PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rotorheads (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads-23/)
-   -   Meanwhile in Thailand... (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/585728-meanwhile-thailand.html)

Old Farang 16th Oct 2016 07:14


Originally Posted by KiwiNedNZ (Post 9542234)
.................. again from what I was told was benefits of having one manufacturer when it came to parts and logistics etc

A great pity that the powers that be in all branches of the Thai military do not subscribe to this sensible method. Google some of the branches and look at the diverse range of all aircraft that they operate.

tasspook 16th Oct 2016 09:18


Does it have a much better payload than C++?
Hahahahahaha........um, where does one even attempt to start answering this VERY timely question???

Flapwing 17th Oct 2016 14:43

The ACs may have to be removed so the payload will match the C++........

tottigol 18th Oct 2016 00:27

Truth is Lockheed is trying to get rid of the parked D models by organizing raffles.
At least one of the launch customers has returned them and handed over the keys and are now flying the AW139.

Nescafe 18th Oct 2016 00:52

It's an old tart in a new dress.

gulliBell 18th Oct 2016 05:14

In terms of the old tart in a new dress, I think the dress on C+ was a major improvement on C, and C++ refined it a little more. I never understood what Sikorsky were trying to achieve with the D, particularly if pitching it to offshore customers. More power is always good, but does the fancy avionics package in D get you around the patch any faster or safer than C++? Just trying to understand why an operator might decide to upgrade a C++ fleet to D, particularly with AW139 being an alternative in the market.
Esso Australia have just upgraded from six S76C to four AW139. Which is an upgrade equation I can understand. And the Macau operation changed from S76C+ to AW139, I can understand that also. But if C++ is your starting point I don't understand why you might want to change those for a D.

twisted wrench 18th Oct 2016 08:36

Could be because TAS could not buy new C++īs , The C++īs they are flying now belong to CHC and now TAS will ( do) own there own D models.


Also as stated earlier they preferred to stay with one aircraft manufacturer, Sikorsky ( Lockheed Martin) for there fleet of S92A and S76D models.

helimutt 18th Oct 2016 14:57

If you look at the ease of maintenance on a 76 to a 139, and the cost of maintenance on a 139 (ask anyone who works on both) then the 76 starts to look like the better option for a very busy offshore operator. I wouldnt be surprised if these become some of the highest time S76D in the world very quickly and i'm sure there'll be feedback soon.

Holy Moly 30th Jan 2017 12:18


Originally Posted by malabo (Post 9541137)
I guess the days of hanging on to a CHC paintscheme for that offshore cred are gone :rolleyes:

Lately that old paint scheme just represents, lack of strategic planning and vision, general collapse, and execs absconding with millions. Massive re-branding is in order to 'run away' from the past as soon as possible. :ugh::uhoh::eek: The outfit that made out like a bandit was LENOVO...

Peter3127 31st Jan 2017 11:09

Nice pics - March Calendar?

rrekn 31st Jan 2017 12:30


Originally Posted by Holy Moly (Post 9658410)
Lately that old paint scheme just represents, lack of strategic planning and vision, general collapse, and execs absconding with millions. Massive re-branding is in order to 'run away' from the past as soon as possible. :ugh::uhoh::eek: The outfit that made out like a bandit was LENOVO...


Methinx that may be on the cards....


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:54.


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