Bundeswehr orders H145 LUH SAR
Thread Starter
Bundeswehr orders H145 LUH SAR
The German Bundeswehr has ordered seven Airbus Helicopters H145 LUH- SAR (Light Utility Helicopter - Search and Rescue) to replace some of the legacy Bell UH-1D operate by the German Army Aviation (Heeresflieger)
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/pres...licopters.html
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/pres...licopters.html
Hope they don't want to do winching training on it.............
Care to explain or just leave us all guessing?
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/stor...in-rescue.html
https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/stor...in-rescue.html
Last edited by SASless; 13th Dec 2018 at 14:15.
It's not a problem for normal winching with one winch operator on the skids and the winchman/casualty on the wire but, as I understand it, if you want 2 people on the skids (instructor and student) and someone on the wire, the door area is very crowded and the lateral C of G is out of limits - let alone trying to stay OEI in the hover for the training.
Operations fine but HHO training I am led to believe it isn't suitable for.
Operations fine but HHO training I am led to believe it isn't suitable for.
Nine percent improvement in OEI Hover Performance.....according to Airbus...with a 40% increase in payload.....if I understand what they are saying.
http://www.helicopters.airbus.com/we...ower_2107.html
http://www.helicopters.airbus.com/we...ower_2107.html
Originally Posted by [email protected]
... if you want 2 people on the skids (instructor and student) and someone on the wire, the door area is very crowded and the lateral C of G is out of limits ...
plus winch operator on skids are out of lateral C of G limits too?
That means that rescue swimmer + casualty on wire
plus winch operator on skids are out of lateral C of G limits too?
plus winch operator on skids are out of lateral C of G limits too?
SAS that 40% increase in payload figure seems rather misleading - a 40% increase in what? Weight on the wire? AUM of the aircraft for OEI OGE hover? What have they done to the engines to give themselves a 2.5 min OEI capability instead of a 2 min one?
I have no idea....just posted the Airbus link.
EC/H145's can have the winch on any side (if you buy the kit) If you didn't buy the kit - you probably didn't think deeply enough about what you wanted to do.
Different helicopters are different helicopters and some people try to fit their old habits and comforts into new helicopters that don't conform to their expectations. I had this same expectations problem swapping from AS355 to EC145. Get over it. Adapt.
Different helicopters are different helicopters and some people try to fit their old habits and comforts into new helicopters that don't conform to their expectations. I had this same expectations problem swapping from AS355 to EC145. Get over it. Adapt.
9 Plus,
Your scenario of a rescue swimmer+casualty on the wire and operator on the skid should be within CofG. The scenario crab describes is two on the wire and an operator plus instructor in the door.
The 40% increase is in USEFUL payload I.e you had a useful payload of 400kg it is then increased by 160kg.
Another deciding factor for performance is whether your controlling authority allow you to use 30 sec power or 2 min power in your contingency planning.
The performance will also be affected depending if TU206 has been embodied giving increased 2 minute OEI power.
Crab,
How do MFTS fit into the above two statements?
FNW
Your scenario of a rescue swimmer+casualty on the wire and operator on the skid should be within CofG. The scenario crab describes is two on the wire and an operator plus instructor in the door.
The 40% increase is in USEFUL payload I.e you had a useful payload of 400kg it is then increased by 160kg.
Another deciding factor for performance is whether your controlling authority allow you to use 30 sec power or 2 min power in your contingency planning.
The performance will also be affected depending if TU206 has been embodied giving increased 2 minute OEI power.
Crab,
How do MFTS fit into the above two statements?
FNW
Crab, remind me of the hover performance of a Whirlwind after an engine failure will you.....for that matter....without an engine failure.
SAS - the Whirlwind 9 was a whizzer at this sort of thing.......................!! (Obviously 'cos it was crewed by the RN!) and could keep up with high performance fixed wing.............
FNW - you would have to have some definition of what useful payload is - MAUM minus ZFW or MAUM minus Basic Wt or some other figure to apply that 40% - it sounds like a typical manufacturer's fudge. Is there an increase of 40% over the mass for OGE hover OEI using 2 min power?
As for MFTS - which continues to be so bad the students have released a 'music' video about it which is doing the rounds on Whatsapp - I don't know if they have that engine mod or not, just that the 145 is a retrograde step from the 412 for winch training.
Sas - apparently the Whirlwind used to winch itself down to the casualty! You do know the RAF stopped using those many, many years ago???
As for MFTS - which continues to be so bad the students have released a 'music' video about it which is doing the rounds on Whatsapp - I don't know if they have that engine mod or not, just that the 145 is a retrograde step from the 412 for winch training.
Sas - apparently the Whirlwind used to winch itself down to the casualty! You do know the RAF stopped using those many, many years ago???
Crab,
Useful load (or Disposable load): The difference between maximum gross take-off weight and basic weight empty. It is, in other words, all the load which is removable, which is not permanently part of the airplane. It includes the usable fuel, the pilot, crew, passengers, baggage, freight, etc.
FNW
Useful load (or Disposable load): The difference between maximum gross take-off weight and basic weight empty. It is, in other words, all the load which is removable, which is not permanently part of the airplane. It includes the usable fuel, the pilot, crew, passengers, baggage, freight, etc.
FNW
Originally Posted by [email protected]
- let alone trying to stay OEI in the hover for the training.
Operations fine but HHO training I am led to believe it isn't suitable for.
Operations fine but HHO training I am led to believe it isn't suitable for.
Even with worst temperature at sea level with no wind assisting, you have 3100 kg for 2 min and over 3450 kg for 30 sec.
So with empty weight around 2300 kg, plus 6 crew on board/on winch you can have a good hours fuel and be always be able to hover for 2 ½ min OEI (add the 30 sec to the 2 min, cause you can use both)
Time enough to get the hoist operation finished or clear enough, that you can transition into forward flight.
Any wind will dramatically increase possible weight.
on the other hand, why put an instructor on the skid?
You can do that in the initial phase, catching a wooden cross with lines, after that, the winchoperator should be fit enough to work the winch.
If you insist on an instructor, he could look out of the other door or use the the tail camera...
Three on one side (SWAT) isn ˋt any problem.
If you insist on an instructor, he could look out of the other door or use the the tail camera.
The student can't learn what real winching is like with a wooden cross on the hook and if you just want to practice his voice marshalling you don't need to winch at all
As for the weights - I am just going on what I have been told - perhaps the empty weight of the MFTS aircraft is greater than yours. The Metropolitan police had plenty of plans to use the winch on their 145s but I was told the problem was being safe OEI for training
Crab,
The MFTS aircraft are lighter than Flying Bull’s.
The Met Police aircraft are older C2 aircraft not the newer D2 used by MFTS. They are chalk and cheese.
FNW
The MFTS aircraft are lighter than Flying Bull’s.
The Met Police aircraft are older C2 aircraft not the newer D2 used by MFTS. They are chalk and cheese.
FNW
How do you teach stretcher entry to the cabin or even double lift entry to the cabin?
OR: do it on a simple rig in the hangar.
The Sikorsky H-19, upon which the Whirlwind was modeled, I got acquainted with in Sunny Southern Alabama during the summer one year....was grossly overpowered with its 600 she Pratt and Whitney R1340 Radial engine.
As we dashed off down the takeoff lane to the south....with the steep downward sloping ground at the end of the pavement....the acceleration would pin your ears back right till the front landing gears began to shimmy against the bungee cords....at which time you were done accelerating but usually could not stop before going over the precipice.
She made good pilots out of you as to learning how to nurse Rotor RPM.
I cannot recall even thinking of winching with them.
As we dashed off down the takeoff lane to the south....with the steep downward sloping ground at the end of the pavement....the acceleration would pin your ears back right till the front landing gears began to shimmy against the bungee cords....at which time you were done accelerating but usually could not stop before going over the precipice.
She made good pilots out of you as to learning how to nurse Rotor RPM.
I cannot recall even thinking of winching with them.
The Sikorsky H-19, upon which the Whirlwind was modeled, I got acquainted with in Sunny Southern Alabama during the summer one year....was grossly overpowered with its 600 she Pratt and Whitney R1340 Radial engine.
As we dashed off down the takeoff lane to the south....with the steep downward sloping ground at the end of the pavement....the acceleration would pin your ears back right till the front landing gears began to shimmy against the bungee cords....at which time you were done accelerating but usually could not stop before going over the precipice.
She made good pilots out of you as to learning how to nurse Rotor RPM.
I cannot recall even thinking of winching with them.
As we dashed off down the takeoff lane to the south....with the steep downward sloping ground at the end of the pavement....the acceleration would pin your ears back right till the front landing gears began to shimmy against the bungee cords....at which time you were done accelerating but usually could not stop before going over the precipice.
She made good pilots out of you as to learning how to nurse Rotor RPM.
I cannot recall even thinking of winching with them.
Winching?! Try the Sproule net
Getting back on topic, crab@ does seem to wish for the days of the Sea King cabin, big door, plenty of headroom, coffee maker, etc. Unfortunately the call for such as the H145 is to meet a different tasking group and I've no doubt that this variant will meet the needs of the Bundeswehr. Lateral GG, payload, etc are more than adequate for their tasking: even the lowly old BK117, grandad of the 145, had way more lateral CG than was expected. Having the winch on the left also helps offset the lateral, although many Australian operators opted for a right hand winch fit (after market) and one requirement of the fit was/is to move the battery from the nose to behind the left engine.