PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rotorheads (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads-23/)
-   -   Best for HEMS? Thoughts (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/364131-best-hems-thoughts.html)

capt tosspot 28th Feb 2009 08:59

Best for HEMS? Thoughts
 
Any experienced drivers or medics want to chip in to pub debate on this quiet day as to which makes better HEMS machine - 902, 109, 135 (or other). I prefer 902 as its got great cabin and skids, but 135 also in there as it is nice to fly with easy to use AP. Never flown 109 grande but not sure about wheels and cabin space? :confused:

XV666 28th Feb 2009 09:10

How long's a bit of string?

What are the criteria:
What range is required?
What payload is required?
Is day/night/SPIFR a need/want/requirement?

B412EP will better any of the named types, with the AW139 coming along (give it another year or two: hopefully!) as a 21st Century replacement. 109S is small, but then so is the Bo105 and the 135, but for short range primary stuff, it seems to cope.

What level of medical care needs to be carried: NETS/PETS, on board gas/power, how big a power converter needed? What voltage do you need to go up to?

So, how long is that piece of string: are we talking UK short range county stuff, or somewhere in between AA and SARH?

Pub debate? Who's is the first round :ok:

HOGE 28th Feb 2009 09:20

How long's a bit of string?

Twice the distance from the middle to the end.

tacr2man 28th Feb 2009 09:36

1996 BELL 430 For Sale. If its a big string , this would most likely fit the bill 430 ?

SASless 28th Feb 2009 13:31

I have flown the 105, 117, and 412.....hands down the 412.

Much good use of 365's and 76's.

The 105 does a good job, the 117 better yet, and the 412 a very good job.

105...small, hard for the med crew to get to the patient, 117 (with big engines and autopilot) fairly roomy and fast but prone to make the med crew airsick, and the 412 the most capable and roomy. LZ size difference between the 117 and 412 not much different in reality. Plenty of range, lift ability, and easy access to patients with limit being ability of med crew to deal with the patient care needs. Usual crew was two med crew but add one more and two serious patients could be attended to in flight.

Cost issues are a different kettle of fish with the 117/145 being the best compromise nowadays.

The 109 is a poor choice due to cabin space.

griffothefog 28th Feb 2009 13:40

HOGE,

Which end??? I think you will find it is twice the distance from the middle to ONE end :ugh:

Back to thread, AW 139, no comparison (if we could get the skids to fit) :ok:

rottweiler 28th Feb 2009 14:25

My money would be on the 902, but I have not flown the 412. Wonder how they compare with running costs? As a compromise think the 902 gets it, but I have talked to people who swear by the 412. Now thats been no help at all, sorry.

TOMMY1954 28th Feb 2009 17:36

Medic point of vue
 
Purely from the medic side, the best would be the AW 139 , followed by the 412 , then 117/145.
I worked as medic crew for 7 years in a Bell 222 A , not much space , not much power , lotīs of adrenalin pumping in hot weather , but I miss those days.
Cheers

902Jon 1st Mar 2009 10:19

As with all of these things - it is horses for courses.
In London where at HEMS the average flight sector including t/o & landing is 6 minutes, where there is fuel at various locations around the city, and there are number of receiving hospitals, range & comfort and speed are not such big issues. But operating from a rooftop and flying into fairly tight confined areas much of the time does require a reasonable amount of engine power. So in that situation the 902 works very well. However in Canada, the U.S or Oz where the area to be covered could be huge, with little choice over fueling sites and/or hospitals the 902 would be useless. In that situation an
S76 or 365N or 412 would obviously be a better choice. Change the variables again and the BK117/EC145 could be the best option.

i.e there is no best helicopter - just the one most suitable for your operation.

WylieCoyote 2nd Mar 2009 12:55

Would someone be able to enlighten me as to the endurance of a 109 Grande, I'm talking in HEMS configuration with Doc and paramedic ofcourse. Interested to know how they compare to the other UK type machines(135,902,117).

mfriskel 2nd Mar 2009 15:59

If you take into consideration- landing offsite in unumproved areas, getting into and out of small areas, needing good power for vertical departures in all kinds of conditions (including VERY hot), minimizing effects of rotorwash, good single engine performance, and acceptable speed, no need for fuel endurance over 2 hours- in the rear having good room for patient and med crew, smooth platform that you can even do a good 12 lead with no ghosting, capability for 2 patients if they are not critical trauma, good scene safety with high rotor system, no tail rotor, high mounted engines and rapid start and shutdown-
I would pick the MD900, 902 configuration with PW207E engines. It is also a good hoisting platform.
If you don't need a small machine, don't worry about rotorwash or landing in towns and nasty LZs, and money is not an object- go with a 412 or 139.

Mark

peterprobe 3rd Mar 2009 09:04


If you take into consideration- landing offsite in unumproved areas, getting into and out of small areas, needing good power for vertical departures in all kinds of conditions (including VERY hot), minimizing effects of rotorwash, good single engine performance, and acceptable speed, no need for fuel endurance over 2 hours- in the rear having good room for patient and med crew, smooth platform that you can even do a good 12 lead with no ghosting, capability for 2 patients if they are not critical trauma, good scene safety with high rotor system, no tail rotor, high mounted engines and rapid start and shutdown-
I would pick the MD900, 902 configuration with PW207E engines. It is also a good hoisting platform.
If you don't need a small machine, don't worry about rotorwash or landing in towns and nasty LZs, and money is not an object- go with a 412 or 139.

Mark


wot he said........ agree entirely:D

ShyTorque 3rd Mar 2009 17:21


Would someone be able to enlighten me as to the endurance of a 109 Grande, I'm talking in HEMS configuration with Doc and paramedic ofcourse. Interested to know how they compare to the other UK type machines(135,902,117).
Not seen a HEMS version in UK but from some other role experience of the 'S' version:
Max. gross aircraft weight is 3175 kgs and it has Class A performance at 3175 kgs in a temperate climate.
The basic weight is about 2120 Kgs.
Up to approx 640 kgs of fuel.
Fuel burn with ECS on is about 225 kgs/hr at 150 kts cruise (slightly less ECS off and decreasing slightly with weight reduction, or keep the fuel burn up and enjoy the cruise speed increasing towards 160 kts).

With three crew and one casualty (estimate 90 kgs each?) plus 50 kgs for baggage / equipment you should get full fuel on board, so expect somewhere around 2.75 hours to 3 hours cruise flying.

If you mean flying / loitering at endurance speed, look to 3.5 hours plus.

This is a good, potent aircraft for good speed, good range and excellent OEI performance, but as already pointed out, the cabin would be cramped for a stretcher case despite the extra length over the earlier models.

capt tosspot 4th Mar 2009 14:14

ta Heli, I was looking at local HEMS / AA trips around an hour in total back to fuel. Able to lift crew of 3 plus casualty plus pax or attachment if need be - say 460kgs plus 150 for med kit. SPIFR a definate as things seem to be moving that way. The 135 / 902 / Grande should all cope with this. I was just after thoughts if you have flown any of these on toughness of machines, cabin sizes, loading level, wheels v skids, tail v notar, high head v droopy blades - the hands on thoughts. Is the speed difference important over 20 minute legs - say responding to HEMS?

412 seems to get big vote from those who have worked it. cheers

capt tosspot 4th Mar 2009 14:20

ta SASless. I havent yet heard from medics who use the cabin. One pilot mentioned having to turn the seat round to let paramedic sit at head of patient which was a bit of a bind. Is it really that awkward inside the cabin on the Grande? I take it you can get to all of the patient ok? Does the low sill height make it easier to load?
cheers.

capt tosspot 4th Mar 2009 14:56

Yes, I agree re you get the suit to fit. That said, it may be that good finance, availability of second hand machines etc could swing it with the 'ideal' choice becoming 'well this is all we can afford'

Ive had a few happy and busy days with London and do like the NOTAR and big cabin for the urban stuff. I personally rate the 902 for that kind of work. I dont know how the spares backup is doing now but if its sorted then its a good machine til the next gen comes up. cheers.

capt tosspot 4th Mar 2009 15:01

Hi Wylie, I can give you 135 T2 stuff (not 2+). With 370 kgs of bodies on and 150 of kit we can carry 465 kgs of fuel at most T and PA that we fly in. The burn is 197 / hr so thats 2.3 hrs to dry.
I think the + gives you another 85 kgs of payload and takes it up to 2920 AUW, but ask a 2+ wallah to be sure.
cheers.

capt tosspot 4th Mar 2009 15:05

Thanks for that Mark. I feel the 902 is shading it - I believe a large Guiness is called for. :rolleyes:

capt tosspot 4th Mar 2009 15:11

Seems that 109 Grande gets ticks for power, speed and US style robustness (which suprised me as I never really thought of it as a utility type airframe). But cabin is maybe tight for working in especially if you have big patient? Any medics help here with actual experience?

JimL 4th Mar 2009 19:35

For a comparison of HEMS machines and payloads, check attachment A of this document:

http://www.jaa.nl/secured/Operations...08%20Print.pdf

Jim


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:52.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.