Phrogger

So, you don't want to hear from any Army or Marine Corps personnel with personal experience on the H-2? :D (No, I don't have any H-2 experience... just know enough about them to know the Marines had 11 UH-2B's and the Army evaluated some for gunships and along with the Navy evaluated a compound variant.)

I thought maybe the Army is allowing sponsers now, much like sports venues do... and this unit is being sponsered by Kawasaki.

You want 'em all? Here you go, with the years made, model # and (quantity) Vertol 1958 Vertol 107/YHC-1 (one) 1959-1960 Vertol YHC-1A (three) Boeing-Vertol 1960 Boeing-Vertol 107-II-1 Factory prototype (1) 1961-1964 Boeing-Vertol 107-II-2 (16, includes second prototype "Tab 2" - later converted to a HKP4B, and the following supplied to Kawasaki: one kitted at sub-assembly level, five regular kits and one as parts.) 1962 BV-107-?/XH-49A/CH-46B (none built, contract cancelled before first one was built, Tab 2 was painted up in USAF scheme for a short time) 1962-1966 BV-107-M/CH-46A (194

Some minor corrections Canada CH-113A Voyageur: Narrow airfoil shaped rear pylon (if by that, you mean asymmetric, with the trailing edge offset slightly to the starboard, yes) and equipped with APU (like CH-46A). More glazing on the nose, unique only to the Voyageur. Forward port side emergency exit is shorter, lower edge is up off the floor, and corners rounded (like late CH-46D/F models). Small fuel stub wings with 380 US gallon system capacity (also like CH-46A and NYA BV-107-II) without fuel jettison tubes. Entry door's lower half door with two full width steps (like H-46). CH-113 Lab

comment withdrawn

I'm not a modeller, I joined to check out helicopter pics, stories and share my tidbits to help you guys out when I can - and I must say, you guys do some AWESOME work. That being said, I would love it and be SO honored if someone did a dio on this H-34 sketch/story: http://www.hmm-364.org/1965/richardson-tj.html Why? Because of Lt Richardson and his crew's actions, my father survived what would have been almost certain death. Check out Dad's letter to Lt. Richardson here: http://www.hmm-364.org/1965/richardson-tj-ltr.html One day, a little over 3 years ago I googled my last name when

Figured I'd bump this thread with a few more pics of N6679D in its tandem wing config. Sorry, don't know who the guys are, it's an archive photo someone else gave me and they didn't know either. I'm guessing it's the flight test ground crew assigned to this project.

The CH-46D/F's were only ~12-15K lbs (empty - according to the various log books I signed off), depending on if they had all their armor or not and how much weight they gained from in-service repair. Add 2400 lbs if the tanks are FULL, which they weren't and you're still well under 20K. It is possible to push one on the harder tidal beach sand, I was there. I can imagine it is easier to push a 46 than a 60, even if the weight is the same, because there's more surfaces you can push against. We did have cause to manually move them some when stacking the hanger or hanger deck for storms - whe

LOL! Reminds me of the time I did a troop lift with a dozen Force Recon Marines. Dropped them off my CH-46 on a Camp Lejeune beach and we shut down awaiting their return from their mock search and destroy mission. When they came back, we told them the chopper wouldn't start and needed them to get behind it and push it down the beach so we could bump start it. They actually fell for it! They got us rolling about 1-2 mph and the pilot tapped the brakes at the same time the co-pilot hit the APU Start switch. The APU lit off and the Recon boys applauded themselves for the job well done...

I found this picture today of N6679D painted up in USAF markings - with blatant Boeing Vertol logo added for advertising effect, I'm sure. Helis info on CH-46B Not sure if this is a recent addition, or if it's been hiding there all along.

Here's a couple of shots of THE first Canadian CH-147F, fresh from paint.

On the KLM tail (and winglet), the bulk of these show because they are removable panels & screws. On the tail cone, the join ring shows and all the button head fasteners in the station frames. Looking forward of the horizontal stab, the skin panels' butt joints and laps are barely seen.

I've been involved in the building of "1/1 scale" Boeing wide bodies for 25 years. (Mostly 747 & 777, with a little 767 & 787 thrown in once in a while). Every single one made in since I've been here has had white wheel wells. All the aluminum ones are sprayed with a coating of Dinol or CorBan in the wells. Depending on how heavily the application was sprayed, it may be anywhere from barely off-white to a sand or tan color. Gear door interior colors are white on the 747 may or may not be coated, depending on customer preference. Other wide body models have white interiors if the d

Impressive! I agree it gets easier as the scale gets larger. Still, Pierre Scerri's 1/3 scale Ferrari 312PB impresses me more than Park or Glen... mostly because the Ferrari is fully operational and even sounds like the real thing. Just further supports what Hawkeye is saying though... http://www.craftsmanshipmuseum.com/scerri.htm

The engine in these pics is not a T58-GE-16. The -16 has a rectangluar tailpipe and is used on the CH-46E. (There are a few other less noticeable external differences, too). It is most likely a T58-GE-10, as the spec info at the bottom of the info board states.

I was just showing your awesome work to a co-worker and I noticed one small detail about your blade cart that you should be able to easily correct... you have the blades in the cart upside-down. They would be resting in the cart on their leading edges, not the trailing edges. Besides the fact the trailing edges are more fragile, the root of the blades is pretty heavy and might want to lift the tip end out of the cart.

If you're taking artistic license, leave them off. There are 747-300 and earlier aircraft that have the coversion to the HF ant in the vertical fin - like the 747-400 & -8 have. Like this Varig -300 or this Air Bridge freighter conversion

Nice pics of the rotorprop... but it's not Army flight test. Same reason I didn't include Sikorsky's original Blackhawk, the S-67. But if you wanna include wannabe's, that' cool with me. :) Not sure if this pic is real because its the only one I've seen with the fan-in-fin design... any info on this?

Another case of Army/Navy teamwork on a compound helo... the NH-3A/S-61F. This bird started life as Navy HSS-2 (SH-3A), BuNo 148033.

It started life as a CH-47A (65-07992), but during the 347 conversion, got a 110" plug added amidships, retractable landing gear, 4-bladed rotors that are 30" longer than a D-model and a 30" taller aft pylon. The 347 is on display at the US Army Aviation Museum in Ft. Rucker. More details here: http://www.chinook-helicopter.com/history/aircraft/A_Models/65-07992/65-07992.html

After kinda highjacking this thread with some non-Army 107 talk (granted, some was ON topic, too), I thought I'd throw some UH-2 pics in the thread. I've seen at least two of these in other threads, but figured they ought to be in here too. In one of the old H-2 threads someone stated they didn't know what happened to these when the Army was done... according to Helis.com, they went back to the Navy and served as UH-2A's

Depends on year you are emulating, the only sure thing is the shape of the engine exhaust. E's are the only ones with the rectangular exhaust. All E models are conversions from D & F models - and later on, even A models. E's originally had the same size stub wings as a D, but actually carried a little less fuel since the bladders inside went from having the lower 2/3 self-sealing to fully self-sealing. Intakes on either model could be witch's tats (or Madonna, if you prefer), full-barrier filters, or EAPS. Fiberglass blades were introduced roughly at the same time as the first E models

FWIW - the 46's and 53's in HMX-1 are CH, not VH variants. Both are assigned to the "green side" of HMX-1, whereas the VH birds are assigned to the "white side." Green side birds are used for regular USMC helo duties, experimental evaluations and sometimes as support aircraft for VIP missions. Unlikely either would ever carry POTUS - unless that's what he wanted specifically. (LBJ used to prefer white-top VH-1 Hueys over the VH-3.

I realize this is an old topic, but maybe it'll help someone in the future. They are hung from the chording, which is tied to that upper tube (used for hanging litter stanchions) to keep them out of the way when the seats are stowed and to make them easy to find for passengers when they board. Not all the passengers are the brightest candles in the box. A GOOD set of troop seats would not show the ridges of the braces because the braces are curved, so if the nylon is tight, they don't show. OTOH, it is a battle to keep the seats in good shape. Nice job!! Phrogs Phorever!

All the cabin windows are the same size, so you can have bubble (or flat) windows anywhere you want. For SAR duty, it would seem logical to have them further away from the stub wings. I liked having a bubble window in the stub wing location for blade tracking purposes whenever weather wasn't favorable for just taking the flat window out. Bubble windows were always harder to get and seemed to get broken easier, so they tended to be a hot commodity. If you ordered a bubble window and they were not in stock, supply would just send you a flat one since they are alternate part numbers for each