Sikorsky S-92: From Design to Operations
HC
I have to report one incident a number of years ago when I was in a 332L at Vy, max continuous AEO and descending due to rapid ice buildup. Fortunately the freezing level was around 1000 feet so we did what the aircraft wanted, got rid of the ice at below 1000 feet and carried on northwards -
I have to report one incident a number of years ago when I was in a 332L at Vy, max continuous AEO and descending due to rapid ice buildup. Fortunately the freezing level was around 1000 feet so we did what the aircraft wanted, got rid of the ice at below 1000 feet and carried on northwards -
Thanks Steve, though I am not quite sure whether that counts as an incident or an event. Its always a bit alarming when you have to do what the aircraft wants to do rather than what you want to do, but did you think that safety was compromised? I suppose it could have been, in that the descent might have put you in conflict with other traffic, but apart from that it seems to show that the "system" works despite encountering severe icing.
I've now seen a copy of the flight manual RIPS section - it seems like a good system, though its not fully duplex in that the blade heating elements, though zoned, are not duplexed, which I guess is why Nick went silent when I asked if there were any single point failures that could bring the system down. The flight manual includes the information that in the event of a failure of an element, out-of-balance vibration may occur with instructions to "vacate icing conditions". As I mentioned previously it may be impossible to vacate icing conditions safely if you have embarked on a flight in IMC where freezing and cloud level are below MSA, so I suppose the wisdom of doing that would depend on how severe the vibration is likely to be.
HC
I've now seen a copy of the flight manual RIPS section - it seems like a good system, though its not fully duplex in that the blade heating elements, though zoned, are not duplexed, which I guess is why Nick went silent when I asked if there were any single point failures that could bring the system down. The flight manual includes the information that in the event of a failure of an element, out-of-balance vibration may occur with instructions to "vacate icing conditions". As I mentioned previously it may be impossible to vacate icing conditions safely if you have embarked on a flight in IMC where freezing and cloud level are below MSA, so I suppose the wisdom of doing that would depend on how severe the vibration is likely to be.
HC
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bristow buys S92, Helicomparator has a Bad day
Looks like helicomparator's home office didn't read the stuff he has been posting:
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060614/sikor...gies.html?.v=1
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060614/sikor...gies.html?.v=1
RJ,
Perhaps since Bristow...once part of OLOG but still only a subsidiary but Trade Name for that group...and thus bound by US Trade laws....has to forsake the backhanders, dash, incentives, and such....and make business decisions based upon comparative merit nowadays unlike in the past.
After all....there has been a significant change in their management during the past year.
Or is it simply a matter of keeping up with the neighbors since CHC has gone with the S-92?
Perhaps since Bristow...once part of OLOG but still only a subsidiary but Trade Name for that group...and thus bound by US Trade laws....has to forsake the backhanders, dash, incentives, and such....and make business decisions based upon comparative merit nowadays unlike in the past.
After all....there has been a significant change in their management during the past year.
Or is it simply a matter of keeping up with the neighbors since CHC has gone with the S-92?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: All over the place
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fact that Bristow were going to buy the 92 was about the worst kept secret in the industry, other than the actual announcement, as they have been quite openly discussing it at all levels of management. Of course, they already know what they are getting through the Norsk operation!
From the reports from the various operators, it seems to be an excellent choice of machinery, and even in the latest incarnation of the Puma, (and the EC-225 is a very nice aircraft), the S-92 is leagues ahead in terms of cabin space and passenger comfort.
And just think, they never did buy any
EH-101's even after flying them around for years and getting paid for it!
From the reports from the various operators, it seems to be an excellent choice of machinery, and even in the latest incarnation of the Puma, (and the EC-225 is a very nice aircraft), the S-92 is leagues ahead in terms of cabin space and passenger comfort.
And just think, they never did buy any
EH-101's even after flying them around for years and getting paid for it!
Maybe the options on the 13 are forward planning for the 2012 coast guard contract??
The firm order for 2 will be snapped up by a client without trouble, I'm sure.
The firm order for 2 will be snapped up by a client without trouble, I'm sure.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Frozen North
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget that the Bristow name now covers all of OLOGs operations as well as the traditional stamping grounds in the North Sea. I have seen nothing which suggests that Helicomparitor is going to change which foot he presses on aplication of power in the near future.
OA
OA
Wow - I think I must have made it big now - I get a thread including my name! So now I can retire.....OK maybe not!
Bristow Group (OLOG as was) were always going to buy the S92. Since they are USA based you can hardly find that surprising. It was bound to get into their fleet eventually. I have posted this many times.
As far as I know, the 2 mentioned are not destined for the UK, but I don't doubt that at some point we will get some. The main reason is that they are cheap and available, unlike the EC product which is expensive and not very available. There will always be a market for the cheaper option, some (most!)oil companies are primarily driven by cost and if both aircraft fit the bill on paper, why not go for the cheaper one?
But at the moment in the UK by early next year its 6 EC225s plus 2 for CHC, zero S92s. We Brits always did have an eye for quality...
From the passenger's point of view there is not much to choose between them - you can either have the slightly larger-cabined but vibratory 92 or the slightly smaller but smoother 225. But I know that the Norwegian offshore wokers unions have repeatedly complained about vibration levels on the 92 - I suspect they would prefer the 225 if they tried it.
From the oil companies point of view, unless you need the extra range / payload of the 225 for long trips, the 92 does the job cheaper than the 225.
But as I have always said, from the pilot's point of view there is no contest... So I remain very glad that I get to fly the best (civil) pilots' helicopter in the world. The detractors are welcome to their 92s - they are speaking in ignorance because they have never flown the 225 and don't know what they are missing.
HC
Bristow Group (OLOG as was) were always going to buy the S92. Since they are USA based you can hardly find that surprising. It was bound to get into their fleet eventually. I have posted this many times.
As far as I know, the 2 mentioned are not destined for the UK, but I don't doubt that at some point we will get some. The main reason is that they are cheap and available, unlike the EC product which is expensive and not very available. There will always be a market for the cheaper option, some (most!)oil companies are primarily driven by cost and if both aircraft fit the bill on paper, why not go for the cheaper one?
But at the moment in the UK by early next year its 6 EC225s plus 2 for CHC, zero S92s. We Brits always did have an eye for quality...
From the passenger's point of view there is not much to choose between them - you can either have the slightly larger-cabined but vibratory 92 or the slightly smaller but smoother 225. But I know that the Norwegian offshore wokers unions have repeatedly complained about vibration levels on the 92 - I suspect they would prefer the 225 if they tried it.
From the oil companies point of view, unless you need the extra range / payload of the 225 for long trips, the 92 does the job cheaper than the 225.
But as I have always said, from the pilot's point of view there is no contest... So I remain very glad that I get to fly the best (civil) pilots' helicopter in the world. The detractors are welcome to their 92s - they are speaking in ignorance because they have never flown the 225 and don't know what they are missing.
HC
My apologies Steve
I had understood that 1 92 was destined for Aberdeen but there being no sign of it, I had assumed that they had all ended up in Norway - wrong again!
HC
I had understood that 1 92 was destined for Aberdeen but there being no sign of it, I had assumed that they had all ended up in Norway - wrong again!
HC
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote=HeliComparator]
From the passenger's point of view there is not much to choose between them - you can either have the slightly larger-cabined but vibratory 92 or the slightly smaller but smoother 225. But I know that the Norwegian offshore wokers unions have repeatedly complained about vibration levels on the 92 - I suspect they would prefer the 225 if they tried it.
Now that I am officially out of the rotorcraft industry, I can finally post on the “vibration issues” with the S-92. In my former position I had the opportunity to go around the world to help customers put the S-92 in service. During that time, I have had the opportunity to ride on customer 92s in the Gulf, the North Sea and Newfoundland. Barring some maintenance issues, all of the 92s I have flown on have been within limits. And there in lies the problem. While the limits on the 92 are acceptable on a military aircraft they are not acceptable in the civil market. It is my experience that some of the operators do just enough track and balance work to get the ship within limits. If you want to feel what a well tuned 92 feels like you need to take a trip to Newfoundland. Their 92 is the smoothest customer aircraft that I have flown in. A well tuned 92 is every bit as good as a Super Puma (which I have also had the opportunity to fly in.)
Road Warrior
From the passenger's point of view there is not much to choose between them - you can either have the slightly larger-cabined but vibratory 92 or the slightly smaller but smoother 225. But I know that the Norwegian offshore wokers unions have repeatedly complained about vibration levels on the 92 - I suspect they would prefer the 225 if they tried it.
Now that I am officially out of the rotorcraft industry, I can finally post on the “vibration issues” with the S-92. In my former position I had the opportunity to go around the world to help customers put the S-92 in service. During that time, I have had the opportunity to ride on customer 92s in the Gulf, the North Sea and Newfoundland. Barring some maintenance issues, all of the 92s I have flown on have been within limits. And there in lies the problem. While the limits on the 92 are acceptable on a military aircraft they are not acceptable in the civil market. It is my experience that some of the operators do just enough track and balance work to get the ship within limits. If you want to feel what a well tuned 92 feels like you need to take a trip to Newfoundland. Their 92 is the smoothest customer aircraft that I have flown in. A well tuned 92 is every bit as good as a Super Puma (which I have also had the opportunity to fly in.)
Road Warrior
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First S-92 in UK North Sea
July 14, 2006 Vancouver: CHC announced today that it has been awarded a four-year contract renewal by Apache North Sea Limited for the provision of helicopter services in support of Apache's offshore operations. In support of this contract, CHC will deploy a Sikorsky S-92 out of Aberdeen, the first deployment of the S-92 in the UK sector of the North Sea.
The contract commences September 1, 2006. Additional support for the Apache contract will be provided from CHC's fleet of Super Puma aircraft.
CHC now operates four S-92 aircraft in Norway and one in Malaysia and plans to introduce three S-92s in Denmark, one in Norway and four search and rescue-configured S-92s in the UK commencing in 2007.[/QUOTE]
The contract commences September 1, 2006. Additional support for the Apache contract will be provided from CHC's fleet of Super Puma aircraft.
CHC now operates four S-92 aircraft in Norway and one in Malaysia and plans to introduce three S-92s in Denmark, one in Norway and four search and rescue-configured S-92s in the UK commencing in 2007.[/QUOTE]
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the move!
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi to all the non-CHC Australia pilots,
Fresh from the Global pprune secure network...a S92 has been allocated to the CHC Australia's offshore industry! Imagine how many CHC Oz pilots will try and get onto this new type!
Great times for the Industry! But the CHC Australia seniority system will prevent any Tom, Dick and Harry to operate this new type - even if you had the rating and squillions of hours!
This was the latest employment add for CHC Australia:
Helicopter Pilots
Full Time Permanent
Captain and FO Positions
CHC Helicopters (Australia) is a subsidiary of the largest international operator of civil helicopters and provides services throughout Australia. Due to company expansion, expressions of interest are invited from suitable qualified pilots holding significant experience in heavy and medium multi engine IFR aircraft, ideally Sikorsky, AS 332L/L1 and Bell 412 helicopters.
Minimum Requirements for Command positions:
ATPL(H) and Aviation Medical Class 1
Command Instrument Rating with 3 renewals
2.500 hours helicopter, 500 hours PIC (ME) and 1500 hours PIC turbine engine helicopters
Minimum Requirements for Co Pilot postions:
Aviation Medical Class 1, IREX and ATPL(H) subjects (preferred)
1500 hours helicopter and 500 PIC helicopter
To be accepted for these positions candidates require:
Strong interpersonal, written and oral communication skills
The ability to work as an effective member of a highly professional organisation
The ability to comprehend and apply technical instruction
Competent flying skills in visual and instrument conditions
CHC Helicopters (Australia) offer:
- Very latest in aircraft, equipment and technology
- Secure, long term employment with a vibrant company
- Extensive on the job training
- A wide variety of interesting and challenging work
- Good working conditions and lifestyle opportunities
- Scope for further career development
Please note that applications without the required minimum qualifications will not be considered.
Interested and qualified candidates should forward their expression of interest letter and resume outlining their relevant experience by e-mail to Human Resources Coordinator at [email protected] no later than 1700 Friday 21st July 2006.
Check next week Australian newspaper for S92 positions - hehe just joking, but soon anyway!
Regards,
CJ
Fresh from the Global pprune secure network...a S92 has been allocated to the CHC Australia's offshore industry! Imagine how many CHC Oz pilots will try and get onto this new type!
Great times for the Industry! But the CHC Australia seniority system will prevent any Tom, Dick and Harry to operate this new type - even if you had the rating and squillions of hours!
This was the latest employment add for CHC Australia:
Helicopter Pilots
Full Time Permanent
Captain and FO Positions
CHC Helicopters (Australia) is a subsidiary of the largest international operator of civil helicopters and provides services throughout Australia. Due to company expansion, expressions of interest are invited from suitable qualified pilots holding significant experience in heavy and medium multi engine IFR aircraft, ideally Sikorsky, AS 332L/L1 and Bell 412 helicopters.
Minimum Requirements for Command positions:
ATPL(H) and Aviation Medical Class 1
Command Instrument Rating with 3 renewals
2.500 hours helicopter, 500 hours PIC (ME) and 1500 hours PIC turbine engine helicopters
Minimum Requirements for Co Pilot postions:
Aviation Medical Class 1, IREX and ATPL(H) subjects (preferred)
1500 hours helicopter and 500 PIC helicopter
To be accepted for these positions candidates require:
Strong interpersonal, written and oral communication skills
The ability to work as an effective member of a highly professional organisation
The ability to comprehend and apply technical instruction
Competent flying skills in visual and instrument conditions
CHC Helicopters (Australia) offer:
- Very latest in aircraft, equipment and technology
- Secure, long term employment with a vibrant company
- Extensive on the job training
- A wide variety of interesting and challenging work
- Good working conditions and lifestyle opportunities
- Scope for further career development
Please note that applications without the required minimum qualifications will not be considered.
Interested and qualified candidates should forward their expression of interest letter and resume outlining their relevant experience by e-mail to Human Resources Coordinator at [email protected] no later than 1700 Friday 21st July 2006.
Check next week Australian newspaper for S92 positions - hehe just joking, but soon anyway!
Regards,
CJ
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Brunei
Age: 62
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've yet to find an Australian who can fly anything more complex than a Bell 47 (preferably with a competent pilot to hold the controls and help translate the flight manual from the original English)... A couple of secondhand A++'s should be the aspiration level!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my Hammock or at the Pub!
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norwich Nobody!
DiCk,
Mate, pull your head out from your Ass H--e its much bighter and sunnier out here. If your talking about a S-92 flight manual, mate its in english, the "global aviation language" remember? Now if you want to translate it back into Euro Trash, thats your bag!
Most of the guys I have flown with both Mil and Civil can hold a power and an attitude without any probs in Godz Own. Check 6, I think you may find you have a stick stuck in your rear baggage compartment!!!!
Max!
Mate, pull your head out from your Ass H--e its much bighter and sunnier out here. If your talking about a S-92 flight manual, mate its in english, the "global aviation language" remember? Now if you want to translate it back into Euro Trash, thats your bag!
Most of the guys I have flown with both Mil and Civil can hold a power and an attitude without any probs in Godz Own. Check 6, I think you may find you have a stick stuck in your rear baggage compartment!!!!
Max!
Last edited by maxeemum; 16th Jul 2006 at 12:27.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DC or is it AC
I can add that I've yet to find anyone OTHER than an australian that CAN fly a '47, certainly judging by the efforts on these forums, free wheel or engine has hernia, they crash.
ex VN jocks were particularly the most useless.
I can add that I've yet to find anyone OTHER than an australian that CAN fly a '47, certainly judging by the efforts on these forums, free wheel or engine has hernia, they crash.
ex VN jocks were particularly the most useless.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Brunei
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's funny that the majority of ozzies i meet transiting from Brunei to the UK are always going on courses over there... always something about doing the course in the UK utilising the 'correct' english! where as doing the course OZ doesn't count as the queen's english.
a foreigner only has to talk to some brits to find out their english is probably better at times... lol ... no disrespect.. peace
a foreigner only has to talk to some brits to find out their english is probably better at times... lol ... no disrespect.. peace