Jump to content

Notice: Effective July 1, 2024, Vertical Forums will be officially shut down. As a result, all forum activity will be permanently removed. We understand that this news may come as a disappointment, but we would like to thank everyone for being a part of our community for so many years.

If you are interested in taking over this Forum, please contact us prior to July 1.

Ec30 Hydraulics

Recommended Posts

I agree with Helidude.

The modifications to the hydraulic system of the AS 350 have in my opinion been a positive move, but the way Transport Canada handled the situation by issuing an AWD without and known issue or rectification is unacceptable. It had a negative impact on our industry and has set a very unsettling precident that after any fatal accident we will be receiving an AWD grounding or limiting the aircraft type involved in the incident.

That's just my opinion.

Hmmm.....Amodao, I don't quite understand your remarks. Based on the fact(s)presented in the TSB report, I did not read any indicators in the published AD's, CF-2003-15, CF-2003-15R1 or CF-2004-10 that indicated TC grounded the Astar.....what I read in all that, was the fact that MNR grounded all "their" aircraft pending further investigation voluntarily.....Unless I missed something, I fail to see any "precident" that was set specifically by T.C.?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

O.K. figuratively speaking, two pilots at the controls (-15 C in Canada during the winter) in a 6 seater aircraft, not to mention the negative publicity the AWD put on the aircraft (customers refusing to hire the aircraft) is not considered acceptable in my books. Over reaction on the part of Transport Canada is not appropriate and in future I hope they review the AWD issuance process and weigh all of the consequences before issuing further reactionary documents.

Again, this is just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<_< Let me try to understand here....since when is public safety an over-reaction?Remote, CHC,and MNR have "unexplained" flight control problems (ie:hardovers) and this is not considered unacceptable? The interest that I see procurred by the AWD is in the respect of "safety", until assurances are put into place by the manufacturer that the unexplained becomes explainable. As this is only "my opinion", I still can not understand how you and M.S. feel that that whole process was unjustified or unfair?


As stated by others before.....just my 2 cents worth... :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So tell me Helilog 56, what was the problem with the hydraulic system and how would 2 pilots at the helm fix the problem. Do you think that maybe there could have been another factor with lets say, the overhaul shop procedures for fixing specific servos, an AME procedual issue not charging the accumaultors properly, hydraulic fluid contaminated with water, a worn out pilot valve on the servo housing, play in the many attachment rod ends, the aircraft out of rig, pilot not following testing procedures before flight etc. etc. etc.

I would like to say that there are other ways to notify the flying community of harzards and problems and the use of Service Bulletins and AWD's should be used for identified problems that have definable fixes.

This particular AWD was initially issued by our regualtory body without consultation with the manufacture of the aircraft. If a definable problem whether it be a procedural or physical is identified then use the AWD process to notify operators, but make sure the research has been done first.

Jumping to conclusions doesn't help anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you said Mags, The simple fix (to preclude the possibility of a broken belt) of moding to a Poly-v belt has been available for a long time. Also Changing Hyd Fluid every 100 hours is a no brainer! Some operators have made that part of their maintenace policy years ago to reduce Servo O/H costs. Particularly for Dunlop Servos.

And Everyone has to agree that up until this whole nasty business question in A-star Hyd surfaced; if you took a poll of 10 pilots while informally having beers, you would hear 10 different ways they would react to a Hyd failure. I still hear it today! Most pilots still think their way is better than the flight manual. This whole business is a chain of events as Amadeo noted in his/her previous post. I think now we have a series of new "links" the chain will not break here again. I hope.

But this has hurt the reputation of the product and the bottom lines of operators who rely on this product to keep them in business.


this is just the way I see it from my angle. :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FAA issues NPRM for cold weather ops in Eurocopter AS350 (all models) and AS355E


AD Notice of Proposed Rulemaking click here


SUMMARY: This document proposes adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the specified Eurocopter France (ECF) model helicopters. This proposal would require replacing the hydraulic fluid at a specified time interval when operating in cold weather. This proposal is prompted by reports of ice forming due to condensation in some parts of the hydraulic system during cold weather operation. The actions specified by this proposed AD are intended to prevent ice from forming in the hydraulic system resulting in an unintended movement of the flight controls and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...