Originally Posted by immaengineer
So the interm fix is to not use Lube? and eventually use the "MHP" Gearbox? Will that really fix the problems?
Do you understand the difference between
lubrication and
sealant? An
engineer ought to.
Look at what he wrote ...
Originally Posted by Grunt92
The instalation procedures for fitting the MGB have also been revised, the feet are no longer put down using sealeant UNDER the foot and they are now metal to metal contact with the airframe.
May I ask you for some clarification?
I'll offer a guess that the "metal to metal" actually has, on both the transmission deck and the gearbox, conversion coating, sealant-coating (for the gearbox, along the lines of Rockhard/Sermetel/whatever the flavor of the month is), a primer, and then paint. (If MGB isn't Mag, is that layer of coating necessary?) Or, are the feet not painted, just primed?
That isn't quite "metal to metal," is it?
Maybe I am being nitpicky here.
That said, an operator's concerns about vibration and time in the salt environment are reasonably well voiced. I will guess also that sealant is applied in a healthy bead around the feet where they attach to the transmission deck. (Keep that moisture out, I say!)
Not asking you to reveal any proprietary info, just hoping to fill in a few gaps by what I assume (perhaps incorrectly) would be standard practice based on older Sikorsky aircraft.
With this reduction to the overhaul life I only hope Sikorsky can keep up with supplying gearboxes on time, otherwise our clients will get rather displeased with the otherwise very good S92A, when will the S92B come out.
I'd guess that
Sikorsky folks know that from the inside better than folks on the outside.
@maxwelg2: you pose excellent questions, which hopefully the engineering team at Sikorsky will have answers for.