Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Stretched Gazelle or B206L1 C30 for SPIFR

Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Stretched Gazelle or B206L1 C30 for SPIFR

Old 2nd Mar 2022, 09:46
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chavenat France
Age: 65
Posts: 54
Stretched Gazelle or B206L1 C30 for SPIFR

I know there are many different threads regarding both these aircraft, but none that compare the two. I will be considering a stretched Gazelle or a L1 with a C30 engine not the original C28. The Gazelle wins hands down for the fun factor, but the L1 wins hands down on seats. The performance figures apart from the cruise/VNE are surprising similar.

My question is which of these aircraft is the cheapest to run based on parts, servicing and fuel consumption. I do not wish to discuss the pros and cons of SPIFR etc, nor any other contentions subject !! I am looking for comments from experienced pilots who have flown or operated both if possible, as to which might be the better long term prospect. Longranger costs are not too difficult to find but DOC or any other costs for a Gazelle are difficult. Any general experience based figures, info, rules of thumb, regarding costs would all be most helpful for either or both aircraft.

I am also looking to let the aircraft to a flying school for IFR training to help pay the bills, but keep it on the N register. I hope this is possible, perhaps not ? I know there are issues using N reg aircraft for commercial work, but am not sure if this includes flight training? I will obviously check what the French or EASA have to say about this, but if anybody has any first hand experience on this I would be most grateful for any helpful comments. Please bear in mind this is for France.

Thank you all in advance for any help and assistance.
biz-buz is offline  
Old 2nd Mar 2022, 22:36
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 493
Billund Air Centre used to do the SPIFR on the Longranger, and may still do. Perhaps a good place to get advice?

Longranger plusses are also economy (very low fuel consumption) and hanger space. And a super smooth ride.
Torquetalk is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 01:29
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South East Asia
Posts: 426
"...Longranger plusses are also economy (very low fuel consumption) and hanger space. And a super smooth ride..." Not only these, but also in terms of support the 206L1 wins hands-down in parts availability and technical/engineering support. And, it's an easy helicopter to maintain with only the rotor brake access likely to result in an expanded vocabulary. But how often do you need to get to the rotor brake?
Saint Jack is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 08:42
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,777
issues with the gazelle is the engine and parts unless you are allowed to fit ex military parts in France ???? Bear in mind teh French Military still use them
Hughes500 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 10:12
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chavenat France
Age: 65
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by Torquetalk View Post
Billund Air Centre used to do the SPIFR on the Longranger, and may still do. Perhaps a good place to get advice?

Longranger plusses are also economy (very low fuel consumption) and hanger space. And a super smooth ride.
Quite agree ! All three points are very important for operational pleasure !

Tks
biz-buz is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 10:29
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chavenat France
Age: 65
Posts: 54
Quite agree, especially engine parts !
biz-buz is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 10:32
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chavenat France
Age: 65
Posts: 54
Thanks St Jack, parts and all the points raised by Torquetalk have swung it for me. Sadly as an ex Gazelle pilot I would have prefered the Gazelle, but all those other factors do weigh in in favour of the L1. Tks
biz-buz is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 13:07
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 560
Originally Posted by biz-buz View Post
but all those other factors do weigh in in favour of the L1. Tks
Just another point to throw out there. If the 206 you have in mind is not currently SPIFR and you are keeping the N reg, you may want to check availability of an SPIFR STC kit for a L1/C30P aircraft. And to add to the above, from the mx side, supporting an N reg 206 series is much easier than any N reg legacy Gazelle, etc.
wrench1 is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 13:45
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 539
cheapest to run
This is not a valid way to compare two different types, surely? You could find two examples of the same type that have running cost figures very different to each other.

helihub is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 13:59
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,647
Using a gazelle for commercial use and training may work out very expensive quite good for private use when the owner looks after it
md 600 driver is offline  
Old 3rd Mar 2022, 17:24
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lost again...
Posts: 721
I don't think you can use an N-reg for training in EASA-land.

You might be able to use if for training for N-rated pilots (but not if it is on a commercial basis - i.e they are paying for the training)) but I'm almost certain that any EASA training must be carried out on an EASA reg aircraft.

I'm sure someone will come along and confirm whether i'm right or wrong.

OH


OvertHawk is online now  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 06:51
  #12 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 70
Posts: 3,958
I would always choose Bell over anything French for customer support, and the Gazelle would not be my first choice for commercial viability. Having flown both types on instruments, one being an IFR L1, the L1 would be a lot less twitchy (there is not a lot to beat a well set up LongRanger). And whoever said that the 206L wasn't fun?
paco is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 07:16
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Escrick York england
Posts: 1,647
As for IFR the stretched POH states that IFR flight is prohibited in the gazelle
md 600 driver is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 12:16
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 746
Everything about this thread suggests we are discussing Flightsim or perhaps just plain whimsy. It doesn't even begin to sound real.
For a start a C30 powered Longranger is an L3, not an L1.
The starry-eyed wishful thinking in the lead post , the unfeasible comparison of two utterly dis-similar (and one utterly inappropriate) types for legally impossible or uncertifiable tasks and the extraordinary 24 hr decision period based on a couple of anonymous opinions on the internet suggest to me that the OP might do better to buy both programmes and just see which he prefers.

Last edited by meleagertoo; 4th Mar 2022 at 12:26.
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 12:46
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,488
a C30 powered Longranger is an L3, not an L1
It might be originally, but then there is an STC.

https://www.asimro.com/bell-206l-1-c30p-stc

You might want to read and comprehend what he OP said,
I will be considering a stretched Gazelle or a L1 with a C30 engine not the original C28
megan is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 13:51
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 560
Originally Posted by megan View Post
It might be originally, but then there is an STC.
FYI: there were several L-1/C30P STCs but I think only one or two are still procurable. Bell also has/had a bulletin that upgrades an L-1 (and L-3) to L-4 performance which they call a L-1+ and L-3+ with the L-1 getting a C30. And just for some trivia there was also a twin-engine upgrade for the L-1 airframe via an STC or factory new called the GeminiST and Bell 206LT respectively.
wrench1 is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 14:17
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 746
Originally Posted by megan View Post
It might be originally, but then there is an STC.

https://www.asimro.com/bell-206l-1-c30p-stc

You might want to read and comprehend what he OP said,
Strangely I did, oddly enough but thanks for the advice anyway.

I was just pointing out the sheer unlikelyness of the entire scenario.

If you want to teach advanced driving on a commercial basis in Europe you don't set your choice between an American registered vintage Maserati with a pickup conversion and an elderly Daimler limo with a V12 shoe-horned into it. Do you?
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 18:38
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: the hills of halton
Age: 69
Posts: 797
Originally Posted by meleagertoo View Post
Strangely I did, oddly enough but thanks for the advice anyway.

I was just pointing out the sheer unlikelyness of the entire scenario.

If you want to teach advanced driving on a commercial basis in Europe you don't set your choice between an American registered vintage Maserati with a pickup conversion and an elderly Daimler limo with a V12 shoe-horned into it. Do you?
If recall correctly , the big issue with SPIFR for a single engine helicopter was the alternate electrical power source . I know that American Eurocopter had a limited STC for AS 350 BA and Bell have one for 407 SR11241DS. Cannot recall how they overcame the power issue.
widgeon is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 19:09
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 560
Originally Posted by widgeon View Post
If recall correctly , the big issue with SPIFR for a single engine helicopter was the alternate electrical power source . I know that American Eurocopter had a limited STC for AS 350 BA and Bell have one for 407 SR11241DS. Cannot recall how they overcame the power issue.
The alternate power source (plus a few other items) was from back before they revised Part 27 in the late 90s and was dealt with by a 2nd gen on the engine. The revised Part 27 required a "1 in a Billion" failure rate for any critical systems which was different than Part 23 airplane IFR requirement of "1 in a Million" failures. This high ratio required dual hyd, dual/triple navs, etc. and basically killed any new single IFR platforms. The original Bell SPIFR kits predated that revision. Fortunately the discussion of single IFR came to the fore front around 2015 or so and laid the ground work for the recently approved 407 and AW119 IFR STCs.
wrench1 is offline  
Old 4th Mar 2022, 22:34
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: South West
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by Torquetalk View Post
Billund Air Centre used to do the SPIFR on the Longranger, and may still do. Perhaps a good place to get advice?

Longranger plusses are also economy (very low fuel consumption) and hanger space. And a super smooth ride.
I think Vantage Aviation at Thruxton have that aircraft or at least they have an IFR B206
gipsymagpie is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.