UH-1N to civil B212
Everything is possible with enough money...
Real answer is not for less than you can pick up a 212 for.
If you're keen you have 2 options:
Have a look at CASA AWB 01-8.
Not sure what the market is for 212s any more, most have been replaced with 412s (same power, less vibration and can't hear them coming from over the horizon).
Real answer is not for less than you can pick up a 212 for.
If you're keen you have 2 options:
- Get a Civil Type Certificate for the UH-1N
- Approach Bell to inspect the aircraft against the B212 type certificate and issue a new data plate.
Have a look at CASA AWB 01-8.
Not sure what the market is for 212s any more, most have been replaced with 412s (same power, less vibration and can't hear them coming from over the horizon).
Guest
Posts: n/a
Possible-yes.
Money-wise i guess you are looking at buying a "cheap" military version (wrongly believing it will be cheap as no one is interested), converting it into a commercial ship for little money (which will not work)....
If you want a Bell 212-they are hardly getting any cheaper than now...
Money-wise i guess you are looking at buying a "cheap" military version (wrongly believing it will be cheap as no one is interested), converting it into a commercial ship for little money (which will not work)....
If you want a Bell 212-they are hardly getting any cheaper than now...
Good Morning,
Bell 212 and UH-1N are two very different helicopters. Contrary to stated above, Bell will not give you a 212 data plate for an N Model however clean and shiny it is. Call/Email them and you will get the answer.
Fly Safe, Always.
Bell 212 and UH-1N are two very different helicopters. Contrary to stated above, Bell will not give you a 212 data plate for an N Model however clean and shiny it is. Call/Email them and you will get the answer.
Fly Safe, Always.
TBM:
These are FAA based answers.
If you are asking to physically change aircraft from an N to a 212 with a new data plate: no conversion possible.
Define civilian use. If you are asking to operate the N for civilian commercial operations, then it is possible. But the best you can probably get is a Restricted airworthiness certificate.
But even under a Restricted category I would think it is economically unfeasible to replace or verify times/origins on all required components.
Check out FAA Order 8130.2G
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...mentid/1027070
Good luck!
W1
These are FAA based answers.
If you are asking to physically change aircraft from an N to a 212 with a new data plate: no conversion possible.
Define civilian use. If you are asking to operate the N for civilian commercial operations, then it is possible. But the best you can probably get is a Restricted airworthiness certificate.
But even under a Restricted category I would think it is economically unfeasible to replace or verify times/origins on all required components.
Check out FAA Order 8130.2G
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...mentid/1027070
Good luck!
W1
No.
If you want to certify it in Resticted Category, then it must be configured identically to the military configuration at the time of FAA conformity. Changes post certification willl require an STC.
If you want to certify it in Resticted Category, then it must be configured identically to the military configuration at the time of FAA conformity. Changes post certification willl require an STC.
The FAA has not so approved it would seem. This TCDS for the UH-1H will show you the difficulties typical of getting FAA approval, and the limitations placed on the aircrafts use. On that basis I don't think CASA would give a thumbs up.
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...$FILE/H6SO.pdf
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...$FILE/H6SO.pdf
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not to mention that converting from a single to a twin makes no sense
THIS
Eagle Copters - Eagle Single
however does make sense
(212 to single)
THIS
Eagle Copters - Eagle Single
however does make sense
(212 to single)
not to mention that converting from a single to a twin makes no sense
THIS
Eagle Copters - Eagle Single
however does make sense
(212 to single)
THIS
Eagle Copters - Eagle Single
however does make sense
(212 to single)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dubai
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never having flown an 'N' or even seen one in the flesh, I was told (possibly incorrectly) that the 212 has inter-engine firewalls and the 'N' does not (or not enough to satisfy the certification authorities)
TOD
TOD
not to mention that converting from a single to a twin makes no sense
THIS
Eagle Copters - Eagle Single
however does make sense
(212 to single)
THIS
Eagle Copters - Eagle Single
however does make sense
(212 to single)
That's how they got from the 205 to a 212. This is why the twinpac was born, keeping the single engine driveshaft and same transmission design.
Guest
Posts: n/a
No, the twinpac was a requirement by governmental operators based on the experience in Nam, where enemy fire took out the single engine on too many ships....
Turned out that the TwinPac is good-but not strong enough for Utility work, so operators used the higher all up weight of the 212, and benefitted from only having one engine and no (!) combining gearbox....
Turned out that the TwinPac is good-but not strong enough for Utility work, so operators used the higher all up weight of the 212, and benefitted from only having one engine and no (!) combining gearbox....
I guess thats why its called a "forum".
The 212 evolved due to the Canadian Armed Forces request.
The 214 did not evolve from the 212. It was due to the "Hot and High" issues in Iran and the UH-1/205 being hopeless there. Commonality between a 212 and 214 is about zero.
The 212 Single is basically a 205B. You can "upgrade" a 205A1 to 205B by SB but it is easier to "downgrade" a 212 by STC as most of the work is already done for you.
As to "converting" an N to civil B212 - no chance.
The 212 evolved due to the Canadian Armed Forces request.
The 214 did not evolve from the 212. It was due to the "Hot and High" issues in Iran and the UH-1/205 being hopeless there. Commonality between a 212 and 214 is about zero.
The 212 Single is basically a 205B. You can "upgrade" a 205A1 to 205B by SB but it is easier to "downgrade" a 212 by STC as most of the work is already done for you.
As to "converting" an N to civil B212 - no chance.
In the US, it would probably not be a huge deal to get a restricted catagory type cert but why on earth would you want to when an H model can lift more with a few upgrades. Also, Pratt does not support the T400 engines in the N model twin Pac.
Ya'll don't overlook the Bell 211 Huey Tug the US Army had Bell build to test as an Artillery Mover. Basically built on a Bell 204 Airframe and using a Lycoming T-55-7C Engine as used on the A and B model CH-47s's.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/849063.pdf
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/849063.pdf
Ya'll don't overlook the Bell 211 Huey Tug the US Army had Bell build to test as an Artillery Mover. Basically built on a Bell 204 Airframe and using a Lycoming T-55-7C Engine as used on the A and B model CH-47s's.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/849063.pdf
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/849063.pdf
Sounds like a real hit!
The Army Preliminary Evaluation (APE) of the Bell Model 211 prototype helicopter (Hueytug) was conducted at the Bell Helicopter Test Facility, Arlington, Texas, Edwards AFB, California, and Bishop, California, from 19 October through 7 November 1968. Flying qualities, performance, and mission suitability were evaluated to determine aircraft capabilities to carry six thousand pound sling loads at a takeoff gross weight of 14,000 pounds. Primary emphasis was directed toward the artillery mission of displacing a 105mm Howitzer M101A1 with 10 rounds of ammunition and 3 cannoneers. The helicopter had eight deficiencies which require mandatory corrections. Two of these are major design deficiencies that may require extensive engineering redesign. They are the directional oscillations in the 30 to 60 KIAS airspeed range, especially prevalent during heavy sling load missions; lack of sufficient directional control margin during high gross weight (14,000 pounds) and high density altitude (above 4000 feet) conditions. The remaining six deficiencies are ineffective force trim feature at high airspeeds, excessive forward position of longitudinal control at high airspeeds, poor static engine droop compensation, tail rotor drive train torque limitations, lack of an engine power torque limiter and lack of a standby generator for IFR flight. There are seven shortcomings the corrections of which are desirable and should be accomplished as soon as possible. The prototype model 211 could marginally perform the 14,000 pound gross weight mission at sea level. At 4000 feet density altitude the marginal tail rotor control and transmission and drive train torque limitations prevented the helicopter from satisfactorily accomplishing the mission. Correction of the deficiencies discovered during this APE coupled with the 200 horsepower increase in drive train torque limits of the design proposal should result in a superior performing helicopter. Correction of the deficiencies should be accomplished prior to a production contract.