Heliops: MV Rena article
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Pacific
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heliops: MV Rena article
Without coming across as being too pedantic but I have to ask.....
How does the 214 pilot and the journalist conclude that the 214b is in the same category as a skycrane or chinook? Last time I checked the 234 & the 54/64 have a whole extra engine and can lift, ohhh I dunno roughly 7 tons more at a time than a 214? Maybe I have interpreted it incorrectly but it sounds like the article author is quoting the pilot verbatim.
Are they having a lend or is it just another case of poor unsubstantiated journalism?
How does the 214 pilot and the journalist conclude that the 214b is in the same category as a skycrane or chinook? Last time I checked the 234 & the 54/64 have a whole extra engine and can lift, ohhh I dunno roughly 7 tons more at a time than a 214? Maybe I have interpreted it incorrectly but it sounds like the article author is quoting the pilot verbatim.
Are they having a lend or is it just another case of poor unsubstantiated journalism?
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Global
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Semi Rigid - I know that the author of the story spoke to Piers Harvey and the info from the McDermott/214B side of the story was from him. We also contributed to the story as well. I for one am thankful that someone from the heli media came down to highlight the helicopter operations over the ship.
This is obviously the bit of the story that you are talking about. The way I read it he is just saying the 214B is classed as a heavy lift machine, along the same lines as the Chinook or the Skycrane, not saying it can lift the same as them or is as big as them. Thats how I interpret it anyway 
Cheers.
BOTW.
It’s very stable and up in the category of the Skycrane and Chinook, as a helicopter that’ll do everything extraordinarily well. Its oversize engine and oversize rotor give it tremendous capability and when you get over 40kts it climbs like nothing else. It’ll get to 10,000ft in next to no time and it holds three or four world records for time to altitude.”
Cheers.
BOTW.
I agree that there is no inference that the 214B lifts the same weight as the Crane or the Chook: it is an excellent article with Ned's usual outstanding photos
English interpretation from an Italian!
Let's take another look at the sentence which is causing concern:
This narrative may have been delivered in grade one Australian-speak but, even so, is still decipherable.
An interpretation would read: The Bell 214B is in the same category as the Skycrane and Chinook in that, in the same way as the Skycrane and Chinook do their jobs well, this helicopter also performs it's tasks capably.
Hope this helps!
.. up in the category of the Skycrane and Chinook as a helicopter that’ll do everything extraordinarily well ..
An interpretation would read: The Bell 214B is in the same category as the Skycrane and Chinook in that, in the same way as the Skycrane and Chinook do their jobs well, this helicopter also performs it's tasks capably.
Hope this helps!
Indeed!
Forced to attended British boarding school (along with my brothers) and according to my late father .. "so thatta we donna oll speek as eef we are comeeng froma da mountain villages ofa Lombardia!"
Forced to attended British boarding school (along with my brothers) and according to my late father .. "so thatta we donna oll speek as eef we are comeeng froma da mountain villages ofa Lombardia!"
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Manitoba Canada
Age: 72
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Q . How manny helycopter piluts duz it tayk to understand one sentince .?
A. Onlee won , but hees eyetallyun.
I lerned to reed and rite at hoam wenn I was a kid. Butt the minit I red the hellycoptr comparrison fraze I new watt it ment.
The riter was sayn that the shinook is gud at watt it dus , the 214 is gud at watt itt duz , and the skycrane is good at watt it duz.
Mye inglish teecher tolled me I wud never get beeond the Bell fordy sevin. She wus rite.
A. Onlee won , but hees eyetallyun.
I lerned to reed and rite at hoam wenn I was a kid. Butt the minit I red the hellycoptr comparrison fraze I new watt it ment.
The riter was sayn that the shinook is gud at watt it dus , the 214 is gud at watt itt duz , and the skycrane is good at watt it duz.
Mye inglish teecher tolled me I wud never get beeond the Bell fordy sevin. She wus rite.
Rena salvage
Mr Watson said the Bell 214B helicopter, operated by Australian firm McDermott Aviation, was a "heavy-duty workhorse".
Weighing in at 7272kg and with a maximum payload of 3500kg, it is the largest single-engine helicopter in commercial use in the world.
Is that correct?
Weighing in at 7272kg and with a maximum payload of 3500kg, it is the largest single-engine helicopter in commercial use in the world.
Is that correct?
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 214B has a max gross weight of 16,000 pounds and is certified for 8,000 pounds on the hook.
As far as being the largest single engine heli in commercial operation, probably.
Don't know anything bigger (single) out there now.
The interior is not any bigger than a B205/B212, it does carry one more pax than the other two though. Instead of a forward "4 man seat" you have a "5 man seat".
JD
As far as being the largest single engine heli in commercial operation, probably.
Don't know anything bigger (single) out there now.
The interior is not any bigger than a B205/B212, it does carry one more pax than the other two though. Instead of a forward "4 man seat" you have a "5 man seat".
JD
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Asia
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 'Big Lifter'
It is nearly 40 years since I flew the B214 but as I recall it, at 16,000 lbs you had to have some of the weight on the hook.
The other reference to its impressive time to height is only applicable if you are operating outside the Flight Manual vertical speed limit (2000 fpm?). From personal experience I know that even at 16,000 lbs and ISA +20° at 10,000 feet you could still be doing 4000 feet per minute rate of climb unless you reduced power. As I recall it, the concern was that inertia would keep the aircraft going up following an engine malfunction and that it may not be possible to get into autorotation.
The other reference to its impressive time to height is only applicable if you are operating outside the Flight Manual vertical speed limit (2000 fpm?). From personal experience I know that even at 16,000 lbs and ISA +20° at 10,000 feet you could still be doing 4000 feet per minute rate of climb unless you reduced power. As I recall it, the concern was that inertia would keep the aircraft going up following an engine malfunction and that it may not be possible to get into autorotation.
inertia would keep the aircraft going up following an engine malfunction and that it may not be possible to get into autorotation
I guess you could imagine something similar in a heli... engine stops while zooming up at 4000 fpm, rotor slows, instinctively drop the collective (making things worse), rotor stalls inverted. Anyone who understands the aerodynamics of all this care to comment?
