|
Its not really relevant because it has largely missed the marketplace |
|
SansAnhedral…those C++ vs D numbers are confounding. At the bottom of the tabulation Sikorsky is listed as the source, but what could be the reason for producing such a table?
|
The table is from an article about the S‑76D in Flight International.
|
Upgraded S-76
I don’t believe that Sikorsky marketing would intentionally publish this chart. These numbers would make it difficult for an operator to justify the increased cost for the newer D. However, the numbers appear to be correct when comparing the information provided in Sikorsky’s marketing brochures for each model. Hover and OEI service ceilings appear to be the only significant performance advantages of the D over the C++. Other improvements are kind of icing on the cake, most of which are standard on the competitor’s newer machines. After all it is still just an upgraded S-76.
|
Just goes to show what a waste the 76Dog is. And not OGP compliant either.:ugh:
|
I bet they still sell a couple of hundred SM:ok: Flight Safety are plumbing in the D sim shortly. I am looking forward to flying her! Will not be too long now.
|
They would have sold more if they had not had the massive failure to achieve certification to schedule. Perhaps the FAA have been tougher on Sikorsky than before.
Having said that they started the D development 10 years too late and the performance is almost perceptibly different from the C++. Against newer products from EC and AW this will just be a cash drain on a company that otherwise has no civil offerings between the S333 (no exactly selling like hot cakes) and the S92. The D is one good reason for the removal of Geoff Pino. |
What's taking so long in certification? From what I can tell, it's the same airframe, same basic components, same everything except new rotor and new engines?
|
Yes you're right SM and I don't disagree with any of your words - but the D will be with us soon and customers, mechanics and pilots will be able to share once again in Sikorsky's brilliant engineering. That's another statement up for debate of course, but I'm sure the D will let the ultimately successful 76 sail off happily into the sunset.
|
Sir Korsky,
Last month on the “working for the big dogs” thread regarding another poster’s possible employment at Sikorsky you wrote… I would avoid any UTC company like the plague. I bet they still sell a couple of hundred SM:ok: Flight Safety are plumbing in the D sim shortly. I am looking forward to flying her! Will not be too long now. the D will be with us soon and customers, mechanics and pilots will be able to share once again in Sikorsky's brilliant engineering. |
Look, it's coming so enjoy it. That's the conclusion I have come to. Lucky for you that you have a lot of time on your hands. :ok:
|
Shell Management wrote: The D is one good reason for the removal of Geoff Pino. United Technologies Corp has announced the appointment of Mick Maurer as President of its Sikorsky Aircraft from 1 July 2012. Maurer will report to UTC chairman and chief executive Louis Chênevert, succeeding Jeffrey P. Pino, who will retire 1 July 2012. To ensure a seamless succession, Pino and Maurer will collaborate closely during the next two months, after which Pino will serve as a consultant to Sikorsky. |
Ski,
Is GFC another name for the Canadian anti sub S-92 which are years late and they can not fly at night or over water. How many years before they will be allowed to risk a ship by trying to land on it? TC |
Any truth to the rumor that the D got certified on Friday just gone?
|
Confirmed.
I/C |
Hello Sir Korsky,
Sorry about my english but I don't understand : "the D got certified on Friday just gone". The D has been certified or his certification has been delayed ? . |
HeliHenri
The message says that the S-76D is now certified........ looks like Friday 12 October...... |
Thank's PANews for the "translation" :)
It's an important (and long awaited) news and there's nothing on the Sikorsy website or in the professional media. . |
S76D
It's one thing turning up to the party late but when you turn up with the wrong product it's sad for those that always thought Sikorsky were a dynamic and forward thinking innovator.
G. |
On that subject it seems to be across the board.
They sort of destroyed Schweizer so they could get their Elmira NY plant for Sikorsky product completions which have now apparently run out of steam. Last story I read on that front was that the local authority was 'asking' them to get to hell out of NY and give the area a chance to get over the trauma. Meanwhile reports from the East of a customer awaiting a new S300 and having been quoted 2 years until production may restart.... on one rather than both of the models taken out of the original plant..... Then there is the 434. The S76D may have been gestating for a long time [for what is 'just' an update on the existing airframe] but the 434 is the model they plain and simple just do not want - except that there is an order for 50 with Saudi Arabia and I guess that if the 76D is to sell anywhere its in the sandy cities so there is a customer base you do not want to upset. If this post-Afghanistan military market downturn does happen companies like Sikorsky are going to need every dollar they can turn in the commercial market... and it does not look as if they are courting the right people at the moment. Still they can always look to the Iranian campaign market.....:eek: |
Geoff: Couldn't agree with you more.
The corporate and offshore markets are not what they were when the 76 was first 'penned' back in the 70's and the latest incarnation (besides the existing improvements) really needed an additional row of seats in order to remain relevant. Clearly Sikorsky are willing to relinquish pole position in the VIP/corporate stakes to AgustaWestland! Even the Pope has switched from Sikorsky to AW! https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-7...+Bidini%29.jpg Aeronautica Militare (Italian Air Force) AW139 MM81807 at Rome's Ciampino Airport on 10th September 2012 (Photo: Aldo Bidini) The new 'Vaticopter' which this year replaced the SH-3D (Sea King) previously assigned for Papal flying duties. Next stop .. the new "Rainbow" when 'EB' starts getting tired! Maybe. |
I wouldn't write the ol girl off just yet. There still seems to be a growing corporate sector in many markets. The quiet tail rotor should help to keep noise complaints away. Lets just hope the D gets from Dog to Darling!
|
IMHO......
....... it was a fundamental mistake to believe that the next generation of avionics could live within an airframe - beautiful though it is - that has so many design shortcomings in this, the age of crashworthiness and 'escapability'.
Retaining the fuel tank under the rear seats was the real killer in this respect. No chance of crashworthy seats when you are sitting on the fuel tank. The door layout imprisons those in the rear seat who also have a tiny window through which to escape if required. Once again we see short-termism winning the argument, great shame. G. |
It's official now...
|
My summer S-76D briefing for O&G OPS showed 3 rows of energy attenuating seats in the cabin (so that includes the rear row atop the fuel cell) and energy attenuating crew seats too, oh and Type IV windows front and rear either side of the single action jettisonable cabin door.
For all the latest hullabaloo about crash worthy fuel cells and seats from a certain O&G customer (and no doubt their chain was pulled by a certain OEM), I cannot for the life of me recall a single EC155 or S-76 that burned post a survivable impact in resent years, because the fuel cell was not up to the latest and greatest crashworthiness standards (I am aware of a certain S-76 EMS incident, but as the rotors struck a fuel bowser in the final moments, the post accident fire did not stem from the lack of a crashworthy fuel cell). As for stroking seats, just how many cases of serious injury or death in the O&G or VIP helicopter sectors (expressed in percentage terms per million flight hours) were caused as a result of not having energy attenuating seats these past 10 years and more? For me, ‘Proven Safety’ wins over the latest certification standards when I step into a machine, be it on land, sea or air. |
"For all the latest hullabaloo about crash worthy fuel cells and seats"
I'll take the hullabaloo any day.....here's wishing I can be one of those great drivers (or passengers) who never needs such trivial items. |
I stand corrected.........
.......... and will dish myself a portion of umbel pie. Don't think those 'goodies were in the plans when I last looked at them so maybe the OGP influence won the day. The energy absorption must be compromised by the tank to some extent I am sure. the seat has to 'stroke' to absorb the energy but maybe you have to duck your head whilst seated and make the most of the view over the heads of rows 1 & 2?
G. :) |
Why are the passengers trying to jump out? Surely, it can't be that bad in there.... :E
|
Norrlandsflyg
Hi Savoia,
Is the Pope, Catholic? Lol :8:ok: lol Anyhow doesn't match up to the splendour of the ASH-3D/AS-61 for His Eminance or the rest of the government from 93a Gruppo TS :) Offhand, there were a number of operators globally promoting the D as their next gen including Norrlandsflyg in Sweden who operate the C in the EMS / Coast Guard SAR role. But have to agree the Sikorsky chart doesn't shown much extra value for money / speed compared to the current C/C++ Cheers |
Or maybe not...
The Swedish Maritime Administration (SMA) has signed an agreement to purchase seven AgustaWestland AW139s for SAR duties, it has been revealed.
The new aircraft will replace Sikorsky S-76s that were inherited by the SMA after the Swedish government nationalised private operator Norrlandsflyg, which operated the aircraft on SAR and air ambulance duties on behalf of the agency. The aircraft are now operated by a new state-owned operator SMA Helicopter Rescue. According to a press release released on 16 October, the AW139s will begin replacing the S-76s from mid-2013 with the last arriving at the end of 2014. The aircraft will be available for operations at sea and over land and are operated from five stations across Sweden at Ronneby, Visby, Gothenburg, Norrtälje and Umeå. 'It is very satisfying that in the future we will have an improved capacity and ability to save lives without increasing the total cost of operations,' said Naomi Eriksson, the Swedish Maritime Administration's deputy director general and head of SAR, in the statement The order will come as a blow for Sikorsky. In 2008, Norrlandsflyg placed an order for six S-76Ds, but the late arrival of the aircraft and then the financial difficulties of the operator have resulted in the apparent cancellation of the order resulting in SMA Helicopter Rescue purchasing the AW139 instead. |
PPRuNe sans Sans? Say it ain't so. :(
I/C |
Model S-76D Certification Basis 14CFR 36 through Amendment 36-28 (applicable sections)14CFR 29 through Amendment 29-52 (applicable sections) except – 29.1317 Amendment 29-49 not adopted for initial TC (Special Condition 29-ASW-16 used) – 29.625 through Amendment 29-41 – 29.631 Amendment 29-40 not adopted – 29.1 through Amendment 29-38 – 29.561(c) through Amendment 29-37 for engines – 29.952 Amendment 29-35 not adopted – 29.963, 29.967, 29.973 and 29.975 through Amendment 29-34 – 29.427 Amendment 29-30 not adopted – 29.787 through Amendment 29-30 – 29.923 through Amendment 29-30 (except (a), (b) (1) & (b)(3), which have demonstrated compliance through Amendment 29-39) – 29.307 through Amendment 29-29 (except the main and tail rotor blades, which have demonstrated compliance through Amendment 29-52) – 29.391 and 29.865 through Amendment 29-29 – 29.562 Amendment 29-29 not adopted – 29.561(b) and (c) through Amendment 29-28 – 29.571 through Amendment 29-27 (except the main and tail rotor blades, which have demonstrated compliance through Amendment 29-52) – 29.908 through Amendment 29-25 – 29.812(b) Amendment 29-24 not adopted – 29.671 and 29.785 through Amendment 29-23 – 29.1309 through Amendment 29-23 (except new avionics, electrical and electronic equipment which have demonstrated compliance through Amendment 29-52) – 29.927 through Amendment 29-16 Special Condition No. 29-004-SC (Docket No. SW004), dated June 17, 1998. AND The Model S-76D defines a configuration which does not include cabin interior furnishing and passenger provisions. |
Aeroservicios Especializados (ASESA) from Mexico orders six S76D.
ASESA locks US Ex-Im financing for S-76D order . |
Has the S76D been certified along with the Deicin/Anti-icing sytem ? And if not, when will that happen ?
thanks |
No; last I heard was that RIPS will follow "within one year of baseline cert."
I'm also not certain that the Type IV windows mentioned by Sikileaks (prior to the post being black bagged) are certified yet, but I stand to be corrected. I/C |
industry insider -
I appreciate the update, thanks. I/C |
Well, 'Los Mexicanos' certainly believe in the 'D' model!
The board of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) authorized more than $50 million to guarantee a loan extended by Apple Bank to Aeroservicios Especializados S.A. DE C.V. (ASESA) of Mexico that will finance the export of a fleet of Sikorsky S-76D™ helicopters to Mexico. ASESA is a leading helicopter-services provider for the oil and gas industry in Mexico and plans to employ the Sikorsky helicopters to ferry personnel to and from deep-water drilling rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. In terms of capabilities, the helicopter provides increased range and a quieter cabin. Upon further certification to come, the helicopter will boast the ability to operate in known icing conditions. |
Am I understanding news right or wrong, but "mexicanos" got 6 ships for $50 M
less than $ 8,5 M per unit.... interesting price level..... :cool: |
TNX, now sounds more realistic.... :E
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 17:35. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.