not venture an opinion about a 407 if I have no time in it and I see you do not have time in an Astar.
If you are going purely by folklore, then I can say that an Astar with Arriel engines has a sterling record as far as engine failures go.To me, the Astar is a superior machine in every way.But then I am biased towards European and Sikorsky products and underwhelmed with the current line up Bell has to offer. But I will not make that a blanket judgement until I fly the 407/212/412/205/206.
Alt3.

[EN48]

What ,in your opinion, are the 'significant issues' with the Astar?

True, I have not acted as a pilot in the A-Star (but have been a pax on a number of occasions). My concerns are based on widely reported problems with support and parts availability and pricing in the U.S. For this info I am relying heavily on posts on Rotorheads, and on the Pro Pilot magazine annual surveys. Dont know if this is in the category of folklore or not. OTOH, there is much to like about the A-Star acft itself, especially the cabin layout. If this acft were as well supported in the U.S. as Bell products, it would be my first choice hands down. My only concern re safety is the possible issue with hydraulic failures (perhaps folklore), but as I understand it, a dual hydraulic system is now available.

[Ian Corrigible]

Those mechanical failure figures are far higher than most accepted numbers. Most OEMs (Agusta, Bell, Eurocopter) quote Human Factors as being accountable for ~75% of causes, with inherent mechanical failures being attributable for less than 10% (if memory serves). We should see some definitive figures from the Joint Helicopter Safety Analysis Team (JHSAT) before too long.

Originally Posted by EN48

And while the 407 engine is a 250 series, it is quite different from the C20. I am wondering if the the C47B has a siginificantly different pattern of failures?

The C47B has suffered from a couple of major design problems, including third stage turbine failures and FADEC failures (which led to a fleet stand-down and development of the reversionary governor after the tragic loss of a USFS 407 during the Challenger debris recovery effort in 2003).

I/C

[EN48]

Those mechanical failure figures are far higher than most accepted numbers. Most OEMs (Agusta, Bell, Eurocopter) quote Human Factors as being accountable for ~75% of causes, with inherent mechanical failures being attributable for less than 10% (if memory serves

Yes, this is pretty much the frame of reference I have had in mind for several years, and why I found the 407 data surprising. The numbers I cited are compiled by me on the basis of reading every NTSB accident report on the 407. Am I missing something?

[widgeon]

I agree with you figures I show 16 of the reported accidents as engine related.
Only bright spot is they have reduced in recent years , 6 of the accidents were in 2003.

[Ascend Charlie]

Perhaps the figures suggest something different: that pilots who fly the 407 have fewer human error-related accidents?

[GeorgeMandes]

You might review, for example, the last three years of 407 accidents and incidents, and redo your analysis to determine what the current statistics say, now that the 407 is mature, as opposed to its introduction as a new product. I took a quick look of reports in the NTSB data base since 2005, and saw 22 reports. While there were engine failures, you didn't see the type of events experienced early in the 407's history.

One can also make the argument, that in a perfect world, the only accidents would be mechanical problems, with pilot training reducing the human error accidents to almost zero. Since you have trained at Bell, you know how great their 407 training is.

I don't think comparing the 480 to the 407 is an apples to apples comparison, when you look at the number of 407s in the fleet and the number of hours flown by the 407 each year. Wouldn't the 407 fleet fly 100 times the annual hours flown by the 480 fleet?

In the last ten days, I flew a 407 from CO to AK, and a L4 from AK to CO. Two and a half days up in the 407, and four days down in the L4. Along the way, I stopped in Penticton and did two days of mountain training in the 407 with Canadian Helicopters. Previously I have made that trip from the lower 48 to Alaska, and also trained with Canadian Helicopters in the Jet Ranger, L4, and 530F. The 407 runs circles around all those other ships both in the mountain environment as well as on a long cross country flight.

While there are always opportunities for pilots to screw things up, the 407 makes the flying part a lot easier between its great power, the responsiveness of the rotor system, the tail rotor authority, and the ability to do slopes. Several months ago in the 407, we needed to climb high to cross a high mountain pass in Colorado with a bunch of wind and turbulence, and easily climbed to 15,500 feet where we were still climbing 700 fpm. If you mated an L4 with a high altitude tail rotor with a 530F, took their best attributes, and added in a bunch of attributes neither ship has, you end up with a 407.

[EN48]

you didn't see the type of events experienced early in the 407's history.

Good point. No doubt that the 407 mechanical malfunction rate seems to be improving over time.

I don't think comparing the 480 to the 407 is an apples to apples comparison

I am very much in agreement on this point, and was not intending to suggest that they are comparable. The 480 is the turbine I have the most experience with, and has a superb safety record, so it made me wonder about the reasons why the two are so different. There are about 130 480's flying vs about 800-900 407's, so no doubt that the 407 flys many more hours per year on a fleet basis, and that needs to be taken into consideration.

I am planning to do the Penticton mountain flying course in the near future. Keep hearing rave reviews.

[GeorgeMandes]

What Bell Helicopter is to emergency training, Canadian Helicopters in Penticton, BC is to mountain training.

[Spunk]

Bell 407 statistics

Maybe I'm wrong or missing something but I think the statistic is wrong.
I assume the entire fleet of Bell 407 is flying far more hours a day then the entire fleet of 480 does in a month.

[EN48]

Thanks to all who responded to my post. As a result of my post being merged with a larger 407 thread which I was not previously aware of, I have carefuly reviewed 12 pages of posts on the 407 dating to 2001 and now have a much better understanding of the issues I was inquiring about.

[DoinTime]

And your conclusion was???

[EN48]

And your conclusion was???

My conclusion: The 407 has a history of malfuntions at an unusually high rate compared to other light turbines. The rate of malfunctions has improved significantly over time, but there MAY be lingering engine/FADEC issues still to be resolved (as suggested by a recent U.S. accident not yet in the NTSB database).

[GeorgeMandes]

Based on your 407 training at Bell, do you consider FADEC manual to be an emergency or abnormal?

[EN48]

do you consider FADEC manual to be an emergency or abnormal?

I consider it an abnormal as I did not find it all that difficult to deal with. Far easier than, say, hydraulics out.

Reading between your lines however, the accident I made reference to in my previous post was not a simple FADEC failure with a reversion to manual (and perhaps not a FADEC failure at all) as the engine either rolled back to idle or quit according to some close to the situation. From what I understand, no amount of throttle manipulation would have restored power (and the pilot is said to be very experienced overall and in the 407).