|
Which Exec Egg Beater
Ok, sorry to type cast. I like egg beaters. Honest.
Anyhow, I get that the question is quite broad and without wishing to get too deep in the weeds, I'm keen on either the AW139 or the EC175. I'd be interested to know about the ease of finding suitably type rated crew (UK ops); and from those who fly them, the quirks, good and bad. Throw into the mix some other wild cards if you like. :) |
Are you sure you want a helicopter in the 7 - ton category? Are you planning to travel in absolute luxury or carry a lot of people? Do you have very deep pockets?
What about the EC 155? |
Originally Posted by [email protected]
(Post 10652982)
Are you sure you want a helicopter in the 7 - ton category? Are you planning to travel in absolute luxury or carry a lot of people? Do you have very deep pockets?
What about the EC 155? High-speed cruise and range are high on the tick list; as is comfort. Needs to comfortably accommodate 8. The Airbus 160 could well be a good fit too actually - Although new tech (proven design with plenty of flight hours is desirable = reassurance). Mulling over crew resourcing but likely not much of an issue - client is very keen to hire and keep; so type ratings can be paid for as req'd. |
Most medium to large twins can do the high speed cruise thing - range a bit more variable and that speed and power uses lots fuel.
If you need 8 comfortably then yes, the 7 -ton class is probably where you are headed. I think 6 in a 155 is very good but 8 might be pushing it. Do you need an icing clearance? I'm thinking trips to the alps for skiing or similar. |
You are going to be able to find far more AW139 crews, some even with UK onshore experience. Any current EC175 pilots are going to be offshore experienced. And there are far, far fewer of them. The EC175 is also a reasonably bigger aircraft (D value of 18.06m vs 16.66m for the AW139). This might be an issue if you intend to operate to or from confined sites. |
I know where you can get a couple of cheap, slightly used Mi-24s..
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-...70?pfmredir=sm |
Originally Posted by NumptyAussie
(Post 10653150)
I know where you can get a couple of cheap, slightly used Mi-24s..
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2020-...70?pfmredir=sm I had a few flights in an MI-8 a few years back... Nice aircraft. |
No idea of your budget but this might suit requirements https://www.lockheedmartin.com/conte...r-brochure.pdf |
Originally Posted by nomorehelosforme
(Post 10653160)
No idea of your budget but this might suit requirements https://www.lockheedmartin.com/conte...r-brochure.pdf |
Originally Posted by El_Presidente
(Post 10653169)
Too big mate - didn't Bristows have these up in Stornoway on SAR back in the day?
|
Originally Posted by nomorehelosforme
(Post 10653182)
Don’t think they looked as pretty as that.... |
Originally Posted by El_Presidente
(Post 10653169)
Too big mate - didn't Bristows have these up in Stornoway on SAR back in the day?
LZ |
Originally Posted by El_Presidente
(Post 10653208)
Kinda salty smelling with a nice rubber floor liner... ;)
I’m sure a few on here could show us some pictures of that scenario. Offshore workers, and pilots are a different breed, as are military, they certainly set the men apart from the boys.... |
Originally Posted by El_Presidente
(Post 10653001)
Mulling over crew resourcing but likely not much of an issue - client is very keen to hire and keep; so type ratings can be paid for as req'd.
|
Qualified and current on both...and possibly keen for the right conditions!
|
Me too. £150k equal time with all expenses paid.
|
175/139
I’ve flown the 175 extensively and also fly the 139. In my opinion the 175 wins hands down in the way it flies! The 139 is a very capable machine but it is old technology and shakes its self to pieces. The 175 has had a difficult birth due to Airbuses reputation but if you want speed, power and comfort then the 175 is my choice. I’m sure the 139 crowd will disagree. |
Originally Posted by rotorgoat
(Post 10653601)
I’ve flown the 175 extensively and also fly the 139. In my opinion the 175 wins hands down in the way it flies! The 139 is a very capable machine but it is old technology and shakes its self to pieces. The 175 has had a difficult birth due to Airbuses reputation but if you want speed, power and comfort then the 175 is my choice. I’m sure the 139 crowd will disagree. |
Originally Posted by El_Presidente
(Post 10653169)
Too big mate - didn't Bristows have these up in Stornoway on SAR back in the day?
|
The 139 should be outdated compared to the 175 as its coming up to 20 yrs old in a few years. If you have the damping systems fitted (passive/active) it makes it a much smoother ride. A bit too early to say for the 175 but the 139 has an immense number of flight hours logged with so many airframes produced creating a good reputation. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 23:37. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.