SAR: Search & Rescue Ops
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Sea and elsewhere
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
Originally Posted by HeliComparator
CF
Hey that's not fair you totally changed your post whilst I was answering it! Yes to your last Q
Hey that's not fair you totally changed your post whilst I was answering it! Yes to your last Q
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
CF
Nothing really. The wording of the FM Supp is different but the essence is the same. I would bounce the question back by saying where in the L / L2 supp does it say that you can't? You just have to be within x minutes flying time of the +ve temp band (ie coast) where x is I think 5 minutes? Sorry, I am not so sad as to keep the flight manuals at home so I can't be definitive at 23:53 pm.
HC
So what has the 225 got that gives it a better clearance than the L/L2
HC
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my house
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
HC
Enjoy your holiday. The certification of the floats to 11t from 10.4t was a genuine question and not a red herring. I was involved in an evaluation of the EC225 in early 2004 and it was an issue which was brought up by ECF at the time during a technical briefing and meeting in Marignane. Perhaps while you are on holiday, I will see if I can find a reference on the presentation CD purely for interest, if I can still find the CD.
HH
Enjoy your holiday. The certification of the floats to 11t from 10.4t was a genuine question and not a red herring. I was involved in an evaluation of the EC225 in early 2004 and it was an issue which was brought up by ECF at the time during a technical briefing and meeting in Marignane. Perhaps while you are on holiday, I will see if I can find a reference on the presentation CD purely for interest, if I can still find the CD.
HH
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
Interesting disscusion...
Could any of you please tell me what is exactly a "limited icing clearance" versus "unlimited icing clearance or full de-icing" ?
What says exactly the FM ?
I've only flown aircrafts without icing clearance, I can imagine what is full de-icing but "limited"... to what?
Thanks
Could any of you please tell me what is exactly a "limited icing clearance" versus "unlimited icing clearance or full de-icing" ?
What says exactly the FM ?
I've only flown aircrafts without icing clearance, I can imagine what is full de-icing but "limited"... to what?
Thanks
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Sea and elsewhere
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
Ref the 332 icing clearance, I too don't have flight manuals at home but the AS332L Flight Manual specifically requires 500' of positive temp air above minimum permisable operating altitude. I think you (HC) are mixing up the Flight manual procedures with the "operational rules" referred to in a previous post which were written to allow alleviations from the very restrictive flight manual limitations. It is the Operational rules which allow the 5 minutes to the coast alleviation;but this is for departures only. For arrivals, there must be 500' positive air temperature above the airfield prior to landing.
I will check the exact text next time I am at work and no doubt HC will discuss this further when he comes back from holiday.
Apologies to those who started this thread; the subject has veered somewhat off course.
I will check the exact text next time I am at work and no doubt HC will discuss this further when he comes back from holiday.
Apologies to those who started this thread; the subject has veered somewhat off course.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
OK guys - the important thing here is that the SAR guys will have a machine that IS certified to fly in anything but freezing rain.
That is an undeniable step forward and exactly what the crews need to do a job that doesn't get any easier.
Having an APU is, in my opinion, another benefit as you get everything excepts the RIPS before you've even got the engines started. This means the FMS etc is pointing you in the right direction even before you get the NR to 105% and better still you're warm enough to think straight - every little helps.
Now a question for Nick. In a conversation I had with Ron Doeppner we discussed the required parameters for the icing trials. He was fairly definate that Sikorsky and/or the FAA had asked the DGAC how they had certified the 332 family. I know what he told me the answer was, but I'm a little nervous about making that public - I'll bet you aren't.
Now let's all enjoy the technology in all our machines and just be glad that the coastguard guys have joined the 21st century, especially when we need them for us!
That is an undeniable step forward and exactly what the crews need to do a job that doesn't get any easier.
Having an APU is, in my opinion, another benefit as you get everything excepts the RIPS before you've even got the engines started. This means the FMS etc is pointing you in the right direction even before you get the NR to 105% and better still you're warm enough to think straight - every little helps.
Now a question for Nick. In a conversation I had with Ron Doeppner we discussed the required parameters for the icing trials. He was fairly definate that Sikorsky and/or the FAA had asked the DGAC how they had certified the 332 family. I know what he told me the answer was, but I'm a little nervous about making that public - I'll bet you aren't.
Now let's all enjoy the technology in all our machines and just be glad that the coastguard guys have joined the 21st century, especially when we need them for us!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
Reflex,
The DGAC has never told anyone what was actually flown or tested on the Super Puma, so nobody knows what was done to certify it. I asked the head of the US FAA Rotorcraft Directorate, and he told me that the DGAC stonewalled him when he asked, in writing, and the CAA Flight Test Group leader told me the same. It is considered very strange conduct, but there is nothing other states can do because the bilateral agreements require the systems to be certified if the host country does so.
That being said, I have spoken to 332L2 pilots who flew regularly in pretty tough icing conditions, and they say the 332's rotor ice system works. I guess the 332 team never read helicomparitor's diatribe on why it is a waste of time to have rotor ice protection.
nightwatchman's questions:
1) Is there a fuel dump on the S92? Not yet, but it is easy to install and certify, and several hundred dump kits have been delivered on Black Hawks, so just ask for it and have a nice check handy, and you have it
2) Are the vibration problems affecting the S92 worsened by higher weights or only affected by speed? Don't you mean to ask, "When did you stop beating your wife?" Read the posts from 92 pilots, and try desparately to avoid helicomparitor's desparate diatribes.
3) Is there anyone winching using a S92 and have they had trouble getting a stretcher in and out of the door (noting the position of the sponson) or the wire rubbing against the sponson in high wind conditions? A stokes litter is an easy load to bring through the wide door, and rotor wash is not a great effect. The USAF recently conducted trials with all sorts of loads and found the tasks quite normal. I have heard of difficulties with the EH-101, and I guess that makes folks gunshy, but the 92 is quite nice for hoist operations.
4) Does it offer SE hover performance at MTOW in nil wind conditions (UK temps)? Not until you get pretty far down in gross weight, about 21000 lbs from memory.
5) Is it true you can only use the windscreen wipers below 40kts airspeed? And when is any helicopter manufacturer ever going to produce a decent set of wipers for an aircraft... my car has better wipers for F#%ks sake!!!! I honestly don't remember the speed limitation, I am searching for my 92 flight manual right now. I don't recall 40 knots! I will ammend this post when I find it!
The DGAC has never told anyone what was actually flown or tested on the Super Puma, so nobody knows what was done to certify it. I asked the head of the US FAA Rotorcraft Directorate, and he told me that the DGAC stonewalled him when he asked, in writing, and the CAA Flight Test Group leader told me the same. It is considered very strange conduct, but there is nothing other states can do because the bilateral agreements require the systems to be certified if the host country does so.
That being said, I have spoken to 332L2 pilots who flew regularly in pretty tough icing conditions, and they say the 332's rotor ice system works. I guess the 332 team never read helicomparitor's diatribe on why it is a waste of time to have rotor ice protection.
nightwatchman's questions:
1) Is there a fuel dump on the S92? Not yet, but it is easy to install and certify, and several hundred dump kits have been delivered on Black Hawks, so just ask for it and have a nice check handy, and you have it
2) Are the vibration problems affecting the S92 worsened by higher weights or only affected by speed? Don't you mean to ask, "When did you stop beating your wife?" Read the posts from 92 pilots, and try desparately to avoid helicomparitor's desparate diatribes.
3) Is there anyone winching using a S92 and have they had trouble getting a stretcher in and out of the door (noting the position of the sponson) or the wire rubbing against the sponson in high wind conditions? A stokes litter is an easy load to bring through the wide door, and rotor wash is not a great effect. The USAF recently conducted trials with all sorts of loads and found the tasks quite normal. I have heard of difficulties with the EH-101, and I guess that makes folks gunshy, but the 92 is quite nice for hoist operations.
4) Does it offer SE hover performance at MTOW in nil wind conditions (UK temps)? Not until you get pretty far down in gross weight, about 21000 lbs from memory.
5) Is it true you can only use the windscreen wipers below 40kts airspeed? And when is any helicopter manufacturer ever going to produce a decent set of wipers for an aircraft... my car has better wipers for F#%ks sake!!!! I honestly don't remember the speed limitation, I am searching for my 92 flight manual right now. I don't recall 40 knots! I will ammend this post when I find it!
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
Does this help (copied from lates RFM)?
Maximum airspeed for windshield wiper operations is 40 knots.
I gather there are plans to increase this figure. Currently they would seem to be for ground taxying use only!!
Maximum airspeed for windshield wiper operations is 40 knots.
I gather there are plans to increase this figure. Currently they would seem to be for ground taxying use only!!
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
At least it's a nice round number; I could never fathom out who dreamt up a figure of 141 kts for the 76!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
212man,
I was the genius who set the max wiper speed to 141, it coincided with the Autorotation Vne, so I thought it would be easy to remember.... The wipers didn't have enough poop to swing back to the middle above about 150 knots (the wipers stuck out there and the CB poped), so I knew we had to limit it to 140 or so. The 141 came to me in a moment of inspiration.
I have to believe the 40 knots on the 92 will be lifted soon. Till then, rainex (which always worked better for me, frankly, on every aircraft I flew.)
I was the genius who set the max wiper speed to 141, it coincided with the Autorotation Vne, so I thought it would be easy to remember.... The wipers didn't have enough poop to swing back to the middle above about 150 knots (the wipers stuck out there and the CB poped), so I knew we had to limit it to 140 or so. The 141 came to me in a moment of inspiration.
I have to believe the 40 knots on the 92 will be lifted soon. Till then, rainex (which always worked better for me, frankly, on every aircraft I flew.)
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
"so I thought it would be easy to remember.... "
Seems to have worked; it's one of several useless numbers floating around my head
Seems to have worked; it's one of several useless numbers floating around my head
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: europe
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
According to 332L/L1/L2 FM/PMV limitations, listed under prohibited manoeuvres you`ll find "flight in icing conditions".
I am really looking forward to try out the S92 RIPS, i cant understand why HC argues against rotor de-icing equipment!!!
I have flown 332l/L1 with rotor de-icing which workes fine and makes life (flying offshore in wintertime) a whole lot easier.
The S92 wiper speed is 40 kts, Heard about someone switch it on accidentally at cruise speed, the wiper flipped over an made a big scratch in the wind screen...
If you buy a decent car you`ll get proper seats,wipers and a heat/vent system that works and where you can preset temp.
The standard S92 seats are "a pain in the arse" after 2 hours...
The only way you can monitor the temp in the cabin is by the colour in the face of your passengers... (white/blue is cold and red is hot)
But the apu is nice to have, you can use heater or aircond prior to pax boarding the cabin. (it can be hot in Norway during the to short summer..)
In Norway pax have to use same suit summer and winter and appreciate the a/c, and in some of the latest contracts its demanded by the oil company`s.
The vibration level increases with weight and of course speed.
what is strange is that CHC Helikopter service are flying at reduced pwr setting/speed and Norsk aims for 150 kts, they are both experiencing the same problems related to vibrations...
I am really looking forward to try out the S92 RIPS, i cant understand why HC argues against rotor de-icing equipment!!!
I have flown 332l/L1 with rotor de-icing which workes fine and makes life (flying offshore in wintertime) a whole lot easier.
The S92 wiper speed is 40 kts, Heard about someone switch it on accidentally at cruise speed, the wiper flipped over an made a big scratch in the wind screen...
If you buy a decent car you`ll get proper seats,wipers and a heat/vent system that works and where you can preset temp.
The standard S92 seats are "a pain in the arse" after 2 hours...
The only way you can monitor the temp in the cabin is by the colour in the face of your passengers... (white/blue is cold and red is hot)
But the apu is nice to have, you can use heater or aircond prior to pax boarding the cabin. (it can be hot in Norway during the to short summer..)
In Norway pax have to use same suit summer and winter and appreciate the a/c, and in some of the latest contracts its demanded by the oil company`s.
The vibration level increases with weight and of course speed.
what is strange is that CHC Helikopter service are flying at reduced pwr setting/speed and Norsk aims for 150 kts, they are both experiencing the same problems related to vibrations...
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
Norsk's Third S-92 Enters Revenue Service
Friday January 6, 12:37 pm ET
STRATFORD, Conn., Jan. 6 -- Norsk Helikopter's third S-92 entered into revenue service this week when it departed from Stavanger Airport, in Sola, Norway, on Monday, January 2. The aircraft was made by Sikorsky, a United Technologies Corp. (NYSE: UTX - News) company.
In February 2005, Norsk became the first North Sea oil operator to launch the S-92 into revenue service. Norsk's third S-92 helicopter will be used under contract with BP Norge and Talisman Energy Norge for employee transport missions to and from oil platforms in the North Sea.
Norsk Helikopter's S-92 fleet to date has accumulated 3,206 flight hours and transported 66,100 passengers, 754 tons of baggage and 77 tons of freight.
"Sikorsky's S-92 helicopter has capacity for 19 passengers, and represents substantial improvements as far as comfort, range, and upgraded safety are concerned. BP is pleased to have started up its operations with the S-92, with all the advantages that this helicopter represents; initial passenger feedback following the first flights has been very positive," said Mr. Jan Erik Geirmo, BP Norge AS' Senior Communications Advisor.
Particularly useful to the offshore oil environment is the Rotor Ice Protection System (RIPS) that comes standard on all S-92 helicopters. The system meets the Federal Aviation Administration's latest and most stringent all-weather flight safety standards. RIPS allows the S-92 to launch into known icing conditions that might otherwise delay or cancel flight operations. The RIPS determines the temperature and moisture content of the surrounding environment and applies heat to the main and tail rotor blades to remove any ice buildup.
Friday January 6, 12:37 pm ET
STRATFORD, Conn., Jan. 6 -- Norsk Helikopter's third S-92 entered into revenue service this week when it departed from Stavanger Airport, in Sola, Norway, on Monday, January 2. The aircraft was made by Sikorsky, a United Technologies Corp. (NYSE: UTX - News) company.
In February 2005, Norsk became the first North Sea oil operator to launch the S-92 into revenue service. Norsk's third S-92 helicopter will be used under contract with BP Norge and Talisman Energy Norge for employee transport missions to and from oil platforms in the North Sea.
Norsk Helikopter's S-92 fleet to date has accumulated 3,206 flight hours and transported 66,100 passengers, 754 tons of baggage and 77 tons of freight.
"Sikorsky's S-92 helicopter has capacity for 19 passengers, and represents substantial improvements as far as comfort, range, and upgraded safety are concerned. BP is pleased to have started up its operations with the S-92, with all the advantages that this helicopter represents; initial passenger feedback following the first flights has been very positive," said Mr. Jan Erik Geirmo, BP Norge AS' Senior Communications Advisor.
Particularly useful to the offshore oil environment is the Rotor Ice Protection System (RIPS) that comes standard on all S-92 helicopters. The system meets the Federal Aviation Administration's latest and most stringent all-weather flight safety standards. RIPS allows the S-92 to launch into known icing conditions that might otherwise delay or cancel flight operations. The RIPS determines the temperature and moisture content of the surrounding environment and applies heat to the main and tail rotor blades to remove any ice buildup.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
"Till then, rainex (which always worked better for me, frankly, on every aircraft I flew.)"
Nick, which part of you did you apply the Rainex to? So far we have only tried rubbing it on the windscreens, but "Hey man, each to his own thing....."
Nick, which part of you did you apply the Rainex to? So far we have only tried rubbing it on the windscreens, but "Hey man, each to his own thing....."
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
This is tending to re-run the old EC 225 V S92 battle. Apart from Nick getting the weight of a UK SAR S92 about a ton out first time around, nothing really new has been said. There are pros and cons of an EASA Limited Icing Clearance and an EASA Full icing Clearance, but those are best dealt with in a different thread - should we start one?
This thread was originally started to talk about the UK Coastgard SAR contract, but the suitability of the AB 139 for the southern bases seems to have slipped under the radar - comments please.
RI
This thread was originally started to talk about the UK Coastgard SAR contract, but the suitability of the AB 139 for the southern bases seems to have slipped under the radar - comments please.
RI
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??
Shy Torque, Rainex on windshields, KY elsewhere.....
And for running in, this thread began with the moans of Bristow people who thought their lock on SAR was unfairly ruined by a userper aircraft, so the discussion of the several aircraft, 61's and 225's is entirely within its scope, IMHO. Regarding the "ton" of weight, it was 1300 lbs that I said, and we have found a very sizable part of that in the stuff the 225 forgot to include in its weight statement.
Running in you are right about one thing, the 139 crowd has been conspicuously silent here.
And for running in, this thread began with the moans of Bristow people who thought their lock on SAR was unfairly ruined by a userper aircraft, so the discussion of the several aircraft, 61's and 225's is entirely within its scope, IMHO. Regarding the "ton" of weight, it was 1300 lbs that I said, and we have found a very sizable part of that in the stuff the 225 forgot to include in its weight statement.
Running in you are right about one thing, the 139 crowd has been conspicuously silent here.
Re: UK Coastguard SAR - Bristow out??