However, the insides of the shafts had previously been cleaned and any corrosion would have been reported (none found) and the helis have not just been sitting about neglectd for the past 9 months, they had the long term storage procedure followed, which includes protecting the "important bits" such as transmission and engines, from corrosion.

Anyway, I'm not saying the inspections shouldn't have been done, just that it was highly unlikely that a problem would have been found (highly unlikely, as in beyond the bounds of possibility!)

And if you run it every 7 days , there is no anti det to be carried out. Most companies cannot afford to let a multi million pound investment sit corroding.

You're not allowed to let it sit corroding, or if you did, it would be very expensive to ever be able to fly it again!

I know this thread is primarily about the 225s that have sat idle since the grounding, but what about the ones in Vietnam and China that have been flying all through the grounding of the others.

I understand there have been no issues with them during this time.

Kiwi, no and that is not surprising. Its clear that the 2 ditched aircraft had unusual issues with corrosion. As I keep saying, Bristow with is fleet of 17 or so EC225s have never had this problem and so its fairly unlikely to occur for an operator with a relatively small fleet. Of course "fairly unlikely" isn't good enough and so naturally I welcome the various measures recently announced that will take "fairly unlikely" back down to the levels of safety required for certification.

HC,

So the sludge and moisture were apparently "unusual" and for some reason you are entirely happy that the BRS fleet is not affected.

So what is the real story then or can't it be told.

Terminous......if you cannot grasp the humor....that is your personal problem.....and nothing anyone says to you can convey the humor. Sadly...you either get it or you don't....it has nothing to do with religion....and everything to do with plain old commonsense.

Apparently you have a deficit of that or you would have tweaked to what was being said.

I am so disheartened you cannot appreciate good humor when it is offered.

Let's just say....i find you thicker than two short planks if you fail to see what is humorous about the joke being made.

Lighten up Dude.....relax.....chill out.... seek comedy in your life....and find a way to see humor in every day situations......after all the best humor is based upon every day life.

For sure....if you cannot laugh at yourself....there is no hope for your Soul.

Anyone that is so thick as not to see the funny side of what was posted.....needs a re-think on life's varied perspectives.

Damn fella, I sent you three helicopters and two boats......what were you waiting on? As a famous American Comedian would opine....."Here's yer Sign!"!

There was some serious thought in that post you cannot fathom!

And Sasless I find that generally, you have too much to say for yourself and are somewhat pompous.

RVDT, if its ever been explained why the CHC shaft had an uniquely large amount of sludge its passed me by. But since you are big on conspiracy theories I suspect its down to those aliens that landed at Rosewell.

HC,

Not a conspiracy - just an open mind on safety and no googles painted on the inside to impair the vision!

All will be revealed one day I hope.

RVDT,

At the presentations in Aberdeen by EC to all operators, it was explained that this particular CHC aircraft not only had high gearbox hours, but had spent more time than any others shut down offshore (and overnight, but not 100% sure).

Therefore there were frequent cycles of cooling and condensation combined with particles from wear on the spline to build up "mud" more thickly and for a far longer period than any other 225 in service.

The conditions for stress corrosion could not have been greater. A CHC engineer who was present stated that other CHC 225s had also been working in similar conditions, although for not nearly as long.

Colibri49,

Thanks for that. Now we have a better idea all round.

So the chc machine was old and high hours but the bond machine was new and low hours.....
I presume all the bristow machines are not old, not new, not high or low hours just in sweet safe spot then?

You really don't know when to quit do you?

Lowfat, not quite sure where your last sentence comes from (other than a desire to be rude for the sake of it) so I'll ignore it.

The Bond aircraft was new and had a slightly modified shaft with the reprofiled hole. Fortunately no Bristow aircraft had that mod state of shaft.

The CHC aircraft, as has just been explained, had unusual operating conditions which (may) have accounted for its corrosion. it had relatively high hours on the gearbox, but so do plenty of ours. But anyway, for whatever reason, it had much more corrosion than any other 225.

Make of all that what you will, but those are the simple facts.

That's the bit I have been looking for - "the whatever reason".

I hope ECF know what the "whatever reason" is. :ugh:

Well Colibri seems to know the reason given. Even if its an incorrect guess on the part of EC, it doesn't matter because the changes to the maintenance programme and the relocated oil jets will ensure it doesn't happen again.

Which event won't happen again? the sludge or the crack?

The sludge build up wont happen again, therefore the crack won't happen again. Unless of course another reason for failure comes out of the woodwork, but that seems highly unlikely with all the time spent on researching it.

Lowfat, I can't remember if you are (were) a 225 pilot? If so, are you nervous at the thought of flying it again, because you are coming across very negative.

I have considerable experience of Eurocopter and their fixes. I have no concerns about flying in 225s

.

Regards
Aser