Agusta AW139
Aser, no info on VXP from me sorry. We use the Smiths system. Not sure if the offshore people will accept VXP yet.
AB139Engineer, thanks for the info. We're going to send our nozzles to them for cleaning and put new ones in, but will take photos anyway.
Is anybody else using the new scissor link bushes?? We managed to get one set, and so far they are working better than the old type.
AB139Engineer, thanks for the info. We're going to send our nozzles to them for cleaning and put new ones in, but will take photos anyway.
Is anybody else using the new scissor link bushes?? We managed to get one set, and so far they are working better than the old type.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last set of scissor bushes lasted 250 hours, one thing I recommend doing to each bush is chamfering the outer edge of the end being pushed in the scissors, this will reduce any chance of scoring the inside of the component. A few seconds with some 320 grit emery paper really helps.
Make sure you shim the scissor bush until they are a snug fit. This will help insure maximun service life.
Make sure you shim the scissor bush until they are a snug fit. This will help insure maximun service life.
Yeah, but were they the new type, or the old type?
When I left Agusta they were looking at three different types. Good to see that they have managed to get an improved bush to market. Wasn't the one I thought they would go with, but perhaps it is only an interim solution.
I don't bother re-working the bushes. Sit them in dry ice for a few minutes, and they drop in nicely. Same with the pivot bushes. Been doing it like that for the last 2 years with no issues. And yes, shim to get as snug a fit as possible. Agusta have a scheme where you can reshim when the play gets close to limits. For the amount of time it takes to do that, you might as well just let them run to limits and change them.
Now I'm just waiting for them to rework the main gear so that the tyres last a bit longer. Unofficial word is that they are working on it, but no time frame. Sheesh.
When I left Agusta they were looking at three different types. Good to see that they have managed to get an improved bush to market. Wasn't the one I thought they would go with, but perhaps it is only an interim solution.
I don't bother re-working the bushes. Sit them in dry ice for a few minutes, and they drop in nicely. Same with the pivot bushes. Been doing it like that for the last 2 years with no issues. And yes, shim to get as snug a fit as possible. Agusta have a scheme where you can reshim when the play gets close to limits. For the amount of time it takes to do that, you might as well just let them run to limits and change them.
Now I'm just waiting for them to rework the main gear so that the tyres last a bit longer. Unofficial word is that they are working on it, but no time frame. Sheesh.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nooby the bushes are the ones with the red teflon impregnated liner. I say that there still not good enough, we need proper long life carbide bushes like all the other decent helicopters. We should get at least 600 plus hours out of scissor bushes.
Have you tried the newer profile tires yet? They look like they were made for Fred Flintstone, they have a rather squared off profile compared to other helicopter tires.
Have you tried the newer profile tires yet? They look like they were made for Fred Flintstone, they have a rather squared off profile compared to other helicopter tires.
OK, the reddish brown teflon lined bushes are the old ones. The one set of new ones we received are black in colour. I asked our friendly tech liaison at Agusta where we could get more, and he said we shouldn't have them yet!! Well, we sure aren't handing them back 
I'll order some of the new tyres. We only have 4 sets of the old ones left. That should last us about a month
I'll order some of the new tyres. We only have 4 sets of the old ones left. That should last us about a month
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear the approval of the 4th axis autopilot is now a reality in Europe, what is happening with the FAA or Transport Canada approval process? Anyone out there have any recent information on this matter?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: US
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aser,Noooby,
Just found out about this site. It's really nice to find a real forum.(as opposed to the foolishness on JH).Not that I'm against a little foolishness now and then. Anyway,I'm an AB139 tech in the GOM. We have the VXP system installed on all of our aircraft. It works very well. However,it won't do everything that HUMS will do. We also have experienced some problems getting T/R ips readings in flight due to the accelerometers not being able to read the vibes. Our Chadwick rep says they are working on new accelerometers with a different gain setting. Overall,operationally the HUMS system is probably the better of the two systems. With that said, you have to consider the cost. I don't remember the exact figures, but the HUMS systems is considerably more expensive than VXP. In my opinion the VXP system suffices for now. Improvements are coming a little slow. As with everything, there are trade-offs to be considered when comparing two systems. Hope this helps.
Just found out about this site. It's really nice to find a real forum.(as opposed to the foolishness on JH).Not that I'm against a little foolishness now and then. Anyway,I'm an AB139 tech in the GOM. We have the VXP system installed on all of our aircraft. It works very well. However,it won't do everything that HUMS will do. We also have experienced some problems getting T/R ips readings in flight due to the accelerometers not being able to read the vibes. Our Chadwick rep says they are working on new accelerometers with a different gain setting. Overall,operationally the HUMS system is probably the better of the two systems. With that said, you have to consider the cost. I don't remember the exact figures, but the HUMS systems is considerably more expensive than VXP. In my opinion the VXP system suffices for now. Improvements are coming a little slow. As with everything, there are trade-offs to be considered when comparing two systems. Hope this helps.
AB139Eng,
BT139-046 should be out tomorrow, Monday 3 Sept. This is the 4-axis BT, and should describe how to update the software. Not sure how long it will take to get the software though (Rev4.8 of the Flight Software).
Agusta are still working on the weight increase. MTOW will go to 6750kg, but there will be structural mods that you will have to do. They're still working on the fatigue data.
BT139-046 should be out tomorrow, Monday 3 Sept. This is the 4-axis BT, and should describe how to update the software. Not sure how long it will take to get the software though (Rev4.8 of the Flight Software).
Agusta are still working on the weight increase. MTOW will go to 6750kg, but there will be structural mods that you will have to do. They're still working on the fatigue data.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: belgium
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have just seen a new AW139, with the new bushings installed "latest ones" 200 hrs of flight and almost no play at all, seems that they r improving them a lot and quick.
Nooby the 3.6 flight software is already prepared and working with 4 axis.
Nooby the 3.6 flight software is already prepared and working with 4 axis.
jet_kay,
A quote from BT139-046:
"Since “PRIMUS EPIC®” Flight Software release 4.8.0 installation is
mandatorily required for the four axis autopilot kit, part I of this
bollettino provides the necessary instructions to perform the software
upload."
Version 3.6 may work with it, but according to the BT, it ain't legal. What Agusta does, and what their customers have to do, are sometimes different
A quote from BT139-046:
"Since “PRIMUS EPIC®” Flight Software release 4.8.0 installation is
mandatorily required for the four axis autopilot kit, part I of this
bollettino provides the necessary instructions to perform the software
upload."
Version 3.6 may work with it, but according to the BT, it ain't legal. What Agusta does, and what their customers have to do, are sometimes different
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MTOW Increase
Yo, Nooby!
I thought the MTOW was going up without structural mods?
The only limitation being whispered about is that you'll just have 6400kgs above 8000ft?
I thought the MTOW was going up without structural mods?
The only limitation being whispered about is that you'll just have 6400kgs above 8000ft?
Last edited by heliski22; 4th Sep 2007 at 22:09.
heliski,
Tell me about it!!! That was what Agusta in Philadelphia said too. Now this week, Agusta in Italy tell me there are structural mods to do
I guess we'll have to hurry up and wait
Tell me about it!!! That was what Agusta in Philadelphia said too. Now this week, Agusta in Italy tell me there are structural mods to do
I guess we'll have to hurry up and wait
I'm doing some background research on the winch penalty on the MGB cycles for the AW139 in SAR role, as per its FLM clauses.
I am surprised NO - ONE has even as much as hinted about this problem as yet!
Anyone out there with experience of the penalties imposed on the MGB when using the winch, please?
Regards,
TC
I am surprised NO - ONE has even as much as hinted about this problem as yet!
Anyone out there with experience of the penalties imposed on the MGB when using the winch, please?
Regards,
TC
Some days ago I was flying the I-REDY, for the first time with the moving map and hook cameras in the MFD, really nice features. Can't wait to try the 4-axis, whatever soft. version 
Thomas don't take it as an offense.
Could you give more info about how important are the penalties?
Regards
Aser
Could you give more info about how important are the penalties?
Regards
Aser
I'm doing some background research on the winch penalty on the MGB cycles for the AW139 in SAR role, as per its FLM clauses.
I am surprised NO - ONE has even as much as hinted about this problem as yet!
Anyone out there with experience of the penalties imposed on the MGB when using the winch, please?
Regards,
TC
I am surprised NO - ONE has even as much as hinted about this problem as yet!
Anyone out there with experience of the penalties imposed on the MGB when using the winch, please?
Regards,
TC
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: vancouver
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be unfair to penalize the operator for anything more than actual load time on the winch itself. What this is all about is mast moment stress which must be accounted for when optional equipment is installed that has significant cof g change upon the aircraft. Years ago while building camera mounts for various helicopters, this factor had to be considered to get a engineering approval.
TC.
I need to get something clear in my head,(a bit hard at my age but I will give it a try.)
Are you saying number of hoists fitted to the aircraft, or the number of hoist cycles?? x sortie time x 2.5.
Sorry if this sounds pedantic but this fact will be of great significance to any pure SAR, not HEMS, operator!
Agusta/Wastelands will be rubbing their hands at the thought of all those gearboxes to be made.
I need to get something clear in my head,(a bit hard at my age but I will give it a try.)
Are you saying number of hoists fitted to the aircraft, or the number of hoist cycles?? x sortie time x 2.5.
Sorry if this sounds pedantic but this fact will be of great significance to any pure SAR, not HEMS, operator!
Agusta/Wastelands will be rubbing their hands at the thought of all those gearboxes to be made.