Sea King (CR)

[althenick]

Taken from the Navy News today

Sea Kinig (CR) (http://www.navynews.co.uk/articles/2004/0408/0004081801.asp#)

Reads...
The first of a new version of the venerable Sea King has been handed over to the Joint Helicopter Command.

Three of the Mk 6 Commando Role (CR) aircraft were delivered to help plug a gap in the Navy’s Operational Capability while the Junglie fleet – the Mk 4 Commando Helicopters – underwent an extensive avionics upgrade over a four-year period.

The programme was instigated in early 2002, aiming to modify five redundant Sea King HAS Mk 6 anti-submarine warfare aircraft to take on a utility/troop carrying role.

Work included removal of sonar dipping gear and winch, radar, electronic countermeasures and weapons systems in the most complex project undertaken by MASU, which converted one of the aircraft.

Serco Aerospace and DARA Fleetlands converted two each.

The handover of the first machines was marked by the presentation of a commemorative cartoon to Brig Caplin, Deputy Commander of the JHC, by Capt Powell of the Sea King Integrated Project Team.

I have a question about this conversion for any of you Technocrats out there.

Why have they retained the Float-type Undercarrige bay? would the removal of this have been more favorable wrt all up wieght? also does anyone know if the Retraction system still works on these A/C?? (Is JunglyAEO out there?)

Many Thanks


Al

[Navaleye]

I think they nabbed another couple of airframes to replace the SKWs lost in Telic.

[[email protected]]

And they'll still need 6 aircraft to do the job of one Chinook and won't have any hot and high capability.

[Flypro]

althenick,

The original undercarriage was kept to reduce conversion costs I suspect and it is now locked down - though I suppose it could always be reactivated ( I can't think why anyone would wish to do that).

Don't you get a little tired of the pro-Chinook brigade always trying to bash probably the most versatile U.K. military helicopter of all time?. Sour grapes I suspect:zzz:

[AllTrimDoubt]

Let me see now...that'll be the SK, modded and back in productive service where 'tis needed, whilst the almighty Chinook was procured and...

[Flypro]

........We had better not talk about the money wasted on that other Helo so far:{ - for what?

[jockspice]

althenick

The gear is indeed locked down as if there was another lever in the cockpit, we'd end up playing with it and break it.:D

Flypro

No one can do anything or post anything on the board about SH without someone piping up about how much better it could be done by the Chinook. It does get very tiring, especially when it is b0ll0cks.:zzz:

[goferthehammer]

As usual you can bet one of the factors for retention was cost, plus equipment stowage, and the gear would be locked down as the retraction control was removed for human factors purposes -ie reverting to type behaviour. Remember the Mk4 doesn't have retractable undercarriage.

[tucumseh]

Ha!

After 35 years, once again the mighty Sea King proves itself. Form is temporary, class is permanent. Perhaps they chose this platform on airworthiness grounds, not just economics!!

Does the conversion extend to cockpit layout and NVG'ing? May be important if they are to operate within a mixed 4/6 fleet. The removal of the listed avionics is simple - not too far removed from the conversion to HU5s. The complex part would be providing the same capability as the HC4.

Good job MASU.

[Hueymeister]

So, how much longer must the venerable old Sea King soldier on in the Junglie guise? What's on the horizon for FASH/SABR or whatever we're calling it this week?

[Shackman]

I'm sure their lordships will be burning the midnight oil to provide us with the best possible options for the future - that's when they can talk to the South American's so as to buy back some 'slightly used' Wessex.

(Although I do hear there are some Whirlwinds around still as well).

Back to the Future

[Hueymeister]

Jock me old, we both know that if the RN bought Chinooks and played with them a la Jungly ethos then they would be the Bees Knees. Problem is the Crabs are far more tied to over-restrictive rules, despite having boys who are equally 'can do' as you boys are..I should know I've worked for both of ya. Whilst Crab bashing can cerainly be fun, it's often too close to the bone for the Crabs it's directed at and after a while becomes a tad monotonous. Semper Instans..or whatever.

HM

[jockspice]

Huey, you old bu993r,

If I may narrow the bracket slightly, I have nothing against those with the can-do attitude, and indeed have just had a fab (all things relative for being at sea, of course!) 2 months with the mix of 18 and 27 on the whistling pig that is the "O" boat, who were more can-do than a can-do thing! Additionally, with the great (again, all things relative!) tri-service rule book we now have, those that can do, do do on a more regular basis, which I am all for. However, when it comes to these forums, it's so often the same old crowd who bleat on that nothing can be as good as having 2 main rotors, with often the minimal info on what others are capable of. As for bashing, it is fun but I only do it in defence - if my banter is too close to the bone, then apply for thicker skin.

By the way, are you ever coming back to the UK? It would be good to see you! :ok:

[Hueymeister]

Here, Here...couldn't agree more....glad to see Joint Happiness Command has a joint Rule Book..has it got more restrictive for you chaps, or easier for the Crabs/Pongoes......?

Re. a return......I'd be happy to stay where I am....Happy as A Schwein in der Scheiße!!!!!!!!! But alas must return next year....probably to the all new Plastic Pig, but watch this space.

[snafu]

It's nice to see the Crabs trotting out the same old war-cries like 'hot and high' and bleating about lift capacity. The problem with the Chinook is that it takes so bl**dy long for the crew to get the troops on board and stow their kit that you could normally have done the job with a King making a couple of runs!!

Ahhh.....inter-aircraft rivalry, don't you just love it!! :ok:

tecumseh - the SK6CR does have an NVG compatible cockpit, but it's been done like the old-style SK4 cockpit with the strip lights and filters. As jockspice mentioned, the undercarriages are locked down, mainly because you'd never get a Jungly to remember to lower it!

[[email protected]]

Oh dear Navy types - did I hit a raw nerve? I know you won't admit it but the Sea King is not a great SH helicopter no matter how much you pretend. It doesn't carry enough, it's not fast enough and the airframes are all shagged - not to mention its pathetic hot and high performance - the reason the airframe is kept simple (eg no retractable gear) is to save weight. One Chinook will deliver as many blokes as a whole wave of SKs - which would you rather have supporting your assault if you were infantry?
Go and fly one and then slag it off.

[Navaleye]

But it can't be in 6 places at once and if it gets shot down then a large chunk of your airlift capability goes with it. 5 Sea Kings haul a lot more then a mangled or unserviceable Chinook.

[[email protected]]

But at least it can get to the places where it might get shot down, and with a useful load on board - what use is an SH helicopter that can't fly because it is too hot?

[Navaleye]

The Indians use SKs, as do the Aussies and I'm sure many other users from warmer climates. I have not heard any great rush to replace them over the last 20 years or read stories about them falling out of the skies when the sun shines.

Let me think of another type which has "hot weather problems" ah yes, the Sea Harrier - and the Indians use that quite happily too.

Gentlemen, I think you are starting to believe your own propaganda.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

This might be of interest (http://navynews.co.uk/articles/2003/0309/0003092901.asp)

And this as well (http://navynews.co.uk/articles/2004/0402/0004022002.asp)

[[email protected]]

So - did the Chinooks stop flying when the OAT went past 45deg? NO!

Did the Chinook engineers have to do 4 MRGB changes? NO!

JunglyAEO you are absolutely right - we have needed a Sea King/Puma replacement for years and the SH Merlin is most definitely not it; but are the MOD ever going to address the lack of helicopter lift capability or are they still going to blah on about BLUH (a Lynx by any other name) or SABR (a Merlin or my c*cks a kipper)?

[InTgreen]

It is nice to see them Navy guys (bless 'em) sticking up for the 'King, it has proved a very valuable and useful platform.... done much mare than it was ever designed for... However, the one unarguable fact is that the poor old girl needs to be put out to pasture soon, or else have a very extensive update package. The reliability is not what it once was, and the change in the FRC's so as circuit breakers can now no longer be reset, for fear of it causing a fire, are, quite frankly, shocking.

That being said, I love the cab!!! :ok:

[tucumseh]

[email protected]

Hi. I'd argue that SK airframes are not all "shagged". Their (conservative) design life equates to over 30 flying years and there have been many production runs from the late 60s (Mk1s) to the 90s (RAF Mk 3a and RN Mk6). True, some are nearing an honourable retirement, but very many have another 15-20 years left. Some of the "new" AEWs are 1st production run Mk1s and they will easily last until the replacement arrives with the new carriers. The RAF's Mk3/3As much longer.

Also true is that the Mk4 can't carry a full load, but that is largely down to it being fully equipped with a self protection suite which, historically, makes it perhaps the best protected aircraft in service. As for high/hot/dry, the rest seem to manage for aircraft bought to hover in the dip.

Criticisms? MGB drip tray access in ASW variants. Station 490. Aft avionics bay cooling/airflow convention. (Why can the Indians get it right and we don't? But the corona discharge used to make it entertaining). Er, that's about it.

This is not to say the Chinook doesn't have merits. It was bought to fulfil a specific role, which it does admirably. However, that their expansive roles now overlap demonstrates the sheer versatility of the SK.

All the best

[AdrianShaftsworthy]

Slightly offthread I know but do you SH crabs still play the 'crew duty hours' card or do you now work as hard as the Junglies and stick around until the jobs done?!
Memories of Otterburn years ago when Chinooks all bu****ed off to the pub and left the Junglies to finish off the job! On the other hand........!:hmm:

[airborne_artist]

Weren't some or all of the first tranche of Junglie SKs acquired when HMG fell out with the country had ordered them (was it Egypt?), and so the Navy was told to buy them to keep Westland sweet.

Having been both a grunt and a driver, airframe I have to say that I don't give a t*ss whether it has one beater or two, and is dark blue or light blue, so long as it arrives at the correct RV on time. FAA 100% reliable, in my experience.

Are the Chinooks still equipped for static line parachuting? Did three jumps in 90 minutes one morning at Everleigh!

[[email protected]]

tucumseh - I fly the 'newest' Sea Kings - the Mk 3A and whilst the airframes are not old in age terms (95/96), they are still the same 50s/60s design and technology beset with the same problems of fatigue (stn 290 still cracks like a bast*rd), vibration, low vmax, water leaking, horrendously hot cockpits etc.etc. Our Mk 3s are very tired and, coupled with the sad old avionics fit, really isn't an aircraft that should be asked to do what it does and go where it goes. The latest plan is to fly them until 2015 when they will doubtless be in the same sorry state that the Wessex was when we finally took it out of service 20 years too late.
The SK needs a lot of maintenance man hours to keep it going (witness 4 mrgb changes in Iraq) and it's only going to get worse until someone gets a grip and procures something better (and I don't mean waiting for Westlands to produce something that isn't fit for the job but props them up for another few years)

[tucumseh]

[email protected]

Yes, I agree with all you say - I just offer a different perspective which is perhaps hidden from guys at the sharp end.

The Mk3A programme was beset with cuts from day one. You ended up with a third of the original quantity. The RAF insisted on providing the project manager so that their best interests were represented. He, and others, fought long and hard for a decent avionics fit (and a concurrent upgrade to the Mk3s) but were knocked back. The radar is the best example. It's touted as modern, but you kept the old 60's Tx/Rx and scanner (even though the RN offered surplus SK6 versions which would have given longer range and halved the blind arc, not to mention reduced support costs because of commonality and extant facilities/spares/TE) and the "new" processor / display dates from the early 80s. At first, the company didn't want to sell it in this form as it was a backward step. You ended up with a hybrid which is neither here nor there.

Many of the ills you discuss are not the fault of the Sea King (or Westlands who, contrary to popular opinion, are the dogs b***ocks - at least in the Sea King, Puma, Gazelle directorate). Industry only delivers what the MoD signs a contract for. Many are support issues, funding and general politics. It remains a fine piece of engineering. Ideally it shouldn't be asked to do what it does but, importantly, it can, safely. And that allows scarce funds to be allocated elsewhere (Chinook Mk3, Nimrod, Eurofighter and other fine examples of non-Westlands products). Take care.

[[email protected]]

Some interesting background tucumseh, thanks for that - whoever let the beancounters force a 'fleet within a fleet' that we have with the Mk3 and 3A should have been shot. We are still banging our heads against a brick wall regarding fleet commonality - they are trying to fit the FLIR/MSS turret to the Mk3 and coming up against the outdated avionics - at least the Mk3 Radops will be able to throw away their acetate overlays once they get the new TR and screens. I gather the reason that the Mk 3 wasn't fitted with the SN500 autopilot to replace the cr*p Mk31 is because the RN pulled out of modifiying their ac and we lost the upgrade on cost grounds.
I am sure that someone will defend the Mk 31 but all I will say to them is fly the Mk3A and then decide for yourself.

[NURSE]

the SK HC4 did sterling work in the Balkans long before the Merlin deployed and in Basrah last year it was SK and chinooks that made up the support hele force. Many of my mates from both reg army and UDR who patroled the Northern Ireland Border much prefered the FAA to be moving them than the RAF who wouldn't turn up in rain mist etc but the Navy seldom let them down.Speaks volumes that. So why on earth did they give support helecopter force to the RAF to command it should have been either the Army or the Navy.
Maybe some of SK airframes are shagged despite being younger than many of the Pumas by the fact they have done more operational flying in worse conditions than the Puma?
As to replacement of SK 4/6 if the project management of the navalised chinook is as bad as the HC3 chinook god help the commando hele support. Maybe it should be a NAVAL project. And I would guess more merlins will have to be procured to replace SK/Puma despite the griping of the RAF.

[Hydraulic Palm Tree]

So why on earth did they give support helecopter force to the RAF to command it should have been either the Army or the Navy

It is - It's called the JHC which comes under LAND which when I last looked was commnaded by an Army 4*. At least the RAF helo force does not have a petty minded, self justifying, archaic and unjoint HQ like the AAC and less so the FAA!

That's right - It doesn't have one at all!

HPT

[ShyTorque]

Hi Nurse,

"Maybe some of SK airframes are shagged despite being younger than many of the Pumas by the fact they have done more operational flying in worse conditions than the Puma?"

Perhaps you could explain how more operational flying in worse conditions affects the state of a helicopter, especially if you are a helicopter engineer? Thanks.

Or is your statement just a poorly camouflaged attempt at criticism based on what someone else told you?

[pr00ne]

Hydraulic Palm Tree


Er, so what's the Support Helicopter Force Headquarters (SHFHQ) at RAF Benson then if it's not a headquarters?

It even has a detachment at Aldergrove.

[[email protected]]

NURSE - the RAF is frequently harangued for not turning up in poor wx - that is because our lords and masters have set wx limits below which we are not supposed to fly. It is v frustrating at times, especially when a Navy cab (no min wx limits) turns up and gets on with it, something we could do but are not allowed to. However from a Flight Safety perspective, is it worth putting the ac and crew at risk just to get a stick of troops in from the rain?
The main criticism you can make of the RAF is that we have far too many layers of supervision/management with associated rule books and limitations but, when we go joint we do actually go joint rather than pretend like the AAC (what has jointery done for RAF Flight Safety?) who insist on controlling the joint HQ and still retain all their own hierarchy.

[tucumseh]

Hi ShyTorque & Nurse

For what it’s worth, I could offer a holistic view.

All support funding in the MoD is based on number of aircraft, their flying rate, where they fly (e.g. temperate climate), attrition rate and pipeline time to effect any given repair. These figures/rates are dictated at God +1 level, and inform support contract and funding requirements. All things being equal, this is simple for consumables and components such as engines and rotor heads, which are removed for maintenance before they fail. (You hope).

Things are seldom equal and in recent years it seems this notional flying rate and conditions have been exceeded in almost every respect. The basis of Nurse’s comment I think. Funding runs out early. Pressure immediately falls on repairers – engineering concessions will be sought to get something out the door which, although serviceable, may have a more limited life. Concessions or Production Permits need to be approved by a technical bod in the MoD – something they have been getting rid of for years. (Most wouldn’t know the difference). At squadron level, all AEOs will recognise this pressure. Apparent reliability reduces as the maintenance interval reduces. Routine spares reprovisioning slows down. Poor availability is confused for unreliability. Companies and their products, often unjustifiably, get a bad name.

It is more difficult for avionics as, generally, they are allowed to fail before removal, mitigated by flex-ops. Their support is based (wrongly) on historical failure rate. Another story which, if told, explains why you are often lacking kit which is lying u/s on a shelf somewhere.

A contractor will be told, often years in advance, that he should expect x units to repair or overhaul in a given year. He gears his capacity, including staff, their training and buying long lead spares, to that requirement. Increase the flying rate or change to a more hostile environment, and self evidently he gets more to repair, but doesn’t have the staff or spares. So the pipeline time goes from, say 3 months, to 12 months (often more) as it now includes production lead time of extra spares. The pressure intensifies to "make do" to permit flying, which degrades quality. Perhaps an AEO will be under pressure to effect depth C repairs which he cannot possibly verify. The natural outcome of the “just in time” policy, which is simply not applicable to a variable scenario such as that faced by the services. Importantly, much of the above is based on peace time ops. Other ops exacerbate the problem, again perhaps what Nurse is saying?

In my opinion, the balance of probability is that the additional work coupled with the above knock-on effects, do have an adverse effect on the SK (or any aircraft), especially the airframe, engines and transmission components. This is especially true of the AEW and SK4 which routinely fly heavy. Less obviously, the centre of gravity is vital to stress loading (and handling). Often it is at the aft limit, sometimes beyond. You wouldn’t believe the money the MoD HAVE to spend on this and load shedding conventions every time something changes in the a/c. (Westlands can’t find enough stress engineers for love nor money). Kit routinely operates outside its design envelope which automatically means industry is absolved of any liability for failure. This doesn’t mean the kit’s crap or wrongly specified. More often it means that squeezing an extra 10% reliability or functionality would have doubled the length of the programme and trebled the cost. Especially if the kit is commercial off-the-shelf. That the MoD do change specs and cut budgets in mid-stream explains most programme delays, which are seldom the fault of their project managers or industry. They don’t state the requirement. Almost all problems you read about are predictable and predicted.

Sorry to rabbit, but its interesting reading views from the other side. I see lots of comment on how b####y awful industry is, but there’s always another side. File this away in case you're unlucky enough to become a Requirements Manager!!

[NURSE]

NI is an operational enviroment and if the RAF can't sort it's rules out for an operational theatre why has it been given a job it is obviously incapable of doing?
I have heard many of my friends moaning about having to walk out of patrols along the border because of the RAF's refusal to fly in inclement weather but navy or AAC have been able to collect in similar conditions. It in their opinion show's the RAF in a very poor light.

[[email protected]]

NURSE - back in the 80's when it was a real operational environment and shootings, mortar attacks, bombs were daily and commonplace occurences, we operated to the same rules and got the job done very well. If there was someone lying bleeding then the wx limits went out the window but for routine tasking/resupply we stopped flying at 1km and 100'. On one or 2 occasions I went the extra distance and launched in poor wx to recover troops who had been out all day/night and often discovered (especially with the UDR) that they had been sheltering in a barn instaed of patrolling. Some of the stunts I have heard of carried out by RN and AAC crews beggar belief and highlight very poor captaincy and a willingness to risk everything for no reason - this is a really good way to do the enemy's job for him.

If they didn't want to walk they shouldn't have joined the infantry!

[NURSE]

interesting cause most of my mates were UDR and unless the barn was an o.p. I never heard any mention of them doing that i'm not saying it didn't happen. But I certainly heard of more than one occasion were a foot patrol had been out in difficult weather in difficult terrain and were left in the lurch by the RAF. Yep maybe you did bend the rules when there were casualties but you didn't always show up when you said you were going to. It left troops on the ground when they shouldn't have been and in some cases added risks to others tha didn't have to be taken ie puttin out CPV's to pick them up. Or them having to tab fairly long distances in bandit country therefor placing them at more risk.
I won't even mention the numerous stories of them rapidly having to move back across the border cause some aircrew can't read maps.

[jockspice]

Some of the stunts I have heard of carried out by RN and AAC crews beggar belief and highlight very poor captaincy and a willingness to risk everything for no reason - this is a really good way to do the enemy's job for him.

Nice to see that you are defending your own service by calling the rest of us cowboys by what you have heard . Feel free to stop by Yeovilton or Wallop to tell us what we are doing wrong and how the crabs are so squeaky in the Province.
I will leave it there, as should you.:mad:

(edited by jockspice because of severe anger making comments inappropriate)

[[email protected]]

NURSE - the UDR were easily the least professional troops I have ever worked with, only beaten by the part time UDR. After a day's hard patrolling in heavy persistent rain it was always amazing that the pick-up grid wasn't very far from the drop off one and that the troops were all bone-dry. As for landing at the wrong grid - I won't say it hasn't happened to me or others but more frequently it is the chalk commander who can't accept that he is in the wrong place either because he plotted the wrong grid or just can't map read.
Jockspice I'm not calling all the AAC or FAA cowboys - just those who think TANS letdowns to Crossmaglen in a 200' cloudbase and running out of fuel with a USL up the wrong estuary in ****e wx is good airmanship.
We can all hover taxi from field to field in fog - it's not difficult but it's certainly not clever (just how deep in the threat band do you want to operate) - I don't always agree with our rules and regulations but some of them have been concocted to protect us from ourselves.

[Hydraulic Palm Tree]

Err - unless I'm much mistaken there are 2 Support Helicopter HQs. One at Benson and one at Odiham - none at Aldergrove (that is the Joint Helicopter Force HQ - I know, I have has the misfortune to work there!). The SHFHQ's are established to command operational HQ's for all battlefield helos (of all services) supporting UK forces from one (or more maybe more) locations during ops. The personnel making up these HQ's are the usual personnel associated with running an RAF Stn during peacetime, and is commanded by a Gp Capt and supplemented by additional J3/J4 personnel who ensure that we train as we fight. The RN have a similar set up at Yeovs.

These HQ's do not compare in the slightest with the behemoth of an HQ that the AAC have at Wallop. Why so big? - answers on a post card please!


HPT

PS. Pr00ne - I am convinced that you are either CAS or CinC STC, as you seem to know :mad::mad::mad::mad: all about helicopters, particularly those of the RAF.

[Hueymeister]

I'm with Jockspice here..most know my background, so I think I am in a fair position to compare Crab with Jungly here......Crab@Somewheresounding pongo-ish......the RN aren't the only ones to do some silly things in NI...I remember a very important Helo asset being run out of fuel and shutting down south of the border, thinking it was Newry, when in fact it was Dundalk....several Banner Pumas going international through the Monaghan Salient...etc, etc. I was met by the then boss (ex CH47 man) of a twin engine trg unit some years ago who remarked...'Hey *****, are you flying with those Cowboys? What a bunch of unprofessional W***ers they are..can't find their arses or elbows'..pointing at 2 Mk4's on the Pan at Strawberry, I thought I might try and explain the error of his ways, but realised quickly that I would be wasting my valuable time, he was obviously an Arse, and pissing in his coffee cup would be a better option.....but did I do it?...you'll have to wait for my memoirs for that one.

The RN boys had a good rep in NI, because at that time their rules allowed them more flex to work in crappy wx and they had a Cab that could lift up to 26 peeps at a time, and still fly for 30 mins. These facets engendered a positive and rewarding rapport with the Unit Co's who knew they could rely on the 'Dark Blue' to move more in worse wx, hence they asked for the Mighty King more often. The Boys in Dark Blue were a 'can do' mob, no more so than we Crabs were, but they had more flex in those days. The Yeov's FOB had a preface from the FONA which basically said 'Here's some guidelines to get the task done, if you break 'em to complete the task, have a good reason for doing it and I'll back you up' Can't say fairer than that. At that time we (Crabs) had more of a blame culture than I hope we do today....rule infrigements were dealt with quite severely, and so few were apt to bend them to get the job done, safely

I've been out of the game for a while, but I hope the above provides a balanced arguement.........Can we now stop Crab/Pongo/Fish'ed bashing?

Hey HPT..you won't get that 3 stripe that way!!!!!


ps..any granma, spooling or syntex errors are velly mich Weißen induced!!!

[pr00ne]

Hydraulic Palm Tree,

"PS. Pr00ne - I am convinced that you are either CAS or CinC STC, as you seem to know **** all about helicopters, particularly those of the RAF."

Tee Hee, like it!

All I ever flew in HMFC was the DHC1, JP3/4, Gnat, Hunter (Stude and Inst), and F-4M on Sqn.

Never did understand whirly things...........................

CAS, nah, I couldn't take the pay cut.

[NURSE]

always easy to slag to UDR I didn't see to many of the crabs spending their whole careers in provance living outside the wire and being under threat 24/7. Look at the casualty figures!!!!
And if they were so poor why was sein fein always so keen to get them disbanded?

[pr00ne]

Nurse,


"And if they were so poor why was sein fein always so keen to get them disbanded?


Maybe because in their eyes UDR = UVF?

[NURSE]

Which is the same for all the security forces colusion wasn't only a UDR problem they said the same of the RUC and would you say they were unprofessional or the regular army?

The comments the UDR made about the behaviour of the regular armed forces and their alledged professionalism are broadly similar to those that have been expressed here about them.

Or was it the UDR were actually quite effective in not allowing the IRA free reign?
Or was it just they were mainly protestants who were armed and therefore could fight back when attacked?

[Harry Peacock]

Just got back from a fun trip in the old SK 50 lifting landrovers to a place called Bamaga (to right pointy bit of Oz) well inside the tropics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes we were limited but 'got the job done' and had a fun time! As well the Sk are going to be going for a while here as well and they've got their fare share of cracks etc. while we wait for a replacement and surprise, surprise they're not looking at Chinook!!!! (But then I've got a soft spot for the old girl!!) Or anything for that matter!

On one point mentioned earlier though as an aside:

InTgreen

The reliability is not what it once was, and the change in the FRC's so as circuit breakers can now no longer be reset, for fear of it causing a fire, are, quite frankly, shocking.

A bit of a concern does anyone have any details of why??? We're a long way from Westlands here and the pigeons get tired easily, probably shot for food in some 3rd world country so we've not got the important message!!

Any info gratefully accepted

H.P.
:confused:

[[email protected]]

NURSE - I wasn't commenting on the political/religious persuasion- as soldiers they were frequently late, in the wrong place, left everything from weapons to ammunition on the aircraft, happily patrolled outside their EW screen, never seemed to be wet when they had been out all day in NI sunshine, were very insecure on the radio and overall just didn't impress.
42 Cdo were by far the best troops I worked with in 2 years there with the Paras (can't remember which Btn) a close second.

Hueymeister - I didn't say the RAF never got things wrong - if you didn't go over the border you weren't trying hard enough. Everyone gets it wrong sometimes (Puma at Dundalk) some more high profile than others - my point was that going out in all weather is OK providing you are doing it for a good reason and not just to deliver the mail/bread/eggs.

[Greenleader]

All this Sea King vs Chin-hook rivalry reminds me of the fastest helo debate. One venerable CH driver was heard to say how his chopper could go as fast as the Lynx (Still the fastest chopper!) without any mods - true, but it still can't outrun said Lynx's main armament - the Battle proven TOW Mach 1 missile (Alright, just less than), and I had much fun tracking said large and very vulnerable CH targets! TeeHee!!

[NURSE]

[email protected] so have many regular army units done exactly the same things including the Paras!
The reputation was always thet the Navy and AAC got the job done and provided the support they were expected to in an operational enviroment. Whilst the RAF hid behind rules that SHOULD have been left on the mainland for non operational flying and unfortunatley similar things have been said about many op theatres with the RAF are getting the reputation for wanting to get the medals without having done the work.
Maybe before the rules are written the people devloping them should have to experience some of the ramifications of them first hand ? EG them having to accompany army patrols in real ops in inclement weather instead of sitting in warm offices thinking up ways of keeping aircraft on the ground and pilots in the bar.

BTW read through what you said about the UDR and think about it because i find it highly insulting. Escically having stood at to many gravesides!

[12 PSI]

Harry P, I think the circuit breaker thing was to do with Kapton wiring that may or may not be in the aircraft. It featured in a 'Cockpit' article last year after a jungly loom caught fire. I'd get your engineers to check the wiring spec down there if I was you!:oh:

[[email protected]]

NURSE - I stand by what I said about the UDR being unprofessional troops - do you think it might be connected with why you have stood by so many gravesides?

You keep getting your knickers in a twist about NI being an operational theatre requiring special (or no) rules - there is nothing like the threat in NI that there was and even then people confused SH ash and trash missions with 'warfighting' and put themselves in positions that didn't justify the risks. Our rules are our rules but when the AAC or RN can operate like the Chinook SF then you can start banging on about how great you are - where were they in GW1 f'rinstance?

[NURSE]

seam to remember the flightline at Basrah had more SK hc4 than Pumas during my tour and yep there was Chinook there. And plenty of Lynxes and Gazelles.

And in response to your question most were murdered off duty 1 infront of his kids. Cause my mates lived in The community not inside guarded perimiters.

[Chairborne 09.00hrs]

Can anyone tell me how many cabs have been converted to the "new" Mk 6(CR)? The Navy News article mentions five aircraft, but I would appreciate confirmation of this from those in the know.


Serial numbers would be much appreciated.


Regards,

Chairborne 09.00hrs

[rafloo]

As well as taking a long time to drag the chinook crew out of the hotel room.

[strek]

Chairborne

5 aircraft were converted.

The first by the Mobile Aircraft Support Unit (MASU), a team of RN Senior Rates and Civil Service Designers.

After this two each by Serco Aerospace at Yeovilton and DARA Fleetlands.

XV700 XV703 XZ922 XZ580 XV676

Any further questions let me know.

Strek

[Chairborne 09.00hrs]

Thank you very much, Strek - I have sent you a PM.

[John Eacott]

XV703: 050 824NAS, 1972 :eek: :cool:

This one was taken on Hermes, about 1974.

http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/photos/pprune/050%20Hermes%20flight%20deck.jpg

[Widger]

No one has mentioned the fact that you can't fold a Chinook and when it goes T*** it blacks most of the deck. SK goes T*** you put it in the hangar and get another one out.

Had a very interesting conversation with some pongoes last week about being left to trek half way across Armagh.

Chinook....bl**** good aircraft when it works and complements the flexibility that the SK brings. A place for them both.

Oh and don't forget about the Salaries it takes to fly each!

Respect to you both!

[John Eacott]

Courtesy of Strek, a couple of "more recent" photos of XV703. Spot the difference(s)!

http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/photos/pprune/XV703%201.jpg


http://www.helicopterservice.com.au/photos/pprune/XV703%202.jpg