S-92 to deliver UK SAR-H service
Portland has been 0900-2100hrs, except for the first few months 0800=2000, since Bristow took over from the Navy in 1995. All year round!! Civvy duty hours, you'd better get used to it! The finer points escape me but something to do with not being able to do 12hrs if starting before 0800, I think.
Also more time to get the make up sorted for the T.V. 
3D
Also more time to get the make up sorted for the T.V. 3D
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: devon
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
granfer, just for info the Devon Air Ambulance trust currently runs two EC135s, the original machine was retired some years ago after sterling service. One of them is leased however so the Radio Devon appeal is to purchase a second helicopter to replace the leased one.
As a Devonian living near Chivenor the 'yellow helicopters' will be sorely missed. They are part of North Devon and it won't be the same not seeing them overhead.
As a Devonian living near Chivenor the 'yellow helicopters' will be sorely missed. They are part of North Devon and it won't be the same not seeing them overhead.
Is it me or are the stats 'skewed' towards the S-92, and only compared against the Navy Sea King variants. Surely the MK 3/3a has a greater radius of action than the S-92, and does the 92's radius include at least 20 mins on task for winching etc (or even longer for searches now that top cover MPA is no longer available). There also seem to be other anomalies when looking on Sikorsky's own website.
I have nothing against the new aircraft (in fact I would quite like to fly it) but comparing it with the oldest and heaviest aircraft makes the arguments a little strange - but no doubt ideal to 'sell' it to the politicians, press and public who do not ask 'searching' questions.
I have nothing against the new aircraft (in fact I would quite like to fly it) but comparing it with the oldest and heaviest aircraft makes the arguments a little strange - but no doubt ideal to 'sell' it to the politicians, press and public who do not ask 'searching' questions.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Devon
Age: 71
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for putting me straight on the Devon AA current fleet "arandcee" , thought I saw a Bo105 going in to the NDDH recently - the recent cold weather must have got to my brain . I'll also miss the Big Yellows skimming over my roof heading out to the Bristol Channel area - it's reassurring to know that they are there looking after peoples safety , not always over the sea .
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is it that folks persist in saying GANNET mainly does medtxfrs? Last year the boys did 447 jobs and the majority were rescues, although they led in every other stat as well.
Tasking is mainly north (Lochaber/Glencoe) or south (Galloways/N Lakes) - mainly mountain jobs, and east/west is quite a bit less but we're also doing more work in the Cairngorms and SE Borders with snags at Lossie/Boulmer. 45% of all jobs are at night and almost always on NVG but the Sea Searcher radar is still doing us proud for those night/IMC transits. Not sure how you get across the Crinan Canal area with an S92 in IMC? That might be cutting off a major transit route when the weather's grim. Presumably the FIKI clearance is good?
I'm afraid that there's the same no of secondary duties at Gannet as any other RN sqn (such is life). It's not true to say it's the only RN unit with a Lt Cdr WAFU as CO (what about 705, 750, 771, 849, 854, 857?)
PWK is mighty expensive though, beyond what you might expect for a regional airport and I'm sure GLA is cheaper in the long-run. The RN is looking at options for FOB's for Merlin/whoever.
Agree with disc-loading comments. My MRT contacts tell me they're never keen to work with the S92's due to downwash and a few other reasons.
Tasking is mainly north (Lochaber/Glencoe) or south (Galloways/N Lakes) - mainly mountain jobs, and east/west is quite a bit less but we're also doing more work in the Cairngorms and SE Borders with snags at Lossie/Boulmer. 45% of all jobs are at night and almost always on NVG but the Sea Searcher radar is still doing us proud for those night/IMC transits. Not sure how you get across the Crinan Canal area with an S92 in IMC? That might be cutting off a major transit route when the weather's grim. Presumably the FIKI clearance is good?
I'm afraid that there's the same no of secondary duties at Gannet as any other RN sqn (such is life). It's not true to say it's the only RN unit with a Lt Cdr WAFU as CO (what about 705, 750, 771, 849, 854, 857?)
PWK is mighty expensive though, beyond what you might expect for a regional airport and I'm sure GLA is cheaper in the long-run. The RN is looking at options for FOB's for Merlin/whoever.
Agree with disc-loading comments. My MRT contacts tell me they're never keen to work with the S92's due to downwash and a few other reasons.
Is it me or are the stats 'skewed' towards the S-92
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Second star on the left
Posts: 124
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grandfer
Last time I visited the guys at their base at Eaglescott, they were using a Bolkow so I suspect that what you saw a relief aircraft.
Heads down, look out for the flack
Last time I visited the guys at their base at Eaglescott, they were using a Bolkow so I suspect that what you saw a relief aircraft.
Heads down, look out for the flack
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid that there's the same no of secondary duties at Gannet as any other RN sqn (such is life). It's not true to say it's the only RN unit with a Lt Cdr WAFU as CO (what about 705, 750, 771, 849, 854, 857?)
705, 750 etc, etc are all Squadrons. The Boss of GSF is unique (in the FAA) in so much as he is the Commanding Officer of HMS Gannet.
Had a chat with the boys at Lee and Portland over the past couple of days and they can't wait to get the 92... they dont like the AW aircraft they currently fly.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vec
Quite right about the Boss being CO of HMS Gannet as well as the squadron - it does bring a broader range of responsibilities, even for a small outfit like Prestwick. There's an OOD requirement but the DLC(F) is incorporated into one of the all-flights authorisers being contactable.
Although there's no DPO etc, those duties are provided for by a much bigger pool of manpower at say Culdrose or Yeovs than Gannet has, so I think it's a simlar workload ratio. I'm referring to the usual stuff like DO, Visits, Ops, DOps, blah blah.
Quite right about the Boss being CO of HMS Gannet as well as the squadron - it does bring a broader range of responsibilities, even for a small outfit like Prestwick. There's an OOD requirement but the DLC(F) is incorporated into one of the all-flights authorisers being contactable.
Although there's no DPO etc, those duties are provided for by a much bigger pool of manpower at say Culdrose or Yeovs than Gannet has, so I think it's a simlar workload ratio. I'm referring to the usual stuff like DO, Visits, Ops, DOps, blah blah.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RoA
Typical RoA of Stornoway S92 is 250nm with 30 mins on scene and fuel to carry out instrument approach on return - at least equivalent to Mk3 Sea King.
The S92 has many good points and a few things that need to be worked around. Despite comments on high disc loading, all tasked mountain jobs have been successfully completed and there are benefits to being able to lift more MRT troops in one go. Initial scepticism (sp?) from the MRT has largely been removed by training and liaison, though perhaps Glencoe/Lochaber teams have not had as much exposure to the 92 as the more northern teams.
Increased speed (140kts) is of course a great improvement, as is the ability to hop over the top of the mountains in airframe icing conditions (still making 135kts TAS). NVG will increase capability massively, and that will come (the sooner, the better).
Everyone seems very suspicious of the 92, but I would not swap back to the Sea King in a million years. It would probably be tedious of me to go into all the increased safety features of the 92, so I won't.
The S92 has many good points and a few things that need to be worked around. Despite comments on high disc loading, all tasked mountain jobs have been successfully completed and there are benefits to being able to lift more MRT troops in one go. Initial scepticism (sp?) from the MRT has largely been removed by training and liaison, though perhaps Glencoe/Lochaber teams have not had as much exposure to the 92 as the more northern teams.
Increased speed (140kts) is of course a great improvement, as is the ability to hop over the top of the mountains in airframe icing conditions (still making 135kts TAS). NVG will increase capability massively, and that will come (the sooner, the better).
Everyone seems very suspicious of the 92, but I would not swap back to the Sea King in a million years. It would probably be tedious of me to go into all the increased safety features of the 92, so I won't.
The S92 has many good points
Calli - for 'at least the equivalent of the Sea King' read 'exactly the same capability as a 50 year old helicopter' - very impressive for a new generation helo 
except that in order to get that RoA, you have to have the aux tanks fitted which reduces the cabin capacity. Can you get 17 pax seated in an S-92 with the aux tank fitted?
The safety features of the 92 were extensively lauded when the aircraft was pushed as a SAR machine and they traded heavily on its heritage, being based on the Blackhawk drive train etc. Unfortunatley the 'meeting new airworthiness and certification standards' sales pitch didn't mention that the 30 min run dry capability required under FAA pt 29 had been dodged by Sikorsky rather than complied with as highlighted by the Newfoundland crash.
Now to be fair, most are expecting the Soteria aircraft to be a B model with a better designed aux tank, new oil filter housing with 6 fixing points and possibly even a whole new MRGB to cope with the MRGB foot cracking issue but there is no guarantee this will be the case, especially since they will need to be in service next year for the transition to start in 2012.
It is about time Soteria did start to put their plan into the public domain if they want to avoid speculation and scuttlebutt.
except that in order to get that RoA, you have to have the aux tanks fitted which reduces the cabin capacity. Can you get 17 pax seated in an S-92 with the aux tank fitted?The safety features of the 92 were extensively lauded when the aircraft was pushed as a SAR machine and they traded heavily on its heritage, being based on the Blackhawk drive train etc. Unfortunatley the 'meeting new airworthiness and certification standards' sales pitch didn't mention that the 30 min run dry capability required under FAA pt 29 had been dodged by Sikorsky rather than complied with as highlighted by the Newfoundland crash.
Now to be fair, most are expecting the Soteria aircraft to be a B model with a better designed aux tank, new oil filter housing with 6 fixing points and possibly even a whole new MRGB to cope with the MRGB foot cracking issue but there is no guarantee this will be the case, especially since they will need to be in service next year for the transition to start in 2012.
It is about time Soteria did start to put their plan into the public domain if they want to avoid speculation and scuttlebutt.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: In the Country
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No S-92B in the pipeline from what I understand but there will be some changes to the aircraft such as a new extended range fuel tank in the cabin, and a higher MTOW from 26,500 pounds to above 27,000 pounds.
Crab
To comply with FAA/JAR 29.927, the OEM doesn’t require a 30-minute run-dry gearbox.
I stand to be corrected, but I do not believe either the AS332 Series (like the S-92, has a cooler bypass option) or EC225 has a Normal Use 30-Minute Run-Dry certification/capability. I accept the 225 does have an emergency glycol lubrication system, but this is not a Normal Use system.
The only helicopter I know of with a true 30-minute Run-Dry gearbox is the Sikorsky UH-60M, but I stand to be educated if others exist.
As for the Cougar incident, you might do well to await the final report before blame is apportioned for this incident.
Unfortunately the 'meeting new airworthiness and certification standards' sales pitch didn't mention that the 30 min run dry capability required under FAA pt 29 had been dodged by Sikorsky rather than complied with as highlighted by the Newfoundland crash.
29.927 amendment 26, 10/3/1988:
c) Lubrication system failure. For lubrication systems required for proper operation of rotor drive systems, the following apply:
(1) Category A. Unless such failures are extremely remote (with no moving parts i.e. static seals just like any other helicopter oil filter housings and an oil cooler bypass provision, why should the OEM or FAA/JAA not accept that such failures would be extremely remote?), it must be shown by tests that any failure which results in loss of lubricant in any normal use lubrication system will not prevent continued safe operation, although not necessarily without damage, at a torque and rotational speed prescribed by the applicant for continued flight, for at least 30 minutes after perception by the flightcrew of the lubrication system failure or loss of lubricant
c) Lubrication system failure. For lubrication systems required for proper operation of rotor drive systems, the following apply:
(1) Category A. Unless such failures are extremely remote (with no moving parts i.e. static seals just like any other helicopter oil filter housings and an oil cooler bypass provision, why should the OEM or FAA/JAA not accept that such failures would be extremely remote?), it must be shown by tests that any failure which results in loss of lubricant in any normal use lubrication system will not prevent continued safe operation, although not necessarily without damage, at a torque and rotational speed prescribed by the applicant for continued flight, for at least 30 minutes after perception by the flightcrew of the lubrication system failure or loss of lubricant
The only helicopter I know of with a true 30-minute Run-Dry gearbox is the Sikorsky UH-60M, but I stand to be educated if others exist.
As for the Cougar incident, you might do well to await the final report before blame is apportioned for this incident.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hilife, you have to excuse CrabSAAvn for his inaccuracies. He has no working knowledge of anything civilian especially when it comes to regs.
Crab: How do you expect the 'preferred bidder' to share its secrets to all when the contract isn't signed?
Crab: How do you expect the 'preferred bidder' to share its secrets to all when the contract isn't signed?