Bell 47 production to (eventually) resume

That’s my point exactly. It fills a requirement. Has there really been anything to replace it developed whilst it was out of production? I’d have to say no.

If you want to be like that about it what is the point of new build FW 190’s and Me 262’s, and Twin Otters?. Besides which, the last I heard, Viking were also planning to start build Beavers again but that was a couple of years ago and it all seems to have gone quiet on that score.

Exactly…the Beaver and Twin Otter are ancient designs, but they still do their jobs very well. As marketing men say, the fill a “niche”.
That’s why the 47 will re-enter production.
Besides, with a helicopter, if you’re making spares for the power train, you’ve done the hard bit, might as well make the easy bits: the cabin and steel tube fuselage…:D

i’d think again on that one !! they are favoured by ausie cattle musterers

As they are in America. In Texas, I flew in one that was used for cattel herding. A lot of fun.
But for traditional AG spray use, not many are used for that here in the US. Of course, there are many other options here ranging from 47s and Hillers (many turbine) to surplus military OH-58s.

But the Aussies ar crazy anyway, it’s a well known fact.

Good question.
A lot of 47s are used for agriculture (which the R-22 and 44 aren’t used for much and for sport use) .

i’d think again on that one !! they are favoured by ausie cattle musterers

and boy can they throw them arround

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0lGvFheJ5Y

and this??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yxe_O01SG5Q

or this ??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsSvfJO9Tqc

its agriculture use is probably more than you would first think !!

What’s the point? There is Robinson around (pistons and turbine), and also Schweitzer aka Sikorsky Light Helicopters (also pistons and turbine). And in the East there are more. It’s not like the world is waiting for another light helicopter.

If you want to be like that about it what is the point of new build FW 190’s and Me 262’s, and Twin Otters?. Besides which, the last I heard, Viking were also planning to start build Beavers again but that was a couple of years ago and it all seems to have gone quiet on that score.

The M*A*S*H show comes to mind whenever I hear about this model. 🙂

Simply put, the Bell’s a classic (and historic) airframe.
Unlike the Robinsons and the Hughes/Schweitzer/Sikorsky, the Bell is very stable and IIRC, has a higher paylod than that pair, as an example You don’t see many of the others in AG use.
Having flown all three, I know which one I’d want.

To answer your question with a question…
Why rebuild Spits…a Piper can carry more at less cost as will a Mustang, Cessna Mustang that is. 😀

What’s the point? There is Robinson around (pistons and turbine), and also Schweitzer aka Sikorsky Light Helicopters (also pistons and turbine). And in the East there are more. It’s not like the world is waiting for another light helicopter.

Boyle, thanks for reminding me, I forgot that was a Soloy conversion.:o They don’t mention that on the Wiki page either : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_47.
If I can find that info I will edit it in.

All factory built 47s were piston.
The turbines were retrofits done by a firm named Soloy with its own STC.
They used the Allison (now Rolls) engine similar to the one in the Jet Ranger.

So unless they bought the Soloy rights or develop their own STC, I’d assume they’ll be piston.
Scott’s Helicopters does a lot of AG work, and turbines are in most fixed wing crop sprayers today, so I wouldn’t rule it out but they haven’t said one way or the other.

Are they going to resume the piston or turbine model Bell 47?

Good question.
I’d also wonder about its operating costs as a trainer.
A lot of 47s are used for agriculture (which the R-22 and 44 aren’t used for much and for sport use) where operating costs aren’t quite as critical. I’d guess the operating costs would come down to parts cost and overhaul times.
And you have to remember, the Bell is roughly in between the 22 and 44 in size and capacity.

My intructor in 47s had 2000 hrs in R-22s and he thought the Bell was a better trainer, though both ships had their strong points.
And during a visit to Abbotsford, BC last year, I discovered a large helicopter training school that used the Bells.

I wonder how it will compare costwise to the Robinson 22 and 44. ?

After 1.5 years doing airframe minor and major servicing on the little ones I think they are a bit more complicated than that;) we spent hours and £’s doing crack and corrosion inspections on the welded airframe, never a sign! The wirelocking on the control runs was a thought provoking job, checked by 2 SNCO’s! But, oh so easy to move when the firealarm was tested just attach a wheel to each skid and whip it outside, whilst the Whirlwind gang messed around (I had done 6 months on them that was enough reskinning for any fitter!) I did 2 years at Ternhill on my last posting, did it help me in my future civvy career, no! I became a fitter in the bakery industry:eek:

I can just remember the Sioux’s at Ternhill, my dad worked on engines, then the Gazelle’s replaced them.

Brian

looking after the little ones

Getting it back into production should be relatively easy…

…there must be, what, nine or ten parts to a Bell 47? :diablo:

After 1.5 years doing airframe minor and major servicing on the little ones I think they are a bit more complicated than that;) we spent hours and £’s doing crack and corrosion inspections on the welded airframe, never a sign! The wirelocking on the control runs was a thought provoking job, checked by 2 SNCO’s! But, oh so easy to move when the firealarm was tested just attach a wheel to each skid and whip it outside, whilst the Whirlwind gang messed around (I had done 6 months on them that was enough reskinning for any fitter!) I did 2 years at Ternhill on my last posting, did it help me in my future civvy career, no! I became a fitter in the bakery industry:eek:

They are pretty popular…

Good news.

Getting it back into production should be relatively easy…

…there must be, what, nine or ten parts to a Bell 47? :diablo: