Marine One Woes
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd still like to know whether the gov would have chosen the 92 over the 101 had the cabin widths been the same.
And I at least hope the gov demands that the fuel be external of the cabin on the new, completely redesigned 101.
And I at least hope the gov demands that the fuel be external of the cabin on the new, completely redesigned 101.
Last edited by Dan Reno; 26th May 2007 at 12:58. Reason: Spellin, what else!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan,
9,000 troops to Iraq, and standing behind the President like Italy and England did was the key. Both PM's publicly asked Pres Bush to buy their machine, on their local TV. If he had turned them down, they would have been very embarrassed, after taking the heat to back the Iraq mission.
Here is a link to a discussion of the VH-92 demonstrator:
http://webpages.charter.net/nlappos/wildcat1.pdf
9,000 troops to Iraq, and standing behind the President like Italy and England did was the key. Both PM's publicly asked Pres Bush to buy their machine, on their local TV. If he had turned them down, they would have been very embarrassed, after taking the heat to back the Iraq mission.
Here is a link to a discussion of the VH-92 demonstrator:
http://webpages.charter.net/nlappos/wildcat1.pdf
Last edited by NickLappos; 26th May 2007 at 13:45.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick,
No wonder there is so much BS here about the 101! I'd be embarrassed also to know the only reason the 101 got the nod was strictly political and that now the Yanks have to pay for and do a complete redesign of the loser just to bring to bring it up to 92 standards and keep our President safe! Could you imagine the outcry accross the pond if they had to do it to the 92!? The US would swim to the Brits defense if need be but they certainly don't seem appreciative of our efforts in many ways. Perhaps still licking their wounds over the thrashing we gave them way back when... How childish.
No wonder there is so much BS here about the 101! I'd be embarrassed also to know the only reason the 101 got the nod was strictly political and that now the Yanks have to pay for and do a complete redesign of the loser just to bring to bring it up to 92 standards and keep our President safe! Could you imagine the outcry accross the pond if they had to do it to the 92!? The US would swim to the Brits defense if need be but they certainly don't seem appreciative of our efforts in many ways. Perhaps still licking their wounds over the thrashing we gave them way back when... How childish.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Nick for explaining to Dan the scale of the task that LM face in integrating the systems, whether or not it was their choice to do it.
Nick, do you categorically know that the customer has not requested extra performance in the areas of communication, navigation or survivability? If the exisitng systems are satisfactory to meet the current and future requirements, why didn't the purchasing authority direct the fitment of this equipment as part of the contract/competition?
The VH-92 sounds like it had so many advantages over the US101, safety, performance, established operating procedures, security cleared personnel and assembly areas, and now an already fully integrated, fully proven and full performance mission suite. Your government must really want that extra cabin size.
As for rewarding Tony Bliar ... there were much better ways, but hey we all love a good conspiracy.
P.S. Impressive noise figures, Nick.
What are you on Dan?
Firstly, have you ever flown in an EH101? Have you seen them being assembled? Do you have access to the Engineering Specifications? If you have, then point to the exact BS and publish the truth for all to see.
Secondly, this is about engineering business. The S92 and the EH101 compete in some forums, some decisions go one way some the other. Is every single pro-EH101 decision political????
Thirdly, there is nobody on this forum who can be seen as the AW or LM equivalent to Mr. Lappos. Therefore we are listening to one side of a 'phone call. Decisions that may seem ludicrous to Nick may have good grounding. My attempts, and I am pro-EH101 (note not anti S-92), is to try and put some objective assessment on many subjective statements.
Lastly, if you think that we hold some 200 year grudge ...
Nick, do you categorically know that the customer has not requested extra performance in the areas of communication, navigation or survivability? If the exisitng systems are satisfactory to meet the current and future requirements, why didn't the purchasing authority direct the fitment of this equipment as part of the contract/competition?
The VH-92 sounds like it had so many advantages over the US101, safety, performance, established operating procedures, security cleared personnel and assembly areas, and now an already fully integrated, fully proven and full performance mission suite. Your government must really want that extra cabin size.
As for rewarding Tony Bliar ... there were much better ways, but hey we all love a good conspiracy.
P.S. Impressive noise figures, Nick.
What are you on Dan?
Firstly, have you ever flown in an EH101? Have you seen them being assembled? Do you have access to the Engineering Specifications? If you have, then point to the exact BS and publish the truth for all to see.
Secondly, this is about engineering business. The S92 and the EH101 compete in some forums, some decisions go one way some the other. Is every single pro-EH101 decision political????
Thirdly, there is nobody on this forum who can be seen as the AW or LM equivalent to Mr. Lappos. Therefore we are listening to one side of a 'phone call. Decisions that may seem ludicrous to Nick may have good grounding. My attempts, and I am pro-EH101 (note not anti S-92), is to try and put some objective assessment on many subjective statements.
Lastly, if you think that we hold some 200 year grudge ...
Last edited by waspy77; 26th May 2007 at 15:44. Reason: Tried but couldn't hold my tongue
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
High Wing Drifter
Waspy
Sunday Times
November 2004
Washington Post
January 2005
But seeing as it is designed by Lockheed in Owego (not Lockheed UK IS) and built by Bell I don't see where Britain comes into the equation. Didn't they tell Tony that just a couple of blokes from Havant would be involved.
As for rewarding Tony Bliar ... there were much better ways, but hey we all love a good conspiracy.
November 2004
TONY BLAIR is seeking to capitalise on his special relationship with George Bush by urging the American president to buy British-built Westland helicopters for his Marine One fleet.
The US Navy is looking to replace its ageing fleet of helicopters that make up Marine One. They are famous throughout the world for taking a succession of presidents to and from the White House lawn.
Recognising the publicity value of taking such an iconic role, Blair lobbied for the British firm to win the contract during his private meeting with Bush in Washington this month.
He is said to have emphasised the quality of the Westland bid and its importance to British and American jobs.
Westland has attempted to Americanise its bid by offering a US-built version of EH101 helicopter — carefully renamed the US101. Its consortium is led by Lockheed Martin, the US defence contractor, and includes Bell, a US helicopter manufacturer.
Whitehall officials have also written to the Bush administration putting forward the case for Westland.
Both the White House and Downing Street refused to comment on the bid last week, because it was “a commercial matter”.
The US Navy is looking to replace its ageing fleet of helicopters that make up Marine One. They are famous throughout the world for taking a succession of presidents to and from the White House lawn.
Recognising the publicity value of taking such an iconic role, Blair lobbied for the British firm to win the contract during his private meeting with Bush in Washington this month.
He is said to have emphasised the quality of the Westland bid and its importance to British and American jobs.
Westland has attempted to Americanise its bid by offering a US-built version of EH101 helicopter — carefully renamed the US101. Its consortium is led by Lockheed Martin, the US defence contractor, and includes Bell, a US helicopter manufacturer.
Whitehall officials have also written to the Bush administration putting forward the case for Westland.
Both the White House and Downing Street refused to comment on the bid last week, because it was “a commercial matter”.
January 2005
Sixty-five percent of Lockheed's aircraft will be built in the United States; the transmission will be built in Italy and the blades in the United Kingdom.
The Navy said the Lockheed helicopter would meet its needs more quickly and on budget.
The contract calls for 23 helicopters, with the first to be delivered in 2009.
The public campaign for the contract attracted international attention, including personal appeals to President Bush from Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The Navy said politics did not factor into its decision.
The Navy said the Lockheed helicopter would meet its needs more quickly and on budget.
The contract calls for 23 helicopters, with the first to be delivered in 2009.
The public campaign for the contract attracted international attention, including personal appeals to President Bush from Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The Navy said politics did not factor into its decision.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wishing to be controversial, and the quote is only to serve the purpose of showing that opinions, are only opinions.
I personally cannot see what George W Bush would have had to gain politically by the decision. I do believe that Tony Bliar and Silvio Berlusconi would have a lot to gain by publically asking though. How long after the US101 decision did Italy withdraw from Iraq ...? Just my personal opinion, only time will tell the truth.
BBC 30th May 2003
I personally cannot see what George W Bush would have had to gain politically by the decision. I do believe that Tony Bliar and Silvio Berlusconi would have a lot to gain by publically asking though. How long after the US101 decision did Italy withdraw from Iraq ...? Just my personal opinion, only time will tell the truth.
BBC 30th May 2003
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said he believes weapons of mass destruction will be found in Iraq
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WASPY "What am I on" infers what? And like most here, I've neither flown or watched one be assembled. Does that mean you have done so and therefore you are the "One who walks amongst the unwashed" here. What data do I have? Only what I've digested here so perhaps you should read back a 100 pages of previous posts rather asking it to be re-hashed anew. And the BBC failed to report England along with other Europeon countries, past Presidents, Congress and the UN all agreed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Is that your best comeback in defense of the 101's terrible design? A bit off subject aren't you? No, I haven't got 101 drawings nor do I have V-22 drawings but just from reading what is here I can see the 101 will be another "Flying Pork Rind" for the US taxpayers to swallow.
If you really believe that "the 101 will be another "Flying Pork Rind" for the US taxpayers to swallow" then you deserve pity, rather than abuse.
When the US does buy a European type (and it's rare) it's usually because the advantages are huge - as with the B-57 Canberra, and the AV-8 Harrier. The US101 enjoys significant advantages, too.
What you call the "101's terrible design" has so far led to its selection (over and above the cheaper competing S-92) in Denmark, Portugal, Canada (where it was the CAF's preferred choice for both requirements, though politics dictated that it could not be bought for both) and Japan, where selecting a non-US machine was extraordinary and unexpected.
Presumably all political.....?
Let's reiterate, shall we? The EH101 has eight military customers (RN, RAF, MMI, CAF, RDAF, Portugal, USMC and JMSDF) while the S-92 has one - in Canada, where a second Merlin order was politically impossible after the Chimo/Petrel affair, but where the Merlin was the CAF's preferred choice for the NSH requirement.
The Merlin has demonstrated better performance, availability and operational usefulness with the RAF in Iraq than the Chinook, and is rapidly becoming the SF platform of choice in theatre. It's quiet, agile, extremely fast, and has big enough doors. It remains to be seen whether externally mounted tanks offer much of an advantage in today's operational conditions. Chinook experience would suggest otherwise.
The aircraft was the preferred choice of the CSAR community, according to every HH-60 pilot I spoke to who flew it, and scored high enough marks to win VH-X, ON MERIT, too.
The S-92 is a fine machine, and it enjoys some compelling advantages. As a warmed over S-70 derivative, it was always going to be cheap and quick to develop, and very competitively priced, and there's no denying that a twin-engined configuration will offer payload/range advantages over a triple, and that direct operating costs will be impressive. Perhaps that's why the S-92 has been greeted so enthusiastically by the offshore industry.
That does not make it the best choice for a military operator, however.
And I have seen both aircraft being assembled, have flown in both, and have flown the Merlin, briefly, though as a fixed wing PPL I would not claim that the experience gave me any particular insight, beyond noting that the quietness and smooth ride of the Merlin in its Heliliner configuration (and I've flown in PP8 as well as in HC3s) is astonishing, and unlike any other helicopter in which I've travelled. That's quite a factor for VVIP flying.
When the US does buy a European type (and it's rare) it's usually because the advantages are huge - as with the B-57 Canberra, and the AV-8 Harrier. The US101 enjoys significant advantages, too.
What you call the "101's terrible design" has so far led to its selection (over and above the cheaper competing S-92) in Denmark, Portugal, Canada (where it was the CAF's preferred choice for both requirements, though politics dictated that it could not be bought for both) and Japan, where selecting a non-US machine was extraordinary and unexpected.
Presumably all political.....?
Let's reiterate, shall we? The EH101 has eight military customers (RN, RAF, MMI, CAF, RDAF, Portugal, USMC and JMSDF) while the S-92 has one - in Canada, where a second Merlin order was politically impossible after the Chimo/Petrel affair, but where the Merlin was the CAF's preferred choice for the NSH requirement.
The Merlin has demonstrated better performance, availability and operational usefulness with the RAF in Iraq than the Chinook, and is rapidly becoming the SF platform of choice in theatre. It's quiet, agile, extremely fast, and has big enough doors. It remains to be seen whether externally mounted tanks offer much of an advantage in today's operational conditions. Chinook experience would suggest otherwise.
The aircraft was the preferred choice of the CSAR community, according to every HH-60 pilot I spoke to who flew it, and scored high enough marks to win VH-X, ON MERIT, too.
The S-92 is a fine machine, and it enjoys some compelling advantages. As a warmed over S-70 derivative, it was always going to be cheap and quick to develop, and very competitively priced, and there's no denying that a twin-engined configuration will offer payload/range advantages over a triple, and that direct operating costs will be impressive. Perhaps that's why the S-92 has been greeted so enthusiastically by the offshore industry.
That does not make it the best choice for a military operator, however.
And I have seen both aircraft being assembled, have flown in both, and have flown the Merlin, briefly, though as a fixed wing PPL I would not claim that the experience gave me any particular insight, beyond noting that the quietness and smooth ride of the Merlin in its Heliliner configuration (and I've flown in PP8 as well as in HC3s) is astonishing, and unlike any other helicopter in which I've travelled. That's quite a factor for VVIP flying.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Cornwall
Age: 75
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's some justice at least
Whatever the arguments and the 'conspiracy theories' I think it right and proper that the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth will get a (daily?) reminder of the consequences of going into a poorly thought-out war on the basis of a lie and then compounding the error by poorly managing the peace.
In 20 years time will President's sitting in their 101 on their way to work wonder to themselves how they happen to be traveling in a machine that had its origins not in Connecticut or Texas but in good ol' Europe.
We, of course, will be able to explain to him that alliances are formed with a price attached. If the 101 was UK's and Italy's price then let that me a lasting memorial to one President's stupidity and naivety.
G
In 20 years time will President's sitting in their 101 on their way to work wonder to themselves how they happen to be traveling in a machine that had its origins not in Connecticut or Texas but in good ol' Europe.
We, of course, will be able to explain to him that alliances are formed with a price attached. If the 101 was UK's and Italy's price then let that me a lasting memorial to one President's stupidity and naivety.
G
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wishing to continue this pizzing contest but the AV8 is the most dangerous aircraft in the world as we speak. That fact is well known so if that's another "huge advantage" from accross the pond I'd say it's only for the manufacturer and enemy it's trying to kill and not the pilot. My opinion is the 101 is another Flying Pork Rind along with the V-22 and so let's leave it at that.. Agreed?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan Reno
I was asking what proof or experience you had concerning "so much BS here about the 101" because you belittle the 101 as if you know it intimately, I was wondering how well you knew how it performed. You also state "but just from reading what is here" and that is my point exactly if you have formed your opinion of the 101 on the contents of this thread alone then you have formed it from a very limited source of data.
My last post begins with "Not wishing to be controversial, and the quote is only to serve the purpose of showing that opinions, are only opinions." This was in response to the preceeding post by Flying Lawyer, with a series of quotes concerning the political nature of the decision.
The political decision debate, post #93
"The win was based on the Navy deciding that the EH could be made ready for increment I 5 months faster than the H-92."
As for the "what are you on?" (it was not intended as an insult, apologies if it was taken as such - it could just be a "separated by a common language thing")
I have no idea what your statement implying the British are somehow harbouring a 200 year old grudge and have no comprehension of
"The US would swim to the Brits defense if need be but they certainly don't seem appreciative of our efforts in many ways" means or what it has to do with the Marine One Woes debate. It seems a deliberate slight on the British.
I was asking what proof or experience you had concerning "so much BS here about the 101" because you belittle the 101 as if you know it intimately, I was wondering how well you knew how it performed. You also state "but just from reading what is here" and that is my point exactly if you have formed your opinion of the 101 on the contents of this thread alone then you have formed it from a very limited source of data.
My last post begins with "Not wishing to be controversial, and the quote is only to serve the purpose of showing that opinions, are only opinions." This was in response to the preceeding post by Flying Lawyer, with a series of quotes concerning the political nature of the decision.
The political decision debate, post #93
"The win was based on the Navy deciding that the EH could be made ready for increment I 5 months faster than the H-92."
As for the "what are you on?" (it was not intended as an insult, apologies if it was taken as such - it could just be a "separated by a common language thing")
I have no idea what your statement implying the British are somehow harbouring a 200 year old grudge and have no comprehension of
"The US would swim to the Brits defense if need be but they certainly don't seem appreciative of our efforts in many ways" means or what it has to do with the Marine One Woes debate. It seems a deliberate slight on the British.
The Marine Corps view the AV-8B as pivotal to their conops. So much so, that they feel that they need a STOVL version of JSF to replace it.
It is no more dangerous than any other tactical, single-engined, shipborne aircraft of its generation, and indeed landing accidents are rather less likely if you stop and then land, rather than trying to land and then stop.
And those who fly it have a more robust attitude to loss rates than armchair bound internet buffs, clearly.
It is no more dangerous than any other tactical, single-engined, shipborne aircraft of its generation, and indeed landing accidents are rather less likely if you stop and then land, rather than trying to land and then stop.
And those who fly it have a more robust attitude to loss rates than armchair bound internet buffs, clearly.
A bit off centre I know, but earlier this month I queried of a salesman from Boeing why the CSAR competition was won by the noisiest contender?
The reply suggested that noise footprint was not a part of the customers requirement.
Living in an area regularly overflown by EH101 Merlin's and Chinook's the question I raised was prompted by having noted that the rotor beat of the Chinook can be heard long long before a Merlin operating at the same FL. That added to the recollection of a hostage rescue sojourn into Iran that would require an element of surprise would seem to suggest that 'stealth' should have played no small small part in the CSAR mission.
As such persons clearly played a part in selecting the Presidents craft perhaps we should not assume they have thought through all of the issues in a sensible manner!!
The reply suggested that noise footprint was not a part of the customers requirement.
Living in an area regularly overflown by EH101 Merlin's and Chinook's the question I raised was prompted by having noted that the rotor beat of the Chinook can be heard long long before a Merlin operating at the same FL. That added to the recollection of a hostage rescue sojourn into Iran that would require an element of surprise would seem to suggest that 'stealth' should have played no small small part in the CSAR mission.
As such persons clearly played a part in selecting the Presidents craft perhaps we should not assume they have thought through all of the issues in a sensible manner!!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Western MA
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dull your tongues for a moment to help this Gurkha.
PILOT PACIFIER said today:
"It is not often that I find myself embarrassed to say that I'm British. If I was to ever meet WO Pun, then I don't think that I could look him in the eye knowing how much this country has let him down..."
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...=277365&page=5
Stop throwing rocks accross the pond long enough to help this hero.
"It is not often that I find myself embarrassed to say that I'm British. If I was to ever meet WO Pun, then I don't think that I could look him in the eye knowing how much this country has let him down..."
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...=277365&page=5
Stop throwing rocks accross the pond long enough to help this hero.
Last edited by Dan Reno; 27th May 2007 at 22:40.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: mostly in the jungle...
Age: 59
Posts: 502
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nick,
you mentioned the BERP blades earlier.
What is the big detriment to new designed blades (you mentioned lack of lift, but why....). I mean the folks in the UK are not dumm. If there is no advantage in the BERP pieces, why stick with it?
By now prestige should really not be the problem anymore. For them there should be way more in the gamble now:
I assume that Westland/LM EH101/US101 deal has a lot to do with license fees, royalties, etc. If LM ends up building a better/new 101, surely any innovation will flow back across the big ditch.
As it looks the Increment II machines will not have a lot in common with the original 101 - modified shell and nothing else. Aaah, at least it looks similar
I really would appreciate some "simple" aerodynamic lesson about the BERP versus 92 or newer ideas blades! 2000 lbs of lift is no small change, 101-folks would be stupid to let that go ....
Hey, maybe LM will hire Gulf to help them out with the blades
3top
you mentioned the BERP blades earlier.
What is the big detriment to new designed blades (you mentioned lack of lift, but why....). I mean the folks in the UK are not dumm. If there is no advantage in the BERP pieces, why stick with it?
By now prestige should really not be the problem anymore. For them there should be way more in the gamble now:
I assume that Westland/LM EH101/US101 deal has a lot to do with license fees, royalties, etc. If LM ends up building a better/new 101, surely any innovation will flow back across the big ditch.
As it looks the Increment II machines will not have a lot in common with the original 101 - modified shell and nothing else. Aaah, at least it looks similar
I really would appreciate some "simple" aerodynamic lesson about the BERP versus 92 or newer ideas blades! 2000 lbs of lift is no small change, 101-folks would be stupid to let that go ....
Hey, maybe LM will hire Gulf to help them out with the blades
3top
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somerset
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
let's not go there
we have been down that route before (Berp vs others). Nick and the 'S92 supporters' have one view of the BERP blade, others (including me) have a different one, neither will agree that the other is correct and both sides will try and prove their own point with some supposed data without any definite answers being arrived at, eventually it will probably descend into a tirade of abuse.I am not bothering to rise to answer this as there are people here who hear but don't listen, but I will agree that you are entitled to believe whatever you wish if it's posted here (but remember it is a RUMOUR network and treat the statements here as such, everyone is biased to some degree and that is reflected in the posts here, including mine)
BTW the Aerodynamic theory of the blade is pretty well known and can be found across the web if you search.
DM
I am back early as it's raining here and the weekend got spoiled
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: mostly in the jungle...
Age: 59
Posts: 502
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DM,
"BTW the Aerodynamic theory of the blade is pretty well known and can be found across the web if you search."
That's why I ask here. Cannot find a consise answer. However if Nick claims a 2000 lb lift difference, he would (should?) be able to proof it.
As mentioned, I doubt that the UK-folks are any less ingenious than US.
2000 lbs is not a believe, but a rather solid number.
I would like to know how it was arrived at, and how the BERP folks look at this....
No bias, ..... by the time Inc. II is there, it is a new machine with an old name...
3top
"BTW the Aerodynamic theory of the blade is pretty well known and can be found across the web if you search."
That's why I ask here. Cannot find a consise answer. However if Nick claims a 2000 lb lift difference, he would (should?) be able to proof it.
As mentioned, I doubt that the UK-folks are any less ingenious than US.
2000 lbs is not a believe, but a rather solid number.
I would like to know how it was arrived at, and how the BERP folks look at this....
No bias, ..... by the time Inc. II is there, it is a new machine with an old name...
3top
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The statement s absolutely correct, the BERP blades on the EH-101 are 1980 technology, and produce less lift that modern blades, for the same power. This is provable, and not subject to any orders from the Crown.
Why? Because they were built in an attempt to both hover efficiently and also allow high speed cruise, and they were made to compete with the blades of the Black Hawk generation, which they do. Power-wise, the BERP is a bit more efficient then the BH blades (1972 technology.)
If one measures the power needed to produce a given lift in a hover, and corrects for disk loading, the result is called the Figure of Merit. The BERP is about 4% worse than the S-92/UH-60M blades (1995 technology) and also about 4% worse that the Carson S-61 blades or the EC-225 blades, (which are all in a pack, according to the flight manual data).
3top asks, "If there is no advantage in the BERP pieces, why stick with it?"
There is an advantage, they exist, and a new blade design costs about $100M to develop, and there is no incentive to spend that money (while there are lots of things to fix, otherwise). Remember, the EH-101 has Cathode Ray Tube cockpit with symbol generators, clearly 1985 technology, why does nobody defend them as well? because those CRT tubes don't have a press agent like BERP blades do!
BTW, I do owe dangermouse the data on how the EH-101 BERP blades provide no stall advantage over modern blades, but I cannot find my old computer file with some flight manual data (three moves in 2 years!). DM, do you have the max speed chart from the EH-101 flight manual?
Why? Because they were built in an attempt to both hover efficiently and also allow high speed cruise, and they were made to compete with the blades of the Black Hawk generation, which they do. Power-wise, the BERP is a bit more efficient then the BH blades (1972 technology.)
If one measures the power needed to produce a given lift in a hover, and corrects for disk loading, the result is called the Figure of Merit. The BERP is about 4% worse than the S-92/UH-60M blades (1995 technology) and also about 4% worse that the Carson S-61 blades or the EC-225 blades, (which are all in a pack, according to the flight manual data).
3top asks, "If there is no advantage in the BERP pieces, why stick with it?"
There is an advantage, they exist, and a new blade design costs about $100M to develop, and there is no incentive to spend that money (while there are lots of things to fix, otherwise). Remember, the EH-101 has Cathode Ray Tube cockpit with symbol generators, clearly 1985 technology, why does nobody defend them as well? because those CRT tubes don't have a press agent like BERP blades do!
BTW, I do owe dangermouse the data on how the EH-101 BERP blades provide no stall advantage over modern blades, but I cannot find my old computer file with some flight manual data (three moves in 2 years!). DM, do you have the max speed chart from the EH-101 flight manual?
The US101 will have BERP IV, not just BERP.....
and a new cockpit (already flying in CIV 01, and in the Danish Merlins, for which the five-screen LCD cockpit was designed).
NICK LAPPOS IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG IN CLAIMING THAT:
"LM chose to INVENT an entirely new cockpit for their EH-101, they scrapped everything that was in production" and yet, as always, he speaks with absolute authority.
and a new cockpit (already flying in CIV 01, and in the Danish Merlins, for which the five-screen LCD cockpit was designed).
NICK LAPPOS IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG IN CLAIMING THAT:
"LM chose to INVENT an entirely new cockpit for their EH-101, they scrapped everything that was in production" and yet, as always, he speaks with absolute authority.
Last edited by Jackonicko; 9th Jun 2007 at 12:08.