hairyian Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 ^ get a decent sized shaft, it's called a sikorsky.... But not any of the models that have crashed and ditched in the North Sea resulting in fatalities ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Para Handy Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Super Puma helicopter 32 miles south of Shetland, off Fair Isle. Well surprise, surprise. Not the first won’t be the Last. Said the aviation expert........ Super Puma helicopterpiece of french rubbish Why? Crack found in ditched helicopter gearboxAnd just ask anyone in the army who has been in oneAir Accidents Investigation Branch I have read a good few of there reports over the past few yearsSuper pumas just don't look goodhttp://www.aaib.gov.uk/home/index.cfm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohanofNess Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 ^Just to counter Jim Ferguson's opinion there, my dad has worked with S61's, S76's, Pumas, Super Pumas, S92's and Chinooks. I can't once remember him once mentioning that any eurocopter helicopter was dangerous or a piece of french rubbish. Now he has been working with helicopters since he went to Shetland in 1972 and he still works with them now. If I was away to step on a helicopter I think may have some manufacturing fault I'd listen to him and not some punter on an internet site who occasionally looks at air accident logs. Does it ever occur to anyone that there are folk that might have to get on one of these choppers and unfounded scare mongering is putting them off going to their work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Does it ever occur to anyone that there are folk that might have to get on one of these choppers and unfounded scare mongering is putting them off going to their work. I'd hardly call it unfounded scaremongering given their track record of the recent past, and particularly the incidence of gearbox issues involved. Certainly the guys working on and with them every day are the experts, and I'm not attempting to diminish that, but my own personal opinion is that I'd refuse to step aboard one unless for a life or death issue given the information currently available. For anyone else finding themselves in the position of using one right now, they'll just have to make up their own minds, but I'd take the view that if they chose to they've either not been paying attention or have scant regard for their own life and safety. The Puma had a long and relatively good track record, and last I heard was quite well liked all round, but incidents these last three years or so involving current versions have all but wiped that positivity out and are posing questions about the design, build quality and airworthiness of them. Whether the information available justifies those questions, or whether its scaremongering is, I accept, probably largely down to personal opinion, I just tend to be in the former camp, as do others who are punting the same opinion at various places around the web. All it took was one catastrophic mechanical failure and all hell broke loose, and the name Chinook became a very bad word that saw it banished from the North Sea forever, the Puma has now had three ditchings in under four years, two in the last five months, all directly attributed to serious gearbox mechanical failures....need I continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stilldellin Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 ^ Spot on GR. I wonder if it occurs to some what the outcome would have been if these recent incidents had occurred with weather like today. Maybe best to draw back the curtains, look out the window and have a rethink ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohanofNess Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 I'd hardly call it unfounded scaremongering given their track record of the recent past, and particularly the incidence of gearbox issues involved. I don't disagree, the particular model of puma that has the shaft which appears to have a manufacturing/design fault is of concern which is why it's grounded. Generalised pish that all machines by the same manufacturer are a heap of rubbish is scaremongering though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infiltrator Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Some good discussion in the latter pages of this thread, consensus seems to focus on a design change to the original gearbox design. http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/498649-north-sea-heli-ditching-oct-2012-a.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Generalised pish that all machines by the same manufacturer are a heap of rubbish is scaremongering though. Agreed. An error has been made someplace with the one model, that's all. Shouldn't have happened, but even though it has their track record is no worse than that of their competitors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohanofNess Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Exactly lets not forget it wasn't that long ago the S92 was grounded with gearbox concerns and it's the current darling of the guys working offshore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.