109 or 135?

[Billywizz]

Can I have your opinions, comments, limitations & comparisons on the agusta109 compared to the EC135? Preferably if you have flown both types. I want a pilots perspective not the sales talk please

[ppheli]

and what role would you be putting the aircraft to - police, EMS, corporate or what?

[Marco]

Depends, as stated on what you're going to use it for.

109 - Better for corporate. Police- the real estate inside isn't as good as competitors.

135 - Not so good for corporate. Much better for police, hence the amount of UK police which have them. The T2 performance is excellent though. VTOL up to +36C at 0 PA at max auw.

[Head Turner]

I am sure all this has been discussed before and the virtues of the 135 and the 109 expounded.
The 109, now with the increase in MAUM following the u/c mod will be the machine for the corporate user with it's looks, speed and now the extra payload available will give fuel to extend IFR possibilities. It will also be quieter with the wide chord composite tail rotor. Should please the neighbours. The 135 is,as previously stated more atuned to the police-medivac business.

[Billywizz]

It would be used for corporate work.
sorry if I missed the previous posts on this, but would be grateful for the help.

[oxi]

I had the same questions a while back, and reckoned the 109 fitted the bill better.

Fingers crossed........

It does what the book says so we are all happy!!!

If you can get the increased weight mod as it gives you another 150 kg, very helpful.

Also get the 5 tanks to give you 660kg of fuel and the extended locker or cargo hold, suppressing just how much you can fit.

The air-cond system works well, keep an eye on the finished quality ie the paint as the Italians are not as good as they could be with this.

Where are you buying it as I believe the Americans get them green then fit Garmin gear (2 430's) and different audio panels, the Gemeillie audio panels and trimbles aren't the best.

I would recommend the 109 over the 135 for corporate for sure.

[Giovanni Cento Nove]

About the only thing in common between the two would be the engines. (If we are talking about current models of course.)

The 109 as a corporate aircraft would probably be the better of the two.

The issues and which is better (IMHO):

Speed - 109

Comfort pilot - 135

Comfort pax - 109

Visibility - 135

To fly - 135

Maintenance - 135 by a long way

Range - 109

Payload/Range - 135

Single engine perf - 135

Noise - 135

Avionics - 135 (MEGHAS version)

Reliability - 135

Water leaks - 135

Build quality - 135

Resale value - 135

Number in service - 135

Contemporary - 135

Pax safety (clearance from the turning bits) - 135

Crashworthiness - 135

Based on currently operating both aircraft and in our particular case. A109E and EC135P2. The 109 has 1000 HP for T/O versus the 135's 842 HP.

The increased gross weight mod on the 109 is probably 250K USD to retro. The new T/R blades about 25K USD to retro depending on the residual life remaining on your current blades or could be as much as 50K USD if you are replacing expired blades.

[John Eacott]

The A109E now comes standard at 3000kg, from what I understand, and also has the Elite mod to the rear seats, giving more seat back rake, and slightly less fuel. The 3T mod also raises the gear speed to 140kias (from 120), but I was told (stand to be corrected) that the wide chord/quieter tail rotor blades are only cleared for 2850kg machines. I think the retractable steps are now standard, also.

With the extra mauw the 109E now approaches a useable payload, but with aircon and usual add ons, current corporate aircraft tend to tip the scales at close to 2000kg. With only 2850 mauw this doesn't leave much for pax, with full fuel and pilot, but the extra 150kg is a Good Thing :ok: Aircon is essential, there are no opening windows :cool: Plenty of baggage space with the extended boot, good cruise speed, but the PW206 engines are very sooty :eek: You'll need a good hangar rat to wash the tail at least every 5 hours flying, for a new design engine it's disgustingly dirty.........

Still an Italian cockpit, just like their cars: short legs & long arms required! If you have a sliding door fit, the pilot's cyclic is rigged way off to the right and forward, apparently to allow for the fitting and use of a winch, but a drama to get used to, and should be re rigged to a more normal position. The co pilot's stick doesn't have the same issue. No door pockets, so storage for plates, etc., is limited.

I've just seen J109's post, the 3T retrofit costs $US150k.

[John Eacott]

Further on the 109E tail rotor upgrade: the machine I (occassionally) fly just passed over a couple of times at cruise, and initially sounded like a JetRanger! Substantial difference in the noise signature, the new blades went on a day ago. The old blades had 650 hours on them, changeover was $US19k, but with extended life, reduced maintenance inspections, etc., well worth the dosh.

The new blades should be certified for the 3T weight about the end of January 2005, from what I was told.

[oxi]

109's out of the factory now are fitted with some of the items required for the increased weight kit such as, tail boom doublers, and stronger gear doors, I think all that is involved is stronger strutts and retract mechasim.

Standard 109's have chrome retraction arms to the servo where as the new kit has a black arm (to the mains).

Question for the Elite drivers, what is your max fuel figure as I operate the power with the lent back seat. My guage shows 660kg at full tanks, but I understand that it should be 638kg???

[Billywizz]

Many, many thanks for your comments. It's very useful to get info on the mods available.
Looks like the pendulum is swinging towards the 109.
A merry christmas to one and all.
Cheers

[John Eacott]

The design of the new A109 tail rotor blades fascinate me: here are a couple of pictures. They balanced in on the first run below 0.003ips, so they were certainly well matched at the factory :ok:

http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/photos/pprune/A109%20tail%20rotor%201.jpg

http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/photos/pprune/A109%20tail%20rotor%202.jpg

[Gimble Stop]

John,
What equipment did you use to get a reading of 0.003ips. I think it might be broken.

More like 0.03ips I think. In any case it is very good. I have had similar results with the old type (-111 ) blades as well. This can be a bit misleading though because it depends on good trunnion shimming.

My two cents. 109’s are a bloody good thing. The PW206 engines are exceptional as well.

EC 135’s You can not get service here (Australia) no matter what they tell you.

[Billywizz]

great pictures of the tail rotors,
so Eurocopter excel themselves on the maintenance in Oz as well!

[oxi]

Eurocopter will never see our business again.....sneaky #$#%% !