View Full Version : NASA Airbus Helicopters H135
chopper2004
29th Jan 2020, 06:18
Announced here today in Anaheim and a historical first: NASA orders 3 x Airbus Helicopters H135 to replace the legacy Bell UH-1H at Kennedy Space Center supporting space ops.
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2020/01/nasa-places-order-for-three-airbus-h135-helicopters.html
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1025x587/da36af98_9b70_4f0e_9e1f_4e3d78aff7b7_23966525ba730a67072019b 11fbf31ea659d89f6.jpeg
PilotEpisode
29th Jan 2020, 11:10
Looks nice in the NASA livery!
Tango and Cash
29th Jan 2020, 13:57
Surprised they didn't go with an EC145/UH-72 and leverage the Army contract for something with a bit bigger cabin.
chopper2004
6th Feb 2020, 13:26
Surprised they didn't go with an EC145/UH-72 and leverage the Army contract for something with a bit bigger cabin.
Good point seeming as the Lakota replaced the Huey in the army and would make sense as the NASA Hueys carries security and emergency response teams around the launch area.
cheers
chopper2004
1st Oct 2020, 13:36
First pair delivered (photos courtesy of Airbus )
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2020/10/two-airbus-h135-helicopters-delivered-to-support-space-exploration-at-nasas-kennedy-space-center.html
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/355fae14_c923_4474_a370_5d0568857cb5_19e477b0c64f6b4aae15374 1cd0f11c79496d3d8.jpeg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/6a96f671_ed7f_4a28_91aa_6324cb79dd95_0779e1c50cbbeec806dd050 35c475de8a46ab123.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/89a1f7a6_eaa7_4bf1_9df1_910da4682a58_727c66f909531f25195b1be ae45ee23840582825.jpeg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/86d15dcd_097b_4cd9_8caa_86e1068e78d6_fecf15adfb7aad851bb340f a0450576c8ef83472.jpeg
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1333/6edba328_fba5_438e_b197_358a67c8c9d9_e642ee50f3a48475367b6bc a353b88164ab2fd0c.jpeg
Kulwin Park
2nd Oct 2020, 09:22
VERY NICE !!! I've worked on both the old & new 135's - they are a brilliant workhorse.
But why do they have the taller vertical fin fairing?
No floats either, which I thought would've been a requirement over water rescuing & transferring astronauts?
VERY NICE !!! I've worked on both the old & new 135's - they are a brilliant workhorse.
But why do they have the taller vertical fin fairing?
No floats either, which I thought would've been a requirement over water rescuing & transferring astronauts?
The extended vertical fin fairing is Airbus’s response to the design department’s decision to remove the vertical stabilisers on the T3 variant. The first T3s, without the fin extension, had (still have) an uncomfortable tendency to fishtail at high speed, especially in turbulent conditions. The fin extension is now offered as an optional refit for those early airframes. Makes you wonder how come the test pilots signed it off in the first place.
FloaterNorthWest
2nd Oct 2020, 14:58
The extended vertical fin fairing is Airbus’s response to the design department’s decision to remove the vertical stabilisers on the T3 variant. The first T3s, without the fin extension, had (still have) an uncomfortable tendency to fishtail at high speed, especially in turbulent conditions. The fin extension is now offered as an optional refit for those early airframes. Makes you wonder how come the test pilots signed it off in the first place.
This tendency only became apparent when the Helionix model (P3H and T3H) was released which has a completely different AFCS system to the early T3 and P3.
Earlier 135's with sideslip angles around 30-45 degrees suffer from instability from the wake from the endplates entering the fenestron. Not ideal.
JimEli
2nd Oct 2020, 20:14
Earlier 135's with sideslip angles around 30-45 degrees suffer from instability from the wake from the endplates entering the fenestron. Not ideal.
Flying at sideslip angles around 30-45 degrees is Not ideal.
Flying at sideslip angles around 30-45 degrees is Not ideal.
Depends on your speed. At a guess the 135 is completely capable of 90 degrees up to about 60 knots at the limit of the TR?
20-40 knots with an angle of 30-45 is the worst for endplate wake.
Kulwin Park
2nd Oct 2020, 23:50
Thanks QTG. Explains it all now. I hadn't touched the Helionix types, so hadn't see that fin.
This tendency only became apparent when the Helionix model (P3H and T3H) was released which has a completely different AFCS system to the early T3 and P3.
Haven’t flown a Helionix T3, but the problem first appeared (and it’s still there) on the original FCDS T3 with the traditional AP.
MikeNYC
3rd Oct 2020, 14:57
No floats either, which I thought would've been a requirement over water rescuing & transferring astronauts?
I don't believe water rescue is part of their mission...you may notice the H135's are not hoist equipped. USAF HH-60's served that role for awhile, but not sure if that remains accurate.
chopper2004
3rd Oct 2020, 20:08
I don't believe water rescue is part of their mission...you may notice the H135's are not hoist equipped. USAF HH-60's served that role for awhile, but not sure if that remains accurate.
Still have the 920th Rescue Wing at Patrick AFB
https://www.920rqw.afrc.af.mil
cheers
drakkar
4th Oct 2020, 02:19
I don't believe water rescue is part of their mission...you may notice the H135's are not hoist equipped. USAF HH-60's served that role for awhile, but not sure if that remains accurate.
Looks like they have the hoist fix parts at least RH transmission cowling in 2 parts and the RH top skid
.
gipsymagpie
4th Oct 2020, 20:29
This tendency only became apparent when the Helionix model (P3H and T3H) was released which has a completely different AFCS system to the early T3 and P3.
The non-Helionix T3 are still stuck with a 90kt limit on the IAS UM mode IFR so I think the problem is on both variants. Limitation cannot be removed unless tall fin is fitted. To be honest the place you actually notice the lack of fin area is that it is less stable in yaw in the hover. Sure you use less extremes of pedal cross wind (ie you don’t get as near to full travel) but you have to work harder to hold a heading.
All of nips and tucks on T3 are about making it better for high altitude out of wind hover. I prefer a P or T2+ For sea level to and fro work (although I do like Helionix a lot).
chopper2004
6th Apr 2021, 14:00
Third and final H135 delivered last week...
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/arrival-of-third-airbus-helicopter-completes-kennedy-s-security-fleet
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x640/169551353_10159638223531490_6624289444808095637_n_2cb8b72bcc 4a8f95ad930ccb8937663fe3b65a3b.jpg
cheers
havick
6th Apr 2021, 16:15
The extended vertical fin fairing is Airbus’s response to the design department’s decision to remove the vertical stabilisers on the T3 variant. The first T3s, without the fin extension, had (still have) an uncomfortable tendency to fishtail at high speed, especially in turbulent conditions. The fin extension is now offered as an optional refit for those early airframes. Makes you wonder how come the test pilots signed it off in the first place.
The fin replacement was free, but Airbus then schwacks you 30-40k for the autopilot software mod to go with it.
FloaterNorthWest
6th Apr 2021, 20:06
The non-Helionix T3 are still stuck with a 90kt limit on the IAS UM mode IFR so I think the problem is on both variants. Limitation cannot be removed unless tall fin is fitted.
Gipsy,
Can you give me the FLM reference for this limitation?
Thanks
FNW
Kulwin Park
7th Apr 2021, 11:52
Thank you Chopper2004. I see that "442" doesn't have the radome fitted on it's nose, nor does it have the extra oil cooling vent on the left side transmission cowling. It must be modded differently, or about to get mods applied to it.
Thank you Chopper2004. I see that "442" doesn't have the radome fitted on it's nose, nor does it have the extra oil cooling vent on the left side transmission cowling. It must be modded differently, or about to get mods applied to it.
When IBFs are installed, then the oil cooling vent is located at the end of the doghouse. Therefore, no oilcooler outlet on the transmissioncowling.
skadi
FloaterNorthWest
7th Apr 2021, 13:02
When IBFs are installed, then the oil cooling vent is located at the end of the doghouse. Therefore, no oilcooler outlet on the transmissioncowling.
skadi
Skadi,
All new T/P3 135 now use the upper vent method regardless of if IBF are fitted or not.
FNW
Skadi,
All new T/P3 135 now use the upper vent method regardless of if IBF are fitted or not.
FNW
Ok, the engine air intake also from the side with just mesh cover? The reason for relocating the vent was to prevent ingestion of warm air into the engine.
skadi
FloaterNorthWest
7th Apr 2021, 14:08
Ok, the engine air intake also from the side with just mesh cover? The reason for relocating the vent was to prevent ingestion of warm air into the engine.
skadi
Yes for both P and T models.
P3H models come with IBF as standard, T3H it is an option.
FNW
retoocs
7th Apr 2021, 14:25
The 300+ hour installation time of the IBF on the P/T2 sort of forced them to incorporate the design into the P/T3.
havick
7th Apr 2021, 14:42
Gipsy,
Can you give me the FLM reference for this limitation?
Thanks
FNW
For the T3 CPDS model with the SPIFR/DPIFR kit:
FLM 9.2-56 pg5 para 2.2
hope this helps.
Yes for both P and T models.
P3H models come with IBF as standard, T3H it is an option.
FNW
Thanks. That makes sense, since the PW engines were very sensible when operating in offairport szenarios. Lot of wear at compressor blades without IBF
skadi
Koalatiger
7th Apr 2021, 19:05
What is the MTOW on the 135?
havick
7th Apr 2021, 19:16
What is the MTOW on the 135?
Typically 2980kg
Kulwin Park
8th Apr 2021, 11:31
Thank you Skadi & Havick. I had not thought of the hot outlet air going straight to the engines.
gipsymagpie
8th Apr 2021, 15:47
Typically 2980kg
That's been increased on H models to 3100kg.
gipsymagpie
8th Apr 2021, 15:49
Thank you Skadi & Havick. I had not thought of the hot outlet air going straight to the engines.
Unfortunately the T3 comes with a limit for downwind (25 kts) that isn't there on the earlier models. Again, all for the direct air intakes and reingestion of fumes.
havick
8th Apr 2021, 15:58
Honestly I’ve been pretty surprised at the lack of support on even the dumbest of parts and other issues from Airbus with our T3.
eg. dzus fasteners for the tail rotor driveshaft cowl are no longer procurable, yes you can source direct through other suppliers but really?
Some major avionics parts no longer supported or procurable on what is only a 5 year old machine.
It’s a great product but death by a 1000 cuts to push you into something else for the next purchase which is kind of sad.
sorry for the thread drift. The nasa machines look great all lined up.