PPRuNe Forums


Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30th Dec 2016, 17:37   #1 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Iceland
Age: 51
Posts: 779
S92 "unexpected control responses"

Anyone heard what happened here?

North Sea Helicopter Spins on Helideck During Emergency Landing - Oil and Gas News
Aesir is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 17:53   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 22
From what I hear the aircraft had some sort of tail rotor bearing failure which resulted in loss of control on the tail rotor.

The crew were very fortunate that the failure happened over the helideck and not over the water, for sure, it could have been a hell of a lot worse.

I also believe Sikorsky were aware of issues with this type of bearing beforehand so it will be interesting to see how they respond.
Mitchaa is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 19:21   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,342
well if there response is the same for their light helicopter programme then I wouldn't hold your breath. Was given by them beginning of the year 333 days AOG for a life item !!!!! Now that s what I call support !
Hughes500 is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 19:47   #4 (permalink)


Probationary PPRuNer
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Near the surface
Posts: 4
Interesting story. My initial reaction on the news item title was a tail rotor drive failure - 'spins' -. After reading the article and Mitchaa's reply it looks more like a tail rotor controle failure at a certain power setting.

In times like these it would be interesting to have a rotor variant of avherald.com.
breakdip is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 21:35   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sometimes here, sometimes there
Posts: 354
Perhaps related to this AD, issued earlier this month?

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu..._Emergency.pdf
Variable Load is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 23:00   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 270
Ground them
roundwego is offline  
Old 30th Dec 2016, 23:06   #7 (permalink)

Nigerian In Law
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Haven't Been There, Never Done That
Posts: 761
Oh dear. Another "death by press" incident ?

NEO
Nigerian Expat Outlaw is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 10:31   #8 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: dark side off the sea!!
Posts: 142
Bring back the S-61
jonnyloove is online now  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 11:48   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,020
If nearly all the large helicopters in the NS are Super Puma then nearly all the incidents will involve Super Puma.

If nearly all the large helicopters in the NS are S-92 then nearly all the incidents will involve S-92.

Simples.
jimf671 is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 12:14   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Earth.
Posts: 462
Does anyone know if EASA issued an AD aswell? I am having problems getting on to the EASA AD system.

Thanks,

TiP
TiPwEiGhT is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 12:51   #11 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: In the air with luck
Posts: 914
Don't worry Hughes500
The wait will be worth the 3\400% up lift in price
500e is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 18:15   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: aberdeen,scotland
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimf671 View Post
If nearly all the large helicopters in the NS are Super Puma then nearly all the incidents will involve Super Puma.

If nearly all the large helicopters in the NS are S-92 then nearly all the incidents will involve S-92.

Simples.
jimf671 You hit the nail on the head . If it was TRPC shaft bearing then massive well done to the crew....things like that can happen to ANY helicopter , it's all our worst nightmare scenario. Good result everyone walked away ! 👍.

Last edited by chance it; 31st Dec 2016 at 21:03. Reason: Grammar
chance it is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 18:36   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: OS SX2063
Age: 46
Posts: 994
TipWeight,

It does not appear that EASA have issued an AD, a simple search (which took a long time to work) returned no recent results for 's92'.

Gary
VeeAny is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 19:19   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sometimes here, sometimes there
Posts: 354
An AD issued by the regulator responsible for initial type certification will automatically apply. So no EASA specific AD required and compliance by all EASA aircraft to the FAA AD is required.

Here's an extract from the UK CAA website (see also CAP 747).

"Aircraft on the UK Register are required to comply with applicable UK ADs, European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) ADs and those issued by the National Authority of the State of Design."
Variable Load is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 22:40   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 22
Realistically the S92 should be grounded to find out what the hell is happening with this bearing.

Same as the EC225, looks like it's failed twice, even after OEM intervention.

Money talks though and both CAA and EASA know they cannot ground this helicopter.

If one goes into the North Sea with casualties, all hell will break loose, that is a certainty. CHC, (And equally all the other operators that are aware) Sikorsky, CAA and EASA all to blame. At least two occurrences with inadequate actions, they need to be very very careful. This happens again, the lawyers will be over the lot of them.

Was always going to happen, S92 is no different to the EC225, I'm not sure who I trust more, the Yanks or the French. I think they are both as equally as incompetent as each other. The U.S just don't seem to hinge upon safety as much as we do in Europe.

Let's just hope this failure mode doesn't cause loss of life otherwise S92 will become the new EC225.

Last edited by Mitchaa; 1st Jan 2017 at 08:31.
Mitchaa is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 23:19   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: N of 49th parallel
Posts: 52
Your first two sentences use the words "realistically" and "actually" in a vain attempt to justify your argument. Sorry, but you fail.

Two fatal accidents (L2 & EC225) with full independent investigations do not find a root cause. The latest EC225 accident also highlights that HUMS did not provide any indications of an issue, yet resulted in a catastrophic failure with no chance of any survivors.

I'm not going to waste bandwidth drawing the lack of comparison!

I do wish there was a "bullsh1t" coughing emoticon that I could use.
Apate is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 23:41   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apate View Post
Your first two sentences use the words "realistically" and "actually" in a vain attempt to justify your argument. Sorry, but you fail.

Two fatal accidents (L2 & EC225) with full independent investigations do not find a root cause. The latest EC225 accident also highlights that HUMS did not provide any indications of an issue, yet resulted in a catastrophic failure with no chance of any survivors.

I'm not going to waste bandwidth drawing the lack of comparison!

I do wish there was a "bullsh1t" coughing emoticon that I could use.
I see it how it is. This is pointing to the same failure mode as Sikorsky have already identified. This makes it exactly the same as the bevel EC225 incident in respects to that after an emergency AD, the same failure happens again.

You want to sugar coat this?

HUMS? EC225 bevel WAS picked up on the flight before. Was this failure mode? Who knows?

So who do you work for? CAA, CHC Silorsky or EASA? I'm independent and have no vested interest other than complete transparency, my own brother flys these (outwith Europe) and my own son leaves and returns to Aberdeen every 3wks hence my input.

Let's paint a pretty picture and convince ourselves everything is good though.

I just hope this issue gets resolved quickly now.

Last edited by Mitchaa; 1st Jan 2017 at 08:38.
Mitchaa is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 23:47   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 22
And what do you mean finds no cause? We know in both cases that it was planetary gear failure and we know in both cases of the ditchings it was bevel shaft failure.

G-REDL was missed due to the incompetence and lack of communication between Eurocopter and Bond. An early detection warning was present in the form of a chip that was produced and the incorrect actions were taken.

With reference to the EC225 bevel, early detection was also evident in the HUMS graphs which showed rising trends beforehand (but were subsequently ignored or missed)

I have no idea if there was an early warning here or not other than there is a specific check for this particular failure mode on the HUMS system. I'm sure this will come to light in the investigation going forward.

Last edited by Mitchaa; 1st Jan 2017 at 08:40.
Mitchaa is offline  
Old 31st Dec 2016, 23:52   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 424
Mitch,

This has happened a lot more than twice unless there is another tail rotor bearing that fails and requires a run on landing due locked or loss of thrust. I heard of two back six or so years. One in Norway for sure.

The Sultan
The Sultan is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2017, 00:35   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: N of 49th parallel
Posts: 52
Quote:
So who do you work for? CAA, CHC Silorsky or EASA?
Nope - I don't even work for Sikorsky!

Quote:
I'm independent and have no vested interest other than complete transparency, my own brother flys these (outwith Europe) and my own son leaves and returns to Aberdeen every 3wks hence my input.
I suggest you move over to another forum. This one is for professional pilots.
Apate is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 23:14.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1