Which Turbine ?

[oxi]

Do any operators have any suggestions as to the preffered engines to use in the Agusta 109 Power?

From what I can see they (PW206 and Turbo 2K1) are pretty closely matched, I currently fly an arrius and its clean as a bell, which is the big plus.

I'm trying to get an idea of some of the maintence issues.

Appericeate your imput.

Also I haven't operated a A109 in solid IMC, can anyone fill me in as to their performance, ie ice, turbulance penetration and autopilot sensitivity 3 Axis DUPLEX (how good is it).

[John Eacott]

The PW206 is an absolute pain re washing the tail boom: the soot build up is shocking and needs constant attention. Otherwise the PW performs well, fuel burn around 205kg/hr in normal cruise, not much difference in burn up to 85% cruise Tq. Small problem if the front plate on the engine isn't modd'd with a groove & O ring, it will dump enough oil to cause concern when the sealant lets go PW blamed Agusta, who didn't bother to incorporate the mod.

Start & all other functions pretty normal, as you'd expect from a FADEC engine.

IMC the 109 is stable, the autopilot hasn't changed since the 109A, and is a nice package; just more options with the EFIS Don't take a 109 near icing, not worth it, turbulence will always be an issue although the semi rigid head makes it a better proposition than the fully articulated A & C models. The Sperry 702 system is great, a coupled approach hands off is fine, as long as you set up the intercept within reason. Don't expect it to cope with extremes, and it will take you down to 60 feet on rad alt, down the centreline. Yaw may need a little coaxing to stay in balance, since it is only single channel, but I'm only talking about a gentle push with your toe to keep it sweet.

[Giovanni Cento Nove]

These 2 engines look very similar due to a proposed joint venture years ago that never really took off. As for the 206 engine it does make soot but that can be addressed by your tailboom colour.

The 206 engine does have some performance advantage OEI when gas generator speed becomes the limit over the Arrius 2.

Fuel gear on the 206 engine is Hamilton Standard/Woodward.

The Pratt is "self inhibiting" against corrosion.

You mention you fly an Arrius powered machine and tag yourself from Aus. If you fly a 355N then appreciate the Arrius engine in the 109 would be an Arrius 2 which has only has the name in common with an Arrius 1.

[oxi]

Sounds like we may as well stay with the Turbomecca product, although they don't seem to be a propular choice in the 109 ?

[Head Turner]

From my experience you are OK to stick with Turbomeca UNTIL you need them to fix it. Then you will wish that you'd gone for the PW.

We were grounded for 4 months waiting for Turbomeca to fix the engine. Never again.

We are now PW powered and it's great except for the soot but I'll live with that any day.

[oxi]

I just don't understand that soot thing, the turbos have it licked. Pratts seem way behind in that catergory just look at a van of king air.

Having said that I believev the first time fuel nozzels require changing is at 500 hours.

[Notar fan]

The PW206 series engines are truly renowned for sooting. Pratt has made great improvements in that area with the 207 series by rearranging the fuel nozzles. I think Rolls Royce did something like that on the C47 with some success.

Overall, P&W engines are extremely maintenance friendly. Pratt's customer service is second to none. If I had a choice in engine type, I would'nt have to give it a second thought.

[oxi]

Thanks all for your imput....and if anyone has further to add...feel free.

Otherwise

A Merry Xmas to all, and fantastic new year.

[3top]

Hanging another ship on the same engines!

How is the soot problem on a EC135?
By any chance, is the exhaust flow any help on keeping a EC135 tail clean or is just "the same pain in the neck" with the 206's?

3top