EC 225 latest ......so quiet
if you’ve scratched that itch enough flying helicopters, now is the time to switch to the airlines.
If you can.... GO....GO....GO.....GO!
If you do....don't waste a second looking back!
Some people need to swot up on the raw numbers of rotorcraft accidents, and deaths.
Two types with a substantial period in service (14 yrs), shine out above all that has gone before in terms of the raw numbers concerning accidents and fatalities. These are the S-92 and EC225. Maybe the 7 and 8 tonne newbies will match and exceed the standards set by the 92 and 225 (let's hope they do), but that remains to be proven. Other comparable aircraft have had hundreds of accidents including hundreds of fatalities. In particular, doing 12 years of intense CAT service without a fatality is pretty outstanding.
The numbers are out there.
" when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it"
William Thomson (Lord Kelvin)
[Helmet, body armour, take cover.]
Two types with a substantial period in service (14 yrs), shine out above all that has gone before in terms of the raw numbers concerning accidents and fatalities. These are the S-92 and EC225. Maybe the 7 and 8 tonne newbies will match and exceed the standards set by the 92 and 225 (let's hope they do), but that remains to be proven. Other comparable aircraft have had hundreds of accidents including hundreds of fatalities. In particular, doing 12 years of intense CAT service without a fatality is pretty outstanding.
The numbers are out there.
" when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it"
William Thomson (Lord Kelvin)
[Helmet, body armour, take cover.]
ASN is a really good starting point. Clearly, through the manner of how this site operates, rather like Wikipedia, one needs to be sceptical and look for corroboration in news articles and regulators' websites. The thing about the 225 and 92 is that so little has happened to these types that it is relatively easy to join up all the dots.
It's a while ago now so I don't remember all the details of where and how, but in 2013 I set about trying to get some perspective on this. ASN wasa major part of that. Once you start looking back at things like S-61, 330, Mi-8, and 332 accidents, the numbers stack up in a way that is no longer happening with modern types. Take the Mi-8/17, which have been produced in very large numbers compared to most types. The number of accidents is large, though not very large in relation to the number built, but when you get to many thousands of fatalities and then can't keep count, it's quite chilling, and the contrast with modern types could not be greater.
It's a while ago now so I don't remember all the details of where and how, but in 2013 I set about trying to get some perspective on this. ASN wasa major part of that. Once you start looking back at things like S-61, 330, Mi-8, and 332 accidents, the numbers stack up in a way that is no longer happening with modern types. Take the Mi-8/17, which have been produced in very large numbers compared to most types. The number of accidents is large, though not very large in relation to the number built, but when you get to many thousands of fatalities and then can't keep count, it's quite chilling, and the contrast with modern types could not be greater.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Progress or no progress
Some people need to swot up on the raw numbers of rotorcraft accidents, and deaths.
Two types with a substantial period in service (14 yrs), shine out above all that has gone before in terms of the raw numbers concerning accidents and fatalities. These are the S-92 and EC225.
" when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it"
William Thomson (Lord Kelvin)
[Helmet, body armour, take cover.]
Two types with a substantial period in service (14 yrs), shine out above all that has gone before in terms of the raw numbers concerning accidents and fatalities. These are the S-92 and EC225.
" when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it"
William Thomson (Lord Kelvin)
[Helmet, body armour, take cover.]
- In the first five years of NS ops there were 18 helicopter related fatalities
- In the most recent five year period there were also 18 helicopter related fatalities
- The safest period of operation 1987-1996 had not a single fatality despite this being the period of peak activity.
- In the first 20 years (1975 - 1995) there were around 76 helicopter related fatalities over four accidents
- In the last 20 years (1997-2018) there have been around 62 helicopter related fatalities over ten accidents
Also we need to debunk the myth that most accidents are pilot related. Of course, in aviation in general that is true. But in the NS the vast majority of these 144 deaths were attributed as having a primary mechanical cause.
So why has the Puma been singled out;
- It's the most common type so unsurprisingly has been involved in more incidents
- The workers and unions have lost confidence as the accident rate increased
- AH have failed to win them over
- The Puma is an older design which is smaller and arguably less comfortable than the new machine (S92)
- Despite a nasty scare the S92 has yet to have a fatal accident in the North Sea
- The specific causes of the epicyclic related accidents is similar but remains unattributed awaiting the final report - so doubts remain
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dyce, Aberdeen
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was walking around Alnwick last night about 5pm when a 225 circled around. Red paint scheme with silver flashes (Bond/Babcock) ?. Disappeared from sight wondered if it went into Bulmer? Driving to Dyce tonight caught a quick sight of possibly the same aircraft landing at Dyce. Are they flying again? Anybody have any info. Thanks, Ken
Leased 225s are also required to be airworthy before being returned to lessors. There are quite a few leaving operator fleets and being returned this year. Lessors are not happy about being stuck with them. No one wants to be left holding a turd.
yes some companies and lessors are letting them go for marginally more than a B3e A-Star. Some utility operators are starting to snatch them up and the companies/lessors have been happy to get them off their books and call it a day.
It seems unreasonable to have the lessee pick up the responsibility for leasing a deficient unit.
etudiant
No, it is the Lessee's responsibility to maintain the aircraft in accordance with the OEM maintenance schedule and in an airworthy state. Remember, most leases were taken out way before the 2016 fatal accident. Airbus does not accept that the 225 is deficient of faulty, after all, its no longer grounded and regulator groundings are excluded from lease arrangements.
bombdoorsopen
CHC did return non-airworthy 225s aircraft to lessors but that was under the provisions of Chapter 11, not the lease agreements themselves.
Surely the lessor retains the responsibility for the airworthiness of the item.
It seems unreasonable to have the lessee pick up the responsibility for leasing a deficient unit.
It seems unreasonable to have the lessee pick up the responsibility for leasing a deficient unit.
bombdoorsopen
There are 225 returned by CHC in various states of maintenance...all abandoned.. Left for someone else to pick up the bill to return to airworthiness status..
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Paro
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who are the Lessors of the 225's and how big a bath did they take when the 225's fell from grace?
Milestone, Waypoint LCI and Bristow who purchased through its Brilog Leasing subsidiary to then lease at inflated prices to its various business units and to contract on to clients. There is quite a fight going on between Airbus, Financiers (BNP Paribas for many of the 225s) Lessors and Lessees.
It was all good living high on the hog for the short time it lasted but the oil industry has structurally changed and the oil and gas helicopter business is going to be a diminishing one from now on.
It was all good living high on the hog for the short time it lasted but the oil industry has structurally changed and the oil and gas helicopter business is going to be a diminishing one from now on.
etudiant
No, it is the Lessee's responsibility to maintain the aircraft in accordance with the OEM maintenance schedule and in an airworthy state. Remember, most leases were taken out way before the 2016 fatal accident. Airbus does not accept that the 225 is deficient of faulty, after all, its no longer grounded and regulator groundings are excluded from lease arrangements.
bombdoorsopen
CHC did return non-airworthy 225s aircraft to lessors but that was under the provisions of Chapter 11, not the lease agreements themselves.
No, it is the Lessee's responsibility to maintain the aircraft in accordance with the OEM maintenance schedule and in an airworthy state. Remember, most leases were taken out way before the 2016 fatal accident. Airbus does not accept that the 225 is deficient of faulty, after all, its no longer grounded and regulator groundings are excluded from lease arrangements.
bombdoorsopen
CHC did return non-airworthy 225s aircraft to lessors but that was under the provisions of Chapter 11, not the lease agreements themselves.
It seems logical that the lessee be required to maintain the aircraft appropriately, but I am surprised that this would include AD responses as well. If I rent an apartment, I don't assume responsibility for repairs due to building code adjustments.
Aircraft leasing clearly has some pitfalls for the unwary....