Yes, it is definitely a pilots aircraft.

There's nothing sweeter than a 407, a tanker full of Jet A, a 150' line, an 800 L bucket and a raging forest fire ...Oh, the crew of BCFS firefighting Gals weren't to bad either :ok:

407...we must introduce you to real helicopters....things you climb up into and walk around in....the kind you can get lost in on the way to the cockpit....real helicopters. Or in lieu of real Wokka's....at least a 212...what the zero series always wanted to be when they grew up!

SASless, I only fly 212 in the winter, about 15 winters worth of skiing, etc. The strange truth is... that I've never actually flown the old gal in summer ...ever ? :p

407 - IMHO, the best non military single engine ship around as far as power, speed and smoothness. However there are less than 10 copies in Aus, I am told, so support may be a problem? Also glass cockpit won't like your 40+ summer days Down Under. 2 back facing seats and 2 cabin compartments is a disadvantage for sightseeing. Be prepared to send your 407 to the mechanics regularly.

B2/B3 - Great power, close to but not as powerful as 407. Hydraulics are a concern though. Better passenger layout than 407. Also you'd have to deal with the French - although they are getting better and timelier with spares. Far more copies of B2 and B3's around than 407 so the backup expertise is very good.

EC-130 - Very beautiful lines, very modern and very expensive to run. Terrible range but you can put in an aux tank. Up to 8 POB all facing forwards. Only a handful in your part of the world so servicing/spares/expertise will be an issue. Flies almost as beautifully as the 407 in terms of speed, grunt and smoothness.

206L-IV - Old, venerable, very reliable, cheap but a very good ship. They're everywhere so there are almost no bugs in them, spares are cheap and you can buy them at any Walmart (almost). This is a Holden (in Australian parlance) instead of a prestige model like a Cadillac.

Don't worry about left and right foot pedal use - like driving a LH drive car in the US or a RH drive car in the UK, you'd get used to it.

For the money...would not an L4 be a good compromise all the way around....good value for money...lots of spares...they go 100 hour to 100 hour...plenty of power in most applications...and nowhere the numbers of AD's SB's etc. Also ....no FADEC to worry about. Not as fast as the competition but the customer service issue is not a problem...your engineers already know the basic machine. Lots of the same spares....etc.

Sasless, your growing old. Sure a new L4 is nice, but it aint no 407........
Im telling you once you fly one, you wont want to get back in an L........
Not saying Im a total 407 fan as in the begining, as most aircraft, it had big bugs. But , as most aircraft, the first dummies to buy them have no paid for those.................Its Sweeeet.

I agree with the last two posts. (Warren and Sasless)

The L4 is great value for your dollar.

Good power, especially in hot and high conditions.

Good speed, our L3's on low gear scoot along quite well..when light, much better than a 206, not quite as good as the 407.

Good range, better than a 407, not quite as good as an Astar.

Very safe and economical ....and

Will probably fit into your existing hangar. 3 and 4 blade aircraft (without a blade folding kit ) are hangar hogs.

If I had the money, I'd be buying an L4 for my personal use. The chances of that happening are slim to none though :O

Thanks guys, really appreciate the input, v helpful.

I'm actually thinking about it for my partner in the UK (so's I can drive it during the Brit summer :D ) , rather than here in Oz - so maybe the support side is less of an issue.

Tend to agree with SASless that what I'd really like is a Huey; feels like the old Wessex and with nearly the same fun of actually mounting the door of your trusty steed. The 212 was just as much fun - took one vertically out of the Hague city centre a couple of years back with a nearly full load of actors on board and plenty of go-juice. Somebody described it as a "yes" machine, as in "can you take......." "Yes, no problem".

.......but then you have to find work for these big thirsty beasties and that ain't so much fun.
Cheers
JerryG

Bert me old son,

I hate to tell you but we have grown old...we have beat the odds so far! So far my beard is gray...not white. I am getting better at not scaring myself.

Now if the man wants a Huey....have I got a deal for him....complete with de-mil'd guns....that we can handle for him. I even know where he can test drive one.

:ok:

CQ 407 Final Report
 

The CQ 407 investigation final report is here: http://www.atsb.gov.au/aviation/pdf/200304282.pdf

Just reading in the latest Vertical Mag that Bell have decided to "shelve" the fan in fin testing. they were quoted as saying they were looking at other advanced technologies....

There was an article in Flight a couple of weeks back suggesting that Bell is still conducting an ‘internal competition’ between the fenestron (sorry, tail fan :E) and PATS for MAPL. I'm yet to be convinced that Bell would choose PATS for a civil product, but we’ll see.

I/C

Bell 407 and Garmin 430 problem
 

Maintenance and Garmin are at a loss for a problem with our 430.

If the rotors are turning the Garmin takes 5 mins to find itself and occassionaly it will fail in flight (5 minutes). Replaced the control head 3x, switched connectors, antenna, cables.

Pilots are sure the antenna location may be the problem but Maintenance and Garmin say no.

Another 407 and a 412 have the same problems. We even checked what avionics tech installed the equipment.

Any ideas?

GPS needs service??
 

I have the same problem with a BK117, The antenna is mounted on the Hyd Cowling and the GPS comes up with "GPS needs service" With some investigatton we found that another operator had the same problem with their BK wit the antenna mounted in the same spot. They repositioned the antenna on the cowling between the exhaust diffusers pretty close down to the tail boom and this seemed to cure the problem.
I believe the garmin units can get confused with some multi blade helicopters interfering with the recieved signal from satelites, with the antenna so close to the head and blades this causes a pulsing distortion of the recieved GPS signal that causes the service fault to come up. It seems that getting as much vertical space between the antenna and blades is the go and also as far away from the hub as possible.
We have a 400 fitted to an AS365 and the antenna is mounted on the top of the fin with no problems in that install.

PM me and I will see if I can find some photos of the BK antenna mount

Might this CAA Paper give some hints as to the problem ?

FWIW,

Our BK117 has a 430 with the antenna on the hyd cowling, and the setup works a treat. Never a problem in 2-3 years. Go figure? :confused: :ok:

Our JetRangers have Garmins, with the antennae on the battery lid, on the nose. They haven't given any reception problems in about 10 years :D

bell 407 and garmin 430
 

Spoke to the mechanic and he has gotten approval to move the antenna to the nose. FYI he had to do ground tests yeterday with moving the antenna to several locations on the aircraft.

Thanks for the input

Bell 407 - Problems again.
 

Is it only the South African 407's that are having HMU problems (large number of the SA fleet grounded due to HMU faults and awaiting parts, support, etc) or is this a world wide problem. Seems our problems only started after the upgrade was installed. Where is Bell when you need them. Better yet, where's a good Squirrel when you need one?

What problems are you having??
Our 407 recently came up with a "Restart Fault" on test it showed up as an igniter relay fault but there were no problems starting the machine, every shutdown the fault came back, this was just after HMU change but I don't think it would be due to the HMU, Who knows!!!

We're having some start Relay problems on our ship. It's definitely to do with the Relay, vs the HMU though. The start light does not illuminate during the initial start sequence, but the aircraft starts fine.

No issues with HMU's in the entire fleet (7 aircraft )

we had the same "start" light not illuminating, replaced the little 1/2" x 1/2" relay on the floor of the instrument panel, no problems now

You fly S/N 53032 I presume ? :ok: :D

407 driver, is that good ???

give the man the sherlock holmes hat, glasses with the eyebrows and nose, along with the bent pipe :cool:

Daisycutter, Sounds like your in SOOOnami country. Rumor control is Squirells are on the way. Bells go back in the box........

US Army picks 407 to replace OH-58D
 

407ARH selected as the Kiowa Warrior replacement. 368 a/c, for FUE Q4 FY-08.

..........

Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc., of Fort Worth, Texas, was awarded July 29, 2005, a $210,746,761 cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for the system development and demonstration of the Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter, including sub-system integration and testing as well as training-device development. The ARH will replace the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior Helicopter (first fielded in 1985) and will be a dual crew station, single-pilot-operable aircraft capable of operating worldwide. Work will be performed at Fort Worth, Texas, and is estimated to be completed on Sept. 30, 2008. There were 11 bids solicited on Dec. 8, 2004, and two bids were received. The U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity. Their public affairs office can be reached at (256) 955-9174. (W58RGZ-05-C-0234)

DoD 7/29/05

Fly Smart. Fly Bell. :ok:

You didn't think the Army was going to buy A-stars now did you?

The news said that 11 companies were solicited and two submitted proposals. Bell and Boeing were the only two who sumitted.

Boeing must be pissed! They spent a lot of money to get the rights for the Little Bird...

:{

The LUH contract is next.

Who wins, Bell, Lockeed/MD, Eurocopter? It will be interesting.

Bell 210 :) LOL

Now that's progress!:\

It's a sad day when the Army has to take a Super Jet Ranger off the shelf than a newly designed helicopter to do exactly what they need to do. And a zero time 210 is really a step back.

212man....seen the numbers on the 210?

Read the list of improvements over the 205A-1?

Remember the commonality of parts...212 bits that will be used?

The 210 will be a very hot ticket for utility helicopter operators....and 212's will go away (in the US anyway).


There will always be "Killer Eggs"....407's will not fit into the places the SpecOps guys need to go.

SaSless

Tell me how a clapped out, multi 1,000s of hours UH-1H airframe is magically turned into a zero time brand new 210. Then they take a 703 and with nothing more than a records check turn it into a -17.

Does this mean what the Restricted perators have maintained all along, the Huey and the 205 are the same aircraft?

Check the useful load of a UH-1H 703 and the 210. In the charts we look at the UH-1H still out lifts the 210 for a few million dollars less. Especially if you throw the composit blades on.

Will Bell EVER build another totally new helicopter??

Sikorsky, MBB, and Boeing-Vertol fan here. Bell's are fun to fly in vibrant way....and yes...Bell might one day build a new aircraft....but it certainly will not be for the US Army.

I have always found it interesting to find that Bell can take the same Restricted Catagory Huey airframe and turn it into a 210 but the rest of us cannot take the same airframe and turn it into a Standard Catagory aircraft. Go Figger?

407 engine/transmission ?
 

Long story for maybe a short question:

(Bell 407)

During preflight I found the upper deck was covered in fluid and the transmission fluid level in the sight gage was maxed. The aircraft had just returned from a one hour flight, the off going pilot said he had not noticed anything unusal.

I called the on call mechanic and he said he serviced the transmission fluid with what he indicated (said, failed to write it up) with one pint of fluid. It was nothing major and would vent out to the level the transmission needed.

Cleaned up the mess and did a ten minute runup to ease my mind, and nothing seemed to be leaking.

Next flight same thing, messed up deck and maxed out fluid level.
Transmission pressure fluxuates at the low end of the green arc (2 light bars, chickets) but in the green.

Engine oil pressue at the top of the green arc. Fluid level lower then on preflight but only slightly.

This am the mechanic sivened of some fluid to get the transmission sight gage level mid range.

So the question came up in discussion:

If the oiler cooler had an internal leak allowing the engine oil to seep into the transmission, would you see and indication on the pressure instruments?

The mechanic assures me in this case he overfilled the transmission but said the second option could be a bad seal.

Overfill or transfer...
 

We had the same problem with our Bell 407's.

Overfilling the main txmn will lead to oil being vented out the pressure release valve on the txmn housing.

We leave our levels just below the yellow line (normal min mark) and above the bottom screws. This level seems to prevent the venting of txmn oil. If overfilled, it will vent till it finds its own "comfortable" level, it’s just messy! High or low skids don’t make a difference in the txmn levels. Then very important to check for correct levels 20 minutes after shut down when the oil is still warm.

BUT NOTE: The transfer we experienced was from the main txmn to the engine. I am not sure if it will transfer from the engine to the main txmn. Apparently it won’t happen, but I stand corrected.

If you have a transfer problem where the oil transfers past the damaged/old labyrinth seals on the drive shaft at the free wheel unit, there is no indication in the cockpit on the engine or txmn temperature gauges when transfer occurs from the txmn to the engine during a normal flight, if it hasn't been an extended flight, in my experience. That is as I said transfer from the txmn to the engine.

The only indications will be on the after flight. There will be excessive oil in the oil tank, visually visible through the engine oil level sight glass. If you open the engine oil cap, oil will come bubbling out the now very full oil tank, causing another fine mess. You will also notice a drop or slight drop in the main txmn oil level sight glass, depending on flight duration and severity of the leak rate.

Apparently there is no limit to the rate of transfer according to our engineers, as long as the txmn levels stay in limits. The seal must however be changed as soon as possible as 555 in the engine oil system is not ideal, as it hasn't got the same properties for cooling and lubrication as with 560. It also has to do with the fact that 555 don’t have the same high temperature performance as the 560, even though they are both synthetic oils.

You are worried about an internal leak. The chance of an internal leak is very remote, if not impossible.

Hope it helped. Overfill seems more likely to be your problem. Good luck.:ok:

Bell 407 Paperwork
 

Ladies and Gents,

I just did a major revision on our 407 handbooks and had to find out that the former holder of the aircraft didn't care too much about conducting revision service on them. Most of the missing items I was able to find on Bell's webside but a few items are still missing. Can anybody please help me out with...

==> actual 407 OSN Index (ours is dated March 04)
==> II - 9 (reissue 09-06-01)
==> II - 32
==> MMS - Revision 1
==> CR & O TR-407-1 Rev. 2 (03/09/04)
==> MM-05 (missing, I guess he misread the cancellation of the supplement and deleted the entire chapter):ugh:
==> MM-13 title REV 15
==> MM chapter 98 page 3/4 Rev 4
==> MM Rev. 16

and maybe the very first GEN OSNs # 1 -31

Thanks a lot,

Spunk

Bell 407 question
 

Our mech replaced a Garlock seal on the starter generator. This required a run up for leak check and then a 10 min flight.

I understand the leak check but the mech could not explain why the 10 min flight. All he said was a there is a load difference.

Anyone with any insight?