Bell 206 or EC120?
 

i am looking at both a 206 and the ec120 to buy for a business man to travel around ireland. Please express pros and cons for comparisson and your final choice. $1 mil budget. thanks.

For 1 mil Aus dollars you could get two pretty good second hand Jetrangers-not to sure about the price of a used ec-120- would imagine though a little bit more.

To compare them operationally-if you looked up the word reliable in the dictionary you would find a photo of a jetranger-they just keep going. Ofcousre you'll always find the knockers but over a ten year period we operated up to 4 206's and other than the routine maintenance I can remember a couple of t/r chip lights, 1 eng chip and a couple of gauge failures.And i'm talking about 600-800 hrs per year per machine. The other consideration is support and parts....do your homework there....again I don't know what eurocopter/Bell have in Ireland.

I was fortunate to operate a EC-120 on trial for around 3 months and in that time had great feedback from pilots and passengers. Someone with a lot more time on the ec would give you a better appreciation however I loved flying the machine and the pax loved it. Bigger windows and a lot more comfortable.If your planning to have a full ship expect a lot of negative comments about the back middle seat in the jetranger...it's a F#$%^. Every day people would complain about having to sit there. We called it the TFC,(Thanks for coming) seat. Atleast in the EC everyone gets a great seat and no arguements.

The luggage compartment on the ec is little more generous than the jetranger however as all 206 drivers know it's amazing what you can fit in a jetranger boot.

Thats my 3 cents worth-to answer your question if it's just you and/or your pilot criusing around Ireland with regards to price take the jetranger option-maybe a few ec operators could add some pointers to even the debate.......Have you considered a R44?

SMO

206 vs 120
 

This could start quite a debate!!

Would probably go for 206 myself, however do agree that the 120 has better alround visibility for the pax however have heard some stories of problems with the 120 i.e. c of g - this may have been corrected now.

Otherwise both lovely machines.

206 no doubt.
 

i fown both of them, both as a pass and as a pilot, 206 its a work horse. True ec is more confortable for the pass, but 206 its so reliable and its so a noble machine and a joy to fly. Its slower though but its a very safe 'the safest single engine aircraft in the world' and it keeps its record for a long time. Maintainance its not hard and well documented, your mechanic can do a lot more to it than on the EC to fix it on the field.

More technology on the EC, quiter for sure, but the penalty for it its power. Although jet rangers are not a loader heli, it can carry more weight and be more forgiving in altitude and hot wx.

Its just my POV.
I flown both of them to see what i would buy, and got a 206. Ohh, operation cost is also lower. (at least in mx)

The budget is $1m - US I assume ? That won't get much of a 120......

Do a search on EC-120. There have been a few threads on their maintenance and reliability problems.

It's not just about operating costs etc, is it.
We are living in the 21st century now and things such as duty of care/risk assessments etc have to be considered.
I would seriously also look at crashworthiness issues.
The 206 has that woefully inferior tail rotor authority issue hanging over it too.

On a separate note: bear in mind the spares and servicing scene.

A helo sat on the deck waiting 4 days for a replacement part for instance, is just scrap metal:ooh:

A few other things to consider:

Autorotation - ever seen an EC120 auto from about 10-15' AGL? Talk about slamming you into the ground! You'll find the 206 offers much more margin than the EC120 due to the nature of the rotor system. Much more inertia in the 206.

Useful Load - Don't get hung up in EC telling you that the 120 has a greater AUW. Once you load it with the necessary equipment and fuel to fly it away, you'll have more UL in a JetRanger with the same equipment. This is especially easy to see when comparing Bell and EC's HOGE and HIGE charts from their technical specs. You'll find a tight race, but I suspect EC would tell you differently.

Having flown in both, I would not take an EC120 above 110-kts. It seemed like everything was about to shake loose in the cabin.

I'd take the JetRanger. :ok:

Thomas Coupling wrote:
"The 206 has that woefully inferior tail rotor authority issue hanging over it too."

Thomas...in my limited experience in helicopters to date which includes 1000+ hours in jetrangers ive never had any problem with tail rotor authority..and ive done most hovering ops that require alot of pedal....treat it right and think about what your doing and you should never have any tail rotor authority / lte or whatever they call it tommorow problem :ok:

Belly Tank..

That is exactly what I was going to say, you just beat me to it!

This LTE "Problem" on B206 is a non issue.

Belly Tank & Aesir:

I disagree. I know several pilots that have experienced it. It is real and it is out there but it can be managed.

When I fly a Jet Ranger I am always very cognizant of wind direction and the conditions that can lead to LTE.

IHL,

I didnt say that it its not an issue, maybe my wording was a bit obscure, however as you say with proper management and decision making it is overcome.

and i think this applies to most if not all aspect of flying.

cheers!

$1m
 

headsethair - US$1m ~ £570k

You'll easily get an EC120 for that money. Quick search of the 'net or look in Helimart found several. e.g. 2002 with 1,000 hrs for EUR870k (£558k)

Belly Tank / Aesir:

Ignorance is bliss....I suggest you get to know your a/c a little more:

NickLappos said:


posted 3rd October 2005 11:03
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

rotorboy,

In an LTE study I did about 7 years ago, based on worldwide accidents of all helos, using four different data bases, this is what it showed:

95% of all LTE accidents involve Bell 206 models.

Virtually 100% of all LTE accidents involve Bell helicopters (one Robbie in UK was reported as LTE, but was probably over pitching).

My conclusion was that the inadequate size of the Bell 206 tail rotor was the principal cause of its LTE woes.
A second finding is that all tail rotor authority events were being called LTE because the marketing campaign conducted by Bell was effective on removing the heat from their design.

LTE really does not exist, it is a label used to blame the pilot when a marginal helicopter loses yaw control within its approved envelope. That does not mean that a 206 can be milked by an experienced pilot to not lose tail authority.

LTE cannot be experienced by any helo built to modern standards (larger tail rotor). It is impossible to get LTE in a Black Hawk, Apache, S76, H-500, EH-101, Lynx, etc because they have adequate tail rotors.

TC,

Beg to differ: maybe with the small tail rotor, but the 206 with the later tail rotor is quite manageable, and we operate frequently hot and high.

I'd be making more of an issue of the EC120's low inertia main rotor system, and the R22-like autorotation characteristics :eek: I'd have grave reservations using an EC120 for low level operations that wouldn't cause any concern in a 206, because I'm not sure that I'd get away with a survivable auto. Apparently the factory pilots prefer to run on around 40-50kts in the 120, maybe for a good reason!

Thomas Coupling wrote,

"Ignorance is bliss....I suggest you get to know your a/c a little more:"

I think i have reasonable knowledge of My aircraft the 206 in this case, ive done most ops that require the use of alot of pedal mainly OGE hover work etc etc hot and as high as you can get here in australia!. and as i said in my limited experience on Jetrangers 1000 + hrs on type to date ive never had a problem or accident, and as i mentioned before its managable if you treat your aircraft with respect it deserves.

so your statement above is totally ignorant about the fact you should give a bit more credit to your peers before you make assumptions on their ability :8

IF you have a Million to play with and look around just a bit I think you can get a pretty nice B206L4 and have some spare change for cockpit toys.
Give it some thought.

Thomas coupling..

Ohhohh.. If Nick said it then it MUST be true :rolleyes:


The original question was:

In my opinion the perceived LTE "Problem" of the 206 is not an issue in choosing which aircraft to buy! If properly flown it´s not a problem!!

Like was said for $1 mil you can get a nice 206L4 which is certainly a much superior aircraft to the EC-120.

I have a friend who operates EC-120 and from talking to him he seems to have unusual problems with parts availability and cost :{ Don´t get me started there..few months ago he had to replace the flashing beacon at a cost of $9.000.- The whole thing had to be replaced as a unit, not possible to change the bulb!

He fly´s his EC-120 about 350 to 400 hrs a year. I fly my AB206B a 1971 model with.. yes you guessed it, the small diameter tail rotor.. I fly about 150 hrs a year and guess who takes more money to the bank after all costs have been figured in? I do.

Needless to say his EC-120 is for sale.

When comparing the two EC-120 & B206 one should consider the autorotative characteristics as well of both aircraft. Since they are single engine I would much rather be in a B206 following engine failure, both aircraft do have engine failures like any motor vehicles and the outcome of such a failure will be more likely to be succesful in the B-206.

Unfortunately it´s difficult to do a "Study" of succesful outcomes of engine failure landings comparing aircraft since many countries do not require any reports to be made if the landing was succesful with no damage.

Here is my suggestion for the original poster:

"Be Smart, Fly Bell"

Belly up: I wouldnt brag about a 1000hrs on type if I were you. There are people on here who have flown that on type in only 18 months, that is not a lot of experience:8
And you are not my peer...you can't even spell Chief Pilot in your profile never mind act like one:uhoh:


Aesir et al:

Join the real world eh? You can't keep flying a 40 yr old design forever....one has to move on and invest in technology with all its merits. Safety is the industry mantra now.

Aviation news comments

Just another view..................................

Aesir: interesting web site.

I have a few hours on the EC120 and 206.Each has its own role.For pax work I would choose the 120.For anything else I would choose the 206.I would prefer a 206L4. Just keep in mind that you cant load 4 adults and pilot and use all the baggage space in the 120.

TC- who pis*ed in your porridge? SO what if belly tank can't spell. And they are entitled to their own opinions.(I can't spell either:} )

Thanks DC!

See TC i do have a peer!..your words were the last straw i have now enrolled in spelling classes, ill let you know how my progress goes:8

As for the thread...you will like this TC i also have limited experience in the 120 and have found it to be a nice aircraft for pax work as DC has stated, nice open cabin etc etc, its horses for courses what are you planning on doing with the machine you choose CPT Hobbs, is it mainly going to be used for the business man alone or will most of your loads be with a full compliment of passengers.

as DC has stated have you looked at a L4!

Thank you for your view Thomas..

You said:

That is exactly why I fly B-206..SAFETY! Get it?

I want to be in something that can land safely if I have engine failure which we all know can happen in all helicopters anytime and if I don´t have two engines then for sure I´m going to be in a helicopter that can autorotate safely.

I know why LTE happens and some other things that could happen to B-206 in flight and I know how to avoid those situations..! An engine failure I have no control over, it could happen when I least expect it.

New helicopter designs do not necessarily mean that they are safer in all aspects. Manufacturers do try to make them more economical to operate than the competition so customers will buy them. And boy did EC get the DOC´s wrong on the EC-120, they can say whatever they will about how economical it is but ask any operator in the field who will give you a straight answer and then find out how much it costs to run. There are loads of 120´s for sale now, I wonder why?

But don´t get me wrong, like someone said if you don´t worry to much about engine reliability and perhaps fly all the time over land and non-hostile terrain then the EC-120 is fine for passenger transport for someone who has the funds to run it. There is lot´s of people who don´t really care if it cost´s $300 or $500 pr/hr to run.

I like the B206 because it cheap to run which means I make more cash and it´s safer to fly in my area of operations.

I´m guessing that the original poster has probably gotten tired of reading the bull that´s been posted but please keep us informed what you end up buying whichever way you decide!

For that kind of money!!
 

I guess $1m is about £700K, you could of course go for a twin (AS355) wouldn't be brand new of course probably F1 / F2 but you could probably get something reasonable for that kind of money.

If I was a Playa........I would have bought a 407 when it first came out. Since I have a saying etched in my brain. "Never buy an A model of anything" I waited to see how many of the "Rollers" paid for the ADs that would surely come out, and they did.
Now its a bit better, someone else suffered the problems and its a great purchase......
Same thing flys with the EC-120. Let someone else do the testing and since I see a few more buying the farm recently it is not over yet. Then maybe.
As to purchasing "new" only a proven aircraft and only then if I cannot find a clean machine that someone else has eaten the initial depreciation.

If I had the ability to purchase anyway...........

Horses for courses I guess. Jetranger if want to do a wide range of work, 120 if you mainly fly pax. 40 year old design vs new one? Who cares. Which one makes the most commercial sense, thats the bottom line. Second-hand L-4 would be much better than either.

TC, I think you will find that the tail-rotor is not an issue in the B III Jet-ranger.
I would consider someone with 1000 hours on type to have a bit of an idea. What do you consider experienced on type? Just remeber its not always total hours on type, but what you did in those hours...

Are we talking an LTE issue here?? I have heard this song before. Personal opinion is Pilots are the problem. If any aircraft is prone to doing something out of the ordinary it should be addressed in the intial training and etched in the pilots gray matter. If done correctly problems should not occur OR if Murphy is flying then the pilot will be able to correct things before a disaster occurs based on his awareness in the seat.

Im Still voting for an L-4

As it was when I first flew a 206 a long while ago. I was warned to be carefull with pre-BIII Jet-rangers. Something to simply be aware of.

And it appears you have not forgotten, good.. Another good example, if I can drift a bit, was the Huey. Many variations of it but as there are also different UH-60s, the one big difference was that the Huey used two airframes.
UH-1B, C, M etc. had the B204 airframe, wheras the D,H,V etc. had the B205 airframe.
When I transitioned from the H to the M, the first thing the IP did was take me way up in the mountains and do a 360 turn at a 50'OGE hover on a hot day (in a big LZ) Dam thing ran out of pedal. Lesson there was although it was a Huey with an L-13 etc. The tailboom was still smaller and the tail rotor cannot handle things, Hot, Heavy, High........

Back to reality, Im still voting for the L-4.........

EC120/B206
 

Hello,

I believe there was a thread on the comparison of the EC120B and Bell206B in regards to training both operationally and engineering.

Anyone point us in the right direction.
Thanks

206/120
 

I fly both and would also be interested to see that thread

It was a very short thread a long time ago when not many people had much experience of the EC120.

I suggest we start a new discussion here.



Heli_Sticktime

Sounds like you're in a good position to start the ball rolling.





Heliport

I would be interested in this too, especially as these two helis are the different ways I was thinking of going after gaining my ppl(h). I Thought the EC120 was an amazing quality product after reading the magazine tests, but then I read a thread on here some months ago that was slating the EC120 battery positioning and switches, and also probs with the VEMD along with other probs.

Made me think that yes the EC120 is modern and pretty (and expensive), but maybe the 'good old' 206 might be the better bet? I would really be interested in the honest professional opinion of somebody that has flown both? Especially as I'd never get this kind of response from the sales people...."EC120 not powerful enough...? I've seen one lift a Chinook!" :eek: You know the kind of thing.

aging fleet replacement.. Looks like 120's get old fast...
 

08/00

NEWS
From the County of San Bernardino

The Board of Supervisors today authorized the sheriff to purchase two EC-120 patrol helicopters as part of a phased-in replacement of the county's aging fleet of law enforcement aircraft.

The Patrol Helicopter Replacement Program is designed to replenish the Sheriff's Department’s aging fleet of patrol helicopters over a five-year period. The EC-120 was selected after an extensive evaluation by Sheriff’s law enforcement aviation experts based upon the aircraft’s operating capabilities, maximum payload and lower operating cost. The EC-120 also costs approximately $250,000 less that the department’s other style of patrol helicopter, the McDonnell Douglas/Boeing MDH-600N.

The purchase will cost $2.28 million and will be funded from the Sheriff’s Department Special Revenue Fund Budget

01/05

SAN BERNARDINO — The Sheriff's Department is working on a plan to have a more advanced eye in the High Desert sky.

The department wants to replace its aging fleet of seven helicopters with six new models from American Eurocopter which can better handle the county's diverse geography and perform more tasks, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.

The sheriff's current primary helicopters, American Eurocopter EC120s, are not able to adequately handle the tasks required of them in San Bernardino County, officials said.

"We've been operating (the EC120s), but we've found them lacking in power," said Lt. Tom Hornsby, of the Sheriff's Aviation Division.

The Sheriff's Department's plan for replacing the fleet calls for purchasing three Eurocopter AS350 B3 helicopters, at a cost of $2.6 million per helicopter, during the 2004-05 fiscal year and another three helicopters during 2005-06, according to county reports.

The Board of Supervisors already approved the purchase of two helicopters with contingencies and with the cost of the third helicopter to be covered by revenue from the sale of the current fleet, according to county reports. However, a recommendation before the board to authorize the purchase at Tuesday's meeting was postponed until Feb. 1.

Hot summer air can steal power from the engines of the EC120s, and they are limited at performing rescues in rough terrain and mountainous areas, Hornsby said. They are also unable to carry extra passengers beyond the helicopter's crew, he said.

In addition to the four EC120s, the Sheriff's Department's Aviation Division also operates a Sikorsky H3, a McDonnell Douglas 500 and a McDonnell Douglas 600N. All seven will be sold to help cover the costs of the purchase, according to county reports.

The AS350s that the Sheriff's Department wants are common in Europe's Alpine areas. They have the extra power needed in mountainous areas and during high temperatures, Hornsby said. They can also carry three to four rescue personnel with their supplies in addition to the on-board crew.

The AS350s are also equipped with fire buckets for an initial attack during fire season and have an external hoist for dropping rescue and fire personnel in inaccessible areas, Hornsby said.

"Those are a couple of missions that we can't even think about doing with the EC120s," Hornsby said.

Thanks for that Rotormatic,

It illustrates just what I was asking about. I know that I am a low-hours spode compared to many on this site, but that doesn't mean that I don't care about helis the same as all of you.
There aren't as many types of helis as there are planes, but real information about them is harder to come by. As mentioned before, the mags only get to test helis when distributors give them a few hours, or an affiliated owner gives them a flight, so where's the truth?
The best (and most honest) comment I have read recently was by Dennis Kenyon in Loop, where he is talking about whether to recommend somebody to buy an Enstrom 280 or not. Brilliant and insightful because it was honest and based on professional and personal experience.
So why can't we see that on here; what about a league table, a ratings guide? Similar to the 'Good, the Bad and the Ugly' ratings that you get in some car magazines. Why won't people cough up and say what they feel about helis and types?

Is it because I is a Spode?

Excerpt from Jane’s Defence Weekly dated 24 Jan 06

“Singapore to receive EC 120 helicopters for pilot training

Singapore Technologies Aerospace (ST Aerospace) is due late in 2006 to take delivery of six EC 120 Colibri light utility helicopters, five of which will be used to provide flight training for the Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) under a SGD120 million (USD74.5 million) programme finalised in November 2005.

The public-private-partnership will see the company own and maintain the aircraft, with pilot training performed by the RSAF. Known as the Rotary Wing Course (RWC), the contract covers a period of 20 years.”

The EC 120 replaces a fleet of AS 550 Fennec’s, the military version of the AS 350B2 and is to be equipped with a Chelton EFIS cockpit.

After a very thorough evaluation the EC 120 beat the Bell 206.

Thanks for that.

The 206 is very forgiving in regards to mishandling in EOL training. Has anyone experience on both that can comment

EC120/B206
 

From my limited experience in both I can say the following

The EC120 doesn't have as much power as the 206,VEMD on the EC is good. One thing I find a help is the recording of a "gong" if you pull too much power for too long, at least you know when someone has done something bad, whereas in the 206 you wouldn't have a clue. If you're the only person flying the A/C then it's ok, but if you're at an operator that has many pilots of varying levels I would prefer to know if someone has wound the machine.

Aircon as standard in the EC is nice, specially in Africa and it seems to work well, does drip every now and then, the door ejectors are also cool if you're autorotating with an engine failure into water without floats(I know that should never happen but it just did in Cape Town a month ago and a student died):sad:

What I don't like is that the rotors turn the other way, nothing major but as you enter an auto and you instinctivly push in the pedal/which one was it again:\ you sometimes get a surprise when it yaws the wrong way.

EC is also like the Squirrel, comes off one one skid first whereas the 206 comes up straight normally, you also have to give a good bit of right pedal when you're pulling power for the lift off so that you don't cause a problem (something to do with the Fenesrton effect).

Shutdown in the EC is way faster than the 206, that two mins at idle in the 206 is 30 secs in the EC, if you're doing short hops it all adds up.

Seats in the EC also have some kind of loading structure that if you come in hard in an auto they collapse a certain way to protect you, someone with more knowlege can ellaborate.

Auto's in the EC are FAST compared to the 206, the fall out the sky, the 206 seems to glide more

If I had to choose I suppose it would be the EC for me, but that's because the EC I fly only has 200hrs on it and the 206 has 3500hrs. If I really had the choice it would be an AS350.

My 5 cents:ok:

Heli Sticktime - could you define "not as much power as the 206"? And did the police helicopter mentioned above have the usual accessories attached to it to make it heavier?

Phil

The 206 has the "bathtub" - the lower part of the fuselage - to absorb shock in a crash. I know from experience that it works. It once saved me from a broken back or worse...

How things change...
 

Here is a press release from EC listing the equipment in the 120's, and another example of how things change in a short time...

Date 1/24/2000
San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department Adds EC120s To Fleet

Las Vegas, Nev. - San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department will take possession of the first two EC120s to be used in Law Enforcement in the United States. These aircraft are being featured at this year's HAI convention. Two more are scheduled for delivery in mid-2000.

San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department obtained its first helicopter in 1970. Over the course of the last 30 years, it has increased its fleet to 13 aircraft, including 11 civil and military surplus helicopters, and 2 fixed wing aircraft.

San Bernardino County is the largest county in the continental United States, with more than 20,000 square miles. In fact, it could hold 5 New England states within its boundaries. "We needed an aircraft that is extremely quiet, and can stay airborne for an exceptionally long time. It also had to perform well at high altitudes, as our terrain ranges all the way up to 12,500 feet," said the Department's Commander, Capt. Don Belter. "We found that the EC120 is capable in all conditions, and can stay in the air for up to 4 hours. We were impressed at how well it performed in 110-degree weather."

The department is replacing part of its fleet with the EC120, thanks to the aircraft's superior capabilities. "We checked out several aircraft in the same class, and found that nothing compares with the EC120," said Sheriff Gary Penrod.

All 14 of the pilots have already attended the training for the EC120, and everyone is excited about it. "Another reason we are especially pleased with Eurocopter is because of the professional treatment we received by everyone, from the exemplary sales staff, all the way up to American Eurocopter's President Christian Gras. "

The EC120 is the perfect multi-mission, light single-engine helicopter. Its design and performance characteristics lend itself to be well suited for a wide range of law enforcement functions, such as Patrol Support, Fire-Fighting, EMS, and SAR. These functions are all part of San Bernardino's duties in their Airborne Law Enforcement Air Support mission.

San Bernardino County's custom configuration includes a PA system installation, dual sensor (video/thermal imagery) manufactured by FLIR, as well as an Airborne Data Terminal. The FLIR system can track moving targets, while a moving map system assists the crew in navigating to any street address in Southern California.

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 2005 FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM
Amended and Updated 02-28-2005

REPLACEMENT OF AIRCRAFT Funding Request: $7,744,689
The EC-120 does not have enough power for safely conducting missions at high altitude. The EC-120 is not capable of being used as a firefighting helicopter.

During the hot summer months (peak fire season) the EC-120 is often unable to land off-site to pick-up fire command personnel for airborne assessments.

The EC-120 is also incapable of rescuing victims who are caught mid-stream in flash flood environments. Yucca Valley and Morongo Basin “monsoons” routinely result in victims being caught in flash floods and public safety personnel are required to engage in extremely dangerous ground based “swift-water” rescue efforts.