Another Puma Down - Norway
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36169929
Rotor-head detachment according to witnesses!
Hate these bloody things!
Rotor-head detachment according to witnesses!
Hate these bloody things!
http://www.tv2.no/v/1039640/
Seems the gearbox had just been changed also from what's posted on Pprune
Seems the gearbox had just been changed also from what's posted on Pprune
Just good fortune that previous incidents didn't result in deaths though isn't it? I know the cause of this hasn't been declared yet but the MRGB must be in the frame to some extent.
Its predecessor the 332 had its share of trouble. Time they binned them IMHO. People I know dread having to travel on them.
Its predecessor the 332 had its share of trouble. Time they binned them IMHO. People I know dread having to travel on them.
The previous problem would not have caused detachment of the main rotor head as has happened here. The bevel gear shaft that failed previously had the root cause exhaustively investigated and a solution was put in place to prevent this happening again by using a different designed bevel gear shaft and modified oil sprayer to prevent the sludge build up that caused the previous failures. The bevel gear shaft is situated at the bottom half of the gearbox and when it failed it only dropped about 10 mm causing the drive to the oil pumps to disengage. The rest of the gearbox operated as it should.
This is a different issue and as I am an engineer I deal in the fact and not speculation. . The investigation will find out soon enough.
Last night, Airbus helicopter delivered a safety information notice in light of information gained from the last 48 hours stating that the 225 is safe to fly.
This is a different issue and as I am an engineer I deal in the fact and not speculation. . The investigation will find out soon enough.
Last night, Airbus helicopter delivered a safety information notice in light of information gained from the last 48 hours stating that the 225 is safe to fly.
jamiem555 said:
..............Last night, Airbus helicopter delivered a safety information notice in light of information gained from the last 48 hours stating that the 225 is safe to fly.
The inference I would take from that is that they have identified the problem and, again by inference, that something was incorrectly assembled in the recent maintenance work.Steve
Steve_D said:
The inference I would take from that is that they have identified the problem and, again by inference, that something was incorrectly assembled in the recent maintenance work.
Steve
That could be the case. I think they know the cause and are just proving it at the moment. Who knows what (human) factors have led to this. Steve
Steve_D said:
The inference I would take from that is that they have identified the problem and, again by inference, that something was incorrectly assembled in the recent maintenance work.
If it was, why was it able to be done that way and where was the check procedureIs it enough to say that's the way it is, carry on until someone else does the same?
That rotor head in the air is an amazing bit of footage caught at the time. Shocking.
I wonder if all the offshore oil industry companies would consider establishing a fund to look at the development of a much safer type of transport for that particular need.
I'm thinking Rotodyne. I read the book by David Giibings a while ago and was re-reading the chapter "50 years on" which looked at what could be developed now just before this incident. The type Z with improved silencers and modern composites would seem to be a very viable option.
The rotor head in the Rotodyne does not see the same forces as a Helicopter, can autorotate, survive one engine out, one set of tip jets out, and still land safely.
OK I'm a bit biased as a Rotodyne fan but, it seems to be a viable solution and much simpler than the Osprey and other tilt rotors. Carter Aviation Technologies have done a bit of modern research.
Any Lotto winners out there with a potential investment project...
RIP to all those on board
I wonder if all the offshore oil industry companies would consider establishing a fund to look at the development of a much safer type of transport for that particular need.
I'm thinking Rotodyne. I read the book by David Giibings a while ago and was re-reading the chapter "50 years on" which looked at what could be developed now just before this incident. The type Z with improved silencers and modern composites would seem to be a very viable option.
The rotor head in the Rotodyne does not see the same forces as a Helicopter, can autorotate, survive one engine out, one set of tip jets out, and still land safely.
OK I'm a bit biased as a Rotodyne fan but, it seems to be a viable solution and much simpler than the Osprey and other tilt rotors. Carter Aviation Technologies have done a bit of modern research.
Any Lotto winners out there with a potential investment project...
RIP to all those on board
Scotty2 said:
The rotor head in the Rotodyne does not see the same forces as a Helicopter, can autorotate, survive one engine out, one set of tip jets out, and still land safely.
A conventional twin engine helicopter can do all of that just as well as a Rotodyne could, and a Rotodyne Main Rotor Gear Box (MRGB) sees all of the axial forces a conventional helicopter's does - it's only the torque that isn't transmitted up the mast. None of the Super Puma accidents have been caused by power transmission issues. The Rotodyne head still carries large bending and shear forces, as well as the dominating centrifugal forces from keeping the blades attached. The rotor mast, its various thrust bearings and all rotor linkages are every bit as safety critical and non-redundant as a conventional helicopter's.It is the concept of flying under a set of spinning adjustable blades that is the redundancy difficulty.
Shocking footage (yet horribly engrossing) and very sad for all involved, surely it's time for a redesign of the MGB by now?
This might sound like a silly question, but is it time to bring the Chinook back for civilian flight? 30 years of military flying has surely proven it as reliable by now?
This might sound like a silly question, but is it time to bring the Chinook back for civilian flight? 30 years of military flying has surely proven it as reliable by now?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff