Jump to content
ARC Discussion Forums
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

BWDenver

Members
  • Content Count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About BWDenver

  • Rank
    Canopy Polisher

Profile Information

  • Location
    Manassa VA
  • Interests
    Bird shooting, with camera and gun, target shooting, aviation photography, aviation research, and in the summer riding my Harley Road Glide Ultra

Recent Profile Visitors

787 profile views
  1. Ken, That's not entirely true. The US 500D is flown from the LH seat, at least the civil version that I flew in the Rockies doing exploration work for oil companies. The 206 BII & BIII was flown from the RH side. The position of the pilot has more to do with what is known as "Translating Tendency" of the helicopter roto system. With the TR under the tip path plane the helo tends to hang one side low. Western Helos hang LH side low as that's where the thrust of the TR shifts them. The European birds with blades that rotate in the opposite direction hover RH side low. So the placement of the pilot likely has more to do with weight and balance than custom. The 500D took a bit of getting use to as you rally hung lower than a Bell bird. All total I have about 3500 Hrs in helos. Most in UH-1's, OH-58's and CH-47"s. And on the civil side 500D and 206 BII & BIII. And a little AH-1G time. Fun bird, especially in a dive... And why do you board a fighter or an airliner form the LH side? Has more to do with how Knights got on horses - with their swords.... Bryan
  2. Mi-8AMTSH The long high aspect ratio metal blades droop quite a bit. I must admit this is the first time I've noticed the antennas strung to the horizontal stabilizers. Likely HF.
  3. The real thing... Not sure if the Mi wipers have a "park" position. Most birds I've flow do. Looks like HB came close to getting the windows right. Note the center window extends about 3" farther down than the L & R chin bubbles. It looks like the bird had two defog lines on the outboard side.
  4. Attached is a shot taken in the mid 90's at a Moscow air show. I didn't take the shot, and won't discuss who did. The bird is an Mi-8MTB-5/Mi-17M. Interesting study in upgraded armor and the adoption of the ramp sililar to the Chinooks I few.
  5. This looks like the Hip modified to run on Compressed Natural Gas. The turret looks like most graft on IR/FLIR turrets I've seen. Another interesting lump is the one forward of the roof hatch. - Bryan
  6. I doubt that is an OAT instrument. I have never flow a helicopter where the OAT is place on the instrument panel. Simple reason is it’s fairly useless in flight unless you going into the clouds and are worrying about icing. And AH/MH-6's are likely VFR only AC. In all the birds I’ve flown the OAT gage is placed at the top of the windscreen, or in the case of the CH-47, in the RH overhead window. You use it for validating your PPC (Performance Planning Card), and the HIT Check, after that you really don’t pay attention to it. Unless it’s to reinforce how hot and miserable you are like when I landed at Balad AF in Iraq and the OAT gage was stuck on 57C. I've never seen a military helo OAT gage in anything but C. So a temp of 89 would be a wee bit uncomfortable... What is missing from the instrument panel is an RMI, Radio Magnetic Indicator. There is probably a standby “Wet” compass on the top of the panel. My guess is your looking at digital readout heading display indicator. Where ever they are they are flying at 350 MSL, 250 AGL, and just cruising along with a 600 degree C TOT, they are not really “heavy”. Even if it was an OAT, at 30C/90F you would likely be seeing a higher TOT. 1996 and you're probably looking at an MH-6J My best guess... Bryan
  7. By any chance does anyone know who or where the shot of the 58D came from? -Bryan
  8. Thouth I'd post a few images of the FWD head out and folded out. CH-46E 156477 HMM-264 Newriver 5-12-93. Aft blades, Reb BL Left, Yellow is over the tunnel, BL R of the Green blade. Only have a BW of this bird. - Bryan
  9. For the most part the 47D started out as an A, B or C. And the F will be a rebuild of the D fuselage. The original A's were easier to tell as they put roof stringers lengthwise to stiffen the bird as the A had a "Oil Caning" structural problem. They also lacked the Aux tanks behind and in front of the main tank and there was only one filler point on each side. I think the 47B's also lacked the 6 tanks, and the 47C was the first bird to be produced with 6 tanks. But I could be wrong on that and the B 's got aux tanks later on. I only have about 4 hrs in a 47C when the our unit flew a 4 ship in last formation flight of 47C's to the Boeing factory for D conversion. I retired with 600 Hrs in the 47D. The C was a bit "looser" to fly than the D. If memory serves there was a slight difference between the B and C fuel filler points and the vents on the top of the sponsion. The blades evolved from metal to composite over the years. A "Baby C" had metal blades, a "Super C" had plastic. So you could make an F from an A, by first changing the pylons, blades and engines. Not to mention the cockpit. I don't think anyone but Aurora made a 47A with the original dual rear wheels. But as has been pointed out, it would be a lot easier starting with a D. Then all you would have to do is the glass cockpit, engine differences and various bites and pieces on the outside like RAW, radio antennas and Flare Pods. The biggest difference, for a modeler, between the 712 (C) and 714 (C & F) is going to be the exhaust stack. Along with the track for the particle separator in front of the engine. The Reserve unit I was in started to get the 47C with 714's in 2004. All my time was with the 712's. Bryan
  10. Having the bird squatted a bit makes it easier to look at the TR, along with doing the Daily and preflight. Along with shipping the bird in a C-130. I remember crawling up on the stinger on a UH-1, it was a real pain just to get a good look at the pieces parts. You had to grab the tail light and pull yourself up. When I was up there I would "thump" the vertical fin out of habit. When I was in Korea, I thumped one of the 377 Taegu Dustoff birds and heard a rattle back. After 2 Hrs of fooling with it, the CE pulled a fuel fitting out of the fin. Sobering to think what that would have done to the shaft... I still have the blue fitting some where... I still wonder how the heck it got there... - Bryan
  11. The attached shot was taken at Ft Eustis VA, when I was attending AMOC, Oct 80 - March 81. My track was the OH-58. I was the distinguished graduate of the OH-58 Maintenance Test Flight Class. I was also the ONLY one in the class... Had a lot of fun and learned a lot about the Kiowa. the UH-61 was sitting on the flight line at Felker AAF. And was still flying on occasion. Enjoy.. - Bryan
  12. Any body know if Phrogger is still active?

     

    Bryan

  13. I now "remember" where I saw the pics of the UH-1H RC bird boom. It was here!. At that time I didn't know where my shots of the 218th AC ended up. I'll call a bit later this afternoon. Bryan
  14. Actually this is the Desert/Arctic scheme. The birds at White Sands also used this scheme, along with OH-58A's. Bryan
  15. Ah yes, but like a red head I once knew, lovely to look at but a hand full... The Hiller had a couple of issues going against it. One was price. The other was it's early SAS. During the flight test phase the SAS would kick off at random times. Without SAS the bird was, as reported in the flight test docs, "dangerous" in the hands of an inexperienced pilot in turbulence. It was simply not stable without the SAS. The 58 was a bit twitchy in turbulence, but no where near as dangerous. In retrospect there is no doubt now that Hughes "bought" the contract for the LOH. It was priced under the cost of materials for the OH-5A. Remember the engine and radios were GFE, Government Furnished Equipment, and not part of the cost from the manufacture. Hughes made up for it, in part, on spares, a lot of the major components were throw always on the OH-6A, while the OH-58 gear was overhaulable. Both birds used the same engine, but the fuselage of the 58 was heavier. The 58 was a heck of a lot quieter inside to fly than the OH-6. The 500 was the only bird I flew, out side of the 47, where I had to use both earplugs and a helmet. I think the 500 was even louder than the 47 in the cockpit. And for those OH-6 fans remember the "Hughes tail rotor stall"? Turn down wind at low speed and you got a stall, spin, crash sequence. Early on the "Old Hands" demanded to fly the OH-6 when they showed up in Viet Nam. Then the swashplates uniballs started having "issues" and the Old Hands, decided it was better to give the OH-6's to the "new guys" until they got them fixed... Bryan
×
×
  • Create New...