Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Heli500

  1. Sorry, torque check is what I need. Nothing is re-torqued.

    I agree with Heliian. I will see if I can get it without 150hr check. Might have to put it in at first then remove at a later revision after more data can be obtained.



  2. Yes it is possible without Airbus aproval. You can deviate from manifactures instructions as long as it is approved in your MSA and does not excede LifeLimit, OH or AD. It would be something along the lines of a combination of flight idle ground run and a max power flight.

    Currently when you build up and install a head on an astar, you are supposed to check torque after first ground run before first flight. You would do the re-torque after a set time on the ground, then again after a set time full power flight (call it 15/15). It would need to be verrified at the next 150Hr inspection.

  3. Hi All,

    For those that make cameo apperances maintaing astars in the field and at remote bases or have engineers that do, we need some help. We're in the process of updating our MSA and hit a roadblock. We created an alternate procedure for the 2-10 hour re-torques similar to the one for the Bell 206 TRDS and Mast Nut. Transport was good to go with it, but require some more data from us. That data bieng log entries for the re-torques with results (No Movement or Discrepencies) for MR Head, Servos, TR Blade, Suspension bars etc..... If anyone is willing to share a few photos of past entries that we can submit it would be greatly appreciated and we will return the favour once our MSA is approved.

    I tried to go to Airbus and get a letter similar to the one that Bell had issued long long ago, but they shot me down as usual.



  4. We just pulled a spider off our B3e with 2000 Hrs since new ( mostly people moving). Split bush bearings had broken free and been spinning for a while. Output shaft was still ok, but the spider was a mess. There had been issues of the bearings not bonded in well during production as explained by the Airbus Rep. 

    Let us know what you find.

    • Thanks 1
  5. We were excited when this SB came out and wanted it for our B3e, that excitement faded fast when we realized it would not work with an onboard load cell.

    You are in a unique situation were you can test the 2 versions. Would you be able to conduct an experiment where you load up a hook to max that your TQ limits and weight limits will allow. Try and lift it with the load cell conector disconnected at the hook. Then try it with it connected. See if there is a difference and if you can get the Nr to bump up.


    It would definitely help some operators make a decisions on retro fitting older aircraft.


    Why did they just not make a Nr trim switch. Then it could have been utilized with internal loads too.

  6. I belive with the onboard hook you will no longer be able to reach the max potential of the B3e as stated in the flight manual. This was Airbus fix  for the problem. You are going to have a tough time finding anyone with experience with the post mod airframe and siren hook, I think its very rare. Most opt for delivery with an onbard hook. 

    It would have been alot better if you just could flick a switch and have the vemd/decu let the Nr go to  400 rather than have to detect a load.

    Here is something to debate and maybe help you get your answer.

    Will a straight B3 (2b or 2b1) out lift a B3e (2d & dual hyd)? In my head the lighter old B3 that does not have a governed down Nr should.

  7. None of these graphs take into account average hours per pilot or how many pilots accounted for the hundreds of thousands of hours. In a 100000 hours the accident rate would be different if it was flown by 100 plots or 500 pilots. It also does not take into account pilot skill/experience level. Toral hours flown. Accidents with 10000 hour pilots vs 600 hr pilots

    Going straigt up hours to accidents doesn't really tell the story. If this is what the new regs are based of in my oppinion it will not make a difference. The same number of accidents to flight hours will remain the same. It is really up to the company to realize a guys ability to perform the job vs safety and recognize when to pull them early from a shift or know when to pull then self. Everyone has a limit to the amount of work/stress there brain and body can handle.

  8. Thats an interesting read.


    Im interested in the ELT findings. I submitted an SDR (service difficulty report) about 6 years ago on the G switches. We were finding that 20 to 30% of our fleet were failing on the annual test. This is just another example where the ELT has failed to activate after an incident. Whithout the sat track unit and had the injuries been worse, this could have been a different story.  

    We were mandated by Transport Canada to buy these junk 406 Elts years ago, and when they are alerted to a problem they do nothing. We all remember how flying in turbulence would set off the old units, now you need to pile the aircraft in at 10G to get the thing to go off (Maybee). It would be interesting to see the stats on how many crashes there has been, where the 406 failed to activate.

    From a maintenance standpoint the only ICA I have seen is to do the self test evey 30 days. I have never heard of taking it out and shaking it every 4 months.

    Has anyone else found they have had to replace the G switches?

  9. I think Heliian is messing with you, I have never heard of anyone recommending Winair. If you add Winair to your company, you will need another person to your staff to input all of the data required to keep everything up to date. Just started at a company and inherited the program, I hate the f'n task cards. Doing a 300 hr requires you to print out 80 sheets of paper!


    For a 5 aircraft fleet I would just get someone really good at excel to audit your aircraft, books and spreadsheets. I used to use Compucrap to track my inventory and cut POs and a spreadsheet to do everything else. It was simple, cheap and worked. It just looked circa 1987. Not recommending it, but it got the job done.


    Personally I find Spreadsheets to be the easiest thing to work with and update, everything is right there in your face, but then you really have to know what you are doing when it comes to updating parts that have multiple parameters tracked. The last place I worked I linked the whole WO process and maintenance tracking spreadsheet into one .xls workbook then locked it out so all you could update were the current times and give it a work order number.


    Now I wish Winair was that simple



  10. That is BS. If you get ACA from an in house program it quaifies as an approved training as long as the training has been approved by TC. I have asked every inspector I have ever delt with about this and you will get a bunch of different answers. If you are an AME in this situation and are about to jump ship, call your local transport office and ask for a letter from them stating the training you recieved was approved by them.


    It is then up to the next company you work for to test you on that type and recoganize the training you have recieved and grant you your ACA.


    When a pilot gets endorsed by a company to fly a type of AC it is good for where ever he goes. Why is it not the same for AMEs


    For Transport to reject the Can Heli course is like saying that thier 206s are some how different than anyone elses.


    There is a lot of grey area in the Regs on this so if you do not get the right answer from your PMI go ask another one, and his boss.


    Remember prior to CARs all a guy had to do was right the TC type exam and he got the endorsement. Its all up to the company what they accept

  11. Refer to my post on 355 differences course...remember, your type course (airframe or engine) must be TC approved. You can have a "company course TC approved", but that is usually a one off, and is not portable, meaning it can only be used for ACA issue privileges for the company that the TC approval was issued to. Went thru that a couple of years ago trying to issue ACA to well qualified AME who held a Can.Heli. 206 airframe and engine course cert which TC would not allow to be used for ACA purposes for the company (not CH) I worked for at that time. Very frustrating.

  12. I would say Marc is right. Under CARS with the training you have the grandfather clause works. Whether its right or wrong, CARS say you can do it. My concern would be the liability of signing it out under you AME license. I would personally make sure you document exactly what revisions of manuals you are using and where you borrowed them from. Also document any special tools you borrowed.

    Cover your A$$ right..


    I have never worked on a 520 so I cannot say how different a beast it really is. I would say its probably closer to the f model than a D/E with the longer blades and beefed up components. If I were the owner of said machine I think I would be using an AMO to due the annual and 100hr. I am sure you are more than competent to do the inspection but why take the risk. Spend a million on and aircraft but refuse to spend an extra $30 bucks an hour to get it inspected is kind of sad.


    Whatever the CARS rules are about type certificates and prior to 1999 grandfather clauses, what is your experience level with the Notar. Do you feel comfortable signing it out. I would suggest if you are going to due the import, either find an AME with 520 experience `to work with or work with an AMO with the appropriate rating. Im sure someone on this site could help you out.



  13. Has anyone had any trouble with the Garmin SL40 opening up FM transceivers. We have 3 SL40's and whenever you transmit on VHF the FM opens up and the co-pilot gets squelched out. You can actually sit in the hanger and transmit VHF in one machine and have it squelch the FM in the machine beside it.


    Has anyone else encountered this?



  14. Hey Pup,

    The wax will do nothing for lift. Your better off skipping breakfast on drill move days. If you wax the blades the next problem you will have is the tabe wont want to stick to the wax. Oh maybee check the length of tape. If its 2 feet you can get your engineer to shorten it up. That might give you a pound or two. Also blade tiedowns at the tips of your blades will destroy a bit of lift. So missing breakfast tie downs and tape that might give you 10 or 20 lbs. PMA blades suck



  15. A/c limits are aircraft limits. How many of you out there feel more comfertable taking over a machine that has some sort of a tatel-tale gauge in it. At least you know if the last guy that flew the machine was not abusing it. Its the only way I can think of to keep everyone flying the machine honest and not pushing where the red line is.


    What about educating the customer better. Drillers are drillers. What they say wieghs 300 lbs is usually like 450. If the helicopter is pulling max power @ 1000' to get the drill off the flat deck that brought it there in May how well is it going to do in Aug at 4000' with the less exeperinced pilot. You guys want change talk to your customer and explain the aircrafts limitations and safety margines. And b*tch at your opps managers for putting you and your co-workers in situations like that.


    I remember a pilot telling me that he was asked to help out another company move a drill because they were not available. Our 500 had had a load cell and the drill had been placed at 7000' with a jet box. The biggest part of the drill was 1400 lbs ( the drillers had no clue what it weighed) after he slid it off the deck he rode it down to like 2000 or 3000 feet. Im sure he was sweating and crapping himself woundering how he was going to stop at the other end. After all this he at least had the decency to tell the customer to go pump his hat never call us again for help. I'm not to sure what happened to the 206 but im pretty sure it shat out its turbine on the side of a highway about a week or so latter (know one onboard was hurt).


    All I can say is 95 percent of the time im glad im spinning wrenches and it aint my aurse in the seat and if you use your transients constantly to lift something then your just asking to get bit. Sad reallity is the damage you do to the machine might not bite you or the next guy, but it will defidently bite the owner of said aircraft when it come to pay the standard aero or turbocrappa bill and that just makes for sh*ttier scotch at the christmas party.


    Cheers all and fly safe



  16. Wow, I find that incredible. We teach AME student apprentices about collective bounce and min friction.


    Why is this incredible. Not all aircraft react like a bells. Not all aircraft require any minimal friction on the colective for flight. Last bell I put a wench to was at SAIT about a decade ago. I guesse that was the last time I had ever heard of colective bounce. There is a reason that we type endorse AME's before we give them ACA. I asked 2 pilots to explain (not bell pilots) and they could not either. I did not know if it was just a phanominum that occured in this type of rotor head. There was a post about how pilots would ask there engineer to reduce the friction on the machine they were flying. Maybe now someone will read this and know that maybee thats not the best idea. Im glad you still remember every detail about every aircraft type and system you learned about in school. I guesse you're a better engineer than I. If I ever have any questions about Mag timming i will drop you a line. I think that this thread has been very informative and personally I learned from it. I sure the guys that put out this TSB report would be happy to know that there were people from all over the industry discussing it in an open form and educating people in hopes to one day prevent an accident like this from happining. I think the whole point of the reports being published is so we all can get closure and learn from others mistakes.


    Oh ya pretty sure we're also taught to use the Maintenance Manual when perfoming maintenance on an aircraft. I pretty much stick with that and its worked for the past decade. I guesse I did remember something.





  • Create New...