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

EC225 crash near Bergen, Norway April 2016

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

EC225 crash near Bergen, Norway April 2016

Old 1st May 2016, 13:32
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: ZA
Age: 62
Posts: 19
There is no reason so far to believe that this accident is not a repeat of the G-REDL incident. I was not very satisfied with the report on this accident as it struck me as being complacent, that just to keep on doing the same things, but better was going to prevent the same thing happening again.
In the repotr it was said:-
"Safety Recommendation 2011-036 It is recommended that the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) re-evaluate the continued airworthiness of the main rotor gearbox fitted to the AS332 L2 and EC225 helicopters to ensure that it satisfies the requirements of Certification Specification (CS) 29.571 and EASA Notice of Proposed Amendment 2010-06."
Was this done?
The report contains the following passage:-
"Epicyclic gearbox spalling events on the AS332 L2 helicopter Data provided by the helicopter manufacturer indicated that between 2001 and 2009 there were nine recorded cases of planet gear spalling on the AS332 L2 (see Table 2). In addition, information provided by the operator showed that there had been seven events in 2010 on their fleet where magnetic particles had been found on the MGB magnetic chip detectors which had resulted in the removal of the gearbox for repair. The information provided by the manufacturer regarding the number of planet gear rejections due to spalling was incomplete. During the investigation anecdotal evidence was provided that indicated that overhaul facilities disposed of rejected gears without routing them for investigation."
This indicates to me a high level of complacency, the kind that brought down two NASA shuttles. Bearing spalling is not something you ever want to see in a gearbox, as it's progression is not predictable and often results in rolling elements being deposited into the gear mesh. At which point it is game over for the gearbox.
mostlylurking is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 13:32
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern Europe
Age: 41
Posts: 132
Originally Posted by Beaucoup Movement View Post
I'm sure he meant April instead of March Mitchaa! easily done...

Actually, March is what is reported in the media, if so, the rotorhead has been in service for over a month, not two days.

Last edited by The Bartender; 1st May 2016 at 13:35. Reason: Specified rotorhead
The Bartender is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 13:34
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 801
Originally Posted by Beaucoup Movement View Post
Special 25, I can't see the 225 flying again certainly not in the North Sea. Confidence is certainly at rock bottom & it took a long time for confidence to be built up again after the last accidents/controlled ditching's relating to gearbox issues in the North Sea (including L2) which wasn't that long ago as we all know.
If it wasn't due to a gross maintenance error that could have caused the same with any other type, I tend to agree.
henra is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 13:41
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,212
Originally Posted by mostlylurking View Post
... ... During the investigation anecdotal evidence was provided that indicated that overhaul facilities disposed of rejected gears without routing them for investigation." ...

Not happy with that bit.
jimf671 is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 13:42
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 182
Originally Posted by Special 25 View Post
I believe that apart from a couple of short maintenance flights, this was the first full passenger flight since the rotorhead change. I would imagine that will be the focus of the investigation right now.
According to FlightRadar24 there was an earlier flight (1hr47min - HKS240) carried out on the day of the accident to an offshore location in the same area as the accident flight: HKS 240 departed 0602, landed back at Bergen at 0749. HKS 241 then shown as having departed Bergen at 0911.
Democritus is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 14:24
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Interloper
Posts: 108
I believe that this rotor shot slung over the water dripping is not from the Norway event,
but from G-REDL ? Bit of confusion there ( at least to me ).

TylerMonkey is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 14:37
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Inside the Industry
Posts: 759
Tyler

That's why it says G-REDL right below on the yellow background !!

Michaa

I am very close to the corpoate men in suits. I advise them for my pay cheque. If this is an MGB epicyclic failure like the REDL failure, it's au revoir to the H225 from me unless it has a whole new MGB design which is proven for a while. Without such a change, the risk would be intolerable.
industry insider is online now  
Old 1st May 2016, 14:43
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Interloper
Posts: 108
As I said " at least to me ". Title is only on the second photo so my dyslexic brain did not join the dots automatically. Old age is a wunerful thing.
TylerMonkey is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 14:54
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Interloper
Posts: 108
Yes, even a sadder event if it is a repeat.
Here is a blow up of the strut end but still very hard to see any pertinent detail.

TylerMonkey is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 14:57
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: no comment ;)
Age: 55
Posts: 771
If MGB design/production is to be blamed (again) than NH90 MGB
/ with civil cert. may be considered like one of quick patch up solution...
NH90 fleet have reached 100.000 f/h without known MGB issues.

Regarding HUMS that is for sure way to prevent or reduce such kind
of major structural failure but producers and operators must open the
data access to rest of the industry. Today's single board computers are
powerful enough to perform near real time computing and indication
of something major is about to go wrong.

RIP to all poor souls and sincere condolences to all involved.
9Aplus is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 15:41
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 322
I work for one of the smaller oil companies. Our management fly on helicopters. They get good, independent, technical advice. Whether to use the 225 will be an informed risk based decision, not a decision based on sentiment. Most of us know the guys in our organisation who will make the recommendation and trust both their judgement and their moral compass. They are inherently conservative, because they want to sleep at night. If they decide we shouldn't use the 225 we won't. Money won't come into it.

I can't speak for every company operating on the UKCS and NOCS, but please don't assume they are all lead by immoral bean counters.
SLF3 is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 15:52
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Age: 54
Posts: 101
Mitchaa,
How confident are you that there is enough spare capacity inthe North Sea to allow normal crew change operations to continue without the225? Whilst I have no specific knowledgein this regards, if there is, it implies that the helo operators have beenunder-utilising their assets. Would beinterested to hear your thoughts and those of anyone else in the know.
Clever Richard is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 15:54
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Posts: 1,212
ALTERNATIVES?

Fill in the blanks.

S-92 - ...
AW189 - ...
EC175 - ...
S-61 - ...
Mi-171 - ...
AW101 - ...
NH90 - ...
jimf671 is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 15:56
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: At the back of the bus
Posts: 12
Originally Posted by SLF3 View Post
I work for one of the smaller oil companies. Our management fly on helicopters. They get good, independent, technical advice. Whether to use the 225 will be an informed risk based decision, not a decision based on sentiment. Most of us know the guys in our organisation who will make the recommendation and trust both their judgement and their moral compass. They are inherently conservative, because they want to sleep at night. If they decide we shouldn't use the 225 we won't. Money won't come into it.

I can't speak for every company operating on the UKCS and NOCS, but please don't assume they are all lead by immoral bean counters.
Spot on. The constant harping about the profit motive on this forum is very tiresome.
MoodyMan is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 16:10
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: DDA
Posts: 36
Interesting quote from the CHC thread. 50% of aircraft sitting without contract??

Still think everything is all rosy there Buddy!
I will be more than happy to revisit this conversation along with my original post and say "Boy did I tell you so"
My original prediction of MAX 2 years almost a year ago is going to turn out to be spot on.
It's simple basic 1 on 1 economics....It was never going to survive...no matter what

Here is my original post

Here are the Facts on CHC's Fiscal performance

85% of the Heli's are Leased
50% of the Heli's are NOT on Contract

Last Financial Year
1,650 Million total Income approx

Last Financial Year Expences (NOT ALL JUST THE BASICS)
109 Million P.A. in Administration (hangers on in Head Offices)
330 Million Crew Costs ( no change in the last 2 years)
1,100 Million in Leasing Costs (Heli's, building ETC)
145 Million Interest on Primary Debt.

Last Financial Year
190 Million NET LOSS

Look at the Interest on primary debt $145 Million.....so even if the Company has NO Debt it would still run at a loss.

That $600 Million CD & R bought as preferred Shares is just another Company Credit Card ....CD & R receive 8.5% Interest P.A. on the purchase Price....Take at look at the the last Quartely results and you will see the 10 Million in interest.
So what they have done is take the $600 Million dropped down the Primary Debt from around 1.5 Billion to 1.3 Billion...Spent god knows how much on new Machines, because no leasing Company will touch them....The end result is in reality the Primary Debt as I see it was about 1.45 Billion and it has now ballooned out to around 1.7 Billion. I haven't even mentioned the Senior Notes yet....I won't go into to much detail....But it goes like this... there is 100's of Millions in Senior Notes that the Company doesn't have to pay a cent on until the maturity of the Agreement.

If there was ever a Company that was insolvent this is it.

It's like this....If you had a Credit Card that got maxed out on,....Then you would get another one to pay the interest Bill on the first Card (Senior Notes) Then when the Second Card get maxed out you get a third Card ( CD & R $600 Million @ 8.5%) to pay the Interest on the Second.

That Moron Joan Hooper only ever Quoted EBITDAR and Cash Flow...No wonder she was sacked!

I give the Company 2 Years MAX before the Padlocks go on the Doors.
My best bet is G.E. will swoop in when it finally grinds to a halt.

If you want hours and hours of Fun Reading here are the 175 Pages of the FACTS (Form 10K)

If anyone things they can dig they way out of this Hole I'm all Ears!!
aheoe26104 is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 16:15
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: US
Posts: 107
Does anyone know if the H215C1e transmission is the same p/n assembly as the H225? Aside from one less rotor blade on the hub are there other major differences ?
roscoe1 is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 16:25
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Age: 54
Posts: 101
Mitchaa,
Thanks for your response. All of your points seem sensible to me so it will be interesting to see what happens.
Clever Richard is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 16:36
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Univers
Posts: 34
f MGB design/production is to be blamed (again) than NH90 MGB
/ with civil cert. may be considered like one of quick patch up solution...
NH90 fleet have reached 100.000 f/h without known MGB issues.
NH90 MGB is an AW design.
Margins is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 16:48
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: no comment ;)
Age: 55
Posts: 771
Yes, and approx 1/3 smaller in size...
9Aplus is offline  
Old 1st May 2016, 17:20
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 55
Interesting how the positive Spin on accident statistics separate the new model from the predecessors, however the certification basis relies on this model being a variant, and certified to older standards.
The new standards would clearly make the main shaft a principle structural element, one that would require fatigue substantiation by testing. So the two ditchings would not have been a surprise that the finite element model incorrectly predicted the stresses. And how is the rest of the shaft? Sometimes if you simply make a part stronger where it failed, you just chase the failure somewhere else. Full scale fatigue testing based on measured loads would have prevented those issues. What else was missed in the design assumptions? The authorities should question any other PSE failure mode that was certified by Finite element.
Also, I may have misunderstood, but I recall the statement that AB increased quality inspections to one in every four, as this was an important part. How does one ask to fly on the inspected one?
-many predictions and speculations on this site, here is mine: The facts will show that this accident was preventable. Most are. Never easy to swallow that truth.
OnePerRev is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.