EC225 crash near Bergen, Norway April 2016
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIBN has this afternoon published a press release with info to the public on how to handle finds of missing parts.
| AIBN press release (in Norwegian)
They tell the public to rinse finds with fresh water and call the local police.
They also attached three photos of special missing parts, and tell the public to call the AIBN immidiatly if they are found.
Here are the photos:
| AIBN press release (in Norwegian)
They tell the public to rinse finds with fresh water and call the local police.
They also attached three photos of special missing parts, and tell the public to call the AIBN immidiatly if they are found.
Here are the photos:
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Right side of zero
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Birmingham
If you re-read my initial post with the quotes, you will see the following stated by the AIBN on the 13th during the press conference:
"The reality of the matter is that we have all the components belonging to the suspension bars."
"Though we are still missing the center portion of one of them, we do have the end pieces."
"What is important to us at this point is to find the second stage planet carrier."
Furthermore, in the AIBN press release today, even though they posted a photo of the already recovered 1st stage planetary carrier, and a non-connected suspension bar it was only added for comparison to help the public in their search to find the still missing 2nd stage planetary carrier as well as the mid-portion of the FWD suspension bar. It says so in Norwegian in the text above the photos, and the statement in the post from Byeskille saying "..three photos of special missing parts.." is incorrect. It states no such thing in the press release.
In fact, here is the whole official statement about the photos on the AIBN webpage, in English.
There is now also an updated preliminary report available, released today.
Link(English)
If you re-read my initial post with the quotes, you will see the following stated by the AIBN on the 13th during the press conference:
"The reality of the matter is that we have all the components belonging to the suspension bars."
"Though we are still missing the center portion of one of them, we do have the end pieces."
"What is important to us at this point is to find the second stage planet carrier."
Furthermore, in the AIBN press release today, even though they posted a photo of the already recovered 1st stage planetary carrier, and a non-connected suspension bar it was only added for comparison to help the public in their search to find the still missing 2nd stage planetary carrier as well as the mid-portion of the FWD suspension bar. It says so in Norwegian in the text above the photos, and the statement in the post from Byeskille saying "..three photos of special missing parts.." is incorrect. It states no such thing in the press release.
In fact, here is the whole official statement about the photos on the AIBN webpage, in English.
There is now also an updated preliminary report available, released today.
Link(English)
Last edited by Magjam; 27th May 2016 at 16:39.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Home
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Birmingham, from the quotes above.
I read, they have both ends of one of the suspension bars (front one, as the pics show the other 2) but they are still missing the middle section (the tube section).
However all components, as we see it, have been present. Though we are still missing the center portion of one of them, we do have the end pieces."
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Home
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chance it, so much for that theory.
The latest update pretty much confirms it for me. Obviously, just my own opinion, but really does seem to be a similar event to G-REDL.
3 cases of rotor head detachment in 9000000 hours flying , 2 of which were MGB epicyclic planet gear 2nd stage bearing's , However the MGB was trying to give warning by making metal for a couple of weeks beforehand that were ( for different reasons) unfortunately misdiagnosed and 1 where we don't quite know yet , but we do know that there was no issue with CWP / Marms beforehand and an intact epicyclic ring gear in the wreckage , so nothing like the 2 earlier accidents, yet all this hysteria .....!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the new report update is helpful (and in English) it says as Satcomm points out ...
Whilst several parts vital for the investigation have been recovered the four weeks since the
accident, some key components are still missing. These components are in particular the epicyclical
second stage planet gear carrier and parts of the forward suspension bar.
and interestingly ...
The investigation team has discussed a list of scenarios that Airbus Helicopter prepared based on
fault tree analysis. At this stage, the AIBN can confirm that the scenarios under consideration
include failure of epicyclic module, suspension bar (lift strut) attachment and MGB conical
housing
Whilst several parts vital for the investigation have been recovered the four weeks since the
accident, some key components are still missing. These components are in particular the epicyclical
second stage planet gear carrier and parts of the forward suspension bar.
and interestingly ...
The investigation team has discussed a list of scenarios that Airbus Helicopter prepared based on
fault tree analysis. At this stage, the AIBN can confirm that the scenarios under consideration
include failure of epicyclic module, suspension bar (lift strut) attachment and MGB conical
housing
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nuremberg (metropol region)
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not each PPRuNe-User is a pilot and/or engineer being conversant with (Super) Puma. Two video clips for a better understanding of the problematic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnpvtFQowKc & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD4jKBOIBwc
BTW: The gearbox manufacturer and AIRBUS supplier for AS 330 - according to PPT https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/vi...ce-industry-/7 , page 6 page 7 and to https://www.avioaero.com/Press-relea...sory-gearboxes - is the AVIO PROPULSIONE AEROSPAZIALE SPA, which is also the developer and manufacturer of the Propeller Gear Boxes of A400M.
BTW: The gearbox manufacturer and AIRBUS supplier for AS 330 - according to PPT https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/vi...ce-industry-/7 , page 6 page 7 and to https://www.avioaero.com/Press-relea...sory-gearboxes - is the AVIO PROPULSIONE AEROSPAZIALE SPA, which is also the developer and manufacturer of the Propeller Gear Boxes of A400M.
Last edited by AW009; 28th May 2016 at 05:45. Reason: BTW
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PARIS
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@birmingham: you wrote: "the new report update is helpful (and in English) it says as Satcomm points out ..."
Really ? In what ?
Explain !
Really ? In what ?
Explain !
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@birmingham: you wrote: "the new report update is helpful (and in English) it says as Satcomm points out ..."
Really ? In what ?
Explain !
Really ? In what ?
Explain !
Hence why on day two AH told ops to check items associated with these failures modes but seemed to suggest based on the presentation of the wreckage they thought suspension bar theory more likely. They couldn't say so for many reasons; not least that like AIBN they couldn't be certain.
So we now know they haven't yet recovered enough debris to do more than hypothesise about the cause.
Currently we don't know for certain what happened let alone why.
So AIBN have been honest and open and said they are still searching.
So it is helpful in that it is absolutely clear where they are and what they are doing and also why that is all they can say at each stage.
Last edited by birmingham; 28th May 2016 at 11:58.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nuremberg (metropol region)
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Mitchaa, @Birmingham:
Certainly this is not a wise and diplomatic statement by AIRBUS.
So AIBN avoids in present and still unsufficant body of evidence any anticipated verdict on sb./sth. and this evenhandedness is most expedient.
According to Airbus Helicopters’ analysis, seven potential initial events have been retained to explain the main rotor detachment of LN-OJF. Out of these seven scenarios, only one – the failure of the attachment of a suspension bar – can been assessed as probable by Airbus Helicopters, based on the information available to date.
At this stage, the exact cause of this possible event is still unknown. Analysis of the helicopter’s maintenance history has just started and should provide a better understanding of the most likely causes.
Source: Norway-Statement - Airbus Helicopters
At this stage, the exact cause of this possible event is still unknown. Analysis of the helicopter’s maintenance history has just started and should provide a better understanding of the most likely causes.
Source: Norway-Statement - Airbus Helicopters
The Accident Investigation Board Norway, or AIBN, said failure of the housing of the main gearbox, a gear called the epicyclic module and a suspension bar that attaches the rotor to the airframe are being considered as possible causes for the April 29 crash.
Source: Correction to Norwegian Helicopter Crash Investigation Story - NASDAQ.com
Source: Correction to Norwegian Helicopter Crash Investigation Story - NASDAQ.com
Last edited by AW009; 28th May 2016 at 12:15.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess they feel they need to raise the profile of this. So much so that the CEO has put his career on the line in approving the release of the latest statement. They must be supremely confident that this will be the final conclusion of the AIBN.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nuremberg (metropol region)
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can a (Super) PUMA insiders say definitively whether Avio is still involved in the development and manufacture of current MRGB, or is the basic concept of the present MRGB only a legacy from the days of the AS 330 and Airbus alone would pass the buck, if the Statement of AIRBUS would proof as inaccurate?
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: **** You
Age: 74
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arrrgggg finally a few more pictures of the puzzle.
The Missing Ring Gear makes it's presence now....That my friends now makes this whole thing a game changer.
Anyone notice Airbus put the Sus Bar as lead cause, but the AIBN have Epicyclic as lead cause.
Airbus know dam well an Epicyclic failure is an absolute game over scenario for the EC225. It might be allowed to live if the Sus Bar or Foot was proven as root cause.
Like I said in the beginning a Sus bar failure won't result in a ruptured gearbox.
EVERYTHING including the Engines literally hangs off this Gearbox and will break away with very little resistance.
It's simple physics.
Any massive sudden over torque will cause a Bevel Gear to fail well before a Straight Cut Gear. The only reason they use Bevel Gears is because Straight cut Gears can't transmit TQ 90 Degree's. Any TQ failure induced by the way of a failing Sus Bar will destroy the Bevel well before the Epicyclic lets go.
This didn't happen here.
Here's another thing, during run dry full power testing the Gearbox finally grinds to a halt after it twists the engines off like butter, Barby Plate tears away the Sus Bars then snap like twigs and guess what, the Gearbox stays in one piece. Funny that hey!
So somehow this Sus Bar defied the Laws of Physics by breaking and either it, or one of it's 2 ...Tin Can Mates then damaged the Gearbox Case (Bit like throwing an empty Beer Can at your Car and expecting the Window to be broken), by now there is no TQ going into the gearbox because those 3 piss ant Tie Bolts holding the Engines to the Tranny are the first thing to leave the scene, and then the Ring Gear bursts with enough force to spit Planets out that end up in different locations despite no TQ coming from the Engines.....Nice Fairy Tale. I wish you all the Best with that Mister Airbus!
Talk about failing on your Sword.
Simple fact is s Broken Sus Bar or foot will transfer lifting force from the Sus Bars into the Barby Plate and the whole Tranny, less the Engines would depart the Scene.
It's really no more complex than that.
It's about time Helicopter design stopped trying to mimic the Fixed Wing World, and concentrate on reliability and longevity instead of efficiency.
Keep in mind a Helicopter is a very inefficient and inherently unstable platform to begin with, and trying to change that comes at a cost.
I know what the cost is and who ends up paying for it....Question is do you!
I knew in my gut the EC225 was never going to make it the first time I stood under the Rotor when it was running some 7 years ago now.
I still maintain and always will, that weird kidney pounding harmonic thump these 225's produce with FPOG is just not normal for anything that rotates let alone a Helicopter.
The Missing Ring Gear makes it's presence now....That my friends now makes this whole thing a game changer.
Anyone notice Airbus put the Sus Bar as lead cause, but the AIBN have Epicyclic as lead cause.
Airbus know dam well an Epicyclic failure is an absolute game over scenario for the EC225. It might be allowed to live if the Sus Bar or Foot was proven as root cause.
Like I said in the beginning a Sus bar failure won't result in a ruptured gearbox.
EVERYTHING including the Engines literally hangs off this Gearbox and will break away with very little resistance.
It's simple physics.
Any massive sudden over torque will cause a Bevel Gear to fail well before a Straight Cut Gear. The only reason they use Bevel Gears is because Straight cut Gears can't transmit TQ 90 Degree's. Any TQ failure induced by the way of a failing Sus Bar will destroy the Bevel well before the Epicyclic lets go.
This didn't happen here.
Here's another thing, during run dry full power testing the Gearbox finally grinds to a halt after it twists the engines off like butter, Barby Plate tears away the Sus Bars then snap like twigs and guess what, the Gearbox stays in one piece. Funny that hey!
So somehow this Sus Bar defied the Laws of Physics by breaking and either it, or one of it's 2 ...Tin Can Mates then damaged the Gearbox Case (Bit like throwing an empty Beer Can at your Car and expecting the Window to be broken), by now there is no TQ going into the gearbox because those 3 piss ant Tie Bolts holding the Engines to the Tranny are the first thing to leave the scene, and then the Ring Gear bursts with enough force to spit Planets out that end up in different locations despite no TQ coming from the Engines.....Nice Fairy Tale. I wish you all the Best with that Mister Airbus!
Talk about failing on your Sword.
Simple fact is s Broken Sus Bar or foot will transfer lifting force from the Sus Bars into the Barby Plate and the whole Tranny, less the Engines would depart the Scene.
It's really no more complex than that.
It's about time Helicopter design stopped trying to mimic the Fixed Wing World, and concentrate on reliability and longevity instead of efficiency.
Keep in mind a Helicopter is a very inefficient and inherently unstable platform to begin with, and trying to change that comes at a cost.
I know what the cost is and who ends up paying for it....Question is do you!
I knew in my gut the EC225 was never going to make it the first time I stood under the Rotor when it was running some 7 years ago now.
I still maintain and always will, that weird kidney pounding harmonic thump these 225's produce with FPOG is just not normal for anything that rotates let alone a Helicopter.
Last edited by buzz66; 28th May 2016 at 15:43.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Home
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buzz66 - my thoughts as well. That's exactly why I have not bought into the suspension bar theory from the beginning. I think we would have seen a pic of the whole assembly MGB and MRH being slung away.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: **** You
Age: 74
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nuremberg (metropol region)
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
May I remind my question in comment http://www.pprune.org/9391153-post971.html politely? The answer may be of the highest economic policy and in particular armor political importance.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Certainly very unusual see this article from Reuters http://news.trust.org/item/20160528144905-i8qy5
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nuremberg (metropol region)
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Mitchaa, @Birmingham & @satcomm: To pinpoint on something or on somebody, in the particular case AIRBUS Helicopters has the least privilege because the 'suspension bars' are also an extremely questionable construction!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On what basis do you conclude the the suspension bars are of "questionable construction" ?