Sikorsky S-92: Operations
When you say "all the pages" do you mean that, or just the basic menus? The RFM Part 2 has a pretty good selection of illustrations If you send me (PM) a file sharing link I can upload a certain well known training provider's training manual which also has a pretty good selection of pictures - and a whole lot more!
Failing that, have you tried the Simulator? Setting up a camera on a tripod looking at the centre MFD, off motion, should give you a good opportunity to get what you want.
Failing that, have you tried the Simulator? Setting up a camera on a tripod looking at the centre MFD, off motion, should give you a good opportunity to get what you want.
Well Known Training Provider
212,
Just a note of caution. If your material comes from that well known training provider by the name of Flight Safety, my recollection, confirmed by a call this morning to a person that is in a position to know, is that they copyright their training materials, so if Chopper Jog is doing this as a business proposition, there could be some legal ramifications. My guess is that Flight Safety looks in on this forum from time to time.
Thanks,
John Dixson
Just a note of caution. If your material comes from that well known training provider by the name of Flight Safety, my recollection, confirmed by a call this morning to a person that is in a position to know, is that they copyright their training materials, so if Chopper Jog is doing this as a business proposition, there could be some legal ramifications. My guess is that Flight Safety looks in on this forum from time to time.
Thanks,
John Dixson
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dubai
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sim is your best proposition, you will find exposure a bit of a pain because of the contrast, you will need surprisingly short exposure times because of the nature of the lit LEDs versus unlit (LEDs emit coherent light). This comes from hours of cursing. It is possible that you will need to de-moire some images and there will be a slight curvature at the corners which can be corrected with a 'photo editing program'.
Another method is to reconstruct them from scratch using word, another one of my specialities - I have high OCD as the rest of the forum will attest to. The advantage of the word method is that once you have established your master frame, all others are relatively simple to construct with simple editing.
TOD
Another method is to reconstruct them from scratch using word, another one of my specialities - I have high OCD as the rest of the forum will attest to. The advantage of the word method is that once you have established your master frame, all others are relatively simple to construct with simple editing.
TOD
Another method is to reconstruct them from scratch using word
I have high OCD as the rest of the forum will attest to
Whats the orange and red on the airspeed tape??
Red is V Alpha Max which I believe corresponds to maximum aft stick
The orange dashes are when V Alpha protection begins
The Amber line is VLS - which I think corresponds to the minimum speed that auto thrust will allow
Something like that - Mr OCD will give you chapter and verse I'm sure!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dubai
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi 212, your explanation will suffice though to be exactly precise, V alpha max can be achieved in other sidestick positions apart from fully aft. I must say I hadn't thought of the table idea, very nice, I will explore it for my A380 dual engine rollback in flight project!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: On the move!
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S92 EFIS Cockpit Project/Presentation
Our Company (Privately owned) is already in contact with Flight Safety, Rockwell Collins and Sikorsky to discuss the copyright and legal issues with the development of this project.
they relate to the Alpha protection
Red is V Alpha Max which I believe corresponds to maximum aft stick
The orange dashes are when V Alpha protection begins
The Amber line is VLS - which I think corresponds to the minimum speed that auto thrust will allow
Red is V Alpha Max which I believe corresponds to maximum aft stick
The orange dashes are when V Alpha protection begins
The Amber line is VLS - which I think corresponds to the minimum speed that auto thrust will allow
Oh sorry, thought this was a fixed wing forum for a moment!!!
HC
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Age: 54
Posts: 178
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Input module chip detect frequency versus flying hours question
Hi all
It's been a while since I posted here. We recently had a input module chip #2 detect that would not clear on Cougar airframe KKN, resulting in the AC requiring a sleepover offshore and servicablility checks prior to being flown back by Cougar. There's a brief synopsis of chip detects over here included in the attached blog entry:
http://bondpapers.********.com/2012/...foundland.html
From what I've been told the MRGB has been changed out on this AC as a proactive measure based on HUMS data trend analysis. Just curious as to what other operators have seen since changeout to the Phase III MRGB wrt. chip failure frequency versus TIS as this issue has not been seen on Cougar's local S-92 fleet HUMS trend data.
Safe flying
Max
It's been a while since I posted here. We recently had a input module chip #2 detect that would not clear on Cougar airframe KKN, resulting in the AC requiring a sleepover offshore and servicablility checks prior to being flown back by Cougar. There's a brief synopsis of chip detects over here included in the attached blog entry:
http://bondpapers.********.com/2012/...foundland.html
From what I've been told the MRGB has been changed out on this AC as a proactive measure based on HUMS data trend analysis. Just curious as to what other operators have seen since changeout to the Phase III MRGB wrt. chip failure frequency versus TIS as this issue has not been seen on Cougar's local S-92 fleet HUMS trend data.
Safe flying
Max
Max,
The "paper" you highlight is of no value and the author is simply showing his ignorance. Such uninformed diatribe is dangerous! For example, included in this wonderful mess are a number of engine chip lights! The engine lube system is totally separate from the MGB lube system.
The input chip detection system has also been subject to a number of modifications over the years to improve the reliability and accuracy of the information given to the crews. Spurious warnings used to be quite common.
The detector itself is both a temp sensor and chip detector. Initially the crew indications didn't differentiate between an input hot or input chip scenario - this was corrected with updates to the aircraft software.
I would be very surprised if there is any correlation between a change of MGB casing design (Phase 3 MGB) and the generation of an input module chip indication.
Edit: Max, I see this is actually "your" list first posted here some time ago. Your original post was immediately followed by someone highlighting the errors in your list that I also mention above. What a shame you decided to ignore the professional advice offered by wrencheli in 2009!
VL
The "paper" you highlight is of no value and the author is simply showing his ignorance. Such uninformed diatribe is dangerous! For example, included in this wonderful mess are a number of engine chip lights! The engine lube system is totally separate from the MGB lube system.
The input chip detection system has also been subject to a number of modifications over the years to improve the reliability and accuracy of the information given to the crews. Spurious warnings used to be quite common.
The detector itself is both a temp sensor and chip detector. Initially the crew indications didn't differentiate between an input hot or input chip scenario - this was corrected with updates to the aircraft software.
I would be very surprised if there is any correlation between a change of MGB casing design (Phase 3 MGB) and the generation of an input module chip indication.
Edit: Max, I see this is actually "your" list first posted here some time ago. Your original post was immediately followed by someone highlighting the errors in your list that I also mention above. What a shame you decided to ignore the professional advice offered by wrencheli in 2009!
VL
Last edited by Variable Load; 27th Mar 2012 at 03:18.
The only relationship with the MGB change, I can think of, is that new gearboxes do routinely make some metal in their early life, and this could have been such an activity - if the input modules were new too. It would not be readily possible for the flight crew to do anything about it, if the chip light didn't clear.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Age: 54
Posts: 178
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VL
Don't quite understand your reply wrt my "list" post or the "paper", The link I included was to a blog entry that came up when I Googled S92 input chip. The point in case you missed it was wrt. the potential correlation between MRGB changeouts and chip detect/HUMS data signature change which we've seen over here recently on only one airframe. Sorry if i have somehow offended you. I don't recall the 2009 post, can you please provide the post # and I'll go back and take a look.
Safe flying
Max
Don't quite understand your reply wrt my "list" post or the "paper", The link I included was to a blog entry that came up when I Googled S92 input chip. The point in case you missed it was wrt. the potential correlation between MRGB changeouts and chip detect/HUMS data signature change which we've seen over here recently on only one airframe. Sorry if i have somehow offended you. I don't recall the 2009 post, can you please provide the post # and I'll go back and take a look.
Safe flying
Max
Max, I will try and make this simple - hopefully you can follow 
You posted a link to a blog as though it was something that was of value. The blog is full of errors, however quite ironically the majority of the information in the blog is referring to a post you made on this thread in 2009. Go to the blog and follow the link "helicopter pilots' discussion site" and you will find yourself at message #1291 on this thread. So your uninformed postings are now being transformed into "professional pilot" comments!
I do hope that you realise that the handful of Cougar S92s are not the only S92s being used out there and that with over 150 airframes in service that a chip light on one machine flying out of St Johns does not really warrant any discussion at all!
Let go and move on......
VL
You posted a link to a blog as though it was something that was of value. The blog is full of errors, however quite ironically the majority of the information in the blog is referring to a post you made on this thread in 2009. Go to the blog and follow the link "helicopter pilots' discussion site" and you will find yourself at message #1291 on this thread. So your uninformed postings are now being transformed into "professional pilot" comments!
I do hope that you realise that the handful of Cougar S92s are not the only S92s being used out there and that with over 150 airframes in service that a chip light on one machine flying out of St Johns does not really warrant any discussion at all!
Let go and move on......
VL
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Age: 54
Posts: 178
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK VL, let's try and move on with constructive discussion on this public forum...the fact of the matter is that the data referred to in my referenced post is from CADORS and is publicly available information. I didn't even realize that the author had referred to the PPRuNe forum until you mentioned it. Please explain how that can be construed as "un-informed"?
Also, the context is perfectly applicable even if the author of the blog has in your opinion misconstrued certain facts. Please elaborate on what exactly the author stated as incorrect. That in itself highlights the lack of clarity present in this industry to the public. Nobody expects people outwith this industry to fully understand all the technical data and interpretations, however is it too much to expect a "laymans" terms announcement to be made that all can understand?
As an engineer in the industry I fully understand the implications of mis-information, that is ultimately how we ended up with 491. Sikorsky even admitted this via out of court settlements. I also understand the fact that nothing happens without a reason, so for a relatively new MRGB and engine set to have chip generation there must be a root cause issue when other airframes as you pointed out do not appear to have this issue. Or is it just not being publicly aired elsewhere, in which case should we not just request less information? Well, the offshore industry over here do not see that as a proactive way forward and the more information released the better, however I do take your point on mis-information.
We are all entitled to our own opinion, I frankly disagree with yours, specifically in reference to your statement that "with over 150 airframes in service that a chip light on one machine flying out of St Johns does not really warrant any discussion at all". IMHO that is how the Broome incident ended up being swept under the carpet and we all know the outcome of that only too well.
We are meant to learn from our mistakes, not bury our head in the sand and introduce complacence. That would be a dis-service to our lost colleagues in this industry.
Safe flying
Max
Also, the context is perfectly applicable even if the author of the blog has in your opinion misconstrued certain facts. Please elaborate on what exactly the author stated as incorrect. That in itself highlights the lack of clarity present in this industry to the public. Nobody expects people outwith this industry to fully understand all the technical data and interpretations, however is it too much to expect a "laymans" terms announcement to be made that all can understand?
As an engineer in the industry I fully understand the implications of mis-information, that is ultimately how we ended up with 491. Sikorsky even admitted this via out of court settlements. I also understand the fact that nothing happens without a reason, so for a relatively new MRGB and engine set to have chip generation there must be a root cause issue when other airframes as you pointed out do not appear to have this issue. Or is it just not being publicly aired elsewhere, in which case should we not just request less information? Well, the offshore industry over here do not see that as a proactive way forward and the more information released the better, however I do take your point on mis-information.
We are all entitled to our own opinion, I frankly disagree with yours, specifically in reference to your statement that "with over 150 airframes in service that a chip light on one machine flying out of St Johns does not really warrant any discussion at all". IMHO that is how the Broome incident ended up being swept under the carpet and we all know the outcome of that only too well.
We are meant to learn from our mistakes, not bury our head in the sand and introduce complacence. That would be a dis-service to our lost colleagues in this industry.
Safe flying
Max
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: in my house
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok, i cant read the blog but from what i am reading i will mention a few things. you can tell me if you think its relevant. or helps in any way.
The MGB may have been changed, but do you know it was PH III or just guessing? either way, it is only the upper casing of the gearbox that is new. the rest could have been an O/H box. when fitting a new MGB, the inputs are removed and fitted to the replacement. therefore could be thousands of hours in use with no O/H.
if an engine and an input get chip warnings at the same time weather both new both old or a mix of the two. they are coincidence. neither is connected to the other in anyway except for the high speed drive shaft and the fwd support tube.
build debris is often found in new or O/H gear boxes, but we know that and take it into account. but it is not unusual to get a chip light on our a/c though rare on or 92's, but if it does happen then a servicabilty check is called up.
if the chip light would not go out, i presume they checked it and if they found nothing on it then its a fault somewhere else in the system more likely.
The MGB may have been changed, but do you know it was PH III or just guessing? either way, it is only the upper casing of the gearbox that is new. the rest could have been an O/H box. when fitting a new MGB, the inputs are removed and fitted to the replacement. therefore could be thousands of hours in use with no O/H.
if an engine and an input get chip warnings at the same time weather both new both old or a mix of the two. they are coincidence. neither is connected to the other in anyway except for the high speed drive shaft and the fwd support tube.
build debris is often found in new or O/H gear boxes, but we know that and take it into account. but it is not unusual to get a chip light on our a/c though rare on or 92's, but if it does happen then a servicabilty check is called up.
if the chip light would not go out, i presume they checked it and if they found nothing on it then its a fault somewhere else in the system more likely.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: St. John's, Newfoundland
Age: 54
Posts: 178
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Ironchefflay
We were informed that all airframes over here had been upgraded to Phase III, last schedule I saw was with a completion date of mid-March. KKN was done a while ago, I'd have to dig through the logistics announcements to confirm when it was upgraded.
Your feedback is much appreciated, I do recall previously we had an airframe that required two engine changes in a matter of days. As you state refurbed parts are commonly used and build debris is common post-rebuild. One would assume that circulation flushing is performed post-rebuild in an attempt to capture the bulk of the resident debris prior to hover checks etc.
Either way I trust the AMEs and pilots to make the right calls. I'm more intrigued on why we had one specific airframe show up this issue in comparison to the rest of the Cougar fleet as they tend to get their TIS spread out. The fact that KKN was previously SAR designation got me wondering about TIS versus the rest of the fleet.
Safe flying
Max
We were informed that all airframes over here had been upgraded to Phase III, last schedule I saw was with a completion date of mid-March. KKN was done a while ago, I'd have to dig through the logistics announcements to confirm when it was upgraded.
Your feedback is much appreciated, I do recall previously we had an airframe that required two engine changes in a matter of days. As you state refurbed parts are commonly used and build debris is common post-rebuild. One would assume that circulation flushing is performed post-rebuild in an attempt to capture the bulk of the resident debris prior to hover checks etc.
Either way I trust the AMEs and pilots to make the right calls. I'm more intrigued on why we had one specific airframe show up this issue in comparison to the rest of the Cougar fleet as they tend to get their TIS spread out. The fact that KKN was previously SAR designation got me wondering about TIS versus the rest of the fleet.
Safe flying
Max
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Scandinavia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first two P:s...
Is there a forum for oil & gas platform workers where I can talk about my worries after the Deepwater Horizon accident? After all, I do land on those floating thingies, and I think I know a lot about their safe operation. 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: retirementland
Age: 79
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Google Step Change in Safety. Though a pilot really would struggle to make a major contribution to a highly specialist industry they know so little about - but at least in the offshore sector everyones comments are welcome.