Isn't it disappointing how Honeywell don't give a crap about the 139 Epic Platform, but see fit to put out major software updates every few weeks for the Embraer Jets to make sure that everything on them works well.

I did hear a rumour that Agusta were looking at going to Raytheon from machine number 400 and ditching Honeywell all together. I certainly hope so!

Honeywell have been holding the 139 back with a lack of updates, updates that don't work properly, and updates that are months, if not years too late for the roles the aircraft is being used for.

I personally can't wait for the day when we don't have to deal with their products anymore, unless they are going to wake up and start supporting the 139 with quality software, hardware, and product support, like they are supposed to!

Can you tell that I am not too happy with their products on the 139?? :eek:

Do any of you other operators have this problem. I would like to know what problems you are exactly having. Honeywell still says we are the onlyl ones, recently someone flying Embarer jet complained of the same problem. Now they think we have a legitimate problem.

We also have the "odd" indications when we installed Phase 4. The problem we have with the ILS is that the aircraft does not fly down the centre line, but slightly off to one side.
When changing from P3 to P4 there were a lot of wiring changes, GPS and AHRS were involved, it is worth rechecking these changes. Are you basic 4 axis or enhanced?
Phase 5 does fix some of these problems, introduces some new features and also some new problems.
We also have numerous trim fail warnings, usually pitch or roll, these reset by reselecting the A/P channel, another irritating issue.

We have a mix of basic and enhanced. Phase 5 coming soon. The ILS in some of the aircraft will bring you down the right side of the runway. Recycling the AP does cure the trim problems that should not be there anyway.

To those experiencing problems with Honeywell - are you submitting Service Difficulty Reports?

Trim failures
 

We too have quite a few trim cautions which seem fine after reset, across our fleet. We report all to factory.

SDR's - great tool. Especially with the freedom of information in the U.S. Possible not as open with info in the EU.

When your Tech Rep or Customer Support guy says " Never seen that before " do a little dredging in the SDR databases and you will see that maybe they are handling the truth a little carelessly in defence of their product. You will / should find records of similar problems.

FAA Public Search is here.

I have made several people change their tune with reference to SDR Reports.

Service Bulletins for instance always look like they are written by a lawyer to avoid liability.

139 ILS and other faults
 

Interesting what you say about flying an offset iLS to the right of centreline. We had the same problem on one of our AW139s. We found the fault and its fixed now. Turned out to be the AHRS units! this particular machine had p/n 145130-1002 fitted both sides which caused the problem. All our other machines have p/n 142185-1105 which work fine on the ILS.
We swapped out both units with the different p/n; flew it down the ILS and works fine. Honeywell dont know why.
We also have the occasional yaw trim fail, switch off APs then back on and all is fine. MCDU #1 goes to backup or blanks on battery start, reset CB, an audio panel AV900 goes blank on battery start, reset CB etc etc. MCDU blanking fault caused by the #1 CSIO module which was replaced to fix an AP button nil operate so there ya go!!!
Also the main battery and aux battery current drain readings using ext power problem is caused by the CSIO modules. All our machines the main and/or aux toggle between 0 to -5amps. Sounds like its a calibration adjustment problem on the CSIO modules. If they had a damn preset pot to adjust I would be in there!
Yes Im not happy with Honeywell products either, particularly when one of our machines did an emergency landing at night in the pouring rain with the CAS lit up like a christmas tree indicating multiple failures. The MAUs had a gut full of water. Have since did the BT to move the vent hole from under the #2 MAU. Their circuit board conformal coatings dont sem to work to keep the moisture out as several cards were severly corroded.
We operate in Australia.

The FLOAT ARMING SAGA
 

I was chatting with a far eastern operator today and he told me he had accumulated 4,500 hours on their 139 fleet all of which were flown with the floats 'ARMED' - without incident - as recommended by the RFM. Are there still any Luddites out there who insist on going against the manufacturer's instructions in this regards and switch the arming on and off during landings and take offs offshore?

G :ok:

Mmmmm ....

....... Are there still any Luddites out there who insist on going against the manufacturer's instructions in this regards and switch the arming on and off during landings and take offs offshore? ......


Geoffers .... unfortunately YES .... I know of one company in the middle east whose 'Flight Standards' section has decided to go against the FLM recommendation in that regard! :ugh:

:*

Thanks for the info. will look into this. We do not arm the floats while over the water. This is done on final. I wonder how many hours Agusta tested this before it did have a failure? Based on the enviroment we are in and other quirks with the aircraft I feel safer doing it this way.

Mmmm ....


..... I feel safer doing it this way.


.... err ... Which way? ... and Why? :confused:

"Are there still any Luddites out there who insist on going against the manufacturer's instructions in this regards and switch the arming on and off during landings and take offs offshore?"

I know of at least one company in the GoM that matches that description.:uhoh:

Acceptance Checklist
 

Next month we will completing acceptance checks on behalf of a client for delivery of a new AW139 from AAC in Philadelphia. Anyone out there use an Acceptance Checklist that they would be willing to share? I am certain that AAC uses one but I want to converse with operators who have been through this process to ensure that we don't get bitten by the 'gotchas'...

Appreciate any help in this regard.

wde

Are you telling your client you need to fish for a checklist on the internet?:}

Nope. We have one; just looking to employ best practices out there ... never too good to look at what others have to offer ...

;0

Regarding the recent crash of Helimer 207
 

The thing I dont understand is that rescuers report, they only found a helmet floating on the water. I guess it was a very hard impact, but what about the floatation system?

Would the floats inflate even in a very hard impact on the water? If they shear off, will they still swim? If the floats deploy delayed, can they bring the machine back on the water surface?

This is what the flight manual states:

GENERAL INFORMATION
Emergency Flotation and Life Raft System Part N° 3G9560F00111
The flotation bags are automatically deployed on ditching by water
sensors (2 of the four sensors must be activated for flotation inflation)
or by manual operation of the guarded FLOAT pushbutton on either
the Pilot or Copilot collective grip.
For operation of both automatic or manual flotation inflation the switch
on the FLOATS EMERG control panel mounted in the interseat console
(pilots side), must be set to ON. The control panel also incorporates
a self test function for the flotation system.

WARNING
Do not deploy flotation bags in flight. Bags
will automatically deploy on water touchdown.

IN FLIGHT PROCEDURES
1. FLOATS EMER switch
Over land operation — Confirm OFF.
Over water operation — Confirm ARMED, FLOAT ARM caution
displayed on CAS

Anybody know what Helimar's SOP was on arming/disarming the floats when over water?

Depending on the water impact they may or may not have inflated, even if they were armed. One crewmember made it out, so the impact was at least partly survivable.

The floats must not have been armed. Which, if flying at a cruise speed would make sense.

Agusta does not realize that if the floats should somehow inflate at 150 kts that the pilot would probably loss control. Why should we fly around with the floats armed, it should be part of the pre-landing and emergency ditching checklist.

S-76 float arming speed was 74 Kts.

As posted before, floats on the 139 as per RFM are armed for flight over water, there is no speed indicated for arming. There is no gray area, companies who do not arm over water at high speeds due to worries about un-commanded activation are breaching the RFM and as such if they have an accident and lose the heli with the floats disarmed I guess the insurance company will have a field day.

About GOM ops, I was shocked to hear that at least one operator does not operate the 139 as a CAT A maching (Class 1), only CAT B, what is the point in having the machine and operating it that way?

Regards,

Lunar