Helijet banned by TC from landing S-76Cs at certain B.C. hospitals
Thanks Gulli; very informative! Interesting to hear about the manual FCU control as EC were considering it for the EC155B (Arriel 2C1) but decided it was too coarse. For the B1 (2C2) they used a backup mode taking commands from the other FADEC.
The technique I teach for manual control of an engine in the C++ is to set 40% Tq with trim and just leave it there. As long as there is torque on the other (good) engine the RRPM will be governed at 107%. There should be no need to adjust the power on the manual engine at any stage of flight, unless you're heavy and landing to a hover in which case you just trim up as required to keep the governed engine from driving up to an OEI limit. For a running landing with manual engine at 40% Tq there is no risk of over-speeding the rotor when lowering collective after touch-down.
When landing to a hover with an engine in manual and high power setting it is very important to co-ordinate the lowering of the collective with the reduction in engine trim otherwise you can drive the governed engine into an OEI limit (if trim down power too quick), or overspeed the rotor (if you lower the collective too quick without reducing manual power). With some prior thought and a little practice it is very easy to operate the C++ with an engine in manual.
Double DECU failure and operating with both engines in manual is also straight forward if you lead with up collective prior to increasing power, and you lead with trim down before lowering collective. There is no rotor speed governing possible with both engines in manual control. This is something not often practiced with students as the likelihood of it ever happening is very remote.
When landing to a hover with an engine in manual and high power setting it is very important to co-ordinate the lowering of the collective with the reduction in engine trim otherwise you can drive the governed engine into an OEI limit (if trim down power too quick), or overspeed the rotor (if you lower the collective too quick without reducing manual power). With some prior thought and a little practice it is very easy to operate the C++ with an engine in manual.
Double DECU failure and operating with both engines in manual is also straight forward if you lead with up collective prior to increasing power, and you lead with trim down before lowering collective. There is no rotor speed governing possible with both engines in manual control. This is something not often practiced with students as the likelihood of it ever happening is very remote.
This is something not often practiced with students as the likelihood of it ever happening is very remote
@megan
I'm just happy if students remember to discharge the fire bottle as part of the engine fire drill. Double DECU fail and all those other obscure or infinitely unlikely possible malfunctions are a bridge way too far. Sticking to proficiency in the basic stuff usually takes up all of the available training time; hopefully should the dog of fate appear it's just a gentle bite.
I'm drifting way OT here, sorry about that. I'll shut up now.
I'm just happy if students remember to discharge the fire bottle as part of the engine fire drill. Double DECU fail and all those other obscure or infinitely unlikely possible malfunctions are a bridge way too far. Sticking to proficiency in the basic stuff usually takes up all of the available training time; hopefully should the dog of fate appear it's just a gentle bite.
I'm drifting way OT here, sorry about that. I'll shut up now.
https://www.verticalmag.com/press-re...heliports-b-c/
Helijet now approved for operations to hostile congested helipads with the C+. Anybody know what this new STC they have is all about?
Helijet now approved for operations to hostile congested helipads with the C+. Anybody know what this new STC they have is all about?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Canada
Age: 60
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Malabo asked:
I believe the issue with landing at these Helipads stems from TC organizing TC regulated helipads into H1, H2, and H3. In most cases where Helijet operates, the helipad is deemed H1. An H1 pad then for the most part requires a CAT A helicopter to operate to and from it. There was no CAT A certification for the S76C+ used by Helijet's air ambulance to fly to these hospitals in congested areas. Now having said that, Helijet, was operating well within the power envelope to meet what TC wanted, however, the S76C+ required other components to be certified to CAT A, not just the performance. From what I understand, Helijet had to seek an STC to operate the helicopter within the performance category of CAT A without the other components such as dual RADALT display, lower bubble window, a ratcheting collective (whatever that is, lol), etc. They required Sikorsky to provide them with the performance charts and profiles of CAT A to allow them to proceed without the province having to resort to an AW139! Someone from Helijet can better explain this but I think that is essentially the issue. I hope that clarifies it a bit.
Helijet now approved for operations to hostile congested helipads with the C+. Anybody know what this new STC they have is all about?
STC is by Maxcraft Avionics. There is a control box (Rad Alt/TDP Tone Generator) that allows you to set a TDP height via a dial and indicator window. When TDP is reached, an audio tone is heard.
There is also an Approach to Hover display unit.
RFM Supplement Number is FMS-05-70-00-087 Category "A" Urban Operations Sikorsky S-76C+/C++.
Eliminates the requirement for the vertical visibility door option.
There is also an Approach to Hover display unit.
RFM Supplement Number is FMS-05-70-00-087 Category "A" Urban Operations Sikorsky S-76C+/C++.
Eliminates the requirement for the vertical visibility door option.
