PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - EC225
Thread: EC225
View Single Post
Old 3rd Aug 2004, 21:45
  #43 (permalink)  
HughMartin

Howcanwebeexpectedtoflylikeeagles
whensurroundedbyturkeys
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 201
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't want to get bogged down in the detail of certification requirements as it is easy to start using petty detail to win points. I think it is more important to look at the global picture and make a judgement on whether the WHOLE product provides a better level of safety.

As far as the 225 and the 92 is concerned, this has to be a subjective opinion as safety can only be defined historically and neither the 225 nor the 92 has a track record as a whole product. They both use components from existing machines but until they have several thousand hours under their belts it will be impossible to make an accurate assessment.

Meeting a certification requirement is not the be all and end all. Certification requirements are always written in hindsight.

Having flown the L2 for the last 4 or so years, my gut feel is that Eurocopter has reached the end of the Puma development line. Don't get me wrong, the L2 is a great machine to fly but in my opinion it is working at its limit. The airframe is 25+ years old and there are engine and system issues which require close monitoring. The electronics are also not the most robust. The aircraft does however have good redundancy.

Operationally, the L2 does what is asked of it. Compared to the "L" the “L2” is a dream. It can carry 19 passengers most of the time with a huge amount of baggage/cargo (up to 1760 lbs/800 kgs). The 225 will do the same - but from the figures I have seen, not much more (if any). Unless baggage space is sacrificed for extra fuel tanks, its range is going to be less than that of the L2 / S92.

My main concern with the 225 is that the airframe and engines will struggle with the extra weight and power demands and serviceabilty and maintainability will be a problem.

As for Puma passenger appeal - there isn't any! In the 19 seat configuration, if it was a cattle float it would be deemed illegal on the grounds of animal cruelty.

I haven't had the opportunity to observe the S92 at close quarters. From my previous Sikorsky experiences, if I ever get to fly the 92, I suspect I would enjoy it better than the Eurocopter products I have been used to for the last 20+ years.

The cabin and cockpit has to be a winner. There is no comparison with the Puma sardine tin.

I cannot comment on the systems as I have no detailed knowledge apart from that which can be gleaned from the Sikorski web site.

Operationally, I do think that the S92 could have done with more fuel tankage. According to the figures I have seen, it can carry a full load of 19 passengers with normal baggage and full fuel. The L2/225 can only carry 16 pax (approx) with fuel fuel. Unfortunately, with a head wind of any significance, the range of both Eurocopter and Sikorsky is severely reduced. On the North Sea, this means that with a northerly wind of more than 15 - 20 knots, neither the S92 nor the L2 will be able to reach the the majority of the East Shetland Basin oilfields from Aberdeen. If the 225 gets sponson fuel tanks fitted (which will mean sacrificing baggage space) it might well make the difference. From what I understand, it will not be possible to fit extra fuel tankage to the S92 without loosing fixed passenger seats. Some may say that a crew is being spoilt by being able to carry full fuel and a full load but there are times when it is most frustrating when there is not a need to carry a full load of passengers but the spare weight capacity cannot be used by carrying more fuel. It will also mean that we will still be stuck with having to pick IFR alternates which are affected by the same weather pattern as our nominated destinations - not an ideal situation.

The big decider is going to be cost. At the end of the day, the seat/mile cost is going to determine who wins the race for the large helicopter market for the next twenty years. Eurocopter has had it good in the recent past. Maybe it is now Sikorsky’s turn. It will all be down to which government gives the best “opportunities” to allow their export price to be lower.



PS. I don't know why, Mr Moderator, but my post count below seems to have been reset back to 1. I don't think I have dreamt that I have posted on this forum before.

Last edited by HughMartin; 3rd Aug 2004 at 21:56.
HughMartin is offline