www.brantly.info

The board's been pretty quiet lately, so I thought I might try to generate some chatter. I'm a professional pilot flying S-61s in the Bahamas, and my dream is to own a Brantly B-2B. I've read all I can about it, I've visited the factory, and I've even logged an hour or so in a couple of them. I was hoping to get those of you that own, have owned, or have flown a B-2B to share some thoughts with us. I thought I'd put out a question, see what kind of response we get, and then shift to a new topic when everyone's had their say.

Since the idea is to get some interesting talk going, I'll start with a simple, yet controversial, question:

1. Why hasn't the Brantly kicked the R-22's butt?

performance and servicabilty
but they are fun to fly at sea level with a hundred pound pass.

Marketing
Maintenance costs
Factory support
Too loud
Marketing (again)

O.K. Let's talk about that.

Performance -- You couldn't use it for mountain training, but it's a much better ship than the R22 for 5000' and below.

Serviceability -- Isn't that just the result of not having very many aircraft in the fleet? In other words, doesn't this beg the question of why the B-2B hasn't bested the R22?

Marketing -- Ding, ding, ding! We've got a winner! I think this is the problem. And, to compound the problem, the farther behind you get in fleet numbers, the tougher it is to catch the competition. There's really no excuse for this, since Brantly had a 15 year jump on Robinson. But, as we all know, Frank is a master of marketing -- and of profit margin. He turned a Special FAR into a profit center for his company (the safety training course), and his R44s MUST be returned to the factory for rebuild every 1200 hours. Oh, I could go on and on, but the fact is that Brantly isn't even advertising anymore.

Maintenance costs -- A byproduct of low fleet numbers.

Factory support -- Also a byproduct of low fleet numbers.

Too loud -- I don't know about this one. I think the Brantly is noticeably quieter than the Robinson, but I don't have any numbers on that. I do know that you can't land an R22 on a golf course without ruining the greens, because of the exhaust.

Thanks for the replies. Now for the next question (Everybody join in!):

What could Brantly do differently TODAY to get the B-2B back in the game? Please, be specific!

Tom

You don't know about it being too loud? I can't think of any piston helicopter louder than the Brantly, especially the B2. I frequently go to big helicopter fly-ins where the majority of piston helicopter models are present. The Brantly is the only one that I see people holding their ears around as it approaches/departs/hovers. The Robinson isn't even close to being as loud.

And as for factory support, a company can have poor factory support even with high fleet numbers. Look at some of the large companies that have months or years delay in getting parts or ships from. I think whether a company is 5 people, 50, or 500, support provided is as good or bad as they make it.

I would like to see a turbo-charger converion for the B2B. Carson turbo conversion made a big difference for the Hiller UH12C & the Bell 47G density alt. performance issue. Noise should not be a major problem to correct!

Thanks,
Mark

I hadn't thought about a turbo conversion for the B-2B. As you mentioned, it would have to be via an STC, since Lycoming only produces the IVO-360 on demand for Brantly, and then they have a minimum order requirement (another reason they have trouble competing -- no volume discounts). I like the concept, since one of the complaints about the B-2B is that it isn't great at altitude. I don't think there are any structural issues with it at altitude (it's a pretty beefy aircraft).

When you talk about Carson conversions for the 12C and the 47, do you mean Carson Helicopters from Perkasie, Pennsylvania? I didn't know they did piston work. If it's a different Carson, please let me know. I'm a big fan of the Bell47 (although I've never flown one -- if anybody has one, give me a call!).

I still don't think noise is a big factor, but I don't think it would be complicated to add a muffler system that would tone it down. If you had the extra power from the turbo conversion, there would be very little penalty in performance (at least at altitude).

Good comments! Thanks!

Anybody else have any thougts on this (or anything else)?

Re: Flylow's post above. I guess love is blind and appreciation for a great helicopter is deaf. Whenever I've heard a Robinson, it has sounded irritating, and whenever I hear a Brantly, it sounds like music. Does anyone have any numbers on this?

Good point about service. I don't own a Brantly, so I can't say (and I don't think I gave an opinion in any of my prior posts). How is the factory service these days?

One more thing on service. Although it can be good or bad, regardless of fleet size, it seems to me that someone with a large fleet has less of an excuse for bad service than someone with a relatively small fleet (if there is such a thing as an excuse for bad service). There's a lot more money available to the person servicing a large fleet.

Comments?

Tom,

Yes, the paperwork I have on a Bell / Carson Super C-4 that I had said Carson, Perkasie, PA. from the 60'S I did a Google search and it looks like the company is under a diff. name, and nothing about turbo conversions. I wish someone would do one as a experimental for flight testing and proving it's self for a STC conversion. What do you think? How about a Brantly 305 Turbo? Wow!!! I wish the factory would look at this. If the B2B could work a little harder the factory might sell some birds and the support could gear up! I'm going to surf for companies that do turbo conversions. Thanks, Mark

Mark,

It's now Carson Helicopters and they operate a fleet of Silorsky S-61s (which is what I fly). They also developed a new, high performance blade for the S-61. Perkasie is my hometown, by the way.

I think the turbo conversion would be a great idea. If Brantly got the STC, they could offer it as an upgrade on new aircraft, and offer it as an upgrade to the existing fleet.

BTW, the Brantly factory is an awfully fun place to visit. It's a little hard to get to, but it's worth the trip.

Thanks for all the posts and feedback. I'm in the process of hatching my next diabolical and controversial question. Stay tuned.

Tom

Tom,
I think the turbo and 305 tail rotor blades would be a kick butt option! Esp in a training package. You would have extra power for all the manuvers and extra TRA for those windy days.

A few years ago I looked at a Brantly outside of St. Louis. The owner had gotten a pair of tailrotor blades off of a five-seat Brantly 305, then obtained approval (Form 337) to install them on his B-2B. I flew it, and it had plenty of authority (as far as I could tell from a brief flight). The interesting thing is that the blades are already certified by the FAA. It's just a matter of finding a pair and getting approval to install them on a B-2B.

I agree the B-2B would be an excellent trainer.

Hummmm, who made this quote? LOL...

I always wondered what happened to that helo with the 305 TR blades. I lost my deposit on it when I couldn't find a hangar for it. It was a beautiful ship.