Canadian Sea Kings grounded
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Royal Leamington Spa
Age: 78
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canadian Sea Kings grounded
Four months after the head of Canadašs air force expressed his utmost confidence in the Sea King helicopter, the military has grounded the aircraft indefinitely.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: here and there
Age: 67
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They would have there replacements Cyclones if Sikorsky meet there contract to supply by 2009. Still not meeting contract specifications is the reason for delay to deliver.
For a start they aren't Sea Kings! They are S61's......
To be precise they are Ch124's but they are identical in 99% of the case to an S61.
Secondly - so what if they "tipped forward" ...could have been the pilot!!!
Anyone out there know what happened?
CH148 a long long long way off and Sikorski must be haemorrhaging money.
To be precise they are Ch124's but they are identical in 99% of the case to an S61.
Secondly - so what if they "tipped forward" ...could have been the pilot!!!
Anyone out there know what happened?
CH148 a long long long way off and Sikorski must be haemorrhaging money.
Last edited by Thomas coupling; 17th Jul 2013 at 21:04.
They are Sikorsky Sea-Kings. (CH-124)
They were manufactured by Sikorsky, in Canada, and are 100% based on the SH-3. They have nothing in common with the commercial S61, other than being a military variant of the same basic platform. There are lots of interchangeable designs, parts and systems between the H-3 series and S61, but they are not the same aircraft.
Closer examination will reveal they have;
T-58 engines
24000 Series Main Transmission
Folding Rotor Head (and applicable metal blades)
Short tail pylon (and applicable tail rotor blades)
Short airframe
Small sponsons
They were manufactured by Sikorsky, in Canada, and are 100% based on the SH-3. They have nothing in common with the commercial S61, other than being a military variant of the same basic platform. There are lots of interchangeable designs, parts and systems between the H-3 series and S61, but they are not the same aircraft.
Closer examination will reveal they have;
T-58 engines
24000 Series Main Transmission
Folding Rotor Head (and applicable metal blades)
Short tail pylon (and applicable tail rotor blades)
Short airframe
Small sponsons
.
And if the commander of the RCAF talks about Sea King, maybe we can consider that he is right ...
Rule number one : the chief is always right !
.
And if the commander of the RCAF talks about Sea King, maybe we can consider that he is right ...
Rule number one : the chief is always right !
.
Last edited by HeliHenri; 18th Jul 2013 at 10:08.
I stand corrected - sincere apologies.
Perhaps I should have been more succinct:
There are 2 SeaKings in the world:
Sikorsky and Westland.
These two versions are like chalk and cheese is what I should have said.
The differences are (to name a few) with engines/electrics/governors/dimensions/gearbox.
Would still love to know why the cab "tipped forward". Unless the pilot did it it can surely only be a runaway fwd in pitch?
Perhaps I should have been more succinct:
There are 2 SeaKings in the world:
Sikorsky and Westland.
These two versions are like chalk and cheese is what I should have said.
The differences are (to name a few) with engines/electrics/governors/dimensions/gearbox.
Would still love to know why the cab "tipped forward". Unless the pilot did it it can surely only be a runaway fwd in pitch?
Absolutely no need to apologize... 
There are actually four series of Sea-Kings in the World. Sikorsky is the original, and the other three are licence built variants. Westland, Agusta and Mitsubishi all built significant numbers of this great aircraft under licence.
Tipping forward?
Too much fuel or personnel forward, not enough aft
Brakes seizing (common post maintenance item)
Taxiing (and stopping) with a significant tailwind
Pothole, drain or other ground hazard
Releasing cyclic with trim turned off
SAS or servo runaway
Mixing unit bellcrank or component failure
Flight control failure or interference (like tail wheel lock cable in flight controls)
Flight control hardware failure or lack of safety causing loss of flight control integrity
Something completely new that hasn't been seen before!
There are actually four series of Sea-Kings in the World. Sikorsky is the original, and the other three are licence built variants. Westland, Agusta and Mitsubishi all built significant numbers of this great aircraft under licence.
Tipping forward?
Too much fuel or personnel forward, not enough aft
Brakes seizing (common post maintenance item)
Taxiing (and stopping) with a significant tailwind
Pothole, drain or other ground hazard
Releasing cyclic with trim turned off
SAS or servo runaway
Mixing unit bellcrank or component failure
Flight control failure or interference (like tail wheel lock cable in flight controls)
Flight control hardware failure or lack of safety causing loss of flight control integrity
Something completely new that hasn't been seen before!
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Aberdare, Wales
Age: 31
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cyclic Hotline, thank you for clarifying the situation between the versions of Sea King.
Are there really differing dimensions between the Sikorsky, Westland, Agusta and Mitsubishi built versions?
Are there really differing dimensions between the Sikorsky, Westland, Agusta and Mitsubishi built versions?
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hassocks, Mid-Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SH-3 Sea King
Some people still believe the name "Sea King" was given to this aircraft by Westland. It was not. The Sea King was named Sea King by Sikorsky.
Boeing would go on to name their next naval helicopter (a year after the introduction of the Sea King) the Sea Knight/CH-46.
The Sea King - built by Agusta, see here. It was used to fly the Pope until the introduction of the AW139.
Designation Agusta-Sikorsky SH-3D
Boeing would go on to name their next naval helicopter (a year after the introduction of the Sea King) the Sea Knight/CH-46.
What was the Agusta version?
Designation Agusta-Sikorsky SH-3D
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hassocks, Mid-Sussex
Age: 67
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S-61 Silver was a totally different project.
SH-3D (built by Agusta) additionally served the Italian Navy and was also bought by the Iranian Navy and Iraqi Air Force.
SH-3D (built by Agusta) additionally served the Italian Navy and was also bought by the Iranian Navy and Iraqi Air Force.
Basic dimensions for all of the Sea-King variants started out exactly the same. The SH-3H upgraded model utilizes a 4 inch longer tail pylon, permitting the use of the longer tail rotor blades, thus improving tail rotor performance just like the commercial S61N model.
The HH-3E (S61R) is a slighty longer airframe than the H-3, and is the basic design for the current "stretch" SH-3 (prospective S61T) because all the parts like flight controls, etc, already exist.
The commercial S61N and S61L both had stretched airframes, with plugs behind the cockpit, to provide more cabin space, and a range of cargo or airstair door configurations, but more importantly to remedy a serious aft C of G limitation with the basic design. The "L" model had the same short tail pylon as the H-3, whereas the "N" model had a longer pylon, and various changes to the tail rotor drive-train and stabilizer.
I was never CAF, but am intimately familiar with all variants.
The basic Agusta versions were straight licence built Sikorsky SH-3D models, and everything on them is identical to a Sikorsky built model. Agusta also built a large number of HH-3 models. Agusta's licence territory covered Southern Europe, North Africa, Middle East and South America. Many remain in service.
Concur with the naming convention of the US Navy helicopters - the basic protocol originated with the Navy (same for the Army with Native American tribes).
The Agusta S61N1 Silver was a short S61 (SH-3D length) commercial S61N helicopter. The timing was wrong; if they had started building them 5 years earlier and incorporated some significant upgrades, it would probably have been a raging success - but they didn't. Two helicopters were ever built and both were sold to, and are still operated by the Royal Malaysian Air Force.
The HH-3E (S61R) is a slighty longer airframe than the H-3, and is the basic design for the current "stretch" SH-3 (prospective S61T) because all the parts like flight controls, etc, already exist.
The commercial S61N and S61L both had stretched airframes, with plugs behind the cockpit, to provide more cabin space, and a range of cargo or airstair door configurations, but more importantly to remedy a serious aft C of G limitation with the basic design. The "L" model had the same short tail pylon as the H-3, whereas the "N" model had a longer pylon, and various changes to the tail rotor drive-train and stabilizer.
I was never CAF, but am intimately familiar with all variants.
The basic Agusta versions were straight licence built Sikorsky SH-3D models, and everything on them is identical to a Sikorsky built model. Agusta also built a large number of HH-3 models. Agusta's licence territory covered Southern Europe, North Africa, Middle East and South America. Many remain in service.
Concur with the naming convention of the US Navy helicopters - the basic protocol originated with the Navy (same for the Army with Native American tribes).
The Agusta S61N1 Silver was a short S61 (SH-3D length) commercial S61N helicopter. The timing was wrong; if they had started building them 5 years earlier and incorporated some significant upgrades, it would probably have been a raging success - but they didn't. Two helicopters were ever built and both were sold to, and are still operated by the Royal Malaysian Air Force.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Utrecht, Nederland
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First photos of crashed Sea King
The Canadian military has released photographs taken after a Sea King helicopter tipped forward and smashed its five rotor blades on the tarmac at Canadian Forces Base Shearwater in Halifax.
No one was hurt in Monday's incident, which led to indefinite grounding of the Sea King fleet.
No one was hurt in Monday's incident, which led to indefinite grounding of the Sea King fleet.
The first photograph taken at night shows the helicopter laying on its left side with its tail rotor laying on the right side of the tarmac. Courtesy Department of National Defence
The second photograph taken during daytime shows a rear view of the helicopter. Courtesy Department of National Defence
On Tuesday the wing commander at the base, Lieutenant-Colonel James Hawthorne, said the taxiing chopper tipped forward causing each of the 10-metre blades to break into pieces of flying debris that dented walls and broke glass on surrounding buildings.
Investigators from the military's directorate of flight safety are continuing to conduct a technical assessment of the incident.
Investigators from the military's directorate of flight safety are continuing to conduct a technical assessment of the incident.