Bog Standard Chinook

[CoffmanStarter]

Looks like a complex programme of works ?

A program to convert the fleet to a single standard is making significant progress; the first standardized aircraft became operational in Afghanistan at the beginning of the year. The £290 million ($451 million) Project Julius program is geared to modernize and, more crucially, standardize the RAF's current fleet of 46 Chinooks.

http://www.aviationweek.com/media/images/fullsize/Defense/Helos/RAFCH-47-Boeing.jpg

Full story here ...

Aviation Week (http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_02_25_2013_p31-548398.xml)

Coff.

[JFZ90]

single standard with mk4,5 and 6 variants

looks like mk 5 is basically mk 4 with bigger sponson tanks?

and a mk6 is a mk4 with additional digital fcs modes? or does a mk6 have the bigger tanks too?

(i appreciate that if the avionics are all basically the same this is the biggest most relevant step toward total standardisation)

[minigundiplomat]

Mk2/2A - Mk4

Mk3R - Mk5

Mk6 is the new purchase F-Models with Digital AFCS as JFZ states.

[SASless]

I have always found it odd....that the RAF cannot coordinate the acquisition of the Chinooks and have had so much trouble with that program.

How many years did the one batch set in a hangar waiting for certification and the Mull Crash aircraft was being flown without a proper certification.

Did anyone go to Jail as a result of that mis-management?

[Chugalug2]

SASless:-
Did anyone go to Jail as a result of that mis-management?
No, although a couple of relatively junior SO's were named in the Haddon-Cave Report to take the rap for similar mess ups with Nimrod. Not sure that mismanagement adequately covers the subverting of the Airworthiness Regulations and Air Accident Investigation procedures anyway. The issuing of illegal orders used to be contrary to Military Law, but seems now to be recognised as consistent with the exigencies of the Service...

[nice castle]

To the OP, 'complex' is not the word!

[Two's in]

Only the MoD can make then apparent end (don't hold your breath) to 33 years of systemic negligence and configuration mismanagement seem like an "achievement". Hopefully someone will get a gong for this.

[nice castle]

End? We're just about to get going mate. Hold onto your hats...

[Training Risky]

I'll never forget my first sortie on the OCF about 11 years ago. After all I had read about the Mull incident I was a bit apprehensive about flying what looked to me like a big bag bag of spanners. As I pulled the first engine condition lever (throttle) back to idle (on the ground I hasten to add) the engine failed to respond and error messages became abundant on the FADEC panel. The only way to shut down was to pull the fire handles..."great start" I thought.:rolleyes:

[tucumseh]

Did anyone go to Jail as a result of that mis-management?

The Public Accounts Committee, when describing it as the "gold standard cock-up" asked MoD to name the person with "management oversight" of Chinook HC Mk3.

MoD lied, saying this was impossible. A swift glance at the DPA (at the time) staff list told you it was precisely the same 2 Star who had the same responsibility for Nimrod RMPA/2000/MRA4. His name, and the evidence he had been forewarned about the reason for the failure of both programmes years in advance, was passed to PAC. They did nothing, which tells a story.

So, it's a toss up who deserves to spend longer in gaol!

[MG]

That makes a change, a Chinook thread that degenerates into another diatribe on the Mull of Kintyre and/or Mk3 history.

[chinook240]

MG, agreed, although not new news, it's good news. It's a shame the thread descends to the bottom as usual.:ugh:

[kintyred]

Without question the finest transport helicopter ever designed. The Mk 3 is based on the US SOE version with larger external fuel tank to allow greater volume in the cabin (but not weight). To compensate for the reduced hover performance, the US version is fitted with a refuelling probe. (Heilcopters are power hungry in the hover but don't need as much horsepower in the cruise). As a result of the design it has a lower lifting capacity than the Mk 2 it will never be as capable as the latter so talk of harmonising the fleet is just pie in the sky. And let's not even start talking about the different handling characteristics!

[Just This Once...]

To compensate for the reduced hover performance, the US version is fitted with a refuelling probe.

Errr, what?

[Evalu8ter]

The Mk3 is slightly less capable in the hover due to the higher wetted area caused by the big tanks and the slightly increased AUM. The Mk3, of course, came with the fittings for a probe, modified fuel system, fuel dump and IFR lights etc. Much, but not all, of this kit has been removed during the Mk3 Reversion programme. It is, however, IMHO a more stable hover platform.

The Mk3s also originally left Ridley Park with an analogue cockpit before flying to Louisiana for the glass cockpit. Now they are back in an analogue configuration they'll have all had 3 cockpits by 100hrs with a 4th to come....

Handling qualities? Hmm.....

[kintyred]

Check the heading hold next time you're in the hover!!! And don't forget the increased fuel minima for the mk 3 reducing the payload. OK only 260kg but that's an extra couple of troops.