If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Is this for real?
The OTHER Kevin in San Diego wrote:
On 25 May 2006 11:01:28 -0700, "Mike Rotor Nowak" wrote: We got to meet the pilot (DJ I think was his name) at HAI... he said the updrafts were so intense, the collective was bottomed out at the hover, and to decend, he had to do nose dives (pretty dramatic on the video). The power to hover up there was virtually nil... hell, he did a toe-in the entire time, never set it down fully. They had the chopper there too... not highly modified at all, just a factory B3 with a flight recording computer and some cameras. No crazy stripping jobs, it still had all the seats... and Eurocopter made sure to flaunt that the configuration on the stand was the same as it was during the attempt. That contradicts what Eurocopter themselves said at the time (published in AvLeak). IIRR, they'd stripped the seats, the cabin insulation, steps on the skids, nav lights, basically anything that wasn't absolutely necessary. Going from memory T/O fuel was 60-80kg. (I forget the exact figure), and flight time to the top from Lukla (9,350 ft., 20-odd miles away) was somewhere in the range of 12-17 minutes; total round-trip including the 3' + spent on top was 25-40 minutes. Depending on the report, the a/c was either 120 or 160 kg. lighter than stock. The thing that cheeses me off is that landing on the top with just a single person on board is basically a stunt. A few days previously they'd landed at the South Col aka Camp IV (7,906m/25,938 ft.) as a warmup, and rather than taking the opportunity to demonstrate some practical utility by landing and taking off there with two people (or equivalent weight) on board, they just had the pilot. As well as being the highest camp, from which climbers leave for and return from the summit on the normal Southeast Ridge route, the South Col is about the highest spot from which you could realistically evacuate someone in a fair variety of weather conditions. It's also about the highest place where major medical attention can be available, and it avoids having to carry/lower someone down the Lhotse face by hand to the Western Cwm, a slow and hazardous undertaking. When the Indians set the old landing and takeoff record with the Cheetah (license-built Lama) back in 1969 at 24,600 feet, they did it with two crew on board, and did the same when they broke that a month or so previous to the Eurocopter Everest stunt by landing and taking off at a density altitude of 25,135 feet, using a Cheetah equipped with a new engine with which they're considering upgrading their fleet. I would have been far more impressed by Eurocopter if they'd landed at the South Col again with an extra 80kg. or so on board, rather than on top with just the pilot. A Eurocopter type claimed at the time that they could have easily landed on top with an extra person on board, but talk is cheap. What is clear is that in most conditions an AS350B3 should be able to rescue climbers from just about anywhere in the Western Cwm, i.e. Camps I and II which are both between 6 and 7,000m; helo evacuation from Camp III on the Lhotse Face is almost certainly not an option. In 1998 Colonel KC Madan managed to bring out two climbers, one at a time, from the Western Cwm after they'd been brought down from Camp 4, using an AS350B2 that was operating well over its certification height, so a B3 would provide a useful improvement on that in any case, and probably could get to the South Col and back with two onboard at least some of the time. But Nepal has more pressing issues at the moment than buying a new helo to rescue climbers. Guy |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Is this for real?
The OTHER Kevin in San Diego wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2006 21:49:15 GMT, Guy Alcala wrote: That contradicts what Eurocopter themselves said at the time (published in AvLeak). IIRR, they'd stripped the seats, the cabin insulation, steps on the skids, nav lights, basically anything that wasn't absolutely necessary. Going from memory T/O fuel was 60-80kg. (I forget the exact figure), and flight time to the top from Lukla (9,350 ft., 20-odd miles away) was somewhere in the range of 12-17 minutes; total round-trip including the 3' + spent on top was 25-40 minutes. Depending on the report, the a/c was either 120 or 160 kg. lighter than stock. This is very similar to what we heard through the aviation rumor mill - including some talk at Heli Expo down in Dallas.. Ok, so now I take back my "wow"... Interview with the pilot, Didier DelSalle, talking about potential rescue capability he http://www.spadout.com/articles/gene...er_everest.htm Guy |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Is this for real?
Guy Alcala wrote:
snip A couple of corrections. When the Indians set the old landing and takeoff record with the Cheetah (license-built Lama) back in 1969 at 24,600 feet, they did it with two crew on board, and did the same when they broke that a month or so previous to the Eurocopter Everest stunt by landing and taking off at a density altitude of 25,135 feet, using a Cheetah equipped with a new engine with which they're considering upgrading their fleet. Actually on November 1st, 2004, and it was at a DA of 25,150 feet/(rounded down to) 7,665m. Both crew were Indian military, and strangely enough the FAI denied the record because "Pilots were not holding a valid Sporting Licence when the flight took place." See http://records.fai.org/rotorcraft/pending.asp#canceled I can only say I feel the Indian reply should have been the Hindi equivalent of "Badges! We don't got to show you no steenkin' badges!" Guy |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|