EMS Twin heli-which one?

[victor papa]

Sorry, I know similiar sites were done, but we got to a dead end and here is where we are.
Currently operate AS350B3 Squirrels with full ALS(advance life support) ambo kit(single patient).
Need to expand to twins to include extended night and IF operations. Minimum of 3 heli's required at 3 different stations.
Standard requirements for all 3: twin, single plt IFR, 2 ICU stretchers and 2/3 med crew(at worst 1 ICU, 1 litter patient), 2 pilot, min 3 hours range
Base 1: Full rescue capability in gusting mountain conditions, sea rescue
Base 2: 6000ft, average temp 38 degrees, alt and temp up to 8000ft @ 40 degrees.
Base 3: High humidity, alt up to 6600ft @ 32 degrees, definate 3 hrs + range.
We know we gonna have to compromise somewhere, but need 1 type to ease maintenance, rostering, interchangeability etc.
We have operating cost(manufacturer and 2 independant surveys), purchase price, performance graphs, machine availability for EC135, EC 145/BK 117C1 interim, MD Explorer, Agusta Grand, Bell 412, S-76, AS 365N2 & N3.

MD cheapest but no support here, range, rescue capability.
Agusta-expensive, lead time, cabin size, range
Bell 412- operating cost seem high, downtime?
S76- low rotor massive problem and restricting factor due to running crowds and often terrain.
EC135- 2 patient and crew hot and high not good

It seems it is between the EC145/BK and Dauphin(graphs, range-145 not good, payload after performance reduction for alt/temp). Anybody out there knowing both machines and/or who can shed a different light?:confused:

Pls, we are not critisizing any type, just looking at the requirements.

[What Limits]

Dig deep and go for the AW 139. None of the aircraft you have listed will get close to your requirements without serious compromises.

Besides, all in your list are old-tech. Get something nice and new!

[hostile]

I also recommend AW 139 on your operation. AS365N3 is almost what you need, but performance is not in same level than AW 139. Also, strong gusty side winds with fenestron might give you some interesting situations. Needs practice.

Hostile:ok:

[Quick Start]

Go for the N3
It's the best for hot and high and is smooth and fairly quiet
The 139 is not sorted yet, it needs another couple of years.

[Aser]

139 not sorted? c'mon! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[victor papa]

Thank you so far.

"what limits", the 139 is not a contender at the moment due to it's price tag, lead time and size. It is just to big to be accommodated on the current helipads.

Pls guys, I have to convince management why any twin(being slightly bigger) can not just take 2 patients in the same circumstances the B3 takes 1.

Difficult to explain the amazingness of the B3 and it's capabilities and performance!!!
AS350B3:D:ok:

[Aesir]

Bell 412- operating cost seem high, downtime?


The 412 is really in a different class than the smaller MD, EC, Agusta helicopters you mention.

It can do the job and more. Are you sure the operating cost is that high compared to other helicopters in it´s class.

You mention "downtime?" with question mark. Check thoroughly with other operators. It needs its scheduled maintenanace like the other types and length of downtime depends on your maintenance facility´s capabilities.

Also don´t forget to check out the Bell 429 (http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/aircraft/commercial/missions/429EMS.cfm).

http://www.bellhelicopter.com/en/assets/images/headers/commercialHeader.jpg

[BRASSEMUP]

Victor Papa,

What Country are you going to operate in?

[victor papa]

What difference will knowing the country make? The regulations is not an issue as we have to adhere to our clients requirements which is more restricted than the regs.

[BRASSEMUP]

Well i've used different types hot and high before that's all..................But oh well it doesn't matter!!!!!!!:rolleyes:

[victor papa]

HI BRASSEMUP

I did not intend to be rude. In the industry, especially here, people quickly start assuming and then cause havoc. That is why I gave the actual altitudes and average temps instead of location.

Pls, if you have flown various types hot and high, we need desperately to hear from you. The graphs only tell halve the story. We need as much help as we can get before committing and then realising it was a mistake. We are a non-profitable organisation not looking for the cheapest twin, but the one who will enable us to do our work.

One of the reasons we are careful for brand new models not yet fully prooved in extreme conditions, is that we will need reliability and proven performance. That is why we thought of asking the guys/girls who currently fly these models out there.
;)
TKS

[helopat]

Victor,

You've got a serious set of requirements in your first post. To be honest, I don't think the 109 would fit all that gear and people...especially with a requirement for 3 hrs endurance. I'd say you'll have to go for the 76 or the 412 if you need to get that kind of payload in the machine...don't know whether those machines will go the distance (3hrs). I have to agree that the 139 is probably the perfrect machine but if helipads aren't workable and lead time is a problem (which it is) then your choices are limited.

The real pitty is that the best machine for the job as you've stated it doesn't sound like an option because its costly...you're the poor fella who's got to convince the people with the purse strings that its the best choice...I don't envy you.

Best of luck...let us know how it all works out.

HP

[maxtork]

Just a thought without much to back it up...what about an EC155? If you get the B model you get the high HP 2C2 engines. It is plenty fast so the range might work out. Five main rotor blades should help at altitude and the bigger than the N3 cabin might be able to fit all your gear and people. Not sure about the purchase price or operating cost but they should be inline with the competion like the S76 etc. I'm sure EC can give you all the specifics but if you need any additional info let me know and I think I might be able to put ou in touch wit a useful resource!

Max

[victor papa]

Morning
Thanks. We can not go bigger than the machines listed. The 412 is a touch and go. The problem with the range is the return flight. Most flights approximately 1 hr to 1.5 to destination. If we do not have close to 3 hrs range, we will have to deploy fuel to all the hospitals which creates problems.

Based on performance only, 2 B3's per site would have been an almost perfect scenario. Unfortunately regulations are forcing us to seek a twin and thus 2 patients/machine. Obviously, we need a safety margin in the machines performance as well. No use we pull max TQ/N1 every take off otherwise we may just as well buy BO105's for next to nothing and operate under the smoke screen of a twin ops.:=:ugh:

[RVDT]

Those numbers you are quoting are a huge ask for any twin. The only difference would be that with an engine failure in either of the aircraft, twin or single, is the crash site might be in a slightly different place.

The answer to your capacity issues with the same performance would probably be an additional B3!

The B3 can operate Night and IFR, the issue is only the regulations. In light of the fact that you are not going to get a twin to match the B3's performance - change the rules!!

If that is not the answer and it appears you have ended up with either EC145 or AS365, talk to the guys at Nucleo Elicotteri Vigili del Fuoco in Trento Italy. Thay have operated eveything from Llamas to K2's to 117C to B2, now B3 and N3. I think you may end up with a combination of B3's and N3's like they have. Horse's for courses!!

Some of the engine parts are the same at least. Are you operating B3+ (2B1 engine).

[victor papa]

Yes we do as well as the older B3. The B3+ operates at Base 2 and do so with flying colours. We have had to take off(with patient onboard) at 2239kg, 6200 ft, 39 degrees and after dropping the patient we did a test flight to confirm that the VEMD does not get stuck at 8.8 on the FLI. She cruised with a smile at 138 knots begging for a "proper" workout.:D:O

[Swamp76]

SK76B

No problem with hot/high, fast, proven. The lower rotor is not an insurmountable issue.

Lots of S76 EMS cabin options.

Using en-route times is problematic, distances would tell more as the various models get there in different times. Low-level the B will give you 2:20-2:30 endurance. I wouldn't cruise it low for an hour though, and you can then get 3 hours.

[maxtork]

As was posted before you could possibly go with an additional B3 but if you are required to go twin how about an AS355NP? It is the new twin star with VEMD and upgraded ngines and such (not to be confused with the 355F models which I have heard not much good about). I did a quick look on ECs website and the useful load on the NP is 2447 Lbs compared to 2253 for the B3. It does burn a touch more fuel at 400 lbs/hr over the B3s 347 and it is a touch slower at 122kts vs 127kts at a higher gross weight. I'm not sure about cost but I would bet it is a good bit cheaper than the bigger twins you mentioned. Many of your airframe spares would be the same and transition training for the engineers would be pretty easy. You just wouldn't be able to put 2 patients onboard unless they were siamese twins!

Just a thought

Max

[victor papa]

We had a look at the new 355. Unfortunately the thinking is that if we go twin, the extra expense has to be justified by a second patient. That is what concerns us, because if we choose the wrong twin we will have a lot of explaining to do flying single patient because of limited performance at the altitudes and temps. If we were at lower altitudes and colder temps it would have been a lot easier.
How is the support for the S-76B at the moment or is it not affected by the development and marketing of the C++? Personally I have a good few years on the A++ and C+.

[ShyTorque]

The S-76B, being no longer in production, is a fine machine but support has to be somewhat suspect. Having flown A++ and C for SAR and Casevac and the B and C+ for corporate work, I suggest you find out how long a replacement main gearbox will take to arrive. The big problem I see with the B model is the higher basic weight (how heavy will your internal fit be?) and the higher fuel burn. All things taken into consideration, sadly it might not have the long "legs" you need.

[victor papa]

HI

I worked with the s-76A++, C+ and N2, N3 offshore. I was never directly involved with the Dauphins. We are getting conflicting reports about the N3's capabilities hot and high. Anybody out there having flown the EC145 and N3 hot and high? Please advise.

[Bitmonx]

Have a look at the Agusta 109 Grand. The Swiss rescue REGA will be using them for rescues in the mountains and use the EC145 at lower altitudes.
I don't know the price tag of a 109 Grand but it is fast and has lots of power.

[havoc]

How is the search going?

The temps (+30C) in Montana has sparked discussion whether the 407 is best suited here. 2 years left on the lease so the interest is there now for maybe a better suited EMS aircraft. The pilots were not part of the orginal discussion on what to put in service (hospital based program).

[victor papa]

havoc, we are still nowhere!!

We are at a point were we are revisiting the regulations, MOP's and SOP's. The company is devided. We basically have to decide whether we move to a twin for the prestige and idea of a second engine and distribute fuel to all possible landing sites further than 1 hour flying time(easy until you try and figure out how you are going to manage the fuel and it's checks and the security there off in a developing country) or whether we stay with our B3's and renew the fleet with B3+ and always being accused of pushing the laws with single engine. :ugh::ugh:
We are currently evaluating the twins using HOGE and OEI performance. If it can not pass this, our question will be to the authorities what is the difference between a twin with no OEI/HOGE in our environment and a single(definately not the cheapest on the market, but in our experience the one)B3? Keep in mind that we easily get a 3 hour range out of the B3+. We fly them at 8.5(max all up)/8(en route) on the FLI and then burn as little as 120kg/hr with the altitudes. Despite some hairy rescues in 60 knot winds in the mountains doing short haul/hoisting, we have not recorded any limits reached in 18 months on the VEMD.
This complicates the transition to the twins if their performance is going to be marginal in the conditions.

In short, HELP!!!!!!!!!!

[havoc]

Good luck on this process, asking the other pilots here you get 3 answers and of course the mech said he would walk if we put xxx model here. LOL


Intersting enough the other hospital in our city flies a 135 and a week ago had an engine seize. Our med crews are asking alot of questions about our 407 single engine.

[victor papa]

What was the 3 answers and which model would cause the engineer to walk? Surely not the B3- our engineers would rather look after 10 B3's than 2 twins it seems.

Was it a 135T or P? Following the ATSB site for twin incidents/accidents and their outcome, it seems there has been a few P's in trouble with chips or banging noises which is why I ask.

If the twin had OEI and HOGE capability during the failure the med's have a point, however if it did not-what is the difference other than the expectation or hope that the remaining engine will cause you not to enter auto if possible?

[rotorrookie]

Why twin? VP you just have to convince the guy with the check that singles are just as safe for this job. You could proably have two for one twin, then having 2per site.
Why would a small twin be any safer when its operated near HOGE limits hot an high, most of the twins you mentioned have a crap OEI performance anyway.
and when the pilots know they are operating near limits it will automatically increase stress factor wich can make the flight unsafer and increse the possibility of pilot making an error and twins are more to handle.

In what small twin would it not make any difference loosing one engine when operating near HOGE limits??? I think you would hit the dirt in the twin too
But if you are flying offshore thats a diffrent thing and always good to a spare one if you dont like swimming

Can't you not have a mixed fleet of singles and twins??
But I say BE SMART FLY BELL go for 412:ok:

[havoc]

VP,

The 135 engine was a P206 series, 1st failure of this engine series apparently, all the parts went out the back with no other damage to the Acft. They did have OEI power and did a run on at the home airport.

The mech is dead set against S-76, he has worked on them before and hates them. He is very tempermental.

Two pilots love the 109, they used to fly for the Columbia River Bar pilots in Astoria OR, http://www.columbiariverbarpilots.com/

#3 pilot wants a 117 because that all he knows in the civil EMS world.

When the discussion comes up from the med crews about what aircraft we would like, we try to answer with what is it you plan to do with it and build from there.

No good answers just more opinions. I guess it all comes down the the guy with the check book.

[victor papa]

Morning

From the hangar floor this side there is total agreement with your mech. It seems a S-76 is fine in a offshore scenario with all the support, but to keep 1 or 2 going EMS, the engineers here also say NO!!

As I have said before, the cheque book is not the problem. The problem is justifying the money spend. If a twim makes a clear difference to safety it is decided. However, for all the extra expense, maintenance, downtime, fuel we need a definite improvement and can not afford being able to do less than what we do currently with the B3.

What is the lead time on the Agusta Grand"s now?

[ShyTorque]

Lead time is about 18 months. If you are lucky.

[victor papa]

HI ALL

What is the performance of the B4 like? There are a few operating here and none of the operators seems to want to trade it for anything else. Thinking is we want a second pilot if we go beyond sunset which the B3 can't give us. The twins are battling to give us any safety advantage and definately not our current range capability. So, what instead of a twin we put a B3+(for rescues, especially day long/heavy patient trips) and a B4 as a standby and extended night VFR machine with 2 pilots and 1 stretcher. This arrangement will take off a lot of pressure from the maintenance department as 1 machine out of the 2 can always remain online with some planning and should cover an AOG situation leaving one available. The B4 has the second hydraulic system and other than the tail, the spares are the same.

If our SOP's are written correctly, we might be able to convince the regulatory body based on the performance figures of the twins and as was said earlier the lack of hitting limits continuously enabling the crew to concentrate on more than just a T4/TQ gauge.

Any ideas?:(:hmm:

[maxtork]

VP,

Becareful with that idea as I'm not sure you can get two pilots and a patient in a B4. There are a few EMS B4s out there but I think they run a north south patient arrangement just like the B3 does which puts one end of the patiet where the duals would go. You may be able to find an EMS interior for it that puts the patient across the back wall but it might be tight. It is a wider cabin but not THAT wide. You might check on that first. Other wise they are a good machine very much like the B+. They do have some quirks though like the variable rotor RPM that the B3 doesn't have. It (in my opinion) isn't as smooth as the B3 either. As far as the dual hydraulics I think they are selling th new B3s with the dual set up like the B4 now as well so if that was a big saftey issue you can get it without going to the wide cabin.

I have lots of B4s in my area that I look after (about 40 of em!) so I can probably get you some good info on it if you choose to go that way.

Hope it helps

Max

[victor papa]

maxtork, I just confirmed with the local Eurocopter division. They are adamant there is a kit with 2 pilots and 1 stretcher. Have a meeting next week, asked for an STC to confirm. If so, it will be a good solution? I have some experience on the B4(couple of months) and have some idea of the differences. If you look after 40 of them, please assist. I am not sure whether the kit is full ALS, but even if it is litter it is better than nothing and not less than the twin would have given us.
I believe from the local operators that the B4 does not loose a lot hot and high-sort of level out with the 2250kg max all up?

[maxtork]

VP,

One of the bennefits of the B4 over the older B3 is the variable rotor RPM. It is controlled by the tail rotor position potentiometer as well as the altitude. Normally it is use for slowing the rotor down in cruise to make it quieter but at high altitudes it also raises the NR above the nominal 100% (393rpm). This could be a bennefit when you are getting close to the limits giving a bit more performance. The newer B3+s with the dual channel have a similar set up. They have the same inputs to the engine computer but the potentiometer is mouted in the baggage compartment on the tail rotor control linkage via a long sloppy link. This means the NR is set at nominal just like the old B3 for most flight regimes but at high pedal inputs and high altitude it will raise the NR just like th B4 for better performance. In my opinion this is the best of both worlds. So based on this fact alone I would say the B4 is better than the old B3 but probably about the same as the new B3+. I haven't had a chance to look at the charts in the book to see if there is any appreciable increase from one to another but again that is only on paper and that doesn't always transfer to real world. Unfortunatley I can't think of any of my customers that run the B4 and the B3 so it may be hard to find one person who knows both well other than an EC pilot.

Over all I can't say anything really bad about the B4. It has it's quirks like most aircraft but all in all I think it is a good machine. My biggest complaint is the variable NR which can make things rough. The hammers under the floor are tuned per rotor rpm so if you change the NR the hammers aren't in tune anymore and it'll shake the fillings out of your teeth! As long as you tune it for an NR and fly at that NR it should be fine. The blades still tend to drum on the big wide cabin but it isn't too bad.

Max

[victor papa]

Just an update.

We have been operating our new old B4 for a week now. We ended up designing our own ALS kit which allows for either single or two pilot. The 2 pilot is not much less space for the patient than the B3 but the general feedback has been extremely positive from the meds due to the perception of more space due to the visibility and light. Single pilot of course she is a dream come true for the meds with all the space. The stretcher loading mechanism was tricky for loading 2 pilot, but the engineering geniusses got it to work beautifully especially with the RH door STC which allows it to open.

So far the performance is great especially at the cost. The flying types are getting comfortable with the fenestron characteristics and performance. We are surprised how well she handles strong winds as we get more experience flying her.

We are still looking at light twins and the arguments are all the same. The only difference is that the B4 is silencing her critics more and more daily!

[JimL]

You might wish to check this out - specifically the performance data at the back of the document.

http://www.jaat.eu/secured/Operations/Public%20Documents/TGLs/AGM%20S4%20Ops%20TGL%2043%20HEMS%20Mountain%20Ops%20Feb%2008 %20Print.pdf

Jim

[EC145Pilot]

We have been flying the EC145 for a few years in the alps above 3000m and in the pyrenees. Despite all that has been said about the EC145 crews are happy with it for their daily rescue missions (for those intimate with the french helicopter "world" our choppers are blue; so now you know who I work for). I might post later the typical weight, load, endurance for their missions, but I first need to give them a call (I fly the EC145 but in the plains).
Like any chopper it won't do everything but it will do nice things.
We now have one EC145 flying in French Guyana but it's too early for a precise update. In a few weeks one will arrive in La Réunion (Indian Ocean) where it will fly both hot and high. I'll try yo keep everyone informed on how it performs.
cheers.

[148SQN]

Look into the Md902 Explorer :)

[ChopperFAN]

Does the 427 suit the EMS role? I know its 1 patient, but how does it handle hot and high conditions?

Is Alfa helicopter the only company that uses it for a simular role

Thanks Simon