Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

ADA AW139 Ditched?

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

ADA AW139 Ditched?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd May 2017, 07:55
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Difficult but a good call by the skipper in my honest opinion. Better to be in the water awaiting rescue than in a heap near the land.
RWing is offline  
Old 2nd May 2017, 11:48
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 5,926
Received 391 Likes on 206 Posts
It is worth noticing that the crew duly implemented the flight manual procedure, safely terminating the mission and confirming the outstanding reliability and modern design of the world-class leading AW139
Crew may contend that if it had been in sea state 6, sub zero temps, with SAR a long, long way away.
megan is online now  
Old 2nd May 2017, 12:03
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,283
Received 498 Likes on 207 Posts
All's well that ends well!

The Crew and Passengers are safe.

The helicopter is merely a reusable shipping container for its contents!

I might be a scaredy cat but upon the second indication OR hearing odd unusual bad noises from the MGB area......I would have parked it on something solid or on its floats.

Guessing wrong with cast iron failures carries a serious penalty!
SASless is offline  
Old 2nd May 2017, 12:34
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wanaka, NZ
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
How many other AW139's have been parked on the water? The only other one I can think of was in Hong Kong, and they had a pretty good reason for parking that one after the tail rotor went for a swim first.

What ever resulted from that Bristow Nigeria S76C++ getting parked in the Atlantic? Discussion on that ran out of steam a long time ago.
gulliBell is offline  
Old 2nd May 2017, 19:08
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: N of 49th parallel
Posts: 199
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Despite the good outcome, there still needs to be an understanding on why one of the floats failed and the aircraft inverted in what must have been pretty benign conditions.

The obvious question is "are the floats up to the job"? As gulliBell points out we don't have much history to go on.
Apate is offline  
Old 2nd May 2017, 19:36
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,738
Received 149 Likes on 74 Posts
Several helicopter I have flown. RFM States words to this effect:
"Floats are designed to allow enougn time to evacuate the aircraft."
Also activities during evacuation or salvage can easily cause float deflation.
albatross is offline  
Old 3rd May 2017, 04:27
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 714
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts
Leonardo knows how to handle an incident. Airbus could learn.
I dunno, Sultan. Leonardo's press release was strategically ambiguous. "Nothing wrong with the transmission", and in the same breath "crew complied with RFM direction and ditched". As an owner or insurance company I could rightly be peeved at such a statement. As far as the whole "ditch the bitch" sentiment, there would be no 92's flying today if all of them followed the RFM on an engine fire warning. Like Megan said, sounds easy in daytime warm flat water, different story where you will statistically lose a few even with a good ditching.
malabo is online now  
Old 3rd May 2017, 05:03
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: daworld
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
malabo, where are you getting "nothing wrong with the transmission". That is absolutely NOT what Leonardo said.

They only said that there was no sign of oil pressure loss and no sign of leakage.

That is VERY different to what you are stating.

So Sultan is on the ball with what he said.

Was there an earlier revision of this letter that said something different???

I see no reason for owners or insurers to be "peeved". Quite the opposite. They should be happy that a statement of known FACTS was released so soon by the Transmission OEM (Leonardo).
noooby is offline  
Old 3rd May 2017, 11:58
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wherever the work is
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To answer Apate's question, we service our own floats at the operation where I work (AW139) and we regularly send them back for repair as they fail the leak checks due to damage/wear/degradation. It's not often we have a full set of floats that pass the annual servicing, at least one or two fail.
NomadicMechanic is offline  
Old 3rd May 2017, 19:11
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What happened to the certification requirement for sea state 4 with the critical cell deflated? Has that gone?
AnFI is offline  
Old 3rd May 2017, 20:09
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,738
Received 149 Likes on 74 Posts
We do not know when or how the float got deflated. Are not all float bags dual cell?
Just wondering. I don't have a 139 endorsement so am not posting with any knowledge of the float system attached thereto.
Kudos to the crew for their decision to ditch and successfully carry it out.
High temp followed by secondary indications ..Land immediately seems to be the go to procedure.
Second guessing from the comfort of the couch is a PPrune is SOP on this site. Given the inability to climb out of the aircraft in flight, open the cowlings and investigate..the crew had to react to the indications, and secondary indications they were faced with.
I don't think anyone is going to ditch unless they feel that is the best choice regardless of sea state.
The NF 92 accident taught us a lot of lessons.
albatross is offline  
Old 3rd May 2017, 21:47
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 223
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by AnFI
What happened to the certification requirement for sea state 4 with the critical cell deflated? Has that gone?
Sea state 4 certification only requires that the aircraft remain upright long enough for the pax to disembark into a raft after having ditched in sea state 4, as far as I know.....I read through it years ago....my memory is not what it once was.
Bladestrike is offline  
Old 3rd May 2017, 21:51
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,283
Received 498 Likes on 207 Posts
I don't have a 139 endorsement so am not posting with any knowledge of the float system attached thereto.
I suspect there is more interest in the one Float Bag that is NOT attached thereto!
SASless is offline  
Old 4th May 2017, 16:51
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: tomorrowland
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AnFi and Bladestrike. For your information ditching equipment of AW139 has been certified fo SS 6.
gmrwiz is offline  
Old 4th May 2017, 17:13
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,738
Received 149 Likes on 74 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
I suspect there is more interest in the one Float Bag that is NOT attached thereto!
Sorry I thought the bag was deflated not detached.
Darn funny comment in any case. Had a good snortlaugh over it.
Cheers
Albatross
albatross is offline  
Old 4th May 2017, 17:25
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,283
Received 498 Likes on 207 Posts
The photo was not very clear....and my advancing senility may have played a role in my confusing the actual situation however in defense there is not much difference in the end result it would seem.
SASless is offline  
Old 5th May 2017, 07:44
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,383
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mmmm ...

If one views the movie of the ditched a/c near the recovery workboat one can clearly see the deflated LH rear float flapping/slapping against the a/c hull .....
spinwing is offline  
Old 5th May 2017, 08:19
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Brighton, UK
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Spinwing, do you have a link for that movie ?
ec155mech is offline  
Old 5th May 2017, 10:48
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,283
Received 498 Likes on 207 Posts
And if one had no video to watch....and there was just the one grainy still image to look at....what would one surmise?

Detached or uninflated....or inflated but leaked down to ambient air pressure....is not the effect the same?

The question was raised about certification requirements and an another person reported failure of at least one bag of four as being common.....and even a dull third grader should wonder about the 139 float system's performance when used in a ditching.
SASless is offline  
Old 5th May 2017, 11:12
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 4,379
Received 24 Likes on 14 Posts
Even fully functioning floats aren't always going to keep a ditched machine upright; I'd say we're chasing a bit of a red herring to make an issue out of one float failing following a successful ditching and escape by all on board.

John Eacott is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.