Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

navy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
    At the time the UK, France and the BENELUX navies were all using naval lynx, as were the Scandanavians, which were a joint project by Westland and Sud Aviation, The same SA who had provided us with the Alouette and Gazelle, before becoming Aerospatiale.
    There was a wealth of expertise on our doorstep in operating the type at sea from small ships decks. As ancientmariner said earlier, once the Dauphin was selected, the dutch, with whom we had a long standing working relationship in ship design (NEVESBU) were unable to offer any further assistance, and we were left to work with just the french, who had only just cleared the Dauphin for naval operations as ours were being delivered.
    Initial images of the design showed a Lynx on deck, and from memory the Dockyard model in NMCI has a Lynx on deck.
    The Dauphin was a new aircraft, not just the navalised version, the whole aircraft was new. France had withdrawn from the Lynx project and designed the Dauphin for their own needs, but they only withdrew the Naval Lynx in 2012.
    It was like VHS or Betamax. We went with Betamax. Nothing wrong with it, and audio and video engineers love the quality of the Beta, but every home had a VHS.
    I,m not sure I said that as Nevesbu had a staff and a full time technical manager at VCD who was responsible for integrating the operations package including all comms and radar systems including ECM/ESM matters in relation to the Helicopter. Everybody remained in situ until the Government decision closed the Yard. The LYNX problem, as AC saw it, was the single Gem 42 engine which was an engine short of the TWO they required. They theorised that all Helicopters flying over ocean areas from ships or otherwise, as in Airsea rescue, MUST have TWO engines. The full package was their choice including, cabins, briefing room, workshops, X/Y cranes etc. etc. etc. to HOSTAC-1.

    Comment


    • #92
      France just recently stopped using the Alouette III as an SAR aircraft working from their Aircraft carrier.
      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
        I,m not sure I said that as Nevesbu had a staff and a full time technical manager at VCD who was responsible for integrating the operations package including all comms and radar systems including ECM/ESM matters in relation to the Helicopter. Everybody remained in situ until the Government decision closed the Yard. The LYNX problem, as AC saw it, was the single Gem 42 engine which was an engine short of the TWO they required. They theorised that all Helicopters flying over ocean areas from ships or otherwise, as in Airsea rescue, MUST have TWO engines. The full package was their choice including, cabins, briefing room, workshops, X/Y cranes etc. etc. etc. to HOSTAC-1.
        Sure the AC were not looking at the Westland Wasp, as the Lynx is and always was a twin engine helicopter.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
          Sure the AC were not looking at the Westland Wasp, as the Lynx is and always was a twin engine helicopter.
          Certainly an error of recall on my part for which I apologise and must do better!!. The Lynx for some reason was discarded by AC and the points made for the Dauphin were twin engines, full international flight, retractable under carriage . The Lynx was not popular with AC for some singular reason.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
            Certainly an error of recall on my part for which I apologise and must do better!!. The Lynx for some reason was discarded by AC and the points made for the Dauphin were twin engines, full international flight, retractable under carriage . The Lynx was not popular with AC for some singular reason.
            It has been mentioned a number of times on the board over the years that the Air Corps wanted the Puma for Army Support/SAR and the Lynx was favored for Naval Support but the DoD compromised and selected one helicopter type (Dauphin) for both missions. Is that true or just an urban legend?
            It was the year of fire...the year of destruction...the year we took back what was ours.
            It was the year of rebirth...the year of great sadness...the year of pain...and the year of joy.
            It was a new age...It was the end of history.
            It was the year everything changed.

            Comment


            • #96
              We need not forget that both the Lynx and Puma were very common sights just north of the border. So maybe the chance of one of the "old boys" taking a potshot at an AC Lynx or AC Puma was considered too high?

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                We need not forget that both the Lynx and Puma were very common sights just north of the border. So maybe the chance of one of the "old boys" taking a potshot at an AC Lynx or AC Puma was considered too high?
                The Gazelle was also a common sight In the north as well, but that didn't stop the Air Corps from operating 2 of them.
                It was the year of fire...the year of destruction...the year we took back what was ours.
                It was the year of rebirth...the year of great sadness...the year of pain...and the year of joy.
                It was a new age...It was the end of history.
                It was the year everything changed.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by CTU View Post
                  The Gazelle was also a common sight In the north as well, but that didn't stop the Air Corps from operating 2 of them.
                  AFIK we did not do troop movements near the border with the Gazelle but if we had got some Puma's or Lynx's they would have been used for that.
                  I was just thinking, poor visibility, an AC Puma/Lynx landing near the border with troops jumping out, might that not have been mistaken for a RAF machine?

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by CTU View Post
                    It has been mentioned a number of times on the board over the years that the Air Corps wanted the Puma for Army Support/SAR and the Lynx was favored for Naval Support but the DoD compromised and selected one helicopter type (Dauphin) for both missions. Is that true or just an urban legend?
                    It was what it was in the early 1980's the Aer Corps selected the Dauphin and seemed to see it as the one for Naval Support and Search and Rescue. Five were bought and at least two were Fully fitted for Naval use with Harpoon and compatible landing gear. Later it was discarded mentally after Tramore for the opposite reasons of it's original selection- Not enough Range-Not enough lifting capacity- limited single engine performance-not able to find it's way home in low vis. All that when fitted to full instrument rules, international flight including flying to France and finding a home with another Service.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                      It was what it was in the early 1980's the Aer Corps selected the Dauphin and seemed to see it as the one for Naval Support and Search and Rescue. Five were bought and at least two were Fully fitted for Naval use with Harpoon and compatible landing gear. Later it was discarded mentally after Tramore for the opposite reasons of it's original selection- Not enough Range-Not enough lifting capacity- limited single engine performance-not able to find it's way home in low vis. All that when fitted to full instrument rules, international flight including flying to France and finding a home with another Service.
                      One of the issues identified by Dh248 accident report was that though the heli was fitted with avionics capable of an ILS approach to waterford by autopilot, which would have put the aircraft in a hover over the runway, this was not approved for use by the Air Corps themselves, and pilots were not trained in its use.
                      As for the risk of our aircraft being confused with british aircraft on the border Both the Puma we had during 1982 and all the Alouettes up there had a large tricolour (visible from space) painted on the side, and bottom.
                      For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                      Comment


                      • Given that the AW-139's will not last forever and will need replacing would the future H160M family be the aircraft to suit us?
                        The H160M being the aircraft that the Dauphin tried to be but didn't quiet make it. And would it be the aircraft that would allow us to return to naval aviation, first on the MRV and possibly later on the P50's replacements?

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	H160M.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	520.0 KB
ID:	698324

                        Comment


                        • We need to go bigger. Merlin/NH90/S92 size, though not necessarily those types (the NH90 is a particular disaster, hopefully the MTT will sort out all the teething problems with that design). Going forward though we need to determine the role a shipboard heli is expected to do. Aerial surveillance can just as easily be done by dedicated ship launched drones such as the schiebel Camcopter. If it is for carrying "ass and trash" or People and stores then bigger is better, the Dauphin size just isn't big enough. The concept of the Blue-Green/MRV/P31 replacement is to be available to deploy overseas with vehicles and troops, or act as a platform for disaster relief.
                          In either case the Dauphin variant would do the job, but only just. Better off with something that has a large cabin, flat internal floor and plenty of thrust for working in less than ideal weather conditions.
                          For now, everything hangs on implementation of the CoDF report.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                            Given that the AW-139's will not last forever and will need replacing would the future H160M family be the aircraft to suit us?
                            The H160M being the aircraft that the Dauphin tried to be but didn't quiet make it. And would it be the aircraft that would allow us to return to naval aviation, first on the MRV and possibly later on the P50's replacements?

                            [ATTACH]8785[/ATTACH]
                            Except it carries less troops than an AW139 (5 versus 10)

                            Future from Airbus has to be bigger (they don’t offer anything similar sized).... from Airbus that means NH90 (20), H215M (24?) or H225M (28?)


                            Seats depend on if they are troop seats, crash-worthy seats, equipment etc

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                              Except it carries less troops than an AW139 (5 versus 10)

                              Future from Airbus has to be bigger (they don’t offer anything similar sized).... from Airbus that means NH90 (20), H215M (24?) or H225M (28?)


                              Seats depend on if they are troop seats, crash-worthy seats, equipment etc
                              Be careful, the 5 is a French configuration, in the offshore support role it carries 14 passengers! It should be able to carry 8+2, the latter being gunners.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by na grohmiti View Post
                                We need to go bigger. Merlin/NH90/S92 size, though not necessarily those types (the NH90 is a particular disaster, hopefully the MTT will sort out all the teething problems with that design). Going forward though we need to determine the role a shipboard heli is expected to do. Aerial surveillance can just as easily be done by dedicated ship launched drones such as the schiebel Camcopter. If it is for carrying "ass and trash" or People and stores then bigger is better, the Dauphin size just isn't big enough. The concept of the Blue-Green/MRV/P31 replacement is to be available to deploy overseas with vehicles and troops, or act as a platform for disaster relief.
                                In either case the Dauphin variant would do the job, but only just. Better off with something that has a large cabin, flat internal floor and plenty of thrust for working in less than ideal weather conditions.
                                Actually even if the NH90 is a larger aircraft, when stowed it has a smaller footprint than the H160M as it has a proper folding tail.
                                Seem to remember that the Spanish were also interested in the MITT version to replace their Sea Kings. The aft ramp does help in HADR getting goods in and people out quickly.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X