Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

206 BIII Operating Costs in the Uk

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

206 BIII Operating Costs in the Uk

Old 14th Jan 2008, 10:31
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
206 BIII Operating Costs in the Uk

Used the search procedure but I can't find any UK specific, upto date answers.

Just need the average hourly costs for a Jetranger, excluding fuel and pilot.

Many thanks
Eworth
eworth is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2008, 11:00
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 515
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
Depends on component times, how many hours a year you do and how lucky you are, really! For example, TT straps will cost you around £6,000 to replace and need doing every two years. So if you only fly 50 hours a year, there's a £60/hour variable for a start.

I'd say about £250-£300/hour, but that's a wild estimate.
206 jock is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2008, 11:07
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Harwich
Age: 65
Posts: 777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Magazine article I saw a couple of years ago put the DOCs around the £300 mark. Fuel's gone up since then, but it was a small part of the overall figure.
Hilico is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2008, 11:15
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks very much for that, we came out with much the same figures. This machine is certainly going to be put through a lot of hours, so we are going to use £265ph for planning purposes.
Many thanks
Eworth
eworth is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2008, 17:43
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Worksop, UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Guys, what ever figure you come up with double it and hope for the best, it seems to me that its open season for anything with a turbine,have had 3, its no joke
Rescue One is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2008, 17:46
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Worksop, UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Forgot to mention DONT buy ab206 3
Rescue One is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2008, 22:21
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
why not a ab206 BIII V ?.

tell me more.

cs.
Choppersquad is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2008, 23:05
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Worksop, UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Agusta Bell under EASA can only have Agusta parts fitted, NOT Bell parts, so all those unfortunate people who have Agusta Jet Rangers with a mix of parts are now flying them illegal. Agusta dont seem to want to support the ageing product anymore and the parts supply chain is drying up rapidly. Ironically if you need say main rotor blades (for example) they come from Bell and shipped to Agusta who then issue you with their correct paperwork which states that they are now fit for purpose, but beware this does not apply to all parts which appear to be common.

I have just come out of a B3 which the CAA revoked its brand new c of a and has had to have EVERY Bell part removed/replaced. Some parts were no longer available and had to be sent away for NDT testing for the manufacturer to issue the release as new ones were not available. This is obviously a European problem.

If in doubt contact the CAA who have all the information.
Rescue One is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2008, 07:55
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 515
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
What? I hope you are being badly advised.

I have a letter on file from Agusta customer services stating that if I provide them with a list of Bell parts fitted to my aircraft (as long as they were fitted before the moratorium date...March 2006 IIRC), they will formally adopt them on their system. I have provided a complete list to them and haven't heard a dicky-bird since.

And mine is more Bell than Agusta!

Last edited by 206 jock; 15th Jan 2008 at 13:21.
206 jock is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2008, 08:39
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
206

i think you will find rescue 1 learnt all of his information the hard way in ££££££

hi G
md 600 driver is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2008, 13:19
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 515
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
MD 600

I'm sure that's true, but runs contrary to all the advice that I have been given. If the catch-all "all those unfortunate people who have Agusta Jet Rangers with a mix of parts are now flying them illegal" is true, then my machine is illegal. And worthless. So of course I'm entitled to ask.

So therefore, could I repeat my request for some back-up to this assertion? Or at least more information? If - for example, not that this is the case etc etc - the Bell parts in question were fitted after the moratorium, more fool Rescue One.

Let's put it this way, either him (or his engineer) or Agusta has got it wrong (I have a letter from them in my grubby mitts).

As an owner of an Agusta Bell JetRanger with a shedload of Bell parts on it, I'd like to know which
206 jock is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2008, 14:00
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: yorkshire uk
Posts: 1,522
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
There are probably just as many machines with the opposite problem ...so why not organise a "swap shop " between machines . Also as has been said before , there are loads of parts for sale out there for agusta parts , air and ground ltd being just one . There may be an extra cost of recertification /inspection etc but they still come out much cheaper than new.
Is there any legal responsibility for Agusta to support their products ??
anyway if you think your machine is now worthless due to Bell parts contact me and i will be happy to buy it off you.....
nigelh is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2008, 11:11
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 515
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
Nigel, of course you're right: there may be some swapsies to be done, but experience tells me that there are few Bells with Agusta bits on (the notable exception being the one that kicked all this off.....). Certainly the received wisdom when I was considering machines was to go for Agusta as you can always fit Bell parts to them, but not the other way round.

Not sure where Rescue One has gone, but I'd like to hear from him/her again: I'm genuinely interested as like all these things, different people have different takes on the same story.

As for my machine, it is up for sale, but not because it's an Agusta with Bell bits on it...more that I'm committed to a newer aircraft. So feel free to make me an offer. Air and Ground can have their tailboom back then!!
206 jock is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2008, 22:19
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Worksop, UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You will find that engineers being what they are interpret the rules as THEY see it, not necceserily how Agusta (service letter) and more importantly EASA now viewinsurance it. The engineers think that because this situation has been ok since time began that its still ok, which I can tell you is incorrect and is why you should now take fresh instructions from the CAA (Mr McMillan East Midlands office) who I am sure will enlighten (frighten) you.

Of course the biggest problem here is that you have to make a claim on your insurance to be told that you have unwittingly invalidated your insurance by having parts fitted which are not certified by Agusta.
My particular machine had brand new Bell tail rotor blades fitted which HAD to be changed to Agusta blades, guess what no part used blades anywere and eventually Agusta had no option but to certify said blades because they are no longer in production. So if the new owner dings a blade in the near future the machine is grounded indefinatly because Bell nor Agusta now manufacture those blades.
Rescue One is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2008, 22:35
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Worksop, UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I should just add that I have no particular axe to grind against the product and that in a way I was lucky due to the fact that I bought the machine from a dealer who eventually had no option but to refund my money. My only down side was not having my own machine to fly for most of last year which meant hiring, and the emotional stress. This all started in November 2006 and the helicopter was released to service in November 2007. That helicopter had not flown properly 5 months prior to that either awaiting the now defunked C of A, but thats another story which should be taken up on another thread, maybe !!

I wouldant rest your hopes on the monitoriam bit jock, but if it helps you sleep easy at night zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Rescue One is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 10:02
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 515
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
Rescue,

Thanks for clearing your circumstances up. Luckily I'm dealing with Agusta on my Bell parts and it looks fine....as long as the parts were historically fitted.

Of course, there is the problem of future supply for an older machine...
206 jock is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 11:33
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Worksop, UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
206jock,

Just to compound the problem, around that time some ex militery 206 parts became available which originated in the middle east (Saudi). The MRG in my machine had come from this source but didant have the correct (recent) release to service which I believe is a EASA form 1. The CAA took the view that the gearbox should at the very least have a mid life (1200 hour) inspection, but they would have prefered the full thing due to the incredible old age of the unit, which must have been laid around somewere gathering dust. Just to add fuel to the fire THIS unit had a release from Agusta ??. I believe NigelH made the point that these parts which I believe originated from a dealer down on the south coast (who had them advertised on his website) could well be the very same items he mentioned.

We did try at the time to get people to do the swopping thing, and if you get Helidata you will have seen the add looking for MRB and TRB on ours to swop with Bell owners. The parts pool has dried up, hence why Agusta had no option but to certify the TRB. The machine had to have brand new MRB at a cost of $60k a pair on a 1980 machine ?, because they had no option in the end. Its sad really because I did offer to contribute towards the cost of the blades way back in April 07 but they were adamant that they could get around the problem without going to that exspense.

I did see a similar thread on this forum just before xmas regarding this very problem, but cannot find it anymore, was that you ?
Rescue One is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2008, 11:48
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 515
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
I recall the advert in Helidata, I know of what you speak. Makes sense now! The ex-mil parts were originally offered by one company who then sold them to another, as I understand it. I sourced a tailboom from this stock that also had to be overhauled prior to fitment on my machine.

The other thread was originated by a friend of mine who had a problem with his BIII and parts supply. I think Agusta are heartily sick of this issue, but being Italians, they won't actually propose a workable solution!
206 jock is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2008, 16:48
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question Bell / Agusta 206 parts

Surprised to see such unenlightened thinking from the regulatory authorities (but am I surprised now that EASA rules?)
The original (and I still believe valid) premise was that Agusta built the 206, and many other USA origin helos, under licence. Thus 'fit, form and function' had to be acceptable to the original DA (Design Authority) i'e identical. The only exceptions to this were the installation of assemblies were prescribed, rather than on the dynamics, for instance, some of the close tolerance individual parts dimensionally in metric as opposed to imperial. This also applied to structural items too, eg doors, cowlings etc. Of course, it would be optimistic to expect a new Agusta blade to fly with a part life Bell blade through the entire operational spectrum from hover to Vne, but then it might be a challenging exercise doing the same with 2 x Bell blades, under the same conditions. I am intrigued to read of this 'unique' interpretation since I was involved in the UK engineering scene. For what it's worth I hold a (converted) Pt 66 licence, so this subject is dear to my ears.
Would like to hear the rationale for such a non-pragmatic statement from the Authority. The statement that Bell parts are furnished by Agusta with covering Italian release is absolutely correct. So where's the sense gone?
Puzzled of Essex
cmacltd is offline  
Old 19th Jan 2008, 10:05
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South of UK
Posts: 515
Received 16 Likes on 13 Posts
cmacltd

Have a look at http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1594/LTO2539.pdf

Although nothing has subsequently been published (it was nearly three years ago and EASA are still 'consulting'), this is being 'interpreted' as effectively a moratorium on the cross-fitment of parts.

As the Bell and Agusta machines are subject to different Type Certificates (unlike IIUC some US planks that were made under licence in Europe), the 'interpretation' is that there should be no cross fitting of parts.

The biggest problem is that everyone is happy to dole out tea and sympathy to AB owners, but no-one wants to get off their fat asses and do something about the situation.
206 jock is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.