Boeing Chinook (RAF)

[Tinman]

Its called JPR, RAF Reg, 28 Sqn Merlins were training and developing tactics, doctrine for it.

Herrick and Telic finished off when DSF said its a remit of SF.

[ArmChairCivvy]

DSF said its a remit of SF

I was guessing it had gone along those lines (explains the choice of a/c).

[arfah]

............

[bobp]

Thanks Arfah I forgot about Cobham buying Flight Refuelling Ltd. As you mentioned a handy little earner.

[S M H]

The few C120 k had air to air refuelling kits in 1982 as a urgent requirement. The Royal Air Force let the kits go out of service. Now we are 30 years later aquireing the same capability !

[bobp]

They developed the refuelling probe for the C130k in a few days if I recall.

[ArmChairCivvy]

TD has done some in-depth digging (a recent 4-part series on Falklands) and in addition to the in-flight refuelling conversion (of 11; see below for the 7+4 technical detail) the role of 5 more with extra internal tanks should not be forgotten:

"Eight personnel and approximately 500kg of stores were parachuted into the sea 60 miles north of Stanley, to the awaiting replenishment vessel, RFA Fort Austin. 24 Hours and 45 Minutes after take-off, Hercules XV200 landed back at Wideawake, and no, that time is not a spelling mistake. 44 air despatch flights delivered everything from laser-guided Paveway II bombs and spare parts to SAS personnel and the new CO of 2 PARA after Goose Green.

Eleven RAF Hercules would be converted to enable inflight refuelling and four of these would also be converted to single point tankers with the Mk 18B refueling package."

[marktigger]

yes the tanks were old long range tanks from andover C1

[arfah]

............

[arfah]

............

[arfah]

............

[marktigger]

the foot print of a chinook in the hanger on a QE is going to drastically reduce what else can be carried and create huge spatial reasoning problems in trying to move them and other assets round

[ArmChairCivvy]

mark,

not true, the higher area within the hangar was specifically designed to accommodate Chinooks. What is missing is power-assisted folding of the rotor blades. They can be manually folded; tedious, time consuming, and in high winds outright dangerous.

The above has to be qualified with "how many Chinooks" are we talking about.

[marktigger]

mark,

not true, the higher area within the hangar was specifically designed to accommodate Chinooks. What is missing is power-assisted folding of the rotor blades. They can be manually folded; tedious, time consuming, and in high winds outright dangerous.

The above has to be qualified with "how many Chinooks" are we talking about.

the powered blade fold i think has been investigated a number of times. So is it feasible or just prohibitively expensive in term of cost, reliability and trade of in capability?
yes the height of the hanger had been designed to accommodate chinook and osprey however the foot print of the blades is another matter and how far they droop. it restricts the space you have to manouver things in the hanger. (carrier hangers tend to be fairly crowed places at the best of times). Manual folding is the current solution and in a hanger it should be easier to do. if you have the space.

[Aethulwulf]

Chinook blades can not be manually folded. They can be manually removed, but that is not the same as folded. Removing (and refitting) them is a fairly major engineering job (takes hours) and a test flight would probably be required after each refit.

The Sea Knight (CH46) has folding rotar blades, but not the Chinook (CH47).

[Gabriele]

I believe manual folding is possible, and long (always?) has been. On deck it could be a problem due to wind, but on Queen Elizabeth a Chinook can be put on the lift with the rotor spread wide and folded once down in the hangar.

The HC6 includes a rotor brake which should make it easier even on deck. Not to say it is the easiest or most popular thing to do, but it can be done.

[marktigger]

nice picture also demonstrates the droop issue very well

judging by the sea state not under way and in nice calm conditions.

[ArmChairCivvy]

in the "trades" say say dont criticise a job not finished (there is no issue with the other one, in the background).

If there is an issue, what is it? I mean , now, when the rotor lock has been introduced?

[marktigger]

will the lock stop the up and down motion of the blade?

I wonder if a successful blade fold is introduced will the USMC replace their CH53's with chinooks?

[downsizer]

Do you know what a rotor brake does?

[marktigger]

slows and stop rotating movement of a rotor blade?

but I'm not talking about the Rotating movement. Even with the head braked the blades will still move up and down in any sort of airflow and yes they are tied down but opening an moving them on a deck I'm sure is an interesting job.

[abc123]

Chinook blades can not be manually folded. They can be manually removed, but that is not the same as folded. Removing (and refitting) them is a fairly major engineering job (takes hours) and a test flight would probably be required after each refit.

The Sea Knight (CH46) has folding rotar blades, but not the Chinook (CH47).

A question:

How easy/hard is to take helicopter not originally projected to have folding blades and make it that you can fold them on a regular basis?

[Ron5]

Interesting story on UK Chinooks:

http://aviationweek.com/defense/raf-chi ... 0d419c57c7

[marktigger]

i wonder what the next evolution for the chinook will be?

[shark bait]

A quad tilt rotor?