There is a hoist option available for the S-92 and certified for human external cargo (HEC class D).
An aft sliding upper door is fitted (permanently) instead of the normal upper clamshell door. When required, the lower airstair door is removed and replaced with a hinged inward swinging lower door. The hoist and its supporting structure is bolted to existing fittings on the airframe.

Ok. I knew there had to be some way to hoist with it.

Really nice helicopter.

AESIR,

The S92 certainly is hoist capable, yes even with civvie drivers. The little company in Newfoundland certainly are using theirs.

Nice pic. Those lads no their stuff, not the first ground that they have broken when it comes to leading the way in the helicopter bus..:ok:

I really wanna lick that blue paint...

Normally, the sliding door would be used for SAR ops (there is a fine single or dual hoist system available).

Even the airstair door allows winching, as Sikorsky has designed in a way to remove the lower airstair section, and install an inward swinging half door by pin replacement. Should you need to quickly fit the airstair S-92 for SAR, just drop the stairs and install the swing door.

Hello, Hank. How is the 195?

How does the inward swinging door affect floor space within the cabin? Does it inhibit the bringing in of a stretcher?

The door is hinged at its forward edge and swings toward the forward bulkhead. It swings thru space used as a "foyer" and so works well. The door is 1.27M (50") wide and the cabin is 1.98M (78") wide, so full-length litters and such are not a problem.

Page 18 of this brochure below shows the general layout of seats, and illustrates what I say above:

http://www.sikorsky.com/file/popup/0,3038,827,00.pdf

Salesman
 

Glad to see you're still pushing 92's for me Nick!! :ok:

IB 92s, I remember reading that there is a Fly By Wire version of the 92 scheduled to fly this year; is that still the plan?

Still the plan!!

S-92 Expands Helideck Performance Envelope
 

S-92 Expands Helideck Performance Envelope
Tuesday July 26, 3:04 pm ET


STRATFORD, Conn., July 26 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Sikorsky Aircraft continues to expand the S-92 flight envelope with new flight manual procedures for European offshore operations that allow the aircraft to either land safely on the helideck or continue flight if an engine is lost during takeoff or landing.
Sikorsky added JAR-OPS 3 (Joint Aviation Requirements Operations 3) Performance Class 2e Elevated Helideck performance data to the flight manual after completing 250 takeoff and landing maneuvers with simulated engine failures on a fully instrumented S-92.

The flight test data was incorporated into the flight path computer simulation model to generate S-92 helideck performance charts to meet expected future European Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) Operational Performance Requirements.

Most European-based twin-engine helicopters currently operate offshore in accordance with Performance Class 2 data. Performance Class 2 operations accept a limited period of exposure during which the loss of an engine during takeoff or landing from a helideck may result in a forced water landing.

The JAA is expected to require all twin-engine aircraft to meet the Performance Class 2e criteria by 2010. With the addition of the new Performance Class 2e data, the S-92 meets the requirement well before the deadline.

The S-92 provides unprecedented levels of safety and reliability, including Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning Systems (EGPWS) in all civil aircraft configurations. The S-92 helicopter is the first in the world certified by the European Aviation Safety Agency/Joint Aviation Authorities (EASA/JAA) to the latest and most rigorous safety standards. The S-92 was also the first helicopter certified by the FAA to FAR Part 29 Transport Rotorcraft, Amendment 47, the latest U.S. safety regulations, which mirror the European standards.

Interesting! Anyone have any details on the nature of the profiles and the temperature envelope? Will Norsk/CHC HS be amending their procedures or had they been given the info in advance?

It is not clear to me why there is silence on this press release. Either the announcement is so mundane that there really is nothing to it; or it is so obscure that it is not clear what effect it will have on offshore operations.

None of the 'Category A debate' posters (with the exception of 212man) appear to be interested. Is it because the statement: signals that this is really only a quirky European issue that it has no bearing on offshore operations in other regions (Rick Burt are you out there?), or perhaps it is because of the statementCould it be that the fact that this is the first set of procedures/data which provides the offshore community with the potential of zero exposure procedures is of no import - in that case why did several debates on 'hard core Cat A' go on for so long?

Well I think it's significant; at last, we now have properly documented, manufacturer originated data and guidance that will allow objective planning and operation to helidecks. Quite apart from anythng else, I would imagine it puts the crews and operators in a much better position to defend themselves in the event of litigation following an incident/acident.

Even if not a direct cause of an accident, the current practices surrounding performance planning, associated with helideck operations, could be readily pulled to pieces by any half decent lawyer (I would have thought.)

Strange how it is considered a 'quirky European trait' to wish to be able to land and take off with relative impunity to power unit failure; maybe some people have a different view on whether they consider their 'little pink bodies' to be frangible structures or not!

I can say with some certainty that these procedures will be applied outside the European theatre with one operator at least .;)

It's not very new....
Take a good old AS 365N, take about 1 ton from absolute MTOW on an offshore ops average day, and you'll get your "helideck PC1" capability, with all performance graphs required in RFM.
It' also true, almost nothing will be left for pax/fuel....:bored:

It is a trueism that most twin engined helicopters do not operate to - lets call it Group A in old money - when taking off offshore. That is not to say that they cannot do it, they can but they will have to reduce their operating weight by a significant amount. The exposure times ecountered during a non Group A take off can be measured in seconds.

Lets wait and see the weight penalty that the '92 has to pay before we gasp in admiration.

Wiz

Class 1! You must be joking
 

We never will get a proper Class 1 offshore because it's impossible to feed into the performance calculations the cumulative effects of turbine exhausts, turbulence and strange temperature gradients in the vicinity of flares etc.

Sure this is encouraging news but I believe the data used by Sikorsky came from trials on a shore based helipad!

GIC,
not that you ever get any orographic turbulence when taking off in Cornwall, I take it?!! (from what I've seen PZE is pretty close to offshore variables)

Given the choice between a 'best guess' and a manufacturer's test data, I know where my money is.

manufacturer's test data
 

Flight manual stuff is better than zilch any day but just don't go bettin' your sweet ass on it or you might just find yourself climbing into a rubber row boat.

Now PZE - that's an interesting performance environment too. Fortunately they don't have to land and take off in the lee of a derrick.

S92 engine out?
 

Heard a rumor the other day that one of the PHI S92s suffered an engine flame out on take off from a GoMex Heliport.

Aircraft flew away from the take off and landed back at the heliport, it was over 90F apparently (over 30c)

Kind of "shuts up" those who thought the aircraft was short of power.

Anyone know any more about this?

HH:cool: