Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Sikorsky S-92: Operations

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Sikorsky S-92: Operations

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 19th May 2011, 17:50
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Abu Dhabi
Posts: 1,079
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
Sikorsky Aircraft Delivers Three VVIP S-92 Helicopters to Royal Thai Air Force | Vertical - Helicopter News



What's that on the nose? some kind of nightsun/EVS/flir ?

Regards
Aser
Aser is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 22:31
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aser,

Could it be a laser wire/obstacle detection system?

Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be wire strike protection fitted (although I'm not sure if the S92 can be equipped with this option).

Simon
helisdw is offline  
Old 20th May 2011, 03:14
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: in my house
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
never seen wirestrike equipment fitted but is part of the 50hr check to look at it or 'N/A if not fitted'
ironchefflay is offline  
Old 20th May 2011, 04:55
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: 1 Dunghill Mansions, Putney
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
helisdw is correct, it's the EADS HELLAS (HELicopter LASer Radar) system already fitted to the RTAF's 412EPs.



I/C
Ian Corrigible is offline  
Old 20th May 2011, 21:22
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 698
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
CH-148 has wirestrike protection for the FLIR

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/navy_im...rival-10_l.jpg
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 20th May 2011, 23:12
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Durham, NC USA
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Incomplete Installation

It appears as if only parts of the WASP kit were in stalled on this aircraft. In addition to the lower cutter, there should be ramps near the base of the wind screen wipers and a cutter on the upper cowling to protect the rotor parts. In addition, there may be a requirement for additional structure between the windscreen posts left and right of the windscreen center panel.
Jack Carson is offline  
Old 20th May 2011, 23:33
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, it appears so Jack as they also still have the blade droop 'indicators' on the rescue hook assembly.
Dan Reno is offline  
Old 21st May 2011, 18:35
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Operating Costs

Heli-One reports the operating cost of an S-92 at $10K per flight hour for commercial aircraft. At $100+million what is the operating costs of the Canadian military version?

The Sultan
The Sultan is offline  
Old 22nd May 2011, 01:52
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 876
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sultan

That must be an all inclusive rate with crew, capital cost, insurance, hangar, overheads etc.

The actual Nose to Tail Total Assurance Program (TAP) hourly rate for a civil S-92 is less than one quarter of that.
industry insider is offline  
Old 23rd May 2011, 15:12
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 698
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
In addition, I wonder how much it will cost and who will be footing the bill to replace all the MGBs out of the "interim" CH148s with the IDMGB whenever they finally manage to finish it


...and hopefully before then definitively determine the root cause of the foot cracking issue so as not to continue that problem with the new casting.
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 00:14
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 876
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sans

Sikorsky has so far and I understand will continue to foot the bill for all replacement MGB and other product improvements (not options) for the S-92.
industry insider is offline  
Old 24th May 2011, 00:38
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,263
Received 336 Likes on 188 Posts
and other product improvements (not options)
Like the 100 kts wipers oh, no - my mistake
212man is online now  
Old 26th May 2011, 19:12
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Earth
Posts: 698
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
Well I think this has officially surpassed ridiculous

Canada reveals new delay for interim CH-148 delivery

Canada's top defence official said on 26 May that Sikorsky has delayed formal delivery of the first of six interim CH-148 Cyclone maritime helicopters to the third quarter.
The new timetable marks the latest in a long series of delays since Sikorsky was awarded the contract in 2004 to deliver 28 military derivatives of the S-92 under the maritime helicopter programme (MHP).
The original contract called for first delivery in 2009, but Canada last year agreed to accept the first six aircraft with an "interim" capability in November 2010. That schedule was further delayed to the first half of 2011.
It appeared that Sikorsky had met its obligation when the first CH-148 arrived on 13 May at Shearwater, Nova Scotia. But the aircraft has not been formally delivered because Sikorsky failed to meet all of the contractual delivery requirements, Minister of Defence Peter MacKay said in a statement.

Although the first CH-148 is now based with 12 Wing at Shearwater, the first aircraft will remain under Sikorsky's control until the contract is fulfilled, McKay said, adding that milestone is "expected later this summer". Sikorsky must clear a Canadian certification process for military airworthiness and conduct initial training for aircrew before formal delivery is declared, MacKay said.
"The arrival of this helicopter demonstrates progress with this project and brings us one step closer towards the delivery of a maritime helicopter capability," MacKay said.
It was not immediately clear when Sikorsky will deliver the five other interim helicopters, or the remaining 22 CH-148s with a full capability suite. As of last July, Sikorsky was required to deliver the CH-148s with full capability by June 2012.
The six interim helicopters are being delivered without some operational software, maximum engine power, full endurance and automated datalinks.

Last edited by Senior Pilot; 26th May 2011 at 21:35. Reason: Add quote from link
SansAnhedral is offline  
Old 27th May 2011, 10:45
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,332
Received 623 Likes on 271 Posts
I guess the Sikorsky management must rue the day the MRGB failed its run-dry test and they decided not to redesign it, electing to push on with the 'extremely remote' fix instead - it must have cost them a fortune and badly tainted their reputation. Did anyone get fired?
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2011, 15:10
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Croydon
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Crab

A few Haddon-Cave salmon letters are certainly in order me thinks.

Today there is yet another FAA AD on the S-92 Main Gear Box:

We are adopting a new AD for the Sikorsky Model S-92A helicopters. This AD requires an NDI, eddy current or FPI, of each MGB upper housing assembly rib on the left, right, and forward MGB mounting foot for a crack because it cannot be detected visually.

This AD is prompted by a report of a crack found on the MGB upper housing assembly left mounting foot forward rib during removal of an MGB that had reached its life limit of 1,000 hours TIS.

The MGB mounting foot has a history of two types of cracks. The visual inspection for these two types of cracks is required in AD 2010-24-04 (75 FR 70812, November 19, 2010).

The discovery of a third type of crack on the left mounting foot forward rib may not be reliably detected by visual inspection.

This condition, if not detected and corrected, could result in loss of the MGB, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.
squib66 is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2011, 16:47
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,332
Received 623 Likes on 271 Posts
And perhaps they also wish they had gone with a 5-bladed MR which seems to work so well on similar size helos produced by Sikorsky in the past

Although, given the cracks in the I-beams on the Sea King perhaps high levels of vibration and MRGB cracks are just a Sikorsky trademark
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2011, 11:00
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: yeovil
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
... or perhaps the Canadians should have had the NSA/NSH, which would have meant delivery many years ago and several years of unexciting but effective service?
nimby is offline  
Old 4th Jun 2011, 17:59
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Industry Insider:

Heli-One was say operating cost (i.e. DOC) was 10K per flight hour. Now that we know from the latest AD that the transmission case is $500 dollars per hour that makes sense.

The Sultan
The Sultan is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2011, 04:36
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 876
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sultan

DOC? DMC? Which one do you mean?

They are very different as I am sure you know.
industry insider is offline  
Old 5th Jun 2011, 17:27
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Arlington, Tx. US
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
II

Where is the confusion. Heli-One says operating cost, not maintenance cost.

The Sultan
The Sultan is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.