Stick to the Point of the Thread
Walter,
Having, I hope, been one of the people trying to keep this thread on course I am certainly not going to reply in kind to your last post except to say:
The words I used in italics were all taken word for word from the reports I identified - the words from the Racal report were not in italics because I had added some explanatory comments. Nobody is trying to blind anyone with science except perhaps yourself - if you think these authortities have got it wrong feel free to write to them.
I have already told you by PM that a full check of the RTS we had at the time shows no evidence of the fit, or intention(at that time), to fit the AN ARS 6 CSAR system to the Chinook - I would not know if it was fitted later, but it does not look like it - at least up to the late 90s. To humour you I have now wasted a couple of hours that I should be spending with my grand-children to look at the latest documents we have received on the Interim and later full CA Release and associated Service Deviations. These go to AL 8 to Issue 1 of the CA RTS (dated Sep 1998) and SD 19/94 (dated Sep 1994) and they give no mention of your "special" fit equipment. As there is a full explanation of the AN-ARS 6 system on the web I assume it is not classified equipment.
If you want to go further I strongly recommend you take up ZH 785's suggestion.
JB