A109 V 145

[ab139heli]

HI,


I YOU HAVE TO SELECT BETWEEN A109 POWER AND EC 145 FOR

HOT AND HIGH ENVIRONMENT WHICE ONE YOU WILL TAKE ?AND

WHY?

[tiltrotor]

I suppose that all depends on your mission requirements. If you are talking about the EC145 (you wrote 145) than you are looking at a quite different aircraft (larger cabin space, rear-clamshell doors, more seats,etc.)

The A109 is certainly a great performer, the K2 and in particular the Power. never the less, it only seats five (1+4) and if, for example, you were to use it for medevac operations, the access, internal space requirements etc, are certainly more limiting as compared to the EC145 /BK117.

I hope that this answers some questions, if you were to talk about this coparision. Remember, it is important to keep in mind what operation you are going to use it for.

I have flown helicopters in Oman before and believe that either of the aircraft would have sufficicent performance for most operations.

[Arraitch]

For passengers, take the Agusta - the fully articulated head is so much smoother for them, and they all get a reasonable view of the outside. The BK / EC has a rigid head, so all turbulence or pilot input gets passed on to the cabin, so it is jittery and jerky. If a passenger is in the back section without a window, expect to see their lunch fairly soon. CSAS can help, though.

For freight, take the BK - easy to load, flat floor, clamshell doors.

For speed, take the Agusta.

For pilot comfort, take the BK - that Agusta footwell is too damn tight, and the nosewheel locking lever bites into your left leg.

For protecting the tail rotor and stinger (confined areas) take the BK - the 109 sprays sparks from stinger strikes too often - you can do it just picking up to the hover.:eek: And the 109 rotor is very low when spinning, can scare the passengers and the pilot if boarding is done hot.

[Oracle]

Hi!

I flew the first BK117 demonstrator when it came through Seeb back in the 80's - and wasn't at all impressed by its 'wooden' handling - hard to beat a 205 really in the hot and high world! The Augusta 109 K2 has a great reputation as a good all-rounder for mountain and for EMS work - although as TILTROTOR has already mentioned - it has got a rather small cabin (even with the fat doors and windows fitted. My opinion though is that if it's good enough for the REGA fleet - the Swiss mountain rescue/EMS mob in their mountainous terrain, then it would manage well in Oman's terrain - also size-wise, you are better off with the 109 getting into and out of the village LZ's you currently operate 205's in to. REGA also use it with NVG's. The 109 has a reputation of being slightly maintenance intensive, - but hopefully the newer K2 models will be more engineer friendly! Are you thinking of not getting your larger new Augustas now -or are you just shopping around for a smaller/nippier machine for general comms/casevac work?

Hope this helps!

Oracle...:D

[SASless]

Hard to beat a 205 at high and hot places....Bollocks....the Alouette III will do that anytime.....pound for pound. Load the two up to gross at sealevel....go straight to 10,000 feet and land.....you will need the III to fetch the 205 crew home from the crash site.

[Randy_g]

I think one of the best is the 214B for hot and high. It could probably carry the Alouette 111 to 10,000'. :D :D Finally a Bell product that wasn't underpowered !!! Put the PT6-67D in the 205 and It's hot/high performance improves significantly. Still no-one (except the Russians) have come up with a utility helicopter that has a bigger cabin than the good ol' Bells.

Cheers

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/naughty.gif Randy_G

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/man_grilling_hamburgers_sm_wht.gif

[Thud_and_Blunder]

SASless,

I reckon an AB205 (which AB139s organisation has operated in the past), even though it might not be at Gross, still has a more useful payload at 10000 ft - Jebel Shams springs to mind - than the redoubtable III.

...and the Air Force in the same country as Ibrahim would certainly agree with Randy, as they're one of the few users of the type.

[SASless]

But you will still have to limit the load on the 205....but not in the III.....as far as loading to max gross at takeoff for a delivery direct to 10,000 feet. Yes the 205 is the larger aircraft, and has a larger cabin with more available seats but once again....it takes the pilot remembering he cannot load it up on the beach and head straight for the mountain top without cutting weight first.

The 214 is great for load carrying ability....but not so for reliability....and availibilty of parts now days. Bell had a good idea that needed more polishing to make it a first class helicopter. The starting system suffers.....along with the usual weakness of a Bell and that is cracking and structural problems.

The one thing about the 214 is that it isn't underpowered.....the usual handicap of most helicopters followed by the tail rotor being less effective than it needs to be.

[Randy_g]

SASless a quick question for you, what is the useful load of the A3 ?? Likewise what is the fuel burn ??

Cheers

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/naughty.gif Randy_G

http://randyspics.tripod.ca/gifs/man_grilling_hamburgers_sm_wht.gif