Bell 206: JetRanger and LongRanger
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Chilliwack, BC Canada
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the quick and accurate response Sprocket.
I've looked in at the transmission of some old 206's in my past and seen obvious paint cracks on that upper joint. You know what thas happened to the ship in the past.....
I've looked in at the transmission of some old 206's in my past and seen obvious paint cracks on that upper joint. You know what thas happened to the ship in the past.....
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gizmocat,
There is a basic misunderstanding in your question that should be discussed, and that is the idea that a published limit is associated with a failure. In other words, "If I overtorque by 1%, what will break that I can look at to be sure the aircraft was not overtorqued?"
The simple answer is nothing will break, because most helicopter limits are not at the edge of failure for the stressed items. The torque limits are set by a judgement that so many cycles at that power level, and so many at proportionately less will result in gradual breakdown, chips and possible gear tooth cracks. The issue is fatigue life, not one-off failure.
When you are pulling the excess torque, the engine power indicators will all tell you that you are high in power. If you pull, say 120% when 110 was the limit, you can expect nothing bad to present itself, yet. If the box has this happen every flight, over a relatively short time, chips might form, or the gears might develope small cracks at their roots. Keep it up, and a tooth will fail, or perhaps worse.
When we test and qualify, we are making a statistical bet that the worst case field usage will conform to our power levels, and that the gearbox quality will conform to the worst case assumptions we have, so that for the prescribed overhaul interval, the box will be reliable and trouble free. Pull more power regularly, or abuse the box in other ways (wrong oil or long change intervals, improper warm-up, excessive number of cycles, excessive rotor vibration, water/corrosion buildup, etc) and it will not last as long.
In short, most common overtorques result in reliability problems, and you trust the pilots who came before you to properly fly and write-up the helicopter.
There is a basic misunderstanding in your question that should be discussed, and that is the idea that a published limit is associated with a failure. In other words, "If I overtorque by 1%, what will break that I can look at to be sure the aircraft was not overtorqued?"
The simple answer is nothing will break, because most helicopter limits are not at the edge of failure for the stressed items. The torque limits are set by a judgement that so many cycles at that power level, and so many at proportionately less will result in gradual breakdown, chips and possible gear tooth cracks. The issue is fatigue life, not one-off failure.
When you are pulling the excess torque, the engine power indicators will all tell you that you are high in power. If you pull, say 120% when 110 was the limit, you can expect nothing bad to present itself, yet. If the box has this happen every flight, over a relatively short time, chips might form, or the gears might develope small cracks at their roots. Keep it up, and a tooth will fail, or perhaps worse.
When we test and qualify, we are making a statistical bet that the worst case field usage will conform to our power levels, and that the gearbox quality will conform to the worst case assumptions we have, so that for the prescribed overhaul interval, the box will be reliable and trouble free. Pull more power regularly, or abuse the box in other ways (wrong oil or long change intervals, improper warm-up, excessive number of cycles, excessive rotor vibration, water/corrosion buildup, etc) and it will not last as long.
In short, most common overtorques result in reliability problems, and you trust the pilots who came before you to properly fly and write-up the helicopter.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks again for the answers. I'd better explain the main reason for my original post. A mate of mine is working to design a part task trainer, and the "out of cockpit" indications are impractical to simulate on a computer (paint chips etc). We were wondering if we could somehow penalise the pilot for being in an overtorque situation for too long... Stop the donk, flash a warning light, that sort of thing, but keep it realistic at the same time. Maybe we'll just have to up the anti, and blow the gearbox after a certain ammount of time in an overtorque situation. Should keep them on their toes anyway.
Bests
MB
Bests
MB
It's not just an adventure....
it's just a job!
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Philippines
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Gizmo
As I recall from days gone past, you have to really hit the high end in a 206 to do damage.
I once took off from a cut line in North-Central Ontario during a Snow sqall near dusk and, you guessed it, everything went dark pretty fast! On top of that the instrument lights were U/S. When I got the flashlight on the panel (thanks to a quick thinking passenger) I saw the Q coming down through 112%!
The engineers later said it would have to be near 125% to do any real damage but they inspected the mast anyway. No problems.
The one other thing you can check is the "through shaft" under the engine. If you are not able to move it fore and aft, you have most likely done damage, ie. "BENT SOMETHING"!
Cheers and Merry Christmas
OffshoreIgor
As I recall from days gone past, you have to really hit the high end in a 206 to do damage.
I once took off from a cut line in North-Central Ontario during a Snow sqall near dusk and, you guessed it, everything went dark pretty fast! On top of that the instrument lights were U/S. When I got the flashlight on the panel (thanks to a quick thinking passenger) I saw the Q coming down through 112%!
The engineers later said it would have to be near 125% to do any real damage but they inspected the mast anyway. No problems.
The one other thing you can check is the "through shaft" under the engine. If you are not able to move it fore and aft, you have most likely done damage, ie. "BENT SOMETHING"!
Cheers and Merry Christmas
OffshoreIgor
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
Another couple of places to look are the pan underneath the engine and the rear of the fuselage just before it hits the tailboom (thanks to the boys at Yellowhead for those). I would guess that the even spacing between the tailboom and fuselage would be affected as well.
Sasless - no not hangar talk - experience! We were trained to listen to the ol' 47's engine instead of looking at the RPM gauge, and when I flew a longranger without a torquemeter on the side I did the same with the sound of the tranny (best with your head out of the door). It's a very distinctive sound at 100%, even more so above that.
Phil
Sasless - no not hangar talk - experience! We were trained to listen to the ol' 47's engine instead of looking at the RPM gauge, and when I flew a longranger without a torquemeter on the side I did the same with the sound of the tranny (best with your head out of the door). It's a very distinctive sound at 100%, even more so above that.
Phil
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
Phil
Your link is no longer current - I've deleted it to save people wasting time.
I don't think Lear Siegler has had the Fort Rucker 206 (TH-67) Tech Manual on its website for a long time.
If you find a direct link to an online manual, please post.
Heliport
Your link is no longer current - I've deleted it to save people wasting time.
I don't think Lear Siegler has had the Fort Rucker 206 (TH-67) Tech Manual on its website for a long time.
If you find a direct link to an online manual, please post.
Heliport
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The Lonely Planet
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
206 operating cost
hi all
can any owner 206 operators tell me the hourly cost of a 206 111 based on approx 175 hours per year usage.
if possible has anyone also looked at the operating cost of
a r44 raven 2 based on its life span taking into consideration
its overhaul at end of life.
Some pilots will tell you are better buying a old jet ranger and paying for componants as they come up,the age of the machine will insure you are at its lowest cost when purchasing the machine insuring you do not loose as much when selling it versus r44 for half what you paid for a new one.
hopfully some one has operated both to settle the mind on the matter.
regards
choppersquad
can any owner 206 operators tell me the hourly cost of a 206 111 based on approx 175 hours per year usage.
if possible has anyone also looked at the operating cost of
a r44 raven 2 based on its life span taking into consideration
its overhaul at end of life.
Some pilots will tell you are better buying a old jet ranger and paying for componants as they come up,the age of the machine will insure you are at its lowest cost when purchasing the machine insuring you do not loose as much when selling it versus r44 for half what you paid for a new one.
hopfully some one has operated both to settle the mind on the matter.
regards
choppersquad
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If your willing to pay for an excellent model that will answer your question and more both Conklin de Decker (includes helicopter cost database) and SLM (in my opinion, has a better model) offer solutions. Both consider residual value.
Conklin is at: http://www.conklindd.com/cgi-bin/sof...87d+1107062294
SLM is at: http://www.aircraftcostanalysis.com/
I have used both but have not stake in either so I hope I'm not breaking any forum rules.
Conklin is at: http://www.conklindd.com/cgi-bin/sof...87d+1107062294
SLM is at: http://www.aircraftcostanalysis.com/
I have used both but have not stake in either so I hope I'm not breaking any forum rules.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thanks cross-eyed i will look into this,but there must
be a 206 owner on the forum who can give me
a idea .as we all know when turbines go wrong
it hurts the pocket.some one must have gone from a
turbine to a piston machine due to operating costs
who can settle this dicussion.
regards
cs
be a 206 owner on the forum who can give me
a idea .as we all know when turbines go wrong
it hurts the pocket.some one must have gone from a
turbine to a piston machine due to operating costs
who can settle this dicussion.
regards
cs
I operate B206B and I find that the Bell published Direct operating cost is pretty accurate @ $200.- pr/hr.
The DOC does not include insurance, hangar, crew compensation & financing.
But the R44 is probably cheaper although I have not much experience with the R44 (only R22!) but comparing these two is comparing apples and oranges, they´re not really in the same class if you want to operate them commercially in my opinion.
Its like people often compare the B206B with the AS-350B2 which really competes with the B407.
I guess the B206B should be compared to EC120 really! and I know that the JetRanger will be cheaper and more reliable than the EC120 although the JetRanger will make more noise.
But for a cheap to run personal helicopter I´m sure the R-44 is fine.
The DOC does not include insurance, hangar, crew compensation & financing.
But the R44 is probably cheaper although I have not much experience with the R44 (only R22!) but comparing these two is comparing apples and oranges, they´re not really in the same class if you want to operate them commercially in my opinion.
Its like people often compare the B206B with the AS-350B2 which really competes with the B407.
I guess the B206B should be compared to EC120 really! and I know that the JetRanger will be cheaper and more reliable than the EC120 although the JetRanger will make more noise.
But for a cheap to run personal helicopter I´m sure the R-44 is fine.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,156
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
I know about 10 years ago, it was approx 80,000 pounds per year to run a 206 privately, meaning roughly 250 hours a year - if it was 60,000 one year, it would be 100,000 the next, so the figures were quite accurate.
We operate here on around 200 per hour, but our machines do 600 hours per year on commercial basis.
Phil
We operate here on around 200 per hour, but our machines do 600 hours per year on commercial basis.
Phil
Better red than ...
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Appleby-in-Westmorland Cumbria England
Posts: 1,412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did the comparison a while ago for by business plan, so I'll post it when I can find in in the next day or so, - 206 -v- R44 (NB, the R44 won)
h-r
h-r
If you want to keep your machine for your own use and don't need the 5th seat, I'd say the R44 R1 is the machine for you. I'd recommend that you ignore anyone's view on DOC on a 206: the reality is so tied to component times and - frankly - luck, that what the papers say and what you find in reality will be different.
I bought a 206, primarily as I wanted to lease it back to a commercial operator to contribute to operating costs (and keep the VAT-man off my back!). But frankly it's cost me a fortune in the last three years with unexpected repairs and components due. But I've had a good run for the last few year (touch wood), but with a turbine wheel due in a few months, who knows what horrors will come to light when they take it out!
But no doubt, the R44 will depreciate, where the 206 will hold its value - but be warned that the value of a 206 is more closely asscociated with component time than age.
Personally, I love the 206 to fly - it is better than the R44, but whether it's worth the difference is open to debate.
I bought a 206, primarily as I wanted to lease it back to a commercial operator to contribute to operating costs (and keep the VAT-man off my back!). But frankly it's cost me a fortune in the last three years with unexpected repairs and components due. But I've had a good run for the last few year (touch wood), but with a turbine wheel due in a few months, who knows what horrors will come to light when they take it out!
But no doubt, the R44 will depreciate, where the 206 will hold its value - but be warned that the value of a 206 is more closely asscociated with component time than age.
Personally, I love the 206 to fly - it is better than the R44, but whether it's worth the difference is open to debate.
I guess I have been lucky with the B206 I' ve flown or operated, but unscheduled maintenance has been pretty much non-existent, except for the *
Janitrol heater, although right now, "Knock on wood" it works fine.
However "Choppersquad" you asked for operating cost based on 175 hr/yr. Those cost depend alot on the insurance, hangar cost, crew etc.. just figure around 200 USD pr/hr, or if you are in the UK on 200 Sterling, to be on the safe side and if you have unscheduled maintenance its just your bad luck, its really impossible to estimate the unscheduled maintenance required!
You dont really say if the aircraft is for commercial use or private? If for private then you cant go wrong with a Robinson, but commercially then:
Janitrol heater, although right now, "Knock on wood" it works fine.However "Choppersquad" you asked for operating cost based on 175 hr/yr. Those cost depend alot on the insurance, hangar cost, crew etc.. just figure around 200 USD pr/hr, or if you are in the UK on 200 Sterling, to be on the safe side and if you have unscheduled maintenance its just your bad luck, its really impossible to estimate the unscheduled maintenance required!
You dont really say if the aircraft is for commercial use or private? If for private then you cant go wrong with a Robinson, but commercially then:
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i've been doing the same and haven't come accross anything, i'm just looking for the JetBanger manual. if anyone one could point us in the right direction it would be much appreciated.
HH
HH