Jump to content

Bell 407


ebabil
 Share

Recommended Posts

Is there a civil or "utility" version of this bird?

Bell 407 looked very similar to me. It would be good if had a utility version of this helicopter. Maybe a separate module.

  • Like 1

FC3 | UH-1H | Mi-8MTV2 | A-10C II | F/A-18C | Ka-50 | F-14A/B | F-16CAH-64D

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: C-130 | UH-60 | F-4E

 

Youtube

Z390 / i7 9700K / RTX3070 / 32 GB Ram / 2x 500 gb SSD and 1 tb HDD // MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah thanks for heads up. Are Bell 206 and 406 the same? I couldn't find much detail about 406 model

FC3 | UH-1H | Mi-8MTV2 | A-10C II | F/A-18C | Ka-50 | F-14A/B | F-16CAH-64D

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: C-130 | UH-60 | F-4E

 

Youtube

Z390 / i7 9700K / RTX3070 / 32 GB Ram / 2x 500 gb SSD and 1 tb HDD // MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

any of them are welcomed

  • Like 2

FC3 | UH-1H | Mi-8MTV2 | A-10C II | F/A-18C | Ka-50 | F-14A/B | F-16CAH-64D

Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: C-130 | UH-60 | F-4E

 

Youtube

Z390 / i7 9700K / RTX3070 / 32 GB Ram / 2x 500 gb SSD and 1 tb HDD // MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 12/8/2020 at 7:35 PM, barundus said:

No, the Bell 206 is essentially the OH-58 A/C
The Bell 406 is the OH-58D, and the 407 grew out of that.

 

Not exactly..... The 407 was an upgrade/derivative to the 206L-4.  Common mistake, but the OH-58 and 206/407 lines have not connected for a long time.


Edited by pbishop
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2021 at 5:22 PM, barundus said:

Please explain.

 

 

I guess it all depends on what perspective we look at it from, and I apologize if my explanation is long.  I also hope that you know I mean no disrespect in anything I say or have said.

 

The first experimental 407 was built from a 206L4 which had few similarities to a OH-58 in airframe, power plant, external lines, and avionics at the time of its creation.  The 206A/OH-58A started similar enough, and the 206B/OH-58B were also fairly similar enough to be considered the same at the core.  However, the 206 progressed beyond this, into the 206B2/B3, then the 206L/L+/L2.  By the time the rotor was to be redesigned, the 206L2 only resembled the original 206A/OH-58 in its looks (you could tell it started as the same aircraft).  It had a new transmission, powerplant, avionics, extended fuselage, and many structural changes behind the nose back to the tail.

 

The OH-58 got the new rotor in the early 80's, but before the 206 would ever see the upgrade, it would continue to develop and grow into the 206L3, the 206L4, and the 206LT twin.  After the 206L4, the next logical growth path was to replace the rotor with a 4 blade design (~1995), more than 10 years after the OH-58.  After 3 different iterations/models of the 206, 12 years, and the end of the OH-58 contract, they simply put the rotor on the 206L4.  The similarity from their heritage made it easy enough and logical enough from a financial aspect that it simply made sense.  I have to add that this happened after the development of the 412 from the 212, and the upgrade of the 2 blade bell 230 to the 4 blade 430 (1992).  So I think it would be easier to say Bell was already moving all their rotors to 4 blades, and it makes more sense the 206 was next on the list to grow from this experience.

 

In addition, all helicopter companies suffer from the costs of developing a rotor.  The high development cost and time to produce it are what make it so difficult.  So when a company has the developed technology, they will usually use it where they can.  Bell is probably one the most significant examples of this.  Here are a few examples of rotor derivatives/uses that just made sense, but the model did not grow from where the rotor design came from in all theses cases:

 

Bell 505 has a 206 rotor installed.

Bell 360 will use a derivative of the 525 rotor design

Bell 407 uses the OH-58D rotor.

Bell 429 uses a derivative of the 427 rotor design.

 

So, I guess it depends on what you define as the seed something grows from.  The first 407 that was once a 206L, and Bell made a decision that made financial sense at the time.  I am still not convinced Bell had ever intended to make the 407, but instead create a new model from scratch to replace the 206.  Probably a result of financial constraints, but that is only speculation though.  What is not speculation is if they could grow the two front seats into something comfortable......., and that applies to OH-58, 206, and 407.

 

Something odd though is your reference to the Bell 406.  Knowing what that number means, I don't think its used in the right context here.  The model number you refer to is not what you will find on the type certificate.  The type certificate will say OH-58D, because that is the model.  In the context of the internal bell number 406, the 407 internal number is not 407.

 

Anyways, I am fairly tired so I hope some of this makes sense when reading it.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your thoughtful clarification!  Agreed on all!
I was attempting a "one-sentence" explanation to draw a simple differentiation between the two lines. 

407 borrows much of it's dynamic components from the 58D, hence I connected the two in simplest terms. 

Same goes for the 206 to the OH58A/C - in simplest terms, I view 206/58A-C more similar in capability/dynamic components than to 407.

As to the "406", acknowledged it was never type-classified as such.  I referenced that, again, to attempt to describe linkage between the lines. 

Sure wish we'd had the C47 in the KW! (transmission limitations aside). And the dual-FADEC, light-weight sensor, etc....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/5/2021 at 3:24 AM, pbishop said:

 

I guess it all depends on what perspective we look at it from, and I apologize if my explanation is long.  I also hope that you know I mean no disrespect in anything I say or have said.

 

So where in all this does Airwolf fit in?

😉

 

  • Like 1

Sons of Dogs, Come Eat Flesh

Clan Cameron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I came here looking for some more info about the similarities between the OH-58 and the civilian variants. I was trying to find out how similar the OH-58 and the TH-57 Sea Ranger would be to possibly get a trainer variant out of the work that has been done on the Kiowa. From what I have read it looks like the TH-57 is a derivative of the Bell Jet Ranger 206.

 

Bell_Jet_Ranger.jpg


Edited by Evoman
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Evoman said:

I came here looking for some more info about the similarities between the OH-58 and the civilian variants. I was trying to find out how similar the OH-58 and the TH-57 Sea Ranger would be to possibly get a trainer variant out of the work that has been done on the Kiowa. From what I have read it looks like the TH-57 is a derivative of the Bell Jet Ranger 206.

 

Bell_Jet_Ranger.jpg

 

You are correct, both the TH-57 and TH-67 are based on the 206.th-67-oct95a.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

FYI to all those who, like me, were interested in the Kiowa because it looked like it might fly similarly to its civilian counterparts - got to try the 206 myself.

 

On 12/4/2019 at 6:31 PM, borchi_2b said:

One thing though, 206 and 58d Kiowa Warrior are defenately not feeling anything alike 😉 and this is confirmed by all the testers that, cause they have all gone through the TF67, which is a 206

 


Edited by Sephyrius
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...