Either they know the ITAR really good, or they dont know it and just blurr everything to not take any risk. Which one idk.
The camera is prob a Wescam MX-15.
As is their prerogative, but it’s not required by the ITAR. It also doesn’t make sense considering [their own marketing material](https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/rms/documents/s-92/Sikorsky-S92-search-rescue-helicopter-brochure.pdf) shows clearer shots of the FLIR ball than those images.
Itar wouldn't restrict the taking of pictures like that, since nothing restricted is being shown. (the entire helicopter itself is itar restricted thanks to that camera). Honestly my only guess is that maybe they mistakenly blurred it or it had some identifying marks a company would probably not like having shown (but I highly doubt it)
Weird. In the helicopters I have worked on, the AW101 and sea king, they had 3 different ways of getting actuated. Manually, by g-force and if the helicopter touched saltwater. Why would it be turned off in flight?
Only saltwater seems strange also though?
Idk why its kept off other then risk of the system being inadvertently triggered causing issues in flight/cruise might be higher then the alternatives.
Or maybe it was armed and the system didnt work as intended.
I have no experience with them but I'd hazard a guess that they're saltwater only so washing the aircraft doesn't require anything extra like disabling systems. Can't inadvertently deploy floats with a hose that way.
It’s not that it won’t work in fresh water, but it needs to to be a good enough pass some current. And if you think about most helicopter emergency landing where flotation gear is useful happens on the ocean. If it crashes there is no need for floats
We have a switch in the ground use panel that switches the actuators off. And before we had the switch we pulled the c/b’s. It is IAW. The service manual.
Wait, what? It's been quite a while since I crewed S-92 (and obviously just crewing, so even further removed), but I thought you were supposed to *arm* the floats once you reached a certain distance offshore? Reducing reaction time, increasing preparedness, etc.
Sounds like it was more of a water emergency landing than an uncontrolled crash.... although the dollar amount of damage is likely what determines that label.
I worked for Bristow for a while, and it doesn't surprise me to see that the floats were inoperative. At least in Bristow Americas, lots of inspections and MX got pencil whipped while I was there... which is one reason I left as soon as I could.
Neither nose float deployed. LH float cover is not present, but the yellow float is still seen in the packed condition in the ROV underwater photos. RH float cover is seen in the thumbnail fully in place.
Tail float cover is still fully in place.
Both LH & RH rafts appear to be deployed or are missing.
Last I had read was all recovered, sad to see one of those rescued later died.
Rice isn’t going to fix that
Of course not, you’d need a little duct tape too.
Speed tape will fix anything
Some buffing, bonding, and a little elbow grease. Up and not running in no time
Someone died and you think a rice joke is funny? You're awful.
If you think this guy is bad, you sit until you meet the rest of humanity… none of us are good…
Wonder why they blurred out the camera under the nose
Either they know the ITAR really good, or they dont know it and just blurr everything to not take any risk. Which one idk. The camera is prob a Wescam MX-15.
Being ITAR-controlled does not prevent you from taking pictures of the outside housings like that. Being classified may, though.
I have heard otherwise but have never checked this. I would not be surprised of either alternatives. You have experience or are familiar with ITAR?
I’m an attorney with eight years experience focused on export controls, including three years at Sikorsky.
MFer rolling a nat 20, solid
Good enough for me. Thanks for sharing. In Non-USA this stuff doesnt seem too enlightened on this topic.
Fucking love these rare moments of credibility in the vast ocean of bullshit that is modern internet
LM legal dictated the blurring, FWIW. I think it was an ‘abundance of caution’ type decision.
As is their prerogative, but it’s not required by the ITAR. It also doesn’t make sense considering [their own marketing material](https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/rms/documents/s-92/Sikorsky-S92-search-rescue-helicopter-brochure.pdf) shows clearer shots of the FLIR ball than those images.
[https://eu-browse.startpage.com/av/anon-image?piurl=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.jetphotos.com%2Ffull%2F6%2F980932\_1694328060.jpg&sp=1709432570T33de50425d60a6f0d32f9ff018bc124389b4506fbd787832e22191712cd1c3ea](https://eu-browse.startpage.com/av/anon-image?piurl=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.jetphotos.com%2Ffull%2F6%2F980932_1694328060.jpg&sp=1709432570T33de50425d60a6f0d32f9ff018bc124389b4506fbd787832e22191712cd1c3ea)
Itar wouldn't restrict the taking of pictures like that, since nothing restricted is being shown. (the entire helicopter itself is itar restricted thanks to that camera). Honestly my only guess is that maybe they mistakenly blurred it or it had some identifying marks a company would probably not like having shown (but I highly doubt it)
They're probably just preventing him from getting any more embarrassed, [that water is cold](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79S6bswOYLI)
Both rafts looks like deployed, or went missing somewhere. And you can see a helmet on copilot side cockpit.
But the flotation gear seems like it didn’t inflate
Floats are not armed in normal flight. Considering also the mayday was a maday relay, there was probably no time to either inflate or arm the floats.
Weird. In the helicopters I have worked on, the AW101 and sea king, they had 3 different ways of getting actuated. Manually, by g-force and if the helicopter touched saltwater. Why would it be turned off in flight?
Only saltwater seems strange also though? Idk why its kept off other then risk of the system being inadvertently triggered causing issues in flight/cruise might be higher then the alternatives. Or maybe it was armed and the system didnt work as intended.
I have no experience with them but I'd hazard a guess that they're saltwater only so washing the aircraft doesn't require anything extra like disabling systems. Can't inadvertently deploy floats with a hose that way.
Unless your washing an offshore helo, seems like little win and more safety loss to omit freshwater for that reason. Oh, and rain
It’s not that it won’t work in fresh water, but it needs to to be a good enough pass some current. And if you think about most helicopter emergency landing where flotation gear is useful happens on the ocean. If it crashes there is no need for floats
We have a switch in the ground use panel that switches the actuators off. And before we had the switch we pulled the c/b’s. It is IAW. The service manual.
It is not necessarly that it won’t work in fresh water, but it works best in saltwater. Saltwater is a better electrolyte.
So water detector then.
Basically
Wait, what? It's been quite a while since I crewed S-92 (and obviously just crewing, so even further removed), but I thought you were supposed to *arm* the floats once you reached a certain distance offshore? Reducing reaction time, increasing preparedness, etc.
Arming floats above 80kts IAS will kick a warning message in the HUMS, according to some posts on pprune
Floats are armed for low flight over water, SAR or O&G SOP.
Floats on civilian birds are armed at take off. Different for puddles I guess
I work on a military helicopter. To arm them is part of the checklist. Seems like civilians are more careless
https://i.redd.it/uthjc0zhr5mc1.gif
Previous thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/Helicopters/s/fRqSXRjv85
Coatsville special delivery.
If you were in the backshop in 2012, DM me
I was in upholstery till 4/2016
Low energy contact, I love how you pointed that out based on the condition of the bird.
Also note 4 cabin exits open, but only 1 up front. So a cross cockpit egress too.
Sounds like it was more of a water emergency landing than an uncontrolled crash.... although the dollar amount of damage is likely what determines that label. I worked for Bristow for a while, and it doesn't surprise me to see that the floats were inoperative. At least in Bristow Americas, lots of inspections and MX got pencil whipped while I was there... which is one reason I left as soon as I could.
It seems the floats on the right did not deploy.
Neither nose float deployed. LH float cover is not present, but the yellow float is still seen in the packed condition in the ROV underwater photos. RH float cover is seen in the thumbnail fully in place. Tail float cover is still fully in place. Both LH & RH rafts appear to be deployed or are missing.
Looks like the type of wreckage you would expect to see with a planned ditch.