Agusta AW139
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near the Mountains
Age: 67
Posts: 345
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horizontal Stabiliser Winglets/Wires
Anybody any trouble with keeping winglets from getting loose on the ends of the horizontal stabiliser? Or keeping wires to the Pos Lts from breaking?
heliski22, no problems with winglets coming loose here, but have had a nav light on the winglet stop working due to the wiring breaking. When we pulled it apart we found that Agusta had missed out some terminals in the wiring loom back there and had spliced everything together with far too much wire, which then chafed through!
Agusta supplied the correct parts under warranty.
If your winglets are coming loose, do a HUMS aquisition on your tailrotor and see what it says. You might have a 4/rev shaking it back there. Early (heavyweight) tailplanes had iron weights at the tips for harmonics, but the later tailplanes (with nav lights in them) don't.
Also have a look at your top anti-col light base plate (inside the cowling where the wires come out of it). If it is beginning to crack, then that is also a sign of excessive tailrotor vibes.
If after you do a tailrotor vibe run, the HUMS says to do pitchlink and mass, jus do the mass first and then do another run. Quite often it will bring you down to an acceptable vibe level, and it saves you messing around with all the locking on the pitchlinks.
Not sure if you have HUMS or not, personally I like it, especially the RTB side of it.
Agusta supplied the correct parts under warranty.
If your winglets are coming loose, do a HUMS aquisition on your tailrotor and see what it says. You might have a 4/rev shaking it back there. Early (heavyweight) tailplanes had iron weights at the tips for harmonics, but the later tailplanes (with nav lights in them) don't.
Also have a look at your top anti-col light base plate (inside the cowling where the wires come out of it). If it is beginning to crack, then that is also a sign of excessive tailrotor vibes.
If after you do a tailrotor vibe run, the HUMS says to do pitchlink and mass, jus do the mass first and then do another run. Quite often it will bring you down to an acceptable vibe level, and it saves you messing around with all the locking on the pitchlinks.
Not sure if you have HUMS or not, personally I like it, especially the RTB side of it.
Yes, but it's not the same 
I know you are ok, but it must be cold over there! post more pics.
Hi heliski, I remember that one of our machines had a problem with winglets coming loose, don't have any details.
Regards
Aser
I know you are ok, but it must be cold over there! post more pics.
heliski22 Horizontal Stabiliser Winglets/Wires
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anybody any trouble with keeping winglets from getting loose on the ends of the horizontal stabiliser? Or keeping wires to the Pos Lts from breaking?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anybody any trouble with keeping winglets from getting loose on the ends of the horizontal stabiliser? Or keeping wires to the Pos Lts from breaking?
Regards
Aser
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a waste
All of that money to develop and certify a new design and all they had to do was to dehumidify their bonding facility, dry the nomex core completely and address a few quality management issues in relation to materials acceptance and cure cycle temperature rates, materials handling and storage and the original design would almost certainly been totally adequate for the task. What a waste.
Even worse, one humid day at the production facility and what assurances are there that the same problem will not re-occur with the new design?
The solutions are there for FREE at http://www.adhesionassociates.com/pa...ve%20Bonds.pdf
For the sake if air safety someone at AW please at least read this link. Your damage tolerance analysis is only valid if the strength of the surrounding adhesive is not degraded by micro-voiding. Your strength testing is only valid if your samples reproduce the micro-voiding found in service disbonds.
The only other solution is to eliminate micro-voiding by reading the link. It is FREE. I have waived my consultancy fees to help you improve air safety. What more can I do? You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him fish!
Regards
blakmax
Even worse, one humid day at the production facility and what assurances are there that the same problem will not re-occur with the new design?
The solutions are there for FREE at http://www.adhesionassociates.com/pa...ve%20Bonds.pdf
For the sake if air safety someone at AW please at least read this link. Your damage tolerance analysis is only valid if the strength of the surrounding adhesive is not degraded by micro-voiding. Your strength testing is only valid if your samples reproduce the micro-voiding found in service disbonds.
The only other solution is to eliminate micro-voiding by reading the link. It is FREE. I have waived my consultancy fees to help you improve air safety. What more can I do? You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him fish!
Regards
blakmax
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Doing SAR somewhere.
Age: 57
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most interesting Blakmax.
And surely a great gesture to offer your advice and expertise for free.
As far as I know the tail booms are being made by PZL Swidnik and Turkish Aerospace Industries.
I hope proper and definitive steps are taken in order to ensure a proper and reliable manufacturing tail boom assembly process so we all can forget about this issue before "something happens".
Agusta must ensure a proper quality control is enforced in all production process while ussing the lastest industry standards.
And surely a great gesture to offer your advice and expertise for free.
As far as I know the tail booms are being made by PZL Swidnik and Turkish Aerospace Industries.
I hope proper and definitive steps are taken in order to ensure a proper and reliable manufacturing tail boom assembly process so we all can forget about this issue before "something happens".
Agusta must ensure a proper quality control is enforced in all production process while ussing the lastest industry standards.
the tail booms are being made by PZL Swidnik
PZL know better than that, no ever any problem with composites there.
for example main rotor blades of Mi2plus and W3A
(execept one case with W3A and de-ice switched off by pilot error)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi 9Aplus
With regard to the implied quality by reference to other products, I am sorry but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I have no visibility of PZL's product quality but I urge PZL and any other manufacturer to read the link. It will either confirm the suitability of their processes or highlight deficiencies.
Furia, my reasons for making this freely available are obvious in the posting on the Charity Challenge posting. Please everyone make a donation. I am not in the position to chase consulting work at the present moment. I am not rich, but I am retired an not in the position where I do not need to survive on consulting fees. I'd like to be rich but my conscience dictates that I know I must address airworthiness issues where my knowledge is of value and to hell with the money.
The absolute stupidity of this stuation is that even if I charged my full consulting rate, it would have cost AW a fraction of the cost of the design and certification of the new product, and would have eliminated any doubt about the integrity of their products. I have made a number of direct and indirect approaches to provide advice at a nominal low fee, but I have not had any responses.
Is it really the situation where you can lead a horse to water but you just can't get him to stand on the surf board? Must it realy be this hard?
Regards
blakmax
With regard to the implied quality by reference to other products, I am sorry but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I have no visibility of PZL's product quality but I urge PZL and any other manufacturer to read the link. It will either confirm the suitability of their processes or highlight deficiencies.
Furia, my reasons for making this freely available are obvious in the posting on the Charity Challenge posting. Please everyone make a donation. I am not in the position to chase consulting work at the present moment. I am not rich, but I am retired an not in the position where I do not need to survive on consulting fees. I'd like to be rich but my conscience dictates that I know I must address airworthiness issues where my knowledge is of value and to hell with the money.
The absolute stupidity of this stuation is that even if I charged my full consulting rate, it would have cost AW a fraction of the cost of the design and certification of the new product, and would have eliminated any doubt about the integrity of their products. I have made a number of direct and indirect approaches to provide advice at a nominal low fee, but I have not had any responses.
Is it really the situation where you can lead a horse to water but you just can't get him to stand on the surf board? Must it realy be this hard?
Regards
blakmax
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Doing SAR somewhere.
Age: 57
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PZL know better than that, no ever any problem with composites there
When I did the AW139 type rating in Agusta Center in Sexto Calende by 2008, I was told that the tail booms were made by PZL-Świdnik.
Maybe you can correct us, me and the Agusta instructor, and let us know who and where is producing the "troubling" Tail Boom?
Sorry 9Aplus, but tailbooms were made at PZL. Not sure if they are now or not, but they definitely were, and the early ones coming in to the factory in Italy in 2005 were crap! Factory used to spend a couple of days doing repairs to the exact same area on every tailboom. Top lefthand mount point, about 3 inches back from the front. They all came with a big lump there that had to be reworked. Early fuselages weren't much better with misdrilled holes and holes that weren't deburred. After about S/N 31050, things improved markedly in the build quality.
NHF guys....
but I was in PZL early Mar 2008. have foto in front of one of ready 139 airframes.
Visited composite works of PZL too, only main/tail rotor blades and SW4
MGB&turbine support seen there
Oct 2008. was in Cachina Costa & service/flight line, Verigiate & assembly/flight,
Somma Lombardo & after sale/AOG (new one now is on Malpensa), Sesto Calende & training near lake....
In Vergiate (final assembly) asked who is producing tail booms for 139?:
"facility in South Italy" was the answer! No photo allowed because of NH90
program.
Will meet them next week and ask again, to have clear mind after all
Blakmax - hope I will call your PAID consultant composite service soon
but I was in PZL early Mar 2008. have foto in front of one of ready 139 airframes.
Visited composite works of PZL too, only main/tail rotor blades and SW4
MGB&turbine support seen there
Oct 2008. was in Cachina Costa & service/flight line, Verigiate & assembly/flight,
Somma Lombardo & after sale/AOG (new one now is on Malpensa), Sesto Calende & training near lake....
In Vergiate (final assembly) asked who is producing tail booms for 139?:
"facility in South Italy" was the answer! No photo allowed because of NH90
program.
Will meet them next week and ask again, to have clear mind after all
Blakmax - hope I will call your PAID consultant composite service soon
Last edited by 9Aplus; 28th Feb 2010 at 05:18.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: On the way to the fridge
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vibrating Fuel Probes
I have heard that the reason for so many failures on the secondary fuel probes is due to decreasing fuel levels the probes begin to vibrate and fail.
Can anyone confirm this?
Can anyone confirm this?
Ahhh fuel probes, the never ending quest for a probe that won't fail!
Not sure if it is vibes or not. One machine I've worked on had 7 (yes, seven!) failures in 2 years. All were the #2 Sec probe. One time, we pulled the dead probe, replaced with a shiny new item. New probe failed in 3 hours flight time. Pulled dead probe again, replaced with new probe. Refuelled, checked fuel reading, checked for leaks. Turned off power and put aircraft back on the line. Next time power was turned on, probe was dead. Out of the 18 probes I've changed (yes I do keep track, probes are a
with me, and I let Agusta know that everytime I change one!), 16 have been #2 Sec probe, 2 have been the #1 Sec probe. No Main probe failures for me.
So if it is vibe related, why is the problem almost exclusively the #2 Sec probe?
One thing I have noticed is that the foam in the sump panels gets wet from water running along the belly in flight, and is a VERY tight fit around the wiring. Quite a few times taking the sump panel off, cutting the foam away from the probe connection, and drying everything out, would get the probe working again.
Agusta did change the Sec probes a while back to a new and improved version, and while failures do seem to be less common than before, I would have thought they could get them as reliable as the main probes with not too much effort!
Personally, I'd like to see a waterproof Canon Plug down there to connect the probe wiring to the airframe wiring, instead of that stupid brown rubber terminal block. At least then we would know that it isn't the connection causing the problems!
I hate fuel probes in the 139
Not sure if it is vibes or not. One machine I've worked on had 7 (yes, seven!) failures in 2 years. All were the #2 Sec probe. One time, we pulled the dead probe, replaced with a shiny new item. New probe failed in 3 hours flight time. Pulled dead probe again, replaced with new probe. Refuelled, checked fuel reading, checked for leaks. Turned off power and put aircraft back on the line. Next time power was turned on, probe was dead. Out of the 18 probes I've changed (yes I do keep track, probes are a
with me, and I let Agusta know that everytime I change one!), 16 have been #2 Sec probe, 2 have been the #1 Sec probe. No Main probe failures for me.So if it is vibe related, why is the problem almost exclusively the #2 Sec probe?
One thing I have noticed is that the foam in the sump panels gets wet from water running along the belly in flight, and is a VERY tight fit around the wiring. Quite a few times taking the sump panel off, cutting the foam away from the probe connection, and drying everything out, would get the probe working again.
Agusta did change the Sec probes a while back to a new and improved version, and while failures do seem to be less common than before, I would have thought they could get them as reliable as the main probes with not too much effort!
Personally, I'd like to see a waterproof Canon Plug down there to connect the probe wiring to the airframe wiring, instead of that stupid brown rubber terminal block. At least then we would know that it isn't the connection causing the problems!
I hate fuel probes in the 139
engineers to design the electrical system
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: On the way to the fridge
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#2 Fuel probe
I heard that at the HAI this year Agusta in the product improvement brief said that they are replacing the screws that hold the probe together and that production alignement will take from S/N 500. And that a evaluation of possible foam modification to allow better water drainage.
Another theory for probe failure is when refueling, fuel is hitting the probe and causing damage.
One aircraft I have we changed 5 #2 probes all with S/N lower than 500. I have one arriving greater than S/N 500 we will see how long that one last on this airframe.
Another theory for probe failure is when refueling, fuel is hitting the probe and causing damage.
One aircraft I have we changed 5 #2 probes all with S/N lower than 500. I have one arriving greater than S/N 500 we will see how long that one last on this airframe.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Europe trying to enjoy retirement “YES”
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been away from the thread for a while hence apologies if already covered but did hear on the grapevine that 139 had had boom damage/strike and needed it replaced just wondered if anyone had the info.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: ...in view of the 'Southern Cross' ...
Posts: 1,383
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmm...
Aser posted that an (ERA) machine in South Amarica (Suriname) returned from a flight with the 'boom in a slightly 'different' 'shape' than when it had left .....
Aser posted that an (ERA) machine in South Amarica (Suriname) returned from a flight with the 'boom in a slightly 'different' 'shape' than when it had left .....