Thanks Thanks:  36
Likes Likes:  32
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 93
  1. #26
    CQMS Dogwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    761
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jetjock View Post
    Ex IAC 244. One of four ex IAC Dauphins now earning a crust with the Chilean Navy. There was plenty of life in those birds if a small amount of money(relative) was spent.

    http://www.airliners.net/photo/Chile...1258af652cef3e

    Another pic of same helo landing on Chilean Navy OPV 'Piloto Pardo'. Still being used in the maritime role they were designed for.

    Bloddy scandalous what the IAC got away with allowing the maritime capability die. Sickening.

  2. #27
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Note the flat calm waters on which the landing is being made. You'll rarely get conditions that calm even inside cork harbour. The OPV does not appear to be underway either.

    We are better off without them TBH.

  3. #28
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,267
    Post Thanks / Like
    A lot of people breathed a sigh of relief when they were stood down, as it meant that expensive mistakes were now unlikely to bite careers on asses. For our little air arm to devote a huge amount of time and effort, money and manpower, to become what was effectively an offshore test department of Aerospatiale was a professional embarrassment.

    regards
    GttC

  4. Likes Goldie fish liked this post
  5. #29
    CQMS Dogwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    761
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    Note the flat calm waters on which the landing is being made. You'll rarely get conditions that calm even inside cork harbour. The OPV does not appear to be underway either.

    We are better off without them TBH.
    If the PDF were still operating helos with a maritime capability, no matter how unsuited some people may think they were, the principle of getting a helo capable platform now would not have been an issue. The OPVs being built would have had a flight deck (minimum) & the leap of faith with the blue / green ship wouldn't have been such a leap of faith. Note, every OPV being built for navies in the past 4-8 years has a flight deck capability as a min. Think of the capability of an S-61 or S-92 to HIFR off such a platform?!

    Small minds in our DF caused the loss of such a capability, never to be regained.

    One should watch the Cook report on an FP patrol with P31 in the nineties, good flying if a I can remember correctly. Am not slagging the individuals who flew, some outstanding pilots, one in particular springs to mind as excellent & is now a rescue helo pilot also. The NS were as much to blame , as the COs on P31 didn't control the helo crews properly either.

  6. #30
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,883
    Post Thanks / Like
    Given the increased aft deck space on the P60's & their air search radars - could they be upgraded to carry a HIFR kit, in a TEU for example?

  7. Likes Dogwatch liked this post
  8. #31
    CQMS Dogwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    761
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by pym View Post
    Given the increased aft deck space on the P60's & their air search radars - could they be upgraded to carry a HIFR kit, in a TEU for example?
    What air search radar? They'll be fitted for, not with! TEU for helo fuel (permanently carried) & more importantly pumping equipment? Not too sure if it would all fit. Anyone know how much avgas P31 carried?
    Last edited by Dogwatch; 17th February 2013 at 23:14. Reason: Spelling

  9. Thanks pym thanked for this post
  10. #32
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    Surely carrying aviation fuel in a tank in a TEU would not be safe?!

  11. #33
    Non Temetis Messor The real Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,152
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Surely carrying aviation fuel in a tank in a TEU would not be safe?!
    Why would it not be safe?

  12. #34
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    No fire monitors for one thing

  13. #35
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    How do you think it's normally carried about Dev?

    Whatever about how much avgas P31 carried, most of it was unusable due to water contamination (caused by condensation).

    S92/61 doesn't need to land to HIFR. The reason all recent OPVs had heledecks as standard was possibly because their navy was permitted to have a history of Naval Ops. A government cost saving initative here means that our naval air op experience was never allowed to grow.
    Keep in mind also that the current FOCNS was a lowly nav officer last time a heli landed on P31's deck. The skillbase is lost, and needs a huge effort to restart (not to mention a suitably equipped ship).

    As for Air Search radar, I thought the last renderings of P61 had it fitted WITH air search radar?

  14. Likes The real Jack, pym liked this post
  15. #36
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    No fire monitors for one thing
    What do you mean by "fire monitor"?

    Is it like the firehose that all ships, not just naval ones, are equipped with?

  16. #37
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    How do you think it's normally carried about Dev?

    Whatever about how much avgas P31 carried, most of it was unusable due to water contamination (caused by condensation).

    S92/61 doesn't need to land to HIFR. The reason all recent OPVs had heledecks as standard was possibly because their navy was permitted to have a history of Naval Ops. A government cost saving initative here means that our naval air op experience was never allowed to grow.
    Keep in mind also that the current FOCNS was a lowly nav officer last time a heli landed on P31's deck. The skillbase is lost, and needs a huge effort to restart (not to mention a suitably equipped ship).

    As for Air Search radar, I thought the last renderings of P61 had it fitted WITH air search radar?
    Never seen anything like that but I assume this 2 x TEU unit is land based ?

    As you would know one of the biggest risks at sea is fire.

    The whole point of HIFR is that the help doesn't land, that's what's why there is a IF in HIFR !

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    What do you mean by "fire monitor"?

    Is it like the firehose that all ships, not just naval ones, are equipped with?
    http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/...4_116a412a.jpg

    See to right of starboard funnel.

    A firehose won't cut it with aviation fuel.

  17. #38
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Why won't a firehose "cut it"?

  18. Likes The real Jack liked this post
  19. #39
    Colonel
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,403
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dogwatch View Post
    Bloddy scandalous what the IAC got away with allowing the maritime capability die. Sickening.
    A bit harsh Dogwatch. I think the decision (by who ever it was) not have a helicopter flight deck on the LPVs signalled the end of the role and that it was not needed or wanted.
    With the two Casa's and the AW139 fleet the capabilities of the Air Corps to support the Naval Service has greatly increased.
    If one or both the 'navalised' Dauphin's were kept it probably would of been at the expense of one or two AW139s.
    The AW139s have the range to operate anywhere in the Irish EEZ from land.

  20. Likes Goldie fish liked this post
  21. #40
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,267
    Post Thanks / Like
    First of all, it's not avgas (petrol), it's avtur (kerosene), which is not really much different to what's burning in the ships engine and likewise, will not readily ignite unless provoked. Secondly, water contamination is not that big of an issue as the water can be filtered out during refilling of the tank and afterwards by filtration as the fuel is dispensed. It only becomes an issue if there are very large quantities allowed to get in, which means bad drills on the part of the ship's crew or if it causes biocontamination in the tank itself and even that can be treated. With regard to the Dauphins, certain elements in both the NS and the AC disliked operating with each other/helis on ships/NS giving orders to AC and vice versa,etc,etc and so the project was allowed to die and unmourned death.

    regards
    GttC

  22. #41
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    When hpt comes in he'll know more about the fuel contamination issues on P31. He was a self confessed whirly bird feeder and waver.

  23. #42
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,322
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    Why won't a firehose "cut it"?
    Not enough water / foam in comparison

  24. #43
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Not enough water / foam in comparison
    Poppycock. You are surrounded by water. The same firepumps that pump thru the ships firehose pump thru a fire monitor. There is no shortage of water to pump out. Because of the risk that already exists aboard ship (fuel oil, lube oil, lots of sources of ignition etc) every ship can also make its own foam. Last ship I was on carried 6 40 gallon drums of foam concentrate. I'm sure if we had to carry aircraft on deck we would have had a larger stock.

  25. #44
    CQMS Dogwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    761
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhodes View Post
    A bit harsh Dogwatch. I think the decision (by who ever it was) not have a helicopter flight deck on the LPVs signalled the end of the role and that it was not needed or wanted.
    With the two Casa's and the AW139 fleet the capabilities of the Air Corps to support the Naval Service has greatly increased.
    If one or both the 'navalised' Dauphin's were kept it probably would of been at the expense of one or two AW139s.
    The AW139s have the range to operate anywhere in the Irish EEZ from land.
    Would have the query the ability of AW139 to reach all areas of EEZ. The decision to have LPVs without flight decks was due to the inertia of personnel who didn't want to be at sea. Yes the MPAs provide excellent capability, but 2 is not sufficient. The point I feel that is pertinent is that an OPV that is flight capable with the possibility of catering for an AW139 or S-61/S-92 would enhance the maritime capabilities of the nation, disregarding the previous issues.

    To GF, helos flew off P31 regularly up until 1998, well after MM had left!

    & yes the drawings of the new ship are correct in that the mast will take an ASR, but it's not in the final spec that the yard are building (i know it was in the initial).

  26. Thanks Goldie fish, pym thanked for this post
  27. #45
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,883
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think it was mentioned here, some time ago - that anyone joining the Air Corps in recent years, signed a document which included a section about committing to time at sea & deployments. Added to Scorpys posts in the AC section, I think it's fairly safe to say that the old guard & their attitudes are largely a thing of the past.

    Unfortunately it appears as though a lot of damage was done and certain folks lacked vision. Hopefully in time, that damage can be rectified.

  28. Thanks Dogwatch thanked for this post
  29. #46
    Colonel
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,403
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Dogwatch View Post
    Would have the query the ability of AW139 to reach all areas of EEZ. The decision to have LPVs without flight decks was due to the inertia of personnel who didn't want to be at sea. Yes the MPAs provide excellent capability, but 2 is not sufficient. The point I feel that is pertinent is that an OPV that is flight capable with the possibility of catering for an AW139 or S-61/S-92 would enhance the maritime capabilities of the nation, disregarding the previous issues.
    Some technical data of the AW139 from the AgustaWestland website:
    Max range ** 1250 km 675 nm
    Max endurance ** 5 h 56 m
    ** with 1654 kg fuel - no reserve - @ 6000 ft
    http://www.agustawestland.com/product/aw139-0
    I know from personal experience if your detailed to go to sea on board a Naval ship you have very little choice in the matter (not that I didn't want to go).
    There's no doubt that a naval ship with a helicopter flight deck, hanger and navalised helicopter on board has extra capabilities.
    If the LPVs had a helicopter flight deck and hanger it would of been possible a Dauphin could of been sent to Liberia on board Niamh to support the ARW.

  30. #47
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    AW have been proven to be full of shit when it comes to the specs on their aircraft.
    Max range/Max endurance is a notional figure, when an aircraft flies in perfect weather with no excess weight such as seats, strops, stretchers, flir, passengers, crew other than pilot etc.

    Your last line makes no sense. If the LPV needed a helideck, the HPV would have been sent instead.

    Thread split time?

  31. #48
    Colonel
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    2,403
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    Your last line makes no sense. If the LPV needed a helideck, the HPV would have been sent instead.
    A 76mm gun was more important than an unarmed helicopter.

  32. #49
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    The ballistic qualities of the 57mm Bofors and the 76mm Oto Melara are comparable. In fact Eithne was supposed to embark on a similar mission but it was pulled at short notice.

  33. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  34. #50
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,056
    Post Thanks / Like
    as the COs on P31 didn't control the helo crews properly either.
    Capt of Aircraft Vs Capt of Ship.

    there was no command and control issue, the AC were been fcuked about as much as the NS and as a result the Dauphins spent more time carrying ministers than they did at sea.If the requirement had been for five plus two as opposed to five inclusive of two, if the NS had been in possession of its own crew...and if my aunt had balls she 'd be my uncle, it might have worked out a little better.

    To say that the Dauphin operated regularly as an asset to Eithne again is fanciful as most of what was carried out was currency training to keep the concept alive as opposed to actual definable tangible results.

    Look at the current fleet, all class carry petrol in jerry cans on Deck, once you rig it to be dumped ina hurry not an issue. Aoife carried fuel for Virgin Challenger..no issue.TEU of Jet A1...relatively harmless, won't ignite until heated to 21 degrees centigrade and even the it must be pressurized, will ignite at a lower temp if atomized.

    However Jet Fuel is a pain to store, its prone to water contamination in suspension and requires daily sampling and is a waste of space on a ship that rarely operates in the coy of helos.

    Given the PVs carried tons of ammunition from Barry in Wales( albeit for one slight hiccup) again not a major issue.


    Misnomer if anyone thinks the monitors on Eithnes boat deck were there to put out fires should a helo ditch.The instruction was to use them to blast the helo over the side and let the rescue crew do the rest.

    If the LPVs had a helicopter flight deck and hanger it would of been possible a Dauphin could of been sent to Liberia on board Niamh to support the ARW
    No......OPVs are smaller than Eithne, they would have to be considerably larger to accommodate a hanger and flight deck. Eithne was the smallest ship of her type to be able to deploy a helo, given that proved to be too unstable for gurarranteed sustainable operations and given the increase in atlantic swells over the past 10 years, fitting out an even small ship to carry a helo was never an agenda.

    Until the NS are the owners of the assets, there will never be another venture into Naval Aviation.

    Done unto death in the past...
    Just visiting

  35. Thanks Goldie fish, pym thanked for this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •