Agusta A109

[PatMcgroin]

We have had our share of phantom warnings but we are about to replace our third Xmission due to actual chips. We fly a lot and are usually heavy. Needless to say we are a little curious as to weather we have a bad batch, or if it is a fleet thing. The transmission factory was very impressive and I thought this would be the last thing we would have a problem with.:confused:

[heliski22]

We're at 1140hrs, 1200 hours due soon obviously and the a/c went into service in Jan '03.

I'll have to check with Maintenance but I'm almost certain that we've not had anything on the plugs except possibly some of the usual tiny post-production stuff in the early hours after entry into service.

We lost an inverter in the first week, a screen after two months and a main gear actuator after a year, all replaced on warranty of course. Other than that, it's been a case of throw fuel into it, light it up and leave.

Although we always run heavy, tanking fuel where there are no passengers due to local supply limitations, we're pretty rigid about the loading and, despite the nod and the wink as well as the Italian shrug of the shoulders, 2850 means 2850 for us.

The last oil analysis showed nothing but we're increasing the frequency anyway to six months which, for us mean about 120 hours. Maybe we should be doing it more? I don't know, I just wish they'd give us a plug that works.

[havoc]

Off subject, my time is all skids or fixed wheels any insight on this incident

Date: 7/21/07

Program: Airlift Northwest
Seattle, Washington

Type: Agusta A109 Mark II
Operator/Vendor: CJ Systems

Weather: Not a factor

Team: Pilot. No injuries reported. No patient.

Description:
While returning to base at a hospital helipad in Bellingham,
Washington the pilot attempted to land with the wheels still
retracted in the aircraft. After initial contact, the pilot pulled
up from the pad, lowered the wheels, and landed without further
incident.

Additional Info:
The pilot was alone in the aircraft. Antenna, light and aircraft
receieved damage and are currently being repaired. No injuries.
NOTE: Initial investigation indicates probable failure of radar
altimeter, among other factors.

[PatMcgroin]

Looks like he just forgot to lower the gear and the landing gear warning is a reminder that is tied to the radar Alt. Guess it did not work this time. I assume he had some kind of distraction going on at the time. It is not the first time.

[heliski22]

Yep, managed one myself once, got to the hover but realised before I set down. Primary cause - distraction on finals, no excuses.

Lucky no harm done. It was my 568th 109 landing, all 567 previous were obviously with the gear down.

The general rule is -

"There are two kinds of 109 drivers, those that have done it and those that are going to do it!"

[ShyTorque]

Yes, this is the only aircraft I've flown with the gear lights completely out of the field of view of the pilot. All that's needed is an airspeed switch and a nice flashy light placed somewhere obvious to remind the pilot he's forgotten something important. Like the Puma's had for 35 years or so.

[ARRAKIS]

I'm looking for someone having experience with A-109 as HEMS machine. I have a few questions regarding it's use.

Arrakis

[500e]

I built something idiot proof once,
Then they found a better idiot:E

[OEI and Still Flying]

Started this post for 109s pilots/operators to compare notes.

Lets start with the following

Blade Delamination

Erratic altimeters

Pitch and role in light turbulence with auto pilot (I mean light)

[helopat]

We've found that the pilot and copilot altimeters don't agree during accel and decel (ie. during takeoff and initital acceleration up to about 60 kias and decel below 60 kias, although not as bad on decel). Agusta have installed a restrictor on the pilot side pitot system (A109E that is)...god knows why. I suppose that under most circumstances the aircraft is flown single pilot so its not really an issue. For us, operating multi crew, it has given us the shiites but we've learned to live with it.

As far as erratic airspeed (ie. fluctuations in steady state flight) we haven't had any problems.

No blade dramas...knock on wood.

No problems with pitch and ROLL in any normal flight conditions including flight in light to mod turbulence with auto pilot on.

HP

[ShyTorque]

Helopat, are all your comments with regard to the E, or to the S model? :confused:

Thanks.

[helopat]

Yep, all A109E from my side...sorry if its not specific to the S, but thought any info might help.

[ShyTorque]

Thanks, I just asked because your comments didn't seem to fit the S (I've a little time on both) :)

I wonder if the problem with the altimeters is why Agusta moved the pitot heads to the nose for the S, rather than the "traditional" position above the cockpit as in the E?

I've also noticed that the S autopilot doesn't cope too well with turbulence; I feel the response in pitch is too harsh.

[tottigol]

I saw some news to day regarding the delivery of some AW-109N (Nexus) to the Italian Carabinieri (Army Police).

[Cov HEMS]

The Problem with the 109 S Altimeters (+/- 100ft in light Turbulence Indicated) is an error introduced by the new Pitot location.
In the old location the static port was located on the underside of the Pitot tube. Now the pitot has simply been rotated 90 degrees and planted on the side of the nose, the static port is inboard and in-between the Pitot and the Nose section.

During small pitch changes there is a pressure change in this area which causes a significant pressure area in the static system, hence the altimeter errors.

This can cause difficulty flying accurate indicated altitudes in light turbulence.

I guess this is also why the Autopilot has fun as well!

But it is a GREAT machine!!!

[tonyosborne]

The 'N' or Nexus seems to use components from the LUH, Grand and Power...

There's a little more information on pages 34/35 at http://www.webmags.co.uk/mag.aspx?magcode=DIGITAL_003

[MiKeRoToR]

Hello partners i am looking for information and opinions from pilots who work with A109E Power in mountain (up to 9000 fts), i would like to know something like helicopter configuration for a rescue mission, power, fuel, weights... etc, with the aim of evaluating if this helicopter will be usefull on my working zone. I think that it is best a ec145 but if is so expensive

thanks to all, and good flights

[JimL]

MiKeRoToR,

Check the data in Attachement A of JAA TGL 43 - it contains exactly what you require.

http://www.jaat.eu/secured/Operations/Public%20Documents/TGLs/AGM%20S4%20Ops%20TGL%2043%20HEMS%20Mountain%20Ops%20Feb%2008 %20Print.pdf

Jim

[MiKeRoToR]

Thank you Jim it´s perfect

[BlenderPilot]

The Agusta 109E Power has a little white line on the TOT (not the N1) scale, that line is exactly at 450 degrees TOT, but nobody, not even in Philadephia, or in any manual explains what that line is!!!

It drives me crazy not to know!

Anybody knows what it is???

[helimutt]

Min temp during normal start. :ok:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.ok, so I admit it was a guess!;)

[speds]

Blenderpilot

The scale is non linear. Temperatures from 0°- 450°C are at low resolution. The more interesting area for us is from 451°-1000°C and that section of the scale is at a high resolution.

The White Tick indicates the point at which the scale changes.

Speds

[Brilliant Stuff]

Sorry I know nothing about the 109 except it's fast.

What do you mean by resolution?

[Hover Bovver]

I think that he means scale, by saying resolution, as in below the white line the scale is quite small (big temp changes per cm) and past the white line the scale is larger( smaller temp change per cm so more visually accurate )

[BlenderPilot]

The scale is non linear. Temperatures from 0°- 450°C are at low resolution. The more interesting area for us is from 451°-1000°C and that section of the scale is at a high resolution.

The White Tick indicates the point at which the scale changes.

Speds

Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, Thank You, !!!!!!!!!!:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[Brilliant Stuff]

Gotcha. Thank you.

[heema]

hi, the power109 increase weight (3000kg)can carry 5 pob with 2h fuel up to260nm range flying at 3000ft

[VeeAny]

Heema

I read your post and thought what rubbish.

I apologise, I calculated the figures for our 3000kg 109E and with 5 pob @ 130kts cruise @ 3000' you could actually do that at the old weight of 2850kgs, assuming 200kgs per hour at 130kts at 3000' and 85kgs per person, 5 inc pilot. [ And before anyone says it no i didn't go to the flight manual for the fuel flow, just a quick estimate based upon operating it].

You would run out of fuel on landing but you could in theory do it.

With a 3000kg machine you could do it with 75kgs a side as a reserve.

You live and learn.


GS

[ShyTorque]

And with an "S" model you would land with an hour's fuel plus a bit in hand (3175 Kgs MAUM).

[VeeAny]

ShyTorque

Now your just showing off!

We might be getting one later this year :ok:.

GS

[Darren999]

We have 2. Really enjoy flying these...:ok:


http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd91/DarrenELucas/2007-12-08_06_Darren_Lucas_in_PennS.jpg

[BlenderPilot]

That 100%-102% N2/NR switch has given us food for though recently, it just happens that around here on hot days our first limitation is TOT on the 109E, AND going up to 102% pushes the TOT quite a bit, so my and a colleague were discussing the "what if" we took off with 100% instead of 102% every now and then to avoid being limited by the TOT sooner than necessary.

If my memory serves me right, going up to 102% is not in the limitations section but rather in the Norm Procedures so it is not mandatory (or is it not?).

But my question is . . . . . what is the benefit of being at 102 instead of 100?

Two benefits that come to mind are . . . .

- Having a little higher N2 RPM during an Eng Failure, thus having a little more time to spare in case of

- Having more TR RPM's thus having more TR authority, which with the older metal blades is not really an issue as they have much more authority than the new composite blades.

But I wonder if having 102 at TO will improve lifting ability vs. 100? To me it's the contrary as you will reach the engine limits faster and will be unable to pull more pitch with out exceeding something.

Opinions and thoughts?

[Shawn Coyle]

Assuming there is no change in rotor efficiency between 100 and 102, the logic should go as folows:
The power required to hover will be the same regardless of the rotor RPM. The engines shouldn't care what RPM they are driving the rotor at, and the TOT and N1 should be the same (torque will be slightly lower at 102 than 100, as power is torque times RPM).
The change in TOT you see as you bump the RPM to 102 should be transitory and return to the original value when everything settles down.
This, as was first stated, assumes the rotor doesn't change efficiency between the two RPMs.
The reason for the higher RPM is more than likely for OEI considerations as you state.

[ShyTorque]

The 102% is a performance requirement, to ameliorate excessive Nr droop if an engine fails below Vy where you are likely to be close to the ground.

[Phoinix]

http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l236/BlenderPilot/Show%20and%20tell/Drugo/IMG_2670.jpg


I'm trying to guess how do these weights at the root of the blades work? Do they help to reduce pitch moment forces on the T/R mechanics? Could someone refresh me on how do they work?

[Graviman]

Phoinix, these reduce the "tennis raquet" effect. Each tail rotor blade occupies a radial segment of tail rotor disc, rather than the ideal radial line. The centrifugal force (in the blade reference coord system) is thus trying to flatten out the blades in rotor plane. The weights are also trying to lie in plane, so that the two resulting pitch torques cancel. This just keeps the pedal forces sensible.

Hope that helps!

[RVDT]

Blender Pilot,

Apart from the High Nr switch I think you may find that on the 109E the engines breath slightly differently (vaguely remember L and R power charts). There is another switch on the overhead which will match TOT rather than Q so you don't reach a TOT limitation on one engine first where that may be a limiting factor.

[oscar mike]

Hello there

I am a corporate pilot, flying an EC 135 T2+ in France. We have no engineer in the company, and the 135 has proven to be very reliable. It is very nice to fly, and I appreciate the "avionique nouvelle", really ideal for SPIFR.
But my boss looks for a helicopter that goes faster and farther, for about the same size...

I have been favourably impressed by the GRAND. It seems to be superior in speed, range, cabine volume and finitions (and aesthetically too, which is more subjective...).
But I would appreciate some feedback about the everyday use of the A109S, in the VIP role... From the pilot's point of view of course, but also the engineers and the passengers!
Thanks for your help!

[Bladecrack]

Reliability seems to be an issue with the 109S, as the 2 Grands based near me seem to always be U/S... Avionics and A/P in the 135 are hard to beat.

Good luck,

BC

[Aser]

http://www.shephard.co.uk/Assets/Images/Rotorhub/Products/Simulators/rotorsim-a109.jpg
Italy: A109E Level D Simulator Training Now Available at Rotorsim

Rotorsim A109E simulatorTo support the training needs of our A109 operators, AugstaWestland's Rotorsim training center in Sesto Calende, Italy, now has a Level D, FAA and JAA certified, A109E simulator available to meet your Type Rating, Recurrent, or Dry Time requirements. Rotorsim is an organization committed to providing comprehensive training solutions to AgustaWestland helicopter operators around the world. We offer a full range of flight and mission training to civil, para-military, and offshore operators. Our training center is staffed A109 Power Level D Simulator Training Now Available at Rotorsim Flight crew of Estado de Mexico Rescata by experienced subject matter experts using the latest technologies and training concepts to deliver a superior training experience.

The CAE-built A109 simulator allows the aircrew to train for any normal or emergency situation they might encounter, including takeoff/ landing, engine failure, IFR conditions, and a range of mission-specific environments. Our A109 simulator has been operational since November 2006. We have a 6-hour Standard Recurrent Package that includes day, night, IFR, and emergency training. Additionally, we have the ability to tailor a custom course that meets your specific training needs. Please contact Mike Moffitt at [email protected] or Craig Zysk at [email protected] to arrange for your A109 training at our operational and certified Rotorsim training center.

[aland343]

hi everybody, acually I am flying in Spain and would want to know if there is any posibility to work anywhere, I am junior pilot 600 h rating a109, R44 and actually flying with EC 135 but without rating, do somebody help me to find some place out of spain for flying, like sic and there is no problem to travel. I am french and have JAR3 license.

Thnak's everybody.

Alan

[rotorless]

HI

i am doing a research on helicopter prices over the years.
does anybody knows for how much a factory new A109C was selling?

[Ian Corrigible]

$2.6 mil ('95).

I/C

[mwelch]

:ok:I believe there was a post at one time that described the reason for no cool down time for the 109. Can anyone expand on that issue? Coffee table discussion!

[JOURNIOO4]

please may any one tell me the exact price of 109e rotor blade?

[LadyGrey]

Hello all:)

We are in the very, very first stages of designing a heli-garage on a big yacht.

Question: Is it easy to fold the main rotor blades on a Grand?

How long does that approx. take? Done by pilot or qualified yacht-staff?

Anything to consider?

Thank you very much
LadyGrey

[ShyTorque]

The blades don't fold.

[LadyGrey]

But on the website it says


Baggage compartment extension (1.9 or 2.3 m)
Main rotor blades high visibility painting
Blade folding
Customised painting scheme with metallic colours:confused::confused:

Please help!

Thank you
LG

[LadyGrey]

that´s the way we want it

http://heli-yacht.com/image-gallery/heliyacht4.gif

[spinwing]

Mmmm ...

I'm not sure of the details of blade folding specific to the A109 ...however ...


Be aware that depending on where the aircraft is registered the folding/unfolding of main rotor blades may be allowed to be done by the pilot if he has been specifically trained AND approved to do so .... OR it may require a Licensed Engineer be present to attend to that task .... also it may be a requirement that an entry be made in the aircraft maintenance documents whenever this is done.

Good luck ..

[stacey_s]

Even if it can be accomplished on any Helicopter it will need certification by a duly Licensed person, normally a licensed Engineer and an independent inspection (Dupes) thereafter, so two people, and with some regulatory authorities that does not include the pilot, not Yacht personnel unless they also happen to hold engineering qualifications.

P.S did I mention I'm licensed and like boats? any vacancies?

S

[spinwing]

Mmmm ....

Stace .... here's a plan .... a team effort me the pilot/engineer you the engineer ... complete coverage ... now where do we put the bar?


:}

[LadyGrey]

Yes, Stacey, in three years time, it`ll take that much time to build that boat:)

Some 80Meters, I suppose there will be some space left over for a bar...:ok:

Thank you Gentlemen for your replies, very much appreciated

LG

[9Aplus]

Yachtspotter.com - News & Forum (http://www.yachtspotter.com/focard3.php?foo=FC135)

This beauty was built 2008. in Croatia, Pula shipyard, AW 109 made often traffic on
expanded back deck, but AW109 is so/so choice for seagoing operations.
1) wheels / better chose skids
2) break problem tnx to strange parking brakes hidraulic accumulator problem,
fleet of 8 units, withdrawn from US Coast guard use tnx to that.

Take something with skids instead (AW119 Koala_e) if single engine fits other safety issues
like life insurance of your VIP guests, EC135 can be maybe better choice.... :ok:

[stacey_s]

what about EC130 B 4, nice aircraft for short trips?
S

[stacey_s]

and good Single engine machine!!!

[ShyTorque]

LadyGrey, I have sent you a P.M.

[LadyGrey]

Good morning

Got some very nice pm´s, thank you very much:ok:

Think I found it

Paravion Technology, Inc. - Agusta A109 and A119 Blade Fold Kit (http://www.paravion.com/products/a109_blade_fold_kit/a109_blade_fold_kit.php)

Will check with these guys and Agusta directly tomorrow.

Nice day, Gentlemen:)
LG

[Oogle]

Lady Grey

PM me if you want info specifically on the setup of the boat in the photograph that you posted.;)

[LadyGrey]

Yes:)

Just sent pm

Thank you

[helisteve]

Hi,
Anyone flown, operated or worked on this type of machine? All comments appreciated.
Thks:)

[vfr440]

'Morning Lady Grey, Hi stace!
Stace is absolutely correct, an LAE or equivalent will have to sign off the fold or deploy of the M/R blades. A duplicate inspection may be carried out by a trained and authorised pilot. BUT

You'll need a few extra hands, and you note that the kit includes a blade pin removal tool. That, from experience, is essential - and you have to have the blade at exactly the right (pre-designed) coning angle to get the damn thing out. And don't forget to set the rotor-brake, or the entire head will rotate on you and sweep you off the transmission deck and wreck a blade as well, likely as not. Might be fun on a deck if there is any swell; no experience of that - yet! (I'd come as Stace's apprentice if you like, even though I'm not in the first flush of youth LOL :)) Keep us posted on how the project goes ~ VFR

[LadyGrey]

Hello VFR,
long time since my first post in November 09...We did a lot of research on that blade folding stuff and came to the same conclusion as you and other professionals...ain´t no fun:=

So, we decided to forget about that issue and go for a "garage" without folding....

Safe flying, Lady Grey

[spinwing]

Mmmm ....

.....we decided to forget about that issue and go for a "garage" without folding....


Ok .... but I hope you will investigate some form of blade (tip) supporting struts to allow the static rotor system to cope with any inclement sea states which might be encountered whilst the ship is underway ????

Cheers

[Helicopterfixerman]

I've been quoted a top straight line speed for this aircraft at 210mph. Is this correct? I'm assuming that's IAS.......

Anyone know?

[Tango 647]

Vne is 168kts IAS which it can achieve in straight and level flight = 193mph

[Helicopterfixerman]

Many thanks !

[memories of px]

to be carried out within 5 hours:-
A mistaken value of the tightening torque of the tail rotor special hub plug P/N 109-0133-18-103 has been discovered in the Maintenance Manual of A109A and A109AII helicopters.
The investigation carried out by Agusta has revealed that the wrong value of the tightening torque was introduced with the revision 9 of the A109A and A109AII Helicopter Maintenance Manual dated 15 June 2009. This condition, if not corrected, could ultimately lead to tail rotor failure.

[206 jock]

Deleted as mods beat me to it.

[Eurocrapter]

I fly an A109 Grand that keeps popping the red discs but the bottles do not discharge. We are all scratching are heads. Any ideas anyone?

[ShyTorque]

Ferrchristsakes get that tail rotor balance sorted out! ;)

Not heard of this one before; is it one, or both sides?

Could it be OAT related, if the aircraft is parked in direct sunlight?

[Eurocrapter]

sometimes one side, sometimes both. kept in hangar, temp is around 90 F.

[ShyTorque]

I wonder if the discs are acting like one-way valves, allowing denser air in during cooler periods but not letting any out again. As the temperature increases, the pressure builds behind them and pops them out. :confused:

[heema]

I flty the 109e If the sys is the same I m thiking of 2 things
1- the soft where has to be reloaded becuase it send the massage to the ADU then EDU
2- ther is leekage in the tube
3-gust came the gass on the sensor too old:rolleyes:

[Earl of Rochester]

Evidently the Kiwi's have just ordered three more LUH's!

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/galleries/images/59021/500x400/new-zealand-air-force-agusta-a109.jpg

[meloni]

Hello!

any news about the 109 E and S Pilot checklists??

is any official checklist available directly from Agusta?

[spinwing]

Mmmmm ....

You mean there isn't anything in the RFM?


;)




Its usually the job of the Chief Pilot, Chief Instructor (TRI/TRE) or Ops Person, to go through the RFM and make up a suitably practical (and accurate) checklist (and have it approved when necessary) for company pilots to use.

[ShyTorque]

Its usually the job of the Chief Pilot, Chief Instructor (TRI/TRE) or Ops Person, to go through the RFM and make up a suitably practical (and accurate) checklist (and have it approved when necessary) for company pilots to use.

OK for a company aircraft on an AOC - but what about private owners? It's not unreasonable to expect a manufacturer to do this.

[spinwing]

Mmmm ...

No ... I would think not .... who did your type rating ... a TRI/TRE who should have been able to supply you with an (approved) checklist.

And even as a Private Pilot (and I would hope a quite experienced one) flying this quite sophisticated Helicopter ... you should be able to sit down with the flight manual and make a suitable checklist.

:E

[Bilbo Bagover]

The trouble is that many of the checklists out there are not approved by the manufacturer and not subject to manufacturer updates.

We have had long discussions about the consequences of following an unapproved checklist, damaging the aircraft and ending up with a refusal for warranty or worse.

Our solution is to make a photocopy of the relevant sections of the flight manual and bind them into manageable flip cards. When Agusta amend the flight manual we amend the cards.

It would be nice if Agusta provided them with the aircraft! Anybody know why they don't?

Bilbo

[meloni]

That's what I did.....

copied all the relevant parts... anyway like Bilbo said would be nice if Agusta provided them with the aircraft

[ShyTorque]

No ... I would think not .... who did your type rating ... a TRI/TRE who should have been able to supply you with an (approved) checklist.

I wasn't speaking for myself; when I did my type rating there wasn't even a CAA syllabus for the latest marque, let alone a checklist... :E

And even as a Private Pilot (and I would hope a quite experienced one) flying this quite sophisticated Helicopter ... you should be able to sit down with the flight manual and make a suitable checklist.

Thanks for the advice, oh condescending one. I fly on an ATPLH with about 30 years of rotary experience in all. I do have a checklist for the 109 but I prefer to use the RFM as it's the only "approved" publication. ;)

[If all else fails]

Just getting the RFM right is challenge enough. Contract them to it though....and they provide....currently on draft 3....looking very good now.

The checklist should, however, always be the 'operators' preserve as the manner in which the aircraft is flown, crew numbers, CRM procedures, etc...etc...can all vary from customer to customer, and it is the operator who intrisically knows the answer to how the aircraft will be used.

My opinion, it is a big ask for the maker to cover all possible checklist outcomes, and in this litigious age, why would they?

Just be clear that your own checklist has all the critical ingredients.

I have seen the 'generic' 139 check list, which looks very good and obviously benetfits from the recency of the aircraft. The 109, however, has a great many different variants now and standardisation of checklists would obviously be more difficult.

[spinwing]

Mmmm ...

Shyt ol' darling ..... I was not at all condescending ... re-read through the posts ...

You WILL see I refer to approved checklists made up (from the RFM) by suitably qualified persons attached to an aircrafts owner/operator ...

You as an ATPLH with about 30 years of rotary experience (as am I) have the ability to formulate from the RFM what is required and what may be left out of a checklist .... why have a personal dig at me for offering advice ....

I would hope that any organisation who would offer a machine of the A109's calibre for use would have also gone to the trouble of having suitable checklist made up.


Have a Merry Christmas .....

[ShyTorque]

I would hope that any organisation who would offer a machine of the A109's calibre for use would have also gone to the trouble of having suitable checklist made up.

As in... Agusta Westland..exactly, I agree, which was my point. But they haven't.

Condescending - the tone of your post certainly appeared to be just that. You wrongly assumed that I was a PPL because I asked a question on behalf of a private owner, who would be without the benefit of a chief pilot, chief instructor, TRE/TRI, etc to provide a checklist.

However, Merry Christmas to you, too. :)

[Shawn Coyle]

Unless there is some over-riding requirement (like a Part 135 operation in the US) that mandates the company make up and follow a checklist, it's natural to make up and use your own checklist.
There is no legal requirement to only use the manufacturer's checklist and if you have any optional equipment installed that has a Flight Manual Supplement, and especially one that is not installed at manufacture, then you have to make your own checklist.
Be prepared to defend it!
For the 109E and subsequent models for example, there is no need to go to flight after starting the first engine - the fuel control will maintain the N1 when the governor is turned on, unlike the earlier models.
And it makes sense to only move the two engine mode switches at the same time to prevent the situation of trying to take off with one at idle and one at flight - it's happened many times in the past, and will continue to happen unless you have the discipline of moving both switches at the same time.

[ShyTorque]

And it makes sense to only move the two engine mode switches at the same time to prevent the situation of trying to take off with one at idle and one at flight - it's happened many times in the past, and will continue to happen unless you have the discipline of moving both switches at the same time.

I agree! However, you are probably aware that there is an optional mod kit available to help prevent this happening; it gives an audio warning if the collective is raised in a "single engine" configuration.

[spinwing]

Mmmmm ...

..... It gives an audio warning if the collective is raised in a "single engine" configuration.

As does the 139 .... now! (but its not an option).


:}

[oxi]

Geez you guys make it sound all so hard. I don't mean to sound arrogant but with plenty of time on all the 109's it ain't that difficult.

Why go to flight on the ground if you don't need to?

The EDU's will show you quite clearly that one is in idle hence the yellow displays.

For memory the Grand has an aural associated with this.

[Shawn Coyle]

oxi:
You're exactly right.
But the number of times people have tried to take off with one engine at idle and one at flight in all the helicopters with the P&W 206/207 (except the Bell 427/429- more on that in a minute) is amazing.
You would think that a quick check of the gauges would be in order prior to lifting the collective, but it appears as though there are a lot of folks who don't.
The Bell 427/429 did not go with three-position switches - they have a two-position switch - off and start. The engines are taken from idle to fly using the collective mounted throttles. Bell also declares an engine failure on the basis of a torque split instead of on compressor speed on those two machines.

[ShyTorque]

Why go to flight on the ground if you don't need to?

Don't you mean "Idle"? How do you take off without going to "Flight"?

The audio warning is part of the mod I referred to. Not all 109S's have it; the later ones (after serial 22045) do have it as standard. For earlier airframes it came out as an optional BT (109S-16, dated October 2007), requiring something like 28 man hours to retro-fit.

Without the mod there is no audio warning. Also, the yellow strip when 102% N2 is set can mask the adjacent yellow one for OEI. Also, the No2 engine control knob is hidden under the collective.

[oxi]

Hi ShyTalk generally the only time I go to "Flight" is immediatly before take off.

Or if its really necessary to run the air/cond due to atc delays. Cant have uncomfortable punters.

From "Idle" to "Flight" one engine at a time to see it all happens nice, torques match etc etc. Alway rpm set to 100% then 102% for lift off.

I preferr to do my hydraulics at "ground idle" occasionaly I will check for binding of the servo which may be felt at flight rpm as opposed to idle.

Checklists sure as per the rfm and applicable supplements but a good flow check wins everytime for me, provided you know the helicopter..

[ShyTorque]

I do likewise but we are sometimes required to ground taxy for prolonged periods, especially if low-viz procedures are in force. I do that at 100%.

I too select 100% before going from "Idle" to "Flight" mode; otherwise the Nr overswings briefly to 104%, which I don't like to see. As the Nr peaks, then cuts back after the second engine catches up, if on a helipad or in a field, I then immediately select 102% for lift off.

[captchopper]

Hey guys, I am flying a A109C which has an empty weight of 2006Kg. I was wondering how there's another machine (A109C) here that has an empty weight of around 1900Kg ???
The extra equipment fitted in our's, I think are AWR, Loudspeaker system, small inbuilt retractable search light which functions as landing light. But I still don't think that is enough of a difference to cover about 100Kgs of payload difference..
Hope you experienced guys can through some light on this.

Thanks

[vfr440]

The problem revolves around the fact that Agusta didn't see fit to appoint a weight engineer to review the changes from the A109A2 model. Hence you have the trailing link on the undercarriage (for example) made of stainless steel. Which is a laudable idea for durability but adds weight.

And just about everything within the design was 'beefed up' so the weight grew (and grew). Panels that were .020" became .032", and one element you could look at would be the plethroa of ' electrical provisions' built in with multi-pin plugs and sockets just everywhere. 'Many a mickle makes a muckle' as they say. You would be amazed at the cumulative effect of all these minimal weight increases. (I tackled a new machine on delivery and managed to remove some 25kg of redundant wiring and connectors. Huge amount of work = labour = much money)

And finally the interior(s). If your machine has the 'silent' one, it has lead sheeting sandwiched in the beautiful (and heavy) custom leather trim, to attenuate the Xmsn noise in the cabin. And very effective too. But one hell of a penalty to payload:sad:

Gott a stack of detail on this somewhere (but not sure where I put it) ~ VFR

[A109Pilot]

It corresponds to the minimum N1 speed of 50% for continuous operation. The only logical explanation I can come up with, and yes, you won't find it anywhere.

[Ready2Fly]

Who of you got to fly one without an (JAA/EASA) IR(H)? My guess it, it was a prerequisite for most jobs, to fly one.

Well, if you are an owner... ;)

My reasoning is, if your aim is to fly the north sea, an IR(H) (plus ATPL) is a must, anyway. If you are in to corporate/vip onshore flying, do not spend the money, unless you get a chance for a job offer, even if it was slim. Seems like a hen/egg problem and with so many pilots with time/qualification waiting for a job, it is not worth the financial risk (imho).

Anyway, no thread drift: Who got to fly one without having a IR(H)?

[kneedwondean]

I fly one on an aoc with a jaa cpl(h). No IR. Right place right time though. And winters are 'interesting'.

[Ready2Fly]

Did anybody of you fly G-JMON in the 'good old days'?

Would appreciate any colour on the aircraft via PM. :ok:

TIA

[VitaminGee]

Good morning folks. Can anyone tell me if the AW109LUH can operate up to ISA +35? Searched all over the internet but can't find an answer.

[vfr440]

You couldl try a request to FAS in Abu Dhabi, they operate A109 Ps I think. The early A109 with the A250 engines would be limited on pay-load - VFR

[Mark Six]

From the A109E RFM:


AMBIENT AIR TEMPERATURE LIMITATIONS
The minimum ambient air temperature for operation is -25°C (-13°F).
The maximum sea level ambient air temperature for operation is +45°C (113°F)
and decreases with pressure altitude at the standard lapse rate of 2°C (3.6°F) every
1000 ft (305 m) up to 20000 ft (6096 m)

[VitaminGee]

Thanks. Believe the one we are looking at has T'meca Arrius 2K2 engines.

[Mark Six]

The LUH is based on the 109E which had the option of the Arrius engines or the Pratts. The RFM I have is for the P&W option but I assume the figures would be the same for both. The 109S (PW 207 engines) has a max operating temp of 50 degrees at sea level (ISA plus 35).

[VitaminGee]

Thanks, most helpful. :ok:

[captchopper]

Hi folks,
I am trying to find the average fuel consumption rate and the max. internal gross weight of the A109K2.
The company wants to know if its a good option putting money into one of the k2's. The high temp./ high altitude performance of the K2 is believed to be one of the best, comments?
Thanks in advance! :ok:

[IKE_JR]

Anyone can tell me how much will I spend in overhauling this PW206C engines?

I know theres a lot of variables to judge... But what is an average price for overhaul?

Thank you

[mfriskel]

It would be impossible to say without knowing how much time is on the engine, and the idivudual timed componants as well as any damage history or exceedence history in the recorder. The last 207E I was involved with cost $330,000 thru Pratt and Whitney. That engine got new compressor turbine and power turbine discs.
There is a company in Phoenix that might be able to assist you either in the overhaul or overseeing the overhaul and making sure you don't buy too many parts that are not required to be replaced. Search for Phoenix Engine Services in Mesa Arizona and ask to talk to Doug Whitmarsh.

[IKE_JR]

@mfriskel

Thank you very much my friend.

Will try to contact him.

[FullTravelFree]

Browsing the 'helicopter-ebay' for a second hand A109 IFR.
But a lot of ad's don't clearly specify IFR or VFR certified.

I guess the expert eye can see that on the equipmentlist:
but where to look for to rule out the VFR ships?
Most of the ships seem to have the AP/SAS/VOR/DME etc.

Also, should the A and C models be avoided, at any cost?
There are some nice looking lowtime older ships, but I heard
something about 'ghost' engine fire warnings and
high maintenance costs, low performance, versus the E models.

Any info appreciated! :ok:

FTF

[Anthony Supplebottom]

There are a couple of good C models in the UK just now and no, they don't need to be avoided at all costs but like its always mentioned here - get all the proper surveys done before buying.

The seller will tell you if the ship is certified for IFR and there are more than a good few outfits who can quickly tell you what it would cost to bring the helo up to IFR standard if that's whats required.

This (http://www.airplanemart.com/aircraft-for-sale/Helicopter/1989-Agusta-A109C/5350/) one would be right up your street (unless of course you have the money to splash-out on an E or S). But as a two seat IFR training aircraft the C is perfect.

[FullTravelFree]

But as a two seat IFR training aircraft the C is perfect.

The ship would be for a corporate role. Full fuel, 4/5 pax, luggage and me.

I'm working out the numbers and trying to find the limitations for different A109 variants.
I managed to scroll through the full 31 pages, which had a some good info and it's share of pprune discussion and bashing ;)

I was surprised to find that the earlier models are practically three seaters.
(why put in the 8 seats...). So it is either E or S, my the boss has to open
his wallet a bit more then I initially told him... hmm
Also I'm not Italian build with my 1.90 meters.... hmm again.

Any more info from people, highly appriciated! :ok:

FTF

[Anthony Supplebottom]

FTF, 5 pax, full fuel, luggage plus yourself = E model or later.

But - with all the seats full the E model is not very comfortable and you would rather consider the S.

Have you looked at the EC135 P2+ or even T2+?

[WOMBAT45]

I have flown both types. You will need an S model for IFR fuel reserves.

I agree with the previous poster the EC135 beats the pants off the 109. It may be slightly slower but is much more "pilot friendly" especially IFR. The 109 doesn't even have a chart holder and Alt Aquire mode so has to be monitored and hand flown much more than the 135.

[Bilbo Bagover]

I would be surprised if the EC135 "beats the pants off" the A109S but willing to compare real world figures as opposed to marketing bumpf.

As an indication in the UK there are 28 corporately operated A109E/S/SP versus 7 EC135s so I would guess that would give you a clue to the more capable machine for corporate transport.

Wombat, as a comparison, can you calculate the performance of an EC135 for FTF’s request:
To keep it simple how far could both fly, and how quickly, with 30 minutes reserve?
1 pilot at 90kgs
5 pax at 90kgs
30kgs of luggage
Class 1 from an elevated heliport (such as Battersea) ISA conditions.

For one of our Grands:
3175kg MTOW Class 1 Elevated Helipad
Aircraft empty weight 2186kg
Less 570 for Crew, Pax and luggage
Leaves 419 kg for fuel.
Take 100kg off for the 30 minute reserve leaves 319kg which will keep you flying for an 1hr27 mins at 150 knots and therefore give you a range of 217nm.

So in answer to FTF’s question the Grand will go 217nm in 1hr27 minutes with 1+5 pax with luggage.

FTF if you need a cofg calculator for the Grand or Power please send me a PM.

Oh and you do have to buy a kneepad to hold your chart and it really could do with altitude acquire mode (standard in the SP) but otherwise the autopilot is pretty good.

Bilbo

[FullTravelFree]

Thanks gents, for numbers and comparisons.

In the wealthy people's world, looks are very important.
We dont wont to look like a policecar or ambulance, we want to
be Italian sportscar :} (that 'we' doesn't include me though)

Most flights here will be VFR, because of availability of instrument approaches.
The IFR bit comes into play when going abroad and crossing some mountain ranges.
This whole research (mind you, this is just research for now) came from a recent flight when we had a 40kts tailwind,
and I told him that this is the 'normal' cruise of a 109. He liked it a lot, was smiling all the way.
Also our current ship will go to it's 12 year next summer. Good time for an upgrade I'd say! :ok:

Oh and you do have to buy a kneepad to hold your chart

...already got it :)

FTF

[WOMBAT45]

As I said I have flown both types and find the 135 much more pilot friendly.

[Brilliant Stuff]

The 135 can have an aux tank fitted into the boot, don't know if the 109 can, I thought all 109s were IFR?

Also we now have the 135 "e" available...
135 corporate ship cruises 140kts plus.

I think the 109 is so popular due to it's looks and fashion.
A 135 with a snazzy paint-job won't look like Police/Hems...

I am also told the 109 is maintenance heavy whereas the 135 is maintenance light 2hr 100hr service followed by 5day 500hr Service and 10 day 100hr service.

I stand corrected at any time.

[espresso drinker]

I'm not sure if this will help. :E

Helicopters (Winning Moves) - Top Trumps Wiki (http://toptrumps.wikia.com/wiki/Helicopters_(Winning_Moves)?oldid=4496)

[ShyTorque]

As I said I have flown both types and find the 135 much more pilot friendly.

Good if you're paying. But the pax usually do that and they don't like the harsh ride so much.

140 kts? That's the gear limiting speed of a 109. We have to slow down from the cruise to 140 kts to put the gear down as airbrakes.

And who ever heard of a corporate aircraft with skids? :E

[McGowan]

On a less dangerous note, how many 109E or S operators have had problems with the passenger step actuator. Ours failed the other day and have been quoted A$18.5k to replace it.

[BlenderPilot]

On a less dangerous note, how many 109E or S operators have had problems with the passenger step actuator. Ours failed the other day and have been quoted A$18.5k to replace it.

Having flown A109E and S for the last 7 years and having flown at least 7 different ones equipped with Pax Steps, I can tell you that if it hasnt't broken, it will, most operators of the 10 or so different A109's around here just leave the step down permanently after it breaks, or just leave it down before it does.

[RVDT]

109 - like a Ferrari is the fastest way to get from here to where you will break down next!

And the winners are -

Looks - 109

Speed - 109

Payload range - 135

User friendly - 135

Reliability - 135

Cost - Both horrendous

High altitude - 109

Comfort - 109

Pax safety (proximity to spinning parts) - 135

Noise - 135

Maintenance ease - 135 (800 hours / 12 months / 36 months)

Only flown each for about 300 hours so assessment may be limited!

[ShyTorque]

On a less dangerous note, how many 109E or S operators have had problems with the passenger step actuator. Ours failed the other day and have been quoted A$18.5k to replace it

I think the electric steps on all helicopters tend to be "temperamental". Fixed steps (or no steps) are more reliable...

[WhirlwindIII]

Flew 109 for 2000 hours (on the nose). For the mountain work and your range/load combination I'd lease an S-model on power-by-the-hour (negotiate the lowest you can get, and sometimes it can be much lower than initially thought), 24/7 fly-in and fix-it capability at the nearest service center, and remember to keep the tail rotor balanced at least according to the maintenance plan (even if you have to buy a Chadwick or whatever) - found this to be a very useful point. Don't remember ever seeing a VFR 109 but they probably exist. I do not care for the squirrly nature of the 135 on approach and at the hover.

[Dirtyhands]

On a less dangerous note, how many 109E or S operators have had problems with the passenger step actuator. Ours failed the other day and have been quoted A$18.5k to replace it


The new 109SP's have two actuators per step, Twice the trouble....:ugh:
Depending on your warranty I believe there is limited the number of times you can get them replaced at AW's expense too.

Still, a great machine IMHO.

[Brilliant Stuff]

Whirlwind can you elaborate what you mean with squirrelly nature?

[Bob the Doc]

Don't want to look like a police car or an ambulance? We have an S and an E as ambulances and there is at least one 109 (I think an E) operating as a police car

[Ready2Fly]

As a police car? Just driving it or flying as well?

SCNR

[apb]

First of all, sorry if It was asked before.
I have seen here:
http://www.easa.europa.eu/certification/experts/docs/oeb-general/List_of_Helicopters_--_Type_Ratings_List-11012013.pdf

there are two licence´s type to fly the A109:

If you fly these models you will have A109 Type Rating:
A109 A
A109 A II
A109C
A109K2
A109LUH

And if you fly these models you will have AW109 Type Rating:
A109E
A109S
AW109SP

My question is, for example,if you have an A109 TR you can´t fly an A109E?, do you have to do a diference´s course or is it a complete and new TR?, or if you have an A109TR you can fly the whole A109 family?.

[Curtis E Carr]

As you said, there are now two types which, therefore, will require a type rating course and skill test to fly, say, the Power after having only flown the C model.

[apb]

As you said, there are now two types which, therefore, will require a type rating course and skill test to fly, say, the Power after having only flown the C model.
Ok, thanks for your reply Curtis.

[puntosaurus]

The current view in the UK CAA is that you follow the rules of the license you hold, so if you hold a JAR license (even one deemed to be an EASA license) then the old rules apply, ie. only differences training required to move between A109 variants. As soon as you change to an EASA license you need to be very careful to ensure you get the right types put on it. If you've been flying both Allison and P&W powered machines, you need to get A109 (Allisons) and AW109 (P&W) types on the new license. In other words, do your differences before you change your license !

HTH

[apb]

Very interesting point puntosaurus,I didn't know it, thanks.

[IKE_JR]

Hello,

The company I work is planning to buy a 109Power year range 2000-2004.

I know the newest model (2008 and up)has the sliding doors, but the older ones (we saw 3 options) and none of them had the sliding doors.

Does anyone knows if it is possible to retrofit it to a sliding door? If it is possible, how much this "change" would cost (or estimate)?

Thank you

[Agusta]

Yep you are right, Dyfed Powys Police operate a 109E... or did.

[MooseLoose]

Hello A109E Drivers. The RFM I've been looking at Rev.46 says "ENG 1 MODE switch : FLT". Before ENG 2 Start. Does everyone do this or know if is acceptable to start the 2nd ENG while the 1st is at IDLE? Also do you turn the Inverters on before or after the 2nd ENG Start? Rev. 46 says after.

[400hover]

Thats the procedure for the engines. Only start the second engine after the first is established at flight position, and dont forget to check amp below 100amps.

The inverters should be both turned on after both engines are estabilized at flight position. Also a rfm procedure!

[MooseLoose]

Thank You 400Hover. Do YOU then go back to idle on the 1st Eng to do the system checks or go to FLT on the 2nd Eng?

[400hover]

Not sure about that, but i thing that when you go to flight position you never retrocede to idle, unless to engine cut!

[Dick Smith]

Has it always been a requirement to move the first started engine to flight before starting the second engine?

I feel sure I was taught that leaving the first engine in idle was ok.

What is the reason to move the first engine to flight?

Also I understood the less tha 100 Amps was a recommendation not a requirement.

Can anyone advise?

[MooseLoose]

Thank you Dick. I can now admit I too was shown to start the 2nd Eng with the 1st at IDLE, but have been re-reading the RFM which says to have the 1st ENG at FLT before starting the 2nd.

I'm guessing the reason is for a softer Engagement with the 1st ENG at FLT like the Bell 412 requirement to be at 77 to 85% NR for the 2nd Eng start. Which is where I think the 100 amp recommendation has come from. Even though the 412 RFM says below 150 amps. Most guys I've flown with, wait until below 100 amps.

I haven't been able to find anything in the A109E RFM about waiting for below 100amps, but do have a check of the amps, as that too was shown to me during my endorsement.

[John Eacott]

Dick,

Yes, the first engine to flight idle after start was there from the start: drove me nuts as I thought it a recipe for forgetting to wind up the second engine plus it was unnecessarily noisy outside at 100% Nr.

Now, hands up the AW109 driver who hasn't pulled pitch with only one engine in flight? :p

[Dick Smith]

Does this mean Agusta has
changed the starting procedure?

[John Eacott]

Dick,

No, I have an old Rev 11 copy which shows the same procedure. It does note that It is recommended to start the engine in IDLE, nevertheless, if necessary, it is possible to start to FLIGHT by setting the ENG MODE switch directly to FLT.
A little ambiguous, since if you start in IDLE (as I always do) after post start checks the last requirement before second engine start is
ENG 1 MODE switch : FLT

Followed by a note:

In the starting phase it is suggested to select FLIGHT mode as soon as possible in order to speed up the engine oil heating

Clear as mud?

[Shawn Coyle]

The start procedure in the 190E and subsequent models mirrors the start procedure for the Allison/Rolls-Royce powered models where it was necessary to put the first engine to Flight when cross-starting.
The FADEC engines will 'govern' N1 at IDLE, so there is no real requirement to put the first engine to FLIGHT - in fact, a case could be made that it's better from a procedures point of view to leave it at IDLE - the logic being that you should only ever have both engines at IDLE or FLIGHT together, so as to not try to takeoff with one at IDLE and one at FLIGHT.

The only PW206/207 helicopters that I know of that haven't had someone try to takeoff with one at IDLE and one at FLIGHT are the Bell 417/429 - their engine switch has only two positions - OFF and IDLE (or is it START). The rest of the engine control is done with collective mounted throttles...

[helmet fire]

John Eacott's note is the key, the RFM say to start the second engine with the first at fly. Simple really.

Not to do with soft engagement and neither is the B412 from memory. The B412 is to avoid and "avoid" area.:8

Re taking off with one engine at idle in the A109 - it has actually led to more than one accident and even a fatality on an EMS ship in the US. This happens not only because of the engine start procedure (although a common contributing casual factor) and not because it is a PW206/207.

Have not heard of EC135 guys making the error, but I have no experience with that type.

In the A109E I would argue it is a unique human factors issue that permits take off with one engine at idle and both roof mounted throttles at fully open. In other-words, the visual indication from flying other types is the roof mounted throttles - and these can be sit ironed full open in the fly position, however the engine switches are down on the console and can be at idle even when the throttle is mismatched at fully open with no warning light.

No doubt in my mind that this is a human factors issue straight from the human factor manual of what not to do in design :}
And I think JE's comments on the number of guys caught out is testament to that. Shows also how poor the display system is that a Ts and Ps check is also failing to pick up one engine at idle before take off.

But this is a problem somewhat of the past if you upgrade your machine. As a result of the fatal in the US and some lobbying by other operators (we were one) the system is upgrade able to include an engine out aural warning and engine out light which activates anytime you increase collective with one engine at idle.

Engineering out the problem is always the superior answer to human factor issues, and short of getting rid of the whole throttle design in the A109E, they have done a good job with this one. It is a very effective engineering solution and all A109E operators should do it or face the almost inevitable instance of making the same mistakes and risking the same old outcomes from the same old known issue.

Not sure if this affects the grand and grand new, I have no experience in those types.

[Anthony Supplebottom]

helmet fire, approximately how much is then engine out/idle warning system, round figures?

[ShyTorque]

Not sure if this affects the grand and grand new, I have no experience in those types.

Same system on the Grand, a retrofit "one engine at idle" audio warning kit is available. Yes, I've also lifted off with one at idle. Having fronted up to my mistake, I got the blame, not the aircraft. I pointed out the warning upgrade kit was available but they've never bothered with it. The thinking seemed to be if it was a known problem, then I should have known about it and taken more care. Thankfully, no harm was done (apart from to my professional pride) but I know that I'd be down the road if it had been.

[Brilliant Stuff]

Don't you love known problems....:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[heliski22]

Now, hands up the AW109 driver who hasn't pulled pitch with only one engine in flight?

Guilty, M'Lud...

However, I got in the habit of both to IDLE and then both to FLT together. Yes, I know it says summat else in the RFM but that's what I did for nearly 1000 hours at an average 1 start per slightly less than a flying hour. The apparent benefit, according to the maintenance organisation at the time, was significantly less wear on the brushes in the Starter/Gen. However, I don't remember the details of the explanation I got other than they were not replaced on ours nearly as often as others....

22

[ShyTorque]

I do the same, but the load on the gennies isn't so critical on the later models (below 160 Amps load on the first genny before the second engine is started). Out of mechanical sympathy I allow it go down to about 130 Amps or less (it normally is very quickly so if the engines have been run that day).

[John Eacott]

In the A109E I would argue it is a unique human factors issue that permits take off with one engine at idle and both roof mounted throttles at fully open. In other-words, the visual indication from flying other types is the roof mounted throttles - and these can be sit ironed full open in the fly position, however the engine switches are down on the console and can be at idle even when the throttle is mismatched at fully open with no warning light.

No doubt in my mind that this is a human factors issue straight from the human factor manual of what not to do in design :}

I'd suggest that this also is an issue with the rotor brake on/off for start, since Agusta still don't have a simple code line in their software to inhibit start with the rotor brake on.

With both speed selects and the rotor brake all painted black, if the R/B is inadvertently left on and a quick glance at the overhead made it can easily be overlooked. Yes, I know there is a caption!

[ShyTorque]

I'd suggest that this also is an issue with the rotor brake on/off for start, since Agusta still don't have a simple code line in their software to inhibit start with the rotor brake on.

It's the only helicopter I've flown where the brake pressure (rotor and parking brakes) bleeds off in very short order after stopping the rotors - then the rotor brake will re-apply itself once the rotors start turning again! An ex-compatriate of mine set the transmission of a 109 on fire, on his first day in the job....

Blatantly stupid design, imo, (certainly wouldn't pass an MOT test) but then what do we pilots know about cockpit design? :ugh:

Even the military Gazelle had a bit of bent wire on the Rotor brake handle so you couldn't advance the throttle with the rotor brake on :ok:

[heliski22]

Blatantly stupid design, imo, (certainly wouldn't pass an MOT test) but then what do we pilots know about cockpit design? :ugh:


...and works in the opposite direction to its larger sibling, the 139...:ugh:

[gwelo shamwari]

Was wondering if I could pick the collective brain.

Recently flew a A109E that if you let it sit for more that two hours, start it up and pick it up in to the hover, it will have a one per airframe bounce - not through the controls. It happens with or without the SAS or inverters on. lower the collective to flat pitch and it goes away for the rest of the flight. If you start up with a short period of time it does not reappear, let it sit for a couple of hours and its back again.

The engineers said that they changed the dampeners, inspected the rotor head (elastomeric bearings, droop stops, etc), tested the inverters, checked for grounding issues but with out any luck.

Any thoughts?

[Swinging Spanner]

Hi gwelo,

I am not very familiar with the A109E, but was wondering if they use fibre optic gyro's or the mechanical type?

Sometimes the mechanical type can cause this phenomenon in different types of helo's. Just thinking outside the box...or maybe in this case inside the box :)

Another is depending on operating environment-I had many experiences where helo's with elastomeric bearings on MR head assy's in very cold environments would affect vibration and seem rough after first start of the day and even after take off but within minutes the elastomerics would soften up and helo become smooth again...even if elastomerics were new.

Best of luck
SS

[VeeAny]

Gwelo,

Is it an Elite ?

They have damper installed on the forward support tubes (the ones that transfers the lift loads from the gearbox to the airframe), might transmit vibration if they are wearing out perhaps ?


G.

[spinwing]

Mmmmm ...

I have absolutely no experience with the 109 .... BUT heaps of hours on the 412 ...

IIRC there was a situation with the 412 some time ago where certain Elastomerics were discovered to be made of slightly differing compounds which led to some interesting tracking and balancing issues ( :ugh: ) ...

Visual inspections tended to mean very little as the elasto's always looked perfect ... check records ... did this issue spring up after the changing of one elasto component in the head?

If all other methods of rectifying this vibe fail ... I'd suggest changing ALL the elasto's as a 'complete set' (I know this will be expensive) and seeing if the problem dissapears.

Good luck ...

[Ready2Fly]

I am looking for a A109E Power with sliding doors (to buy), preferably in Europe - obviously only helicopters currently not advertised.

Looking forward for pm's if you know somebody who might consider a sale.

TIA

[Ready2Fly]

Given the phonenumber and website, i guess this (http://www.aviatorsale.com/aircrafts/9997/) is not for real...?

[Bravo73]

Given the phonenumber and website, i guess this (http://www.aviatorsale.com/aircrafts/9997/) is not for real...?

Why not? Have you tried calling the number? It is the standard format for a UK mobile number.

And the contact address is the same address as listed on G-INFO.

It shouldn't take long to work out if this is a scam or not.

[Ready2Fly]

In the past, a lot of adverts from the website mentioned above have been fraudulent. A Bell 407 from the same owner has been such a victim as well (G-MAYE at the time).

I have found another advert from a different seller in the meantime so you are probably right.

[206 jock]

Apparently I'm selling my aircraft on that site and my phone number is +44- (0)70-31971702. It's a pity though that I cannot spell my own name and that's not my phone number!

I've given up getting these things taken down. It's like killing a zombie or an earthworm.

[Ready2Fly]

Well, one more h or not... ;)

Apparently it is the same seller advertising it on :mad: ...

And the same phonenumber gives different (presumably owner) names for different aircraft.

ok ... i am getting off topic here ... :ugh:

[gwelo shamwari]

Was wondering if anyone had any leads on leasing a US registered A109E in offshore configuration.

Thanks in advance.

[speds]

Saudi Aramco use N Reg A109 for sea pilot transfers in Middle East. You might try them?
Contact us (http://www.saudiaramco.com/en/home/contact-us.html)

[noooby]

Try Era as well. They have plenty of them in the GoM. But only if you want an E model.

[Kulwin Park]

After reading all through the previous posts, and still unsure, a question for the 109'ers out there:
Which engine is preferred in the 109 if I was to operate one - the Pratt 206 or Arrius 2K ????

Costing or benefits. Things have changed with engine manufacturers in the past years so wondering if the Arrius one with more rated power has less maintenance and operational needs?

Cheers KP

[sarboy w****r]

Does anyone have a copy of the A109 type rating course document produced by AW please (it is a lot like the RFM, but goes into a lot more systems detail)?

Alternatively, can someone tell me whether how many magnetically-held switches there are in the A109 (i.e. switches that can automatically flick over to another position)?

I think 3 of the switches on the helipilot panel (SAS1, SAS2 & ATTD HOLD) are magnetically held plus 2 on the overhead panel (GEN BUS 1 & 2). Can anyone please confirm?

[VeeAny]

Sarboy,

On a 'standard' 109E and S model the only ones I can recall are the ones you mention and a quick search of one of the training docs for 'magnetic retention' turns up only those switches, so 5 in total that I can confirm, others may know differently.

Gary

[noooby]

Kulwin Park, considering how rare the Arrius engined 109E is and that Leonardo (Agusta) don't offer that engine option anymore, I would say that the Pratt engine is preferred!

[GipsyMagpie]

Is training mode switch magnetically held too?

[VeeAny]

GM,

I don't know, would be logical if it is, I will ask someone to look in the Maintenance Manual today and see.

Gary

[Kulwin Park]

Noooby, looking at the AW / Leonardo website, it says that the Arrius version is still offered. And more powerful. Is this true?

[noooby]

Oh, they'll still sell you one, but from the production lists, it looks like only 12 civil Arrius powered 109E's were ever built. S/N 11501 to 11512 and three of them have crashed. The last one made was in 2004.

The military 109LUH does have the Arrius. I guess with all the weight they carry with extra equipment, they needed the power and weren't worried about higher DOC's.

Looks like one of them is in Oz. 11510, VH-NPZ.

[Phoinix]

Guru knowledge requested.

On 109E, you have MCP rating on TOT and N1, but not on TQ.
I plan hovering; in the mountains in winter (TQ will be the limit).
Looking at the MCP OGE chart (because I want a power margin), I take the TOM that allows me to hover at the expected OAT and PA.
What will my TQ be when I get into the hover, if all conditions are as planned?

Thanks!

[[email protected]]

What is your max tq limit?

[Phoinix]

What is your max tq limit?

MCP and TOP is 100% TQ.

[[email protected]]

So your N1 and TOT limits are there to protect the engine and the Tq limit is there to protect the transmission.

If you are within your N1 and TOT limits in the hover and you are below your AUM for OGE hover at those MCP limits you should have enough Tq headroom - however, mountain flying is massively dependent on wind conditions and you could have 100% Tq or 20% Tq on two sides of the same feature.

Predicting hover Tq in the mountains is unreliable so always fly through the area you want to hover first at 40 - 80 kts so you have enough spare performance to cope with turbulence.

When you have proved that the conditions are safe, do a power check to see what you actually have available before committing yourself to the hover.

Have an escape route for as long as possible on your approach and try to make a level speed reduction to the hover if you are close to your power limits (it uses less power and it is easier to notice up and downdraughts)

[Phoinix]

Yeah, I know. But this weird limitations configuration doesn’t work on the planning part. You cannot plan your MCP TQ for something the way Agusta wants in the flight manual.

[Phoinix]

So, any Agusta 109 drivers out there to clear the topic?
How to plan a flight with TQ margin if the TQ doesn't have the MCP range at all, but the charts for T/O and MCP power exist (MCP for TOT and N1 limit only)?
Like one pilot said: "we never have power related issues". But I don't buy that, every helicopter has power issues that we need to plan for.

[Non-PC Plod]

Surely if you want to ensure a power margin, you calculate the max all up mass for hover OGE in the given conditions, and then you reduce the mass by whatever margin you require. eg, if you want a 5% thrust margin at 3000kg, you will ensure your mass is 150kg below the max.

[Phoinix]

Again, not the point. Ok... I give up. So Agusta never runs out of power, period.

[Non-PC Plod]

Maybe you are not explaining your point clearly enough? Clearly Agusta will run out of power like any machine. The Hover OGE graph tells you when that will be. It just doesnt tell you whether the limiting factor will be Tq N1 or TOT. Does that matter? Most more modern aircraft provide you with a "PI" or first limit indicator which tells you when you get to the limit on any of the parameters. It doesnt make much difference to me which one it is.

[Hilico]

G-OPEN (https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-bell-206b3-jet-ranger-iii-g-open) B206 enters cloud in challenging weather, distraction?

G-FRRN (https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-aw109sp-grandnew-g-frrn) A109SP starts up at Battersea with rotor brake on

G-MACA (https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-robinson-r22-beta-g-maca) R22 in hover loses control in gust of wind, strikes ground

[ShyTorque]

The Agusta 109 rotor brake control is a badly thought out design, certainly in the way that it's not pilot proof, as this one discovered.

As the report states, the handle on the left side of the overhead panel is fairly small and is partly hidden by the ECLs. The latter are normally left in the "Flight" position at all times (engines are started and stopped using the controls on the centre console) so there is no need for putting one's hand up to move them - which might be a further prompt to notice where the brake handle is.

The utility hydraulic pressure for the rotor brake tends to bleed away after shutdown, as does that of the parking brakes (it's important to chock a 109 if you want it to be where you parked it on a slope when you return).
If there's no utility pressure the rotors will begin to turn quite normally on start up despite the brake handle still being in the "ON" position. However, as the rotors begin to turn, the hydraulic pump re-pressurises the utility system and the brake comes on again all by itself, harder and harder... say no more!

I never leave the rotor brake handle "ON" for this reason. I know of one pilot some years ago who started his first A109 job in the morning, inadvertently left the rotor brake on for a subsequent startup and was looking for another job by the end of the afternoon.

[Hilico]

I was a little surprised to see that flying SP in the 109 a checklist is not used. There may be a good reason for that, SPIFRs might be able to tell me. As it is, I barely fasten my seatbelt without referring to the checklist (the rotor brake is on it, and much easier to see in the a/c I’m training on).

[Non-PC Plod]

"The AW109SP is designed to be flown by a single pilot and the checks are generally performed from memory without reference to a written checklist."

I think this phrase is an unhelpful generalisation. The checks are clearly listed in the RFM. When conducting training on the factory course, every student will use a checklist. If an operator chooses to dispense with checklists, then it is their own lookout, as it opens them up to exactly this sort of error. I would like to know on what evidence the AAIB has decided this is the norm?

[ShyTorque]

In forty years of aviation, I've never had the privilege of a factory course, on any type I've flown.

[heli14]

I was a little surprised to see that flying SP in the 109 a checklist is not used

Not sure if it's still the case, but the owner's previous aircraft (a 355N) was flown almost exclusively by one pilot, day in day out and was private use only. If it's the same with the 109, it could explain no checklist as the pilot would be so familiar with it, and would (usually) know exactly how the aircraft had been left from it's previous flight (e.g. rotor brake on/off etc)

[Non-PC Plod]

heli 14. I am sure you are right. But it just proves the point why most commercial operators would always use checklists.

[Non-PC Plod]

In forty years of aviation, I've never had the privilege of a factory course, on any type I've flown.

I can only comment on the courses I am familiar with. I have no idea whether most other training schools would teach you to use a checklist. I would hope they do, as CRM and TEM are supposed to be integrated at all stages of training, and use of a checklist is probably the most basic form of error management imaginable.

[MightyGem]

After an incident where someone started with the rotor brake on, :* we adopted the procedure where if the brake was left on after shutdown, then a cover was put on the cyclic.

[rr84c]

The Agusta 109 rotor brake control is a badly thought out design, certainly in the way that it's not pilot proof, as this one discovered.
You can't even start a Robinson R22 with the rotor brake on :rolleyes::ugh:

[aa777888]

Nor a 44, as it has a starter motor interlock on the rotor brake. Not sure about the 66, but I'd guess it's the same. It's always a bit embarrassing when you make that mistake in the 44, but thankfully that's all it is.

[ShyTorque]

You can't even start a Robinson R22 with the rotor brake on :rolleyes::ugh:

Precisely. But then, who would want to start one up anyway? :E

[McGowan]

Sorry if this has been asked before, but, can anyone give me the OEI fuel burn in the cruise for a A109E P&W 206C engines. I've looked at the RFM and can find nothing.
The new fuel requirements thing here is wanting me to know what fuel I'll need if I have a single engine failure at critical point in a flight to make it to my destination or an alternate plus 15 minutes dicking around above the aerodrome then landing. Why a VFR aircraft is going to hang around for 15 minutes before I land I don't know. Typical of the rubbish produced from Canberra.

[spinwing]

Mmmm ...

How long have you been flying that thing ? ...

[Same again]

But it just proves the point why most commercial operators would always use checklists.

Bristow do start-up checks from memory on more complex helicopters than the 109. A flow pattern, regularity and practice helps but if I need a checklist to remind me to do up my seat belt then it is possibly time to give it up!

[ersa]

Sorry if this has been asked before, but, can anyone give me the OEI fuel burn in the cruise for a A109E P&W 206C engines. I've looked at the RFM and can find nothing.
The new fuel requirements thing here is wanting me to know what fuel I'll need if I have a single engine failure at critical point in a flight to make it to my destination or an alternate plus 15 minutes dicking around above the aerodrome then landing. Why a VFR aircraft is going to hang around for 15 minutes before I land I don't know. Typical of the rubbish produced from Canberra.


Normal Fuel burn 220KG/Hour
OEI fuel burn non holding 160KG/Hour