PPRUNE Exclusive: LUH winner announced

[Ian Corrigible]

PPRUNE Exclusive: LUH winner announced

http://turboshaft.com/db2/00189/turboshaft.com/_uimages/LUHwinner.jpg

Ft Rucker, June 30th 2006: The U.S. Army today announced the long-awaited outcome of its search for a Light Utility Helicopter (LUH) to replace the service’s current fleet of UH-1H Hueys and OH-58A/C Kiowas. In an unusual move, the U.S. Army revealed that it has decided to select a multinational offering built by four OEMs, two systems integrators and 287 major suppliers.

Commenting on the Army’s unusual approach to its selection of the LUH, spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore said: “We were originally planning to select a single aircraft most suited to the job, but in the wake of the recent air tanker scandal and concerns over the future of the helicopter industrial base decided that this would be the best outcome for all concerned.”

Asked to comment on how this novel solution was reached, LTC Kilgore revealed: “AATD was asked to perform an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) for us. After several months of intensive study, it was found that, contrary to popular myth, you can actually please all of the people all of the time.”

When asked whether there were any downsides to this multinational effort, LTC Kilgore admitted: “Yes, we will of course have to adhere to four times as many Airworthiness Directives over the life of the program, but we figured that this will be good training for our aircrews as they transition to future civilian roles. Additionally, the aircraft uses a combination of imperial and metric systems, but this is actually seen as a risk reduction benefit, since if one system fails our crews will still have a back-up system to rely on.”

Leading industry commentators were less convinced by the Army’s decision. When shown the blueprints of the selected LUH design, the UH-72 Chimera, Mr. Rhett Flater of the American Helicopter Society said: “My God, what have we created...?!” Noted former helicopter professional Mr. Nick Lappos agreed with this sentiment, adding: “I’m glad I got out of this crazy industry when I did.”

The first UH-72 Chimera will be delivered to Army Aviation units in 2008, and the type is expected to reach full operational capability by 2023.


(Okay, so the Wx here is bad and I’ve had a slow day…) :E

[Overt Auk]

Looks like a winner to me. (But aren't those skids a bit short?)
OA

[ShyTorque]

Shouldn't it be painted blue and yellow, like the last one?

[Ian Corrigible]

On a more serious note, selection now confirmed as the EC145:

DoD contracts
DoD (http://www.defenselink.mil/contracts/2006/ct20060630-13367.html) June 30th

EADS North American Defense of Arlington, Va., was awarded June 30, 2006, a $43.1 million firm-fixed-price, fixed-price-level-of-effort, cost-reimbursable contract for the Light Utility Helicopter with MEDVAC B and hoist B kits along with pilot transition and maintainer training. Work will be peformed in Columbus, Miss., and is expected to be completed by June 30, 2016. The Light Utility Helicopter is designed to conduct light-general support, civil search and rescue, personnel recovery, air ambulance medical evacuation, casualty evacuation, limited civil command and control operations in the conduct of homeland security, and counter-drug operations. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. Bids were solicited July 26, 2005, and five bids were received. The Army Aviation and Missile Command at Redstone Arsenal, Ala., is the contracting activity.

I/C

[Rich Lee]

Perhaps the US can purchase a few extra used ones from the French mountain rescue pilots!:ouch:

[Whirlygig]

Shy,_you_mean_like_this_one? (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2397635&postcount=114)

Cheers

Whirls

[widgeon]

Any good pubs in Huntville ?.

[Bell427]

The Aviation Today web site had the breaking news first! For all up-to-the-minute aviation news, go to www.AviationToday.com for the latest
information and analysis. If you regularly consult Aviation Today, you would have read this story, hot off the presses:

Drumroll, please: the news on LUH is finally in. Waiting until after the U.S. stock market closed in the afternoon, the U.S. Army announced today
that is has awarded a $43.09 million contract to EADS North American Defense of Arlington, Va. for the production and contractor logistics support of
the Light Utility Helicopter. The Army intends to procure and field a total of 322 Light Utility Helicopters beginning in Fiscal Year 2007. "The Light
Utility Helicopter contract action we signed today will have far reaching effects," said Col. Cory Mahanna, Utility Helicopters Project Manager. "This
fleet of U.S. Army aircraft will benefit America in crisis situations, like those associated with Hurricanes Katrina and Hugo, and the aftermath of
the Mount St. Helens' explosion. The LUH will be our Army's 'first responder' during future disaster scenarios. This new aircraft will give our
soldiers an important new tool for use in the defense and security of our homeland." The LUH is a commercial/non-developmental item aircraft to
conduct light general support, civil search and rescue, personnel recovery, air ambulance medical evacuation, casualty evacuation, limited civil
command and control operations in the conduct of homeland security, and counter-drug operations. The LUH is intended to perform these functions only
in permissive, non-combat operational environments. The primary users for the LUH are the active Army units and the Army National Guard.

Access Intelligence, LLC * 4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd Floor * Rockville, MD * 20850 * USA

[Aser]

The real announcement:

http://www.uh-145.com/

EADS North America Selected to Provide U.S. Army’s Light Utility Helicopter
30 June 2006

Arlington, Virginia– EADS North America today announced that the UH-145 military helicopter has been selected by the U.S. Army as its next-generation
Light Utility Helicopter (LUH). The LUH requirement is for up to 352 aircraft with a potential total program life-cycle value of $3 billion.

The LUH award is a continuation of EADS’ 20-year heritage as a helicopter supplier to U.S. national and homeland security agencies including the Department of Homeland
Security, the U.S. Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, DEA and the FBI. The decision, announced today by the U.S. Army, marks EADS North America’s first major
system win as a prime contractor for the U.S. military.

“We’re pleased that the UH-145 was chosen by the U.S. Army for this important mission and gratified that this selection demonstrates the service’s confidence in our ability to meet the fast-paced delivery schedule and support requirements of these critical Army aircraft,” said Ralph D. Crosby, Jr., EADS North America’s Chairman and CEO. “We look forward to a long association with the U.S. Army.”

EADS North America leads a UH-145 team of companies that includes four primary partners: its American Eurocopter business unit, which will handle the helicopter’s
production, assembly and delivery; Sikorsky Aircraft, responsible for contractor logistics support (CLS); WestWind Technologies, for systems integration and engineering support; and CAE, the supplier of UH-145 cockpit procedural trainers.

UH-145 program management will be located in Huntsville, Alabama and led by the EADS North America Defense business unit of EADS North America. A network of leading U.S. subcontractors has been created for the Light Utility Helicopter, bringing together companies such as Aerolite, Armor Holdings, the NORDAM Group, Keith Products, Thales USA, Turbomeca USA and Wulfsberg Electronics.

“When EADS North America was created four years ago, we committed to in-source U.S. jobs of high value, bring the best technology to America, and contribute to homeland security,” Crosby said. “The UH-145 will enable us to deliver once again on all three promises, while providing the Army with an optimum solution from a team of
leading U.S. suppliers.”

The UH-145’s industrial activity will be centered at American Eurocopter’s Columbus, Mississippi facility, which is to undergo a major expansion to accommodate the Light Utility Helicopter program. The Production line of the UH-145 – a version of Eurocopter’s EC145 multi-mission helicopter, currently built in Germany – will be
duplicated in Columbus through a series of steps that begins with partial assembly, followed by full assembly and the subsequent U.S. manufacture of major subsystems.

American Eurocopter President Marc Paganini said, “The UH-145 contract marks another significant growth of our U.S. government business and recognizes the excellence of our products. This also signifies a major new evolution of the Columbus plant – which has grown steadily since its startup in 2004.”

“EADS North America has won an important U.S. Army contract that will support military missions both at home and abroad,” said Senator Thad Cochran of Mississippi. ”The
Light Utility Helicopter program award indicates that Mississippi continues to enhance its reputation as a state with advanced technology development capabilities and is firmly committed to meeting the needs of the men and women who are fighting to protect our nation.”

“The announcement of the EADS North America U.S. Army Light Utility Helicopter selection is great news for the state of Mississippi and the Golden Triangle region,” said
Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi. “With this success, EADS and American Eurocopter will help further develop the state of Mississippi as a worldwide center of excellence in
helicopter manufacturing and aerospace technology.”

"The addition of this important new manufacturing program to American Eurocopter's existing Columbus operation is a great complement to our burgeoning defense industry,
and we welcome production of the Army's new Light Utility Helicopter in Mississippi,” said Governor Haley Barbour of Mississippi. “Our state's partnerships with outstanding
companies such as EADS North America and American Eurocopter to provide high-tech, high-quality military systems to our men and women in uniform continue to strengthen, and that's a testament to our highly-skilled workforce."

“EADS North America and American Eurocopter’s U.S. Army contract win means bigger and better things are going to happen in the Golden Triangle,” stated Congressman
Roger Wicker, representing the First Congressional District of Mississippi. “EADS and American Eurocopter are delivering on their promise of bringing high value jobs and
technology to the region and we are ready to support them.”

“The Golden Triangle region continues to grow as a national competitor for technology and defense sector development,” said Congressman Chip Pickering, of Mississippi’s Third Congressional District. “American Eurocopter is a company dedicated to the people of this region and they will continue to bring worldwide aerospace technology to benefit Mississippi’s economy and create high-paying jobs.”

EADS North America has made a significant commitment to the UH-145 program, with the first helicopter already in assembly for delivery to the Army this November. In
addition, components already have been allocated for the manufacture of seven more UH-145s.

American Eurocopter’s expansion of the 92,200 sq.-ft. Columbus facility will begin almost immediately, with its size increasing to approximately 276,000 square feet to
accommodate the UH-145 program activity.

About EADS North America (www.eadsnorthamerica.com)

EADS North America is the North American operations of EADS, the second largest aerospace and defense company in the world. As a leader in all sectors of defense and
homeland security, EADS North America and its parent company, EADS, contribute over $8.5 billion to the U.S. economy annually and support more than 174,000 American jobs through its network of suppliers and services. With 11 operating companies located in 30 cities and 15 states, EADS North America offers a broad array of advanced solutions to its customers in the commercial, homeland security, aerospace and defense markets.

http://www.uh-145.com/images/photo1_2.jpg
http://www.uh-145.com/images/photo7.jpg

My bet was the new era blackhawk, the US139, too good... :(
I hope they don't have problems in mountains with th 145 like the french http://pistehors.com/comments/627_0_1_0_C/

[SASless]

Keep your eye on the news in the future.....there will be an account of the "politics" behind this acquistion. Eurocopter set aside a wad of money for the construction of the manufacturing facility and heliport for this project at least a year ago. Seems odd they would begin work before they were awarded the contract.

[HELOFAN]

was this the winning video that sold them?

Interesting.

HF

www.luh-explorer.com

download the demo video

:ok:

[MightyGem]

Additionally, the aircraft uses a combination of imperial and metric systems, but this is actually seen as a risk reduction benefit, since if one system fails our crews will still have a back-up system to rely on.”

Anyone like to try and explain this statement? :confused:

[pohm1]

The picture at the top of the thread doesn't actually appear to be an EC145, which has a tail rotor as opposed to a NOTAR system. Is the pic an MD900?:confused:

[Ian Corrigible]

phom1, MightGem & HELOFAN - sorry for the confusion, the original story was a pi$$-take ahead of the formal announcement (hence 'Chimera'...).

Here's the UH-145 in all her glory:

http://www.eurocopter.com/publications/img_wsw//PHOTO-LUH.jpg

I/C

[topendtorque]

Anyone like to try and explain this statement? :confused:

could be something to do with US Def Dept Procurement peering over their evening Bourbon and deciding that the OZ procurement was getting away with just too much of a lead in the cock-up area - esp. if they were Texan bred-?

[John Eacott]

A recent photo of the 145 at Quad A

http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/photos/pprune/N145LUH.jpg

[Coconutty]

Anyone like to try and explain this statement?

It's so they can measure the visibility in metres and the cloudbase in feet :E

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/coconut.jpg
Coconutty

[SASless]

Approximately 350 airframes to be bought for non-combat missions. Anyone care to argue that is a proper waste of money for a military organization? These are not "trainers" but rather "utility" aircraft. Any doubt our National Guard aviation units are an integral part of the combat aviation force of the Army?:ugh:

Who would prefer to go to "war" in a 145 vice a UH-60?

I am starting a pool....100 USD to the person that correctly identifies the correct date a UH-145 gets shot down....anyone care to make a wager?

[rjsquirrel]

The REAL story of the LUH is one that must make Bell marketers stay up late, staring at the walls as the nice program they built was stolen by EC. It all began in Columbia a few years ago....

The Columbian government wanted a good mountain helo to carry teams into the war on drugs. The US Army said, "Buy the Black Hawk, it works real fine up there, and bullets don't bring it down!" So the Columbians put their order in for 60 Hawks, courtesy of the US Gov, which was chartered to help them with cash to fight the drug war (since the Columbian drugs end up on Main Street, of course.)

Bell sniffed the multi-million dollar order, and wanted a piece of that action, so they invented the "new" Huey, the 210. It was like dressing up a 60 year old and making her look like Jessica Alba. They argued that the Hawk was too big and too powerful for Columbian mountains. They argued that the simple Huey was a wonder-helo, the best ever made ( You remember the Huey? Every hill in Vietnam has 4 of them marking each point of the compass. No, you don't remember? Oh, that's right, that was 35 years ago!!)

The Army tried to stop them, and so did the Columbians, but the marketers knew how to press Congressional buttons, so they managed to make a Congressional compromise that allowed 30 Hueys to be sold, and the Hawk order dropped to 30 aircraft. Everybody won but the Columbians who watched those clunkers land and sit, unable to fly in the mountains.

Meanwhile, the heady feeling the Bell salesmen felt made them start on the US Army to sell out the Guard and have them take a Stateside-only mini-copter. The "proven" Huey was the choice, one that had no place in US Army operations, but could be used for Guard duty (this was back when the Guard went to college and played Monopoly on weekends, kiddies.) The Army crapped, Army engineering in Huntsville practically had a collective heart attack, but Congress kept on coming.

The Iraq war then started (all by itself) and the bills mounted, so even the Army decided that Rummy was right, a cheap stateside helo was OK. The Bell 210 was a shoo-in, but THEN someone decided to make it a competition. Uh-Oh. Now the Huey would have to run against some REAL helicopters. Bell tried to stop the insanity, but it was too late. The clunker had no chance against helos designed 45 years later (sort of like OJ trying to run the 100 yard dash today!)

Is the 145 a good light helo? You bet! Is it a good combat helo? In a pigs eye. There isn't a single system that can take the punishment that a Hawk or an Apache can take, and the Army crews will pay the price for it, when the time comes and everybody forgets that the Guard was supposed to stay home and play Katrina with the new LUH.

[alouette]

Boy, I wonder who got bribed this time to pull this contract ashore. Go to war with this bird, hmmm...does them 145 meet the crashworthiness design standards of lets say the UH-60airframe. I doubt it.:ugh:

[SASless]

Folks,

Nick and I along with quite a lot of youngsters went to war in Hueys, Cobras, Hughes 500C's, Bell 206A's (Kiowa's) and early model Chinooks. That was 1950's technology. Times have changed.....specifications have changed...and the National Guard and Army Reserve missions and requirements have changed.

Used to be the NG and AR units were keepers of combat aircraft held in reserve for the active Army units. After Vietnam, the mission changed to make the NG and AR units integral parts of active duty units and equipped them with front line combat aircraft. These units deployed as part of regular units.

Now we have the Army equipping NG and AR units with "non-deployable" aircraft.

As Forest Gump reiterated...."Stupid is as stupid does!"

When the crap hits the mix-master....what will happen when these 350 non-deployable aircraft are needed in a combat zone? Where are the "reserve" flyable, ready to go to war aircraft going to come from?

Ask the Canadians about their Griffons and Afghanistan?

This is one immense cockup!

[helmet fire]

rjs is right.....I wonder about mission creep too. Sounds great to have a non deployable cheap utility airframe for stateside, but how long will the "non deployable" bit reallly be remembered when combat ops starts?

And more importantly: what now for MDH? Ouch!

[SASless]

http://pistehors.com/comments/627_0_1_0_C/

Discusses the 145's problems with the French Rescue Service.

[topendtorque]

Boy, I wonder who got bribed this time to pull this contract ashore. Go to war with this bird, hmmm...does them 145 meet the crashworthiness design standards of lets say the UH-60airframe. I doubt it.:ugh:

I must say that the one squeaky clean brand new copy that I got close to looked quite neat in the seat compression department, but all very academic when one is flat on one's bloody nose because the skids were too short to avoid tripping over.

[Farupthere]

http://pistehors.com/comments/627_0_1_0_C/

Discusses the 145's problems with the French Rescue Service.

The EC145 fleet was never grounded.
REGA and PGHM fly EC145's for mountain rescue, with no major problems.
Is the EC145 a good civilian multi-purpose helicopter : yes.
Is it specifically designed for mountain operations : no.
Does it do the job : yes, most of the time in a better way than the old Alouettes.
Is it smart to engage the AFCS for mountain flying : no.
Is it a zero tolerance helicopter (mountain) : yes, the slightest mistake (if not corrected immediately) may rapidly become dramatic.

[13snoopy]

rjs is right.....I wonder about mission creep too. Sounds great to have a non deployable cheap utility airframe for stateside, but how long will the "non deployable" bit reallly be remembered when combat ops starts?
And more importantly: what now for MDH? Ouch!
Yes, that is my question also. The lady who runs MD must be up at nights now for sure.

[Ian Corrigible]

The lady who runs MD must be up at nights now for sure
Just wait until you see the press release giving Lynn's no-holds-barred reponse to the loss :eek:

In the meantime, MDHI is still claiming it will ramp-up to 250 aircraft per year by 2008: see Mesa helicopter company expects fast growth (http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=69005).

Discusses the 145's problems with the French Rescue Service
I'm surprised PANews hasn't already posted it, but the latest edition of Police Aviation News (http://www.policeaviationnews.com/Acrobat/PANewsJuly06.pdf) provides some interesting background into this issue, and what actually transpired.

I/C

[alouette]

The good ol' CREEP...

container...restraint system aka tie-down chain...energy absorption...environment...and post-crash factors....

Years of research of ACAP blown away in one instance with a baguette-like airframe...just correct me if I am wrong:ugh:

By the way "farupthere": Are you calling me an old alouette

[Farupthere]

By the way "farupthere": Are you calling me an old alouette
Certainly not, I love Alouettes (nothing sexual in this) ;)

[PANews]

Thank you for the plug on PAN. I tend not to self advertise the magazine [other than the blatant handle!] but thanks for introducing it.

Just a word of minor caution, on page three top there is an error in that it appears to say there was one accident each for Secutite Civile and the Gendarmerie. In fact both were to Securite Civile machines - a point loudly underlined by the [highly trained] Gendarmerie...

Private thoughts on following the thread until now have been that on the face of it no one has presented a finite list of the number of alpine accidents in the period and the range of machines involved. Certainly I have only a vague idea, many are kept quiet. Without that sort of information it is a bit iffy to slag off the BK as being dangerous in all alpine rescues. How many Alouettes have been dinged in the same period.... not even newsworthy.

The downside on the selection of the EC145/BK117C2 is that it just piles yet more jam on the Eurocopter bread. That is not to berate the product, it just seems that the ability to successfully develop a [not so young] product is as ever vested in Europe.

Perhaps there are stirrings to a renewed greatness in US industry, but one way or another its taking an awful long time with many tight turns along the way [210, 427, 900 etc]!

[alouette]

The stir in selling more of those "cheap" air frames is the lack of spare parts, i.e. support. Boy, I can tell you a thing or two., but I rather keep my mouth shut. EADS is not able to support the growing fleet of baguette helicopters in a timely fashion...so I suppose an AOG situation will take a few weeks if not months. Combat readiness, eh? That reminds me of an older issue of Rotor&Wing where one, I think Army Major said "Give me a small side arm and an OH-6 and I am combat ready:D Again, I raise my glass and toast to this levelheaded decision

And to Farupthere: " God damn right. Alouettes, the best helicopter ever built. They are like good old red wine. A toast to an engineered masterpiece. Why do you think I chose that handle?" :)

[Farupthere]

Private thoughts on following the thread until now have been that on the face of it no one has presented a finite list of the number of alpine accidents in the period and the range of machines involved. Certainly I have only a vague idea, many are kept quiet. Without that sort of information it is a bit iffy to slag off the BK as being dangerous in all alpine rescues. How many Alouettes have been dinged in the same period.... not even newsworthy.

Incidents may be kept quiet, but not accidents.
Since 2000 (mountain rescue) :
Alouette III, Gendarmerie, Pyrenees (2000)
EC 145, Securite Civile, Pyrenees (2003)
EC 145, Securite Civile, Pyrenees (2006)

But things are not always what they seem to be...

[helmet fire]

I have just read the link posted above, one that is claimed to be a Google interpretation of a French Article.

Intresting how they too confuse what LTE is.
Never have I heard of a BK117/EC145 getting LTE. The BK can however suffer from LTA (Loss of Tail Rotor Authority) at higher DAs, and even in the flat land that is Australia, it can be experienced. Several fire fighting pilots on BK117 will have seen it, and several of the EMS operators have also experienced it.
This is not a new or unknown defficiency - it is a type limitation. I thought that they had largely resolved the defficiency in the EC145 with the larger C model tail rotor. This tail rotor has been retrofitted to some B2s that I have flown and it improves the pedal margin at high DAs.

Does anyone know the conditions of the 2006 accident that they are claiming to be LTE (though is more likely to be LTA)? I mean in terms of DA, wind AUW, etc.

[Farupthere]

According to someone who was there a few minutes after the crash, conditions were excellent, CAVOK, wind about 10 kts, 7800 ft standard, ISA +10.
Aircraft was hovering near a cliff for hoisting ops.

[tbc]

Can someone enlighten me as to the difference between LTE and LTA.

I had a discussion with a very experienced test pilot a couple of years ago about LTE and he convinced me that it was simply the tail rotor being asked to do something it wasn't capable of doing, in other words a design limitation.

Could that now be called LTA, because to a simpleton like me if the system becomes ineffective it might be because it has run out of authority, or could it be that it has reached it's authority limit as a result of its design and therefore become ineffective.

:ugh:

[Bravo73]

tbc,

Unfortunately, it does often come down to a difference in symantics. However, this is what I wrote in another thread about LTE/LTA:

There's a difference between LTE (Loss of Tail Rotor Effectiveness - in it's simplist terms, the TR is not 'big' or effective enough to provide control within the entirety of the flight envelope) and LTA (Loss of Tail Rotor Authority - TR doesn't have enough RPM to maintain control due to mechanical problem or the pilot 'overcooking' things).

This has been covered in depth in previous threads.

The B206A was particularly prone to LTE whilst most helis can be subjected to LTA if the pilot allows the RRPM to droop too far.


That thread is here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=202277). It contains lots about LTE/LTA. Otherwise, the search function should help.


HTH,

B73

[helmet fire]

Here is a link to a more in depth thread:
Tail Rotor Stuff (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=143383&highlight=loss+of+tail+rotor+authority)

And here is an addition to B73s comments:

Loss of tail rotor control: You are not able to control the tail rotor pitch mechanism.

Loss of tail rotor thrust: Little spinning thing at the back stops spinning or falls off.

Loss of tail rotor effectiveness (LTE): "Newly" discovered and named in the 80's after many (in particular OH-58/B206) accidents. Although somewhat awkwardly named (as the tail rotor is still effectively working and must be providing thrust) LTE refers to what is thought to be an ingestion of main or tail rotor vorticey through the tail rotor which causes an onset of yaw in the direction induced by torque that cannot be overcome by the application of full "power pedal". The yaw rotation can build up quickly enough to fool most pilots into believing they have experienced a loss of tail rotor thrust. Almost all cases have occurred on B206 variants.
The concept has come under fire lately because of the early thoughts that the tail rotor enters vortex ring state being a little hard to prove. Oh - and then there is fenestron stall that possibly fits into this category too, although strongly denied as a possibility by the manufacturer whilst allegedly being strongly experienced by the pilots!

Loss of Tail Rotor Authority(LTA): A term to make the old Huey war story of "..and then I ran out of bloody left pedal and..." sound a little more sophisticated and technical. In this situation, the tail rotor does not produce enough lift to counteract the torque/crosswind combination you require, your power pedal hits the stop, and around you go - though often quite gently when compared to LTE or loss of thrust. A lot of aircraft are susceptible to this, but the UH-1D/H Huey is famous for it - and many people have had the earth come up and smite them as a result. This lack of authority can have multiple causes such as the most common which is a loss of RRPM mentioned by B73 and others, but is not limited to just those cases. LTA is caused by insufficient lift properties of the blade to counter act TQ such as High DAs, adverse winds, sideways flight or just plain insufficient pitch available due design or rotational flow (RPM). LTA can even occur at the bottom of an auto by having insufficient non power pedal available to counter act yaw such as in the UH-1 with strakes fitted.

[Farupthere]

Interesting threads, thanks for the link.

Crab wrote this :

the AAC who fly non SAS equipped Gazelles have never had a Fenestron Stall event - the RN and the RAF both flew SAS equipped aircraft and all the incidents occured on these aircraft.

Why? well in the hover the SAS yaw channel does some of the work for you, meaning that the pilot never gets a real feel (unless he flys SAS out for a lot of the time) for the idiosyncrasies of the Gazelle. Therefore it is easy for a disturbance in yaw to the left to be initially masked by the SAS which means the the real required pedal position is not selected as the SAS actuator has started to adjust the fenstron pitch.
Then, if the yaw deviation persists, eventually the yaw channel saturates (only 10% authority) and gives up the job. Now the actual pedal position is way behind that required to contain the disturbance and now the pilot has to do some work. He makes a sensible input and it doesn't work because it actaully needed twice what he put in to prevent further yaw so the yaw rate increases.
If the pilot now pushes full right pedal he will arrest the rate of yaw (the French test pilot proved it from 120 deg/sec) but more often than not pilots are reluctant to use that much pedal -they have never had to use it before so it can't be right so they lower the lever to reduce the rotation and usually land heavily.
An Army Gazelle pilot who has flown SAS out all his life will have used full right pedal before, especially operating with a left crosswind when heavy and will have no qualms about putting it to the stop which will arrest the rate of yaw.


Excellent post. This can happen on the EC 145 if the autopilot is engaged, when you want to take over the system, you don't know what margin is left (worst case being the SEMA/trim has totally rolled up). More than this, the effort needed on the pedals to take over are very important and it's not possible to have a smooth action to control the aircraft, which is yet required when you hover near cliffs.

Another big deal....
http://www.safran-group.com/article.php3?id_article=1349&lang=en

[SASless]

more often than not pilots are reluctant to use that much pedal -they have never had to use it before so it can't be right so they lower the lever to reduce the rotation and usually land heavily.

Pray tell why a pilot would not push the pedal to the stop if needed? If the helicopter is yawing the "natural" instinct should be to counter the yaw with pedal....as much as needed. It is hitting the stop that sends the signal about the possibility of a problem....not the fact more pedal than "normal" is required.

If more than one CFS trained pilot has made that mistake as described....there is sure something wrong with the way they are being trained.

Does CFS teach a concept called: "THINK" or is it all hung up with "Quick Stop, Quick Stop, GO!" as a mindset?

[tbc]

Wasn't there an airspeed switch around 48 knots associated with the SAS Yaw channel?

From memory the SAS channel became 'live' at 48 KIAS anyone confirm?

[Farupthere]

No such "switch" on the 145. AP takes actual heading at 40 kts, and keeps it if you decelerate, unless proper pilot's input on pedals.

SASless points out an important fact concerning training, the quickstop topic is maybe more appropriate to discuss such matter (and goes far beyond RAF).
"limitations are for normal operations" I like it very much !

Back to LTA : in a hover, AP engaged, A/C keeps heading selected. If for some reason (turbulence, wind direction change...), correction is necessary, you have to take over. Remember I told the efforts are REALLY important to do so (and input must be more than 2°/sec). What may happen then ? A. Yaw channel recognizes pilot's input, OK. B. Yaw channel is still in control (pilot action was not detected). All inputs on pedals will be taken like "disturbancies", actuators are now working against pilot's inputs, until no more mechanical margin is left. When the nose begins to turn, it's too late.

[Ian Corrigible]

Back to the top...

MD Helicopter protests contract
East Valley Tribune (http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=69845) 7/18

MD Helicopters, a Mesa-based producer of light helicopters, has filed an official protest with the U.S. Army over the awarding of a $1.5 billion contract for a next-generation utility helicopter to a rival bidder. MDHI, which is located at Falcon Field, was one of four companies competing for the work. The winning bid was submitted by American Eurocopter, a unit of European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co., a French-German consortium.

The Army announced on June 30 that it planned to order 322 of Eurocopter’s UH-145 aircraft for light troop transport and other utility duties, replacing some machines that date back to the Vietnam War era. Although the company is foreign-owned, American Eurocopter said the aircraft would be built at a plant in Mississippi.

MDHI had proposed a modified version of its twin-engine Explorer for the Army’s use and would have assembled the aircraft in Mesa. If the local company had won, it would have provided a big boost to East Valley helicopter production and employment.

In a statement released last week, MDHI acting Chief Executive Lynn Tilton blasted the Army’s action as an”outrageous decision completely at odds with supporting American industry . . . The United States is struggling to stay competitive with its global neighbors, and our own taxpayer money is being poured into the coffers of foreign companies when that money could be going to rebuild this industry in our country.”

In an interview following the announcement, Tilton said MD’s bid may have been hurt by problems the company had under its previous ownership by RDM, a Dutch defense contractor. The company, which is a legacy of the former McDonnell Douglas Corp., was bought last year by Patriarch Partners LLC, a $5 billion New York-based private investment firm founded by Tilton. Patriarch has injected capital into the business and ramped up production of the company’s light helicopters in a comeback effort.

Tilton said the Army had not fully considered the company’s turnaround. “There is absolutely no question in my mind that the MDHI bid offered the best overall product and value,” she said.

Kimberly Henry, spokeswoman for the U.S. Army’s Aviation and Missile Command in Alabama, declined to comment on the specifics of MDHI’s complaint, saying “we need to let this play out.” She said neither of the other two losing bidders, Bell Helicopter or AgustaWestland, has filed a protest so far. A spokesman for EADS North America could not be reached Monday.

Under the Army’s contract procedures, protests are reviewed by a designated official who ranks above the contracting officers and who was not involved in the decision. The policy of the service is to decide the issue within 35 days, during which activity on the contract is suspended.

I/C

[tbc]

The point I am making is that if as I recall there was a Yaw airspeed switch (Gazelle) and from memory it did not 'kick in' until above 48 KIAS, then how does the SAS 'mask' the LTE/LTA issue?

[Coconutty]

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Teddyoutofthecot.jpg

What on Earth does she hope to achieve :sad:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[13snoopy]

Back to the top...
MD Helicopter protests contract
East Valley Tribune (http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/index.php?sty=69845) 7/18
MD Helicopters, a Mesa-based producer of light helicopters, has filed an official protest with the U.S. Army over the awarding of a $1.5 billion contract for a next-generation utility helicopter to a rival bidder. MDHI, which is located at Falcon Field, was one of four companies competing for the work. The winning bid was submitted by American Eurocopter, a unit of European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co., a French-German consortium.
The Army announced on June 30 that it planned to order 322 of Eurocopter’s UH-145 aircraft for light troop transport and other utility duties, replacing some machines that date back to the Vietnam War era. Although the company is foreign-owned, American Eurocopter said the aircraft would be built at a plant in Mississippi.
MDHI had proposed a modified version of its twin-engine Explorer for the Army’s use and would have assembled the aircraft in Mesa. If the local company had won, it would have provided a big boost to East Valley helicopter production and employment.
In a statement released last week, MDHI acting Chief Executive Lynn Tilton blasted the Army’s action as an”outrageous decision completely at odds with supporting American industry . . . The United States is struggling to stay competitive with its global neighbors, and our own taxpayer money is being poured into the coffers of foreign companies when that money could be going to rebuild this industry in our country.”
In an interview following the announcement, Tilton said MD’s bid may have been hurt by problems the company had under its previous ownership by RDM, a Dutch defense contractor. The company, which is a legacy of the former McDonnell Douglas Corp., was bought last year by Patriarch Partners LLC, a $5 billion New York-based private investment firm founded by Tilton. Patriarch has injected capital into the business and ramped up production of the company’s light helicopters in a comeback effort.
Tilton said the Army had not fully considered the company’s turnaround. “There is absolutely no question in my mind that the MDHI bid offered the best overall product and value,” she said.
Kimberly Henry, spokeswoman for the U.S. Army’s Aviation and Missile Command in Alabama, declined to comment on the specifics of MDHI’s complaint, saying “we need to let this play out.” She said neither of the other two losing bidders, Bell Helicopter or AgustaWestland, has filed a protest so far. A spokesman for EADS North America could not be reached Monday.
Under the Army’s contract procedures, protests are reviewed by a designated official who ranks above the contracting officers and who was not involved in the decision. The policy of the service is to decide the issue within 35 days, during which activity on the contract is suspended.
I/C
She better bring more than lip gloss if she think's she's gonna change anyone's mind...like maybe go-go boots and a leather micro-miniskirt!
Although from her glam shots she appears a little too "thighy" to wear that sort of outfit.:rolleyes: :mad:

[Coconutty]

Snoopy - haven't you heard :confused:

It's not the Thighs - it's the Quality that counts :E

:ok:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[13snoopy]

Snoopy - haven't you heard :confused:
It's not the Thighs - it's the Quality that counts :E
:ok:
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg
Good one. Very nice!:D :D :D

[helmet fire]

13doggie,
can you do us two favours please mate?
1. Stop quoting the entirety of posts made one or two posts earlier just to add pointless one liners?
2. Play the ball and not the man/woman?

It is obviously entirely relevant to the 322 machine decision that Ms Tilton is a bit "thighy" and you should keep beating that drum mate!:ugh: I am thinking that she would be barking mad not to protest this one as her commercial future hangs in the balance, and snoop-boy is concerned about her lip gloss and skirt length.

I think that Ms Tilton is as intrested in the tightness of snoop-boy's buns as we are in his pointless comments. Or maybe that's what pisses him off?

Welcome to the Helicopter Industry Ms Tilton: World leader of professionalism and of course, personal appearance advice.
:8

[Coconutty]

Helmet - well said.

I personally don't believe that anything will be achieved by the protest, I certainly can't see the powers that be changing their minds :rolleyes: .

As the CEO I suppose Lynn has a responsibility to air her views and re-inforce the ongoing change at MD, which can only be good - I just hope she doesn't ruffle too many feathers in the process.

It would have been a ludicrous decision to invest the amount of money she has and rely on winning the LUH contract to turn the company round, and her business plans will of course have considered that she might not.

She has publicly declared her faith in the products - and there have already been benefits to existing customers such as improved spares availability, and the 902 tail boom extension allowing an increase in the MAUW.

Keep up the good work :ok:

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d129/coconut11/Coconutty.jpg

[PANews]

I have spoken to her and more recently David Oglesby and I guess they knew all along they were on a pretty sticky wicket. The US Army were in at the start of Notar and rejected it as not meeting their preferences before it went on to commercial operations. They are unlikely to have changed their technical minds on that decision just because the CEO is good looking.

We can only guess at the reasons it was rejected but they are probably the usual ones relating to tail authority - potentially more important in a military situation.

Some of the existing sales slated for 2007 and beyond will undoubtedly be available earlier and that was always the unspoken agenda if [when!] the bid failed.

[Ian Corrigible]

...according to the press. The Lakota (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakota) were apparently one of a group of seven tribes (the Great Sioux Nation) and spoke Lakota, one of the three major dialects of the Sioux language.

Decision on the MDHI protest due today.

I/C

[Ian Corrigible]

LUH appeals rejected (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102400525.html), clearing the way for the UH-72 program to proceed. Look out for more Kiowas and Hueys on the gray market !

I/C