CH-47 Chinook

[Weaver]

With you on the HC.3 now Kit. Italieri do an MH-47E with the same nose that's available in the UK: http://www.hannants.co.uk/search/?FULL=IT1218

Now that's REALLY handy, thanks. The MH-47E is almost the same shape as the HC3, complete with uber large sponsons and the extra bulges etc. I feel some plastic cutting coming on...........again! 

And if you look at a sprue shot, it's the standard fuselage complete with moulded-in standard sponsons that you have to cut off to fit the set of big ones that come on a separate sprue. That gives you the option of using the standard sponsons which are narrower: anything to reduce the Chinook's enormous deck/hanger footprint particularly since you're making it longer with the radar nose.

[jonesthetank]

In terms of sonar placement, why not go with something similar to the Swedish HKP4 (KV107)?

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Sweden---Navy/Kawasaki-Hkp4C-(KV-107-II-16)/0797498/L/&sid=2e8099f6362ea736bb3dbe256783718c

[Weaver]

Don't forget its an ASW Chinook the Cabin & Doors would be configured for the crew entry only as the Cabin would be fitted for Radar & Sonar equipment and operators. The Radar itself would be probably fitted under the fuselage in a similar manner to the Spanish Seakings. Torpedoes, Depth charges and sonar bouys would likely be carried in eith a weapons bay or attached to the enlarged sponsons.

SAR & Utility role aboard RN ships would probably remain with the Wessex although a Navalised CH-47 would probably take over the role as the Seakings actually did.

The adoption of the Chinook as the RNs large Naval Helo instead of the Seaking does raise another interesting aspect, as most post 60's designs have had Sea King compatability built into them. Would designs such as the Type 22 (II, III), Type 23, Type 45, Ocean and RFA's now have larger flight decks and hangers to allow for navalised Chinook to be operated and hangered (The newer ships are designed to allow a Chinook to use the flight deck but not hangered !!!.

G

The requirement for big helos on frigates was driven by the need to prosecute long-range contacts made by the new towed-array sonars. Options would be:

1. Buy an off-the-shelf design (Sea King? Seahawk?) until Merlin was available,

2. Develop a new big frigate helo nationally. Since not buying the Sea King would almost certainly mean that Westland didn't build it at all, probable the best option would be the WG.30, i.e. the big-cabin Lynx. That would cost a packet in the short term, but it would then position Westland to win both the Puma replacement and NH-90 competitions, which would be very good in the long term.

3. Re-organaise the RN to have more Chinook carriers, so that a towed-array frigate didn't have to relay on it's own air assets to prosecute the contact. Building more RFAs with this capability, plus the ability to re-fuel and re-arm them (but not hanger/service them) on the frigates would be one solution.

[PR19_Kit]

This is a dual role ASW/SAR aircraft, it's surely big enough. 

Actually the issue about the hangar size is only one factor in the 'shipability' of the aircraft. When the first Merlin made a landing on the after deck of RFA Fort Victoria, then in dry dock in Portsmouth, the downwash blew the 'roller-blind' hangar doors right into the hangar! I'd think a Wokka would be even worse from that point of view.

[Weaver]

This is a dual role ASW/SAR aircraft, it's surely big enough. 

Actually the issue about the hangar size is only one factor in the 'shipability' of the aircraft. When the first Merlin made a landing on the after deck of RFA Fort Victoria, then in dry dock in Portsmouth, the downwash blew the 'roller-blind' hangar doors right into the hangar! I'd think a Wokka would be even worse from that point of view.

Possibly, possibly not: one of the advantages of a twin-rotor design is lower disc-loading, which translates as lower-energy downwash.....

[kitnut617]

And if you look at a sprue shot, it's the standard fuselage complete with moulded-in standard sponsons that you have to cut off to fit the set of big ones that come on a separate sprue. That gives you the option of using the standard sponsons which are narrower:

I've got a couple of these kits, cutting out the standard sponsons is made very easy by it having a score line moulded in on the inside. It's where I got the sponsons for my EH-101 Petrel project.

[rickshaw]

This is a dual role ASW/SAR aircraft, it's surely big enough. 

Actually the issue about the hangar size is only one factor in the 'shipability' of the aircraft. When the first Merlin made a landing on the after deck of RFA Fort Victoria, then in dry dock in Portsmouth, the downwash blew the 'roller-blind' hangar doors right into the hangar! I'd think a Wokka would be even worse from that point of view.

Possibly, possibly not: one of the advantages of a twin-rotor design is lower disc-loading, which translates as lower-energy downwash.....

Never been near an Angry Chook have you?

[Weaver]

This is a dual role ASW/SAR aircraft, it's surely big enough. 

Actually the issue about the hangar size is only one factor in the 'shipability' of the aircraft. When the first Merlin made a landing on the after deck of RFA Fort Victoria, then in dry dock in Portsmouth, the downwash blew the 'roller-blind' hangar doors right into the hangar! I'd think a Wokka would be even worse from that point of view.

Possibly, possibly not: one of the advantages of a twin-rotor design is lower disc-loading, which translates as lower-energy downwash.....

Never been near an Angry Chook have you?

Nope - how does it compare to a Merlin? (Should have said "one of the theoretical advantages..."  )

[kitnut617]

Possibly, possibly not: one of the advantages of a twin-rotor design is lower disc-loading, which translates as lower-energy downwash.....

Never been near an Angry Chook have you?

Beat me to it ----   I was going to say the downwash was one of the big things that was griped about when the Chinook got awarded the USAF CSAR job.

[famvburg]

        I was just gonna say that I've been around taxying & hovering Chinooks before & I think I'd rather stand in a hurricane!

This is a dual role ASW/SAR aircraft, it's surely big enough. 

Actually the issue about the hangar size is only one factor in the 'shipability' of the aircraft. When the first Merlin made a landing on the after deck of RFA Fort Victoria, then in dry dock in Portsmouth, the downwash blew the 'roller-blind' hangar doors right into the hangar! I'd think a Wokka would be even worse from that point of view.

Possibly, possibly not: one of the advantages of a twin-rotor design is lower disc-loading, which translates as lower-energy downwash.....

[Weaver]

Okay, okay! 

My point was that a twin-rotor helo should have a lower-energy downwash than a single-rotor one of equivalent power, but that doesn't change the fact that a Chook is a damned big machine with upto 9000 shp pushing air about. As to whether this would be a problem on board ship, it's worth remembering that the CH-53E Super Stallion is routinely used on board ships despite having over 13,000 shp.

[rickshaw]

This is a dual role ASW/SAR aircraft, it's surely big enough. 

Actually the issue about the hangar size is only one factor in the 'shipability' of the aircraft. When the first Merlin made a landing on the after deck of RFA Fort Victoria, then in dry dock in Portsmouth, the downwash blew the 'roller-blind' hangar doors right into the hangar! I'd think a Wokka would be even worse from that point of view.

Possibly, possibly not: one of the advantages of a twin-rotor design is lower disc-loading, which translates as lower-energy downwash.....

Never been near an Angry Chook have you?

Nope - how does it compare to a Merlin? (Should have said "one of the theoretical advantages..."  )

No, idea.  Never seen a Merlin.  However, I've worked fairly extensively with Angry Chooks and yes, they have a hell of a downwash.  I've also worked with UH-1, Kiowa and Blackhawks.   None compare to a Chook.  I was standing under a Seaking a few weeks ago, when one was dipping into a pond at our local park during a small bushfire (it and two Squirrels were doing firebombing).  I was impressed with its downdraft.  Not as much as Chook but a hell of a lot more than a Blackhawk.

[PR19_Kit]

Having spent quite some time standing under various Chinooks (my daughter wasn't based at Odiham for fun you know.....  ) the downwash is HORRENDOUS! Specially as they open up just before lift-off. You can 'feel' each individual blade going past as well as hear them.

Quite how the cargo handling guys manage when they're hooking or un-hooking I'm not sure, and how do they keep their berets on?

[NARSES2]

Quite how the cargo handling guys manage when they're hooking or un-hooking I'm not sure, and how do they keep their berets on?

Hair grips ?  Must admit you wouldn't get me anywhere near one of those with the rotors turning

[Fulcrum]

Why don't instead of basing them on ships, we just keep them at coastal heliports(like the Swedes). To increase it's range, just add a inflight refueling probe & some KC-130's.