Agusta A109
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couple of reasons that I can think of : poor view out for the Police Observers, long nose gets in the way. There is a half bulkhead between Cabin and cockpit, leaves a feeling of splitting the crew, and finally it's noisy. You can hear them coming for miles. 
I think the 109 got a bad press for a while following a couple of crashes which were due to the scissors assembly on the rotor being fitted incorrectly.
I believe, never flown it so can not confirm, that in the hover, nose up attitude is rather uncomfortable for the police observers. It is certainly a very sexy looking machine, I would love to fly it, but from what I have seen, not as a HEMS machine! Tail rotor too exposed, small wheels, no ground clearance, small cabin. On the plus side, nice and fast, sexy and the power (from what I hear) has 'power'!
Guest
Posts: n/a
think it has a lot to do with Mc Alpine marketing their product better as well. Selling a complete package , is there much type approved police kit available for the 109 ? , Does landing a wheeled aircraft in muddy fields present a problem as compared to skid equipped ?. I have also heard horror stories about the maintainability of them . But they do look sexy that's fer sure
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I decided not to comment on this one, because I don't have direct experience of the 109E (unfortunately), but even with my limited knowledge, I can't agree that the Thames Valley Air Ambulance 109E produced much evidence of it being a good choice for this use:
It crashed in an effectively uncontrolled fashion because of the scissor jack problem mentioned previously;
It once got stuck on a railway because its wheels got mixed up with rails and/or sleepers - skids would seem to be a better bet surely?
In the end, it was binned by the trust paying for it. There were differing stories about why, but high cost of operation was said to be part of the reason.
I do agree that the success of the 135 and (to a lesser extent) the 902 is at least partly due to the marketing effort put in by their UK distributors. The fit of police role equipment offered must surely be a major factor - it is something that the police officers who decide what is flown can make (fairly) informed decisions upon. The other issue is maintenance support - the numerically more common have (relatively) well established support and parts systems.
I would be interested to hear why DP went for a 109E again, but I suspect we will never really know.
Incidentally, Police Aviation News publish numerical comparisons between candidate airframes.
As a driver though, I would love to have the opportunity to fly one!
It crashed in an effectively uncontrolled fashion because of the scissor jack problem mentioned previously;
It once got stuck on a railway because its wheels got mixed up with rails and/or sleepers - skids would seem to be a better bet surely?
In the end, it was binned by the trust paying for it. There were differing stories about why, but high cost of operation was said to be part of the reason.
I do agree that the success of the 135 and (to a lesser extent) the 902 is at least partly due to the marketing effort put in by their UK distributors. The fit of police role equipment offered must surely be a major factor - it is something that the police officers who decide what is flown can make (fairly) informed decisions upon. The other issue is maintenance support - the numerically more common have (relatively) well established support and parts systems.
I would be interested to hear why DP went for a 109E again, but I suspect we will never really know.
Incidentally, Police Aviation News publish numerical comparisons between candidate airframes.
As a driver though, I would love to have the opportunity to fly one!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Dansaff
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helinut, I agree that skids are normally better than wheels for most operational purposes but that is not always the case. The Forces work both wheeled and skidded ac to great effect but having flown a variety of both I lean slighty towards skids.
In defence of the Thames Valley Air Ambulance, the scissors cock up on both ac was human error and the litigation continues. As for the nose wheel incident I believe the ground gave way which although no less embarrassing, could happen to any of us.
I'm not a huge fan of the Power, yes its sleek, fast and works well as a VIP heli, but as a workhorse I think it falls down on cost, durability and flexibility. Agustas are also known for an excessive rearwards Centre of Gravity which requires good pre planning to ensure safety.
I think its an expensive choice.
In defence of the Thames Valley Air Ambulance, the scissors cock up on both ac was human error and the litigation continues. As for the nose wheel incident I believe the ground gave way which although no less embarrassing, could happen to any of us.
I'm not a huge fan of the Power, yes its sleek, fast and works well as a VIP heli, but as a workhorse I think it falls down on cost, durability and flexibility. Agustas are also known for an excessive rearwards Centre of Gravity which requires good pre planning to ensure safety.
I think its an expensive choice.
I stand to be corrected, but I bet you the decision to buy the 109 rather than the other two on the short list, was NOT made by anyone with aviation experience
Doesn't commonality of types tell you something when purchasing equipment. 95% of police air support units operate only two new generation types...why is that?
Bean counters win again (for the short term).
Doesn't commonality of types tell you something when purchasing equipment. 95% of police air support units operate only two new generation types...why is that?
Bean counters win again (for the short term).
As I received a mention!
My understanding was that the final final final decision was made at the police authority - a factor that tends to fit in with TC's feelings on the matter.
In the end though it will be seen as a 'tick' in favour of the 109 especially after the recent sales of the A119 to police units in the USA.
My understanding was that the final final final decision was made at the police authority - a factor that tends to fit in with TC's feelings on the matter.
In the end though it will be seen as a 'tick' in favour of the 109 especially after the recent sales of the A119 to police units in the USA.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...besides all other points and because nobody else mentioned it yet - the 109's tend to overheat their main transmission when operated in extended slowflight or (even worse) hovering. The machine is build for the fastlane! I did surveilance type work in one, and we would always temp out after some time. As a police ship you need to be able to sit somewhere as long as it takes without temp concerns.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Age: 70
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True it looks good and is fast. However, after dark when you want a Nightsun fitted the top speed is 140 kts IAS, which is only single figures better than the 135 & 902. The searchlight fit does seem a bit of a meccano modification, certainly with the SX-16. One wonders if they'll consider the Nightsun II although taking it on and off isn't an option with this equipment. Have to agree with JC though, it is very noisy.
No experience of the E, but time on earlier models. The nose up/CoG issue was partailly resolved in the C, by shifting most of the avionics from the tail boom to the nose bay, but even in the A & AII, I never found it that much of a problem. MGB shouldn't overheat, I'd suspect blockage somewhere, which can (and does) happen on the engine oil coolers. Well known for clogging up with dust and dry grass, particularly fire fighting or sling loading, and at low speed there is insufficient airflow to compensate. Quick clean usually does the trick!
Re skids vs wheels, there are problems with both. The reference to wheels & railway lines, there is always the possibility that skids could be bent landing on lines, if the skid tube is misplaced such that weight is concentrated on the tube away from the saddles. Also, the toe and/or heel of skids are always at risk of catching and inducing dynamic rollover in bush landings.
109 has always struck me as more of a high speed VIP transport than a workhorse. 12 years of operation has taught me that it is a classic Italian piece of machinery: if it isn't leaking oil somewhere, it will
Re skids vs wheels, there are problems with both. The reference to wheels & railway lines, there is always the possibility that skids could be bent landing on lines, if the skid tube is misplaced such that weight is concentrated on the tube away from the saddles. Also, the toe and/or heel of skids are always at risk of catching and inducing dynamic rollover in bush landings.
109 has always struck me as more of a high speed VIP transport than a workhorse. 12 years of operation has taught me that it is a classic Italian piece of machinery: if it isn't leaking oil somewhere, it will
Similar experiences to John. A RAAF Iroquois landed on some train tracks in the early 70s and the heel of one skid got stuck in the rails... and here come de train!! The crewy had run ahead to warn the train, but with all wheels locked up it skidded and skidded... and slid past the chopper on the next track! Lucky the pilot had turned the blade sideways.
Our Agusta was not an E, but we had some troubles landing on soft ground - the wheel sank into the grass, past the hub, and we were belly onto the ground. Lucky not to lose the antennas. It is possible to damage a brake line if it sinks too far.
We didn't leak too much oil - except from the dampers - but the Allison engines made sure the tail boom could never rust, being covered with a fuel residue and soot. The CG would progress backwards as the fuel burnt off from the front and the soot deposited at the back.
The Agusta was never a successful military machine, once the Russians developed an oil-seeking missile.
Our Agusta was not an E, but we had some troubles landing on soft ground - the wheel sank into the grass, past the hub, and we were belly onto the ground. Lucky not to lose the antennas. It is possible to damage a brake line if it sinks too far.
We didn't leak too much oil - except from the dampers - but the Allison engines made sure the tail boom could never rust, being covered with a fuel residue and soot. The CG would progress backwards as the fuel burnt off from the front and the soot deposited at the back.
The Agusta was never a successful military machine, once the Russians developed an oil-seeking missile.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: ISLE OF MAN
Posts: 780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fundamental issue that has been missed is that policing has to be done with a certain amount of style. There are few things that will instill confidence in the public more, than those lovely little retractable wheels popping out in the low hover, just before touchdown. Then, when the observer steps out in suitably Gucci kit to right wrongs and defeat evil he will have something of an advantage.
Must say though, seems a barmy choice, and if things are so critical in the crime mecca of Dyfed Powys thenn perhaps they should have gone for something even bigger, like a dauphin??
Must say though, seems a barmy choice, and if things are so critical in the crime mecca of Dyfed Powys thenn perhaps they should have gone for something even bigger, like a dauphin??
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: South of the North Pole
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Searchlight issue besides, they do need the speed as they have the largest force area to cover in the UK (4,188 square miles, with the furthest points 160 miles apart). Their HQ (and thus hangar, ops base) is not located particularly near the center, either!
Ppheli: Where do you get your stats from?
Strathclyde
NE
Chiltern
N Mids
C Counties
Devon and Cornwall
all bigger than Dyfed Powys area!!!
Even we cover 9500 sq miles!
As was also mentioned earlier, when you stick nightsun and cameras on the 109, you're down to 140kts Vno which is 5 kts faster than a 135?
What will they do for relief pilotage?
Strathclyde
NE
Chiltern
N Mids
C Counties
Devon and Cornwall
all bigger than Dyfed Powys area!!!
Even we cover 9500 sq miles!
As was also mentioned earlier, when you stick nightsun and cameras on the 109, you're down to 140kts Vno which is 5 kts faster than a 135?
What will they do for relief pilotage?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A109 - reliability
I was stuck in the middle of a conversation, (well, bordering on an argument!) between two people yesterday discussing the reliability of the Augusta 109.
Can anyone here shed more light so i can do a better job as mediator next time!
Tigg
Can anyone here shed more light so i can do a better job as mediator next time!
Tigg
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Caribbean
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As with any helicopter it depends. Let me give you two scenarios.
I have a friend who had a A109AII for personal use a couple of years ago. He bought it because, as a twin, it had a low capital price. He flew it for an hour or two a week. Half the time that it was on the ground, it was sat outside in the cold, damp rain. He moaned, bitterly that when he came to fly it, it was unreliable. It cost him a fortune to operate on an hourly basis. He says he was paying for a days unscheduled maintenance every week. His techlog was full of defferred defects. The gear rarely worked. He survived a year with it, then sold it.
I also know of a very succesful operation that has several A109A's & II's. They fly them every day, always hangar them in a beautiful hangar, have a team of dedicated engineers who pamper the machines. They swear by them, have operated then for almost twenty years.
Get the picture.
I have a friend who had a A109AII for personal use a couple of years ago. He bought it because, as a twin, it had a low capital price. He flew it for an hour or two a week. Half the time that it was on the ground, it was sat outside in the cold, damp rain. He moaned, bitterly that when he came to fly it, it was unreliable. It cost him a fortune to operate on an hourly basis. He says he was paying for a days unscheduled maintenance every week. His techlog was full of defferred defects. The gear rarely worked. He survived a year with it, then sold it.
I also know of a very succesful operation that has several A109A's & II's. They fly them every day, always hangar them in a beautiful hangar, have a team of dedicated engineers who pamper the machines. They swear by them, have operated then for almost twenty years.
Get the picture.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Uk
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fair point, so care for it and it will reward you well, as with anything.
But would those caring engineers have to do more work per week to keep it in tip top condition than they would on say a S76??
But would those caring engineers have to do more work per week to keep it in tip top condition than they would on say a S76??
HT,
I operated a 109AII for 9 years, which is now on the bottom of the Pacific, along with the ship taking it to North America
When it was sold, a weight lifted from my shoulders.
We averaged 300 hours per year, but it was labour intensive in maintenance hours, and never made money as a charter machine. Fast (sometimes), fun to fly (short trips only, seating's awful), attractive lines, leaks oil constantly - all in all, Italian
I operated a 109AII for 9 years, which is now on the bottom of the Pacific, along with the ship taking it to North America
When it was sold, a weight lifted from my shoulders.We averaged 300 hours per year, but it was labour intensive in maintenance hours, and never made money as a charter machine. Fast (sometimes), fun to fly (short trips only, seating's awful), attractive lines, leaks oil constantly - all in all, Italian
Have to agree with Senor Eacott. Ours was a MkII Plus Widebody, and it needed to be washed after EVERY flight, due to the oil being vented in front of the tailboom and the copious soot pumped out of the C20Rs. They could never be used in war because an oil-seeking missile would find it every time.
Yes, it was fast, our VIP seating for 4 in the back was comfortable with the extra 7" shoulder room, but the range was tragic. Half the available payload was taken up with spare cans of oil in the boot. Aircon couldn't keep pace with summer.
Reliability? It had an electrical glitch that tripped number 3 inverter on almost every flight. Couldn't fix it. Had a recurring generator problem. Pulling a chip detector was a nightmare.
Overall, an Italian show pony, not a work horse.
Our S76 is far more reliable, rarely has a fault, but keeps an engineer fully employed on the scheduled maintenance and the paperwork.
Yes, it was fast, our VIP seating for 4 in the back was comfortable with the extra 7" shoulder room, but the range was tragic. Half the available payload was taken up with spare cans of oil in the boot. Aircon couldn't keep pace with summer.
Reliability? It had an electrical glitch that tripped number 3 inverter on almost every flight. Couldn't fix it. Had a recurring generator problem. Pulling a chip detector was a nightmare.
Overall, an Italian show pony, not a work horse.
Our S76 is far more reliable, rarely has a fault, but keeps an engineer fully employed on the scheduled maintenance and the paperwork.