EC225 crash near Bergen, Norway April 2016
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if in the UK the CAA has made any pronouncements;
The CAA said;
2 Compliance/Action to be Taken
2.1 The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), in exercise of its powers under article 15 of the Air Navigation Order 2009, directs operators of any Airbus Helicopters EC225LP or AS332L2 helicopter which is:
a) registered in the United Kingdom; or
b) flying in the United Kingdom or in the neighbourhood of an offshore location.
to comply with the requirements set out in paragraph 2.2.
2.2 Operators and pilots must not conduct any flight with an Airbus Helicopters EC225LP or AS332L2 helicopter.
2.1 The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), in exercise of its powers under article 15 of the Air Navigation Order 2009, directs operators of any Airbus Helicopters EC225LP or AS332L2 helicopter which is:
a) registered in the United Kingdom; or
b) flying in the United Kingdom or in the neighbourhood of an offshore location.
to comply with the requirements set out in paragraph 2.2.
2.2 Operators and pilots must not conduct any flight with an Airbus Helicopters EC225LP or AS332L2 helicopter.
So, the answer to Helicrazi is yes, SAR is banned, or would be if there were any operators with these helicopters.
And to the second question, the CAA bans both, and (partly because of that) I suspect the EASA AD is simply sloppy drafting, as per everything else EASA produces. But there may be a good reason, I wouldn't know.
HeliComparator:
You are correct, there are L2's servicing the Babcock SAR contract, which is why I don't understand EASA allowing 225's to continue, but not L2's.
Of course with the CAA blanket ban across all roles, then it wouldn't matter anyway.
You are correct, there are L2's servicing the Babcock SAR contract, which is why I don't understand EASA allowing 225's to continue, but not L2's.
Of course with the CAA blanket ban across all roles, then it wouldn't matter anyway.
I see your point. Could it be as simple as a typo? Maybe they forgot to add "or AS332L2" to that para? Presumably it was done in a bit of a rush.
Apologies if this has already been posted...
EC225 Main Rotor Head and Main Gear Box Design - Aerossurance
EC225 Main Rotor Head and Main Gear Box Design - Aerossurance
MGB and mounting very similar in basic principle, but the devil is in the detail and inside there are major differences in materials etc. Although the L and L1 are identical I think? The AS332L and L1 had a head with conventional bearings, the L2 and 225 have no conventional bearings in the head, just elastomeric thingies (multilayered blobs of rubber and metal discs). More blades on the 225.
Administrator
Apologies if this has already been posted...
EC225 Main Rotor Head and Main Gear Box Design - Aerossurance
EC225 Main Rotor Head and Main Gear Box Design - Aerossurance
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: London
Age: 60
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MGB and mounting very similar in basic principle, but the devil is in the detail and inside there are major differences in materials etc. Although the L and L1 are identical I think? The AS332L and L1 had a head with conventional bearings, the L2 and 225 have no conventional bearings in the head, just elastomeric thingies (multilayered blobs of rubber and metal discs). More blades on the 225.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: EASA land
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Babcock has grounded all 225's and that includes the EC-MCR, the brand new, one and only SAR 225 operated by Inaer Spain
Last edited by Thorond0r; 3rd Jun 2016 at 00:52.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: LOS
Age: 67
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed. Call all the hard working AIBN investigators tomorrow morning and ask them to start their summer holiday. Tell 'em an internet publication has solved things for you. Actually quit the whole branch, what a waste of tax payer's money. Same all over Europe. I bet hundreds of millions would be saved over the becoming years if we all just let the media tell us what went wrong.
The media is reporting what the AIBN reported, even included the actual report so how is that wrong with what the others posted.
I would say wdew is referring to all the speculation that this was a sus bar failure, and it appears that the AIBN has ended that speculation. I, and some others like Mitchaa had said that from the beginning....
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Age: 63
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only for idiots like you. I have never seen such a cover up by an Authority.
Note book's need to get hands on. EPI no chance if they did the correct actions. I Knew/ know both the people that made those errors in Miri and REDL. 1 is due an Alloute 3 plus a hangar to the team. The other was not welcome to return.
Note book's need to get hands on. EPI no chance if they did the correct actions. I Knew/ know both the people that made those errors in Miri and REDL. 1 is due an Alloute 3 plus a hangar to the team. The other was not welcome to return.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Age: 63
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When it suits you. 32 years on the Sa330J AS 332L / L1 / L2 First course on the EC225 LP
Retired now at 55.
Moderator Outwest loc: LOS
This member from his posts has never been close any puma aircraft.
Retired now at 55.
Moderator Outwest loc: LOS
This member from his posts has never been close any puma aircraft.
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Home
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTEOnly for idiots like you. I have never seen such a cover up by an Authority.
Note book's need to get hands on. EPI no chance if they did the correct actions. I Knew/ know both the people that made those errors in Miri and REDL.[/QUOTE]
Not going to comment on the idiot thing but what would you suspect they are covering up? Why would you have such a hard time believing this is a MGB/EPI failure?
Note book's need to get hands on. EPI no chance if they did the correct actions. I Knew/ know both the people that made those errors in Miri and REDL.[/QUOTE]
Not going to comment on the idiot thing but what would you suspect they are covering up? Why would you have such a hard time believing this is a MGB/EPI failure?
I may be confused but isn't roscoe's link to a news report with a headline stating 'Super Puma crash was gearbox failure' - the actual AIBN report doesn't say anything of the sort, it just says:
- which is what we already knew?
TeeS
Recent metallurgical findings have revealed features strongly consistent with fatigue in the outer race of a second stage planet gear in the epicyclic module of the MGB. It cannot be ruled out that this signifies a possible safety issue that can affect other MGBs of the same type. The nature of the catastrophic failure of the LN-OJF main rotor system indicates that the current means to detect a failure in advance are not effective.
TeeS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Age: 63
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't call me am Idiot. I have Been type rated on the 225 longer than any one, 21 st July 2005. I never said it was not a EPI or Main Module failure. The rubbish I have read on his site is shocking. Read the report it is all bollocks. POSSIBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now retired Ill be happy to see the norge early retirement that we pay for cancelled.