EC225 MGB outcomes?
 

Anything from that meeting today at Eurocopter in Aberdeen?

Nr/ILS
 

Does any of you use NR ILS button after landing on rigs ? It seem to reduce the noise significantly and at the same time reduce ff from 370 to 330 kg/hr.

We just do that onshore when rotors running picking up passengers etc. I think the slight worry would be that someone, one day, would take off from a rig with NrILS on. Less likely (for us with a long taxi to the runway), and less critical onshore.

Yep, we do it on and offshore.

We've put it in our pre-takeoff checklist to make sure the Nr is normal for departure

We use the Nr ILS both onshore and offshore but personally I always leave the Nr ILS off when I am on an unstable helideck. Nr ILS check is on the pre take off and after landing checks.

Many thanx for the information :ok:

Ah so as long as its on the checklist, there is no possibility of missing it on the 5th takeoff of the shuttle. Sorted.

Max TOT difference between engines
 

It is not stated in the Flight Manual but I would like to compare notes as to how much TOT difference between No 1 and No 2 eng is considered acceptable. Recently I flew an aircraft with a 30 C difference between both engines with N1 equal and Torque about half % difference. It is not pleasant as this reduces the power margin available for take off and landing .

Hi Gnow

Are both engines passing the engine power check? If so, then there is no problem and you will get the required OEI performance. In my experience, the TOTs are normally fairly close. I don't think I have seen more than 20degrees difference. You will get a DIFF PWR warning if the TOT difference reaches 80degrees bit I am sure the EPC would flag up an out of spec engine before that.

I suspect the maintenance manual may have a figure above which maintenance action is required but as a mere pilot I have no knowledge of it.

I've seen TOT differences like this on G/runs and airtests post maintenance, usually traced to a P2.4 or P3 pipe not seated/sealing correctly or a P3 pipe gasket that's been damaged during installation.

We did have an interesting one some years ago - power assurance check gave massive TOT margin on one engine, and it ran really cool in flight. However it transpired it was one of the 8 TOT probes not correctly bolted down so it was not in the hot gas flow (new engine from the factory!)

EC225 type rating in the US
 

Gents, quick question: other than American Eurocopter Training Center and ERA Training Center is there anyone else providing EC225 Initial / Recurrent training in the States?

Interesting to notice that an Initial EC225 type rating conducted at Eurocopter Training Services in Marignane takes 23 hours of flight time (FFS + Flight Instruction including IFR extension + Checkride) whereas American Eurocopter quotes 28 hours (!) and ERA 15 hours (!!)

Can't answer your first para, but regarding the differences in flight times it is worth bearing in mind that Sim vs aircraft makes a big difference. In the aircraft, all the time you spend strapping in, starting up and shutting down doesn't count and since it can take 40 mins for a beginner to complete startup drills under instruction, you effectively get a lot of "free" training. In the sim the clock starts when you step into the box and stops when you exit, so it takes a lot more sim time than aircraft time to achieve the same thing. Plus of course in the Sim you can do a lot of stuff that you just can't do in the a/c.

I don't know if there are differences in the sim and aircraft proportions of the 3 courses you mention, but that is one factor that might explain the differences.

On that topic, are the ABZ simulators full of pilots staying current, or half unused?

EC sim was busy last week and is being used this week for recurrency training.

Ditto the Bristow one, new pilot training, command course training, getting ahead on OPCs etc

I hear you HC, point taken about Sim vs A/C

Well according to ETS website an Initial EC225 type rating consists of 18.5 hours in the Sim (IFR extension included), followed by 3 hours in the a/c & 1.5 hours checkride (In Sim presumably?)

The breakdown for American Eurocopter must be similar to ETS though it is not clear where the Sim portion is conducted (Presumably in either ABZ or MRS)

Since ERA has no EC225 Sim I would guess the 15 hours are a/c time?

One day .....
 

....... regulators will wise-up and acknowledge that pilot training for certain complex types with so much built-in redundancy and complete system monitoring (HUMS etc) CANNOT be accomplished satisfactorily in the aircraft alone without a simulator contribution. I often come across customers who have virtually no emergencies training beyond touch drills. Not even autorotations. Not good!! :ugh:

G.

Geoffers, I quite agree. Imagine what it was like for us introducing the EC225 into service in mid 2005, with the first sim in the world being available late 2008. Of course at the time we didn't know what we didn't know about the aircraft. Apart from anything else, the Sim revealed the flaws in the RFM emergency procedures that we had previously had to take as gospel.

I don't have to imagine too hard....;)

So, bearing in mind your PPrune handle, I presume you are complaining that when you introduced the B212 into service, there was insufficient string pulleys and clockwork to make a suitable simulator?





Yes, I know...




People think that I think the sun shines out of EC's whatsits but I am the first to berate any manufacturer who brings out a new complex type without provision of a simulator at or before the first sale.

This was one of the reasons Brunei Shell cancelled the initial order for AB139s. At the time the manufacturer was saying they didn't think there was enough demand for a simulator :ugh:

Use. of Go Around after engine failure on take off
 

There was a Lettre Service somewhere in the year 2008 that says the use of The Go Around upper mode which is described in the un approved section of the flight manual that states " in the case of engine failure and engagement of the Go-Around mode, the flight path, speeds and compliance with the limitations must be carefully monitored. If necessary, in order to use the available power in the best way possible, the flight crew must recover manual control in accordance with the flight manual procedure. "

Five years have gone by and I cannot find any documentation to say that this is no longer valid. I wonder if Fadec V 12 has solved this and if so where can I find the documentations.

gnow, not really the FADEC software, but the APM software that goes with it, has the fix for this problem. So I your aircraft has the latest APM software then the GA mode should quickly take into account, and handle correctly, an engine failure either during or before engagement of GA.

Not sure about the documentation but I think it is in the SB that went with the release of the APM software (sorry, you will have to look!). IIRC the change was made in vS9-51 which was when v12 first came out. Of course the current version is the next one, vS9-61 with the TCAS II functionality.

Thanks HC... maybe I will seach through TIPI again or drop them a line. Our machines have Fadec V 12 and VMS software 2-4-7 so the problem should have been fixed

I found it - SB 22-003. However, it is cryptic - all it says that is relevant in the list of benefits is:

" - improve the strength of integration of the VMS information in case of engine failure (P/N LS 1903-71-08),"

Thank you so much again HC. As usual another crate of cyber beer from me again. A lot of people were not aware about the poor go around OEI performace because it behaved normally in training mode . I had been the bad boy most of the time reminding my friends ( which makes me a bit of a pain in the butt! ) . The last couple of days Eurocopter issued another " Optimum use of AFCS" and there had been a good write up on the Go Around function but I did not re call literature to cancel the letter on the misbehaviour of the Go Around after engine failure. Thanks alot again.

Out of interest, gnow, but are your EC225s still currently flying?

No..the clients are still waiting for the big brothers in the North Sea to start operating before they go ahead. Meanwhile I am at Helisim flying the sim:)

Weststar Aviation orders 2 EC225s
 

It seems like Westar has just ordered 2 EC225s for offshore in Malaysia.
This thread has picked up some serious dust since late November 2012.

Deux hélicoptères lourds d'Eurocopter en Malaisie | La Provence

Here's the english version on HeliHub:

Weststar Aviation Services order two Eurocopter EC225s | Helihub - the Helicopter Industry Data Source

Probably because they can't get S92s for love nor money

I believe we will hear some good news announced by Eurocopter mid week in regards to the shaft.

Fingers crossed then.

Si

New shaft probably coming in 2014. Band aid until then, 225 back in the air by June or July 2013.

Seems like good news might be on the horizon!

Heard the cold temps might have had something to do with the cracking.......

Vertical Article

Eurocopter is closer to finalizing the probable cause of a bevel shaft crack that led to the ditchings of two EC225 LP helicopters in the North Sea in 2012, the company told its customers this week.

In a statement, Eurocopter said it has made “significant progress” regarding the crack initiation root cause during its third campaign of testing, although its conclusions still need to be shared and discussed with the investigation authorities and Georgia Technology Research Institute.

Eurocopter said it has been able to replicate both crack initiation scenarios on test benches, and that the crack propagation model has been verified in bench tests as well. The company’s investigations have led it to the conclusion that no abnormal dynamic overload is present. Instead, Eurocopter’s perspective is that a combination of factors can lead to a weakened fatigue strength of the EC225’s vertical shaft.

A flight test to demonstrate the scenario up to full rupture is currently in progress.

Eurocopter said it will keep working with helicopter operators, oil and gas companies, unions and other key stakeholders to ensure full validation of the results and the recommended solutions. In the meantime, the company said, on-going safe flight operations continue.

This should be exciting!

A flight test to demonstrate the scenario up to full rupture is currently in progress.:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: