ROC helo record

[Spaced]

I was having a discussion about this the other day with a friend, and havent been able to find the relevant record.
I was guessing around 4000ft/min but its only a guess.
Does anyone know, either official or unofficial.

[Giovanni Cento Nove]

Time to climb to a height of 3 000 m : 1 min 22.2 sec


Date of flight: 12/04/1972
Pilot: John C._HENDERSON (USA)
Course/place: Stratford, CT (USA)


Rotorcraft:
Sikorsky_CH-54-B (2_JFTD12-5A, 4 800 hp_each)

7184 fpm near enough!

FAI (http://records.fai.org/rotorcraft/current.asp?id1=112&id2=1&id3=2)

[NickLappos]

Those records were set by a team that broke several all at once. The "practice" was done by Sikorsky test pilots, who then trained the Army crews (the customer gets the records, guys - simple logic!)

They told of the funny calls from Air Traffic Control "Your traffic is a helicopter at FL300, climbing. He is heading 030 degrees at 30 knots."

One Crane had a flameout at altitude. No restart possible because they had taken off the APU to reduce weight. He autorotated down to a golf course in Monroe CT where he put it down quite nicely.

[PT6ER]

Nick

I believe the APP on the Skycrane is not cleared for in-flight operations anyway. At that time was it not also a hand pump hydraulic start system for the APP??

The utility hydraulic system pump (which provides engine start hydraulics) is driven by the accessory drive section (on the rear of the transmission housing) that would be powered by the rotor system during flight or the APP on the ground (rotors stopped).

I'm surprised he couldnt have got a stater assisted windmill relight going, but when it all goes "quiet" there are many things to do in much too short a time :)

[Spaced]

Thanx guys, appreciate the info.

[NickLappos]

The last thing a dead stick Crane driver needs is to remember that the APP is not flight rated (that limit is because it is not fire zone protected and so is not really a flight "engine"). I trust that every Crane driver in the world knows that if both engines flame out, he can start the APP and try to relight them!

I doubt that any forward speed the crane can get to would provide enough oomph to rotate the engine enough for a start, but I could be wrong (never got a Crane checkout).

The trip down from 36000 feet was a long long one, PT6ER, think about it! At 2500 FPM it would take 15 minutes!

[PT6ER]

He can now, it has an electric starter generator but I thought prior to becoming the S64 it had a hand pumped hydraulic accumulator that powered an hydraulic starter motor for the APU.

Lots of time to pick a field eh??

Not much use when you are logging or firefighting though :)

Dont forget that the utility system (powers the main engine start motors) is rotating as long as the blades go round OR the APP is on line (until Nr goes high enough to "de-clutch" the APP drive train).

Some really great thinking went into the hydraulic design (and many other aspects) of the Crane and my hat is off to those drivers of slide rules.

(Personally I grimace every time I hear or see the phrase "designed by computer" - it is a tool but it needs an engineer to wield it. No prize for guessing what I do for a living eh?)

[ShyTorque]

On a detachment a few years ago, an RAF Chinook crew suffered some banter from a fast jet crew about speeds and performance of pointy jets versus helicopters.

It was agreed to make a bet over rate of climb. A heli pilot would fly in the back seat of a Tornado and the time from brakes off to 10,000ft would be recorded. A Tornado pilot would then be flown in a Chinook and the time recorded.

The Tornado pilot roared off and up as fast as possible, in full reheat, rattling all the windows and scaring the locals. As the stop watch clicked, quite soon afterwards (only quite soon, it was a Tornado), the jet pilot smugly said: "There, beat THAT!"

So the Chinook lifted to the hover and ambled upwards.......

As it went past 9,990 feet the Chinook pilot announced "Brakes OFF"....... :E

[NickLappos]

Great story, Shytorque!!

PT6ER, The Crane was the last of Igor's personal babies. It was the direct outcome of the S-60 experiments that were done with the piston H-37 drive train.Here is Igor and his engineering team out for a quick flight underneath the first crane. Never mind computer designed, here you have a real case of putting your faith on the line!:

http://www.aerofiles.com/sik-s60.jpg

http://avia.russian.ee/vertigo/foto/gallery/sikorsky/sik_s-60_1.jpg

And the B model Crane was the cousin of the H-53A, with many parts used to make the design go qucker and cheaper.

[ShyTorque]

Thanks Nick, I think that last photo needs a caption :E

Passenger on left of photo:

"Hey Guys - It's OK I think this pip pin probably adjusts the seats......"

Or

"Funny - I'm sure I put my luggage and newspapers down just there"


Or even:

"Off camera, Lappos admitted that the initial customer response to the new economy class seating fit was rather disappointing".

[PT6ER]

Nick,

I'm going to hear Sergei Sikorsky speak this evening - looking forward to hearing some stories about his father and hopefully more about the Crane.

Regards

PT6ER

[NickLappos]

PT6ER, Ask Sergei about this, and tell him I said hello!

On that S-60 flight, the pilot was Jack Peterson, and his co-pilot was Jim Kay.

After takeoff, Jim checked to see if the platform was behaving itself, as he glanced back to look, he said to Pete, "Pete, don't do anything sudden!"

"What's wrong, is the load swinging ?" Pete asked.

"Nope, worse. The Old Man is up and walking around!"

Igor had undone his belt and began strolling around the tiny platform, oblivious to the fact that there was no railing, or that they were 1500 feet above the ground! After much strenuous gesturing, Igor got the hint and sat back down!

[4ero]

Is ROC not limited in the POM of some machines. Being so, as in the case of an engine failure the upward momentum will prevent the machine entering auto in time?

[Giovanni Cento Nove]

Heard that as well. 214B light will achieve some large numbers i.e. 6000 fpm or better which is 60 knots straight up after all, I think they are restricted to no more than 4000. You have the problem you mentioned, it takes a while to get the flow back in the opposite direction with the gravity assist and the overhead windows are inclined to fall in round your head as well!

[NickLappos]

Engine failure is not an issue for climb rate, as all these helos are twins, and do not have to suffer simultaneous dual engine failure.

The climb rate restrictions are almost always handling qualities, longitudinal static stability. In high climb rates, there are weird little areas where the tail falls under the main toror downwash, and the nose attitude actually trims up as speed is increased. This is no problem for pilots, but boggles the requirements for "stick stability".

Also, the airspeed system has to meet some accuracy requirements, and at high climb rates, it can fall under the main downwash, and make unacceptable shifts in its calibration, or get really jumpy.