RAF Mk6 Chinook : First Flight
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 66
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
RAF Mk6 Chinook : First Flight
Boeing has revealed that the first flight of the newest CH-47 Chinook heavy-lift helicopter for the Royal Air Force (RAF) took place on 15 March at the Boeing helicopter facility near Philadelphia. The successful flight took place ahead of schedule and confirmed initial airworthiness for the Mk6 Chinook.
Boeing Press Release
RAF Mk6 Chinook
Coff.
Oh, come on! Boeing's sparkies make one little mistake and you never let it go. It's not easy multiplying volts by amps, you know.
Still looks like a good old Chinook to me (and I do mean GOOD). Nice and clean, though.
Still looks like a good old Chinook to me (and I do mean GOOD). Nice and clean, though.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any further news on these Chinooks or are they money down the pan?
Delivered to the UK in May 2002, the extended-range aircraft was originally planned for use in support of operations involving Special Forces personnel, but along with the RAF's other HC3s was placed into storage after it became clear that the type's flight software could not be properly certificated.
Work to prepare the stored aircraft for operational use began in June 2008, with the reversion project to increase the acquisition's cost of almost £270 million ($435 million) to around £420 million. The current effort involves Boeing, GE Aviation Systems, Qinetiq and the RAF, with the aircraft being modified at Qinetiq's Boscombe Down site in Wiltshire.
Delivered to the UK in May 2002, the extended-range aircraft was originally planned for use in support of operations involving Special Forces personnel, but along with the RAF's other HC3s was placed into storage after it became clear that the type's flight software could not be properly certificated.
Work to prepare the stored aircraft for operational use began in June 2008, with the reversion project to increase the acquisition's cost of almost £270 million ($435 million) to around £420 million. The current effort involves Boeing, GE Aviation Systems, Qinetiq and the RAF, with the aircraft being modified at Qinetiq's Boscombe Down site in Wiltshire.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A2QFI, the Mk.6 Chinooks are all new build, they haven't been delivered yet. The ones which you refer to are the HC.3s, which have since all been retro-modded by QinetiQ to become HC.5s...
-RP
-RP
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Odiham
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not quite RP the Mk3s have indeed been retro fitted with analogue cockpits and have been flying from Odiham as Mk3Rs for some time. They are due a Julius upgrade to the Thales digital cockpit over the next few years when they will be Mk5 standard.
Busy time at Odiham!
Busy time at Odiham!
Errrrrr....back to Square One.....why not just wipe the Software install and install the new version? (Or...perhaps just buy an off the shelf version from Boeing that is well proven and in use for years by the US Army?)
The successful flight took place ahead of schedule and confirmed initial airworthiness for the Mk6 Chinook.
Last edited by minigundiplomat; 16th Apr 2013 at 12:17.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks for the three replies. It still seems to me that it has taken an unquanitified shed-load of money to sort out a poorly researched purchase.
Last edited by A2QFI; 16th Apr 2013 at 12:51.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ottawa
Age: 53
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ErrrrrrErrrrrr....back to Square One.....why not just wipe the Software install and install the new version? (Or...perhaps just buy an off the shelf version from Boeing that is well proven and in use for years by the US Army?)
Wait - hang on, I'm not in the RAF anymore, what am I saying. What a rubbish job the MoD did in buying those Mk3s, anyone could have done it better!
CWD
Last edited by Canadian WokkaDoctor; 16th Apr 2013 at 21:05.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ottawa
Age: 53
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyhow - well done to the Brits and Boeing on getting the Mk6 into the air, now could you please get the other one off the production line so the RCAF aircraft can get thier turn.
CWD
CWD
The successful flight took place ahead of schedule and confirmed initial airworthiness for the Mk6 Chinook.
https://sites.google.com/site/milita...s/finance-docs
a common configuration
BZ the current Chinook team, but one success doesn't make up for what went before.
Last edited by dervish; 16th Apr 2013 at 16:49.
CWD, now now, play nicely! One for us, one for you!!
The Mk6 is not 'common' to either the CH47F or the Mk2/3/4 as it has the DAFCS. The UK has not adopted a standard 'F' for a number of good reasons. CAAS, at the time, had a HMI optimised for US Army ops and would have required a complete change in RAF SOPs - for example, the UK use crewmen in the cabin extensively for navigation and data entry, none of which are (were) possible with CAAS when we looked at it. When I asked for some necessary changes the answer from US Army was 'when you've got 2500 cockpits running this system we'll listen to you...' Airworthiness, as CWD mentioned, was also tricky because CH47 didn't have the best rep (MoK, Mk3 AU fiasco) so getting a nascent MAA and reluctant RTSA to buy into US Army airworthiness regs was a step too far at the time. There are other important changes in avionics and mission kit and the Mk6 also has a rotorbrake to help with ship ops.
A2QFI,
The original Mk3 purchase was a dreadful mess, and has been thoroughly rodded-out by the NAO. Suffice to say, in the finest traditions of procurement, no senior hands were sacked or even reprimanded; indeed, several involved were still in post when I arrived at ABW a decade later. The cost to 'put it right' is misleading as it involved several upgrades that would have to have been put onto the ac even had it entered service on time - in many respects they were just catching up with their sisters. The real irony is that the 8 Mk3s were built by Boeing with legacy cockpits then flown to Honeywell to have the glass cockpit installed; they are now on 'legacy' cockpits again until the Mk5 programme...therefore some ac will have had 3 cockpits by 100hrs TT and some will be on number 4 by about 1000hrs....
MGD,
Mk6 is a Combined Test Team from day 1 with Boeing, Boscombe and RWOETU crews involved; never say never, but hopefully even QQ can't put unnecessary delays into this programme. Oh, I'm aware of the potential irony of what I've just said......
The Mk6 is not 'common' to either the CH47F or the Mk2/3/4 as it has the DAFCS. The UK has not adopted a standard 'F' for a number of good reasons. CAAS, at the time, had a HMI optimised for US Army ops and would have required a complete change in RAF SOPs - for example, the UK use crewmen in the cabin extensively for navigation and data entry, none of which are (were) possible with CAAS when we looked at it. When I asked for some necessary changes the answer from US Army was 'when you've got 2500 cockpits running this system we'll listen to you...' Airworthiness, as CWD mentioned, was also tricky because CH47 didn't have the best rep (MoK, Mk3 AU fiasco) so getting a nascent MAA and reluctant RTSA to buy into US Army airworthiness regs was a step too far at the time. There are other important changes in avionics and mission kit and the Mk6 also has a rotorbrake to help with ship ops.
A2QFI,
The original Mk3 purchase was a dreadful mess, and has been thoroughly rodded-out by the NAO. Suffice to say, in the finest traditions of procurement, no senior hands were sacked or even reprimanded; indeed, several involved were still in post when I arrived at ABW a decade later. The cost to 'put it right' is misleading as it involved several upgrades that would have to have been put onto the ac even had it entered service on time - in many respects they were just catching up with their sisters. The real irony is that the 8 Mk3s were built by Boeing with legacy cockpits then flown to Honeywell to have the glass cockpit installed; they are now on 'legacy' cockpits again until the Mk5 programme...therefore some ac will have had 3 cockpits by 100hrs TT and some will be on number 4 by about 1000hrs....
MGD,
Mk6 is a Combined Test Team from day 1 with Boeing, Boscombe and RWOETU crews involved; never say never, but hopefully even QQ can't put unnecessary delays into this programme. Oh, I'm aware of the potential irony of what I've just said......
Advice please ladies and gentlemen and a serious question.
I was told that the Mk 3 - about which so many awful stories have been told - was also purchased by the Dutch and they have flown the aircraft without issue.
a. Is this true.
b. Is it correct that the only real issue is that we didn't have the software codes and so couldn't prove the aircraft safe.
c. Why could we not buy the aircraft to a US spec in the first place?
Old Duffer
PS Whatever else - Chinook is a great piece of kit!!!
I was told that the Mk 3 - about which so many awful stories have been told - was also purchased by the Dutch and they have flown the aircraft without issue.
a. Is this true.
b. Is it correct that the only real issue is that we didn't have the software codes and so couldn't prove the aircraft safe.
c. Why could we not buy the aircraft to a US spec in the first place?
Old Duffer
PS Whatever else - Chinook is a great piece of kit!!!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: 1601
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Mk6 Chinook : First Flight
Good programme on this week about BN, the RAF chinook that has served for 30 years. They also went around the Boeing factory looking at the new series being made. The yanks reckon they will still be operating theirs for another 20-30 years
Old-Duffer,
The Dutch Block 5 ac had a similar, though older Honeywell cockpit. Theirs was monochrome and ours got colour. The issue was that the DefStans were written very stringently and we would have had to have paid lots to access the source code to prove the primary flt instruments were certified to our standards. They were already meeting US DO178B standard. It was an issue, but not the only one.
Having said that, the spec wasn't great and we would probably not have lived with that cockpit for long, it would have driven us nuts. As Evalu8ter has said, buying US off the shelf means that we don't get a rotorbrake and we get an inferior DAS set up, so it's not a cost-effective idea.
Duplo: No, don't be daft! That would be far too useful. We're lucky to get the 14 that we are, we were going to in line for 22. Any add ons like radar just increase cost and reduce airframe numbers. More likely, if you ask for too much, you just get laughed at and end up with nothing.
The Dutch Block 5 ac had a similar, though older Honeywell cockpit. Theirs was monochrome and ours got colour. The issue was that the DefStans were written very stringently and we would have had to have paid lots to access the source code to prove the primary flt instruments were certified to our standards. They were already meeting US DO178B standard. It was an issue, but not the only one.
Having said that, the spec wasn't great and we would probably not have lived with that cockpit for long, it would have driven us nuts. As Evalu8ter has said, buying US off the shelf means that we don't get a rotorbrake and we get an inferior DAS set up, so it's not a cost-effective idea.
Duplo: No, don't be daft! That would be far too useful. We're lucky to get the 14 that we are, we were going to in line for 22. Any add ons like radar just increase cost and reduce airframe numbers. More likely, if you ask for too much, you just get laughed at and end up with nothing.
Last edited by MG; 16th Apr 2013 at 19:38.