A life on the ocean waves

[glojo]

Certainly not the roughest conditions I have personally witnessed but it does gives folks an idea of conditions when landing on a rolling, pitching lump of 'concrete' :)

Click (http://www.wimp.com/impressivelanding/)

[LeCrazyFrog]

Lynx rules the waves!!!!:ok::ok:

[Lyneham Lad]

Phew - glad he got it down when he did - don't think I could have held onto my dinner for much longer... :ooh:

[Kreuger flap]

Phew - glad we haven't seen that one before on here. Oh wait.

[Airborne Aircrew]

Why's he so bloody wobbly? Don't they teach navy pilots to hover? :E

[rarelyathome]

Good job it was all in slow motion - could have been tricky at normal speed!

[brakedwell]

Just like a computer game ;)

[glojo]

As I said in my first post I have personally witnessed pilots landing on the deck of a frigate that is possibly smaller than the one on that video clip in sea conditions far worse than those we have just looked at. Not only was the sea state far worse, not only was the landings done at night, but they were also carried out up in the Artic Circle in conditions that could freeze the condensation from your nostrils before you could sneeze ;)

Furthermore the aircraft I am talking about was a much lighter Wasp that may have been more challenging to fly, although please do not think I am attempting to belittle the skills of anyone that flies our modern day magnificent flying machines.

However once the Wasp touches terra firma or terra steel the air crew will have to wait until four aircraft handlers run out onto that swaying deck and secure the aircraft with canvas strops and in the example I am talking about...... where the deck was not covered in grease it was covered in ICE! (The grease was used to prevent ice from sticking to the ship's superstructure, but grease on a flight deck is NOT a good idea)

This is an image posted merely to show the strops used to hold the Wasp onto the deck (no harpoon type deck-lock in those days :cool:)

http://stusdarkroom.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/wasp-1.jpg

Please note that I am NOT blowing my own trumpet, I am also NOT saying what colour uniform the pilot wore, and I am NOT attempting to belittle ANYONE. My comments and posts are made to highlight\congratulate all those that fly these machines in conditions where some civilians might have nightmares when they just look at them on a TV screen in the comfort of their living room

We often read about how the most frightening part of a military sortie is the time spent over enemy territory, this might well be the case but I would prefer the word 'hostile' as opposed to enemy.

Just found another image that highlights the 'uppy, downy' movement of a South African (http://www.saafmuseum.org.za/aircraft/2011/westland-wasp-has-mk1/) runway\airfield and for those that have not served on a small ship in rough weather then just think about a runaway lift that also rolls from side to side :) :)

[Kreuger flap]

I have also personally witnessed pilots landing on the deck of a frigate even smaller than the one you describe you saw and in sea conditions far far worse than those you describe and we have seen in the clip. Not only was the sea state 100 times worse, not only was the landings done at night with the pilots eyes shut as it was so scary, but they were also carried out up beyond the Artic Circle in conditions that could freeze your eyes shut unless you were wearing heated goggles. We are talking temperatures as low as absolute zero here people.

Furthermore the aircraft I am talking about was a much much much lighter ultralight that was definitely more challenging to fly, although please do not think I am attempting to belittle the skills of anyone that flies our modern day magnificent flying machines.

However once the ultralight touches terra firma or terra steel the air crew will have to wait until eight aircraft handlers run out onto that swaying deck and secure the aircraft with old bits of string and in the example I am talking about...... where the deck was not covered in acid it was covered in THICK THICK ICE! (The sulphuric acid was used to prevent ice from sticking to the ship's superstructure, but sulphuric acid on a flight deck is NOT a good idea)

Please note that I am NOT blowing my own orchestra, I am also NOT saying what colour uniform the pilot wore, and I am NOT attempting to belittle ANYONE. My comments and posts are made to highlight\congratulate all those that fly these machines in conditions where some civilians might have nightmares when they just look at them on a 50 " OLED 3D TV screen in the comfort of their cinema room.:ok:

[Red Line Entry]

And t'crews used to live in t'paper bag on high street and eat warm gravel for breakfast...

[ShyTorque]

WARM gravel, did you say?

Luxury.... ;)

[Charlie Time]

Nicely done, but nothing extreme there. Would have been better positioned alongside the flight deck so that the crew could observe the quiescent period.

[LeCrazyFrog]

RN deck landings are conducted alongside, better references on short finals and better "fly away" conditions in case of a single engine failure. However, you need to turn your head to have deck references once you are alongside + when you have your quiescent period, you then have to move across, stabilize over the grid and land on... long time, chances are it rocking and rolling again

Other navies do a straight in approach : trickier in case of an engine failure, worse references before the deck (less backdrop) but once you are on the deck, you have the full view in front of your eyes without having to turn your head (which can give you some bad sensations, especially at night in rough weather). When the thing gets calmer, you just have to crash the cab on the grid...

[NRU74]

Many years ago at Rosyth I was invited on board the Canadian Destroyer Algonquin which carried [I think] a Sea King
They used a landing technique which involved dropping a cable which was secured to the deck and then a winch was used to assist in the landing procedure.
Is this procedure still used ?

[Charlie Time]

Last time I operated with the Canadians they still did.

[LeCrazyFrog]

RAST procedure. Our friends from the other side of the pond can talk better about it as it is used for their SH-60 recoveries onboard I believe.

[Wirbelsturm]

Didn't the Canadians call it the 'bear trap'?

I always found landing the Lynx easy, even in rough sea states, it's very responsive and, due to the semi rigid rotor head, very stable and quick to follow the cyclic inputs.

The Sea Pig on the other hand was far more tricky to land well in a rough sea state and putting it onto the UK Carriers in rough weather between operating spots was always sporty. The problem with the Sea King was that it tended to 'hang' under the rotor disc and pivot after the cyclic input making it essential to judge where it was going to be before it got there!!!

Ahhh, the good old days when the Policemen were older and there were carefree winds in the world! :sad:

[glojo]

Hi Wirbelsturm
Thank you very much for your post and you make and interesting point. Did you ever get the opportunity to fly the wasp or was it of a different era?

[Wirbelsturm]

I flew the Wasp a couple of times as a 'jolly', I was never qualified on it as I started on the Sea King before transferring to the Lynx later in my time.

Being a tall chap and a rugby player the Wasp was never really to my design and the ubiquitous 'Nr' horn would sound quite often as the poor old Nimbus donk attempted to lift my bulk and that of the QHI! Often the sortie length could be extended by removal of the doors! Deck landings were done to some fairly tight decks, the Type 42 destroyers being one of the smallest then Leanders and the T21 Gin palaces. Ironically, in my time, I always found the smaller decks better to land on as your visual references were 'closer in' thus the drift and pitch easier and quicker to pick up. The T23 was a football field designed for the Merlin and therefore didn't allow the same level of 'finess', all IMHO of course.

The Lynx was a massive generation leap forward for ship board power and controllability in comparison to the Wasp which suffered many similar problems of the Sea King with respect to design by also having a fully articulated head. What gave the Wasp its advantage was its relative power to weight advantage until you put a torpedo on it!

Halcyon days! :p

[glojo]

Wirbelsturm :ok::ok:

I must confess to being mightily impressed with that 'deck-lock' gadget fitted on the Lynx. A brilliant invention and one that was much needed.

Do not talk about height :(:(:( There is tall and then there is moi!!!

Ironically, in my time, I always found the smaller decks better to land on as your visual references were 'closer in' thus the drift and pitch easier and quicker to pick up.Having served on both the county class destroyer (Wessex) and then the leander class frigate I can see where you are coming from..

[Fly3]

Does anyone else have nightmares about trying to land on HMS Undaunted at night just south of the Portland Races during your Wasp training? Now that was a challenge!

[glojo]

Good morning Fly3,
The thread is called 'Life on the ocean waves' so please please feel free to let loose with the experience's

http://www.leander-project.homecall.co.uk/Leander/HMS%20Undaunted%20flight%20deck.jpg
Picture linked to leander-project

I understand the deck was fitted in the 1950's and she stayed in commission until the mid 1970's. Eventually used as a target and sunk by an exocet missile.

Useless piece of information.
These ships (Type 15's) were among the fastest frigates\destroyers the Royal Navy hadpost war and in 1971 the opportunity arose to settle just what class was the fastest..... Type 15 vs the C&A class

"Fastest Ship of the Fleet", attracted great publicity. On 6th July 1971 the two ships met off the Firth of Forth in perfect weather.

After two hours the race had little in it, Cavalier had worked level with Rapid when the frigate lifted a safety valve. HMS Cavalier was declared winner by a mere 30 yards, over a distance of 64 miles. Her average speed was 31.8 knots, a speed very few more modern ships could achieve.

Nothing to do with flying but those two ships were 'flying' along at a great rate of knots :) although a Nimitz class carrier would cruise by them as would certain classes of submarine ;)

[Bengo]

The harpoon deck lock is a brilliant device indeed , especially when compared with the RAST paraphernalia, but much misunderstood and misused until Hermione's cab dived over the side one day, fortunately without seriously harming anyone ( I think the SMR got a belt from a piece of MRB). That changed the rules and brought the nylon lashing back into the game.

The harpoon, or more accurately, the grid, also contributed greatly to cocktail parties by providing a good spot for a fountain, if the XO could get the pipework past the FOF3 dockyard reps....

A similar device, but with a rectangular grid is also fitted to Merlin Mk1's and the T23. Don't know about the T45 - anyone help?

[glojo]

In an earlier post I was trying to explain that when we were operating up in the Artic Circle during the 'Cod Wars' the flight deck would usually get covered in both snow and ice, which made the operating of our wasp aircraft 'interesting'.

The snow could be brushed off the deck prior to hauling out the aircraft, the down-wash might then blow away what was left. Then with any luck this might melt away the remaining ice but we are talking about ice formed from salt water which has a very low freezing point :(

When the wasp landed the flight deck crew would have to be very quick on their feet otherwise they would join the wasp in their own creation of the 'Bolero' on ice!!
http://i1258.photobucket.com/albums/ii527/glojoh/FlightdeckIceland.jpg


Next we have the postie coming out to drop the mail.. I must confess that whilst we were on station the weather was not so pleasant and we never even got to see the boys in light blue.

http://i1258.photobucket.com/albums/ii527/glojoh/Nimrodmaildrop.jpg


Quick question...
Did these Nimrod crews play the same stunt as the Shackleton crews that dropped off our mail off the coast of Beira

http://i1258.photobucket.com/albums/ii527/glojoh/MaildropBeira.jpg

One of those containers would 'accidentally' split open and the mail from our loved ones would flutter down from the heavens much to the annoyance of all those aboard one of Her Majesty's finest. This was a trick regularly performed by aircrews and something we enjoyed watching. We also very quickly learnt that it did not pay to rush out to collect that mail as the ship's boat might become a target for any small objects that might be released from the overly enthusiastic 'bomber crew' :ok::D

They never did offer to collect our outgoing mail :8:)

If anyone has any photographs of the Beira patrol for 1967/68 and 1973 then could they give me a shout please? (they might have pictures of those grey funnel liners which transported me to all four corners of the World) :ok::)

[Thomas coupling]

All of this pales into insignificance compared to the Canadian haul down system. Bear Trap allows an 8 tonne S61 to be recovered in Sea State 6+ Tha's pitch and roll way outside your wildest dreams boys and girls.
Surely the hairiest landings and takeoffs ever. At night without NVG it takes you to a completely different level of competency.
The Canadians, typically, take this in their stride. No fuss, no bother.
And 46 years and counting without an accident :D:D:D

[Wirbelsturm]

I tried it once, flying out of Halifax, scared the living daylights out of me! Not sure I'd say it takes 'another level' of competency as, once connected the system just hauls the aircraft down and you have to hold power against it, it certainly didn't do anything with 'finess'.

Ironically, when it comes to ship borne operations, there are no such things as 'limits' per se. I have operated, mid Atlantic, when a sudden storm (about which the forecaster was blissfully ignorant) brewed up and whipped the sea into an almighty mess. Upon returning to the deck with MLA (400lbs) dry tanks there weren't many other options irrespective of the pitch, roll and SHOL numbers, it was either land or swim. To be honest neither were particularly appealing at the time but the Sea King was a well built beastie!

:ok:

[Mach Two]

Well, I raise a glass to anyone that can even think of operating a helicopter from any of those situations. I tried it a couple of times, just for fun, and found it completely unnatural and almost impossible from a flat surface that stayed completely still! Not for me.

There must be things I can do that they can't. Can't think of anything right now...

[glojo]

Hi Thomas,
Thank you very much indeed for your contribution. I did try to suggest that those conditions were not excessive but sadly it was not well received.

My own personal thoughts are that each service may well have a specific skill set that it brings to the table. this is why we have 'horses for courses' and it is what makes us an efficient, lean, mean fighting machine.

I enjoy the inter service banter, the rivalry, the competitive edge, but now I get the impression each service is fighting for survival at the possible cost of the other??

If you have ANY images of deck landings then PLEASE feel free to dump them here.

I will never forget one day when it was really rough and we were waiting the return of our aircraft.

As I walked toward the hanger I could not help but notice the Deck Landing Officer dangling from the open hanger doors by the tips of his artic boots... The man was upside down, swinging just like a wild pendulum and when he saw me the following was said....

"Good afternoon John.....

Roses are reddish,
Violets are blue-ish
And if it was for Christmas
We'd all be Jewish"

There was ice and snow everywhere, we were all freezing cold, we had goggles on to protect our eyes from the freezing spray and here was this man, upside down, dangling by the tips of his toes and not having a care in the World! Those words were said nearly forty years ago, but as soon as I say them, the cold, the spray, the laughter are all as clear today as they were on the day they were said.

What a fantastic team and happy days ;);)

PS
I dare not reminisce about my times committing acts of 'sabotage' :eek:;);) at RAF Khormaksar :O

[Thomas coupling]

Wirbelsturm: I stand by my statement "different level of competency". It is and always be so. Not to say anyone could aspire to this level of competency with the right training, but until you get that training you will never, repeat NEVER be able to do what the Canadians can do with their maritime haul down configured aircraft.
Example:
I have taught deck ops in the RN and in the CAF. Ironically, I have come full circle after 30yrs of flying and now teach ship ops again to mil pilots.
You cannot land on a mil boat unless you land within certain deck limits as laid down in HOSTACS. A typical limit is: Pitch: +/- 3 degrees. Roll: +/- 5 degrees. What the document is telling you is that the actual moment of physical contact/launch must be inside these limits to prevent the a/c from sliding off the heaving deck.
These limits are attained during the 'quiescent period' which all floating bodies have, where they effectively stop heaving for a second or so, allowing you to employ these advertised limits. The moment you land on, the cab is secured to deck with lashings and the boat goes on its merry way heaving etc.
For haul down those same limits are: Pitch: +/- 15 degrees, Roll: +/- 30 degrees :eek::eek:
With or without a 12 tone breaking strain dragging you down into the bear trap, these are pucker factor limits and test the best in pilots. Add NIGHT no NVG, NO lights in SS:6 and you are on a completely different level of competency if something goes wrong.
[That is why S61 sponsons are stressed to +4G compared to Westlands 1G....
Different world guys.....:=

[Wirbelsturm]

Thanks for that, I'm glad you cleared it up for me after 4500 hours maritime helo ops and >2000 deck landings I don't know how I overlooked HOSTAC's. I'm afraid I have to disagree about Bear Trap.

You cannot land on a mil boat unless you land within certain deck limits as laid down in HOSTACS.

Irrelevant, HOSTAC's and the SHOL mean nothing when you have nowhere left to go. The old JSP 318 always used to have a get out clause in the first pages of anything goes if it is in the interests of the service.

I have flown a few BEAR TRAP landings with the CAF onto an Iroquoi class in high sea states and, whilst different and interesting, it was not a particularly tricky manoeuvre, something the Canadians are willing to agree with.

In training the limits are there for everyones protection. Unfortunately, in the big bad world, the weather doesn't always read HOSTACs and the SHOL and the ship can't always give you a red 15 wind. That's the trick of being a Mil Helo pilot, not getting hauled down by a cable.

Harpoon will hold the aircraft on the deck with negative pitch to extreme deck angles. The 'quiescent period' isn't always there long enough to be useful, trust me I've seen it recovering in the South Atlantic. Even the SHOL book used to have a precis that the limits contained within were a 'guide', subsequently removed by a MOD pencil pusher who said 'Limits' were limits. Max pitch and roll limits were 'out of the window' when you didn't have any where else to go. When that scenario appears then you need skill and concentration. The deck lock systems in the RN only work when the thing is on the deck, getting it there is the tricky bit.

Edited to add: Never operated NVG at sea in my time, incompatible cockpit lighting and deck lighting add on to that darkened ops, emcon silence and contact approaches and things were great fun in 'my day'.

[LeCrazyFrog]

:hmm::hmm::hmm:
1G..??? I certainly remember having "crashed" the mighty Lynx on a deck and I can assure you that we hit more than one G as one of the crew members had to go to sickbay with quite some backpain...
Now I don't wanna know where the blades would end with an articulate rotor head on a "4G landing"...;)

[Wirbelsturm]

I certainly remember the Sea King being far greater than 1G, infact I seem to remember the oleo's and gear being the same from the S61 to the Sea King and, indeed, the compression struts being the same as well. Three sacrificial cross bolts and a honeycomb compression strut. A mate of mine dropped one on the deck, broke the tail wheel oleo and crushed both compression struts (the sponsons rotate around the main mounting bolt which hold them to the airframe). A quick inspection, two new struts and a new tail wheel oleo and off it went again. Certainly far greater than 1G.

The only difference, mechanically, was the size of the sponson.

Anyhoo, it's all pretty irrelevant as the Canadians don't fly the S-61 they fly the CH-124 which, like the Sea King, is based on the SH-3 or S-61.

[Thomas coupling]

Wirebelsturm,

Strange response. You have "flown a few bear trap landings" and "limits were out the window when you had no-where else to go"...
I think that says quite a lot about your perspective overall.
I flew S61's for 3 yrs, I taught CAF deck ops, I was their standards officer. I have flown all types on all ships in the RN.
The S61 / CH124 is a different beast from the Wasteland model (different engines/gearbox/electrics/hydraulics/engine governor/dimensions/fuel supply system) and the sponsons are stressed for heavy landings. The CH124 is an S61. It is NOT a "SeaKing".
I actually "dropped one on the deck, broke the tail wheel oleo" - Spooky...do I know you? [Did it sailing out of Halifax in sub zero temps???]
Suffice to say - the CAF do this deck landing/bear trap for a living, day in day out, night, no lights etc. Joe outsider would never hope to compete, trust me (even with your mediocre 4500hrs) because they haven't reached that level of competency. Your escape route is to suggest pilots do better than this in an emergency, but we all know what happens in an emergency don't we: some stick to the rules and others, throw it out the window:rolleyes: Accidents happen.
I am NOT saying the CAF are better pilots, re-read my previous posts. Now read my lips: The CAF maritime pilots are better at rough seas landings because they are used to it and trained to do it right. Something the rest can only aspire to.
Accept it - the brits are not the best at everything matey :bored:

[glojo]

Accept it - the brits are not the best at everything matey

Good morning Thomas:ok:
I thought we Brits were the best at:

Moaning

Black catting (my story has more 'daring do' than your story)

Talking a good fight.

Making excuses or blaming others when things do not go quite right.

Reading these very informative posts I get the impression the S61 was not the smallest of helicopters and would have probably not have been flown from the smallest of ships? I appreciate ALL ships will roll and pitch but the smaller the vessel the more 'exciting' the movement http://www.fungiforum.com/style_emoticons/default/puke.gif Would the smaller ship in rough seas present a greater challenge when getting the beastie back onto the deck? The latest technology to lock the aircraft onto the deck is a tremendous step forward and must offer a far safer work environment?

I hate to see petty squabbles take place on forums and could this disagreement be more to do with the way the message is worded? I tend to respect all service personnel and try to read between the lines in any message that might appear to disagree with what I know to be factual?

If the weather takes a horrible step for the worse and you are up in the air with no where to go other than back to 'mother', then back to mum it is.

Regarding the skills of the Canadian Navy pilots then it would be a fool that does not acknowledge that you are located in a part of the World that sees more than its fair share of 'inclement' weather and as such you have to both train and fly in those inclement conditions.

Your very nice Halifax class frigate is a huge ship compared to the frigates of my era and would probably be twice the weight of my old Leander class

http://ipolitics.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Frigate-Helicopter-300x239.jpg

Hopefully we can all recount our experiences in a friendly manner with perhaps that banter we all enjoyed.

I have a few very happy memories regarding our visit to Esquimalt... Happy days :ok:

[Canadian WokkaDoctor]

Regarding the skills of the Canadian Navy pilots


Sorry to correct you here glojo, given you very gentlemanly tone, but the Royal Canadian Navy no longer has any helicopter pilots. For quite some time the Canadian Air Force - Now (once more) the Royal Canadian Air Force - operates all air assets for the Canadian Forces, even off boats..........err ships. :ok:

CWD

[glojo]

Hi CWD, ;)
First off and MOST important.... Many, many apologies for my blunder :O

I fear however that you may be opening a can of worms with that last statement :ok::ok:

Watch this space :D:D

For quite some time the Canadian Air Force - Now (once more) the Royal Canadian Air Force - operates all air assets for the Canadian Forces

[Wirbelsturm]

In respect to Glojo's post I will try and avoid contentious banter!!!

Accept it - the brits are not the best at everything matey

I don't think I ever said I did????? I had the privilige of sitting behind a very experienced and very cool US Lt Cdr doing deck landings to a US Carrier in an F14. Suffice to say getting a machine of that size, at that speed onto a deck of those dimensions was a skill level far greater than mine! :eek:

I also had the great opportunity to work with a whole host of aviators from many different countries during a time at Portland with FOST. Personally, and with liability to get myself harangued at the next Taranto night, I found the best prepared, skilled and professional to be the Germans.


[Did it sailing out of Halifax in sub zero temps???]



Sorry, nope this was done during a rolling flank barrier to the US after a JMC in the late 80's. Nice noise and a Stuka Sea King when we brought it back to HMS Invincible in the morning.

(even with your mediocre 4500hrs)
Hmmm, catty, 18,000 now.


Your escape route is to suggest pilots do better than this in an emergency, but we all know what happens in an emergency don't we: some stick to the rules and others, throw it out the window:rolleyes: Accidents happen.


Out of interest this sounds exactly what a Creamy would say (An instructor who goes directly to instructor training without any operational experience), are you a creamy??? Not out of disrespect you understand but anyone who has operated onboard ship in blue water should know that what happens operationally doesn't always adhere to your rule book.

My example was during a transit from South Georgia back to the Falkland islands in rather inclement weather. We received a distress call from a Spanish deep sea trawler with a badly injured man some 200 miles to the east of our postion (we were 100 miles out from Grytviken). The weather was bad but within limits and there was no forecast deterioration expected. (We did our own weather forecasting in those days!!!) We ranged and launced for the Trawler now 120 nm away and mum steamed, down swell, toward us to reduce the transit. The pickup put us on the limit of endurance as the trawler could manoeuvre in the swell for risk of capsizing. (The winchman received a bravery medal for his pickup that evening out of interest and very well deserved!). Once the casualty was onboard we set off back for mum, now in the evening gloom arriving at night. Upon reaching mum the sea state had worsened and the deck motion was horrendous (if you have ever operated in the south Atlantic you would know that storms can come up almost instantly without warning). She couldn't turn across swell as a cross cut swell was running and could have caused severe damage. She could only continue to run down swell with the main breakers. We estimated the sea to have built to a sea state 7/8. Now we were 200 nm off Gryviken and an endurance of about 15 minutes. We landed with deck pitch and motion far outside of the 'limits' as I, as the Captain, had no other choice.

So, under your:

Your escape route is to suggest pilots do better than this in an emergency, but we all know what happens in an emergency don't we: some stick to the rules and others, throw it out the window:rolleyes: Accidents happen.


Where do you think I should have gone to keep it within the rules? I don't mean it in any condescending manner it's just that sometimes the environment doesn't play nicely.

In my current aircraft I have a system which allows me to land in 75m visibility at 145kts with a 210 tonne aircraft. I have to practice and use it every 6 months to remain qualified and it enhances my operational performance for the company by reducing my need to divert. Does it make me a better pilot? I don't think so, infact I would go so far as to say that the excess of automation has reduced my raw flying skills.

My perspective is that, when training, limits are to be adhered strictly to as failure to do so will end up with tears or the destruction of the confidence of the trainee. In operational scenarios I see the aircraft as a tool to achieve a task dictated by a higher authority and I will endeavour to achieve that task within the strictures given to me. If, during the execution of that task, the environment changes to such a point that I might need to go outside of those limits then, with the consideration of my crew, I will make that decision. It's what I'm paid to do.

I see myself as a perfectly middle of the road pilot, many of my mates were far better than me, many a touch worse. I do like to think that I always got the job done and I never, ever hid a limit transgression from the engineers or the authorities. If I did something I held my hands up and admitted it with whatever mitigating circumstances I felt were relevant. A philosophy I retain today (although it's an easy life in a big Tube)

[Thomas coupling]

Glojo: The SeaKing / S61 did fly and operate from the smallest of naval ships (Type 22 - 3500 tonnes) and still does. There are smaller (Like clyde @ 1800 tonnes) and the King does this too. The type I flew in Canada were from the Margaree class (3100 tonnes). She was cleared to operate her a/c up to SS:8. in extremis.
Ironically the Merlin can also fly to some of these 'small' boats because her footprint is smaller than the SeaKing and her tip path plane is also smaller.

Wirbelsturm: Including the exchange to CAF: 4 front line tours. 1 on Wasp, 2 on SeaKing and 1 on S61. Went straight to Wasp from 705 wings.
Have flown 11 different helos since and my last was EC135T and P models.

Your tea and medals trip was a one off in most pilots careers. It is less likely to happen these days of MAA because the Captain would have told you to ditch alongside and NOT land in those precarious circumstances for fear of stoofing, fireballing and damaging his boat (which is a far greater issue than losing a cab and 3 or 4 crew).
No-one outside of the CAF (and perhaps a couple of other navies that employ haul down) can train for that, you are entering the unknown. BUT the boat would still have had a quiescent period and you would have utilised it even if you didn't realise it otherwise you wouldn't be here today to tell the tale.
Believe me when I say that landing on, in SS7, would happen atleast half a dozen times a year off Newfie St John in Winter. And it would be categorised as: "Interesting".:eek: Certainly no medals.

[Wirbelsturm]

Glojo,

I hate to see petty squabbles take place on forums and could this disagreement be more to do with the way the message is worded?

Certainly not a squabble from my perspective, I just disagree a little with what was said. :E

The world would be a dull, banterless shell if we all agreed with each other all the time!!! As I haven't touched a Helicopter in donkey's years I don't know how the 'Yung Un's' do it now. It's probably changed beyond all recognition.

I fell for the 'never fly anything you can't walk under and doesn't have a toilet and a coffee machine' speech many years ago!

:p

Thomas,

As you said, it was only the crewie who got the tea and medals. Oddly enough the Captain was an old friend of mine who had faith (possibly more than me at the time) in my abilities.

I did need to explain my rationale though.

Sea King Mk 2+5, Lynx Mk3, S61, UH-1D, A109, A320, B777.

[Flap62]

Thomas Coupling,

That is why S61 sponsons are stressed to +4G compared to Westlands 1G

Surely sitting on the ground on a lovely summers day the sponsons are experiencing 1G. Any vertical deceleration (even the gentlest of landings) is therefore going to overstress the 1G. Are you really sure about that figure?

[Wirbelsturm]

No-one outside of the CAF (and perhaps a couple of other navies that employ haul down) can train for that, you are entering the unknown

It would seem then that we have been bantering needlessly as the only point I was trying to put across (obviously badly :ugh:) was that often crews, from any nation, operating in one of the most dangerous aviation environments going, have to expect the unexpected.

Are you still in the rotary world or have you moved on like myself? (Every now and again with a touch of regret into the Aluminium Tube world)

Happy flying!!!

[Thomas coupling]

Flap62 what I meant was + 1G...an additional 1G on top of resting G. IE: The sponsons experience +1G under a decelerative force.

Wirblesturmski: What years did you do SK2 and 5? I was 1980 - early 90's.
I work for a foreign aerospace company now. Gave up fluggling in 2007 to drive a desk low level!

[Wirbelsturm]

Mid 80's early 90's.

814 & 849 Sqn's

Sometimes look at those desks with a little envy these days when I'm looking at Greenland from FL400 at 2:00am! Although the mighty 777 is ok to fly!

Happy Landings.

[SunderlandMatt]

Crow! ;)

Now lets see you do that at night on FLIR. :{

[Hedge36]

Those were the days...

http://www.helis.com/database/pics/sis/27_1083.jpg

[LeCrazyFrog]

Seasprite helicopter heavy landing - YouTube

I wonder if someone knows what happened coz it doesn't seem very rough from the deck cam...
Apologies for the music, not mine...

[glojo]

Your wish is our command

Press Release: New Zealand Defence Force Seasprite Court Of Inquiry: Summary Of Findings
The Court of Inquiry for the accident involving a Royal New Zealand Navy Seasprite Helicopter on board HMNZS Te Mana during First of Class Flight Trials (FOCFT) has been completed. The trials involve determining the safe operating limits of ship’s pitch and roll, wind strengths and aircraft handling under normal and emergency conditions. On 20 February 2002, during FOCFT, Seasprite NZ3604 made a heavy landing onto the frigate HMNZS Te Mana resulting in significant damage to the aircraft. The Court of Inquiry found that the heavy landing was the result of a unique and largely unforeseeable combination of ship motion and aircraft rate of descent at the moment of touchdown.
Air Vice-Marshal John Hamilton, Chief of Air Force said, “These events, when taken in the context of the inherently greater risk involved in FOCFT, all contributed to a greater or lesser degree to the accident. No one significant event has emerged as being pivotal to, or directly causative of, the accident. Accordingly, few recommendations could be made by the court to specifically improve procedures or practices in avoiding such incidents.”




Seasprite Court Of Inquiry: Summary Of Findings
Questions and Answers
What are First of Class Flight Trials (FOCFT)?
The First of Class Flight Trial process seeks to determine the safe operating limits for the aircraft from a ship under normal and emergency conditions. The limits are computer modelled prior to the commencement of the trial; the flying trial itself sees a gradual expansion of the limits, from the benign to the extremes of the modelled envelope. In this case, the FOCFT task plan called for two sorties to be conducted in “degraded” mode – in this case being flown with either the Automatic Stabilisation Equipment (ASE) off, or the hydraulic boost off.
What happened during the accident?
The incident trials took place in Cook Straight. The wind was south-south westerly at approximately 20 knots with a sea state of 3 – 4. The ship was pitching 2 – 3 degrees (occasionally 4 degrees) and rolling up to 7 degrees.
The second sortie of the day was planned to investigate known data point in three stages: Automatic Stabilisation Equipment (ASE) off, ASE off and lateral coupler disengaged, and hydraulics off. The first two approaches/landings/launches were conducted uneventfully. The third landing required the hydraulic boost to be disabled, a scenario that significantly increases the pilot’s workload. With the Test Pilot at the controls, the Seasprite hovered over the deck, and after a period of time, descended. The aircraft impacted the deck heavily resulting in significant damage to the landing gear.
What is the cost of the repair?
The cost of damage to the aircraft has been estimated at approximately $7.4 million (NZD).

[LeCrazyFrog]

merci beaucoup. Now I can see how with HYD off the pilot must have struggled to compensate for deck motion...