EC 225 latest ......so quiet
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: England
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Europe
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
latest AD
EASA Safety Publications Tool
EASA Safety Publications Tool
Pulling the chip detectors and filter every day - any unintended consequences awaiting there?
"Flying again" it might....the question is who will be flying in it?
The Airbus folks are rolling the Dice on this....one more catastrophic failure that kills a load of passengers and the crew...and their whole product line is going to be looked at very closely by potential buyers/operators/passengers.
The stage is set to see the end of a helicopter manufacturer if they get it wrong yet again.
The Airbus folks are rolling the Dice on this....one more catastrophic failure that kills a load of passengers and the crew...and their whole product line is going to be looked at very closely by potential buyers/operators/passengers.
The stage is set to see the end of a helicopter manufacturer if they get it wrong yet again.
It will be very interesting to see how this all plays out.
Not to impressed with the no fuzz burn aspect. This will make a difference in the "emergency Procedure" for a chip. I would certainly like to know if the light is just fuzz or perhaps something bigger.
Also do not like the daily chip plug / filter inspection.
But that is just my opinion.
Not to impressed with the no fuzz burn aspect. This will make a difference in the "emergency Procedure" for a chip. I would certainly like to know if the light is just fuzz or perhaps something bigger.
Also do not like the daily chip plug / filter inspection.
But that is just my opinion.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helihub.com:
Source: EASA
On 7 October 2016 the decision to lift the temporary flight suspension of the Super Puma EC225 LP and AS332 L2 helicopters from Airbus Helicopters put in place on 2 June 2016 following the crash of an EC225 LP helicopter in Norway on 29 April 2016. The set of very stringent protective measures which enable the decision to allow these type of helicopters to return to flight include:
The elimination of a specific type (Type A) of 2nd stage main gearbox planet gear involved in the accident by another type (Type B) which has a demonstrated reliable service life.
An additional safety factor applied to the demonstrated service life of this gear type (Type B), resulting in the time before replacement being reduced to less than half its current value.
The daily inspection or after 10 flight hours (whichever comes first) of the chip detectors, and every 10 flight hours oil filter with very stringent criteria.
All main gearboxes that have suffered from unusual events will be withdrawn from service. Unusual events include external events that might shock the gearbox but without visual evidence of damage.
EASA has been closely monitoring the analysis and tests conducted by Airbus Helicopters. We maintain our full support to the investigation led by the Accident Investigation Bureau of Norway (AIBN) for the accident. This action continues to address the initial safety recommendation on EASA and we will address any further recommendations addressed to EASA.
EASA will closely monitor the compliance action taken by the helicopter manufacturer and operators following the return to service along with operational information.
We will continue to work with the helicopter manufacturer, international regulators and national aviation authorities, offshore operators, to ensure that the highest possible safety standards always prevail.
Source: EASA
On 7 October 2016 the decision to lift the temporary flight suspension of the Super Puma EC225 LP and AS332 L2 helicopters from Airbus Helicopters put in place on 2 June 2016 following the crash of an EC225 LP helicopter in Norway on 29 April 2016. The set of very stringent protective measures which enable the decision to allow these type of helicopters to return to flight include:
The elimination of a specific type (Type A) of 2nd stage main gearbox planet gear involved in the accident by another type (Type B) which has a demonstrated reliable service life.
An additional safety factor applied to the demonstrated service life of this gear type (Type B), resulting in the time before replacement being reduced to less than half its current value.
The daily inspection or after 10 flight hours (whichever comes first) of the chip detectors, and every 10 flight hours oil filter with very stringent criteria.
All main gearboxes that have suffered from unusual events will be withdrawn from service. Unusual events include external events that might shock the gearbox but without visual evidence of damage.
EASA has been closely monitoring the analysis and tests conducted by Airbus Helicopters. We maintain our full support to the investigation led by the Accident Investigation Bureau of Norway (AIBN) for the accident. This action continues to address the initial safety recommendation on EASA and we will address any further recommendations addressed to EASA.
EASA will closely monitor the compliance action taken by the helicopter manufacturer and operators following the return to service along with operational information.
We will continue to work with the helicopter manufacturer, international regulators and national aviation authorities, offshore operators, to ensure that the highest possible safety standards always prevail.
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: awaiting position fix
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
krypton john - You are describing general maintenance of an aircraft. Yes, more system disturbances will occur, but are you implying standards of maintenance will drop? Perhaps you should give our maintenance crews more respect?
As a maintenance crewman for the last 36 years I have to partially agree with 212man. When you do an overhaul or perform almost any maintenance that requires disassembly of parts (which I think is the definition of maintenance), you run the risk of incurring some damage that was not there before your endeavor. We have all cut an o ring while reassembling something and fortunately we usually find the seep/leak before it goes back in service. Sometimes it takes a while to show up. The chances of catastrophic failure are slim but it can happen ( S92 oil filter studs not withstanding). I think if people get complacent because they do something every day the likelihood increases but filters and O rings should never fall into that category if proper procedures are followed, even if it means replacing cheap o rings every day and performing an extra run-up to leak check. Geez, do you check your landing light on pre-flight or do you think that if you turn it on an extra time that might be the last time it works before it fails and you would have been better off not checking it because it would work when you actually needed it? I think I'll stay in bed today......
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be very interesting to see how this all plays out.
Not to impressed with the no fuzz burn aspect. This will make a difference in the "emergency Procedure" for a chip. I would certainly like to know if the light is just fuzz or perhaps something bigger.
Also do not like the daily chip plug / filter inspection.
But that is just my opinion.
Not to impressed with the no fuzz burn aspect. This will make a difference in the "emergency Procedure" for a chip. I would certainly like to know if the light is just fuzz or perhaps something bigger.
Also do not like the daily chip plug / filter inspection.
But that is just my opinion.
Inspecting chip detectors and the oil filter every 10 hours will require a lot of man hours. It is common to replace o-rings and fasteners every time these components are re-installed. Larger pieces of debris usually do not make it to the oil filter, since there are wire mesh screens located at the oil pump pickups.
The elimination of a specific type (Type A) of 2nd stage main gearbox planet gear involved in the accident by another type (Type B) which has a demonstrated reliable service life.
Anyone have a picture of the filter housing?
Larger pieces of debris usually do not make it to the oil filter, since there are wire mesh screens located at the oil pump pickups.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apparently the 225s are safe to fly again according to one agency but not two others, the cause is not fully understood and the investigation hasn't finished. It is as clear as mud to me.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There are two configurations of planet gear within the current type design. In depth review of the design and service data showed that one configuration has higher operating stress levels that result in more frequent events of spalling, associated with rolling contact fatigue, while the other exhibits better reliability behaviour. By limiting the type design to the gear configuration with lower stress levels and better reliability and specifying a reduced life limit, combined with more effective oil debris monitoring procedures and other operational controls, an acceptable level of safety can be restored."
Redesigning an epicyclic is hardly a trivial exercise and there must have been a very good reason to do so. I don't know the engineering history of this does anyone know if it was in response to earlier failures or simply to increase time between inspections or allow higher loadings?
Also were all the previous MGB accidents (excluding the bevel gear systems) involving type A?
Redesigning an epicyclic is hardly a trivial exercise and there must have been a very good reason to do so. I don't know the engineering history of this does anyone know if it was in response to earlier failures or simply to increase time between inspections or allow higher loadings?
Also were all the previous MGB accidents (excluding the bevel gear systems) involving type A?