Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Rotorheads
Reload this Page >

Chinook Question?

Wikiposts
Search
Rotorheads A haven for helicopter professionals to discuss the things that affect them

Chinook Question?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 5th Jul 2010, 11:06
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 119
Received 33 Likes on 19 Posts
Chinook Question?

Hi All

I am currently reading Eye of the Storm by Peter Ratcliffe about his time in the SAS.
In this book he mentions getting onto a Chinook in Saudi Arabia during desert storm when " The aircraft began to shake preparatory to take-off, the pilot suddenly shuts down. The racket and vibration suddenly began to dininish and the rotors began to slow.The pilot announced we have a problem its either a fuel blockage or its the hydraulics. If it is fuel it will be 30 min if it is hydraulics we'll be at least 2 hours."
It ends up been hydraulics and the flight is delayed.

When I first read this I dismissed the facts initially as I could not think of any problem on the types I fly that would have me confused between those two systems. So my initial reaction was that the author probably has his facts mixed up. However in his book he appears to try to be factual so to any Chinook drivers out the is there any problems you can develop that would need checking both systems and what would cause them? or has the Author made a mistake?

Cheers
SLFMS is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2010, 11:23
  #2 (permalink)  

Hovering AND talking
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
" The aircraft began to shake preparatory to take-off, the pilot suddenly shuts down. The racket and vibration suddenly began to dininish and the rotors began to slow.The pilot announced we have a problem its either a fuel blockage or its the hydraulics. If it is fuel it will be 30 min if it is hydraulics we'll be at least 2 hours."
Is this your paraphrase, or a verbatim quote from the book?

Cheers

Whirls
Whirlygig is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2010, 13:22
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 119
Received 33 Likes on 19 Posts
It is a quote from the book although I did remove some non relevent sentences from the paragraph.
SLFMS is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2010, 13:58
  #4 (permalink)  

Hovering AND talking
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
suddenly began to dininish
Either something stops suddenly or it gradually slows - it can't suddenly fade ....

If that's the standard of Peter Ratcliffe's English, then I would take the "facts" with a pinch of salt. If it's a paraphrase, then exact wording would be more helpful.

Cheers

Whirls

Last edited by Whirlygig; 5th Jul 2010 at 19:28. Reason: To clarify
Whirlygig is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2010, 15:32
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Goodwood, Sussex, UK
Age: 70
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Perhaps it is an Australian version containing colloquialisms unknown beyond their borders!
Earl of Rochester is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2010, 17:10
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USofA
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I can't think of anything which would create confusion between fuel and hydraulics; especially with excessive vibrations during run-up. I suppose "preparatory to take-off" could mean anything from initial start-up to before take-off checks. The AFCS hydraulics are an obvious culprit with vibes since there could be adverse feedback, air in the system, or any number of other problems. A fuel blockage though should really only starve an engine and cause it to run weak or shut down completely (assuming it is beyond the cross valve). I think I would be more worried about imbalances in the driveshafts or rotors.

I'm with Whirlygig, take this with a grain of salt!
Hooker47 is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2010, 20:14
  #7 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A side note

Peter Ratcliffe served about twenty five years in the British SAS and was the RSM when he left. He states in his book that it was written to correct some of the nonsense that has been written about the SAS in recent years, especially after books like 'Bravo Two Zero" and "The One That Got Away" came out. I didn't think the book was that well written from the grammatical sense, (as if I would know!). I think he was concentrating on giving an accurate account from the Army point of view rather than an aviation one.

Ratcliff's book has been criticised quite strongly by some of those he accused of talking 'tosh' - we will never know!

Last edited by parabellum; 5th Jul 2010 at 20:39.
parabellum is offline  
Old 5th Jul 2010, 21:04
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: GMT
Age: 53
Posts: 2,063
Received 180 Likes on 66 Posts
It would have been a Mark 1 Chinook, though I can't think of why a fuel blockage would cause vibration, maybe someone else could shed light on it.

The vibration could stem from any number of problems with the hydraulics, in common with most helicopters.
minigundiplomat is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2010, 01:23
  #9 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 119
Received 33 Likes on 19 Posts
I also thought the author was probably mistaken however I dont know anything about Chinooks so I have not presumed to be correct.
Without getting stuck on words there was a problem and the pilots shut down. The phrase "its either a fuel blockage or its the hydraulics." is the bit that had my focus.
I have had vapour in the fuel lines on start and that can be quite noisy and also have vibrations. It is not hard to diagnose though.
With the hydralics/AFCS I understand how vibrations could occur and need ground inspection to work out where the problem is coming from.
Personally though the issues I have had, it has been apparent which system is playing up.
My question for Chinook drivers is, can you have a problem where you would be unsure as to the origin,either from the fuel or the hydralics?

Cheers
SLFMS is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2010, 02:41
  #10 (permalink)  

Just beating the air into submission!
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AS an ex Chinook driver, the two systems are completely separate and there is 'artistic licence' applied here for effect. However, knowning the RAF maintainers the greatest artistic licence is in the phrase: "If it is fuel it will be 30 min if it is hydraulics we'll be at least 2 hours." The maintainers would never work that fast. No wonder the flight was delayed!
HeliAviator is offline  
Old 6th Jul 2010, 23:46
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USofA
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My question for Chinook drivers is, can you have a problem where you would be unsure as to the origin,either from the fuel or the hydralics?
As I said yesterday, I can think of no instances where I would be confused between hydraulics and fuel. In addition, I can think of no reason why the fuel system would cause vibrations of any kind.

Fuel tank, cross feeds, engine. Done. If there was a block in the tank the other tanks would feed the blocked engine. If there was a block in the cross feed the tanks would feed the engine on their respective side. If there was a block at the engine, I would imagine it would simply stop running. None of these scenarios should be coupled with vibrations.

Generally, vibrations on takeoff are caused by blades, shafts, or hydraulics.

Ignoring vibrations completely and I still can think of nothing which would create confusion between the two. Fuel obviously is used only for the engines and the APU. The only time hydraulics even gets close to these parts is during initial start-up. Stored hydraulics pressure gets the APU spinning and then it creates pressure to start the main engines. It is very easy to differentiate between a hydraulics problem versus fuel problem on start-up: doesn't spin, it's hydraulics; doesn't fire, it's fuel.

Clear as mud?
Hooker47 is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2010, 00:58
  #12 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 119
Received 33 Likes on 19 Posts
Great thank you Hooker47 and Heliaviator and others for your replies that was what I was after.
Incidentaly Hooker47 I have had partial light offs in a engine (s76) which can be interpreted as vibrations however nothing like rotor/shaft unbalance. I guess it depends on how one defines vibrations. As you said though crossfeeding for the start and priming the engine solves the problem quickly if it does not just stop itself.
From the Authors perspective he may have heard the pilot wrong or just remembered it wrong. I just wanted to check.

Cheers

P.S
I really enjoyed the book. Although it was not writen that well. It was still a good informative read. If you like that type of book I would recommend it.
SLFMS is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2010, 18:59
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Tulsa
Age: 45
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CH-47 Startup

I am a former CH-47D IP, and here is an answer.

The author probably did not intend to imply that the shaking or noises were caused by a fuel or hydraulic problem. I think you may be reading that into the story.

Unless the section of the book goes on to further connect the problem with the physical description of a normal aborted startup, he was just describing the events (although I see how you could think they were connected). He was overly descriptive of a normal startup and shutdown and, without stating it, went right into stating the cause of the entirely normal "sudden shutdown". Most likely, the shutdown was initiated because a crewmember spotted a leaking fluid that had yet to be identified. (Yeah, yeah, I know. If a hook doesn’t leak that means it's empty.)

If you want to know why the shaking made it in the book, if it was "normal", read on:

So why would a writer who has possibly ridden on plenty of helicopters, maybe even Chinooks, think that the shaking was notable? Short answer: Big tandem rotors shake the bird a lot during run-up.

Almost everyone who sits on a hook during startup, especially someone who has little experience sitting on tandem rotor helo's during run-up, will notice quite a lot of shaking and noise. Both are completely normal. They are caused by the imbalances that are experienced as the rotors transits through various rpm bands that are experienced only when the rotor is spinning below normal operating speeds.

All full size helicopters’ rotors are only balanced for specific operational ranges. The tandem design just makes startup particularly rough because they have two unbalanced rotors that are displaced in plane of rotation, waterline, blade pitch, and, most notably, arm. The offset main rotor systems create oscillations that interfere with each other.
rotorwarsh is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2010, 20:49
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The great thing about the Chinook is that you could have a full formal dinner actualy inside it with about 25 present. I only say this because despite having 800+ hours on the beast I've forgotten the tech.
wallsend is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.