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

EC 225 Return to REAL Service

Wikiposts
Search

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

EC 225 Return to REAL Service

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd February 2017 | 13:36
  #161 (permalink)  
30 Countries Visited
20 Anniversary
Veteran: Army
Veteran: National Guard
 
Joined: May 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 18,633
Likes: 1,072
From: Downeast
Sultan sure knows so much....that is not true.
SASless is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd February 2017 | 13:47
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
From: La La Land
Wonder how Airbus Helicopters will persuade offshore workers after this survey then?

https://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news...-pumas-return/

Last edited by TTFD; 2nd February 2017 at 16:48. Reason: Change web link
TTFD is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd February 2017 | 19:18
  #163 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 299
Likes: 9
From: uk
TTFD:

You believe they will get a choice? Unless you call "get on this aircraft or stay at home and we will employ somebody else" a choice. Sadly money talks and fact is the EC225 performs much better than a S92 in payload & range terms.
finalchecksplease is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd February 2017 | 19:40
  #164 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 236
Likes: 4
From: All over the place
The unsatisfactory safety record in the North Sea — which is not solely due to technical problems, Faury noted — has led Airbus to do some brainstorming.
Can someone interpret what the above statement means? Are there other issues at play?

- See more at: https://www.verticalmag.com/news/air....GuvajtO8.dpuf
rotor-rooter is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd February 2017 | 20:11
  #165 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,556
Likes: 56
From: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
Dying to see how they'd react if somebody presented them with the unknowns involved in navigating wells or mooring rigs and objectively compared those with aircraft design and manufacturing processes.

The lower number of events; wells or rig moves; allows the cracks to be papered over.
jimf671 is offline  
Reply
Old 2nd February 2017 | 21:31
  #166 (permalink)  
50 Countries Visited
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 7,373
Likes: 931
From: Den Haag
Originally Posted by rotor-rooter
Can someone interpret what the above statement means? Are there other issues at play?

- See more at: https://www.verticalmag.com/news/air....GuvajtO8.dpuf
Probably something to do with two perfectly servicevable aircraft being flown into the water!
212man is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd February 2017 | 04:58
  #167 (permalink)  
5 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
From: Aberdeen
Originally Posted by jimf671
Dying to see how they'd react if somebody presented them with the unknowns involved in navigating wells or mooring rigs and objectively compared those with aircraft design and manufacturing processes.

The lower number of events; wells or rig moves; allows the cracks to be papered over.
Who exactly are "they"? Do you have a particular stereotype passenger in mind? "They" could be the directional drilling specialist who knows more about what is happening 15,000ft below him than the flight crew know about what is going on in the MGB. "They" could be on their way to a semi to control and manage that rig move. In any single day's NS flying there are usually more technical specialists in the back than in the front (no disrespect intended). Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and to make their own choices, even the hard ones. For many that is an educated choice. And not just those who upgrade themselves to 'Business Class' beside the bigger escape window or the door jettison handle.

Last edited by Concentric; 3rd February 2017 at 05:10.
Concentric is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd February 2017 | 11:02
  #168 (permalink)  
10 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
From: SE England
Originally Posted by SASless
Which Model/Type of "Puma" did they have to reduce Cruise Speeds on to stop their going through MGB's like unsupervised Kid's going through the contents of a Cookie Jar? It was told to me that getting to TBO on the Gearboxes was impossible until Power Settings (thus cruise speed)were reduced then all was well.
A similar thing has been done with the 92 so I'm not sure that can really be held as a black mark against the Puma.

A certain operator that did cruise at 80% Q is now using 70%, commensurate with most other operators - allegedly due to a higher number of rejected MRGBs in comparison.

Of course the RFM says you can sit at 86% all day...
FC80 is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd February 2017 | 11:21
  #169 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,556
Likes: 56
From: Inverness-shire, Ross-shire
'They' are the 90.1% in that survey who are not happy for the aircraft to return to service.
jimf671 is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd February 2017 | 12:36
  #170 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 448
Likes: 7
From: Sometimes here, sometimes there
A certain operator that did cruise at 80% Q is now using 70%
The 80% SOP never made sense. Not only did it result in more stresses on the powertrain, more importantly it resulted in a much worse specific fuel consumption.

Commercially it was plain dumb
Variable Load is offline  
Reply
Old 3rd February 2017 | 15:48
  #171 (permalink)  
30 Countries Visited
20 Anniversary
Veteran: Army
Veteran: National Guard
 
Joined: May 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 18,633
Likes: 1,072
From: Downeast
FC80,

The point I was hoping to make is....and you reinforce is operational practices have a direct effect upon reaching TBO targets. That a specific TBO is published initially it is based upon a "model" that overtime might have to amended as real life results are obtained. That applies to every new make/model/type of aircraft.
SASless is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



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

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.