Agusta AW139
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Italy
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geoffersincornwall
Of course the aircraft does not realize whether it's flying at 100 or 102%. For AW139 Cat A operations 102% has not been selected to have the best rotor efficiency but to achieve the best Cat A performance. So in this terms the best aircraft efficiency is 102% NR
Actually is FADEC and nothuing else that it'll take care of the power delivered topping the engine at 2.5' rating and giving you always the max power available. Collective has to be kept at the same position most of the times and when needed (at the extreme of the nevelope) pulled in order to droop the rotor as much as required to achieve transitional lift.
You do not need to know whether the engine is at max power, you need to carry out the reccomended procedure. Actually you need to watch NR gauge and not PI. Many conditions will not require max OEI power to carry out the procedure.
If you operate the aircraft within the RFM limitations you'll have huge safety margins at 100% NR in the whole Cat B envelope respecting the certification requirements.
212man
The reason 102% has been selected is not to achieve 100% when the rotor droops but to have a greater inertia reserve down to 90% when is required
Actually is FADEC and nothuing else that it'll take care of the power delivered topping the engine at 2.5' rating and giving you always the max power available. Collective has to be kept at the same position most of the times and when needed (at the extreme of the nevelope) pulled in order to droop the rotor as much as required to achieve transitional lift.
You do not need to know whether the engine is at max power, you need to carry out the reccomended procedure. Actually you need to watch NR gauge and not PI. Many conditions will not require max OEI power to carry out the procedure.
If you operate the aircraft within the RFM limitations you'll have huge safety margins at 100% NR in the whole Cat B envelope respecting the certification requirements.
212man
The reason 102% has been selected is not to achieve 100% when the rotor droops but to have a greater inertia reserve down to 90% when is required
Geoff,
Firstly, bpaggi (if he is who we think he is) should know, and I would bow to his superior knowledge; it is nice having someone who is at the sharp end of Flight Testing prepared to confirm/refute such statements. Like 212man - I would like to qualify my statements, as he does, by stating that I have no intimate knowledge of the AW139 performance.
Category B performance consists of the provision of AEO data - one of which elements is the provision of "the horizontal distance required to take-off and climb over a 15 m (50-foot) obstacle"; one of the conditions of that manoeuvre is that "a landing can be made safely at any point along the flight path if an engine fails" - which we can assume to mean that the trajectory remains outside the HV diagram. As this is conducted at AEO, we can assume that the most efficient condition of rotor-speed is used (in your text 100%) - no failure is assumed.
Category A - for all of the noise we make about it - is mostly about distances. Under normal circumstances, we can assume that distances are critical only if the engine fails at the critical point - which is at TDP (minus the pilot recognition and intervention time - i.e. one second unless otherwise justified and accepted). The distances are: the rejected distance; and the take-off distance. These distances are specified with one-engine-inoperative.
In meeting the requirement for the rejected distance, the point in space at which the engine-failure is assumed to occur plays its part. TDP is the last point at which the pilot has to be able reject the take off and land; field-of-view and the (average pilot's) ability to fly the helicopter into the area provided by the rejected take-off distance available dictates where this point can be in a vertical and horizontal sense.
For the take-off distance; the pilot must, with a failure recognised at the critical point, be able conduct a contined take-off and avoid all obstacles in achieving the the projected take-off distance required at the appropriate conditions. The achievement of this distance also depends on the point in space of the TDP.
However, as procedures have become more sophisticated, the total energy package has had to be considered; in that package are a number of potential benefits (mainly for the continued take-off - for the rejected take-off, some of these could, if exceeded, be disbenefits): the vertical acceleration at the point of failure; the potential energy contained at the height of the TDP; and the energy stored in the rotor before it is drooped (to the manufacturers recommended setting).
As you well know, this total energy package is used extremely effectively in achieving the OEI trajectory to avoid the take-off surface; in an elevated procedure, it provides the deck-edge miss and utilises the drop down to recover the rotor speed (to 100%?) and provide acceleration to Vtoss.
Now to return to the initial point; the conditions for the Cat A procedure are optimised to utilise all engergy at a single critical point of failure. If that point is passed with all-engines-operating, the procedure ceases to be critical unless (and I can't imagine why this would be the case), the single engine profile is flown with AEO.
Jim
Firstly, bpaggi (if he is who we think he is) should know, and I would bow to his superior knowledge; it is nice having someone who is at the sharp end of Flight Testing prepared to confirm/refute such statements. Like 212man - I would like to qualify my statements, as he does, by stating that I have no intimate knowledge of the AW139 performance.
Category B performance consists of the provision of AEO data - one of which elements is the provision of "the horizontal distance required to take-off and climb over a 15 m (50-foot) obstacle"; one of the conditions of that manoeuvre is that "a landing can be made safely at any point along the flight path if an engine fails" - which we can assume to mean that the trajectory remains outside the HV diagram. As this is conducted at AEO, we can assume that the most efficient condition of rotor-speed is used (in your text 100%) - no failure is assumed.
Category A - for all of the noise we make about it - is mostly about distances. Under normal circumstances, we can assume that distances are critical only if the engine fails at the critical point - which is at TDP (minus the pilot recognition and intervention time - i.e. one second unless otherwise justified and accepted). The distances are: the rejected distance; and the take-off distance. These distances are specified with one-engine-inoperative.
In meeting the requirement for the rejected distance, the point in space at which the engine-failure is assumed to occur plays its part. TDP is the last point at which the pilot has to be able reject the take off and land; field-of-view and the (average pilot's) ability to fly the helicopter into the area provided by the rejected take-off distance available dictates where this point can be in a vertical and horizontal sense.
For the take-off distance; the pilot must, with a failure recognised at the critical point, be able conduct a contined take-off and avoid all obstacles in achieving the the projected take-off distance required at the appropriate conditions. The achievement of this distance also depends on the point in space of the TDP.
However, as procedures have become more sophisticated, the total energy package has had to be considered; in that package are a number of potential benefits (mainly for the continued take-off - for the rejected take-off, some of these could, if exceeded, be disbenefits): the vertical acceleration at the point of failure; the potential energy contained at the height of the TDP; and the energy stored in the rotor before it is drooped (to the manufacturers recommended setting).
As you well know, this total energy package is used extremely effectively in achieving the OEI trajectory to avoid the take-off surface; in an elevated procedure, it provides the deck-edge miss and utilises the drop down to recover the rotor speed (to 100%?) and provide acceleration to Vtoss.
Now to return to the initial point; the conditions for the Cat A procedure are optimised to utilise all engergy at a single critical point of failure. If that point is passed with all-engines-operating, the procedure ceases to be critical unless (and I can't imagine why this would be the case), the single engine profile is flown with AEO.
Jim
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmm........
Lots to think about there.
Bpaggi - just to clarify I said that the aircraft doesn't know if it's being operated Cat A or Cat B not that it was unaware of the NR ...... it obviously IS.
My situation is that I have to teach exactly what it says in the RFM/QRH and my colleagues and I try hard to do that. We are however beginning to encounter other (very professional) colleagues from around the world who come for their recurrent training and bring with them their intelligent interpretations of the gaps and ambiguities of the master documents such as the RFM.
What we crave is the aviation equivalent of that wonderfully interesting DVD that often accompanies the Movie DVD - "How it was made" "Interviews with the director".....That kind of background stuff would enable those of us in the firing line to deliver not only 'technique' but also 'understanding'
It is desperately frustrating to have the opportunity to deliver an accurate and meaningful contribution to the safe and effective operation of this great helicopter only to be starved of background info. We have tried asking more experienced AW colleagues but cannot get a consistent answer. Whatever we get we need it from those that know and in writing.... please.
If Bpaggi can help further would love to chat.
G
PS - Doesn't a proper FADEC include control of the starting cycle???
Bpaggi - just to clarify I said that the aircraft doesn't know if it's being operated Cat A or Cat B not that it was unaware of the NR ...... it obviously IS.
My situation is that I have to teach exactly what it says in the RFM/QRH and my colleagues and I try hard to do that. We are however beginning to encounter other (very professional) colleagues from around the world who come for their recurrent training and bring with them their intelligent interpretations of the gaps and ambiguities of the master documents such as the RFM.
What we crave is the aviation equivalent of that wonderfully interesting DVD that often accompanies the Movie DVD - "How it was made" "Interviews with the director".....That kind of background stuff would enable those of us in the firing line to deliver not only 'technique' but also 'understanding'
It is desperately frustrating to have the opportunity to deliver an accurate and meaningful contribution to the safe and effective operation of this great helicopter only to be starved of background info. We have tried asking more experienced AW colleagues but cannot get a consistent answer. Whatever we get we need it from those that know and in writing.... please.
If Bpaggi can help further would love to chat.
G
PS - Doesn't a proper FADEC include control of the starting cycle???
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Italy
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geoff, you're perfectly right. You all operators need to know how and why everything was made. We are perfectly aware of that and we have already (as a company) organized a meeting with the Italian Corporates Pilots where we gave a presentation on how we built the AW139 Take Off and Landing procedures.
I also think we need all possible feedbacks from you because everything is made for you.
I'll start working on this and I'll let you know as soon as possible what we can organize.
I'm also available in this forum whenever I can.
Yes FADEC includes also control starting cycle.
I also think we need all possible feedbacks from you because everything is made for you.
I'll start working on this and I'll let you know as soon as possible what we can organize.
I'm also available in this forum whenever I can.
Yes FADEC includes also control starting cycle.
To answer ASER's statement;
"I think the rotor is more efficient at NR 90% than 100% at 2.5min power , in the transition to Vtoss. No?"
Next time you have an aircraft for training, sit in a high hover in a high power situation, out of wind, and get the training captain to fail an engine. If you droop the NR down toward 90% you will find the Aircraft will sink. By lowering the collective and allowing the NR to increase toward 100% the aircraft will start to climb, indicating the increase in efficiency of the rotor system at 100%NR.
"I think the rotor is more efficient at NR 90% than 100% at 2.5min power , in the transition to Vtoss. No?"
Next time you have an aircraft for training, sit in a high hover in a high power situation, out of wind, and get the training captain to fail an engine. If you droop the NR down toward 90% you will find the Aircraft will sink. By lowering the collective and allowing the NR to increase toward 100% the aircraft will start to climb, indicating the increase in efficiency of the rotor system at 100%NR.
Thanks pitchlink,
It was really a question.
I was just thinking about the possibility that at 90% we were using more pitch, more thrust from rotor, and all the possible power from the engine,even at less rotor speed.
Now, re-reading the posts from Geof,bpaggi and you. I understand the NR droop is just a "tool" to jump into flight,
Regards
Aser
It was really a question.
I was just thinking about the possibility that at 90% we were using more pitch, more thrust from rotor, and all the possible power from the engine,even at less rotor speed.
Now, re-reading the posts from Geof,bpaggi and you. I understand the NR droop is just a "tool" to jump into flight,
The droop is allowed up to 90% and is not meant to achieve a better efficiency but to convert the huge M/R inertia into transational lift
Aser
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bpaggi
The gathering of Italian Corporate Pilots was a great idea, especially with regard to the operation of the 139. However, it seems a pity it was confined to corporate pilots (after all, the aircraft neither knows nor cares who or what is in the cabin) and only to Italian pilots.
Unless, of course, there is a plan to disseminate any useful infromation from that meeting to other interested parties, or, even better, to repeat the exercise in the different theatres where the aircraft is operated.
Regardless of geographical location or type of operation, it's really silly that those of us who are lucky enough to fly but who also carry the accompanying responsibilities involved in operating this fine aircraft are still scrabbling around amongst ourselves to keep abreast of developments and in the search for explanations for different things, whether by e-mail, telephone or even here on PPRuNe.
And, while I'm at it, where the hell are we with the MTOW increase?
22
The gathering of Italian Corporate Pilots was a great idea, especially with regard to the operation of the 139. However, it seems a pity it was confined to corporate pilots (after all, the aircraft neither knows nor cares who or what is in the cabin) and only to Italian pilots.
Unless, of course, there is a plan to disseminate any useful infromation from that meeting to other interested parties, or, even better, to repeat the exercise in the different theatres where the aircraft is operated.
Regardless of geographical location or type of operation, it's really silly that those of us who are lucky enough to fly but who also carry the accompanying responsibilities involved in operating this fine aircraft are still scrabbling around amongst ourselves to keep abreast of developments and in the search for explanations for different things, whether by e-mail, telephone or even here on PPRuNe.
And, while I'm at it, where the hell are we with the MTOW increase?
22
S.A.R. AW-139 Promo Video from Agusta Westland
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EJV4F_bRHVE
Best regards
Aser
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EJV4F_bRHVE
Best regards
Aser
Last edited by Aser; 31st Mar 2008 at 15:18. Reason: wrong link
Japan Coast Guard Takes Delivery Of Its First Three AW139 Helicopters
http://www.verticalmag.com/control/n...es/?a=7220&z=6
No nightsun,no liferafts, and only one hoist but int the twin-hoist arm, strange.. 
Regards
Aser
http://www.verticalmag.com/control/n...es/?a=7220&z=6
These helicopters were ordered in late 2006 as the initial phase of a replacement programme for up to 24 helicopters.
Regards
Aser
Now that we had the chat about the CAT A 102% thing...
1-Can we also say that the reason we must(by flight manual) use 102% for Hoist & External loads ops. is related to OEI scenario and not rotor lift in hover?
2- Why don't we have an airspeed limit to arm floats in the supplement, is it tested up to VNE??
3- If you know that while in hover you are going down if engine quits, will you popout the floats before water contact? f.m. suggests to wait the water..
4- We are happy in floating in the water(after a really good ditching), we can not leave the rotor brake in "park" position due to the weight on wheels(I'm not talking about using rotor brake to stop rotors), isn't it?
Best regards & excuse the writing
1-Can we also say that the reason we must(by flight manual) use 102% for Hoist & External loads ops. is related to OEI scenario and not rotor lift in hover?
2- Why don't we have an airspeed limit to arm floats in the supplement, is it tested up to VNE??
3- If you know that while in hover you are going down if engine quits, will you popout the floats before water contact? f.m. suggests to wait the water..
4- We are happy in floating in the water(after a really good ditching), we can not leave the rotor brake in "park" position due to the weight on wheels(I'm not talking about using rotor brake to stop rotors), isn't it?
Best regards & excuse the writing
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aser
I am in pursuit of the many questions floating around at the moment and the latest contributions to the debate are:-
1-Can we also say that the reason we must(by flight manual) use 102% for Hoist & External loads ops. is related to OEI scenario and not rotor lift in hover?
The latest version of the answer to the '102%' query is that it appears that the helicopter was first certified under the 'Normal' Category and the 100% Nr became an RFM-set-in-stone feature. When the Cat A programme was under way the use of 102% was found to improve performance due to added rotor inertia. The 102% feature was then added via Supp 12. Draw your own conclusions but remember if you ding-it whilst working outside the RFM then the legal-beagles will come looking for your a**e. I remain in the hunt for the horses mouth.
2- Why don't we have an airspeed limit to arm floats in the supplement, is it tested up to VNE??
I'll chase that one
3- If you know that while in hover you are going down if engine quits, will you popout the floats before water contact? f.m. suggests to wait the water..
I guess we will have to wait for the first ditching to get some answers
4- We are happy in floating in the water(after a really good ditching), we can not leave the rotor brake in "park" position due to the weight on wheels(I'm not talking about using rotor brake to stop rotors), isn't it?
Mmmmmmmm we have said the same thing - must go find another horse!!
G
1-Can we also say that the reason we must(by flight manual) use 102% for Hoist & External loads ops. is related to OEI scenario and not rotor lift in hover?
The latest version of the answer to the '102%' query is that it appears that the helicopter was first certified under the 'Normal' Category and the 100% Nr became an RFM-set-in-stone feature. When the Cat A programme was under way the use of 102% was found to improve performance due to added rotor inertia. The 102% feature was then added via Supp 12. Draw your own conclusions but remember if you ding-it whilst working outside the RFM then the legal-beagles will come looking for your a**e. I remain in the hunt for the horses mouth.
2- Why don't we have an airspeed limit to arm floats in the supplement, is it tested up to VNE??
I'll chase that one
3- If you know that while in hover you are going down if engine quits, will you popout the floats before water contact? f.m. suggests to wait the water..
I guess we will have to wait for the first ditching to get some answers
4- We are happy in floating in the water(after a really good ditching), we can not leave the rotor brake in "park" position due to the weight on wheels(I'm not talking about using rotor brake to stop rotors), isn't it?
Mmmmmmmm we have said the same thing - must go find another horse!!
G
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heliportugal
Does anyone knows what happened with a AW-139 operated by Heliportugal during a ferry flight from Italy to Portugal?
I heard an strange history, apparently the main rotor hits the WSPS due a strong turbulence?
Would be nice to know what realy happened.
Cheers
I heard an strange history, apparently the main rotor hits the WSPS due a strong turbulence?
Would be nice to know what realy happened.
Cheers
Atlantic Airways Takes Delivery Of An AW139
Tuesday, April 15, 2008 / AgustaWestland
AgustaWestland is pleased to announce that Atlantic Airways Ltd of the Faroe Islands has taken delivery of an AW139 medium twin turbine engine helicopter during an official ceremony held at AgustaWestland’s Vergiate plant yesterday. The helicopter is configured for 12 or 15 seat layouts for both public passenger transport and offshore passenger transport operations.
The delivery to Atlantic Airways continues the rapidly growing AW139 customer base in Europe with aircraft now in operation in Ireland, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Luxembourg, Estonia, Finland and Turkey.
The AW139 is a new generation medium twin-turbine helicopter setting new standards against which all new medium twin will be measured. Designed with inherent multi-role capability and flexibility of operation, the AW139 is capable of carrying up to 15 passengers or six litters with two medical attendants or up to four litters and four medical attendants at the highest speed, in the most spacious cabin and with the best power reserve of any other helicopter in the medium twin-engine class. The AW139 has quickly become the aircraft of choice for offshore support operations offering unparalleled features in its class in terms of performance, capacity and safety which will dramatically enhance Atlantic Airways’ operations. The AW139 is ideally suited for the offshore role, with its large cabin and baggage compartments, offering ease of access and egress by its large sliding doors. Remarkable space on board and modular equipment solutions, allow an easy and quick conversion between various configurations.
In addition to offshore transport, the AW139 can be used for a number of other applications including EMS/SAR, executive/VIP transport, law enforcement, utility and government roles. The helicopter has achieved a great success becoming the best selling medium twin in the world marketplace. Over 90 different customers in more than 30 countries have ordered over 330 helicopters.
As the national airline of the Faroe Islands established in 1987, Atlantic Airways is based at Vagar Airport and operates domestic as well as international scheduled and charter services through its mixed fixed/rotary-winged aircraft fleet. Scheduled transport services link the Faroe Islands to various destinations in Northern Europe including major cities in Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Additionally, Atlantic Airways undertakes other missions including search and rescue.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008 / AgustaWestland
AgustaWestland is pleased to announce that Atlantic Airways Ltd of the Faroe Islands has taken delivery of an AW139 medium twin turbine engine helicopter during an official ceremony held at AgustaWestland’s Vergiate plant yesterday. The helicopter is configured for 12 or 15 seat layouts for both public passenger transport and offshore passenger transport operations.
The delivery to Atlantic Airways continues the rapidly growing AW139 customer base in Europe with aircraft now in operation in Ireland, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Luxembourg, Estonia, Finland and Turkey.
The AW139 is a new generation medium twin-turbine helicopter setting new standards against which all new medium twin will be measured. Designed with inherent multi-role capability and flexibility of operation, the AW139 is capable of carrying up to 15 passengers or six litters with two medical attendants or up to four litters and four medical attendants at the highest speed, in the most spacious cabin and with the best power reserve of any other helicopter in the medium twin-engine class. The AW139 has quickly become the aircraft of choice for offshore support operations offering unparalleled features in its class in terms of performance, capacity and safety which will dramatically enhance Atlantic Airways’ operations. The AW139 is ideally suited for the offshore role, with its large cabin and baggage compartments, offering ease of access and egress by its large sliding doors. Remarkable space on board and modular equipment solutions, allow an easy and quick conversion between various configurations.
In addition to offshore transport, the AW139 can be used for a number of other applications including EMS/SAR, executive/VIP transport, law enforcement, utility and government roles. The helicopter has achieved a great success becoming the best selling medium twin in the world marketplace. Over 90 different customers in more than 30 countries have ordered over 330 helicopters.
As the national airline of the Faroe Islands established in 1987, Atlantic Airways is based at Vagar Airport and operates domestic as well as international scheduled and charter services through its mixed fixed/rotary-winged aircraft fleet. Scheduled transport services link the Faroe Islands to various destinations in Northern Europe including major cities in Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Additionally, Atlantic Airways undertakes other missions including search and rescue.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,383
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmmmmmm .........
I am just about to join the ranks of "Rated Pilot" on this wonderful machine .....
The "Mental Abuse" stage (Ground School) completed this last week ...... physical abuse to start next week (I bloody hope!).
Nothing quite like either an Italian Sports Car (?) OR a young Italian woman to take a bloke back to "before he had grey hair" stage of his life eh?
:
I am just about to join the ranks of "Rated Pilot" on this wonderful machine .....
The "Mental Abuse" stage (Ground School) completed this last week ...... physical abuse to start next week (I bloody hope!).
Nothing quite like either an Italian Sports Car (?) OR a young Italian woman to take a bloke back to "before he had grey hair" stage of his life eh?
:
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,383
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ooooohhher .........
I've gotten that wrong already ....... girfriend is from Koln ..... but she is younger!
Quote from Groucho ....... "Your only as old as the woman you feel"
I've gotten that wrong already ....... girfriend is from Koln ..... but she is younger!
Quote from Groucho ....... "Your only as old as the woman you feel"
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AW139 and using the FLOATS correctly
How many offshore guys have adjusted to using the floats correctly and armed them as you go outbound across the coast and vice versa when you make land? Do you disarm them whan on deck?
G
G
Hi Geoff,
We disarm the floats after reaching Vy during after T.O checks, and arm them again at 90kts decellerating to the deck. I think due to the fact we had 2 inadvertent float deployments (on the ground) when we first got the aircraft! I'm sure you already know about that.
Maybe see you in August when I am due to be out in the sim.
Rgds
We disarm the floats after reaching Vy during after T.O checks, and arm them again at 90kts decellerating to the deck. I think due to the fact we had 2 inadvertent float deployments (on the ground) when we first got the aircraft! I'm sure you already know about that.
Maybe see you in August when I am due to be out in the sim.
Rgds
AW139 and using the FLOATS correctly "G"
Geoff, everyone is using them incorrectly. The AW139 has the safest, most practical float installation I've seen, yet everyone is stuck in historical practises of arming and disarming them constantly going through Vy. Do what you can when you are training pilots, maybe in a few years the lightbulb will come on.
I think other manufacturers should take a page out of Agusta's book and modify their float systems to do the same.
Pitchlink thinks it's OK to discredit a technical advance because some dufus can't follow a procedure. Time to move on everyone.
Geoff, everyone is using them incorrectly. The AW139 has the safest, most practical float installation I've seen, yet everyone is stuck in historical practises of arming and disarming them constantly going through Vy. Do what you can when you are training pilots, maybe in a few years the lightbulb will come on.
I think other manufacturers should take a page out of Agusta's book and modify their float systems to do the same.
Pitchlink thinks it's OK to discredit a technical advance because some dufus can't follow a procedure. Time to move on everyone.
