Wildcat - why is turret on top of nose?
 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Does it look like they designed the Wildcat from scratch?

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.

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

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?

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.

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?

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/wikiped...20px-Oh58d.jpg


Even the old Lynx AH had a roof mounted sight.


On wildcat, down to commonality.

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.

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?