Bell 206: JetRanger and LongRanger
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's supposedly not harmful, provided you go to 100% for awhile, then recool for 2 minutes before shutting down. We idle for extended periods at accident scenes while the med crews are preparing the patient. No one, including RR, has said that's a problem, as long as the proper shutdown procedures are followed, or the aircraft isn't shut down.
L1 C-28 to C-30
Does anyone remember what was included when upgrading Bell 206 L1 C-28 to C-30 engine?
I know it needed rotorhead certified for higher AUW .
Is the mast the same?
Can you use same gearbox?
What about the rest of the drivetrain and the tailboom?
And after it basically has an L3 performance right???
I know it needed rotorhead certified for higher AUW .
Is the mast the same?
Can you use same gearbox?
What about the rest of the drivetrain and the tailboom?
And after it basically has an L3 performance right???
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: on the edge
Posts: 823
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Asi C30p
Installation of Detroit Diesel Allison 250-C30P turboshaft engine and associated airframe and tail rotor control modifications similar to the Model 206L-3 in accordance with Air Services International FAA Sealed Master Drawing List, ASI Installation Manual, and ASI-206L-1-FM Flight Manual FAA approved April 6, 1982, or later FAA approved revisions as required as part of this modification.
Like this???
Cheers
Blackhand
Like this???
Cheers
Blackhand
If all you want to do is fly your L-1 at the L-3 MGW of 4150, then just bolt on a set of 206-11-149-101 grips/yokes and you're good to go with only an RFM supplement. (I would imagine that there's not an L-1 in all the land that hasn't been so converted.)
If you can get ahold of Bell 206 Service Instruction BHT-206-SI-2050 it will give you the details of what must be done to install the C-30P and convert an L-1 into a gen-u-wine L-3.
Then, if you really wanna go hog-wild, there is also apparently a Service Instruction to turn both an L-1 and L-3 into an L-4 (BHT-206-SI-2052) with a 4450 internal gross weight. Procure both of those SI's and you'' get all the poop.
At low altitudes, there's really no advantage to converting an L-1 to an L-3...IN ME HUMBLED O'PINION. I flew both, side by side at PHI for a long time. The lighter L-1 would perform just as well as an L-3 while burning slightly less fuel. Your mileage may vary, depending on what you're doing with it and at what density altitude. Of course, the L-3 typically ran cooler, and obviously had much more TOT "to spare" for work at higher altitudes.
If you can get ahold of Bell 206 Service Instruction BHT-206-SI-2050 it will give you the details of what must be done to install the C-30P and convert an L-1 into a gen-u-wine L-3.
Then, if you really wanna go hog-wild, there is also apparently a Service Instruction to turn both an L-1 and L-3 into an L-4 (BHT-206-SI-2052) with a 4450 internal gross weight. Procure both of those SI's and you'' get all the poop.
At low altitudes, there's really no advantage to converting an L-1 to an L-3...IN ME HUMBLED O'PINION. I flew both, side by side at PHI for a long time. The lighter L-1 would perform just as well as an L-3 while burning slightly less fuel. Your mileage may vary, depending on what you're doing with it and at what density altitude. Of course, the L-3 typically ran cooler, and obviously had much more TOT "to spare" for work at higher altitudes.
Thanks guys, I check on it at bell web
Well there is one, you dont have to clean the tailboom twice a week like with the C-28
At low altitudes, there's really no advantage to converting an L-1 to an L-3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South Coast
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
N2 rotor lock up.
Rolls Royce released a "Technical variance" a while back to allow a larger clearance at the power turbine seal. This was very successful especially on the C20R in the 500's and the larger clearance has now been written into the overhaul manual.
The main problem I have experienced with 3rd generation HTS oils in the 250 engine is there tendancy to cause either oil leaks or smoking at shutdown. As the oil is a lot thinner when hot, it tends to get down the tightest threads until they turbine cools down. Light smoking which starts a couple of seconds after the turbine stops turning is normally due to this rather than the #5 bellows seal. Don't forget though, if you change over from something like Aeroshell 500 to an HTS oil, don't do it all at once and use the top off method. You will dislodge built up carbon which may block up a oil jet.
The main problem I have experienced with 3rd generation HTS oils in the 250 engine is there tendancy to cause either oil leaks or smoking at shutdown. As the oil is a lot thinner when hot, it tends to get down the tightest threads until they turbine cools down. Light smoking which starts a couple of seconds after the turbine stops turning is normally due to this rather than the #5 bellows seal. Don't forget though, if you change over from something like Aeroshell 500 to an HTS oil, don't do it all at once and use the top off method. You will dislodge built up carbon which may block up a oil jet.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is also an increased horsepower kit for the L3, which includes, among other things, a torque gauge in which the yellow range goes to 104.8%. This gives the allowed power of the L4, but doesn't increase the allowed MGW. It can be very useful for coming out of confined areas in the summer at MGW.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Under
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L3 to L4 conversion
That is very interesting Gomer. Will you get the additional 300 pounds lift capacity that the L4 has over the L3, effectively?
I believe this conversion is so expensive that it makes no economic sense to convert to an L4. Does anyone know of a conversion that has happened and the costs to the operator?
Then, if you really wanna go hog-wild, there is also apparently a Service Instruction to turn both an L-1 and L-3 into an L-4 (BHT-206-SI-2052) with a 4450 internal gross weight
Last edited by Bell_Flyer; 16th Oct 2009 at 23:26.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Where I'm pointing...
Posts: 582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Bell rep I spoke to gave me an "estimated" number of between $500k and $750k.
The "uplift" installing the above was more than the price difference to get a second-hand 407.... (~$865k hull value L3)
The "uplift" installing the above was more than the price difference to get a second-hand 407.... (~$865k hull value L3)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The increased torque limitations on the L3, via a remarked torque indicator, comes complete with a requirement to conduct the transmission sungear inspection at the significantly lower interval of 600 hrs.
Out of interest, who out there utilises the Increased MAUW in the Jetranger via the FMS (cant remember the number - maybe 39?) - again, with a 'minor' caveat of reduced IAS until the fuel burn brings the AUW down to the standard internal MAUW figure. Here in OZ, I cant imagine too many people using it, most would be TOT limited anyway at higher OAT/DA.
Out of interest, who out there utilises the Increased MAUW in the Jetranger via the FMS (cant remember the number - maybe 39?) - again, with a 'minor' caveat of reduced IAS until the fuel burn brings the AUW down to the standard internal MAUW figure. Here in OZ, I cant imagine too many people using it, most would be TOT limited anyway at higher OAT/DA.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, you don't get increased max gross weight, you just get more available torque for takeoff. It involves much more than a different torquemeter, and there are no increased inspection intervals that I'm aware of. There are a number of enhancements for the L series, involving different changes, depending on your budget and requirements. You can go all the way to complete L4 specs if you want and can afford it.
I believe Air Evac is doing that in the US, in addition to buying some new L4s.
I believe Air Evac is doing that in the US, in addition to buying some new L4s.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Down Under
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L3, L4, 407
The L4's and 407's are priced very similarly - can't see why you would want an L4 unless hangar space and/or the slightly higher running costs are a problem. The 407 lifts more, flies faster, etc. Air Evac must have their economic reasons to convert to L4's.
We looked at converting B to BA, BA to B2 and then also to the Honeywell conversion kit for the AS350's. All were cheaper than the L3 to L4 conversion. Makes you wonder what Bell were thinking - maybe they need the extra dough to subsidise their bad decisions elsewhere, OR they are trying to kill off the L4?
We looked at converting B to BA, BA to B2 and then also to the Honeywell conversion kit for the AS350's. All were cheaper than the L3 to L4 conversion. Makes you wonder what Bell were thinking - maybe they need the extra dough to subsidise their bad decisions elsewhere, OR they are trying to kill off the L4?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bell had already killed the L4. The production line was closed several years ago, and they reopened it for the Air Evac production run. The 407 is much more expensive to operate than a 206, especially considering that Air Evac already operates more than 80 206s, and the continuing tailboom problems make the 407 questionable, IMO.
Odd starting characteristic
My turbine recently came back from overhaul, and since then, we have an intermittent problem on start. Until the engine went away (and with my previous aircraft), as you wound up to 15% and cracked the throttle, the engine would start immediately.
Now, it sometimes 'hangs' for a second or so before firing. The resulting start is then hotter than normal, (still within limits). Of course, whenever I demonstrate it to engineers, it behaves normally and they pat me on the head and tell me to go flying, but their theories have indicated a possible prob with fuel control (don't beleive it) or cracked igniter insulation (but it apparently sounds very healthy) resulting in poor spark.
My turbine recently came back from overhaul, and since then, we have an intermittent problem on start. Until the engine went away (and with my previous aircraft), as you wound up to 15% and cracked the throttle, the engine would start immediately.
Now, it sometimes 'hangs' for a second or so before firing. The resulting start is then hotter than normal, (still within limits). Of course, whenever I demonstrate it to engineers, it behaves normally and they pat me on the head and tell me to go flying, but their theories have indicated a possible prob with fuel control (don't beleive it) or cracked igniter insulation (but it apparently sounds very healthy) resulting in poor spark.
Current situation? Aircraft is now sat on the tarmac at Brussels International with a complete failure to start! Press the starter...tick tick tick...15%...open the throttle....nothing!
Why do aircraft always choose the best times to throw their toys out?
Anyone know any good local 206 engineers to save me sending my lot from the UK? Have tried Heli service Belgium and they told me to call back on Monday......
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Over here
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 407 has cracking problems, especially around the horizontal stabilizer, and now requires doublers and even triplers to hold it. I know of at least two in which the tailboom broke off in flight, and amazingly there were survivors in one.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Homer, Alaska
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have only been flying the 407 since November 2008, but I am not aware of issues with current ships. Are you referring to older or current production 407s? As I read the AD from 2003, it refers to:
This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the specified Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (Bell) model helicopters that requires preflight checking and repetitively inspecting for a crack in certain tailbooms that have not been redesigned and replacing the tailboom if a crack is found; modifying and re-identifying certain tailbooms and installing an improved horizontal stabilizer assembly; and assigning a 5,000 hour time-in-service (TIS) life limit. This amendment is prompted by cracking discovered in other areas of certain tailbooms and introduction of a redesigned tailboom with a chemically milled skin, which does not require the current inspections.
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Model 407 Helicopters
When was the last accident that resulted from the recurring tail boom issues you reference? It would also be helpful to know what were the dates of the two accidents you reference.
This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the specified Bell Helicopter Textron Canada (Bell) model helicopters that requires preflight checking and repetitively inspecting for a crack in certain tailbooms that have not been redesigned and replacing the tailboom if a crack is found; modifying and re-identifying certain tailbooms and installing an improved horizontal stabilizer assembly; and assigning a 5,000 hour time-in-service (TIS) life limit. This amendment is prompted by cracking discovered in other areas of certain tailbooms and introduction of a redesigned tailboom with a chemically milled skin, which does not require the current inspections.
Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Model 407 Helicopters
When was the last accident that resulted from the recurring tail boom issues you reference? It would also be helpful to know what were the dates of the two accidents you reference.