Cyclic Hotline

As I have never operated a Lynx, I have a simple question.
Is the Lynx any good?
As it is solely a military aircraft, it's exposure is limited to those who operated them in the military. I have never really been around this machine, other than on the ramp and watching them operate around our commercial ops. The commercial variant was proposed and never appeared, and the derivative WG30 appeared and disappeared without trace.
What kind of performance, endurance, range, etc, does this machine have? Is it practical, reliable and maintainable? What military and commercial machines would be equivalent, in terms of performance or operations?
I was just reading in "Overhaul and Maintenance" magazine, that amongst other options being considered to retain the fleet, that re-airframing was one solution, and the Danish fleet was currently accomplishing this.
Could anyone other than Government entities and the military ever consider re-airframing an existing aircraft, as a viable and practical undertaking?
I have read elsewhere in this thread, comments extolling the virtues of this machine, but just wondered about the overall operational aspects of the machine.

PNVS

Plain and simple to your question CH.
NO.

Mr.Proach

The Lynx is a fantastic machine. It's VERY powerful, handles exeptionally well and is forgiving of all but the most severe mishandling. I think most Lynx boys would agree. The problem is that it is very expensive and difficult to maintain. when they have the tits flown off them, e.g. NI they work well and stay reasonably serviceable. It's when there're flown stop start fashion that they really tend to meld with the hangar floor. hangar queens rapidly become christmas trees for the benefit of others that require spares. The twin engine testosterone monster is a good aircraft, it just consumes vast amounts of cash and spares.
PNVS, your clearly a frustrated Lynx man, Floppy puke by any chance?

[This message has been edited by Mr.Proach (edited 14 January 2000).]

PNVS

Mr.Proach,
No I am not.

Tips

Mr Proach, (corking name by the way) you are right in all that you say. CH, the Lx is a truly great AC to fly but an absolute nightmare to maintain. A lot of people give the aircraft a hard time but I am willing to bet that a great number of them have never actually flown it, but are content to stay on a simple machine and slag it off without having experienced the old Twin Engined, Rolls Royce Mobile Sexual Tyrannosaurus. Sure it has faults but most of the people who have flown it for any amount of time have a healthy regard for it. If spares procurement had been correctly administered years ago we would be in a far more healthy state of affairs right now.

[This message has been edited by Tips (edited 14 January 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Tips (edited 14 January 2000).]

64av8or

To add to the Lynx suitability question, PNVS, although a closet SE type, is correct in what he/she says. The Lynx is good for military punchy flying and a great display aircraft. It would never suit the civil market as it is noisy, uncomfortable and expensive to run. Those who have flown it respect it and the wiser pilots know exactly how far to push it as it can bite back real hard!

2's forward 1's back

PNVS.
Are you not;
1. Floppy pilot.
2. Want to be Lynx pilot.
My guess is yes to both.

Mr.Proach

PNVS,
We've got your number son. If ever someone was an araldite pursuit ship warrior then it has to be you. So check your T4, fly at IPS, and go annoy someone else with your HONTI. (Helicopter of no tactical importance)

PVR

WHOOP- WHOOP!! The atlantic Conveyor has birthed here in Suffolk!

We can go and restore ourselves over the Flatlands and annoy the coneheads once again.
I apologise to who ever ordered the bucket of goodies that have arrived here, I'll get you a beer next time I'm down in Hants.

2's forward 1's back

PVR
You must have been over Felixtowe on an airtest, I was on the fairground, I thought I heared the pointless whining of a Gazelle overhead.

HeliAv8tor

Well all you AAC pilots, I must say I told you all so last year before I left. My advice is the same, get a licence, get a real job, get out and get a life. Until the AAC gets away from soldier first and pilots second you will always get a raw deal. Wake up why not be a professional pilot with good military skills and then the quality of life for you may improve. As to the Lynx, as an ex-QHI with +2500 hours on the beast, it is an extremely capable helo. However, the fudging of serviceability figures over the past 20 years by officers who should have known better has created a total fiasco. As to the Apache, the AAC will front it. It will not be allowed to fail, however the service given by those who eventually fly it may not very professionally, but that is not due to the calibre of the pilot, but more do to the poor management skills of those command them. PS. Gary, best regards and a happy new year to you and to all you fellow rotary wing aviators.

TwinTorque

Well it has been said by everyone except PNVS who seems to shy away from flying a real mans aircraft and wants to stay on a training aircarft. More power to you mind, flying around in a constant state of emergency with your one engine. As to the Apache when the AAC gets it it will fail because the Army has deemed it reasonable to place ab initio officers in it and they will not be able to cope. The AAC has this in built ability to be able to miss manage everything and is probably the most disorganised bunch of aviators this side of the Urals.

HeliAv8tor

TwinTorque, I like the cut of yer tail rotor old chap. Sentiments well expessed. Most of the experienced aviators (I count myself in this) packed up and left long ago, mainly because we believed in our ability as professional aviators. I am thankfull to the AAC for teaching me to fly and giving me the 4000+ hours to hone my skills. However, unfortunately they have lost their way. In my opinion mainly due to officers playing career roulette. Stating to higher authorities that there is nothing wrong with my Sqn/Regt, that there is no shortfall in spares, training hours, quality of life or moral and the list goes on. I truly hope that the lesson, albeit a hard one is being learnt by those who are responcible for and can (If they have the metal for it) make change for the better. As to Lynx, its one of the best rotary wing aircraft I have had the pleasure to have flown. Happy and safe aviating to you all

Max Transient

Dear Cyclic Hotline,
Yes, actually, the Lynx is a delight to fly. It has one or 2 bad habits but what aircraft from that era dosn't. It's fast, it's outrageously agile and can stop on a sixpence if that's what you want it to do. I've clocked up over 3000 hours in the thing and was more than happy to carry on flying it after it's more recent failures. The problem with the Lynx fleet lies not with the aircraft rather with the poor management of the fleet, a complete lack of foresight into the future requirements of both the aircraft, it's users and operators; and, as you will not be surprised to hear, a bunch of politicians unwilling to spend anything on anything unless they really, really have to.

Gem

The Lynx is without doubt a awesome aircraft to fly, it is a pleasure each and every time you fly if (except perhap's on the really bad vib run's!!).

Equally, it has had 3 major accidents now in 18 month's.

Is it the airframe, the crew or the system? Well crews are current at best and getting the spares is like getting blood from a stone.

SARcastic

Who cares what happens to the Lynx - its been around too long and should be replaced anyway. Problem is the Apache is not quite as redhot as the manufacturer makes out - I wonder if it will take 15 years to get that to a mark 8 ??

Grey Area

I agree the Lynx is a cracking beast to fly. It's fast, VERY agile and for its day had a lot of power. BUT it vibrates like hell and needs loadsa maintaining, particularly of the mission equip, whatever your fit, which doesn't like vibration. All in all it's a great helicopter but a not so hot as a mission platform; why do you think Sea Lynx is getting stuffed by Sea Sprite every time for new contracts? Sprite is older but kinder on mission systems, it's agile enough and big enough. After all who goes shopping in a Ferrari? Apart from Airline Pilots!

Moby Dick

Question to other Lynx pilots: are you all strictly adhering to the painted 'cyclic stick markings' for alignment of cyclic during MPOG and sub minimum pitch or using the ASE controller on demand?

Pegasus#

Grey Area,
Super Lynx is getting stuffed by SeaSprite for simple reasons of size: T700 engines vs Gems of any type means SeaSprite can carry BIG, heavy anti-ship missiles (Penguin in particular) FAR further. However, you do need a slightly bigger deck, and what happens to SeaSprite support to overseas operators when the USN retire it in 2 years? An interesting issue for Kaman, while Litton may JUST have got the mission systems for the Australians working by then.
(Sorry, I forgot, a non-UK company screwing up a non-UK programme is of no interest to the "bash all contractors" contributors on this BB; we prefer national self-denigration).

siouxsie

Moby Dick.
What an interesting question. I wonder why you needed to ask it? I thought the FRCs were quite clear on the subject. Or do you know better? Maybe it's just another useful crew-room myth'.
The reason for aligning the 'cyclic stick markings is in order to minimise stresses to the rotor head and mast when running on the ground. Either at MPOG or, mainly at sub-min pitch.
Using the AFCS Controller-test to set the position of the cyclic takes no account of the stress issue and merely sets the arbitrary datum given by the vertical gyros.
So, what do you reckon is the best procedure?