A-119 Vs EC130

[Hawk-02]

Hello all,

To anyone who was flown these types and can offer some insight, which way would you go if your looking at mainly pax charter, with elements of corporate and light utility work.

I'm a big fan of the Augusta for it's powerful PT6, cockpit layout and generous cabin, being able to seat 7 pax instead of standard 6 in 130 is a bonus.

Would you rather do scenics with the club seating (3+3) arrangement or bench seat (4 along the back, 2 in front)?

What's Augusta's support like? compared to Eurocopter?

Thank you

[Flugplatz]

vs

Hi Hawk-O2

I have flown the EC-130 B4 for scenics and I would imagine it is hard to beat on that score. The seating with 4in the back and 2 up front works very well with excellent viewing from all seats; I had passengers who used to argue over who sits in front but once we got going they had no complaints - front seat pax are exposed to a lot of sun so on long flights the back seats are actually better. There is still plenty of room per person. In fact you can get high-density seating layout with 3 pax in the front; although performance is not so good.

Another bonus is that the variety of door arrangements open/removed allows a lot of flexibility for photographers and pax, with config changes made very quickly.
We also used it for pax transfer which was very good too, although the trim took a bit of a battering. It was so quiet the pax didn't always need headsets; and the fenestron gave a lot of confidence to ground crew during pax running change-overs; just one extra level of safety.
The B4 is also pretty robust and powerful since it is based on the AS350 B3, it can lift around 1000kg external. Reliability was good and Eurocopter support was up to their usual standards :-)

I don't know about the A119 but I would think it is also an excellent choice, maybe more capable but maybe more expensive? My two-cents worth..

Flug

[funfinn2000]

I Love the Koala, The machine has so many plus's,

lots of power, never ever had to use all of it, over 4 hrs fuel which is great for my country because there is no delays at airports for fuel stops. seats are very comfortable in the back and front, HELIPILOT system , forcetrim makes for a comfortable flight, flys great in strong winds. not sure what the Agusta support is like. very expensive to buy new but worth every penny,and hold value very well.

I like the 130, not much time in one, I prefer the the 3/4 seating and this machine is the best for any type of scenic work, not too good in the wind though, Golfers helicopter. fancy fadec and not sure on the support.

Do want to buy a Koala???

[RavenII]

FF2000,

are you flying City West's Koala?

[EBCAU]

In general, passengers love the B4 - and pilots don't.

[Dis-Mystery of Lift]

The 130 is great for scenics. Load it up 6 pax ,overnight bags etc might get 1and half hours fuel...fine for Airfield work not great for operating out of CA's especially with wind on right rear quater have run out of Cyclic and pedal.

Koala is everything the 130 is not...powerful,fast,smooth.

Like EBCAU said the 130 is a pax machine and the A119 is a Pilots Machine.

[RavenII]

Isn't there a complete different price tag on these machines???

[victor papa]

Definately a price tag difference especially if you add maintenance and reliability costs after purchase in my experience. What makes the 119 a pilot machine also often get a bit confused or is to much for the airframe and tail to handle and then keeps the techno types busy. The newer B4's in my experience have no power issues and the Arriel 2 uses a lot less fuel especially if you climb a bit you can stay in the air for a long time. I prefer the openness and light inside the B4 creating the feeling of having even more space. Where we operate the average sized male is 5ft 8 to 6 ft 2. It gets uncomfortable after a while in the back with 2 of them opposite each other especially if you have an overweight(almost guaranteed) male or female in the back too. Make that 4 of them and it gets interesting. For me and a few others of averaged length of 6 ft the cockpit is a challenge as well with your knees high in the air to get the feet on the yaw pedals.

Both good machines, but I take the B4 anyday even if she is a bit slower-at least I can stretch out and enjoy a 180 degree view.
knowing she will be ready for the next flight after shutdown.

The fenestron debate. I have seen guys doing amazing things with the fenestron and it becomes a surprising agile aircraft(will never be the B3). Let a good and experienced pilot teach the correct flying techniques with the fenestron and you will soon wonder what the fuss was about. Remember no hydraulic assistance on the TR so it is a different feel.

[flygunz]

Having flown the Koala, in fact I had City West's from new, I would say that Agusta created one of the best singles on the market. The PT6 is more than enough and the cabin is roomy and comfortable, it moves like grease and I agree with ff2000 it's good in moderate turbulence. In fact I prefer it to the 109 and for an operator the running costs are manageable if compared to a 109.
If BM is up for sale I would recommend a look as it was designed for a corporate lifestyle and from what you have said would suit if sold at the right price. If you need any history before it went to Ireland PM me.
Best of luck!

[DynamicallyUnstable]

I have no experience in the 119 but the 130 is a sweet machine. I have flown about 20 different ones and it is amazing how much different they are from each other. Some are SMOOTH and POWERFUL and sometimes you get one thats a bit of a dog and shakes a bit. I like flying it and after coming out of of the B2 I didn't like the stiff feel of the pedals from the non-boosted pedals but that only lasted a week or so. Now I don't feel the difference at all and in the UNLIKELY event of a hydro fail (redundant hydraulics) the T/R is one less thing you'd have to deal with as it is STIFF in the AS350 without hydro.
All in all, for tours, a fantastic machine.

[Head Turner]

The downside of the 4 hours endurance and power a'plenty is that you get spoilt when returning to other machines. I flew a Koala for 2 years and have more than 800 hours experience operating very much in the people moving business. Initially I did find that that controls were stiff, compared to the French machines but this was a small price to pay for a really fine powerful,and reliable machine that does what it says on the box. Fuel consumption at SL is marginally more than the B3, however climbing up to 4-5000 ft will reduce fuel burn considerably. Passenger comfort is on par to other similar machines. With the 4 hours endurance there is need for pilot and passenger planning in regard to the 'convenience stops'. Have never needed to use full T/O power even at 6800DA/35C.
The best single there is available for people moving and not having to stop after ever lift to refuel.
My experience with the 130 is very limited. Was operating one in Kenya and it suffered from lack of power when at 10000DA, whereas the B2 handled the situation with no great problems.

[EN48]

Can anyone comment on support for the 119 in the U.S., particularly in the Boston area? This is a very appealing acft on many counts, but its worthless without reasonably local, competent support, both service and parts.

[SARREMF]

EN48. The 119 is built in Phili so I would have thought that was reasonbly close?

[EN48]

The 119 is built in Phili so I would have thought that was reasonbly close?

Depends on your view of "reasonably." Thats around 3 hrs flying time provided the acft can fly. I did check the list of service centers, and while there are some closer, they are listed as 109 service centers, not 119.

[9Aplus]

AW is polite till you put down payment, later God knows.....

[vfr440]

AW general

Now how true is that!! I heard that they have been robbing the production line for spares, and if so, that is the slippery slope. For the customer, of course

[9Aplus]

Strong sales increase in 2008. made them to put nose up....
2009. real life is here....

AW is only heli producer company which is unable to assist customer to
finance balance payments, add trouble with spares and
nightmare is all yours....

[Nrgy]

Few questions regarding EC130 and AW119.

If anyone with some hands on experience with the EC130 B4 and/or Agusta 119 and could answer a few questions, your insight would be greatly appreciated.

We are in the process of looking at one of these machines to use mainly for private transport. We need power to operate anywhere from sea level, up to an IGE hover at 6,700 ft on the occasional 30c+ days in the summer. And some trips could be up to 350nm.

I had the opportunity to fly the EC130 recently, and a few questions that I didn't manage to ask, hopefully someone here could answer:

- What is a typical cruise speed from this machine? Our pilot said 110knts was a comfortable speed, and as we approached 120knt there was some noticeable vibration. I was hoping for at least a comfortable 120knts out of this, and perhaps even up to 130 with 4 pax and full fuel.

- Can the EC130 be tuned for higher cruise speeds so there is less vibration at 120+?

- Would range be dismal at 120knts +?

I have not had a chance to look at an Agusta 119, so some basic questions that come to mind are:

- Can this ship cruise comfortably at 140knts with 4 pax and full fuel? If not, what is a realistic speed?

- What is the fuel burn at 140knts? 130knts?

- What kind of range could you expect at the above cruise speeds?

- How does passenger comfort compare to the EC130?

Lastly, if anyone has information regarding D.O.C.s for either of these machines, that would be very helpful as well. I would imagine the Agusta is the more expensive of the two to operate, however if you're spending less time in the air in the Agusta then it may not be any more expensive to operate than the 130?

Thank you!

[victor papa]

Are you looking at new machines because if you are the 130 and new T2 is like chalk and cheese which means answering your questions using the 130 will have no relevance. The T2 much faster due much lower vibration levels due the new system. T2 much more power due Arriel 2D and 950shp MGB instead of current 350 750shp box. Much improoved aircon system with a environmental control added. Lower operating cost due much higher TBO on the Arriel 2D.

[ka26]

I would go for the EC130T2 or AS350B3

1) lower operating cost
2) good performance, especially at high altitudes
3) requires less maintenance
4) comfortable seat design for passengers

p.s. it's gonna be a little bit difficult to reach 350 NM in both models; you should consider the reserve fuel; average speed 120 kts (not more).