AW169

[Phoinix]

Originally Posted by tottigol

If weight and power to weight ratio is the only parameter you take into account to determine a "412 killer" you are missing out on 40 years of technological and avionics advances.

I wasn’t really implying it needs a killer, it’s dying of natural causes as we speak... even if it is gets the drone quad on the tail.

[noooby]

Originally Posted by Same again

It is only a '412 killer' if it can match or exceed the 412 in all other areas. I would be interested to see if it could fly 8 hours per day water bombing for weeks on end with minimal maintenance and few unserviceability issues. Very pretty though....

As a former 412 mechanic, I can say there is no such thing as minimal maintenance on those pigs. 212 was much better and I'd actually rather take a 139 into the bush than a 412. Far less day to day problems.

Stupid pendulum absorbers that broke apart every 50 hours. Stupid MR blades that are near impossible to balance if you breathe on them. Grrrrrrr. MR heads that would keep moving forever and never settle down after install, continuously affecting vibes. Oh and the governor rigging for the +2/-2. And AFCU failures all the time.

Yeah, I remember the 412. Not fondly.

[Same again]

I'd actually rather take a 139 into the bush than a 412. Far less day to day problems.

Hmmm. That comment raised a few eyebrows and sniggers here in the bush and yes we are all familiar with both types.

[tottigol]

Originally Posted by Phoinix

I wasn’t really implying it needs a killer, it’s dying of natural causes as we speak... even if it is gets the drone quad on the tail.

I am stiill laughing.
I remember Bell's ads on R&W when the DoD pulled the carpet from under them by adding the IFR requirement to the LUH competiotion.
I think I actually saved that somewhere.

[noooby]

Originally Posted by Same again

Hmmm. That comment raised a few eyebrows and sniggers here in the bush and yes we are all familiar with both types.

Mechanically, the 139 is the simplest machine I've ever worked on. Electrically, people are scared of it. And for no real reason. It is DC only. No AC crap to try and find issues with.

I just wish they'd upgrade the slump pads to 6800 or 7000kg instead of being stuck at 6400kg.

Those doing sling work say it lifts really well. Although I'd also like to see the hook mounts beefed up.

I would not take a 169 bush though. It is not made for easy access without a hangar and work stands.

Perhaps I'm biased with 15 years on the 139 but it's served me well.

[zlydzidek]

Has anyone flown with MaxViz EVS-2300.
What are your thought in comparison with other products?
Does it works better than single band product?
When IFR at night, is it possible to see clouds, layers?
Thank you!

[Phoinix]

SVS is right in front of you and does the job in the same way. Both are info only, SVS not limited by thick clouds though - in haze or thin layers of clouds you can see through, otherwise you don’t.

Flying based on any of these data is not an option (certification wise).

Personally, I didn’t like it, SVS all the way for SA purposes only.

[zlydzidek]

Originally Posted by Phoinix

SVS is right in front of you and does the job in the same way. Both are info only, SVS not limited by thick clouds though - in haze or thin layers of clouds you can see through, otherwise you don’t.

Flying based on any of these data is not an option (certification wise).

Personally, I didn’t like it, SVS all the way for SA purposes only.

Ok, agree.
But if you would be IFR at 6000ft away from the ground and would like to find yourself between layers of clouds to avoid icing? Will it work just for this?

[Phoinix]

You see the cloud with your eyes and you do with IR... you only see through very thin layers vith EVS. So in any case, when you see you are inbetween layers, the EVS is the same as your eyeball mk.1.

[[email protected]]

Water vapour - ie clouds and fog - attenuates IR frequencies so you can't see through them. An IR sensor detects differences in emitted radiation and the water vapour acts a a wet blanket, making everything the same emissivity.

[Phoinix]

Originally Posted by P1tchlink

Does anyone have experiences with tail mounted TLX searchlight for police landings in dark places? Does it have good freedom of operating from pilots viewpoint or bad shadowing of wheels and fuselage?

trakka and any other high power search light is limited to a certain height. You are not allowed to use it for t/o and landing.

The two 169 landing lights are perfectly suited for the job.

[Aucky]

Originally Posted by P1tchlink

Does anyone have experiences with tail mounted TLX searchlight for police landings in dark places? Does it have good freedom of operating from pilots viewpoint or bad shadowing of wheels and fuselage?

I’m told by a friend operating a police 169 that the aft mounted searchlight is good for surveillance work when linked to the Wescam, but has no value for a high/low recce for off airfield landings due to the software stops and aircraft shadowing preventing the beam from pointing where you need it. I can put you in touch if you need more information.

[Cencio]

Hey

Anybody knows Where and How Much for AW169 type rating course?

[ApolloHeli]

Originally Posted by Cencio

Hey

Anybody knows Where and How Much for AW169 type rating course?

AFAIK there's only Leonardo at Sesto Calende, Italy. I don't know the explicit cost, but I've heard of pilots bonded for £50k for the type rating.

[212man]

Originally Posted by ApolloHeli

AFAIK there's only Leonardo at Sesto Calende, Italy. I don't know the explicit cost, but I've heard of pilots bonded for £50k for the type rating.

pretty sure SAS in the UK do type ratings too

[helicrazi]

Originally Posted by Cencio

Hey

Anybody knows Where and How Much for AW169 type rating course?

I think coptersafety are now able to do them too

[handysnaks]

“pretty sure SAS in the UK do type ratings too”
SAS send their pilots to Sesto to do the Leonardo course.

[212man]

Originally Posted by handysnaks

“pretty sure SAS in the UK do type ratings too”
SAS send their pilots to Sesto to do the Leonardo course.

I see. I guess things changed https://helihub.com/2017/07/10/sas-t...ilot-training/

[HeliboyDreamer]

Originally Posted by 212man

I see. I guess things changed https://helihub.com/2017/07/10/sas-t...ilot-training/

Early 2018 (6 month after the above mentioned article) people were still being sent to Sesto. Not sure what would be the current situation now.

[Hot_LZ]

SAS have an ATO approval for AW169. Their initial TR I believe are conducted by Leonardo. Recurrent checks are conducted by their own TRE but all in Sesto.

LZ