Bell 505 Jet Ranger X
It is going to pick up 2 tonnes, yeah right, can't see it picking up 1 tonne on a hook. 
If it does i will buy one tomorrow and get rid of the 500's we use for a particular job, especially as it can be flown from left seat !
If it does i will buy one tomorrow and get rid of the 500's we use for a particular job, especially as it can be flown from left seat !
Hughes .....and you would be right !!! Sorry my mistake , those figures are obviously wrong ! Just over 2000kg external gross weight and about 700kg on hook sounds more likely .....so not really competition to your 500,s !
I've heard several times from Bell engineers and sales folks at various shows they are working on a 900kg release for the hook... will be awesome if that's true. That would compete well against even the best of the MD lifters and may compete soundly with the AS350B2's...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Age: 67
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FH1100 Pilot says:
I recently flew the 505 - I got to sit in the back seat as well. The aircraft only had two seats in the back, but they are separate seats, so I think the third (middle) seat would be exactly the same size, and they were very comfortable. The cabin (and seats) felt a lot like an EC120 to me.
I think capability wise, it does compete with the EC120 (although it has more power). It just goes to show that the EC120 is wildly overpriced and I'm glad I don't own one because I'm guessing the used price of EC120s is going to take a beating.
As to whether it competes with the R66 is a more interesting question. The R66 is certainly less expensive, I would say is as fast, has a comparable baggage compartment. The price difference is enough to buy a nice R44 to keep next to your R66, but the 505 feels like a much more substantial aircraft. If I was a wealthy person who wanted a personal aircraft, there is no question I would prefer the 505 over the R66. I found the G1000 very nice, and heads and shoulders above the avionics in the R66 (Frank really wasn't a glass panel fan).
Which one looks better is totally in the eye of the beholder, but I really like the idea of the L4 drivetrain (even if I miss having a throttle on the collective). It's certainly a tried and true rotor system (I fly an L3).
The startup, shutdown, and "fly" versus "land" stuff is much simpler than the R66 due to the FADEC (and some very clearly labeled and well thought out switches/knobs in the 505). I think there will be far fewer engines smoked by the less experienced of the pilot crowd.
Certainly if I was a wealthy person and part of the reason for owning the aircraft was to impress my friends, the 505 is a much more impressive aircraft to ride in than the R66.
Really? Doesn't look like it to me. In fact, the pictures I've seen make the back seats look very JetRanger-ish in width. But I've never seen one in person and, Googling my little fingers off, I cannot seem to find on the internet a figure for the interior width of the 505. I guess Bell doesn't want us to compare things.
Bell is positioning the 505 in a curious place. It cannot eat into 407 or even 206L-4 sales - that's a given. It will not compete against the H120 (at nearly double the price with the same engine). And at US$1.2 million, it's quite a bit more expensive than the $900k R-66. Maybe $300,000 is nothing for buyers? And anyway, with its L-4 drivetrain and 504 horsepower engine, the 505 is a class above the 300 h.p. R-66. Or not? Will the 505 and R-66 compete in the same market segment?
As to whether it competes with the R66 is a more interesting question. The R66 is certainly less expensive, I would say is as fast, has a comparable baggage compartment. The price difference is enough to buy a nice R44 to keep next to your R66, but the 505 feels like a much more substantial aircraft. If I was a wealthy person who wanted a personal aircraft, there is no question I would prefer the 505 over the R66. I found the G1000 very nice, and heads and shoulders above the avionics in the R66 (Frank really wasn't a glass panel fan).
Which one looks better is totally in the eye of the beholder, but I really like the idea of the L4 drivetrain (even if I miss having a throttle on the collective). It's certainly a tried and true rotor system (I fly an L3).
The startup, shutdown, and "fly" versus "land" stuff is much simpler than the R66 due to the FADEC (and some very clearly labeled and well thought out switches/knobs in the 505). I think there will be far fewer engines smoked by the less experienced of the pilot crowd.
Certainly if I was a wealthy person and part of the reason for owning the aircraft was to impress my friends, the 505 is a much more impressive aircraft to ride in than the R66.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Age: 67
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RVDT says:
I didn't think it looked crude at all. I actually liked the tubular frame. They told us at the factory that the cabin was made in Mexico and trucked to Canada.
I agree about the TR cables - I much prefer a push/pull tube, but if I survived an Enstrom with TR cables I guess I can live with it in the 505...
Had a look at one at HAI in Dallas and in all honesty it looks crude.
I think the cab section is made in Spain.
Tubular frame - cables to the TR control.
I think the cab section is made in Spain.
Tubular frame - cables to the TR control.
I agree about the TR cables - I much prefer a push/pull tube, but if I survived an Enstrom with TR cables I guess I can live with it in the 505...
Bell 505 JetRanger X Achieves FAA Certification
Dallas, Texas (June 8, 2017) Bell Helicopter, a Textron Inc. (NYSE: TXT) company, is pleased to announce that its Bell 505 Jet Ranger X has been certified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
The Bell 505 continues to surpass significant milestones – achieving type certification in December 2016 from Transport Canada Civil Aviation, then gaining production certification, and recently celebrating the first customer delivery.
“This is another significant milestone in our journey to market entry for the Bell 505,” said Mitch Snyder, Bell Helicopter’s president and CEO. “This aircraft incorporates the latest advancements in safety and aviation technology and we are extremely proud of our return to the short light single class of helicopters.”
Bell Helicopter will continue to work with other certification authorities around the globe. Through the flight test program, the Bell 505 underwent rigorous certification activities and achieved more than 1,000 flight test hours. The Bell Helicopter Training Academy is also prepared for entry into service with customer training, and the flight training device and coursework are all on track.
“Customer response for the Bell 505 has been outstanding, and we look forward to seeing the aircraft perform all the various missions it’s equipped for around the world,” added Snyder.
The Bell 505 offers operators many advantages including the Safran Helicopter Engines (HE) Arrius 2R engine that incorporates the dual channel Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) that delivers exceptional performance and reduces pilot workload. A first-in-class fully integrated Garmin G1000H flight deck features dual 10.4-inch (26.4 cm) displays, which provide critical flight information for crews at a glance. Through Bell Helicopter’s high inertia rotor system, Bell Helicopter has demonstrated throughout the flight test program exceptional autorotation capability that is part of the Jet Ranger legacy.
With a speed of 125 knots (232 km/h) and useful load of 1,500 pounds (680 kg), the Bell 505 is designed to be safe and easy to fly while providing significant value to the operator. The customer-driven design of the aircraft places safety, performance and affordability at the forefront, blending proven systems with advanced technology and a sleek, modern design.
The Bell 505 continues to surpass significant milestones – achieving type certification in December 2016 from Transport Canada Civil Aviation, then gaining production certification, and recently celebrating the first customer delivery.
“This is another significant milestone in our journey to market entry for the Bell 505,” said Mitch Snyder, Bell Helicopter’s president and CEO. “This aircraft incorporates the latest advancements in safety and aviation technology and we are extremely proud of our return to the short light single class of helicopters.”
Bell Helicopter will continue to work with other certification authorities around the globe. Through the flight test program, the Bell 505 underwent rigorous certification activities and achieved more than 1,000 flight test hours. The Bell Helicopter Training Academy is also prepared for entry into service with customer training, and the flight training device and coursework are all on track.
“Customer response for the Bell 505 has been outstanding, and we look forward to seeing the aircraft perform all the various missions it’s equipped for around the world,” added Snyder.
The Bell 505 offers operators many advantages including the Safran Helicopter Engines (HE) Arrius 2R engine that incorporates the dual channel Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) that delivers exceptional performance and reduces pilot workload. A first-in-class fully integrated Garmin G1000H flight deck features dual 10.4-inch (26.4 cm) displays, which provide critical flight information for crews at a glance. Through Bell Helicopter’s high inertia rotor system, Bell Helicopter has demonstrated throughout the flight test program exceptional autorotation capability that is part of the Jet Ranger legacy.
With a speed of 125 knots (232 km/h) and useful load of 1,500 pounds (680 kg), the Bell 505 is designed to be safe and easy to fly while providing significant value to the operator. The customer-driven design of the aircraft places safety, performance and affordability at the forefront, blending proven systems with advanced technology and a sleek, modern design.
Ahh, that would be me!
And wasn't it also jeffg who said:
Well, let's see. It did get its FAA certification...supposedly. But is it actually certified? I can't seem to find anything on the faa.gov website about it, and there is certainly no new TCDS in their database. So I'm not sure why Bell made the Big Announcement. Did they jump the gun?
But okay, if it did actually get US certification then I am truly surprised. As I've said, I didn't think they'd do it considering that they bailed on Louisiana as a manufacturing base for it.
Still, certification by itself doesn't mean much. Just ask Beechcraft (Starship) or Cessna (162) or any of the other manufacturers who've pushed a design through to certification only to see the thing fail in one way or the other. But it appears that I might have to concede to jeffg on the first point.
But...! Does it cruise at 125 knots? Knot hardly. Objective pilot reports that have been published put the cruise speed around 110-115 knots, which is right in line with an L-4 on low-skids. The reporters report ride-quality issues above that point, which is just what one would expect with an L-model rotor system. But hey, what's ten or fifteen knots among friends, right? So all the dreamers were off by *only* ten or fifteen knots, so what? Well, a lot of the fanboys really hung their hat on that "125 knot" cruise speed. Oh well.
#3. $1.075 million? Hah. What are they saying now, $1.2? Is it possible to actually get one in fly-away condition for $1.075?
I'm still waiting for some other real real numbers. What are the actual basic operating empty weights? What is the actual fuel burn and endurance with that paltry 88 gallon capacity?
As I predicted, the horizontal stab did move. You just wait: Endplates/winglets are next.
So without backtracking or crawfishing, I'll hold off on the hat-eating for just a bit. I'll still do it...but let's not get ahead of ourselves here.
Curiously, I had a guy...I'm not sure exactly what he does or who he works for, but he must read forums such as these, and he seems to be pretty high up in one of the major manufacturers (won't say which). He offered to buy me lunch! He said that if I were to go to the last Heli-Something that he would provide a hat which I could munch on for photo-op and publicity purposes. He also told me some proprietary things about the 505, and some things about the 525 fatal that haven't yet been disclosed to the public. Which is odd - I must have a face that people like telling things to (I wish they wouldn't). Maybe he made the the stuff up, or maybe it will all come out anyway, I don't know. (I should have asked him something about the 609 crash. He'd probably pretend to know something about that one too.)
In any event, I don't like this man - never have, actually. He and I go back a long way. He's not an honorable man by any stretch of the imagination. (There's more I could say but I won't.) And so I politely declined his kind invitation to...um..."lunch."
We shall see how well the 505 does in the market. If it's a success, then hooray for Bell! I remain skeptical.
And wasn't it also jeffg who said:
And don't forget that IF it gets certified , and IF it can cruise at 125kn , if it is delivered for $1.075m .....then you WILL eat your hat !!
But okay, if it did actually get US certification then I am truly surprised. As I've said, I didn't think they'd do it considering that they bailed on Louisiana as a manufacturing base for it.
Still, certification by itself doesn't mean much. Just ask Beechcraft (Starship) or Cessna (162) or any of the other manufacturers who've pushed a design through to certification only to see the thing fail in one way or the other. But it appears that I might have to concede to jeffg on the first point.
But...! Does it cruise at 125 knots? Knot hardly. Objective pilot reports that have been published put the cruise speed around 110-115 knots, which is right in line with an L-4 on low-skids. The reporters report ride-quality issues above that point, which is just what one would expect with an L-model rotor system. But hey, what's ten or fifteen knots among friends, right? So all the dreamers were off by *only* ten or fifteen knots, so what? Well, a lot of the fanboys really hung their hat on that "125 knot" cruise speed. Oh well.
#3. $1.075 million? Hah. What are they saying now, $1.2? Is it possible to actually get one in fly-away condition for $1.075?
I'm still waiting for some other real real numbers. What are the actual basic operating empty weights? What is the actual fuel burn and endurance with that paltry 88 gallon capacity?
As I predicted, the horizontal stab did move. You just wait: Endplates/winglets are next.
So without backtracking or crawfishing, I'll hold off on the hat-eating for just a bit. I'll still do it...but let's not get ahead of ourselves here.
Curiously, I had a guy...I'm not sure exactly what he does or who he works for, but he must read forums such as these, and he seems to be pretty high up in one of the major manufacturers (won't say which). He offered to buy me lunch! He said that if I were to go to the last Heli-Something that he would provide a hat which I could munch on for photo-op and publicity purposes. He also told me some proprietary things about the 505, and some things about the 525 fatal that haven't yet been disclosed to the public. Which is odd - I must have a face that people like telling things to (I wish they wouldn't). Maybe he made the the stuff up, or maybe it will all come out anyway, I don't know. (I should have asked him something about the 609 crash. He'd probably pretend to know something about that one too.)
In any event, I don't like this man - never have, actually. He and I go back a long way. He's not an honorable man by any stretch of the imagination. (There's more I could say but I won't.) And so I politely declined his kind invitation to...um..."lunch."
We shall see how well the 505 does in the market. If it's a success, then hooray for Bell! I remain skeptical.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: here
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow! You predicted that they would move the h-stab! You must be a genius! I mean obviously this is the first aircraft in the history of aviation that had to have a design change during flight test. That FH project you worked on was a success right off the drawing board wasn't it? Oh wait... it never got certified... or produced. Bob, were you really talking about yourself all this time?
Hanging that hat on some very low fruit aren't we Bob?
Oh goodness! Now you're predicting it will grow end plates! An idiot savant could make that guess.
Doesn't cruise at 125? Take a look at post #87. Bell never said it would, you did. Bell advertised a 'max speed' of 125 kts. Certainly a seasoned aviator and flight tester like yourself knows the difference between the two...right?
From what I've heard they've attained that goal.
Did they miss the price? Yes but who hasn't? Was that really a surprise? Or a daring prediction?
What else did you say?
Maybe you were high when you wrote that?
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/431f2b0c090a9337862581450067d102/$FILE/R00008RD_Rev_0.pdf
Its been there. Maybe you're not as knowledgeable about the FAA as you think?
So someone whom you consider less than honorable who 'pretends' to know stuff and you think may work for an OEM told you something that you think is proprietary? Maybe he was PT Barnum?
Hanging that hat on some very low fruit aren't we Bob?
Oh goodness! Now you're predicting it will grow end plates! An idiot savant could make that guess.
Doesn't cruise at 125? Take a look at post #87. Bell never said it would, you did. Bell advertised a 'max speed' of 125 kts. Certainly a seasoned aviator and flight tester like yourself knows the difference between the two...right?
From what I've heard they've attained that goal.
Did they miss the price? Yes but who hasn't? Was that really a surprise? Or a daring prediction?
What else did you say?
If *ANYBODY* thinks that nose configuration will make it through to production they are high. Not gonna happen. (In fact, if anyone thinks that helicopter itself will make it into production they are also high.)
Well, let's see. It did get its FAA certification...supposedly. But is it actually certified? I can't seem to find anything on the faa.gov website about it, and there is certainly no new TCDS in their database. So I'm not sure why Bell made the Big Announcement. Did they jump the gun?
Its been there. Maybe you're not as knowledgeable about the FAA as you think?
... I had a guy...I'm not sure exactly what he does or who he works for...and he seems to be pretty high up in one of the major manufacturers (won't say which)....He also told me some proprietary things about the 505, and some things about the 525 fatal that haven't yet been disclosed to the public...(I should have asked him something about the 609 crash. He'd probably pretend to know something about that one too.)... He's not an honorable man by any stretch of the imagination.
Last edited by jeffg; 21st Jun 2017 at 10:47.
The 505 definitely cruises MCP over 125kts in good CG and ambient conditions. The demo pilots showed it at HAI. The ride is better down around 119kts, but there's lots of torque margin at 119kts.
They said it changes a few kts if you are on the forward CG limit.
They said it changes a few kts if you are on the forward CG limit.
But...! Does it cruise at 125 knots? Knot hardly. Objective pilot reports that have been published put the cruise speed around 110-115 knots, which is right in line with an L-4 on low-skids. The reporters report ride-quality issues above that point, which is just what one would expect with an L-model rotor system. But hey, what's ten or fifteen knots among friends, right? So all the dreamers were off by *only* ten or fifteen knots, so what? Well, a lot of the fanboys really hung their hat on that "125 knot" cruise speed. Oh well.
Before getting into the 505, let me say something about jeffg for a moment. Jeffy, why do you have to go after me personally? I've never done anything to you, and attacking me personally makes you look so...I don't know...immature, like a little piece of sh*t.
And what's your hard-on for the FH1100? We weren't trying to certify it - IT WAS ALREADY CERTIFIED by Hiller back in the 1960's. Fairchild-Hiller produced over 250 of them before pulling the plug. We were merely trying to *sell* it. (We also were trying to get the 12E rotor blades approved for the 1100 but that was not a deal-breaker. It was a fine ship even with the original blades.)
As far back as 2001 we knew we were in a race with Frank Robinson. We'd brought the 1100 to a convention, and Frank was there. He came to our booth and spent a lot of time poring over the 1100. It didn't take a rocket scientist, genius or fortune-teller to make us realize that he was (logically) going to come out with a turbine version of the R-44. And although Robinson didn't officially announce the R-66 until 2007, you have to know that they were working on it long before then.
So we knew we were in a case of Beat The Clock, or more appropriately, "Beat The Frank." All we needed was a launch customer for five ships and we could have started production. Building 20 ships per year would've made us very happy. But we never got that far. As good a ship as the 1100 was, nobody really wanted a "brand-new 30 year-old helicopter." In the end, the owner of the company simply ran out of time and money. And when the R-66 hit the market it was, naturally, game-over.
Which brings us to the 505. Yes, it is certified. By the way, thank you jeffy for the link to the TCDS. I notice though that it's dated June 20th, and my previous post on the matter was on June 19th. So the TCDS wasn't yet published when I wrote it. So thanks for being a dick! As usual.
Okay, Bell has come out with a 5-seat helicopter with an over-powered French engine and an L-4 drivetrain. It's got a nice, big, unobstructed cabin and modern avionics. It will likely lift and climb away with anything you can put in it. But with only 85 gallons of fuel, *nobody* is going to be cruising that Arrius around at MCP as the fuel burn would assuredly be more than 30 gph.
By the way, I didn't dream up that "125+ knots" cruise speed thing. Bell did in their initial promo material for the 505. So while the Arrius could maybe pull a lightly-loaded 505 along at that speed, pilot-reports are that the ride-quality is "not the best" up there and its realistic cruise speed will be around 110-115 knots. John Eacott reports (and I can attest) that L-models could go that fast. I've flown the "straight" L-model and they were pretty zippy (faster than the later L-1 and L-3).
Plus, NOBODY is going to be flying that Arrius around at MCP, which will probably push the fuel consumption up above 30 gph. And with only 85 gallons of jet fuel onboard, that won't get you far.
I am really, really surprised that the nose of the prototype made it into production. The first guy who takes a bird through the windshield of a 505 (at any speed!) is going to have a very bad day. A friend of mine told me that their 505's will have an extra-thick windscreen on the pilot's side. (Heh, I guess the pax aren't that important.) Extra-thick, maybe, but will it be bird-proof? Sheesh, it would have to be glass, right? Maybe all 505 pilots ought to wear helmets with the visor down!
Oh, and the 505 *will* get winglets. Trust me. Why did Enstrom put them on the 280FX? Simply because the ride quality of the 280C in yaw could make you sick. Why does the Bo-105 have them...the BK117? The 222? Because virtually every helicopter that does better than 110 knots has winglets to help with the yaw. (The Astar is the curious exception.) Do we think Bell has performed some magic on the 505 that will allow it to not have winglets? Remember, the original L-model came out without winglets...briefly. The 505 will get them.
The 505 will probably have c.g. issues. It will *definitely* have LTE issues with that same huge vertical fin that every 206 has. (Didn't Bell learn ANYTHING??) And, at 3680 pounds MGW and a 37 foot rotor diameter, this is one BIG, light, entry-level helicopter.
And now it's up to $1.5million. Hmm, I wonder how long it'll be before we're saying, "Well yeah, it may cost $2million, but it's twice as good-looking as that R-66 isn't it? Oh...wait..."
nobody really wanted a "brand-new 30 year-old helicopter."
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: here
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob,
You're exact quote post #315 was:
The requirements you set for the eating of a hat were pretty specific.
Bell now has both a Canadian and US TC.
Bell has sold and delivered at least 5 to date which means they are producing it.
Bell states they will deliver 75 this year (if you have evidence otherwise please post. Your conspiracy theories aren't acceptable)
It would seem that all the requirements for the eating of hat have been met. So stop with your never ending scope creep in an attempt to weasel your way out of it.
Are you an 'honorable man' who will you keep his word Bobby?
If you are I found this to help you out
HowTo
at Your Hat | Uncyclopedia | Fandom powered by Wikia
Loook in the mirror Bob. Why do you?
You're exact quote post #315 was:
Congratulations to Bell! Let's hope that U.S. certification follows shortly.
But if they actually produce and sell that thing I'll eat my hat.
Bell 505 JRX Achieves Type Certificate - Heliweb Magazine
But if they actually produce and sell that thing I'll eat my hat.
Bell 505 JRX Achieves Type Certificate - Heliweb Magazine
Bell now has both a Canadian and US TC.
Bell has sold and delivered at least 5 to date which means they are producing it.
Bell states they will deliver 75 this year (if you have evidence otherwise please post. Your conspiracy theories aren't acceptable)
It would seem that all the requirements for the eating of hat have been met. So stop with your never ending scope creep in an attempt to weasel your way out of it.
Are you an 'honorable man' who will you keep his word Bobby?
If you are I found this to help you out
HowTo
at Your Hat | Uncyclopedia | Fandom powered by Wikia
Jeffy, why do you have to go after me personally?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Zealand
Age: 52
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 206 still does what it says it will do, yes the 505 may be faster bigger and can lift more, but at 3-4 times the price of a good second hand 206...