Agusta A109
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: N20,W99
Age: 53
Posts: 1,119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A109Elite I think its called, I had breakfast this morning with a friend of mine who is giving up his A109Power to switch to this new aircraft, its cabin is somewhat larger, the seats have been pushed back, but the main difference to him has been it has a "floating xmsn" something similar to the B230 or LongRanger's its supposed to make the ride much smoother.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The difference the Elite has over the 'basiic' Power is the rear seat back moved a bit to the rear; no more leg room but a enhanced rear seat.
Floating transission is a bit misleading. The Elite has 'Fluidlastic Pylon Absorbers' on the two front transmission mountings. This removes some of the transmission 'buzz' that filter down into the airframe on the Power.
Good, powerful machine, juust lacks leg room fro the pax and has a fwd CofG problem.
Floating transission is a bit misleading. The Elite has 'Fluidlastic Pylon Absorbers' on the two front transmission mountings. This removes some of the transmission 'buzz' that filter down into the airframe on the Power.
Good, powerful machine, juust lacks leg room fro the pax and has a fwd CofG problem.
The Elite vs the Power: The rear pax seat is raked back to give more headroom, but at the loss of 60-70lt fuel capacity. Also, landing lamps built into the stub wings/undercarriage fairings, pax step on starboard side that retracts with the gear, lock on the nose access (and pretty paint on the locks!), different avionics suite, storm lights for both pilots, and the main transmission dampers. The rear pax window is noticeably wider, to accommodate the changed rear seat position.
I haven't noticed any fwd CoG problems, but payload is still very average. Empty weight & fuel burn are the same as my BK117, but MAUW is 500kg less. Full fuel leaves only c160kg for pilot and pax
I haven't noticed any fwd CoG problems, but payload is still very average. Empty weight & fuel burn are the same as my BK117, but MAUW is 500kg less. Full fuel leaves only c160kg for pilot and pax
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some more technical rumours. 109 will have a 3000 kg AUW once mods to u/c have been approved. Which if true would suggest a 1000 kg payload. 640 for full fuel, which leaves 360 for the human cargo. Which is quite respecful.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, there is an FAA STC for 3,000 kgs MTOW in the works, it may, or may not be applicable to the A109E that is in the hands of the Italian gods, the issue being that Agusta will want the aircraft to land at MTOW resulting in a requirement to beef up landing gear (oleo rate?) Performance will also likely be an issue.
Oxi,
Yes, and the Sperry is excellent. Only single channel for the yaw, so a little judicious pressure sometimes needed to keep the ball in the middle, but otherwise a delight to operate.
Fully coupled ILS down to 60ft on rad alt can't be bad in anyone's book, even if you can't use it (legally...
)
Yes, and the Sperry is excellent. Only single channel for the yaw, so a little judicious pressure sometimes needed to keep the ball in the middle, but otherwise a delight to operate.
Fully coupled ILS down to 60ft on rad alt can't be bad in anyone's book, even if you can't use it (legally...
)
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe/US
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JE----Thats 40' coupled on the ILS!
The A109E is a terrific machine for high speed handling & SPIFR.
It is very solid in Cb build up, coupled or hands on.
The AP doesn't kick off with mild yaw excursions like the B430!
If you choose your Alt/temp conditions well in the IFR cruise you'll get better than published burn rates. I've had 4 hours endurance based on Fuel Flow indications.
It has teething problems like all machines that are relatively new, but is great value for what it does!
On the other hand, in the Police roll it is not the best in the low speed area. T/R authority is lacking with too much Tq change for quick input demand. Response is expectantly normal, but not riveting and dynamic like the
135 or 902's.
I'd say this Welsh deal is probably driven based on the amount of spin and discount given in the sale. Consider who is involved.
Unless they intend doing lots of IFR in the Police roll (Can't, imagine the cops have a need for that---very little community contribution), I think time will show them their expensive decision will be alot more than they had planned or were told.
If the Power isn't cruising at the high end of the Tq band, (as it was designed to do) it will have all sorts of problems, and yep, Trans P & T will be one. Engine opr temps on the number 1 particularly, will get the pilots attention. If they are constantly operating in a wet and humid/sea area ( most of Wales)..watch the corrosion costs spiral. The DAU's ( Data Aquisition Unit ) have problems too, outboard Dampner bearings, ECS, Landing gear and a lot of non-warranted (after 1 year) items................. other than that...it's a great and comfortable corporate cruise ship for short CEO's and little people! With a small fortune to spend!
But, hey, they get to go to their destination faster than most!!!
What you see is what you get. A very quick, powerful speed demon! But nothing else...certainly not utility....someone mentioned the original design was for the mil....HELLO?....What the Belgium's....they had to be bribed to buy it!!!! Even a 20 year old AH-1S would smoke the A109 in gunnery and versatilty on the battle field! Utility it is not...and I have a good idea about them....flew the UH-60 for a long time.....now thats UTILITY!
And it looks good too!!!! Fun to fly for pilots who want to FLY!
Not for cops chasing ground or surveillance! Bad choice Dudes!
The A109E is a terrific machine for high speed handling & SPIFR.
It is very solid in Cb build up, coupled or hands on.
The AP doesn't kick off with mild yaw excursions like the B430!
If you choose your Alt/temp conditions well in the IFR cruise you'll get better than published burn rates. I've had 4 hours endurance based on Fuel Flow indications.
It has teething problems like all machines that are relatively new, but is great value for what it does!
On the other hand, in the Police roll it is not the best in the low speed area. T/R authority is lacking with too much Tq change for quick input demand. Response is expectantly normal, but not riveting and dynamic like the
135 or 902's.
I'd say this Welsh deal is probably driven based on the amount of spin and discount given in the sale. Consider who is involved.
Unless they intend doing lots of IFR in the Police roll (Can't, imagine the cops have a need for that---very little community contribution), I think time will show them their expensive decision will be alot more than they had planned or were told.
If the Power isn't cruising at the high end of the Tq band, (as it was designed to do) it will have all sorts of problems, and yep, Trans P & T will be one. Engine opr temps on the number 1 particularly, will get the pilots attention. If they are constantly operating in a wet and humid/sea area ( most of Wales)..watch the corrosion costs spiral. The DAU's ( Data Aquisition Unit ) have problems too, outboard Dampner bearings, ECS, Landing gear and a lot of non-warranted (after 1 year) items................. other than that...it's a great and comfortable corporate cruise ship for short CEO's and little people! With a small fortune to spend!
But, hey, they get to go to their destination faster than most!!!
What you see is what you get. A very quick, powerful speed demon! But nothing else...certainly not utility....someone mentioned the original design was for the mil....HELLO?....What the Belgium's....they had to be bribed to buy it!!!! Even a 20 year old AH-1S would smoke the A109 in gunnery and versatilty on the battle field! Utility it is not...and I have a good idea about them....flew the UH-60 for a long time.....now thats UTILITY!
And it looks good too!!!! Fun to fly for pilots who want to FLY!
Not for cops chasing ground or surveillance! Bad choice Dudes!
Last edited by Helipolarbear; 23rd Dec 2003 at 08:32.
HPB,
We're both wrong, the book says 50ft (RFM A109E 7-31 Rev 5)
Most of my IFR was on the A & AII, maybe the earlier Sperry had a different rad alt parameter?
We're both wrong, the book says 50ft
(RFM A109E 7-31 Rev 5)Most of my IFR was on the A & AII, maybe the earlier Sperry had a different rad alt parameter?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe/US
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JE...The book does advise on 50' level off, but the calibration is not perfect as you know. I got down to 40' with the last 2 109E's flown. Flew a few C models and MII's. Level off's at 50 would be the average. Great system ....every heli should have one!!!!! God Bless Sperry!
Fly Safe & Happy Xmas
Fly Safe & Happy Xmas
Swerve: are you alleging that the pilot was totally to blame for what happened that snowy christmas day?
Are you in FULL possession of the facts?
Interesting couple of 'prods' you have made at their unit?
Are you in FULL possession of the facts?
Interesting couple of 'prods' you have made at their unit?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not pointing any fingers - just read the accident report and make your own mind up! Then ask yourself if 99% of profesional pilots would make that error and get away with it / carry on working at the same unit as if nothing had happened - maybe only in darkest Wales:
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 109E is still fimly attached to the hangar floor awaiting the greenies to wire up the nightsun. Apparently the mk2 nightsun was not pilot friendly and so it was back to mk1 and the wiring has had to be re-done.
The other modification has been the fitting of a warning notice. Not too sure what it says but something to do with the fuel system!
The other modification has been the fitting of a warning notice. Not too sure what it says but something to do with the fuel system!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Palmsville
Age: 73
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agusta 109E Performance
We are looking at getting a small VIP helicopter for inter city transport and although used normally to Bell and Sikorsky products it has been suggested we look at Agusta 109E because is fast and looks quite good. We've been offered a nice A109E with the PW206C engines, but before I go further I was wondering if any PPruners have experience of this type, because I'm not sure it will perform well enough in the heat. I think the Arrius engines are more powerful, but there is good price for a PW engined one available in Europe now. It's planned to use it to JAR type performance limits. My question is how the performance would be affected when operating at average temperature at sea level of 32 degrees C. What would Category A twin engine take off weight be at that temperature? Also what is single engine performance like? I just need to know about what would be maximum weight to fly one engine at 1000 feet at 30 degrees C at Vy at maximum continuous single engine power.
What is reliability like with this type? Naturally sales agents always come out with great answers, but I'd like to know from anyone who has real experience of the type and will give an honest answer.
Anyone can give some answers, thanks a lot.
What is reliability like with this type? Naturally sales agents always come out with great answers, but I'd like to know from anyone who has real experience of the type and will give an honest answer.
Anyone can give some answers, thanks a lot.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You would not be disappointed with the performance of the A109E with the PW 206C. I have been flying them for over three years under more demanding circumstances than the aircraft was ever designed for, and at 3,000kg takeoff weight. We have been flying them off the back of ships, in tropical conditions doing counter-drug operations. Power and performance has never been an issue, but cabin size and maintainence support has been. It has a very small cabin, and support from Agusta is no where near the level of support you get from Bell or Sikorsky. The aircraft is fast and sexy as long as you don't hang floats, FLIR and searchlights from it, but it slows down in a hurry if you do. Do yourself a favor and fly in the A109E first to see if you are comfortable in it, as it doesn't have much headroom or legroom and that wouldn't be good for VIPs. If I had the money, I would buy a S-76 or Bell 430 instead...just my humble opinion.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I guess that's about right. The Prat engine dose not offer quite as much power in hot & high...on paper, but it is reliable power! Also do your sums re payload/range: how many pax - how far. If you fill the L/R tanks you will end up with a pilot and overnight bag and a lady passenger, not much more and don't believe what anyone tells you about empty weight, the published EW is before any "options" such as interior are included, sit down and look at the Weight & Balance. And there is a 109E for sale in Europe with NO AC, make sure it has an ECU!
30C HIGE about 2660Kg
30C HOGE about 2300Kg
One Engine Inoperative 2.5 min Power
Cat A WAT Limit (Clear Area) 30C MTOW about 1,000ft
40C MTOW about -350 ft
Cat A WAT Limit 15x15m Ground Based Helipad or 20 x 20m Elevated Helipad 30C MTOW about -300 ft
27C MTOW about SL
Depending on how you read the graphs
Fun Eh?
30C HIGE about 2660Kg
30C HOGE about 2300Kg
One Engine Inoperative 2.5 min Power
Cat A WAT Limit (Clear Area) 30C MTOW about 1,000ft
40C MTOW about -350 ft
Cat A WAT Limit 15x15m Ground Based Helipad or 20 x 20m Elevated Helipad 30C MTOW about -300 ft
27C MTOW about SL
Depending on how you read the graphs
Fun Eh?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 109 Power performance is predominantly streets ahead of those aircraft considered in the same (light twin) class. The comment made above comparing the cabin size of the 430 and the S76 against the power is not comparing apples to apples. Those aircraft are signifcantly more expensive.
Mike is correct the manufacturers figures tend to be on the biased side but generally a standard Power wieghs around 1970 kgs and the Elite comes out at around 2030 Kgs. Most people agree that the useful load is not great, however when the speed of the 109 is introduced into the equation the majority end up choosing the 109. Anyone visiting Cheltenham last week will have to admit they are popular.
Mike is correct the manufacturers figures tend to be on the biased side but generally a standard Power wieghs around 1970 kgs and the Elite comes out at around 2030 Kgs. Most people agree that the useful load is not great, however when the speed of the 109 is introduced into the equation the majority end up choosing the 109. Anyone visiting Cheltenham last week will have to admit they are popular.