AS365
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the Haven of Peace
Age: 79
Posts: 600
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends where you want to fl;y them really, but I like all the variants of the N model SA365.
From the pax viewpoint as a corporate machine it's nice and smooth, but the cabin is rather lacking in headroom except for the 2 rear facing passengers in the 5 seat VIP interior. It is possible to gain more room, but at the expense of range as it involves sacrificing some fuel tank space.
From the operating poi8nt of view they all have the same basic autopilot (perfectly adequate even in basic form) and pretty similar cruise sppeds, in the region of 150 knots in Europe. On hotter climes, the cruise spped does decrease a bit, but so does the fuel burn. Just to give you an idea, in the part of the world where I now operate (West africa) we use as basic block planning figures:
SA365N 130 kts Fuel burn 265 kg/hr
SA365N1 130 kts Fuel burn 275 kg/hr
SA365N2 135 kts Fuel burn 280 kg/hr
SA365N3 140 kts Fuel burn 305 kg/hr
The standard fuel tanks are the same for all variants, with a capacity of 915 kg, so you'll see that the N3 suffers a bit in terms of range - but it's wonderful in the mountains!!
Whe4n I started flying 365N series, all the new variants were SA365N... but some years later the new RFMs came out labelled as AS365.... For me, they all go in my logbook as SA365.... My 3 personal flight manuals from factory courses on N, N1 and N2 are all SA365....
But, I digress. I think it's a lovely pilots' machine and although probably not quite as good as the S76 from a passenger point of view in terms of cabin space, it's smoother, almost as fast, tough, low on maintenance and overall one of my favourite machines of all time
From the pax viewpoint as a corporate machine it's nice and smooth, but the cabin is rather lacking in headroom except for the 2 rear facing passengers in the 5 seat VIP interior. It is possible to gain more room, but at the expense of range as it involves sacrificing some fuel tank space.
From the operating poi8nt of view they all have the same basic autopilot (perfectly adequate even in basic form) and pretty similar cruise sppeds, in the region of 150 knots in Europe. On hotter climes, the cruise spped does decrease a bit, but so does the fuel burn. Just to give you an idea, in the part of the world where I now operate (West africa) we use as basic block planning figures:
SA365N 130 kts Fuel burn 265 kg/hr
SA365N1 130 kts Fuel burn 275 kg/hr
SA365N2 135 kts Fuel burn 280 kg/hr
SA365N3 140 kts Fuel burn 305 kg/hr
The standard fuel tanks are the same for all variants, with a capacity of 915 kg, so you'll see that the N3 suffers a bit in terms of range - but it's wonderful in the mountains!!
Whe4n I started flying 365N series, all the new variants were SA365N... but some years later the new RFMs came out labelled as AS365.... For me, they all go in my logbook as SA365.... My 3 personal flight manuals from factory courses on N, N1 and N2 are all SA365....
But, I digress. I think it's a lovely pilots' machine and although probably not quite as good as the S76 from a passenger point of view in terms of cabin space, it's smoother, almost as fast, tough, low on maintenance and overall one of my favourite machines of all time
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Where a bed is
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even though it's a nice machine to fly, never found them to be low on maintenance. If it's a single ship operation make sure you have a good line of spares and good access to ongoing support. All the very best
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Afrika sometimes
Age: 68
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Tox,
I agree that if you just operate one or two ships it's a good idea to keep a good supply of spares for anything Eurocopter because their AOG system and spares supply in general leaves a lot to be desired, even with improvements they claim to have made. I still think they're pretty low on maintenance though, compared with other modernish medium helicopters like the S76 and Bell 412, compared with which they only need about 60% of the daily maintenance. The N3 seems to be more of a problem because of the problems every helicopter with Arriel 2 series engines in hot climates has with passing power assurance. It would be interesting to hear what the major problems are on Dauphin fleets in different geographical locations.
I agree that if you just operate one or two ships it's a good idea to keep a good supply of spares for anything Eurocopter because their AOG system and spares supply in general leaves a lot to be desired, even with improvements they claim to have made. I still think they're pretty low on maintenance though, compared with other modernish medium helicopters like the S76 and Bell 412, compared with which they only need about 60% of the daily maintenance. The N3 seems to be more of a problem because of the problems every helicopter with Arriel 2 series engines in hot climates has with passing power assurance. It would be interesting to hear what the major problems are on Dauphin fleets in different geographical locations.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS365
Does anyone have experience with retrofit of the 10 blade Quiet Fenestron to a AS365N2? (standard fit on an N3)
Since installation, we are getting reports of a high freq at the pedals at higher speeds, OK in the hover or low speeds.
TR Balance is below 0.1 ips. Unable to notice anything unusual on a spectrum scan at hover or at different airspeeds. Hub and blades are new and fully "mod"ed.
I was wondering if this might be something inherent. Anyone have any similar problems?
I certainly endorse the comments on EC support and spares. After most of my career working on Bells
, EC was a whole new ballgame. 
Since installation, we are getting reports of a high freq at the pedals at higher speeds, OK in the hover or low speeds.
TR Balance is below 0.1 ips. Unable to notice anything unusual on a spectrum scan at hover or at different airspeeds. Hub and blades are new and fully "mod"ed.
I was wondering if this might be something inherent. Anyone have any similar problems?
I certainly endorse the comments on EC support and spares. After most of my career working on Bells
, EC was a whole new ballgame.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Northern Region
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SA 365 N Question ?
Has anyone experienced large deviation when ALT mode is engaged on the Autopilot ?
The helicopter deviates down 200 - 300 feet down and then 200-300 feet up like a true Dauphin
Not very nice after a long ride !
We are operating with a hoist on the AC and we where told that the hoist might have this effect on the Aircraft !
Has anyone got this same experience or similar.
Regards
Helikopter
The helicopter deviates down 200 - 300 feet down and then 200-300 feet up like a true Dauphin
Not very nice after a long ride !We are operating with a hoist on the AC and we where told that the hoist might have this effect on the Aircraft !
Has anyone got this same experience or similar.
Regards
Helikopter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes, it's expensive flying maasvlakte. But if i'm not mistaking, you've had that problem in september 98 as well. As far as i know it has nothing to do with the hoist. When you engage alt, does it first fly straight and level? And only after a disturbance it will start fluctuating, wich will get worse and worse?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Northern Region
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dauphin N
Yes the problem was in 98 as well.
And yes the AC does fly straight and level just after you engage ALT, but the disturbance is so little that it is never possible to fly with the ALT engaged because the ride gets worse and worse.
Thanks a lot guys for your replys
Regards
And yes the AC does fly straight and level just after you engage ALT, but the disturbance is so little that it is never possible to fly with the ALT engaged because the ride gets worse and worse.
Thanks a lot guys for your replys
Regards
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think you need an avionics engineer.
First do a full autopilot test, if it reed "0" switch the test to off, watch the PRY indicators in the centre panel; P: Half Down, R: Half right.
Ok so far so good, now check(What most people forget) without disengaging the AP. the TRIM. China hat forward(+/-2 sec), watch the pitch indicator, it should go up AND the cyclic should move forward AND keeps moving forward, because the AP has no reference, so the stick should continue to move smoothly forward. You have to use the trim release to stop or the beep trim in opposite direction. (I think it has to be checked before every flight as opposed to the ap test: first flight of the day) (Flight Manual 4.1 chapter 5.2.3 afterstart checks, special checks). If the P indicator moves, but the cyclic does not, the trim motor will continue to run untill the force is strong enough to move the cyclic, then it will jump forward ( or backward, sideways, depending th direction of the trim) If that is the case, then have a look at the bearings of the controle push-pullrods and bellcranks, most probably the are rough due to sand or dust and I think they will need replacement.
It would translate in ALT-hold: at time of engagement; no distorsion, so smooth flying. When there is a distorsion, the trim motor will start to run, but because the controle bearings are to rough, it will need a bigger force to move them. When they move, it will be to much so you will go the opposite direction of the distorsion, resulting in a trim action in the other direction, and so on .. so the Dauphin will make bigger and higher jumps as to where the trim is at its max travel speed and lenght.
But it definatly is not the hoist!!
Good luck, let us know when it's solved
First do a full autopilot test, if it reed "0" switch the test to off, watch the PRY indicators in the centre panel; P: Half Down, R: Half right.
Ok so far so good, now check(What most people forget) without disengaging the AP. the TRIM. China hat forward(+/-2 sec), watch the pitch indicator, it should go up AND the cyclic should move forward AND keeps moving forward, because the AP has no reference, so the stick should continue to move smoothly forward. You have to use the trim release to stop or the beep trim in opposite direction. (I think it has to be checked before every flight as opposed to the ap test: first flight of the day) (Flight Manual 4.1 chapter 5.2.3 afterstart checks, special checks). If the P indicator moves, but the cyclic does not, the trim motor will continue to run untill the force is strong enough to move the cyclic, then it will jump forward ( or backward, sideways, depending th direction of the trim) If that is the case, then have a look at the bearings of the controle push-pullrods and bellcranks, most probably the are rough due to sand or dust and I think they will need replacement.
It would translate in ALT-hold: at time of engagement; no distorsion, so smooth flying. When there is a distorsion, the trim motor will start to run, but because the controle bearings are to rough, it will need a bigger force to move them. When they move, it will be to much so you will go the opposite direction of the distorsion, resulting in a trim action in the other direction, and so on .. so the Dauphin will make bigger and higher jumps as to where the trim is at its max travel speed and lenght.
But it definatly is not the hoist!!
Good luck, let us know when it's solved
Last edited by Spheriflex; 18th Oct 2006 at 19:09.
Long time I havn't flown a "N"
but, I remember we also can check the full needle deflection on each galvanometer when we select the test switch to "OFF" just before disengaging AP. With only half a deflection, we can expect a lazy and slow correction on affected axis. It also worth having a look on the coupled axis FD bar to check if AP correctly responds to required corrections.
Often the fault is originated by actuators amplifiers....but don't take it for granted, to me it's more like esothery and magic stuff.
but, I remember we also can check the full needle deflection on each galvanometer when we select the test switch to "OFF" just before disengaging AP. With only half a deflection, we can expect a lazy and slow correction on affected axis. It also worth having a look on the coupled axis FD bar to check if AP correctly responds to required corrections.Often the fault is originated by actuators amplifiers....but don't take it for granted, to me it's more like esothery and magic stuff.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have some experience in the past with porpoising in flight on the 365, replace the a/P actuator under the right forward seat position, also a seized rod end bearing can also cause this problem
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS365 Arriel 2C OEI and maximum power?
Turbomeca quote the Arriel 2C OEI 30' rating as 963shp
and Maximum Continuous Power as 779shp (EC quote better figures in the AS365 Panther literature as 977shp/800shp) for the same engine.
As a newcomer here I am thoroughly confused.
Can someone explain if the the two engines in the AS365 Panther can be run simultaneously at the maximum 963/977shp OEI 30 seconds rating, if so what would be the maximum time the two engines could run in this condition and any oter limitations / dangers.
Alternatively, is there some techncal restriction such as transmission capacity which would limit this.
I ask because EC appear to be claiming that the AS365 has a maximum power in excess of 1800shp which is the two OEI 30' ratings added together, can this be right?
EC AS365N3 Technical Link
Turbomeca Arriel 2C Link
and Maximum Continuous Power as 779shp (EC quote better figures in the AS365 Panther literature as 977shp/800shp) for the same engine.
As a newcomer here I am thoroughly confused.
Can someone explain if the the two engines in the AS365 Panther can be run simultaneously at the maximum 963/977shp OEI 30 seconds rating, if so what would be the maximum time the two engines could run in this condition and any oter limitations / dangers.
Alternatively, is there some techncal restriction such as transmission capacity which would limit this.
I ask because EC appear to be claiming that the AS365 has a maximum power in excess of 1800shp which is the two OEI 30' ratings added together, can this be right?
EC AS365N3 Technical Link
Turbomeca Arriel 2C Link
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by ReallyConfused
Is there some techncal restriction such as transmission capacity which would limit this.
Although the installed power of modern twins may seem unusable at ISA/SL, they do offer much improved hot/high performance, with the reduced output of powerplants at 4K/95 or 6K/95 filling the gearbox (or at least coming close to doing so).
I/C