RAF Mk6 Chinook : First Flight
 

http://www.shephardmedia.com/static/...rticle/mk6.jpg

More here ...

Boeing Press Release

RAF Mk6 Chinook

Coff.

Made by Boeing! Hope it hasn't got Li-Ion batteries:ooh:
Regards, Den.

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.:ok:

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.

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

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!

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?):ugh:

I'm sure Boscombe will continue the precedent...........

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.

Thanks for the update Chinny Crewman! :ok:

-RP

Yeah, because buying a complex weapon system is that easy........ Plus, the US Army is happy to live with airworthiness risks that many other uses are not comfortable with, and with ITAR regulations you only get what the USG wants to give you - which sometimes is not that much. But then, I'm sure you would have done a better job of it.

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

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

Can someone say what this actually means? If you look at the non-compliance matrix in the Chinook Mk2 evidence achieving first flight doesn’t tick that many boxes in the airworthiness checklist.

https://sites.google.com/site/milita...s/finance-docs


Reading the same evidence they’re only 28 years late as RAF engineers demanded this in 1985. There were at least 5 accidents caused by poor configuration control. I wouldn't have let the PR man even mention this.

BZ the current Chinook team, but one success doesn't make up for what went before.

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......

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!!!

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

Hey, Evalu8ter, you mention that the Mk6 has a rotorbrake to help with ship borne ops. Do the US Chinnoks not have one or did we bin it somewhere since the Mk2?

I assume this brand new helo also has useful things like radar and TCAS?

OD,

a. No

b. No

c. See Evalu8r's excellent summary just above your post.

CGB

All UK Chinooks have a rotor brake.

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.