SAR machine - what's the best choice?

[3top]

Hi all,

gentlemen, I am asking you to help me to analyze the best machine for a serious SAR-outfit.
a) Looking for realworld experience (I have non to speak of...)
b) Considering airframe size S-76, Bell 212/412, SA-365
c) Considering airframe size BK117/EC145, Bell 230/430, Agusta
d) Considering airframe size AS-350/355, Bell 407/417, Agusta A119

I really appreciate your take on this!

My partner in this is a die-hard 412 man, although from a crewchief point of view. I would really like to convince him to at least look at alternatives, especially from the drivers point of view. He doesn't seem to have any experience with the 76 or 365 ( neither do I, but I am very open to suggestions, he is rather not :))

c)+d) are only options for a SAR "light"-approach and for a rather Air-Ambulance service with an occasional SAR flight. I understand that with d) SAR is rather limited for range and weight, though the A119 seems to be a fast and powerful rig.

Also operational differences are welcome, ops cost, weight/fuel/distance considerations.

I can find most of the data from publications, but we all know that in the real world machines are heavier, less powerful, and no (factory:)) test pilots at the controls!
Nothing means more than REAL experience!

Thanks in advance for your time and effort with this!!:ok:

3top :cool:

[Um... lifting...]

There are a lot of factors here... you probably need to sit down with your partner and develop a performance specification. To say you need a SAR bird is a vague thing. It's like saying "I need a motor vehicle".
Are you working:
Offshore?
Mountains?
Hot?
Heavy?
What radius of action do you need?
Long Range?
Fuel Available?
EMS?
Who's paying for this?
What's the budget?
Who maintains it?
How you gonna stay current?
Winching?
Slinging?
Cabin space?
And those are all before my morning coffee...

[Gomer Pylot]

Anything other than a 412. No range, no speed, rough, and mid-last-century technology, poorly done.

[170']

I operate 412's on Mountain and Maritime SAR, I agree the whistles and bells are dated. even on the new ones we operate. But!

Overall It's a reliable workhorse with no hangar queen tendencies. And spends a lot less time being maintained than our Dauphins. The rearcrew prefer it, and I don't know of any of the Bell drivers with their hand up to move to the Dauphin service. The few that changed over, did it for schedule purposes more than equipment choice, and all regret the move. Schedules aside!

We operate in a region of high winds and mountainous terrain, and the Dauphin TR control issues can be a problem in winch ops.

The Dauphin is perhaps better in EMS operations, speed etc. Perhaps better within it's class for longer range maritime ops. where you can more easily be assured of getting the wind in the right place. In a tight ravine with only one possible position. It's my choice to stay with the Bell.

I'm not saying the 412 is the only solution. or the best overall machine. But it does a good job in our application and shouldn't be discounted as a possible entrant in the proposed service.

170'

[3top]

GOmer, thanks, I kind of feel like that, but without any 412 (or 76 or 365) experience, I can't really make any statement, that's why I ask:)
UM..l..
maybe I posted the wrong question:
What I am looking for is a pilot-side comparison of the machines mentioned.
My partner is the die-hard 412 man, "Its a tank, its what I know, its the best, its the only one, its invincible!" HOw do I make him open the eyes, to at least admit there is other airframes and it takes evaluation. No doubt the 412 can do the job, but what if there is a better, more economic, safer airframe, at least lets look at it!
Make no mistake he knows his job, but he was "indoctrinated" for 20+ years on this rig - crew, but not driver. "A Bell is a Bell is a Bell, and nothing beats it" - Syndrome....
What I am looking for is discussion like the one we just had about the S-76.
But please include the 412 for experience.
If I can get everyone to discuss also the other airframes mentioned I will split this thread into 3....
I try to answer your points below as good as possible for a start.
3top:cool:
Offshore?
yes
Mountains?
highest 12000ft ISA+20, normal ops will do with 4000ft ISA+20
Hot?
very, and humid too
Heavy?
likely
What radius of action do you need?
for the 412/76/365 group 150nm offshore, 200nm over land
Long Range?
yes
Fuel Available?
yes, but not many places to put up depots
EMS?
will be part of the duties
Who's paying for this?
contract, but will scrutinize the proposal for performance/cost effectivness
What's the budget?
For this discussion assume, limited for procurement to 3-4 used frames in the 412/76/365 size
Who maintains it?
operator, ourselves
How you gonna stay current?
inhouse training, contracted personal
Winching?
yes
Slinging?
possible, but not essential initially
Cabin space?
As much as possible, but everything else is more important, we adjust to space available
And those are all before my morning coffee...
It is grown in the country, minimum pilot requirement - 5 mugs a day! :)

[3top]

170',

thanks for your input!
That's exactly what I need! I am not against or for any particular machine (... though I do like the Dauphine, but that is very subjective, never was in one, so when I get a chance the big dissapointment might wait....).

How does range/load compare? Especially the S-76B and the 412?

3top

PS: I am looking forward to get my hands on ANY of the bigger rigs!:)

[Um... lifting...]

In no particular order:
365N2 with the N3 tail rotor (you won't get a used N3, Ns are old and underpowered, N1s are worse).
S-76C or C+ maybe, though I'm no 76 expert. I gather the B is underpowered (or more correctly, too heavy... that's like the N1)
I like most of the Bells I've flown, but I wouldn't use 'em for SAR (they're crappy search platforms for one... they shake too much). I disagree with tail rotor comments about 365s... good crosswind authority once you get out of the N1 tail rotor, and the N3s t/r is the best so far. If you need more than 35kts crosswind capability, you might already be in some trouble. I've winched downwind, crosswind, in stack gas burble... I don't buy the tail rotor argument for a second. Also, if you're in that tight a space or have to land in the bush... it's hard to knock the blades off a 365 tail rotor. The 12,000' requirement might be pushing it for a N2, but I'm not sure of that... the N3 would do fine.
Most things smaller you're hard-pressed to put a large stretcher case in the cabin and work on the patient. I know, the clam-shell door machines are good for that, but they tend to be more of a specialty EMS machine, and those clam-shell doors do you no good in flight.
In short, everything's a tradeoff. Everybody likes what they know, but if your pilot's only flown a 412, how does he know it's best for the job? A 412 cruises at what... 110? A 365 or 76 will cruise at 140, so your Golden Hour radius just increased by 30 miles... look at a map and see if that matters to you or not.
Your pilot also might find he likes Sikorsky or stepping on the other pedal. A 412 is a pickup truck... a 76 or a 365 is more of a utility vehicle. Sort out the extreme cases on potential missions, get hold of some performance charts for the respective machines and play with those. Sounds like you don't want a mixed fleet, but you want something that can do everything you want adequately (normally the compromise one ends up with) and one or two things exceptionally. DOCs will also be a factor, and spares. There's no such thing as the perfect machine, but something in the 10000# region is probably where you want to be. I think if your pilot DOESN'T at least explore other alternatives when he has a chance to set something up from scratch, he's out of his mind.
Ay caramba! Where's my coffee?

[3top]

Um..l...,

come down here to visit and I get you all the coffee you ever want!
Might get addicted to the local stuff though, watch out :)!

My partner in this is a fixed wing (AF) pilot. He knows the 412 only from the rearseats - or occasional fly along in a front bucket.

The 12000 ft is only the highest spot in the country, I guess we would have to fly with little fuel and unload a lot, 'cause up there is no place to put down - winch it would be!

I have to look it up - I think I remember the S-76B has PT-6 engines and is therefor rather heavy and a fuel-guzzler ( can't be worse than the 412 though....), but I think someone on the other thread claimed it has the best OEI numbers of them all.
What I liked best for (supposedly) most S-76 models is, that Vne is generally your first limit!?:) Anyone to confirm?

3top

[SARREMF]

Ladies and Gentlemen

The future choice for SAR will be the AW 139. It has everything you want in bucket loads. Having flown the 412 [in the SAR role] I would, now, only look to the future and think about the 139.

The 412 was a good old bus but you don't have to accept a limited OEI capability [if at all]. You don't have to accept a cramped cabin. You can carry more than 6 people in the back and you can still have 2 hrs fuel and be OEI [depending on conditions obviously].

The future is bright and it has 139 all over it!

[3top]

Well, I wish I could, but this baby is just a little to big, financially - at this time! Besides I fear the deliverytime is outrages (2+ years??)
Any used ones on the market?

3top

[Um... lifting...]

Ah, bufala mozzarella and fresh tomatoes... and sauvignon blanc (unconventional, I admit, but still...)
Nah, no such thing as a used AW-139, not yet, certainly not 3-4 of them, and while initial indications are it's going to be a terrific aircraft (I hope so, I'm planning on flying it sooner or later), a small operator is probably not the one to sort out the inevitable bugs anyway. That's why I was aiming you at the N2 Dauphin and the 76C or C+, they're probably available and reasonably mature. I figured you had a time constraint as well as a budgetary one.
Also, remember, depending upon your geographical peculiarities, you probably only need "so much" helicopter. To get the wrong machine is not to optimize the operation. Like I said... I'd start by bracketing 10,000# by maybe 1500-2000# either side... anything smaller probably won't suit, anything bigger will probably cost too much one way or another.

[3top]

Which gets us right into the 412/76/365 arena...

Which one would be the most economic to run?
IS C&D fairly accurate on these?
Hangar Queens?

Looking up the Agusta A119, I like it better every time I read it over!
We are aiming for a different job (contract) as a start (that's where the time constraint comes from....).
At some point we also want to go for the Tourist-market, and there the A119 is less than optimal for pax-visibility.
On the other hand, with the first jobs being less critical for cargo-room visibility, the all around specs look excellent for the A119.
Not a real SAR-machine, it nevertheless can carry a good winch and has a lot of range - called SAR-"lite":)
And they are on the used market - is this a good or bad sign? The A119 is not that old yet...

Anyone know of any hidden problems with the A119 - except for the old T/R.
I assume that can be replaced with the new one...

3top:cool:

[andTompkins]

Will the Agusta pilots run a full touchdown auto during training or demo flights? I've never heard anything good about the A119 OEI performance ... :} ... but those could be rumors.

Tompkins

[3top]

There is a A119 in the area, but I never saw them doing a Full-touchdown-Auto.

Any issues with the Auto on the A119??

3top

[GLSNightPilot]

There is no way you can go 150 miles offshore with a 412 and come back, without refueling at least once. That's just out and back, nevermind any search and rescue. It just doesn't have that range. 2:45 max fuel endurance, no reserve at all, in an SP, less with HP/EP, and 110 knots cruise, if you're not too heavy.

[Scattercat]

GLSNightPilot

I'd have to dissagree ... I've done 165 nm out with 20 min on-scene to winch in a HP. Admittedly we have ERA's giving us a little over 4 hrs.
That said ... I'd be looking at modern technology over 60's stuff.
Go the AW139!!

[GLSNightPilot]

God, what crap those Era tanks are. The gauges are worthless, and it takes absolutely forever to get them full of fuel. But there isn't much other choice for getting decent range out of a 412.

[iac]

Ditch the Dauphan idea, Irish air corp have just sold off theirs to be replaced by aw 139's, dogged with problems from the start; overweight and underpowered when kitted out with SAR gear and search rader hence poor endurance, then had problems on upgrades, ended up with mix of analog & digital systems. A DOG :(

[helopat]

Will the Agusta pilots run a full touchdown auto during training or demo flights? I've never heard anything good about the A119 OEI performance ... :} ... but those could be rumors.

Tompkins

Correct me if I'm wrong (and appologies for getting off subject) but isn't the A119 a single engine machine? If so, then OEI performance is ALL THE TIME :}

Happy to eat my hat if I'm wrong here.

Anyhoo....

HP

[tottigol]

Will the Agusta pilots run a full touchdown auto during training or demo flights? I've never heard anything good about the A119 OEI performance ... :} ... but those could be rumors.

Tompkins


I fully agree with you, OEI performance decidedly sucks in a '119.:rolleyes:

[Helimikey]

Agusta 119 Koala is definetely a single engine helicopter. The 109 series are twins...

[Saint Evil]

Having flown the odd few SAR Cabs, if you can go for one with a fully articulated head. The semi-ridgid ones I have flown have all been worse in the hover and don't ride the bumps as well.

Bigger is good as they can take more pounding and shrug it off better than the little toy ones(412 etc).