Bell 429
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Avon, CT, USA
Age: 68
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bell 429
Anyone have any experience with the 429? Bell is totting it as the most adavanced light twin-engine heli in the world.
Bell is charging $29,000 (VFR) and $43,000 (IFR) USD for ground and flight training. That seems very steep!
Bell is charging $29,000 (VFR) and $43,000 (IFR) USD for ground and flight training. That seems very steep!
Bell is totting it as the most adavanced light twin-engine heli in the world.
The Bell 429 FatRanger. I am sure it is/will be great. But does sound pretty stiff $ wise, be interested to see what is in the course content. Might Google it.
Doors Off
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
429 at Mercy One
I note that a Bell 429 has been doing demo flights at Gloucestershire (UK) this week with a major EMS operator.
Has anybody heard how Mercy One are getting on with theirs?
Has anybody heard how Mercy One are getting on with theirs?
Program director at Mercy one seems happy (recent AIN report) but remember that its operator Air Methods decided not to take any more of its planned buy of ten units after this one (AIN report at HeliExpo)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: All over the place
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And umm... what stump puller of a twin aircraft did Air Methods buy to replace the 429? Oh yeah I forgot,they bought single engined aircraft instead because they're cheaper to operate!
I love how people speak ill of an aircraft they have never seen or flown before.
I love how people speak ill of an aircraft they have never seen or flown before.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: tx
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you even bother to read the AIN article? Those are not Bell pilots and it appears they think very highly of the 429. It even seems that they prefer it to the 135 for speed, range and payload.
I have flown the 429, as well as the 135 and 145, and find that what the Mercy one pilots say about the aircraft is true. It's too bad that there is all sorts of negative press out there based on opinion and not fact!
I have flown the 429, as well as the 135 and 145, and find that what the Mercy one pilots say about the aircraft is true. It's too bad that there is all sorts of negative press out there based on opinion and not fact!
Sorry, I look at facts and sales.
When I first saw the mock-up @ CAMTS 2005, Bell's CSR gave us a candid 400/600 lbs payload figure in the EMS configuration.
That number seems to stick judging by the sales numbers and actual number crunching, sometimes you have to read past the glossy brochures and fancy .pdf.
I have flown enough Bell hours (on pretty much all of their LTE capable designs) to know where the truth is subtly merged with hype and myth.
Besides that, the 429 is not even aimed at competing with the 135, but rather the 145 and the 109 Grand New.
When I first saw the mock-up @ CAMTS 2005, Bell's CSR gave us a candid 400/600 lbs payload figure in the EMS configuration.
That number seems to stick judging by the sales numbers and actual number crunching, sometimes you have to read past the glossy brochures and fancy .pdf.
I have flown enough Bell hours (on pretty much all of their LTE capable designs) to know where the truth is subtly merged with hype and myth.
Besides that, the 429 is not even aimed at competing with the 135, but rather the 145 and the 109 Grand New.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: All over the place
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as sales go, the recession hit every manufacturer pretty hard. Bell lost alot of the 429 sales mostly because of that. I would say it's not a very solid fact.
It is a heavy machine, but the guys at Bell are working to reduce the weight. It is NOT competing against the 145. It is certified under part 27 and not part 29. Because of that, the weight is limited to 7000lbs max gross weight.
I don't know why I argue because I feel it's pointless. People seem to have their minds made up before the aircraft actually has a chance to prove itself. It ticks me off because I know poeple who have worked on this project and they really put alot of effort to make this a good aircraft that they are proud of.
It is a heavy machine, but the guys at Bell are working to reduce the weight. It is NOT competing against the 145. It is certified under part 27 and not part 29. Because of that, the weight is limited to 7000lbs max gross weight.
I don't know why I argue because I feel it's pointless. People seem to have their minds made up before the aircraft actually has a chance to prove itself. It ticks me off because I know poeple who have worked on this project and they really put alot of effort to make this a good aircraft that they are proud of.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland and Various
Age: 47
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I asked if we were going to be getting any for offshore, as an alternate to the 135. I was told a resounding no, due to the fact that after our required equipment was installed (floats, etc), average pilot (real company average as opposed to a new fresh from the military or from being a cfi) and fuel to reach the places it would need to go, that there would be roughly 200-250 pounds of payload left.
That may have been an exaggeration, but it was made clear that we aren't buying any and I was disappointed.
The first time I saw it I was told by the Bell rep that I should think of it as a twin engine 407, speed and payload wise. I wish it was, I liked sitting in it, but its gotta perform!
That may have been an exaggeration, but it was made clear that we aren't buying any and I was disappointed.
The first time I saw it I was told by the Bell rep that I should think of it as a twin engine 407, speed and payload wise. I wish it was, I liked sitting in it, but its gotta perform!
Join Date: May 2009
Location: FBO
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bell 429
I have to agree with Helico ru and the fact that everyone is very quick to jump on the negative bandwagon before even flying or even seeing it in person.
.....it's all just options at this point.
Regards,
RG
.....it's all just options at this point.
Regards,
RG
So I took the time and read the AIN report, did you?
It smells smack of another of Bell's publicity stunts, aimed squarely at those aeromedical programs run by...medical types and bean counters.
"The 135 was a good workhorse, but with the 429 we can still make 130 knots over the ground into a 30-knot headwind. It's a Corvette. This thing is fast."
That's 160 KTAS, right? Too bad the VNE is really 155 Kts.
"........, Mercy One program director, said power from the 429's twin P&WC PW207D1s (1,100 shp each) makes it natural for difficult scene work."
Too bad the 207 D1 really puts out 758 shp in 30 sec OEI mode.
What other crap can come out of the ONLY commercial operator of the Bell 429 in the USA?
It smells smack of another of Bell's publicity stunts, aimed squarely at those aeromedical programs run by...medical types and bean counters.
"The 135 was a good workhorse, but with the 429 we can still make 130 knots over the ground into a 30-knot headwind. It's a Corvette. This thing is fast."
That's 160 KTAS, right? Too bad the VNE is really 155 Kts.
"........, Mercy One program director, said power from the 429's twin P&WC PW207D1s (1,100 shp each) makes it natural for difficult scene work."
Too bad the 207 D1 really puts out 758 shp in 30 sec OEI mode.
What other crap can come out of the ONLY commercial operator of the Bell 429 in the USA?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously a mix-up there with the xmsn rating. It is a strangely written article - the claim that Mercy One's aircraft can lift a 900lb payload with full fuel doesn't make any sense unless they are using a green, unconfigured aircraft, which sounds unlikely. Using the basic empty weight, full fuel (1453lb) plus a 200lb pilot would leave only 860lb useful load.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: tx
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So because you don't like the 429 (and apparently Bell) you feel the need to disparage the Mercy One pilots and crew? I've actually met Dan Keough and the pilots at Mercy One and they are very professional group. And they are, to a pilot, very excited about the 429 and it's performance. While they noted that the EC135 technically has 100 lbs more usefull load they also noted that it doesn't inspire confidence on a hot day at MTOW while the 429 did. They also said that they were averaging 110kias in the 135 and 145kias in the 429. But what do they know, they just fly both aircraft daily and I'm sure that their knowledge is nowhere near that of yours, even though you don't.
Look usmc, you first accused me of being biased because I was expressing a FACTS based opinion (scarce payload), while you ever so proudly (of course
) were basing your hype on somebody else opinion of a new shiny toy and a (obviously sponsored) report on a magazine.
So I went and read the glowing report, then being a pilot and not just an enthusiast I compared their statements against FACTORY SPECS (as also someone else did) and those statements fell short of the truth.
Are you telling me I am biased?
Bell has known for over FIVE years of the 429s weight issues, and I think that AMC has sent the right message up the line.
) were basing your hype on somebody else opinion of a new shiny toy and a (obviously sponsored) report on a magazine.So I went and read the glowing report, then being a pilot and not just an enthusiast I compared their statements against FACTORY SPECS (as also someone else did) and those statements fell short of the truth.
Are you telling me I am biased?
Bell has known for over FIVE years of the 429s weight issues, and I think that AMC has sent the right message up the line.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: tx
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
totti, I will reiterate for you..."I have flown the 429, as well as the 135 and 145 , and find that what the Mercy one pilots say about the aircraft is true. " FYI when I was flying the 135 and 145 I was in the employ of AEC. I have compared all three aircrafts actual performance against that of the RFM, have you? Therefore my observations are based on more than "hype and someone elses opinon", unlike yours. You assume that the AIN article was 'obviously sponsored' (do you have evidence of that 'FACT' or is this also just opinion?). I pointed out that in a completely seperate and non related conversation on a visit to Mercy they expressed the same opinion, have you heard differently from them?
Yes Bell missed the mark on payload. I think there is a bit of confusion in the AIN article. If you look at what was said: "It is not a concern for us because our missions are typically less than 125 miles each way. I can sit on the pad with 900 pounds [payload] and full fuel all day." Given the usual mission range and the stated fuel burn it is safe to assume that they are off loading fuel. Given that Mr. Keough is not a pilot I think it is safe to assume that what he refers to as 'full fuel' is actually their standard mission fuel, not what you or I would refer to as full fuel. More of an honest mistake from a non pilot wouldn't you say?
Your other 'fact' wrt:
"The 135 was a good workhorse, but with the 429 we can still make 130 knots over the ground into a 30-knot headwind. It's a Corvette. This thing is fast." That's 160 KTAS, right? Too bad the VNE is really 155 Kts.
Did you bother to convert to TAS? KDSM sits at 958'msl. They probably fly at 2000'msl or higher. At 2000'MSL the 429s TAS is 157 ktas(153 kias vne). At 4000' msl TAS is 160 ktas(151 kias vne). At 6000'msl the 429s TAS is 162 (149 kias vne). And yes it will fly that fast. It's this speed factor that would, presumably, allow them to takeoff with less than a full fuel (as you and I would call it) and still safely accomplish their mission with a reserve.
Yes Bell missed the mark on payload. I think there is a bit of confusion in the AIN article. If you look at what was said: "It is not a concern for us because our missions are typically less than 125 miles each way. I can sit on the pad with 900 pounds [payload] and full fuel all day." Given the usual mission range and the stated fuel burn it is safe to assume that they are off loading fuel. Given that Mr. Keough is not a pilot I think it is safe to assume that what he refers to as 'full fuel' is actually their standard mission fuel, not what you or I would refer to as full fuel. More of an honest mistake from a non pilot wouldn't you say?
Your other 'fact' wrt:
"The 135 was a good workhorse, but with the 429 we can still make 130 knots over the ground into a 30-knot headwind. It's a Corvette. This thing is fast." That's 160 KTAS, right? Too bad the VNE is really 155 Kts.
Did you bother to convert to TAS? KDSM sits at 958'msl. They probably fly at 2000'msl or higher. At 2000'MSL the 429s TAS is 157 ktas(153 kias vne). At 4000' msl TAS is 160 ktas(151 kias vne). At 6000'msl the 429s TAS is 162 (149 kias vne). And yes it will fly that fast. It's this speed factor that would, presumably, allow them to takeoff with less than a full fuel (as you and I would call it) and still safely accomplish their mission with a reserve.