Bell 505 Jet Ranger X
Wow. Whatever stuff BellBlade is smoking, I want some of that! 1900 pounds for a 505? Heh. Right..
The last 206B I flew - an el-strippo with no rotor brake came in at 1850. The 505 is certainly no composite lightweight like the 206. There was a 505 at Heli-Expo and it had an EW of 2245. And it was very basic...let's call it "utilitarian" (no carpets or interior trim panels or any frills at all). So take out the seats and take the doors off and you remove...what...150? Let's be real. Let's say you can maybe...maaaaayyybeee get a 505 down to 2100 pounds against an external load MGW of 4475. That leaves us with a useful load of 2375. Let's put in a really skinny, hungry pilot at 190 (with helmet), and say...ohhh, 30 gallons/200 pounds of fuel - is that fair? That leaves us with 1985 to put on the hook. Okay, close enough to 2000. But it'll be maxed-out.
I don't know why people keep thinking the 505 is going to be this really great performer like it's Bell Helicopter's new little Big Lifter. In reality it's not a 206B with a big engine...it's more like an L-model with a 500 horsepower engine. Like my grammar school teachers used to tell my parents, lets not expect too much out of the poor thing.
The last 206B I flew - an el-strippo with no rotor brake came in at 1850. The 505 is certainly no composite lightweight like the 206. There was a 505 at Heli-Expo and it had an EW of 2245. And it was very basic...let's call it "utilitarian" (no carpets or interior trim panels or any frills at all). So take out the seats and take the doors off and you remove...what...150? Let's be real. Let's say you can maybe...maaaaayyybeee get a 505 down to 2100 pounds against an external load MGW of 4475. That leaves us with a useful load of 2375. Let's put in a really skinny, hungry pilot at 190 (with helmet), and say...ohhh, 30 gallons/200 pounds of fuel - is that fair? That leaves us with 1985 to put on the hook. Okay, close enough to 2000. But it'll be maxed-out.
I don't know why people keep thinking the 505 is going to be this really great performer like it's Bell Helicopter's new little Big Lifter. In reality it's not a 206B with a big engine...it's more like an L-model with a 500 horsepower engine. Like my grammar school teachers used to tell my parents, lets not expect too much out of the poor thing.
Funnily enough FH1100 for once I agree with you !!!
The figures you show of around 2000lb being doable on the hook is , to me anyway , impressive enough !!
i am not aware that it was built to be a heavy lifter but to be a great corporate , private and aerial work machine at a very sensible price .
The figures you show of around 2000lb being doable on the hook is , to me anyway , impressive enough !!
i am not aware that it was built to be a heavy lifter but to be a great corporate , private and aerial work machine at a very sensible price .
No Nigel, of course the 505 was not intended to be a "light-heavy-lifter," that was my little joke because some people have been making noise about how much the 505 might lift. But like you, I think 2000 pounds is pretty respectable. Should come in pretty handy for those guys slinging Christmas trees every year who are currently pulling the guts out of their 206B's.
As for the 505 being a "great" corporate machine...well... down in my thread about Heli-Expo (at which I was hoping to meet you) I wrote about spending some time with Bell's N505CQ, which had the barest of bare-bones interiors. I played with different loading scenarios in the loading page on the G-1000 that Bell conveniently provides. It turns out that...imagine my surprise...the 505 is fairly nose-heavy! The version with the fancy Mecaer interior would be even more so. Ergo, the 505 pilot will have to pay close attention to c.g. Mr. Big Bossman might not be real happy being told that he has to take a back seat while his sweet young thing-gf-trophy wife sits up front next to me, heh-heh-heh...I mean...not *me* but the 505 pilot. I know that the guy I used to fly for HATED sitting in the back. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see which market segments that the 505 does well in.
As for the 505 being a "great" corporate machine...well... down in my thread about Heli-Expo (at which I was hoping to meet you) I wrote about spending some time with Bell's N505CQ, which had the barest of bare-bones interiors. I played with different loading scenarios in the loading page on the G-1000 that Bell conveniently provides. It turns out that...imagine my surprise...the 505 is fairly nose-heavy! The version with the fancy Mecaer interior would be even more so. Ergo, the 505 pilot will have to pay close attention to c.g. Mr. Big Bossman might not be real happy being told that he has to take a back seat while his sweet young thing-gf-trophy wife sits up front next to me, heh-heh-heh...I mean...not *me* but the 505 pilot. I know that the guy I used to fly for HATED sitting in the back. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see which market segments that the 505 does well in.
BellBlade
Dont really care what crap the manufacturers say, what will it actually lift
All my 500's supposedly according to the manufacturer have a max of 3500lbs, well I have been at 3300 lbs and not been able to get the load off the ground !
So really looking for a real world answer
Dont really care what crap the manufacturers say, what will it actually lift
All my 500's supposedly according to the manufacturer have a max of 3500lbs, well I have been at 3300 lbs and not been able to get the load off the ground !
So really looking for a real world answer
I think Kiwi Ned knows a few operators who are lifting with them . I only know that in the early days they were happy with the lifting capacity !
FH1100 ..... What sort of weight did they have on the end of the boom ? Would it not be nice to have the ability to change the weights for different lifts ... Done by the pilot ? Or are we not deemed capable ?!!
FH1100 ..... What sort of weight did they have on the end of the boom ? Would it not be nice to have the ability to change the weights for different lifts ... Done by the pilot ? Or are we not deemed capable ?!!
Nigel, that is a very good question. At the show, N505CQ had "some" weight back there but I could not tell how much. Nor do I know whether it is pilot-adjustable - it would certainly necessitate an entry on the Form C in the W&B section of the RFM. And it would probably be tricky (if not difficult) and definitely not a good idea to change that weight while the ship is running.
Nigel, that is a very good question. At the show, N505CQ had "some" weight back there but I could not tell how much. Nor do I know whether it is pilot-adjustable - it would certainly necessitate an entry on the Form C in the W&B section of the RFM. And it would probably be tricky (if not difficult) and definitely not a good idea to change that weight while the ship is running.
And the lifting listed above was described by an actual 505 cargo hook user. He said they were slinging 1700 lbs over and over again and pushed it up over 1900 without using much of the takeoff power range on the PSI.
Someday you will really have to eat your hat...
During HAI i went and looked at the 505 they the hat-eating curmudgeon is referencing. It had only a very small weight on the aft ballast point. So the CG was so in a ferry condition suitable for sitting in the static exhibit and flying back to Texas. So of course it would not be as well suited for 5 heavy folks in the front. It’s really no different from the Astars or other light helicopters with the whole cabin in front of the rotor flapping hinge.
And the lifting listed above was described by an actual 505 cargo hook user. He said they were slinging 1700 lbs over and over again and pushed it up over 1900 without using much of the takeoff power range on the PSI.
Someday you will really have to eat your hat...
Look, don't try to pretend that 505CQ was just a demo ship with no flight time on it that ferried over from Ft. Worth. If you'd looked, you would've seen that the paint was chipped off the (external!) tailboom attach bolts and all of the hardware securing the aft engine cowling. This tells me that 505CQ's tailboom has been off at least once, maybe more. It's been around. And it's probably been giving rides.
You can static balance an aircraft like the 505 two ways: 1) for a full cabin load; or 2) for an empty cabin with a light pilot. If you do either, you'll probably be out of c.g. with the opposite loading. If you balance it for a full cabin, then a lightweight pilot will have to carry a big bag o'ballast with him. Or a hard copy of my pilot logbook. Not to mention that there'll be a lot of weight at the back of the ship. The 505 allows you to put a total of 40 pounds (40 pounds!) on those cable thingees behind the t/r gearbox. So obviously we have some balance issues. 40 pounds?! Damn. And of course, the more weight you put on as ballast is weight that must be deducted from the useful load.
And it's not even about "five heavy guys." I did a c.g. workup with two 200-pounders up front, a 200-pound male in the left-rear, and two 150-pound females (portly, I'll admit, but maybe one of them was Mrs. BellBlade) in the other two back seats. Total cabin weight: 900. Result? OUT OF C.G. We might note that these days, a 200-pound male would not really be considered "a heavy guy" but rather "a comparatively skinny Walmart shopper." Just out of curiosity, what do *you* weight, Mr. Blade?
And yes, my dear Blade, the 505 *is* different from an Astar. But with your limited knowledge of rotary-wing aviation and lack of real-world experience in operating helicopters, I'm not surprised you missed this. The Astar has a baggage compartment in the tailboom to help with the balance. Too nose-heavy? Stick some weight back in the baggage! A case of oil or bottled water...the ground-handling wheels...my porn video collection...something. But you can't do that with the 505 because the baggage compartment is right under the mast and weight there does not affect the c.g. So you're stuck. So while *you* may want to minimize the 505's balance issues as "just like an Astar!" you are....umm, what's the word? "Wrong." Again.
.......oh dear ..... and just as I was beginning to warm to you, you go and remind me why we fell out last time !!! Whatever awful thing Bell Helicopters did to upset you so much... I think it very likely you deserved it !! As has been pointed out by many people , you have been totally wrong on almost every point ( and predictions) you have made so why should we assume anything has changed ?!!!
Ps . I also think you have some anger management issues that need dealing with !
Ps . I also think you have some anger management issues that need dealing with !
Last edited by nigelh; 29th Mar 2019 at 01:26.
My Heli Expo Adventures
Was lucky to go up in 505 customer demo flight in Atlanta and was surprised no 505 on the Bell booth, but maonly in what I call the 'odds and sods' out of the way of the main booths. One caught my eye was ENG configured one so here are my photos 
Cheers
Cheers
with that much weight in the tail, I'm considering the result of a hard landing and how that will play out.
I'm sure thats why all those doubler plates are there at the attachment point.
The tailboom is sure to buckle or snap right off when you plunk it down excessively. Lets assume the gear can handle it and only spreads, but that extensive tailboom damage will result in an uncontrolled spin I'm sure and then a rollover.
40lbs back there is alot to content with.
I'm sure thats why all those doubler plates are there at the attachment point.
The tailboom is sure to buckle or snap right off when you plunk it down excessively. Lets assume the gear can handle it and only spreads, but that extensive tailboom damage will result in an uncontrolled spin I'm sure and then a rollover.
40lbs back there is alot to content with.
Good point you bring Gray H; who will maintain these things? I'm hearing that even a simple TT Strap change (required at 36 months/1,200 Hrs) will not be done by the local CSF, but will need to be done in Arizona (guess where 
?).
And how about if you put a small hole in the belly, landing on a twig in the field; how is that fixed? How complicated does it get on a FADEC equipped machine? Ever hear of HIRF & Lightning requirements?
Things to be considered for those operating in the 'real world'
Fly safe, always
?).And how about if you put a small hole in the belly, landing on a twig in the field; how is that fixed? How complicated does it get on a FADEC equipped machine? Ever hear of HIRF & Lightning requirements?
Things to be considered for those operating in the 'real world'
Fly safe, always
I was involved in a discussion with the chief design engineer on the 505 and he explained that the 40 lbs. is capability to support the turrets that were considered in development at the time. The customer base wanted an 90 lbs payload on a forward hard point. This plus camera monitoring equipment in the front left seat. That configuration needed approximately 30 lbs of ballast. 40 lbs was to give some growth for the future. The lead engineer said they structurally tested the boom with quite a bit more than 40lbs on the boom and it was statically broken at some obscene multiple of the Max hard landing load they have seen. I recall it was more 400%...
its funny that FH1100 doesn’t reaslize that when he says “out of CG” he’s making my point. The aircraft he sat in was ballasted before he sat in it for light single pilot ferry... the Garmin was updated for the ballast before he started drooling on the cockpit bits... then he went and added 900 lbs at the front of the aircraft. It wasn’t ballasted for that and was out of CG.,. Duh... it’s like he doesn’t have a firm grip on his immediate surroundings... literally it was probably a difference of a few lbs of ballast. The one I rode in with 3 other folks (4 people total) had 8 lbs. of ballast on the tail per the Bell demo pilot.
its funny that FH1100 doesn’t reaslize that when he says “out of CG” he’s making my point. The aircraft he sat in was ballasted before he sat in it for light single pilot ferry... the Garmin was updated for the ballast before he started drooling on the cockpit bits... then he went and added 900 lbs at the front of the aircraft. It wasn’t ballasted for that and was out of CG.,. Duh... it’s like he doesn’t have a firm grip on his immediate surroundings... literally it was probably a difference of a few lbs of ballast. The one I rode in with 3 other folks (4 people total) had 8 lbs. of ballast on the tail per the Bell demo pilot.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: New Zealand Riviera
Age: 53
Posts: 31
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BellBlade
Dont really care what crap the manufacturers say, what will it actually lift
All my 500's supposedly according to the manufacturer have a max of 3500lbs, well I have been at 3300 lbs and not been able to get the load off the ground !
So really looking for a real world answer
Dont really care what crap the manufacturers say, what will it actually lift
All my 500's supposedly according to the manufacturer have a max of 3500lbs, well I have been at 3300 lbs and not been able to get the load off the ground !
So really looking for a real world answer
They are still ugly!!
@EMS R22: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. According to an old friend of mine (F-4 Phantom Pilot, USN) all helicopters are inherently ugly and can only fly because the Earth repels them out of sheer disgust. It looks good to me.
It looks good to me.
Spent a couple of days shooting Fuchs Helikopters new 505. They like it and its regularly up in the top of the Swiss alps being used for mountain flying with their students. Hook hasn't been certified in Europe yet but once it is they will use it for some lifting work as well. I think it all comes down to the paint schemes as to how nice it does or doesn't look - this paint scheme actually looks quite nice on it, whereas others I have shot look so so. But bottom line doesn't really matter what any of us think of it - if the owners like it and are happy with it then thats all that matters. FH1100 and others can bag the heck out of it but people are buying them and operating them and so far apart from a few teething problems that some operators have had overall they are pleased with them.
FYI
Quote ........Good point you bring Gray H; who will maintain these things? I'm hearing that even a simple TT Strap change (required at 36 months/1,200 Hrs) will not be done by the local CSF, but will need to be done in Arizona (guess where)
The TT straps can be done by your maintenance organisation in the UK .
Quote ........Good point you bring Gray H; who will maintain these things? I'm hearing that even a simple TT Strap change (required at 36 months/1,200 Hrs) will not be done by the local CSF, but will need to be done in Arizona (guess where)
The TT straps can be done by your maintenance organisation in the UK .