22 Bell Kiowa 206B-1 for sale Australia
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...0005SERev2.pdf
Without more info or specific knowledge of things down under, I would guess 44023 falls under one of the above listed methods and the operator is the "owner" of the TC or whatever.
Last edited by wrench1; 20th Feb 2019 at 01:09.
Thread Starter
megan
Well of course CASA could not make a mistake, so when you look up the Australian register for VH AGK and the manufacturer of what appear to be a Bell oh58 is nominated as the same as the owner and operator, in the records, that indeed it must in fact be true.
I wonder if they have (the owner) manufactured any other Bell look a likes. Good old CASA. Not sure how Bell would view the aircraft records held and overseen by the Australian government not showing them as the manufacturer. I wonder what the lawyers would make of this if there were a court case for liability related to the manufacturer, and this aircraft, and a third party. After all this is the official record, and there is plenty of places that need signing when you apply for registration for an aircraft.
I wonder if they have (the owner) manufactured any other Bell look a likes. Good old CASA. Not sure how Bell would view the aircraft records held and overseen by the Australian government not showing them as the manufacturer. I wonder what the lawyers would make of this if there were a court case for liability related to the manufacturer, and this aircraft, and a third party. After all this is the official record, and there is plenty of places that need signing when you apply for registration for an aircraft.
It is certainly interesting as350 re 58's in Oz, there are a total of 17 X OH-58A's AMT have "manufactured", serials 008, 009, 010, 011 (Australian AMT commercial manufacturer serials, no Bell listed), 44018, 44019, 44023, 44027, 44028, 44031, 44034, 44049, 44051, 44053, 44054 (manufactured by another Australian commercial operator), 44064, 44070, 44073, plus an OH-58C 70-15092 manufactured by Bell.
The Certification of this helicopter conforms to CASA Type Certificate VR507. https://www.casa.gov.au/file/96391/d...token=ID2655YX
The confusion appears to originate from attempting to fit a product certified under the CASA process into the regulatory process of another (FAA).
The confusion appears to originate from attempting to fit a product certified under the CASA process into the regulatory process of another (FAA).
Originally Posted by megan;
OH-58A's AMT have "manufactured", serials 008, 009, 010, 011 (Australian AMT commercial manufacturer serials, no Bell listed)
In the case of the 58 above it had a new design (TC VR507) approved by CASA here:
https://www.casa.gov.au/file/96391/download?token=ID2655YX
There are 4 similar FAA TCs that provide approval to operate certain 58s in the Restricted Category. Some of these "new" TCs require the addition of a 2nd data plate with the current TC holders name like this (Page 7): http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...DE_SN_List.pdf
As to how Bell views these changes, they have zero input or direct liability for those aircraft approved under a separate TC. Except that is in a US Tort trial where everybody is libel.
So in the case of the B-1s, if someone where enterprising enough, they could pursue the same tack as AMT did with the 58s and get their own CASA TC approval. Or, maybe AMT could amend their 58 TC to include the B-1s which I don't think would be much of a stretch.
Having previously certificated the former Canadian Air Force helicopters, I don't think they'll have any problem obtaining a new TC for these machines. The likelihood of adding them to TCDS VR507 is extremely unlikely, as all references and limitations are directly applicable to the CH-136 Kiowa configuration, publications, instructions and limitations. A new TC will have all the applicable references to the Australian Army configuration and manuals which will be specifically required to form the basis of certification. They are obviously already capable of producing all the updated certification documentation for a Restricted TC from their previous TCDS for the OH-58A.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: In my Swag
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There will be an issue sourcing MR blades.
The MRGB outputs at 360 RPM instead of 390 for the civil version.
Tail boom is slightly longer.
Don't know if Tompkin's OH 58s have these differences.
The engines are 250C20 and we're maintained in civil workshops.
FWIW
The MRGB outputs at 360 RPM instead of 390 for the civil version.
Tail boom is slightly longer.
Don't know if Tompkin's OH 58s have these differences.
The engines are 250C20 and we're maintained in civil workshops.
FWIW
I really couldn't answer that question. But I think there is a definite demand for good, inexpensive and supportable helicopters for private operators or commercial (Restricted) operation. Anyone that develops the certification basis for this helicopter should be able to configure them for sale, or alternatively, buy the lot and sell them ready to fly away. I suspect they may be rather popular. I wouldn't mind a PC-9 myself.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 59
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having worked on these exact machines and the civil 206 there are a lots of differences between the two. Parts over the long term could be difficult to source as even the gearboxes use different part number components internally due to run dry requirements of the military version, eg, planetary carriers of the MRGB in the OH 58 are metal, the 206 uses plastic ones.
As the holder of the TC, you become the "Manufacturer" of the Product and if you have access to the original drawings, or the ability to essentially replicate the PMA process, you can make all the parts you want. Of course, you may be able to qualify the original OEM parts for the same application by identicality.
I'm interested in the configuration and differences in the Rotor and Drivetrain System with a different NR and Main Rotor diameter? Does anyone have a link to good data on this?
I'm interested in the configuration and differences in the Rotor and Drivetrain System with a different NR and Main Rotor diameter? Does anyone have a link to good data on this?
However, as soon as the US Navy procures their next basic rotorwing trainer you'll probably see a number of TH-57s hit the surplus market. The 57 is an off-the-shelf 206BIII complete with a TC.
[QUOTE]
Originally Posted by Cyclic Hotline;
you can make all the parts you want]
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Live @ the Key Club
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers
BE
The auctions are under way:
https://www.graysonline.com/promotions/military
The spare parts are mind boggling. Literally dozens of C20 turbines etc.
https://www.graysonline.com/promotions/military
The spare parts are mind boggling. Literally dozens of C20 turbines etc.
A once in a lifetime opportunity for Oz to create a volunteer civil air patrol organisation.
It would help to reboot cadet air corps.
Federal election around the corner, timing is good.
It would help to reboot cadet air corps.
Federal election around the corner, timing is good.
