Talk:Bell 407/Archive 1

Bell 407 ICAO designation
Can anyone provide a source to the ICAO designation for the Bell 407? I've looked everywhere but I cannot seem to find such information. I'm making this request not only to add a little information to the Bell 407 article, but to also create a realistic ATC call for the Bell 407 in Flight Simulator. Srosenow 98 10:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * B407
 * --Born2flie 01:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Requested merger
Bell 417 → Bell 407 — Overlappngs subject matter, one is a derivitive of the other, and minimal content on each page. - BillCJ 19:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Survey

 * ''Add  * Support   or   * Oppose   on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~.


 * Support Seems that there should be no real issues with it. Bell 417 seems to be just the civilian version of the ARH-70A, itself based initially off of the 407. Probably won't see the 417 on the Bell page until the FAA certifies it.
 * --Born2flie 21:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
As of today, Bell has not even put the 417 on its website. Until such time as more info becomes available, a dedicated article seems premature. - BillCJ 19:22, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Decision
After 1 week, it is 2-0 in favor of merging. - BillCJ 05:54, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Photos
BillCJ the article has too many photos for the amount of text it has. They are interfering with the page layout and bunching the [edit] tabs. Anynobody 07:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Performance
Can anyone check the values for maximum speed, please? 140 knots = 260 km/h, not 237 km/h. The German entry gives 260 km/h. This would be above cruise speed, which seems reasonable. Peeceepeh 06:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That conversion is correct. I fixed it. -Fnlayson 12:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * My source (Janes Aircraft Recognition Guide) says the maximum speed is 128 knots=237km/h. If this is not a problem for anyone, I will "fix" the stats. However, some of the stats in that publication contridict the stats on this website as well, so I would have to correct ALL of them. Kriscott 21:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think we should stick with Bell's specs first. Add other data not listed there. -Fnlayson 21:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

FRAHM damper NOT FRAHM dampener
Re my edit and revert - Specifically referred to as a FRAHM damper by Bell

http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/Storage/TB%20407-99-14.pdf

There are other references for the 407 at http://www.bellcustomer.com/files/displayCategory.cfm?ID=22 M100 (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You reverted without a summary, and without a reference, back to an edit that was based solely on an incorrect presumption about grammar. The use of "dampener" is common in the industry in regards to rotor construction. The misunderstanding is probably that vibration absorbers aren't always called "dampers" and are rarely located on the top of the rotor system. Your comment here is the first time any reference for the term "Frahm damper" has been shared anywhere in this article. I've since edited the same caption to reflect that "Frahm" is the name of the inventor, not an acronym as the all capitalized "FRAHM" suggests. I have not found any specific biographical information on Frahm, but a Google search brings up several references to the introduction of dampers of this type by Frahm, circa 1909. --Born2flie (talk) 07:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe we need an article on the device and how it works? Damper/Dampener is a US/UK spelling difference, nothing more. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by)   03:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

L-3 or L-4
The intro and the first paragraph of the article say that the 407 is based on the L-4 airframe, but the Development section and Jane's state that it was a 206L-3 that was modified for the development. The reference listed as "Frawley, Civil" apparently claims both and is the source for the seemingly contradictory statements in the Development section. I was wondering if we could get some clarification from the Frawley reference as to which airframe the prototype and/or production aircraft are based on? --Born2flie (talk) 16:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The Frawley entry is legally copied at Airliners.net here. It mentions that the prototype was converted from an L-3, but nothing about the L-4. Airliners.net has most of the entries from Frawley's International Directory of Civil Aircraft, but some entries are from older editions, such as 1997. Airliners.net has updated some of the entires, but the 407 appears to be identical to Frawley's 2003-04 edition. - BillCJ (talk) 17:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Seems the 206L-4 began production in 1992, possibly replacing the L-3? Perhaps that is why the references claim it is a development of the 206L-4. If the 206L-3 was no longer the production standard, that would make sense as to why Bell used the 206L-3 for a demonstrator. You don't lose money if you recap on an aircraft that is "last year's model" and harder to sell as a result. --Born2flie (talk) 19:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hum, I just double checked this with Jane's. The Frawley book lists a modified 206L-3 for the prototype.  Jane's Helicopter Markets and Systems lists a modified Bell 206L-4, while the All the World's Aircraft entry lists 206L-3.  Will just keep it as L-3. -fnlayson (talk) 21:56, 30 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I must not have read the All the World article well enough. It says the 407 prototype was modified from an L-3, but the basic 407 was based on the L-4. -fnlayson (talk) 18:16, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

May 10, 2009 crash
Bell 407 crashed in Irkutsk Oblast, Russia, killing Irkutsk Oblast Governor Igor Esipovsky. English is not my native language, and I am not confident enough in my grammar to put this information right into article. Please someone fix my grammar errors and add it to article. Hexie (talk) 20:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I have not checked this talk page in a while. Here's a google translated version of that article.  I'm looking for an English article on this.. -fnlayson (talk) 20:12, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Fire-X UAV version
I added an entry for Fire-X here a few months ago. Here's an update: Aviation Week is reporting that the US Navy has funds to order more MQ-8 Fire Scouts in the 2012 budget request. These include 12 MQ-8Cs, which is the designation for the 407-based Fire-X. The Av Week article is subscription now. I'll look for a free article on this. This entry will probably need to point to Northrop Grumman MQ-8 Fire Scout article later. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Is this the article you're referring to? - BilCat (talk) 21:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, that is the one! -Fnlayson (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah rekon they uploaded it after you looked for it :( - BilCat (talk) 22:07, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yep, the last time I checked was last night. Interesting development and hopefully that'll stay in the budget. -Fnlayson (talk) 22:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/bell/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 13:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Add info about 407GXP
The 407GXP has been around for awhile now and should be added to the article. I hesitate to add anything due to a potential conflict of interest (and more to the point, I don't know much about it). If someone with more experience could update the article, I think that would be a good thing. Here's the Bell page: http://www.bell407gxp.com/  B.Rossow ·  talk  17:01, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 09:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

New version
A new 407GXi version that has been certified by US and European regulators. See relevant articles: "Bell 407GXi wins European certification", "US regulator approves Bell 407GXi", "Bell unveils improved 407 variant"

I think this should be mentioned under the GX variant in the Development section or Variants entry. Thoughts? -Fnlayson (talk) 17:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Doesnt appear to be that major change but it could be listed in variants. MilborneOne (talk)

keep or delete accident section?
The NTSB's CAROL database lists well over 100 accident investigations for Investigation mode is "Aviation" and Aircraft make contains "bell" and Aircraft model contains "407". This means the "Accidents" section in the article is either way too short, useless, or superfluous. If we're going to include a subset of accidents, what are the inclusion criteria? --31.150.29.138 (talk) 09:44, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Accident entries need to be notable for coverage on Wikipedia. See the Aircraft articles section at WP:AIRCRASH for relevant guidelines. -Fnlayson (talk) 09:53, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect Tailboom Description
In the article tailboom is described as being constructed with a carbon composite structure. Per the aircraft manual, this is incorrect. It is actually similar in construction to the 206 series tailboom with an aluminum skin monocoque design. The tail rotor driveshaft cover is composite in the 407 and aluminum in the 206, this might be where the confusion arises. Helidriver21 (talk) 12:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)