AW139 lost tail taxying DOH
Bell Tailbooms
Sultan, after joining the 119th Avn Co in Pleiku in mid 1965, we had to take each of our B models to Nha Trang to get the four tail boom attachment bolts replaced. A couple of fatals down south had exposed the problem.
Thanks,
John Dixson
Thanks,
John Dixson
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tail boom fell off
I am glad that the term structural failure is being used now and not "fell off". Hopefully Agusta will find factors that led to the failure of the composite structure, previous tail strikes or debonding. The failure was not at the main tail boom attachment frame but it looks about two feet aft of that, where the attachment fittings longerons end. If the incident had not happened when taxying...........
In the old Sikorsky days it was the tail wheel lock that snapped.....not the tailboom!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 429 Likes
on
226 Posts
The pilot was last seen running away with his tail between his legs...... 
Seriously, thank goodness this occurred on the ground and that they are all safe.
Seriously, thank goodness this occurred on the ground and that they are all safe.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: All The Places I Shouldnt Be
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have bunch of friends at Gulf and glad they were on the ground.
Will be interesting to see what the outcome is of this one. Was told from a friend there it is being looked at as an isolated incident and hope thats the case.
Anyone know how many 139s are out there in case the fleet had to be grounded.
Will be interesting to see what the outcome is of this one. Was told from a friend there it is being looked at as an isolated incident and hope thats the case.
Anyone know how many 139s are out there in case the fleet had to be grounded.
A few have crashed, but roughly 150 older series, 60 newer, and another 23 from the Philly assembly, so....maybe about 230 AW139 in service?
refs: AgustaWestland AW139 Production List © by: Damiano GUALDONI
So following a factory-authorized repair we have a major structure collapse without even any flight loads, and absolutely no prior hint or indication from any inspection on the manufacturer's schedule, and no visual clue at all (cracked paint, ripples, oilcanning, etc.). Hard to believe any airworthiness authority or the manufacturer has not grounded the fleet as a precaution.
And my thanks to the brave soul that risked the flogging to take the picture. On PPrune we either embellish wildly or minimize greatly, and that picture set the seriousness straight.
refs: AgustaWestland AW139 Production List © by: Damiano GUALDONI
So following a factory-authorized repair we have a major structure collapse without even any flight loads, and absolutely no prior hint or indication from any inspection on the manufacturer's schedule, and no visual clue at all (cracked paint, ripples, oilcanning, etc.). Hard to believe any airworthiness authority or the manufacturer has not grounded the fleet as a precaution.
And my thanks to the brave soul that risked the flogging to take the picture. On PPrune we either embellish wildly or minimize greatly, and that picture set the seriousness straight.
Ned you old scoundrel.....you can bet yer sea boots there are lots of folks looking over their bird's hind ends with a view towards ensuring it is an "isolated" incident!
Where is the Agusta SB...AD....email to all operators....about this event?
If it had happened in flight...with the fatal result it would generate....I bet there would be that kind of action taken immediately.
Where is the Agusta SB...AD....email to all operators....about this event?
If it had happened in flight...with the fatal result it would generate....I bet there would be that kind of action taken immediately.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: All The Places I Shouldnt Be
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASLess - Am only passing on what was told to me, and for the record he who told it to me I have the utmost respect for. 
Will certainly be interesting to see the developments. Was in touch with friend at INAER Group last night and he never even knew about this and he is in charge of all their onshore ops and they have a bunch of 139s so it seems AW isnt saying too much to the other operators.
I would have thought they would have at least told them of the accident and that it is being looked into.
Will certainly be interesting to see the developments. Was in touch with friend at INAER Group last night and he never even knew about this and he is in charge of all their onshore ops and they have a bunch of 139s so it seems AW isnt saying too much to the other operators.
I would have thought they would have at least told them of the accident and that it is being looked into.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Aberfreeze or the Sandpit
Age: 58
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helispanner, I _did not_ say the "tail fell off"
I said
AW139 lost tail taxying DOH
Where is the weak point in the boom structure? why did this one fail there? (presumably under fairly light loading) bearing in mind the earlier tail strike.
Given the usual culture in the gulf, there probably will be two souls looking for 139 slots in the near future (for no good reason)
Epiphany, I did eat what remained of my hat, I took your current position into account first and barbecued it . . .(nowt but dust
) cof cof splutter.Cheers for the info gents, LMSLB . . .
The companies I work for have suspended flights on 139's for the forseeable (so I'm told) Shell / Conoco pending shareholder co review.
I believe GH grounded the 139 fleet for, ooh, minutes and minutes (well, 'till the next flight was due out anyway)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Portugal
Age: 71
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AW139 lost tail taxying DOH
EASA AD No.2008-0157 was issued following reports by operators of debonding of fuselage tail boom panels and requires repetitive inspection of these panels of certain part numbers of tail boom.This is covered by Augusta Bollettino Technico 139-134.To quoteŽThis condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to the structural collapse of the tail boom installation, resulting in loss of control of the helicopter`.I do not know if this helicopter had a tail boom that came within this AD but looking at the photo this failure comes in area 2 of the inspection sequence.Not withstanding the fact that the tailboom had a repair following the previous tail strike. I am eagerly awaiting the report into the cause of this incident that so easily could have been a tragedy.
Last edited by Drayman; 27th Aug 2009 at 10:54.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
quote frome MALABO: "A few have crashed..."
prothotype N.1 was lost few years ago and last year the one in Abu Dhabi (apparently no machine fault but the result of the investigation is still missing).
prothotype N.1 was lost few years ago and last year the one in Abu Dhabi (apparently no machine fault but the result of the investigation is still missing).
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: ABU DHABI
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These are not rumors the tailboom tore off just aft of the longerons. I have pictures but don't know how to paste them. There has been many tail boom delaminations with the 139 tailboom in the past and an BT was issued to carry out this inspection just about exactly where the boom tore from. All operators are anxiously awaiting the investigation from Agusta who are on site now.
Now where is 'lost at sea' when you need him to tell you what a wonderful aircraft this is?
Westlands have always been good at shielding operators in one nation from info regarding failures in another and sometimes operators within the same nation! Why should AW be any different?
A structural failure following a factory authorised repair!!!!!!!!WTF!!
Westlands have always been good at shielding operators in one nation from info regarding failures in another and sometimes operators within the same nation! Why should AW be any different?
A structural failure following a factory authorised repair!!!!!!!!WTF!!
To think it was repaired to save the expense of replacing it!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: France
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crab, the 139 is a good machine. This event I am sure is not as simple as it may seem. Composite materials react in different ways to metal structures (Sea King) and I am sure that any advisory from Agusta regarding the previous damage and the authorised repair was good at the time. The investigation and report hopefully available in the wide world will benefit all and give valuable information on what is a new technology within the rotary world and in the future benefit the whole industry.
So in my humble view, uninformed comments like WTF, are not constructive and certainly do not add to what has previously been an informative thread.
So in my humble view, uninformed comments like WTF, are not constructive and certainly do not add to what has previously been an informative thread.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Not always were I want to be
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
139 Enginner
I'm curious with your thoughts why ADA in Abu Dhabi has 5-6 "NEW" tail booms in for repair for debonding, some with less than 20 hours on them out of the factory? Granted this tailboom of Gulfs was repaired after a tail strike by Agusta. Something just doesn't seem right. I bet the directors and enginnering at Agusta are right about now.
right about now.