Civilian SAR Aircraft
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: dark side off the sea!!
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They just changed uniform most have now completed the S-92 course and the first 4 have completed the intial paramedics course. All is going well for them.
Thanks for the update.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Portugal
Age: 45
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello everyone,
regarding the use of the Merlin as a SAR platform, we at the Portuguese Air Force are doing just that. May I remind you that we upgraded from the Puma S1 (Makila 1A1 engines), which unfortunately we didn't sell to the RAF.
Regarding the use of the Merlin as a long distance platform, I have no way to compare it to the S-92, although some of our guys who were at the replacement programme from the start said the cargo door on the S92 was very small, and you'd get problems when working with stretchers.
One big disadvantage over our Puma is the position of the winch, way back in the helicopter, which means the pilot has to be too forward of references when working over small vessels, etc. The Danish have a better position for their winch (almost behing the pilot), and a cargo door on the port side of the helicopter, which can also be useful.
Regarding the downwash, it is true that for cliff rescues it can be dangerous, however, regarding small ships we haven't had problems. Our Sar Techs spent hours in the water testing different hover heights, did hundreds of winching ops, and we came to 60ft as the ideal height for winching, which ensures that the Sar Tech will be out of the downwash on the descent and in the water.
Regarding small ships, if they can maintain a course and speed, we'l direct them to wind 30 degress port side, and the added ship speed and wind speed will usually mean the downwash is way behind the a/c. We haven't had any problems when we stick to this procedure, however if you try it with a tailwind, you'll get into trouble. We train at night with a 40 ft navy patrol, and the downwash of the helicopter, in tailwind conditions, has made the ship turn 180 degress!
If the small vessels can't maintain a course and speed (adrift or sinking), we usually pick the survivors from the water or from their liferaft (we tell them to tie a rope to the ship and put themselves in the liferaft). If there is someone really hurt and unable to exit an adrift vessel, then we have to use hi-line and we can't choose where the wind is blowing from if they can't manoeveur, and that's the only situation where downwash will really make a difference. Two days ago I was winching 3 frenchmen from a liferaft close to a drifting trimaran (45 ft long), and we almost turned the trimaran on its head...
Regarding hover references, well, with auto hover you don't need that, unless you are over bigger ships, where you do visual hover, but then you have the speed advantage, and downwash is not a big problem (hasn't been for us). I know the Canadians have been through the same problems as we have and have come to similar conclusions. It's a good a/c, but maybe not the ideal for cliff rescues or small vessels, however, I wouldn't go back to the Puma, doing rescues at night from 30 ft fishing vessels, without NVG's or auto-hover
.
Cheers
Pinho
regarding the use of the Merlin as a SAR platform, we at the Portuguese Air Force are doing just that. May I remind you that we upgraded from the Puma S1 (Makila 1A1 engines), which unfortunately we didn't sell to the RAF.
Regarding the use of the Merlin as a long distance platform, I have no way to compare it to the S-92, although some of our guys who were at the replacement programme from the start said the cargo door on the S92 was very small, and you'd get problems when working with stretchers.
One big disadvantage over our Puma is the position of the winch, way back in the helicopter, which means the pilot has to be too forward of references when working over small vessels, etc. The Danish have a better position for their winch (almost behing the pilot), and a cargo door on the port side of the helicopter, which can also be useful.
Regarding the downwash, it is true that for cliff rescues it can be dangerous, however, regarding small ships we haven't had problems. Our Sar Techs spent hours in the water testing different hover heights, did hundreds of winching ops, and we came to 60ft as the ideal height for winching, which ensures that the Sar Tech will be out of the downwash on the descent and in the water.
Regarding small ships, if they can maintain a course and speed, we'l direct them to wind 30 degress port side, and the added ship speed and wind speed will usually mean the downwash is way behind the a/c. We haven't had any problems when we stick to this procedure, however if you try it with a tailwind, you'll get into trouble. We train at night with a 40 ft navy patrol, and the downwash of the helicopter, in tailwind conditions, has made the ship turn 180 degress!
If the small vessels can't maintain a course and speed (adrift or sinking), we usually pick the survivors from the water or from their liferaft (we tell them to tie a rope to the ship and put themselves in the liferaft). If there is someone really hurt and unable to exit an adrift vessel, then we have to use hi-line and we can't choose where the wind is blowing from if they can't manoeveur, and that's the only situation where downwash will really make a difference. Two days ago I was winching 3 frenchmen from a liferaft close to a drifting trimaran (45 ft long), and we almost turned the trimaran on its head...
Regarding hover references, well, with auto hover you don't need that, unless you are over bigger ships, where you do visual hover, but then you have the speed advantage, and downwash is not a big problem (hasn't been for us). I know the Canadians have been through the same problems as we have and have come to similar conclusions. It's a good a/c, but maybe not the ideal for cliff rescues or small vessels, however, I wouldn't go back to the Puma, doing rescues at night from 30 ft fishing vessels, without NVG's or auto-hover
.Cheers
Pinho
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S92 in Stornoway
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pinho_fap said, "some of our guys who were at the replacement programme from the start said the cargo door on the S92 was very small, and you'd get problems when working with stretchers."
That was a good observation back then, the door was only 32 inches wide, and getting a litter in was not very easy.
As a result, a new 52" wide cargo door was designed (I was some help, as Program Manager in pushing it through) and made available. The S-92 depicted on the video has this bigger door.
In fact, if I recall correctly, the 101's sliding door only opens about 52" when the bubble windows are installed in the forward fuselage, because the door would crush the window otherwise (I saw the stops on the door in Canada).
I am sure both doors on both helos are quite satisfactory for litters and hoist work.
One thing I do note on the video is the folks standing under the downwash while the aircraft is in a low hover - the worst condition. Doesn't look like any big deal.
That was a good observation back then, the door was only 32 inches wide, and getting a litter in was not very easy.
As a result, a new 52" wide cargo door was designed (I was some help, as Program Manager in pushing it through) and made available. The S-92 depicted on the video has this bigger door.
In fact, if I recall correctly, the 101's sliding door only opens about 52" when the bubble windows are installed in the forward fuselage, because the door would crush the window otherwise (I saw the stops on the door in Canada).
I am sure both doors on both helos are quite satisfactory for litters and hoist work.
One thing I do note on the video is the folks standing under the downwash while the aircraft is in a low hover - the worst condition. Doesn't look like any big deal.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Portugal
Age: 45
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the bubble window in the front fuselage, that is quite true, but we don't use the bubble window in that position in the SAR configuration. We use the bubble window on the Systems operator position, starboard side, aft of the cargo door, or in the 2nd observer position, port side, aft of the port pilot position. We only use the bubble window on the front starboard side in the fishery control configuration, because that is the position of the console operator (1st observer). However, I have seen photos from the S92 cockpit, and I can say that our Nav capability is much inferior to what the Danish have, in fact, their was considered by most people at Westland to be the best solution in terms of equipment and capabilities of all the variants (the worst was generally assumed to be the VH-71, tons of radios and cryptos on that thing, it will have a 30NM radius...).
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pinho, regarding nav, I remember a press flap because GPS had been left out. I know that was corrected, but it does show that the nav was probably left to second thoughts.
The Canadian H-92 has quite a nice nav package, I think.
The Canadian H-92 has quite a nice nav package, I think.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: iran
Age: 53
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fod Radar
Hi
I Need Some Document About Foregn Object Debris Radar
That Produce In QuinteQ COMPANT Radar In Uk .do U Me Favar And Send Me Some Document Specially Thchnical Document
[email protected]
I Need Some Document About Foregn Object Debris Radar
That Produce In QuinteQ COMPANT Radar In Uk .do U Me Favar And Send Me Some Document Specially Thchnical Document
[email protected]
