EC-225 orders hot up
simfly
Of course the 225 has had some technical issues, as has the 92 in service with other operators and soon with BHL. Because manufacturers don't test their aircraft properly, its a sad but well-known fact that new helicopters always come with problems and will certainly be initially less reliable than those they replace. Its the bathtub theory - ie take a section longways through a bathtub so see the shape of the reliability graph. Crap at first, but then steeply improving to bottom out for a long time, before aging aircarft syndrome starts to cause failure rates to creep up again. I would say the 332 is just starting to creep up the back of the curve whilst the 225 and 92 are very much in the middle of the downward slope.
I am not sure if the oil companies understand this - they certainly like to complain at every glitch. But it has to be that way (until manufacturers do more maturity flying) as otherwise you never replace your aircraft and they slowly die on their feet.
What this debate has really been about is the different design approaches followed by Sikorsky and Eurocopter. Once intial reliability and spares issues are addressed, you will be left with two fairly reliable aircraft but which are completely different in design concept, and that is what I have been talking about.
Yes, the 92 is intrinsically rougher than the 332L even when flown at the same speed, however its active anti-vibration system does generate spheres of acceptable vibration in the cabin, but unfortunately also zones where the vibration is bad. So it just depends on where you sit. For the structure outside the cabin though, it has to put up with the stress.
HC
Of course the 225 has had some technical issues, as has the 92 in service with other operators and soon with BHL. Because manufacturers don't test their aircraft properly, its a sad but well-known fact that new helicopters always come with problems and will certainly be initially less reliable than those they replace. Its the bathtub theory - ie take a section longways through a bathtub so see the shape of the reliability graph. Crap at first, but then steeply improving to bottom out for a long time, before aging aircarft syndrome starts to cause failure rates to creep up again. I would say the 332 is just starting to creep up the back of the curve whilst the 225 and 92 are very much in the middle of the downward slope.
I am not sure if the oil companies understand this - they certainly like to complain at every glitch. But it has to be that way (until manufacturers do more maturity flying) as otherwise you never replace your aircraft and they slowly die on their feet.
What this debate has really been about is the different design approaches followed by Sikorsky and Eurocopter. Once intial reliability and spares issues are addressed, you will be left with two fairly reliable aircraft but which are completely different in design concept, and that is what I have been talking about.
Yes, the 92 is intrinsically rougher than the 332L even when flown at the same speed, however its active anti-vibration system does generate spheres of acceptable vibration in the cabin, but unfortunately also zones where the vibration is bad. So it just depends on where you sit. For the structure outside the cabin though, it has to put up with the stress.
HC
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HC, thanks for the info. With regard to the clients, you're right, most of the workforce offshore doesn't understand, even more so in the ESB believe me! One of my headaches recently has been to try and convince them that things are improving as your aircraft gets hours under it's belt. I'm employed by the same as you, though I'm highly involved with just one of the clients and want nothing more than to please the folks offshore. I just get wary of any bashing between types, especially as we'll be operating both soon but any worthy info I take onboard!
simfly
See the thread at http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=268299
I would say that the 225 availability rate has been way over 75%, say 95% which is pretty good considering the 4 or 5 trips (10+ hours) each aircraft flies each weekday. Do you have actual figures? Of course the oil companies expect 100% but then they would!
You had better start to develop your placatory skills for the new fleet in Scasta!
HC
See the thread at http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=268299
I would say that the 225 availability rate has been way over 75%, say 95% which is pretty good considering the 4 or 5 trips (10+ hours) each aircraft flies each weekday. Do you have actual figures? Of course the oil companies expect 100% but then they would!
You had better start to develop your placatory skills for the new fleet in Scasta!
HC
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Orange, TX USA
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
225 dreams
I heard it was 8 although this could be over 5 years. I think the biggest problem will be loosing the 61 & 139 work to the 225. This might not be the trade off they are looking for.
