Md902 Explorer Ship ops.
Tightgit
I'm pretty sure that either a Belgian or Dutch Company used the 902 for dropping off harbour pilots so that probably included a bit of winch work and the odd deck landing. For deck work I would have thought the 902 would be fine, no experience of USLs with the 902 I'm afraid.
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Top heavy.
Griffo - that was the first thing that struck me as I stood next to the towering beast. Can't help but think that it'll feel uncomfortable sitting on a pitching deck. Wonder what the actual limits are...
I notice from the bumff on the website there is a an elaborate tie down procedure for ship-borne ops. Hmmm.
I notice from the bumff on the website there is a an elaborate tie down procedure for ship-borne ops. Hmmm.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: England
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at the following links it appears that some early versions of the MD Explorer (known as the MH-90 Enforcer) have already successfully carried out maritime operations with the US Coastguard as described in the following links:
MH-90 Enforcer
U.S. Coast Guard Aviation History
Those operations may have actually involved at least 4 of the helicopters and appears to have been successful and much liked by the US Coastguard.
I also suspect that back in those days less powerful engines may have been used than those currently available on the more modern MD902 Explorer. With even more engine power available I would have thought that would make them even better for maritime operations.
However, as I am not a pilot I cannot speak with any authority about that.
MH-90 Enforcer
U.S. Coast Guard Aviation History
Those operations may have actually involved at least 4 of the helicopters and appears to have been successful and much liked by the US Coastguard.
I also suspect that back in those days less powerful engines may have been used than those currently available on the more modern MD902 Explorer. With even more engine power available I would have thought that would make them even better for maritime operations.
However, as I am not a pilot I cannot speak with any authority about that.
Timex and Gullwings,
The 902 landing on THV Mermaid or Patricia during winter ops will be exciting enough for those concerned, but my last post was really referring to the old days when we did crew changes to the various light vessels around the coast..... If you see one up close and personal you will know what I mean
Anyways, enough of the war stories...... I'm sure the 902 will cope with the larger Trinity decks no problem. Have fun guy's
The 902 landing on THV Mermaid or Patricia during winter ops will be exciting enough for those concerned, but my last post was really referring to the old days when we did crew changes to the various light vessels around the coast..... If you see one up close and personal you will know what I mean
Anyways, enough of the war stories...... I'm sure the 902 will cope with the larger Trinity decks no problem. Have fun guy's
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Downwind
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure there was a marine pilot operation in China (Shanghai?) that used the 902.
Unfortunately the operation suffered a fatal accident as noted on a thread here.
I've no idea if there was an investigation or a report, but there might be something out there.
Unfortunately the operation suffered a fatal accident as noted on a thread here.
I've no idea if there was an investigation or a report, but there might be something out there.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Timex - re C of G
Interesting that you compare such aircraft to the 902, from a C of G standpoint.
In turn
- Gazelle, very low C of G, albeit on a fairly narrow track skid, but never used "properly" (i.e. over the ocean) as a ship-borne aircraft, rather used from Amphibious Decks, and therefore close to shore without a lot of deck movement.
- Lynx - really low C of G, fabulous "flat" gearbox, sub-min pitch, harpoon and tricycle undercarriage with massive shock absorbtion ability - ideally suited for big ocean, small shipborne operations & embarrassed to be compared to a 902 in this role!
- Wessex - engines in the chin gave it a much lower C of G than might be expected from just looking at it. Tricycle undercarriage and well able to handle ship ops, though generally operated from larger vessels and, apart from the Mk3, more often used close to shore for Amphibious Ops.
- Sea King - Queen of Ocean ops for over 40 years, generally operated from larger decks and not worth comparing to a 902 either!
Overall, comparisons, on the grounds of top-heaviness should probably not be made with any of the mentioned aircraft, all which have all proved themselves many times over in every role they've been called upon to perform, and many others they've found themselves in. The comparator, on the other hand, despite being a generation or two "ahead" of the four types mentioned, will take many years to be regarded in a similar light, I'd provocatively suggest!!
Can't see why you are worrying, Gazelle, Lynx, Wessex, Sea King etc etc and numerous other types seem to have managed so I don't see why the 902 won't.
In turn
- Gazelle, very low C of G, albeit on a fairly narrow track skid, but never used "properly" (i.e. over the ocean) as a ship-borne aircraft, rather used from Amphibious Decks, and therefore close to shore without a lot of deck movement.
- Lynx - really low C of G, fabulous "flat" gearbox, sub-min pitch, harpoon and tricycle undercarriage with massive shock absorbtion ability - ideally suited for big ocean, small shipborne operations & embarrassed to be compared to a 902 in this role!
- Wessex - engines in the chin gave it a much lower C of G than might be expected from just looking at it. Tricycle undercarriage and well able to handle ship ops, though generally operated from larger vessels and, apart from the Mk3, more often used close to shore for Amphibious Ops.
- Sea King - Queen of Ocean ops for over 40 years, generally operated from larger decks and not worth comparing to a 902 either!
Overall, comparisons, on the grounds of top-heaviness should probably not be made with any of the mentioned aircraft, all which have all proved themselves many times over in every role they've been called upon to perform, and many others they've found themselves in. The comparator, on the other hand, despite being a generation or two "ahead" of the four types mentioned, will take many years to be regarded in a similar light, I'd provocatively suggest!!
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
zorab: I think you are right in suggesting that any aircraft cannot be considered proven until tested in an environment such as offshore, as it much more extreme than onshore ops.
LarryIsHappy: I hope you're right.
LarryIsHappy: I hope you're right.
Last edited by DeltaNg; 25th Nov 2009 at 23:01.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- Gazelle, very low C of G, albeit on a fairly narrow track skid, but never used "properly" (i.e. over the ocean) as a ship-borne aircraft, rather used from Amphibious Decks, and therefore close to shore without a lot of deck movement.
I get your point though.
