Wildcat - why is turret on top of nose?

[Trim Stab]

Can anybody explain why the Wildcat has its EO/IR turret on top of the nose extension, rather than underneath?

I know the naval Lynx is like this, but I thought this was a compromise due to some other constraint. But as the Wildcat was envisaged from the start with a turret, surely it would have been better to put it under the nose?

Putting the turret under the nose would allow the sensors an uncompromised 360 horizon and only slightly less vertical movement than its current position.

I can't think of any reason why you would want to look up on a naval or army helicopter.

[unmanned_droid]

Some illustrations show a 360 degree search radar under the nose. I guess this way you can have both.

[Trim Stab]

Some illustrations show a 360 degree search radar under the nose. I guess this way you can have both.

I think that may be the reason why the Lynx had to have the turret above the nose, because there was no other space to put it on the underside of the aircraft. But if you are designing an aircraft from scratch then there is no need for this configuration - plenty of fixed wing ISR aircraft have radar and turret mounted below.

[alfred_the_great]

my only thought is that helicopters tend to travel forward slightly nose down - if the EO/IR device were underneath, would that not be impinged?

[Trim Stab]

my only thought is that helicopters tend to travel forward slightly nose down - if the EO/IR device were underneath, would that not be impinged?

No, I don't think that could be the reason. Possibly during takeoff during the phase to build airspeed the nose is pitched a long way down but normally the turret would be stowed for that phase. In normal cruise it would not be a problem at all - the turrets can swing through greater than 180 degrees in pitch.

It seems to me that putting the turret on top of the nose loses a lot of mission possibilities, but gains nothing as far as I can work out.

[[email protected]]

I would think commonality between the RN and AAC versions would be the simple answer - just goes to show what an afterthought the AH 1 was - much like the SH version of the Merlin with the comedy ramp.

[Trim Stab]

I would think commonality between the RN and AAC versions would be the simple answer - just goes to show what an afterthought the AH 1 was - much like the SH version of the Merlin with the comedy ramp.

Who wanted the turret on top - AAC or RN? Can't see why it would be much of an advantage to either, and plenty of reasons why it is a disadvantage to both.

[Wensleydale]

Who wanted the turret on top - AAC or RN? Can't see why it would be much of an advantage to either, and plenty of reasons why it is a disadvantage to both.


When trying to land on a pitching ship, I would imagine that deck clearance with a lower mounted turret could be a problem?

[Bing]

But if you are designing an aircraft from scratch then there is no need for this configuration

Does it look like they designed the Wildcat from scratch?

[Trim Stab]

When trying to land on a pitching ship, I would imagine that deck clearance with a lower mounted turret could be a problem?

You could design out that risk by putting it on an offset step under the nose (sort of like it is now, but other way up).

I would have though the advantages of having 360 horizon would far outweigh any of the difficulties of integrating the various systems. I don't know of any other platform that puts the EO/IR turret in such a compromising configuration.

[Bing]

I don't know of any other platform that puts the EO/IR turret in such a compromising configuration.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/74/SH-60B_Seahawk2.jpg/1200px-SH-60B_Seahawk2.jpg

[melmothtw]

'a compromising position for an army helicopter' is what I think he meant to say, Bing.

[[email protected]]

Surely it is because the radar is their primary sensor and it has to have premier siting under the nose to give it a maximum unobscured sweep.

With that there, there really isn't any room for the EO ball as well.

Again, commonality of design would seem to drive the AAC one to have the same configuration (less the radar) as the RN one.

[Rotate too late]

Surely it is because the radar is their primary sensor and it has to have premier siting under the nose to give it a maximum unobscured sweep.

With that there, there really isn't any room for the EO ball as well.

Again, commonality of design would seem to drive the AAC one to have the same configuration (less the radar) as the RN one.
What’s the laser target designator like?

[Bing]

'a compromising position for an army helicopter' is what I think he meant to say, Bing.

I wasn't totally sure, but then the Apache and Cobra have their EO/IR sensors in a similarly compromised position so it's not true that no other army helicopter has it in such a compromising position either.

[Rotate too late]

I wasn't totally sure, but then the Apache and Cobra have their EO/IR sensors in a similarly compromised position so it's not true that no other army helicopter has it in such a compromising position either.

It’s the Same height as the LTD as is the weapon rails. Just like in the infantry, you have to show your hand eventually, but the MMA inc RFI reduces the risk in a conflict.

[NutLoose]

Well simply nailing it on the underside would also mean the scanner head would be reversed Ie the left side would be the right, maybe it would need a complete redesign of the scanner unit too, but dry hydraulics never was my forte. It will also be partially protected from ground fire?

[Not_a_boffin]

Thought the priority for pongo cabs was to have the sight as high as possible, allowing use of cover for recce and obs. Hence


Kiowa Warrior MMS


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Oh58d.jpg/220px-Oh58d.jpg


Even the old Lynx AH had a roof mounted sight.


On wildcat, down to commonality.

[tucumseh]

On Lynx Mk3/8, when the radome was dropped to the chin to facilitate a 360 degree scanner, the sidelobes interfered with the seeker head of Sea Skua. The initial solution was two metalised "playing cards" to tailor the beam pattern. That would be about 1990. Prior to that, it was a 180 scan, but it wouldn't display lock to +/- 90 so you couldn't turn away at even 90 degrees after firing. The nose area of Lynx has always been a compromise.

[bobward]

I heard a tale about the early coastguard AW139's and their under nose sensor fit. It worked well until one landed on muddy ground. The wheels went in and it twanged the expensive sensor head.

1 Is this true, or just and urban myth? and
2 might that be the reason why Wildcat has the turret on top, just like the Lynx did?

[[email protected]]

That may have been more to do with the poor (narrow tyres and little clearance) undercarriage it had which was unsuitable for soft ground.

[alfred_the_great]

If the nose down altitude in flight thing is a red herring, my presumption would be that because the Lynx Mk10 started off like that..

[dangermouse]

There are no such things as an Army Wildcat and a Navy Wildcat, they are the same airframe fitted with role specific kit, any Army one can be turned into a Navy one and vice versa (unlike a Merlin for instance)

so as correctly stated above to give a 360 radar picture the radar goes underneath, if you want a radar and an EO on a helicopter that fits into a ships hangar that you can change by LRU swapping into an 'Army' aircraft guess where the EO goes?

(BTW there is no such thing as a Lynx Mk10)

DM

[[email protected]]

BTW there is no such thing as a Lynx Mk10) perhaps that is what the Super/Wild/Lynx/Cat started out as:E

If it walks like a duck................

[Trim Stab]

There are no such things as an Army Wildcat and a Navy Wildcat, they are the same airframe fitted with role specific kit, any Army one can be turned into a Navy one and vice versa (unlike a Merlin for instance)

so as correctly stated above to give a 360 radar picture the radar goes underneath, if you want a radar and an EO on a helicopter that fits into a ships hangar that you can change by LRU swapping into an 'Army' aircraft guess where the EO goes?

(BTW there is no such thing as a Lynx Mk10)

DM

Hmm, but the Merlin manages to get both radar and EO on underside of aircraft.

The radar and EO would not unduly obstruct each other if fitted underneath if there was a gap between them - no more obstructive than the fixed gear on a helicopter anyway.

Would be interesting to know if EO with limited horizon is really that constrictive on Wildcat role. It would be nigh on impossible to use on a fixed wing aircraft.

[Bing]

Hmm, but the Merlin manages to get both radar and EO on underside of aircraft.

Would that be the Merlin that carries it on the starboard weapons carrier?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/image_data/file/6864/ProudManta1g.jpg

Or the one that carries it on the nose?

https://www.helis.com/h/eh101it_206.jpg

[[email protected]]

Wing mirrors, how quaint - is he planning to tow a caravan ?;)

[tucumseh]

I remember back in 1985 a few folks were having kittens at the thought of a radar scanner fault. 3-point jack on a rolling ship, remove 36 bolts, drop radome.... Not sure if anything changed.

[Just This Once...]

There are no such things as an Army Wildcat, only a Navy Wildcat being flown by the Army

Fixed that for you.

[Bismark]

The fact is it doesn't matter that it is where it is. Te Army got what the RN were getting, no choice in the matter. The EO pod aids the aircrew in their search capability. In general, and given the detection range of the sensor, the aircraft will be heading towards the target (+_ 100deg). The 360 radar allows for a ground stabilised picture which makes life so much easier for the crew.

[switch_on_lofty]

Bit of clarification here:
Lynx Mk3 - 180deg radar + TANS + plotting board on observer's lap. No camera.
Lynx Mk8 - 360 radome but only a 180deg scan due to interference. Central tactical system i.e. 1 colour screen for tactical stuff. Sea Owl near-IR camera.
Wildcat HMA Mk2 - 360 radome with new radar and MX15 turret atop with many cameras and lasers built-in. Generally radar used to search and camera(s) used for ID in conjunction with other sensors like EW and AIS. So unless you want to look at something behind you or directly below you you can use the turret. Since you have a 360 radar you can keep tracking everything while you move the aircraft to put the target in the field of view.
Wildcat AH Mk1 - like HMA but with no radar.

[SASless]

Wing mirrors, how quaint - is he planning to tow a caravan ?

BAE failed again....if they had put a pair of Mirrors on the Tail Fin....the Pilot could look at the back of his own head.

[Trim Stab]

The fact is it doesn't matter that it is where it is. Te Army got what the RN were getting, no choice in the matter. The EO pod aids the aircrew in their search capability. In general, and given the detection range of the sensor, the aircraft will be heading towards the target (+_ 100deg). The 360 radar allows for a ground stabilised picture which makes life so much easier for the crew.

It must somewhat limit surveillance tactics though if they can only fly straight at a target. When flying surveillance on a fixed wing we would always stand off and circle a decoy target (another boat, or some other poacher's camp fire) while keeping the real target geo-locked on the MX15. We used sometimes to use it pointing down like a radar altimeter on VFR night approaches in Africa. I expect crews would find lots of other uses for it if it could point down - might be useful for winching for example, or perv-flying along the beach;)

[John Eacott]

Wing mirrors, how quaint - is he planning to tow a caravan ?;)

I guess you never noticed those shiny things out of the side window of your yellow peril, crab@ ??

http://www.military-airshows.co.uk/photocomp/jun06/chrisfs.jpg

But I'm impressed that the left seat driver remembered to signal for a left turn :p

[pulse1]

If this article turns out to be correct, it might not matter where the turret on the Wildcat is:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/threat-to-marine-landing-ships-and-navy-helicopters-in-defence-review-5kmpwgtd8

[[email protected]]

John - they removed them all a few years before we stopped flying the yellow bus and lots of us weren't happy with it:ok:

Shame the cojo is indicating left while they are in a right turn........... another one who needs L and R on his gloves:)

[Trim Stab]

John - they removed them all a few years before we stopped flying the yellow bus and lots of us weren't happy with it:ok:

Shame the cojo is indicating left while they are in a right turn........... another one who needs L and R on his gloves:)

The two crew members are saving money by using their palms as lifting devices. Very dedicated.

[KiloB]

The two crew members are saving money by using their palms as lifting devices. Very dedicated.

Don’t knock it till you’ve tried it. A mate and I flew a light aircraft for about 20 min just using a hand out the vent panel on each side during an afternoon ‘bimble’.

KB

[[email protected]]

There is a theory that when cupping your palm into the airflow at 90 kts, it feels exactly like a perfect female breast.............discuss.......

[kintyred]

There is a theory that when cupping your palm into the airflow at 90 kts, it feels exactly like a perfect female breast.............discuss.......

Yes, but you need to put a peanut in your palm to simulate the nipple!

[Vendee]

Good God! The clocks have gone back already.......... to 1970 :ugh:

[[email protected]]

It's a virtual crewroom - no need for the outrage bus or the need to be painfully PC:ok:

[Vendee]

It's not a virtual crewroom. It's supposed to be a forum for professionals, male and female. :rolleyes:

[kintyred]

Good God! The clocks have gone back already.......... to 1970 :ugh:

Now that's funny!

[[email protected]]

It's supposed to be a forum for professionals, male and female. who hopefully haven't had their sense of humour surgically removed and don't feel the need to take offence where none is intended:ok:

And it is a forum for professional pilots - from many of your posts it would seem you are/were an engineer.

[Vendee]

who hopefully haven't had their sense of humour surgically removed and don't feel the need to take offence where none is intended:ok:

And it is a forum for professional pilots - from many of your posts it would seem you are/were an engineer.

You are wrong again.

"A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here."

Still, its interesting that you felt the need to check up on my posting history.

[[email protected]]

Still, its interesting that you felt the need to check up on my posting history as it is interesting that you chose to question a light-hearted post - you never know who is posting or why.

Yes, the description of the Mil forum is wider than I suggested - still within the Professional Pilot's Rumour Network though - you see we pilots are very inclusive:ok: