412 and Goodrich hoist

[havoc]

Copied from Flightweb, looking for info


Hi all,

I would like to pick brains regarding the Bell 412 and the Goodrich hoist. This is not a concern with our other aircraft the AW 139, as there’s no skid. A safety concern has been addressed by one of our sister bases regarding the proximity of the stokes litter with a patient in, to the skid when hoisting in, and it making contact and possibly injuring the patient. Before I get correspondence saying that this is a problem that proper crew training and litter face shields should negate, I am aware of that so please dont include that in suggestions.

My question is, have any other services had this problem addressed as a crew safety concern, and if so, how did you solve the problem, apart from crew chief refresher training. If not, I would like to hear from you as well. Please only to do with the 412, not any other aircraft. Also if your service has had modiciations to your hoist arm made, I would like to hear from you.

Thanks and looking forward to hearing from you

Eddie Callachan

Senior Flight Paramedic
UAE Airforce
Al Bateen Airbase
Abu Dhabi
United Arab Emirates

[SirVivr]

Havoc:

We are just starting to operate the EP with the Goodrich.

First change, by the Winch Operator Trainer, was to adjust the hoist speed to slow it down before the Winchman/Stretcher reaches the skid protector. He could envision them being caught by the protector.

Further changes will be posted as we encounter them.

I suppose LA County, San Bernadino and the rest of the West Coast groups don't know about PPRUNE.

Suggestion:

During the three days prior to Heli-Expo, Goodrich has been hosting a seminar. I went last year. Very informative. Attendance from the above organizations, the US Army, US Coast Guard and many others.

Including Bristow, North Sea, with an outstanding video presentation.

A good reason for an expense paid trip to Houston.

Regards,

C Alexander

[Blackhawk9]

We run the Goodrich Hoist on 10 of our 412 EMS (5 Classic, 5 EP) machines in oz (and 6 x S-76, 4x 365 and AS332) Great hoist super reliable, just get your Engineer to adjust the up travel speed limit to take effect about 8 to 10 feet below the skids (75 ft/min) so even if the crewman is still hoisting in at full speed (250 ft/min) you will not drive the victim into the skids. Basic limits first and last 2 feet 10ft/min, next 10/15 feet 75ft/min , max speed 250ft/min rest.
The hoist arm fitted to our machines is the arm manufactured by Helitech in Brisbane Australia (owned by Sikorsky) much better arm then fitted to 412's I saw in the states. better mounting into xmissn pylon and top deck and better position for hoist relative to Airframe.

[SirVivr]

Blackhawk9:

I am interested in this arm from Helitech. Google tells me little.

More information would be appreciated. CG, etc.

Check your PM's.

Chas Alexander

[havoc]

Thanks for the info, I have passed all onto Eddie in the UAE.

I also posted this in the mil forum and had good response from the RAF.

[GS Pilot]

Operating a 412EP with Goodrich Hoist.
Our STC (from Aeronautical Accessories) states under limitations:

"Hoist operations are approved only in hovering flight. The object being hoisted must be completely in the cabin before forward flight is established."

All of our SO's would like to see that limitation removed so that we can begin hoisting out while on approach and then transition into fwd flight while hoisting in due to the stabilizing effect that low airspeeds have upon the load, not to mention it minimizes time spent in the hover.

Anyone else have this limitation in their STC?

[hoistop]

We use Goodrich external hoist with Bristow modification (arm etc. same as on RAF Griffin) on 412.
I believe adjusting low speed cam as suggested above and being a bit careful when coming to skid should suffice.
Years ago (and with old internal hoist config.) we had a situation where a rescuer was injured (arm injury) while passing by skid - and he tried to sue the crew! (didn`t work)

Limitation about hoisting in hover only is ridiculus. Probably result of some engineering ideas - like the one that used to be on EC 135, where NON ESS Bus failure stopped normal hoist operation, but thru battery bus hoist emergency power was still available - but limited to UP only!. (Not thinking that in such situation lowering load to the ground might be better option.)
Well, truth is also, that under certain combination of forward speeds and load types, an increasing swinging might occour - eventhough this speed will be generally above 30 KTS.

Regards

hoistop