medical checks - hearing
 

AFAIK helicopter crews are allowed some latitude because we wear headsets and can crank up the volume.

G. :ok:

JAR Class 1 Hearing Standards
 

UK CAA JAA Class 1 Hearing Standards are here - Audio - JAR Class 1 Hearing Standards | Medical | Safety Regulation

Quote:

---

However the hearing of experienced pilots at re-certification can be acceptable even if worse than the levels above, as JAR-FCL 3 Appendix 16 to Subparts B and C, paragraph 2 (b) states that: ‘If satisfactory hearing in a noise field corresponding to normal flight deck working conditions during all phases of flight can be demonstrated, recertification may be considered by the AMS (Aeromedical Section)’. This will usually take the form of a flight (real or simulated) with a training captain or instructor who reports that all tasks involving hearing were performed satisfactorily.

---

I have had to perform this hearing check on a CPL(H) student after an operation on his ears, which was satisfactory

The hearing loss that I and others flying the S92A have suffered is above 3000Hz thus currently no medical restrictions.

Searching for this thread to try and find the Norwegian report, I find the link given on page one doesn't seem to take you to an actual report: Forskning

Can a Norwegian speaker help? I found an index of publications but nothing that seemed relevant.

Thanks...

Hearing Loss in Civilian Airline and Helicopter Pilots Compared to Air Traffic Control Personnel - Transport Research International Documentation - TRID

Analysis of Helicopter Sound for the Development of A New Generation Active Headset (Conference Paper by Thomas L Lagö, Sven Johansson, Per-Anders Hellström) - Electronic Research Archive @ Blekinge Institute of Technology (BTH)
Any help

500e, thanks but I thought there was a specific study for the S-92 referenced, following concerns by the Norwegian pilot union.

Being an active member of the Brass Ear Trumpet Brigade.....hearing loss is no fun.

Too many hours in the cab of a Wokka with antiquated hearing protection (or none at all) doomed me early on...and now I pay the penalty.

The real problem with a loss of High Frequency hearing is the increasing problem with differeniation....all consenants sound the same...b,c,d, t, v, z's....all blend together and if they come from cute wee kiddies or attractive young women (higher pitched voices)....they really blend together.

Throw in the clatter of beer mugs on granite....tinkling of silverware.....some background music...and the chatter of the throng....and it is lip reading time.

Throw in a good dose of Tinnitus....and forget ever having some Peace and Quiet....wonder why some old Men get cranky?

If you get to where you need "special" tests to keep your medical....you should be looking more towards finding a "Special Ed" Teacher to marry rather than struggling to keep your medical.

A note for those who think cranking the volume knob up is a cure....at some point you max out on the headset volume and the audio control box volume....and you still cannot understand what is being said. If you are using more volume.....you have a hearing problem that has nothing to do with sheer volume....but rather a differeniation problem....and volume shall not cure that.

Take care of your hearing....but know when to make the decision re which is more important....retaining your ability to hear or earning a paycheck by flying for a living.

SAS, thanks for the concern but I'm not worried about hearing loss from the S-92 (I think the AS332 did a pretty good job of that on its own!) It's a purely technical interest in relation to how ANR equipment functions.

212man - Try here: Whole-Body Vibration Noise Levels In The Cockpit - Jan Ivar Kåsin, November 2008. The S-92 specific section is pp14-22.

I/C

Pardon!!!

Sorry... I had to say it.:)

212....being a dull third grader on this topic....I always wondered how the ANR system "eliminates" noise. If you are sat next to a 350db transmission (picking a number out of the air here...but suggesting really really loud)...it would seem to me the screaming din remains even if you magically do not "hear" it anymore.

Thanks Ian - just what I was after. I saw the title listed but hadn't realised it was the one!

:eek: Unlikely to be at 350 dB - it's Logarithmic in the way it goes up. every 3 dB is DOUBLE the power, so 103 dB is twice the energy of 100 dB. 350 dB would turn you into a 'Pink Mist.' Even the LRAD Acoustic Weapon has a maximum continuous volume: 162dB (you don't want to hear that!) :sad:

120 dB = Threshold of discomfort
130 dB = Threshold of Pain
140 dB = Jet Aircraft (Full Power) at 50m

Assumption: The maximum sound pressure is 194 dBSPL that cannot be exceeded because the average air pressure of 101325 Pa. L = 20 × log (101325 / 0.00002) = 194 dB. RMS value is not peak value.
A typical false statement: "No noise levels can exceed 194 dB ever". Is the end at 194 dB? In addition to this perception threshold is discussed more often a physical limit to 194 dB. Sound is nothing more than a minor disturbance of air pressure and 194 dB is theoretically the same as the disturbance itself. It must be distorted. Even louder noise is possible, but much distorted". (Chaos).

This high sound pressure will break all measurement microphones and human beings are completely torn when they are close to the center of a nuclear explosion. No hearing protection (ear muffs or ear plugs) can help you there.

These madness sound levels will never be measured but only estimated or calculated. :ouch:

But it is true. the S-92 is awesomely loud in the front office, especially with the door open in the SAR role. :uhoh:

I can recommend a flying helmet with in-ear CEPs.

Do you know if there have been any measurements with door opened and closed?

Do you know how many extra dBs with the door open?

Dear mister SM,

I read somewhere else as well that you recommended wearing safety glasses in the cockpit.I hope for all the helicopter pilots out there,that you hold a function far away from being involved into what WE should wear or use.
The 92 should be redesigned,simple as that.
SK should wake up and realize that we are living in 2011,soon 2012,and that the times of extreme vibrations and retarded amounts of noise in a helicopter should have been left in the last century

end of rant,

rotorknight

It is the employers responsibility to protect his employees from noise, not an aircraft manufacturers as there are no certification requirements on this.

Car manufacturers have a responsibility to produce safe cars that are not hazardous for the driver to drive
Why not have similar standards for the aviation industry :confused:
Imagine a buss driver wearing hearing protection ?

just my pennies worth

Pv

They are safe - this is a matter of health.

SM, that's true, BUT the operators fly the helicopters that the Oil companies fancy. see AW139, was never designed for offshore flying. and is crumbling under the unexpected pressure that continuous offshore exposure has given it. being in the industry.

one ,at times, gets the idea that the only reason companies choose a certain type. relates to the big boys toys syndrome. everyone else has this shiny new helicopter so it must be fantastic. when the opposite is often the case. version 1.0 snags. lack of spares = low availability.

back to the issue at hand, havent been so (un)fortunate to have a flight in a S92 but have been in the cockpit when avionics is on. and its unbelievable loud.

and if the Oil companies are so interested in safety. they would focus of the working environment of the people that fly them back and forth as well as the safety equipment of the helicopter.

noisy environment = fatigue = faults = accidents.

The AW139 was never designed for offhore ops? Rubbish just look at the power, windows, raft locations, high rotors etc etc

Noise and vibration reduction is biased in favour of the pax who travel in the back once or twice a month
whilst we up front we travel back and forth each day
I wonder where oil company/manufactuers priorities lie ??

S92 jockie

I thought the worst vibration on the 92 was in or near the back row.

SM just because the offshore industry has found use for it. doesn't mean that it was the primary design area. from what I have been told from several Agusta staff. The 139 was originally designed to do law enforcement and VIP. and to fly maybe 3-500 hours a year.

As paddyviking said: Confort is reserved for pax. I drive a VIP EC155 and it's lounge-quiet in the back. The (separated) cockpit is a different story: rotors, fans, wind noise, cold (to get decent temperatures in the front you have to boil the pax alive) and hard seats. And don't even dare to turn on the heat, it's like having a third engine running in the cockpit, but only noise-wise)

What crap EC155.How can you seriously suggest the AW139 was only meant for VIP and police ops !.Aren't you mixing it up with the stretch EC155.....now that does have a limited market.
The AW139 was developed as a bigger and better Bell 412 replacement for all roles...and has succeeded handsome I would say with sales, now approaching the 600 mark.

Heli1 I'm only saying what I was told by Agusta people. where they have their information from I can only guess.

fact is though although being widely sold. it has some major flaws.
maint. is really heavy and time consuming.\
support on it is slow > IAW the people I've been talking to.
not to mention the tail rotor problems

Im sure there are pro's and con's as with other helicopters. but point is. IMO there are better options out there.

Flying helmets offer protection and noise attenuation, another good reason for using them.

Staying in bed every working day,offers the ultimate protection against banging your head,and you get rid of the noise at the same time,and if you are a lonely fellow/lady you do not even have to suffer from vibrations either.
Man I should have thought about that before :hmm:

good weekend to you all

an ex 92 jockey :ok:

Rotorhead.....


Anyone with firsthand experience with a Chinook Cockpit knows what I mean by "really really loud"!

All that din does not magically disappear with noise cancelling earphones.

S-92 Noise Levels
 

Good Day Everyone;

I've been flying the S-92 for about 1300 hours. The first 800 was using a Bose Aviation X headset. Besides going through about twice as many batteries as it did in an S-61 or AS-332, it worked fine.

Last summer I started wearing a Gallet LH-250 with CEP. Since then I notice the noise level is quite a bit higher, especially in the low frequency range generated by the rotor system. (It is quite a bit louder in the right seat than the left seat too.)

High noise levels in the S-92 is common knowledge and I'm wondering what other S-92 pilots are wearing for sound protection and how it is working out for you. Helmet, headset, ANR, CEP, combinations....

Any information or advice would be greatly appreciated.

RH

We've been using Senheissers with ANR and aircraft power source, with no complaint, for 5 years. We are now transitioning to Alpha helmets with ANR - too soon for feedback

We use Bose A20 headsets, Gallet LH250's fitted with CEP's and others modified with the Bose A20 system -- these are the most common in use here with 100+ pilots.
Of course there are one or two other types in use but the above have been adopted by the company as they seem to be the most effective.
It seems to be very much what suits the individual pilot, for me I use Gallet helmet with CEP's as I get better radio reception.
I would love to hear if there could be a system that incorporates CEP with the Bose ANR to get the best of both

Regards

Pv

protection is worth the price
 

This FAA site Aircraft Noise Levels Appendix 10 and 11 provides the noise ratings of most helicopters. Nonetheless, it would be wise to get a db meter and check it out for yourself. In the past we built and tested rocket engines and as such measured the db levels and then had head sets made specifically for the noise environment. The cost was about $300 per set but none of us have hearing issues, so well wort it.

QuietPro100Ex
 

The earplug QP100eX will soon be tested in a helicopter cockpit. The plug was primarily aimed for offshoreworkers in an noisy environment, but might be efficient for pilots.

Google QP100eX and you will find interesting data regarding the earplug. Built in ANR, dosimeter that records the amount of noise with a microphone inside the earcanal and built in microphone for speak (no need for mouth microphone).

OMP

Thank you for the replies and information. Yes, I think to a point individual preferences are important. When I've finished my research, I'll post it here for all.

RH

We are investigating the Bose setup out of Norway.

Does anyone out there have experience with the Merit Apparel ANR setup in the Gallet?

Thanks,

RH

I use a flight helmet, with CEP and molded earplugs from westone.com they make them specifically to adapt to the CEP. Many places around the US to get the molds poured, listed on thier website.

4000 hours in H-60 an S-61, and no hearing problems to date.

Another one bites the dust
 

:sad: I have officially become a casualty of the S-92A (SAR Config) acoustic war. After about two years flying it in the SAR config, I was rewarded with strong tinnitus, and hearing loss above 6 kHz. So what is the 'magic combination of Helmet/ANR/CEP/Ear-Plugs that will make this outrageously loud cockpit acoustically safe for those who have to fly it? :confused: :eek:

There are going to be many hard-of-hearing S-92 veterans in the not so distant future!:ugh::ugh:

Tried ALPHA helmet with upgrades, currently GALLET 250 with CEP and custom ear moulds. :ooh:

Is there a good Helmet / ANR solution??? Money is no object.

Bonjour Rotor124,

First let me say that English is not my first language. Many friends say I barely can speak it. So wordalogy may be lacking. Beer with me.

I am a fairly new pilot who has just been told that there may be a chance i can fly some S&R very soon but you have now made me Wonder as you are one of the first i have read about that is not flying the new Sikorsky model now.

So, to help in my choice is it able to get some more détails from you and a number of issues. A little history first, if possible you can answer, thèse will aid me in my choice to carry out a career in S&R in the S92.

How long have you be flying in cockpit?
Hours total and years?
Have you flown loud helo’s before….I once saw a 214ST and thought that was 2 as loud as the model of yours?
Did you have a exteinsive carreer that gave early damage? Some of thèse vertical rep giuys spend 10 hours a day oustide.

Relating to your currrent position…. If damage was done in two years you guys must fly hard. How many mission a day? How many hours with that big S&R door open? Do you do multiple missions daily? Is hover time long? Average hours in a month / week? Is there a notoceable increase with S&R door open rather closed?

I hope you may aid in my quieries as I would not want to loose my Herring! I wish you many joyful days ahead.
Are others in your S&R coleques reporting same.

ILS – I Love Smurfs!

Hi,
I just wonder if any of you uses ear plugs and head set or ear plugs and helmet together?
Is it common to use both?
Will this eventually solve the problem?

I have flown a bit over 3000 Hrs in the S92. The last 1000 approx using a Gallet helmet and ear normal plugs instead of the Gallet earplugs with speakers. I fly around 700 hrs a year up to about 7 hrs a day some days. I have no hearing problems at all. No tinnitus or major hearing loss since using the helmet. There was some hearing loss before, but it has not developed at all since. I have regular hearing tests to check. Not everyone likes wearing a helmet for comfort reasons, but I find it very comfortable and easy to use. It is a lot more comfortable than the old military Mk 4 I used earlier.