Tweet
There was one over Cork on Monday. They are keeping busy.
-
Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing. -
trade-off
Originally posted by FMolloy View Post
Of course two is better than one, but it's not the only consideration: like I said, it's a trade-off: more engines, less helicopters.
Is there a significant difference in the safety records of single and twin-engined helicopters? Saw somewhere that the Bell JetRanger - single engine - is one of the safest helicopters in the world....
The Air Corps just bought some single-engined aircraft - the PC-9s, and if they replace the Cessnas with Turbo Porters...Comment
-
Like I said, more engines means more capability. They might have been able to afford more single-engined helicopters for the same money, but they wouldn't have been able to lift a section plus gear & two door-gunners or shift artillery pieces etc. like the AW-139.Originally posted by carrington View Post
They got the trade-off right.
I dunno, but the JetRanger isn't shifting troops for the US & the Blackhawk is. What does that say about a single-engined heli's suitability to the role?Originally posted by carrington View Post
You're clutching at straws now - how many two-engined primary & advanced trainers are out there?Originally posted by carrington View Post"The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."Comment
-
An aeroplane will not drop like a stone when its only engine fails.
Catch-22 says they have a right to do anything we can't stop them from doing.Comment
-
Huey?
For example, sign of my age I suppose, but I remember the Huey:
Single-engined, troop-lifter, gunship...
BTW, I mentioned the PC-9, the Cessna and its possible replacement because I was wondering if there was a distinction in terms of safety between a single-engined helicopter - which the Air Corps say is a no, no - and single-engined fixed-wing aircraft, which seem to be perfectly acceptable?Comment
-
autorotation (again)
I think we dealt with that issue earlier in the thread....Originally posted by Goldie fish View PostComment
-
The Huey began life in the 1950s, it is not modern by an means. Everyone (including the AC and Price Waterhouse Coopers) is recommending multi-engine aircraft to replace the Cessnas.Comment
-
Just on a side note.Im confused is it AW-139 or AB-139?Both terms have been used here.
Which is correct?:confused:"Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.Comment
-
No, you mentioned autorotation like it was a simple affair & someone who has actual experience of helicopters pointed out it wasn't as easy as that. There is a significant difference between losing power in a single-engined plane & losing power in a single-engined helicopter, stop trying to link the two.Originally posted by carrington View Post"The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."Comment
-
Both are.Originally posted by apod View Post
It was the AB-139 when both Agusta & Bell were involved in it's development. Now that Bell have pulled out it's the AW-139, the AW standing for Agusta Westland."The dolphins were monkeys that didn't like the land, walked back to the water, went back from the sand."Comment
-
"The Question is not: how far you will take this? The Question is do you possess the constitution to go as far as is needed?"Comment
-
Thanks thats clered that up for me
"Let us be clear about three facts. First, all battles and all wars are won in the end by the infantryman. Secondly, the infantryman always bears the brunt. His casualties are heavier, he suffers greater extremes of discomfort and fatigue than the other arms. Thirdly, the art of the infantryman is less stereotyped and far harder to acquire in modern war than that of any other arm." ------- Field Marshall Wavell, April 1945.Comment
-
139 or 149?
Just had a look at the Agusta Westland model lineup. The AW139 is marketed as a civilian helicopter, whereas the AW149 is the military variant.... Why did the Air Corps opt for the 139 rather than the 149?Originally posted by ZULU View PostComment
-
proven design
Yes, I know, I was just giving an example of a single-engined helicopter that can lift a section of troops and provide fire support/self-defence. "Considered to be the most widely used helicopter in the world, with more than 9,000 produced from the 1950s to the present, the Huey is flown today by about 40 countries." (from www.fas.org)Originally posted by DeV View Post
As an aside, don't write things off just because they were first designed a long time. The design of the FN MAG that equips the Irish Army - and many other armies - dates from the 1950s too, and the .50 cal HMG is an even older design.Comment
-
Hi there
As regards single-engines ops for turbines, pay attention to the CAA (UK)'s refusal to allow Cessna Caravans and the like to carry out cargo transport under Instrument conditions, despite it being allowed in several European countries and despite the PT-6s inherent reliability. The inherent liability of having only one engine clinches it for the CAA, no matter how reliable the engine is.....as an aside, don't most multi-engined helis only have one gearbox? The built-in liability is still there.Whatever about surviving if one engine of the pair fails, if the gearbox fails, then you really are in the shit.If you want genuine redundancy, get a twin engined, twin gearbox heli..the choice for the AC to replace the 172s with a twin is quite limited. Realistically, the Islander/Defender is the only suitable twin for the low/slow stuff and the capacity for carriage of surveillance equipment.
regards
GttCComment
Comment