Hearing problems and flying the S92
"Lot of the sound waves enter through your skull and that is where a helmet is more efficient than a Headset."
With any luck my extra thick skull will actually assist me for a change!
With any luck my extra thick skull will actually assist me for a change!
Hi all,
in use with the belgian police helicopters and hopefully soon also in our squadron are ortoplastics.
The follwing link is only to give you the idea of an ortoplastic - it´s in german and not from the manufacture we might get ours from.
http://www.inear.de/files/phpyjVzYr.pdf
Systems you can get:
system made to fit your ear by making it specially for your ears.
specified sound proofing for the model you fly, i.e. the frequencys, which are produced by the bird are filtered out do to special drillings (gearbox, rotor, engines)
have inbuild earphones, so you can understand radiotransmissions etc.
could have inbuild microphone, so you can stick your head outside (winching) with no windnoises coming throug the mike.
I´ve heard the quality of the belgian police equipment and was stunned.
The mic took the speach from inside the ear!!!!
Greetings Flying Bull
in use with the belgian police helicopters and hopefully soon also in our squadron are ortoplastics.
The follwing link is only to give you the idea of an ortoplastic - it´s in german and not from the manufacture we might get ours from.
http://www.inear.de/files/phpyjVzYr.pdf
Systems you can get:
system made to fit your ear by making it specially for your ears.
specified sound proofing for the model you fly, i.e. the frequencys, which are produced by the bird are filtered out do to special drillings (gearbox, rotor, engines)
have inbuild earphones, so you can understand radiotransmissions etc.
could have inbuild microphone, so you can stick your head outside (winching) with no windnoises coming throug the mike.
I´ve heard the quality of the belgian police equipment and was stunned.
The mic took the speach from inside the ear!!!!
Greetings Flying Bull
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Somewhere, Over the Rainbow
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
+1 vote for the noise protection advantage of CEPs. I have used them with a helmet for about 5 years and about a year ago got them installed in my headset for the "helmet not preferred" moments. The difference is clear as day, and they really do work on cutting down the crap getting into the ears.
Mike
Mike
Hi Mike,
I think the ortoplastics are going a step further - allowing adaptation for the noise enviroment you´re working in.
The additional mic you can have makes the thing great for crewmembers, who stick their head out to give us the guidence we need in smal places or while winching.
With the pricing I found for CEPs, I think you can also afford ortoplastics - and have state of the art protection.
In case I find the appropiate homepage, I´ll post it hear.
Greetings Flying Bull
I think the ortoplastics are going a step further - allowing adaptation for the noise enviroment you´re working in.
The additional mic you can have makes the thing great for crewmembers, who stick their head out to give us the guidence we need in smal places or while winching.
With the pricing I found for CEPs, I think you can also afford ortoplastics - and have state of the art protection.
In case I find the appropiate homepage, I´ll post it hear.
Greetings Flying Bull
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Custom Ear Plugs
Have tried them and rejected them after a week of use. The skin in the ear where the plugs touched became sore and this compromised subsequent use. I know of 2 colleagues who are flying with hearing aids thanks to the excessive noise INSIDE the headset.
Where to next I wonder?
G
Where to next I wonder?
G
Probably accept the fact you will need a Brass Ear Trumpet at some point in your flying career I would say!
Crazy Scandihooligan
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Damn, some mountain goat is nibbling my ear ;-)
Age: 52
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The recommendations in the report are translated as follows:-
"VIBRATION (Bodily)
Vibration levels are below the action value for the majority of military and civilian helicopters that are measured and summed up to a specified flight. For S-92, however, is the vibration level equal measures the value of an offshore account. This means that there should be measures to reduce the vibration level, or reduce the flying time to get a less than 0.5 m/s2 ila. an 8-hour workinconstantly making improvements on their helicopters, but has not necessarily a primary focus on reducing noise and vibration exposure in flying personnel. Much of this work is to reduce wear on moving parts and the hull. One would think that the recent helicopter vibration has less impact on the flying personnel than the old models, but this is not always the case and may reflect some of the problem as mentioned above. g day. Regulation on protection against mechanical vibrations are not yet approved by the MLS, but it is possible to prevent by the frontrunner. Helicopter manufacturers are constantly making improvements on their helicopters, but has not necessarily a primary focus on reducing noise and vibration exposure in flying personnel. Much of this work is to reduce wear on moving parts and the hull. One would think that the recent helicopter vibration has less impact on the flying personnel than the old models, but this is not always the case and may reflect some of the problem as mentioned above.
New S-92 in relation to the Super Puma L2 is a good example of a helicopter type where a helicopter of a newer generation vibrates more than the "old" helicopter. Our measurements show that the Super Puma has 42% lower vibration level below 1000 feet in cruise 145 knots than the S-92.
NOISE (Inside the headset)
In many contexts it is desirable to be on the safe side. Although pilots use ear protection and it is carried out a noise-reduction measures in the S-92 is the measurement results closely over the rafters and upper action value. One is not in any way on the safe side, given that 85 dBA is a limit in relation to risk of developing hearing damage. Regulations recommends a 10 dBA lower value relative to the lower action value, which gives 70 dBA within ear pads as an ideal noise level in a helicopter cockpit for a comfortable workplace. This is the level we are not in the near today. Due to that there have been too little on this issue, NOK is because it lacks certification requirements that deal with."
Now that is a literal translation of the summary... it could i am sure be put into "Better" English.
It is also interesting to read that the researchers state that there is no industry standard with regards to health and safety to the levels of acceptable noise in the cockpit of a helicopter, wether it be vibrasional noise on the body or noise that is heard through a headset.
But it is comforting to note that Sikorsky have made an effort to put a thicker pane of glass on the commanders side to reduce the effect of "noise" upon him/her. But the researcher also reassures us that he is in no doubt sure that there will be guidelines for manufacturors to restrict the amount of noise in the cockpit in the future.
MD
"VIBRATION (Bodily)
Vibration levels are below the action value for the majority of military and civilian helicopters that are measured and summed up to a specified flight. For S-92, however, is the vibration level equal measures the value of an offshore account. This means that there should be measures to reduce the vibration level, or reduce the flying time to get a less than 0.5 m/s2 ila. an 8-hour workinconstantly making improvements on their helicopters, but has not necessarily a primary focus on reducing noise and vibration exposure in flying personnel. Much of this work is to reduce wear on moving parts and the hull. One would think that the recent helicopter vibration has less impact on the flying personnel than the old models, but this is not always the case and may reflect some of the problem as mentioned above. g day. Regulation on protection against mechanical vibrations are not yet approved by the MLS, but it is possible to prevent by the frontrunner. Helicopter manufacturers are constantly making improvements on their helicopters, but has not necessarily a primary focus on reducing noise and vibration exposure in flying personnel. Much of this work is to reduce wear on moving parts and the hull. One would think that the recent helicopter vibration has less impact on the flying personnel than the old models, but this is not always the case and may reflect some of the problem as mentioned above.
New S-92 in relation to the Super Puma L2 is a good example of a helicopter type where a helicopter of a newer generation vibrates more than the "old" helicopter. Our measurements show that the Super Puma has 42% lower vibration level below 1000 feet in cruise 145 knots than the S-92.
NOISE (Inside the headset)
In many contexts it is desirable to be on the safe side. Although pilots use ear protection and it is carried out a noise-reduction measures in the S-92 is the measurement results closely over the rafters and upper action value. One is not in any way on the safe side, given that 85 dBA is a limit in relation to risk of developing hearing damage. Regulations recommends a 10 dBA lower value relative to the lower action value, which gives 70 dBA within ear pads as an ideal noise level in a helicopter cockpit for a comfortable workplace. This is the level we are not in the near today. Due to that there have been too little on this issue, NOK is because it lacks certification requirements that deal with."
Now that is a literal translation of the summary... it could i am sure be put into "Better" English.
It is also interesting to read that the researchers state that there is no industry standard with regards to health and safety to the levels of acceptable noise in the cockpit of a helicopter, wether it be vibrasional noise on the body or noise that is heard through a headset.
But it is comforting to note that Sikorsky have made an effort to put a thicker pane of glass on the commanders side to reduce the effect of "noise" upon him/her. But the researcher also reassures us that he is in no doubt sure that there will be guidelines for manufacturors to restrict the amount of noise in the cockpit in the future.
MD
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Eastern Canada
Age: 64
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must say, after only a short exposure to the S-92A, it is the loudest work environment I know. I have so far tried DC headset, ALPHA helmet (Stock), ALPHA Modified with Oregon Aero Hush-Kit, ALPHA Helmet Stock ear-cups with GENTEX SPH-5 Ear seals, and have now added a set of CEP. Hopefully it will help.
I'm finding that by the end of a second trip 7-8 hours, I have the ICS turned up to MAX and still have to ask for repeats. This is the loudest helo I have ever been in. Much louder than the SK or even the Chinook! I'm sure that the cockpit proximity to the MRB tips and the 4-blade design are doing it. Every bit of glass and plexi in the front office is moving like a drum skin. The windshield must be moving in and out 0.5 cm with the passage of each blade (Roughly 16 Hz). It is an astounding acoustic assault. As I recall from my HFE (Human Factors In Engineering), the danger range for Whole Body Vibrations is in the 1-80 Hz range. That puts the S-92 Cockpit environment in the first quarter (linear) or middle of that range (logarithmically). I suspect that the sound pressure levels and acceleration limits are at or above the OSH safety standards... But what can you do?
I'm finding that by the end of a second trip 7-8 hours, I have the ICS turned up to MAX and still have to ask for repeats. This is the loudest helo I have ever been in. Much louder than the SK or even the Chinook! I'm sure that the cockpit proximity to the MRB tips and the 4-blade design are doing it. Every bit of glass and plexi in the front office is moving like a drum skin. The windshield must be moving in and out 0.5 cm with the passage of each blade (Roughly 16 Hz). It is an astounding acoustic assault. As I recall from my HFE (Human Factors In Engineering), the danger range for Whole Body Vibrations is in the 1-80 Hz range. That puts the S-92 Cockpit environment in the first quarter (linear) or middle of that range (logarithmically). I suspect that the sound pressure levels and acceleration limits are at or above the OSH safety standards... But what can you do?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Trolls
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S92
Recent developements introduced after gearbox mounting problems require us to cruise at reduced speeds which means using less torque
which has the added benefit of reduced vibration
If your company does not have this directive -- try keeping the torque closer to 70% rather than 80%, it adds a few mins to the flight but makes for a smoother ride
Helmet and CEP's seem to work better overall than any headset available
Pv
which has the added benefit of reduced vibration
If your company does not have this directive -- try keeping the torque closer to 70% rather than 80%, it adds a few mins to the flight but makes for a smoother ride
Helmet and CEP's seem to work better overall than any headset available
Pv
Busdriver - I used to fly the HH-60 too (maybe we know each other - its a small world!) and loved it, but its the noisiest helicopter I've ever flown - even with CEP's I was worried about my hearing decline.
Slightly Off Topic, but still kind of relevant. I remember when an audiologist came to the UK base I was working at to measure Helo cockpit noise levels.
Pilots were wanting company to splash out on Bose ANC headsets.
Audiologist agreed that noise levels were excessive, but said that Bose was not the way to go. They do cancel out low freq well, but evidently not high freq, and they don't have very good clamping pressure for passive attenuation.
His opinion was that a helmet was best, and a good DC headset (best clamping pressure he said) with GOOD ear plugs. Just crank up the radio volume to hear it.
I use ER-4P earphones from Etymotic Research for audio enjoyment, and they have 25dB passive attenuation. If their earphones are anything to go by, then their earplugs should be fantastic.
They might be expensive, but you only have two ears!
Pilots were wanting company to splash out on Bose ANC headsets.
Audiologist agreed that noise levels were excessive, but said that Bose was not the way to go. They do cancel out low freq well, but evidently not high freq, and they don't have very good clamping pressure for passive attenuation.
His opinion was that a helmet was best, and a good DC headset (best clamping pressure he said) with GOOD ear plugs. Just crank up the radio volume to hear it.
I use ER-4P earphones from Etymotic Research for audio enjoyment, and they have 25dB passive attenuation. If their earphones are anything to go by, then their earplugs should be fantastic.
They might be expensive, but you only have two ears!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noise and vibration in Helicopters
Hi,
I'm currently flying the S-92. Vibration is - in my view - the biggest problem, because of the impact on the hearing.
As Health and Safety rep. for the Pilots at my base and AAP IFALPA rep for Norway (Norsk Flygerforbund - Norwegian ALPA) I'm about to give a speech on Noise and Vibration in Helicopters at the end of April to a Flight Safety Forum.
The current speed restriction from Sikorsky helps....
70% torque is good...
6 AVC's are better than 3....some times.
....but in the hangar - only AC - and the cockpit screen cooler fans running, 110 dB has been measured.....OUTSIDE the S-92!!
Hush kit is available (2-3 dB as I recall, correct me)
I'm very interested in :
- your type of hearing protection equipment flying the S-92 and other large helicopters
- your experience on the equipment (yearly flying hrs, torque setting,S-92..)
- do you have tendency to - or do you have tinnitus? Any corrolated hearingloss?
- links to scientific research (I do have the Norwegian ones and the one made in Southhampton back in 1988)
- your thoughts on how to solve the problems
j.staffeldt - at - gmail.com
If will - ofcourse - respect your privacy, and I do not need any personal information.
Just trying to get an overall picture, because everybody is talking about it, and not many are doing something about it.
Best regards
Jørgen Staffeldt
Captain S-92
Bergen
I'm currently flying the S-92. Vibration is - in my view - the biggest problem, because of the impact on the hearing.
As Health and Safety rep. for the Pilots at my base and AAP IFALPA rep for Norway (Norsk Flygerforbund - Norwegian ALPA) I'm about to give a speech on Noise and Vibration in Helicopters at the end of April to a Flight Safety Forum.
The current speed restriction from Sikorsky helps....
70% torque is good...
6 AVC's are better than 3....some times.
....but in the hangar - only AC - and the cockpit screen cooler fans running, 110 dB has been measured.....OUTSIDE the S-92!!
Hush kit is available (2-3 dB as I recall, correct me)
I'm very interested in :
- your type of hearing protection equipment flying the S-92 and other large helicopters
- your experience on the equipment (yearly flying hrs, torque setting,S-92..)
- do you have tendency to - or do you have tinnitus? Any corrolated hearingloss?
- links to scientific research (I do have the Norwegian ones and the one made in Southhampton back in 1988)
- your thoughts on how to solve the problems
j.staffeldt - at - gmail.com
If will - ofcourse - respect your privacy, and I do not need any personal information.
Just trying to get an overall picture, because everybody is talking about it, and not many are doing something about it.
Best regards
Jørgen Staffeldt
Captain S-92
Bergen
Last edited by Jørgen Staffeldt; 26th Feb 2010 at 16:34.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anecdotal only. It was the main rotor gear box on the WS55 Series 3, right behind my head, that did for my hearing, after only fifteen months on type. My AME told me that even if I had wanted to go on flying after age sixty I would probably fail the hearing test.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: not where I want to be
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finally
It is finally taken up in Norway,albeit by the newspapers,so lets see if something will be done now.
Lots of coverage(in Norwegian) in Dagbladet.no - forsiden from this week.
rotorknight
Lots of coverage(in Norwegian) in Dagbladet.no - forsiden from this week.
rotorknight
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Winchester, TN
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good excuse with the Missus
After 2,100 hours in CH-53s, I can tell you the noise primarily comes from the transmission. I can only wish we had active noise reduction in those days.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Eastern Canada
Age: 64
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Effective Noise Protection - SAR S92
Finally found a combination that works. Gallet Helmet with Oregon Aero Hush Kit installed, Zeta Liner, and CEP with custom moulded ear plugs. Can't even hear the APU starting up. Sweet silence. It also helps to open the left cockpit window when hoisting, to let the pressure waves escape!
As an aside to that.... Can you fail a medical (under 60) for high pitch hearing loss? (ICAO).
Ive been told by my AME that my high side is below limits, but he still issues the cert!
Sorry for thread creep.
GTF.
Ive been told by my AME that my high side is below limits, but he still issues the cert!
Sorry for thread creep.
GTF.