Bell 206: JetRanger and LongRanger

[John Eacott]

TC,

Beg to differ: maybe with the small tail rotor, but the 206 with the later tail rotor is quite manageable, and we operate frequently hot and high.

I'd be making more of an issue of the EC120's low inertia main rotor system, and the R22-like autorotation characteristics I'd have grave reservations using an EC120 for low level operations that wouldn't cause any concern in a 206, because I'm not sure that I'd get away with a survivable auto. Apparently the factory pilots prefer to run on around 40-50kts in the 120, maybe for a good reason!

[belly tank]

Thomas Coupling wrote,

"Ignorance is bliss....I suggest you get to know your a/c a little more:"

I think i have reasonable knowledge of My aircraft the 206 in this case, ive done most ops that require the use of alot of pedal mainly OGE hover work etc etc hot and as high as you can get here in australia!. and as i said in my limited experience on Jetrangers 1000 + hrs on type to date ive never had a problem or accident, and as i mentioned before its managable if you treat your aircraft with respect it deserves.

so your statement above is totally ignorant about the fact you should give a bit more credit to your peers before you make assumptions on their ability

[B Sousa]

IF you have a Million to play with and look around just a bit I think you can get a pretty nice B206L4 and have some spare change for cockpit toys.
Give it some thought.

[Aesir]

NickLappos said:

Thomas coupling..

Ohhohh.. If Nick said it then it MUST be true


The original question was:

Please express pros and cons for comparisson and your final choice. $1 mil budget. thanks.

In my opinion the perceived LTE "Problem" of the 206 is not an issue in choosing which aircraft to buy! If properly flown it´s not a problem!!

Like was said for $1 mil you can get a nice 206L4 which is certainly a much superior aircraft to the EC-120.

I have a friend who operates EC-120 and from talking to him he seems to have unusual problems with parts availability and cost Don´t get me started there..few months ago he had to replace the flashing beacon at a cost of $9.000.- The whole thing had to be replaced as a unit, not possible to change the bulb!

He fly´s his EC-120 about 350 to 400 hrs a year. I fly my AB206B a 1971 model with.. yes you guessed it, the small diameter tail rotor.. I fly about 150 hrs a year and guess who takes more money to the bank after all costs have been figured in? I do.

Needless to say his EC-120 is for sale.

When comparing the two EC-120 & B206 one should consider the autorotative characteristics as well of both aircraft. Since they are single engine I would much rather be in a B206 following engine failure, both aircraft do have engine failures like any motor vehicles and the outcome of such a failure will be more likely to be succesful in the B-206.

Unfortunately it´s difficult to do a "Study" of succesful outcomes of engine failure landings comparing aircraft since many countries do not require any reports to be made if the landing was succesful with no damage.

Here is my suggestion for the original poster:

"Be Smart, Fly Bell"

[Thomas coupling]

Belly up: I wouldnt brag about a 1000hrs on type if I were you. There are people on here who have flown that on type in only 18 months, that is not a lot of experience
And you are not my peer...you can't even spell Chief Pilot in your profile never mind act like one


Aesir et al:

Join the real world eh? You can't keep flying a 40 yr old design forever....one has to move on and invest in technology with all its merits. Safety is the industry mantra now.

Aviation news comments

Just another view..................................

Aesir: interesting web site.

[Dynamic Component]

I have a few hours on the EC120 and 206.Each has its own role.For pax work I would choose the 120.For anything else I would choose the 206.I would prefer a 206L4. Just keep in mind that you cant load 4 adults and pilot and use all the baggage space in the 120.

TC- who pis*ed in your porridge? SO what if belly tank can't spell. And they are entitled to their own opinions.(I can't spell either )

[belly tank]

Thanks DC!

See TC i do have a peer!..your words were the last straw i have now enrolled in spelling classes, ill let you know how my progress goes

As for the thread...you will like this TC i also have limited experience in the 120 and have found it to be a nice aircraft for pax work as DC has stated, nice open cabin etc etc, its horses for courses what are you planning on doing with the machine you choose CPT Hobbs, is it mainly going to be used for the business man alone or will most of your loads be with a full compliment of passengers.

as DC has stated have you looked at a L4!

[Aesir]

Thank you for your view Thomas..

You said:

Join the real world eh? You can't keep flying a 40 yr old design forever....one has to move on and invest in technology with all its merits. Safety is the industry mantra now.

That is exactly why I fly B-206..SAFETY! Get it?

I want to be in something that can land safely if I have engine failure which we all know can happen in all helicopters anytime and if I don´t have two engines then for sure I´m going to be in a helicopter that can autorotate safely.

I know why LTE happens and some other things that could happen to B-206 in flight and I know how to avoid those situations..! An engine failure I have no control over, it could happen when I least expect it.

New helicopter designs do not necessarily mean that they are safer in all aspects. Manufacturers do try to make them more economical to operate than the competition so customers will buy them. And boy did EC get the DOC´s wrong on the EC-120, they can say whatever they will about how economical it is but ask any operator in the field who will give you a straight answer and then find out how much it costs to run. There are loads of 120´s for sale now, I wonder why?

But don´t get me wrong, like someone said if you don´t worry to much about engine reliability and perhaps fly all the time over land and non-hostile terrain then the EC-120 is fine for passenger transport for someone who has the funds to run it. There is lot´s of people who don´t really care if it cost´s $300 or $500 pr/hr to run.

I like the B206 because it cheap to run which means I make more cash and it´s safer to fly in my area of operations.

I´m guessing that the original poster has probably gotten tired of reading the bull that´s been posted but please keep us informed what you end up buying whichever way you decide!

[blade771]

For that kind of money!!

I guess $1m is about £700K, you could of course go for a twin (AS355) wouldn't be brand new of course probably F1 / F2 but you could probably get something reasonable for that kind of money.

[B Sousa]

You can't keep flying a 40 yr old design forever....one has to move on and invest in technology with all its merits

If I was a Playa........I would have bought a 407 when it first came out. Since I have a saying etched in my brain. "Never buy an A model of anything" I waited to see how many of the "Rollers" paid for the ADs that would surely come out, and they did.
Now its a bit better, someone else suffered the problems and its a great purchase......
Same thing flys with the EC-120. Let someone else do the testing and since I see a few more buying the farm recently it is not over yet. Then maybe.
As to purchasing "new" only a proven aircraft and only then if I cannot find a clean machine that someone else has eaten the initial depreciation.

If I had the ability to purchase anyway...........

[BigMike]

Horses for courses I guess. Jetranger if want to do a wide range of work, 120 if you mainly fly pax. 40 year old design vs new one? Who cares. Which one makes the most commercial sense, thats the bottom line. Second-hand L-4 would be much better than either.

TC, I think you will find that the tail-rotor is not an issue in the B III Jet-ranger.
I would consider someone with 1000 hours on type to have a bit of an idea. What do you consider experienced on type? Just remeber its not always total hours on type, but what you did in those hours...

[B Sousa]

tail-rotor is not an issue in the B III Jet-ranger.

Are we talking an LTE issue here?? I have heard this song before. Personal opinion is Pilots are the problem. If any aircraft is prone to doing something out of the ordinary it should be addressed in the intial training and etched in the pilots gray matter. If done correctly problems should not occur OR if Murphy is flying then the pilot will be able to correct things before a disaster occurs based on his awareness in the seat.

Im Still voting for an L-4

[BigMike]

As it was when I first flew a 206 a long while ago. I was warned to be carefull with pre-BIII Jet-rangers. Something to simply be aware of.

[B Sousa]

Something to simply be aware of.

And it appears you have not forgotten, good.. Another good example, if I can drift a bit, was the Huey. Many variations of it but as there are also different UH-60s, the one big difference was that the Huey used two airframes.
UH-1B, C, M etc. had the B204 airframe, wheras the D,H,V etc. had the B205 airframe.
When I transitioned from the H to the M, the first thing the IP did was take me way up in the mountains and do a 360 turn at a 50'OGE hover on a hot day (in a big LZ) Dam thing ran out of pedal. Lesson there was although it was a Huey with an L-13 etc. The tailboom was still smaller and the tail rotor cannot handle things, Hot, Heavy, High........

Back to reality, Im still voting for the L-4.........

[Choppersquad]

206 tot gauge problem

gents
wondering has any one come across the tot gauge in the 206
jetranger in flight going from normal needle setting eg straight and level flight setting on the gauge,needle passing through the
red to the maximum for approx 2,3 minutes and then resetting it self back to normal reading based on normal flight.
there is no increase or decrease in engine output while this is happening.
is this a common problem with tot gauges in the 206.
regards
cs

[B Sousa]

Through the red as in through maximum temp?? 2-3 minutes.
Yikes thats scary and should also be a reason to put the thing safely on the ground. In all odds the guage or sending unit may be bad, but thats a big no fly either way.

[NickLappos]

The gage actually reads resistance thru the thermocouple sensor in the engine, and can often fail by going to ground some other way, leading to sky high readings.

You are right not to panic, but B. is right, don't start that puppy again until someone has put a tester on the thermocouple loop.

[Disguise Delimit]

I saw one do 2 clockwise laps of the gauge - must mean a TOT of around 4000 degrees!

[diethelm]

Nick is correct, check the thermocouple or the block where the ship wiring connects to the thermocouple. Not a Jet Ranger issue but a C20 issue.

[rotormatic]

There are two types of TOT indicators in the Bell Jetranger.

The basic system is comprised of an engine thermocouple harness, junction block, airframe thermocouple harness and an indicator.

Early serial number ships used a self contained system that did not use any aircraft DC power to operate. The TOT indicator used the current produced by the thermocouples to move the needle.

This system required the airframe thermocouple harness, along with the engine thermocouple harness, (wired in series) to be calibrated to eight ohms, using a barfield test set, which is basically a wheatstone bridge. This test set allows a very accurate harness calibration. The resistance spools used to trim the thermocouple harness are mounted in the instrument panel. With this system, the resistance of the thermocouple harnesses is critical to the accuracy of the TOT indicator.

This early system was maintenance intensive, due to the calibration requirements needed during an engine change, and scheduled checks of the system. The thermocouple harness required calibration at each engine change, due to the manufacturing tolerances of the engine thermocouple assembly.

The only way this system would read high would be caused by loss of resistance in the thermocouple harness, or a faulty indicator.

Later serial number Jetrangers upgraded to a servo type indicator. This indicator only uses the voltage produced by the thermocouples as a reference value to measure the engine turbine temperature... Aircraft DC power is used to move the indicating needle.

This later system is more reliable, and requires less maintenance, because thermocouple harness lead resistance is not critical, since the indicator does not draw current from the thermocouples (no voltage drop). There is no requirement to calibrate the thermocouple harness when a servo indicator is installed during scheduled inspections, or engine changes. Also, with the servo system, resistance spools are not installed in the thermocouple circuit.

Situations that would make an indicator reading go high with the servo system would most probably be limited to the indicator.