RAF receives first three Chinook HC.6s...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF receives first three Chinook HC.6s...
Not noticed this mentioned on here before now...
RAF takes delivery of first three Chinook HC6s - 1/20/2014 - Flight Global
-RP
RAF takes delivery of first three Chinook HC6s - 1/20/2014 - Flight Global
-RP
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: One Three Seven, Disco Heaven.
Age: 65
Posts: 2,543
Likes: 0
Received 34 Likes
on
17 Posts
Spotted at Brize on the 13th
ZK551 Chinook HC.6 ? FighterControl ? Home to the Military Aviation Enthusiast
ZK551 Chinook HC.6 ? FighterControl ? Home to the Military Aviation Enthusiast
Would it not have been quicker and easier just to fly the thing home from the factory?
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/335...antic-r44.html
http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/335...antic-r44.html
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
With there eventually planned to be sixty Chinooks operated by the RAF does anyone know if there is likely to be another squadron reformed on the type, or will there just be more for the existing squadron's shared pool?
THS,
Under the original Defence RW Capability Strategy the assumption was that the proposed 24 new build CH47s would replace almost 1 for 1 the Merlins as they went to CHF; therefore 28/78 would, in effect,become CH47 Sqns. The reduction in the buy to 14 and the reduction in numbers of both Puma 2 airframes and crews probably puts 28, 33, 78 and 230 all into the mix together. My guess is that one will become a CH47 Sqn, one a Puma Sqn and one will, perhaps, become a joint CH47/Puma OCU as 27(R) was in the 1990s. In that case which numberplate will not have a seat when the music stops....?
Has it been confirmed in the Puma force if both 33 and 230 survive?
Under the original Defence RW Capability Strategy the assumption was that the proposed 24 new build CH47s would replace almost 1 for 1 the Merlins as they went to CHF; therefore 28/78 would, in effect,become CH47 Sqns. The reduction in the buy to 14 and the reduction in numbers of both Puma 2 airframes and crews probably puts 28, 33, 78 and 230 all into the mix together. My guess is that one will become a CH47 Sqn, one a Puma Sqn and one will, perhaps, become a joint CH47/Puma OCU as 27(R) was in the 1990s. In that case which numberplate will not have a seat when the music stops....?
Has it been confirmed in the Puma force if both 33 and 230 survive?
240 was the best number for an OCF! I can even supply some memorabilia that the first OC 27(R), in his infiniitesimal wisdom, thought fit to dispose of when the OCF rebadged 20 years ago.
Last edited by kintyred; 22nd Jan 2014 at 11:28.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,071
Received 2,939 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
Surely you mean OCU..
I would have thought these Chinooks won't come on line for a while, don't the RAF have a tradition of parking new Chinook types up in a hangar for a few years to mature like a fine wine?
Ex 240 OCU
I would have thought these Chinooks won't come on line for a while, don't the RAF have a tradition of parking new Chinook types up in a hangar for a few years to mature like a fine wine?
Ex 240 OCU
Nutty.....shame on you!
It's not an easy task buying a helicopter that has been around since the very early 1960's , which is operated by dozens of Militaries in so many configurations and models, and one has to be quite sure the ones bought are the real McCoy and not some kind of a knock off. Translating those Operator Manuals from American into English takes a while.
It's not an easy task buying a helicopter that has been around since the very early 1960's , which is operated by dozens of Militaries in so many configurations and models, and one has to be quite sure the ones bought are the real McCoy and not some kind of a knock off. Translating those Operator Manuals from American into English takes a while.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Umm, where did I put the Garmin?
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Damn straight! Have you any idea how hard it is to put all those Us back in and overhaul the Autocorrect? That's a five million pound support contract with QuinetiQ right there!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ottawa
Age: 53
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless - you mean translating the -10 from US Army "speak" to English, which is a task that is more taxing than you could imagine – especially when you have an OEM that doesn’t understand why the -10 isn’t ok for every user!
Yes certainly.....but then we only print ours in English.....which should cut it to half the size of yours.
As the -10 is the Operators Manual.....I am quite sure the RAF and RCAF would not want to include anything from that into their own Manual.
The Maintenance Manual and Parts Manual....except for spelling and nomenclature....should pretty well translate as the hardware is the same.
I am sure Boeing provided what the Customer specified in their purchase contract .....you did of course specify what documentation you wanted and the style and content standards that would be acceptable....right?
As the -10 is the Operators Manual.....I am quite sure the RAF and RCAF would not want to include anything from that into their own Manual.
The Maintenance Manual and Parts Manual....except for spelling and nomenclature....should pretty well translate as the hardware is the same.
I am sure Boeing provided what the Customer specified in their purchase contract .....you did of course specify what documentation you wanted and the style and content standards that would be acceptable....right?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ottawa
Age: 53
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAS - we specified, the assumption within a certain OEM was that what was there already would fit the bill, guess what...........
The main difference is that US Army accepts many things that other Air Forces don't/will not, and the OEM doesn’t want to change things.
As for French manuals, there are separate (and not been delivered yet) funny that I am told that the cleanest manuals at a Sqn are always the French versions! Cant think why!
The main difference is that US Army accepts many things that other Air Forces don't/will not, and the OEM doesn’t want to change things.
As for French manuals, there are separate (and not been delivered yet) funny that I am told that the cleanest manuals at a Sqn are always the French versions! Cant think why!
Last edited by Canadian WokkaDoctor; 22nd Jan 2014 at 14:39.
Saw 2 Chinooks westbound on H3 between Bagshot and Thorpe this evening about 4.15; the lead aircraft had 3 or 4 'protrusions' on top of the fuselage while the second only had one. Could the lead have been an HC6? This was a few minutes after we had seen one eastbound on H3.
