AW109 Trekker Operating Info
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AW109 Trekker Operating Info
Our company is considering a light twin helicopter. The 3 candidates are the Bell 429, EC135, and AW109. I've found plenty of info from operators of the Bell and Airbus, but not the Agusta. Can anybody offer info on real-world operating cost and pros/cons of the 109? We'd be getting the version with skids.
Our company is considering a light twin helicopter. The 3 candidates are the Bell 429, EC135, and AW109. I've found plenty of info from operators of the Bell and Airbus, but not the Agusta. Can anybody offer info on real-world operating cost and pros/cons of the 109? We'd be getting the version with skids.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all about the role your putting the aircraft to and given you are talking about Bell 429, the country you are planning to operate from. I've operated all 3 and each has advantages for various tasks. For example, the Bell 429's utility heavily depends on where you're going to register it and what you are using it for (private/commercial) due to the weight restrictions. The availability of spares/training also play a part.
I’m familiar with the 429’s weight limit. All helicopters should be able to carry the loads we need. I’m mostly looking for info on maintenance support info such as parts availability and field service support. I know that Bell and Airbus are good in our area. I just don’t know anyone that operates Agusta to get real-world info from.
I'm guessing the role is to haul people around which is pretty much what everybody does with a helicopter. I have about 200 hours in the 109S and found it to be a solid aircraft. Fast and powerful but the set up was not great for IFR. The company I worked for had a fleet of 9 and they were reliable with very little unscheduled maintenance. These aircraft had between 2,000 to 7,000 hours. Parts didn't seem to be an issue. I do not know much about the Trekker but a nearby operator was adding them to an existing fleet of 119's so they can't be too bad. I feel the expense of operating an Agusta is probably more folk lore than fact. They're ALL expensive. The 135 would be a good choice as well. Never flown the 429 but the reduced GW of 7,000 pounds (because of a certification screw up in the U.S.) could be an issue.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 415 Likes
on
218 Posts
I operated the 109S for fifteen years, including a good proportion of IFR. It’s a good aircraft for the corporate role, albeit with a relatively small cabin, but the autopilot is a bit basic and doesn’t cope well with turbulence. It’s a slippery beast and will easily go through Vne if you don’t keep a close eye on it in turbulence or when beginning a descent. The electronics are its Achilles heel, unreliable and very expensive to replace. These aircraft ideally need to be hangared to avoid false warning captions caused by water ingress (which is probably true for many other types), but my record was to see both engine chip lights, main gearbox chip light and tail gearbox chip light all on at once after an overnight stop outside in heavy rain.
And since your statement is generic about helicopters, let's add firefighting, SAR, special operations, mine hunting, attack, intelligence gathering, HHO, HEC etc etc So no, moving people is not what everyone does with a helicopter.
Anyway, back on topic...
My opinion of the Trekker having seen one (simplified A109S) and flown a reasonable amount in E/S models is that the A109 is great at going in straight lines VFR but the AP in the EC135 is superior on the FCDS version and in a whole other class on the Helionix 135. The A109 has some very serious cross coupling that the Sperry AP could barely overcome and there are no protections in it - it will quite happily take you into vortex ring should you set an inappropriate power - the EC135 protects from that in both FCDS and Helionix forms. Not sure about the 4 axis 109 system but the Helionix 135 AFCS is class leading. Pilot wise it would be a 135T3H. I find the 429 autopilot and interface to be too complex for achieving simple stuff (eg Altitude change is 6 button presses versus 2 on 135). The flight director setup on 429 is also completely pointless in my opinion.
The A109 does have a much more cramped cockpit than the EC135 or Bell 429.
Cabin wise, the Bell 429 is best with huge opening and full height cabin all the way back (not so for the EC135). Windows are bigger too. I prefer the flat floor for 135 and 429 cabin too. I prefer the sliding cabin on the 109 versus the hinged version.
In terms of servicability, our 109 were pretty reliable but as mentioned above seem to pickup snafu with water ingress. Never had a problem on either 429 or 135 with that. Leonardo spares supply was a bit patchy I recall and I know of one gearbox workshop that has about 10 gearboxes awaiting spares before going back into aircraft. But that wasn't really my side of the house.
In summary, as a pilot I'd want a Helionix 135 (with the 3100 kg AUM). Passenger, I would want a 429. Engineer probably the 135 or 429 but probably leaning to the 135 as the tail rotor on 429 causes problems due to the vibration (bonding leads, TGB mounting etc).
And I'd want it in matt metallic dark silver - see PH-WTG in the Netherlands.
Quote “And I'd want it in matt metallic dark silver - see PH-WTG in the Netherlands.”
I’m in total agreement with the colour…. Very cool! See pictures attached
https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10130086
I’m in total agreement with the colour…. Very cool! See pictures attached
https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10130086
I'd argue that's just one possible role for those three aircraft types. Off the top of my head: EMS, power line inspection, camera ship, load lifting. All have wildly different requirements.
And since your statement is generic about helicopters, let's add firefighting, SAR, special operations, mine hunting, attack, intelligence gathering, HHO, HEC etc etc So no, moving people is not what everyone does with a helicopter.
And since your statement is generic about helicopters, let's add firefighting, SAR, special operations, mine hunting, attack, intelligence gathering, HHO, HEC etc etc So no, moving people is not what everyone does with a helicopter.
Whatchu mean? You've probably never sat in a 109, but thanks for your input on what color you like best. The guy is going to haul people around for business and take his buddies to the hunting camp, etc. Get a grip on reality.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With small private ops, your specific location will have more affect on what level of mx field support you will enjoy. For real-world info, my suggestion would be to determine what you think your average yearly aircraft usage will be, then visit your local maintenance providers to see what exactly they can offer for all 3 models as experience levels are also location dependent. Unfortunately, not all service centers are created equal especially with the 3 models you listed. Good luck.
We have in-house maintenance that will get trained on whatever helicopter we get. For major stuff, we'll probably take it to an MRO in Dallas or Houston. Thanks for the idea of visiting with MRO. I'll have our maintenance manager talk to his contacts.
Perhaps it’s you that needs to get a grip on reality?
As for questioning what I have sat in….probably a lot more than you including a few 109’s
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lr pilot
The most important thing here is what the purpose and priorities are for your company’s decision makers. I’m guessing that the purpose is for VIP transport, and if this is so best discuss the pros and cons with those that pay and ride! I comment below as someone with mainly 109 experience - around 2000 hrs of it.
What sort of distances are typically flown? If it’s short, say up to 50 nm hops, speed doesn’t matter too much, but if it’s mainly longer distances then it will become more important. And here the winner will be the 109, closely followed by the 429, then well back the 135. And taking of speed, why do you spec skids and not wheels? The 109 is a solid 155kt cruise gear up, and if your pax are flying because getting places quickly is important, they’ll appreciate that. The gear is very reliable and as HEMS use shows, can land on most surfaces.
In terms of pax comfort the 109 is certainly well ahead of the 135, though the 429’s bigger cabin may give that the edge here, plus I think it may be a bit smoother than the 109.
Fuel consumption should be an important factor to consider, particularly in today’s world. The bulk of the 429 handicaps it here, burning around 270kg/hr compared with the 109 230kg/hr. Don’t know the 135 figures, but I’d guess in terms of mpg it’s similar to the 109.
Regarding other factors, the 109 autopilot is fine for VFR and IFR, though it’s poor in turbulent weather - if you care about your pax you’re best to hand fly the worst. But that’s not the end of the world - if it’s not too often.
Agree all comments on the 109 not liking to be left out in the rain - never quite achieved Shy’s Christmas tree, but spurious chip lights are common until the heat and air has dried things out. Fortunately any genuine problems with engines or main or T/R transmissions are very rare…..
Overall reliability of the 109 is very good - needs regular maintenance but unscheduled stuff not too frequent. As to relative maintenance costs, I can’t comment, but suspect there’s not a lot between them.
In the UK where helicopter use is pretty extensive, the 109 totally dominates the charter market, with very few 429s and 135s around. Which is probably the bottom line - at least in our environment.
The most important thing here is what the purpose and priorities are for your company’s decision makers. I’m guessing that the purpose is for VIP transport, and if this is so best discuss the pros and cons with those that pay and ride! I comment below as someone with mainly 109 experience - around 2000 hrs of it.
What sort of distances are typically flown? If it’s short, say up to 50 nm hops, speed doesn’t matter too much, but if it’s mainly longer distances then it will become more important. And here the winner will be the 109, closely followed by the 429, then well back the 135. And taking of speed, why do you spec skids and not wheels? The 109 is a solid 155kt cruise gear up, and if your pax are flying because getting places quickly is important, they’ll appreciate that. The gear is very reliable and as HEMS use shows, can land on most surfaces.
In terms of pax comfort the 109 is certainly well ahead of the 135, though the 429’s bigger cabin may give that the edge here, plus I think it may be a bit smoother than the 109.
Fuel consumption should be an important factor to consider, particularly in today’s world. The bulk of the 429 handicaps it here, burning around 270kg/hr compared with the 109 230kg/hr. Don’t know the 135 figures, but I’d guess in terms of mpg it’s similar to the 109.
Regarding other factors, the 109 autopilot is fine for VFR and IFR, though it’s poor in turbulent weather - if you care about your pax you’re best to hand fly the worst. But that’s not the end of the world - if it’s not too often.
Agree all comments on the 109 not liking to be left out in the rain - never quite achieved Shy’s Christmas tree, but spurious chip lights are common until the heat and air has dried things out. Fortunately any genuine problems with engines or main or T/R transmissions are very rare…..
Overall reliability of the 109 is very good - needs regular maintenance but unscheduled stuff not too frequent. As to relative maintenance costs, I can’t comment, but suspect there’s not a lot between them.
In the UK where helicopter use is pretty extensive, the 109 totally dominates the charter market, with very few 429s and 135s around. Which is probably the bottom line - at least in our environment.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lr pilot
The most important thing here is what the purpose and priorities are for your company’s decision makers. I’m guessing that the purpose is for VIP transport, and if this is so best discuss the pros and cons with those that pay and ride! I comment below as someone with mainly 109 experience - around 2000 hrs of it.
What sort of distances are typically flown? If it’s short, say up to 50 nm hops, speed doesn’t matter too much, but if it’s mainly longer distances then it will become more important. And here the winner will be the 109, closely followed by the 429, then well back the 135. And taking of speed, why do you spec skids and not wheels? The 109 is a solid 155kt cruise gear up, and if your pax are flying because getting places quickly is important, they’ll appreciate that. The gear is very reliable and as HEMS use shows, can land on most surfaces.
In terms of pax comfort the 109 is certainly well ahead of the 135, though the 429’s bigger cabin may give that the edge here, plus I think it may be a bit smoother than the 109.
Fuel consumption should be an important factor to consider, particularly in today’s world. The bulk of the 429 handicaps it here, burning around 270kg/hr compared with the 109 230kg/hr. Don’t know the 135 figures, but I’d guess in terms of mpg it’s similar to the 109.
Regarding other factors, the 109 autopilot is fine for VFR and IFR, though it’s poor in turbulent weather - if you care about your pax you’re best to hand fly the worst. But that’s not the end of the world - if it’s not too often.
Agree all comments on the 109 not liking to be left out in the rain - never quite achieved Shy’s Christmas tree, but spurious chip lights are common until the heat and air has dried things out. Fortunately any genuine problems with engines or main or T/R transmissions are very rare…..
Overall reliability of the 109 is very good - needs regular maintenance but unscheduled stuff not too frequent. As to relative maintenance costs, I can’t comment, but suspect there’s not a lot between them.
In the UK where helicopter use is pretty extensive, the 109 totally dominates the charter market, with very few 429s and 135s around. Which is probably the bottom line - at least in our environment.
The most important thing here is what the purpose and priorities are for your company’s decision makers. I’m guessing that the purpose is for VIP transport, and if this is so best discuss the pros and cons with those that pay and ride! I comment below as someone with mainly 109 experience - around 2000 hrs of it.
What sort of distances are typically flown? If it’s short, say up to 50 nm hops, speed doesn’t matter too much, but if it’s mainly longer distances then it will become more important. And here the winner will be the 109, closely followed by the 429, then well back the 135. And taking of speed, why do you spec skids and not wheels? The 109 is a solid 155kt cruise gear up, and if your pax are flying because getting places quickly is important, they’ll appreciate that. The gear is very reliable and as HEMS use shows, can land on most surfaces.
In terms of pax comfort the 109 is certainly well ahead of the 135, though the 429’s bigger cabin may give that the edge here, plus I think it may be a bit smoother than the 109.
Fuel consumption should be an important factor to consider, particularly in today’s world. The bulk of the 429 handicaps it here, burning around 270kg/hr compared with the 109 230kg/hr. Don’t know the 135 figures, but I’d guess in terms of mpg it’s similar to the 109.
Regarding other factors, the 109 autopilot is fine for VFR and IFR, though it’s poor in turbulent weather - if you care about your pax you’re best to hand fly the worst. But that’s not the end of the world - if it’s not too often.
Agree all comments on the 109 not liking to be left out in the rain - never quite achieved Shy’s Christmas tree, but spurious chip lights are common until the heat and air has dried things out. Fortunately any genuine problems with engines or main or T/R transmissions are very rare…..
Overall reliability of the 109 is very good - needs regular maintenance but unscheduled stuff not too frequent. As to relative maintenance costs, I can’t comment, but suspect there’s not a lot between them.
In the UK where helicopter use is pretty extensive, the 109 totally dominates the charter market, with very few 429s and 135s around. Which is probably the bottom line - at least in our environment.
OP the 135 is dog****. Cross it off your list. Horrible helicopter in my opinion. Especially compared to what you are considering.
According to Bell Helicopter, we operate the 2nd highest total flight time 429 in the world. If you have any questions about the airframe, feel free to PM me.
Last edited by Rotorhead84; 20th Dec 2022 at 12:47.
The following 2 users liked this post by admikar:
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: USA
Age: 39
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've only ever met or talked with a small handful of people who actually enjoyed flying the POS. Most guys aren't that impressed with it in my experience.
I'm glad you like it. They sure sell a lot of them.