Sikorsky S-92: From Design to Operations
Guest
Posts: n/a
NH90 , was a pic in the local paper a couple of weeks back.
http://www.nhindustries.com/p4a7.htm
http://www.nhindustries.com/p4a7.htm
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Widgeon - if your right (and you seem closer to the action) I'm wrong!
I was thinking it was the EC225 as it is on schedule for cold wx trials in Q1/03.
Since I guess the AB139 will need to get similar trials in this year it sounds like there will be 4 new types chasing the wx!
If they all have to do high altitude testing too this year I guess the folks in Leadville will be in for a bonanza year!
I was thinking it was the EC225 as it is on schedule for cold wx trials in Q1/03.
Since I guess the AB139 will need to get similar trials in this year it sounds like there will be 4 new types chasing the wx!
If they all have to do high altitude testing too this year I guess the folks in Leadville will be in for a bonanza year!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: yes
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S-92 in the North sea
Statoil and Norsk Helikopter in Bergen, Norway confirmed on friday that they have bought, and will start operations with the Sikorsky S-92 from January 1. 2005.
Check out the link below.
http://www.statoil.com/statoilcom/sv...256CBE004326A2
Check out the link below.
http://www.statoil.com/statoilcom/sv...256CBE004326A2
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First S-92 in the North Sea
I understand that two S-92`s has been ordered for flying in the North-Sea for Norsk Helicopter on a 5 year contract with Statoil.
About time a new and more powerful machine is introdused into the offshore marked. Not to talk about pilot and passenger comfort!
Is Norsk Helicopter launch customers for this machine since they have a firm order? Understand there are a few others sniffing on the machine as well, but have they firm orders?
About time a new and more powerful machine is introdused into the offshore marked. Not to talk about pilot and passenger comfort!
Is Norsk Helicopter launch customers for this machine since they have a firm order? Understand there are a few others sniffing on the machine as well, but have they firm orders?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Coalface,
Peter Gray is a real professional, and flew commercial S-61's as I recall. I flew him for a C+ article a few years back, and he was perhaps the most thorough reporter that I had ever flown. Here is a link to the article, which is under "features," reached thru the link on the left column:
http://www.flightinternational.com/f...y.asp?Code=105
Peter Gray is a real professional, and flew commercial S-61's as I recall. I flew him for a C+ article a few years back, and he was perhaps the most thorough reporter that I had ever flown. Here is a link to the article, which is under "features," reached thru the link on the left column:
http://www.flightinternational.com/f...y.asp?Code=105
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Sea and elsewhere
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for pointing me to the article Nick. Can you tell me what the likely empty weight of the painted aircraft will be fully equiped for offshore IFR work (basic weight + all equipment, seats etc but minus crew and fuel)? I have seen the publicity brochure weight but we all know that the final weight is always more.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Hartford, CT USA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats a great article, sounds like you guys made quite an aircraft. Then again I expected nothing less. When I read the article I remembered a previous discussion where you asked pilots what they wanted in their aircraft, and if my memory serves me, it looks like many things made it in. Good on ya.
I cant wait to fly one (gonna be a while) wheres my snickers bar?
I cant wait to fly one (gonna be a while) wheres my snickers bar?
Guest
Posts: n/a
coalface,
Unlike most brochures which quote stripped aircraft, we put in a pretty complete equipment package, so the S-92 brochure on the web site is quite accurate. I do have a full equipment list for that weight, if you'd like. The empty weight of a well equipped S-92 ready for work (19 pax, full interior, dual autopilot, FMS/GPS, dual nav/comm, De-ice rotors, Satcom, HF, HEELS, rafts floats and all whatnot) is between 15,800 and 16,200 lbs, depending on what extras are needed. It is hard to get it above 16,200 lbs. Max Gross weight Cat A at 90 degrees F is 26,150 lbs, and full fuel is 5150 lbs. Figure 19 pax and 2 crew at 200 lbs is 4200 lbs, baggage at 15 lbs each is 285, so total take-off gross weight is 25,815lbs. The full fuel is enough to go 460 Nm with 30 min reserve (figure 9.7 lb per NM at Vbr, 10 at Vcruise).
At 26,150 lbs, the aircraft HOGE at 6500 feet, and HIGE at 11000 feet, Vcruise is 152 Kts, Vbest range is 139 Kts.
FYI, you also get a main transmission that ran 3 hours after a massive oil leak, damage tolerant rotor and structural components, full bird strike protection (controls and drive shaft covers that are nearly ballistic so birds don't cave them in at Vne), and tolerance of engine burst events. {You also get ballistic tolerance, based on the H-60 design requirements, but one hopes this is not necessary in the oil patch!}
Unlike most brochures which quote stripped aircraft, we put in a pretty complete equipment package, so the S-92 brochure on the web site is quite accurate. I do have a full equipment list for that weight, if you'd like. The empty weight of a well equipped S-92 ready for work (19 pax, full interior, dual autopilot, FMS/GPS, dual nav/comm, De-ice rotors, Satcom, HF, HEELS, rafts floats and all whatnot) is between 15,800 and 16,200 lbs, depending on what extras are needed. It is hard to get it above 16,200 lbs. Max Gross weight Cat A at 90 degrees F is 26,150 lbs, and full fuel is 5150 lbs. Figure 19 pax and 2 crew at 200 lbs is 4200 lbs, baggage at 15 lbs each is 285, so total take-off gross weight is 25,815lbs. The full fuel is enough to go 460 Nm with 30 min reserve (figure 9.7 lb per NM at Vbr, 10 at Vcruise).
At 26,150 lbs, the aircraft HOGE at 6500 feet, and HIGE at 11000 feet, Vcruise is 152 Kts, Vbest range is 139 Kts.
FYI, you also get a main transmission that ran 3 hours after a massive oil leak, damage tolerant rotor and structural components, full bird strike protection (controls and drive shaft covers that are nearly ballistic so birds don't cave them in at Vne), and tolerance of engine burst events. {You also get ballistic tolerance, based on the H-60 design requirements, but one hopes this is not necessary in the oil patch!}
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Sea and elsewhere
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick, thanks for the range/payload info. By my calculations, a full offshore load of 19 passengers + bags + some freight will be able to be launched to a rig about 210 nautical miles out with home base as an alternate using North Sea reserves. This is a lot better than we have today.
Is there an option to increase fuel capacity without affecting the offshore seating layout? There are times with strong Northerly winds over the North Sea that we cannot get enough fuel in the tanks to make the East Shetland basin (and occasionally the new North Atlantic rim fields) direct. The S92 does have an extra 20 - 30 mins endurance over the Puma L/L2 but there will be the occasions when even this is not enough.
I know every pilot always wants an extra 1/2 hour whatever the total capacity is but in this case, it might make the difference between a flight going or not, particularly if the Shetland weather is not good. Obviously there is a cost/weight penalty with extra fuel capacity and even if there is an option available, it may not be worth the cost for the handful of times this happens per year.
By the way, what is the weight capacity in the baggage bay and how will the offshore variant be configured? Is the hydraulic ramp a feature on all models? The bigger the baggage bay the better.
Is there an option to increase fuel capacity without affecting the offshore seating layout? There are times with strong Northerly winds over the North Sea that we cannot get enough fuel in the tanks to make the East Shetland basin (and occasionally the new North Atlantic rim fields) direct. The S92 does have an extra 20 - 30 mins endurance over the Puma L/L2 but there will be the occasions when even this is not enough.
I know every pilot always wants an extra 1/2 hour whatever the total capacity is but in this case, it might make the difference between a flight going or not, particularly if the Shetland weather is not good. Obviously there is a cost/weight penalty with extra fuel capacity and even if there is an option available, it may not be worth the cost for the handful of times this happens per year.
By the way, what is the weight capacity in the baggage bay and how will the offshore variant be configured? Is the hydraulic ramp a feature on all models? The bigger the baggage bay the better.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sikorsky S-92 completes key weather test
Dallas, Texas, Feb. 9, 2003
Sikorsky’s S-92 helicopter recently passed the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Falling and Blowing Snow qualification testing. The aircraft achieved FAA Type Certification in December 2002.
Operating on a special FAA clearance, S-92 prototype aircraft #4 tackled a severe snowstorm in Hamilton, NY. Located in the Lake Ontario snow belt, 25 miles south of Syracuse, Hamilton is home to some of the most treacherous weather conditions in the country.
Waiting for just such a weather occurrence, the S-92 launched from Sikorsky’s main plant in Stratford, Conn., on January 31st. The helicopter arrived in Hamilton just in time to experience heavy snowfall, high ground accumulations, and visibilities that normally shut down flight operations, yet the aircraft was able to achieve its requirements for U.S. FAA environmental certification.
Aircraft #4 accomplished 20 minutes of taxiing, five minutes of hover and an hour of forward flight, all in snowy conditions with temperatures ranging from 25-34 degrees Fahrenheit and less than a quarter mile of visibility.
“The aircraft performed flawlessly, with its systems handling all of the snow we could find,” said Ron Doeppner, S-92 Experimental Pilot. “Especially during white-out conditions that can heavily tax the engine inlets.”
Several Hamilton residents, upon hearing the helicopter orbit the airport but unable to see the aircraft in the snow, called the police to report an aircraft in distress. With the airport closed to flight traffic, residents apparently did not believe that an aircraft could navigate such a severe storm. When local police arrived at the airport, the S-92 crew convinced the local constabulary that nothing was amiss.
“Instead, we found the perfect storm,” said Rick Becker, Engineering Test Pilot.
Before it is allowed to transport passengers, each aircraft must comply with U.S. Government standards for strength and safety. The S-92 now meets Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 29 Airline Transport Rotorcraft, Amendment 45, the most stringent rotorcraft safety requirements imposed to date.
Sikorsky’s S-92 helicopter recently passed the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Falling and Blowing Snow qualification testing. The aircraft achieved FAA Type Certification in December 2002.
Operating on a special FAA clearance, S-92 prototype aircraft #4 tackled a severe snowstorm in Hamilton, NY. Located in the Lake Ontario snow belt, 25 miles south of Syracuse, Hamilton is home to some of the most treacherous weather conditions in the country.
Waiting for just such a weather occurrence, the S-92 launched from Sikorsky’s main plant in Stratford, Conn., on January 31st. The helicopter arrived in Hamilton just in time to experience heavy snowfall, high ground accumulations, and visibilities that normally shut down flight operations, yet the aircraft was able to achieve its requirements for U.S. FAA environmental certification.
Aircraft #4 accomplished 20 minutes of taxiing, five minutes of hover and an hour of forward flight, all in snowy conditions with temperatures ranging from 25-34 degrees Fahrenheit and less than a quarter mile of visibility.
“The aircraft performed flawlessly, with its systems handling all of the snow we could find,” said Ron Doeppner, S-92 Experimental Pilot. “Especially during white-out conditions that can heavily tax the engine inlets.”
Several Hamilton residents, upon hearing the helicopter orbit the airport but unable to see the aircraft in the snow, called the police to report an aircraft in distress. With the airport closed to flight traffic, residents apparently did not believe that an aircraft could navigate such a severe storm. When local police arrived at the airport, the S-92 crew convinced the local constabulary that nothing was amiss.
“Instead, we found the perfect storm,” said Rick Becker, Engineering Test Pilot.
Before it is allowed to transport passengers, each aircraft must comply with U.S. Government standards for strength and safety. The S-92 now meets Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 29 Airline Transport Rotorcraft, Amendment 45, the most stringent rotorcraft safety requirements imposed to date.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: North Sea and elsewhere
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hope no one minds this thread being nudged back up the page but my last post had a couple of questions about the S92 for N.L.
I know he will be a busy man and can't be expected to keep an eye on Pprune all the time.
I know he will be a busy man and can't be expected to keep an eye on Pprune all the time.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Coalface posted, Nick replies (belatedly!):
CF: Nick, thanks for the range/payload info.
NL: No sweat!
CF: By my calculations, a full offshore load of 19 passengers + bags + some freight will be able to be launched to a rig about 210 nautical miles out with home base as an alternate using North Sea reserves. This is a lot better than we have today.
NL: Close enough, with JAR reserves (mission +30 min +10%), it is 443 NM one way, so probably 220NM radius with some loading time on the rig.
CF: Is there an option to increase fuel capacity without affecting the offshore seating layout?
NL: We have to physically lose 2 seats to add 185 Gal, 4 seats to add two of the aux tanks, they each add 120 MN to the range, so you could go 560NM with one aux. However, the tank and fuel weigh about 1450 lbs, so you would have to carry about 16 pax/baggage at 220lbs each with full fuel to hold MGW limits.
CF: By the way, what is the weight capacity in the baggage bay and how will the offshore variant be configured? Is the hydraulic ramp a feature on all models? The bigger the baggage bay the better.
NL: The ramp is standard. The baggage is on the ramp, and in racks above and to the side of it with 2000 lbs as its limit (less, perhaps 1000 lbs or so due to CG on the typical oil machine). It is accessible from inside or outside. Roller floors are optional and pallets are easily loaded, the aircraft jacks up to allow a fork lift under, with 2 M clearance under the otherwise low tail cone. The pax seats each remove easily for cargo carrying.
CF: Nick, thanks for the range/payload info.
NL: No sweat!
CF: By my calculations, a full offshore load of 19 passengers + bags + some freight will be able to be launched to a rig about 210 nautical miles out with home base as an alternate using North Sea reserves. This is a lot better than we have today.
NL: Close enough, with JAR reserves (mission +30 min +10%), it is 443 NM one way, so probably 220NM radius with some loading time on the rig.
CF: Is there an option to increase fuel capacity without affecting the offshore seating layout?
NL: We have to physically lose 2 seats to add 185 Gal, 4 seats to add two of the aux tanks, they each add 120 MN to the range, so you could go 560NM with one aux. However, the tank and fuel weigh about 1450 lbs, so you would have to carry about 16 pax/baggage at 220lbs each with full fuel to hold MGW limits.
CF: By the way, what is the weight capacity in the baggage bay and how will the offshore variant be configured? Is the hydraulic ramp a feature on all models? The bigger the baggage bay the better.
NL: The ramp is standard. The baggage is on the ramp, and in racks above and to the side of it with 2000 lbs as its limit (less, perhaps 1000 lbs or so due to CG on the typical oil machine). It is accessible from inside or outside. Roller floors are optional and pallets are easily loaded, the aircraft jacks up to allow a fork lift under, with 2 M clearance under the otherwise low tail cone. The pax seats each remove easily for cargo carrying.
