EC145
Best agrument for the 145 instead of the 155 is the 155 itself as I hear. Next best agrument is the lack of support to the owner/operator by the French side of Eurocopter......and yes....wear your wellies and carry a brolly in rainy season if you fly the 155.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 48 Deg South
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard that Shell Nigeria arent too happy with their new purchases according to some little birdies from that area. 
Maybe some of our African visitors can elaborate on that one a little more.
DC - Talk to Childflight also as they have an N2 I think and are having some teething problems with it. Seems they added a lot of mods to it and now there is a pain in the ass vibration that wont go away. That info is not firsthand but worth looking at. Terry M would be the best person to give you first hand info.
On the other hand Vic Pol seem to be very happy with their N3s.
Autorotate.
Maybe some of our African visitors can elaborate on that one a little more.
DC - Talk to Childflight also as they have an N2 I think and are having some teething problems with it. Seems they added a lot of mods to it and now there is a pain in the ass vibration that wont go away. That info is not firsthand but worth looking at. Terry M would be the best person to give you first hand info.
On the other hand Vic Pol seem to be very happy with their N3s.
Autorotate.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Here,there &everywhere
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Autorotate,
I know the one you're talking about.I've seen Childflights Dauphin on the ground more than in the air.I've spoken to Eurocopter and what you say is apparently exactly the problem.Vibrations in flight.The first problem was to do with the yaw system on the autopilot.
Apparently it is a awesome machine though.It can do 160 kts with 2 onboard and half fuel.
I know the one you're talking about.I've seen Childflights Dauphin on the ground more than in the air.I've spoken to Eurocopter and what you say is apparently exactly the problem.Vibrations in flight.The first problem was to do with the yaw system on the autopilot.
Apparently it is a awesome machine though.It can do 160 kts with 2 onboard and half fuel.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: In the Haven of Peace
Age: 79
Posts: 600
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Dauphin is a good helicopter for medium range SPIFR. It is reliable and cheap to maintain. The cruise speed would depend on what part of the world you would be operating and what weight you wanted to operate it at (N. Europe around 140 knots, tropics around 130 knots realistically speaking).
Shell have been having some problems with their EC 155s in Nigeria. From what I hear a lot of them are no different from the teething problems almost any new type has in its early days. The main complaint is probably to do with actual single-engine performance as opposed to claimed single-engine performance. The Arriel 2C1 is basically pretty much the same engine as the Arriel 2S1 as fitted in the S76C+ and most operators of the latter type in hot climates have been having a lot of problems with engines failing power assurance. Supposedly the Arriel 2C2/2S2 will address most of these problems, but that remains to be seen.
I've yet to fly a helicopter that doesn't leak in the rain.
Shell have been having some problems with their EC 155s in Nigeria. From what I hear a lot of them are no different from the teething problems almost any new type has in its early days. The main complaint is probably to do with actual single-engine performance as opposed to claimed single-engine performance. The Arriel 2C1 is basically pretty much the same engine as the Arriel 2S1 as fitted in the S76C+ and most operators of the latter type in hot climates have been having a lot of problems with engines failing power assurance. Supposedly the Arriel 2C2/2S2 will address most of these problems, but that remains to be seen.
I've yet to fly a helicopter that doesn't leak in the rain.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK (Wilts)
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keep the costs down...
The EC145 is certified as the BK117 C2. This allowed Eurocopter/Kawasaki to keep the certification costs to a minimum. You might be interested to note that as a result of this EC were able to use the large screen by applying the regulations in force at the time of the certification of the BK117, the screen does NOT conform to birdstrike criteria in force at the time of the certification of the C2; this has been a sticky point with the CAA.
As an aside, the choice of a plank wing IFR FMS for a helo destined for a lot of SAR and police work was not wise. Try it and see.......
As an aside, the choice of a plank wing IFR FMS for a helo destined for a lot of SAR and police work was not wise. Try it and see.......
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd love to trade my 117 for a 145, the improvements all appear to be the result of listening to the customer. Difficult to believe Eurocopter would be capable of such a move 
At the risk of spooking the weather gods, in 5+ years operation my 117 has yet to leak in the rain, in flight or on the ground. And all the panels still go back in the right place without persuasion; German and Japanese standards at their highest, IMHO.
I remember the astonishment shown many years ago, when the VicPol introduced new radios and we asked for motorcycle control heads for the Dauphin, since they were already waterproofed. The radio techs actually thought we were joking
At the risk of spooking the weather gods, in 5+ years operation my 117 has yet to leak in the rain, in flight or on the ground. And all the panels still go back in the right place without persuasion; German and Japanese standards at their highest, IMHO.
I remember the astonishment shown many years ago, when the VicPol introduced new radios and we asked for motorcycle control heads for the Dauphin, since they were already waterproofed. The radio techs actually thought we were joking
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eurocopter gets first EC 145 sale to the US
Eurocopter has sold its first EC 145 in the United States to the Lee County Division of Public Safety/EMS.
Lee County, which lies along the west coast of Florida, includes the city of Fort Myers and 652,000 acres of coastal area and barrier islands.
The EMS is responsible for providing advanced life support for out-of-hospital emergencies and primary health care and also responds to personnel searches, mass casualty incidents, and missing or downed aircraft reports.
They've been operating helicopters since 1978, and currently fly a B0-105. Delivery of the EC 145 to Lee County is slated for early 2004.
Well whadya know!
Lee County, which lies along the west coast of Florida, includes the city of Fort Myers and 652,000 acres of coastal area and barrier islands.
The EMS is responsible for providing advanced life support for out-of-hospital emergencies and primary health care and also responds to personnel searches, mass casualty incidents, and missing or downed aircraft reports.
They've been operating helicopters since 1978, and currently fly a B0-105. Delivery of the EC 145 to Lee County is slated for early 2004.
Well whadya know!
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: callian, var,France
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eurocopter EC145
Calling EC145 operators worldwide
It fits my mission profile from the persepctive of size and carrying capacity.
Any body got any feed back on this helicopter from the handling characteristics perspective.
I have heard particualrly from the French that the helicopter does not handle well in confined areas, lack of tail rotor authority, very rigid ride, not good in the mountains. OK, So its not an Allouette III.
I am also very interested to know how the mainteance load is viewed for technicains and its suitability to remote operations.
Is the current lack of FADEC control a real issue.
Would it be OK for VIP passenger transport, does it roll like a pig in the wind. The flights are always short hops.
Thanks.
It fits my mission profile from the persepctive of size and carrying capacity.
Any body got any feed back on this helicopter from the handling characteristics perspective.
I have heard particualrly from the French that the helicopter does not handle well in confined areas, lack of tail rotor authority, very rigid ride, not good in the mountains. OK, So its not an Allouette III.
I am also very interested to know how the mainteance load is viewed for technicains and its suitability to remote operations.
Is the current lack of FADEC control a real issue.
Would it be OK for VIP passenger transport, does it roll like a pig in the wind. The flights are always short hops.
Thanks.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: World Wide
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting question/ topic....... I thought that the EC145 was really just a growth version of the BK117 ...and as such would have EXCELLENT confined area handelling qualities ...( but maybe not at 10,000ft !!) ..... certainly the BK does ...must watch what is said closely ...
Are the CAA the only regulatory authority concerned about the fact that the 145's controls run through flexicables up the central front windscreen frame? I know they've expressed reservations about birdstrike resilience.
I have asked about the rumours that the flying qualities of the EC145 were being 'knocked' by French pilots newly introduced to it.
The standard reply [albeit suspect because it is an EC source] is that the high time pilots are comparing their long experience with such as Alouettes ['seat of the pants flying'] with the high tech new technology 145. The difference between the two is vast. It is an age old observation - the same as expressed by those in open cockpit bi-planes transferring to enclosed monoplanes I guess.
The most likely exponent might be someone with BK117 experience apreciating the added value of the upgrades machine. The same type of criticism was heard from those moving from the Lama to the AS350B3 ....... but it sells.
The standard reply [albeit suspect because it is an EC source] is that the high time pilots are comparing their long experience with such as Alouettes ['seat of the pants flying'] with the high tech new technology 145. The difference between the two is vast. It is an age old observation - the same as expressed by those in open cockpit bi-planes transferring to enclosed monoplanes I guess.
The most likely exponent might be someone with BK117 experience apreciating the added value of the upgrades machine. The same type of criticism was heard from those moving from the Lama to the AS350B3 ....... but it sells.
I can only comment on the handling of the BK, but I'd love to be able to afford/justify the upgrade to a 145
With the C model tail rotor blades, the "lack of tail rotor authority" is almost a none event. At max. gross, high DA, it will need a bit of care as would most other machines, but the TR thrust is there, and effective.
Rigid ride? Well, it is a rigid rotor design, and certainly handles the turbulence more like a fixed wing than a "conventional" articulated head helicopter, but you can use that ability to fly in areas that you just wouldn't take a "conventional" machine. Not if you want to fly out in one piece, that is!
Confined areas? The 117 is superb, if you can fit in a Squirrel, you'll land a BK, often with more confidence and safety. High tail rotor, two donks, small rotor diameter, good power reserves.
High altitude: the 145 has better engines & performance, so I'd expect it to outperform the 117-B2 that I have, which we use to land at 6000ft on a daily basis, with 8 skiers and their equipment. The roof top pad we have is a gridded deck, with no ground cushion as a result, but the BK handles that well.
FADEC: nice to have, but not exactly critical to the machine's capability, surely?
Maintenance: we have surged through remote fire operations up to 12 hours/day, and kept going with commendable reliability.
VIP transport: the short tail boom can induce a semi Dutch roll, if not handled well. CSAS will help against this, or a boot full of opposite yaw to stop the PIO
The enlarged door opening of the 145 should make VIP passenger access easier than the 117, which has a relatively small sliding door, and subsequent difficulty with entry around VIP seats.
The French have a degree of difficulty with the 145, since it slots into the sales market against the 365N/155. As the "home grown" machine will naturally be considered superior, a degree of parochialism may need to be allowed for
Hope that helps....
With the C model tail rotor blades, the "lack of tail rotor authority" is almost a none event. At max. gross, high DA, it will need a bit of care as would most other machines, but the TR thrust is there, and effective.
Rigid ride? Well, it is a rigid rotor design, and certainly handles the turbulence more like a fixed wing than a "conventional" articulated head helicopter, but you can use that ability to fly in areas that you just wouldn't take a "conventional" machine. Not if you want to fly out in one piece, that is!
Confined areas? The 117 is superb, if you can fit in a Squirrel, you'll land a BK, often with more confidence and safety. High tail rotor, two donks, small rotor diameter, good power reserves.
High altitude: the 145 has better engines & performance, so I'd expect it to outperform the 117-B2 that I have, which we use to land at 6000ft on a daily basis, with 8 skiers and their equipment. The roof top pad we have is a gridded deck, with no ground cushion as a result, but the BK handles that well.
FADEC: nice to have, but not exactly critical to the machine's capability, surely?
Maintenance: we have surged through remote fire operations up to 12 hours/day, and kept going with commendable reliability.
VIP transport: the short tail boom can induce a semi Dutch roll, if not handled well. CSAS will help against this, or a boot full of opposite yaw to stop the PIO
The enlarged door opening of the 145 should make VIP passenger access easier than the 117, which has a relatively small sliding door, and subsequent difficulty with entry around VIP seats.The French have a degree of difficulty with the 145, since it slots into the sales market against the 365N/155. As the "home grown" machine will naturally be considered superior, a degree of parochialism may need to be allowed for
Hope that helps....
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: 48 Deg South
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spent a day with the Lausanne based Rega 145 and according to Laurent Racine, who I spent some time talking to, it is a great machine. He said it is very smooth and even though it doesnt have the FADEC system it is still the same to manage as the BK, in fact it is easier.
Some of the areas they go into are confined and he said that they have had no handling issues with it, and he compares it the same to the BK, with the added advantage of new cockpit, moving maps etc etc. The only negative thing he said was when it was in a high alt hover with a lot of wind it did get kicked around a bit more than a BK, but having never flown one cant really say much more than that.
I have plenty of images of the insides of it if you want them posted here, including panel shots with everything up and running.
P.S. The French Securitie Civil lost a 145 not long ago when it struck some rocks.
Some of the areas they go into are confined and he said that they have had no handling issues with it, and he compares it the same to the BK, with the added advantage of new cockpit, moving maps etc etc. The only negative thing he said was when it was in a high alt hover with a lot of wind it did get kicked around a bit more than a BK, but having never flown one cant really say much more than that.
I have plenty of images of the insides of it if you want them posted here, including panel shots with everything up and running.
P.S. The French Securitie Civil lost a 145 not long ago when it struck some rocks.
@ touareg
The EC 145 is approved as a new version of the proven BK 117. But differencies between the older BK 117 B2 or C1 and the new ship are much greater than on any other BK series.
At the moment not so much ships have really enough (real missions) flight hours for a final comment.
John Eacott describes the BK 117 B2 and C1 models and their handling and servicing characteristics very well. The differencies to the EC 145 are not so big.
What's now the EC 145:
1. We have the same engines like the C1. That means no FADEC and 2 min cooling time. But the new MTOW is now 3585kg/7,826lbs.
2. We have an improved main rotor. Should provide a little more lift.
3. The greatest step forward is the new cockpit layout with the new "MEGHAS" glass cockpit. That's really the best on the ship (my opinion) because of the much more better pilots view outside. But the new glass cockpit could give so much indication possibilities, so much informations and require therefore much more knowlegde from the pilot. That's the big big difference to the older ships. On the differential training is the biggest point to teach the pilots the needed cockpit skills especially on emergencies. It's the first time in my pilots-life that i have heard from older pilots: that ship isn't the right thing for my last years, because of the complete new avionic and cockpit generation. Including a new very good autopilot (fully automatic ILS Approach up to 65ft), the ship should allways fly with the AP engaged.
4. More fuel and increased endurance (2,5h).
5. As said with the old engines and the new MTOW is especially the OEI performance not so good.
Short: the ship is nearly allways underpowered. To reach CAT "A" performance under operation conditions it seems impossible to take the advantage of the more payload and fuel.
6. The rear cabin is larger. (Really good)
7. A new hoist without the big older boom direct above the sliding doors. (booth sides possible) that means improved hoist capabilities.
The ship is very good to fly (of course a rigid rotor) and as good as the older BK's on confined areas. But absolutely shure it's not a hot and high helicopter. The "flexicables" working good and the ship is new for Eurocopter ships equipped with twist grips.
As a new ship with not so much flying time the maintenance load is difficult to describes. That's a question of the next 2-4 years.
And at last: the thing is really (maybe to) expensive to buy.
I'm not shure if it is possible to buy and to fly the EC 145 on free market and business conditions at the moment worldwide. Have heard, you have to expect delivering times up to 2 years.
The EC 145 is approved as a new version of the proven BK 117. But differencies between the older BK 117 B2 or C1 and the new ship are much greater than on any other BK series.
At the moment not so much ships have really enough (real missions) flight hours for a final comment.
John Eacott
describes the BK 117 B2 and C1 models and their handling and servicing characteristics very well. The differencies to the EC 145 are not so big.What's now the EC 145:
1. We have the same engines like the C1. That means no FADEC and 2 min cooling time. But the new MTOW is now 3585kg/7,826lbs.
2. We have an improved main rotor. Should provide a little more lift.
3. The greatest step forward is the new cockpit layout with the new "MEGHAS" glass cockpit. That's really the best on the ship (my opinion) because of the much more better pilots view outside. But the new glass cockpit could give so much indication possibilities, so much informations and require therefore much more knowlegde from the pilot. That's the big big difference to the older ships. On the differential training is the biggest point to teach the pilots the needed cockpit skills especially on emergencies. It's the first time in my pilots-life that i have heard from older pilots: that ship isn't the right thing for my last years, because of the complete new avionic and cockpit generation. Including a new very good autopilot (fully automatic ILS Approach up to 65ft), the ship should allways fly with the AP engaged.
4. More fuel and increased endurance (2,5h).
5. As said with the old engines and the new MTOW is especially the OEI performance not so good.
Short: the ship is nearly allways underpowered. To reach CAT "A" performance under operation conditions it seems impossible to take the advantage of the more payload and fuel. 6. The rear cabin is larger. (Really good)
7. A new hoist without the big older boom direct above the sliding doors. (booth sides possible) that means improved hoist capabilities.
The ship is very good to fly (of course a rigid rotor) and as good as the older BK's on confined areas. But absolutely shure it's not a hot and high helicopter. The "flexicables" working good and the ship is new for Eurocopter ships equipped with twist grips.
As a new ship with not so much flying time the maintenance load is difficult to describes. That's a question of the next 2-4 years.
And at last: the thing is really (maybe to) expensive to buy.
I'm not shure if it is possible to buy and to fly the EC 145 on free market and business conditions at the moment worldwide. Have heard, you have to expect delivering times up to 2 years.
Last edited by tecpilot; 13th Sep 2003 at 19:49.
Can't comment on the specific questions first made, but to follow up on the last remarks: I fly the EC-155 and have to say that the Avionique Nouvelle cockpit is superb. It is hard to imagine a more pilot friendly environment, especially for SPIFR.
I fully agree to 212man. The point is the pilot must be able to use the possibilities of the glass cockpit. And there are a lot of procedures in case of an indication or equipment failure.