But you get to use the turn-in $$ to value it for mishap classification purposes. It's always easier to write a HAZREP than an MDR, so if you drop-test something on accident it can be well worth it to pick up the pieces. Cargo hooks on a Phrog were the classic case for this: turn-in $$ was just below the old class Charlie limits, while if you dropped it in the ocean you made your ASO and front office sad.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
"Quirks" of Past Aircraft
- Thread starter Wingnut172N
- Start date
But you get to use the turn-in $$ to value it for mishap classification purposes. It's always easier to write a HAZREP than an MDR, so if you drop-test something on accident it can be well worth it to pick up the pieces. Cargo hooks on a Phrog were the classic case for this: turn-in $$ was just below the old class Charlie limits, while if you dropped it in the ocean you made your ASO and front office sad.
Kaman
Beech 1900 pilot's; "Fly it like you stole it"
I don't know if this falls under the category of "quirks", but we had a helluva time with the early AQS-13F sonar reeling machines. A number of transducers were lost for a variety of problems; corrosion, dome control electrical anomalies, cable miswraps, etc...The Navy and Bendix worked with the fleet to gather statistical data through standardized reporting forms ANC gradually the problem(s) were corrected. The SH-60F suffered from being under-funded and a compromise over a more capable platform being acquired. Many of us felt the Navy should have bought the EH-101 Merlin or the S-96...However, the Navy master helo plan called for the H-60 as the helicopter of the 21st century...
A few old....old school:
P-38- Heater sucked, made bomber escort at altitude almost unbearable to the pilots.
Me-109- Wheel base to narrow for grass fields. Ground loops killed a lot of Germans.
F4U- Cockpit too far back on the fuselage. Had to slip the aircraft to see the deck.
B-29- Engines had a bad habit of catching fire on start-up.
SB2C- Well..........was a shitty design.
P-38- Heater sucked, made bomber escort at altitude almost unbearable to the pilots.
Me-109- Wheel base to narrow for grass fields. Ground loops killed a lot of Germans.
F4U- Cockpit too far back on the fuselage. Had to slip the aircraft to see the deck.
B-29- Engines had a bad habit of catching fire on start-up.
SB2C- Well..........was a shitty design.
jcj
Registered User
I've read somewhare that the nickname of the SB2C was "Sonuvabitch 2nd class"
erikwriter
New Member
I am a civilian who has been reading recently about the creation of Task Force 160, to be specific, the book The Night Stalkers. I came across your posts here, talking about some of the nuances flying Blackhawks, and I was hoping you may be able to answer a question for me.
In The Night Stalkers the authors say during Task Fore 160s inception, particularly during the period after Eagle Claw but before Urgent Fury, many pilots lost their lives during training missions. Right about this time the new Blackhawks were being integrated. My question, how big of a transition is it to go from flying a Chinook or a Huey to flying a Blackhawk. What are the biggest differences? As a civilian with no flying experience I would guess weight or maybe the power of the twin turbines. Am I way off base? Probably. Is there something else that makes the transition from flying Chinooks to Blackhawks difficult? And how was it corrected? Thanks
I believe the mishaps during the inception of TF-160 had more to do with the development of tactics, the aggressive nature of the flying, and the OP-tempo than issues with the 60.
I haven't flown the Chinook, but I was a 'Hawk pilot and have a descent chunk of time in the Huey. One of the biggest differences is the inertia of the rotor head. The Huey has way more inertia than the 60. The 60 also has a lot more tail rotor authority.
I haven't flown the Chinook, but I was a 'Hawk pilot and have a descent chunk of time in the Huey. One of the biggest differences is the inertia of the rotor head. The Huey has way more inertia than the 60. The 60 also has a lot more tail rotor authority.
erikwriter
New Member
thank you for the reply.
yeah, i sort of assumed the initial difficulties the Stalkers experienced had to do with tactical stuff opposed to equipment familiarity. that said, it must have been like jumping from a front engine front wheel drive honda civic to a rear engine, rear wheel drive porsche 911, no?
i read something in another thread about rotor RPMs? does that sound like a thing?
erikwriter
New Member
We lost a lot of Hawks early in service with the Army because of a mechanical design flaw. The stabilator would schedule full down suddenly due to the i shielded electronics controlling the position of the stab. At a hover or low speed this isn't that big a deal but with that massive stab full down at a high airspeed the aircraft would literally pitch over and no amount of aft cyclic would do anything about it. Combine this with a low level profile and your nose down in the trees before you would even recognize it much less try to do anything about it.
The fix was wiring a selector switch on the cyclic so that the pilot could command the stab to a position vice let it do its own thing back there. Not a perfect solution but it's something.
erikwriter
New Member
i would appreciate it greatly if could you tell me that in layman's terms. what effect would this have on the Hawk while TF-160 pilots were running fast and low training missions, as well as precisions landings?
I think this is more an urban legend, I remember hearing that it actually only happened once. I'm told the Navy doesn't have the cyclic slew switch? Either way the fear was certainly there.
Quirk: Coning roll. A helicopter with an articulated rotorhead will roll towards the advancing blade in forward flight as the disc cones up. So if I roll a 60 right into a 60 degree banked turn and pull to get 2g, I'll also have to add some amount of left cyclic to maintain the turn. In practice, that plus the mixing unit reducing left cyclic throw with high collective positions can combine to make it so the only way to roll out of the turn is unload the disc.
We have a manual slew control switch on the center console. Largely the boxes work automagically and we don't play with it, but the option to throw to manual control (and usually set 0 deg) is there. Op checking the stab is part of prestart checks. If the automatic system disengages, we are supposed to get failure tones and master cautions. It is an EP we practice because it requires the non flying pilot to slew the stab while the flying guy tries to get the nose pitching moment under control
As for conning roll, we're limited to 45deg AOB. Also our autopilot systems add in aft cyclic during high angles of bank to keep Gs on the head. Outside of you talking about it, I've never heard it mentioned amongst the line pilots. Maybe TPS Aero guys have more insight.
The MiG-15 is the "quirkiest" airplane I've ever flown. Here are a few that I recall from just 1 flight in it:
-The only flight hyds are for the ailerons. When the Russians built it, they realized they needed a way to balance the heavy elevator forces, so rather than aerodynamically balance it with an offset hinge or elevator horns, they installed a big balance weight in the tail. Flying it, when you start to pull more than 3g, the stick force gets really light. Keep pulling, and the longitudinal control forces abruptly reverse, meaning if you let go, the stick snaps all the way aft and bad things happen.
-It has a giant centrifugal flow engine which generates enough gyroscopic precession that it can actually roll the airplane upright if you do a loop and don't feed in coordinated aileron and rudder over the top.
-No fuel gauge, except for the feed tank. The feed tank lasts about 10 minutes. If you wait for the fuel gauge to come off the peg, you'll flame out at the initial.
-Really bad Dutch roll, like +/- 45 degrees of bank in the landing configuration. Relatively easy to counter, but scary if it's a turbulent or gusty day.
-No aileron effectiveness below 130 KIAS, IIRC. You touch down below that.
-The only flight hyds are for the ailerons. When the Russians built it, they realized they needed a way to balance the heavy elevator forces, so rather than aerodynamically balance it with an offset hinge or elevator horns, they installed a big balance weight in the tail. Flying it, when you start to pull more than 3g, the stick force gets really light. Keep pulling, and the longitudinal control forces abruptly reverse, meaning if you let go, the stick snaps all the way aft and bad things happen.
-It has a giant centrifugal flow engine which generates enough gyroscopic precession that it can actually roll the airplane upright if you do a loop and don't feed in coordinated aileron and rudder over the top.
-No fuel gauge, except for the feed tank. The feed tank lasts about 10 minutes. If you wait for the fuel gauge to come off the peg, you'll flame out at the initial.
-Really bad Dutch roll, like +/- 45 degrees of bank in the landing configuration. Relatively easy to counter, but scary if it's a turbulent or gusty day.
-No aileron effectiveness below 130 KIAS, IIRC. You touch down below that.
I have no idea, as I don't have time in either platform. I would guess it's a bit of a change from a Chinook. It was probably a step up from the Huey, as there's tons more power and a more robust rotor head.
Xmid, how did you get time in a Huey? I thought you went HTs. I'm jealous. I'd love to fly one, if for no other reason than nostalgia's sake.
The failures do happen every so often on the Navy models. While it's possible to program full down, usually it just craps out and freezes at some point. I'm guessing you guys get the same thing every so often.
It means operational tempo, as in how busy or not busy you are while conducting operations.
My understanding of the Navy 45 deg AOB limit is to increase lifetime of components on the head by avoiding the onset of blade stall, because Seahawks are the fatties of the Hawk world.
I've never read anything about the AFCS applying aft cyclic (nor aft pitch SAS) during turns. The maneuvering stability function of the AFCS actually moves the longitudinal trim servo forward to increase the aft force required by the pilot to maintain the g-loading - so we can feel the g's (all 1.4 of them). If you're a 60S dude, see para. 2.9.4.8
As for coning roll. This is but one effect of many on a complicated helo like the Hawk. You also have to consider sideslip, tail rotor aero, tail pylon aero, and the stab.We observed a rightward migration of cyclic position with increased airspeed (in a lightweight -60L), but this was minor. The cyclic remained within 1/2" of centered all the way to Vh and up to 60 deg AOB either direction at 100 KIAS. Even with full up collective, you still have > 3" of left cyclic available, so I'd be surprised if the -60 had any issues recovering from a steady turns up to 60 deg. Maybe there be dragons beyond that AOB; I wouldn't know.