EC 175

[HeliHenri]

.

Does anyone know when will be the first delivery? (not talking about the first commercial flight).

The last official statement from AH few days ago is not very precise : "Airbus Helicopters will begin EC175 deliveries later this year to the first customers"

So June ? December ?

.

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by DOUBLE BOGEY

I think we must be a little pragmatic and maybe accept that the issue with the EC225 MGB has probably had an impact. Hopefully as the new shaft enters service and things stabilise the EC175 will have its day in the sun.

In the same way as the AW139 tail rotor problems have had an impact on AW189 sales, eh?

There's no avoiding the issue that, at the moment, in the eyes of the operators, the aircraft doesn't seem to make as economic sense as the AW189. What is the approximate price per airframe, please?

[Margins]

DB

I'm pretty sure that EC175 is an exceptional helicopter as I'm sure that AW189 is an outstanding chopper.
I figure you look a little biased on Airbus product and very marketing oriented.
Please also consider some more aspects of your fantastic chopper if compared with the 189:

Usefull load: EC175 2600 kg; AW189 2900 kg

I think we must be a little pragmatic and maybe accept that the issue with the EC225 MGB has probably had an impact. Hopefully as the new shaft enters service and things stabilise the EC175 will have its day in the sun. I never forget that the EC225 has still not hurt anyone but the Insurers!

Run Dry Capability:
EC175 Land as soon as possible within 15 minutes
AW189 Land should be made within 50 minutes

[tottigol]

I am not fantasizing DB, I fly in rhe GoM and can tell you that you normallly don't carry 19 passengers and their bags, because there is not enough baggage space.
At what power setting was the aircraft cruising at 156 KIAS.
You don't fly ariund making holes in the sky in IFR, you go the alternate, and THEN you add your 30 minutes in normal cruise, if you are a pilot you ought to know that.



Stop being insulting, you are desrespecting a whole lot of experienced off-shore pilots.

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

TOTTIGOL, I have flown in GOM, in the EC175.

EC225 -I do not know what loads you are being asked to carry out there, but in the rest of the world 19 pax and their bags for normal crew change flights in an EC225 is no problem!! There are about 150 UK 225 pilots who would agree with that. The baggage hold takes 350 kgs of bags. I personally have never had a bulk out in an EC225 but it happens occasionally especially demanning and up manning when personal tools are involved.

The only offshore pilot I am pissing off is you as you continue to trash a helicopter you have never ever flown and I probably doubt you have seen and I continue to confound you with simple facts.

My motivation to sing the EC225 and EC175s praises is clear and it is very nice and easy because both machines are outstanding helicopters.

The big Q is what is your motivation. What is your vested interest in trashing helicopters other than those you fly. I do not trash other helicopters. I stick to what I know. What exactly is your problem?

Lets start by establishing just how informed you really are:

1. Have you ever flown the EC225

2. Have you ever flown the EC175

3. Have you ever seen either an EC225 or an EC175.


Now I will wager a fiver you refuse to answer at least two of those questions. Please also do try to be honest. I will know if you spit out a pork pie.

Lets see how much substance there really is behind Tottigols vitriolic postings.

PS I do not understand your strange statement about the IFR reserve. To be clear, this reserve is for holding not for Flying to the alternate. Maybe you yanks do it different to us in EASA land.

DB

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

Silence from TOTTIGOL. Guess all four "No's" then!

[tottigol]

DB, I am not desperate, I am not trying to trash any aircraft, I am trying to get some honest answers from you and you are not giving them.

If you are familiar with this:
NCO.OP.126 Fuel and oil supply — helicopters, then you'll know that the 30 minutes apply only if you don't need an alternate, given planning for all possible eventualities is unrealistic, however generally speaking if you go IFR is because the WX is crappy.

I have not flown in any Eurocopter product but I am very familiar with them, as a matter of fact they share the ramp with what I fly.
We do not bump passengers in the 225, but the baggage SPACE not the weight, is extremely limited considering what the passengers carry in the GoM, if you deny that, than you do not know how operations are carried out.

I am quoting you:
2. Helicopters burn fuel as they fly (you might have noticed) you therefore take an average between them listed figures. You instead are making them up as you go.

3. The cruise speed at 7500 is 156 KIAS. I have seen it with my own eyes. Yet, when asked you do not provide a power setting and an altitude, perhaps you were in one of the passenger seats? Or perhaps you cannot correlate IAS with TAS?
156 KIAS are well above the published recommended cruise charts, the numbers on those charts are TAS.
Also on page 51 of the technical data the speed mentioned to achieve those ass numbing ranges is BEST RANGE @ 5000' rather than the eye popping 156 KIAS?

Perhaps, since it's PUBLISHED you ought to read this:
http://airbushelicoptersinc.com/imag...hData-2014.pdf before you make assumptions in a qualified forum.

4. The MTOM will be certified at 7800 kgs very soon Perhaps you'll be interested in listening to what your company has to say about that.
At 7500 the published radius of action Auth 16 oil and gas pax is 140 mms. Only thing we agree on, but NOT at 156 KIAS, much less.
At 7800 this will increase to between 170 and 200 depending on the mass of the pax. And so shall the fuel burn, but you omit to say that.
These are mathematical facts. Your own mathematics.

You are still pushing numbers for the 7800 Kg certified max weight of the 175, numbers that DO NOT MATCH the ones in the published material, you refuse to answer simple questions and you continuously change your version with regard to the increased gross weight.

So I am going to post a link AGAIN, hoping that you read it and notice the wide differences between your version and the official position of AIRBUS:

Airbus Helicopters mulls strategy for higher-weight EC175 - 5/21/2014 - Flight Global

Also here:

EC175 Info Center

2016 is not soon.

You seem to be very confused with regards to the process required to increase the gross weight in an airframe that has already been certificated at a lower one, a process that involves the certificating authority and not just the OEM. Perhaps you ought to consult with Bell on this matter.

Then you go on telling us that 7800Kg performance is the same as 7500Kg even though NONE OF THE CHARTS IN THE RFM EVEN MENTION 7800Kg but clearly show that with ever increasing weight the cruise speed moves to the left of the graphs, do you think we're stupid?

Also, recommended cruise speed is NOT IAS but TAS, so you have to understand that when you go to the ISA+20 and say "I saw it with my own eyes cruising at 156 KIAS", that is a statement that on its own has no merit, because it does not consider what power was being used at the time.

I am not desperate, I am a very experience helicopter pilot who takes his aerodynamics and performance figures rather seriously, and I am rather amused that AIRBUS allows an individual as unprepared as you to represent them in a public forum.

Now go spread your bull**** somewhere else, I've had it with you.
You can keep the five of whatever currency of your choice.

[terminus mos]

DB

Maybe I can get names of some offshore workers, weigh them and make a proper list. Would that help TM?

Thanks for the offer but no need, as I said, in my experience, they all weigh the same and our POB system has data on several thousand "bears" and all of our pilots and statistically "bears" and pilots are no different. We therefore use the same weights for everyone for planning purposes but it always amuses me that OEMs think that pilots are smaller than "bears".

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

TOTTIGOL you have never flown a Eurocpter product and yet you spout off as if you know it all.

You have been outed as a cad and a Bounder. Spouting off about aircraft that you have never flown, no nothing about (sorry, you seem to have been on the same aerdrome apron) and yet feel the need to discredit them based on your Half baked theory's taken only from a book. Truly an armchair warrior.

I have spoken only of aircraft that I know, fly and instruct upon.

Sorry mate but you are full of it.

DB

[Bravo73]

You would appear to be getting pretty aggressive, DB. And yet you still haven't answered my question:

Originally Posted by Bravo73

What is the approximate price per airframe, please?

And yes, I have flown plenty of EC types.

[tottigol]

I would like to apologize to the fine individuals who attend this forum regularly. I allowed a lesser individual take the best of me and drag me into a slugging match that I had no intention of starting.
I provided a less than optimal display of myself over the last two days, as a professional I should have not acted in such a reckless manner.

DB, go on continue with your fairytale life, I however suggest you attend a pilot aerodynamics refresher as soon as possible, because your ideas are very few and well confused, unless of course my initial theory of antigravity proves correct.

You are selling a load of bollocks to whoever is willing to spend 20 million Euros based on an airy cabin and a 20 minutes smooth ride, even the numbers provided by your employer do not support your made in the sky facts, funny part is you do not know the numbers on the goods you are pushing!

[DOUBLE BOGEY]

TOTTIGOL I well appreciate your epiphany. I on the other hand I have done nothing wrong. I have only written from first hand knowledge of the helicopters that I know extremely well (EC225) and the EC175 which I know as well as one can flying it before it is in service.

One thing puzzles me though. I am not a test pilot but I do have a formal qualification in aeronautics. Whilst I accept that in terms of performance there may be slight advantages the one type has over another, all the manufacturers are well capable of exploiting engine and rotor designs to almost maximum effect.

It should be noted that the EC175, the AW139 and the AW189 do not sit in the same MTOM class. They occupy different places in the market especially in offshore where deck mass limits play a part.

Therefore it is not easy to compare like for like and I suspect this is a challenge for the operator as to which machine will meet his needs better.

For AIRBUS a huge amount of effort has gone into the integration of systems and the HMI to provide maximum safety for the crew and passengers.

However, I do not think we can underestimate the need for helicopters that at least pass a nod and a wink to the offshore passengers. It is easy to forget in the rarified atmosphere of Fuel SFCs and Cat A Charts that in fact the mission is to transport our fellow human beings, in comfort, as they simply go to their work. In this respect the EC175 is a massive step forward. While TOTTIGOL you may dismiss the "Airey Cabin" "Enormous Windows" and "Exceptionally smooth Ride" as trivia, to AIRBUS these are the things our customers asked for and on the recent demo tour it is clear from their comments that we have delivered. One very prominent Offshore Union Leader called it "The future of Offshore Transportation" the head of the HSSG said "It is clear Airbus have listened to the Industry"

TOTTIGOL - I have no interest in sparring with you I simply will not sit idle while you and your like spout uninformed rubbish about our helicopters. In so far as you being dragging into a slugging match, NO SIR, you have been caught out once and for all having finally had to admit that your only knowledge is that which you have taken, twisted and manipulated for reasons you still fail to explain, in a poor attempt to discredit the EC175. That is unprofessional, unfair and a terrible example to all who now understand how little you really know.

BRAVO 73 - I apologise but I do not have a clue how much an EC175 would cost as this is not my area of expertise. However, if you really want to know for a genuine reason I can put you in contact with the Sales team who can help. PM with your details and I will IMMEDIATLEY pass them on.

[212man]

While TOTTIGOL you may dismiss the "Airey Cabin" "Enormous Windows" and "Exceptionally smooth Ride" as trivia, to AIRBUS these are the things our customers asked for and on the recent demo tour it is clear from their comments that we have delivered. One very prominent Offshore Union Leader called it "The future of Offshore Transportation" the head of the HSSG said "It is clear Airbus have listened to the Industry"

And, for a sense of balance, that is exactly what AW have done too, with the 189 and its large windows and 'skylight' ceiling lighting (see page two here http://waypointleasing.com/wp-conten...ure-ONLINE.pdf). So, I think the message is getting through to the OEMs (well, some of them....)

[cyclic]

TM

I have been doing my own little statistical survey with regards to passenger weights. Each flight, I take the manifest and have a little flutter with myself as to whether I will be the lightest person on board (NS is dull). Generally, over the last year I would say that in 8/10 flights discounting the very small folk, the P2 and some of the ladies, I am generally the lightest on board. I'm 6'1" so not that small. Obesity is a ticking time bomb for this country and particularly in Scotland. Building an aircraft to house obese passengers isn't the answer although a spacious aircraft both front and rear is a good thing. The employers and the personnel have a real responsibility to put a brake on this health epidemic. I have worked offshore so I know the temptations and the pressures that make the lifestyle a pretty unhealthy one and I'm not saying this doesn't apply to quite a few of the crews as well. Sorry to interrupt the slanging match...

[Ian Corrigible]

Originally Posted by Bravo73

What is the approximate price per airframe, please?

Pricing for any large rotorcraft varies significantly depending on configuration and support package, but as a guideline NHV's original order for 10 aircraft was "valued at close to 150 million Euro," so in the region of EUR 15 million ea. equipped.

The AW189 is similarly priced, based on recent contract announcements (IRO €12.2M baseline, €15M equipped). AW's pricing is traditionally very competitive, with the AW139 baselined over $1M below the smaller S-76D.

I/C

[Bravo73]

Originally Posted by Ian Corrigible

Pricing for any large rotorcraft varies significantly depending on configuration and support package, but as a guideline NHV's original order for 10 aircraft was "valued at close to 150 million Euro," so in the region of EUR 15 million ea. equipped.

The AW189 is similarly priced, based on recent contract announcements (IRO €12.2M baseline, €15M equipped). AW's pricing is traditionally very competitive, with the AW139 baselined over $1M below the smaller S-76D.

I/C

Thanks (again), I/C.

I thought that the AW189 might have been considerably cheaper to purchase than the EC175. This might have (partly) explained why it is currently outselling it 2 to 1.

But it's not. So, there must be something else that explains why the industry is tending to choose Italian over French in this case...

[Ian Corrigible]

AW have been extremely smart in marketing to the thriving lease market (e.g. LCI, MAG & Waypoint). The company has structured its cross-fleet sales deals so that the lessors can enjoy significant flexibility in which aircraft they actually end up taking -- for example, an agreement is made to buy $100M of 139s, 169s and 189s, but the actual ratio of models taken is left negotiable until end-user customers are secured.

I'm sure the success of the 139 has also helped its bigger brother!

I/C

[tottigol]

Has anyone been able to download or acess the Airbus Helicopters EC-175 performance data brochure lately?
Either I am having trouble or they removed everything but the first four pages.
Also, any news regarding the "soon to be certificated gross weight increase"?

[212man]

Has anyone been able to download or acess the Airbus Helicopters EC-175 performance data brochure lately?

Yes, it is rather truncated! (But still has the old page numbers at the bottom.)

[tottigol]

Yes, I suspected it wasn't necessarily my defective browser.
Were you able to download it in its entirety before Airbus put the cloaking device into action?
Thanks.