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

End of the 225?

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

End of the 225?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 6th Jul 2016, 12:23
  #201 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,289
Received 512 Likes on 214 Posts
Never mind the chaff....there is some Wheat amongst the posts!

I am learning far more about Gearbox design and manufacturing, heat treatment, gear coatings, and bearing wear than I ever have....which does make for an interesting read of some of the posts.

This is a very serious situation, not only for AH and the Operators, but the Industry as a whole to include the Authority's that Certify Aircraft.

To lose two aircraft and all of the people in them as has happened....requires the causes be definitively identified no matter how much it costs or however long it takes.

It will require the dropping of Shields by every involved party if that is to happen.

There lies the major problem in my view....as there are too many vested interests that might not be as candid in their review as might be required.

We had a similar situation back when the 92 was having its problems but at least part of that was due to it being a brand new Machine having its teething problems. Those issues seem to have been identified and resolved.

Hopefully, the Gearbox issues with the 225 will be resolved as well and the Aircraft can be returned to service.
SASless is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2016, 14:20
  #202 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 4 Posts
SAS, as ever, clarity in a sea of technical flotsam!
DOUBLE BOGEY is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2016, 20:24
  #203 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: N/A
Age: 47
Posts: 150
Received 27 Likes on 11 Posts
So now we have confirmation that there was a fire onboard the egyptair A320 without a cause for it (yet)... How come, the fixed wing world acts so differently than ours? Why haven't all A330s been grounded till the cause has been found?
Is the rotary word "over-reacting" or is the fixed wing world not doing enough because of much more money involved?
casper64 is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2016, 23:32
  #204 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West coast Australia :)
Posts: 238
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The client in the stuck wing world is us, if we don't want to fly on a type the airline laughs knowing there are plenty of other passengers. In rotary world the client is the oil company and if they say no there are no more passengers. It's the power they have as each company pays for many passengers.

Si
bigglesbutler is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2016, 01:56
  #205 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 397 Likes on 247 Posts
Originally Posted by casper64
So now we have confirmation that there was a fire onboard the egyptair A320 without a cause for it (yet)... How come, the fixed wing world acts so differently than ours? Why haven't all A330s been grounded till the cause has been found?
Is the rotary word "over-reacting" or is the fixed wing world not doing enough because of much more money involved?
Are you involved in rotary wing aviation, fixed wing aviation, or any aviation at all? Your post mixes apples and tire irons, at best.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2016, 05:14
  #206 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
Never mind the chaff....there is some Wheat amongst the posts! I am learning far more about Gearbox design and manufacturing, heat treatment, gear coatings, and bearing wear than I ever have....which does make for an interesting read of some of the posts,.
Glad to hear you are learning from some of the posts. Unfortunately, the subject of rotorcraft gearbox design is very complex and not easy to summarize in a couple sentences of the typical post.

Scanning thru posts that you don't find helpful just comes with using an open public forum. Much preferable to censorship.
riff_raff is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2016, 14:11
  #207 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
riff raff: "Unfortunately, the subject of rotorcraft gearbox design is very complex and not easy to summarize in a couple sentences of the typical post."

and that is why the risk assosciated with these gearboxes should be taken into account when the 2 engine solution is considered

it is not correct to say 1x10^-5 squared (1x10^-10) is the risk and it is a completely untrue premise
AnFI is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2016, 14:57
  #208 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Used to be God's own County
Posts: 1,719
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Can we just answer the original thread - the 225 is now a dead duck.
EC/AH flummoxed the industry lay time - even stating that fault could have been caused by a bead of sweat dropping into the shaft from a guy in Marseiile. FFS - they have an ology in BS - or as AH call it - Merde du Vache.
AH tried to get away with minimal last time - they have stretched max fro MGB and been found wanting.
EESDL is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2016, 16:52
  #209 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This thread should read is the twin dead

its got nothing to do with being a 225

its got everything to do with what Ive been banging on about

its just a hideously complicated gearbox with hundreds of bearings and back up lubrication systems and all sorts of pig ignorant engineering solutions more fatally dangerous freewheel units than one needs to be exposed to this sort of problem is inherent in the Multi Engined approach

S92s 225s Merlins ec135 a109s all have multi engine related accidents often

a guy dies in London under a twin and a bunch of people die in a pub under a twin so theyre going to ban singles great logic guys ordinary people are sick of being kicked around by pompous ignorant elites

now its going to be twin only in the military too !!
totally nuts


AnFI is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2016, 18:08
  #210 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,201
Received 397 Likes on 247 Posts
Originally Posted by AnFI
This thread should read is the twin dead
Nope
its got nothing to do with being a 225
Actually, it does.

S92s 225s Merlins ec135 a109s all have multi engine related accidents often
Merlin isn't a twin, nor is the CH-53E.

The S92 crash in Canada (Cougar) was not due to the input gears failing from the two engines, but output from the bevel to the TTO -- whether you had one or two engines driving the gear box has nothing to do with the box running out of oil and then failure of drive to the tail rotor.

Can you offer an example of an S92 accident that actually has to do with two engines?

AnFI, if all you have is a hammer, does everything really look like a nail?

The 225 has a particular design issue that will or won't be addressed successfully enough to return that fleet to service. Can't be a rush job, that would probably defeat the purpose.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 16th Jul 2016, 19:26
  #211 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: A very long way North
Posts: 469
Received 15 Likes on 9 Posts
Originally Posted by AnFI

its got everything to do with what Ive been banging on about
Yes, on and on and on and on.....
PlasticCabDriver is online now  
Old 17th Jul 2016, 00:08
  #212 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Lone 50 4 ref
Anfi quote "its just a hideously complicated gearbox with hundreds of bearings and backup ....... to be exposed to this sort of problem is inherent in the Multi Engined approach "

ref hammer and nail metaphore its the illogical focus on engine related accidents as opposed to general system failures that deserves that parallel
engines are only a small proportion of accidents why is that hammer used when nails are so rare?

PCD "on and on and on and on....."
and eventually the point might get some serious consideration

helicopters are fundamentally simplex, the most reliable components are simplex, duplication and complexity are the helicopters enemy

Last edited by AnFI; 17th Jul 2016 at 07:24.
AnFI is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2016, 09:01
  #213 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,329
Received 104 Likes on 51 Posts
Originally Posted by AnFI
This thread should read is the twin dead
So your proposal would be to fly the Bears offshore with Robbies?!
Could you please stop wasting bandwith with this utter nonsense?
henra is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2016, 09:26
  #214 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,329
Received 104 Likes on 51 Posts
Originally Posted by AnFI
S92s 225s Merlins ec135 a109s all have multi engine related accidents often
No, they don't.
They do have accidents but they are rare and they have to do with very demanding Usage profiles rather than the question 1 engine or two or even more. In this particular case the second stage epicyclic that apparently failed could give a flying f*ck if the first stage gear was driven by one, two or three donks.
The thought you are a helicopter pilot thoroughly scares me, seeing that you have obvious difficulties understanding the most basic causal inferences.
henra is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2016, 11:42
  #215 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,289
Received 512 Likes on 214 Posts
Banging on.....an empty Drum!
SASless is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2016, 04:36
  #216 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nuremberg (metropol region)
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@henra: Don't worry, be happy (respective amused)
AW009 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2016, 05:27
  #217 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The question regarding the future of twin engine helos is actually interesting.

First, consider the fundamental reason for using twin engines. It is primarily because existing turboshaft engine designs were not perceived as having an acceptable level of reliability for the given applications. On the other hand, using a single larger turboshaft engine would give better fuel efficiency and much lower manufacturing cost.

The new generation of turboshaft engines are far more reliable than previous ones. So I think we'll see more new helo designs using a single engine instead of twin engines.
riff_raff is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2016, 10:04
  #218 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Out there
Posts: 362
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
First, consider the fundamental reason for using twin engines. It is primarily because existing turboshaft engine designs were not perceived as having an acceptable level of reliability for the given applications.
Hmmmmm....? So, nothing to do with getting you to LSALT, to a safe landing place or back on the deck or ground then....?

edit:- Should've said in the event of an engine failure

Last edited by Evil Twin; 18th Jul 2016 at 21:15.
Evil Twin is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2016, 10:31
  #219 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,251
Received 332 Likes on 185 Posts
Quote:

First, consider the fundamental reason for using twin engines. It is primarily because existing turboshaft engine designs were not perceived as having an acceptable level of reliability for the given applications.
Hmmmmm....? So, nothing to do with getting you to LSALT, to a safe landing place or back on the deck or ground then....?
Or simply not having sufficient installed power?
212man is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2016, 11:04
  #220 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: here today, where tomorrow?
Age: 47
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by riff_raff
The question regarding the future of twin engine helos is actually interesting.

First, consider the fundamental reason for using twin engines. It is primarily because existing turboshaft engine designs were not perceived as having an acceptable level of reliability for the given applications. On the other hand, using a single larger turboshaft engine would give better fuel efficiency and much lower manufacturing cost.

The new generation of turboshaft engines are far more reliable than previous ones. So I think we'll see more new helo designs using a single engine instead of twin engines.
riff raff I am sure that you are ruled under FAA, come across the pond to see how things re looking and you will quickly realize that European agencies are not looking at thing in this way at all and so are Europeans manufacturers: we europeans love to make things very complicated and pragmatism isn't something that attract our laws makers trust me...

I only wish you were right, but me think we can only dream of it!

Davy

Last edited by singesavant; 18th Jul 2016 at 16:21.
singesavant is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.