DOCSLIB.ORG

H Helicopter with a Rigid Rotor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
H Helicopter with a Rigid Rotor UNITED STATES MILITARY AIRCRAFT by Jos Heyman Air Force H = Helicopter (1940-current) The H series was introduced on 11 June 1948 and continued from the R series. Last update: 1 July 2016 H-1 Platt-LePage PL-3 Specifications: rdm.: 30'6", 9.30 m length: 29'4", 8.94 m engines: 1 Pratt & Whitney R-985-21 max. speed: 110 mph, 177 km/h (Source: Ray Watkins, via 1000aircraftphotos.com photo #8250) The Platt-le-Page design was a helicopter with rotors mounted on lateral outriggers. A single prototype was ordered on 19 July 1940 as XR-1 and with serial 41-001. The first untethered flight took place on 23 June 1941 and the aircraft continued to be tested until 21 June 1946. The XR-1A , of which one was ordered on 29 October 1941 with serial 42-6581, had a glazed nose and a R-985-AN-1 engine. It flew for the first time on 27 May 1943 but was damaged on 26 October 1944 and was declared surplus at the end of the war. In 1946 it was transferred to civilian operators as NX6950. In October 1944 a contract was awarded for seven YR-1A s but that was cancelled in April 1945. The serials are not known. Platt-lePage was acquired by McDonnell in 1944. The latter company developed the twin rotor concept under the company designations H-1A to H-1B. These are not military designations. H-2 Kellett KD-1 Specifications: rdm.: 40', 12.19 m length: 26', 7.92 m engines: 1 Jacobs R-915-1 max. speed: 120 mph, 193 km/h (Source: USAAF?) In 1940 the YG-1C was modified with a different engine and redesignated as XR-2. The serial was 37-378. The aircraft was destroyed in tests. Production was undertaken as O-60. Refer also to G-1, H-3, O-60 H-3 Kellett KD-1 Specifications: rdm.: 40', 12.19 m length: 26', 7.92 m engines: 1 Jacobs R-755-3 max. speed: 106 mph, 171 km/h (Source: USAAF?) YG-1B 37-380 was in 1940 converted as the XR-3. Refer also to G-1, H-2, O-60 H-4 Sikorsky VS316A/S47/S48 Hoverfly Specifications: rdm.: 38', 11.58 m length: 35'5", 10.80 m engines: 1 Warner R-550-1 max. speed: 75 mph, 121 km/h (Source: National Museum of the Air Force) A single XR-4 was ordered with serial 41-18874 and made its first flight on 14 January 1942. The helicopter had a rdm of 36', 10.97 m and had a Warner R-500-3 engine giving it a max. speed of 102 mph, 164 km/h. It also had a different tail rotor configuration and no fuselage covering. Three examples of the YR-4A , to which the specifications apply, were ordered with serials 42-107234/107236 on 15 January 1943. Also on 15 January 1943 the first of 27 YR-4B s were ordered with serials 42-107237/107248, 43-28223/28235, 43-28247 and 43-47953. In addition 15 were produced for the US Navy as HNS-1. Those remaining in service on 11 June 1948 were redesignated as YH-4B . The production version was the R-4B and 100 were built with serials 43-46500/46599. 20 of these were transferred to the US Navy and the USCG whilst the RAF received 45. Those remaining in service on 11 June 1948 were redesignated as H-4B . The R-4B had a R-550-3 engine. In 1943 the XR-4 was fitted with the R-550-1 engine and was redesignated as XR-4C . Refer also to HNS H-5 Sikorsky S51 Dragonfly Specifications: rdm.: 48', 14.63 m length: 41'10", 12.75 m engines: 1 Pratt & Whitney R-985-AN-5 max. speed: 93 mph, 150 km/h (Source: USAF, via 10af.afrc.af.mil/photos) Also known as MX-256, five prototypes of this two seat general purpose helicopter were ordered as XR-5 and with serials 43-28236/28239 and 43-47954. The first flight was on 18 August 1943. Two aircraft were fitted with British equipment and were redesignated as XR-5A . The YR-5A , which were originally designated as YR-5, were generally identical to the XR-5 and 26 were built with serials 43-46600/46625. Two went to the US Navy as HO2S-1 whilst those remaining in service on 11 June 1948 were redesignated as YH-5A . The production version was R-5A (H-5A after 11 June 1948) and although 100 were ordered only 34 were completed with serials 43-46626/43-46659. 43-46660/46725 were cancelled. The designations R-5B and YR-5C were assigned to cancelled developments and the next version, with a Pratt & Whitney R-1340- engine, was the YR-5D which were R-5As and YR-5As converted with a nose wheel, rescue hoist and external fuel tank. The serials were 43-46606 and 43-46640/46659. Later they were redesignated as R-5D and after 11 June 1948 H-5D . In 1947 five YR-5As (43-46611/46615) were converted with dual controls as YR-5E and later YH-5E . The R-5F (H-5F from 11 June 1948) was a four seater based on the Sikorsky S-51 and had a rdm of 49', 14.94 m, length of 41'1", 12.52 m, a R-985-AN-5 engine. 11 were procured with serials 47-480/490. The SH-5F designation was used for aircraft 47-0487. The H-5G was similar to the H-5F except for some minor changes. 39 were procured with serials 48-524/562. One, 48-551, was converted to SH-5G . The final version was the H-5H and 16 were built with serials 49-1996/2011. One, with serials 49-2010, was converted to SH- 5H . Refer also to HO2S, HO3S H-6 Sikorsky VS316B/S49 Hoverfly Specifications: rdm.: 38', 11.58 m length: 38'3", 11.66 m engines: 1 Franklin O-405-9 max. speed: 105 mph, 169 km/h (Source: USAF) The VS316B was a refinement of the original VS316 design. One XR-6, fitted with a Lycoming O-435-7 engine, was ordered with serial 43-47955 and made the first flight on 15 October 1943. This was followed by five XR-6A s with serials 43-28240/28244. Three of these went to the US Navy as XHOS-1 with serials 46446/46448. The YR-6A was identical to the XR-6A except for some minor modifications. 26 were built by Nash-Kelvinator with serials 43-45316/45341. On 11 June 1948 they were redesignated as YH-6A . The R-6A was the production version and 193 were built by Nash-Kelvinator with serials 43-45342/45534. Of these 36 went to the US Navy as HOS-1 and 150 to the RAF whereas those remaining in service on 11 June 1948 were redesignated as H-6A . A batch of R-6As with serials 43- 45535/46115 was cancelled. The R-6B version was to be fitted with a Lycoming O-435-7 engine but production by Nash-Kelvinator was cancelled. Refer also to H-7, HOS H-7 Sikorsky Specifications: rdm.: 38', 11.58 m length: 38'3", 11.66 m engines: 1 Franklin O-405-9 max. speed: 105 mph, 170 km/h The XR-7 was a development of the XR-6 with a different engine. One was ordered and was redesignated as XR-6A on 12 February 1943. Refer also to H-6, HOS H-8 Kellett KH1 Specifications: rdm.: 36', 10.97 m length: 22'7", 6.88 m engines: 1 Franklin O-405-9 max. speed: 80 mph, 129 km/h (Source: USAAF) The Kellett XR-8 was a general purpose helicopter with twin side by side rotors. One XR-8 was ordered with serials 43-44714 and flew for the first time on 7 August 1944. Whilst the XR-8 had two bladed rotors, the XR-8A had revised two bladed rotors. A single example of the latter was ordered with serial 44-21908. The XR-8B designation was used for a version with a rigid rotor system, but this modification was never completed. H-9 G & A (Firestone) 45 Specifications: rdm.: 28', 8.53 m length: 26'3", 8.00 m engines: 1 Lycoming O-290-7 max. speed: 92 mph, 148 km/h (Source: USAAF) In 1944 a single model 45B was ordered as XR-9 as well as a single model 45C as XR-9A . Both were cancelled. The 45B had a length of 35', 10.67 m. Eventually a single XR-9B with serial 46-001 was ordered which on 11 June 1948 was redesignated as XH-9B . The specifications apply to the XR-9B. H-10 Kellett KH2 Specifications: rdm.: 71', 21.64 m length: 65', 19.81 m engines: 2 Continental R-975-AN-5 max. speed: 100 mph, 161 km/h (Source: Johan Visschedijk, via 1000aircraftphotos.com photo #3234) The Kellett KH2 had seating for 10 troops or stretchers for 6. Three XR-10 s were ordered with serials 45-22793/22795, of which the last one was cancelled although other sources suggest that the second aircraft was cancelled. Yet, another source, suggests that only one was completed and flown before it crashed on 3 October 1949. The first flight was on 24 April 1947. On 11 June 1948 they were redesignated as XH-10 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Metodi E Modelli Di Pianificazione E Progettazione Eliportuale Per Servizi Di Trasporto Civile
    Metodi e modelli di pianificazione e progettazione eliportuale per servizi di trasporto civile Luigi Maritano Corso di Dottorato in Tecnica ed Economia dei Trasporti XXIV Ciclo Tutor: Prof. Ing. Salvatore Amoroso Coordinatore: Prof. Ing. Marco Migliore UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI PALERMO FACOLTA’ DI INGEGNERIA Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Ambientale, Aerospaziale, dei Materiali (D.I.C.A.M.) In copertina: Artist Rendering of the Air Pegasus Metro Heliplex heliport http://ironboundnewark.com/we-fly-high-newark-heliportheliplex UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI PALERMO FACOLTÀ DI INGEGNERIA Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Ambientale, Aerospaziale, dei Materiali Corso di Dottorato di Ricerca in Tecnica ed Economia dei Trasporti – XXIV Ciclo S.S.D. ICAR/05 Metodi e modelli di pianificazione e progettazione eliportuale per servizi di trasporto civile Tesi di dottorato di: Tutor: Luigi Maritano Prof. Ing. Salvatore Amoroso Coordinatore del Corso: Prof. Ing. Marco Migliore INDICE GENERALE INDICE GENERALE ................................................................................................. pagina I INDICE DELLE FIGURE E DELLE TABELLE ................................................................ V INTRODUZIONE ................................................................................................................. 1 CAPITOLO 1 - L’impiego civile dell’elicottero: considerazioni di carattere generale e analisi del contesto nazionale ed internazionale Premessa ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • RH-53D Sea Stallion - 1984, 30X
    RH-53D Sea Stallion - 1984, 30x United States Type: Mine Sweeper (MCM) Min Speed: 30 kt Max Speed: 155 kt Commissioned: 1984 Length: 22.3 m Wingspan: 9.0 m Height: 7.6 m Crew: 5 Empty Weight: 10740 kg Max Weight: 19100 kg Max Payload: 8000 kg Propulsion: 3x T64-GE-413A Sensors / EW: - AN/APR-39(V)2 - (USN/USMC) ESM, RWR, Radar Warning Receiver, Max range: 222.2 km - Generic Navigation Radar - (USN/USMC) Radar, Radar, Navigation, Max range: 37 km - Generic FLIR - (2nd Gen, Surveillance, 8x Magnification) Infrared, Infrared, Surveillance Camera, Max range: 55.6 km Weapons / Loadouts: - Mk103 Helicopter-Towed Mechanical Cable Cutter Mine Sweep - Helicopter-Towed Package. - Mk104 Helicopter-Towed Acoustic Influence Mine Sweep - Helicopter-Towed Package. - Mk105 Helicopter-Towed Magnetic Influence Mine Sweep - Helicopter-Towed Package. - Mk106 [Mk104 & Mk105] Helicopter-Towed Magnetic & Acoustic Multi-Influence Mine Sweep - (1971) Helicopter-Towed Package. - AN/AQS-14 Helicopter-Towed Minehunting Sonar - (1985) Helicopter-Towed Package. OVERVIEW: The CH-53 Sea Stallion is the most common name for the Sikorsky S-65 family of heavy-lift transport helicopters. Originally developed for use by the United States Marine Corps, it is also in service with Germany, Iran, Israel, and Mexico. The United States Air Force operated the HH-53 "Super Jolly Green Giant" during the late- and post-Vietnam War era, updating most of them as the MH-53 Pave Low. The dimensionally-similar CH-53E Super Stallion is a heavier-lifting, improved version designated S-80E by Sikorsky. Its third engine makes it more powerful than the Sea Stallion, which it has replaced in the heavy-lift mission.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Military Helicopters 2015-16 Market Report Contents
    GLOBAL MILITARY HELICOPTERS 2015-16 MARKET REPORT CONTENTS MARKET OVERVIEW 2 MILITARY HELICOPTER KEY REQUIREMENTS 4 EUROPE 5 NORTH AMERICA 10 LATIN AMERICA & THE CARIBBEAN 12 AFRICA 15 ASIA-PACIFIC 16 MIDDLE EAST 21 WORLD MILITARY HELICOPTER HOLDINGS 23 EUROPE 24 NORTH AMERICA 34 LATIN AMERICA & THE CARIBBEAN 36 AFRICA 43 ASIA-PACIFIC 49 MIDDLE EAST 59 EVENT INFORMATION 65 Please note that all information herein is subject to change. Defence IQ endeavours to ensure accuracy wherever possible, but errors are often unavoidable. We encourage readers to contact us if they note any need for amendments or updates. We accept no responsibility for the use or application of this information. We suggest that readers contact the specific government and military programme offices if seeking to confirm the reliability of any data. 1 MARKET OVERVIEW Broadly speaking, the global helicopter market is currently facing a two- pronged assault. The military helicopter segment has been impacted significantly by continued defense budgetary pressures across most traditional markets, and a recent slide in global crude oil prices has impacted the demand for new civil helicopters as well as the level of activity for existing fleets engaged in the offshore oil & gas exploration sector. This situation has impacted industry OEMs significantly, many of which had been working towards strengthening the civil helicopter segment to partially offset the impact of budgetary cuts on the military segment. However, the medium- to long-term view of the market is promising given the presence of strong fundamentals and persistent, sustainable growth drivers. The market for military helicopters in particular is set to cross a technological threshold in the form of next-generation compound helicopters and tilt rotorcraft.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildland Fire Incident Management Field Guide
    A publication of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group Wildland Fire Incident Management Field Guide PMS 210 April 2013 Wildland Fire Incident Management Field Guide April 2013 PMS 210 Sponsored for NWCG publication by the NWCG Operations and Workforce Development Committee. Comments regarding the content of this product should be directed to the Operations and Workforce Development Committee, contact and other information about this committee is located on the NWCG Web site at http://www.nwcg.gov. Questions and comments may also be emailed to [email protected]. This product is available electronically from the NWCG Web site at http://www.nwcg.gov. Previous editions: this product replaces PMS 410-1, Fireline Handbook, NWCG Handbook 3, March 2004. The National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) has approved the contents of this product for the guidance of its member agencies and is not responsible for the interpretation or use of this information by anyone else. NWCG’s intent is to specifically identify all copyrighted content used in NWCG products. All other NWCG information is in the public domain. Use of public domain information, including copying, is permitted. Use of NWCG information within another document is permitted, if NWCG information is accurately credited to the NWCG. The NWCG logo may not be used except on NWCG-authorized information. “National Wildfire Coordinating Group,” “NWCG,” and the NWCG logo are trademarks of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names or trademarks in this product is for the information and convenience of the reader and does not constitute an endorsement by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group or its member agencies of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Defense Appropriations for 2009
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2009 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEFENSE JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania, Chairman NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana DAVID L. HOBSON, Ohio JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New Jersey MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio TODD TIAHRT, Kansas ROBERT E. ‘‘BUD’’ CRAMER, JR., Alabama JACK KINGSTON, Georgia ALLEN BOYD, Florida KAY GRANGER, Texas STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR., Georgia NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. PAUL JUOLA, GREG LANKLER, SARAH YOUNG, PAUL TERRY, KRIS MALLARD, LINDA PAGELSEN, ADAM HARRIS, ANN REESE, TIM PRINCE, BROOKE BOYER, MATT WASHINGTON, B G WRIGHT, CHRIS WHITE, CELES HUGHES, and ADRIENNE RAMSAY, Staff Assistants SHERRY L. YOUNG, Administrative Aide PART 4 Page Army Posture ............................................................................ 1 Army Acquisition Programs ................................................. 99 Navy Posture ............................................................................ 145 Navy / Marine Corps Acquisition Programs ...................... 279 Biological Countermeasures and Threats ......................... 325 Statements for the Record .................................................... 439
    [Show full text]
  • Central Asia in the Crossfire Survival Or War?
    WL KNO EDGE NCE ISM SA ER IS E A TE N K N O K C E N N T N I S E S J E N A 3 V H A A N H Z И O E P W O I T E D N E Z I A M I C O N O C C I O T N S H O E L C A I N M Z E N O T The Collective Security Treaty Organization, the Caspian and the Northern Distribution Network: Central Asia in the Crossfire Survival or War? ZHULDUZ BAIZAKOVA Republic of Kazakhstan Open Source, Foreign Perspective, Underconsidered/Understudied Topics The Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO) at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, is an open source research organization of the U.S. Army. It was founded in 1986 as an innovative program that brought together military specialists and civilian academics to focus on military and security topics derived from unclassified, foreign media. Today FMSO maintains this research tradition of special insight and highly collaborative work by conducting unclassified research on foreign perspectives of defense and security issues that are understudied or unconsidered. Author Background Zhulduz Baizakova is a graduate from Kazakh National University and has a MSc degree in International Security and Global Governance, Birkbeck College, University of London, where she successfully defended her dissertation on NATO peacekeeping activities. She served for seven years in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan, including a posting to the United Kingdom. Baizakova is currently specializing in defense and security issues in Central Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Helicopter Turboshafts
    Helicopter Turboshafts Luke Stuyvenberg University of Colorado at Boulder Department of Aerospace Engineering The application of gas turbine engines in helicopters is discussed. The work- ings of turboshafts and the history of their use in helicopters is briefly described. Ideal cycle analyses of the Boeing 502-14 and of the General Electric T64 turboshaft engine are performed. I. Introduction to Turboshafts Turboshafts are an adaptation of gas turbine technology in which the principle output is shaft power from the expansion of hot gas through the turbine, rather than thrust from the exhaust of these gases. They have found a wide variety of applications ranging from air compression to auxiliary power generation to racing boat propulsion and more. This paper, however, will focus primarily on the application of turboshaft technology to providing main power for helicopters, to achieve extended vertical flight. II. Relationship to Turbojets As a variation of the gas turbine, turboshafts are very similar to turbojets. The operating principle is identical: atmospheric gases are ingested at the inlet, compressed, mixed with fuel and combusted, then expanded through a turbine which powers the compressor. There are two key diferences which separate turboshafts from turbojets, however. Figure 1. Basic Turboshaft Operation Note the absence of a mechanical connection between the HPT and LPT. An ideal turboshaft extracts with the HPT only the power necessary to turn the compressor, and with the LPT all remaining power from the expansion process. 1 of 10 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics A. Emphasis on Shaft Power Unlike turbojets, the primary purpose of which is to produce thrust from the expanded gases, turboshafts are intended to extract shaft horsepower (shp).
    [Show full text]
  • Over Thirty Years After the Wright Brothers
    ver thirty years after the Wright Brothers absolutely right in terms of a so-called “pure” helicop- attained powered, heavier-than-air, fixed-wing ter. However, the quest for speed in rotary-wing flight Oflight in the United States, Germany astounded drove designers to consider another option: the com- the world in 1936 with demonstrations of the vertical pound helicopter. flight capabilities of the side-by-side rotor Focke Fw 61, The definition of a “compound helicopter” is open to which eclipsed all previous attempts at controlled verti- debate (see sidebar). Although many contend that aug- cal flight. However, even its overall performance was mented forward propulsion is all that is necessary to modest, particularly with regards to forward speed. Even place a helicopter in the “compound” category, others after Igor Sikorsky perfected the now-classic configura- insist that it need only possess some form of augment- tion of a large single main rotor and a smaller anti- ed lift, or that it must have both. Focusing on what torque tail rotor a few years later, speed was still limited could be called “propulsive compounds,” the following in comparison to that of the helicopter’s fixed-wing pages provide a broad overview of the different helicop- brethren. Although Sikorsky’s basic design withstood ters that have been flown over the years with some sort the test of time and became the dominant helicopter of auxiliary propulsion unit: one or more propellers or configuration worldwide (approximately 95% today), jet engines. This survey also gives a brief look at the all helicopters currently in service suffer from one pri- ways in which different manufacturers have chosen to mary limitation: the inability to achieve forward speeds approach the problem of increased forward speed while much greater than 200 kt (230 mph).
    [Show full text]
  • Iran and the Gulf Military Balance - I
    IRAN AND THE GULF MILITARY BALANCE - I The Conventional and Asymmetric Dimensions FIFTH WORKING DRAFT By Anthony H. Cordesman and Alexander Wilner Revised July 11, 2012 Anthony H. Cordesman Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy [email protected] Cordesman/Wilner: Iran & The Gulf Military Balance, Rev 5 7/11/12 2 Acknowledgements This analysis was made possible by a grant from the Smith Richardson Foundation. It draws on the work of Dr. Abdullah Toukan and a series of reports on Iran by Adam Seitz, a Senior Research Associate and Instructor, Middle East Studies, Marine Corps University. 2 Cordesman/Wilner: Iran & The Gulf Military Balance, Rev 5 7/11/12 3 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 5 THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 6 Figure III.1: Summary Chronology of US-Iranian Military Competition: 2000-2011 ............................... 8 CURRENT PATTERNS IN THE STRUCTURE OF US AND IRANIAN MILITARY COMPETITION ........................................... 13 DIFFERING NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES .............................................................................................................. 17 US Perceptions .................................................................................................................................... 17 Iranian Perceptions............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bell 206B OH-58A Kiowa & Jetranger
    SOUTH AUSTRALIAN AVIATION MUSEUM SIGNIFICANT AVIATOR, AIRCRAFT & AVIATION EVENTS PROFILES _____________________________________________________________________ Bell 206B OH-58A Kiowa & JetRanger Toward the latter half of 1960 it was broadcast to numbers of aircraft manufacturers that the United States Army was in the market for a light observation helicopter (LOH). Through a proposal made initially by the US Navy on October 14th 1960, a competition was created that requested submission of designs conforming to the US Army's specifications. These called for a helicopter that could fulfil the following duties: casualty evacuation, close support, observation, photo-reconnaissance and transport. No single previous helicopter design had been able to meet all these operational requirements. The Army also made it clear that they were looking for a helicopter that had seating for four, a payload of 181kg and a cruising speed in the vicinity of 193km/h. Out of the 12 aircraft manufacturing companies interested in this project, two were contracted to build five prototypes and subject them to the US Army test and evaluation procedures. The two companies that submitted the most favourable designs were Bell, and Fairchild Hiller with Hughes Tool Co. From the test results the Hughes OH-6A (Cayuse) prototype was selected for production in May 1965. US Army Hughes OH-6A (Cayuse) prototype (Public Domain) Bell did not take this loss of contract easily, and almost immediately began to redesign its aircraft. Bell's initial design was listed as D-250 but later the prototype was designated as YOH-4. Bell was also made aware that to promote its modified product two areas would need to be addressed.
    [Show full text]
  • Helicopters 2015 Flightglobal’S Helicopter Data
    DATA INSIGHT HELICOPTERS 2015 FLIGHTGLOBAL’S HELICOPTER DATA This report features helicopter data capabilities with information extracted from Flightglobal’s Fleets Analyzer database. The report is divided in two sections: civil (page 3 to 7) and military (page 8 to 11). CONTENTS CIVil helicopters 3 Fleet share by region 3 Top 10 countries 4 Top 10 types 5 Q1&Q2 Deliveries 2014 vs 2015 6 Fleet growth & deliveries 7 MilitarY helicopters 8 Fleet share by region 8 Top 10 countries and types 9 Q1&Q2 Deliveries 2014 vs 2015 10 Fleet growth & deliveries 11 2 | Flightglobal CIVIL HELICOPTERS: FLEET SHARE BY REGION EUROPE NORTH AMERICA 27% 35% Turbine: 6,770 MIDDLE EAST Piston: 2,608 Turbine: 8,400 Piston: 3,654 2% ASIA-PACIFIC AFRICA Turbine: 509 Piston: 37 18% LATIN AMERICA 5% Turbine: 3,983 Turbine: 1,173 Piston: 2,102 13% Piston: 635 Turbine: 3,224 Piston: 1,192 WORLD total Turbine: 24,287 Piston: 10,266 Note: In-service fleet information based on operator’s location. An additional 1% of the fleet hasn’t been included in the above figures for helicopters based in unknown locations. SOURCE: Flightglobal’s Fleets Analyzer database (September 2015) 3 | Flightglobal CIVIL HELICOPTERS: TOP 10 COUNTRIES RANK COUNTRY TURBINE SHARE RANK COUNTRY PISTON SHARE 1 USA 6,667 27% 1 USA 3,084 30% 2 RUSSIA 1,881 8% 2 AUSTRALIA 1,084 11% 3 CANADA 1,733 7% 3 BRAZIL 578 6% 4 BRAZIL 1,234 5% 4 CANADA 570 6% 5 AUSTRALIA 778 3% 5 SOUTH AFRICA 566 6% 6 ITALY 674 3% 6 UK 413 4% 7 UK 663 3% 7 NEW ZEALAND 381 4% 8 JAPAN 617 3% 8 RUSSIA 339 3% 9 MEXICO 588 2% 9 FRANCE
    [Show full text]
  • Annex to ED Decision 2013/024/R 10/09/2013
    Annex to ED Decision 2013/024/R 10/09/2013 APPENDIX I AIRCRAFT TYPE RATINGS FOR PART-66 AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE LICENCE The following aircraft type ratings should be used to ensure a common standard throughout the Member States. The inclusion of an aircraft type in the licence does not indicate that the aircraft type has been granted a type certificate under the Basic Regulation and its Implementing Rules, this list is only intended for the maintenance purposes. In order to keep this list current and type ratings consistent, such information should be first passed on to the Agency via contact us in case a Member State needs to issue a type rating that is not included in this list. Notes on when the licences should be modified: When a modification is introduced by this Decision to an aircraft type rating or to an engine designation in the rating which affect licences already issued, the ratings on the AML licences may be modified at next renewal or when the licence is re-issued, unless there is an urgent reason to modify the licence. Notes on aircraft modified by STC: It is not the intention of this document to include all aircraft modified by STCs because a great number of STCs were approved before 2003 and are unknown to the Agency. When an aircraft has been modified by an STC for installation of another engine, the Part-66 type rating of this aircraft may change i.e. from Group 2 to Group 1. This is not reflected in this document. In case the applicant to a licence faces such a case, he/she or his/her competent authority can inform the Agency and a new type rating will be defined by the Agency.
    [Show full text]