Ch-47 Chinook - Shipboard Capabilities

[childs56]

I am not going to go into the specifics other then to say, It does not require two separate GPS systems, only that A DGPS system does require a separate receiver (an antenna) then the GPS receiver. But may be built into the GPS unit.

How it works on a specific A/C I do not care to discuss because their are to many different set ups to mention.

The "Differential" in the DGPS comes from the Radio signal that is received by the Differential receiver attached to or remote from the GPS unit itself.  The computations are made according to the difference between what your GPS receiver is telling you and what the Differential receiver is telling you. Kinda like fixing a compass to your GPS but not having to use a map to verify your exact position etc.
Yes two or more GPS/ DGPS receiver units can be used in conjunction with each other, on A/C this is what they do to tell pitch, roll yaw and all those other things A/C do.
You do not require 2 GPS units to give you a more accurate fix or to use DGPS, only that you must have at least one GPS receiver(capable of DGPS) and one DGPS antenna attached to your GPS unit. That is all that I am saying.

Cheers

 

[Good2Golf]

Rog that.

 

[CH-47]

hey guys can u help me with a bit of info about chinook shipboard capability?

 

[CH-47]

i do know that chinooks do a lot of water landing and they are sealed for floating.I have only seen pictures of them doing water landings in river and calm non salty waters.  But how much do we know about it operating in sea based environment? how much of it is marinized? flight manual states it can only operate in sea state 2, not 3. It doesn't have anything about its long term operation in sea environment. Could someone check and let me know how much do we know about its servicing and wash cycle after operating in sea environment. What other issues should be considered?   

 

[CH-47]

does it have floats like NH 90?

 

[Good2Golf]

i do know that chinooks do a lot of water landing and they are sealed for floating.I have only seen pictures of them doing water landings in river and calm non salty waters.   But how much do we know about it operating in sea based environment? how much of it is marinized? flight manual states it can only operate in sea state 2, not 3. It doesn't have anything about its long term operation in sea environment. Could someone check and let me know how much do we know about its servicing and wash cycle after operating in sea environment. What other issues should be considered?    

47, I've only ever swam a Chinook in freshwater, so I can't tell you about the wash procedure, but there was nothing in the AOIs (aircraft operating instructions) limiting ops to fresh water only.  I know of guys who swam ours in salt water up North (around Churchill) and did a freshwater hose off after the swim.  I would also think there would be some requirement to freshwater rinse the engines, much like Sea Kings to after landing on or flying at low level for extended periods over salt water.  I recall the flight manual said the aircraft could be landed in water and shut down in up to SS-2 (and under 40,000 lbs AUW IIRC).  I do not recall any specific limitation about higher sea-states if full power was maintained.  I can see this being useful if you were trying to recover a zodiac or other similar boat in rougher seas/water.  We had a plywood dam that we inserted just foward of the main ramp to minimize water flowing up the cargo area, but it was only meant to limit large flows of water internally, not make the inside totally water proof.  In fact, it was a sure thing that water could reach up to the hook hatch conducting amphib ops with RIBs.

Cheers,
Duey

 

[Navy_Blue]

If we ever do get CH-47 again we will probably not see them on ships.  JSS is only being designed to carry 4 CH-148.  The only concession for the Griffon is that they be craned on and off. Granted 4 CH-148's probably take up the space of one or two CH-47's.  But they're heavy and it becomes a stabilization issue for the ship.  It's endless and expencive. 

The CPF's will require a lengthy refit to accommodate the CH-148.  Even with a refit it's going to be a tight fit. 

The CF should just order more CH-148's and make sure the Army has use of them.  For the size of our armed forces we would find them very useful tools.  Logisticly it makes sence too same parts and the same training to maintain them. 

The CF and the Navy have a lot on there plate right now and if some how they do manage to acquire an amphibious assault ship that could carry the CH-47, we wouldn't have anyone to man the ship.  The US put a crew of 650 on the San Antonio class just to sail it.  We would need to tie up 3 CPF's if we wanted to man just one. 

I can't se why we can't get people in this outfit.  For what ever reason not many people see the CF as a viable career. 

Personally I love it.



     

 

[Cloud Cover]

Welcome aboard 'trode.

Cheers

 

[Guest]

If we ever do get CH-47 again we will probably not see them on ships.   JSS is only being designed to carry 4 CH-148.   The only concession for the Griffon is that they be craned on and off. Granted 4 CH-148's probably take up the space of one or two CH-47's.   But they're heavy and it becomes a stabilization issue for the ship.   It's endless and expencive.  


   

Actually, thats not quite true.

The Hanger on the JSS is spec'd for 4 CH-148   The flight deck is spec'd for 4 more helos, up to and including the V-22 (It's in the SOR)

I can almost guarrantee that there will be space on the flight deck for   *at least* 2 Ch-47s in the "good-to-go" pos.

The Flight Deck has to accomodate a bird taking off and a bird -re-arm, refuel at the same time.

(We want to be VERY usefull to our alies with this new toy.)

We *will* be getting CH-47s.. everybody knows this, the CDS wants em.. the ChairForce wants em.. we know how to fly 'em, maintain them .. (yes.. the know-how has not been forgotten.. yet..)

There will be, of course.."ahem".. a competition.. well..sorta..

Bottom line: JSS has been designed to support a wide range of Helos.. CH-47 included.

Oh.. they want a lil' bird for armed reece in the sky..  that meets lib pork-barreling standards.... Bell ARH.. now shhhhh.. 

 

[Good2Golf]

...
Oh.. they want a lil' bird for armed reece in the sky..  that meets lib pork-barreling standards.... Bell ARH.. now shhhhh.. 

I've been waiting to see how long it took to get that one mentioned...

If that happened, I could see the 146 retained for a specific domestic role, and the ARH/407 join the CH-147G in operations.

I think folks are finally starting to realize where RJH is heading with BHH and will gradually learn to give him the answer he's looking for...

a) maximize the CH-148's potential to support the SCTF with all of its marinization requirements, and

b) put a capable package of Canadian helos in AFG to support us for the next 8-10 years while we're there.  Whether the CH-147G's (okay, maybe CH-147F with refuelling boom and wx radar mods) fly with a modified CH-146 (armed) or a CH-136A (aka 407/ARH) would be an interesting question to deal with in the mess... ;D

Cheers,
Duey

 

[SeaKingTacco]

The CPF's will require a lengthy refit to accommodate the CH-148.  Even with a refit it's going to be a tight fit.

No tighter than a Sea King.  The Cyclone folds into the same "box" as a Sea King.  I saw the "footprint" proposal of a Cyclone on a CPF last week.  Looks to me like it will work.

Guest- there is something about the way in which you write which makes me think we know each other.  Sea King pilot with tac hel background, perhaps?  I Apologize if I am wrong... 

Duey- Interesting things are indeed afoot for the helicopter portion of the Air Force.  Can't wait to see how things are going to work out!

Cheers!

 

[Navy_Blue]

For those of you who think the JSS will be anything more than a floating servies station.  I give you this:

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgmepm/pmojss/index_e.asp

It's the PMO website for the JSS.  It is not protected or secret I got the site from Google.  The most recent draft NOV 17th 05 states that the ship will carry 4 CH-148's have one ready to take off and one stand by with rotors turning on the flight deck.  The other two spots for helos are too maintain the task groups other helicopters.  Nowhere dose it say anything about V-22's or anything tactical other than a boarding team (which is stupid to send an assest like the JSS close enough to board anything). 

In other documents it dose talks of accommodating and recovery of UAV's.  It also states the CH-146 Griffon will be "embarked" and "disembarked" (code for we'll need a crane) via the flight deck.

We may get the CH-47 again but its not worth talking about the Navy using it, joint or other wise.  The CH-148 will do what we need it too. 

Don't get me wrong guys I can't wait to see this ship come out it will be state of the art but its just a ferry, tanker, warehouse, hospital, and an HQ in one big piece of steel.  To a member of the MSE department a ship is just a ship to us, we make them get where they have to go.

The CDS has big dreams and great plans but he doesn't have the numbers (people) to back them up.  Hurry up and wait folks.

P.S. The way it stands right now the HMCS Montreal will be the first ship to get the new flight deck for the CH-148.  They are saying there will be 4" clearance on either side of the helo once its in the hanger.  I would say thats kinda tight.

Thats all for now.

 

[Good2Golf]

NB, 4" clearance for the Cyclone...luxury...should see a Griffy inside a Herc!

I fully agree with you on JSS.  Some folks are mistaking the JSS for becoming the Chief's amphib...two different things.  Like you said, it was my understanding that JSS is a newer, sleeker AOR essentially.  I understand that the Navy has gone to some pains to make sure folks don't mess with the SOR in any substantive way, and that the amphib is a different issue.

Cheers,
Duey

 

[Inch]

P.S. The way it stands right now the HMCS Montreal will be the first ship to get the new flight deck for the CH-148.   They are saying there will be 4" clearance on either side of the helo once its in the hanger.   I would say thats kinda tight.

I was under the impression that the Charlottetown was already in the process of conversion for the trials and that she was no longer capable of Sea King Ops. I heard this from the XO of the VDQ a couple weeks ago, haven't seen anything in writing thus far though so it could just be rumour.

That would be 4" clearance from the door on the way into and out of the hangar, the hangar itself is quite a bit bigger than the door. Otherwise, how the hell would you walk around the thing with 4" clearance inside the hangar? So much for Section Base 3! The Sea King sponsons can't be much more than 6" clearance from the door on either side, it's a tight fit as well.

 

[Guest]

I direct you gentlemen to the original SOR

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/dgmepm/pmojss/docs/JSS_SOR_V3_18-May-05.pdf

In it you will find a number of ref to supporting large birds.. CH-53E AND the V-22 are mentioned specificaly.

AFAIK... The Brain Trust deems this important... in the interest of facilitating our dear friends to the south.

SeaKing Tacco, I don't believe we've met.

I'm just a guy.. tryin to put Hellfires on a JetRanger   ;D >

On a side note, have you guys really wondered why, all of a sudden.. we're getting new toys?!?

MY personal, uninformed theory.. ol'e Georgie boy took Paul aside and offered Canada a chance sit at the big person's table at NATO.. instead of the kiddie group.. (Luxemburg, Belgium..ect. )

He said "Paul, you little scamp.. I know you want to be a grown-up.. if you put away your toys and act like an adult.. we MAY just take you seriously.

So now.. that it's finaly sunk in.. that we don't matter in the big old world (Politicaly).. and the ONLY way to fix it.. to be quite blunt.. it to be USEFULL.. to a better world order.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Even if thats true [and I'm not saying it isn't] these projects are so far out into the future that neither Paul or George, or their policies, are going to be relevant anymore. Further more, the political entity that is Canada today is not likely to be intact in the medium term - we are too divided and polarized as a nation to continue on - the present course of the forthcoming election will once again demonstrate that. Parts of former Canada will be so far to the left or so deep in the other sides camp they will be sitting up here like little frozen pieces of Cuba or Iran.

 

[Navy_Blue]

Hey inch,

In reply to your last.  Charrelotown was out of a normal refit early in the summer and nothing new was done to the flight deck or hanger door.  Same old boat and as per normal for a ship coming out of HSL its worse off than when it went in.  I assume your a zoomy and understand that moving the track for the bear trap port and widdening the hanger door are big jobs.  That is only a fraction of the planes that are in the works for the CPF.  The CPF will be a new ship in the next 10 years. 

I agree with whiskey none of these changes are going to be quick.  JSS isn't due until 2012 but more like 2017.  The CH-148 is something like 2008 to 2011. 

Oh and for our Guest 18th May 05 and 17th Nov 05 are quite different dates and I'm sure doing the math you would find that one is more current than the other.  I say again "floating sevice stations"  JTF may find a way of using them for more fun but its so far down the road everything will have changed in the Forces the Navy and the World.

I love this place  >

Cheers

 

[Guest]

Navy Blue - 

The original SOR still stands. The document you pointed to is NOT a SOR , but rather an annex.

It does not replace the document I aluded to.

It IS in the Navy's best interest to remain as compatable with US Forces as possible.

As you, and others should already know, interoperability and near seamless integration within a US Navy TF is a very high priority.

As such, JSS and any future LHD, LPD.. ect  will be required to support Helos operated by the US. (V-22 will be a BIG part of Maritime Aviation for the US)

You can put a large bet on us accomidating such an aircraft.

 

[Inch]

Hey inch,

In reply to your last.   Charrelotown was out of a normal refit early in the summer and nothing new was done to the flight deck or hanger door.   Same old boat and as per normal for a ship coming out of HSL its worse off than when it went in.   I assume your a zoomy and understand that moving the track for the bear trap port and widdening the hanger door are big jobs.   That is only a fraction of the planes that are in the works for the CPF.   The CPF will be a new ship in the next 10 years.  

I am a Zoomie, in particular a Sea King pilot that has traversed a Sea King or two into and out of a CPF hangar as recently as Wed last week. As SeaKingTacco stated, the Cyclone is supposed to fit into the same size "box" as a Sea King, this includes height, length and width. No mods on the hangar door are necessary, even if it is a few inches wider, it will still fit. My understanding of the new beartrap is that they'll either offset the beartrap or just offset centre lock so that the main probe is slightly left in the trap vice dead centre like the Sea King since the Cyclone will be bigger on the right than the left when folded. No modification to the tracks is necessary, or so I understand it.

The big changes required are a nose guide winch system vice a tail guide winch system to straighten the helo laterally on the deck, and of course the fact that the Cyclone will be nearly 8000 lbs heavier, the deck will need a bit of a beefing up.

 

[Cloud Cover]

The big changes required are a nose guide winch system vice a tail guide winch system to straighten the helo laterally on the deck, and of course the fact that the Cyclone will be nearly 8000 lbs heavier, the deck will need a bit of a beefing up.

Is that loaded with fuel or empty?