Coastguard S92's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: On a radial
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coastguard S92's
Hi..
Thought i'd start a new thread specifically for the discussion of the new coastguard S-92's, as the old CHC S92 thread seemed to go somewhat off topic.
Saw G-CGOC the 3rd S92 for the MCA to have arrived in the UK , land at ABZ this morning, with G-SARC i believe, getting prepped for its flight across the grampians from Prestwick. Thats the 4 ordered now in the uk... Hows training going? Night ratings done with MU at stornoway?
Thought i'd start a new thread specifically for the discussion of the new coastguard S-92's, as the old CHC S92 thread seemed to go somewhat off topic.
Saw G-CGOC the 3rd S92 for the MCA to have arrived in the UK , land at ABZ this morning, with G-SARC i believe, getting prepped for its flight across the grampians from Prestwick. Thats the 4 ordered now in the uk... Hows training going? Night ratings done with MU at stornoway?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a photo of two of the Coastguard S-92s just after arriving at Prestwick on an Antonov An-124 (photo by "DJ17" on Key Publishing discussion forum):
Regards,
David
Regards,
David
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: On a radial
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep seen the two of them on stand at ABZ yesterday and today.... i take it the engineers here finish off the kitting out with FLIR, nightsun etc, as they are not wearing them at the mo..... tell a lie, think i saw OC with the cameras fitted this arvo..
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, UK
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notice only one tail blade is removed from tail rotor assy.
So bi-filar pendulum assy sit above main rotor, and is removed for height restriction?
I take it that a folding tail was rejected on the S92?
S70 probably very similar:
So bi-filar pendulum assy sit above main rotor, and is removed for height restriction?
I take it that a folding tail was rejected on the S92?
S70 probably very similar:
Last edited by Graviman; 5th Dec 2007 at 12:30.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tail fold is on the Canadian Navy variant.
The upper TR blade is pulled to fit into the AN, I don't think the bifilar has to be pulled for the AN, but must be for the C17.
As a note, I was told once that the oldest airframe manufacturer still operating under its initial name is Shorts, and the second oldest is Sikorsky, so the comparison is not just on beauty!
The upper TR blade is pulled to fit into the AN, I don't think the bifilar has to be pulled for the AN, but must be for the C17.
As a note, I was told once that the oldest airframe manufacturer still operating under its initial name is Shorts, and the second oldest is Sikorsky, so the comparison is not just on beauty!
We managed to squeeze 3 into the Antonov!
Look forward to hearing some genuine feedback on the MCA 92s in operation:
- Downwash characteristics during winching
- Ground clearance for mountain rescues
- Ease of hovering close to cliffs etc
- SAR AFCS performance
- AFCS warnings during vigorous 'stiring' (FD Degrade etc etc)
- Salt Spray ingestion effects (or not) in avionics bays
- General reliability
Good news I hope.......
The 2" leaking crack in our (500 hr) MGB casing was too large to repair, so AOG for MGB... ho hum, that's progress for you. (don't tell HC
)
Look forward to hearing some genuine feedback on the MCA 92s in operation:
- Downwash characteristics during winching
- Ground clearance for mountain rescues
- Ease of hovering close to cliffs etc
- SAR AFCS performance
- AFCS warnings during vigorous 'stiring' (FD Degrade etc etc)
- Salt Spray ingestion effects (or not) in avionics bays
- General reliability
Good news I hope.......
The 2" leaking crack in our (500 hr) MGB casing was too large to repair, so AOG for MGB... ho hum, that's progress for you. (don't tell HC
)
Yes, it does hover nose high, typically about 5-7 degrees, but can be more than 10 in high winds
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: HAMPSHIRE
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2" leaking crack in our (500 hr) MGB casing was too large to repair, so AOG for MGB... ho hum, that's progress for you. (don't tell HC )
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some nice photos of the Coastguard S-92s flying here:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpos...postcount=3842
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1277075/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1270835/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1268029/L/
Regards,
David Eyre
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpos...postcount=3842
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1277075/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1270835/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1268029/L/
Regards,
David Eyre
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Wales
Age: 64
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A fellow mole tells me that one of these fine aircraft took considerably longer than its specified response time to get airborne recently. Apparently this was not for any technical reason. Rather than spread false rumour, can anybody shed some light?
The Mole
'Digging for the truth.'
The Mole
'Digging for the truth.'
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: taking up the hold
Age: 53
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say I think it is a bit much that CHC have registered their Sumburgh S-92 G-CGOC (Coast Guard Oscar Charlie). They are clearly trying to cash in on the good reputation that the last Coast guard Oscar Charlie (G-BDOC) had in Shetland for the last couple of decades.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure that CHC would have rather had the letters CHC somewhere in the reg but as I recall, it was the MCA and the Islanders themselves that wanted to keep the 'Oscar Charlie' thing going.
On a professional note, can any of the PoF gurus explain to me why they
Is that due to greater down force on the stabaliser?
And to any of the rear crew:
Does this produce any bell crank/fleet angle or cabin entry issues for winching?
Ta
On a professional note, can any of the PoF gurus explain to me why they
hover nose high, typically about 5-7 degrees, but can be more than 10 in high winds
And to any of the rear crew:
Does this produce any bell crank/fleet angle or cabin entry issues for winching?
Ta
Typically the horizontal stabiliser is stalled in the low wind hover, but starts to work (producing a down force) in stronger winds. In the case of the S92, the canted tail rotor might have something to do with it as well.
HC
HC
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
again, helicomparitor shows how little he knows about what makes helicopters tick.
The broad flat area of the horizontal tail, as well as the tailcone, present area for the main rotor downwash to act on, as vertical drag, even when the surface is stalled. In fact, the down force is greatest when it is stalled. They certainly produce download in a hover and in low speed flight. (How would the NOTAR work otherwise?)
The nose up for the 92 is greatest at about 10 to 15 knots of forward speed at aftmost CG, and even at that, trials by various independent agencies (including those who bought the aircraft for SAR) show that recovering a litter is quite easy, as long as the large door (1.33M wide) is fitted. Door size, cabin width to rotate the litter and surprisingly decent downwash are all judged to be supportive of the task.
The broad flat area of the horizontal tail, as well as the tailcone, present area for the main rotor downwash to act on, as vertical drag, even when the surface is stalled. In fact, the down force is greatest when it is stalled. They certainly produce download in a hover and in low speed flight. (How would the NOTAR work otherwise?)
The nose up for the 92 is greatest at about 10 to 15 knots of forward speed at aftmost CG, and even at that, trials by various independent agencies (including those who bought the aircraft for SAR) show that recovering a litter is quite easy, as long as the large door (1.33M wide) is fitted. Door size, cabin width to rotate the litter and surprisingly decent downwash are all judged to be supportive of the task.