PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - EC 175
Thread: EC 175
View Single Post
Old 26th May 2014 | 02:54
  #156 (permalink)  
Ian Corrigible
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,796
Likes: 1
From: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Originally Posted by terminus mos
How many pax can the 175 carry with CAP 1145 implemented but without re breathers
Based on the requirement that pax "be seated next to push out window exits," presumably 10 for the EC175:



...vs. 8 for the AW189:



(But will this interim CAP 1145 requirement ever actually be implemented?)

Interesting to note from their respective Tech Datas that the cabin volumes for the two aircraft are near identical: 424 cu. ft. (plus 82 cu. ft. baggage hold volume) for the 175, vs. 396 cu. ft. (plus 85 cu. ft. baggage volume) for the 189. It's going to be interesting to see how these compare to the 525: the Relentless minisite used to show a cabin volume of 390 cu. ft. for the 525, but this figure has now disappeared, with Bell quoting only a baggage hold volume of 128 cu. ft. and an unspecified "best in class cabin volume." Perhaps Bell is reviewing its cabin dimensions to offer something better justifying the 'super medium' label? The 525's external dimensions certainly seem bigger.

Originally Posted by Bravo73
How is the order book (compared to current orders for the AW189)?
Airbus Helicopters claimed "total bookings for 48 EC175s" last September, since when they have also announced six for LCI, six more for NHV and two for CHI Aviation, with Pegaso also claimed to have converted two options to orders. So perhaps 64, assuming that the 16 additional orders weren't conversions of options included in the 48 figure, and assuming also no additional unannounced orders.

By comparison, AgustaWestland claims orders for approximately 130 AW189s, "including options and framework contracts."

Originally Posted by tottigol
I seriously doubt that the CT-7 is thirstier than the PT6
Interesting question, totti. The CT7 has a 10+ year advantage in terms of baseline technology and a better growth path (to at least 2,638 shp), but engine thermodynamic performance tends to be better at the upper end of the power spectrum (i.e. the 'part power' SFC problem). Then there's the new-generation Turbomeca Ardiden, selected for the Chinese AC352 variant of the 175, which is claimed to offer a "10 to 15 percent reduction in fuel consumption compared with current engines in this thrust class".

I/C

Last edited by Ian Corrigible; 27th August 2014 at 19:02.
Ian Corrigible is offline  
Reply