ironchefflay:
There is more to improving birdstrike protection. Including moving the inclined drive shaft to the rear of the tail pylon, among other improvments.
Oh, please. So...we're thinking that a bird could strike the tail rotor pylon then? I'm curious as to how a bird could bypass the huge, hulking mass of fuselage and rotor system to find its way to a direct hit on the inclined tail rotor driveshaft. From above, perhaps? And again I ask: How many t/r pylon birdstrikes have been recorded over the years? Seems to me that SAC is touting as yet another "SAFETY FEATURE!!!" something that is arguably so. I mean, let's be honest here; just because they say it, does that make it true?
My helicopter (206B) has the WSPS wire-strike protection kit. Does this make my 206 "safer" than any other 206 out there?
I will agree though that reinforcing the *front* of the helicopter (front transmission cover, servo cowlings, etc.) is a valid, worthwhile endeavor.
Lt. Fubar:
Anyway what's the point in discussing if the floats stayed on, if the crash was not survivable...
Actually, Cougar 91 *was* survivable. At least one guy did.
But Fubar's point is taken. The way most helicopters crash in real life is often *not* survivable.