Bell 407 vs AS-350 B2/B3
Thread Starter
Bell 407 vs AS-350 B2/B3
Okey guys I would like to hear your opinion on this matter. Which one is better for small charter business 407 or 350 B2/b3?
For example in terms of:
1. Operating cost
2. Maintainance support
3. Mission perfomance and versatility, e.g. sightseeing,sling,filming.
Any comments based on experince are highly appreciated
For example in terms of:
1. Operating cost
2. Maintainance support
3. Mission perfomance and versatility, e.g. sightseeing,sling,filming.
Any comments based on experince are highly appreciated
Last edited by rotorrookie; 5th Sep 2008 at 23:04.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N20,W99
Age: 53
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly both (407 or B3) at least once a week . . .
Maintenance Support on Bell, is way, way better.
Operation Cost, EC is cheaper, I would say at least 80 dollars less per hour.
Performance I would say is equal, the B3 might carry a little more, but the 407 is more manuverable, better for off airport for my taste, for EMS the Bell litter kit is more comfortable to use I would say.
Never done sling loads in either one.
I feel a lot safer on the Bell, the EC is more confortable to fly, the Bell is a lot more manuverable and fun to fly.
If I were to pick one in the next 5 minutes, Bell 407 would be it. The decisive point would be the EC's maintenance support, I see so many cases of people being stuck for lack of it, EC around here in Mexico is absolutely bad, and having to deal with EC is always a pain for those involved.
Operation Cost, EC is cheaper, I would say at least 80 dollars less per hour.
Performance I would say is equal, the B3 might carry a little more, but the 407 is more manuverable, better for off airport for my taste, for EMS the Bell litter kit is more comfortable to use I would say.
Never done sling loads in either one.
I feel a lot safer on the Bell, the EC is more confortable to fly, the Bell is a lot more manuverable and fun to fly.
If I were to pick one in the next 5 minutes, Bell 407 would be it. The decisive point would be the EC's maintenance support, I see so many cases of people being stuck for lack of it, EC around here in Mexico is absolutely bad, and having to deal with EC is always a pain for those involved.
Thread Starter
Thanks Blender good points.... being a Bell brainwashed, I would go for the 407 too.
Would like to hear more comments.... where are the EuroCopter fans out there?? or are there none left
Would like to hear more comments.... where are the EuroCopter fans out there?? or are there none left
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B407 - carrying pax good considering 2 x rearwood facing pax, slinging/longline great, EMS good however crampted with stretcher in FWD pos and you loose a seat with it in the rear position medico's can access most of patient in rear pos, winching good but strecher winching is something to get used to. Performance, handling and reliability good with front bubble windows for larger types. Utility mode is good however limited without flat floor depending on load types. sliding doors a must on LH side
AS350b2/3 - carring pax good, better with twin bench front seat, slinging/longlining good however better with large vertical reference window in floor if you aren't tall enough to hang out or fit mod to move pilots seat outwoodly, EMS good with plenty of room however second medico in middle back seat might have to have long arms to assist medico at patients head. Difficult to work on patients trunk and lower limbs in flight because of position of stretcher in fwd pos. Excellent winch (pax or stretcher) platform with flat floor, utility roll is excellent with rear folding seats or easy to remove ie no probs with 200lt drum of fuel for ferries and plenty of tie down hard points, sliding doors a must. Performance, handling and reliability is good.
I concure with preivious statements as well on both types.
AS350b2/3 - carring pax good, better with twin bench front seat, slinging/longlining good however better with large vertical reference window in floor if you aren't tall enough to hang out or fit mod to move pilots seat outwoodly, EMS good with plenty of room however second medico in middle back seat might have to have long arms to assist medico at patients head. Difficult to work on patients trunk and lower limbs in flight because of position of stretcher in fwd pos. Excellent winch (pax or stretcher) platform with flat floor, utility roll is excellent with rear folding seats or easy to remove ie no probs with 200lt drum of fuel for ferries and plenty of tie down hard points, sliding doors a must. Performance, handling and reliability is good.
I concure with preivious statements as well on both types.
Last edited by burger; 9th Sep 2008 at 04:38. Reason: typo
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good answers before. Love our 407, great aircraft, AOG and parts support excellent, if pricey. Never flown a 350, but we have a 355N...and it feels a tad flimsy (mostly trim) - biggest issue I have with EC is engine supoprt, Turbomeca just hopeless. Bell feels/looks a tad old fashioned but hewn from granite and so much power - given the choice would go Bell.
Perhaps more subjectively, the guy from whom we bought our 407 had just bought a 350B3...and was regretting it
Perhaps more subjectively, the guy from whom we bought our 407 had just bought a 350B3...and was regretting it
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: the great white north
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not being an operator myself, i can't comment on operating costs and tech support. although i have heard all of those comments before.
as one with 3K in 350's and 35 hrs in 407's i can say that if i had the choice of going on a job in either a/c i would choose the 350. the types of jobs i do make the 407's advantage in speed a moot point. the 350 is very comfy for slinging or not (bell seats are garbage), i'm 6' and have no problem seeing out the vert. ref. window. the cockpit is spacious and can accomodate more than a post-it note and pencil. oh yeah, and why is the collective the most tempting thing for front seat pax to grab on to as they are getting in (yes, they have been briefed about keeping their hands to themselves!), and also the first place that the seatbelt disappears underneath when they unstrap in order to disembark. unnerving when doing a toe-in, to say the least.
cargo capacity with pax is also far superior in the 350 with cheeks or without as opposed to the bell that has the same shi++y baggage compartment as the 206 which was designed when? decades ago??
flat floor makes the 350 much easier to clean after you have loads of filthy slashers/treeplanters/surveyors/drillers/jughounds filling it up with as much crud as they can carry on the outside of their boots.
engineers tell me that if they had their druthers, the 350 would be the machine to work on as everything is easy to get to whereas the 407 is a real PITA to get anything done.
even in my limited 407 experience, the demisting system in the 407 has already proven itself to be pretty dismal compared to the 350. this, for those of us who have the luxury of operating out of heated hangars every day might not be much of a concern, but for those of use who work in the bush not being able to see properly is a real drag. apparently, with the demisting system on and a little bit of heat, the 407 will be pushing temp limits pretty quick even in cool conditions.
i have never found the astar to be lacking in build quality, but i am glad that bell managed to finally figure out how to make doors that close properly.
so...it is pretty obvious that i am an astar guy and there must be a reason that (in canada at least) the vast majority of intermediate helicopters are of the 350 series.
cheers
FP
as one with 3K in 350's and 35 hrs in 407's i can say that if i had the choice of going on a job in either a/c i would choose the 350. the types of jobs i do make the 407's advantage in speed a moot point. the 350 is very comfy for slinging or not (bell seats are garbage), i'm 6' and have no problem seeing out the vert. ref. window. the cockpit is spacious and can accomodate more than a post-it note and pencil. oh yeah, and why is the collective the most tempting thing for front seat pax to grab on to as they are getting in (yes, they have been briefed about keeping their hands to themselves!), and also the first place that the seatbelt disappears underneath when they unstrap in order to disembark. unnerving when doing a toe-in, to say the least.
cargo capacity with pax is also far superior in the 350 with cheeks or without as opposed to the bell that has the same shi++y baggage compartment as the 206 which was designed when? decades ago??
flat floor makes the 350 much easier to clean after you have loads of filthy slashers/treeplanters/surveyors/drillers/jughounds filling it up with as much crud as they can carry on the outside of their boots.
engineers tell me that if they had their druthers, the 350 would be the machine to work on as everything is easy to get to whereas the 407 is a real PITA to get anything done.
even in my limited 407 experience, the demisting system in the 407 has already proven itself to be pretty dismal compared to the 350. this, for those of us who have the luxury of operating out of heated hangars every day might not be much of a concern, but for those of use who work in the bush not being able to see properly is a real drag. apparently, with the demisting system on and a little bit of heat, the 407 will be pushing temp limits pretty quick even in cool conditions.
i have never found the astar to be lacking in build quality, but i am glad that bell managed to finally figure out how to make doors that close properly.
so...it is pretty obvious that i am an astar guy and there must be a reason that (in canada at least) the vast majority of intermediate helicopters are of the 350 series.
cheers
FP
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Planet Y
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear ya, here in India the most popular machine is the 407 mainly due to the support from the French or rather lack of. The 407 is a good to 14,000' with 6 on-board & gear in the boot (just). Its fast & more fun to fly than the 350. 350 better for slinging from left seat. If I had to pick I feel better in the 407. The 407 is also more reliable. Good Luck & happy landings
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: foot of a mountain
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand the reliability issue with the 350. We have 6 flying an average of 500hrs/year and in the last 2 years the total time offline for the fleet was 16 days(including an engine and MO4 repl). The 350B2 and B3 is great for preventative maintenance due to accessibility which, if attended to once/twice in between 100hrs, make the 100 hour (and even the 500hr to an extend) a non event. We have our own engineers and are not bounded to servicings at an specific day booked at an AMO. The flexibility of the EC scheduled maintenance makes it easy to plan maintenance around bad weather days. Solve the possible problem before it becomes a problem basically.
I do think it is unfair to include the B2 in a race against the 407. Although a great aircraft, you can not compare a hydromechanical driven engine with a "FADEC" engine. B3 and B3+ are the 407's competition and it is a credit to the old B2(although they are still producing plenty new once) that she is mentioned in this company with the superior techno engines.
I do think it is unfair to include the B2 in a race against the 407. Although a great aircraft, you can not compare a hydromechanical driven engine with a "FADEC" engine. B3 and B3+ are the 407's competition and it is a credit to the old B2(although they are still producing plenty new once) that she is mentioned in this company with the superior techno engines.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Huntsville AL
Age: 51
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotorrookie
I would say from a maintenance aspect that the 350 is a easier machine to work on than the Bell. That being said the success of operation depends alot on who is doing the maintenance. If your mechanics are EC guys then they could probably work on the 407 without too much trouble. If they are Bell guys then converting to the 350 may not go so smooth. Bell has very good manuals for the most part and EC and Turbomeca have a much different approach that many people find hard to learn. With a good wrench on staff the 350 is a pretty reliable aircraft and doesn't require a huge amount of tech support from the manufacturer. The 407 may be a bit easier for the new mechanic to learn and what he doesn't know he can usually get help with from Bell fairly easily, not always so with the EC/TM product. Beware also that tech support varies widely by region with every manufacturer so just because someone has great support from Bell in Dallas Tx doesn't mean you will where you are! The same goes for the bad reputation for EC and TM support
Experience really is the key. The maintenance manuals today are written to keep the manufacturer from getting sued not just to tell you how to work on the machine. There are lots of things that are not written in the books and it isn't easy to just "tell you all the tricks". It takes some time for someone to learn all the quirks of a new aircraft and know how to keep it flying in a cost effective manner and find things before they become an AOG situation.
350boy,
The B3 is one with the Arriel 2B engine which is a single channel FADEC and a mechanical backup system. The B3+ as it is sometimes refered to is a 350 with the Arriel 2B1 engine which is a dual channel FADEC and an electrical backup system directly out of the EC130B4. No real power differences to speak of but most folks like the dual channel set up a bit better.
Hope it helps
Max
I would say from a maintenance aspect that the 350 is a easier machine to work on than the Bell. That being said the success of operation depends alot on who is doing the maintenance. If your mechanics are EC guys then they could probably work on the 407 without too much trouble. If they are Bell guys then converting to the 350 may not go so smooth. Bell has very good manuals for the most part and EC and Turbomeca have a much different approach that many people find hard to learn. With a good wrench on staff the 350 is a pretty reliable aircraft and doesn't require a huge amount of tech support from the manufacturer. The 407 may be a bit easier for the new mechanic to learn and what he doesn't know he can usually get help with from Bell fairly easily, not always so with the EC/TM product. Beware also that tech support varies widely by region with every manufacturer so just because someone has great support from Bell in Dallas Tx doesn't mean you will where you are! The same goes for the bad reputation for EC and TM support
Experience really is the key. The maintenance manuals today are written to keep the manufacturer from getting sued not just to tell you how to work on the machine. There are lots of things that are not written in the books and it isn't easy to just "tell you all the tricks". It takes some time for someone to learn all the quirks of a new aircraft and know how to keep it flying in a cost effective manner and find things before they become an AOG situation.
350boy,
The B3 is one with the Arriel 2B engine which is a single channel FADEC and a mechanical backup system. The B3+ as it is sometimes refered to is a 350 with the Arriel 2B1 engine which is a dual channel FADEC and an electrical backup system directly out of the EC130B4. No real power differences to speak of but most folks like the dual channel set up a bit better.
Hope it helps
Max
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B 3 +
Thanks Max and Bushrat,guess thats where the term "Full FADEC"comes from Ivé heard engineers talk of.
Have flown lots of 350's over the last 10 yrs of so and love em !!.
Never touched a 407 but for a 407 to be better than a B3 is a big call.
If the seat is moved over a little in the squirrel it's a nice sling platform(I'm 5 &1/2 Ft) and a good comfortable machine to spend time in.
Have a few hundred hrs in the B3 now and they are a gr8 bit of kit .
Have worked along side 407's over the years and must say they look impressive and can haul arse but with a "fat"Longranger internal layout I much prefer the wide body of the 350's .
Depends on the gig you want to use it on also.
Don't think we'll see a 407 land on" top of the world " though ,or even close to it !!,sorry you bell fan's ,couldn't resist .
Fly safe all.
Have flown lots of 350's over the last 10 yrs of so and love em !!.
Never touched a 407 but for a 407 to be better than a B3 is a big call.
If the seat is moved over a little in the squirrel it's a nice sling platform(I'm 5 &1/2 Ft) and a good comfortable machine to spend time in.
Have a few hundred hrs in the B3 now and they are a gr8 bit of kit .
Have worked along side 407's over the years and must say they look impressive and can haul arse but with a "fat"Longranger internal layout I much prefer the wide body of the 350's .
Depends on the gig you want to use it on also.
Don't think we'll see a 407 land on" top of the world " though ,or even close to it !!,sorry you bell fan's ,couldn't resist .
Fly safe all.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: foot of a mountain
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Careful, they might team up with their ex-alliance again and claim the speed record. I will take the ability to land on top of the world personally-makes me feel better knowing I have that margin of capability left unused.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Planet Y
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems dubious as to a Squirrel ever landing on Everest. Eurocopter refused to get the necessary permission's from CAAN also denying Guinness Book of records to confirm the event. If it were true it would be an awesome marketing angle but it was more likely a PR stunt. Certainly it is no argument here to justify a B3 over a 407 or not. If one wants to achieve a world record then why not do it openly, honestly with all paper work correctly in place..... unless of course you have something to hide ??? hmmmmmmmm
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: foot of a mountain
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK rotors, I won't go into the politics(but it was accredited) but instead go for second best achievement then.
I think the RESCUE of 2 Italian climbers a while ago at a height of 5 700m at mountain Nanga Parbat in Pakistan by a B3(NDTV) can not be disputed and if it can do a rescue at 5700m I think it pretty much landed and took off and landed again at Everest
) but instead go for second best achievement then. I think the RESCUE of 2 Italian climbers a while ago at a height of 5 700m at mountain Nanga Parbat in Pakistan by a B3(NDTV) can not be disputed and if it can do a rescue at 5700m I think it pretty much landed and took off and landed again at Everest
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: surrey
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotor 88
Hi.....I see that you are in India on the 407......I used to fly there many years ago for ONGC in a Sikorsky 58T mainly offshore.
How did you get sorted out with a job over there? any suggestions....?
I went over to the dark side for a while and really miss the helicopters & India.
Best Wishes Paul
How did you get sorted out with a job over there? any suggestions....?
I went over to the dark side for a while and really miss the helicopters & India.
Best Wishes Paul
I'm not sure this is an issue to everyone operating a B3 but isn't the internal gross something like 4960lbs and a 407 is 5250lbs. With similar empty weights, you are legally allowed more internal in a 407 but more external in a B3.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: foot of a mountain
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B3 internal is a auto rotation and aerodynamic limit with single hydraulics if I understand correctly. Shows you how much power margin you have? Order a new one on the line with twin hydraulics and a TR/stabiliser(do not know the detail-anyone?) mod and bingo you have more internal usage. I believe it is closer to the B4 2400kg(think I read 2380 somewhere on a techno's sb?)? Just speculation from what I think I saw. Still magnificent beast for it's size(B3) even limited to 2250kg internal.
even limited to 2250kg internal.