Sikorsky S-92 and Leonardo AW101 VVIP.

[rigoletto]

Hello!

DISCLAMER: I don't know a thing about helicopters, and if I'm posting in the right place of this forums.

I was instructed to gather some initial general information about running costs, reliability and dependability between Sikorsky S-92[1] and Leonardo AW101 VVIP. This is about private board members and executives needs... in Europe. So, would you mind to share some information in regards to this subjects.

Thank you. :)

[1] apparently there is a revision coming in 2021 - S-92B.

[hihover]

I did exactly that same exercise last year. Give me a day or two to see if I still have it at work.

[Ascend Charlie]

I saw a beautiful S-92 in Noo Yawk back in 2006, owned by the owner of a NY football team, its main task was to carry the owner's kids from Long Island to Manhattan to school! Divided into 2 cabins, polished woodwork everywhere. Just gorgeous. Price quoted then was US $25 megabux. No idea about the running costs, but for a gazillionaire, who cares.

[P3 Bellows]

If you want a helicopter that starts and runs all day with no snags then the S92 is your machine. If you are not that keen on flying then go for the Leonardo option.

[RotorBunny]

After experience of flying both; the S-92 beats the AW101 hands down with regards to reliability and serviceability. Of course the caveat is the quality of the technical team tasked with the maintenance of such glorious beasts!

[rigoletto]

This looks like Sikorsky for the win. :D

Thanks.

PS. that NH90 is just military, doesn't it?

[dangermouse]

so the comparison is pointless unless you are a govt or military operator, however if you are and want the biggest, most comfotable and safest vvip aircraft, the choice is clear

[Northernstar]

Hello!

DISCLAMER: I don't know a thing about helicopters, and if I'm posting in the right place of this forums.

I was instructed to gather some initial general information about running costs, reliability and dependability between Sikorsky S-92[1] and Leonardo AW101 VVIP. This is about private board members and executives needs... in Europe. So, would you mind to share some information in regards to this subjects.

Thank you. :)

[1] apparently there is a revision coming in 2021 - S-92B.


I may be able to help with info. Send me a message.

[212man]

so the comparison is pointless unless you are a govt or military operator, however if you are and want the biggest, most comfotable and safest vvip aircraft, the choice is clearAre you sure it's not certified? It has a TCDS: https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/TCDS-EASA-R-013-%20EH101-500%20-%20Issue_05.pdf (https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/TCDS-EASA-R-013-%20EH101-500%20-%20Issue_05.pdf)

[JohnDixson]

Greetings 212. Re this comparison: has the S-92 AVC with 6 FG’s vs the original 3 gained wide acceptance?. Re the number of blades. In either 2003 or 2004, we flew a flight loads survey on the 92 at a GW as I recall of 31800, in support of a Portuguese effort to obtain a European off shore SAR program. You know the original design gross weight for the CH-53 was 33,000 lbs and as we reacquainted ourselves with the subject of blade stall, we also renewed our appreciation for the CH-53 decision makers as to rotor solidity and number of blades for vibration control.

[dangermouse]

But the newer AW101 isn't. Only one civil EH101 was delivered to the Tokyo police but has now been retired, the AW101 is certifiable but not certified by a civil authority

[212man]

Greetings 212. Re this comparison: has the S-92 AVC with 6 FG’s vs the original 3 gained wide acceptance?. Re the number of blades. In either 2003 or 2004, we flew a flight loads survey on the 92 at a GW as I recall of 31800, in support of a Portuguese effort to obtain a European off shore SAR program. You know the original design gross weight for the CH-53 was 33,000 lbs and as we reacquainted ourselves with the subject of blade stall, we also renewed our appreciation for the CH-53 decision makers as to rotor solidity and number of blades for vibration control.
Hi John, to be honest I don't know what proportion of the fleet has 6 FGs, but my recollection is that it was becoming the standard fit. Our aircraft had/have them (retrofitted as not available at delivery) and it was a big improvement, although we would have preferred 5 blades!

[JohnDixson]

Part of that issue is reducing the blade root shear stresses, and another part is that we humans rate the same accelerations differently at higher frequencies: the same accelerations at higher frequencies are rated smoother. There was a learned paper on the subject circulated around the engineering department not much after I matriculated and it addressed that very subject.

[212man]

But the newer AW101 isn't. Only one civil EH101 was delivered to the Tokyo police but has now been retired, the AW101 is certifiable but not certified by a civil authority
That was actually my understanding, so I was surprised to see the EASA TCDS dated 2016 (albeit to Part 29 Amd 27!). I know AW were in discussions with some IOCs a few years ago, and it would needed around 10 orders to pay for re-certification, but then the bottom fell out of the market and long range drilling stopped.....

[Ex Machina]

Rigoletto, The AW101 is not civil certified, so you might need to look for another type for comparison. PM me if you want more detail

[Misformonkey]

Do you consider more than just the MMH/FH. Look at overall supportability, availability of spares, long term development, opportunities to share maintenance burden with other operators, training requirements, user requirements.

I'm sure the S-92 is a solid cab but 101 is popular and the Norway SAR is a technology feast which has a significant amount of sunk cost in development.

[Blackhawk9]

Having had 3 and 6 FG set up 92's operating side by side and flying in both fairly regularly (with two different operators) , if you keep your MR vibes low and don't wait for them to flag to do adjustments , I have found stuff all difference, the 3 FG set up gives you better payloads approx. 1 person over the 6 FG, if I was getting my own 92 I'd only get 3 FG's.
The operator I'm with now has all their machines with 6 FG's, all our machines we fine tune under .1 ips on the MR , we think the 6 FG's are just dead weight but aren't allowed to remove 3.

[rigoletto]

That seems the S-92 is the only real option inside the constraints I was given. Now I need to wait to receive some other instruction about this subject.

Thank you all. :rolleyes:

[detgnome]

Depending on your specific requirements, it might be worth considering the AW189. Doesn't have the same cabin space, but it does have a long range capability as well as being much, much cheaper.

[N707ZS]

Here's an interesting comparison. Mil 38 VIP.

https://www.ruaviation.com/docs/5/2018/10/25/209/?h

[Robbo Jock]

With a few photos from Chopper2004 in this thread (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/627503-russian-helicopters-mi-38-das-2019-a.html)

[tottigol]

Hello!

DISCLAMER: I don't know a thing about helicopters, and if I'm posting in the right place of this forums.

I was instructed to gather some initial general information about running costs, reliability and dependability between Sikorsky S-92[1] and Leonardo AW101 VVIP. This is about private board members and executives needs... in Europe. So, would you mind to share some information in regards to this subjects.

Thank you. :)

[1] apparently there is a revision coming in 2021 - S-92B.

Why would anyone with any brains ask someone with admitttedly no knowledge or understanding of helicopter operations to gather information aout two widely differing helicopter types with totally different operating requirements and costs.
What kind of reliable report would that person or organization expect.
Is that the way they normally run their business.

[tottigol]

After experience of flying both; the S-92 beats the AW101 hands down with regards to reliability and serviceability. Of course the caveat is the quality of the technical team tasked with the maintenance of such glorious beasts!

Did you get to that conclusion after flying the Merlin for three years in the Royal Navy then switching to a higher paying civilian job with widely different on service requirements?
Funny how only Eurocrap stuff is in your profile.
Let's talk about it, bring it on.

[nomorehelosforme]

What kind of reliable report would that person or organization expect.
.

Come on Tottigol, anyone that’s looking to spend $15-$25 million on a VVIP Helicopter knows that this is the best place to start, the poor guy must be multi tasking on a daily basis between RollsRoyce/Bentley, Ferrari/Lamborghini and now has this thrown in his lap....

[tottigol]

Come on Tottigol, anyone that’s looking to spend $15-$25 million on a VVIP Helicopter knows that this is the best place to start, the poor guy must be multi tasking on a daily basis between RollsRoyce/Bentley, Ferrari/Lamborghini and now has this thrown in his lap....

Quite understandable after all..:D

[rigoletto]

It looks like they are just interested on that two models. I say something if they change their minds on the future.

Why would anyone with any brains ask someone with admitttedly no knowledge or understanding of helicopter operations to gather information aout two widely differing helicopter types with totally different operating requirements and costs.
What kind of reliable report would that person or organization expect.
Is that the way they normally run their business.

Let me answer you with another question. :-)

How do you buy a ship if you never bought one before and you are not in the maritime industry? This happens with port business who often don't know a thing about maritime.

You start getting someone who knows about the construction and operation of ships for the particular mission you need. This is not simple because you don't know the market, and then who can be trusted or not.
I mean, ever the best ship builders and yards in the world can build a ship that will sink at launch, specially when we are talking about new/custom hulls - and you lose not just the nominal value of your investment but also 2-3 years of construction.

[RotorBunny]

Did you get to that conclusion after flying the Merlin for three years in the Royal Navy then switching to a higher paying civilian job with widely different on service requirements?
Funny how only Eurocrap stuff is in your profile.
Let's talk about it, bring it on.

Thanks for your valuable reply to this thread and I appreciate your opinion on my experience; I'm sure rigoletto also greatly appreciates your contribution to this thread.
8 years EH101 (or Merlin as it was), 4 years Super Puma (332 & 225), 3 years S92. I have updated my profile just for you!
My opinion is from my personal experiences alone, it might differ from your opinion, and that's OK.

[pants on fire...]

Why would anyone with any brains ask someone with admitttedly no knowledge or understanding of helicopter operations to gather information aout two widely differing helicopter types with totally different operating requirements and costs.
What kind of reliable report would that person or organization expect.
Is that the way they normally run their business.

Sounds like either a member of the Senior Management Team or the Board of any of the major offshore operators these days. ;)

[henra]

Let's talk about it, bring it on.
After @RotorBunny has shown his hand can we now see yours?

[rigoletto]

Hi,

just to better explain, the priorities are (in more or less this order): reliability/safety (best possible track record), moderated/long range/autonomy, reasonable large internal space (at least 8 but preferentially 12 persons, and if possible one cabin crew), maintenance costs and easiness (good/ready vendor support), purchase price. That will not be supposed to fly everyday but to fly for several hours when needed, what may include flying over the sea (seems a relevant requirement to helicopters).

The underling objective is to substitute trains, airplanes/jets and boats on some medium distances with a more ready available solution.

Years ago we substituted flying in favor of trains in several cases because we found out this is in practice faster by train then flying. A airplane/jet is of course faster than a train but we can get to the station on time, board the train and go (same when arriving but on the contrary), while in a airport there are all those process, security checks, and still wait to take-off and later land, and more security checks etc.

Then, in reality this is all about logistics.

The Mi 38 look interesting but seems to be a relatively new aircraft, and Russian equipment (in general) tends to be complicated to maintain in western countries.

I am not replying to every post because I don't have anything to add, but I am reading everything. ;-)

I quite appreciate your help.

Thank you.

[nomorehelosforme]

H

A airplane/jet is of course faster than a train but we can get to the station on time, board the train and go (same when arriving but on the contrary), while in a airport there are all those process, security checks, and still wait to take-off and later land, and more security checks etc.

Then, in reality this is all about logistics.

.

Please correct me if I’m wrong, surely your client travels by private jet? In my limited experience of private jet travel In Europe and the USA I have never encountered the problems you mentioned regarding the airport process. Even when traveling commercial these processes can be pretty seamless, I’m sure you know the process!

[rigoletto]

Please correct me if I’m wrong, surely your client travels by private jet? In my limited experience of private jet travel In Europe and the USA I have never encountered the problems you mentioned regarding the airport process. Even when traveling commercial these processes can be pretty seamless, I’m sure you know the process!

Not private jets but regular commercial ones. Private jets would not really make sense for these routes (far easier to simple buy a train/jet ticket, and the distances are too short to make sense buying one) and would not really solve the problem either because we would still need to go to airport (which is not really close - about 1 and a half hour by car), and ever if the process would be simpler that would not be as ready as having a helicopter on site - this is a large industrial facility (port) and we already have a helipad around too (a small hangar could be constructed if necessary), and our regular destinies in this context are in general other similar facilities. :-)

Private jets are used from time to time, usually to Asia and South America, and when the trips are short in time (couple/few days), specially when there would have a need to go to more than one country/place in a short period of time (couple/few days). People in here don't really mind to luxury but to logistics, and stuff should be ready to work at any time.

Btw, in every airport I know you can't simply get in there, board the plane and go like is done with trains. I don't know other people experience, but every time a put a foot on the airport it take at very least 30 min to be in the plane with it ready to take-off.

[tottigol]

Thanks for your valuable reply to this thread and I appreciate your opinion on my experience; I'm sure rigoletto also greatly appreciates your contribution to this thread.
8 years EH101 (or Merlin as it was), 4 years Super Puma (332 & 225), 3 years S92. I have updated my profile just for you!
My opinion is from my personal experiences alone, it might differ from your opinion, and that's OK.
You are welcome Bunny,
Your initial comparison is still lopsided and without support.

[Self loading bear]

Rigoletto,
From your description I guess it is some salvage business or ships main engine repair work your crew is doing?
If the luxury is not an issue, You might want to look into renovated S61(T) as well.
by Carson’s/Cobham
new laminated rotor blades, glass cockpit.
large cargo door etc.
When you want to scramble a crew for unprepared take-off you will be surprised how much time it will take to scramble aircraft crew and prepare flight plan. Locations to land nearby your destination will also be limited to airports if you can not ask for permissions for off-airport landing well in advance.

I assume you will not want to employ multiple pilots on stand-by?
Who is going to man, manage and maintain the aircraft?
Perhaps better to get a (local?) helicopter company involved to see what they can contribute to your business case?