SARH to go
Crab.
I've tried to stay out of this latest anti civvy rant but your assertion about the twin hoist fit needs correcting. When was it an option?(Genuine question.) Facts please, not your usual third hand information.
It was designed and developed by Bristow, not the hoist makers. Have you got a same capability, dual hoist fit on your yellow perils? No? Thought not! Going to get one? I doubt it!
Sorry for the willy waving but the mention of Billy(I know not by you) brought back a lot of memories, he was the genuine Mr. Nice Guy! And a good mate!
3D
I've tried to stay out of this latest anti civvy rant but your assertion about the twin hoist fit needs correcting. When was it an option?(Genuine question.) Facts please, not your usual third hand information.
It was designed and developed by Bristow, not the hoist makers. Have you got a same capability, dual hoist fit on your yellow perils? No? Thought not! Going to get one? I doubt it!
Sorry for the willy waving but the mention of Billy(I know not by you) brought back a lot of memories, he was the genuine Mr. Nice Guy! And a good mate!
3D
Bootneck,
Re early SAR, do you remember the Lucas Air Hoist? If I correctly recall they were used in the Forties and were stored on the rigs and fitted when necessary. I did an investigation on a failed cable in the seventies.
Re early SAR, do you remember the Lucas Air Hoist? If I correctly recall they were used in the Forties and were stored on the rigs and fitted when necessary. I did an investigation on a failed cable in the seventies.
Crab,
With respect, I do not believe in slagging people off needlessly, I entered the RAF as a Halton Apprentice (81st) straight from the school and I suspect that you entered from Uni or business but not from civil aviation. The Services rely on recruiting young persons. Your posts remind me of the attitude of the military instructors at Shawbury when DHFS was formed and civilianised, "the military system was the best" without any logical reason or investigation for believing that.
I will ask one question, who has the most experience and the largest overall fleet, excluding combat aircraft, military aviation or civil aviation? Withour rancour, or prejudice you have a lot to learn but I salute you for the job you are presently doing. Were you at or over Fairford today?
With respect, I do not believe in slagging people off needlessly, I entered the RAF as a Halton Apprentice (81st) straight from the school and I suspect that you entered from Uni or business but not from civil aviation. The Services rely on recruiting young persons. Your posts remind me of the attitude of the military instructors at Shawbury when DHFS was formed and civilianised, "the military system was the best" without any logical reason or investigation for believing that.
I will ask one question, who has the most experience and the largest overall fleet, excluding combat aircraft, military aviation or civil aviation? Withour rancour, or prejudice you have a lot to learn but I salute you for the job you are presently doing. Were you at or over Fairford today?
Last edited by Oldlae; 12th Jul 2008 at 08:58.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 67
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Has the S92 a greater radius of action than the Seaking or even the S61
2. Will the S92 ever be able to go as far as the Seaking without compromising cabin space?
Answer to 1: yes if you fit auxiliary tanks (according to the manufacturer's published information).
Answer to 2. no (see 1).
But the third question is: with the aux tanks fitted, is there enough space in the S92 cabin to get the job done?
Anyone able to cast light on that? Remember that a Sea King at 240 nm (the practical limit of its RoA if you are to do anything more than scoop and run once on scene) can lift about 12 survivors max on a good day. Can you get 12 survivors and an aux tank in an S92 cabin - I'm sure the beast will be space not weight limited? Or, worst case, can you jettison the tank once it's empty to make more space?
Sven
2. Will the S92 ever be able to go as far as the Seaking without compromising cabin space?
Answer to 1: yes if you fit auxiliary tanks (according to the manufacturer's published information).
Answer to 2. no (see 1).
But the third question is: with the aux tanks fitted, is there enough space in the S92 cabin to get the job done?
Anyone able to cast light on that? Remember that a Sea King at 240 nm (the practical limit of its RoA if you are to do anything more than scoop and run once on scene) can lift about 12 survivors max on a good day. Can you get 12 survivors and an aux tank in an S92 cabin - I'm sure the beast will be space not weight limited? Or, worst case, can you jettison the tank once it's empty to make more space?
Sven
3D - I may have gone over the top regarding the twin hoist but most of the criticisms I receive here are as a result of replying to those petty individuals who keep avoiding the bigger argument and instead pick on one word, phrase or sentence I use and focus on tearing that to pieces.
As for all the blah about being supercilious and arrogant, anyone who knows me will know that is not true - I am however, a passionate believer in the quality of military SAR because I know what we can do, and train for, and what others can't. I will reiterate, because someone will ignore the context and actual words I used, I do not have a downer on civvySAR or any of the individual crews' professional capabilities - I don't generate the 'willy waving' except to clarify what capabilites actually exist within milSAR as opposed to the memories of some who haven't done it for many years and don't understand where we have moved on to.
Despite all the protestations, the night overland SAR and multi-aircraft/multi agency Ops scenarios are where the military has all the experience both in operating the aircraft and in command and control. CivSar does not currently have this.
As for all the blah about being supercilious and arrogant, anyone who knows me will know that is not true - I am however, a passionate believer in the quality of military SAR because I know what we can do, and train for, and what others can't. I will reiterate, because someone will ignore the context and actual words I used, I do not have a downer on civvySAR or any of the individual crews' professional capabilities - I don't generate the 'willy waving' except to clarify what capabilites actually exist within milSAR as opposed to the memories of some who haven't done it for many years and don't understand where we have moved on to.
Despite all the protestations, the night overland SAR and multi-aircraft/multi agency Ops scenarios are where the military has all the experience both in operating the aircraft and in command and control. CivSar does not currently have this.
Old lae - since you mention DHFS - how many instructors who are not ex-military are employed there? Somewhere around none I believe. What does that tell you? That for training military pilots, you need current mil pilots and/or ex mil pilots. The DHFS system is not a civilian one, it is the same system as was used by the RAF before at Shawbury only with some instructors wearing 4 bars on their shoulders - all good guys and many excellent beefers. They don't teach a CAA syllabus they teach a military one.
Bootneck - Bristows are hardly likely to show themselves as anything other than exemplary on their own website are they? May I remind you that they lost the interim contract because they thought the MCA would just accept more of the same 20 year old service and were significantly outclassed by the professional bid from CHC.
Doc Brown - you claim to have met me - where and when? I don't claim to be an authority on UKSAR but as an ex-Sqn trg off I do claim to know the capabilities of the military element (2/3s of UK SAR). Perhaps you should ask those in the 1/3 minority what they know of current military capability.
Bootneck - Bristows are hardly likely to show themselves as anything other than exemplary on their own website are they? May I remind you that they lost the interim contract because they thought the MCA would just accept more of the same 20 year old service and were significantly outclassed by the professional bid from CHC.
Doc Brown - you claim to have met me - where and when? I don't claim to be an authority on UKSAR but as an ex-Sqn trg off I do claim to know the capabilities of the military element (2/3s of UK SAR). Perhaps you should ask those in the 1/3 minority what they know of current military capability.
Crab,
As an engineer I would never critcise aircrew training of any sort, I meant the acceptance of the different engineering procedures at DHFS. I know that it is a minor point which you don't seem to like, but perhaps you shouldn't leave yourself open by mentioning points that you may not be sure about.
As an engineer I would never critcise aircrew training of any sort, I meant the acceptance of the different engineering procedures at DHFS. I know that it is a minor point which you don't seem to like, but perhaps you shouldn't leave yourself open by mentioning points that you may not be sure about.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rescue 1
For goodness sake read the post before slagging Crab off - he was talking about Shawbury and the instructors there - nothing to do with SAR units
If you are civilian SAR - can you answer the question - what is the ROA of the S92 at the moment without cabin aux fuel tanks.
The way I read the graphs is that to pick up 10 people it has a ROA of 150nms - is that correct?
2strops
For goodness sake read the post before slagging Crab off - he was talking about Shawbury and the instructors there - nothing to do with SAR units
If you are civilian SAR - can you answer the question - what is the ROA of the S92 at the moment without cabin aux fuel tanks.
The way I read the graphs is that to pick up 10 people it has a ROA of 150nms - is that correct?
2strops
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Somewhere
Age: 49
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Upgrade Seaking HAR3
Crab
Can you answer this, I have just read the March/April issue of Defence helicopter there is an article about the Seakings deployed to Aghanistan.
The 3 HC4's have been upgraded to HC4+ and have Carson main blades new AW tail rotor blades and upgraded Gnomes all in all the article suggests the Seakings with these upgrades can perform 20% better with better fuel ecomonomy.
Can you shead light on this and and tell us what you know and can the HAR3/3a's be upgraded?
PB
Can you answer this, I have just read the March/April issue of Defence helicopter there is an article about the Seakings deployed to Aghanistan.
The 3 HC4's have been upgraded to HC4+ and have Carson main blades new AW tail rotor blades and upgraded Gnomes all in all the article suggests the Seakings with these upgrades can perform 20% better with better fuel ecomonomy.
Can you shead light on this and and tell us what you know and can the HAR3/3a's be upgraded?
PB
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sven
When did the rescue services last need to rescue 12 soles from 240nms?
Thats a good idea.
But the third question is: with the aux tanks fitted, is there enough space in the S92 cabin to get the job done?
Or, worst case, can you jettison the tank once it's empty to make more space?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 67
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something fishy here?
Sven
When did the rescue services last need to rescue 12 soles from 240nms?
Since Dover is pretty close I guess they must be lemon? Or is it all a bunch of cobblers?
When did the rescue services last need to rescue 12 soles from 240nms?
Since Dover is pretty close I guess they must be lemon? Or is it all a bunch of cobblers?
far enough?
http://www.pprune.org/forums/rotorhe...uard-crew.html
I believe the survivors may have left their boots to save weight? (no soles saved!)
I believe the survivors may have left their boots to save weight? (no soles saved!)
OldLAE - your post just referred to DHFS and the subject we were talking about was pilot training - why do you now say it was specifically the new engineering practises you were lauding when your post says nothing of the sort? I am confused - but that happens easily
The serviceability at DHFS is excellent but they have new aircraft and experienced engineers.
Pumaboy - the Carson blades modification was procured under a UOR for those few Mk 4s, I believe, so getting the same upgrade for all SeaKings would have to be justified another way. The blades massively improve all areas of the Sea King performance such that the normal FE limit of 127kts is available at MAUM and at high altitude whereas on a standard Sea King the performance drops off very quickly with either AUM or DA.
The PTIT measuring on the 1T engines has been accurately fudged so that whilst the guage indicated limit is still the same (795 degC PTIT) the actual PTIT is higher allowing more power to be pulled. The only difference I believe is that whilst the Max con on a normal engine is not cumulative, on the 1T it is and after amassing 2.5 mins the engine is rejected.
The combination of the two mods gives a large increase in hot and high performance which is exactly as claimed by Mr Carson - the Sea King fleet could be given a 'late-life' update that would give immediate performance benefits and probably save a lot of money in the mid to long term - so it probably won't happen. If they carried out these mods and an avionics upgrade on the Mk 3s we wouldn't need shiny S92s or 139s to do UK SAR
Rescue1 did I miss a post somewhere?
Bugs to 40 - I seem to remember that Lossie did a longranger for a lot of souls and had to exceed the MAUM in the process - sometime within the last 5 years I think.
The serviceability at DHFS is excellent but they have new aircraft and experienced engineers.Pumaboy - the Carson blades modification was procured under a UOR for those few Mk 4s, I believe, so getting the same upgrade for all SeaKings would have to be justified another way. The blades massively improve all areas of the Sea King performance such that the normal FE limit of 127kts is available at MAUM and at high altitude whereas on a standard Sea King the performance drops off very quickly with either AUM or DA.
The PTIT measuring on the 1T engines has been accurately fudged so that whilst the guage indicated limit is still the same (795 degC PTIT) the actual PTIT is higher allowing more power to be pulled. The only difference I believe is that whilst the Max con on a normal engine is not cumulative, on the 1T it is and after amassing 2.5 mins the engine is rejected.
The combination of the two mods gives a large increase in hot and high performance which is exactly as claimed by Mr Carson - the Sea King fleet could be given a 'late-life' update that would give immediate performance benefits and probably save a lot of money in the mid to long term - so it probably won't happen. If they carried out these mods and an avionics upgrade on the Mk 3s we wouldn't need shiny S92s or 139s to do UK SAR
Rescue1 did I miss a post somewhere?
Bugs to 40 - I seem to remember that Lossie did a longranger for a lot of souls and had to exceed the MAUM in the process - sometime within the last 5 years I think.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Retired to Bisley from the small African nation
Age: 67
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The PTIT measuring on the 1T engines has been accurately fudged so that whilst the guage indicated limit is still the same (795 degC PTIT) the actual PTIT is higher allowing more power to be pulled. The only difference I believe is that whilst the Max con on a normal engine is not cumulative, on the 1T it is and after amassing 2.5 mins the engine is rejected.
The combination of the two mods gives a large increase in hot and high performance which is exactly as claimed by Mr Carson - the Sea King fleet could be given a 'late-life' update that would give immediate performance benefits and probably save a lot of money in the mid to long term - so it probably won't happen. If they carried out these mods and an avionics upgrade on the Mk 3s we wouldn't need shiny S92s or 139s to do UK SAR
Two problems with the above.
-1T engines do nothing at all for you until the temperature gets above about +30. So for most of the time in the UK they are not worth having (bloody marvellous in the sandpits though).
Whatever you do to a Sea King, and I agree Crab's analysis that with Carson blades and modern avionics the machine would be transformed, in the last analysis its still a Sea King and needs something like 30 maintenance manhours per flying hour. Modern helicopters are an order of magnitude better than that. New aircraft are at least highly desirable, probably essential.
Sven
The combination of the two mods gives a large increase in hot and high performance which is exactly as claimed by Mr Carson - the Sea King fleet could be given a 'late-life' update that would give immediate performance benefits and probably save a lot of money in the mid to long term - so it probably won't happen. If they carried out these mods and an avionics upgrade on the Mk 3s we wouldn't need shiny S92s or 139s to do UK SAR
Two problems with the above.
-1T engines do nothing at all for you until the temperature gets above about +30. So for most of the time in the UK they are not worth having (bloody marvellous in the sandpits though).
Whatever you do to a Sea King, and I agree Crab's analysis that with Carson blades and modern avionics the machine would be transformed, in the last analysis its still a Sea King and needs something like 30 maintenance manhours per flying hour. Modern helicopters are an order of magnitude better than that. New aircraft are at least highly desirable, probably essential.
Sven
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Somewhere
Age: 49
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The whole point of this questioning was and if the SAR-H is delayed or even canx it would probably make sence to make a late life upgrade to fill the gap if the project is canx.
But Crab is right where would the money come fro for a mid-life upgrade as the MoD are cash Strapped
Crab thanks for yor input
PB
But Crab is right where would the money come fro for a mid-life upgrade as the MoD are cash Strapped
Crab thanks for yor input
PB
Crab,
Another minor point, sorry, to put the record straight I was referring to the interface between the Instructors and Engineering re the difference between the F700 and the civil Technical Log when accepting an aircraft as serviceable to fly.
Another minor point, sorry, to put the record straight I was referring to the interface between the Instructors and Engineering re the difference between the F700 and the civil Technical Log when accepting an aircraft as serviceable to fly.