Abz S92
 

As there is all the talk of the coastguard S92 how is ABZ's S92 fairing at the moment ? What are the current servicability rates ? Any new problems ? How many hours has it logged ?

NST

Maybe this will give a clue
http://www.thisisnorthscotland.com/d...=sidebarsearch

HC

Ah, not so good !! Any news on problem ? main/tail rotor ? Is it fixed ?

"The crew of the twin-engined Sikorsky S-92 alerted air traffic controllers when they noticed a vibration about half an hour after they had taken off"

I think the word 'noticed' is somewhat of an understatement! ::\

Don't blow it all out of proportion. Vibration 'noticed'! A/C landed safely. No accident. Nothing to see here, move along please.

Disagree helimutt. Evidently S92 in bits at Longside and something to do with the tail rotor. Good that no-one was hurt and aircraft landed safely, but I for one would be interested in knowing what the problem was.

What do you do differently on the Europian side of the pond? Norwegians and now the flying Englishmen seem to have experienced problems with the S92, but...

one operator just west of the Atlantic doesn't seem to have any problems with the machine.

Good Point Heli Ice

Aren't there a few 92's in daily operation in the GOM . Never see any threads about those machines with technical or teething problems.

Anybody liKe to comment , :confused:

Helimutt, I beleive the pax were told it was rather major? Just a rumour though!

Over 90% availability. Outstanding support from Sikorsky. Only problem is parts availability, sometimes parts are hard to get, but Sikorsky will rob from production if we go AOG.
Overall the S-92 is an easy to maintain aircraft, stay on top bearing wear and the ride is much smoother. The Hums works very good, keep an eye on several key parameters and the aircraft availability will reflect it.

(From a neighbour who heard it from a friend of a friend :hmm: )

Tail rotor blade (s) striking the tail/tailboom tend to scratch the paintwork!

RE the GOM machines, how hard are they being flown ? I believe the ABZ machine does 10hrs regularly per day, so it is a tail rotor problem ? blades hitting the tail boom ?

Helimut, I wsn't trying to blow it out of proportion: I had good reason to find the word 'noticed' amusing! :ugh:

If the reports of blade striking are correct, it will be very interesting to hear the cause. Those blades don't have much scope to flap, TGB loose? :uhoh:

Noticed a thread re-S76 tail rotor and found this reply by NickLappos

The S76 TR is the same as the Black Hawk's but was developed about 3 years later. When the 76 design was being finalized, the BH was going through a bit of development angst where the bonding of the paddle to the blade spar was working loose. There was a recurring ultrasound inspection and the chief S76 designer decided to use a "belt and suspenders" approach, so it is bonded and bolted. Since then the hawk process was squared away, so it dropped the inspection.

How does the 92 tail rotor compare to the Black Hawk and S76 ? Could this be an occurrance of the Blackhawk problem ?

NST

From a Sikorsky press release today:

So the moral is, never believe anything you read in a press release!

HC

As long as it stays in the hangar it is "operationally ready". Its only when it flies it goes u/s. In other words. it spends 98% of its time in the hangar.

Just seen it depart from ABZ this afternoon, is it back on revenue now or is it flight testing ?

NST

So S or U/S ?

I don't know - that aircraft is on contract to Apache - at the moment.

But I'd assume U/S if no one from CHC has commented.

Just hope they are keeping Apache better informed.

So nobody want to reply re the Blackhawk Tail problems ? could it be a similar problem ? Also what hours are the Gom machines flying that never seem to go u/s ?

NST

North Sea,

The item I referred to in the other post was from 1978, and was not a "problem" per se, the bonding at the cuff/spar joint just had to be inspected, and the 76 design team chose to eliminate the inspection with the bolts. The 92 has similar bolts.

I cannot comment on the subject of this thread.

Understandable, I'm sure we will find out the true nature of the problem soon, as I said I saw it flying today so must be S again.

NST

From Rotorhub.


Apr. 25, 2007 - STRATFORD, Conn., - Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. has sold four additional S-92® helicopters to the Bristow Group Inc. (NYSE:BRS), which exercised options to purchase the aircraft under an existing sales agreement. With the sale, Bristow increased its firm deliveries from seven to 11 S-92s, and added 10 more optional aircraft to the contract. Sikorsky Aircraft, based in Stratford, Conn., is a business unit of United Technologies Corp. (NYSE:UTX).

Bristow will use the S-92s to fulfill offshore transportation requirements in various parts of the world. In addition, Bristow anticipates potentially using several of its future deliveries or options for commercial search and rescue requirements.

"The S-92 fleet is approaching 45,000 flight hours after just more than two years in service, and some operators are exceeding 180 hours per month. There is unprecedented demand for the S-92, and this additional Bristow order is further expression of the confidence that our customers have in the aircraft," said Stephen B. Estill, Sikorsky Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer.

The S-92 was the first helicopter in the world certified to the latest Federal Aviation Administration and European Aviation Safety Agency/Joint Aviation Authorities joint airworthiness safety standards.

The S-92 has a proven operational readiness rate in excess of 98 percent. Current operators of the S-92 helicopter are experiencing a significantly reduced manpower requirement.

Not from Rotorhub:

During a recent Sikorsky update where someone I know attended a recent conference, the lead time aircraft in the fleet has 36-3700 hours on the airframe now.

Interesting that Bristow will soon have more S-92s than EC225s.

By my count by year end Bristow in the UK will have the following in North Sea oil & gas operations:

6 EC225s (the oldest two are less than two years old)
6 S92s (all delivered this year)
4 EC155s (all entering service this year)

Add to that 5 S92s with Norsk introduced in the last two years.

That is a massive commitment.

Hippo
Not sure if that's true, though of course you probably need more S92s to get the same job done due to the time spent in the hangar and visiting various en-route airfields:rolleyes:
In truth the American contingent prefer the 92 whilst the European contingent prefer the 225.... What a surprise!
HC

HC

Long time no spar!! I am not getting back into this argument!!

I know you prefer the 332L2 / 225 and my preference happens to be the S-92 if you hadn't already worked it out.

Factually though, it does seem that Bristow will have more 92s than 225s according to reading Rotorhub and doing the numbers.

Lets avoid a drifting thread - I apologise for my part.

The bottom line is that CHC have just had a Serious Incident.

HC
:}
If the 92 was so bad and the sun shone out of the 225 then why didn't you tell your 'superiors' to avoid any embarassing incidents with the 92 (has the 225 had any yet?) Perhaps they have stopped listening to all that pro eurocopter babble and are trying to repair lost contract damage.:D
That aside it would be interesting to hear more about the S92 incident from a more first hand account, perhaps the experience may enlighten the new S92 drivers in the North Sea.:ok:

"My" understanding from afar is that an elastomeric bearing 'retaining' plate disbonded from the blade spar, which is a known isolated problem that does not normally cause any further complications. However in this instance, the bearing then migrated away from the plate.

The same blade was the subject of a 'hangar' incident a short while ago. Perhaps the two are linked?

Apologies in advance to any engineers reading this, I'm sure my terminology is all wrong!

NRdk
Err, which 225 contract did we lose?... Or perhaps they are just good old American boys with a large dose of patriotism and a weak dollar.
HC

The buggers S

HC

Not talking about 225 contracts as such. Just contracts in general going adrift; UK SAR springs to mind. BHL seem to play follow up to the the other companies; on pay terms you wait until the other companies settle awards then pitch in just below (close enough but no cigar):ugh:
Lose a contract because the other side pitches in a few S92's on a contract all of a sudden BHL UK start ordering S92's to stay in the game. If the 225 was the answer to all, then you wouldn't change would you? (the old if it aint broke don't fix it) Don't say you were adjusting to client needs? Since when have you started doing that? :)

Back to the Tail rotor, sounds like an interesting event and well done to the crew for recognising and containing the situation with a sound airmanship decision and land as soon as possible.

Heli-Ice, the point here is that the north sea is a completely different flying environment added to the fact we are on a different lattitude compared to you guys on the other side of the atlantic. We fly in a hostile environment, with weather conditions being quite extreme in some cases with rain, unstables air masses (turbulence), salt spray etc affecting the aircraft in many ways especially when they work hard on a daily basis.

So its inevitable that problems will arise in such circumstances. As for the future who knows! I'm not an expert, perhaps someone else can enlighten me! :)

BM

NRDK

You sound a bit bitter and twisted - were you a former and now disgruntled ex employee? However you are right about the pay thing - our management do always seem to play catchup to CHC.

Some clients want the superior 225 and are prepared to pay for it. Some want the cheaper S92. It was ever thus - some go to a car showroom and buy an Aston Martin, others want a resprayed Ford Transit because its much cheaper and carries the same number of people as the Aston - in fact the cabin is bigger! (OK I am rambling now!!).

But like the good salesmen we are(!), we give them what their hearts desire regardless of our opinions

However iirc the last contract we failed to win went to the opposition on 225s
HC

"But like the good salesmen we are(!), we give them what their hearts desire regardless of our opinions"


I guess all the client wants are transportation from A to B safely. Anyway would be interesting if client would choose an 'Aston Martin' to transport their masses. Fit for purposes and cost effectiive comes to mind:)

helicomparitor uses "superior" and "cheaper" as if he knew what he was talking about.

The 225 is a grandfathered aircraft, based on the 1965 fuselage and technology of its ancient derivative. It does not have the safety, crashworthiness and strength of a modern helicopter. Like his scurge against EGPWS shows, helicomparitor can take irrational positions that would make a gymnast cry out in pain. The 225 was built as a quick stop-gap to resuscitate the 332 line, and its sales have been disappointing, except to Bristow.

I invite all to read the type certificate data sheet for the 225, which outlines how very little of the helo was changed as it was grown to try to match the 92. The changes in FAR and JAR in the decades since the 332 line was designed are as vast as the changes in car technology during the same period, and with the same impact on safety for the occupants.

For those who wonder how such a less-safe design could come from a good company like EC, look to the NH-90, which HAS the crashworthiness and other safety features lacking in the 225. Why? Because the military folks would not subject their passengers (troops) to the sub-standard safety of the 332/225 any longer.

HC:8
Heck of a lot more Transits about on the road then Aston's. (BOTH 'FORDS'):D Will the same happen between the 92 & 225? who knows. Both do their part as helicopters with them each scoring different pro's & con's. Both can fail and drop out of the sky, designed by mere mortals not the gods that fly them;)
If you sat round in your crew rooms about the UK more and a little less on PPRUNE taking tummy punches at Mr Lappos. := (sorry if you aren't short with a chip on your shoulder) You might have picked up enough 'shop floor' worker tips to use in your middle management post that would have kept your company at the fore front of the North Sea & SAR market. But from what we hear this blinkered view and 'management greatness' self belief, are why we are picking up after you. You have erroded your workers terms and conditions, pensions and careers by being slow to adapt to the market. :{ I'm sure if Bristows chopped some dead wood instead of just moving the pile about; pitched itselfs ahead of the game for once it would give us a run for its money...come on Mr CEO USA and UK sharpen the axes and for once and 'show us the money!'
In the long run we would all benefit.:ouch:

Hold on......I've got it!!!......The S92 body (Not the old 332 thing) and the 225 running gear (Not the Blackhawk stuff) and put them together!!!!. I'll make a fortune, sew up the Offshore and military markets and retire. I'm going to call it the Eurokorski ES9225. Whaduya say? Maybe Mr Lapos and Helicomparitor would like to work together as project pilots?
(Remember, it ws my idea first!)

Cosmo,
THAT is a great idea. Can you equip it with TCAS III and AVAD II?? It will sell like hotcakes..:D