Bell 430

[Head Turner]

Thanks everyone we have taken your points and will review the project.

[MPR]

Your 430 project wouldn't be to replace a 119 would it?

PM me if you don't want to broadcast.

[C4]

Question for the Boffins??

Why for a Cat A takeoff (Bell 430), is it required to beep the rotor speed up to 105%???

Does it enhance the takeoff performance or is it just for when the engine fails.

Also why is it limited in the RFM to Cat A takeoffs only?? Why not use it for all takeoffs???

[MightyGem]

If it works the same as in the EC135 with the T2 engines, then it puts extra kinetic energy into the rotor system for use in the event of an engine failure on take off/landing.

However, it does increase the N2 cycle count(on the 135), hence we are restricted to using it only on helipad or full Cat A take offs/landings.

[Shawn Coyle]

The reason for beeping to 105% is for additional energy, and also to improve the rotor efficiency following the engine failure. In the emergency procedure section of the Cat A procedure for engine failure after takeoff from an elevated helipad, there are words to the effect that 'do not lower collective. when following the limitations of weight, etc. for this procedure, the same collective position as used for the departure will ensure the rotor does not droop below limits.'

[C4]

Shawn, you stated "The reason for beeping to 105% is for additional energy"...

Are we talking additional energy during a normal (not Cat A) takeoff???
We have an ongoing discussion as to the difference in performance in a takeoff at max gross using 100% Nr or using 105% Nr. Bearing in mind this is not cat A.
Is there any benefit in performance when beeping Rrpm up for takeoff??

[NickLappos]

The 105 % is nice in case of the engine failure, where that energy can be extracted as the rotor droops just after the failure. For the few seconds, it can be like having 10 to 20% more power on the remaining engine, a nice power boost!

If the engine does not quit, and the rotor does not droop, the extra rpm is not very useful, and might actually hurt climb performance a bit, as the rotor might be less efficient at higher rpm (for the typical helicopter.)

Cat A's are the most performance critical takeoff, and the only one we spend a lot of time on, so the rpm boost is usually specified only for the Cat A.

[Shawn Coyle]

c4 -
Nick has answered the question.
Not a bad question though- sort of lateral thinking that we need.

Kind of like the engine manufacturer that has it's turbine engines approved for single engine fixed wing IFR who stated 'We inspect all those engines twice" - and was asked - "why not inspect all your engines twice???"
Look of wonder crossed his face....

[JimL]

Not exactly on the thread but here was a saying often used when I was operating in the North Sea:

How can a company afford to do something twice when it cannot afford to do it correctly?

[407 too]

430 cargo hook mirrors

i realize most 430's in the states are used for EMS, but are there any operators who have slung loads with the 430 ??

if so, and you used a cargo mirror, was it mouted in std.config (viewed through chin bubble)?? i know that what the 430 has cannot really be called a chin bubble, hence my curiosity as to mirror location

[Aesir]

I have done a lot of sling work with the Bell 222.

The mirror is located at the standard location viewed through the chin bubble. Its adjustable up/down from the cockpit.

I liked slinging with the B222, very restricted visibility, good ground crew with radio was great help. But you get used to it so unaided slinging was quite fun too.

I needed to get used to having the cargo hook 3 meters behind me, even further 30cm back in the B430.

[helmet fire]

Bell 222A thru to B430 lineage Q

Done a search for this already, and there is lots of good info out there, but I was wondering if any Bell 222/430 gurus could give me a quick heads up on the various models.

First there was the Bell 222 A.

What did they change to make the 222 B?

Then what did they change to make the 222 UT?

Then the 222 SP?

Then the 230?

Then the 430?

Is this the right progression? Can any 222, 230, 430 be retro fitted with skids as an STC or did it have to come from the factory like that?
Can the 222 A be made into a B or UT?
Can the 222 B or UT be made into an SP?
Does the SP and 230 really outperform the 222B and UT?
Can a 222 be made into a 230?

For interest only! Sexy jets, and I have always wanted to fly one.

[Ian Corrigible]

Okay, I'll bite:

222 – Introduced in 1980, Lycoming LTS101-650C-2/C-3 donks. Later referred to unofficially as the 222A
222B – Introduced in 1980, uprated LTS101-750C-1 donks, M/R diameter increased by 2¼ ft
222UT – Introduced in 1983, variant of 222B with skid-gear and increased fuel capacity (~60 gal, as a result of the elimination of the retractable gear, a benefit shared with the 230UT and 430UT)
222SP – Introduced in 1988, a handful of Allison 250-C30G conversions undertaken by Heli-Air
230 – Introduced in 1992, development of 230 with 250-C30Gs, liquid inertia vibration elimination (LIVE) system, new high-inertia rotor blades, optional EAPS, simplified electronic systems, and dual hydraulic/electrical/fuel systems; offered with retractable gear or skids (230UT)
430 – Introduced in 1996, featured the four-blade model 680 rotor system, stretched fuselage and Allison 250-C40s; offered with retractable gear or skids (430UT)

The 222SP and 230 were reported to be 5 kts quicker than the 222B in the cruise, with the skid-equipped UT models losing 5-10 kts.

Though most of the 222SP conversions were the underpowered A models, AFAIK at least one EMS aircraft still flying was a 222B conversion.

I believe that the skid conversions were factory-options only, but can’t give you a definitive answer on that.

I/C

[chuckolamofola]

I've put what I know in your text below:
First there was the Bell 222 A.
What did they change to make the 222 B?
The difference between the A and B is the engine and electrical. The B model has the LTS-101-750 vice the A's -650 engine. There was also some changes to the electrical bus.
Then what did they change to make the 222 UT?
The 222UT removes the wheeled landing gear and replaces it with skids. There is also changes made to the electrical system and I also believe this model can fly SPIFR without a SAS system. It also comes standard with the utility interior.
Then the 222 SP?
The 222SP is an A model that has the LST-101 engine removed and replaced with an RR/Allison 250-C30 engine installed. This was done by a third party outside of Bell under an STC
Then the 230?
The 230 is Bell's answer to replacing the LTS-101 with the RR/Allison C30
Then the 430?
Bell added the 4 bladed rotor and more electrical improvements and I think the cabin has a slight stretch.
Is this the right progression? Can any 222, 230, 430 be retro fitted with skids
as an STC or did it have to come from the factory like that?
There may be a way to change from wheeled to skids but most come from the facory that way. I think the cost to do so would be too high though.
Can the 222 A be made into a B or UT?
No, why would you?
Can the 222 B or UT be made into an SP?
Yes, reference STC SH7853SW
Does the SP and 230 really outperform the 222B and UT?
Can a 222 be made into a 230?
No, but you can put the 230's engine in the 222

[trackdirect]

222UT Electrics

The 222UT has a totally DC electrical system wheras the A/B have AC and DC systems, makes the UT a much simpler system.
UTs have more fuel load, bigger wing tanks due to no landing gear in there.
The 430 is a stretched 222, has a plug of about 18 inches, not a great deal has changed in the airframe department, mainly electrics and avionics.
430 has IIDS and EFIS and autopilot as standard so lots of telly screens to look at, but there are 3x 430s that came out with standard flight instruments, no autopilot in these ones only scas and basic attitude hold.
(autopilot interfaces with the EFIS).
222 seats pilot and 9 Pax, 430 seats the same but with a tiny bit more room or there is an option for 10 pax config on the 430.
The 222 flies very much like a big longranger but the 430 is something totally different, No vibration at all from take off and even through translation amazingly smooth (due to the LIVE mounts on the transmission). Feels more like a jet than a helicopter.

Hope that helps a bit Helmet fire.

[helmet fire]

Thanks heaps guys, thats fantastic.

Three last ones: Does the SP and 230 really outperform the 222B and UT?
and
Is the LIVE system fitted to both the 230 and the 430?
and
How many 230 UT were there? I have only ever seen wheeled 230s.

[Jed A1]

At present there appears to be the following numbers of 222/230's on the worldwide civil registers;

222 - 46
222A - 7
222B - 23
222U - 3
222UT - 50
230 - 24
430 - 82

Therefore no 230UT's

So, I ask what is 222U?

[widgeon]

Why was the 430 not that succesful ? , is it a competitor to the S76 , EC155 .
What is the range of a std 430 ?.

I guess the fuselage jigs all left Fleet last year bound for China.

Closest is the 365N3 as far as I can see

[Ian Corrigible]

You're quite right, we overlooked the 222UT.

Some skid-equipped examples:

222

Saint Alphonsus Life Flight


Methodist Hospital CareFlite


222SP

Mercy Air


230

Life Flight Network


Palmetto Health Richland

I/C

[trackdirect]

430 pic