Gymble:

I can only assume you are trying to incite a response from people but quite frankly idiotic statements like this add nothing to the conversation.

'Overpriced' - In comparison to what other new aircraft? S76C++/D , EC155B1???

'Under tested' - How have you formed this opinion? Has the aircraft not been flight tested in line with regulatory requirements? You are aware that this is a NEW aircraft??

The question asked was is there a flight sim for the 139 and some of the other posters seem to be able to reply in an informed manner, perhaps there is a lesson in that!!

I think it's time for a good thread on the AB-139

BTW: The new 139 for CHC
http://www.xs4all.nl/~helifind/news.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~helifind/datas...i-raia_ak2.jpg


It's suposed to , no? like any other new desing I hope.

This apply to any salesman...

Pretty simplistic reply, if you think that you are only paying for two seats you have never compared a 412 in front a 139, c'mon! it's
the new generation, move on. Or you will fly forever withthe crappy fuel system and wipers in the 412 :}


Best regards.
Aser

Um, actually it is single pilot certified (definitely for VFR, not sure about IFR). The Flight Manual supplement that I have seen saying two pilot operation only (VFR and IFR), is only applicable to FAA registered machines. The particle separator is currently fitted to at least one machine, and there is at least another rolling down the production line with all necessary mods done for the installation of the particle separator, they sure are slow at certifying things!!. I would actually agree that it will be cheaper to maintain than a 412. Having worked on both, I would hazard an educated guess that maintenance manhours/flight hour are in fact a lot less with the AB139.
Hawker Pac will sell you one in Oz, as will Heliflite. Not sure about it's weight being Ok for ALL Australian helipads, but then I bet a 76 can't land on every single helipad in Australia either ;)
I can bet that parts will be freakin expensive, parts for all helicopters (especially European ones) are. Aser, you are right about the fuel system, but you might think again about the wiper system when you see it!!! As long as I never have to change the wiper motor, I'll be OK :)
Overall, I think the AB139 is a better machine than a 412, but then a 205 is better than a 412 as well :) Oh yeah, they're basically the same thing aren't they!! So that means the 412 has actually had 40+ years of development and improvement.
Don't know much about the flight sim. CAE I think have an office at Agusta. There is also a Maintenance Simulator being built, but I hear it is falling behind schedule :D
Teething problems, definitely. Headaches occasionally for the early operators, for sure. Going to be a great machine in the long run, you bet!! The first two points can be said about every new helicopter, but the last definitely cannot!!

Regards

I had two japs staying in the same hotel as me in Sesto Calende setting up the flight simulator for the 139 and the 109. The schools at Malpensa airport and Verigate are to be closed down and everyone is to be moved to the new facilities at Sesto Calende.

bellsux: So the sim will be ready on time.. those japs works like crazy don't they? ;)
BTW: Are you in Hotel Del Parco? How is it?

Regards
Aser

AB139 Shortcomings?
 

Rumour heard about the AB139....

Seems a GOM operator is a bit miffed over the 438 pound limit for the baggage compartment. A reputable source for information suggested the operator in question is having a baggage problem. Granted Bubba and Earl always have that 28 pounds of baggage and tools when they go out...and the same 28 pounds of baggage, tools, and frozen fish when they come ashore....right?

Anyone know if this is an issue with the 139?

SASLess,

Might be the same GOM operator I just went and visited ;)

One of the problems I saw when I was there was how quick the battery was running down, even when plugged into a battery cart.

Also noticed that when it is lightly loaded it lands very much like an Astar but when they loaded it up close to max all up weight it seems to be a lot more stable in the landing mode. Now remember thats just from my observations and feedback.

One thing I will say is its a hell of a machine.

http://www.helitorque.com/albums/album33/aet.sized.jpg

Given the large size of the 139's baggage hold (78 sq ft standard, 120 sq ft optional), could it just be a case of operator frustration over maxing-out before bulking-out ? This is going to represent a change from the norm, esp. for those transitioning from the 412's 28 sq ft hold.

I/C

It is an operating limit, listed in Section I of the approved FM, and placarded on the baggage compartment:

"Maximum Load 220KG"

Usually such limits are not for CG control, which is a task controlled by the pilot. Mass distributions are sometimes limited by the crash or maneuver loads, and thus this might be hard to increase without beefups.

After seeing the great pics of the AB139 on the Rotorheads around the World thread - could someone answer me this question.

I note that each PT6 is mounted with the power turbine section facing forward towards the transmission. Therefore the gas producer section aft driving the accessory gearbox.

My question is - how do they duct the exhaust gases? I assume that the exhausts run in between the two mounted engines and then ported out to the exhausts at the rear. Am I right or did I have my computer turned upside down when I was looking at the photos? :confused:

Yes, exhaust is routed to the center, then aft, then outboard. Must get pretty toasty in there:uhoh:

As you may have noticed, initially the visible exhaust duct were flush with the sides but later had to be extended as they were cooking the tailboom panels:ok:

Any comments from operators on how happy they are with vibration levels at high speed:confused:

Re: AB139 Shortcomings?
 

With an exhaust duct about 2 meters long won't that be a maintenance nightmare with time, cracked ducts, loose mounts ,heat damage, access to T/R drive, access to inside of eng , no thanks! I'll stay with 412's, S76's and AS332's they all have there faults , but I like them!! (however I would give my left n_t to work on S92's!!)

Re: AB139 Shortcomings?
 

And there is a lot of work required on the S-92. I heard it took weeks to get a customer to reaccept one ship after it was torn apart to remove (or was it replace) the vibration absorbers which have a nasty habit of failing.

The 139 is not limited by that minor problem.

The Sultan.

Re: AB139 Shortcomings?
 

I believe the baggage compartment "allowable Load" will soon be increased to at least 330Kg ...

AND .... the A139 is about to become the A139 B with a redesign of the nose section to allow the computers to be moved there (for increased cooling?).

:cool:

Re: AB139 Shortcomings?
 

And better CG control :E !

Re: AB139 Shortcomings?
 

It will be a BIG nose with the MAUs there :eek: but the nose up attitude in the hover won't be so ugly...

I heard of big problems with vibration in one machine in the Mid.East... any update?

The placard in the baggage compartment of the 139 I flew today said;
"Maximum Load 200KG"

120 sq. ft. optional baggage hold? If you're thinking about using the space between the main fuel tanks where the aux. tank is located, think again. There is a placard there indicating that no baggage is permitted between the tanks. Regardless, the "standard baggage hold" is huge compared to that of the medium Bells, and accessable from both sides as well.

I was talking with a friend in the GOM and he said the problem isnt the baggae hold but the MGW!.With a full bag of gas the allowable was something silly (low). He said there has just been an increase and hopefully soon to be another. He mentioned that from one operator to another the EGW vsry due to customer requiremnts on floats and rafts that have been built into the A/C

The MGW has recently been increased to 6400 KG's and Agusta is hoping for certification at 7000 KG's. There doesn't appear to be a date established when the 7K is going to be approved. Apparently there are no airframe mods required for the increase in GW.The floats and rafts are standard issue from the factory and I'm not too sure what your friend means by his comment. Seating in the cabin however is another matter. The options are three rows of five, or three rows of four (other than VIP). I know the CHC Europe 139 has 3 rows of 4 due to room required for the passengers and their immersion suits.
The sooner Agusta ups the 139's GW better off we'll all be, including our customers.