AS355 TR useful?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Norway
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AS355 TR useful?
I remember reading somewhere that production of the AS355 has stopped. Is this aircraft used to a greater extent in any commercial operations, other than as an ME trainer or the occational law enforcement?
Also, what is the N-model like to fly compared to the AS350? Very similar (as one would expect)? And how come MTOW is so much higher than for the 350?
Also, what is the N-model like to fly compared to the AS350? Very similar (as one would expect)? And how come MTOW is so much higher than for the 350?
EC135 TR sounds much more exciting, uhmm..., the gap in price between the 355 and the 135 is getting narrower, EC 135 simulator are getting more available....
Then you get to learn the avionics that is one step down from the EC145
Sooner or later the 355 owners are going to be left holding the bag.
Then you get to learn the avionics that is one step down from the EC145
Sooner or later the 355 owners are going to be left holding the bag.
Don:
The 355N was a more refined model over the 355F model both in cruise, power and engine controls fadec). Bigger payload too.
Comparing the 355N to a 350 -
The 355N is a heavy aircraft for its class and pushing out around 520shp each engine with an empty/full weight of 1490kg/2600Kg. Payload: 1100kg. A twin engined, FADEC with associated expensive running costs but it did have the 350B3 gearbox.
The 350B3 is pushing out 850shp with an empty and full wt of 1100kg/2200kg. Payload: 1100kg.
Single engine with associated cheaper running costs and all the world records!
So why go for the twin (unless in the EU over water/IFR etc.)
The 355N was a more refined model over the 355F model both in cruise, power and engine controls fadec). Bigger payload too.
Comparing the 355N to a 350 -
The 355N is a heavy aircraft for its class and pushing out around 520shp each engine with an empty/full weight of 1490kg/2600Kg. Payload: 1100kg. A twin engined, FADEC with associated expensive running costs but it did have the 350B3 gearbox.
The 350B3 is pushing out 850shp with an empty and full wt of 1100kg/2200kg. Payload: 1100kg.
Single engine with associated cheaper running costs and all the world records!
So why go for the twin (unless in the EU over water/IFR etc.)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don.
PDG operate about 12 AS355f1/2 in the uk.
They seem to be very profitable for them.
I operate a 355f2 simply because i like the
safety and security of 2 engines [Rolls Royce]
but do not want the cost of the Turbomeca
engines in the N model.--learnt that the hard way!
TC
The "b3" gearbox you refer to is i believe only in
the NP model. The f2 and the N have the same
gearbox and similiar twin engine performance.
[At least in UK. environment.]
Better OEI performance with the N model.
PDG operate about 12 AS355f1/2 in the uk.
They seem to be very profitable for them.
I operate a 355f2 simply because i like the
safety and security of 2 engines [Rolls Royce]
but do not want the cost of the Turbomeca
engines in the N model.--learnt that the hard way!
TC
The "b3" gearbox you refer to is i believe only in
the NP model. The f2 and the N have the same
gearbox and similiar twin engine performance.
[At least in UK. environment.]
Better OEI performance with the N model.
Last edited by claudia; 2nd Dec 2015 at 23:09.
)
