PPRuNe Forums - Agusta AW139

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Rotorheads (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads-23/)

- - Agusta AW139 (https://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/405110-agusta-aw139.html)

Composite bonding

Hi Blakmax,
11/10 for the response :ok: (I'm not so sure I would have been so polite :uhoh:). Certainly for myself, as an LAE, I have learned a huge amount from your posts and I suspect that goes for many others who read them. It will have made my inspections more careful and searching, thus safety HAS to have improved, even if there is an inconvenience factor when one finds something a little suspicious.

I haven't read your papers (out of time on a nearly permanent basis - like you I am a consultant) but I'll bet they are gold-plated.

And finally Froggy, I teach, and am taught regularly. Over 60 and there isn't a day goes by that I don't learn something. It's good for the soul, improves professionalism, and keeps Alzheimer's at bay. Teachers are GOOD NEWS (I is one ;))

Rant over, I'm a Cabernet man myself but if Froggy's bought a case of Merlot.....................:ok:

VFR

100% agree with froggy....

I totally disagree sentences without any evidences... :=:=:=:=:=

Mmmm ...

..... 100% agree with froggy .... I totally disagree sentences without any evidences...

So makrider .... what is your evidence to prove the contrary view?

Have you read through this thread from start to present posts?

Certainly blakmax's evidence and experience with composite materials goes back many years and those with experience of the problems with this particular aircraft recognise that 'something is not right' with the way (parts of) the aircraft has been built to date ... even the manufacturer has realised they have to change the way some things are being done.

Perhaps a more open point of view might be enlightening ....

Good luck .... ;)

I am not here to start a war with Blablakmax, I am just a stupid driver,he knows much more than me on composite for sure.

I had a look at your "DOT/FAA/AR – TN06/57, Apr 2007 BEST PRACTICE IN ADHESIVE BONDED STRUCTURES AND REPAIRS" here is the link http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/artn0657.pdf
I like the notice at the beginning :The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof :E
And then on page 3 Abstract This document does not represent a comprehensive survey and analysis of the failures or best corrective actions for bonded structures, :eek: but data that resulted from real-world applications and experience with disbands and other adhesive failures in structural applications.:ugh:

I also like your own statement in http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/414...ml#post5681221 "I have already sent my response to the FAA and receives a polite thanks but no thanks" :}

Regards
Froggy

Let's forget this and move forward, anybody got an update or new report about the crash in Almeria and the HK harbour ditch

Almeria seems to be a CFIT. A pilot working there reported that, but no official evidence.

Quote:

Let's forget this and move forward

:D:D:ok::ok:

Ferry Flight US - Europe

Hello!

Did somebody undertake the adventure of a Ferry Flight with a brand new AW139 ( 6800kg´s, aux-tanks ) from Philadelphia to Europe?

Any info´s very much appreciated!

Thank you
Peter

Let me know if you need somebody in the back to keep you entertained on this ferry flight :ok:

:} Supose he need some fuel there... not PAX,
moreover there is "limited" space to enter in cockpit from behind :)

@ RW101 Thank you, the ferry flight will be enough entertainment:)

@9Aplus Yes!

Sorry, but maybe there is somebody out, who did this ferry already:confused:

Thank you
Peter

TIP
There is another way, blades off, "pack" and on Ro-Ro over Atlantic,
last time info 2 year ago, price was level of 30-40k USD (with full insurance) and
2-3 weeks waiting time on other side.:cool:

Well-- since that's the way the last two have been delivered to this ME location,
the blades off, plastic-wrap, ro-ro ship from PHL to Genoa, truck transport to Malpensa, blades back on, inspection, and subsequent ferry flt to ME location seems to have worked just fine. Takes planning & coordination on both sides of Atlantic. :ok:

@ 9Aplus Thank you!

There might be another way....TEB-YUL-YMT/YRC-YKL-YVP-YFB-GOH-KUS-KEF-FAE-Scotland:)

Nice day:)

Using Ro-Ro would take the fun out of this delivery, wouldnt it? Robinsons have done it so that should be a no-brainer for a 139 one might think. Could be the wrong time of the year though.

@ RW 101

Quote:

Using Ro-Ro would take the fun out of this delivery, wouldnt it?

Exactly:ok:

Yes, the R44 thread is very interesting to read, as well as their web-sites...

We´re ferrying in July, so should not be a problem with weather...

Thank you!
Peter

- i -
ATSB TRANSPORT SAFETY REPORT
Aviation Occurrence Investigation
AO-2009-004
Final
Operational event
89 km south-east of Townsville Aerodrome,

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/1582706/ao2009004.pdf

This may be of interest to other Aw139 operators.

Quote:

Abstract
On 2 February 2009, an Agusta Westland AW139 helicopter, registered VH-ESH, departed under the instrument flight rules (IFR) from Mackay Aerodrome, Queensland. The helicopter had been repositioned to Mackay the previous day from its Townsville Aerodrome base due to the threat posed by an approaching tropical cyclone. The purpose of the flight was to return the helicopter to Townsville following the passage of the cyclone.
Shortly after departure from Mackay, the crew were presented with an increasing number of alert messages indicating the failure of various helicopter systems. While the crew were focussed on assessing these messages, the autopilot altitude hold function disengaged, leading to a descent that was not detected by either the flight crew or air traffic services (ATS).
The helicopter descended undetected for over 6 minutes while flying towards an area of rising terrain, losing about 3,300 ft of altitude, before ATS observed the descent and alerted the crew.
The investigation determined that the helicopter sustained two independent technical problems; one associated with water and particulate ingress and a second related to the probable susceptibility of the air data system to in-flight turbulence. These failures resulted in multiple erroneous alert messages and uncommanded disengagement of the altitude hold function. The investigation also identified a number of safety factors relating to workload and task management by the crew and monitoring of the aircraft by ATS.
Following the occurrence, the helicopter manufacturer and operator, and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) implemented a number of safety actions relating to the identified technical and operational safety issues. In addition, the manufacturer and operator of the helicopter, and CASA undertook proactive safety action in a number of cases for which no safety issues were identified.
Finally, concurrent with the release of this report, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau has issued a Safety Advisory Notice suggesting that the Department of Defence should consider enabling the capability of the Australian Defence Air Traffic System in the Townsville area to alert air traffic controllers in the case of an aircraft altitude deviation.

That is a CRM issue more than a technical one. Who was supposed to be flying the helicopter?

It descended at over 500 fpm for 6 minutes and would have presumably continued to do so until alerted by ATC. They may have had CAS messages but that is no excuse for not scanning the instruments at least every minute or so.

If you are SPIFR then that is all the more reason to be vigilant.Automation and 4 axis autopilots are a great aid to flying but have to be monitored.

Strongly agree with Epiphany, CRM was greatly improvised there.:eek:
Not the standards tat are enforced during initial training.

CRM? Reminds me of the joke about why atheists don't like bj's - nobody to talk to...

My read of the report is that the aircraft was flown single pilot. Everyone else on board is a medic/crewman. One of them sits in the front sometimes and helps with the comm radios, maybe. For that he gets the title of Flight Crewman. He doesn't have a pilot license, doesn't have a type endorsement, can't fly, had a few hours briefing on how the doors open and where the radios are. Australians bs themselves that it is a "flight crew". No more a crew than the single-pilot EMS ops in the US. Difference is that you are flying a very complex aircraft. By yourself, at night, in IFR, with unrelated systems malfunctioning, in a strange new aircraft. Judging from the long gaps between training and then flying the 139, and the almost negligible number of the pilot's hours on type, you have to wonder in what regulatory environment would allow such a situation to happen. The whole things looks bush-league, and pretty much an indictment of the sorry state of affairs in the EMS world in Australia.

Good CRM would start with a second pilot in the cockpit - someone to talk to.

purely CRM ... I fully agree with previous posts, now if the aircraft is single pilot just look on the top of your MFD

It just means ALT was not engaged, if it would have been engaged then they would have heard "ALTITUDE, ALTITUDE"

When ever you hear the chime, have a look if the mode is engaged (reverse video or not), Agusta should change the chime to 2 different chimes when engaged (or acquired) or disengaged, let's hope that will be part of the next software upgrade :*

The 139 is not that complex :confused:, but if one organisation can afford a 139 but can't afford for 2 pilots to fly it then they have to think twice on what they want :yuk: