AS355 N Questions
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
From: australia
AS355 N Questions
Hello,
Can I can get some feed back overall about the AS355N
Pro's/Con's
Fuel Burns at Max Con, particularly SL-2000'
External load capability
Maintenance Costs/ Reliability
Cheers,
Can I can get some feed back overall about the AS355N
Pro's/Con's
Fuel Burns at Max Con, particularly SL-2000'
External load capability
Maintenance Costs/ Reliability
Cheers,
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
From: Around the world
I flew one year ago 355N in west Africa and we didn't have any problem with the engines but we changed a couple of fuel controls...
It may be for landings in the bush in areas with plenty of sand everywhere...
We loading maximum 700 kg and the oat was between 30-40 degrees Celsium almost of the days..
It may be for landings in the bush in areas with plenty of sand everywhere...
We loading maximum 700 kg and the oat was between 30-40 degrees Celsium almost of the days..
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
From: Asia/Oz
I don't agree with a couple of the negative comments and would be interested to hear what they are based on. I have several thousand hours experience on the 355N and have found it to be a great little all round light twin. Good CAT A/ single engine performance, very versatile and reliable. Lots of STC's for camera mounts, etc. A great option if you're looking for a relatively cheap light twin with PC1 capability.
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
From: N/A
err but look how it compares to the single (twice the payload and more margin for all the other critical components) , looks ridiculous to carry your spare engine with you everywhere for the whole life of the helicopter 'just in case'. Too much safety 'theory'.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
From: saint martin
Cannot compare a single with a twin
is a different filosofy.If you talk about power ofcourse I will choose a B3 for sling,but fly over the forest or open water I will choose the 355N.
I just say that the 355N is very good twin and you can also sling with a decent power and you can compare like a B2.In OEI is very good and give you a good margins.
is a different filosofy.If you talk about power ofcourse I will choose a B3 for sling,but fly over the forest or open water I will choose the 355N.
I just say that the 355N is very good twin and you can also sling with a decent power and you can compare like a B2.In OEI is very good and give you a good margins.
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
From: N/A
"We all know a single engine like B3 is better for sling but we have to meet the clients requirements and if they require a light twin"
Then tell the client that requiring the twin is not bright. If a twin has to make 2 trips instead of 1 then there is more exposure, 4 engine trips and 2 times the exposure of other critical components to achieve the same thing payload transfer.
Twin mania needs to tone down.
The OEI performance of a single is not as bad as people make out, it just means you have to land imediately, its rare and the outcome is also rarely bad enough to justify the downside of the twin. (and we have already seen that 2 engines does not make the need to land immediately 1x10-9 rare, nonsense untrue maths)
anyway if you really had to be in a twin (for some reason) the 355n is a good machine, i do agree
Then tell the client that requiring the twin is not bright. If a twin has to make 2 trips instead of 1 then there is more exposure, 4 engine trips and 2 times the exposure of other critical components to achieve the same thing payload transfer.
Twin mania needs to tone down.
The OEI performance of a single is not as bad as people make out, it just means you have to land imediately, its rare and the outcome is also rarely bad enough to justify the downside of the twin. (and we have already seen that 2 engines does not make the need to land immediately 1x10-9 rare, nonsense untrue maths)
anyway if you really had to be in a twin (for some reason) the 355n is a good machine, i do agree
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 557
Likes: 27
From: At home
Anfi,
What's that about being bright?!?
Ever seen what the outcome of an engine failure in a single over 150ft rainforest looks like??? Well, there are still a number of missing aircrafts around the Amazon from that reason.
You have to understand, that there are some places you just can't ''land immediately''. Some places you crash, and then you fall the 50 odd meters to the ground after going through the canopy.... in those cases I'd rather punch off the load (if externally) and pull back on the power and RTB, rather than trying the above mentioned scenario.
If the client are willing to pay the extra for the twin and get less efficiency, well what's wrong with that??:roll eyes:
As for this
The loads very often is in the region of 6-700kg in any case, (heavy equipment which is split into main components) so to save the amount of trips the loads would be 12-1400kg's which would be too heavy in any case even for a B3e due to the temp.
Then tell the client that requiring the twin is not bright
The OEI performance of a single is not as bad as people make out, it just means you have to land imediately, its rare and the outcome is also rarely bad enough to justify the downside of the twin
You have to understand, that there are some places you just can't ''land immediately''. Some places you crash, and then you fall the 50 odd meters to the ground after going through the canopy.... in those cases I'd rather punch off the load (if externally) and pull back on the power and RTB, rather than trying the above mentioned scenario.
If the client are willing to pay the extra for the twin and get less efficiency, well what's wrong with that??:roll eyes:
As for this
If a twin has to make 2 trips instead of 1 then there is more exposure, 4 engine trips and 2 times the exposure of other critical components to achieve the same thing payload transfer.
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
From: N/A
Anfi,
Ever seen what the outcome of an engine failure in a single over 150ft rainforest looks like??? Well, there are still a number of missing aircrafts around the Amazon from that reason.
You have to understand, that there are some places you just can't ''land immediately''. Some places you crash, and then you fall the 50 odd meters to the ground after going through the canopy.... in those cases I'd rather punch off the load (if externally) and pull back on the power and RTB, rather than trying the above mentioned scenario.
If the client are willing to pay the extra for the twin and get less efficiency, well what's wrong with that??:roll eyes:
Ever seen what the outcome of an engine failure in a single over 150ft rainforest looks like??? Well, there are still a number of missing aircrafts around the Amazon from that reason.
You have to understand, that there are some places you just can't ''land immediately''. Some places you crash, and then you fall the 50 odd meters to the ground after going through the canopy.... in those cases I'd rather punch off the load (if externally) and pull back on the power and RTB, rather than trying the above mentioned scenario.
If the client are willing to pay the extra for the twin and get less efficiency, well what's wrong with that??:roll eyes:
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 557
Likes: 27
From: At home
but twins are not imune from "land immediately" either
BTW, all single rotor helicopters have 1 MGB..... and it is usually not a problem
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 843
Likes: 0
From: N/A
nubian: "BTW, all single rotor helicopters have 1 MGB..... and it is usually not a problem"
Precisely, the most reliable things in helicopters are the single system (simplex) critical components. They almost never fail. Much more reliable than gearboxes or engines in twins.
Precisely, the most reliable things in helicopters are the single system (simplex) critical components. They almost never fail. Much more reliable than gearboxes or engines in twins.
