Agusta AW139
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,951
Likes: 90
From: After all, what’s more important than proving to someone on the internet that they’re wrong? - Manson
To be pedantic and quote PWC - "single channel Full Authority Digital Electronic Control System" comprising Fuel Management Module (FMM) on the engine and Electronic Engine Control mounted on the airframe. To call it an EEC would be describing only half of what is involved. It is a FADEC right up to the point when it isn't.
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 320
Likes: 56
From: On land
I was somewhat confused to read that myself. It either has full authority or it doesn’t, and the 139 doesn’t. The pilot has the ability to manually manipulate the ECLs, either via the beep trims or the ECLs themselves..
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,951
Likes: 90
From: After all, what’s more important than proving to someone on the internet that they’re wrong? - Manson
And neither does the EC135P, AW109E and S and most but not all PW200 series powered aircraft as it's virtually identical.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 243
Likes: 1
From: West of zero
At the extreme right of the most forward row of circuit breakers on the main overhead CB panel, is a 5-Amp CB labeled “FADEC GSE”. What does this CB protect? Can’t find reference to it in any manual available to us.
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,951
Likes: 90
From: After all, what’s more important than proving to someone on the internet that they’re wrong? - Manson
Power for the interface connectors while connected to PWC DPHM (Diagnostic Prognostic and Health Management) software and then subsequent analysis with GBSLite or FAST (Flight Data Acquisition, Storage and Transmission).
The interface connector modules requirements probably exceed the output capabilities of USB-A.
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 209
Likes: 12
From: Underneath the Radar
Ha! USB!
Not even close, this works on RS422 via a serial converter (like Bill Gates used when Microsoft was still in his garage). P&W needed to update their DHPM software recently because no-one was making the serial converter anymore!
The rest of the aircraft works on a 2Base10 ethernet system (2 wire) which hasn't been made by anyone else but Honeywell in 40 years!
Not even close, this works on RS422 via a serial converter (like Bill Gates used when Microsoft was still in his garage). P&W needed to update their DHPM software recently because no-one was making the serial converter anymore!
The rest of the aircraft works on a 2Base10 ethernet system (2 wire) which hasn't been made by anyone else but Honeywell in 40 years!
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 209
Likes: 12
From: Underneath the Radar
Leonardo have been very cagey about it, but looking at the photos, the differences you can notice are:
1. New nose profile, which looks very similar to the AW169, this hints at a charge from Honeywell to Collins avionics as the Collins system uses the more traditional ARINC box architecture rather than the Honeywell MAU and hence takes up more space, hence the need for the new nose.
2. New engine inlet, which could be a new engine such as the PT6C-67E or a PW100 series varient.
3. New tailboom as shown by the flow visualisation strings.
Be interesting to see what they end up with.
1. New nose profile, which looks very similar to the AW169, this hints at a charge from Honeywell to Collins avionics as the Collins system uses the more traditional ARINC box architecture rather than the Honeywell MAU and hence takes up more space, hence the need for the new nose.
2. New engine inlet, which could be a new engine such as the PT6C-67E or a PW100 series varient.
3. New tailboom as shown by the flow visualisation strings.
Be interesting to see what they end up with.
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 45
Likes: 6
From: Canada
Leonardo have been very cagey about it, but looking at the photos, the differences you can notice are:
1. New nose profile, which looks very similar to the AW169, this hints at a charge from Honeywell to Collins avionics as the Collins system uses the more traditional ARINC box architecture rather than the Honeywell MAU and hence takes up more space, hence the need for the new nose.
2. New engine inlet, which could be a new engine such as the PT6C-67E or a PW100 series varient.
3. New tailboom as shown by the flow visualisation strings.
Be interesting to see what they end up with.
1. New nose profile, which looks very similar to the AW169, this hints at a charge from Honeywell to Collins avionics as the Collins system uses the more traditional ARINC box architecture rather than the Honeywell MAU and hence takes up more space, hence the need for the new nose.
2. New engine inlet, which could be a new engine such as the PT6C-67E or a PW100 series varient.
3. New tailboom as shown by the flow visualisation strings.
Be interesting to see what they end up with.
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 33
Likes: 12
From: Luna
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 45
Likes: 6
From: Canada
Joined: Oct 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 7,373
Likes: 931
From: Den Haag
1. New nose profile, which looks very similar to the AW169, this hints at a charge from Honeywell to Collins avionics as the Collins system uses the more traditional ARINC box architecture rather than the Honeywell MAU and hence takes up more space, hence the need for the new nose.
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Cali
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 491
Likes: 21
From: nowhere special
I put this to some senior Leonardo people at an event recently. The senior people were suitably non commital as you would expect from a listed company. The rest of their sales team were..... less inhibited.
Based on the more junior team members the plan is for:
Based on the more junior team members the plan is for:
- More composite to try and reduce the amount of corrosion issues
- More aligned maintenance schedules (like AH have done with the H175/ H160)
- More future proof/ cheaper/ in house avionics
- Strangely power was not mentioned, it's not really an underpowered aircraft at the moment to the best of my knowledge
- Unlikely an increase in MTOW, but possibly a little. If some of the aircraft can be made of composite, you do not need to go above 7T, the lighter EEW takes care of more payload anyway.
Joined: Dec 2022
Posts: 28
Likes: 5
From: Europe
Well, it's about time for new bits and kit.However, I'm much more interested in the h135 and that german cartoon character on the left door.It seems there trying to imply it's faster, and if it's as quick and smooth as the b429 that would be a significant improvement.
Joined: Mar 2024
Posts: 1
Likes: 1
From: India
Nr 102 beyond 90Kt
AW has been very clear about why 102% was incorporated into the design. It is to allow for that extra 2% to be used during rejected take-offs and OEI landings to remain within the min of 90% Nr for OEI landings. It has nothing at all what to do with climb performance, so using it beyond Vtoss has no benefit.
In my opinion waiting until Vy only increases the chance of crews exceeding the 90 knot limitation.
In my opinion waiting until Vy only increases the chance of crews exceeding the 90 knot limitation.
Hi read your message, i think if pilot follows 5 Degree nose up as published take off profile , it never crossed 75-80 kt . So worrying about speed crossing 90kt with Nr 102 is most likely when pilots don't follow published flying technique.