Crab
Unfortunately the 'meeting new airworthiness and certification standards' sales pitch didn't mention that the 30 min run dry capability required under FAA pt 29 had been dodged by Sikorsky rather than complied with as highlighted by the Newfoundland crash.
To comply with FAA/JAR 29.927, the OEM doesn’t require a 30-minute run-dry gearbox.
29.927 amendment 26, 10/3/1988:
c) Lubrication system failure. For lubrication systems required for proper operation of rotor drive systems, the following apply:
(1) Category A. Unless such failures are extremely remote (with no moving parts i.e. static seals just like any other helicopter oil filter housings and an oil cooler bypass provision, why should the OEM or FAA/JAA not accept that such failures would be extremely remote?), it must be shown by tests that any failure which results in loss of lubricant in any normal use lubrication system will not prevent continued safe operation, although not necessarily without damage, at a torque and rotational speed prescribed by the applicant for continued flight, for at least 30 minutes after perception by the flightcrew of the lubrication system failure or loss of lubricant
I stand to be corrected, but I do not believe either the AS332 Series (like the S-92, has a cooler bypass option) or EC225 has a
Normal Use 30-Minute Run-Dry certification/capability. I accept the 225 does have an emergency glycol lubrication system, but this is not a Normal Use system.
The only helicopter I know of with a
true 30-minute Run-Dry gearbox is the Sikorsky UH-60M, but I stand to be educated if others exist.
As for the Cougar incident, you might do well to await the final report before blame is apportioned for this incident.