Not sure about this non-start first time thing. I have 1500 hours in the police role, short flights + lots of start/stops. It has never ever ever ever failed to start first time. Turbomeca engine. What are you doing wrong???

:ok: I didn't mean it like that, sorry if I caused offence. I just wanted to balance the argument. If you don't put the prime pumps on first, it doesn't start very often. The big UK consortium are going for the PW option, so I guess it must be ok as well.

Just to add to JT2's comment, I have flown a number of EC135s with TM power over a few years in the UK.

There were starting problems with the early versions, if you did not let the prime pumps have a few seconds to do their thing. There were also early problems with the HMUs. However, apart from that and certainly with the later machines my experience on starting is exactly the same as JT2. Perhaps the reputation for poor starts came from that early experience?

There are now two inlet barrier filters (IBFs) offered for the EC135 - one from Eurocopter and a second from FDC/aerofilter. AFS is also working on a third system.

Here in the States, the EC135P2+ has been outselling the EC135T2+ by about 3 to 1, though there has been some concern about P&WC's support in recent years due to its heavy focus on the PW600 turbofan (a situation that may improve now that the VLJ market has cooled). To its credit, TM has also been stepping-up its support, despite record production levels.

I/C

I believe the big consortium buy for PW was down to the fact of available machines in a short time since the TM ones appear to have a longer waiting list, also TM want ultra clean water for their engine rinses which used to be daily but PW are happy with tapwater things like this had a bearing as well.

Well this is how I understand it.

All most all of Germany's Air Ambulance use the PW. The one in Berlin (I think) even has airfilters.

DRF and ADAC mostly PW, the orange and blue ones of Federal Police are T2i ( TM ).

Berlin ( Christoph 31 ) is equipped with sandfilters: Christoph 31 testet Sandfilter (ergänzt) | rth.info - Faszination Luftrettung | Rettungshubschrauber online

skadi

Hi all,

good info!

The start-up failure of the TMs:
I had that happen on a Arriel (B3).
MY FAULT!
Started to cut down on the primer pump time!
The occasion was with very low fuel and the primer on less than 10 sec...
Manual says 30 sec!! Pilot Error!!

My next concern is what engine is better for hot,humid climate!

PW has 20 more horses at MCP, but slightly lower performance on OEI...

Someone mentioned that TM looks better on "paper" - what's the real life situation?

THanx!

3top, :cool:

Another question for all 135 drivers/mechanics/engineers:

Obviously we will need an Airconditioning System or we'll be fried!

EC offers a tropical version....

My question is if someone has experience with either EC aircon and/or the aftermarket AirComm - system.

Going by either companies reputation, this is a no-brainer with the winner being AirComm...

But, I'd rather go for some real life experience.

Thanx,

3top,:cool:

The EC Air Con is known to have issues with vibration and cracking in various areas, it's weight notwithstanding.

The Air Comm is not the only aftermarket A/C. Metro Aviation builds a similar one. The difference is the compressor on the Metro unit is not in the engine inlet flow. Always wondered what a refrigerant gas leak would do to the engines. Flameout?

Cheers Skadi.

3top
Someone mentioned to me recently that PW had halved their power by the hour (I think) costs on these engines, in order to win sales.
Can't remember specifics but presumably worth looking into.

Thank you gentleman!

Keep it coming! All great info!

I will let you all know how this ends up!


3top,:cool:

I'd concur with JT2's comments (19th Apr #514) re starting - after over 5 years and around 2000 starts, putting both TM engines to Idle at the same time, the ONLY time they haven't started straight away was when I'd rushed & forgotten the Prime Pumps - my error, not TM!

Brill Stuff (#519) also comments re water rinses. TM used to insist on daily, now happy with weekly unless in salt laden environment, which could be done "hot" (at idle) or "cold" (using vent switch). Hot makes very little difference to operational availability, cold keeps the aircraft off-line for about 10 mins longer. PW still insist on daily and only have a cold procedure, I understand, despite being happy with tap water. Rather depends on what role you're using the aircraft for.

As far as tail boom colour goes, would concur that a dark tail is a must for Police or lots of hovering operations, whether TM or PW. It's the long hovering that cooks the tail - a nearby Air Ambulance (all Yellow) keeps a nice shiny tail as they just go from A-B & the tailboom stays out of the dirty airflow!

Good luck with whatever you end up with - it's a fabulous machine.:ok:

Panel, Switches pictures
 

Does anyone have pictures of the electrical panel, instrument panel, cyclic and collective controls of an EC135P2.
I am looking for pictures that show the lay out, design and placement of all the controls.

Thanks in advance

TPK the instrument panel should not be any different between the P and T.

Zora just to add, the hot rinsing is a weekly doddle if you have an engineer standing by reason being it needs an engineer to unplug the hoses from the engines since since the connectors are sadly right under the hot section instead of being routed to the outside like the latest 355s

If you only have the pilot it's a bit of a faff.

But fortunately these rinses are now weekly.

Thanks for the info. I was able to find exactly what I needed.

TM is definitely cleaner. Wipe with your finger in the exhaustpipe and you will see the difference! That has nothing to do with the flightprofile ( hovering operation ). Maybe the Air Ambulance use their time off for cleaning their machine....

skadi

We operate two TM powered 135 50% in the hover and both need their tails painting on a regular basis. Using the thermal camera you can see the abuse the tail gets in the hover. Air Glaze is being trialled next to see if that improves the longevity of the tail paint. The affected area is just after the exhausts up to the stabilizer.

But thats a different cause, the heat. I saw the newer Ts have extra "heatshields" right behind the exhaust pipes.
http://www.helionline.net/463-239890.../22916/big.jpg

Hey Skadi,

is that the tall/high landing gear?

3top:cool:

@3TOP

Yes, thats correct!

skadi

Hi Skadi,

thanks for the speedy reply!

Besides more MR clearance, is there any other advantage with the high gear?
At 26 kg MORE weight then the low one it seems quite heavy ....

3top

These HEMS machines, operated by the German Federal Police are equipped with HELLAS ( Helicopter Laser Radar for obstacle warning ), therefore needing more groundclearance.
The other two major HEMS operators in Germany are using the normal landinggear with the EC 135. Loading a patient its a little bit easier then and ground clearance is also ok.

http://www.helionline.net/539-825022.../23745/big.jpg

3top, Eurocopter are about to make an intermediate skid available for the 135. 100mm more ground clearance and 150mm wider footprint than the Low Skids. According to the 135 project boss, they weigh less than 4Kgs more than the Low Skids.
We have the high skids fitted due to the fact we also have the belly pod with the camera and Nitesun. Even so, given some of the places we land, I'd still prefer the high skid to protect the tail. High skids also give you a better sloping ground capability.

According to the flight manual (EC135T2) they don't.

Slope Left, Slope Right, Nose Up, Nose Down (degrees)

Low Skids: 14, 14, 12, 8
High Skids: 12, 12, 12, 8

With MMI (Mast Moment Indicator) inoperative or not installed : 6 degrees all round.

Any advantage to sitting on High skids (for a Police machine) is removed by having a Nightsun that is only 23cm clear on level ground.

Metro Aviation in the US have had an "Intermediate" skid extension for years. STC though. Not liked or condoned by ECD.

"High skids also give you a better sloping ground capability".

....in that your tail/frange is further from the ground in the first place.

But I agree about the nitesun - especially if it is not stowed quick enough before the Radalt switches the power off - at that point, if it's not stowed correctly, the clearance on flat ground is insufficient.

Can floats be fitted to the intermediate-size skids?

ECD now also are selling an intermediate skid if I remember the recent bulletin correctly.

Hi all,

getting close to close the order (actually we are late, but I hope I still can adjust it to accomodate our changed requirements!)

Guys/gals, anyone with experience on the "hight adjustable pilot/co-pilot seat", with lumbar support, etc....

According to the info from EC it basically allows to lower the seat.

The pilots who will fly this ship are everything from tall to short!
Tallest about 1,87 m.

I would like to know, from tall pilots, how are we dealing with headroom (planning to use my helmet!) and seat/pedal adjustability!

I am at it right now! The sooner you answer the more frosty cold ones I own you!!


3top :cool:

We fly helmets with NVG that require a little bit more head space - if you don't want to crack a set of googles. You won't get anywhere close to scratching the interior unless wou want to change pedal setting with NVG tilted upward. Compared to A109, 135 is a wide body concept, even for the tallest pilot we have - measuring 188cm.

Hi Phoinix,

thanx for the quick reply!

Well, I rather asked!
I have about 1400 hrs in the EC120 without a helmet and never realised how small it is until I tried it with a shell!
Basically the EC120 is useless for me and a helmet....
In the 350B3 the helmet limits visibility for external cargo ops severly (though one gets used to this...)

Back to the 135:

So you say that your tall guys are just fine with the standard seats?
non-height adjustable ....

How are the standard seats for lumbar support?

( I mean the tech data on the adjustable seats suggests, "" that they are the best of the best and we better get 2 of these...")

However, they certainly cost a lot more and weight more too,...

If your tall guys are happy with the standard seats, we most likely would be fine too...

Thanks for your time!

3top :cool:

We have stock seats, only adjustable AFT/FWD. I'm 180 cm and these seats are one of the most comfortable seats I've flown in. We have one smaller pilot, just over 165cm and he also doesn't have any comfort issues on 3 hour flights.

As far as visibility goes, from these seats it isn't a problem. I haven't tryed the height adjustable seats though.

Phoinix,

thanx for your info!

I am the 187 cm, but based on your replies I will take a chance with the standard seats! Cheaper (...... less expensive!) and lighter (3.7 kg each seat....)

Another question:
What kind of landing gear are you guys using?
Standard (low), high or custom (like the Metro Aviation 4" leg extension kit)
Any comment on these?

Save flights!

3top :cool:

The standard seat is the most comfortable I have used (182cm). We use a sheepskin type cover that is comfortable all year round.

Great!

We stay with the standard seats!

Another question:

We will get single/dual IFR - MEGHAS (Avionics Solution 11).
One option is the "fuel management system" - flow meters

I hope/aasume that fuel flow and quantity information would be available on the VEMD (or whatever that part is called in the EC135 - Vehicle and Engine Management Display).

Does anyone have details about this?

Would it be advisable to get the Fuel Management Option and what info does it provide, that is not available on the standard glass cockpit equipment?


I appreciate all your tips on this!!


Cheers,

3top :cool:

Fuel Management?

What is wrong with the method you have been using to date? The gauge system in the 135 is very accurate. It even accounts for the aircraft attitude. You can change the units from the front end of the VEMD.

The fuel management system uses flow meters. I can't understand why it was done this way as the data is available from the EECU, which would have been a far simpler solution and accurate enough. The A109E/S does it this way.

Even with a height of over 190cm ( 6'4" ) and helmet the standard seats are ok, better than the ones on some of the bigger machines though.

skadi

RVDT,

I don't know "what's wrong" with the method up to date!
What is the method in your IFR135?
I never got even near a EC135....

That's why I ask - I know how the 350 and the 120 work and I wondered, why the 135 would not provide this data on the VEMD (or whatever this part is called in the 135) in the standard MEGHAS?

Factory rep informs me that the data derrived from the "Fuel management option" is not available on the standard panel (Avionics solution 11 - MEGHAS).

I assumed that the IFR 135 would have all the latest EC-toys in it!
(There is no Analog Instrumets - IFR option anymore)

According to factory info, the fuel management option gives you fuel remaining in the 3 tanks, fuel flows to the engines and time to engine-out at present powersettings (based on main fuel tank level).

This same data I get in our 350B3s from the VEMD .....

So, those of you who drive MEGHAS-135s, should be in the know!
Maybe you have the option installed! (It is a no-weight option, so I assume it is just some extra-paid software!!)

The option illustration shows a 3-tank symbol with different volumes, the RH tank has less volume and shows a bottom corner cut out.

If you are certain, that you do not have the fuel management option, and you still get the above data with a direct (pictorial and numerical) readout from the panel - I will save some bucks (probably a lot!!), forgoing the option!

Keep it coming!

I also appreciate any other tips, complaints, suggestions, etc.

On Monday I have the last chance to modify the order specs!


Thanx!

3top:cool: