Gazelle: Flying, operating, buying
If it's a short cowling at the forward base of the fin where the boom meets up, it's a cover over the quadrant where the cables meet the pitch-change tube for the fenestron. Sometimes fitted, depending on the perception of the powers that be. In winter in Germany we removed them as it was thought that ice could build up inside, in the Falklands we fitted them so that the quadrant would be protected from a sailing blade on start-up/shutdown.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What always intrigued me about the fenestron issue (I won't say stall) was that the french resolutely refused to acknowledge that there was anything occurring. Even when they showed the 120deg/sec, or thereabouts, recovery their test pilot, all primed and ready to go, just said "there you go, just keep the full right pedal applied, no problem!" (That speed for a couple of revolutions is pretty mindboggling if your not ready for it).What they never managed to explain, if they ever actually addressed it, was why it occurred in the first place. There you are in the hover manouvering, concentrating on something else other than the rotor pedals at the time when away she goes. For whatever reason you hit the ground in the recovery and the french say, "well, if you'd held the spin for another turn it would have recovered." Yea great help!! (and seriously that's not being bitter and twisted).
Apart from that, and it seems to have been a very rare occurrence, a great sports car. Just treat it with care and don't get carried away.
Apart from that, and it seems to have been a very rare occurrence, a great sports car. Just treat it with care and don't get carried away.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Rumour has it that the Army didn't buy the SAS for two reasons - they could get several extra machines for the cost of the SAS, and they didn't like the control forces with the force trim on (which was necessary for the SAS).
Having flown the only Gazelle (as far as I know) that was fitted with both the cargo hook and SAS, I can say that the SAS made a huge difference in handling with anything dangling from the hook.
I can also say that the time it took to get stabilzed in a quick stop behind trees was significantly shorter with the SAS than without it, and the stability in the hover was much higher with lower workload with the SAS. This would have had a big effect on using the sight.
That, plus the much improved IFR handling with the SAS always made me wonder at who in the Army was thinking long-term about the problem. How many did the Army lose in inadvertant IMC encounters that might have been saved by having a machine fitted with SAS?
Having flown the only Gazelle (as far as I know) that was fitted with both the cargo hook and SAS, I can say that the SAS made a huge difference in handling with anything dangling from the hook.
I can also say that the time it took to get stabilzed in a quick stop behind trees was significantly shorter with the SAS than without it, and the stability in the hover was much higher with lower workload with the SAS. This would have had a big effect on using the sight.
That, plus the much improved IFR handling with the SAS always made me wonder at who in the Army was thinking long-term about the problem. How many did the Army lose in inadvertant IMC encounters that might have been saved by having a machine fitted with SAS?
How many did the Army lose in inadvertant IMC encounters that might have been saved by having a machine fitted with SAS?
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The reason I mention the possible link between Army Gazelle accidents in IMC at all is that I seem to remember in my brief time associated with the UK military (80-82), there were a couple of fatal accidents involving Army Gazelles where IMC seemed to be a main factor.
Don't know what happened after that, but even at the time there seemed to be a link between non-SAS and IMC.
And that's why I used the word 'might'.
Don't know what happened after that, but even at the time there seemed to be a link between non-SAS and IMC.
And that's why I used the word 'might'.
Shawn - I think at least one of those was in the Falklands as an SOP was to go IMC if you were being chased by a Pucara.
I believe Fenestron stall was the result of mishandling, pure and simple mainly because even when you try and induce it in all the 'appropriate conditions' it won't happen. If it was an aerodynamic shortcoming of the fenestron, it would be reproducable on demand (like running out of TR on a jet ranger is) and it just isn't. I don't believe there have been any properly documented (ie BOIs or the like) incidents of 'fenestron stall' in a non-SAS equipped cab. Thousands of students in all 3 armed services learned to fly helicopters in the gazelle with very few incidents or accidents and, I believe, only one documented engine failure (beats the hell out of an R22).
As for the differences between SAS and no SAS, you just get used to it and, whereas with the SAS and stick feel on you could take your hand off the cyclic to fold a map or pick your nose, you can't without SAS. However, there is a cyclic friction which can help on long transits.
Regarding hyd out flight - try a squirrel if you think the gazelle was bad.
Just for the record the only 'Army' gazelles with SAS were those flown by 3BAS Royal Marines/now 847NAS.
I believe Fenestron stall was the result of mishandling, pure and simple mainly because even when you try and induce it in all the 'appropriate conditions' it won't happen. If it was an aerodynamic shortcoming of the fenestron, it would be reproducable on demand (like running out of TR on a jet ranger is) and it just isn't. I don't believe there have been any properly documented (ie BOIs or the like) incidents of 'fenestron stall' in a non-SAS equipped cab. Thousands of students in all 3 armed services learned to fly helicopters in the gazelle with very few incidents or accidents and, I believe, only one documented engine failure (beats the hell out of an R22).
As for the differences between SAS and no SAS, you just get used to it and, whereas with the SAS and stick feel on you could take your hand off the cyclic to fold a map or pick your nose, you can't without SAS. However, there is a cyclic friction which can help on long transits.
Regarding hyd out flight - try a squirrel if you think the gazelle was bad.
Just for the record the only 'Army' gazelles with SAS were those flown by 3BAS Royal Marines/now 847NAS.
For Shaun - I dont think we lost any to IMC problems caused by a lack of SAS but you are right it was an application that required constant practice.
For Crab - J, The AAC had at least 10 machines fittted with SAS. I believe they were bought for the old 2 Flt (AMF) L. The transits to Turkey (18 Hours) would have been a bugger without it. They were lost when some bright spark decided 2 Flt needed HF (compatability) I'm pretty certain the TA have at least a few of them now.
For Crab - J, The AAC had at least 10 machines fittted with SAS. I believe they were bought for the old 2 Flt (AMF) L. The transits to Turkey (18 Hours) would have been a bugger without it. They were lost when some bright spark decided 2 Flt needed HF (compatability) I'm pretty certain the TA have at least a few of them now.
Mostafa - I stand corrected, I didn't know about the 2 flt ones.
Bertie - I should have been more specific, I meant during flying trg - I assume yours were during one of your AAC tours.
Bertie - I should have been more specific, I meant during flying trg - I assume yours were during one of your AAC tours.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: midlands
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
609fc,
my instructor a very experienced pilot with several thousand hours on gazelles, suggested quietly as he was waving me off after the type convertion
"no need to try and impress! the aircraft will do that on its own"
get the best ex forces training you can lay your hands on down there,
this a/c going to spoil you! there's no way back after owning a gazelle
enjoy.
my instructor a very experienced pilot with several thousand hours on gazelles, suggested quietly as he was waving me off after the type convertion
"no need to try and impress! the aircraft will do that on its own"
get the best ex forces training you can lay your hands on down there,
this a/c going to spoil you! there's no way back after owning a gazelle
enjoy.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking of gazelle's, any idea how much they cost per hour to operate dry.
Also in normal use, G model, what is its approx fuel burn per hour?
Thank you
Geoff
UK figures are fine I can work costs back to include shipping of parts etc
Also in normal use, G model, what is its approx fuel burn per hour?
Thank you
Geoff
UK figures are fine I can work costs back to include shipping of parts etc
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: South Florida
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine overhaul?
turbomecca USA gave me a contact in Colarado but havent been able to get hold of him - Mark Bond.
What is the cost of an Astrazou overhaul? Either return to europe or in the USA.
Just trying to budget - the machine has 450 hrs on it that we are trying to buy.
Thanks Geoff
turbomecca USA gave me a contact in Colarado but havent been able to get hold of him - Mark Bond.
What is the cost of an Astrazou overhaul? Either return to europe or in the USA.
Just trying to budget - the machine has 450 hrs on it that we are trying to buy.
Thanks Geoff
The price of military spec parts will alter your love affair with the Gazelle...civvie parts are much cheaper. (In comparison only...)