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

1986 UK Chinook Disaster Mini-Documentary

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

1986 UK Chinook Disaster Mini-Documentary

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 30th Jun 2022, 07:36
  #21 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,264
Received 180 Likes on 106 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I believe HUMS data stopped the rather punchy RAF Chinook display.
Not strictly HUMS, but an enhanced data recorder package that was fitted to a selection of aircraft. Some rather wince-inducing numbers came back, and subsequent investigation of the stresses that had been put on the blades was even more eye watering.... Health and safety gone mad it was definitely not!
PPRuNeUser0211 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2022, 12:00
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,317
Received 622 Likes on 270 Posts
Shame, it was a very good display but you can't argue with the data.

I displayed the Lynx at Cosford this year and I'm sure people were disappointed that there were no backflips, loops and rolls but you just can't do that stuff any more - the Blue Eagles Lynx had G meters and in the F700 all the manouevres were recorded , each of which reduce component life significantly.

A private owner can't afford to do that and the permit to fly wouldn't allow it anyway.
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2022, 19:51
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,244
Received 330 Likes on 183 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Shame, it was a very good display but you can't argue with the data.

I displayed the Lynx at Cosford this year and I'm sure people were disappointed that there were no backflips, loops and rolls but you just can't do that stuff any more - the Blue Eagles Lynx had G meters and in the F700 all the manouevres were recorded , each of which reduce component life significantly.

A private owner can't afford to do that and the permit to fly wouldn't allow it anyway.
was that XZ179?
212man is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2022, 20:22
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: EGDC
Posts: 10,317
Received 622 Likes on 270 Posts
Thumbs up

was that XZ179?
No, XZ 616 from Historic Helicopters, the first Lynx back on permit to fly
crab@SAAvn.co.uk is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2022, 20:41
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 3,833
Received 72 Likes on 28 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
No, XZ 616 from Historic Helicopters, the first Lynx back on permit to fly
Nice one, Crab.
MightyGem is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2022, 08:32
  #26 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes on 218 Posts
Originally Posted by [email protected]
I believe HUMS data stopped the rather punchy RAF Chinook display.
Slapping the tail rotor blades against the tail pylon stopped the Puma display!
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2022, 10:26
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 67
Posts: 2,090
Received 39 Likes on 21 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
HC.....thank you for confirming what I said....so perhaps what you missed is I was noting that exactly as stated in the Accident Report...new designs might not work as anticipated and that would include systems like Hums and similar technology and we should be very careful our consideration of their effectiveness.

I am old enough to remember rotor track and balance being done with a pole and flag and some grease pencils and lived long enough to see the Chadwick system come along and change the standard for the better.

Same for. Hums....I saw the old bent knuckle advance to the state of the art systems we enjoy today.

That being said....just as your comment reminds us there is a limit to every system's ability to give advance warning of failures.

But as in your example....the chip detector system had to be altered and improved didn't it?

Did Eurocopterr ever come out with the exact cause of the failures....the actual root cause?

I recall they were being a bit quiet about it despite stating they had it figured out and fixed.

I know it was a sad day for you when those Cabs got hauled off for use as potting sheds.

I felt the same when that happened to the Chinook on the North Sea.

The only good of that was Columbia got some darn good helicopters cheap and. have flown them since and made a lot of money tn the process.

Forecasts are the Chinook design shall be flying well over a hundred years after coming to service with the US Military.
My point was that HUMS was never expected to identify planet gear flaws, it was not designed into the system. Which is a bit different from expecting it to work and then finding out the hard way that it didn’t.
HeliComparator 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.