North Sea heli ditching: Oct 2012
Sorry HC I edited my post. If EC can break shafts at will then it also suggests that EC can avoid breaking shafts, or at least on demand. Therefore one might suggest that whatever they do to break them at will is something to avoid....?
HC,
As I have flown neither....I have no axe to grind.
I did not have you in mind in particular....but since you leaped into the conversation....you do have to admit the significance of the problem AND the cure....has affected the 225 far worse than the 92.
You can carry on with your argument about the design superiority of the 225 over the 92 with someone from Sikorsky if you wish.
As to calling the 225 superior to the 92 is your opinion that does seem to be challenged by the current situation.
I understand your loyalty to the 225.....as you have a lot of personal involvement in that program with your employer....thus also some sensitivity to any criticism of the 225 and EC.
Neither EC or SK are without fault, just as the Certification Authorities are alsonot without fault.....and as to the 92....there was some Operator errors as well. So please don't try to trivialize the situation as you and the rest of us know it is a far more complex situation than your post would suggest.
As I have flown neither....I have no axe to grind.
I did not have you in mind in particular....but since you leaped into the conversation....you do have to admit the significance of the problem AND the cure....has affected the 225 far worse than the 92.
You can carry on with your argument about the design superiority of the 225 over the 92 with someone from Sikorsky if you wish.
As to calling the 225 superior to the 92 is your opinion that does seem to be challenged by the current situation.
I understand your loyalty to the 225.....as you have a lot of personal involvement in that program with your employer....thus also some sensitivity to any criticism of the 225 and EC.
Neither EC or SK are without fault, just as the Certification Authorities are alsonot without fault.....and as to the 92....there was some Operator errors as well. So please don't try to trivialize the situation as you and the rest of us know it is a far more complex situation than your post would suggest.
Pittsextra
If EC can break shafts at will then it also suggests that EC can avoid breaking shafts, or at least on demand. Therefore one might suggest that whatever they do to break them at will is something to avoid....?
If EC can break shafts at will then it also suggests that EC can avoid breaking shafts, or at least on demand. Therefore one might suggest that whatever they do to break them at will is something to avoid....?
SAS , if you want to take the line that the S92 is superior to the 225 simply because its not currently grounded, that is your prerogative but not a helpful one because by the same measure that means an R22 is equally superior to the EC225.
Last edited by HeliComparator; 23rd May 2013 at 13:40.
Yes HC i would agree with the comments around operation otherwise one would have expected some caution around that?? However it does seem rather odd that not a single other machine even displayed a cracked shaft beyond the accident machines, and perhaps it is in fact the specific nature that is causing the real issue.
If minute 15:21 to 17:00 is any indication (in the video below) then of course one might suggest that a specific version of FADEC, in specific conditions, would fall into the operation category, especially if it relates to this:-
EASA Airworthiness Directives Publishing Tool
100K hours of which CHCN looks to have been the fleet leader at 3845hrs....
If minute 15:21 to 17:00 is any indication (in the video below) then of course one might suggest that a specific version of FADEC, in specific conditions, would fall into the operation category, especially if it relates to this:-
EASA Airworthiness Directives Publishing Tool
100K hours of which CHCN looks to have been the fleet leader at 3845hrs....
Last edited by Pittsextra; 23rd May 2013 at 19:38.
Kind of takes you back to when the Norwegian S-61's were shucking Spindles but the UK machines were not. Ultimately it was found to be an operational issue.
HC, if you want to use Passengers Carried as the criteria.....you might be onto something....your Company Jet Rangers are carrying more passengers than the 225 fleet I bet.
HC, if you want to use Passengers Carried as the criteria.....you might be onto something....your Company Jet Rangers are carrying more passengers than the 225 fleet I bet.
Last edited by SASless; 23rd May 2013 at 13:48.
Did I miss something and they managed to stop the the Gearbox Housing feet from cracking?
Did I miss something and they managed to get the Level of vibrations down to a reasonable level?
Did I miss something and the S-92 meanwhile achieves the same payload/range as the EC225?
(And I'm writing this not to denegrate the S-92, rather just to show how easy blunt bashing is)
I understand nationalistic pride (and I'm from neither Manufacturer's County) but does the S-92 really deserve this blind defending or is the denigration of the competing model simply because you know of all the shortcomings of your national manufacturer's product and you're looking for revenge?
I tried to keep out of this but your constant gleeful bashing really starts to get annoying even for the otherwise quiet reader...
And now after having vented back to lurking...
Blind defense?
Oh do tell us how you arrived at that conclusion?
In case you failed reading comprehension.....or just did not read what is posted.....back up a few posts on the same page and digest what I said.
Oh do tell us how you arrived at that conclusion?
In case you failed reading comprehension.....or just did not read what is posted.....back up a few posts on the same page and digest what I said.
Neither EC or SK are without fault, just as the Certification Authorities are also not without fault.....and as to the 92....there was some Operator errors as well.
Last edited by SASless; 23rd May 2013 at 19:09.
OK, you are insofar right as you did not directly defend it. You did it indirectly by talking down the competitor. Along the lines: "You know, our Gear Box Problems aren't as big, just look at how bad it is with the competitor".
Edit:
No, I didn't fail reading comprehension nor did I oversee that bit.
But I considered it rather a fig leaf to somewhat disguise your rather open bashing. I sometimes use this tactic myself, you know...
/Edit.
Even though I have absolutely no relation to EC or the 225 it reached the point where it became simply too much.
This is not youtube...
And from other Posts of you I know you can do better.
Edit:
In case you failed reading comprehension.....or just did not read what is posted.....back up a few posts on the same page and digest what I said.
But I considered it rather a fig leaf to somewhat disguise your rather open bashing. I sometimes use this tactic myself, you know...
/Edit.
Even though I have absolutely no relation to EC or the 225 it reached the point where it became simply too much.
This is not youtube...
And from other Posts of you I know you can do better.
Last edited by henra; 23rd May 2013 at 19:54.
SAS
The only statistics that count are souls lost. In the OGP world do you know what the count is between the 235 and the 92 for mechanical failure? When you add that known critical faults were allowed to fly until a major casualty event no one can say the 92 is safer than the 235.
The Sultan
The only statistics that count are souls lost. In the OGP world do you know what the count is between the 235 and the 92 for mechanical failure? When you add that known critical faults were allowed to fly until a major casualty event no one can say the 92 is safer than the 235.
The Sultan
SAS
The only statistics that count are souls lost. In the OGP world do you know what the count is between the 235 and the 92 for mechanical failure? When you add that known critical faults were allowed to fly until a major casualty event no one can say the 92 is safer than the 235.
The Sultan
The only statistics that count are souls lost. In the OGP world do you know what the count is between the 235 and the 92 for mechanical failure? When you add that known critical faults were allowed to fly until a major casualty event no one can say the 92 is safer than the 235.
The Sultan
Sultan, is the EC 235 the EC225 with the new shaft?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
SASless, I have not flown the S92 but I am involved in the EC225. As you have flown neither I doubt you would have a scooby of which I am about to speak. The EC225 is a wolf in sheeps clothing. It has its issues, before the shaft event, like the same cabin as its Puma stable mates which of course one could make a good argument to say the S92 in this respect is better. The Bears certainly love the space.
However, the EC225 is a significant technological leap forward from the S92 or indeed any other machine flying currently. Incidently, the EC175 takes another leap forward again and I have had the good fortune to fly it too.
For those of us who have lived and operated with the EC225 we recognise the significant enhancements in safety and payload/range that the EC225 represents, and I say this in full knowledge that the poor old girl has thus far not cause any loss of life. I am fairly certain that such a statement cannot be said of any other helicopter in the air today.
The S92 is certailny a fine ship with some good qualities for sure, but make no mistake, it is not even in the same stable as the EC225. It is one generation at least behind it.
Your constant jingoistic jibes protray you as you are. Ill informed and ignorant of even the most basic facts. If I was able to give you just 15 minutes of time in the EC225 you would change your perspective forever.
You are backing the wrong horse from a technological perspective.
No doubt in regards to your private portfolio you are probably doing the right thing. Just don't try to hide behind your real motivation to those who know. Your opinions are poorly concieved and your arguments are thin reflections of a mind void of the advantages of facts.
DB
However, the EC225 is a significant technological leap forward from the S92 or indeed any other machine flying currently. Incidently, the EC175 takes another leap forward again and I have had the good fortune to fly it too.
For those of us who have lived and operated with the EC225 we recognise the significant enhancements in safety and payload/range that the EC225 represents, and I say this in full knowledge that the poor old girl has thus far not cause any loss of life. I am fairly certain that such a statement cannot be said of any other helicopter in the air today.
The S92 is certailny a fine ship with some good qualities for sure, but make no mistake, it is not even in the same stable as the EC225. It is one generation at least behind it.
Your constant jingoistic jibes protray you as you are. Ill informed and ignorant of even the most basic facts. If I was able to give you just 15 minutes of time in the EC225 you would change your perspective forever.
You are backing the wrong horse from a technological perspective.
No doubt in regards to your private portfolio you are probably doing the right thing. Just don't try to hide behind your real motivation to those who know. Your opinions are poorly concieved and your arguments are thin reflections of a mind void of the advantages of facts.
DB
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West coast Australia :)
Posts: 238
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DOUBLE BOGEY
You are backing the wrong horse from a technological perspective.
DB not having a go just expanding your point for those who have yet the pleasure to fly an EC225.
Si
Last edited by bigglesbutler; 24th May 2013 at 07:04.
Well happily the button pressing seems set to resume very soon...although it seems nobody told Bristow, or maybe after the last time they back peddled enough??
(Dow Jones) - EC225 helicopters, widely used to transport personnel and equipment to offshore oil rigs around the world, are expected to resume service within a few weeks after being grounded for nearly eight months because of engine problems, although two of its major players are not in agreement on the calendar.
Most EC225 helicopters are capitalized since October 2012, after two helicopters were forced to land in the North Sea due to damage.
Canadian CHC Helicopter operates 30 helicopters and fixed said Thursday expect that the resumption of flights of EC225 is "a matter of weeks," according to the approval of regulators and customers.
Rival Bristow Group (BRS), however, does not expect that its ten EC225 to be allowed to fly again until the fourth quarter.
Eurocopter, a subsidiary of EADS, said in recent weeks the helicopter operators and their customers have discovered the cause of the incident last year. The group is working with regulators to temporary solutions and a new design of the gearbox of the helicopter, which, according to Bristow, could take more than a year.
"Eurocopter is confident that once the safety measures approved by the authorities, the first EC225 will resume full operation by the end of June [or] in mid-July 2013," said the manufacturer in a email.
-Doug Cameron, Dow Jones Newswires
(Dow Jones) - EC225 helicopters, widely used to transport personnel and equipment to offshore oil rigs around the world, are expected to resume service within a few weeks after being grounded for nearly eight months because of engine problems, although two of its major players are not in agreement on the calendar.
Most EC225 helicopters are capitalized since October 2012, after two helicopters were forced to land in the North Sea due to damage.
Canadian CHC Helicopter operates 30 helicopters and fixed said Thursday expect that the resumption of flights of EC225 is "a matter of weeks," according to the approval of regulators and customers.
Rival Bristow Group (BRS), however, does not expect that its ten EC225 to be allowed to fly again until the fourth quarter.
Eurocopter, a subsidiary of EADS, said in recent weeks the helicopter operators and their customers have discovered the cause of the incident last year. The group is working with regulators to temporary solutions and a new design of the gearbox of the helicopter, which, according to Bristow, could take more than a year.
"Eurocopter is confident that once the safety measures approved by the authorities, the first EC225 will resume full operation by the end of June [or] in mid-July 2013," said the manufacturer in a email.
-Doug Cameron, Dow Jones Newswires
When CHC resumes, or attempts to resume North Sea operations with the EC225, as they seem to be preparing for now, the question will almost certainly be raised as to why Bristow isn't following suit.
The CEO of Bristow has made it plain that he won't allow operations to resume until all the safety issues pertaining to the gearbox have been resolved and he's absolutely correct.
I'm not going to risk being the first to reveal that while an intelligent plan has been devised to allow the existing shaft to continue in service, there is still another matter which has to be properly addressed.
Bristow has never compromised on safety in my experience and I'm glad that Mr. Chiles is at the helm to continue that tradition. I've no doubt that shortly another little matter will become public knowledge and that it will most likely cause another delay.
The CEO of Bristow has made it plain that he won't allow operations to resume until all the safety issues pertaining to the gearbox have been resolved and he's absolutely correct.
I'm not going to risk being the first to reveal that while an intelligent plan has been devised to allow the existing shaft to continue in service, there is still another matter which has to be properly addressed.
Bristow has never compromised on safety in my experience and I'm glad that Mr. Chiles is at the helm to continue that tradition. I've no doubt that shortly another little matter will become public knowledge and that it will most likely cause another delay.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Denmark
Age: 42
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. 2582-S-00
Revision 0 2013-05-24 Page 1/3
This document is available on the internet: www.eurocopter.com/techpub
SAFETY INFORMATION NOTICE
SUBJECT: GENERAL
EC225/EC725 Main Gearbox Technical Investigation Update, Proposed
Improved Safety Measures and EC225 Roadmap for the complete
Return-to-Service
AIRCRAFT
CONCERNED
Version(s)
Civil Military
EC225 LP
EC725 AP
Introduction
In 2012 two EC225 helicopters made controlled water landings in the North Sea. In both incidents, the bevel gear
shaft which drives the MGB oil pumps cracked and ruptured after several further flying hours. This rupture resulted
in loss of oil pressure necessary for the MGB lubrication and along with an indicated failure of the emergency
lubrication system (EMLUB) resulted in a checklist action to land immediately.
Subsequent to the two events, protective measures were approved by EASA to permit those helicopters fitted with
similar shafts to continue flying. These measures have been implemented by a number of operators representing
approximately 50% of the affected fleet. Since the second event, in October 2012, approximately 100
EC225/EC725 and some Super Puma helicopters with similar shafts have continued to fly and these helicopters
have flown approximately 20 000 flight hours without any crack incident.
The aim of this Safety Information Notice is to update you with more detail on the technical investigation of the
EC225/EC725 Main Gear Box (MGB) events. In addition, we will present some new safety measures and provide a
roadmap to facilitate a common baseline for planning purposes. For some EC225/EC725 operators that are
currently flying, these new measures will simplify the operation and support of their aircraft. They will also lift some
restrictions for the operators’ aircraft which are equipped with the Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS).
The EUROCOPTER technical investigation has now determined the root causes of the crack initiation and the
characteristics of the subsequent crack propagation. Further safety measures are now being proposed by
EUROCOPTER in order to support the aircraft currently in flight and to allow the suspended fleet to safely return to
flight, starting in June/July 2013. These safety measures and their implementation are described below.
In the longer term, all affected shafts in the EC225/EC725 fleet will be replaced by new shafts. These new shafts
will have a modified design to eliminate any risk of crack initiation.
For the attention of
No. 2582-S-00
Revision 0 2013-05-24 Page 2/3
This document is available on the internet: www.eurocopter.com/techpub
Technical Investigation
The technical investigation has identified a combination of three root causes of crack initiation:
- Active corrosion in localised areas of the shaft;
- Reduced fatigue strength due to residual stresses inherent in the welding process; and
- Reduced fatigue strength due to stress “hot spots”.
As a result of identifying these root causes, we are able to propose:
- Additional Safety measures designed to significantly reduce the risk of crack initiation.
- New Safety measures, easier to apply than the current ones which in the unlikely event that a crack is initiated
provide warning and prevent failure.
For those operators not flying, our recommendation is that these measures should be implemented as part of a
return to service safety case. These new safety measures are detailed below.
New Safety Measures
A number of new safety measures are being discussed with the regulatory authorities. These include:
- Introduction of a shaft cleaning procedure which removes the presence of mud generated by the wear of the
splines and thus the localised humid environment on the shaft, thereby significantly reducing the possibility of
active corrosion and the likelihood of crack initiation.
- Replacement of one of the main gearbox oil jet pipes to provide permanent shaft cleaning and improved splines
lubrication.
- Introduction of an ultrasonic non-destructive inspection (NDI) as an alternative to the current eddy current
procedure. This NDI procedure, significantly faster to apply compared to the Eddy Current NDI ensures that crack
initiation should be identified before flight. The periodicity of this inspection procedure is under discussion with the
authorities and is expected to be set to permit approximately 8-10 hours flight between inspections.
- Certification of a HUMS based in-flight shaft monitoring system. When fitted, this system will consist of an
on-board cockpit amber warning to signal in-flight if vibration levels that indicate the presence of a crack. In the
event of a warning, the aircraft will continue to safely operate for sufficient flight time to permit the pilot to return to
base or perform a normal landing. Although subject to approval by the authorities, we anticipate that a flight time
of two (2) hours will be allowed following the initiation of an in-flight warning.
The shaft cleaning maintenance procedure is expected to be available in June 2013. This procedure will require
draining the MGB but does not require any new or special tools, skills, parts or consumables.
The replacement oil jet is currently being procured and is expected to be available from June 2013.
The process for performing the ultrasonic NDI inspection will be published beginning of June 2013. EUROCOPTER
training for your ultrasonic NDI inspectors will commence from 10th June. Planning is currently underway.
EUROCOPTER is studying how best to meet operator needs for additional qualified resources for these
inspections. The ultrasonic NDI inspection will require a standard ultrasonic test set and endoscope available at
your facilities, along with specific probes which EUROCOPTER will provide.
Certification of the HUMS based in-flight shaft monitoring system is expected by beginning of June 2013. Parts
ordering and aircraft modification can commence from June 2013, when the Service Bulletin is expected to be
issued.
No. 2582-S-00
Revision 0 2013-05-24 Page 3/3
This document is available on the internet: www.eurocopter.com/techpub
For aircraft equipped with HUMS, our aim is that the on-board shaft monitoring will in itself be sufficient to enable
the authorities to lift the flight restrictions over hostile terrain. For aircraft not equipped with HUMS, our aim is that
the ultrasonic NDI procedure will become an alternative to the current eddy current procedure. The classification of
which safety measures are mandatory and which are recommended is currently under discussion with the
authorities.
New Shaft Definition
In addition to these additional safety measures, the long term solution to prevent crack recurrence is to redesign
the shaft.
The redesigned shaft is expected to be certified in 2014. Production will commence in parallel with the certification
process. Production will be increased to a maximum rate to permit fleet retrofit to commence from the third quarter
of 2014. All newly delivered aircraft will be fitted with the new shafts.
The retrofit of the shafts in-service is expected to be conducted during the scheduled MGB overhaul, meaning that
the safety measures will be in-place until then. We are working hard to decrease the retrofit lead times and we will
inform you regularly on the improvements made.
Additional Information
Whilst not key contributors to the ditching root causes, the investigation unearthed some additional issues and
associated solutions:
- The emergency lubrication (EMLUB) system operated correctly but indicated failure due to a wiring problem. As a
first step the wiring on all aircraft has now been corrected. Further improvements are now planned to enhance the
effectiveness of the system. It will mainly consist of a glycol pump improvement and more precise periodic
maintenance. Detailed information on the EMLUB modifications will be published in an ALERT SERVICE
BULLETIN and a Safety Information Notice next week.
- The crash position indicator operated as designed, but it was not described in the Flight Manual. An update to the
Flight Manual has been implemented.
Way Ahead
The EUROCOPTER investigation methodology (root cause analysis) is currently being validated by the
airworthiness authorities and verified by an independent specialist, Shainin Engineering. At the same time the crack
propagation investigation is being independently assessed by the Georgia Technology Research Institute (GTRI).
Current discussions with the airworthiness authorities lead us to conclude that all approvals and validations should
be completed by June 2013. In this case EUROCOPTER estimates that the first helicopters will be ready to
return-to-service by the end of June/July 2013.
This Safety Information Notice will be updated in the first half of June, in order to describe in details the new
measures, and to allow you to better understand how the measures are linked and how they can be used.
Revision 0 2013-05-24 Page 1/3
This document is available on the internet: www.eurocopter.com/techpub
SAFETY INFORMATION NOTICE
SUBJECT: GENERAL
EC225/EC725 Main Gearbox Technical Investigation Update, Proposed
Improved Safety Measures and EC225 Roadmap for the complete
Return-to-Service
AIRCRAFT
CONCERNED
Version(s)
Civil Military
EC225 LP
EC725 AP
Introduction
In 2012 two EC225 helicopters made controlled water landings in the North Sea. In both incidents, the bevel gear
shaft which drives the MGB oil pumps cracked and ruptured after several further flying hours. This rupture resulted
in loss of oil pressure necessary for the MGB lubrication and along with an indicated failure of the emergency
lubrication system (EMLUB) resulted in a checklist action to land immediately.
Subsequent to the two events, protective measures were approved by EASA to permit those helicopters fitted with
similar shafts to continue flying. These measures have been implemented by a number of operators representing
approximately 50% of the affected fleet. Since the second event, in October 2012, approximately 100
EC225/EC725 and some Super Puma helicopters with similar shafts have continued to fly and these helicopters
have flown approximately 20 000 flight hours without any crack incident.
The aim of this Safety Information Notice is to update you with more detail on the technical investigation of the
EC225/EC725 Main Gear Box (MGB) events. In addition, we will present some new safety measures and provide a
roadmap to facilitate a common baseline for planning purposes. For some EC225/EC725 operators that are
currently flying, these new measures will simplify the operation and support of their aircraft. They will also lift some
restrictions for the operators’ aircraft which are equipped with the Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS).
The EUROCOPTER technical investigation has now determined the root causes of the crack initiation and the
characteristics of the subsequent crack propagation. Further safety measures are now being proposed by
EUROCOPTER in order to support the aircraft currently in flight and to allow the suspended fleet to safely return to
flight, starting in June/July 2013. These safety measures and their implementation are described below.
In the longer term, all affected shafts in the EC225/EC725 fleet will be replaced by new shafts. These new shafts
will have a modified design to eliminate any risk of crack initiation.
For the attention of
No. 2582-S-00
Revision 0 2013-05-24 Page 2/3
This document is available on the internet: www.eurocopter.com/techpub
Technical Investigation
The technical investigation has identified a combination of three root causes of crack initiation:
- Active corrosion in localised areas of the shaft;
- Reduced fatigue strength due to residual stresses inherent in the welding process; and
- Reduced fatigue strength due to stress “hot spots”.
As a result of identifying these root causes, we are able to propose:
- Additional Safety measures designed to significantly reduce the risk of crack initiation.
- New Safety measures, easier to apply than the current ones which in the unlikely event that a crack is initiated
provide warning and prevent failure.
For those operators not flying, our recommendation is that these measures should be implemented as part of a
return to service safety case. These new safety measures are detailed below.
New Safety Measures
A number of new safety measures are being discussed with the regulatory authorities. These include:
- Introduction of a shaft cleaning procedure which removes the presence of mud generated by the wear of the
splines and thus the localised humid environment on the shaft, thereby significantly reducing the possibility of
active corrosion and the likelihood of crack initiation.
- Replacement of one of the main gearbox oil jet pipes to provide permanent shaft cleaning and improved splines
lubrication.
- Introduction of an ultrasonic non-destructive inspection (NDI) as an alternative to the current eddy current
procedure. This NDI procedure, significantly faster to apply compared to the Eddy Current NDI ensures that crack
initiation should be identified before flight. The periodicity of this inspection procedure is under discussion with the
authorities and is expected to be set to permit approximately 8-10 hours flight between inspections.
- Certification of a HUMS based in-flight shaft monitoring system. When fitted, this system will consist of an
on-board cockpit amber warning to signal in-flight if vibration levels that indicate the presence of a crack. In the
event of a warning, the aircraft will continue to safely operate for sufficient flight time to permit the pilot to return to
base or perform a normal landing. Although subject to approval by the authorities, we anticipate that a flight time
of two (2) hours will be allowed following the initiation of an in-flight warning.
The shaft cleaning maintenance procedure is expected to be available in June 2013. This procedure will require
draining the MGB but does not require any new or special tools, skills, parts or consumables.
The replacement oil jet is currently being procured and is expected to be available from June 2013.
The process for performing the ultrasonic NDI inspection will be published beginning of June 2013. EUROCOPTER
training for your ultrasonic NDI inspectors will commence from 10th June. Planning is currently underway.
EUROCOPTER is studying how best to meet operator needs for additional qualified resources for these
inspections. The ultrasonic NDI inspection will require a standard ultrasonic test set and endoscope available at
your facilities, along with specific probes which EUROCOPTER will provide.
Certification of the HUMS based in-flight shaft monitoring system is expected by beginning of June 2013. Parts
ordering and aircraft modification can commence from June 2013, when the Service Bulletin is expected to be
issued.
No. 2582-S-00
Revision 0 2013-05-24 Page 3/3
This document is available on the internet: www.eurocopter.com/techpub
For aircraft equipped with HUMS, our aim is that the on-board shaft monitoring will in itself be sufficient to enable
the authorities to lift the flight restrictions over hostile terrain. For aircraft not equipped with HUMS, our aim is that
the ultrasonic NDI procedure will become an alternative to the current eddy current procedure. The classification of
which safety measures are mandatory and which are recommended is currently under discussion with the
authorities.
New Shaft Definition
In addition to these additional safety measures, the long term solution to prevent crack recurrence is to redesign
the shaft.
The redesigned shaft is expected to be certified in 2014. Production will commence in parallel with the certification
process. Production will be increased to a maximum rate to permit fleet retrofit to commence from the third quarter
of 2014. All newly delivered aircraft will be fitted with the new shafts.
The retrofit of the shafts in-service is expected to be conducted during the scheduled MGB overhaul, meaning that
the safety measures will be in-place until then. We are working hard to decrease the retrofit lead times and we will
inform you regularly on the improvements made.
Additional Information
Whilst not key contributors to the ditching root causes, the investigation unearthed some additional issues and
associated solutions:
- The emergency lubrication (EMLUB) system operated correctly but indicated failure due to a wiring problem. As a
first step the wiring on all aircraft has now been corrected. Further improvements are now planned to enhance the
effectiveness of the system. It will mainly consist of a glycol pump improvement and more precise periodic
maintenance. Detailed information on the EMLUB modifications will be published in an ALERT SERVICE
BULLETIN and a Safety Information Notice next week.
- The crash position indicator operated as designed, but it was not described in the Flight Manual. An update to the
Flight Manual has been implemented.
Way Ahead
The EUROCOPTER investigation methodology (root cause analysis) is currently being validated by the
airworthiness authorities and verified by an independent specialist, Shainin Engineering. At the same time the crack
propagation investigation is being independently assessed by the Georgia Technology Research Institute (GTRI).
Current discussions with the airworthiness authorities lead us to conclude that all approvals and validations should
be completed by June 2013. In this case EUROCOPTER estimates that the first helicopters will be ready to
return-to-service by the end of June/July 2013.
This Safety Information Notice will be updated in the first half of June, in order to describe in details the new
measures, and to allow you to better understand how the measures are linked and how they can be used.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
225 return to service
The crash position indicator operated as designed, but it was not described in the Flight Manual. An update to the
Flight Manual has been implemented.
Flight Manual has been implemented.
