Helijet banned by TC from landing S-76Cs at certain B.C. hospitals
 

wow.... this is such crap.... TC really needs to do a study on rectal-cranial inversion with some of the inspectors.... just sayin'....

Robbies have plenty of big windows so should be ok though...

I wonder if AH had a whisper in TC's ear?

Not familiar with the S76 C models so not sure if they have a certified Cat A elevated helipad profile but if not then there you have it - you can't operate in a congested area to elevated pads where an engine failure would put the aircraft and it's crew/pax plus those on the ground in danger.

If TC have been sued in the past for inadequate oversight of the regs then you can understand them behaving in this way. Would you want to be the inspector sitting in the dock after you cut the operator a bit of slack because they are doing a worthwhile job?

G.

The S76 C series do have a "vertical take-off profile" named "CAT A Vertical Operations from Elevated Heliports" in the supplements list of the RFM.
I don't have the informations with me now, but I know it involves some modifications including a door window on pilot's doors and a "detend" on the collective, a precision airspeed indicator and an accurate operational procedure.

Performances are also affected ( penalty on the MTOW )

This "CAT A" garanties either a continued take off after a decision point, or an aborted landing back on the dedicated surface (same principle for landing)

This procedure have been set up in order to cope with an engine failure on elevated heliport take-off and landing over so called "hostile areas" (where an emergency landing cannot be done without life treatening) ....

Yes, I think that's the crux of the matter - the a/c (probably) don't have the mods required. The article refers to additional windows on the pilot's side, which seems to highlight this.

Possibly because the downward vision on the S76 isn't that brilliant so that the pilot can look over the side.. On the 332 doing a helipad T/O one has to have the take off point in view until committal which is easy with the lower cockpit windows.

One had to lower the take off weight on a 332 to do a helipad; about 400 kgs. I shudder to think how much penalty there would be with a 76; most pilots are used to throwing it over the side of elevated helipads.

The S76 has always been a dreadful aircraft.

Well, two former DHS AW139 have recently been sold to a Canadian ccompany...:cool:

A rather sweeping statement. As an executive helicopter nothing else touched it for years.

The only S76C unit that I know who used a low level helipad as part of their route were those that did the Hong Kong/Macau shuttle. IIRC they were limited to four in plush surroundings.

They now use the Agusta 139.

The 76 is a very good aircraft when used in applications it is best suited for....you cannot blame the aircraft for falling short in a few applications while it excels at others.

I think that Shell Management (is that fancy- speak for a hermit crab? Like Branch Manager is a monkey?) is trolling here. Can't beat the S-76B for a smooth VIP ride.

How unexpected: have you seen his posting history on Rotorheads? It has been quite quiet without him for most of this year.

The S76 has regularly featured in accidents, from blades losses in Brazil, Aberdeen and Norwich, deck fatalities, ditchings in Malaysia and Burma and catastrophic flying control failures in Estonia and Nigeria.

Its smoothness has little importance for elevated helipad performance.

Prat. No more than any other.

139 regularly features in accidents as well. ohh 332/225 feature as well. 206/500/350.... just about every helicopter i can think of regularly feature in accidents, that doesn't specifically make them dreadful aircraft...

I would be surprised if the S76C had the performance required to operate the Cat A elevated heliport profile, except perhaps in cold ambient at markedly reduced AUW. We needed the pilot door extra window and other mods to operate the profile on the C+, it was an RFM requirement. For this sort of work, certainly if it's warmer than about 20 degrees, you need a C++ unless you can accept reduced AUW.

Gullibell, as Fareastdriver says the C model, equipped with this optional has been used in Macau / Honkong city for day and night city shuttles. I've met some of the pilots who had been happy doing it. This appart, for "CAT A elevated helipad" there's always a big cut in MTOW to expect compared to clear area profiles.
There's another profile from elevated helipads described in RFM supplement of C+ and C++ (don't know for the C ) It isn't a pure CAt A but it garanties a fly away after a defined point at 30' over deck surface, as long as a "drop down" below the deck level is available, there's no exposure time and in most cases it could replace the full CAT A. the RFM performance tables integrate the "150' OEI rule" in the MTOW limitation.
Here too the payload penalty is huge and for a given zd, varies with the drop down heigh available.
I think this could be used as a base for elevated heliports operations over "hostile areas" (i.e urban environment)

I would like to add that if we respect the MTOW limitations the take-off and landings are really not a problem at all with C+ and C++ models.

The DECU power limitation logic is simply full of genius (that's another story with A+/ A++)

Precisely - you can't just opt not to have them because it's inconvenient or expensive!

@ cpt

In Macau, and I know all about the Macau operation because I worked there, we used C+ (and B222 before that). We never used the C model, nor could we because it just doesn't have the performance. I know how gutless the C model is because I've got a couple of thousand hours on them also. The performance available had to keep you above the level of the heli deck, you could not plan on descending below the heli heli deck using the drop down profile. We used to regularly operate with 10 pax up to about 28 degrees (we didn't need much fuel out of Hong Kong to get back to Macau), and there was never much stuff in the boot. In summer it gets up to about 33 degrees in Hong Kong and there were occasions we could not uplift some passengers due to performance limitations.

When it came time to replace the C+ with something else the C++ was an option, but they selected the 139 instead.

I doubt very much that an S76C, even if fitted with the modified pilot door, would have the power to be operationally sensible if you needed Cat A elevated heli deck performance. Besides, as far as I know, the collective detent system required by the RFM isn't available for the C model.

I have time on the S76C. The advantage over the A+ was the improved gearbox with a higher transmission limit. That meant you always knew you would hit the engine limits first so those gauges were more relevant. It was known as the B- by those who had previously flown the B model.

Hello Gullibell,

Suddenly I'm feeling a bit stupid ... (not the first time actually))) My mistake is probably coming from the fact that I was wrongly associating the "DDR" to the C models ... these pilots from Macau I'd met (one of them made my C+ conversion), were talking about DDR instead of DECU and with the passing years, in my mind "DDR" wrongly implied S76C (that I've never flown)
In regard with the OEI take-off profiles, a pure CAT A ""Helipad doesn't allow a "drop down" below the helideck level, but nevertheless, the "drop down" procedure described in RFM (C+/C++) is very usefull as an "enhanced class of performance 2" when we don't want to allow this "safe forced landing after tak-off" Anyway, this is out of topic as long as the C is concerned.

CPT,

AC 29-2C permits drop-down and an AEO approach to LDP.

This is a legitimate CAT A procedure and employed by all manufacturers.

Jim

Important to remember that AC don't authorise deviations from regulatory requirements.

Cat A elevated heliport departure does allow drop-down in order to gain Vtoss, but (if I recall) you must have the OEI performance to clear all obstacles in the take-off path by at least 15', and you must have performance charts to determine the vertical magnitude of any descent below the take-off surface.

S76C = 1S1 engine (hydromechanical fuel control, manual engine speed "beep" trim)
S76C+ = 2S1 engine (single channel digital engine control with manual mechanical control backup, no engine speed "beep" trim, faults displayed on DDR)
S76C++ = 2S2 engine (dual channel DECU with manual electrical control backup, no engine speed "beep" trim, faults displayed on IIDS)

gulliBell

S76C+ - displayed on IIDS or DDR display
S76C++ - does have ENG TRIM

at the least in the aircraft we have ....

Really?
http://www.eatshootfly.com/keyword/h...rs/i-JzqdRT7/A

Yes?

Attachment 839

Are we getting confused with individual engine trim and both engines together.

Ok - I was looking for something like the A model trim switches.....

Years since I flew a C++ but I see the OEI select switches and collective increase/decrease but no eng trim. Am I confused?
How goes the battle 212man? Always enjoy your posts.

You are confused. My photo points a 2D view and includes the ENG TRIM INC/DEC seen from above .... it is more on the side of the grip - Decu Fault is on the same switch, depress, instead of up/down for ENG TRIM

I'm good Albatross - thanks, although fending off potential redundancy right now!

I must admit, I assumed the central trim switch is for the searchlight, and I don't see anything that resembles engine trims, but I never flew a C+/++, only A+/++.

Edit: I see it now Voanda - thanks!

I see it now. Thanks
flew the A, A++, C+ and C++
It all gets confused in the memory after a while.
I always remember a check pilot on the A guiding me through my initial on the 76. (I was transitioning from 212 ) "This is the 76....you will find is much to complicated for what it actually does!)
In 212 electrics Essential bus - Non Essential bus ..seems clear. In the 76 Primary Bus Essential bus ..by definition in the dictionary Primary is the same as Essential. My poor addled brain had a hard time with that. Won't even think of the twisted electrical maniacs
at Airbus helicopters. Just joking.

...I initially thought the hospitals were lacking sufficient windows.

Yes FED - I believe we have been talking at cross-purposes, and realised that just after I last logged off. The C+/++ trim appears to be for a single adjustment of Nr with, I imagine both engines matched by the DECU/FADEC, whereas the A models (and I guess the C with the 1S1) have two separate trims to control each engine (as you well know!)

Confirm 212man the C has individual engine beeps, same as A.

@ Voando

Regarding my #27. Yes, I should have mentioned the different C+ build specs. C+ could be ordered with or without IIDS, those without IIDS had engine faults displayed on the DDR.

@212man

#38 correct. 2 x ENG beep trim switches for A/C, mounted on collective head, one for each engine, to adjust load sharing between the engines, and to set engine output (rotor) speed, and the governors are still governing whilst you're beeping etc etc.

C+/++ is fundamentally different. There is a single spring centred switch on the collective (seen in #30) that is only active with an engine/s in manual mode, that is, with the electronic engine governing taken out of the equation for that engine. The switch is activated automatically by the DECU (C++) when both A and B channels have failed, most likely indicated with blue engine control light ON and IIDS warning. Alternatively the pilot can manually control engine power with this switch via an overhead 3-position magnetically latched switch, by selecting #1 manual or #2 manual. The spring centred switch on the collective will control the power output (increase or decrease) of the engine in manual control, or both engines together if DECU channel A & B both fail on each engine.

The pilot is then entirely controlling the manual engine/s power with this collective switch (which electrically drives the fuel metering valve in or out as per pilot command). A pilot can't select both engines to manual because the 3 position switch that controls the function doesn't physically give you that option. There is other logic built into the switch operation, e.g. a pilot can't put a good engine into manual mode with a double channel DECU failure on the other engine, blah blah.

The C+/++ description above is not entirely applicable to C+, but they share enough similarities to be grouped together, whereas A/C are entirely different.

Sorry for rambling on, I get carried away sometimes.